Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Deep clade test

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by SEREGA784 View Post
    I see your are R1a1a*. Did you tested or is this a predicted.
    I made a deep clade test.

    But I was predicted R1a1 before.
    Now I am R1a1* in FTDNA Terms.

    Thats R1a1a* in the latest naming (FTDNA does not use the latest names of the haplogroups)

    Your R1a* is also named "R1a1*" now.
    It all moved one name forward in 2009. FTDNA hasnt changed that yet.

    Thats why one often names Haplogroups by mutations.

    I am M17, M198 (Some simply say M17, because, so far, there was not a single one with M17 without M198)
    This will never change, while terms like R1a* sometimes do and then everyone is confused.

    You may also read this here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_R1a_%28Y-DNA%29

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Daniel72 View Post
      Your R1a* is also named "R1a1*" now.
      It all moved one name forward in 2009. FTDNA hasnt changed that yet.
      FTDNA needs to get into sync with ISOGG, both in terms of nomenclature and frequency of tree updates.

      FTDNA's haplotree graphic is very pretty I'm sure, but if it's implementation is so complicated that it can't be kept up to date easily, then it's a negative as far as I'm concerned.

      Comment


      • #18
        Is there a way to tell from the results (your dys#s) which M# you belong

        Comment


        • #19
          If I were you, I would join this FTDNA project group:

          http://www.familytreedna.com/public/...ection=results

          Comment


          • #20
            Serega,

            I looked at your screenshot & it clearly says at the top that you have been predicted to be R1a* This means that no SNP testing has been done.

            If you take the SNP test & turn out to not belong to any subclade of R1a, then you will still be R1a*. Chances are, though, you will turn out to be R1a1* or one of the few that manage to get in a subclade beneath R1a1.

            I think that the community of R1a folk would be better off to get SNP testing done; if a project is available, join a project. R1a is a huge clade & I really suspect that, just like with R1b, it will turn out that there are several super-huge clades nested beneath it. But identifying these will require R1a* & R1a+ men top get involved.

            Timothy Peterman

            Comment


            • #21
              Well, the problem is, new SNPs will not be found if no one makes these "walk though the Y Chromosom" kind of things for 700-800 Dollars or so.

              And unfortunately, R1a is pretty common in realatively poor regions of the planet.

              Its no miracle that R1b has so much known SNPs. Its because its the dominating Haplogroup in the rich part of the world.
              Worse, its the dominating Haplogroup of the USA. And Americans are almost the only people on the planet that are interested in DNA Testing.

              We need some Russian billionairs to check their Y-DNA for new R1a SNPs or so. LOL
              Last edited by Daniel72; 29 January 2010, 03:16 AM.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Daniel72 View Post
                Americans are almost the only people on the planet that are interested in DNA Testing.
                Leaving aside your deliberate exaggeration above, it is both a blessing and a curse that so many Americans are into genealogical research. Without their strong need to find their roots, genetic genealogy would hardly exist outside of academia and where available it would be prohibitively expensive for the likes of you and me.

                The fact that haplotype records from Americans tend to dominate the major databases is the price we pay for the former and, for me, that's not the real issue. The big issue for me (and you) is that most, by virtue of their participation in these things, don't have a clue about their origins outside of America and so cannot add to the quality of the origin data in that respect.

                As for other countries, which could add invaluable information for us, we have the opposite problem: apathy.

                I have a particular interest in Ireland, however it has been said that the Irish are not very interested in being DNA-tested, or in genealogy in general, because of the "we know where we are from" mentality which is apparently all too common there.

                Those of us that form the various Diasporas can only hope that that sort of attitude can be changed, but as to what motivation is required for that to happen I'm at a loss to say.

                Comment


                • #23
                  The most important thing that we, as genetic genealogists, need to do is determine what the barriers are for people in other parts of the world to get tested & then, eliminate those barriers. They might be financial; they might be cultural or religious.

                  The above statement describes disincentives. Perhaps we could increase incentives.

                  If DNA testing could be made a bit cheaper & if some philanthropist would offer a generous subsidies, a lot of kits could become available. If science teachers could encourage their students to have their DNA tested "for extra credit", in conjunction with a family tree showing where those genes came from. If the Boy Scouts (or similar groups in other countries) would offer a merit badge, etc, etc.

                  Each of us is an ambassador for the community of genetic genealogists & we need to do our part to spread the message. Give a talk at your local genealogical society meeting, or at an ethnic fair that involves a lot of people from Slavic parts of the world. Get people enthused. Really cool merchandise that is made only available to those who have had their DNA tested might even be a motivating factor. Create an R1a1 club or an R1b1b2 club with really nice insignia, with the only membership prerequisite being that each member has tested his y-DNA, belong that haplogroup, & provide a sketch of their lineage.

                  Timothy Peterman

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    I've had this discussion with my surname project admin as we lamented the lack of haplo data from various "old countries" of interest.

                    I got into the genetics side by being sold on the benefits by my surname project administrator. I didn't jump straight away; I though it over for quite a while before I said, "What the heck!" and signed up. After I got exactly nowhere on the surname front, I became interested in deep ancestry simply because I wanted to get something out of the investment pending a surname match that may never come.

                    I'll admit that I am now more interested in deep ancestry than surname matching. But that's me, and I can afford all of this testing. I don't consider myself the norm by any means.

                    After batting the apparent apathy issues within certain countries/regions back and forth with my admin, I arrived at the conclusion that the best hope would probably be to target and interest the top academics in the associated fields of archaeology, anthropology, history, etc, in those countries to get themselves and their families tested. I thought that if people of science and knowledge cannot be sold on modern genetic genealogy, then how much hope is there for the man on the street?

                    However, there's no escaping the fact that a person who is fundamentally uninterested in their family history and/or deep ancestry is a tough -- if not impossible -- nut to crack.

                    As for philanthropists, I've said a number of times that I wish Bill Gates would become fascinated by this stuff!

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by T E Peterman View Post
                      Serega,

                      I looked at your screenshot & it clearly says at the top that you have been predicted to be R1a* This means that no SNP testing has been done.

                      If you take the SNP test & turn out to not belong to any subclade of R1a, then you will still be R1a*. Chances are, though, you will turn out to be R1a1* or one of the few that manage to get in a subclade beneath R1a1.

                      I think that the community of R1a folk would be better off to get SNP testing done; if a project is available, join a project. R1a is a huge clade & I really suspect that, just like with R1b, it will turn out that there are several super-huge clades nested beneath it. But identifying these will require R1a* & R1a+ men top get involved.

                      Timothy Peterman
                      I think I might do one, soon.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by Daniel72 View Post
                        ...
                        I am M17, M198 (Some simply say M17, because, so far, there was not a single one with M17 without M198)
                        ...
                        How would I found out from my results that I have M17 and M198????

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by SEREGA784 View Post
                          How would I found out from my results that I have M17 and M198????
                          You would find that out by ordering the deep clade test. You have results for STR (short tandem repeats) markers, which mutate at a faster rate than SNPs (single nucleotide polymorphism). M17 and M198 are SNPs and are tested in the deep clade test. As we've discussed before in this thread, almost no one who's R1a1 tests positive for the SNPs downstream from M17 and M198 in the deep clade test (they're rare among those with European ancestry), but the new SNP M458 (on the Advanced Orders menu) is fairly common among FTDNA customers.

                          Because SNP mutations occur less often, usually thousands of years apart, than STRs, they are used to define haplogroups and subclades and to track human migrations over thousands of years.
                          Last edited by MMaddi; 29 January 2010, 05:32 PM.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by gtc View Post

                            I have a particular interest in Ireland, however it has been said that the Irish are not very interested in being DNA-tested, or in genealogy in general, because of the "we know where we are from" mentality which is apparently all too common there.

                            Those of us that form the various Diasporas can only hope that that sort of attitude can be changed, but as to what motivation is required for that to happen I'm at a loss to say.

                            I am an Irishman living in Ireland.You dont know very much about Ireland when you come out with this kind of statement.A lot of Irish people are interested in genealogy.They are only interested in going back four or five generations not forty.They dont need dna tests to prove that they are Irish and are not interested in proving that they were related to some King who lived 2000 years ago.That seems to be an American passtime.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by 1798 View Post
                              I am an Irishman living in Ireland.You dont know very much about Ireland when you come out with this kind of statement.
                              If you go back and read my post you'll see where I wrote "it has been said", so your question to me ought to be "who said that?" in which case I would refer you to this:

                              http://homepage.eircom.net/~ihdp/ihdp/gen_research.htm

                              So your argument about knowledge of Ireland in that regard is with the authors of that site.

                              A lot of Irish people are interested in genealogy.They are only interested in going back four or five generations not forty.They dont need dna tests to prove that they are Irish and are not interested in proving that they were related to some King who lived 2000 years ago.
                              What you say above is addressed by the message in the that web page.

                              That seems to be an American passtime.
                              Interest in deep ancestry is not restricted to America alone.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                My personal experiences as an Italian/Sicilian-American, as well as countless discussions I've had with other hyphenated Americans and hundreds of international students and colleagues from across the globe, has led me to this generality: people who are born and raised in historically immigrant-sending nations can not begin to understand the ethnic and cultural experiences of hyphenated Americans (or Canadians, Australians, etc.), who to a greater or lesser degree often live in two worlds and cultures. (I think this is especially true for those of us who were raised knowing the immigrant generation.) Therefore, it's difficult for the folks in the mother/fatherland to appreciate the intense interest that so many of us have in "finding our roots", even if we have a very good idea of where we came from, as did I. (Ironically, I've been told by several "real" Italians in the last few years that there's increasing recognition that in order to experience traditional Italian Culture and even language -from those of us who still remember our grandparents' dialects - that Italians need to travel to the U.S, Canada, etc., because Italy has changed so much since the Great Immigration.) It's not surprising to me that those from the sending nations may not have as much of an interest as those in the diasporas to utilize genetic genealogy to help trace family heritage. On the contrary, I believe that it's those of us in the diasporas who may provide the most accurate genetic picture of the sending countries, at least at the time of the immigrations, since populations have changed in so many of these countries since the majority of the immigration occurred.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X