Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Has FT-DNA bitten off more than they can chew with Nat Geno 2.0 SNP results?

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

  • Has FT-DNA bitten off more than they can chew with Nat Geno 2.0 SNP results?

    FT-DNA has gone on record stating they will allow folks who have taken the Nat Geno 2.0 test to transfer their positive/derived SNPs to their FT-DNA account. While I would love for this to happen, I wonder if they fully realize the potential results of this.

    I have been SNP tested at M157.2 a family/private subclade of Z6. Under ISOGG's R-Tree of 28AUG2012 Z6 is R1b1a2a1a1a3b2b1a1b1.

    Again looking at ISOGG's Trees, I note there are 11 steps between the root of the tree and Haplogroup R, 10 additional steps between Haplo R and U106, and, according to the data-mining of the 1000 Genome Project (by several "amateur" researchers) there are at least 12 steps between U106 and M157.2

    It must be kept in mind that for the majority of SNPs above R1b1a2a1a1, there are multiple known SNPs for each step. It is conceivable I may end up with well over 100 positive SNP results added to my tree.

    Looking at the SNP result lists on some projects (such as the U105 project) I note where some folks have tested almost 50 SNPs, and even then, their SNP results take up quite a bit of space. A sudden influx of much larger results may wreak havoc on the IS structure (which is known to have had many difficulties in the past).

  • #2
    Counting the SNPs currently in the ISOGG tree (as well as the SNPs from the 1000 Project below U106) there are:

    116 Known SNPs from the root of the tree to Haplo R
    38 Known SNPs from R to U106
    33 Known SNPs from U106-Z6 (+1 more to my M157.2)

    =188 Potential positive KNOWN SNPs. In addition, according to what I have read about the Nat Geno 2.0 specifications, it is possible there may be even more than that number of new SNPs I may also end up being positive for.

    Comment


    • #3
      I see that you are 4 SNPs downstream of U106 and you have a private SNP.Other people have 10 SNPs before they have reached a private one.It is hard to make sense of any of it.How can anyone give a reasonable TMRCA for U106? I have ordered the Geno 2.0 test and it may not give me the answer I am searching for.

      Comment


      • #4
        I am actually 10 SNPs down from U-106, with this 10th SNP being the family/private M157.2. The current ISOGG "Hierarchical" designation for Z6 (above M157.2) is: R1b1a2a1a1a3b2b1a1b1

        Comment


        • #5
          If there are 600 years on average between SNPs then U106 would be about 6000 to 6600 ybp.L148 is eleven SNPs downstream of U106.I am at Z156 which is only two downstream and thats why I think that Z156 is between 4800 and 5400.

          Comment


          • #6
            L148 is the 10th SNP downstream SNP from U106 as well. I am on a different branch of the U106 tree and I hope that all branches have the same number of SNPs.That would mean that I have eight SNPs to find.


            QUOTE=Wing_Genealogis;346888]I am actually 10 SNPs down from U-106, with this 10th SNP being the family/private M157.2. The current ISOGG "Hierarchical" designation for Z6 (above M157.2) is: R1b1a2a1a1a3b2b1a1b1[/QUOTE]

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by 1798 View Post
              If there are 600 years on average between SNPs then U106 would be about 6000 to 6600 ybp.L148 is eleven SNPs downstream of U106.I am at Z156 which is only two downstream and thats why I think that Z156 is between 4800 and 5400.
              It must be remembered the averages can be very rough estimates. Some folks will fall quite a distance on either side of the average. There may be some folks who have 2 or three private mutations within the last couple of hundred years, and other folks who haven't had a SNP mutation in a couple thousand years.

              It's similar to flipping a coin. While on average you should get as many heads as tails, it is always possible to flip a coin 10-20 times and come up heads every time. (VERY rare, but possible).

              It is not safe to use any generalized figure (like 600 years) per SNP. There are a variety of reasons why the time between two SNPs may vary considerably.

              Comment


              • #8
                U106 was a private SNP sometime in the past.

                Comment


                • #9
                  The U106 tree shows at least four seperate lines with the same number of SNPs back to the founder which suggest a there is a pattern.Thats why I believe that I have the same number of SNPs to find to reach the bottom of the U106 tree.
                  If you dont mind me asking what is the TMRCA for your private SNP?





                  Originally posted by Wing_Genealogis View Post
                  It must be remembered the averages can be very rough estimates. Some folks will fall quite a distance on either side of the average. There may be some folks who have 2 or three private mutations within the last couple of hundred years, and other folks who haven't had a SNP mutation in a couple thousand years.

                  It's similar to flipping a coin. While on average you should get as many heads as tails, it is always possible to flip a coin 10-20 times and come up heads every time. (VERY rare, but possible).

                  It is not safe to use any generalized figure (like 600 years) per SNP. There are a variety of reasons why the time between two SNPs may vary considerably.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by 1798 View Post
                    If you don't mind me asking what is the TMRCA for your private SNP?
                    All I know for certain is all the direct male descendants of Rev. John Wing (1584-1630) have this SNP (M157.2) and the closest non-Wing surname found (60/67 match, 97/111 match) has been found M157.2-

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      You have done well.I would like to have my dna down to a private SNP and then I could close the book on my family history project.I am into my eighth year now.



                      Originally posted by Wing_Genealogis View Post
                      All I know for certain is all the direct male descendants of Rev. John Wing (1584-1630) have this SNP (M157.2) and the closest non-Wing surname found (60/67 match, 97/111 match) has been found M157.2-

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        I was actually just real lucky to get my family/private SNP. It was discovered when I tested at 23andMe and was verified by FT-DNA. The original M157 SNP was discovered quite a few years ago in an academic/research study. Not even FT-DNA has a sample of this M157.1 (which is somewhere under R1a).

                        It's likely new "." SNPs will be discovered with the Nat Geno 2.0 test. However, we won't know for certain until people receive results.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          There arent many Z6 people.Are you sure it isnt a private SNP? Have you worked out a TMRCA for it.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by 1798 View Post
                            There arent many Z6 people.Are you sure it isnt a private SNP? Have you worked out a TMRCA for it.
                            The 4 published Z6+ men are Howland, Waite, Hart and Wynge. Doesn't strike me as a private (i.e. family) SNP.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by 1798 View Post
                              There arent many Z6 people.Are you sure it isnt a private SNP? Have you worked out a TMRCA for it.
                              ISOGG has developed some criteria which must be met for them to consider a SNP "Public" (rather than a private/family SNP). You can see these criteria at their website: http://www.isogg.org/tree/ISOGG_SNP_Requirements.html

                              Z6 has met all of their criteria and they have placed it on their R Haplogroup tree http://www.isogg.org/tree/ISOGG_HapgrpR.html

                              Because it is currently a small haplogroup, the TMRCA estimates are still very rough. The best estimate to date is roughly between 1600-2300 years ago.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X