Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Understanding Raw Data

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

  • #16
    Geno 2.0 Results

    Thanks, Itai--I thought that was the case but was hoping that I could deduce more from the values.

    Jim

    Comment


    • #17
      Geno 2.0 SNPs

      My uninformed interpretation of my Geno 2.0 data.

      In my downloaded Geno 2.0 file, when I look for Z142, this is what I find:

      GRC12124452_ChipNGv1_37946_F03,Z142,Y,A,A

      This is Z142-

      According to ISOGG, for Z142+, I would find:

      GRC12124452_ChipNGv1_37946_F03,Z142,Y,G,G

      Similarly

      GRC12124452_ChipNGv1_37946_F03,Z138,Y,C,C

      is Z138- and

      GRC12124452_ChipNGv1_37946_F03,Z138,Y,G,G

      is Z138+

      The ISOGG Y-DNA SNP Index for 2012 indicates that a terminal Z138 SNP corresponds to a haplogroup designation of I1a3b. However, the longhand Y-chromosome haplogroup designations at Geno 2.0 appear to include many that are novel.

      http://www.isogg.org/tree/ISOGG_YDNA_SNP_Index.html

      On another topic. Unfortunately, there seems to be a limited rate of active participation in the"Our Story" portion of the Geno 2.0 project. One perk that ought to interest people: If you post a story about your paternal and maternal lines, you will be able to see your longhand Geno 2.0 Y-chromosome haplogroup designation when you browse other people's stories. For instance, my shorthand Y-chromosome designation is R-DF23 (it was initially R-M222; I'll get back to that), however, while browsing the "Our Story" section of the Geno 2.0 project, I noticed that my longhand Geno 2.0 Y-chromosome haplogroup designation is R1b1a1c9f1. In fact, many apparently novel haplogroups are listed in the "Our Story" section, particularly for the R1b1a related groups, but for others as well. As for my shorthand Geno 2.0 haplogroup, I am attempting to determine why Geno 2.0 initially listed my haplogroup as R-M222 but now lists it as R-DF23 (and why FTDNA lists my shorthand haplogroup as R-P310, when the positive SNPs it lists include DF23, which is downstream of P310), I manually scanned my Geno 2.0 data for the SNPs listed in the ISOGG Y-DNA SNP Index for 2012, looking in particular at those SNPs listed for R1b1a, and related haplogroups (including private R1b SNPs). I've also looked at the SNPs tested for by men in the FTDNA Ireland project who have R-M222 haplogroup designations. In large part, the raw data I obtained from Geno 2.0 matches up well with the SNP data of men in the R-M222 haplogroup. One major difference: the raw data indicates that I'm M37+. Not only are all the M-222 men in the FTDNA Ireland project M37-, everyone else who tested for it was too. In examining the data transferred from Geno 2.0 to FTDNA, I noticed that although the positive SNPs listed by FTDNA include DF23, which is downstream of P310, as I noted above, they don't include L21+, which my Geno 2.0 raw data does include and which is also upstream of DF23 (possibly, the reason that FTDNA assigned the R-P310 haplogroup designation). I'm wondering why? L-21+ is definitely included, not only in my raw data, but also in the "Your Map" section of the Geno 2.0 project.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by kullfarr View Post
        ... One perk that ought to interest people: If you post a story about your paternal and maternal lines, you will be able to see your longhand Geno 2.0 Y-chromosome haplogroup designation when you browse other people's stories. For instance, my shorthand Y-chromosome designation is R-DF23 (it was initially R-M222; I'll get back to that), however, while browsing the "Our Story" section of the Geno 2.0 project, I noticed that my longhand Geno 2.0 Y-chromosome haplogroup designation is R1b1a1c9f1. ...
        Thanks for the tip!

        Comment


        • #19
          Thanks, kullfarr,

          I have A, A, so assuming this is all correct I am Z49*

          Very interesting! I believe that I am the only person of Anglo-Norman-Irish heritage to fall into that group so far.
          More will be revealed!

          Jim

          Comment


          • #20
            I used kulfarr's tip and checked my longhand haplogroup designation that accompanied my post in the "Related Stories" area. That designation was R1B1A1C9L.

            Geno 2.0 gave R-Z253. Earlier I had checked the ISOGG Haplogroup R and its subclades page, dated 5 Dec 2012, where R-Z253 showed (along with S218, which was not on the 2011 tree) to be R1b1a2a1a1b3a6.

            So, is it R1b1a2a1a1b3a6 or R1B1A1C9L, or something else? Could the Geno 2.0 have been updated since the ISOGG page?

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by KATM View Post
              ...

              Geno 2.0 gave R-Z253. Earlier I had checked the ISOGG Haplogroup R and its subclades page, dated 5 Dec 2012, where R-Z253 showed (along with S218, which was not on the 2011 tree) to be R1b1a2a1a1b3a6.

              So, is it R1b1a2a1a1b3a6 or R1B1A1C9L, or something else? Could the Geno 2.0 have been updated since the ISOGG page?
              My guess would be that the Genographic project & FTDNA are trying to resurrect the YCC tree which hasn't been updated since forever ago, and whose nomenclature differs from the ISOGG tree.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by ScooterCat View Post
                My guess would be that the Genographic project & FTDNA are trying to resurrect the YCC tree which hasn't been updated since forever ago, and whose nomenclature differs from the ISOGG tree.
                Guess I'll need to educate myself some more. This is the first DNA testing I've done, and although I know the results from Geno 2.0 are providing information that changes the trees, it's all still very confusing to a newbie.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by ScooterCat View Post
                  My guess would be that the Genographic project & FTDNA are trying to resurrect the YCC tree which hasn't been updated since forever ago, and whose nomenclature differs from the ISOGG tree.
                  My guess and its a business guess is that they (NG and FDNA ) decided on november 2011 for Ydna and april 2012 v14 for Mtdna, to use as their "starting base foundation", to work together.....I can only envisage that an agreement ( hidden) by these companies will only "upgrade" these trees once they are confident with what they have already completed.
                  and yes I do see YCC being upgrade, but isn't NG presenting FTDNA with only rs numbers

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by Bartot View Post
                    ... but isn't NG presenting FTDNA with only rs numbers
                    Geno 2.0 is displaying the longhand form of the Y-haplogroup in the Our Story section of the website, if, as kullfarr discovered, you fill out your maternal and paternal stories.

                    So far in R1b, these haplogroups are shown(no info as to what version of whose haplotree they're referenced to):

                    R1b1
                    R1b1a1
                    R1b1a1b
                    R1b1a1c
                    R1b1a1c
                    R1b1a1c9
                    R1b1a1c9a <- Me
                    R1b1a1c9c
                    R1b1a1c9d
                    R1b1a1c9e
                    R1b1a1c9e1a
                    R1b1a1c9f
                    R1b1a1c9f1
                    R1b1a1c9g
                    R1b1a1c9l
                    R1b1a1c9l1
                    R1b1a1c9m
                    R1b1a1cbb1
                    R1b1a1cbc
                    R1b1a1cbc1
                    R1b1a1cbc2
                    R1b1a1cbc3e
                    R1b1a1cbc4a2a
                    R1b1a1cbc4a2b2
                    R1b1a1cbc4a2b2a
                    R1b1a1cbc4a2b2b
                    R1b1a1cbc4a2b2b1
                    R1b1a1cbc4b
                    R1b1a1cbc4b1a
                    R1b1a1cc
                    R1b1a1cca
                    R1b1a1ccc
                    R1b1a1ccc4
                    R1b1a1cce
                    R1b1a1cce3
                    R1b1a1cda
                    R1b1a1cda1b
                    R1b1a1cda1b1a
                    R1b1a1cdb2a1
                    R1b1a2

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Edit &quot;Our Story&quot;

                      Does anybody know if you can edit your "Our Story" entry after you posted it on the NatGeo site?

                      Thanks.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by ajmr1a1 View Post
                        Does anybody know if you can edit your "Our Story" entry after you posted it on the NatGeo site?

                        Thanks.
                        Yes you can. I have made several minor tweaks to my story. Simply go to "Our Story" and at the bottom of the screen edit the story you wrote.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          My Geno 2.0 haplogroup was tweaked again - from R1b1a1c9f1 to R1b1a1c9f. I expect changes will be ongoing for weeks, at least.
                          Last edited by kullfarr; 14 December 2012, 01:22 PM. Reason: question already answered

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Thanks for letting me know about the editing function.

                            I am perplexed as to why my mtDNA is still listed as just "H" on the NG site when on the FTDNA site I am listed as H10.
                            From the FMS mtDNA test, I know that I am H10b.

                            I will have to see if this changes after I add a story.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              I was wondering what the new halpgroup listing in the stories are as well.... anyone know?
                              R1B1A1C
                              R1B1A1C9
                              R1B1A1C9A
                              R1B1A1C9C
                              R1B1A1C9D
                              R1B1A1C9E
                              R1B1A1C9E1A
                              R1B1A1C9F
                              R1B1A1C9G
                              R1B1A1C9L1
                              R1B1A1C9M
                              R1B1A1CBB1
                              R1B1A1CBC
                              R1B1A1CBC1
                              R1B1A1CBC2
                              R1B1A1CBC3E
                              R1B1A1CBC4A2A
                              R1B1A1CBC4A2B2
                              R1B1A1CBC4A2B2A
                              R1B1A1CBC4A2B2B
                              R1B1A1CBC4A2B2B1
                              R1B1A1CBC4B
                              R1B1A1CBC4B1A
                              Last edited by Neves; 14 December 2012, 02:00 PM. Reason: distracted.... sorry

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by Neves View Post
                                I was wondering what the new halpgroup listing in the stories are as well.... anyone know?
                                They are significantly revising the naming pattern for the y tree. It doesn't correspond to either FTDNA's or ISOGG's trees. Notice the CBC in the middle of a number of the haplogroup long names. Previously, there was a strict pattern of alternating letters and numbers.

                                I don't think we will know what these long names correspond to as far as haplogroups/subclades until Spencer Wells publishes his paper based on Geno 2.0 results. That paper is expected to have a new yDNA tree.

                                Remember that Geno 2.0 has about 10,000 new yDNA SNPs never tested before by any commercial company. Only after they look at thousands of results for these new SNPs will they be able to accurately place the SNPs on the tree and have permanent long names.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X