Geno 2.0 Update & Y-2014 Tree

[ajmr1a1]

FYI.

Geno 2.0 has been in "beta" since it's inception nearly a year ago.

According to the FTDNA 9th Conference schedule, there
will be an update of the Geno 2.0 project with a presentation
by Miguel Vilar on Nov. 9.

Michael Hammer will talk about the "Implications of the Y-2014 tree" on Nov. 10.

I really hope we hear something more substantial than
"the new y-DNA tree will be released any day" and "the tree changes everyday."

see http://www.familytreedna.com/conference/

[MMaddi]

Well, we shall see. I may be proven wrong (I hope not), but I think this conference will give substantial useful information on a new yDNA tree. I can't imagine that they'll have two of their major presentations on the issue and not have something more than generalities to report.

If this indeed is the public rollout of the full 2014 tree, conference participants may get some sort of hard copy version of the tree. This was done when the 2008 yDNA tree was released. All the conference participants received a wall-size poster of the tree.

But, as I wrote above, we shall see.

[Jim Barrett]

Maybe YES, Maybe NO

If this indeed is the public rollout of the full 2014 tree, conference participants may get some sort of hard copy version of the tree. This was done when the 2008 yDNA tree was released. All the conference participants received a wall-size poster of the tree.

But, as I wrote above, we shall see.

We were given Y-DNA trees in 2005, 2008 and 2010. Yes, we shall see!

[ajmr1a1]

YTree 2014 Sneak Peaks

@Nirl32: @Nirl32: Sneak Peeks at the new and much larger #YTree (2014) seen here at #FTDNA2013 #genealogy #Genographic

According to this tweet, the FTDNA conference attendees were given just
sneak peaks?

Another tweet says new Geno chip will be ready in 7 months to a year.

[Donald Locke]

They are teasing us ajmr1a1 lol.
I have been waiting for the new tree to be published for a long time, they got to stop teasing us and just release it already! haha!

[ajmr1a1]

Geno 2.0 has already sold over 80K kits.
The Geno 2.0 transfers to FTDNA are only a fraction of the kits sold.

Here is another quote from Spencer Wells about FTNDA & Geno 2.0:

GB: So, you guys actually partner with Family Tree DNA to process your samples…

Spencer Wells: We hire them to run the samples through the lab, but that’s essentially the extent of the partnership.

http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/1...pencer-wells/2

[Stevo]

They are teasing us ajmr1a1 lol.
I have been waiting for the new tree to be published for a long time, they got to stop teasing us and just release it already! haha!

I think that new tree may still be a long way off, now that FTDNA has introduced its Big Y test.

It's been raining new SNPs the last few years, and there's another storm on the horizon.

[paulgill]

@Stevo, check with Geno 2.0 if they can still cancel your order, I say that because they gave me that option. to have my order cancelled if it was not shipped already.

[Stevo]

@Stevo, check with Geno 2.0 if they can still cancel your order, I say that because they gave me that option. to have my order cancelled if it was not shipped already.

The Geno 2.0 is for my dad, and it's too late to cancel, since his sample has been received and the test is 20% complete.

Besides, I want to find out what my dad's mtDNA haplogroup is, and Big Y won't tell me that.

I'm all y tested up myself, pretty much, but I haven't had the Geno 2.0. I thought I would go ahead and get it for my dad, since it was on sale and would also give me some mtDNA and autosomal dna info on him.

[Donald Locke]

@ Stevo, I am surprised and disapointed because the way Spencer Wells told it on Twitter that we could be expecting a tree release one day soon.

[gtc]

Re Spencer Wells, it may be recalled that at the 2012 FTDNA Conference he gave a presentation via Skype in which he showed some sort of tree but there was a prohibition on it being photographed and published. The expectation from that session was that he and his team were about to publish in an academic journal. Alas, here we are 12 months later and nothing.

To my mind the only academics with the gumption to take the bull by the horns publish anything halfway useful and recent has been Mannis Van Oven, et al, with their paper "Seeing the Wood for the Trees: A Minimal Reference Phylogeny for the Human Y Chromosome" which has been accepted for publication in the scientific journal Human Mutation but has yet to go through the full editorial process.

Of course anything published in this area is out of date overnight, but Van Oven's aims are clearly stated:

"the large and increasing amount of information included in the 'complete' Ychromosome phylogeny, which now already includes many thousands of identified Y-SNPs, can be overwhelming and complicates its understanding as well as the task of selecting suitable markers for genotyping purposes in evolutionary, demographic, anthropological, genealogical, medical and forensic studies. As a solution, we introduce a concise reference phylogeny whereby we do not aim to provide an exhaustive tree that includes all known YSNPs but, rather, a quite stable reference tree aiming for optimal global discrimination capacity based on a strongly reduced set that includes only the most resolving Y-SNPs. Furthermore, with this reference tree we wish to propose a common standard for Y-marker as well as Y-haplogroup nomenclature. The current version of our tree is based on a core set of 417 branch-defining Y-SNPs and is available online at http://www.phylotree.org/Y."

[paulgill]

http://ytree.morleydna.com/Experimen...ny20131108.pdf

[gtc]

^

I am familiar with the Morely tree, as I am with the ISOGG tree.

FTDNA only updates its Y tree on the basis of academically-published information.

[paulgill]

Why look for the partial when you have the full?

[gtc]

Why look for the partial when you have the full?

Who is that question addressed to?