Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

FTDNA Y-DNA Upgrades for Geno 2.0

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

  • #16
    Originally posted by Jim Barrett View Post
    Did you have the Original Geno test or the Geno 2.0 test? The original tested either mtDNA or Y-DNA STR only.
    His posts at http://forums.familytreedna.com/showthread.php?p=389470 and http://forums.familytreedna.com/showthread.php?t=35669 state he had the Natgeno2 (Geno 2.0) test.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Jim Barrett View Post
      Did you have the Original Geno test or the Geno 2.0 test? The original tested either mtDNA or Y-DNA STR only.
      the full test ...both lines

      Armando helped me out...thanks

      I still need to know how to decipher the negative ones from the download.

      I am curious why I was tested L25 ( which is J2 group , as I am T group) maybe because the marker sits exactly in same place and ftdna does not distinguish what belong to what haplogroup
      Last edited by Bartot; 31st August 2014, 03:11 PM.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by vinnie View Post
        My haplotree page shows a mix of pertinent FTDNA-tested and Geno-tested negative SNPs.
        I detest the "presume positive" that ftdna has.

        it has "presumed positive" for my basal m184 and yet I do not have this in my full natgeno2 download.
        If natgeno2 does not have it , it does not exist.

        This lack of M184 for me agrees with other testing companies

        Comment


        • #19
          Everybody that tested with Geno 2.0 was tested for all 12,052 SNP markers regardless of their haplogroup. If you don't have the allele(s) for the SNP that makes it a mutation you are negative for it. If you have the allele(s) for the mutation you are positive for the marker. Once a person is positive for a marker all of his descendants are positive for the marker. If a an SNP does not show up in the list then you have to look at the markers that are on the same level.

          L25 is T->C and you are T so you are negative for that marker.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Armando View Post
            Everybody that tested with Geno 2.0 was tested for all 12,052 SNP markers regardless of their haplogroup. If you don't have the allele(s) for the SNP that makes it a mutation you are negative for it. If you have the allele(s) for the mutation you are positive for the marker. Once a person is positive for a marker all of his descendants are positive for the marker. If a an SNP does not show up in the list then you have to look at the markers that are on the same level.

            L25 is T->C and you are T so you are negative for that marker.
            thank you ..............resolved.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Bartot View Post
              I detest the "presume positive" that ftdna has.

              it has "presumed positive" for my basal m184 and yet I do not have this in my full natgeno2 download.
              If natgeno2 does not have it , it does not exist.

              This lack of M184 for me agrees with other testing companies
              I didn't have time to look up the following info until this morning so even though you consider this resolved I felt what you had posted needed to be clarified as to why it was erroneous in case others need to learn from it.

              M184, M272, PAGES00129(Page129), L455, and others are all on the same level in both the FTDNA and the ISOGG tree for haplogroup T. http://www.isogg.org/tree/ISOGG_HapgrpT.html

              If you have the following mutations that are tested by Geno 2.0 you are presumed positive for M184 by all geneticists.

              L455 G->T
              M272 A->G

              CTS8862 is downstream of L446 (L446 C->T) and since you have stated in another thread that you are positive for CTS8862 you should be positive for L446, M272, L455, and that is why you are presumed positive for M184. That is because, as I said before, once a person has an SNP mutation all of his descendants have the same mutation. Therefore, you have all of the mutations your ancestors did between M184 and CTS8862 as well as the mutations above M184.

              It does not matter that M184 was not in any of the tests that you have had. What matters is that geneticists have found that M184 is phylogenetically equivalent with M272, PAGES00129, L455, and others.
              Last edited by Armando; 1st September 2014, 08:59 AM. Reason: Corrected CTS8862

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Armando View Post
                I didn't have time to look up the following info until this morning so even though you consider this resolved I felt what you had posted needed to be clarified as to why it was erroneous in case others need to learn from it.

                M184, M272, PAGES00129(Page129), L455, and others are all on the same level in both the FTDNA and the ISOGG tree for haplogroup T. http://www.isogg.org/tree/ISOGG_HapgrpT.html

                If you have the following mutations that are tested by Geno 2.0 you are presumed positive for M184 by all geneticists.

                L455 G->T
                M272 A->G

                CTS8862 is downstream of L446 (L446 C->T) and since you have stated in another thread that you are positive for CTS8862 you should be positive for L446, M272, L455, and that is why you are presumed positive for M184. That is because, as I said before, once a person has an SNP mutation all of his descendants have the same mutation. Therefore, you have all of the mutations your ancestors did between M184 and CTS8862 as well as the mutations above M184.

                It does not matter that M184 was not in any of the tests that you have had. What matters is that geneticists have found that M184 is phylogenetically equivalent with M272, PAGES00129, L455, and others.
                I agree with you in the above for my markers, except, the "missing" M184 for me in every test I have done.
                I have concluded that not everyone gets every basal marker for their haplogroup, and not everyone needs to get every basal marker for their haplogroup,this is not the issue. The issue for me is the term "presumed positive" when the marker M184 for me is completely missing.....maybe the fault is mine in trying to understand the logic behind basal markers. I understand where the testers are assuming I have M184....but
                What I want to know is:
                Is "presumed positive" have the same meaning for people who have transferred their natgeno2 to ftdna...and...the people who have not, i.e, have only tested via ftdna. Clearly "presumed positive" will work for these only ftdna tested people, but the natgeno2 people with all the info that came across!!.............

                T group from July 2014 has 45 basal markers. things change.....once M70 SNP told people you where part of the T1 group, which was 95% of all T people, now you do not need M70 to be a T1 .....M70 SNP makes you a T1a person......things change

                I now sit in ISOGG with L446, CTS11796 and CTS12108. I am positive for all 3

                CTS8862 has been confined to a lower area......things change
                Last edited by Bartot; 1st September 2014, 02:45 PM.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by Bartot View Post
                  I agree with you in the above for my markers, except, the "missing" M184 for me in every test I have done.
                  I have concluded that not everyone gets every basal marker for their haplogroup, and not everyone needs to get every basal marker for their haplogroup,this is not the issue. The issue for me is the term "presumed positive" when the marker M184 for me is completely missing.....maybe the fault is mine in trying to understand the logic behind basal markers. I understand where the testers are assuming I have M184....but
                  What I want to know is:
                  Is "presumed positive" have the same meaning for people who have transferred their natgeno2 to ftdna...and...the people who have not, i.e, have only tested via ftdna. Clearly "presumed positive" will work for these only ftdna tested people, but the natgeno2 people with all the info that came across!!.............

                  T group from July 2014 has 45 basal markers. things change.....once M70 SNP told people you where part of the T1 group, which was 95% of all T people, now you do not need M70 to be a T1 .....M70 SNP makes you a T1a person......things change

                  I now sit in ISOGG with L446, CTS11796 and CTS12108. I am positive for all 3

                  CTS8862 has been confined to a lower area......things change
                  Do you have G or T for CTS8862 in your Geno 2.0 results?

                  I don't understand why you think being tested with Geno 2.0 or FTDNA makes a difference for "presumed positive" for M184. As long as a person has STR markers that match that major haplogroup or a Geno 2.0 results that show a person to be positive for markers on the same level it does not make a difference.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by Armando View Post
                    Do you have G or T for CTS8862 in your Geno 2.0 results?

                    I don't understand why you think being tested with Geno 2.0 or FTDNA makes a difference for "presumed positive" for M184. As long as a person has STR markers that match that major haplogroup or a Geno 2.0 results that show a person to be positive for markers on the same level it does not make a difference.
                    CTS8862 Y T T

                    CTS11796 Y T T

                    CTS12108 Y G G

                    L446 Y T T

                    L455 Y - -
                    nothing for L455

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by Bartot View Post
                      I now sit in ISOGG with L446, CTS11796 and CTS12108. I am positive for all 3

                      CTS8862 has been confined to a lower area......things change
                      Originally posted by Bartot View Post
                      CTS8862 Y T T

                      CTS11796 Y T T

                      CTS12108 Y G G

                      L446 Y T T

                      L455 Y - -
                      nothing for L455
                      That shows that you are positive for CTS8862 and since CTS8862 is below L446, CTS11796 and CTS12108 in the trees at FTDNA, ISOGG, and http://www.yfull.com/tree/T/ your terminal (youngest) SNP is CTS8862.

                      See the part at http://www.isogg.org/tree/ISOGG_HapgrpT.html where it says CTS1774, CTS3767, CTS8862, CTS9984, CTS11984 are downstream of L446. Listed 21 July 2014.

                      I think it is because you missed that last part that you were confused about your terminal SNP. Even Geno 2.0 showed your terminal SNP to be CTS8862 so there are four sites that agree that your terminal SNP is CTS8862.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by Armando View Post
                        That shows that you are positive for CTS8862 and since CTS8862 is below L446, CTS11796 and CTS12108 in the trees at FTDNA, ISOGG, and http://www.yfull.com/tree/T/ your terminal (youngest) SNP is CTS8862.

                        See the part at http://www.isogg.org/tree/ISOGG_HapgrpT.html where it says CTS1774, CTS3767, CTS8862, CTS9984, CTS11984 are downstream of L446. Listed 21 July 2014.

                        I think it is because you missed that last part that you were confused about your terminal SNP. Even Geno 2.0 showed your terminal SNP to be CTS8862 so there are four sites that agree that your terminal SNP is CTS8862.
                        ok

                        I am positive for all as you state above except CTS1774

                        I will most probably need to do a BigY or Y prime in the future

                        Comment

                        Working...
                        X