Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Genographic Project vs FTDNA

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Genographic Project vs FTDNA

    When I received my results from Genographic project, I was identified as belonging to R (M173). I purchased further DeepSNP-R1a test from FTDNA and was subsequently informed via email that "Your result failed to produce a clear result in this run. Your test is now in process at the lab and results are expected to arrive by June 9th."

    Following that delay notification, I received a new notification informing me that "New DeepSNP Results are back."

    On the FTDNA site I found out following;

    Your Haplogroup Your SNP Tests
    R2 M124+ M207+ SRY10831.2+ M157- M173- M198- M343- M56- M87-

    The confusion now arrises as to how can I be both SRY10831.2+ indicating I can be R1a and M124+ indicating I belong to R2.

    I am not sure if these are final results or am I to wait further for more rounds of testing, as there is no indication in either direction on the site or in the email notification. And as per original delay notification the results were expected by June 9th.

    In the mean time, the Genographic Project site status now went back to indicating test results as being in DNA Analysis state (this must be due to new deep testing I ordered with FTDNA) and has not yet indicated final results.

    Note that DYS markers ploted before deep test and after the test have not shown any differences that'd indicate a shift from earlier M173 to new M124.

    I have sent an email inquiry to FTDNA on this, asking for further clarification, but any feedback/input from other members who have come across such a scenario would be highly appreciated.

  • #2
    This might answer your question. It appears that SRY10831.2 is positive for everyone EXCEPT [edit: haplogroup A and] R1a where it has flipped back to its negative state.

    The SRY....... SNP is the one that appears twice in the human tree. It
    occured very early in modern man's history, then it reverts back to the
    original state late in the human tree but only for R1a. So R1a is actually
    negative again. Not the greatest of clarity with the nomenclature, but this
    has often been discussed on the list. R1b would be a haplogroup which is
    positive like almost every branch of the human tree other than R1a (because
    of that very early mutation).
    DNA-Genealogy Post

    [edit: To my knowledge, this is the only known occurence of 2 mutations for the same SNP within the human tree. Flipped to positive between 'A' and 'B' and then back to negative for R1a.]
    Last edited by DMac; 3 June 2006, 07:59 PM.

    Comment


    • #3
      Thanks DMac for your response. It certainly helps me understand it better now.

      Comment


      • #4
        I received an email response from FTDNA on my inquiry on mismatch between Genographic results and further deep R1a SNP tests results.

        Quote
        "There was a bug in the National Geographic System that showed R's SNP as
        M173, which is incorrect. It should have shown SNP 207. The NG database is going through a series of updates now and this is one of the errors that
        they are correcting. In the next few days, you will see on your results
        page through NG that the correct information is posted.

        Family Tree DNA, when first running the test, ordered a SNP test on your
        sample and we SNP'd for R, M207. The additional test we performed, the
        Deep R1a SNP test, confirmed that the haplogroup was even more distinct
        than R, and that it was not R1a or r1b, but R2."
        End Quote

        Any more information on R2?

        Comment


        • #5
          Paper on R2

          Please go thro' this article.
          http://www.ethnoancestry.com/Haplogr...2006_02_19.pdf

          Comment


          • #6
            Thank you father_r2 . I had seen the article you have listed via google searches, and it does appear very helpful in getting better understanding on R2, even if it appears to be investigative in nature and does not tells us conclusively/authorititively the "where" and "how" of R2 lineage. Thanks for the reference info.

            Comment

            Working...
            X