It seems to me there are two fundamentally different ways to subgroup, but I don't see the question addressed anywhere.
by STR (example Raymond project)
-members subgrouped into arbitrary subgroup names or subgroup numbers (e.g. 1 to 100) according to Genetic Distance between their STR results, i.e. STR haplotypes
-equivalent to looking for Y-DNA matches for each member and grouping them together where GD is less than 3, leaving the rest ungrouped
-advantage: simple; disadvantage: haplogroups only predicted not confirmed
By SNP (example Pratt project)
-subgroup names are meaningful names of SNP Haplotree branches (subclades, lineages..)
-Terminal SNP is very important, but only available for Big-Y members?
-advantage: haplogroup is confirmed (but only for those with many SNP tests?) disadvantage: results not clear for dummies
Questions:
1. Is it true, there are these 2 distinct ways?
2. Is SNP subgrouping the way to go, especially as more members test Big-Y, and "private" SNPs/variants are being revealed?
by STR (example Raymond project)
-members subgrouped into arbitrary subgroup names or subgroup numbers (e.g. 1 to 100) according to Genetic Distance between their STR results, i.e. STR haplotypes
-equivalent to looking for Y-DNA matches for each member and grouping them together where GD is less than 3, leaving the rest ungrouped
-advantage: simple; disadvantage: haplogroups only predicted not confirmed
By SNP (example Pratt project)
-subgroup names are meaningful names of SNP Haplotree branches (subclades, lineages..)
-Terminal SNP is very important, but only available for Big-Y members?
-advantage: haplogroup is confirmed (but only for those with many SNP tests?) disadvantage: results not clear for dummies
Questions:
1. Is it true, there are these 2 distinct ways?
2. Is SNP subgrouping the way to go, especially as more members test Big-Y, and "private" SNPs/variants are being revealed?
Comment