Big Y - YFull - Y-Chr Sequence Interpretation Service

[felix]

Ok, I get that. And how can that potentially become a problem for someone? What can be read from the data that might pose a danger in any way even when linked to one´s name? Not even advanced identity thieves can utilize that kind of information, can they? Is it likely that future technologies will make it possible to use the data in unforeseen ways?

Yeah, I've been thinking about the same thing. I'm generally a privacy conscious person, but my DNA results & name are already tied together via 111 Y-STR markers and public/known SNPs on FTDNA's public projects pages. What else would I be giving away?

My DNA test results are on public domain for nearly a year and I haven't faced any problems. I believe Blaine Bettinger who released his DNA results to public domain also may not have had any problems either. Many say medical info could be known to others, but to me most of the medical info I was able to extract using third party tools were not actually true in real life.

I don't think it is a problem to anyone, unless they believe it is. To me, the more your DNA is shared, the more your identify will be traced and helpful for future generations to come. This is just my own opinion.

[lgmayka]

This, perhaps.

The BAM file only has Y chromosome data and (less reliable) mtDNA data, as far as I know--no autosomal DNA information.

[felix]

The BAM file only has Y chromosome data and (less reliable) mtDNA data, as far as I know--no autosomal DNA information.

Actually, my Big Y has more than 20000 autosomal bp variations from the reference. I converted to VCF file (attached for reference). If I take every read into consideration, there are more than 40000 of them. I am not sure how many of them are SNPs (from 63 million identified SNPs but I am trying to find it). Comparing this with 600000+ SNPs on a standard autosomal DNA test, it is very small (only ~ 3%).

[dsm]

mtDNA inclusion

Yes, I understand that part. But can anyone confirm that the .BAM-file is only containing results from the Big-Y test, and does not include results from other tests?

Ask ftDNA. They are the authority.

Cheers DSM

[lgmayka]

YFull will charge $49, FullGenomes also offers service for fee

YFull's web site has announced a fee of $49 for their interpretation service henceforth, and is not temporarily not taking new orders at all.

FullGenomes is also offering a similar interpretation service for a fee, but details are still sketchy.

Once again I must emphasize that these interpretation services do not compete with FTDNA but are a useful, almost necessary, complement to FTDNA's current Big Y offering.

[mwwalsh]

Actually, my Big Y has more than 20000 autosomal bp variations from the reference. I converted to VCF file (attached for reference). If I take every read into consideration, there are more than 40000 of them. I am not sure how many of them are SNPs (from 63 million identified SNPs but I am trying to find it). Comparing this with 600000+ SNPs on a standard autosomal DNA test, it is very small (only ~ 3%).

This is what I understand as well. There is autosomal and mt DNA data included in .BAM files. It appears like it is not extensive, but that is relative statement so I don't know if that autosomal and mt DNA data is significant medically or for any other purposes.

[sjadelson]

YFull's web site has announced a fee of $49 for their interpretation service henceforth, and is not temporarily not taking new orders at all.

Just got my BigY results (finally) yesterday afternoon. No free option for me, I'm afraid.

[drumadoon]

STRs

Got my YFull response and I note it contains 111 STRs. I have only paid FTDNA for 67. If I asked for an upgrade would they just add it on or charge and do a batch run when they seem to already have the results in Big Y?!

[ajmr1a1]

Got my YFull response and I note it contains 111 STRs. I have only paid FTDNA for 67. If I asked for an upgrade would they just add it on or charge and do a batch run when they seem to already have the results in Big Y?!

No, FTDNA will not include these STRs found via BigY for matching.
It would make the BigY an excellent product if they did.

You can start or join a YFull Group and they would be happy to include all this data for you for free.

[Jeroma]

Thank you for this sharing

[mwwalsh]

Thank you for this sharing

Jeroma, you may not have received an answer in full context of Y STRs and Y STR testing. There are different lengths of STRs and Next Generation Sequencing (NGS) tests don't necessarily read them the same way or with the same reliability as specific Y STR tests.

There are good reasons to have STRs tested separately rather than just under the umbrella of NGS testing, like Big Y. I'm not saying that Big Y results don't provide more information than is available on their public project screens. That is why they send you the .bam files if you want them.

We have to keep in mind that some people post with a specific agenda. I guess we all do. It's just we all should all be aware of them.

[KSDA]

While YFull will check your Big Y file for 480 STRs, you won't necessarily receive complete or accurate results. Considering my results for example, of the 480 STRs 57 alleles did not return results and 5 results were considered "uncertain." Limiting to the typical 111 markers for the sake of comparison, 13 markers had no results and one was considered uncertain. Of the 97 reliable and 1 unreliable results, one of the "reliable" values was off by one from my FTDNA Y111 STR test.

[John McCoy]

Has anyone heard from YFull recently? I submitted my BAM file just before they started charging for the service. I did receive an e-mail on April 18 indicating I would receive an ID and password when the analysis was completed. Nothing since then. Soon, I hope!

[DeeTyler]

I also received my BAM file on 4/17 and immediately submitted the link to YFull, and got the confirmation that I would receive a link to the results when they were completed.

After not hearing back from them, I contacted YFull and received a reply that the Y data in the BAM file fell FAR short of the expected reads (the data was damaged). FTDNA was notified by them right away, and when I learned this on Tuesday I also followed up in an email to FTDNA.

I'm not sure if this is the case for you as well, but it appears for our kit the ball is back in FTDNA's court. I haven't heard back yet from FTDNA, but I do hope it will be resolved soon.

[Varego]

I submitted on 3 April and got my results on 5 May.