Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Confused

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

  • Confused

    I have a number of Big-Y matches with no known snp differences. The vast majority are R-S6881. Yet I'm negative for R-S6881 and the snp above it. How can I match these people with no differences? My kit number is 390534.

  • #2
    Because it is confusing

    I understand that R-S6881 is not on the list of Known SNPs only as far as presentation of Big Y results is concerned.

    But the outcome is exactly as you had observed, you are very different from your matches, and yet just by looking at the Matching tab of Big Y results you might think otherwise...

    Mr W

    Comment


    • #3
      It's because of the large number of known SNPs missing from the BigY database that a haplogroup admin, which in this case would be from the U106 project, and/or professional analysis such as YFull needs to be used once the BAM file request and generation option is restored which is supposed to happen in just a few weeks (IIRC).

      Comment


      • #4
        As you're a member of the U106 Project, the best thing to do is upload your VCF/BED files from the Big Y test to the Yahoogroup associated with the project. Then we can include your results in the next run of the free spreadsheet we maintain of over 600 project members' Big Y results.

        The spreadsheet is set up to weed out the type of spurious analysis that FTDNA gives Big Y customers. Besides telling you that you match other customer whom you obviously don't match, they include "singletons" that are not relevant since they're upstream from U106. The spreadsheet will compare the data from your VCF/BED files to all the other project members who've uploaded their files to the group and find which of your "singletons" match other members' "singletons," potentially creating new subclades.

        If you're not already a member of the Yahoogroup, send a join request to [email protected], In order to access the group files section, including uploading files to it, you'll have to join using a Yahoo address.

        Comment


        • #5
          Thanks MMaddi, I've uploaded a zipped raw data file to the files area. I'm not sure what else needs to be done.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by MikeP View Post
            Thanks MMaddi, I've uploaded a zipped raw data file to the files area. I'm not sure what else needs to be done.
            You've done what needs to be done.

            Your Big Y results will be included in the next update of the spreadsheet. Then you'll be able to see which "singletons" in your results you share with others and with whom you share them. Those shared "singletons" may create a new subclade.

            The "singletons" that you don't share with anyone else are, for now, private to your recent paternal line ancestry. Someone in the future may match them, which would form a new subclade.

            Comment


            • #7
              The column for Matching SNPs only counts SNP tests done outside of the Big Y. Annoyingly enough I had some bad results from Nat Geo (they marked me positive to SNPs that came up negative when I retested them at FTDNA) pushing my matches further away from me.

              Matching is a little weird though. I'm an early tester from a test ordered Nov 2013. I'm R-L2 and have only 161 matches. But only 6 share my rare subgroup of A6454.

              My dad's brother ordered Dec 2015. Naturally he's R-L2 > A6454 like me. He has 353 matches of which 7 are A6454. For some reason my kit missed the man who's the closest match to us in our small R-L2 > A6454 > BY3493.

              My father-in-law ordered Sep 2015. He's a R-DF27 with 820 matches. Unfortunately the SNPs ZZ12 and ZZ41 aren't able to be retrieved in the matching page. He does have 2 more subgroups under them that have 1 real match each (Z20907 and BY3291). Amusingly enough he matches my uncle but not me.

              I only pay attention to matches who share the novel variants identified in my most recent subgroups by the project admins. It's the old DNA matching problem. Which would you prefer, hundreds of matches from thousands of years ago or dozens of matches from a few centuries ago.

              Comment

              Working...
              X