GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2004-06 > 1086110891


From: David Faux <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] Interpreting -- getting results for all markers ordered
Date: Tue, 1 Jun 2004 10:28:11 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <40BCA803.8000003@kerchner.com>


That is a very interesting observation Charles and Diane. If you are correct it explains the quick turn around times. FTDNA could do the same, but will not release a result until they are fully confident that they have the absolute correct values for each and every marker. Your interpretation reflects precisely my understanding Charles. I know that a 25 marker test for one of my participants is being held up by one single solitary marker which just refuses to provide a clear reading. I asked Bennett yesterday about the possibility of releasing partial results to at least allow us project administrators to offer something concrete to our participants. He is taking the matter under advisement.

Recall that Bennett was a genealogist before he ever founded FTDNA. He truly understands what we want and need, and is the most ethical businessperson I have had the pleasure of dealing with.

I will take the FTDNA approach thank you, and know my participant's DNA is in storage for the inevitable SNP tests upcoming, and know I can predict haplogroup with their Haplogroup Database rather than having to ask for the input of groups like this to give a best guess at a string of raw numbers.

Does DNAHeritage provide a webpage for each customer like FTDNA? If so, do they indicate what they plan to do about the "missing" marker values. This sounds a lot like DNAPrint, except a few failed markers with that test probably doesn't affect the results much. With Y-DNA testing each marker is critical.

David.

Charles <> wrote:
Diane,

The zeroes for several of your markers (six if I counted correctly)
indicates to me that DNAHeritage.com's lab Sorenson Genomics did not get
results for those markers. This may be one big difference in business
practices between DNAHeritage.com and FamilyTreeDNA.com. It is my
understanding, and has been my experience, that FamilyTreeDNA.com keeps
testing and retesting one's sample, including going to the second vial
and/or getting a new sample if necessary, until they get results for all
the markers ordered and paid for. In some cases that is the reason for
the longer turn-around time. From what I have heard, in about 15% of the
cases the Univ of AZ lab needs to do one or more reprocessings to get
results for all the markers. But for all my tests in my various surname
projects and in my ethnic group project, I have always received results
for the full set of markers ordered and paid for.

Sincerely,

Charles
http://www.kerchner.com/kerchdna.htm
http://www.kerchner.com/dna-info.htm

Diane Graham wrote:
> Good morning,
> I sent this dna sample to DNA Heritage. The 43 markers for $199.00
> package looked good to me. I have since picked up on a couple of
> reasons why I might rather have sent my money to FTdna. Maybe yes,
> maybe no? Never the less, these are the results.


==============================
Gain access to over two billion names including the new Immigration
Collection with an Ancestry.com free trial. Click to learn more.
http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=4930&sourceid=1237


Dr. David K. Faux, P.O. Box 192, Seal Beach, CA, 90740, USA


www.davidkfaux.org



This thread: