GENEALOGY-DNA-L ArchivesArchiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2005-11 > 1131459649
From: Robert Stafford <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] H4 and other potential marker discrepencies -- please advise & help a newbie
Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2005 06:20:49 -0800 (PST)
The only difference in nomenclature between RG/DNAH and FTDNA is at Y-GATA-H4.
The discussion about DYS19 applies only to SMGF, which differs on a number of markers from the commercial labs. However, they have input templates for each firm.
The notes on this page tell you how FTDNA calculates genetic distance. It would be a good idea to check with your customer rep to make sure it is current, though.
Because of the recLOH events that have been discussed on the list, the calculations can be misleading on markers with multiple copies.
Whether you can make any sense out of the data is another question. If you are working with family trees and conducting tests methodically, the answer is a resounding Yes!! You will get a lot out of testing and undoubtedly enjoy the project.
If you are relying on DNA results alone, it may be another matter. I have avoided such projects, except for a tangential role in a very short-lived one. This is where you have to use complex techniques. From some of the posts to the list, it appears to be a frustrating undertaking. Hopefully, those who have been through it will give you advice on the pitfalls to avoid.
RG solves the problem of interpretation by offering an optional report. A molecular genealogist does the analysis and writes up a 10-30 page report. They will analyze results from any firm. It takes a lot of the load off of the adminsitrator and is well worth the extra cost, even for those with lots of experience. We have done four so far and, even though I tell people it is optional, everyone wants to be included in one.
Gary Lee <> wrote:
I am currently trying to make sense of Lee research data from various testing companies. I believe I have my caluclations refined to match FTDNA given that my results for genetic distance numbers match those given from their www site.
I would GREATLY appreciate it if the knowledgable readers of this distribution list could provide the following to me. I promise to use the knowledge to help others:
a) from this list I now know that H4 is reported differently by FTDNA dna others. What other markers suffer the same fate? I see below that 19 may have some differences as well? I've seen Charles Kerchner's lab merge document and this is a good start, but I'm trying to catch all issues here.
b) is there a summary document anywhere showing how genetic distance is calculated for each marker? Again, I believe I have most of this figured out, but would love to make sure.
|Re: [DNA] H4 and other potential marker discrepencies -- please advise & help a newbie by Robert Stafford <>|