GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2007-04 > 1175896408


From:
Subject: [DNA] DYS463 -- Instructions from Dr. Krahn
Date: Fri, 06 Apr 2007 21:53:28 +0000


Dear List:
At Lawrence's suggestion, I wrote Dr. Krahn at FTDNA about the confusions regarding DYS463. I am pasting in his 'summary' for emphasis on what to do:

So here's the summary:
If you have a DYS463 result from Family Tree DNA, DNA-Fingerprint or
from the SMGF foundation (directly!)
For:
Ymatch >> enter the exact value
SMGF >> Use the Family Tree DNA conversion mask and enter the DYS463
value minus 2
Ysearch >> substract 2 units
For results from DNAH or RG do the reverse.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lawrence has been correct. If you have DYS463 results from FTDNA, subtract 2 when you post to y-search, and follow Dr. Krahn's instructions for other databases.

With his permission, I am also copying Dr. Krahn's entire email outlining the causes for this DYS463confusion, as well as my letter asking him for clarification about my own experiences with DYS463.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Thomas Krahn <>
To:
Subject: Re: seeking clarification on DYS463=24
Date: Fri Apr 6 14:03:22 2007

Dear Carol,

I'm very sorry for the confusion that you're in with DYS463 and we're
also unhappy with the situation.
Unfortunately this has historical reasons why there are so many
nomenclature problems with DYS463.

The newest standard for reporting DYS463 according NIST and ISFG
publications includes the two differing repeat units. This is exactly
what Family Tree DNA, SMGF and DNA-Fingerprint report when the labs
release their results.
Relative Genetics and DNA Heritage seem to report a repeat count that is
2 units shorter than we do. Probably they want to stick to the old
reporting method which didn't count the terminal 2 AAGGA units, because
they where thought to be invariant. Just recently somebody found out,
that the chimp DNA sequence had only one AAGGA unit. That's why this was
now included in the new NIST & ISFG standards. See:
http://www.cstl.nist.gov/div831/strbase/pub_pres/ISFG_YSTRupdate_FSI2006.pdf

Only the DNA-Fingerprint Ymatch database and the SMGF database in native
mode support the newest standard for counting the repeats of DYS643.

Ysearch uses the short counting method, because this database contained
mainly allele reports from DNAH and Relative Genetics because Family
Tree DNA didn't test DYS463 those days.
So we decided to keep this nomenclature for Ysearch and we will make a
complete upgrade of the whole database by +2 units one day.

The programmer of the SMGF database wanted to make it easier for FTDNA
customers to enter their alleles into the search mask, so he programmed
an automatic conversion routine. The time when he did this, Family Tree
DNA didn't report any DYS463 results, so he assumed that the Ysearch
standard was relevant. We don't have any influence on the SMGF database,
so we can't change this on our end. I'd guess that SMGF will want to
change this in their next release.

So here's the summary:
If you have a DYS463 result from Family Tree DNA, DNA-Fingerprint or
from the SMGF foundation (directly!)
For:
Ymatch >> enter the exact value
SMGF >> Use the Family Tree DNA conversion mask and enter the DYS463
value minus 2
Ysearch >> substract 2 units

For results from DNAH or RG do the reverse.

I hope this helps,

Thomas
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
wrote:
> Dear Dr. Krahn:
> There seems to be much confusion on the GENEALOGY-DNA list about one of
FTDNA's new Advanced marker: DYS463, and it has been suggested that I write to
you for clarification.
>
> My brother is FTDNA Kit #42776, ysearch TRYKD. Haplogroup: R1b1c9* (S21+) [SNP
tested at both FTDNA & EA]
>
> I ordered a set of Advanced Markers and within the past month he was reported
by FTDNA to be DYS463=24. I automatically uploaded his new Advanced markers to
ysearch and his value at DYS463 is also shown on his ysearch page "24". There
is NOTHING on the ysearch page that says that I should 'convert' that value to
"22". Many people on the list are looking at the ysearch 'conversion' page and
treating DYS463 under the guideline suggested for DNA-Fingerprint results: "DYS 463: Subtract 2 from the value reported by
DNA-Fingerprint before entering it into Ysearch."
>
> I have been searching SMGF database for some time attempting to find close
matches to my brother and have previously identified two surnames as close
matches (surnames are SCHUH and BRAUN, while my brother's surname is GLASS).
Those two close matches are precisely why I ordered a set of Advanced Markers
from FTDNA -- to see if the close matching continued. When I go to the SMGF
database, selecting FTDNA as the Lab Standard and search for one of the
surnames, his DYS463 is reported as 22. When I change the Lab Standard to
DNA-Fingerprint, DYS464 = 24.
>
> FTDNA's statement under 'understanding your results' for the Advanced markers
states:
> "DYS 463: There is a difference in reporting nomenclature for DYS463 between
some
> companies. Our reporting nomenclature matches the standard nomenclature used
> by the NIST. DNA-Fingerprint also used this reporting nomenclature, as does
> the SMGF. Results from Relative Genetics and other resellers who outsource
> from Relative Genetics do not follow NIST's standard, and 2 must be
> subtracted from those results in order to compare against the standard
> nomenclature."
> ------------------------------------
> So, FTDNA is NOT saying to subtract 2 for FTDNA or DNA-F -- only for Relative
Genetics. Have people been miss-applying the ysearch 'conversion' instructions
to subtract 2 from this result? Apparently, there are a number of R1b1c's who
have DYS463=22. Is some of this confusion particularly relevant to R1b1c's?
>
> If we are NOT supposed to subtract 2 from FTDNA DYS463=24 (and FTDNA didn't do
that when I automatically uploaded the advanced markers) then why does SMGF
report SCHUH & BRAUN as DYS463=22, when I've selected FTDNA as the Lab Standard
and then report them as DYS463=24 when I use DNA-F as the lab standard.
>
> I hope that I am accurately portraying the confusion that I am in. I know
this is late in the day in Houston, so have a nice Easter and I look forward to hearing back from you next
week.
>
> Thank you,
>
> Carol Vass
> Kent, WA

This thread: