GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2008-02 > 1202342930


From: "bbailey.lowedna" <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] When is SNP Testing Useful for Genealogists?
Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2008 18:08:50 -0600
In-Reply-To: <476331.66892.qm@web81605.mail.mud.yahoo.com>


Bob...

No, to answer your first question.

When you get matches at 37 or greater, I have never seen mismatches
in a base Haplogroup as G, J, E3b, Q, or R or R1, or R2 from FTDNA.

Can't speak as to other companies.

Bill

-----Original Message-----
From:
[mailto:]On Behalf Of Robert Stafford
Sent: Wednesday, February 06, 2008 5:55 PM
To:
Subject: Re: [DNA] When is SNP Testing Useful for Genealogists?


Bill,

A call of Hg G and G2 are not conflicting. A call of Hg G* and G2 would be.
The * is supposed to indicate that all known SNPs below in the reference Hg
chart have tested negatively. Unfortunately, not all firms seem to strictly
follow this convention. From what I have seen, DNAH and EA do seem to follow
it.

But as to my question: This is not an example of what I requested.

Bob Stafford.

"bbailey.lowedna" <> wrote: Bob..

Yes, in my Bailey project three of Baileys were judge to be Hap-G
while the other two who match at 37 were identified as Hap-G2.

A retest of the three correctly identified them as Hap-G2.

As you suggest a lab misread or primer problem created the
haplogroup mismatch that FTDNA promptly did without charge.
This is why I use and depend on FTDNA.

Also if any of my three project participants match closely at
37 markers with three or more of the other project folks, I
always request one of this match group to order a DEEP SNP test.

Bill


-----Original Message-----
From:
[mailto:]On Behalf Of Robert Stafford
Sent: Wednesday, February 06, 2008 4:30 PM
To:
Subject: Re: [DNA] When is SNP Testing Useful for Genealogists?


Have you found or heard of any cases where people with the same surname (or
variant) and close matches to the ancestral [fewer than 2 mutations with 43
or 35 (FTDNA 37 ex-CDY) markers], who weren't within the same haplogroup. I
can see its happening, probably somewhere within R1b1c. (If it did happen, I
might suspect a lab error or possibly a parallel mutation.) However, until
we find some examples, I think it is better for genealogists to spend the
money elsewhere. They are enough people testing SNPs that something should
turn up, if it is there.

Bob Stafford

"bbailey.lowedna" wrote:
Lindsey...

I find SNP testing very useful when we get close 25 or 37 matches
to confirm that everyone is in the same ancient genetic group or
haplogroup clade.


-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
with the word 'unsubscribe' without the
quotes in the subject and the body of the message



-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
with the word 'unsubscribe' without the
quotes in the subject and the body of the message


-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
with the word 'unsubscribe' without the
quotes in the subject and the body of the message


This thread: