GENEALOGY-DNA-L ArchivesArchiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2008-02 > 1202468077
From: "J. David Grierson" <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] When is SNP Testing Useful for Genealogists?
Date: Fri, 08 Feb 2008 21:54:55 +1100
"Are you saying that FT assigns R1b to SNP tested tests?"
No, I'm saying that the computer algorithm which estimates the sub-clades seems to ignore the evidence of the total haplotype. I have an idea that it only looks at loci 1-12, but perhaps that has been expanded in recent years. For example, my second cousin (ie, we share a great grandfather) is identical to me on 1-37 (no more DYS tested). I am SNP M222+, he is estimated to be R1b1. I was R1b until I had the SNP test, but that was some time ago. I have details of a number of participants in a project whose results on 37-67 are identical to mine, and one off the R1b1c7 modal. We all carry the typical R1b1c7 DYS values at 413a, 534 and 481, yet they are all assigned R1b. This, I think, is confusing for them, especially when FT's advice seems to be that they needn't bother with SNP testing. It is sure confusing to me! It also means that they are seeking genealogical detail in areas and/or family groups (clans) that, in all probability, their ancestors haven't been near for 3000 !
years. Another aspect I would like to informed on is whether the FT program automatically reviews estimated haplogroup assignments as the database grows - or, if one was assigned an estimated Hg when tested (say, in 2003 as I was), there is no review unless one undertakes additional testing.
"Because my understanding is that they do NOT assign sub-clades to R1b kits which have not had SNP tests for R1b sub-clades."
Have a look at the R1b1c7 Group public pages, and you will see many sub-clades shown in red, ie estimated to be R1b1+ up to R1b1c7. The same can be said for many other surname studies.
|Re: [DNA] When is SNP Testing Useful for Genealogists? by "J. David Grierson" <>|