Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2010-02 > 1265302793

From: William Hurst <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] FTDNA admits to errors in many mtDNA sequences
Date: Thu, 4 Feb 2010 11:59:53 -0500
References: <BAY111-DS5599CD6629B8BA6A39342BC550@phx.gbl>,<005a01caa5b8$519168d0$f4b43a70$@org>
In-Reply-To: <005a01caa5b8$519168d0$f4b43a70$@org>

Hi Ron and Lawrence and all,

I just found this sequence in an FTDNA FASTA from 2008: CACACACACACCACGCT I think that supports Ron's position that the insertions were NOT correct in the FASTA. But I just ran this FASTA through Gen-Snip and it reported two insertions at position 525. My position that I can live with that, since the insertions - the correct number of insertions - show up in the right place in the full sequence and I know what they are. I'm not a computer program, so I can ignore or adapt to unanticipated exceptions to programmed "rules." But again, I have no objection to anyone wanting their entry fixed. Just so they know that even the "correction" is not necessarily to the standard nomenclature and will not match lots of other sequences on GenBank.

Bill Hurst

Lawrence wrote:

> Dr. Krahn clearly indicated that the original FASTA sequences within FTDNA
> were correct, and that only the conversion of these to mutation lists was
> nonstandard. But questions remain:
> 1) Why has FTDNA removed the customer option to download the FASTA sequence
> directly?
> 2) When the customer did have this option, was he getting the original FASTA
> sequence from the lab, or a (mis)interpretation based on the mutation list?
> > From: [mailto:genealogy-dna-
> > ] On Behalf Of Ron
> > We were never told that the FASTA sequences were corrupt and
> > needed to be changed.
> > What is really
> > important is to see the error that this problem cre!
> > ates in a FASTA file that is generated from a mutation list that is
> derived from that
> > software output.

This thread: