GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2010-02 > 1266803992


From: Robert Stafford <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] DYS463 and DYS452
Date: Sun, 21 Feb 2010 19:59:52 -0600
References: <710313.29722.qm@web25902.mail.ukl.yahoo.com>
In-Reply-To: <710313.29722.qm@web25902.mail.ukl.yahoo.com>


I searched with the 9 unique SMGF markers and found a lot of new entries
from Ancestry. You can either leave them both out or search high and low.
Those unaware of the problem will miss a lot of close matches, though.

Bob

On Sun, Feb 21, 2010 at 5:17 PM, vernade didier <>wrote:

> List,
> As others I am familiar with the markers from familytreedna standard orders
> and much less familiar with makers like DYS463 and DYS452 . There is a
> problem in ysearch with these 2 markers ; both are displaying "bimodal"
> values because a conversion is needed. Before posting this message I checked
> a few haplogroups for these 2 markers and from that quick survey it's a pity
> that no more data are available for these markers and the the conversion
> problem is making the few available ones unusable.
>
> DYS463 (still) requires to subtract 2 when testing with FTDNA (!). No
> surprise : values in R1b1b2 are "oscillating" between 22 and 24 , whether
> the "2" were substracted or not ; same in R1a1a . One could think it's easy
> to correct but the situation isn't that simple (as you could guess). For
> example among the 50 entries for Q1a3 haplogroup I can count : 25(2) ,
> 24(2) , 23(3) and 22(1). I suspect that the 2 "25" should be 23 and the 2
> "24" may be 2 21 and this would mean thatbthe group splits in 2 groups for
> this rather low mutating markers.
>
> I wanted to discuss also DYS452 but this post is already long enough and I
> think my point is clear : I wish some cleaning of ysearch is done as soon as
> possible .
>
> Didier
>
> PS :
>
> I also wish that these interesting markers not in standard orders (at
> FTDNA) would become incorporated. Extensive testing on many groups has now
> teached us that some markers are not as useful as expected (CDY ...).
> Historically DYS463 and DYS452 were tested by other companies than FTDNA but
> the times are changing and I hope a revised set of standard markers can
> focus on those markers really helpful.
>
> Hope this time my post can appear today and not the next day...
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -------------------------------
> 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: