GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2010-02 > 1266884365


From: "Diana Gale Matthiesen" <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] DYS463 and DYS452
Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2010 19:19:25 -0500
References: <DC5F2413E28F4D33B951436D2892B872@HP><BFECJOAEEPCFBFFLLBGPOEPCGPAA.dna@irishtype3dna.org>
In-Reply-To: <BFECJOAEEPCFBFFLLBGPOEPCGPAA.dna@irishtype3dna.org>


I said nothing about DYS463. I was referring to DYS452, only.

If I had to choose between some 2007 emails buried in a mailing list archive and
the *current* conversion instructions online at both Ysearch and SMGF -- which
you snipped out of the backquote, so I'll repeat them here
http://www.smgf.org/ychromosome/marker_standards.jspx
http://www.ysearch.org/conversion_page.asp
-- I would opt for the latter.

Only a handful of people know about the emails, but everyone who extracts data
from SMGF or enters it at Ysearch is seeing the above conversion instructions.
A slavish adherence to these emails -- when clearly three years later the change
has not been made -- is contributing to the problem.

The important thing here is that the database be *consistent*, not whether the
value is high or low. For the sake of consistency, as long as the instructions
say to enter the value high (i.e., to use the raw test result and not convert
it), it should be entered high, regardless of what you believe "should" be the
value.

As Robert indicated, the high values already outnumber the low values by about
two to one.
http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/read/GENEALOGY-DNA/2010-02/1266801854

It makes much more sense to press those who've entered it low to convert the
value back to high, rather than the other way around.

Diana



> -----Original Message-----
> From: On Behalf Of Irish III DNA
> Sent: Monday, February 22, 2010 3:02 PM
> To:
> Subject: Re: [DNA] DYS463 and DYS452
>
> > Diana wrote:-
<snip>
> > FTDNA, like virtually all labs testing for genealogical
> > purposes, reports DYS452 high. The Ysearch convention
> > is for DYS452 to be high,
<snip>
> > The problem in Ysearch is the values that are low, regardless
> > of how they became low.
> **************************************************************
> *******************
> As Thomas said in his email of 6 April 2007
> http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/read/genealogy-dna/20
07-04/1175896408
> http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/read/GENEALOGY-DNA/20
> 07-03/1172991586
>
> regarding DYS463 (but applies to DYS452 as well)
>
> "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."
>
> So the convention for Ysearch is LOW not HIGH and will remain
> so until FTDNA/Ysearch change it. And lets hope it is soon.
> I agree the counting method should now be high and the low
> records are causing a problem, but we need FTDNA/Ysearch
> to fix rather than go off on our own making changes.
>
> Dennis
>


This thread: