GENEALOGY-DNA-L ArchivesArchiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2010-02 > 1266885600
From: Robert Stafford <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] DYS463 and DYS452
Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2010 18:40:00 -0600
Yes, the instructions do say to use low for DYS463, so everyone should
convert it, so that FTDNA can add 2 to the marker. However, high is now the
de facto standard for DYS452, since they do not say to convert it. The two
ranges do not overlap, so they can easily change only the low values.
Ancestry seems to have the vast majority of the 9 unique markers in
Y-Search, so anyone interested in matching haplotypes should also search at
Ancestry, also. Unfortunately, the searches are too inflexible for data
miners, so they may need to use Ybase. I have not done much research there,
so do not know if it would be fruitful. We may need to encourage Ancestry
customers to enter their data there, also, since it is possible that
Y-Search may have been hopelessly corrupted on the markers discussed.
On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 2:01 PM, Irish III DNA <>wrote:
> 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."
> 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
|Re: [DNA] DYS463 and DYS452 by Robert Stafford <>|