GENEALOGY-DNA-L ArchivesArchiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2010-02 > 1267217900
From: (John Chandler)
Subject: Re: [DNA] Clerical mutations and lab errors
Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2010 15:58:20 -0500
In-Reply-To: <firstname.lastname@example.org> (message fromvernade didier on Fri, 26 Feb 2010 02:24:10 +0000 (GMT))
> The question : how can you collect so easily your "snapshots" ?
I didn't say it was easy. The process is quite tedious, despite all
of my efforts to make it less so. My method involves saving the HTML
source for the data table as a text file and then reducing the text
into a tab-delimited form with standard column headings using a series
of emacs macros. This process also can (and does) eliminate the entries
that don't have 67-marker results. I would be happy to share the macros
with anyone who wants to use this Lisp-based technique.
> The request : can you make available your collect ; I would like a
> check out on how many R1b1b2a1b3 in all these projects (and get a
> hand on these haplotypes, if possible) ?
I have mixed feelings about the haplogroup designations. I have not
thrown them away, but I make no effort to retain the green-vs-red tags
in the FTDNA-supplied web pages, and so there is a jumble of measured
and estimated haplogroups. For that matter, the private web sites
often seem to have haplogroup designations that are not synched with
FTDNA's system -- either because they have not updated the HG column
or because they prefer a different version of the nomenclature or
because they have access to SNP results from other labs.
All that aside, I can report that I have 105 haplotypes claiming to be
R1b1b2a1b3. If you write to me off-line, we can discuss what your
needs are and whether I can fulfill them.
> There are errors in labeling as I mentioned previously : some
> R1b1b2a1b3 seem to be "old" R-U152 or R-M153 because of previous Y
> DNA tree ; I don't know how this is technically possible but it
> seems to occur.
Some of the FTDNA-supplied project pages use the new Flash-based display,
and some of these in turn use the most-downstream-SNP "shorthand" system
of nomenclature. Again, a jumble. I haven't checked to see whether
these correspond exactly to the "longhand" designations displayed for
the kits that happen to belong to other projects.
|Re: [DNA] Clerical mutations and lab errors by (John Chandler)|