Big Y, what next?

General discussions regarding DNA and its uses in genealogy research

Posts: 2277
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2012 5:43 pm

MtDNA:
U5b2b
PostPosted: Thu May 10, 2018 2:17 pm
All Big Y testers should send in a request for their Hg38 .BAM files. These files belong to us because we paid a lot of money for them and our Big Y results belong to us and not to FTDNA. FTDNA is holding out on us and they had seven months to sort the upgrade.

This is the answer I got to my request today.
"Hello,
Thank you for contacting FTDNA. Unfortunately, BAM file generation is not currently active. We hope to have this feature available late May. We apologize for any inconvenience this may cause and thank you for your continued patience.
Best regards,"

Posts: 2277
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2012 5:43 pm

MtDNA:
U5b2b
PostPosted: Fri May 11, 2018 1:02 pm
A post on the FTDNA forum, 10 of May 2018.


Ysearch and Mitosearch going out of business

Hello all,

"I wanted to let you know that it looks like Ysearch and Mitosearch are finally going to be shut down. Management is aiming for the end of this month but the exact date has not been announced yet. I would recommend getting whatever data you may want off of it as soon as possible."


Family Tree DNA

Posts: 2277
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2012 5:43 pm

MtDNA:
U5b2b
PostPosted: Fri May 11, 2018 8:19 pm
The GDPR is going to cause problems for all of us dna testers.

http://gdprandyou.ie/gdpr-for-individuals/

Posts: 2277
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2012 5:43 pm

MtDNA:
U5b2b
PostPosted: Sun May 13, 2018 6:43 am
If FTDNA had to close ysearch because of the new EU rules then the dna projects could be next in line. There is a lot more personal info in the dna projects than there was in ysearch.

Posts: 2277
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2012 5:43 pm

MtDNA:
U5b2b
PostPosted: Wed Jun 13, 2018 5:52 pm
A poster at FTDNA asked a question.
When did DYS439 change from 10 to 11 and then to 12?

Questions

1 - When did DYS439 change from 10 to 11, and when did it change to 12?
2 - Is DYS439 = 11 rare for R1a1a's?
3 - Is there any place in my Y-DNA500 results or BAM-file I can check when I got my 11?

Answer
Any tester who sent his BAM file to Yfull will be able to download his YSTR variants and Yfull gives the ancestral and derived values for each YSTR. This poster may get an idea when there was a change to the YSTR in question.

We know from the thousands of U106 testers that DYS492 changed from 12 to 13 around the time of the birth of U106, so 13 is ancestral value for the U106 group.

Posts: 2277
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2012 5:43 pm

MtDNA:
U5b2b
PostPosted: Tue Jul 24, 2018 10:50 pm
Gioiello
It is more than likely that I have a bottleneck in my Y-line. One of my Big Y matches is a GD of 13 at 67 markers and shares 16 of my YSNPs from my Big Y test. We are within the 30 YSNP FTDNA Big Y matching threshold which I think is a good thing.

It would be a hard task for me to find YSTR testers who would be likely to break down this 16 YSNP block with 67 markers and they will not show up as Big Y matches if they match on 8 or less out of the 16 YSNPs. The problem I have is that there are Z156 testers who have a similar haplotype to mine but they are in different Z156 branches that are at least 4,000 ybp. That is one of the reasons that I think that there is a bottleneck in my Y-Line.

If that is the case, then I am hammered because it would be impossible to trace a Y-line that was bottlenecked for at least 2,000 years. One might be able to track their ancestral line using intermediate clusters but with a gap of 2,000 years then it is a lost cause.

Posts: 2443
Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2012 7:08 am
Location: Pisa (Italy)
YDNA:
R- Z2110 (KV7Y2)
MtDNA:
K1a1b1e/HQ176413
PostPosted: Wed Jul 25, 2018 8:22 am
My experience says that more than 10 mutations out of 67 markers may be also thousands of years, in fact you says: "The problem I have is that there are Z156 testers who have a similar haplotype to mine but they are in different Z156 branches that are at least 4,000 ybp".

STRs are deceitful if don't form a "cluster" with some slow mutating markers.

"That is one of the reasons that I think that there is a bottleneck in my Y-Line". It happens that some lines are rare, and the most part went extinct.

Posts: 2277
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2012 5:43 pm

MtDNA:
U5b2b
PostPosted: Wed Jul 25, 2018 9:53 pm
Gioiello wrote:My experience says that more than 10 mutations out of 67 markers may be also thousands of years, in fact you says: "The problem I have is that there are Z156 testers who have a similar haplotype to mine but they are in different Z156 branches that are at least 4,000 ybp".

STRs are deceitful if don't form a "cluster" with some slow mutating markers.

"That is one of the reasons that I think that there is a bottleneck in my Y-Line". It happens that some lines are rare, and the most part went extinct.


I have two off-modal markers among the first 67 markers and they are specific to my Y line only. I have one Big Y match with the two off modal markers and one Big Y match with one off modal marker. I have only one 67 marker match in 12 years of testing.

There are a lot of bottlenecks among the R1b clan. Some of the most numerous L21 dna clans in Ireland today expanded within the past 2,000 years, M222 and CTS 4466 are two of them that come to mind.

Posts: 2277
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2012 5:43 pm

MtDNA:
U5b2b
PostPosted: Fri Jul 27, 2018 1:41 pm
Gioiello wrote:My experience says that more than 10 mutations out of 67 markers may be also thousands of years, in fact you says: "The problem I have is that there are Z156 testers who have a similar haplotype to mine but they are in different Z156 branches that are at least 4,000 ybp".

STRs are deceitful if don't form a "cluster" with some slow mutating markers.

"That is one of the reasons that I think that there is a bottleneck in my Y-Line". It happens that some lines are rare, and the most part went extinct.



FTDNA continues to promote and sell useless 37 and 67 marker YSTR tests. There could be around 80,000 potential U106 testers in their database and yet
only 4,600 in the U106 project. At least 25% of my YSTR matches could be U106 but they are given the M269 status and they sit on it. FTDNA does nothing to promote YSNP tests which are the only reliable method of determining the relatedness of two ydna testers.

The project admins do not want testers to take YSNP tests because they want to control the different YDNA groups by encouraging testers to take YSTR tests so that they can join their specific projects. They can then control the line of thinking though their project about the origins of their dna subgroup the way that they see it. It is all about control and we see this in the peer review process relating to the ancient dna samples. All samples have to get the okay from the "tribal elders" like in the Stone Age. The Stone Age mentality lives on in the modern era.
Last edited by dartraighe on Fri Jul 27, 2018 5:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Posts: 2443
Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2012 7:08 am
Location: Pisa (Italy)
YDNA:
R- Z2110 (KV7Y2)
MtDNA:
K1a1b1e/HQ176413
PostPosted: Fri Jul 27, 2018 4:53 pm
dartraighe wrote:
Gioiello wrote:My experience says that more than 10 mutations out of 67 markers may be also thousands of years, in fact you says: "The problem I have is that there are Z156 testers who have a similar haplotype to mine but they are in different Z156 branches that are at least 4,000 ybp".

STRs are deceitful if don't form a "cluster" with some slow mutating markers.

"That is one of the reasons that I think that there is a bottleneck in my Y-Line". It happens that some lines are rare, and the most part went extinct.



FTDNA continues to promote and sell useless 37 and 67 marker YSTR tests. There could be around 80,000 potential U106 testers in their database and yet
only 4,600 in the U106 project. At least 25% of my YSTR matches could be U106 but they are given the M269 status and they sit on it. FTDNA does nothing to promote YSNP tests which are the only reliable method of determining the relatedness of two ydna testers.

The project admins do not want testers to take YSNP tests because they want to control the different YDNA groups by encouraging testers to take YSTR tests so that they can join their specific projects. They can then control the line of thinking though their project about the origins of their dna subgroup the way that they see it. It is all about control and we see this in the peer review process relating to the ancient dna samples. All samples have to get the okay from the "tribal leaders" like in the Stone Age. The Stone Age mentality lives on in the modern era.


We are fucking FTDNA, its owners and all its administrators. We test with www.yseq.net, look at this R-L23-L277-PH945 (but YFull uses the other SNP, BY13763, found just from a Big Y):

Bertolini and Evangyul have 29 mutations out of Y37. Even though some could be a multistep mutation, it is an infinity, a little believable that it happened within 4000 years:
Bertolini:
12 24 14 11 13-14 12 12 13 13 13 29 17 9-10 11 11 26 15 19 27 15-15-16-18 10 12 16-23 16 16 16 19 35-37 11 12
Evangyul:
12 23 14 11 11-14 12 12 11 13 14 28 17 9-9 11 11 25 15 19 30 15-16-16-18 11 11 19-24 15 17 17 17 38-38 12 12
PreviousNext

Return to General DNA Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest