GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2005-09 > 1127841499


From: "Sharon Bryant" <>
Subject: Re: haplogroup prediction [waRe: [DNA] Help again please with interpretation...]
Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 13:18:52 -0400
References: <fa.1c7c5d6f.306a715f@aol.com> <000c01c5c36e$c6285cc0$71509045@Ken1> <000601c5c370$3bcb7470$71509045@Ken1> <007201c5c375$8225c330$1002a8c0@Sharon> <002901c5c37a$38193650$71509045@Ken1>


Ken,

I use what is presented to me as the administrator by the testing company.
In the example I gave you, I started to change it on the project results
page and then realized that I had nothing concrete to back up a more
specific haplogroup assignment and went back to the dash.

I don't see how anyone can dictate to the administrators exactly how they
present the information they receive from the testing companies when it is
presented on their project websites.

My projects are using FTDNA exclusively so I can only put forth a guess
about what I would do if a SNP were tested at a different company. I think I
would continue to use the red -- estimated haplogroup and the green --
confirmed SNP for testing. It's much easier to present the explanatory notes
to the comparison charts on the websites if the color usage is uniform for
SNPs.

Several of my project participants are clueless about how to read a
comparison chart even though I have explained the results to them
repeatedly. So I'm trying to use the KISS principle.

Sharon
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ken Nordtvedt" <>
To: <>
Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2005 11:43 AM
Subject: Re: haplogroup prediction [waRe: [DNA] Help again please with
interpretation...]


> Sharon, But that's the problem. You seem to indicate that you control
> ("handle") the information you get from FTDNA; others say they were
> surprised when they went to some results page and the haplogroup treatment
> had changed. Who changed it? I look at surname project results pages,
> and there are many different treatments of haplogroup information or
> disinformation.
>
> Most of the time in the haplogroups I am familar with (R, I, ...) I don't
> care about the haplogroup column. It is when we run across the real odd
> ball haplotypes that I seek information about whether an SNP test has been
> performed. It would be nice if one could find such information uniformly
> and reliably presented in those cases regardless of which surname project
> or database one went to for that information.
>
> You briefly explained your use of "green", "red", etc. Do you use "green"
> if the SNP was done by Ethnoancestry or Trace Genetics? Do you use the
> "red" only if FTDNA estimated haplogroup, or what about an estimation from
> Whit's prediction machine, or from Bonnie's haplogroup J expertise?
> Without clarity, such a column of assignments does little good.
>
> Ken
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Sharon Bryant" <>
> To: <>
> Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2005 9:09 AM
> Subject: Re: haplogroup prediction [waRe: [DNA] Help again please with
> interpretation...]
>
>
>> Ken and all,
>>
>> In my Molyneaux project, we have one participant for whom FTDNA was
>> unable to determine a haplogroup. In that case when I generated the
>> Y-table a dash appeared instead of a haplogroup. The explanation they
>> offered was that they could do a SNP test for their standard fee.
>>
>> However, when put up against Whit's calculator it came up I1c, which,
>> when we discussed it, you agreed.
>>
>> I don't know how other administrators handle the posting of the
>> information from FTDNA but personally I use the green for the SNPd
>> haplogroups, red for the estimated haplogroups and a dash when that is
>> all they will assign to it.
>>
>> Sharon
>>
>>
>>
>> ==============================
>> New! Family Tree Maker 2005. Build your tree and search for your
>> ancestors at the same time. Share your tree with family and friends.
>> Learn more:
>> http://landing.ancestry.com/familytreemaker/2005/tour.aspx?sourceid=14599&targetid=5429
>>
>>
>
>
>
> ==============================
> Search the US Census Collection. Over 140 million records added in the
> last 12 months. Largest online collection in the world. Learn more:
> http://www.ancestry.com/s13965/rd.ashx
>
>



This thread: