Re: [Ashkenazi-Q] Re: Advanced Orders Panel
- Ditto! to both...Thanks Rebekah!On Fri, Oct 1, 2010 at 7:55 AM, <Abramselaine@...> wrote:Dear Rebekah and Thomas,I have been so lost for so long though I do keep hoping that something clicks for me. Any 'free samples' that I'm eligible for will be highly appreciated.And, Rebekah, I trust you implicitly; no hesitation at all.ElaineIn a message dated 9/30/2010 7:26:35 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, rebekahthorn@... writes:
Dear Thomas,I cannot imagine my project members objecting to a free test. However, they do need to be asked first. Some samples are linked to deceased relatives or those who were very difficult to convince to test. Using up these samples, of course, would not be acceptable.My project members trust me because I am honest with them.
Rebekah A. Canada
Volunteer Administrator, Family Tree DNA
H & HV mtDNA Hg Project
Q Y-DNA Hg Project, I-P109 Y-DNA Hg Project, Scandinavian Y-DNA Project
http://friendfeed.com/rebekahthornOn Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 6:51 PM, Thomas Krahn <thomas@...> wrote:Dear Alessandro,
I agree on the addition of L273, L274 to the Q-P36.2 branch.
Ytree is updated.
L330, L331, L334 need further verification. I prepared orders for all controls downstream Q-MEH2 (that I have available) to verify. If you have some reason/proof that those 3 SNPs are on the Q-MEH2 level then please give me a hint. Maybe there are available sequencing traces from older WTY runs?
L329, L332, L333 also need further verification. Essentially I'll verify the same controls as above.
L153 was ancestral in all samples. I agree that it should be removed.
I did this for the Draft Tree.
In Q-M378 I essentially agree with your tree and I've updated the Draft Tree.
Here is the matrix of relevant samples that I have in my database:
Sample L275 L314 L245 L272 L315 L301 L327 GRC004822 G- A- C- A- C- T- T- GRC012587 A+ G+ A- GRC012800 A+ G+ A- C- T- GRC014497 A+ G+ A- GRC020355 G+ GRC023868 G+ GRC10041416 A+ G+ A- C- GRC032745 T+ GRC10034946 T+ GRC10035356 T+ GRC004675 A+ G+ T+ T- GRC011109 A+ C+ G+ A- T+ T- GRC10037108 C- C+ GRC000575 A+ C- A- C+
L314, L315, L301, L327 need of course more confirmations that I try to fill in with running those assays on the listed samples. I hope no-one has any objections to get free test results.
I hope this helps,
On 09/30/2010 02:10 AM, Alessandro Biondo wrote:
Dear Thomas, Using information from both the current draft tree at http://ytree.ftdna.com/ , and the SNP’s details provided at http://ymap.ftdna.com/ , and using also information we know about the SNP and WTY test of members of the Y-DNA Haplogroup Q Project, we think the most updated tree below Q-M242 is like that in the attached excel file. The more dubious placement at present are for the SNPs discovered from the WTY test of sample 38126 (for which a very prudent approach is used), and the position of L301 (because we don’t know if the sample L301+ has been tested also for other relevant L# SNP. The position of the remaining new SNPs seems to be quite reliable (at the current level of knowledge), including the removal of L153. Best Regards, Alessandro. ----- Messaggio originale ----- Da: Thomas Krahn <thomas@...> A: Rebekah Adele Canada <rebekahthorn@...> Cc: Alessandro Biondo <alefbiondo@...> Inviato: Gio 30 settembre 2010, 00:23:56 Oggetto: Re: Advanced Orders Panel On 09/29/2010 05:20 PM, Rebekah Adele Canada wrote:
Dear Thomas, Do you think you will have time soon to fix the many problems with your Draft Y-Tree? http://ytree.ftdna.com/index.php?name=Draft&parent=31182976
This is something I can do on my own. What exact problems do you mean. I'm open for any input. Thomas
You have my permission to use my DNA sample For your research. My Family Tree DNA number is 115493.
Robert Alan Michelson (Bob)
- Hello all,
I have a question that perhaps someone can answer.
I took the chromosome browser results -- three at a time and downloaded them into Excel for the top 15 "cousin" matches. Then I combined them in one file. I ended up with 532 data lines of names, chromosome number, starting location, ending location, centimorgans and matching SNPS.
Then I sorted them by chromosome first followed by starting location and finally ending location. I came up with a considerable number of locations that are identical with two or more people. The same goes with ending locations. In a number of the data lines, both start and end with the same number, though that is the exception, not the rule.
As an example, these five match me
6 32779081 35439082 2.65 1772 6 32779081 36322469 3.18 1873 6 32779081 36322469 3.18 1873 6 32779081 36322469 3.18 1873 6 32779081 36322469 3.18 1873
The first number is the chromosome then the start, end location, centimorgans and SNPS. My question is whether the testing process tends to cluster starting and ending locations or is the actual locations and in this case 4/5 are identical. Am I wasting my time looking at this?
If anyone is curious I will send the excel file without names so that you can see the data.
See what you do when you are retired and the crafts shops are closed
- Hello Bob,
Family Finder rounds off segments to the nearest block, so these regions have the appearance of identicality, but may not be exactly identical.
In any case, 3.18 cM is a very low amount, and unless you know that you are recently related to someone or your block of this size is adjacent another larger one, I would pay very little attention to any segment under about 6-8 centimorgans.
Finally, it's definitely not a waste of time to analyze the data this way for larger blocks. I have overlapping segments with a known maternal second cousin, and with a suspected paternal 4th cousin once or twice removed (we share an unusual surname). By looking at the overlap by region, I can establish which side of the chromosome pertains to which side of my family. This may also be useful if you have uploaded to gedmatch.com.
- Thanks for your reply. I do have a number of people with 8 or more cM matches and the largest 19.6 is identically matched with three of us.