I went ahead and checked the R-A1067 subgrouping in the project and then broke out R-A1067 haplogroup people into two: 13060. ...? R-A1067*
13061. ...? R-A1067
The 13061 folks might fit better downstream but just haven’t tested further. Meanwhile, the R-A1067* Big Y tested guy has latent private SNPs waiting for a match to come along.
Targeted SNP testing before having each Earliest Known Ancestor’s terminal haplogroup is defined is premature. This results in pile-ups of “stuck” testers. Unfortunately, some don’t test further so the tree has parts incomplete.
Targeted SNP testing can’t discover a new SNP. It can rule people out of a true terminal haplogroup, but negative results don’t help the tester, himself.
On Sat, Aug 27, 2022 at 7:34 PM Class1 Driver <class1driver@...> wrote:
Thanks for that good information Mike. I haven't kept up on current events for a few years now (at least).
I like the idea of a BAM file, as one never knows when it might come in handy.? It's good to know that it can be ordered any time in the future. I'll probably order it at some point, even if it's to simply satisfy my natural curiosity, but even more so to preserve that data for as long as possible.
I'm hoping those private variants of others can be traced to specific people, like on the Big Tree, so that I can possibly recommend cheaper single variant testing methods like Thomas Krahn's Yseq company. It worked well in our A1067 Haplogroup.
Yes, definitely, more data is best, as variant selection can be very subjective.
Any new (easy) formulas/methods for SNP rates and the combination of old SNP tests and new that help people like me to make 'best guess' ages of SNP Births and TMRCA??
Thanks for all your efforts Mike, and for staying current for all of us.
Daryl
I might have to relearn how to do a Blat on my phone -- at some future time -- for those questionable variants where it's exact location can't be exactly pinpointed.? ;-)
On Sat, Aug 27, 2022, 4:35 PM Tiger Mike <mwwdna@...> wrote:
In terms of variant call analysis, the Big Y tool set includes Y chromosome browser and lists of private and non matching variants by location number. The chrome BAMsAway add-on can help.
The FTDNA VCF files are still free and YFull accepts them. If you want to use YFull I suggest sending them the VCF file and then waiting to see if there are close matches on the tree with you. At that point you may find variants you question and want a full BAM analysis from YFull.
I think the YFull charge is $49 and includes a free upgrade to BAM file analysis. The FTDNA charge for a BAM file is $99. When they started this with Big Y700 they lowered prices from $100 to $150 but then you add to pay for the BAM file if you wanted it. Few people actually order it.? People who already had Big Y500 always get their BAM files for free, regardless of whether they upgrade to Big Y700 or not.
Something to keep in mind is phylogenetic analysis. This impacts call variant analysis. The more samples analyzed the better. FTDNA (and I think YFull too) may change a call on a variant after comparing raw data from several different samples of the same subclade.
--
For R1b Y DNA questions please post on one of the two forums: R1b Y DNA Project Facebook Group -?
R1b All Subclades Project Activity Feed -
--
For R1b Y DNA questions please post on one of the two forums: R1b Y DNA Project Facebook Group -?