开云体育

There are advantages to not having Family Finder testers named on the Block Tree. While the distinction is slightly blurred by differing coverages and BigY-500 tests, etc., the people currently on the

Re RootsTech 2024: A kind request to anyone participating in person and meeting people from FTDNA: Could you please ask if there are plans to have more language versions? Recently I manged to locate

Hello fellow U106ers, I just received my BigY results and my haplogroup is R-FTE39986, which I'm told is a subgroup of R-M269. If anyone would like to look at my results you are very welcome to do so.

Family Finder, old National Geneographic and other SNP tests do in fact show up in the block tree. Not the names of the testers, but the total number of SNP tests. I wasn’t talking about their

As a fan of Alex Ws detailed presentations, I agree.

And while that's great for folks who want to know their BigY results but for those of us who have already purchased BigY we just wish to have all of the annotated results nearby referenced such that

Family Finder YDNA samples will appear in the discover pages but will not show up in the block tree page! One has to take the Big Y test to get into the block tree page.

Well, I'm still waiting for some ancient remains from a fellow situated below R-Z2265 and well into the ~800 year-long R-FGC396 block (give or take a couple of centuries), for actual evidence for or

I have the same thing. FGC11686 has split off from the FGC11685 block. Block tree shows no testers, discover shows 1. Its been split at FTDNA long enough to show up at SNP Finder and David Vance's SNP

Hi folks, This is an interesting result, especially since it breaks up the R-U106>A2150>BY69794 block. The connection to the Tumulus culture is important, as we have other R-U106 branches belonging to

Just to remind everyone, the small R-A2150 branch that Ewenn is discussing in conjunction with the LEU007 sample, is immediately below R-U106, and notably retains the ancestral DYS492 STR result =12,

Hi all, I attempted an analysis of LEU007, to check if it can really belongs to R-U106, and if possible to refine its haplogroup. LEU007 consists of several fastq files. I only analyzed the "YC1"

truly fascinating Based on combined lines of evidence, we observe that the kinship structure of the burial community was predominantly patrilineal/virilocal involving female exogamy.

Thanks, Found the sample at line 6 of excel table in the supplement. Hope to now find mention of sample in the body of the text.... I am not so practiced in the art of such things but I greatly

Hi, Only one aDNA in this study seems to belong to R-U106, named LEU007. This would be the 5th oldest R-U106+ aDNA recorded to date. Its fastq file has just been added to the European Nucleotide

I think it would be this one: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-024-54462-6 [email protected]> wrote:

I was unable to trace the "news blip" back to refereed journal article. If such exists, might someone provide the link ? ________________________________ Sent: Saturday, February 24, 2024 6:51 AM To:

They were only able to confirm it fell under U106. They used the 1240K assay rather than the more comprehensive (and more expensive) shotgun method. Ray wrote:

nice ! do you know the haplogroup!? -- KELL KOCH President Phone: 208-578-4806 kochson.com

Yes, it is possible for a Big Y result to appear in the Discover tool before it appears in the Block Tree and in the Big Y Match list. ? It sounds like this is the case for the "missing" R-BY153002