YFull
|
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Jan 25, 2017, at 9:40 PM, Charles Thomas <charles_002@...> wrote:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Results are in -- I'm not sure I've learned anything new though.? Well, the TMRCA is new to me.
On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 10:06 AM, Charles Thomas <charles_002@...> wrote:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
James - Thanks for letting us know. I don't see your results yet being considered in the age calculations though. I was really hoping they'd break up this block - they have everything from Z16357 down through the tips of the branches in one big 3000+ year block. Maybe there's something I'm missing or things you guys see as paying customers, but I sure don't see much value in YFull and their tree certainly leaves much to be desired. Jared On Sat, Jan 28, 2017 at 6:18 PM, James Bennett <james@...> wrote:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
开云体育Hi all,
Here is my version at YFull: I show a slightly closer match to Bennett than Thomas. The YTree was last updated January 4th. I'm not sure how often they update it. I'm not sure how it would be updated. As they don't have Pillsbury and Hayes in their database, they won't show that branching. Joel On 1/28/2017 9:33 PM, Jared Smith wrote:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
On Sun, Jan 29, 2017 at 2:56 AM, Joel Hartley <joel@...> wrote:
The YTree was last updated January 4th. I'm not sure how often they update it. I'm not sure how it would be updated. As they don't have Pillsbury and Hayes in their database, they won't show that branching.This is a fundamental limitation of YFull - they use such a limited set of available data to determine their tree - only results of those who have purchased their analysis. They won't know about other known SNPs and branches that have been verified elsewhere. This really limits their ability to estimate timelines. Big Tree uses a much larger sample of FGC/Big-Y testers, but doesn't attempt time estimates. FTDNA's tree uses Big-Y and SNP pack/test results, but is very conservative. ISOGG tries to be more authoritative, but lags behind other known trees due to their high scrutiny and complex submission process. Fortunately they each provide something a bit unique - it just takes a lot of analysis to pull from them what is most useful. As an FYI, you can compare your YFull Novel SNPs list to Alex's list to see which SNPs match at both sites - and which are named SNPs. For example, YFS2491169 (which is position 21390000 - G>A from YFull's spreadsheet for Thomas) is found to be the FGC33968 SNP at the Big Tree - Joel, you'll notice that you have 11 unique/private/novel SNPs from very good read areas - All are named A111nn by Thomas Krahn. I use A11130 to describe this entire block because that's the SNP FTDNA added to their SNP pack. Using the *rough* estimate of 144 years per SNP, this block represents ~1584 years. Because Z17911 is around this old, these SNPs likely represent the vast majority of your line's SNP mutations between Z17911 and present day. A distant Hartley Big-Y would likely solidify these SNPs on the tree and establish a pretty good timeline and SNP framework for this line of your surname. Jared |
James Bennett
Jared Smith