My first surname match

General discussions regarding DNA and its uses in genealogy research

Posts: 3262
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2012 5:43 pm

MtDNA:
U5b2b
PostPosted: Sat Nov 14, 2020 2:53 pm
It took 14 years for a surname YSTR match to show up at FTDNA.

Posts: 3262
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2012 5:43 pm

MtDNA:
U5b2b
PostPosted: Wed Nov 18, 2020 9:54 am
dartraighe wrote:It took 14 years for a surname YSTR match to show up at FTDNA.


FTDNA's YSTR tests are useless for breaking down brick walls in ydna ancestral lines. Lots of testers do not have YSTR matches thanks to FTDNA's low thresholds for 67 and 111 marker tests. A lot of YSTR testers do not join projects so one can never see their YSTR results and a lot of them do not test beyond 37 markers. In my case, the important markers that define my branch are between the 37 and 67 markers and some of the testers in my branch are beyond the 67 marker threshold. The branch is estimated to be just 1,200 ybp. FTDNA could have entered my branch instead of predicted M269 for any tester in their database who has the markers that define my branch. I asked them to do just that but they declined. They cannot say it was for privacy reasons because we are talking about a branch that is 1,200 years old. So FTDNA will not help most people to break down their brick walls as promised. They need to do more. How many success stories are there from FTDNA testers?

People should realize how useless YSTR tests are whenever you learn that two testers who were a 65/67 match were not related within the past 2,000 years when they got their Y-700 YSNP results!!!!!

Posts: 3262
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2012 5:43 pm

MtDNA:
U5b2b
PostPosted: Sat Nov 21, 2020 10:41 am
dartraighe wrote:
dartraighe wrote:It took 14 years for a surname YSTR match to show up at FTDNA.


FTDNA's YSTR tests are useless for breaking down brick walls in ydna ancestral lines. Lots of testers do not have YSTR matches thanks to FTDNA's low thresholds for 67 and 111 marker tests. A lot of YSTR testers do not join projects so one can never see their YSTR results and a lot of them do not test beyond 37 markers. In my case, the important markers that define my branch are between the 37 and 67 markers and some of the testers in my branch are beyond the 67 marker threshold. The branch is estimated to be just 1,200 ybp. FTDNA could have entered my branch instead of predicted M269 for any tester in their database who has the markers that define my branch. I asked them to do just that but they declined. They cannot say it was for privacy reasons because we are talking about a branch that is 1,200 years old. So FTDNA will not help most people to break down their brick walls as promised. They need to do more. How many success stories are there from FTDNA testers?

People should realize how useless YSTR tests are whenever you learn that two testers who were a 65/67 match were not related within the past 2,000 years when they got their Y-700 YSNP results!!!!!


The majority of YSTR test results in the FTDNA database are stagnating due to lack of enthusiasm by FTDNA to encourage all to take YSNP tests. There has to be around one million YSTR testers in their database and they are still selling YSTR tests. The 37,67 and 111 marker YSTR tests are pointless and a waste of money because the Big Y-700 covers all YSTR markers. Anyone really interested in their YDNA line should take a Y-700 test.

Posts: 3262
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2012 5:43 pm

MtDNA:
U5b2b
PostPosted: Tue Nov 24, 2020 10:36 am
YDNA projects should be consigned to history and aren't needed anymore. They had their uses until the the Big Y tests came along.

All any new Y700 tester needs to do is look at his y line in the block tree and follow it from the bottom upwards to get a handle on his recent and ancient origins. I took the estimated formed date for the main branch and divided the number of YSNPs in my line to get the average years per YSNP, which works out at 90 years for me or three generations per SNP. That gives me an idea of the TMRCA for each branch and the region of the clusters gives me a clue where my ancestral branches diverged from each other.

I don't need to be in a project where a complete stranger has access to all of my family finder matches, my MTDA info and all my YDNA info, YSTRs and YSNPs.
Last edited by dartraighe on Mon Nov 30, 2020 7:29 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Posts: 3262
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2012 5:43 pm

MtDNA:
U5b2b
PostPosted: Thu Nov 26, 2020 12:51 pm
dartraighe wrote:YDNA projects should be consigned to history and aren't needed anymore. They had their uses until the the Big Y tests came along.

All any new Y700 tester needs to do is look at his y line in the block tree and follow it from the bottom upwards to get a handle on his recent and ancient origins. I took the estimated formed date for the main branch and divided the number of YSNPs in my line to get the average years per YSNP, which works out at 90 years for me or three generations per SNP. That gives me an idea of the TMRCA for each branch and the region of the clusters gives me a clue where my ancestral branches diverged from each other.

I don't need to be in a project where a complete stranger has access to all of my family finder matches, my MTDA info and all my YDNA info, YSTRs and YSNPs.


FTDNA are updating their TMRCA calculations for all the branches.
U106 admin.
"Speaking more generally, one cannot get an accurate TMRCA off Family Tree DNA's block tree. There are several reasons for this, but it comes down to the fact that not all SNPs tested in one person are tested in any other test. This is particularly bad for the BigY-500 versus BigY-700 tests, where a third of the comparisons are missing."

Posts: 3262
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2012 5:43 pm

MtDNA:
U5b2b
PostPosted: Thu Dec 03, 2020 8:22 am
"Göran Runström from FamilyTreeDNA has advised in the Big Y Facebook group that the FTDNA haplotree now includes results from over 51,000 Big Y testers as well as thousands of academic DNA results.

658 new branches were added in November and 11,532 in total for 2020, averaging over a thousand branches per month.

In November the largest relative growth was in haplogroup E which got almost half of the 10,000 SNPs that were added to the tree."

>The number of testers belonging to the A root in the public tree is 194,726, with 86,886 recorded as M207, but only 51,000 Big Y results. Those who have not had a Big Y test must have taken an SNP pack test!<

>The downside of all of this is that there are almost 800,000 YSTR tests at FTDNA without any YSNP status. That could mean that we are missing 80% of our potential downstream branch matches. I think that it is fair to say that we would like all of the YSTR testers at FTDNA to have SNP status.<

Posts: 3262
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2012 5:43 pm

MtDNA:
U5b2b
PostPosted: Sat Dec 05, 2020 8:38 am
A great post by a U106 expert.

>""Many surname projects were started for the basic purpose of dividing the people of the surname into the various different families of the name in order to end the confusion of which nearby families of the same surname, often also using the same given names, were really, or not really, related. This purpose can sometimes be accomplished with a 37 STR test, and almost certainly with a 111 one. There are still plenty of folks who see no purpose in taking things further.

At the other end are those of who are also interested in the anthropological base of how we got here from there via the migration paths of the ancient ancestral groups from which we descend, subgroup by subgroup down the line. Many Americans in particular fill in the Country of Origin blank with “Unknown”. The Big Y comparisons help us to gain an understanding of where those ancestral unknown locations of our ancestors were, at points along the way.

Working further down the line towards ourselves, we can see the names of other families, and where the folks in those families are from, even if nobody in our own family really has a clue about it. This is the case in my case, so its very nice to understand where that ancestral previously unknown place was, and what the people there were like, and what the history of that place was, and what disasters they went through that made them leave and come here.

Big Y comparisons allow us to branch our families from the beginning of the adoption of the surname by the Surname Patriarch. So, we’re putting the family tree back together. Then we can see, OK, that branch of the family moved over there and merged into that culture, whereas the other branch moved somewhere else and merged into the culture of that place, or otherwise rebelled against it, and moved on to a third place.

Well, its an expensive pursuit, but a fascinating one I think, and the more of your close 67 and 111 STR ballpark matches that you can persuade to order Big Y during a sale like the present one, the more interesting it becomes.

Still further into the details, you actually can get to the point of identifying actual ancestors who must have had a specific SNP mutation. Others can even do this with themselves, or their fathers. But in other cases, such as another one of my ancestral lines, we are able to see specific ancestors from 300 years ago who must have had a Y SNP, because their brother’s descendants don’t, but all the guys on their branch do.

Then, we have family members who have no idea which branch they belong to. But the info in the previous paragraph tells them the answer. Ballpark STR tests won’t usually do that. The specifics of SNP tests can, with a bit of luck.

We’ve always said that not everyone in a family needs Big Y, or SNP tests at all. It depends on the tester’s own situations, interests, and financial resources.

Some folks can get the answers they want by testing another family member’s individual SNPs at YSEQ. Then the only thing missing is that person’s SNPs down his own line of descent since the common ancestor with the other family member. Not everybody feels that they need or want that additional detail. That’s fine.

Personally, I was happy to put all of my SNPs into the database, laying my markers out there early, waiting for others to come along and match me. And here they have come, creating subclade after subclade down my line over the years, inching closer and closer to my own MDKA. I am blessed, and in my opinion we all are, to be a part of this incredible journey. We have lived through the Golden Age of Genealogy. I have loved every minute of it.""<

Posts: 3262
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2012 5:43 pm

MtDNA:
U5b2b
PostPosted: Mon Dec 07, 2020 11:01 am
Another good post from a ydna genius!

>"Y-DNA has really given us a paradigm shift in understanding the origins of surnames. Previously, all we had were a list of nobles that were handed down from us by history, who are supposed to have been the origins of many surnames. Thus, Clan Donald is descended from Donald mac Ranald, Lord of the Isles, and so forth. Most of these lines of descend are true, but what is new to us is that typically only a small fraction of people with those surnames usually descend from that origin: there are multiple Y-DNA origins for a surname. That can be through changing allegiances, adopting of different surnames, illegitimacies, etc. We also find the converse - that surnames have been a lot more fluid throughout history than we have thought, and for the same reasons. A significant minority of Y-DNA lines have changed surnames. So the origins that these surname websites put out are instructive, but the traditional lines of descent only apply to a percentage of living descendants, if any.



Y-DNA offers the tools to test this out, and see who is related to whom. Y-STR tests have traditionally been used for this purpose, and they are a cheap and effective way of proving who is closely related to whom. They can establish a group of people who are related to each other, via their Y-STR connections. But Y-STRs mutate randomly; they can back mutate, and mutate convergently. This means that it's not possible to work out from a simple genetic distance (or, often, from the most careful study of the individual STRs) who is more closely related to whom. A match at a genetic distance of 3/111 is normally more closely related than a match at 7/111, but not always. Y-STRs cannot be used to draw a family tree.



Big Y, and indeed any next-generation sequencing test, offers the means to do this. The test finds novel SNPs, which are stable enough to deduce the hierarchy in which people are related to each other. This provides a basic scaffold of a family tree onto which to place your present matches and the historical people that relate them.



It also provides you with roughly twice the number of mutations: SNPs in BigY-700 occur roughly at the same frequency as STR mutations - approximately once per 83 years each. To put that in context, that's about one SNP or STR mutation every 3-4 generations, but that's an average - runs of up to 10 generations without a new STR or SNP mutation may not be highly uncommon, but it would be exceptionally rare not to have either. This difference can be crucial if you are trying to change your scaffold family tree into a real one.



So the short answer is that Big Y provides a framework on which to hang your family tree, and provides order to relationships in a way that STRs can't. However, it is still not a substitute for paper records. It can't make your family tree for you in the way that autosomal DNA can. But it can tell you where to look and, if you're careful, give you some comparatively very precise indications of when you are related to your closest STR matches, if they also take the Big Y test."<

Posts: 3262
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2012 5:43 pm

MtDNA:
U5b2b
PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2021 1:47 pm
dartraighe wrote:It took 14 years for my first surname YSTR match to show up at FTDNA.


Gio
My surname match got his results recently and I noticed a new YSNP in our part of the tree. I could not find it in my results because I had only 2 reads for this variant but my surname match got a good quality result for it. So it is a valid YSNP in my branch.

I cannot link my surname match to my paper trail and we are both tested with ancestry where we do not show as an autosomal match even as 8th cousins. I need to find some more surname matches to firm up the TMRCA for our little branch and to validate our YSNPs.

Posts: 3262
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2012 5:43 pm

MtDNA:
U5b2b
PostPosted: Mon Jan 25, 2021 3:17 pm
Gio
There are some posts about RISE550 on other forums. In Sergey's tree he shows RISE550 with two chromosome positions, 15080170 C/T and 18945942 C/T. One is BY3719 and the other is BY3718. BY3719 is in Z2103. Some posters are getting excited about the status of RISE550 and are trying to link it with L51 with one read for PF6535.
Next

Return to General DNA Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests

cron