World Families Forums - How to interpret/treat predicted vs tested for L21 and other FTDNA projects

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
July 22, 2014, 05:03:55 PM
Home Help Search Login Register

+  World Families Forums
|-+  General Forums - Note: You must Be Logged In to post. Anyone can browse.
| |-+  R1b General (Moderator: rms2)
| | |-+  How to interpret/treat predicted vs tested for L21 and other FTDNA projects
« previous next »
Pages: [1] Go Down Print
Author Topic: How to interpret/treat predicted vs tested for L21 and other FTDNA projects  (Read 1065 times)
Mike Walsh
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2963


WWW
« on: July 16, 2009, 12:10:11 PM »

RMS2, this is probably mostly for you but I'd appreciate any input from anybod who knows how project admins do things and how other testing companies show up in projects and Ysearch.

I've been trying to keep track of L21* folks that I can find in FTDNA projects and in Ysearch.  I've already had a "learning experience" (in other words I was wrong on something.)  I am finding quite a number of people insert they are R1b1b2a1b5* (R-L21*) in Ysearch that don't appear to be tested for it.... or they may just be other testing companies work.

I also find that FTDNA project admins will sometimes categorize things in R-L21* categories based on haplotype matches (or something else).

On the other hand, I don't recall every seeing a "red" R1b1b2a1b5 predicted designation in an FTDNA project.  In other words, FTDNA does not feel comfortable making R1b1b2a1b5 predictions yet.

The following are in the R-L21+ project and have been promoted beyond the "unassigned" as R1b1b2a1b5 by FTDNA (which means FTDNA does not consider them confirmed L21+ with M222-.)

Should these all be considered "good" R-L21* folks?  I think in some cases they are from another company so they actually are confirmed but just now showing that way?   Anyway to tell by looking at the records?

Do other FTDNA project administrator follow any particular guidelines when presuming a deep clade?

65932 = Johann Martin Wigand, b.c. 1700, Wurzburg, Germany > R1b1b2 tested
153078 = Hoyhtya, Lalli > R1b1b2 predicted
99735 = Karl Karlsson b. 1872 d. 1919 > R1b1b2a1b tested
37201 = John Berry d.1502 Almondbury, W.Yorks, England > R1b1b2 tested
26883 = Richard Tupper b. 1523 Bury, W. Sussex, England > R1b1b2 tested
4151 = John Callum aka McGregor mar. Keith 1735 d c1761 > R1b1b2 predicted
43163 = John Sandison, 1874, Forgue, Aberdeens, Scot.MDKO > R1b1b2 tested
106578 = John Abernethy, b. circa 1775, County Antrim, Nor > R1b1b2 predicted
150847 = Edward Foley, abt 1820 - 1862 > R1b1b2 predicted
53712 = Patrick Whealen b1816, Modreeny,Tipperary, Ireland > R1b1b2a1b tested
50471 = Daniel Leahy,born c1812 Co Tipperary Ireland > R1b1b2 predicted
88224 = Philip Quilliam b.c.1604, Peel, Isle of Man > R1b1b2 predicted
149446 = John Mountain, abt 1800 - aft 1840 >   R1b1b2 tested
26059 = John Durall - ca 1755 Duplin/Onslow Co, NC, USA > R1b1b2 tested
39441 = Jonathan Reynolds, b.c. 1797, NC > R1b1b2 tested
N39486 = James Powell, b 10 Aug 1780, Robeson Co, NC > R1b1b2 tested
20437 = Jonathan Reynolds, b.c. 1797, NC > R1b1b2a1b tested
N10900 = ? > R1b1b2 predicted
« Last Edit: July 16, 2009, 12:18:24 PM by Mike » Logged

R1b-L21>L513(DF1)>L705.2
susanrosine
Senior Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 76


« Reply #1 on: July 16, 2009, 04:26:28 PM »

RMS2, this is probably mostly for you but I'd appreciate any input from anybod who knows how project admins do things and how other testing companies show up in projects and Ysearch.

I also find that FTDNA project admins will sometimes categorize things in R-L21* categories based on haplotype matches (or something else).

On the other hand, I don't recall every seeing a "red" R1b1b2a1b5 predicted designation in an FTDNA project.  In other words, FTDNA does not feel comfortable making R1b1b2a1b5 predictions yet.

Do other FTDNA project administrator follow any particular guidelines when presuming a deep clade?

As you know, I am the co-admin for the Wales project. That is the only project I administer where I have to worry about grouping clades.

I have yet to see FTDNA predict L21*.

I cannot tell if someone has tested with another company. People have sent me copies of results from other companies; that's the only way I would know. But none of them are in my Wales project.

I try to be careful to only put a non deep-clade tested person in with tested ones if they share the last name and the same markers and same ancestor, BUT you should always check with me if you have a question about a certain individual "in red" that I have grouped in a subclade. (I know we've already discussed this a bit in the past).

What I like is that as a group admin, I can use FTDNA's predictor to see how close everyone in the project is to each other. Not that it's very accurate (in my opinion), but it's better than doing my own math, heaven forbid!!! :-)

Susan
Logged

Dad: JAMES:  Ysearch QSCQ3;  R-P312, L21+ (R1b1b2a1b5*)
Dad: mitosearch QSCQ3; T1a; no matches HVR2 or FGS
Mom's brother: LEWTER: Ysearch FYFDA;  R-U106, L48+ (R1b1b2a1a*)
Mom's brother: mitosearch FYFDA, U5b2; 1 exac
vtilroe
Project Coordinator
Old Hand
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 150


« Reply #2 on: July 16, 2009, 11:31:57 PM »

It's virtually impossible to predict L21+ until some of these cluster definitions become "bullet-proof".

Many of those profiles have been tested S145+ by EthnoAncestry, L21+ by Genebase or had a 'G' result for rs11799226 on a 23andMe test.

Whalen, Durall and Reynolds were a few of the 23andMe guys, with results provided on Adriano Squecco's spreadsheet.  Adriano cross-references them with Y-search IDs when available.

Previously I, and now Rich, requires some kind of proof of result from another company if they don't have an L21+ result from FTDNA, such as a screen-shot image or a copy of the test result certificate or other documentation, before they get categorized.
Without that certificate, there is no way of validating the L21 status of a haplotype profile unless it is unambiguously connected to an FTDNA profile that has been SNP tested.

Of course, on very rare occasions, you could run into a guy like me that has an incorrect green haplogroup assignment.
 
Logged

YSearch & MitoSearch: 2GXWW


yDNA: R-U106*


mtDNA: U5a1a1 (Genbank# GQ368895)


R-P312-WTY Project Admin http://tinyurl.com/daertg

Mike Walsh
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2963


WWW
« Reply #3 on: July 17, 2009, 08:58:45 AM »

It's virtually impossible to predict L21+ until some of these cluster definitions become "bullet-proof".

Many of those profiles have been tested S145+ by EthnoAncestry, L21+ by Genebase or had a 'G' result for rs11799226 on a 23andMe test.

Whalen, Durall and Reynolds were a few of the 23andMe guys, with results provided on Adriano Squecco's spreadsheet.  Adriano cross-references them with Y-search IDs when available.

Previously I, and now Rich, requires some kind of proof of result from another company if they don't have an L21+ result from FTDNA, such as a screen-shot image or a copy of the test result certificate or other documentation, before they get categorized.
Without that certificate, there is no way of validating the L21 status of a haplotype profile unless it is unambiguously connected to an FTDNA profile that has been SNP tested.

Of course, on very rare occasions, you could run into a guy like me that has an incorrect green haplogroup assignment.
Are the people in the beginning of this topic in the R-L21Plus project all of those type who were tested by 23andMe or some other service?   Are any just close haplotype matches but truly untested?

Is there a good way to contact Adriano Squecco to get a copy of his L21+ folks on his spreadsheet?
Logged

R1b-L21>L513(DF1)>L705.2
rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #4 on: July 17, 2009, 09:13:50 AM »

It's like Vince said. When people join who don't have an L21+ result from FTDNA, I always ask them how they know they are L21+, and they send me evidence from Ethnoancestry (mostly), 23andMe, or Genebase.

Logged

Mike Walsh
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2963


WWW
« Reply #5 on: July 17, 2009, 09:21:31 AM »

...
Whalen, Durall and Reynolds were a few of the 23andMe guys, with results provided on Adriano Squecco's spreadsheet.  Adriano cross-references them with Y-search IDs when available.
...
I think found the spreadsheet of 23andMe results ..    http://www.webalice.it/asquecco/
Logged

R1b-L21>L513(DF1)>L705.2
Mike Walsh
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2963


WWW
« Reply #6 on: July 17, 2009, 02:21:52 PM »


As you know, I am the co-admin for the Wales project. That is the only project I administer where I have to worry about grouping clades.

I have yet to see FTDNA predict L21*.

I cannot tell if someone has tested with another company. People have sent me copies of results from other companies; that's the only way I would know. But none of them are in my Wales project.

I try to be careful to only put a non deep-clade tested person in with tested ones if they share the last name and the same markers and same ancestor, BUT you should always check with me if you have a question about a certain individual "in red" that I have grouped in a subclade. (I know we've already discussed this a bit in the past).

What I like is that as a group admin, I can use FTDNA's predictor to see how close everyone in the project is to each other. Not that it's very accurate (in my opinion), but it's better than doing my own math, heaven forbid!!! :-)

Susan
In the Wales DNA project, among others, there are the
17-14-10 group 1 (Wales Modal 1 - S9R4J) which also includes the Pugh folks,
the Cadwgon group 2 (Wales Modal 2 - WFF6T),
and the 11-13 Combo group  3 (Wales Modal 3 - KEFGX).

Are those the right Modal ID's that you are using?  I think Robert Hughes set them up.

Each of these three groups has some R1b1b2a1b5 (tested) people.    Are you declaring, or what criteria would we need to meet to declare odds are very, very high that if you fit this you are R-L21*?

Do we have other people with close GD's out there in Ysearch or anywhere that are tested L21-?

In my group, group 3, you have this guy listed.
168   9083   Henry Morgan b. 1825, Pontypool, Wales    R1b1b2a (tested)
How does one end up with "a" hanging on the end?  Does this mean he has a test in progress and he is P310+ but they haven't finished the P312 and L21 testing?

Also, in the general Wales R-L21* group, you have one guy showing up
141   85941   Lewis ap Thomas, ca 1500, Crickhowell, Wales [L21]    R1b1b2 (tested) but not R1b1b2a1b5 (tested).   Is is a high match or did you determine he is L21*.

« Last Edit: July 17, 2009, 02:26:54 PM by Mike » Logged

R1b-L21>L513(DF1)>L705.2
susanrosine
Senior Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 76


« Reply #7 on: July 17, 2009, 05:07:06 PM »

In the Wales DNA project, among others, there are the
17-14-10 group 1 (Wales Modal 1 - S9R4J) which also includes the Pugh folks,
the Cadwgon group 2 (Wales Modal 2 - WFF6T),
and the 11-13 Combo group  3 (Wales Modal 3 - KEFGX).

Are those the right Modal ID's that you are using?  I think Robert Hughes set them up.
Yes, Kristen Saxe (WTY project) and I are both using Robert Hughes' three "Wales" modals from Y-search for these groups/clusters.

Each of these three groups has some R1b1b2a1b5 (tested) people.    Are you declaring, or what criteria would we need to meet to declare odds are very, very high that if you fit this you are R-L21*?
Good question. I ran out of room (only allowed 50 characters including spaces for each group name) to put that only some are confirmed in each group. I have high confidence in the ones where the surname and markers match, otherwise I am trying to get them to test for L21.

Do we have other people with close GD's out there in Ysearch or anywhere that are tested L21-?
None in the Wales project.

In my group, group 3, you have this guy listed.
168   9083   Henry Morgan b. 1825, Pontypool, Wales    R1b1b2a (tested)
How does one end up with "a" hanging on the end?  Does this mean he has a test in progress and he is P310+ but they haven't finished the P312 and L21 testing?
I will have to search my records further, but I believe I was told by someone that he is in your group. Perhaps he is on Robert Hughes' list and that's where I found him.  Not that it matters that much; he has ordered Deep Clade testing; results due back July 29th!

Also, in the general Wales R-L21* group, you have one guy showing up
141   85941   Lewis ap Thomas, ca 1500, Crickhowell, Wales [L21]    R1b1b2 (tested) but not R1b1b2a1b5 (tested).   Is is a high match or did you determine he is L21*.
He is not interested in doing the L21 test because he matches the other man who has already tested and is in that same group and shares the same ancestor. So, you actually don't need him, as his haplotype is a duplicate of the tested man's.  I'm sorry it is sometimes confusing because two (or more) men will tell me they share the same ancestor, yet don't put that info on their own personal pages.

Logged

Dad: JAMES:  Ysearch QSCQ3;  R-P312, L21+ (R1b1b2a1b5*)
Dad: mitosearch QSCQ3; T1a; no matches HVR2 or FGS
Mom's brother: LEWTER: Ysearch FYFDA;  R-U106, L48+ (R1b1b2a1a*)
Mom's brother: mitosearch FYFDA, U5b2; 1 exac
F James
Project Coordinator
Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 27


WWW
« Reply #8 on: August 26, 2009, 10:53:35 PM »


53712 = Patrick Whealen b1816, Modreeny,Tipperary, Ireland > R1b1b2a1b tested


Tested with 23 and me


Frances
Whalen Project co-admin
« Last Edit: August 26, 2009, 10:55:09 PM by Frances James » Logged
Pages: [1] Go Up Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


SEO light theme by © Mustang forums. Powered by SMF 1.1.13 | SMF © 2006-2011, Simple Machines LLC

Page created in 0.118 seconds with 19 queries.