Hi All, and especially to Susan, OK, I am going for it, and I will take whatever yDNA tests could be required. Doug On Sun, Nov 10, 2013 at 11:05 AM, Susan Hedeen < [email protected]> wrote: > Ah-Ha, well I may be sorry that I brought this. Thomas Krahn just > qualified the issue by stating that the bar coding is added only after > the sequencing is complete. So...if I'm interpreting his answer, then > the added bar coding may not be such an issue. I'm going to ask a > follow up question to him. > > On 11/10/2013 10:44 AM, Susan Hedeen wrote: > > Since I introduced this to the list, in full transparency: > > I just received answer from Greg Magoon regarding the bar code runs. > > BGI does not use them; UCLA? Not a definitive answer with the > > qualification, "To the best of my knowledge UCLA will not be using bar > > coding, either" > > > > On 11/10/2013 10:17 AM, Susan Hedeen wrote: > >> Onto the issue of bar coded testing runs: * > >> > >> In view of the issue of bar coded runs raised by Thomas Krahn, I have > >> asked Justin Loe specifically if he knows whether or not BGI (China) or > >> UCLA labs (that FG is attempting to Vet as an alternative lab to BGI in > >> view of the sequencing delays) also use the bar coding technology in > >> their runs. I asked this because the issue arose and wonder if it is a > >> red herring issue...that is if BGI and UCLA also use bar coding, then > >> FTDNA using it is the same, and then the issue is not which company does > >> it better but comes down to cost and coverage. > > > > ------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message >