It would probably be a good idea for ScotlandsDNA/IrelandsDNS to publish a paper detailing their newly discovered SNP's and get them on ISOGG tree. In which case the names may stick. I'm remimed of the expression "Publish or be damned". Iain, interesting to see you are M222* (negative for all the chromo2 snp's). I wonder how much of total M222 they test will be in a similiar position. S661/S658 is sort of looking like the DF13 of M222 (eg. really big chunk, DF13 ≥ 90% of L21.) -Paul (DF41+) On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 8:05 AM, Iain Kennedy <[email protected]>wrote: > Bob, > > The ISOGG tree lists all supplied alternative names from the different > labs. As I pointed out the other day even M222 itself has at least three > names and M222 is not the original one so there is no need to get too > excited about it as long as all the alternatives are made available. I > believe this will happen in due course once the bulk data starts coming in > from the lab and they can see which ones are actually working on the chip. > > http://www.isogg.org/tree/ISOGG_HapgrpR.html > > Bear in mind that some SNPs are still in the 'under investigation' group > (just manually search the page for them) and one or two of the Geno 2.0 > SNPs I believe we were told are not going to be sold as separate tests as > they are considered unreliable. I forget which ones now. > > Iain > > > > > > > From: [email protected] > > Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2013 16:16:43 -0800 > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: [R-M222] Rosetta Stone > > > > I assume that the different DNA testing companies are giving different > (private) labels to the same markers for a reason. But then how do they > justify saying that they offer more or additional markers than their > competitors if they cannot provide their customers (participants) the means > to verify this? What is the reason for reticence on their part to > contribute to a "Rosetta Stone" to translate / compare results from the > different vendors? Is it just greed? Or is there some legal constraint > that is holding them back? Are there legal roadblocks to members of this > list to create such a translation table? Could an independent entity like > the ISOGG host such a table that could provide the transparency we are > looking for? > > > > I find it interesting how quickly access to the following table was > withdrawn: > > >> A copy of Dr. Michael's Hammer's map of the new SNPs downstream from > M222 has been published at: > > >> > https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10151949352643444&set=gm.621729794551000&type=1&theater > > > > Bob Doherty > > Sent from my iPad > > > > ------------------------------- > > 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 >