Ken- Is your explanation below, then, the reason that the GENO 2.0 derived reading on L380 is not reported by FTDNA in their conversion process? If not, have you found other GENO 2.0 readings not reported in the FTDNA conversion? JB McCrummen -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: [yDNAhgI] Missing GENO 2.0 Results in FTDNA Conversion From: "Kenneth Nordtvedt" <[1][email protected]> Date: Fri, January 03, 2014 3:33 pm To: <[2][email protected]> I'm afraid everyone is AA for L380. Whether that is technically ancestral or derived is of secondary importance it seems; it could have mutated somewhere upstream in the tree rendering IJK as well as R haplogroups as derived AA. Kenneth Nordtvedt Haplogroup I Clade Modalities and Trees at: [3]http://knordtvedt.home.bresnan.net -----Original Message----- From: JB MCCRUMMEN Sent: Friday, January 03, 2014 12:53 PM To: YDNA I_ROOTSWEB LIST Subject: [yDNAhgI] Missing GENO 2.0 Results in FTDNA Conversion In previous post, Diana mentioned a missing derived GENO 2.0 result (L380+) in the Project I conversion by FTDNA. I checked the FTDNA GENO 2.0 conversion for my results and L380+ is also missing in the FTDNA conversion table. My GENO 2.0 L380 reading is derived ( AA and ISOGG/Krahn Browser confirms this is derived). Two Questions: 1- Are there other GENO 2.0 participants whose readings (L380 and other SNPs) missing and/or not accurately converted? 2- Are there other GENO 2.0 SNP readings missing and/or not accurately converted? JB MCCRUMMEN FTDNA KIT: 75432 --------------- Previous posting from Diana: From: "Diana Gale Matthiesen" <[4][email protected]> Subject: [yDNAhgI] Rasey I2 Date: Fri, 3 Jan 2014 10:04:28 -0500 Well, duhhh. I could just go look at the ISOGG tree, so I did. Given that he's Z78-, it does surprise me that he's also CTS6433-. But I guess what does surprise me is that his L380+ is still not on the page, even at the bottom as a private SNP. My first impulse is to order CTS1977 and L1290, but I'm wondering if I shouldn't just pop for the BigY, instead of this drip, drip, drip ordering of a la carte SNPs. Diana ----------------- ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [5][email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message References 1. mailto:[email protected] 2. mailto:[email protected] 3. http://knordtvedt.home.bresnan.net/ 4. mailto:[email protected] 5. mailto:[email protected]
Main problem with FTDNA readings of Geno2 results is that no calls get lost in the negatives; only "positives" are reported and sometimes what is positive is in error. Kenneth Nordtvedt Haplogroup I Clade Modalities and Trees at: http://knordtvedt.home.bresnan.net -----Original Message----- From: JB McCrummen Sent: Saturday, January 04, 2014 11:19 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [yDNAhgI] Missing GENO 2.0 Results in FTDNA Conversion Ken- Is your explanation below, then, the reason that the GENO 2.0 derived reading on L380 is not reported by FTDNA in their conversion process? If not, have you found other GENO 2.0 readings not reported in the FTDNA conversion? JB McCrummen -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: [yDNAhgI] Missing GENO 2.0 Results in FTDNA Conversion From: "Kenneth Nordtvedt" <[1][email protected]> Date: Fri, January 03, 2014 3:33 pm To: <[2][email protected]> I'm afraid everyone is AA for L380. Whether that is technically ancestral or derived is of secondary importance it seems; it could have mutated somewhere upstream in the tree rendering IJK as well as R haplogroups as derived AA. Kenneth Nordtvedt Haplogroup I Clade Modalities and Trees at: [3]http://knordtvedt.home.bresnan.net -----Original Message----- From: JB MCCRUMMEN Sent: Friday, January 03, 2014 12:53 PM To: YDNA I_ROOTSWEB LIST Subject: [yDNAhgI] Missing GENO 2.0 Results in FTDNA Conversion In previous post, Diana mentioned a missing derived GENO 2.0 result (L380+) in the Project I conversion by FTDNA. I checked the FTDNA GENO 2.0 conversion for my results and L380+ is also missing in the FTDNA conversion table. My GENO 2.0 L380 reading is derived ( AA and ISOGG/Krahn Browser confirms this is derived). Two Questions: 1- Are there other GENO 2.0 participants whose readings (L380 and other SNPs) missing and/or not accurately converted? 2- Are there other GENO 2.0 SNP readings missing and/or not accurately converted? JB MCCRUMMEN FTDNA KIT: 75432 --------------- Previous posting from Diana: From: "Diana Gale Matthiesen" <[4][email protected]> Subject: [yDNAhgI] Rasey I2 Date: Fri, 3 Jan 2014 10:04:28 -0500 Well, duhhh. I could just go look at the ISOGG tree, so I did. Given that he's Z78-, it does surprise me that he's also CTS6433-. But I guess what does surprise me is that his L380+ is still not on the page, even at the bottom as a private SNP. My first impulse is to order CTS1977 and L1290, but I'm wondering if I shouldn't just pop for the BigY, instead of this drip, drip, drip ordering of a la carte SNPs. Diana ----------------- ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [5][email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message References 1. mailto:[email protected] 2. mailto:[email protected] 3. http://knordtvedt.home.bresnan.net/ 4. mailto:[email protected] 5. mailto:[email protected] ------------------------------- 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