Heard a lot about Big Y results generating new branches in I1. That's cool. It's been dead air on I2. Not sure if that's because of no I2 Big Y results released or no one is as good as Ken at analyzing them. Ken is pretty awesome. Thanks Ken! Then static over the air waves crackled into a scant report of M233 related updates. Scant, because there was little other than 'this group test this snp' to the update. I'd like more understanding about these new SNP's. I've been burned in the past ordering SNP's only to find they're equivalent. The following three SNP's were reported to come out of Geno 2.0 and Big Y, whatever that means, and were recommended to CTS6433 (Cont2a) members: PF3292 CTS7010 CTS5332 (possibly not offered yet by FTDNA, cause they suck) So what's the deal with these SNP's? In the old days, like a year ago, when a new SNP came out this distribution was abuzz with chatter. We need people from CTS6433 to test these, they'd say. Someone from this clade should test first, they'd say. It was all so exciting, I could hardly wait to read the next message. Now I barely get more than 'test this.' Who is positive for these SNP's? Who's negative? Who has ordered them? Are there any STR markers that tag these SNPs? Ryan (losing interest fast, someone fan the flames)

Ryan, there are a lot of novel SNPs to be discovered with these NGS (Next Generation) types of discovery tests. The challenge, I think, is the number of people doing NGS testing in and around your cluster. Invariably, blocks of phylogenetic equivalent SNPs show up. However, if no one near your cluster is testing, you may see little change in knowledge of the tree. You'll just have a long list of SNPs that appear to be "private." We have to think more about subgroup recruiting and test planning. Mike W On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 7:01 AM, Holmes, Ryan D. (KSC-SAD20) < ryan.d.holmes@nasa.gov> wrote: > Heard a lot about Big Y results generating new branches in I1. That's > cool. It's been dead air on I2. Not sure if that's because of no I2 Big Y > results released or no one is as good as Ken at analyzing them. Ken is > pretty awesome. Thanks Ken! Then static over the air waves crackled into > a scant report of M233 related updates. Scant, because there was little > other than 'this group test this snp' to the update. I'd like more > understanding about these new SNP's. I've been burned in the past ordering > SNP's only to find they're equivalent. The following three SNP's were > reported to come out of Geno 2.0 and Big Y, whatever that means, and were > recommended to CTS6433 (Cont2a) members: > > PF3292 > CTS7010 > CTS5332 (possibly not offered yet by FTDNA, cause they suck) > > So what's the deal with these SNP's? In the old days, like a year ago, > when a new SNP came out this distribution was abuzz with chatter. We need > people from CTS6433 to test these, they'd say. Someone from this clade > should test first, they'd say. It was all so exciting, I could hardly wait > to read the next message. Now I barely get more than 'test this.' > > Who is positive for these SNP's? Who's negative? Who has ordered them? > Are there any STR markers that tag these SNPs? > > Ryan (losing interest fast, someone fan the flames) > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > Y-DNA-HAPLOGROUP-I-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' > without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >