开云体育

I've started an initial analysis based on the limited information I have from FTDNA thus far. I can provide more information after I receive Michael's VCF files. The following lists provide the SNP

Hey Joel, Mike Hartley is listed on my match list with 0 shared novel variants, 0 non-matching known SNPs, and 25,684 matching SNPs. Is Mike 31/37 and 59/67 with you? My Thomas match with whom I share

Excellent! Michael, if you could please e-mail me your raw data file from FTDNA, that will be necessary for me to do a full analysis. Go to https://www.familytreedna.com/my/big-y/#matches and then

I notice a new BigY match today with Mike Hartley. I'm not as good as Jared as figuring out what the matches mean. For example, there are 5 SNPs which Charles Thomas and I have that others don't have.

Hi Jared, No, unfortunately I don't have contact info for Ben Evans (VU8W9). I messaged him twice in the past when the form was working but no reply either time. Hopefully the contact form will be

Charles - I've tried to contact the Evans match from ySearch, but their contact form has broken broken for weeks and I can't get anyone from FTDNA (they run ySearch) to respond to my inquiries about

Excellent! He's not within FTDNA's Y-DNA match threshold for me, but may be for others here. If he would join the L513 Project and if we can get a kit #, then I can see how closely he aligns with the

Hi Jared and everyone, I have a new 34/37 match. Surname is Dean who may be related to my previous match of that name. I invited him to check out the L513 project. Charles Thomas

This post should (hopefully) make a lot more sense... A few of us have been doing some analysis to try to figure out how long ago our common ancestors may have lived. We have come up with much more

Awesome news! Thanks for all your work, Jared! Glad to be on the same branch of the tree with you, Chuck! (Assuming your name Chuck is for Charles, that makes two Charles on this branch.) According to

I've again updated the charts at http://dna.smithplanet.com/snp These now include the proper positioning for everyone. I removed the speculative branches that do not have available SNP tests. All of

The S5668 SNP pack results are in for Chuck Martin and they confirm a new Thomas/Martin branch of the tree. First, I had indicated Chuck's kit # previously as 161394. That was incorrect. His actual

Please send all of them (with an indication of or grouping by YFull's quality level). I'm curious how their quality levels align with those from the other sources I used - Mike W.'s analysis, Alex's

Addendum, there are actually more categories: I assume that ambiguous is better than Low quality. Perhaps you do want the Ambiguous ones. Joel

Thanks, Jared, That should be a great resource. I'll send some of my SNPs your way once I sort them out. YFull has them as: Best Quality (5) Acceptable (6) Ambiguous (20) I'm guessing you just want

I have uploaded a new spreadsheet to http://dna.smithplanet.com/media/Z16357-Variants.xlsx This likely has limited utility for anyone other than me, but I thought I'd share it. This file is used for

Charles - Oh, that must be Chuck Martin's SNP pack results. I don't see those results at all yet, but that would put him at the same place on the tree as you. We don't know if he's on the same branch

Thanks Jared, I was wondering what happened to that test. Also I'm wondering why I can't see Phillips on my match list? Hopefully, it should show up soon. Joel

Thanks for the update. I checked and yes FTDNA does indeed show me as R-Y29969 now with BY11573 shown in light brown meaning presumed positive beside Y29969 on the tree. I also noticed that Rodney

I forgot to mention that I've updated the charts at http://dna.smithplanet.com/snp to reflect these changes, in case you prefer a visual view of what's happening. Jared