FTDNA Backbone R1b and implications for L2

[lgmayka]

However, for someone who is just L2+, then this test is as as good a value as you are going to get. Of L2's known subclades, a whopping 14 of 18 are included:

Z49, Z367, DF90, DF103, FGC5336, CTS5689, S1567, S18827, DF110, BY2823, FGC13620, FGC22501, A6454, FGC5301

Of the four that are missing, two are testable (L199 & FGC10543) and the other two are somewhat new and do not yet have an SNP named assigned to them.

As I mentioned in a previous post, this SNP pack does not include the ancient and mysterious S14469.

EDIT: This U152 tree asserts that S14469/FGC4183 is phylogenetically equivalent to DF103, which is reportedly included in the new SNP pack. DF103 is a deletion. I think that YFull does not ordinarily use deletions in its analysis.

[Kwheaton]

What is the best test in this price range then? This test is clearly aimed at people who were (or are) going to order individual SNPs. In an ideal world everyone will order a NGS-test but in my opinion this test has good value for money when you are U152+ and are trying to take small steps.

This panel also has 4 subclades that could be of interest to the former U152*-group. As a former U152*, who participated in Big-Y, I am "patiently" waiting for new SNP matches and interested in seeing how the U152*-group will split up. The rare subclade I belong to is included on this panel and it is frustrating to see that this test is so easily dismissed, frankly it pissed me off, it would be a great way to clear out the everlasting and ever growing "U152>?" groups and also make some bigger steps along the way.

Its a mixed bag.....good if it brings in more L2 and downstream testers--- bad in that it may not be the most cost effective way to do so....it does seem though that FTDNA's marketing seems to be effective so I will take them however we can get them. Rich I sent you an email with the new SNPS avaliable at YSEQ.org. $17.50 is as good as it gets....and I would love if a few of the 9 previously identified would test. I feel that there is a likely geographic indication in the NW Rhine region...

[Wing Genealogist]

I myself would test at YSEQ and FGC but I cannot deny that the Big Y gave us our closest match to date and some may benefit from the R1b backbone---again it is a case of buyer beware.

Its really random what was included and what wasn't---and FGC22501 which was included is 98% X so can't quite understand its inclusion----

Does anyone know who is doing the Y research at FTDNA these days?

Some SNPs are not available on the Deep Clade packs simply because they failed in the development process to make it testable. Every type of testing has SNPs which are difficult for them to handle (Sanger Sequencing is impossible for quite a few NGS SNPs and some Sanger Sequence SNPs are not found in the Big Y).

In addition, even when a SNP makes it into a SNP pack, there is no guarantee the SNP would work properly. The only way to know which SNPs work, and which SNPs fail is to run a batch of tests.

[R.Rocca]

I think this is a good alternative for people who are known U152+ but are looking for their subclade immediately downstream of U152, from what I have seen it includes 7 subclades (L2, Z36, Z56, A274, A517, A1773 and PF6658), although the last one is a bit problematic.

@mafe, thanks for pointing out A274, A517 and A1773. I still had their positions showing on the U152 tree and not their YFull names, so I completely overlooked them.

That does change things quite a bit...aside from folks that are simply L2, this test does look like it has good value for those that are U152*.

[R.Rocca]

The list I have says they do test FGC10516. Isn't this equivalent to FGC10543? Or are there some issues with it.

[Edit: I think 14/18 is right by A6454 is on FTDNA list but may be typo here as YBrowse days is is under DF13]

[Edit Also on list is L408 which is under L199.]

Of course I completely skimmed through my own subclade...you are right, FGC10516 is in the same subclade as FGC10543, so it is 15/18. A6454 is also in L2 and is reliable.

[haleaton]

As I mentioned in a previous post, this SNP pack does not include the ancient and mysterious S14469.

EDIT: This U152 tree asserts that S14469/FGC4183 is phylogenetically equivalent to DF103, which is reportedly included in the new SNP pack. DF103 is a deletion. I think that YFull does not ordinarily use deletions in its analysis.

Of the four YFull S14469+ samples, YF03106, YF03493, YF01424 (Bartold b.1350 d. 1420 Poland), YF03457, Bartold was identifiable as in the U152 FTDNA Group tree as DF103.

YF01310 was a member of the U152 YFull Group, though, and using the YFull Browser function it did show that location 9020396 (DF103) was followed by TAGA>del, however they don't flag INDELS. 1KG-HG00152 is also in their sample also was noted but was flagged as ambigous as there were two del reads for one TAGA read. 1KG-HG00152 was also a nocall for L2 so YFull classifies it as U152. I did not check the other DF103 downstream SNPS.

[haleaton]

Of course I completely skimmed through my own subclade...you are right, FGC10516 is in the same subclade as FGC10543, so it is 15/18. A6454 is also in L2 and is reliable.

A6454 6707762(G/A) is under L2 in YBrowse, I was wrong--maybe dyslexia. And is part of the new test.

So it is actually 16/18. If you include L408. After so many no calls or BED elimination in Big Y, L2 finally gets a big break

EDIT: Or maybe 15.5/18 as there is one L199+ L408- based on tree . . .

[mafe]

What about: BY2895, BY2896, BY2823, BY2868, BY575 ? Any information on these SNPs?

[ballardgen]

Useful test, Its such a shame that the 4 main SNP's under CTS4528 were not included in this new R1b backbone panel, this would have made a massive difference to the expansion of my project if the following could have been added - S11481, S14328, S1211, S6868

[Kwheaton]

Hal,

L2 finally gets a break

I guess that was my original point. It isn't perfect and was not meant as a terminal SNP diviner. But considering what we got from Geno 2 I was surprsied at how much was included at a decent price. Not particularly helpful for those who have done NGS but if we can get a slew of those folks in the U152 project (who haven't) to test we may actually get more company in at leats some of our branches....


For your particular subclade a few individual YSEQ SNPS may be a better value but to help sift the masses into finer categories this may be a decent offering from FTDNA (aside from the SNPS with ambigous calls which one would have hoped they hadn't included).