Re: YFull

Jared Smith

On Sun, Jan 29, 2017 at 2:56 AM, Joel Hartley <joel@...> wrote:

The YTree was last updated January 4th. I'm not sure how often they update it. I'm not sure how it would be updated. As they don't have Pillsbury and Hayes in their database, they won't show that branching.
This is a fundamental limitation of YFull - they use such a limited
set of available data to determine their tree - only results of those
who have purchased their analysis. They won't know about other known
SNPs and branches that have been verified elsewhere. This really
limits their ability to estimate timelines. Big Tree uses a much
larger sample of FGC/Big-Y testers, but doesn't attempt time
estimates. FTDNA's tree uses Big-Y and SNP pack/test results, but is
very conservative. ISOGG tries to be more authoritative, but lags
behind other known trees due to their high scrutiny and complex
submission process.

Fortunately they each provide something a bit unique - it just takes a
lot of analysis to pull from them what is most useful.

As an FYI, you can compare your YFull Novel SNPs list to Alex's list
to see which SNPs match at both sites - and which are named SNPs. For
example, YFS2491169 (which is position 21390000 - G>A from YFull's
spreadsheet for Thomas) is found to be the FGC33968 SNP at the Big
Tree -

Joel, you'll notice that you have 11 unique/private/novel SNPs from
very good read areas - All are named
A111nn by Thomas Krahn. I use A11130 to describe this entire block
because that's the SNP FTDNA added to their SNP pack. Using the
*rough* estimate of 144 years per SNP, this block represents ~1584
years. Because Z17911 is around this old, these SNPs likely represent
the vast majority of your line's SNP mutations between Z17911 and
present day. A distant Hartley Big-Y would likely solidify these SNPs
on the tree and establish a pretty good timeline and SNP framework for
this line of your surname.


Join to automatically receive all group messages.