|
Anything
above this line is advertising and is not a link to information on my web
site |
PROJECT
NEWS
This page is for my project
participants but apparently others read it too.
&
HOT TOPICS
Revised
24 October 2007
PROJECT NEWS
Click here
Last revised 12 October 2006 (result
pages, of course, are always kept current).
|
HOT TOPICS There are three current/hot
topics: 1) SMGF partners with GeneTree |
PROJECT NEWS
12 October
2006 – Results Pages revised.
We have some 67 marker upgrades but not enough to determine how
useful they are.
Project Information at FTDNA
We now have included the FTDNA public site option at:
http://www.familytreedna.com/public/KinneyMcKinneyVariations
http://www.familytreedna.com/public/Lenhart
http://www.familytreedna.com/public/McKenna
The information at that site is automatically generated by FTDNA and is always current. WAIT for results to load (it takes a while). New results appear there as Unassigned Members until changed by the project administrator - FTDNA does not determine family groups. Due to certain limitations, the presentation order and subgroups are confusing. As always, your personal pages at FTDNA provide information and our web site results page has more information about family groups and links to ancestry details.
L I N K S page
If you are an old timer, you may not know about our LINKS page.
It's now the official WELCOME letter to new participants that contains useful
links. You may want to bookmark it:
Kinney, McKinney & Variations and McKenna
http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~gkbopp/DNA/LINKS_Kinney_McKinney_Variations.htm
Lenhart & Variations
http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~gkbopp/DNA/LINKS_Lenhart%20and%20Variations.htm
English, Inglis & Variations
http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~gkbopp/DNA/LINKS_English.htm
The earlier 67 Marker Hot Topic remarks have been moved here (keeping them for a while longer):
9 September 2006
Uploading to Ysearch for 67 markers has been in place for a few weeks.
Presumably the below “naming convention” issue has been resolved. FTDNA’s guidelines for the 67 markers are
here:
http://www.familytreedna.com/gdrules_67.html
11 July 2006 - Discussions between FTDNA and
EA continue . . . .
http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/read/GENEALOGY-DNA/2006-07/1152669431 *
28 June 2006 update - The below status report of the naming convention issue has not changed. However, when/if any of the numeric values change, the genetic distance between FTDNA participants will remain the same. (I confirmed this in a telephone conversation with FTDNA today). Put another way - if you have 67 marker results and "match" another FTDNA participant, your "match" will hold up, even if some of the values change. This is because changes in values will be the same for ALL FTDNA customers, so the matches will be unaffected. Hence the marker reporting issue is not a problem for any of us UNLESS you are trying to compare markers with results from EA. To my knowledge, there is no one in any of the projects I admin (or co-admin) comparing to EA. However, if any of you are involved in other projects (haplogroup projects, etc.) that want your results to use in their various predictions, etc. - keep in mind that until the reporting convention is clarified, your FTDNA results may not be useful to them and/or depending on how this settles out, the EA results they use will have to modified. Don't forget - this is a pioneer field. The naming convention for new markers is part of the pioneer process.
67 Marker Upgrades at FTDNA (originally was 59 markers, they
added more)
A few people in my various projects have these on order - some results are in. I have not promoted upgrades to others until we know how useful these markers will be. I'm NOT putting the results on the web site for any of my projects until some nomenclature/reporting problems are solved because some values may have to be adjusted.
Current status of the problem:
The difference with respect to DYS413 has been worked out. <[FTDNA] lab has reviewed their reporting nomenclature and in the interests of consistency and correctness in the field [have] contacted EthnoAncestry [EA] to try to work with them towards a common nomenclature. . . . waiting to hear back from them. The markers that [they] found the nomenclature to be different are 490, 481, and 531 (406s1 has not yet had a nomenclature adopted by EA). Once a decision is achieved for these markers [they will] make any adjustments as needed to results already reported. [FTDNA is reported source]>
Sources:
Private emails and/or telephone conversations
with FTDNA staff.
http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/read/GENEALOGY-DNA/2006-06/1150924723
http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/read/GENEALOGY-DNA/2006-06/1150932176
* WARNING - not everyone who posts on the above DNA list has reliable and or objective information. I will NOT post links unless I think information is reliable and presented in a responsible manner.
==================
The Hot Topics page began June 2006
The Project News section was added July 2006
Georgia Kinney Bopp
|
GKBopp |