Coming Soon: Y-DNA Haplogroups for Family Finder

[ArmandoR1b]

FTDNA has over 2 million in it's database and 285,000 of them are on their y dna haplotree.

For simple math lets say there 2 million are available for this update, of which 1 million are men.

So 3% tested in December 2023, means roughly 30,000 men or ~1145 additional U152 men (above the normal testing growth) should have been identified by now.

U152 #
Feb 13, 2019:  5532 U152 samples in the FTDNA database
Jan 4 2020:  5712 3.6% increase annualized growth
Dec 31 2020:  6385, 11.8% increase over previous year
Jan 2 2022:  7803, 22.2% increase over previous year
Jan 1 2023:  8474, 8.6% increase over previous year.

From Jan 2020 to Jan 23 annual growth averaged 14.2% over the previous year
8474 x 1.142 = 9677 is roughly what we would normally expect

Right now as of Dec 25 2023, there are 10873 men in the FTDNA database, or 1196 more than would be expected based on prior years.  That's a 28.3% increase over the previous year.

If FTDNA has tested 3% of the database then the U152 project numbers are in line with what should be expected based on these numbers (1145 vs 1196 increase).

But what's discouraging to me is that there has been no corresponding dramatic increase in numbers below U152>L2 on my line.

So I'm not sure this update is going to be of much personal benefit.

But I'm glad that it appears to be helping others like Riveman.

Since you are a person that should be able to read my spreadsheet and since FF and 23andme v5 both used the GSA chip I hope you take a look at it at https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1...ue&sd=true and compare it to what other subclades are found with FF. They should be similar with some exceptions.

Your spreadsheet includes SNPs 
Z142>S7402/Z12222
Z142>S257/Z150
Z142>Z12222, Z150>Y10987/FGC12378
Z142>Z12222, Z150> Y10984/FGC12401
Z142>Z12222, Z150> FGC12405/Y4272
Z142>Z12222, Z150> Y10984/FGC12401,  Z142>Z12222> Y3141/FGC12383

 but apparently none of these, nor Z142 or Z12222 for that matter were included in the spreadsheet that jdbreazeale posted.

I've noted that Z142>Z51 has significantly increased over the last month, while Z142>Z12222 has grown very slow in comparision, so it appears jdbreazeale's spreadsheet is correct, when it concerns my part of the tree.

My spreadsheet was for 23andme v5, as I had stated previously. That means that mine is correct, but only definitively correct for 23andme v5. Read on for more details on the difference.

Since Z12222 is phylogenetically equivalent to Z150 and since Z150 or S257 are what 23andme would have reported then Z12222 has no importance. Z12222 is especially unimportant if FTDNA is not going to report all of the derived and ancestral calls from FF for each individual sample. We both know what a phylogenetic equivalents are and what phylogenetic synonyms are and so on.

Since Z51 has grown a lot and Z12222 has not it is also possible that Z12222 has not grown due to most people that are derived for Z12222 are also derived for a downstream SNP. I could be wrong there but I prefer to know that it is ruled out as possibility. Details are important when looking at all of this without having all of the source information directly from FTDNA.

Example of the spreadsheet that jdbreazeale posted not having all of the SNPs very likely to be tested by FTDNA FF. Notice that P312 is not in the spreadsheet that jdbreazeale posted and also notice that DF13 is not in the spreadsheet that jdbreazeale posted. That doesn't mean that P312 and DF13 are not in the FF test. It means something else and only time will tell why they are not in the spreadsheet that jdbreazeale posted.