Coming Soon: Y-DNA Haplogroups for Family Finder

[ArmandoR1b]

Does anyone know if they have processed FF kits from 2016 yet? I found two that are from early 2017. So they should be getting close to 2016 if they haven't yet. My own kit is from 2012. Any way to find out which year had the largest increase in FF customers?

Good eyes.  They have not gotten to 2016 yet, as the only FF matches I have who are still M269 are 2016 and older matches.  The two that were updated last week were from 2017.

It looks like they are going in order by year from newest to oldest. There are still a lot of kits without a haplogroup, as you have noticed, and it looks like they are from the remaining 2017 and older kits.

[Ebizur]

I think you may have misread my post.  I'm talking about my father-in-law (wife's father):

He's O-CTS11727 and his closest Y ancient is "Dushan 4-1, a man who lived between 7024 - 6643 BCE during the East Asian Neolithic Age and was found in the region now known as Dushan, Guangxi, China.Dushan 4-1.  Shared ancestor 13,000 BCE
You and Dushan 4-1 share a common paternal line ancestor who lived around this time.
Rare Connection, 1 in 740, Only 504 customers are this closely related to Dushan 4-1."

It is sad that they have not even distinguished between O-CTS201 and O-M7. These two primary subclades of O-CTS11727 have very different distributions at present. O-CTS201 is found in Korea and Japan (O-CTS201 > O-FGC50590 > O-MF114497), along the eastern coast of China (O-CTS201 > O-FGC50590(xMF114497)), or mostly in southeastern China (O-CTS201 > O-M159). O-M7 is found mostly among Hmong-Mien and Austroasiatic populations (O-M7 > O-F1276) or among Austronesians (O-M7 > O-Y26395). Dushan 4-1 belongs to O-M7 > O-F1276 > O-F1275 according to FTDNA Discover.

[ArmandoR1b]

My dad, who passed away back in 2018, originally tested with the Genographic Project, whose tests were done by FTDNA. He got an R-CTS2501 result via the Genographic Project, which is the equivalent of R-DF41. That was an actual SNP test result and not a prediction based on STRs. I transferred his results over to FTDNA some years ago (probably in 2012 or thereabouts). My dad did the Family Finder test in July of 2014.

Since BY166 is downstream of CTS2501/DF41, I guess he'll eventually get moved to R-BY166 via his FF results. Has anyone seen someone in a similar situation get a Y-DNA haplogroup assignment via Family Finder that supplanted his old Genographic Y-DNA result?

Since his FF is from 2014 he was tested by FF v1 which was released in 2010. FF v2 wasn't released until Fall 2015. BY166 was discovered in 2014 according to Ybrowse. So your dad won't be assigned BY166 since it wasn't discovered until after FF v1 was released. Big Y was released in 2013 and BY166 had to have been discovered by Big Y based on the first two letters of the SNP.

The fact that BY166 was discovered so early it must be the reason it was included in FF v2 and in 23andme v5 and so on.

[ArmandoR1b]

I think you may have misread my post.  I'm talking about my father-in-law (wife's father):

He's O-CTS11727 and his closest Y ancient is "Dushan 4-1, a man who lived between 7024 - 6643 BCE during the East Asian Neolithic Age and was found in the region now known as Dushan, Guangxi, China.Dushan 4-1.  Shared ancestor 13,000 BCE
You and Dushan 4-1 share a common paternal line ancestor who lived around this time.
Rare Connection, 1 in 740, Only 504 customers are this closely related to Dushan 4-1."

It is sad that they have not even distinguished between O-CTS201 and O-M7. These two primary subclades of O-CTS11727 have very different distributions at present. O-CTS201 is found in Korea and Japan (O-CTS201 > O-FGC50590 > O-MF114497), along the eastern coast of China (O-CTS201 > O-FGC50590(xMF114497)), or mostly in southeastern China (O-CTS201 > O-M159). O-M7 is found mostly among Hmong-Mien and Austroasiatic populations (O-M7 > O-F1276) or among Austronesians (O-M7 > O-Y26395). Dushan 4-1 belongs to O-M7 > O-F1276 > O-F1275 according to FTDNA Discover.

That's the problem with haplogroups based on Y-DNA SNPs from arrays. They are too limited. It's something that I have pointed out several times in this thread. Of course there are anecdotes of some people getting really good results but their lineages were heavily tested prior to the release of FF v2 and so on.

With the FIL of Dewsloth we have the anecdote of a poorly tested lineage. It's due to the database imbalance due to lack of interest and so on.

I am sure if Dewsloth were interested in getting his FIL a Big Y test he would and then maybe his FIL gets a much younger subclade. Maybe not. That's the risk of spending a lot on Big Y.

[Dewsloth]

I think you may have misread my post.  I'm talking about my father-in-law (wife's father):

He's O-CTS11727 and his closest Y ancient is "Dushan 4-1, a man who lived between 7024 - 6643 BCE during the East Asian Neolithic Age and was found in the region now known as Dushan, Guangxi, China.Dushan 4-1.  Shared ancestor 13,000 BCE
You and Dushan 4-1 share a common paternal line ancestor who lived around this time.
Rare Connection, 1 in 740, Only 504 customers are this closely related to Dushan 4-1."

It is sad that they have not even distinguished between O-CTS201 and O-M7. These two primary subclades of O-CTS11727 have very different distributions at present. O-CTS201 is found in Korea and Japan (O-CTS201 > O-FGC50590 > O-MF114497), along the eastern coast of China (O-CTS201 > O-FGC50590(xMF114497)), or mostly in southeastern China (O-CTS201 > O-M159). O-M7 is found mostly among Hmong-Mien and Austroasiatic populations (O-M7 > O-F1276) or among Austronesians (O-M7 > O-Y26395). Dushan 4-1 belongs to O-M7 > O-F1276 > O-F1275 according to FTDNA Discover.

That's the problem with haplogroups based on Y-DNA SNPs from arrays. They are too limited. It's something that I have pointed out several times in this thread. Of course there are anecdotes of some people getting really good results but their lineages were heavily tested prior to the release of FF v2 and so on.

With the FIL of Dewsloth we have the anecdote of a poorly tested lineage. It's due to the database imbalance due to lack of interest and so on.

I am sure if Dewsloth were interested in getting his FIL a Big Y test he would and then maybe his FIL gets a much younger subclade. Maybe not. That's the risk of spending a lot on Big Y.

At least the current SNP call tells me his possible Converso ancestry is not on his purely paternal line.
Ivorix Ancient results:
Target: Dewsloth_FIL_scaled
Distance: 0.5433% / 0.00543311
64.4 Southeast*Asian*(2000*BC–AD*1800)
8.8 Roman*Illyria*(AD*100–600)
7.2 Sinitic*(1230*BC–AD*200)
3.6 Germanic*(AD*100–630)
3.6 Japanese*(AD*540–1850)
2.2 Balkans*(AD*500–1000)
2.2 Italian*(AD*650–1450)
2.2 North*African*(AD*580–1160)
1.8 Sinitic*(1230*BC–AD*1670)
1.6 Ancient*Ancestral*South*Indian
0.8 Roman*North*Africa*(AD*120–220)
0.6 Arabian*Peninsula
0.6 Australian*(2000*BC–AD*1600)
0.4 Jomon*(6900–800*BC)
Unaggregated:

Show Content

Spoiler
Target: Dewsloth_FIL_scaled
Distance: 0.5444% / 0.00544355
17.6 Southeast*Asian*(2000*BC–AD*1800):Hanben*culture:TWN_Hanben:I3614__AD_400__Coverage_83.64%
8.6 Balkans*(AD*500–1000):Balkans:HRV_Omišalj-Mirine:R2051__AD_468__Coverage_48.92%
8.0 Southeast*Asian*(2000*BC–AD*1800):Hanben*culture:TWN_Hanben:I3616__AD_309__Coverage_68.74%
7.8 Sinitic*(1230*BC–AD*1670):Sinitic*(Xiongnu*Mass*Grave):MNG_Xiongnu_East_AsianA43__BC_150__Coverage_69.69%
6.8 Southeast*Asian*(2000*BC–AD*1800):Lapita*culture:VUT_2900BP_all:I1369_all__BC_935__Coverage_23.53%
6.6 Southeast*Asian*(2000*BC–AD*1800):Hanben*culture:TWN_Hanben:I3614__AD_400__Coverage_83.64%
6.6 Southeast*Asian*(2000*BC–AD*1800):Hanben*culture:TWN_Hanben:I13692__AD_400__Coverage_49.03%
4.8 Southeast*Asian*(2000*BC–AD*1800):Hanben*culture:TWN_Hanben:I3731__AD_400__Coverage_81.68%
3.8 Southeast*Asian*(2000*BC–AD*1800)ong*Son*culture:VNM_BA_Dong_Son_Culture:Vt781__BC_292__Coverage_6.89%
2.6 Germanic*(AD*100–630):GothOL_Weklice:R10618__AD_150__Coverage_57.86%
2.4 Southeast*Asian*(2000*BC–AD*1800):Lapita*culture:VUT_2900BP_all:I1368_all__BC_920__Coverage_16.08%
2.4 Roman*Illyria*(AD*100–600):Roman*Illyria:HRV_Omišalj-Mirine:R2051
2.4 Southeast*Asian*(2000*BC–AD*1800):Lapita*culture:VUT_2900BP_all:I1369_all__BC_935__Coverage_23.53%
2.4 Southeast*Asian*(2000*BC–AD*1800):Hanben*culture:TWN_Hanben:I8074__AD_400__Coverage_9.48%
2.2 Italian*(AD*650–1450):Central*Italian*(March*of*Tuscany):ITA_Chiusi_EMA:ETR014
2.2 Japanese*(AD*540–1850):Japanese*(Tokugawa*Period):JPN_Nagabaka_historic:NAG039__AD_1807__Coverage_80.12%
2.2 Roman*North*Africa*(AD*120–220):Roman*North*Africa:Canary_Islands_Guanche:gun005__AD_958__Coverage_25.55%
1.6 Ancient*Ancestral*South*Indian:Ancient*Ancestral*South*Indian
1.4 Southeast*Asian*(2000*BC–AD*1800)ong*Son*culture:VNM_BA_Dong_Son_Culture:Vt781__BC_292__Coverage_6.89%
1.4 Sinitic*(1230*BC–AD*1670):Sinitic*(Qing*Period):CHN_Chuanyun_Historic:L5694__AD_1612__Coverage_24.10%
1.0 Insular*Celt*(AD*100–1000):Roman*Britain:England_LIA:I12932__AD_125__Coverage_71.89%
0.8 North*African*(AD*580–1160):North*African:Canary_Islands_Guanche:gun005__AD_958__Coverage_25.55%
0.8 Sinitic*(1230*BC–AD*200):Sinitic*(Xiongnu*Mass*Grave):MNG_Xiongnu_East_AsianA43__BC_150__Coverage_69.69%
0.8 Jomon*(6900–800*BC):Jomon:Jomon*(6900–800*BC):Jomon:JPN_Jomon
0.6 Southeast*Asian*(2000*BC–AD*1800):Hanben*culture:TWN_Hanben:I13692__AD_400__Coverage_49.03%
0.6 Australian*(2000*BC–AD*1600):Australian:AUS_Mapoon_112BP:MH6__AD_1838__unknown_coverage
0.6 Southeast*Asian*(2000*BC–AD*1800):Tai–Kadai:CHN_Banda_1400BP
0.4 Southeast*Asian*(2000*BC–AD*1800):Hanben*culture:TWN_Hanben:I3731__AD_400__Coverage_81.68%
0.4 Arabian*Peninsula:Arabian*(Umayyad*Period):Levant_Tell_Qarassa_Early_Antiquityyr013__AD_715__unknown_coverage
0.2 South*Amerindian*(9000*BC–AD*1500):Selknam*(500*BP):ARG_Selknam_500BP:I12363__AD_1570__Coverage_57.36%

[Webb]

Does anyone know if they have processed FF kits from 2016 yet? I found two that are from early 2017. So they should be getting close to 2016 if they haven't yet. My own kit is from 2012. Any way to find out which year had the largest increase in FF customers?

Good eyes.  They have not gotten to 2016 yet, as the only FF matches I have who are still M269 are 2016 and older matches.  The two that were updated last week were from 2017.

It looks like they are going in order by year from newest to oldest. There are still a lot of kits without a haplogroup, as you have noticed, and it looks like they are from the remaining 2017 and older kits.

As of this morning two more 37 marker matches with FF tests are further downstream than M269.  Another Vanderhoof is Z211 and one of my NPE Wilders is CTS4065.  It looks like they are only calling to tree defining main branches, and through 2017.  Still no calls for my 2016 and older matches.  Also, all of my 37 marker matches are some form of Z209/Z210 under DF27.  Holland, Wilder/Webb, and Hurst are CTS4065 and Vanderhoof/Vanderhoven are Z211.

[rmstevens2]

My youngest son got his FF R-BY166 placement sometime yesterday. 

I'm still waiting for the results of a couple of FF matches with my surname. 

Maybe it has been mentioned in this thread already and I missed it, but will autosomal transfers get a Y-DNA result from all this?

Now I'm hoping FTDNA starts up with mtDNA results from Family Finder soon. That should be interesting.

[Riverman]

My youngest son got his FF R-BY166 placement sometime yesterday. 

I'm still waiting for the results of a couple of FF matches with my surname. 

Maybe it has been mentioned in this thread already and I missed it, but will autosomal transfers get a Y-DNA result from all this?

Now I'm hoping FTDNA starts up with mtDNA results from Family Finder soon. That should be interesting.

Yes, transfers get assigned, but the result won't be visible to matches, but to the test account only. Unless they have a comparable resolution and chip, like most of the newer MyHeritage uploads, which are based on the same chip version, should get a similar result and hopefully will be public as well. I think they are, but I'm not sure yet.
Those from Ancestry won't be public and the result will be worse also.

[Mabrams]

From the original FTDNA announcement.   Most bold facing is mine.

"

• Autosomal transfer customers who have unlocked their full results will be the third group to receive their results.
  
• Important note: Because Ancestry and 23andMe transfers are not lab-to-lab transfers, haplogroups from these tests will only be displayed to the tester, will not be shared with matches or Group Projects, and will not be included in the Haplotree or Discover™ statistics.
  

It seems like we are midway through the second group (FFs before 2019), so the autosomal transfers should be next. Although "next" could be days or weeks or months.

I have no inkling as to what fraction of Autosomal Transfers pay the Unlock fee.   Might be a significant fraction.   

I dont think the number of MH transfers is very high.  I only see a few in projects that I admin, and they are usually older or female.  Presumably MH kits are also subject to the Unlock requirement.

FTDNA is supposed to be doing a big mtDNA make-over.   But when?  And will the Family Finder mtDNAs be updated before or after?

[ArmandoR1b]

My youngest son got his FF R-BY166 placement sometime yesterday. 

I'm still waiting for the results of a couple of FF matches with my surname. 

Maybe it has been mentioned in this thread already and I missed it, but will autosomal transfers get a Y-DNA result from all this?

Now I'm hoping FTDNA starts up with mtDNA results from Family Finder soon. That should be interesting.

What was the year that he originally got his Family Finder results? 2018? 2017?

[rmstevens2]

My youngest son got his FF R-BY166 placement sometime yesterday. 

I'm still waiting for the results of a couple of FF matches with my surname. 

Maybe it has been mentioned in this thread already and I missed it, but will autosomal transfers get a Y-DNA result from all this?

Now I'm hoping FTDNA starts up with mtDNA results from Family Finder soon. That should be interesting.

What was the year that he originally got his Family Finder results? 2018? 2017?

He got his results in 2017. I'm surprised it was that long ago.

[ArmandoR1b]

It seems we are still waiting for them to get to 2016. Once they finish 2012 most customers will have had thir Y-DNA haplogroup reported and then they should finish the rest shortly after. They slowed down again the past 2 days.

[Webb]

I checked the surname report in the Public Haplotree at FTDNA yesterday and today for DF27>CTS4065. Yesterday there were 39 individuals on the report and today there are 41.

[Riverman]

Is there a branch under E-M35 which doesn't get tested?
I just wonder about the 2.173 testers which are just E-M35. Are they from an untested branch, did they do some sort of old test? Are they being SNP confirmed of some sort? Those kind of skew the statistics a bit, if they still COULD be E-V13.

[rmstevens2]

One of the guys in my maternal grandfather's surname project just got an FF assignment of R1b-M323, which is downstream of R1b-U106.

That's not my maternal grandfather's Y-chromosome line. His is downstream of R1b-Z253. Same surname, different haplogroup. 

Funny the Y-DNA diversity among men with my maternal grandfather's surname. It's not a common surname.