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%