Coming Soon: Y-DNA Haplogroups for Family Finder

[sirdan]

Yea, this is a big feature. Even with general haplogroup, we can fast eliminate "false Matches" and propose Big Y for right people. While auDNA and STR are different products, they may conflict with each other. However, FTDNA should make their offer modern, and cut out the lowest grade STR tests, and make like STR37 much cheaper. And you get STR111 in a price of WGS, soo.. its not even one SNP mutation test on their side, while on the other WGS side is triple product - and even more detailed.

[Jalisciense]

I really want this for AncestryDNA instead.

I'd prefer the mtDNA tbh

I'm much more interested in Y-DNA, because I have some Family Finder matches with my surname, and I've never been able to convince them to do any Y-DNA testing on their own. The Y-DNA results may eliminate them as paternal line relatives, but at least then I can cross them off my list. If the results go at least as far as 23andMe does and match mine, then I can be pretty sure they are paternal line matches. I can consider even offering to pay for the Big Y-700 if the potential is great enough. 

I did FTDNA's FGS mtDNA test and the Chromo2 from BritainsDNA, but mtDNA results haven't done much for me genealogically. Nice to know the full haplogroup, but that's about it.

I wrote it because here in Mexico we just have AncestryDNA and MyHeritageDNA, so we cannot know our mtDNA except if one of them implement it.

Besides there are enough SNP's in the raw data to get our Y-DNA using Morley, clade finder or even ADNTRO, but not the mtDNA.

[sirdan]

They offer this feature for new Family Finder kits during black friday, so it must be close.

New Genetic males receive an intermediate Y-DNA haplogroup that traces the migration of your paternal line ancestors

[rmstevens2]

They offer this feature for new Family Finder kits during black friday, so it must be close.

New Genetic males receive an intermediate Y-DNA haplogroup that traces the migration of your paternal line ancestors

Awesome!

That is definitely a good sign!

[pelop]

I really want this for AncestryDNA instead.

It would be very nice but I don't expect we'd see something like that in the coming months (years?) after the 23andMe leak fiasco.

[Riverman]

I really want this for AncestryDNA instead.

It would be very nice but I don't expect we'd see something like that in the coming months (years?) after the 23andMe leak fiasco.

Why? I think that the haplogroups are not as sensitive (especially the fairly crude ones) and people could opt in to show them or not - the latter would be annoying, but to please to oversensitive...
If FTDNA would get more customers due to this new feature, Ancestry will follow. If it doesn't make a difference, they might continue to ignore it.

[ArmandoR1b]

I really want this for AncestryDNA instead.

I'd prefer the mtDNA tbh

The mtDNA haplogroup is not available through an autosomal test but the Y-DNA chromosome is. The reason that FTDNA can provide a haplogroup from old tests is that the data was already in the results from the test chip. It was never provided to the customer in the raw data but obviously it was extracted. FTDNA is not going to retest everyone due to the cost and because some people only have enough of a sample left for one more test which FTDNA could make money off of and some customers would not be happy knowing that they can no longer get an mtDNA or BigY-700 test for a relative's kit that they manage.

Ancestry would have to offer a separate mtDNA test. They stopped offering the mtDNA and the Y-DNA test in 2014. https://dna-explained.com/2014/06/05/anc...data-base/ It was because of a false accusation using basic data from Y-DNA results. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_...el_Usry_Jr.

[ArmandoR1b]

I can't remember where I read it, so I definitely could be mistaken, but I seem to remember reading somewhere that FTDNA's Family Finder actually goes beyond 23andMe on Y-DNA stuff.

If they get at least as far as 23andMe, that wouldn't be bad, because 23andMe has me listed as R-Z18021, which is the same thing as FTDNA's R-BY166. That's just five steps upstream of my current Big Y-700-tested terminal SNP. FTDNA dates BY166/Z18021 to about 750 AD, which isn't bad. 

Beats the heck out of R-M269.

It probably depends on the chip used at the time. 23andme has had 5 versions using different chips each time. It seems FTDNA has only had 2 versions of autosomal tests. The chips only scanned certain positions of the Y chromosome so data will be limited even with FTDNA.

The best thing about FTDNA is they have Y-DNA experts that know how to determine false negatives and false positives. I have identified several of them on the 23andme v5 chip.

[ArmandoR1b]

If the haplogroup prediction doesn't achieve the 23andMe-level, like the Iron Age time frame, it won't help me a lot, but will be fun to have nevertheless.
However, I hope they don't fall behind 23andMe or even the Morley predictor, because that woudl be a shame and missed opportunity.

It will depend on the version of the chip and what was scanned by the chip in the autosomal test. Morley does not test the DNA. It only reports what was tested and included in the raw data. Morley is outdated and trash anyway so it should never be used or even mentioned. Cladefinder https://cladefinder.yseq.net/ is much better and updated and the author responds positively to reports of false negatives.

By the way, anyone can look at their own raw data. Morley and Cladefinder simply make it easier for people that don't know how to interpret raw data.

[ArmandoR1b]

I really want this for AncestryDNA instead.

I doubt they would ever do it just do to the cost and they would report a lot of incorrect results due to false negatives and false positives. They don't have Y-DNA experts.

[ArmandoR1b]

Ancestry used to give Y-DNA results, but then they quit for some reason (after devouring all the Sorenson stuff, unfortunately).

It was because of the false accusation of Michael Usry based on limited data from Y-DNA.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_...el_Usry_Jr.

https://www.science.org/content/article/...s-innocent

https://www.wired.com/2015/10/familial-d...-suspects/

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/a-fath...-of-murder

[ArmandoR1b]

I wrote it because here in Mexico we just have AncestryDNA and MyHeritageDNA, so we cannot know our mtDNA except if one of them implement it.

Besides there are enough SNP's in the raw data to get our Y-DNA using Morley, clade finder or even ADNTRO, but not the mtDNA.

FamilytreeDNA is the lab that does the testing for MyHeritage. https://blog.myheritage.com/2016/11/myhe...-answered/ If you transfer your MyHeritage kit to FTDNA you should be able to order an mtDNA test from FTDNA using the existing saliva sample provided to myHeritage. Try it and let us know what happens - https://www.familytreedna.com/autosomal-transfer

If it works, hopefully you also decide to get Big-700 for you, your relatives and you convince your friends to do it also.

You can also order for a kit to be sent to you to Guadalajara from FTDNA. I have done it the past to Guadalajara. It was before Covid though. It was sent through regular mail both ways and it did take a long time but it was received in Guadalajara and Houston. You could also have a friend or relative send you a kit through one of the small bus services that do direct routes. I know of one that goes from Dallas to Ojuelos de Jalisco. Also if anyone ever travels between U.S. and Mexico they can take some kits with them. A cousin from Jalisco just did it recently.

[ArmandoR1b]

Here's something from Katy Rowe of Family Tree DNA, updated 29 August 2023, that indicates what kind of resolution we can expect from these FF Y-DNA haplogroups:

This means you’ll only receive a partial haplogroup from an autosomal test. Most customers can expect this haplogroup to have originated in the Metal Age (about 10,000 years ago). Comparatively, a predicted, broad haplogroup from a Y-STR test like the Y-37 or Y-111 will typically have originated in the Stone Age (about 100,000 years ago), and a haplogroup from the Big Y-700 will typically have originated in the Middle Ages or in the Modern Age (about 1,000 to 500 years ago)—within genealogical times.

Introducing Y-DNA Haplogroups for Family Finder Customers

That is because the chips used are either the OmniExpress or the GSA or similar. 

FTDNA and MyHeritage originally had the OmniExpress. FTDNA and MyHeritage went to the GSA chip in March 2019.
23andme v3 and v4 used OmniExpress. 23andme v5 uses GSA since August 2017.
AncestryDNA v2 still uses OmniExpress as far as I can tell.

Although each company can decide to have certain positions of the Y-DNA to not be tested or reported they are still limited by what the chip is capable of and none of the companies placed a high importance of the Y-DNA results. Every single person tested by a specific chip is tested for all of the same positions are reported in everyone's raw data. Due to this the number of positions each chip tested can be seen in the raw data for 23andme, Ancestry and MyHeritage customers.

23andme v3 and v4 OmniExpress tested less than 2185 Y-DNA positions.
23andme v5 tested less than 3397 Y-DNA positions.

AncestryDNA v2 Ominexpress tested less than 1745 positions.

The Myheritage files that I have tested less than 3496 positions. They must be from a 2019 GSA chip.

Based on the above results the reports from the FTDNA GSA chip will have something close to what MyHeritage and 23andme v5 has and the FTDNA Omniexpress will have close to what the 23andme v4 had.

Anyone with transfers from the other companies will get close to what can be seen with Yseq Cladefinder at https://cladefinder.yseq.net/ with the small exceptions of false negatives and false positives hopefully being ignored.

You can see what is reported in the 23andme v5 files at https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1...ue&sd=true The 23andme v4 positions that are tested can be seen at https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1...ue&sd=true

Let me say that if FTDNA follows through with it then it will be wonderful since people without Y-DNA tests and those with Y-DNA tests that haven't had SNP testing will have their haplogroup and FF and/or Y-DNA matches will be able to see if they at least share a similar haplogroup even if not as detailed as those of us with Big-Y testing would like it to be. For instance, L21 and U152 were tested successfully by both OmniExpress and GSA. So anyone that has Y-DNA STR markers that make them seem to be positive for one of those two but are actually negative for both L21 and U152 are now going to be very possibly DF27. Especially so if tested by GSA and negative for DF99.

I hope that FTDNA reports all positive and negative results so that customers can see what they are negative for apart for what they are positive for.

[Bukva_]

Here's something from Katy Rowe of Family Tree DNA, updated 29 August 2023, that indicates what kind of resolution we can expect from these FF Y-DNA haplogroups:

This means you’ll only receive a partial haplogroup from an autosomal test. Most customers can expect this haplogroup to have originated in the Metal Age (about 10,000 years ago). Comparatively, a predicted, broad haplogroup from a Y-STR test like the Y-37 or Y-111 will typically have originated in the Stone Age (about 100,000 years ago), and a haplogroup from the Big Y-700 will typically have originated in the Middle Ages or in the Modern Age (about 1,000 to 500 years ago)—within genealogical times.

Introducing Y-DNA Haplogroups for Family Finder Customers

That is because the chips used are either the OmniExpress or the GSA or similar. 

FTDNA and MyHeritage originally had the OmniExpress. FTDNA and MyHeritage went to the GSA chip in March 2019.
23andme v3 and v4 used OmniExpress. 23andme v5 uses GSA since August 2017.
AncestryDNA v2 still uses OmniExpress as far as I can tell.

Although each company can decide to have certain positions of the Y-DNA to not be tested or reported they are still limited by what the chip is capable of and none of the companies placed a high importance of the Y-DNA results. Every single person tested by a specific chip is tested for all of the same positions are reported in everyone's raw data. Due to this the number of positions each chip tested can be seen in the raw data for 23andme, Ancestry and MyHeritage customers.

23andme v3 and v4 OmniExpress tested less than 2185 Y-DNA positions.
23andme v5 tested less than 3397 Y-DNA positions.

AncestryDNA v2 Ominexpress tested less than 1745 positions.

The Myheritage files that I have tested less than 3496 positions. They must be from a 2019 GSA chip.

Based on the above results the reports from the FTDNA GSA chip will have something close to what MyHeritage and 23andme v5 has and the FTDNA Omniexpress will have close to what the 23andme v4 had.

Anyone with transfers from the other companies will get close to what can be seen with Yseq Cladefinder at https://cladefinder.yseq.net/ with the small exceptions of false negatives and false positives hopefully being ignored.

You can see what is reported in the 23andme v5 files at https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1...ue&sd=true The 23andme v4 positions that are tested can be seen at https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1...ue&sd=true

Let me say that if FTDNA follows through with it then it will be wonderful since people without Y-DNA tests and those with Y-DNA tests that haven't had SNP testing will have their haplogroup and FF and/or Y-DNA matches will be able to see if they at least share a similar haplogroup even if not as detailed as those of us with Big-Y testing would like it to be. For instance, L21 and U152 were tested successfully by both OmniExpress and GSA. So anyone that has Y-DNA STR markers that make them seem to be positive for one of those two but are actually negative for both L21 and U152 are now going to be very possibly DF27. Especially so if tested by GSA and negative for DF99.

I hope that FTDNA reports all positive and negative results so that customers can see what they are negative for apart for what they are positive for.

How would they compare to LivingDNA Y haplogroup results?

[Loderingo]

I welcome new developments but I can't help but feel this is putting the cart before the horse. While having Y-DNA for my autosomal matches would be nice, it doesn't drive me forward as I don't know how most of my FTDNA matches are related to me due to:

1) No or limited trees
2) Poor FTDNA tree software
3) Lack of equivalent to common ancestor/theory of relativity.

I would say this is the area FTDNA should focus on first to help genealogists move forward. By contrast at Ancestry, I know how almost all of my closest relations are connected (either for certain via common ancestor/manual tree inspection or an educated guess by looking at shared matches).

The second thing is a general lack of new matches. In the last week I have had 2 new matches at FTDNA vs. 26 new matches at Ancestry. The other thing for me personally as a Brit is that FTDNA is still very heavily US-focussed. I find it harder to successfully work with American matches due to them being further back in time (and the difficulty of finding that one cousin who emigrated) and I would love for them to do some advertising in Europe.