Big Y-700 "haplogroups" reported by data doctor as invalid?

Question

When we do a Big Y-700 kit on FTDNA, it potentially reports our haplogroup as a new branching subclade identifier.  For example my haplogroup is R-M269 but my subclade is R-FTD8841.  

When I click "Suggestions" I see that it reports my yDNA haplogroup as invalid.  Granted, it's only been a couple weeks since they "discovered" the new subclade so maybe it's because it's brand new and the reference list in the database hasn't been updated.  

Curious more about any guiding policy here. It seems to me better to be more specific since it's still clear in the yTree that the newly identified subclade rolls up to R-M269. 

Apologies if I'm not using the terms correctly, but hopefully my question is clear.  It seems I now have a recognized haplogroup, but also a more specific subclade that I think makes sense to share as well.

Thanks,

Joe

Comments

I know we had a conversation here with Aleš about this roughly a year ago or a little less, but I can't find it. My preference is to use a hybrid haplogroup identifier, e.g., R1b1-BY35083, and that was throwing the same error. We got it corrected; no more suggestion for it in my report.

I can't fathom why R-FTD8841 would be causing a problem. I'm pretty confident that there is no validation going on against a downloaded public version of FTDNA's haplotree, but I could be wrong. My impression was that the only validation was in the syntactical construction of the haplogroup name...which is why my "R1b1-" thing was blowing it up.

I mean, in the past 12 months alone FTDNA has added 12,244 new haplotree branches (in September 2018 the entire tree consisted of 16,361 branches). It would seem inefficient to try to keep up with that, especially considering that FTDNA, YFull, and Y-DNA Warehouse aren't in complete agreement about their trees.

---

I found the discussion:
https://www.wikitree.com/g2g/1445440/suggestions-news-and-updates-july-17th-2022?show=1446148#c1446148

Answer 1

I reimported the y Haplogroup list from

https://ybrowse.org/gbrowse2/gff/ snps_hg38.csv

And the test on your profile and some others are listed there. Next week you shouldn't get the suggestion.

Comments

Thanks, Aleš, I figured it would get updated eventually so wasn't overly concerned about the warning. I have another Y-700 upgrade coming to a matching kit and suspect mine might change again after that. Made me curious how the backend validated them.

---

Thanks, Aleš! I'll let Joe put the Best Answer star on this one.

Concerning this, you'll also have private message inbound. Something you probably already have, but if not it might prove useful.

Answer 2

The best way to establish haplogroup is by taking the Y700 test at Family Tree.

Comments

Hi Linda, thanks for the answer. 

I think you misread what I'm saying. I'm in R-M269 and have been reported as such for over 12 years. I've upgraded to a Y700 test and recruited two other close matches to do the same and it resulted in FamilyTreeDNA discovering a new branch off the R-M269 haplogroup resulting in the subclade label of R-FTD8841. I'm simplifying a bit for the sake of example.

When I put the subclade label of R-FTD8841 in my profile, WikiTree complains that it's not a recognized haplogroup.  

I'm wondering if WikiTree will eventually recognize it since it's brand new or if I did something wrong and should leave it at R-M269? There's way more information derived if I can specify R-FTD8841.

I'm mostly curious if there's a policy that I should leave it specified at the higher-level haplogroup or if WikiTree will catch up and see the new branch.  If it's never going to recognize these new subclade identifiers, then I might propose that WikiTree capture that additional information as well or we can come up with a policy/template that demonstrates how to document it.

Thanks!

Joe

---

Add the Ales tag to this question, he'll be able to answer that question

---

R-FTD8841 is valid as demonstrated at http://scaledinnovation.com/gg/snpTracker.html?snp=FTD8841

Hopefully Ales can tweek something so you don't receive an invalid report.

---

Thanks, Peter, that's a cool visualization and more inline with what I believe to be true than the one that FTDNA shows. I don't really need anything tweaked specifically for me if the system is going to catch up eventually on its own, but it surprised me that there's background validation on that field.

Answer 3

Hi Joe

In our FTDNA group I-M223, we follow the suggestion to upload the RAW data to YFull. This way you have a good second opinion and can check if something is wrong with FTDNA. Maybe you have already done this with your older Y-test. Ask them what they charge for an update to Y-700.

Cheers

André

Answer 4

Mark the suggestion false with explanation “haplogroup assigned by FTDNA”

Note, It might have a different name elsewhere although I didn’t find one.