How about a DNA category for Haplogroups?

Question

I think it would be helpful to create a category called Haplogroups with a sub category for each of the relevent groups more information about them here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup

Could create a single category and the user would post which group they are part of.  for instance mine is I2b1

http://www.clanstrachan.org/freespace/I_info.htm

Germanic or Viking Origins (I2b1)

The distribution of Haplogroup I2b1 is closely correlated to that of Haplogroup I1 except in Fennoscandia (Scandinavian Peninsula, the Kola Peninsula, Karelia and Finland), which suggests that it was probably harbored by at least one of the Paleolithic refuge populations that also harbored Haplogroup I1; the lack of correlation between the distributions of I1 and I2b1 in Fennoscandia may be a result of Haplogroup I2b1's being more strongly affected in the earliest settlement of this region by founder effects (defined as a genetic variation that occurs when a new population is established by a very small number of individuals from a larger population) and genetic drift (defined as a change in the relative frequency in which a gene variant occurs in a population due to random sampling and chance) due to its rarity.

 

Comments

Ed, the following link isn't exactly about Haplogroups, but it is a discussion about DNA on WikiTree and includes a link to an even earlier discussion. Just thought you might be interested in reviewing it.

---

Thanks, I think we all need to give this some thought.  Over the next 10 years I suspect that DNA sourcing will become much more common and we should get in front of it with how we track it.

---

You might get more feedback for this if you put it under Special Projects and tag it as categorization. Just a suggestion.

---

Great idea, Ed! You're thinking users would categorize themselves but not their ancestors?

---

I'm glad you saw this, Chris. I was afraid it was going to get lost in the maze of surname questions.

---

One of the things that Ancestry.com has started doing is that when I put in my DNA information it automatically shows it under the correct ancestors.  I like that functionality.  I entered it in once.  If someone clicks on my correct granfather they see a reference to the DNA as well.  I know a lot of people are struggling to decide how this information should be incorporated but my thought was that some kind of WikiTree DNA link could provide useful information which would help researchers.

 

Ed

---

Hi Ed.

Ancestry beat us to it! That was my idea for WikiTree when we were talking about this a year or two ago. If a male descendant has taken a DNA test, automatically put a note to the effect on all the male ancestors. Then if someone else who thinks they're a descendant wants to confirm the genealogy, they can take a test and compare results. If they don't match, we know there is a mistake on the genealogy on WikiTree.

This won't be an easy functionality for us to add because it doesn't fit in the current structure, technically. We can't use categories because there would be no way to keep them properly updated for all a person's ancestors.

As for what category we can do, now ...

We could categorize users by Haplogroup, and not ancestors. That would still be interesting.

---

I have an interest in DNA genetic genealogy and though new to WikiTree, it would seem useful to be able to note one's interest, even if a summary of a person's haplogroup or other data might require a link to outside WikiTree for follow up.

For the record, I am RL21.

Sandy

---

We're grappling with how to do this and are wide open for suggestions.  If you haven't already you should join ysearch  at http://ysearch.org they are completely open and free.  I've been lookin at how a person can note their DNA profile without giving up too much privacy my ysearch profile is sxnkk which means that if you have a profile there you could click the compare button to see our genetic distance.

 

 

---

I'm late in this discussion, but when I tried to enter my DNA results I was told by ancestry that they dont allow australian users to have the same functionality.  At least wikitree has a level playing field worldwide!

---

Wow, Veronica. That is really surprising about Ancestry.

---

DNA tests from Ancestry aren't even available for Canadians. They definitely aren't the most international of DNA testers.

---

DNA tests from Ancestry aren't even available for the UK! 

Seems very odd for Ancestry not to be offering such a potential money making thing?

Answer 1

I would have to say the best bet would be to put in the general haplogroup such as M, N, O, P, R etc

Comments

It is most helpful to have the general haplogroup followed the most recent (downstream) known SNP for the test taker.  For example I-Z59  (the Y-DNA [upper case]  i haplogroup followed by the Z59 SNP.

---

I think that in addition (I'm I-Z79 currently), with the new tests like the Big-Y and more complete sequencing sure to come, also adding the build#position of the currently known terminal SNP might also be very useful - So something like I37-17147721-Z79+, or Y37-17147721-I-Z79

Answer 2

I believe that instead of a category for Y haplogroups (which keep changing labels) it might be usefull to have a category for Y SNPs.

WikiTreers need to understand most known SNPs are thousands of years old and therefore rarely useful for finding shared ancestry, but some of the SNPs being discovered by Big Y testing will be in a genealogical timeframe.