14 November 2015:   It has been noticed that the DNA results for certain kits are not visible to all.  It seems the default option for relatively new kits  and/or results at FTDNA is to have DNA results visible only to project members. The member or anyone else has to be logged into his private page at FTDNA before the results are visible.    This makes it impossible to effectively compare results with other kits in the project when viewing the project results on the FTDNA Project Public Page.  Quite obviously, this also makes it impossible to compare results with other kits which are not members of the project.   The solution is  for each member to login to their private page,  hover over their kit number and check “privacy settings”, and change “DNA results” to “Anyone”. 

4 January 2015:  During 2014, FTDNA posted ESTIMATED Haplogroupings [using a red font] for virtually all participants who had not previously engaged inSNP testing.  These FTDNA estimates are NOT CONFIRMED by SNP testing, and are subject to change or correction upon proper SNP testing.  The FTDNA postings did, however, lead to a major effort to assign the various participants to their proper Haplogroup and subclade.   The reason for this is that while there may be an apparent match of two or more kits based on their respective STR results, if the kits have different haplogroups there is no way they can have a common ancestor in a genealogically significant timeframe.   In other words, a participant with a “R” SNP cannot have a common ancestor with a participant with an E, I, J, etc., SNP result; their haplogroups are different and while they are both human, their common ancestry dates far back in pre-history. Further, differing subclades within a particular Haplogroup can effectively rule out a close Common Ancestor.  Quite obviously, SNP testing provides a very useful cross-reference in comparing matches of STR results.   It is desirable to avoid mis-matches which might otherwise result from apparent STR matches of kits which are from different Haplogroups and/or subclades. 

At the end of December 2014, FTDNA further undertook a major Haplotree update, which at the present is still underway.  According to FTDNA, “There were major refinements and additions in Haplogroups  R, N, I, and O with numerous smaller changes elsewhere.”   Each FTDNA Participant can access FTDNA’s version of the Haplotree using the link provided  on their respective Kit pages.    There remain differences between FTDNA’s Haplotree and the Haplotree developed by ISSOG, the International Society of Genetic Genealogy.  Additionally, Ray Banks is in the process of developing an “Experimental Composite Y-DNA Haplogroup Tree”.  This latter tree has various sources, but largely mirrors the ISSOG Haplotree.

In the present project, FTDNA assigns each kit a Haplogroup designation on the “SNP Results” page using the FTDNA version of the Haplotree.  Participants will notice that the project administrators have grouped the various kits into subclades using the ISSOG Haplotree.   This is not to say that the ISSOG Haplotree is necessarily  better than the FTDNA Haplotree; however, using the ISSOG Haplotree for the grouping  does provide “food for thought” and gives participants some idea of the direction new research is proceeding.   Additionally, reference to  the specific ISSOG Haplogroup page for respective haplogroup assignments  provides some very interesting and useful  links to  research sources and data.   One can click on the link to, for example, the “R” page found at the ISSOG Haplotree  Main Page and  proceed to explore present information concerning the Tree and SNPs underlying the various assignments. Additionally, there are links to various webpages and other FTDNA projects actively engaged in researching and collecting data relative to the various sub-haplogroups or subclades.

Much additional information can be developed.  For Example, Chris Morley, info’at’MorleyOfHalifax.com  has identified a Northwest England Y-DNA cluster within the SNP:  L448 subclade of haplogroup R1a. The cluster is characterized by the uncommon STR marker values YCAII = 21-21, DYS464 = 12-15-15-17 and DYS534 = 12. See http://www.morleyofhalifax.com/NWEnglandCluster  for further information, including a map of cluster members' supposed ancestral origins, a spreadsheet of haplotypes and a diagram of cluster subdivisions.

The Ray Banks “Experimental Composite Y-DNA Haplogroup Tree” provides an interesting additional component for researchers.  The known predominant composition of terminal branches is shown on the right side of each Haplogroup subclade. See for example the “E1a & E2”tree at: https://sites.google.com/site/compositeytree/e1a.  One can estimate whether the kit participant has “Mandenka” or “Yoruba” ancestry,etc. , thus providing an additional clue as to further avenues of research.  And so on. Many, but not all, of the Banks Haplogroup subclades appear to have ancestral estimates where known.   Further developments, including addition of  an “R” page,  will be interesting to all concerned.

As indicated in the opening paragraph, SNP testing provides a very useful cross-reference in comparing matches of STR results.  Experience shows that the best STR matches are found where the tested SNPs indicate the kits belong to the same subclade.  All participants are urged to try to identify the “terminal SNP”  for the haplogroup  subclade to which they are tentatively assigned.  Please note that many of the “green font” SNP results shown for those who tested in the past [particularly in the “R” Tree including P25 and M269] are functionally out of date and need to be updated with more realistic terminal SNPs. Presently, FTDNA offers SNP testing of individual SNPs for $39.00 each, a relatively inexpensive cost compared to the potential usefulness of updated results.