Profile Nomenclature

Started by Bentzion Shlomo Turin on Tuesday, May 8, 2012


Showing all 6 posts
5/8/2012 at 1:55 PM

Is there a way to describe the haplogroup nomenclature in a way that they will naturally sort as the numbers of profiles increase?

5/8/2012 at 4:41 PM

Adam Robert Brown This is a good question :)

5/23/2012 at 1:12 PM

Not that I know of. The world seems to be moving in the direction of naming Y haplogroups using the most downstream marker that proved positive, and that you will note has been the direction I am going. The nomenclature changes almost weekly, the markers, on the other hand, demonstrate something rather concrete.

5/23/2012 at 5:43 PM


I like that approach and agree with it. The only problems I see with it is that many subclades have a number of identifying markers. Additionally, for branches that have hundreds of subclades it will be very hard for people to find what they are looking for.

What do you think about organizing them in Alpha, then numberical fahion.

I.e. M44 prior to P147, etc.

5/24/2012 at 2:51 AM

I beieve that the E1b1b1c1* (E-M34) haplogroup, to which I and my ancestral paternal lineage belong, is in the process of having just such a further downstream SNP identified (L 792). When that happens, I plan to pay for just the test for that final marker (D in my case). I wonder how I will know when the tree has been updated and FTDNA is ready to test for the new SNP? This implies a more general question -- how can others know when they should consider new downstream markers that might include themselves?

5/24/2012 at 9:34 AM

Andrew, I would recommend finding a group that discusses this subclade. In the case of my Subclade (E1a1 - M44) we have an active googlegroup that is very active and we keep each other aware of developments regarding new SNPs on WTY or otherwise. Wikipedia is also updated fairly frequently so googling for your haplotype or SNPs you can see it.

Showing all 6 posts

Create a free account or login to participate in this discussion