Based on Doug MacDonald's 28 Feb 2004 Analysis, with several updates. (See his full text below)
This article compares the markers used in the Family Tree DNA 12-25-37 marker test with those used in the Relative Geneticsi 26 marker test and provides estimated mutationi rates for most markers.
Background: Our original Barton DNA Project testing was done at Relative Genetics (RG) and we are currently getting 22 of our 119 men tested on Panels 2 & 3 of the Family Tree DNA (FTDNAi) 37 Markeri Test. Because of this, I am quite interested in the comparison of markers and mutation rates from one Testing Company to another. This chart is compiled from FTDNA & RG public information, with heavy reliance on Doug McDonald’s deduction of Sorenson Molecular Genealogy Foundation data to obtain estimated marker mutation rates. The color coding is explained in the notes at the bottom.
This is the “First Panel” of Family Tree DNA’s Test – Also Called their “12 Marker Test”
| Locus | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 |
| Average |
| DYSi# | 393 | 390 | 19/394 | 391 | 385a | 385b | 426 | 388 | 439 | 389-1 | 392 | 389-2 |
|
|
| Rate | 0.0012 | 0.0045 | 0.0016 | 0.0036 | 0.0033 | 0.0033 | 0.0005 | 0.0005 | 0.0045 | 0.0021 | 0.0016 | 0.0028 | 0.002458 |
This is the “Second Panel” of FTDNA’s Test – The 2nd part of their “25” Marker Test
| Locus | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | Average |
| DYS# | 458 | 459a | 459b | 455 | 454 | 447 | 437 | 448 | 449 | 464a | 464b | 464c | 464d |
|
| Rate | 0.0066 | 0.0014 | 0.0014 | 0.0005 | 0.0005 | 0.0045 | 0.0020 | 0.0028 | 0.0075 | 0.0035 | 0.0035 | 0.0035 | 0.0035 | 0.003169 |
This is the “Third Panel” of FTDNA’s Test – The 3rd part of their “37” Marker Test
| Locus | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 |
| Average |
| DYS# | 460 | H 4 | YCAIIa | YCAIIb | 456 | 607 | 576 | 570 | CDY a | CDY b | 442 | 438 | ||
| Rate | 0.0028 | 0.0036 | 0.0014 | 0.0014 | ?? | ?? | ?? | ?? | ?? | ?? | ?? | 0.0012 | Unknown |
Comments:
1. FTDNA’s 25 marker test has a mutation rate of .002828, about 24% higher than RG’s 26 marker rate of .002285
2. Unfortunately, SMGF did not include a number of FTDNA’s Panel 3 markers in their mutation analysis, so no speculation about the average mutation rate of Panel 3 can be made.
3. FTDNA has 13 “fast moving” markers based on Doug’s mutation rate deductions and my presumption that “fast moving” means faster than .0028.
4. Note that FTDNA considers four markers that have no deduced mutation rates in Panel 3 as “fast moving” and also classifies 459a and 459b as “fast moving”, while Doug deduced the 459a and 459b mutation rates to be slow moving (.0014 each) from Sorenson’s data..
5. FTDNA has 12 “slow moving” (less than .0020) markers: 5 in Panel 1, 4 in Panel 2 and 3 in Panel 3
The following two grids are the Relative Genetics “26 Marker Test”
| DYS# | 385 | 385II | 388 | 389 | 389II | 390 | 391 | 392 | 393 | 19/394 | 426 | 437 | 438 |
| Rate | 0.0033 | 0.0033 | 0.0006 | 0.0021 | 0.0028 | 0.0045 | 0.0036 | 0.0016 | 0.0012 | 0.0016 | 0.0005 | 0.0020 | 0.0012 |
| DYS# | 439 | 447 | 454 | 455 | 460 | 461 | 462 | 1BO7 | YCAIIa | YCAIIb | A 10 | C 4 | H 4 | Average |
| Rate | 0.0045 | 0.0045 | 0.0005 | 0.0005 | 0.0028 | 0.0028 | 0.0005 | 0.0013 | 0.0014 | 0.0014 | 0.0045 | 0.0028 | 0.0036 | 0.002285 |
Comments:
1. RG has 8 “fast moving” markers with a mutation rate of more than .0028.
2. RG has 12 “slow moving” markers with a mutation rate of less than .0020 (shown in italics)
Notes:
1. Markers shown in red are “Fast Mutating” according to FTDNA.
2. Markers shown in blue are other fast moving markers (faster than 0.0028, which is my classification decision)
3. Mutations are from the analysis made by Doug McDonald of Sorenson Molecular Genealogy Foundation’s database, posted at Gen-DNA-L on Feb 28, 2004, with an update to me by email on April 7, 2004. Note that Doug listed quite a number of cautions and caveats in his email. A complete copy of his posting is provided below
4. The cells shown in green are included in the FTDNA test, but not in the RG 26 marker test
5. The cells shown in yellow are included in the RG 26 marker test, but not in the FTDNA tests.
6. If there are any errors, they are mine. Please advise and I will correct them. Terry Barton - April 8, 2004
Here is Doug’s first email posting at
http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/read/GENEALOGY-DNA/2004-02/1078025386
GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives
From: doug mcdonald
Subject: [DNA] Separate mutation rates of each marker
Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2004 19:29:46 -0800 (PST)
I have deduced the mutation rates used by Sorensen.
CAVEAT: this is a very tricky procedure which is very sensitive to a certain normalization constant. It also depends on them using the formulas 20a and 20b of Walsh's paper. Because of the great sensitivity to parameter errors, the numbers that are farthest from the average are subject to the worst calculational errors, especially the SMALL ones.
In other words, BEWARE of these numbers. However, because of the way it works, they should come out in the correct order, smallest to largest.
ALSO NOTE: we have NO IDEA how Sorensen obtained the numbers. They do say they are using the multiple alleles model. We have no idea what THEIR error bars are. We have NO IDEA how accurate my back calculation is.
In other words, BEWARE of these numbers. However, because of the way it works, they should come out in the correct order, smallest to largest.
(Duplicate paragraph is not typo!)
NOTE: because of the way they are handling the multiple copy markers (385, 389, 459, YcaII) there is no info on the separate pieces.
But here they are:
385 .0066
388 .0006
389 .0020
390 .0045
391 .0035
392 .0015
393 .0012
19 .0015
426 .0006
437 .0020
438 .0011
439 .0045
447 .0045
448 .0028
449 .0075
454 .0006
455 .0006
458 .0066
459 .0028
460 .0028
461 .0028
462 .0005
ggaat1b07 .0013
ycaii .0028
ygataa10 .0045
ygatac4 .0028
ygatah4 .0036
the overall average is .0028 ... averaging over the two marker ones only once.
The overall average is .0029 if you average over each of the double marker ones twice.
the average over the FTDNA 12 marker set (averaging over the two-marker ones twice) is .0029
the average over the 21 ones common to this and the FTDNA25, using multiple copy ones twice, is .0031 (note that this leaves out 464)
Doug McDonald
And here is Doug’s April 7, 2004 email to me with clarifications and updates:
-----Original Message-----
From: doug mcdonald
Sent: Wednesday, April 07, 2004 4:31 PM
To: Terry Barton
Subject: RE: Marker Mutation Analysis
--- Terry Barton
Doug, thanks!
Let me make sure that I am understanding you correctly. Do I also split the
mutation rate for 389 and 389ii, getting a pair of .0010s
No .... 389-I is .0021 and 389-II is .0028
and for YCAIIa and b, getting a pair of .0014s?
yes
I am also reading at the RG site that they are calling 464 the marker and the a,b,c,d as alleles. I understand you to mean that the mutation rate for R1b at 464 is about .016 or .004 for each of the 4 reported alleles. Is that correct?
yes .... if you list them separately, like FTDNA does, the number for each is the realm of .004
This is extremely rough, and I'm not sure I believe it ... it could be .003. It seems to vary a lot for different datasets. Maybe you should use .0035.
I'm attaching a list of my latest Sorenson numbers ... these are per marker, just like FTDNA lists them.
Doug
****************
Here is a second look at the Sorenson rates. None have changed from my first list by a significant amount. The slowest ones dropped a bit, and in fact they may actually be as low as .0004. They are hard to back-calculate.
Again, this is Sorenson’s data, not mine. I merely reverse engineer assuming Walsh’s infinite alleles model. I have done several different methods of
checking and all agree. The error bars are of course known only to Sorenson.
Hopefully they will publish soon.
Marker Rates
385 .0033 (*)
388 .0005
389I .0021
389II .0028
390 .0045
391 .0036
392 .0016
393 .0012
19 .0016
426 .0005
437 .0020
438 .0012
439 .0045
447 .0045
448 .0028
449 .0075
454 .0005
455 .0005
458 .0066
459 .0014 (*)
460 .0028
461 .0028
462 .0005
ggaat1b07 .0013
ycaii .0014 (*)
ygataa10 .0045
ygatac4 .0028
ygatah4 .0036
Note: the values marked by a (*) have been divided by two from what Sorenson uses.
This is because they are double markers. What Sorenson is doing is counting the pair as one marker. If either changes they count this as one mutation. If you do
this, you need to double the rate I show here. If you count the marker twice, as two markers, the best you can do is use the rates I show here, which are half
what Sorenson uses. They could, of course, actually be two different rates which average the value I give in this list. The two 389 values are listed separately
and does not suffer this ambiguity.
Doug
And here is Doug’s May 31, 2004 email with more clarifications:
-----Original Message-----
From: Doug McDonald [mailto:somerledsdna@yahoo.com]
Sent: Monday, May 31, 2004 12:52 PM
To: GENEALOGY-DNA-L@rootsweb.com
Subject: Re: [DNA] Marker Mutation Rates and other Tools
--- Terry Barton <terry@bartonsite.org> wrote:
I noticed the discussion tonight about YCAII a and b tonight which touched on their mutation rate. According to the work that Doug McDonald teased out of Sorenson's website, the mutation rate for marker YCAII is about .0028, which means that the rate for YCAIIa and YCAIIb is about .0014 each,
Please note that the decision to simply give the two values equal rate, i.e. deciding to divide by 2) was an ARBITRARY decision, because I really wanted to do SOMETHING. Since these markers trpically have similar values, it's probably not terrible.
For markers like 464, where values differ a lot, it is a bad idea, and I actually have data to show that the higher numbers mutate faster, especially >16. Somerled's 12-15-15-16 is extremely stable.
Doug McDonald
