Comments on: The Genographic Project Announces Geno 2.0

By: Robert Stewart

Robert Stewart — Thu, 25 Apr 2013 05:29:57 +0000

Shame there’s not an option to use your FamilyTreeDNA test results in this project. A friend of mine spent over $500 for the Comprehensive Genome test and would love to be able to use the results for this project instead of having to spend another $200 if he wants to join this one.

By: Jeff

Jeff — Wed, 24 Apr 2013 13:37:07 +0000

I was excited by the Genographic 2.0 offer. I ordered my kit in early December and mailed back my swabs for testing before Christmas. I eagerly awaited the 6-8 weeks to get my results…and waited…and waited…and waited. It has now been 5 MONTHS and the online results page says my analysis is only 60% completed. I contacted National Geographic for a partial refund because of the exceedingly long delay, but they refuse to issue one. This is a new and apparently popular test. I would urge people to seek out another DNA testing company than National Geographic, their Genographic Project, and their contractor Family Tree DNA unless you are willing to wait half a year or more for your results.

By: Sean

Sean — Sat, 23 Feb 2013 01:53:17 +0000

“Another great benefit of the Geno 2.0 test is that Genographic will allow the test-taker to upload/transfer their results back into FTDNA, and neither Genographic or FTDNA will charge a fee for this transfer. This means that Project Administrators will be able to work within the FTDNA system to analyze results of their project members rather than having to rely on collecting data from project members outside the system (thereby potentially increasing participation and results).”

This is not true, ftdna would not allow me to transfer my mtdna results because of the chip:

Hello,

Thank you for contacting the Genographic Project. The only information that would have been transferred would be found under the mtDNA>Haplogroup Origins section of your FTDNA profile. Since you do not have any mtDNA matches with our database, you do not have any information at this time. The data-set for mtDNA is not compatible with FTDNA. The mtDNA portion of the Geno 2.0 test is run on a chip, whereas FTDNA must individually sequence strands of your mitochondrial DNA. It is possible this information will be transferable in the future.

Have a nice Day

Regards,

Clint
Family Tree DNA
http://www.familytreedna.com
History Unearthed Daily

By: Price Gen

Price Gen — Mon, 15 Oct 2012 04:46:38 +0000

Awesome Look. Do they test haplogroups as well with the new chip? If so, how many SNP/STR haplogroup markers do they scan? I’ll definitely try it out later.

By: BoogerTSnottington

BoogerTSnottington — Fri, 12 Oct 2012 18:42:23 +0000

These test while they are interesting are geared to those people that are over the top obsessed with seeing their ancestry broken down into percentages. Considering most of these folks have already tested with a plethora DNA testing
companies as if by know they don’t know what or who they are? As if people need to know where they came from 10,000 years BC.

However, get ready for the hordes of the smaller portion of humanity to shell out another $300 dollars who are by now addicted. Like rolling a dice……What ancestry will come out this time. Will Cherokee grandma’s
DNA come out this time…..Shake it up baby…..let her rolllll!!!!

By: declan chalmers

declan chalmers — Tue, 07 Aug 2012 19:07:22 +0000

I have had my 37 dna test with familytreedna why do i need another another kit? and will the results be made known as far as possible in lay mans language?
also will it clarify what haplogroup ones belongs to?

By: c_kb

c_kb — Sat, 28 Jul 2012 07:29:13 +0000

Blaine,
Thank you for your reply. Not that anyone wouldn’t be curious about such things,but I didn’t think that haplogroup and biogeographical (ethnicity) estimates were possible – yet. Given that DNA is remixed over generations by multiple populations, at least in current Western populations. Are you saying that both the time and and biogeographical periods will actually be evident in this test? Aren’t the time spans given currently only in 1000 year increments? If so, how could an ethnicity or near geographical position be evident in anything less than generalities?

By: CeCe Moore

CeCe Moore — Fri, 27 Jul 2012 05:57:01 +0000

Hi Blaine,
As you probably know, the quote was a comment you made on my blog.
Thanks for the link and nice post, as usual!

By: Blaine

Blaine — Thu, 26 Jul 2012 12:43:32 +0000

Identifying cousins using autosomal DNA testing has only been around for about 3 or 4 years since 23andMe and FTDNA launched their Relative Finder and Family Finder products. Before that some people used Y-DNA and mtDNA to find or disprove relationships, but many people undergo genetic genealogy simply to learn about their ancient ancestry: their Y-DNA haplogroup and origins, their mtDNA haplogroup and origins, and their biogeographical (ethnicity) estimate. The Geno 2.0 test will do those three things together better than any current test.

Thus, while identifying genetic cousins is an important goal of many genetic genealogists, a large percentage of test-takers have other interests.

By: c_kb

c_kb — Thu, 26 Jul 2012 07:14:19 +0000

Cece has attributed this quote to you. I don’t know when or where it is from.

I personally see many uses, including ethnicity prediction (which interests both genealogists and non-genealogists); deep clade haplogroup analysis (something I’ve been meaning to do for years but never got around to); SNP discovery to refine Y-DNA and mtDNA trees, etc. I think there may also be numerous third-party uses, some of which we haven’t thought of yet. It’s not useful for identifying autosomal cousins, but of course there’s much more to genetic genealogy than identifying cousins.

Perhaps you could elaborate on this part of your comment?

“….but of course there’s much more to genetic genealogy than identifying cousins.”