PDA

View Full Version : L617 (DF27>L617)



John Marsh
07-16-2013, 10:39 PM
I have given details of L617+ on various forums, but just a reminder for anyone new, I have a web page at http://www.kin.marshdna.com/DNAresultsL617.htm which gives some information on what is known so far about the L617+ subclade. I would be keen to hear directly from any new L617+ persons, they can email me at ajmarsh@arrrg.org .

I am L617+, and have ordered a full Y genome from https://www.fullgenomes.com/ , so when I get results I should have more SNPs to identify the L617+ subclade.

I have not had direct information on how the full Y genome is presented, or how good the test company is, but unverified rumours sound encouraging. If anyone has recently had results from Full Genomes it would be good to hear how the company performed, and how results were presented. If the full Y genome lives up to expectations, I think we should be encouraging as many DF27+ people as can afford it to take the full Y genome test, as it will help us to unscramble DF27+ origins and spread.

John.

John Marsh
10-05-2016, 08:22 AM
Recently we found 3 persons, 1 Kapuscinski and 2 Neeses, possible common ancestor from the area of Germany quite a long time ago, perhaps 1000 to 2000 years ago, who were L617+, but DF27-. DF27+ is definitely above L617+ in the Y haplotree, so all L617+ people would be expected to be DF27+. DF27- was unexpected!

There could be alternative reasons for this. The Kapuscinski/ Neese branch could have had a back mutation to DF27- after the mutation to L617+, or this group could have originated with a separate mutation to L617 in a line which was DF27-.

We know that a SNP mutation Z2552+ occurred fairly soon after DF 27+, and before L617+. I had the Kapuscinski tested for Z2552, and his results have just come back Z2552+. This is fairly compelling evidence that the Kapuscinski/ Neese branch were once DF27+, but some time after the Z2552+ and L617+, their line had a back mutation to DF27-.

These sorts of back mutations are uncommon, but do occur. In this case it is interesting, and will help us to define a branch which possibly was in the general region of Germany perhaps 2000 years ago. Because Z2552 is not tested in most SNP pack tests, it will make it harder for us to locate this branch in Germany.

We have not tested the Neeses for Z2552, but my guess is they are related to Kapuscinski and are most likely Z2552+.

If anyone has any questions about this they can email me at ajmarsh@arrrg.org

Regards,
John Marsh.

lgmayka
10-05-2016, 08:56 AM
Recently we found 3 persons, 1 Kapuscinski and 2 Neeses, possible common ancestor from the area of Germany quite a long time ago, perhaps 1000 to 2000 years ago, who were L617+, but DF27-.
Kapuściński is not DF27- . His Y-DNA Haplotree & SNPs page clearly says DF27* , where
---
* No call or heterozygous call
---

At one time, FTDNA's web site had a bug whereby such a no-call would be erroneously listed on public project pages as negative. That bug has been fixed. Take a look at kit 435024 on the YSNPs page of the Polish Project (https://www.familytreedna.com/public/polish?iframe=ysnp):
---
435024 Laurentius Kapuściński, b. 1832 Koźmin Wlkp. R-L617 L23+, L278+, L389+, L617+, L51+, M269+, P297+, P310+, P311+, P312+, M343+, Z2552+, M478-, M73-, MC14-, PF3252-, PF6610-, PF6714-, PF7562-, PF7589-, PF7600-, S1026-, S1051-, S11493-, S11601-, S12025-, S1567-, S16264-, S1688-, S18632-, S18827-, S6317-, S7721-, SRY2627-, U106-, U152-, U198-, V88-, Y5058-, Z156-, Z16500-, Z17-, Z17300-, Z18-, Z1862-, Z195-, Z198-, Z209-, Z2103-, Z2109-, Z225-, Z251-, Z253-, Z2542-, Z255-, Z2573-, Z295-, Z3000-, Z301-, Z302-, Z326-, Z36-, Z367-, Z381-, Z49-, Z8-, Z8052-, Z9-, M335-, L513-, L584-, L881-, M1994-, M222-, L408-, L47-, L48-, L371-, L238-, A1773-, A2150-, A274-, A4670-, A517-, BY2823-, BY2868-, BY575-, BY653-, CTS10429-, CTS11994-, CTS1751-, CTS3386-, CTS3937-, CTS4466-, CTS4528-, CTS5330-, CTS5689-, CTS6937-, CTS7763-, DF103-, DF110-, DF17-, DF19-, DF21-, DF41-, DF49-, DF63-, DF81-, DF83-, DF88-, DF95-, DF99-, F2017-, F2691-, F2863-, FGC10516-, FGC11134-, FGC13620-, FGC20761-, FGC22501-, FGC3861-, FGC396-, FGC5301-, FGC5336-, FGC5344-, FGC5345-, FGC5351-, FGC5354-, FGC5356-, FGC5367-, FGC5373-, FGC5494-, FGC5798-, L1065-, L1335-, L2-, L21-, DF27*
---

The truth is that DF27 has always been difficult to read.

razyn
10-05-2016, 02:14 PM
DF27+ is definitely above L617+ in the Y haplotree, so all L617+ people would be expected to be DF27+.

All L617+ people are expected to be (DF27>ZZ12>Z2552>L617). That's a thickly populated or "bushy" part of the tree below DF27. http://www.ytree.net/DisplayTree.php?blockID=641&star=false

I think the Plant family, or some members of it, have lost the detectable ZZ12 mutation in a RecLOH event; but their ancestors had it, like the rest of Z2552, including but not limited to its L617 branch. DF27 isn't on a palindrome, and doesn't have RecLOH events.