PDA

View Full Version : DF99 (P312>DF99)



Pages : 1 [2] 3 4

Telfermagne
07-21-2014, 01:55 AM
Yep, I caught wind of that after I made the post, but even when using VAR function I'm getting weird results. I put the haplotypes into a spreadsheet and ran VAR function for each column then added the variances to get my N value.

Since it's a sample of a population, therefore divide N by N-1
So, G = N/N-1 divided by M
and N = 18.4970760232 & M = 0.003
Since G = 18.4970760232/17.4970760232 divided by 0.003
= 1.05715240642/0.003
Therefore, 352.384135473 which is still a super super off result for TMRCA


You should use the sample variance (VAR function) rather than the population variance (VARP function), since the former adjusts for sample bias by implementing Bessel's correction.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bessel%27s_correction
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Variance#Population_variance_and_sample_variance
http://www.excelfunctions.net/variance-in-excel.html (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Variance#Population_variance_and_sample_variance)

Telfermagne
07-21-2014, 02:03 AM
I recall that MitchGlitch presented a TMRCA of 137 generations. If I adopt Nordtvedt's 0.003 mutation rate per marker, then Since N = MG, N = 0.003*137 = 0.411. I ought to be getting a value at least close to that and I am not. :P

In the end this is a testament that I ought to have paid attention during high school math classes.

Telfermagne
07-21-2014, 02:47 AM
EDIT: To get a value for N I ran the haplotypes through Dean McGee’s Y-DNA Comparison Utility to get individual distances from the generated modal haplotype. I then imported those distances into a google spreadsheet and ran a VAR function. I then divided the result of that VAR function by the number of individuals minus one to get a value for N.

So, G = N/n-1 divided by M
= 7.418421053/20-1 divided by 0.003
= 0.39044321331 divided by 0.003
= 130.14773777

EDIT Again:

Another, thought (I think I'm way overthinking this as a result of my lack of mathematical knowledge/refinement of such). I'm going to go back to square one and try thinking of this like finding the distance to a point of origin after traveling at a given rate for a given length of time.

rms2
07-22-2014, 12:51 AM
I agree entirely.



There are problems with a link to the Belgae. The Belgae count as a considerable incursion into the Isles (most probably the Fig Bolg in Ireland were Belgae). They had no special dispensation from the incoming Anglo-Saxons to remain in position in southern England. On the contrary they were most likely among the crowd described by Gildas fleeing west or overseas. Nor do I know of any particular link between the Belgae and the Alps. Maybe I have missed something there.

On the present pattern described above (which I realise is very preliminary), DF99 looks like the descendants of a Celt who happened to be part of the fusion that created the Jastorf Culture. He could have been an iron-worker who saw an eager market. Just guessing. If his descendants chose to remain in the rump of the Proto-Germanic community which developed West Germanic, the present pattern can be explained.

Except that the notion that Britons from what is now SE England took part in the exodus to Armorica does not appear to be correct. Most of those who fled to Armorica did so from Cornwall and Wales and long before the Anglo-Saxons were in position to threaten them.

It is more likely they were fleeing the Irish than they were fleeing the Anglo-Saxons.

In Britain, U152, mostly L2, reaches its highest frequencies in places where the Belgae settled. DF99 is still pretty sparse everywhere, but it is mostly eastern in Britain thus far. Regarding the link to the Alps, I was thinking of DF99 traveling with L2 and eventually becoming a part of the Belgae, just as L2 did.

Of course, I am not arguing that DF99 is Belgic. I was just throwing that out there for consideration.

What makes you think DF99 was part of the Jastorf Culture? Where are the DF99 results from the old Jastorf area? You asked for an Alpine connection to the Belgae. Perhaps you could supply a Jastorf connection to Italy.

Jean M
07-22-2014, 11:35 AM
Except that the notion that Britons from what is now SE England took part in the exodus to Armorica does not appear to be correct. Most of those who fled to Armorica did so from Cornwall and Wales and long before the Anglo-Saxons were in position to threaten them.


Yes that is pretty certainly true. We have the equivalent of Cornwall and Devon names in Brittany. It does look as the Britons of Kent fared unexpectly well by doing a deal with the incomers. But otherwise the Britons of south-east England were slaughtered, captured or fled west or north into regions still British.


In Britain, U152, mostly L2, reaches its highest frequencies in places where the Belgae settled.

The problem here is that wave after wave of incomers to Britain aimed for the rich lowlands. But the Belgae only got as far as what is now southern England. U152 reaches south-east Scotland. It looks more La Tene in distribution. [Of course if the Belgae fled into Scotland ... ;) ]


Perhaps you could supply a Jastorf connection to Italy.

Certainly. The Lombards.

But let's not quarrel over what are very preliminary findings. Maybe one day we will have some aDNA to settle some of these vexed questions.

GoldenHind
07-22-2014, 06:01 PM
FTDNA seems to be completely overwhelmed by the multitude of problems caused by the adoption of their new tree.

There are now 19 people in the P312 Project who have tested DF99+. I believe all but one of them have had their DF99+ result from a test done with FTDNA. Yet only five of this group have been given DF99 as a terminal SNP by FTDNA. Nine are still classified as P312, and another five as M269. The reasons for the difference in treatment are inexplicable to me.



I am pleased to report that FTDNA has now properly classified everyone who has tested DF99+ with them with the terminal SNP of R1b-DF99.

GoldenHind
07-26-2014, 05:46 PM
A new DF99+ result came in today- English surname, ancestry apparently from Northern Ireland (Ulster).

rms2
07-26-2014, 09:43 PM
Yes that is pretty certainly true. We have the equivalent of Cornwall and Devon names in Brittany. It does look as the Britons of Kent fared unexpectly well by doing a deal with the incomers. But otherwise the Britons of south-east England were slaughtered, captured or fled west or north into regions still British.



The problem here is that wave after wave of incomers to Britain aimed for the rich lowlands. But the Belgae only got as far as what is now southern England. U152 reaches south-east Scotland. It looks more La Tene in distribution. [Of course if the Belgae fled into Scotland ... ;) ]



Certainly. The Lombards.

But let's not quarrel over what are very preliminary findings. Maybe one day we will have some aDNA to settle some of these vexed questions.

I think the L2 in Scotland is of later English derivation, like much of the U106 there. I was trying to think of something that matched the (admittedly sketchy) DF99 pattern.

Could be Anglo-Saxon, especially since it has been found in the Netherlands, but I doubt if much of the L2 in southern England is Anglo-Saxon. I think it derives from earlier Belgic and perhaps Roman settlement, which is why that occurred to me for DF99.

I don't believe any of the DF99ers thus far found in Italy has ancestry in Lombardy. Besides, most of the R1b in Italy, which, of course, includes P312, is found in the northern third of that country. Probably very little of it is of Lombard derivation.

Telfermagne
07-27-2014, 05:46 PM
I browsed a my catalog of correspondences with MitchGlitch (the Russian researcher who presented a number of R-DF99 descendancy trees and TMRCA estimates), and I caught that he utilized the UPGMA method to get his results. I'm going to do try the same method to see if I get a result that is at least similar to his, then work with other methods after. UPGMA is not a difficult method to work with outside of the tedious nature of calculating each step/repeated process in the algorithm manually.

Telfermagne
07-28-2014, 05:43 AM
EDIT: Made another booboo :p I forgot to total the marker mutation rates. I borrow a rate of 0.0028 for 67 YSTRs from McDonald's TMRCA calculator.

M = 67 YSTRs * 0.28/100 = 18.76/100 = 0.1876

Recalculation in progress

EDIT:

Done

Sum of marker variance = 67 YSTRs * 0.28/100 = 18.76/100 = 0.1876.

I used Dean McGee’s Y-Utility with the infinite allele mutation model indicated to yield a genetic distance report then I input the data into Google sheets and used the VAR function to compute variance between the samples. I added the individual variances together then I divided the result by the total number of haplotypes. When the infinite allele mutation model is adopted the variance is 39.85.

Since TMRCA = r/M,
39.85/0.1876 = 212.42 = roughly late Neolithic Europe.

Telfermagne
07-28-2014, 04:16 PM
I did another round of calculation, this time I excluded the multicopy markers and got a TMRCA that is much closer to what MitchGlitch yielded. The time frame I got is roughly the late Chalcolithic (138.297... generations).

Full details:

The goal of this document is to estimate a time to most recent common ancestor between the members of the R-DF99 subclade. The estimate will rely upon the 20 Y-67 haplotypes available in FTDNA’s R1b-P312, and Subclades of DF99, L238, DF19 project. I will be borrowing Dr. Kenneth Nordtvedt’s TMRCA formula. I have excluded multicopy markers from the set of haplotypes, so the number of STRs being compared across the samples will be 51.

Since the sum of marker variances = M G where M is the sum of marker mutation rates and G is the TMRCA, then G = r/M where r is the sum of marker variances.

Since I am comparing 51 markers, which falls in between 37 and 67, I cannot use the average mutation rate for when 67 markers are being compared or the average mutation rate for when 37 markers are being compared. I will instead average those two rates and adopt it as my marker mutation rate. The input marker mutation rates were borrowed from Dr. McDonald’s TMRCA calculator at http://dna-project.clan-donald-usa.org/tmrca.htm. So, 0.0033 + 0.0028/2 = 0.00305 therefore the marker mutation rate I will use is 0.00305. Sum of marker variance = 51 YSTRs * 0.305/100 = 15.555/100 = 0.15555.

I used Dean McGee’s Y-Utility with the infinite allele mutation model indicated to yield a genetic distance report then I input the data into Google sheets and used the VAR function to compute variance between the samples. I added the individual row variances together then I divided the result by the total number of haplotypes. When the infinite allele mutation model is adopted the variance is 21.51210526.

Since TMRCA = r/M,
21.5121053/0.15555 = 138.297045 generations = roughly 4,149 years = roughly late Chalcolithic Europe.

Telfermagne
07-28-2014, 07:39 PM
On another note:

When I generated a modal haplotype using Dean McGee's Y-Utility, the German and Swiss DF99 seem to be closest to the modal and since the modal is an "artificial" ancestral signature it can be inferred that the German and Swiss DF99 appear to be the oldest of the group.

German-American gd of 7 from modal
Swiss from Zurich Canton (the High Rhine) gd of 10 from modal
German-American gd of 10 from modal
German-American gd of 11 from modal
German-American gd of 11 from modal

The next closest gds begin with 15, so it seems that the German's right now are the "core" group.

If the current hints at a distribution pattern continue to be observed over time, and the Germans continue to be the closest to a modal/"artificial ancestor" then I would start looking at what populations might have spread from the Rhine outwards during the Chalcolithic.

dstrehlow
07-29-2014, 03:23 AM
ftdna just returned my test result as DF99+ and changed my classification from P312*. From binging on this to catch up my impression is that adding another geographical datapoint woud be the most useful way to get started. I've traced my paternal line to the late 1700s in a village about 80km SW of Gdansk/Danzig. My ancestors are ethnic German, Lutherans, and emigrated from Prussia to the US in the 1870s. From what I can tell this puts me to the north of most or all of the other DF99+ datapoints. I look forward to meeting you all and hopefully finding a YDNA home that will be stable for a while:)

Telfermagne
07-30-2014, 06:39 PM
I did another run this time with the hybrid mutation model:

With the Hybrid Mutation Model adopted variance is 27.83421053. Since TMRCA = Variance/M,
27.83421053/0.15555 = 178.9406013 generations = roughly 5,370 years = roughly ancient Chalcolithic Europe.

Either way the Chalcolithic seems to be the time period of interest (138.297045 generations = roughly 4,149 years = roughly late Chalcolithic Europe with the infinite alleles model adopted; 178.9406013 generations = roughly 5,370 years = roughly ancient Chalcolithic Europe with the hybrid mutation model adopted).

During the Ancient Chalcolithic (hybrid mutation model TMRCA) the western Danubian Michelsberg culture might be a candidate (Rhine & Seine basins).
During the Late Chalcolithic (infinite alleles model TMRCA) the second phase of the Beaker culture seems like a plausible candidate.

The reality of the situation might be in between the two estimates, so we might be dealing with the greater Danubian Neolithic culture as its subsets transitioned into later cultures.

GoldenHind
07-30-2014, 11:04 PM
ftdna just returned my test result as DF99+ and changed my classification from P312*. From binging on this to catch up my impression is that adding another geographical datapoint woud be the most useful way to get started. I've traced my paternal line to the late 1700s in a village about 80km SW of Gdansk/Danzig. My ancestors are ethnic German, Lutherans, and emigrated from Prussia to the US in the 1870s. From what I can tell this puts me to the north of most or all of the other DF99+ datapoints. I look forward to meeting you all and hopefully finding a YDNA home that will be stable for a while:)

Thanks. Your information is a start to answering my question about whether DF99 is present in others parts of Germany besides along the Rhine. I am unable to identify you in the R1b-P312 and Subclades Project at FTDNA, which serves as a home project for members of the DF99 subclade. It would be very helpful if you would join. Let me know if you need assistance in doing so.

dstrehlow
07-31-2014, 03:01 PM
I think I've successfully joined now. Let me know if I don't show up. ftdna's join page is pretty poorly designed and documented. Where in CA are you? I'm in the SF area.

GoldenHind
07-31-2014, 06:21 PM
I think I've successfully joined now. Let me know if I don't show up.

Thanks for joining, and congratulations for determining your DF99+ without any guidance. I have been looking for and attempting to contact likely DF99 candidates and urging them to test, but haven't had much success getting many to order the test. Perhaps somewhere around one in five of those I have contacted have ordered DF99, and nearly all of them have got positive results. For some reason, I didn't spot you.

Your results are now shown with the others who have tested DF99+ on the P312 project website under section E of the Ydna Results section, and your ancestral location is now included in the DF99 map.

Webb
07-31-2014, 08:09 PM
There is a gentleman who is a member of the P312 Facebook group who just tested positive for DF99 as well.

Gray Fox
07-31-2014, 08:18 PM
There is a gentleman who is a member of the P312 Facebook group who just tested positive for DF99 as well.

The one with Northern Irish roots? I think I seen him on here the other day.

Torc Seanathair
08-01-2014, 03:43 AM
Hello Folks,
The fellow with the Ulster roots, here.
Curiously, upon looking at the other DF 99's in the FTDNA project, I noticed an Isaac Stedman listed there. He was the brother of another of my ancestors in Kent, England. Hmmm...

GoldenHind
08-02-2014, 11:38 PM
Since we are now approaching the first anniversary of the discovery of DF99 (see the first post on this thread), I thought it might be worthwhile to review the data to date.

There are 23 individuals in the FTDNA R1b-P312 and Subclades Project who have tested DF99+. If we eliminate 2 who are same surname relations to another in the group, that leaves us with 21.

Tied for most common are those with ancestry from England and Germany, with 33% (7) each. I have lumped together those with identified ancestry in those countries with those Americans whose ancestry is either certainly or highly probably from those countries, and I have included one each from Alsace and the German speaking part of Switzerland (both have German names) in the German category.

In second place with 9% (2) is northern Italy. The others are all singletons and thus slightly less than 5% each: Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland, Flanders and Russia.

The huge numerical bias in the FTDNA database toward Britain in Ireland is well known. Alan suggested recently that one needs to multiply the number with continental ancestry by a large factor to accurately compare them with those of British or Irish ancestry. Rich R. recently said elsewhere on this forum that the next largest group in the FTDNA database are Americans with German ancestry from the middle Rhine. That may explain why there seems to be a comparatively substantial numbers of DF99 with ancestry from that area. However the German portion of the FTDNA database is considerably less than that from Britain and Ireland. So it would appear that DF99 is rare in Scotland and even rarer in Ireland outside Ulster. We also know that out of 2000 anonymous people testing Chromo 2 with BritainsDNA, only four were DF99+. I am informed that all 4 were of English origin. That being said, I have identified a few people with Scottish surnames whom I believe might well test DF99+. Unfortunately none of them seems to be interested in testing for it. I do think it is possible that there may be more DF99 in Scotland than currently indicated. I am far less optimistic about the presence of DF99 in Ireland outside of Ulster.

Although we don't have any identified DF99 from Netherlands, we know from the Genes of the Netherlands Project that four DF99+ were found there in a sample of 500 males, so we know that it exists there. That fits the geographical pattern which is currently emerging. That may sound like an insignificant number, but it does represent over 4% of R1b-P312 found in that study.

Areas on the continent where no DF99 have been found are also interesting. The absence in France could well just be due to the lack of data. The absence from Italy outside of the north could be important. We know there is a third anonymous Italian DF99 from the 1000 Genomes Project, and he is from Tuscany.

Another area where to date DF99 appears to be largely absent is Iberia. True, there is an anonymous Peruvian DF99 from the !KG Project, but he is the only DF99 in a large number of samples of Iberian origin in that database, and there is no assurance that the Peruvian is of Spanish ancestry. If there is any DF99 in Iberia, I think it will be very rare.

Scandinavia remains a puzzle. As I said previously, there is some circumstantial evidence that DF99 is present there. Scandinavia is under represented in the FTDNA database.

Lastly there is eastern Europe and beyond. We have only the one Russian DF99. My suspicion is he is not an isolated case and that more will be found in Russia and vicinity. How it got there is open to debate.

While the current data is still very preliminary, it suggests to me that the greatest concentration of DF99 is likely to be in Germany, possibly especially in the western part, and that it tends to decrease the further one moves away from there in every direction.

Finally I will throw caution to the wind and respond to some of the theories which have been put forth about an ancient cultural identity for the group. I do think Jean M. made some very interesting points. However some will know that I have never been a big fan of attempting to link subclades which probably date from the late Neolithic or Copper Age exclusively with one or another Iron Age culture such as the Celts or Germanics. I think it is fairly clear that DF99 is nearly as old as P312, and I think it is certainly possible that it was present to some degree in both of those cultures.

I look forward to seeing what we learn from a second year of testing.

rms2
08-03-2014, 12:38 AM
. . . However some will know that I have never been a big fan of attempting to link subclades which probably date from the late Neolithic or Copper Age exclusively with one or another Iron Age culture such as the Celts or Germanics . . .

I cannot think of anyone who has ever been a fan of linking any subclade exclusively with one culture or another, even if those cultures actually began in the Copper or Bronze Ages rather than the Iron Age.

There was perhaps one exception a few years ago, a very prolific poster who once remarked that probably all of the R1b subclades that had been discovered by that time (2007 or so) were all there were: M269, M153, M222, S21 (U106), and S28 (U152).

You're tilting at windmills except in perhaps his case.

But, come to think of it, even he managed to make his own subclade a party to the heroics of more than one warlike culture. I know you remember that.

GoldenHind
08-12-2014, 12:13 AM
I thought some might be interested in a look at off modal STR markers in DF99.

The only one which appears to be important at this point is DYS389i. 21 of 23 of those currently identified as DF99 have 12 there. Only two- and they are related- have the modal 13 there. 389i=12 is very rare in R1b, though it is modal in some other haplogroups (G and I). It is only found in about 5% of Rib. It is also a slow mutating marker. While it appears to be a good indicator of DF99 status, I believe it occurs rarely in all other R1b subclades. It is even present in those who are currently P312**. So by no means does it guarantee a DF99 result. I also think it is an open question of whether a greater percentage of DF99 than currently indicated may have the modal 13 there. But at this point I wouldn't be surprised if the first DF99 man had 389i=12.

The other current off modals appear less important.
Slightly over half have 11 at 439, while the rest have modal 12.
At 456, 15 have 14 or 15, while only 5 have the modal 16. Another three are on the other side of the modal with 17.
446 may be more important. 15 have 14 or above, while only six have have the modal 13.

Another observation which could turn out to be significant occurs at 391. While 14 have the modal 11 there, 9 have 10 instead. Although this is somewhat speculative, I wouldn't be too surprised if this is connected to the division of the two subclades of DF99 I have mentioned previously.

andywxman
08-30-2014, 02:04 AM
Hi... new to the forum and new to the world of genetic genealogy... though I have read a bunch.

I was trying to figure out what SNP to test for next and this thread caught my eye. Would love some expert advice.

I'm kit 167399 on FTDNA and in the R1b Gateway project. FTDNA put me down as R-P311. Since my paternal line earliest known relative was surname Rice that came to the USA from Bristol England... and since Rice is a Welsh name I just guessed L21 first and found I was L21- ... then I tried U106 and was U106-

I was looking at my closest matches to try and figure out whether I should try P312 next, or go straight to DF27 or U152 next. But I didn't see any real matches close in DF27 or U152 in advanced search on FTDNA. I did see a DF99 (kit N47555) that had a perfect match at 12, 21 of 25, and 49 of 67.... which led me on a google search to this thread.

In reading I saw that I had the 389i=12 which I read was rare in R1b and a signal for DF99

I'd love any expert advice as to whether I should jump straight to testing this one or whether I'm jumping to conclusions here and should do the logical next step to P312. I assume that I am P312+ since I'm U106- so I'm trying to be cost conscious.

Thanks!

GoldenHind
08-30-2014, 05:52 PM
Hi... new to the forum and new to the world of genetic genealogy... though I have read a bunch.

I was trying to figure out what SNP to test for next and this thread caught my eye. Would love some expert advice.

I'm kit 167399 on FTDNA and in the R1b Gateway project. FTDNA put me down as R-P311. Since my paternal line earliest known relative was surname Rice that came to the USA from Bristol England... and since Rice is a Welsh name I just guessed L21 first and found I was L21- ... then I tried U106 and was U106-

I was looking at my closest matches to try and figure out whether I should try P312 next, or go straight to DF27 or U152 next. But I didn't see any real matches close in DF27 or U152 in advanced search on FTDNA. I did see a DF99 (kit N47555) that had a perfect match at 12, 21 of 25, and 49 of 67.... which led me on a google search to this thread.

In reading I saw that I had the 389i=12 which I read was rare in R1b and a signal for DF99

I'd love any expert advice as to whether I should jump straight to testing this one or whether I'm jumping to conclusions here and should do the logical next step to P312. I assume that I am P312+ since I'm U106- so I'm trying to be cost conscious.

Thanks!

First I recommend you join the R1b-P312 Project. Though technically for those who have tested P312+, we do have a number of members who haven't tested for it yet. The odds that you are P312+ are extremely high. Once you are in the project, I could have a look at your markers and give you better advice.

While 389i=12 is rare outside of DF99, it does appear in most if not all R1b subclades. So while by itself it is not a guarantee of DF99+ status, it is probably worth giving it a try. There is one person of Welsh ancestry who has tested DF99+. If you get a DF99+ result, you will know that you are P312+ as well.

EDIT: In checking the P312 Project, I find a Rice who has 389i=12 and has tested DF27+.

andywxman
08-30-2014, 06:11 PM
Thanks GoldenHind... I have joined the P312 project per your suggestion.

GoldenHind
08-31-2014, 05:45 PM
Thanks GoldenHind... I have joined the P312 project per your suggestion.

I have had a look at your markers and matches. Since you have tested U106- and have 12 at 492 (this is about 90% accurate in predicting P312+ in R1b), I think it is safe to assume you are P312+. However it certainly wouldn't hurt to confirm that.

If you want to proceed with testing one SNP at a time, your rare 389i=12 suggests it would be worth trying DF99 next. I estimate you have at least a 50% chance of getting a positive result.

andywxman
09-01-2014, 04:21 AM
Thanks goldenhind... I appreciate your insight!

GoldenHind
09-05-2014, 06:06 PM
Two DF99 results came in this week. Both have the characteristic 389i=12 and looked to be good candidates for DF99+ status.

One has ancestry only to colonial Virginia, and has what appears to be an anglicized Welsh surname. He was DF99+.

The second has ancestry from northern Italy, from an area in between the other known DF99 there. His results were negative.

It is a further demonstration of how difficult it is to predict DF99 from STR markers.

Dubhthach
09-05-2014, 06:23 PM
We had results in today for a member of the Ireland yDNA Project who came back as P312- and U106- he has a 12 at 389i should I suggest he test DF99? He's confirmed M269+ from earlier test but hasn't tested for P311.

-Paul

R.Rocca
09-05-2014, 06:51 PM
We had results in today for a member of the Ireland yDNA Project who came back as P312- and U106- he has a 12 at 389i should I suggest he test DF99? He's confirmed M269+ from earlier test but hasn't tested for P311.

-Paul

If he is already P312-, then he will also be DF99- as DF99 is downstream of P312.

Dubhthach
09-05-2014, 07:01 PM
If he is already P312-, then he will also be DF99- as DF99 is downstream of P312.

Brain melt there (long day), I was thinking of DF100 (hey I was only off by 1 ;) )

Joe B
09-05-2014, 07:10 PM
We had results in today for a member of the Ireland yDNA Project who came back as P312- and U106- he has a 12 at 389i should I suggest he test DF99? He's confirmed M269+ from earlier test but hasn't tested for P311.

-Paul
Please have that member join the R1b1a2 (P312- U106-) DNA Project (https://www.familytreedna.com/public/ht35new/). There is another Irish fellow that has DYS389i=12 and is R1b-Z2103+ and suspected CTS7822+. DYS389i=12 is also seen in a few of the L51 haplotypes too. What are the rest of the STRs?

Dubhthach
09-05-2014, 07:28 PM
Please have that member join the R1b1a2 (P312- U106-) DNA Project (https://www.familytreedna.com/public/ht35new/). There is another Irish fellow that has DYS389i=12 and is R1b-Z2103+ and suspected CTS7822+. DYS389i=12 is also seen in a few of the L51 haplotypes too. What are the rest of the STRs?

Joe, I've sent him an email there where I beleive I cc'd you on it (I'm assuming your one of the co-admins listed on the project page above).

Anyways his STR results (he has tested out to 111STR's) can be seen here:
https://www.familytreedna.com/public/irelandheritage/default.aspx?section=ycolorized
Change markers to Y-DNA111 and do a search for 16204 -- Graham

-Paul

Joe B
09-05-2014, 08:33 PM
Joe, I've sent him an email there where I beleive I cc'd you on it (I'm assuming your one of the co-admins listed on the project page above).

Anyways his STR results (he has tested out to 111STR's) can be seen here:
https://www.familytreedna.com/public/irelandheritage/default.aspx?section=ycolorized
Change markers to Y-DNA111 and do a search for 16204 -- Graham

-Paul
Thanks Paul,
16204 sure looks like he could be R1b-CTS6889, L51>PF7589>CTS6889+.
Edwin(Morrisdna) has done a lot of work in this area of the tree. http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?2370-R1b-L51-Results-discussion&p=48966&viewfull=1#post48966
Joe

GoldenHind
09-20-2014, 02:54 PM
Another DF99+ result today, Welsh surname, ancestry apparently to Bristol in the 18C. He has the characteristic 389i=12. I assume this is andywxman who posted above. It may or may not be significant that he has no matches at 37 or 67 markers.

Webb
09-20-2014, 04:33 PM
Another DF99+ result today, Welsh surname, ancestry apparently to Bristol in the 18C. He has the characteristic 389i=12. I assume this is andywxman who posted above. It may or may not be significant that he has no matches at 37 or 67 markers.

Bristol was also one of the places Edward settled the Flemish weavers in the 1400/1500 time frame. Hopkins is a good example of a Flemish surname from Wales.

andywxman
09-21-2014, 04:43 AM
Indeed I came back DF99+ .... Really interesting!

Thanks for the insight here Goldenhind in making the decision to test DF99+ first ahead of the other P312 subclades or even P312 itself.

So my surname is Rice and a trace my lineage to Maine, USA in the late 1700s. There is a note that John Rice came to Maine from Bristol England when he was 9 years old in 1769 but I haven't been able to find any connection to whether Bristol was just the exiting port or where he lived or anything about the family before that. I don't match any Rice's in the Rice project anywhere close, but Ysearch found a Price and a Risher that were matches at 12 which I thought was interesting.

Dubhthach
09-21-2014, 07:17 AM
I could be wrong but Price derives from welsh ""ap Rhys", like alot of Welsh names the "p" in "ap" gets attracted to actual root name (Rhys). Rhys is also the origin of name Rice, it does kinda point to a welsh origin before Bristol which given the location of Bristol wouldn't be too surprising.

nb. "ap/ab" is welsh equivalent of "mac" (son of) in this case the (in)famous difference between "Q-Celtic" and "P-Celtic" comes out: maqos (Proto-Celtic) -> mapos (Gaulish/Proto-Brythonic)

jdean
09-21-2014, 10:50 AM
I could be wrong but Price derives from welsh ""ap Rhys", like alot of Welsh names the "p" in "ap" gets attracted to actual root name (Rhys). Rhys is also the origin of name Rice, it does kinda point to a welsh origin before Bristol which given the location of Bristol wouldn't be too surprising.

nb. "ap/ab" is welsh equivalent of "mac" (son of) in this case the (in)famous difference between "Q-Celtic" and "P-Celtic" comes out: maqos (Proto-Celtic) -> mapos (Gaulish/Proto-Brythonic)

That's definitely been my understanding of the etymology of Price with the same assumption for Rice, however the 1881 distribution of the name doesn't really suggest a Welsh origin.

There were a few hot spots for Rice but interestingly the biggest was around Devon with quite a lot bleeding (?) into Somerset (where Bristol is located). Liverpool had a very high concentration which could have had something to do with Wales but I expect you can think of a few Irish names that could have been prone to Anglicization into Rice

The only Welsh County with much of a showing was Glamorgan but this was mostly down to the numbers in Cardiff and Swansea which could just as easily be caused by English moving in during the Industrialization of the area.

The distribution of Price conversely is definitely Welsh !!!

Telfermagne
09-27-2014, 03:50 PM
Bristol was also one of the places Edward settled the Flemish weavers in the 1400/1500 time frame. Hopkins is a good example of a Flemish surname from Wales.

The Flemish are a group that would common between the homelands of the known DF99, but trying to tie the Flemish to any of the families besides the known Dutch DF99s and the Spanish line is hard to do right now.

Some bullet points on Flemish presence:

- British Isles (Flemish soldiers recruited by Normans & later weavers/guild men).
- Germany (there's no real need to explain how Germans & Dutch speakers could be connected, common sense here).
- Russia (Flemish pioneer land drainers).
- Netherlands (Flanders is "Dutch Belgium" for a reason).
- Italy (Flemish pioneer land drainers as with Russia, & France even).
- Spain (the Spanish line at FTDNA explained their origin via a "Flemish merchant", given that Spain used to rule part of Netherlands migration between the ruling land and ruled land would not be unheard of).


A safe bet right now:

The group TMRCA points to the Chalcolithic (at the time I did the calculation there were 20 Y-67 haplotypes used, the two most recent individuals shouldn't change the result by much but I will run it again to be super thorough).

What we can safely say is the members of R-DF99 in FTDNA's database appear to descend from a common Chalcolithic Era ancestor while at the same time some lines in this descent group are more recently related than to others. Given that the trend of positive results is appearing to point towards Germany, Low Countries, and Britain I am inclined to look at the common historic population threads between these areas dating from the Chalcolithic to forward. But, this goes along with a messy problem in that there are many such "historic threads" over this long period of time because the folk of these areas have been "rediscovering the cousin" repeatedly.



The scratchwork:

I used Dean McGee’s Y-Utility to yield a genetic distance report then I input the data into Google sheets and used the VAR function (since I am working with a sample vs. a population) to compute variance. I added the individual row variances together, and then I divided the result by the total number of haplotypes.


With the infinite allele mutation model is adopted the variance is 21.51210526. Since TMRCA = Variance/M,
21.5121053/0.15555 = 138.297045 generations = roughly 4,149 years = roughly late Chalcolithic Europe.


With the Hybrid Mutation Model adopted variance is 27.83421053. Since TMRCA = Variance/M,
27.83421053/0.15555 = 178.9406013 generations = roughly 5,370 years = roughly ancient Chalcolithic Europe.

Frithnanth
09-30-2014, 12:31 AM
Hello!

I am the DF99 whose ancestor is Francesco Canato, from northern Italy. I'd like to correct one information. My ancestor wasn't from Vicenza, as previously registered, but from Rovigo (I don't know if this will make any difference).

Back to the topic, I hardly think that my male line has any relation with the flemish (unless one of my male ancestors was adopted). I found in books from 14th and 15th centuries registers of my surname in people from Vicenza, so unless these Flemish pioneer land drainers came before that, the only possibility was the adoption of a dutch child by the italians.

rms2
09-30-2014, 02:02 AM
Hello!

I am the DF99 whose ancestor is Francesco Canato, from northern Italy. I'd like to correct one information. My ancestor wasn't from Vicenza, as previously registered, but from Rovigo (I don't know if this will make any difference).

Back to the topic, I hardly think that my male line has any relation with the flemish (unless one of my male ancestors was adopted). I found in books from 14th and 15th centuries registers of my surname in people from Vicenza, so unless these Flemish pioneer land drainers came before that, the only possibility was the adoption of a dutch child by the italians.

Seems to me you have a pretty solid Italian pedigree. It's still really early where DF99 is concerned. I wouldn't read too much into a tiny number of Dutch/Flemish DF99 results.

vettor
09-30-2014, 06:06 AM
Hello!

I am the DF99 whose ancestor is Francesco Canato, from northern Italy. I'd like to correct one information. My ancestor wasn't from Vicenza, as previously registered, but from Rovigo (I don't know if this will make any difference).

Back to the topic, I hardly think that my male line has any relation with the flemish (unless one of my male ancestors was adopted). I found in books from 14th and 15th centuries registers of my surname in people from Vicenza, so unless these Flemish pioneer land drainers came before that, the only possibility was the adoption of a dutch child by the italians.

very interesting.............my wife's 3rd cousin in ftdna

R-DF99 Y-DNA HAPLOGROUP H1e1a mtDNA HAPLOGROUP
Most Distant Ancestors
Paternal:
Francesco Canato, 1839-1885, Grignano Polesine
Maternal:
Maria Francisca, Isna, Portugal
About Me
No information entered.
Ancestral Surnames
Anselmi [Italy], Canato [Italy], Cardoso [Portugal], Cortonesi [Italy], Fabbian [Italy], Freddi [Italy], Furlan [Italy], Lovo [Italy], Lughi [Italy], Martins [Portugal], Nascimento [Portugal], Reginato [Italy], Ribeiro [Portugal], Salvadego [Italy], Zorzenoni [Italy]


her tree only involves the surnames ........Lovo, Furlan and Zorzenoni

oldest is Paolo Lovo b.1751 married Anna Tonincello in Gorgo di Monticano

Vicenza and Rovigo have their own provinces inside the region of Veneto ( Veneto has 7 provinces)

Frithnanth
09-30-2014, 10:10 PM
Nice!

Your wife must be the only person that appears as a match in my myOrigins map.

The oldest Lovo from my family that I know is Giobatta Lovo, born in 1847 (I don't know where) and married with Giovanna Reginato.

Webb
09-30-2014, 10:59 PM
People are not reading the posts thoroughly. I never said DF99 is Flemish in origin. It is likely found in a multitude of populations. Someone stated a pocket of DF99 seems to be turning up around Bristol, England and I stated that Bristol happens to be where Edward deposited a sizable group of Flemish weavers around 1400/1500. If I was DF99 and had ancestry from the Bristol area, I would look into it as a possibility.

vettor
10-01-2014, 07:30 AM
Nice!

Your wife must be the only person that appears as a match in my myOrigins map.

The oldest Lovo from my family that I know is Giobatta Lovo, born in 1847 (I don't know where) and married with Giovanna Reginato.

seems a distant match between you two, because the son of paolo was Lelio Lovo b.1779 who married Elisabetta Ortica in Motta di Livenza.......his son was Paolo Antonio Lovo
b. 1810 and married Rosa Perlin , again in motta di livenza, ................from here the lovo line is lost as its now ends in a daughter - Maria Lovo who married Luigi Redigolo

Torc Seanathair
10-03-2014, 05:04 PM
Hello!

[QUOTE]I am the DF99 whose ancestor is Francesco Canato, from northern Italy.

You are the only one of my ftdna Y matches that has tested DF 99+. GD=1.
I've always thought of my paternal line as Scotch-Irish - no hint of Italian. Anyway, hello to you, sir!

Frithnanth
10-04-2014, 11:04 PM
Hello cmoore!

This is very interesting. You are my only DF99 match too.

I'd like to know where and when our common ancestor lived. Was he roman, barbarian or did belong to a more ancient culture?

GoldenHind
10-05-2014, 10:32 PM
Hello cmoore!

This is very interesting. You are my only DF99 match too.

I'd like to know where and when our common ancestor lived. Was he roman, barbarian or did belong to a more ancient culture?

Some notes of caution: the two of you only appear in each other's matches at 12 markers. Also it is highly likely that at least some of both of your matches who are currently classified as M269 or P312 would test DF99+, if only they were to order it. Finally even an educated guess at your last common ancestor would require an upgrade to at least 67 markers by cmoore.

Torc Seanathair
10-06-2014, 04:25 AM
I do think our MRCA is pretty far back. How many generations back will 67 STR's give a good indication?

Telfermagne
10-06-2014, 03:10 PM
I do think our MRCA is pretty far back. How many generations back will 67 STR's give a good indication?

67 STRs can be quite informative, and is the traditional preferred measure (it seems that 111 STRs is the next "push" aside from full-sequencing). From what I can tell 67 STRs is sufficient enough for one person to another person comparisons, while 111 STRs is more desired for finding clade/group TMRCA. The number of generations back is contingent upon the degree of variation between two samples who have both tested a given number of STRs, so testing a given number of STRs alone will not reveal information (67 STRs just provides more opportunity to observe possible variation between samples).


Example of measuring MRCA: With the 67 STR resolution I was able to estimate a TMRCA between myself and another R-DF99 member (the Russian fellow) to find a time frame for a plausible distant common ancestor (a period that roughly coincides with an expanding Western Roman Empire to the Barbarian Migration Period).

Dr. Kenneth Nordvedt’s Most Likely TMRCA formula is MLTMRCA = Genetic Distance/2M where M is the total marker mutation rate over the 51 YSTRs being compared.

Since I am looking at 51 markers, which falls in between 37 and 67, I cannot work with the average mutation rate for when 67 markers are being looked at or the average mutation rate for when 37 markers are being looked at. I will instead make a quick guess by averaging those two rates and then work with it as my marker mutation rate. The input marker mutation rates were borrowed from Dr. McDonald’s TMRCA tool at http://dna-project.clan-donald-usa.org/tmrca.htm.

So, 0.0033 + 0.0028/2 = 0.00305 therefore the marker mutation rate I will use is 0.00305 (even though this is not the precise rate, it won't be so far off that it would severely hinder estimating). M = 51 YSTRs * 0.305/100 = 15.555/100 = 0.15555.

Genetic Distance = 10 with the Infinite Alleles Model adopted
So,
10/2*0.15555 = 10/0.3111 = 32.1440051 generations = roughly 964 years = roughly 11th Century A.D.

Genetic Distance = 11 with the Hybrid Mutation Model adopted
So,
11/2*0.15555 = 11/0.3111 = 35.3584057 generations = roughly 1,050 years = roughly 10th Century A.D.

To check the outcomes I ran the data through Dr. Doug McDonald’s TMRCA tool which gives not only a TMRCA estimate but probability values for each outcome. Keep in mind that the initial output is the number of transmission events, not the number of generations, and “the number of transmission events is essentially twice the number of generations back to the MRCA (Most Recent Common Ancestor)” (McDonald). So, I divide the transmission event outputs by 2 to get TMRCA in generations.

Since there is not a big gap between the genetic distances from the infinite alleles model and the hybrid mutation model (there is a difference of one between them), I input the distance from the infinite alleles model to save time (it was the genetic distance I found first). A TMRCA of roughly 32 generations did occur in the given output, and the cummulative probability that the TMRCA is less than the given value is low. The cumulative probability for the TMRCA of roughly 32 generations is 26.3%, so there’s a 26.3% likelihood that the TMRCA is less than 32 generations.

For the next step I look at probabilities of roughly 75% or higher. The TMRCA ranking given by Dr. McDonald’s tool is:
At 75% cumulative prob. TMRCA is estimated to be less than 46.5 generations
At 85% cumulative prob. TMRCA is estimated to be less than 51.5 generations
At 95% cumulative prob. TMRCA is estimated to be less than 60.5 generations
At 97.6% cumulative prob. TMRCA is estimated to be less than 66 generations

So, it seems that there is a 97.6% likelihood that the TMRCA is less than 66 generations, a 95% likelihood that it is less than 60.5 generations, an 85% likelihood that it is less than 51.5 generations, and a 75% likelihood that it is less than 46.5 generations. So I feel better with a TMRCA ranking of 46.5 to 66 generations = roughly 1,395 years to 1,980 years = roughly coincides with an expanding Western Roman Empire to the Barbarian Migration Period.

GoldenHind
10-13-2014, 01:46 AM
I located another DF99+ group, all of whom seem to be descendants of an early 17C English settler to Virginia. It appears at least one of the group got a DF99+ result in a Big Y test, but as he isn't currently a member of the P312 Project, I can't be certain. Their surname project lists them all as DF99. I have added an 111/111 same surname match who is in the project to the DF99+ list.

GoldenHind
10-27-2014, 05:32 PM
I have noticed that FTDNA is now predicting DF99+ status for a number of people. Presumably they are basing this on close genetic distance to confirmed DF99+ samples.

Torc Seanathair
12-08-2014, 06:48 PM
I have taken advantage of the FTDNA holiday marketing ploy and ordered the upgrade to 67 STR's.
It doesn't seem like much is happening for DF-99's. Are we that sparse?

GoldenHind
12-08-2014, 07:18 PM
I have taken advantage of the FTDNA holiday marketing ploy and ordered the upgrade to 67 STR's.
It doesn't seem like much is happening for DF-99's. Are we that sparse?

There has been a fairly long period where no one ordered DF99, so there was nothing to report. There are now a handful pending, although a few them are from DF27+ people who are obviously confused by the omission of DF27 from the FTDNA tree. There is also a Big Y pending- now over a month overdue- which I suspect may turn out to be DF99+. I have sent a lot of emails to prospective DF99+ in the R1b-P312 Project, but received very few responses and there have been even fewer orders.

My guess is that DF99 is relatively rare compared to the larger P312 subclades, but not quite as rare as the current data suggests.

Frithnanth
12-10-2014, 10:11 PM
Got my bam analyzed by yfull (YF02364) and according to them I don't have any of the SNPs below DF99. I am DF99*.

GoldenHind
12-10-2014, 11:45 PM
Got my bam analyzed by yfull (YF02364) and according to them I don't have any of the SNPs below DF99. I am DF99*.

I assume you are referring to your Big Y results. To the best of my knowledge, not all of the SNPs known to be below DF99 were included in the Big Y, and possibly none of them are. So you may well not be DF99* after all.

GoldenHind
12-17-2014, 11:16 PM
Several DF99 tests results have come in the past few days. All were negative.

I was very hopeful for two of them who have the characteristic 389i=12 and looked to have good chances to be DF99+. One of these was a BigY from someone with ancestry from Staffordshire in England. They got nothing below P312 so are probably DF27+ Z196/Z195-. The other was a multi-branched German family, who also now look likely to be DF27.

Also getting DF99- results was someone with Scottish ancestry who had tested negative for all other P312 subclades. The result wasn't surprising as he has a 111 marker match to someone who is P312**.

Finally there were expected DF99- results for someone who has tested DF27+ and is obviously confused by the absence of DF27 from the FTDNA tree.

There are a few DF99 orders still pending, and I am hopeful at least some of them will get positive results. I have also identified a few people whose markers and matches suggest a very good chance they are DF99. Now I just have to persuade them to order it.

GoldenHind
01-12-2015, 07:01 PM
Another result in for someone with ancestry from Abruzzo in Italy. He had previously tested negative for U152, L21 and DF27, and had the characteristic 389i=12. I thought he would be a slam dunk. However his results were negative.

Once again it demonstrates the difficulty of predicting DF99 in the absence of close STR matches with other DF99 examples.

Had this person tested positive, it would have extended the range of DF99 in Italy southwards. However it currently remains confined to the far north of that country.

Torc Seanathair
01-13-2015, 06:52 PM
Does anyone know of an accessible list of DF99's outside of FTDNA's projects? I'm the sole DF99 in their Ulster project, and there are zero DF99's in their Scotland and Ireland projects. I'd be most keenly interested in the British Isles and low countries.

GoldenHind
01-13-2015, 11:51 PM
Does anyone know of an accessible list of DF99's outside of FTDNA's projects? I'm the sole DF99 in their Ulster project, and there are zero DF99's in their Scotland and Ireland projects. I'd be most keenly interested in the British Isles and low countries.

The short answer is no. You could look at the R1b-all subclades project. Otherwise you could try the various geographical projects, especially those in countries where DF99 has been found. Surname projects would probably be looking for a needle in a haystack, unless you concentrate on surnames known to have DF99 examples..

If you find any who do not appear in the P312 and subclades project, please let me know. Keep in mind if the DF99 designation is in green, it is confirmed. If in red, it is only predicted.

GoldenHind
01-14-2015, 08:01 PM
Although it has been mentioned some time ago, I should have added this with regard to the Low Countries. We know DF99 has a presence there from the Genomes of the Netherlands study. In a sample of 500 males, there were four who were DF99. This may not sound like much, but the 500 samples includes all haplogroups, and the majority of R1b in Holland is U106. The DF99 portion amounts to 1.5% of all R1b and 4.3% of P312.

Although we don't have any DF99 from the Netherlands in the P312 project. we do have two related samples whose origin in the 17th century has been traced to Flanders.

My guess is that the DF99 comprises roughly the same percentage (around 5%) of R1b-P312 in England.

Torc Seanathair
01-15-2015, 06:27 PM
The R1b-All subclades project had only one predicted DF99 that I didn't see in the P312 project, kit#99332.

The colorized charts seem to crash on me before I get to DF99's, so I went the SNP route.

GoldenHind
02-03-2015, 08:52 PM
There has been only one DF99 result recently, and it is hardly worth reporting as he is a 67 marker match to someone with a variant spelling surname who has already tested DF99+. Both only have ancestry to the USA, and the surname can be either English or Welsh, depending on the variant. In checking their surname website, they appear to be part of group which claims to come from Shropshire, and Wales before that. My guess is that this is probably originally a Welsh family. There are strong indications of an element of DF99 in Wales, which bears further investigation.

There are some other DF99 tests now overdue at FTDNA, so perhaps there will be more to report soon.

Torc Seanathair
02-25-2015, 05:58 PM
My 67 STR results are finally posted. I'm down to 3 matches listed at 67.

GoldenHind
03-07-2015, 07:29 PM
After a month with no DF99 results, three have come in, two positive and one negative.

The negative result was from someone with American ancestry only and a common English surname. He has the P312 modal value of 13 at DYS389i. He will now go on the P312** list, but I strongly suspect he will turn out to be in the L624+ group.

One of the positive results was expected, as he is a 67 marker match to some of our German DF99s. He has ancestry to the Mannheim area in Germany.

The second positive result was for someone with an ancestral German surname but ancestry only to Ohio in the USA. However he tells me that the earliest known ancestor listed his father's birthplace as Germany in the US census. The surname is found in the southern parts of Germany in a band from west to east.

Both DF99+ results have the characteristic 12 at 389i.

Chalk up two more on the list of German DF99s.

EDIT: I should have added that the second German DF99 mentioned above has 111 markers, but no matches at all above 25 markers. It is not uncommon for someone who is DF99+ to have no matches at 67 markers, but none at 37 either is a bit unusual.

lgmayka
03-08-2015, 09:16 PM
#109663 of Poland has tested
M269+, P312+, SRY2627-, U106-, U152-, Z196-, DF27-, L21-, M153-, M65-
His 67-marker haplotype is Ysearch 93HBC (http://www.ysearch.org/search_view.asp?uid=93HBC&viewuid=93HBC&p=1).

If I were to suggest another SNP test, which has the highest probability: DF99, DF19, or L238 ?

GoldenHind
03-09-2015, 07:00 PM
#109663 of Poland has tested
M269+, P312+, SRY2627-, U106-, U152-, Z196-, DF27-, L21-, M153-, M65-
His 67-marker haplotype is Ysearch 93HBC (http://www.ysearch.org/search_view.asp?uid=93HBC&viewuid=93HBC&p=1).

If I were to suggest another SNP test, which has the highest probability: DF99, DF19, or L238 ?

Since others may be in the same situation, I thought I would respond here rather than by PM. Predicting P312 subclades from STR markers is in many cases very difficult. Your man has no matches even at 12 markers, which is almost unheard of in P312.

L238 is largely confined to Scandinavia, and has a very strong STR signature which the person in question does not match. However there is at least one L238+ who doesn't match that signature, so it is not impossible, just very unlikely.

DF99 is found as far east as Moscow, so a Polish example is certainly possible. There is no STR signature common to all DF99, with the exception of DYS389i, where all but two have the otherwise unusual (in R1b) 12. Since your man has a 14 there, which is on the other side of the modal 13, I don't think this is very likely. although not impossible.

I am not an expert on DF19. I don't believe it has a common STR signature, though there are some markers those who are expert look at in considering possible DF19 status. None of these seem to match either. However DF19 appears to be more numerous than either DF99 or L238, and there is one confirmed DF19+ from Poland with a Polish surname. I suspect this is his best bet. I would start with DF19, then DF99 and finally L238. The other possibility of course is that he is P312**. This group so far is mainly British, but that may well be due to the enormous over weighting of British samples in the FTDNA database.

GoldenHind
03-09-2015, 11:27 PM
Another DF99 result came in today, long overdue. Another one with German ancestry, this time from Bavaria. Once again he has the characteristic DYS389i = 12.

GoldenHind
03-10-2015, 05:40 PM
Yet another DF99+ result today, also with ancestry from Germany, a village near Heidelberg. Also not a surprise, as he is a 67 marker match to one of the Pennsylvania Dutch DF99s.

If anyone is counting, the last four DF99+ results all have ancestry from Germany.

andywxman
03-21-2015, 01:18 AM
I ran a PCA Analysis on the 37 STR's in the DF99 group on FTDNA. This gives some level of guidance as to which folks are closer together that may be a little better than GD, since its taking into account which STR differences are most statistically significant. I'll let others with a deeper history thinking about the DF99 group comment as to what it may or may not mean.

4104

andywxman
03-22-2015, 03:30 PM
I also took the whole P312 group and did the same analysis on the major families

edit... screwed up the size of L238 in the first image... the one with the smaller L238 is the one to look at.

4120

GoldenHind
03-22-2015, 07:50 PM
I ran a PCA Analysis on the 37 STR's in the DF99 group on FTDNA. This gives some level of guidance as to which folks are closer together that may be a little better than GD, since its taking into account which STR differences are most statistically significant. I'll let others with a deeper history thinking about the DF99 group comment as to what it may or may not mean.

4104

I'm not entirely certain how accurate or reliable this type of analysis is, but I do have some observations.

All but one of the Germans, including those of the probable Germans with USA origins only, appear above the horizontal axis. Meanwhile those with origins in Britain and those of USA origins with British surnames appear in all four quadrants. This could merely be a reflection of the enormous bias toward British samples in the FTDNA database. The only one with a confirmed Welsh origin is surrounded by Germans.

The lowermost group is an odd international mix of English, the Russian and one of the Italians.

The two Italians do not cluster close together on the vertical axis, but are very similar on the horizontal axis.

Perhaps others will have further observations.

GoldenHind
03-22-2015, 07:56 PM
I also took the whole P312 group and did the same analysis on the major families

edit... screwed up the size of L238 in the first image... the one with the smaller L238 is the one to look at.

4120

With the caveat from above, the only thing that really surprises me is the placement of L238. I am not surprised that DF99 and DF19 are fairly close, as their distributions as currently known have more similarities than differences, and both are considerably different than most of the other P312 subclades.

The fact that L624 is so far removed from the rest may merely be a reflection of the fact there are only four in the group at present.

GoldenHind
03-27-2015, 06:14 PM
Two DF99 results reported today, both earlier than expected. One positive and one negative.

The negative result was for someone who bears one of the most famous (some might say infamous) English surnames in both the Tudor and Stuart periods.

The positive result is the first confirmed DF99 in Scandinavia. He is a Swedish national, with ancestry in that country back to the early 18th century. He has no matches at 67 markers, and only two at 37: one a DF99+ with a German surname and ancestry from a former eastern German province now in Poland, the other an untested M269 with Swedish ancestry.

I have long suspected a presence of DF99 in Scandinavia in general and Sweden in particular, so I am particularly pleased with this result.

castle3
03-28-2015, 07:18 AM
Interesting, Goldenhind.
If it is indeed the surname (*r***e**) I believe you are referring to, then some of the infamous line actually took their surname from a relative. Their true surname should have been W******s, who originally hailed from Wales.

GoldenHind
03-28-2015, 07:20 PM
Interesting, Goldenhind.
If it is indeed the surname (*r***e**) I believe you are referring to, then some of the infamous line actually took their surname from a relative. Their true surname should have been W******s, who originally hailed from Wales.

You have correctly identified the surname in question. The person does not have ancestry beyond the USA, so we cannot tell if he is descended from either line which bore this surname. Since he tested DF99- and hasn't done any other SNP testing, he could be in any subclade, and really isn't relevant here. The surname apparently has a single origin, from a place of that name in Nottinghamshire.

GoldenHind
03-28-2015, 07:33 PM
A note from a recent post on another thread on this forum, relating to a whole genome study of the population of Iceland, which may be of interest here.

Apparently the sample included 274 males, 96 of whom were R1b. Of the 96, one was classified P312*. Since the classification was based on either the 2012 or 2013 ISOGG tree, and DF99 wasn't added to that tree until December of 2013, this P312* has to be either DF99 or P312**. I think the former is much more likely.

GoldenHind
04-15-2015, 06:23 PM
Another German DF99+ result in today, with ancestry back to the late 17th century in Tübingen. As usual, he has a 12 at DYS389i. This is very rare in R1b, but standard in DF99.

There is obviously a trend developing here. Of the last six DF99+ results, five have origins in Germany and one is from Sweden. There are some interesting ones pending as well.

GoldenHind
04-17-2015, 07:59 PM
Since it will be awhile until the next round of DF99 results come in, I thought some might be interested in a summary of the ancestral origins of those who have currently tested DF99+. I have combined all multiple related surname variants into a single number so as to not skew the results.

Germany 6

England 4

Italy (North) 2

Switzerland (German surname) 1

Belgium/Flanders 1

Wales 1

Scotland 1

Ireland/Ulster 1

Sweden 1

Russia 1

USA- English surnames 5

USA- probable German origin 2

USA- probable Welsh surname 1


Adding the likely origin of those without ancestry beyond the USA, the samples from the British Isles and Ireland (13) are slightly surpassed by those with ancestry from the continent (14). In viewing these numbers, one has to keep in mind the enormous over weighting of samples from Ireland and the British Isles in the FTDNA database. Probably of more significance is where DF99 has yet to be found- Ireland outside of Ulster, France and Iberia. While I suspect some will eventually turn up in those places, I think that the concentration of DF99, such as it is, is likely to be in Germany and England.

GoldenHind
04-20-2015, 07:25 PM
Since a picture can be worth a thousand words, here is the map showing the ancestral locations for those who have tested DF99 who have ancestry beyond the USA. The sample showing in Poland is actually someone with a ancestry to Posen, a former province of Prussia, ceded to Poland after WWI.



4402

lgmayka
04-21-2015, 02:12 AM
The sample showing in Poland is actually someone with a ancestry to Posen, a former province of Prussia, ceded to Poland after WWI.
Just to clarify: Individuals' ethnic identities may vary, but Poznań has been Polish throughout its entire history (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pozna%C5%84#History) except for the Prussian occupation of 1793-1807, the Prussian/German Imperial occupation of 1815-1918, and of course the Nazi German occupation of 1939-1945.

In 1918, Germany enthusiastically accepted Woodrow Wilson's Fourteen Points (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourteen_Points#Influence_on_the_Germans_to_surren der), which explicitly included the restoration of a free and independent Poland whose security would be guaranteed by international treaty (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourteen_Points#The_Fourteen_Points). In reality, of course, the German Weimar Republic almost immediately began plotting the military and economic destruction of Poland, in complete and utter violation of the Fourteen Points to which Germany itself had so eagerly agreed.

A quote from Hans von Seeckt, commander-in-chief of the German army from 1920 to 1926 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hans_von_Seeckt#Development_of_the_Reichswehr):
---
The existence of Poland is intolerable and incompatible with Germany's vital interests. She must disappear and will do so through her own inner weakness and through Russia — with our help. Poland is more intolerable for Russia than for ourselves; Russia can never tolerate Poland. With Poland collapses one of the strongest pillars of the Peace of Versailles, France's advance post of power [is lost]. The attainment of this objective must be one of the firmest guiding principles of German policy, as it is capable of achievement — but only through Russia or with her help.

Poland can never offer Germany any advantage, either economically, because she is incapable of development, or politically, because she is a vassal state of France. The restoration of the frontier between Russia and Germany is a necessary condition before both sides can become strong. The 1914 frontier between Russia and Germany should be the basis of any understanding between the two countries...
...
We must become powerful, and as soon as we have power, we will naturally take back everything we have lost.
---

A description of the Weimar Republic's trade war against Poland (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German%E2%80%93Polish_customs_war#Customs_war_betw een_Poland_and_Germany):
---
Germany also blocked Polish attempts to get a loan from Great Britain, seeing it as a threat to its long-term plan to annex Polish territory after the fall of the Polish state.[27]

When Polish delegations tried to reach a peaceful understanding with Germany on 10 December 1926, Stresemann rejected the talks, saying there would be no normalization of German-Polish relations until the "border problems" were resolved. To clarify, he identified Upper Silesia, Pomerania and Danzig (Gdańsk) as "border problems".[28] These sentiments were echoed by Reichsbank President, Hjalmar Schacht, who stated that any economic agreements with Poland must be preceded by Poland's relinquishment of Upper Silesia and the Polish Corridor to Germany.
---

But I digress. :) And again, individual ethnic identities may vary. At various points during Prussian/German colonization and oppression, the German population in Poznań (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_population_of_Pozna%C5%84) may have almost equalled (in 1848) or even exceeded (in 1945) the Polish population. The Nazis displaced 60,000 Poles from their homes in order to settle 90,000 Germans in the city (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_population_of_Pozna%C5%84).

GoldenHind
04-22-2015, 01:03 AM
I didn't men to set off a firestorm of Polish grievances against the Germans. I just wanted to point out that the ancestors of the individual in question appear to be ethnic Germans, and despite his marker appearing well within the current Polish borders, lived in what was then a province of Prussia and later Germany. Their surname is German, and the world surname profiler shows it is most common in Pomerania (also largely in Poland since WWII), followed by Mecklenburg and Schleswig-Holstein.

I have been familiar with the general history of the greater area since my undergraduate days, from the advent of the Teutonic Knights through the partitions of Poland in the 18th century, to the re-drawing of borders following WWI and WW11. While it is an interesting subject, it is really not terribly relevant to the subject at hand.

GoldenHind
04-23-2015, 06:34 PM
Another DF99+ result in today, our second from Ireland. However like the previous DF99+ with Irish ancestry, this one is also from Ulster (Co. Donegal in this case) and has an English surname, in this instance one very well known from that of the premier maker of British swords for at least two centuries.

I don't want to blow my own horn too much, but I identified this person as an almost certain DF99+ candidate from a very strong STR profile found in a few DF99 people. Prior to FTDNA's recent rollback of predicted subclades, they had predicted this person to be U152>L2>L20.

One more example of the value of STR signatures, based on a number of matching off modal markers, as evidence of ancient relationships. I should emphasize that this was first discovered by Ken Nordtvedt, and I am only following his lead.

Torc Seanathair
05-05-2015, 05:49 PM
I have seen P312 characterized as "proto-italo-celto-germanic". So, how would DF99 be characterized?
What is it? Or what is it not?

GoldenHind
05-09-2015, 08:51 AM
Another DF99+ result in, the second one from Sweden. This one has ancestry to the 18th century in Gavleborg.

GoldenHind
05-09-2015, 08:56 AM
I have seen P312 characterized as "proto-italo-celto-germanic". So, how would DF99 be characterized?
What is it? Or what is it not?

Good question. I don't think we have enough data to answer it yet. DF99 appears to be nearly as old as P312, and like P312, DF99 could well have a presence in both the Celtic and Germanic cultures. To date it appears to be more common in the Germanic areas, though how and when it or some portion of it became part of that culture is unclear. Jean M suggested a couple of possible scenarios some time ago on this thread.

Torc Seanathair
06-16-2015, 03:36 AM
I found where Jean M wrote on page 24 of this thread that DF99 may have started in the Jastorf Culture, where Celtic and early Germanic elements were both present. So, both lines can take some credit.
I like the idea which Webb stated, where DF99 may have tagged along with the Normans into the British Isles. The timing sounds about right to me. It wouldn't actually directly follow the Scandinavian lineage of the Normans.

GoldenHind
06-19-2015, 07:49 PM
There are some interesting developments in determining the substructure of DF99. One of our German DF99's has recently received his Big Y results. That makes a total of six DF99's who have undergone NGS testing. All six have been analyzed by Alex W. He splits the six into three separate DF99 subclades.

The first contains myself and the 1KG sample from Peru. Alex lists two different SNPs for this subclade, but others have suggested the total is actually three SNPs and three INDELS.

Alex lists the second subclade, which is composed of one of the cousins of Flemish origin and the 1KG sample from Tuscany, as sharing six SNPs. One of these is SS23540. which reportedly was found in three of the English DF99/S11987 samples in the database released by BritainsDNA, and two (or three?) of the DF99 samples in the Genes of the Netherlands samples.

The third subclade is composed of two Big Y samples, one from Veneto in northern Italy and the other the recent one from Germany. Alex lists three SNPs shared by these two, and confirms both are negative for S23540.

Unfortunately none of these are available for testing outside of the Big Y or FullGenomes.

Alex also lists a new SNP (Z29643) which he says has an equivalent position to DF99.

Finally I know of another DF99 who has Big Y results pending. It will be interesting to see how his results compare.

lgmayka
06-19-2015, 09:14 PM
Finally I know of another DF99 who has Big Y results pending.
Perhaps we need a Big Y for kit 192606 (the DF99+ of Moscow patrilineage)?

GoldenHind
06-19-2015, 11:34 PM
Perhaps we need a Big Y for kit 192606 (the DF99+ of Moscow patrilineage)?

Yes, that would be very helpful. I don't know if the person who manages his kit would spring for it. However I have no doubt that he would fall into the first subclade mentioned above. He shares a very strong STR signature of 7 rare to unusual STRs with a small group of other DF99+ people, including myself. I actually discovered this signature prior to the discovery of DF99. Since then 100% (five for five) of those with this signature who have tested for DF99 have received positive results.

GoldenHind
06-19-2015, 11:43 PM
There are some interesting developments in determining the substructure of DF99. One of our German DF99's has recently received his Big Y results. That makes a total of six DF99's who have undergone NGS testing. All six have been analyzed by Alex W. He splits the six into three separate DF99 subclades.

The first contains myself and the 1KG sample from Peru. Alex lists two different SNPs for this subclade, but others have suggested the total is actually three SNPs and three INDELS.

Alex lists the second subclade, which is composed of one of the cousins of Flemish origin and the 1KG sample from Tuscany, as sharing six SNPs. One of these is SS23540. which reportedly was found in three of the English DF99/S11987 samples in the database released by BritainsDNA, and two (or three?) of the DF99 samples in the Genes of the Netherlands samples.

The third subclade is composed of two Big Y samples, one from Veneto in northern Italy and the other the recent one from Germany. Alex lists three SNPs shared by these two, and confirms both are negative for S23540.

Unfortunately none of these are available for testing outside of the Big Y or FullGenomes.

Alex also lists a new SNP (Z29643) which he says has an equivalent position to DF99.

Finally I know of another DF99 who has Big Y results pending. It will be interesting to see how his results compare.

In checking my notes, I see that Greg R actually found a total of nine SNPs shared in the second group, consisting of the person of Flemish origin and the 1KG sample from Tuscany. One of the others is S16136, which also was found in three of the four DF99/S11987 in the anonymous results from BritainsDNA. Greg also said the two samples in the first group were ancestral to all nine of these SNPs.

Theconqueror
06-21-2015, 03:25 PM
Hello all,

I am P312* and waiting for my results for DF99. I have 12,28 at 389i,ii. I have a well defined genealogy back to 1100s on the paternal line, and farther back when accounting for allied families. Like many, I am descendant of Rollo and have blood lienages with most of medieval Norman and French nobility. I have close matches with folks in Britain with Norman sounding names (Tracey (Traci), Bartlett (Barthelot), Leavitt (Livet), Lyle (De Lisle), Newell (noel)...etc. I will keep you posted when I get the results.

Cheers

Rick

Torc Seanathair
06-25-2015, 05:26 PM
There are some interesting developments in determining the substructure of DF99. One of our German DF99's has recently received his Big Y results. That makes a total of six DF99's who have undergone NGS testing. All six have been analyzed by Alex W. He splits the six into three separate DF99 subclades.

The first contains myself and the 1KG sample from Peru. Alex lists two different SNPs for this subclade, but others have suggested the total is actually three SNPs and three INDELS.

Alex lists the second subclade, which is composed of one of the cousins of Flemish origin and the 1KG sample from Tuscany, as sharing six SNPs. One of these is SS23540. which reportedly was found in three of the English DF99/S11987 samples in the database released by BritainsDNA, and two (or three?) of the DF99 samples in the Genes of the Netherlands samples.

The third subclade is composed of two Big Y samples, one from Veneto in northern Italy and the other the recent one from Germany. Alex lists three SNPs shared by these two, and confirms both are negative for S23540.

Unfortunately none of these are available for testing outside of the Big Y or FullGenomes.

Alex also lists a new SNP (Z29643) which he says has an equivalent position to DF99.

Finally I know of another DF99 who has Big Y results pending. It will be interesting to see how his results compare.

I think I know which of the three subclades I would be grouped with.
Which individual or subclade appears to be closest to the initial DF99?

GoldenHind
06-25-2015, 07:16 PM
I think I know which of the three subclades I would be grouped with.
Which individual or subclade appears to be closest to the initial DF99?

I don't think there is any reason to believe any of the (at least) three subclades of DF99 is older or closer to initial DF99 than the other two. My guess is that all three are about the same age and were born within a century or so after the birth of DF99 itself.

I am interested in which subclade you think you would fall into and why. If you prefer not to discuss it here, send me an email.

I do think it is noteworthy that the two Italians fall into two different subclades, and that the one English sample is in a different subclade than the majority of the English BritainsDNA samples. If someone wonders why that isn't the case with the Germans, there is only one German DF99 sample to date with NGS results.

Theconqueror
06-27-2015, 12:31 AM
Hello,

I got my results from Ftdna and I turned out to be DF99+. My kit number is 92458. Let me know if I can be of any help. I have a strong genealogy back to Rollo and the rest of medieval Norman nobility. I also have lineage on the frankish side. Rick

GoldenHind
06-27-2015, 05:43 PM
Hello,

I got my results from Ftdna and I turned out to be DF99+. My kit number is 92458. Let me know if I can be of any help. I have a strong genealogy back to Rollo and the rest of medieval Norman nobility. I also have lineage on the frankish side. Rick

In an extremely fast turnaround, as noted above, Theconqueror is our latest DF99+. He has ancestry back to the 12th century on the Channel Island of Jersey, formerly part of the Duchy of Normandy. He still bears the same French surname as his 12th century ancestor, and is our first DF99 from France.

Now we know that DF99 was present in Normandy.

Theconqueror
06-28-2015, 02:19 AM
And just to be more precise, my ancestors pledged allegience to Philippe Auguste in 1204 and moved to the newly French Normandy the same year, leaving family and a fiefdom behind. They moved through Normandy many times throughout the centuries. So the family has been essentially Norman for a long time.

Helgenes50
06-28-2015, 05:43 AM
And just to be more precise, my ancestors pledged allegience to Philippe Auguste in 1204 and moved to the newly French Normandy the same year, leaving family and a fiefdom behind. They moved through Normandy many times throughout the centuries. So the family has been essentially Norman for a long time.

And now, are you always in Normandy ?

Theconqueror
06-29-2015, 12:45 PM
No Canada.

Theconqueror
07-03-2015, 05:07 PM
Hello all,

I started looking at the origin of the surnames in the DF99 group on FTDNA and it is quite interesting. About 31% of individuals can be considered Germanic; and then the Scandinavian, Norman, and Saxon/Welsh surname groups are
distributed equally at 23% each. For instance, surnames like Hamilton and Overton, attached to the land are Normans. The person from Russia, Vorontsov, appears to come from an important family that can be trace their origin back to
Variangian viking. One or two individuals have distant ancestors surnames that are less obvious but on the whole, it sees pretty clear.

Having said that, I will do more research but the distribution of the origin of the surnames might point to a group from the eastern/baltic area., or purely Germanic/Frankish? Any thoughts?

Disclaimer: this is not scientific and I just looked at surnames origins because I have an interest in genealogy, especially Norman genealogy. If anyone has a full list of surnames, that would also be appreciated as I worked with a group of 22 surnames.

Rick

GoldenHind
07-03-2015, 09:21 PM
Alex W. has made a preliminary analysis of the latest DF99 Big Y results. The person with the new results does not have ancestry beyond the USA, but his 37 and 67 marker matches are all English, and his surname is English, one regional to the East Midlands (according to the British surname profiler). Alex has found that he falls into the DF99 subclade with the DF99 with ancestry from Veneto in Italy and the person with ancestry from Württemberg in Germany. All three share three unnamed SNPs below DF99. Alex also says that in addition to those three, the "English" and German samples share at least six further SNPs.

I find it interesting that a German and English sample should share so many SNPs below DF99, while their connection with the Italian is much more distant. I would also note that people of English origin are now known to be present in all three DF99 subclades. No doubt people will come to differing conclusions about why this is the case.

Theconqueror
07-03-2015, 10:21 PM
Is the surname english or anglo-norman? I noticed that people are usually uninformed about norman surnames. It has an impact on how you analyze df99.

Telfermagne
07-05-2015, 01:00 AM
In checking my notes, I see that Greg R actually found a total of nine SNPs shared in the second group, consisting of the person of Flemish origin and the 1KG sample from Tuscany. One of the others is S16136, which also was found in three of the four DF99/S11987 in the anonymous results from BritainsDNA. Greg also said the two samples in the first group were ancestral to all nine of these SNPs.

Checked my chromo2 data, the SNPs listed weren't on my profile, curious still about further df99 subclass testing options.

Theconqueror
07-05-2015, 03:07 PM
You need to look into the etymology of names before making assumption about "English" ancestry.

GoldenHind
07-05-2015, 06:15 PM
Having said that, I will do more research but the distribution of the origin of the surnames might point to a group from the eastern/baltic area., or purely Germanic/Frankish? Any thoughts?

Rick

There appears to be at the very least a Baltic component in DF99, though how and when it got there is yet to be determined. The two DF99 from Sweden cluster very closely to the German from the former eastern German province of Posen. The world surname profiler indicates the surname of the German is most common in Schleswig-Holstein and Pomerania. I also believe the Russian DF99 might well have an origin in Sweden.


Is the surname english or anglo-norman? I noticed that people are usually uninformed about norman surnames. It has an impact on how you analyze df99.

The surname in question derives from a diminutive for the personal name Nicholas, so I don't think it is possible to say. Also I don't equate English surnames with Anglo-Saxon origins, though I'm pretty sure most English surnames have an Anglo-Saxon etymology. When I have said a surname is English, I am merely saying it is a surname found in England. Some English surnames do have an Old French etymology, and some have Scandinavian origins. I have tried to note this when this is the case. When I say someone who doesn't have ancestry beyond North America has an English surname, I am merely saying it is evidence which suggests his ancestors came from England, and not when or how his ancestors got to England.

Theconqueror
07-06-2015, 01:48 AM
Thanks for clarifying. As a genealogist, I noticed that many surnames in the DF99 sub-group under the P312 FTDNA group, were obvious Anglo-Norman names. It does make a difference when analyzing potential migratory patterns. Keep up the good work.

Theconqueror
07-06-2015, 04:02 PM
As for the Russian fellow, if I am reading this right, it is labeled Vorontsov as most distant ancestor. A quick search into the etymology of the name brings references to a Varangian origin. Who knows?

GoldenHind
07-07-2015, 06:53 PM
Ridiculously speculative: Assuming the Peruvian samples are of Iberian ancestry, it will be interesting to see if there is an Atlantic versus a central (Netherlands down to Italy) division of DF99.

I happened across this old post. Although the origins of the Peruvian DF99 remain unknown (my money is on an English origin), I think almost two years of results have answered this question. DF99 is predominately central, running from England and Sweden down through the Low Countries and Germany to northern Italy. It appears to be largely to completely absent from the Atlantic coast.

GoldenHind
07-07-2015, 07:10 PM
Checked my chromo2 data, the SNPs listed weren't on my profile, curious still about further df99 subclass testing options.

As I recollect, your Chromo 2 results showed you are negative for S16136 and S23540, both of which are present in the two people in the second DF99 subclade.

Further testing options are a real puzzler. FTDNA has recently halted adding new SNPs. Each of the known DF99 subclades has multiple SNPs, and picking just one SNP from each is problematic. I have considered asking YSEQ about a DF99 panel, but that would require the submission of a new sample for FTDNA customers. I'm not optimistic that either option is going to result in a large enough amount of orders to justify the expense to the companies in question. Currently the only available options are the BigY or FullGenomes, and I am painfully aware that most people are unable or unwilling to spend that much money on cutting edge DNA testing.

GoldenHind
07-23-2015, 09:39 PM
Another DF99+ in this week, courtesy of a Big Y test. There is nothing earth shaking about the result, as he is a YDNA cousin to the DF99 who has ancestry from Wales. Alex W. is currently analyzing his raw data results, so it will be interesting to see which subclade of DF99 he falls into. He does not yet appear on the DF99 list, as his Big Y results came in before his STR markers.

GoldenHind
07-25-2015, 10:46 PM
Another DF99+ in this week, courtesy of a Big Y test. There is nothing earth shaking about the result, as he is a YDNA cousin to the DF99 who has ancestry from Wales. Alex W. is currently analyzing his raw data results, so it will be interesting to see which subclade of DF99 he falls into. He does not yet appear on the DF99 list, as his Big Y results came in before his STR markers.

Alex has now completed his analysis. The new DF99 falls into the subclade which formerly had only two people: one of the cousins with ancestry from Flanders and an anonymous 1KG sample from Tuscany. These two share a further 10 SNPs below DF99. The new sample has five of the ten. The other five apparently aren't covered in the Big Y, and whether he is positive or negative for them is not known.

Among the SNPs shared by all three are S23540 and S16136. These were also found in three of the four English DF99 samples in the anonymized 2000 results released previously by BritainsDNA. I am informed they were also found in at least two (I am unclear on the exact number) of the four DF99 found in the Genomes of the Netherlands study. We can thus say this subclade extends from England and Wales across the channel to Flanders and Holland, and then down to the far north of Italy. I have no doubt the connection between Holland and north Italy goes through Germany.

The third DF99 subclade appears to have a similar distribution. The three known to fall within it so far are an American of undoubted English (probably East Midlands or East Anglia) ancestry, a person with ancestry from southern Germany and a person with ancestry from the Veneto region of Italy.

The first subclade remains somewhat mysterious, as one of the two is the anonymous 1KG Peruvian.

I hope we will get more DF99 samples with NGS testing, whether the Big Y or otherwise. I would love to known which subclade the two Swedish DF99 fall into.

GoldenHind
07-27-2015, 06:42 PM
Another DF99+ result in today, also from Normandy. This was no surprise, as he is a same surname match to the other DF99 from Normandy. I believe that although they share the same surname and their markers show they share a common descent, they have been unable to find a common ancestor.

Torc Seanathair
07-30-2015, 12:28 PM
Further testing options are a real puzzler. FTDNA has recently halted adding new SNPs. Each of the known DF99 subclades has multiple SNPs, and picking just one SNP from each is problematic. I have considered asking YSEQ about a DF99 panel, but that would require the submission of a new sample for FTDNA customers. I'm not optimistic that either option is going to result in a large enough amount of orders to justify the expense to the companies in question. Currently the only available options are the BigY or FullGenomes, and I am painfully aware that most people are unable or unwilling to spend that much money on cutting edge DNA testing.

If YSEQ offered testing for S16136, S23540, and Z29643, count me in.

R.Rocca
07-30-2015, 07:26 PM
This one is a real head scratcher....the U152 project just received new Big-Y results for the following:

Kit no. B3492, MDKA = John BROWN, b. 1758 and d. 1780

Then I look at his Big-Y matches, and he shares a whopping 17 SNPs with just one other FTDNA customer:

Kit no. 326703, MDKA = Willard BROWN (1806/7-1860s) NH > NY > OH > MI

Nothing out of the ordinary, right? Well, the issue is that the second "Brown" belongs to DF99+! The STR values for these two are nowhere near each other. Odd that these two would share 17 SNPs with each other, no?

VinceT
07-30-2015, 09:11 PM
This one is a real head scratcher....the U152 project just received new Big-Y results for the following:

Kit no. B3492, MDKA = John BROWN, b. 1758 and d. 1780

Then I look at his Big-Y matches, and he shares a whopping 17 SNPs with just one other FTDNA customer:

Kit no. 326703, MDKA = Willard BROWN (1806/7-1860s) NH > NY > OH > MI

Nothing out of the ordinary, right? Well, the issue is that the second "Brown" belongs to DF99+! The STR values for these two are nowhere near each other. Odd that these two would share 17 SNPs with each other, no?
There are approximately 17 equivalent SNPs below R-U106 shared by R-FGC396>L199.1 and R-FGC396>Z27230. Yet representative samples from either clade have GDs of 34,35/111 or 19,22,24/67. Until the FGC and BigY tests were done, we had no real clue of the relationship aside from the DYS390=24, DYS492=13 signature that is common to most haplotypes under R-U106 xZ18, xL48.

That said, these two Browns have a GD of 37/111. I would definitely suggest that both should be re-tested for both DF99 and U152, or at least asked to submit their raw BigY data for review by a knowledgeable analyst.

faulconer
07-30-2015, 09:55 PM
That is very odd. It almost sounds like the result you would expect if the surname was the filter on the results. I share 48 SNPs with a U152+ kit and I am DF19+. If I used that kits surname as a filter, it would show only them and 48 SNPs shared. I have DF19+ kits with over 100 shared SNPs without the filter.

GoldenHind
07-30-2015, 10:30 PM
There are approximately 17 equivalent SNPs below R-U106 shared by R-FGC396>L199.1 and R-FGC396>Z27230. Yet representative samples from either clade have GDs of 34,35/111 or 19,22,24/67. Until the FGC and BigY tests were done, we had no real clue of the relationship aside from the DYS390=24, DYS492=13 signature that is common to most haplotypes under R-U106 xZ18, xL48.

That said, these two Browns have a GD of 37/111. I would definitely suggest that both should be re-tested for both DF99 and U152, or at least asked to submit their raw BigY data for review by a knowledgeable analyst.

I am in touch with Big Y DF99 in question, and hope to get Alex W to do an analysis of his data. Getting FTDNA to do a re-test is a herculean effort, and in my experience they don't get back to you- they just quietly change the result.

EDIT: Alex W now has the Big Y raw data for the DF99 person in question, so we should know soon whether there is an error in his result.

GoldenHind
07-30-2015, 10:34 PM
This one is a real head scratcher....the U152 project just received new Big-Y results for the following:

Kit no. B3492, MDKA = John BROWN, b. 1758 and d. 1780

Then I look at his Big-Y matches, and he shares a whopping 17 SNPs with just one other FTDNA customer:

Kit no. 326703, MDKA = Willard BROWN (1806/7-1860s) NH > NY > OH > MI

Nothing out of the ordinary, right? Well, the issue is that the second "Brown" belongs to DF99+! The STR values for these two are nowhere near each other. Odd that these two would share 17 SNPs with each other, no?

The DF99 Big Y sample has the otherwise very rare (in R1b) DYS389-1 = 12, which is very strongly modal for DF99. Does the U152 sample have the same? Not that the single STR is determinative, but I think the answer would be suggestive.

GoldenHind
08-01-2015, 07:47 PM
Alex W has looked at the Big Y raw data file for the person mentioned above by Rich R., and confirms his DF99+ result. As indicated above, his ancestry is to New Hampshire only, but there is little doubt that the line comes from England.

I looked through the R1b All Subclades Project and found someone else who has tested DF99+, possibly also in the Big Y. He indicates ancestry from London in the late 16th century. I have written the surname project administrator with the request that the person in question join the P312 and Subclades Project.

GoldenHind
08-06-2015, 09:25 PM
Another DF99+ in today, USA ancestry only, but an English place name for a surname. Others in the same lineage in their surname project show ancestry from Warwickshire to the late 16th century. This one was very predictable, as he is a very good match to an STR signature which is a part of DF99. So far 100% of those matching this signature who have ordered DF99 have got positive results.

GoldenHind
08-06-2015, 09:29 PM
FTDNA has today changed the DF99 classification for someone who recently tested DF99 in the Big Y. Now they classify him as R-L175, which appears to be under L21>DF13. Doubtless this is yet another glitch in the FTDNA R1b tree. I will contact them to see if they will change it back, as his Big Y results are still showing DF99+, and Alex confirmed that.

Frithnanth
08-07-2015, 02:58 AM
FTDNA has today changed the DF99 classification for someone who recently tested DF99 in the Big Y. Now they classify him as R-L175, which appears to be under L21>DF13. Doubtless this is yet another glitch in the FTDNA R1b tree. I will contact them to see if they will change it back, as his Big Y results are still showing DF99+, and Alex confirmed that.

It's me, and I already contacted them. They told me that they will change my terminal SNP back to df99. Funny thing is that they also told me that the L175 was detected through the Big Y test, but according to the YFull report (BAM file analisys) I'm negative to it.

haleaton
08-07-2015, 02:23 PM
Another DF99+ in today, USA ancestry only, but an English place name for a surname. Others in the same lineage in their surname project show ancestry from Warwickshire to the late 16th century. This one was very predictable, as he is a very good match to an STR signature which is a part of DF99. So far 100% of those matching this signature who have ordered DF99 have got positive results.

The Eaton surname project, which I am a member of, recently had a DF99+ which I assume this is. Eaton which may derive form "place (town, farm) by water (river)" or have other ways is was created independently in the the British Isles. So there are likely many different lineages under the "Eaton" Surname.

There were multiple immigrants to the New World in the 17th Century. The New England ones generally have excellent paper trails with quite a few descendants tested. The surname project has several STR groupings and finally now has a couple who have had SNP (I am L2+) testing so the common ancestry was very ancient and they just may happen to have the same surname, unless there was an NPE.

SNP testing has not been really known, let alone popular, in the two surname projects I follow. Hopefully, this know will change and encourage at least one person in each lineage to get NGS tested.

GoldenHind
08-07-2015, 10:45 PM
It's me, and I already contacted them. They told me that they will change my terminal SNP back to df99. Funny thing is that they also told me that the L175 was detected through the Big Y test, but according to the YFull report (BAM file analisys) I'm negative to it.

Actually it was someone else, so it obviously happened with more than one DF99 Big Y sample. FTDNA was notified about the problem by more than one person, and the effected entries have now been corrected.

GoldenHind
08-07-2015, 11:03 PM
The Eaton surname project, which I am a member of, recently had a DF99+ which I assume this is. Eaton which may derive form "place (town, farm) by water (river)" or have other ways is was created independently in the the British Isles. So there are likely many different lineages under the "Eaton" Surname.

There were multiple immigrants to the New World in the 17th Century. The New England ones generally have excellent paper trails with quite a few descendants tested. The surname project has several STR groupings and finally now has a couple who have had SNP (I am L2+) testing so the common ancestry was very ancient and they just may happen to have the same surname, unless there was an NPE.

SNP testing has not been really known, let alone popular, in the two surname projects I follow. Hopefully, this know will change and encourage at least one person in each lineage to get NGS tested.

I don't like to discuss people's DNA results publicly without their permission, which is why I only give some broad hints of the identity of those with new results.

I am quite happy to discuss surnames and their origins. Eaton/Eton is indeed a not uncommon English place name. The Oxford Dictionary of English Place-Names by A. D. Mills gives two alternate origins: 1) 'farmstead by a river' from OE ea + tun, and 2) 'farmstead on dry ground in a marsh, or on well-watered land' from OE eg + tun. There are quite a few places named Eaton in England, so it is quite likely that unrelated families would have taken their surnames from different places of that name. Eaton by Chester has been the seat of the Grosvenor family, now Dukes of Westminster, since the days of the Normans. The current Duke is said to be one of the wealthiest men in Britain.

haleaton
08-08-2015, 01:35 AM
I don't like to discuss people's DNA results publicly without their permission, which is why I only give some broad hints of the identity of those with new results.

I am quite happy to discuss surnames and their origins. Eaton/Eton is indeed a not uncommon English place name. The Oxford Dictionary of English Place-Names by A. D. Mills gives two alternate origins: 1) 'farmstead by a river' from OE ea + tun, and 2) 'farmstead on dry ground in a marsh, or on well-watered land' from OE eg + tun. There are quite a few places named Eaton in England, so it is quite likely that unrelated families would have taken their surnames from different places of that name. Eaton by Chester has been the seat of the Grosvenor family, now Dukes of Westminster, since the days of the Normans. The current Duke is said to be one of the wealthiest men in Britain.

I take note and appreciate your sensitivity and responsibilities being a project administrator or working DF99 with living people.

Similar problem in paper genealogy where you are not supposed to post information on living people without consent with a little more leeway when it is behind a password authenticated website like Ancestry, though anyone can walk into a library and use it. You are right as this is a public site. At least I was ambiguous and talking generally about Eaton lineages and the value of SNP testing to surname projects.

You make me concerned about referencing a public sample listed under a long dead persons name without reference to any discussions with living folks, which I think is okay. (Discussion left for another thread.)

"OE" also derives from same origin as French word "eau" for water, though I have not found a similar French name. The interesting thing about these colonial bottleneck families is it makes much more likely to locate a line at a particular time and place before high mobility, though that may be way underrestimated assumption about the ancient world based on some of the ancient DNA results and chemical analysis results.

My interest is this is boosting SNP testing, preferably NGS, in surname projects.

GoldenHind
08-09-2015, 07:28 PM
"OE" also derives from same origin as French word "eau" for water, though I have not found a similar French name.



I doubt you will find a similar French name. The second element, -ton, one of the most common endings for English place names, appears to be exclusively Old English. It is derived from the OE word 'tun,' meaning a farmstead or settlement. The same second element is found in Washington, also an English place name. I am not an expert in French place names, but I suspect the closest equivalent is likely to be -ville.

GoldenHind
08-09-2015, 08:39 PM
The upcoming week marks the second anniversary of the announcement of the discovery of DF99 by a British geneticist (see post #1 on this thread), so I thought it might be interesting to summarize some of what we have since learned about this subclade. I think looking at where it hasn't been found is liable to be very informative.

Ireland

Ireland probably has the greatest over weighting relative to its population of any nation in the FTDNA database. Yet to date only two DF99 have been found there. Both have English surnames, English matches and ancestry from Ulster. I have little doubt both represent English families who settled there in the 17th century in the process known as the Plantation of Ulster.

Scotland

Scotland is also extremely well represented in the FTDNA database. To date only a solitary DF99 has been found with ancestry from that country. I have seen some examples of Scottish surnames whose markers suggest they might be DF99, so there could well be more there. However I very much doubt DF99 is anywhere near as numerous in Scotland as in England.

France

While France is under represented in the FTDNA database, it does include a number of North Americans of French ancestry. To date the only DF99 with French ancestry are from Normandy (there are two but they are distantly related).

Spain and Portugal

We are yet to have even a single DF99 with confirmed origins in Iberia. Yes, there is the anonymous DF99 from Peru in the 1000 Genomes Project, and many have assumed he is most likely of Spanish origin. While that certainly might be the case, there has been a fair amount of immigration to Peru over the last century and a half from other European countries, including England and Germany, and most of their descendants live in Lima, where this sample was collected. The 1000 Genomes project was rich in samples from Iberia and the Spanish New World colonies, but this was the only DF99 found amongt them.

Italy

We actually know of three DF99 with origins in Italy. All three are from the far north of the country: one from Veneto, one from Liguria, and an anonymous 1KG sample from Tuscany.

Of course any of this could change tomorrow. No one knows what future testing will reveal. DF99 samples could turn up in any of the areas from which it is currently absent. People in Europe have been moving around since the Bronze Age. The only reason we know the Flemish cousins are originally from Flanders is due to the fortuitous discovery of a 17th century legal record which referred to his ancestor in Spain as a "Flamenco" (person from Flanders). This ultimately led to the discovery of his baptismal record in a place near Liege. The British Library contains a curious 16th century document among the Harleian MSS which refers to an Englishman, who had both my first and last names, who traveled to Spain, where he married "the doughter of Don Gomes Butrone, the greatest Duke in all Biscay, and had yssue by her a sonne and doghter." Doubtless in most instances the movement is undocumented. There will always be outliers.

While I would not be surprised if DF99 is found in some of the areas from which it is currently absent, I doubt the numbers will be sufficient to replace the current pattern of DF99 distribution in Europe. We can only go by the evidence at hand. What we have is an apparent total absence of DF99 from the far west and south of Europe, ie the Atlantic coast and the Mediterranean. Any attempt at explaining the origin and history of DF99 must account for that.

One possible explanation of why DF99 appears to be absent from the south and west might be that they spread somewhere in the north east of Europe, perhaps somewhere around the Baltic, as theconqueror suggested, and simply petered out the farther away they went. If so, England seems to be the sole exception to the dwindling effect. Another possibility is a star like expansion from somewhere in the middle, perhaps somewhere around central Germany. I find a spread from a point beginning in the west from France or from the south in northern Italy to be unconvincing.

Torc Seanathair
08-19-2015, 05:58 PM
Your own surname would be of Norman origin, would it not, Golden?

GoldenHind
08-19-2015, 11:54 PM
Your own surname would be of Norman origin, would it not, Golden?

My surname is actually an English place name of Anglo Saxon etymology. The first element is the OE word which refers either to the heather plant or to a heath. I like to modernize its meaning as Heather Farm. However many Normans adopted the name of their English manors as a surname. There are certainly people of probable Norman origin who had my surname by the 12th century, but I cannot say with certainty whether I am descended from any of them or not.

GoldenHind
08-21-2015, 06:10 PM
A new DF99 in, from the R1b backbone test. He is the first DF99 from France outside of Normandy. He hasn't entered any information about his ancestry, but lives in the Rhone-Alpes region near the borders with Switzerland and Italy. I will contact him to see what can be learned. He only has 12 markers, but does have the characteristic 389-1 = 12.

GoldenHind
08-23-2015, 07:14 PM
A new DF99 in, from the R1b backbone test. He is the first DF99 from France outside of Normandy. He hasn't entered any information about his ancestry, but lives in the Rhone-Alpes region near the borders with Switzerland and Italy. I will contact him to see what can be learned. He only has 12 markers, but does have the characteristic 389-1 = 12.

I have now contacted the individual in question, and he says his EKA was living in the Savoy region of France when he was married in the first decade of the 19th century. I will ask him to enter his ancestral information.

GoldenHind
08-24-2015, 10:59 PM
For those who may be interested, the ancestral and geographical information on the latest DF99 from France has now been added, and may now be seen in both the list and map of DF99 on the R1b-P312 and Subclades Project public website.

GoldenHind
09-14-2015, 05:43 PM
Another new DF99 in, courtesy of the R1b backbone test. He is a German national. I find it interesting that he has no matches at 67, 37 or 25 markers, and only a single match at 12- to another German. He does have the characteristic 389-1 = 12. He hasn't entered any ancestral information.

EDIT: While I don't yet have any ancestral information concerning this individual, he lives in the area between Hamburg and Bremen. His surname is found throughout Germany, but is most common in a band across the north of the country from the the northern Rhine area in the west, then to the east through Schleswig-Holstein, Mecklenburg and Pommerania. His sole match has ancestry from the old eastern Prussian province of Posen, now in Poland. We do have another German DF99 from that area.

GoldenHind
09-16-2015, 08:33 PM
Another DF99 in today. Not really a surprise, as he is a 111 marker same surname match to someone who previously tested DF99+. USA ancestry only, but an early arrival in New England with a common English surname.

GoldenHind
09-18-2015, 05:16 PM
Yet another German national received DF99+ results today. Although he lives in Berlin, his ancestry is from the former Prussian/German province of Silesia, which became part of Poland after WW2.

GoldenHind
09-20-2015, 09:14 PM
Another new DF99 in. English surname with ancestry to a early 17C immigrant to Virginia. There are a large number of people in the FTDNA system who share this surname and matching STRs. One gives ancestry to the London area in the late 16C.

This is the fourth DF99 added to the list this week, two German nationals and two Americans with early colonial ancestry and undoubtedly of English origin. All of them have the distinctive 389-1 = 12. Perhaps this subclade isn't going to turn out to be quite so rare as was thought not so long ago. I haven't done a count for a while, but there is no doubt those with English and German origins predominate, and are roughly equal in number.

I have identified two individuals whose markers suggest they are probably DF99. If I can persuade them to test, and if they do turn out to be DF99+, it will be very interesting.

Frithnanth
10-05-2015, 01:16 AM
So, it seems we've got another result from Italy and no one posted here. I'm just a rookie on this subject, but based on the big difference between the number of people with italian descent and the germans and british on FTDNA database, and considering the number of DF99 positives in this areas, shouldn't we start to consider as a strong possibility that df99 was spread from Italy. Just an idea.

Sorry if I just spat bs.

GoldenHind
10-08-2015, 02:59 AM
So, it seems we've got another result from Italy and no one posted here. I'm just a rookie on this subject, but based on the big difference between the number of people with italian descent and the germans and british on FTDNA database, and considering the number of DF99 positives in this areas, shouldn't we start to consider as a strong possibility that df99 was spread from Italy. Just an idea.

Sorry if I just spat bs.

I post a notification here every time I become aware of a newly identified DF99+ sample, regardless of their origin. Almost all of my information comes from the FTDNA R1b-P312 and Subclades Project, though occasionally someone notifies me of something from other sources. I am not aware of a recent DF99 from Italy. However I have been away from home for a few weeks and had only occasional internet access while away, so I have some catching up to do, and it is possible I may have missed someone. If you know of a recently identified DF99 from northern Italy, perhaps you could let me know either by PM or email.

Perhaps you are referring to either the recently identified DF99 from Savoy (now part of France), which was under Italian rule for some time, or to the anonymous DF99 from Tuscany in the 1000 Genomes Project. If so, both have been mentioned in this thread.

As for your suggestion that DF99 may have spread from northern Italy, I don't really see much evidence to support it. I am not aware of any known movement of population from northern Italy to Germany and England, where most of those who are DF99 have been found. On the other hand, I certainly wouldn't rule out an expansion in the Bronze Age from the Alpine area in general. Until we get some ancient DF99 identified, all we can do is speculate based on what we know so far about its modern distribution.

Frithnanth
10-08-2015, 03:07 AM
I post a notification here every time I become aware of a newly identified DF99+ sample, regardless of their origin. Almost all of my information comes from the FTDNA R1b-P312 and Subclades Project, though occasionally someone notifies me of something from other sources. I am not aware of a recent DF99 from Italy. However I have been away from home for a few weeks and had only occasional internet access while away, so I have some catching up to do, and it is possible I may have missed someone. If you know of a recently identified DF99 from northern Italy, perhaps you could let me know either by PM or email.

Perhaps you are referring to either the recently identified DF99 from Savoy (now part of France), which was under Italian rule for some time, or to the anonymous DF99 from Tuscany in the 1000 Genomes Project. If so, both have been mentioned in this thread.

I was talking about the new one with ancestry from Bene Vagienna, Piemonte.

GoldenHind
10-08-2015, 04:01 PM
I was talking about the new one with ancestry from Bene Vagienna, Piemonte.

Thanks, I have now spotted him. His result from the new Rib backbone test came in while I was away. As you say, his ancestry is from what is called Piedmont in English, located in the far northwest of Italy, and quite close to one of the other DF99's from northern Italy. The area has quite an interesting history. If DF99 in Italy is found only in the far north of Italy, it could be an important clue to the history of DF99.

GoldenHind
10-09-2015, 06:45 PM
Another DF99+ result in as a result of the R1b backbone test. His ancestry is to early colonial New York, but he bears one of the most famous (some might say infamous) surnames in English history, and one not well regarded in Ireland or by Catholics in general. Oddly enough, another person of the same surname, who looked like a good candidate for DF99, got negative results some time ago.

There are now 49 identified DF99+ individuals in the FTDNA R1b-P312 and Subclades project. Each of them, with the exception of the two related individuals with ancestry ultimately from Flanders, have the distinctive and otherwise rare (in R1b) 12 at DYS 389-1. I think it is highly probable that first DF99 man had that value.

rms2
10-09-2015, 07:07 PM
If that surname is Cromwell, the famous (or infamous, depending on one's point of view) Cromwell y-dna line was actually Welsh, since Oliver Cromwell was descended from Morgan ap William through Morgan's son Richard Williams, who adopted the surname of his mother, Katherine Cromwell, the sister of the famous Thomas Cromwell.

Naturally there are probably other Cromwell y-dna lines out there. I don't know if Oliver Cromwell's y-dna line even exists anymore.

GoldenHind
10-09-2015, 07:26 PM
If that surname is Cromwell, the famous (or infamous, depending on one's point of view) Cromwell y-dna line was actually Welsh, since Oliver Cromwell was descended from Morgan ap William through Morgan's son Richard Williams, who adopted the surname of his mother, Katherine Cromwell, the sister of the famous Thomas Cromwell.

Naturally there are probably other Cromwell y-dna lines out there. I don't know if Oliver Cromwell's y-dna line even exists anymore.

As I don't like to discuss people's results on public forums without their permission, I can only comment hypothetically. While you quite correct about Oliver Cromwell, I don't think there is any doubt that Thomas Cromwell's origins were English. The surname has a single source, a place of that name in Nottinghamshire. Cromwells are recorded in there from the late 12th through the 15th century. Ralph de Cromwella, recorded there in 1177 and 1195, may well have been of Norman origin. Unfortumately I don't have any information at present on whether the person I referred to is related to either of the two famour persons of the name.

rms2
10-10-2015, 03:01 AM
Since you began post #394 above with remarks about the infamy of the surname and the distaste for it in Ireland and among Catholics in general, I thought you were probably referring to Oliver Cromwell and that perhaps the man you were referring to might claim descent from him.

I also added a caveat at the end of my post indicating that I recognize there are probably other Cromwell y-dna lines still in existence and that I do not know if Oliver Cromwell has any y-dna descendants alive today.

GoldenHind
10-11-2015, 10:52 PM
Since you began post #394 above with remarks about the infamy of the surname and the distaste for it in Ireland and among Catholics in general, I thought you were probably referring to Oliver Cromwell and that perhaps the man you were referring to might claim descent from him.



Although I don't like to discuss people's DNA results on a public forum, I do try to give a hint about the surname so those who are sufficiently curious can identify the result in question. Perhaps I should make it more clear that this doesn't imply there is necessarily a relation. Thus in the past when I mentioned that an Ulster DF99 shared a surname with the most famous maker of British swords, or that some of the German DF99's shared a surname (with a slight variant in spelling) with the current chancellor of Germany, I did not mean to suggest they were necessarily related to their famous namesakes.

Since the cat is now out of the bag, I suppose I can now comment about the recent person in question. When I referred to Ireland, I was indeed referring to Oliver Cromwell, and when I mentioned Catholics, I referred to Thomas Cromwell, who was Henry VIII's principal agent in dissolving the monasteries in and suppressing the Catholic church in England. I did not mean to suggest there was a relationship to either person, who, as you pointed out, did not share a common ancestry in the male line.

The person in question has a very unusual situation regarding his matches. Though he has tested 111 markers, he only has one match at any level (including at 12 markers), and that is a 34/37 match with someone of the same surname. This may be due to a very unusual 31 at DYS389-2. I don't believe I have ever previously encountered a similar situation- a single 37 marker match with none at any other level, including at 12 markers- with an R1b-P312 example.

There is yet a third person of this surname whom I mentioned above, who previously tested DF99- and is now identified as DF27+. He has several matches at 12 markers to individuals named Williams, which may or may not be significant. We all know 12 marker matches in R1b may well not be related.

childpsyche
10-28-2015, 01:12 AM
I am new to this forum, having just tested positive for R-DF99 through FTDNA. My surname is Rose, born in Wisconsin, and I can follow the genealogy back to Hugh Rose in Scotland. However, I suspect that my Y-DNA is not really directly from this line since I don't know of any Rose lineages with this haplogroup. Are there verified DF99 with matching trees that might help me figure out if this is my true heritage or not? Thanks.


23andme Paternal line: R1b1b2a1a
23andme Maternal line: U8a1
FTDNA R-DF99 (DF99+ and many others tested, per the company)

lgmayka
10-30-2015, 03:32 AM
#159178 of Poland has tested DF99+ .

GoldenHind
10-30-2015, 06:08 PM
I am new to this forum, having just tested positive for R-DF99 through FTDNA. My surname is Rose, born in Wisconsin, and I can follow the genealogy back to Hugh Rose in Scotland. However, I suspect that my Y-DNA is not really directly from this line since I don't know of any Rose lineages with this haplogroup. Are there verified DF99 with matching trees that might help me figure out if this is my true heritage or not? Thanks.


23andme Paternal line: R1b1b2a1a
23andme Maternal line: U8a1
FTDNA R-DF99 (DF99+ and many others tested, per the company)

Please join the R1b-P312 and Subclades Project at FTDNA. Then I can have a look at your STR markers and try to answer your question. My recollection is that I have encountered some people named Rose whose STR markers suggested they were likely to be DF99+.

GoldenHind
10-30-2015, 06:13 PM
#159178 of Poland has tested DF99+ .

I have suspected DF99 might be present in Poland in ethnic Poles (perhaps a remnant?) as opposed to the two DF99 ethnic Germans we currently have with ancestry from what is now Poland. In fact I identified a few likely candidates. Another bit of evidence which suggests an eastern distribution of DF99.

Please ask him to join the P312 and Subclades Project.

GoldenHind
10-30-2015, 06:16 PM
Yet another DF99+ today. His result wasn't really in doubt, as he is a 67 marker same surname match to another DF99. English surname, Usa ancestry only. However as I mentioned with the first of this surname, others with matching surname and markers have ancestry to Warwickshire in the late 16th century.

GoldenHind
10-31-2015, 06:02 PM
#159178 of Poland has tested DF99+ .

The new DF99 from Poland has now joined the R1b-P312 and Subclades Project, so I can report a few additional details. He has ancestry from the 19th century to what was then a very rural part of southeast Poland, quite near the modern border with Slovakia and close the Carpathian mountains, which could be important. He has no matches above 12 markers, and has the near universal (in DF99) 12 at 389-1. He also has a unique 12 at 393, which may or may be significant.

GoldenHind
11-02-2015, 12:10 AM
The new DF99 from Poland has now joined the R1b-P312 and Subclades Project, so I can report a few additional details. He has ancestry from the 19th century to what was then a very rural part of southeast Poland, quite near the modern border with Slovakia and close the Carpathian mountains, which could be important. He has no matches above 12 markers, and has the near universal (in DF99) 12 at 389-1. He also has a unique 12 at 393, which may or may be significant.

I have now been in touch with the recent DF99 from Poland. He tells me his surname means "German" in Polish. Interesting.

Torc Seanathair
11-10-2015, 01:27 PM
I've just joined the FTDNA "British Isles by County" project. Out of 5,278 members, I only found two DF99's there before me. I encourage each of you English, Irish, Welsh, and Scots to come on over.

GoldenHind
11-10-2015, 09:00 PM
I've just joined the FTDNA "British Isles by County" project. Out of 5,278 members, I only found two DF99's there before me. I encourage each of you English, Irish, Welsh, and Scots to come on over.

Unfortunately there aren't very many DF99 who have identified a county of origin in the British Isles. Most of those of probable British origin only have ancestry within the USA.

I am getting ready to do an update on the origins of those who have tested DF99+. I will try to post it sometime this week.

GoldenHind
11-11-2015, 03:14 AM
Tomorrow marks two years since FTDNA began testing for DF99. During that time, the number has grown from one to over 50 in the R11b-P312 and Subclades Project. There are no doubt others who have not joined the P312 project. I am aware of several of them, and there are no doubt others hidden away in the various surname projects. I believe the introduction of the new R1b backbone test will lead to the identification of many more.

So I thought it would be appropriate to do another update on the origins of the group. As before, I have combined multiple examples of a surname or variants of a surname, where their markers suggest they share a common origin, into a single entry so as to not skew the results.

Those who have indicated a specific location in Europe for their earliest known ancestor:

Germany 7
England 4
Italy 3
Sweden 2
Ireland 2 (both Ulster)
France 2 (Normandy and Savoy)
Switzerland 1 (German surname)
Belgium 1 (Flanders)
Scotland 1
Wales 1
Russia 1
Poland 1


For those who have ancestry only in the USA or indicate only a general country of origin:

English surname 9
German surname or probable German origin 3
Probable Welsh origin 1
Probable Scottish origin 1

Adding the two categories together, there are 21 of continental origin against 19 from the British Isles and Ireland. Considering the enormous overweighting of people of British and Irish origins in the FTDNA database, it appears that DF99 is primarily a continental marker. While I don't claim this is equivalent to a scientific survey, I do think it gives a fairly good idea of the modern distribution of the DF99 subclade.

GoldenHind
11-13-2015, 08:08 PM
Perhaps someone with more tech savy than me would be good enough to post the current DF99 map from the R1b-P312 project, showing just those entries from Europe ranging from Ulster to Sweden to Russia to northern Italy. There is a clear pattern, and it hasn't changed a great deal from what first emerged.

corner
11-14-2015, 10:52 AM
Perhaps someone with more tech savy than me would be good enough to post the current DF99 map from the R1b-P312 project, showing just those entries from Europe ranging from Ulster to Sweden to Russia to northern Italy. There is a clear pattern, and it hasn't changed a great deal from what first emerged.6630
Here's a screenshot.

GoldenHind
11-14-2015, 05:50 PM
Thanks very much. I might add that the German national from the Hamburg-Bremen area (mentioned in post 386 above) does not appear on the map, because he has not entered his geographic coordinates.

Frithnanth
11-28-2015, 12:20 PM
Those who have indicated a specific location in Europe for their earliest known ancestor:

Germany 7
England 4
Italy 3
Sweden 2
Ireland 2 (both Ulster)
France 2 (Normandy and Savoy)
Switzerland 1 (German surname)
Belgium 1 (Flanders)
Scotland 1
Wales 1
Russia 1
Poland 1


Is it possible to calculate the age of DF99 in each of these countries, based on the STR of the members?

GoldenHind
11-28-2015, 08:48 PM
Is it possible to calculate the age of DF99 in each of these countries, based on the STR of the members?

I can give this a go, but there are numerous difficulties. First obviously it can't be done for those cases where there is only one example, which eliminates half the countries. Secondly not everyone has 67 markers- a number only have 37 and a few only 12. One of the two French examples only has 12 markers, which eliminates France as well.

One would need to use Ysearch to do this, as a manual calculation would take too much effort. Unfortunately not everyone has a Ysearch entry.

As for the age of DF99 itself, the last I looked Yfull was giving a date of 2700 BC, very close to that of its parent P312.

Finally I'm not sure how relevant the results would be. I don't think we have enough samples yet to give meaningful results. There is also the problem that their ancestors may well have got to that location from another country, and haven't been there since the Bronze Age. Take the two from Ireland- It is virtually certain that their ancestors were settlers from England during modern times, so their genetic distance to each other is basically irrelevant.

rms2
11-28-2015, 09:01 PM
You probably already know this, but you can use McGee's Utility for that purpose.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wEvsRpRv-SI

GoldenHind
11-29-2015, 08:38 PM
I had a quick look today, though I didn't take the time to learn how to use the McGee Utility, which I have heard of but never tried to use. Germany came out the highest, which is not surprising as they have the greatest number and thus are more likely to have larger GDs. There are a few Germans who look fairly distinct from most of the others, but only have 37 markers. One of the Italians only has 37 markers, which left only two to compare. I threw the two Ulster Anglo-Irish in with the English and added the one from Scotland as well.

I did not do the two from Sweden, as one only has 37 markers. However they are fairly close to each other as well as to one of the Germans who only has 37 markers.

The highest GD I found among the Germans was 30 at 67 markers. Two others were 28 and one a 27.
Italy was second with 27 at 67.
The highest I found in the Briitsh group was 26 at 67.

I did not include any of those who don't have ancestry beyond the USA but can be assigned with a reasonable probablity to a European country of origin.

For the reasons I stated above, I wouldn't read too much into this. A small difference in genetic distance with so little data in my opinion is not likely to be significant. It does perhaps underscore the age of DF99, as the GDs are fairly large.

GoldenHind
11-30-2015, 11:56 PM
I will continue playing around with genetic distance in the DF99 group. I'm not entirely certain what it signifies, but it is clear to me there is no STR distiction between the English, German and Italian groups.

The closest GD I could find between the Italian from Liguria and another DF99 sample was 16 at 67 to the German national from northwest Germany.

The closest DF99 to the Italian from Veneto was a GD of 21 at 67 to one of the Anglo-Irish.

GoldenHind
12-04-2015, 10:46 PM
The new P312 SNP pack announced today by FTDNA contains not only DF99, but also three SNPs known to be below below DF99: FGC847, FGC16982 and S16136. These can otherwise only be tested in the Big Y and probably require analysis by Alex W. to determine their presence. Unfortunately they only cover two of the three known DF99 subclades. This new test is currently offered at $99 until the initial round is completed, when the price will rise to $119. I would recommend this test to anyone who has tested DF99+, or who thinks they are likely to be DF99+, and has not done the Big Y, with the caution that about a third of DF99 will not get anything new. However it is highly probable that those who aren't positive for the three SNPs tested will fall into the third DF99 subclade.

andywxman
12-05-2015, 09:42 PM
Where do you go on the site to do the P312 SNP pack for 99 bucks?

Edit: Nevermind... I found it... just ordered it!

GoldenHind
01-09-2016, 09:52 PM
There is both good and bad news to report on the DF99 front.

The good news is, contrary to my post above, the new P312 pack at FTDNA tests for SNPs known to be present in all three currently identified DF99 subclades. These are:

Subclade One: FGC847

Subclade Two: FGC16982 and S16136

Subclade Three: BY3450, BY3449 and BY3447.

Also tested is Z29643, which at this point appears to have an equivalent position to DF99 itself. The P312 pack is an appropriate test for anyone who has tested DF99 and has not done the Big Y, as it will very probably identify which of the three DF99 subclades they fall into. Most of what we currently know about the substructure of DF99 has come from an analysis of Big Y raw data by Alex, although that has been supplemented with two tests from FullGenomes and two anonymous results from the 1KG Project. I am hoping that it may be possible to add even more DF99 SNPs in future versions of the P312 pack, but that remains to be seen.

Now the bad news. Because none of these SNPs appear on FTDNA's R haplotree, a link for ordering the P312 pack does not appear anywhere on the pages of those who have tested DF99+. However it can still be ordered. To do so, click on upgrade on your homepage, then advanced tests. Enter SNP pack in the drop down filter box, and scroll down to the P312 pack. Unfortunately it has been reported that those in the DF99 category may receive an automated cautionary notice from FTDNA that this is not an appropriate test for them to take. However they will still process the order.

A better option, for those who can afford it, is to order the Big Y. However it will be necessary for them to submit their raw data to Alex W. for an analysis to determine their subclade. FTDNA generally offers sales on the Big Y several times a year, and coupons for further discounts are often available.

Further bad news. I am informed DF99 is not included in the new Geno 2 next generation test from National Genographic. So much for their claim this test is based on the latest discoveries in the field of genetics. It would be a waste of money for anyone who is DF99 (or likely to be) to order the new Geno 2 test.

GoldenHind
01-19-2016, 01:18 AM
I have noticed that a number of DF99+ individuals are turning up in the matches lists of various DF99 members of the R-P312 project. I suspect they have recently had DF99+ results from the new R1b backbone test, and don't understand what it means. I am trying to compile a list of them to urge them to join the project. I have been in touch with one of them who has a very unusual surname. He tells me he believes that the family came from Ostfriesland along the North Sea coast of Germany.

GoldenHind
01-20-2016, 01:33 AM
I have noticed that a number of DF99+ individuals are turning up in the matches lists of various DF99 members of the R-P312 project. I suspect they have recently had DF99+ results from the new R1b backbone test, and don't understand what it means. I am trying to compile a list of them to urge them to join the project. I have been in touch with one of them who has a very unusual surname. He tells me he believes that the family came from Ostfriesland along the North Sea coast of Germany.

The person I mentioned above has now joined the R1b-P312 and Subclades Project. My surmise that he tested DF99+ in the new R1b backbone test was correct. Unfortunately he hasn't entered any information on his EKA, so only his kit number and STRs are displayed. I will ask him if he is willing to add that information. A check of his very unusual surname on the world surname profiler website shows it is most common in Niedersachsen (Lower Saxony) in Germany.

EDIT: I might add that he has the characteristic 12 at DYS389i, as do virtually all of DF99.

GoldenHind
01-23-2016, 07:25 PM
Another person who tested DF99+ in the R1b backbone test joined the P312 project today. Although the privacy settings are apparently preventing any information on the EKA from showing, he has ancestry to the USA (North Carolina) and what appears to be a rare English surname. The British surname profiler shows the surname in 1881 in two areas quite far apart- Somerset and Yorkshire. An odd aspect is that he has close 67 marker matches to a couple of different English surnames and one German one.

Torc Seanathair
02-09-2016, 06:56 PM
I have my results back from my P312 Pack, and it was positive for the FGC847 SNP. That seems to be a small group for its age, forming 4500ybp. It was only identified and confirmed in 2014-2015, so I suppose I will just sit back and watch it grow as more tests are completed. I like the specificity in all this, even though the grand meaning is still pretty fuzzy.

GoldenHind
02-09-2016, 10:02 PM
I have my results back from my P312 Pack, and it was positive for the FGC847 SNP. That seems to be a small group for its age, forming 4500ybp. It was only identified and confirmed in 2014-2015, so I suppose I will just sit back and watch it grow as more tests are completed. I like the specificity in all this, even though the grand meaning is still pretty fuzzy.

We had two P312 SNP pack results for DF99 individuals come in yesterday, and I was very pleased that the results for both identified their DF99 subclade. Torc, as mentioned above, is FGC847+. The other, with ancestry probably from the Bristol area, is FGC16982+ S16136+ and S23540/FGC16988-, which puts him in a different subclade from Torc, and in a subdivision within the second DF99 subclade with one other person, who is almost certainly of German origin.

There is yet another pending, and I am predicting from his STRs he will also be in the FGC847+ group.

Although I was only successful in getting about half of the SNPs known to be downstream of DF99 included in the P312 pack, so far at least those which were included seem to be working well.

GoldenHind
02-11-2016, 08:35 PM
We had two P312 SNP pack results for DF99 individuals come in yesterday, and I was very pleased that the results for both identified their DF99 subclade. Torc, as mentioned above, is FGC847+. The other, with ancestry probably from the Bristol area, is FGC16982+ S16136+ and S23540/FGC16988-, which puts him in a different subclade from Torc, and in a subdivision within the second DF99 subclade with one other person, who is almost certainly of German origin.

There is yet another pending, and I am predicting from his STRs he will also be in the FGC847+ group.



The pending results for the other P312 pack test I referred to above came in today, as I expected he is also FGC847+.

Telfermagne
02-12-2016, 04:23 AM
Didn't get any notification yet but logged into my haplotree and saw FGC847+

GoldenHind
02-12-2016, 06:03 PM
Didn't get any notification yet but logged into my haplotree and saw FGC847+

FTDNA does not send notification that results are in. Because FGC847 (and the other SNPs below DF99 included in the P312 pack test) does not appear on their tree, your classification will remain as DF99.

Torc Seanathair
02-13-2016, 02:27 PM
FTDNA does not send notification that results are in. Because FGC847 (and the other SNPs below DF99 included in the P312 pack test) does not appear on their tree, your classification will remain as DF99.
It appears that they also do not list FGC847+ in the positive SNP's on the pdf of the printable SNP Certificate. So, it also needs to appear on their tree before that will happen?

GoldenHind
02-14-2016, 10:38 PM
The other, with ancestry probably from the Bristol area, is FGC16982+ S16136+ and S23540/FGC16988-, which puts him in a different subclade from Torc, and in a subdivision within the second DF99 subclade with one other person, who is almost certainly of German origin.


I need to correct a major error in the quoted portion of my post above. The person in question is indeed FGC16982+ and S16136+, but S23540 is not actaully included in the P312 pack test, so obviously he didn't test negative for it. The second DF99 subclade has three subdivisions, two of which are S16136+ and one which is S16136-. None of the SNPs which divide the S16136 group in two parts are included in the P312 pack. My thanks to Andy for pointing out my error.

GoldenHind
02-26-2016, 09:47 PM
An extremely interesting DF99+ result in today, courtesy of the R1b backbone test, and one with a twist. The person in question has an unusual surname, with ancestry only to Mexico, and he lists Spain as his country of origin. He has the usual DYS389i=12, and although he has 111 markers, he has no matches at all above 25 markers.

I thought this might finally be proof of the presence of DF99 in Iberia. Although I would not be surprised to find it there, I suspect it is likely to be rarer there than elsewhere in Europe. So I looked at the World Surname Profiler website to see where in Iberia the surname is found, and was very surprised to see that it is exclusively found in Alsace in France. I have contacted the person who manages his kit to see if he can provide any further information.

GoldenHind
02-27-2016, 08:22 PM
I have to make a rather embarasing correction to my post above. I wrote the surname down incorrectly (late onset dyslexia?). On entering the correct spelling in the world surname profiler, I see the surname is indeed found in Spain, although in a rather limited area: Madrid, Castille and La Mancha, as well as along the Mediterranean coast in Catalonia and Valenica. It is also found in Languedoc in southern France as well as in Picardy in northern France. However the highest concentration is in Corsica. I am in contact with the person who manages the kit to see if there is any further information. He tells me the person comes from a well to do family in Mexico, and that his grandfather was a famous Mexican film star and director.

Since he doesn't have proven ancestry to Spain, I don't think this is absolute proof DF99 is present in Iberia, but it is pretty strong circumstantial evidence to that effect.

GoldenHind
03-04-2016, 08:06 PM
Another DF99+ in today. He has ancestry to an early 17C settler (apparently a mariner) in Virginia who is undoubtedly of English origin. Curiously he recently tested Z-2970 in the Geno 2 Next gen test, which does not test for DF99. He remains classified as Z2970 by FTDNA, even though the Geno 2 results do not show positive results for any of the upstream SNPs from Z2970. It's another fine mess from the new and "improved" version of Geno 2. I will have to contact FTDNA to see if they will properly reclassify him as DF99. Another person of matching surname and STRs, but of no known relation, has the M343 pack pending.

It almost goes without saying that he has the near universal DF99 12 at DYS389-1.

GoldenHind
03-04-2016, 11:11 PM
Yet another DF99+ today. He indicates ancestry from Germany. He has a very unusual surname, which appears to be a corruption of a longer German surname. I believe he has specified an ancestral location in Germany, but hasn't entered it. I will ask him to do so. he is a 65/67 match to one of the Pennsylvania Dutch DF99 and a 60/67 match to the DF99 from Switzerland.

rms2
03-07-2016, 01:21 AM
I don't post much in this thread, but I have been following it all along.

I am glad to see the evidence for the eastern distribution of DF99 panning out the way it has. It would be nice to see DF99 turn up in an eastern Bell Beaker context, which I think it will eventually. I want to add that to my table of Bell Beaker results.

Or maybe it will turn up in Corded Ware?

GoldenHind
03-08-2016, 09:05 PM
I don't post much in this thread, but I have been following it all along.

I am glad to see the evidence for the eastern distribution of DF99 panning out the way it has. It would be nice to see DF99 turn up in an eastern Bell Beaker context, which I think it will eventually. I want to add that to my table of Bell Beaker results.

Or maybe it will turn up in Corded Ware?

Thanks for both your interest and comments. I sincerely appreciate it. It has been an interesting journey, with many surprises, and certainly unexpected on my part.

The current data certainly suggests that DF99 has a more eastern distribution than most and perhaps all of the P312 subclades. Despite its scarcity compared to the larger P312 subclades, I think DF99 may well be the oldest subclade of P312. Thus it may have been born at a more easterly location along the route taken by P312 into Europe, and for some reason doesn't seem to have participated much in the continued P312 march to the Atlantic. So I suspect DF99 is most likely to be found among the Eastern Bell Beakers. I also think it is quite likely that a significant portion of DF99 was absorbed into the Germanic people at a fairly early period. Since I find the proposed association of P312 with the Bell Beakers pretty convincing, an appropriate candidate for at least a large part of DF99 would be Beakers who appear to have merged with the developing Germanic people in the pre-Roman Iron Age.

For some time I have speculated that an expansion point from the southern Baltic area (generally Mecklenburg in northeast Germany and Pomerania, now mostly in Poland) might be a good fit for DF99. So I was very pleased to learn that there were Bell Beaker settlements on the Oder and Vistula rivers in an area now part of Poland, and that they apparently eventually expanded to the Baltic coast. The Jastorf and Pomeranian cultures appeared in these regions in the pre-Roman Iron Age. A DF99 presence among these Beakers would make sense.

Another possibility is that DF99 was present among the Hallstatt Celts. Northern elements of Hallstatt may have been incorporated into the Jastorf culture, as Jean mentioned in her book Ancestral Journeys.

The Corded Ware possibility is tempting, as an expansion of DF99 out of Sweden wouldn't be a bad fit. It appears that the Beakers didn't reach Sweden, so that possibility would apparently require an origin in Corded Ware. However until and unless some P312 is found among Corded Ware aDNA, I don't think there is much support for that possibility.

As a cautionary note, I want to emphasize that all this is highly speculative and very preliminary. Nor do I suggest that this necessarily applies to all of DF99.

What we really need is more aDNA from both the Beakers and Corded Ware. More scientific sampling of modern European populations which includes testing for DF99 would also be helpful. The relative scarcity of DF99 requires a fairly large sample to detect it. The only such study I know of is that from the Genomes of the Netherlands. Four DF99 were found in a sample of 500, which is less than 1% of the total. However Holland is really predominantly U106 country, and DF99 was 4.3% of the P312 portion (which was 18.6% of the total). Oddly enough, we have yet to identify even a single DF99 from Holland in the FTDNA database, though we obviously know it is there.

TimoT
03-09-2016, 11:54 AM
it is highly interesting to read also the speculation of P312-DF99 historical developments, this helps to understand P312-L238 developments too (even the history of it surely is not the same).

rms2
03-09-2016, 12:04 PM
Did you all catch this from Poland? At least one R1b-DF99 among some modern Polish y-dna (n=201).

http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?6522-Early-Medieval-aDNA-from-Poland-coming-soon&p=144564&viewfull=1#post144564



ID179 - R1b-DF99


Update: That is a prediction based on STRs and, as a subsequent post shows, might be somewhat off. Still, it is an interesting stat.

GoldenHind
03-09-2016, 07:38 PM
it is highly interesting to read also the speculation of P312-DF99 historical developments, this helps to understand P312-L238 developments too (even the history of it surely is not the same).

I think a good fit for L238, at least for its Nordic component, would be Beaker settlements in Norway.

GoldenHind
03-09-2016, 08:07 PM
Did you all catch this from Poland? At least one R1b-DF99 among some modern Polish y-dna (n=201).

http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?6522-Early-Medieval-aDNA-from-Poland-coming-soon&p=144564&viewfull=1#post144564



Update: That is a prediction based on STRs and, as a subsequent post shows, might be somewhat off. Still, it is an interesting stat.

Thanks very much, I hadn't spotted that. I looked at the STRs of the sample in question, and they do strongly suggest DF99. I have been pretty successful in predicting DF99 status from STRs, especially when they fit some of the various STR signatures found in DF99, where I am batting around 100%. Outside of those signatures, there have been at least two I strongly suspected would be DF99 who tested negative. There seems to be some obscure clade of DF27 which has similar markers.

We do have three DF99 with ancestry from what is now Poland. That may not sound like much, but we only have a total to date of just over 50. It is perhaps worth having another look at them. I doubt many P312 subclades have anywhere close to 6% of their total from Poland.

EDIT: I ran my markers through the Nevgen predictor and the results were 100% P312>DF99 and P312*, so it obviously worked well for me.

GoldenHind
03-09-2016, 10:28 PM
Here are the details on the three DF99 from what is now Poland.

1) A Polish American (who happens to be a Catholic friar). His ancestry is from southeast Poland near the Carpathians, from Osobnica near Jaslo. I believe this is relatively close to the upper Vistula river. He tells me his Polish surname means "German." He has 67 markers, but no matches whatsoever above the 12 marker level. I believe there was an eastern Beaker presence in the Carpathian basin in the Bronze Age.

2) A German national who lives in Berlin. His ancestry is to the 19C in the former German province of Silesia, part of Poland since WWII- Neusalz an der Oder, now Nova Sol. As the name suggests, this is located on the Oder river. His surname is one of the most common in Germany, so has no geographic significance. He only has 37 markers and no matches worthy of noting.

3) An American with a German surname and ancestry to the former German province of Posen, part of Poland since WWI- Grünfelde near Bromberg (now Bydgoszcz). This is quite close to the Vistula river. The world surname profiler shows his surname in most common in a band across northern Germany, from Lower Saxony to the former East Prussia, but Schleswig-Holstein and Pomerania have the highest concentration. He has only one match at 67 markers, to a DF99 Swedish national whose ancestry is from central Sweden. Pomerania has been under Swedish control at various times in the past.

What is difficult to know is whether we are looking at traces of ancient Beaker settlements, or whether they are merely descendants of the many Germans from the west who settled in these areas in the Middle Ages. It will be really interesting to see if DF99 turns up in the survey of medieval DNA from Poland, in the unlikely event they test for it.

GoldenHind
03-11-2016, 12:54 AM
I was very surprised to see that FTDNA has added four SNPs below DF99 to their R1b tree. They have them arranged like this:

DF99
.....FGC16982 S16183
..........FGC16979
.....FGC847

Unfortunately they haven't yet listed any of the SNPs in the third known subclade of DF99. Additionally it appears they have misplaced S16136, which should be below FGC16982 rather than on the same level. But it's a start.

My guess is this is due to the results of those DF99 individuals who have ordered the P312 SNP pack. Once someone tests positive for one of the SNPs in the third subclade of DF99, perhaps they will add them to their tree as well.

It would be helpful if everyone who is DF99 and hasn't done the Big Y or other NGS testing ordered the P312 SNP pack.

GoldenHind
03-13-2016, 06:36 PM
Another new DF99 today, courtesy of the new R1b backbone test. He has a German surname and lists Germany as his country of origin. He only has 37 markers (of course he has a 12 at 389-1), and has only one match at that level (to someone with another German surname). I will contact him to see if he has any further details.

EDIT: I have just noticed he is not listed on the project website, apparently due to his privacy settings.

GoldenHind
03-14-2016, 01:33 AM
Another new DF99 today, courtesy of the new R1b backbone test. He has a German surname and lists Germany as his country of origin. He only has 37 markers (of course he has a 12 at 389-1), and has only one match at that level (to someone with another German surname). I will contact him to see if he has any further details.

EDIT: I have just noticed he is not listed on the project website, apparently due to his privacy settings.

He now appears in the P312 project results section.

gordymac1
03-17-2016, 07:05 PM
Hello there. I have been having my father's YDNA tested on FTDNA. If I have been reading his results right (they are still in progress as they had to ask for a second sample from him after these many years), he is testing positive for DF99 FGC16982S16136. I have no idea what this means. What project should I join to maximize his participation in any studies? His surname is GORDY. Unfortunately, his earliest ancestor can only be traced back to Southeastern Alabama U.S. abt 1835.

GoldenHind
03-18-2016, 05:15 PM
Hello there. I have been having my father's YDNA tested on FTDNA. If I have been reading his results right (they are still in progress as they had to ask for a second sample from him after these many years), he is testing positive for DF99 FGC16982S16136. I have no idea what this means. What project should I join to maximize his participation in any studies? His surname is GORDY. Unfortunately, his earliest ancestor can only be traced back to Southeastern Alabama U.S. abt 1835.

The only project at present at FTDNA for DF99+ individuals is the R1b-P312 and Subclades Project. DF99 is a subclade of P312. We have been trying to get all those who have tested DF99 to join it. No advance permission is required to join. See my post #441 above for the position of FGC16982 and S16136. Let me know if you have questions or problems.

It's an unusual surname. It doesn't appear to be English. Do you have any idea about its origin?

gordymac1
03-18-2016, 07:51 PM
The only project at present at FTDNA for DF99+ individuals is the R1b-P312 and Subclades Project. DF99 is a subclade of P312. We have been trying to get all those who have tested DF99 to join it. No advance permission is required to join. See my post #441 above for the position of FGC16982 and S16136. Let me know if you have questions or problems.

It's an unusual surname. It doesn't appear to be English. Do you have any idea about its origin?

Thanks for the reply! I'll look up the project.
So far nobody has a bead on where this name is from, but there are some clues it may have come over from the Channel Islands. The first record of it in the U.S. is probably in Virginia about 1674 with a court proceeding involving a group of children whose ages are being established before they are indentured. Some of the children have English names, but others appear to be French. The Gordy in this group is listed as ADRIAN GARDEE WITH A POSSIBLE RELATIVE, PETER GARDEE listed too. The ship that brought them appears to be registered on the island of JERSEY, and an adult subsequently indentured with ADRIAN GARDEE has definitely been traced back to the Channel Islands. I have also seen records of the name in the southeastern part of France in the 1600s. I also seem to recall the name appearing several times in records in a Huguenot Church on Threadneedle St in London in the late 1600s, but I have never found it officially listed as a Huguenot surname.

GoldenHind
03-19-2016, 03:16 AM
Thanks for the reply! I'll look up the project.
So far nobody has a bead on where this name is from, but there are some clues it may have come over from the Channel Islands. The first record of it in the U.S. is probably in Virginia about 1674 with a court proceeding involving a group of children whose ages are being established before they are indentured. Some of the children have English names, but others appear to be French. The Gordy in this group is listed as ADRIAN GARDEE WITH A POSSIBLE RELATIVE, PETER GARDEE listed too. The ship that brought them appears to be registered on the island of JERSEY, and an adult subsequently indentured with ADRIAN GARDEE has definitely been traced back to the Channel Islands. I have also seen records of the name in the southeastern part of France in the 1600s. I also seem to recall the name appearing several times in records in a Huguenot Church on Threadneedle St in London in the late 1600s, but I have never found it officially listed as a Huguenot surname.

Thanks for your response and joining the project. We do have another DDF99 from the Channel Island of Jersey (which was formerly part of the Duchy of Normandy) as well as one from Savoy in southeastern France.

Theconqueror
03-20-2016, 04:11 PM
Hello, good to hear about another DF99. As for your family name, it potentially comes from de Garde (later Ward in the British Isles).


Thanks for the reply! I'll look up the project.
So far nobody has a bead on where this name is from, but there are some clues it may have come over from the Channel Islands. The first record of it in the U.S. is probably in Virginia about 1674 with a court proceeding involving a group of children whose ages are being established before they are indentured. Some of the children have English names, but others appear to be French. The Gordy in this group is listed as ADRIAN GARDEE WITH A POSSIBLE RELATIVE, PETER GARDEE listed too. The ship that brought them appears to be registered on the island of JERSEY, and an adult subsequently indentured with ADRIAN GARDEE has definitely been traced back to the Channel Islands. I have also seen records of the name in the southeastern part of France in the 1600s. I also seem to recall the name appearing several times in records in a Huguenot Church on Threadneedle St in London in the late 1600s, but I have never found it officially listed as a Huguenot surname.

GoldenHind
03-20-2016, 07:30 PM
Another new DF99 today from he R1b backbone test. His ancestry is from Norfolk in England, and of course he has the standard 12 at 389-1. According to Reaney, the surname is derived from an Old English nickname, although it can also be a pageant or tournament name.

GoldenHind
03-20-2016, 09:35 PM
Alex W. has just completed his analysis of the Big Y raw data of one of the Ulster Anglo-Irish DF99s. He shares 11 different SNPs below DF99 with an English DF99 (myself). As he is part of a very strong STR cluster within DF99, the match was not a surprise, but the number of shared SNPs below DF99 was. Our GD is 20 at 67 markers, so this STR cluster is likely to be fairly old.

GoldenHind
04-01-2016, 04:17 AM
Another DF99 today from a R1b backbone test. He has ancestry to the 18C in rural Gloucestershire in England. His result is no surprise, as he is a 67 marker match to another person of the same surname who previously tested DF99+. However that person is a descendant of an English mariner who settled in early colonial Virginia, while the new DF99, who is an Australian, has no known paper trail connection to the American line. Presumably their lines converge at some date before the establishment of the American line.

If my count is correct, this is the 61st DF99 in the P312 project. However I know for a fact that there are other DF99's who are not in the project, but how many I cannot say. Incidentally 59 of the 61 have the characteristic 12 at DYS389-1, which is rare in R1b outside of DF99.

GoldenHind
04-01-2016, 06:41 PM
I was very surprised to see that FTDNA has added four SNPs below DF99 to their R1b tree. They have them arranged like this:

DF99
.....FGC16982 S16183
..........FGC16979
.....FGC847

Unfortunately they haven't yet listed any of the SNPs in the third known subclade of DF99. Additionally it appears they have misplaced S16136, which should be below FGC16982 rather than on the same level. But it's a start.

My guess is this is due to the results of those DF99 individuals who have ordered the P312 SNP pack. Once someone tests positive for one of the SNPs in the third subclade of DF99, perhaps they will add them to their tree as well.

It would be helpful if everyone who is DF99 and hasn't done the Big Y or other NGS testing ordered the P312 SNP pack.

FTDNA has now added an SNP from the third known DF99 subclade to their tree: BY3447. So now they have included at least one SNP from each of three DF99 subclades. Better yet, it now appears that one can order tests for these on an a la carte basis from their haplotree and SNP page. However unless one has some idea which subclade one is likely to fall into, ordering the P312 SNP pack, which includes five SNPs below DF99, is liable to be less expensive in the long run.

GoldenHind
04-05-2016, 07:28 PM
Since we now have over 60 men in the R-P312 project who have tested DF99+, I think it is finally time to set up a separate FTDNA project for DF99 (incidentally, there are a few who don't appear on the P312 project website, presumably due to their privacy settings). I will post any further developments as they occur.

GoldenHind
04-09-2016, 12:20 AM
There is both good and bad news concerning the new DF99 Project.

The good news is that the project has been approved and is up. My thanks to Mike W. and some helpful people at FTDNA for doing this for us. There are now 26 members in it who were transferred from the R1b All Subclades project. Unfortunately I am told this can't be done with those DF99 who are only in the P312 project.

Now for the bad news. It is not yet listed on FTDNA's list of YDNA R haplogroup projects, so the website is difficult to locate. Worse yet, even if one does find the webiste, there appears to be no way one can actually join it! The usual "Join" icon isn't present. I can't even join it myself! FTDNA has been notified, so I hope those issues will be resolved shortly.

rms2
04-09-2016, 12:28 AM
They'll get it straight.

GoldenHind
04-09-2016, 12:35 AM
Thanks to Mike W, I was finally able to join it. One has to first log on one's FTDNA page, then click on projects/join, and then enter R-DF99 in the surname search box. This will bring up a page which includes a join icon. Clicking on that without going to the actual DF99 project website worked. I notice it doesn't however appear on my list of projects on my homepage. I have to click on manage projects to find it.

The wonders of modern technology.

GoldenHind
04-09-2016, 04:56 PM
One of the problems I mentioned above has now been corrected. The "Join" icon now appears on the project website.

GoldenHind
04-12-2016, 09:12 PM
Another DF99 today. He tested DF99+ FGC16962+ S16136+ FGC16979+ in the P312 SNP pack. FGC16979 hasn't been listed in the SNPs tested in the P312 pack, so either it was just omitted in the list or FTDNA added it on their own. They did recently add it to their R1b tree.

The person is an adoptee in search of his biological father and has no idea of his father's surname. He is a very close STR match to a group of DF99 of various surnames who have tested DF99, but haven't tested yet beyond that.

Torc Seanathair
04-14-2016, 05:19 PM
I'm waiting on a DYS463 STR result from YSEQ.net, and was considering adding FGC864 to their "Wish a SNP" list. They ask the location of the SNP on the chromosome. Any clue?

GoldenHind
04-15-2016, 12:17 AM
I'm waiting on a DYS463 STR result from YSEQ.net, and was considering adding FGC864 to their "Wish a SNP" list. They ask the location of the SNP on the chromosome. Any clue?

I'm not great at technical stuff, but believe FGC864 is 14209332G-A. It would be great if YSEQ added it, as FTDNA isn't currently offering it. It is tested in the Big Y, but would probably require an analysis by Alex W of the raw data to find the result.

From your STR markers I very strongly suspect you are positive for it.

GoldenHind
04-21-2016, 11:08 PM
Various news on the DF99 front.

The DF99 Project is up and running. The last I checked it still does not appear in the R section of FTDNA YDNA Haplogroup projects. They are supposedly working on fixing this. There are now 50 members, but there are still over a dozen DF99 in the P312 and Subclades Project who have not yet joined. I am contacting them individually asking them to join. Some may be deceased or have gone inactive for some reason.

There are two DF99 who have ordered the Big Y, which is currently on sale. It will be interesting to see how they fit into the DF99 tree. If anyone else is inclined to help further the research, a Big Y test would would be of great assistance.

Someone in the R1b All Subclades Project has tested FGC16979+. This is at least two steps below DF99, and looks like it may be the most common DF99 subclade. It appears to be the most common DF99 subclade in Britain, though it is also found on the continent. Unfortunately he doesn't list an email address, so I have no way of contacting him to ask him to join. He is a same surname STR match to a DF99 with an English surname and early colonial American ancestry.

GoldenHind
04-26-2016, 07:17 PM
Another DF99+ result today. He is a 67 marker match to another DF99 with the same surname who lists his MDKA as an English settler in early colonial Virginia. They are part of a larger group that poses a bit of a puzzle. They are all very close 67 marker matches, and some are 111 marker matches, but they have a variety of surnames. Aside from their DNA, the only thing they have in common is that they are all from the American South. I have no doubt that at least some of them are the result of NPEs, which may have occurred from early colonial times to more recently.

Torc Seanathair
04-27-2016, 02:04 AM
I'm not great at technical stuff, but believe FGC864 is 14209332G-A. It would be great if YSEQ added it, as FTDNA isn't currently offering it. It is tested in the Big Y, but would probably require an analysis by Alex W of the raw data to find the result.

From your STR markers I very strongly suspect you are positive for it.

I have now ordered the FGC864 a la cart from YSEQ.

GoldenHind
05-02-2016, 09:04 PM
Another DF99+ today. It was no surprise, as he is a 111 marker match to two others who have the same surname (or a variant). They are apparently descended from a very early immigrant to colonial Virginia. The surname could be English or Welsh, but I believe a Welsh origin is more likely. Someone from the same surname group tested BY3447+ and BY3449+ today in the P312 SNP pack test. There are two others in this DF99 subclade, one of American ancestry only but with a surname which is most common in eastern England (East Anglia and the East Midlands), and someone with German ancestry. Quite a span, from Wales to Germany.

GoldenHind
05-04-2016, 07:58 PM
The results for the P312 SNP pack have come in for another DF99 person. He does not have ancestry beyond the USA, but has a surname which is apparently English (primarily found in the eastern half of England), though also found in the far northwest of Scotland. He is positive for FGC16982 and S16136 and negative for FGC16982. That puts him in the same category as someone who is apparently Pennsylvania Dutch, whose origins are almost certainly from Germany.

GoldenHind
05-05-2016, 04:33 PM
The results for the P312 SNP pack have come in for another DF99 person. He does not have ancestry beyond the USA, but has a surname which is apparently English (primarily found in the eastern half of England), though also found in the far northwest of Scotland. He is positive for FGC16982 and S16136 and negative for FGC16982. That puts him in the same category as someone who is apparently Pennsylvania Dutch, whose origins are almost certainly from Germany.

Correction to the above post (since I can no longer edit it) FGC16982+ S16136+ FGC16979-. Thanks to Torc for pointing it out.

gordymac1
05-05-2016, 09:28 PM
Correction to the above post (since I can no longer edit it) FGC16982+ S16136+ FGC16979-. Thanks to Torc for pointing it out.

Hi there. My Dad's kit, N35880 just came back with 16982+S16136+FGC16979. Is this the kit you are discussing above? Thanks! :)

GoldenHind
05-06-2016, 12:24 AM
Hi there. My Dad's kit, N35880 just came back with 16982+S16136+FGC16979. Is this the kit you are discussing above? Thanks! :)

Thanks for that. I hadn't seen that your dad's result came in today. No, I was speaking of someone else who tested positive for FGC19682 and S16136 but negative for FGC16979. Your dad has now tested positive for all three of them, so he is listed in a different section in the DF99 project's DNA results section (220 as opposed to 205).

Torc Seanathair
05-09-2016, 05:26 PM
I have my results on DYS463 from YSEQ, and it says I have a 26. That matches the other guys in Group 110 of the DF99 Project, while my cohort in Group 100 has a 25.
I'm still waiting on the FGC864 results.

GoldenHind
05-10-2016, 05:09 PM
I have my results on DYS463 from YSEQ, and it says I have a 26. That matches the other guys in Group 110 of the DF99 Project, while my cohort in Group 100 has a 25.
I'm still waiting on the FGC864 results.

Excellent. DYS463 appears to be an important marker for a group within DF99>FGC847>FGC864. FTDNA used to offer single STR tests for those in the 68-111 panel, but apparently they no longer do so. I am sorry though that you have had to turn to YSEQ to test it as well as FGC864. I have tried to get FGC864 included in the P312 SNP pack at FTDNA, but so far without success.

On the other hand, I am happy to see that YSEQ is willing to provide a service unavailable at FTDNA.

GoldenHind
05-11-2016, 04:45 AM
Hi there. My Dad's kit, N35880 just came back with 16982+S16136+FGC16979. Is this the kit you are discussing above? Thanks! :)

Someone else in the same STR cluster as your dad just got a FGC16982>S16236>FGC16879+ result. No surprise really. I have no doubt everyone in this matching STR group would get the same result.

GoldenHind
05-14-2016, 04:21 PM
A DF99 project member who ordered several DF99 SNPs a la carte tested FGC16982+ but FGC16979-. However he does't have a result for the S16136, which is in between those two, and we have those who are FGC16982+ who are both positive and negative for S16236, so he could fit into either category.

andywxman
05-14-2016, 06:43 PM
A DF99 project member who ordered several DF99 SNPs a la carte tested FGC16982+ but FGC16979-. However he does't have a result for the S16136, which is in between those two, and we have those who are FGC16982+ who are both positive and negative for S16236, so he could fit into either category.

Is that me?

Ftdna has me at S16136+ unless im reading it wrong.

GoldenHind
05-15-2016, 10:34 AM
Is that me?

Ftdna has me at S16136+ unless im reading it wrong.

No, it was someone else, for whom a new category had to be created. You are in fact S16136+. In checking, I see your test for FGC16979 came in negative, so you have now been transferred to the correct section with the others in the same category. For some reason, your FGC16979 result wasn't included in the list of received lab results for the project. Obviously there are still a few technical bugs in the DF99 project.

andywxman
05-17-2016, 08:57 PM
Got it Goldenhind... thanks!

andywxman
05-17-2016, 11:21 PM
so it looks like with the data so far on the GD

16136+ may be more than 3000+ years old
16979+ may be more than 2000+ years old

probably older than than given that only 9 people that are 16136+ have 67 markers

Here is a quick age chart I made on the group (hiding the names... but they are the FTDNA order minus the 16979- that I am doubtful will be 16136+ and the ones that didn't have 67 markers)


http://i.imgur.com/mHREd6N.png

GoldenHind
05-27-2016, 11:59 AM
Big Y results have come in from the DF99 from Piedmont in northern Italy. An analysis of the raw data by Alex W. shows he shares three SNPs with the the Italian from Veneto (including BY3449 and BY3450), an additional six SNPs with an American with an English surname (including BY3447), and an additional 13 SNPs (for a remarkable total of 22) with a DF99 with ancestry from Wurttemberg in Germany. This must take their MRCA well into the early historical period. Although there are other possible explanations, I note that Piedmont was settled by various Germanic tribes, including Burgundians, Goths and Lombards.

GoldenHind
06-03-2016, 02:00 PM
Big Y results have come in for our ethnic Polish DF99. He is positive for both BY3449 and BY3447, which puts him in a growing group. I was particularly interested in this one, as he is pretty isolated within the DF99 group both geographically and by STRs. It will take further analysis of his raw data by Alex W., who is currently on vacation, to determine which subgroup within BY3447 he is part of.

GoldenHind
06-10-2016, 05:14 PM
After a long drought, there is a new DF99+, courtesy of the R1b M343 backbone test.. He is a Russian national in St. Petersburg, but has what appears to me to be a German surname. Unfortunately he hasn't entered any ancestral information. I will contact him for further information. He only has 37 markers, with three matches at that level, one of whom appears to be a Swedish national. He is the second DFF99 from Russia.

I have checked this surname in the world surname profiler website, and found no instances of it. However if the Y in the name is changed to an I, the name is found in Pomerania on the south Baltic coast, formerly part of Prussia, now in Poland, and at one time under Swedish rule.

It almost goes without saying that he has the characteristic 12 at DYS389-1.

Roaring
06-10-2016, 11:33 PM
After a long drought, there is a new DF99+, courtesy of the R1b M343 backbone test.. He is a Russian national in St. Petersburg, but has what appears to me to be a German surname. Unfortunately he hasn't entered any ancestral information. I will contact him for further information. He only has 37 markers, with three matches at that level, one of whom appears to be a Swedish national. He is the second DFF99 from Russia.

I have checked this surname in the world surname profiler website, and found no instances of it. However if the Y in the name is changed to an I, the name is found in Pomerania on the south Baltic coast, formerly part of Prussia, now in Poland, and at one time under Swedish rule.

It almost goes without saying that he has the characteristic 12 at DYS389-1.

Well, Hello there... cousin i guess? No need to try to change my surnmane in any way, it was linglistically raped by numerous translations already. Original form is Heiseler, i'm indeed a Russian national, though my most distant ancestor i'm aware of came to Russia in 1708 from kingdom of Denmark-Norway.

Now can you tell me a bit about my haplo? Distribution, connected cultures, etc? Also who is the other guy from Russia?




It almost goes without saying that he has the characteristic 12 at DYS389-1.

And what does it mean?

GoldenHind
06-11-2016, 01:30 AM
Well, Hello there... cousin i guess? No need to try to change my surnmane in any way, it was linglistically raped by numerous translations already. Original form is Heiseler, i'm indeed a Russian national, though my most distant ancestor i'm aware of came to Russia in 1708 from kingdom of Denmark-Norway.

Now can you tell me a bit about my haplo? Distribution, connected cultures, etc? Also who is the other guy from Russia?




And what does it mean?

Thanks very much for your very interesting response. It would be very helpful if you could enter the name of your most distant ancestor with the 1708 date on your personal pages at FTDNA, under profile. Otherwise no information will appear on the project website other than a list of your markers. Also it is important to enter the geographical coordinates there for the earliest place you know he lived. if you know for certain the place in the Kingdom of Denmark-Norway he came from, it would be very helpful to list it. The geographical coordinates are necessary to get your entry to appear on the DF99 map. This shows the location of the earliest known ancestor for everyone in the DF99 project. This map is the best evidence we have for the distribution of the DF99 subclade, and circumstantial evidence of its origin and connected cultures. I have been rather furstrated that neither of the two DF99 men with ancestry from northwest Germany have done this, so neither appears on the map. You can see the map by logging onto to the DF99 Project website, clicking on DNA results and then map. When the map appears, select all from the blue drop down box. and click on that. There is a definite pattern to the DF99 subclade, different from any other P312 subclade. It definitely has a more easterly distribution than any other P312 subclade. Perhaps someone more competent with technology than myself could post a screenshot.

Although we know that DF99 is found in Sweden, before you it has not yet been verified in either Denmark or Norway, though I have strongly suspected it is present there.

As to the cultural associations, there is endless argument on this website about the significance of P312. I tend to agree with those who believe it came to Europe from the Indo-European Yamnaya culture near the Black Sea via the Danube, and spread though Europe in the Bell Beaker culture. My best guess is that DF99 was connected with the Eastern Bell Beakers, as it seems to have virtually no presence along the Atlantic coast, unlike much of P312.

As for marker DYS389-1, a 13 there is almost universal in P312, except for DF99, almost all of whom have a 12 there instead. This is a very stable marker, so my belief is that the first DF99 man already had mutated from a 13 to a 12 there, and this has passed on to almost all of his descendants. It is a very good, though not infallible, indicator of DF99 status within P312.

My apologies for assuming your surname was German.

GoldenHind
06-11-2016, 04:36 AM
Since you mentioned your ancestral surname was Heiseler, I have looked for it on the world surname profiler website. I don't claim this site should be taken as gospel, but it is the best source I know for looking at the modern distribution of surnames. It shows Heiseler as being a German surname, most common in the Landeck area in the very south of that country, and next most common in Rheinland-Pfalz and Mecklenburg-Vorpommern. It is present in other parts of Germany including Schleswig-Holstein, now part of Germany, but formerly under Danish rule. I believe that at the time Schleswig was annexed by Prussia after the Danish-Prussian war of 1864, it was largely populated by ethnic Danes. Otherwise I couldn't find any connection between the surname and Scandinavia, although of course that doesn't exclude the possibility.

Roaring
06-11-2016, 09:13 AM
Since you mentioned your ancestral surname was Heiseler, I have looked for it on the world surname profiler website. I don't claim this site should be taken as gospel, but it is the best source I know for looking at the modern distribution of surnames. It shows Heiseler as being a German surname, most common in the Landeck area in the very south of that country, and next most common in Rheinland-Pfalz and Mecklenburg-Vorpommern. It is present in other parts of Germany including Schleswig-Holstein, now part of Germany, but formerly under Danish rule. I believe that at the time Schleswig was annexed by Prussia after the Danish-Prussian war of 1864, it was largely populated by ethnic Danes. Otherwise I couldn't find any connection between the surname and Scandinavia, although of course that doesn't exclude the possibility.

It's German surname indeed, he just came from kingdom of Denmark-Norway.

GoldenHind
06-11-2016, 10:40 PM
Big Y results have come in for our ethnic Polish DF99. He is positive for both BY3449 and BY3447, which puts him in a growing group. I was particularly interested in this one, as he is pretty isolated within the DF99 group both geographically and by STRs. It will take further analysis of his raw data by Alex W., who is currently on vacation, to determine which subgroup within BY3447 he is part of.

Alex W. has completed his analysis of the Big Y raw data for the DF99 from Poland. He shares four SNPs below BY3447 with someone who only has ancestry to the USA, but has an English surname characterized by the Great Britain surname profiler as an East Midlands surname. They form a branch of BY3447 distinct from the German and Italian (Piedmont) examples, who share quite a number of additional SNPs. Thus we have two different branches of BY3447, one with a Pole and an Englishman, and the other with a German and an Italian. Four different samples under BY3447, and each from a different country.

GoldenHind
06-30-2016, 06:22 PM
Another DF99+ result in today. There wasn't much doubt about this one. He is a very close STR match to the DF99+ family from Normandy. He tells me that there is an NPE in his YDNA line, which occurred in a town in Maine where both his ancestor and people with the same surname as the Norman family were living.

GoldenHind
07-05-2016, 08:06 PM
Two more people who have previously tested DF99+ have joined the project. There are now four of them who have matching markers and variant spellings of the same surname. They are apparently descendants of a family, various branches of which settled in colonial Virginia. They indicate the family came there from a small village in Shropshire, located near Newport in that county and very close to the border with Staffordshire. Some of them indicate an earlier origin from a location near Wrexham in north Wales. According to Reaney, the surname can be either of Old English origin, or a Welsh name meaning "fair".

I don't quite know what to make of this group. I don't discount a Welsh origin, though I have it on very good authority that DF99 in Wales is extremely rare. There are certainly some DF99 from Wales, as well as others with Welsh surnames.

GoldenHind
07-09-2016, 04:52 AM
A very interesting result in today. A DF99 of undoubted German ancestry has tested positive for FGC847. This SNP forms one of three separate subclades of DF99.

What makes it interesting is that until now, the FGC847 subclade was exclusively of British ancestry, except for the mysterious 1KG sample from Lima, Peru.

So far this subclade has a strong STR signature. Unfortunately this newest addition only has 37 markers, and most of the off modals in the signature are in the 38-67 panel. One of the distinguishing markers of the signature is 391=10, which he does have.

GoldenHind
07-13-2016, 12:18 AM
One of our FGC847+ finally got his results for FGC864 from YSEQ today and is positive. I don't want to steal his thunder in case he wants to announce it himself.

It's very unfortunate that FTDNA still has neither included FGC864 in the P312 SNP pack nor made it available as a stand alone order, as it forces those who want to test for it to go elsewhere.

Torc Seanathair
07-13-2016, 05:35 PM
FGC864+, thundering in my own head.
So,from a quick glance at the STR's, it looks like the GD is closer between the fellow with County Donegal, Ulster roots (if I remember correctly) and myself, than your two gents with Nottinghamshire roots. Yet, there is enough difference to indicate the SNP has been around a good while.

The a la carte test took awhile, but I liked the price!

GoldenHind
07-29-2016, 07:36 PM
Another DF99+ in today from the R1b M343 backbone test. Ancestry only within the USA, but originally a German surname, now anglicized. He has the virtually universal DF99 off modal 389-1 = 12. He has joined the P312 project (probably this was done automatically from the R1b all subclades project), but is not yet in the DF99 Project.

EDIT: He has now joined the DF99 project, which now has over 60 members.

GoldenHind
09-05-2016, 07:39 PM
A new DF99 today from the R1b backbone test. He has a German surname, and ancestry from Canton Bern, Switzerland to the 16th century. He is the second DF99 from that country, but not an STR match to the first. I have also identified another probable DF99 with ancestry from that country, and he tells me he plans on doing the R1b backbone test.

It almost goes without saying that he has the characteristic 12 at 389-1.

He has joined the P312 project but not yet the DF99 project. I will contact him and request he do so.

EDIT: He has now joined the DF99 project.

Roaring
09-05-2016, 10:12 PM
A new DF99 today from the R1b backbone test. He has a German surname, and ancestry from Canton Bern, Switzerland to the 16th century. He is the second DF99 from that country, but not an STR match to the first. I have also identified another probable DF99 with ancestry from that country, and he tells me he plans on doing the R1b backbone test.

It almost goes without saying that he has the characteristic 12 at 389-1.

He has joined the P312 project but not yet the DF99 project. I will contact him and request he do so.

Hello again, since our last conversation i've been thinking about all that Y-dna stuff and orgin of my surname.

According to surname search services it's indeed semms to be most common in Tyrol and surrounding areas, however all of my matches (25 and 37 level) are concentrated around North Sea- English, Dutch, Swedish. Would it be right to think that my ancestors rather came from some areas in Germany that are bordering named countries, or thoose matches don't mean much?

I ask that since i've read information that my surname may be form of North-German surname Heise.

GoldenHind
09-06-2016, 12:49 AM
Hello again, since our last conversation i've been thinking about all that Y-dna stuff and orgin of my surname.

According to surname search services it's indeed seems to be most common in Tyrol and surrounding areas, however all of my matches (25 and 37 level) are concentrated around North Sea- English, Dutch, Swedish. Would it be right to think that my ancestors rather came from some areas in Germany that are bordering named countries, or thoose matches don't mean much?

I ask that since i've read information that my surname may be form of North-German surname Heise.

Unless a surname has a very localized distribution, I would be inclined to give more weight to STR matches, especially at the 67 marker level.

DF99 is present in all parts of Germany, from north west to south east, including the former German provinces which are now part of Poland. The concentration appears to be in the Rhineland and southwest Germany, but I suspect that may largely be due to fact that most of the migration from Germany to the USA seems to come from that area, and Americans of German ancestry comprise most of the German DF99. It is interesting that neither of the two DF99 German nationals come from that area: one is from Niedersachsen/Lower Saxony and the other, a Berliner, has ancestry from Silesia (ceded to Poland after WWII).

According to the world surname profiler site:

http://worldnames.publicprofiler.org/

Heise is found throughout Germany, but most common in the northern half of the country, from Lower Saxony to Vorpommern, and including Brandenburg and Thuringen. As I remember, this is different from that of Heiseler, though there some overlap.

Although I don't think you can rule out an origin from anywhere in the Germanic language area (including Scandinavia, Austria, etc.), I still think the most likely area is Schleswig- Holstein, which had very strong ties with Denmark, in whose army your EKA served.

GoldenHind
10-09-2016, 01:14 AM
The Russian DF99 who is a member of an old Moscow Boyar family which claims to have Scandinavian Rus origins (see post #150 on page 15 of this thread and following) has tested positive for DF99 subclade FGC847. This group is now composed of one from Russia, one from England and one from Germany. I have no doubt that all three would also test positive for FGC864, which is beneath FGC847. However unfortunately FTDNA does not yet test for FGC864. So far everyone who has tested DF99>FGC847, as well as those who are also FGC864, all share a very strong STR signature.

EDIT: A minor correction to the above. The DF99>FGC847 from Germany has only tested 37 markers, and while he matches the STR signature I referred to in those markers, there are several off modals in the signature which aren't included in the first 37. My guess is that the STR signature in question may only include a portion of the DF99>FGC847>FGC864 subclade, as the only two individuals in that category who have done NGS testing share an additional 6 SNPs beyond FGC864.

Telfermagne
10-14-2016, 12:57 AM
Good news for sure, I figured he'd be positive. In the next few weeks I'll be revisiting the tmrca issue. Been out of the scene for a while.

GoldenHind
10-14-2016, 10:33 PM
Good news for sure, I figured he'd be positive. In the next few weeks I'll be revisiting the tmrca issue. Been out of the scene for a while.

Good to have you back. I look forward to your tmrca calculations. I think before we were looking at a timeframe of around 500-800 AD.

GoldenHind
11-04-2016, 06:31 PM
Another new DF99+ in. He has a German surname, with ancestry from Switzerland. I don't have any further details. He has not yet joined either the P312 or DF99 projects.

He is now the third Swiss-German DF99.

EDIT: He has now joined the DF99 Project.

Telfermagne
11-12-2016, 04:07 AM
Ran into some problems with tmrca since the new german fgc847 only tested 37 ystrs. Plus I'm stuck using my mobile phone to calculate for now and group calculations are a bit tedious.

I went ahead and did a person to person comparison between myself and the russian, considering individual ystr mutation rates across 111 ystr.

Even the simpler person to person calculation was cumbersome on a cell phone (something I don't look forward to doing again lol), so there may be slight errors, but the calculation should be good given that it didn't differ much from my previous using 67 markers instead of the 111 panel. I will double check in the future when I can get ahold of a computer.

TMRCA with all 111 was roughly 39 generations.

Time range estimate (assuming a generation is 30 years)
846 A.D.

EDIT: I removed the calculation which excluded multicopy markers, I want to recheck it before reposting.

R.Rocca
11-17-2016, 10:18 PM
Another Italian DF99 turned up today:

Kit no. N47076
MDKA: Giovanni Sinacori b.1869, Santa Ninfa Trapani, Italy

EDIT: I have added him to the DF99 project.

GoldenHind
11-18-2016, 12:59 AM
Another Italian DF99 turned up today:

Kit no. N47076
MDKA: Giovanni Sinacori b.1869, Santa Ninfa Trapani, Italy

EDIT: I have added him to the DF99 project.

Thanks for adding him to the DF99 project. I wondered how he managed to find it.

He is the first DF99 in Italy outside of the extreme north of that country. It is tempting to assign a Norman origin to him, as we know DF99 is present in Normandy. I note however that the Vandals were in Trapiani in the 5th C., so that is another possibility. Obviously there are other possibilities. I guess we will need to wait to see where else in Italy DF99 is found.

Though he only has 12 markers, he does have the characteristic 12 at DYS389-1.

Do you have any idea of the origin of the surname?