PDA

View Full Version : New Group: U152 > L2 > 13685121 (C/T) > 21885515 (C/T)



R.Rocca
10-18-2013, 03:28 PM
Some exciting news for L2* folks. The Full Genomes results for GailT's paternal lineage kit are complete (MDKA: Johannes Crauss b. 4 Nov 1751, Ronshausen, Hesse, Germany).

1. The kit was tested via FTDNA to U152+ L2+ L20-. The FGS test confirms it is also Z49- Z367-.
2. The kit shares 21885515 (C>T) with "1000 Genomes Project" sample HG00152 (L2+ Z49- Z367-) from Great Britain.
3. 21885515 (C>T) was also found derived in four "Genome of the Netherlands" samples.
4. 21885515 (C>T) was also found in 49 Sardinian samples from Francalacci et al. 2013, but they were all Z192+ which is a separate branch from L2 altogether. This means the mutation either happened two different times in two different groups or there is a problem with the Francalacci data.
5. The kit also shares the following SNP with three unpublished L2+ Z49- Z367- British genomes: 13685121 (C>T). This SNP is also derived in four "Genome of the Netherlands" samples.
6. Based on those unpublished British genomes, 13685121 (C>T) is one level down from L2 but one level up from 21885515 (C>T)

So, congratulations to GailT for making this previously L2* branch official!

Alessio B. Bedini
10-18-2013, 04:16 PM
Congratulations!
Unfortunately my genetic distance from Gailt is 21/37 .. I do not know whether i have these SNPs ..

R.Rocca
10-18-2013, 05:58 PM
Congratulations!
Unfortunately my genetic distance from Gailt is 21/37 .. I do not know whether i have these SNPs ..

Alessio, I am quite a distance from the Clauss STRs as well 25/67, but the 13685121 group may be as frequent as Z367 and Z49 and also very old, so we never know.

I still suspect we will find a distinct group south of the Alps as well.

Alessio B. Bedini
10-18-2013, 06:13 PM
I hope that your suspect is truth soon ..

GailT
10-18-2013, 11:39 PM
And here is a list of the high confidence "private" SNPs they found in my L2 sample, at the 99% and 95% confidence level. Assuming 1 SNP per 3 generations and 30 years per generation, this would give an age of 4860 years.


6943194 C->A FG621+ 99% Genuine = 35
7165871 A->G FG622+
14034324 G->A FG633+
14118649 T->C FG634+
14250126 G->A FG635+
14397558 G->T FG636+
14406860 C->G FG637+
14641775 T->C FG638+
14945091 T->C FG639+
14978697 T->C FG640+
15264448 C->G FG641+
15286148 C->A FG642+
15645359 G->C FG643+
15760679 A->T FG644+
15895734 A->G FG645+
16003174 G->A FG646+
16234333 T->G FG647+
16982219 G->A FG648+
17078688 G->A FG649+
17164397 G->A FG650+
17239012 G->A FG651+
17285400 A->T FG652+
18631512 G->A FG653+
19329986 A->T FG654+
19385930 T->G FG655+
19542618 A->G FG656+
21259715 C->T FG658+
21369596 G->A FG659+
21536579 A->G FG660+
21696427 T->C FG661+
22065095 T->C FG662+
22572293 T->C FG663+
23118896 A->G FG664+
28694569 C->T FG667+
28722590 A->G FG668+

2945130 A->T FG615+ * 95% Genuine = 19
3389443 C->G FG616+ *
3495582 A->T FG617+ *
4192020 C->G FG618+ *
4356141 C->T FG619+ *
4572235 T->C FG620+ *
7521830 C->T FG623+ *
7740741 C->T FG624+ *
8149773 A->T FG625+ *
8348808 C->G FG626+ *
8597270 A->C FG627+ *
9524177 T->C FG628+ *
13595148 G->T FG629+ *
13613633 A->C FG630+ *
13685121 C->T FG631+ *
13824685 T->A FG632+ *
20358892 G->A FG657+ *
23745653 T->C FG665+ *
23777440 T->A FG666+ *

Rathna
10-19-2013, 03:36 AM
Alessio, I am quite a distance from the Clauss STRs as well 25/67, but the 13685121 group may be as frequent as Z367 and Z49 and also very old, so we never know.

I still suspect we will find a distinct group south of the Alps as well.

Are you recognizing that not all R-L2 came from North to Italy and that it was ancient also in Italy, which has other more ancient samples of R-U152?

Acque agitate
10-19-2013, 10:48 AM
Some exciting news for L2* folks. The Full Genomes results for GailT's paternal lineage kit are complete (MDKA: Johannes Crauss b. 4 Nov 1751, Ronshausen, Hesse, Germany).

1. The kit was tested via FTDNA to U152+ L2+ L20-. The FGS test confirms it is also Z49- Z367-.
2. The kit shares 21885515 (C>T) with "1000 Genomes Project" sample HG00152 (L2+ Z49- Z367-) from Great Britain.
3. 21885515 (C>T) was also found derived in four "Genome of the Netherlands" samples.
4. 21885515 (C>T) was also found in 49 Sardinian samples from Francalacci et al. 2013, but they were all Z192+ which is a separate branch from L2 altogether. This means the mutation either happened two different times in two different groups or there is a problem with the Francalacci data.
5. The kit also shares the following SNP with three unpublished L2+ Z49- Z367- British genomes: 13685121 (C>T). This SNP is also derived in four "Genome of the Netherlands" samples.
6. Based on those unpublished British genomes, 13685121 (C>T) is one level down from L2 but one level up from 21885515 (C>T)

So, congratulations to GailT for making this previously L2* branch official!

Hello Richard,
First of all thanks for your work that helps all of us in understanding the spread of R- U152 .
it seems to me very unlikely that the same mutation occurred in 2 separate branches and at a time so close. For this reason I ask you if the 5 samples of Z192 + "1000 Genomes Project" (2 Mexicans and 3 Toscani) themselves contain 21885515 (C > T). If not, my doubts on the results of Francalacci can only increase .
With regard to the possibility that there is a distinct group under the Alps , I think it is possible (as you know, we are patiently awaiting our results) , maybe people who have contributed in some form to the formation of the Ligurian. I also believe possible that some Roman Gens would be a carrier of R- L2. Some historians clues lead me to suppose that. Of course, even with the help of a little imagination . I would not mind descend from the Gens Julia , Cornelia , Claudia ... (The long wait is playing tricks on me)

Rathna
10-19-2013, 01:22 PM
Congratulations!
Unfortunately my genetic distance from Gailt is 21/37 .. I do not know whether i have these SNPs ..

You have a GD from Gail of 21 out 37 markers, i.e. a MRCA 3800ya. As Gail calculated by private SNPs an ancientness of 4800 y, you should descend from a common ancestor 1000 y more recent, then you should have many private SNPs in common with Gail.
Of course I don't mind my three golden points: mutations around the modal, convergence to the modal as time passes, sometime a mutation goes for the tangent. Anyway a FGS could be an interesting verification of these theories.

R.Rocca
10-21-2013, 12:18 PM
Unfortunately the primers for 13685121 will be nearly impossible to develop based on where it is located on the Y-chromosome. However, all L2 samples who were derived 13685121 (including the Crauss kit) also have the deletion 9020396 (TAGA/-). It is found outside of U152 as well, but rarely, so I think it can be used as a proxy for 13685121 until full genome testing becomes the norm. Working primers have already been tested for 9020396, so the detals will be passed along to FTDNA once they start accepting that kind of information again.

Also, the Crauss kit shares 28722590 (A/G) [aka FG668] with HG00152, but it was not found in the GoNL samples. This means that it is one level down from 21885515 (C/T) and two levels down from 13685121 (C/T) and 9020396 (TAGA/-).

For clarity on the hierarchy:

Level 1: U152
Level 2: |_____L2
Level 3: ...........|_____13685121 (C/T), 9020396 (TAGA/-)
Level 4: ......................|_____21885515 (C/T)
Level 5: .................................|_____28722590 (A/G) [aka FG668]

MacUalraig
10-21-2013, 12:56 PM
Can you share with us who developed the primers you mention as you infer it was not FTDNA? Thanks

Alessio B. Bedini
10-21-2013, 01:18 PM
Instead I would like to know how soon I can test new SNPs on FTDNA ..

R.Rocca
10-21-2013, 01:33 PM
Instead I would like to know how soon I can test new SNPs on FTDNA ..

A few weeks ago FTDNA said they would start accepting primer details again in three weeks. I don't know how far along they are with that process, but I don't plan on asking them again until after the FTDNA Conference in November.

R.Rocca
10-21-2013, 02:44 PM
Can you share with us who developed the primers you mention as you infer it was not FTDNA? Thanks

You can read about the efforts here and donations are always welcome for primer purchase:

http://www.justgiving.com/DNAforum

R.Rocca
10-22-2013, 11:58 AM
OK folks, the 9020396 INDEL has been given the name "DF103". We'll send it to FTDNA as soon as they start accepting primer details again.

Alessio B. Bedini
10-22-2013, 03:13 PM
I already feel that I have DF103 in my YDNA :)

Kwheaton
10-22-2013, 03:32 PM
OK folks, the 9020396 INDEL has been given the name "DF103". We'll send it to FTDNA as soon as they start accepting primer details again.

Should I have look through Jerry's (WHEATON) WTY to look for this? I vaguely remember quite a few deletions?

R.Rocca
10-22-2013, 04:04 PM
Should I have look through Jerry's (WHEATON) WTY to look for this? I vaguely remember quite a few deletions?

Yes, that would be great.

Kwheaton
10-22-2013, 08:43 PM
Yes, that would be great.

Unfortunately not tested :(

Alessio B. Bedini
11-07-2013, 08:47 PM
it seems to me that today FTDNA has added DF99 in the menu à la carte
I hope DF103 may be added soon ...

Alessio B. Bedini
11-09-2013, 06:21 PM
If I wanted to use the form on GAP to request on FTDNA lab research a SNP DF103 and to make it available for sale, what I should write?

SNP Name: DF103
Hg19 Chromosomal Position (or rs#):*
Ancestral or Derived State:*
Approximate Haplogroup:*
Rationale for Offering SNP:*
Where was the SNP Discovered?*
Submitted By:*

R.Rocca
11-09-2013, 10:36 PM
If I wanted to use the form on GAP to request on FTDNA lab research a SNP DF103 and to make it available for sale, what I should write?

SNP Name: DF103
Hg19 Chromosomal Position (or rs#):*
Ancestral or Derived State:*
Approximate Haplogroup:*
Rationale for Offering SNP:*
Where was the SNP Discovered?*
Submitted By:*

It was already requested yesterday.

haleaton
11-15-2013, 03:50 AM
I was curious if somebody was able to extract STR values from 1K Genomes data in the past few years and we could compare HG00152 (L2+ Z49- Z367-) for Genetic Distance. I wonder if Full Genomes has that data or would report any STR comparisons.

R.Rocca
11-15-2013, 12:39 PM
I was curious if somebody was able to extract STR values from 1K Genomes data in the past few years and we could compare HG00152 (L2+ Z49- Z367-) for Genetic Distance. I wonder if Full Genomes has that data or would report any STR comparisons.

Due to the quality of the data, extracting STRs from any 1K Genome sample was unproductive. Either way, I think that DF103 likely has a WAMH, so I don't think HG00152's STRs would have been of much value.

R.Rocca
11-30-2013, 09:56 PM
Unfortunately the primers for 13685121 will be nearly impossible to develop based on where it is located on the Y-chromosome. However, all L2 samples who were derived 13685121 (including the Crauss kit) also have the deletion 9020396 (TAGA/-). It is found outside of U152 as well, but rarely, so I think it can be used as a proxy for 13685121 until full genome testing becomes the norm. Working primers have already been tested for 9020396, so the detals will be passed along to FTDNA once they start accepting that kind of information again.

Also, the Crauss kit shares 28722590 (A/G) [aka FG668] with HG00152, but it was not found in the GoNL samples. This means that it is one level down from 21885515 (C/T) and two levels down from 13685121 (C/T) and 9020396 (TAGA/-).

For clarity on the hierarchy:

Level 1: U152
Level 2: |_____L2
Level 3: ...........|_____13685121 (C/T), 9020396 (TAGA/-)
Level 4: ......................|_____21885515 (C/T)
Level 5: .................................|_____28722590 (A/G) [aka FG668]

Please not that Full Genomes has renamed FG668 as the "FG" initials were in use by another lab. It is now known as FGC4220.

Alessio B. Bedini
01-02-2014, 12:43 PM
Some very good news for us folks.
DF103 is available on FTDNA! :) :) :)

Biloo
01-27-2014, 06:43 AM
kit B3002 (Germany) from the R-U152-FTDNA project is DF103-

Alessio B. Bedini
01-27-2014, 10:22 AM
Kit B3002 is the closest to me :\

Alessio B. Bedini
01-28-2014, 04:07 PM
I am very interested to the kit Burkart and Castelli because they are the closest to me.
My GD from Burkart is 14/67
My GD from Castelli is 14/37
The distance from Burkart to Castelli is 13/37
I think these 3 kits can be linked.

If Burkart is DF103- also I think I am DF103-.
Meanwhile, I wait for the result of my test FGC5338 and within a few days we will see ..

R.Rocca
02-28-2014, 01:25 PM
From the first FTDNA Big-Y results of kit no. N81364 (Bartold, Poland), this is the revised tree for this group:

......U152
......|_____L2
.................|_____FGC4183, DF103
............................|_____FGC4166
............................|..........|_____FGC42 20 <<< kit no. N12648 (Crauss, Germany)
............................|__________14927800 (C/T), 23891656 (C/T), 23098660 (-/A)<<< kit no. N81364 (Bartold, Poland)

As I speculated previously, this group will likely make up a large chunk of northern L2+ Z49- Z367-. DF103 is really a very slow mutating STR and 23098660 is an insert...neither of which Big-Y reports on (I think), so Bartold's position is based on other published and unpublished samples.

Kwheaton
02-28-2014, 08:01 PM
Rich,
Do you happen to know a current number of how many L2's are being Big Y tested?

Any news on your Full Y?
Kelly

GailT
03-01-2014, 12:39 AM
My Crauss FGC samples in also being tested for BigY. The 9 year old sample in storage was a dud, and I had to get a new sample, so no results with this batch of BigY, but it should be done by March 28.

Kwheaton
03-01-2014, 01:06 AM
My Crauss FGC samples in also being tested for BigY. The 9 year old sample in storage was a dud, and I had to get a new sample, so no results with this batch of BigY, but it should be done by March 28.

Thanks Gail, Sorry about the dud.

That's about the same time our WHEATON result should be in from FGC. Yours should provide some nice cross validation and information on Big Y vs. Full Y for the L2 folks.
Kelly

R.Rocca
03-02-2014, 02:15 AM
Looks like the distribution of DF103 has now been extended once again...Kit no. N115394 from Bergamo, Italy has tested DF103+.

Alessio B. Bedini
03-02-2014, 09:11 AM
I am very unsure whether to take the test because instead kit. B3002 is negative and I think I'm in the same group in this kit.
I think I'll wait a few days to see the results of Big-Y that in these days are coming out.
I'll wait also Rich's results because i think I'm in the same his group

Kit N115394 still has a lot of genetic distance from GailT. This could mean that DF103 was born over 2000 years ago in Germany.

So the ancestors of N115394 came to Italy not before 400-500 AD.
They may have come at the end of the Empire or with the Lombards, or even later with the franks.
We have to see if he has closest genetic cousins ​​in Germany.

Rathna
03-02-2014, 09:59 AM
Kit N115394 still has a lot of genetic distance from GailT. This could mean that DF103 was born over 2000 years ago in Germany.

So the ancestors of N115394 came to Italy not before 400-500 AD.
They may have come at the end of the Empire or with the Lombards, or even later with the franks.
We have to see if he has closest genetic cousins ​​in Germany.

These people are at GD of 6 out 37 markers from 2S6EX Castelli Gandino, Italy:
6Q92R LONG Unknown
7NG8J Jackson Armagh, Northern Ireland
F6FRW Kinsey Breedon on the Hill, Leicestershire, England
PB66F Eskew Tennessee, USA
SAMMH Barton Unknown
T9FUU Kelly Ireland
THVY8 MacMillan Scotland
but I'd exclude 6Q92R LONG Unknown (DYS492=13), THVY8 MacMillan Scotland (both for DYS464= 15-15-15-16 and DYS413a= 24 and DYS413b=25).
Of course the unique certainly related by the SNP DF103 is 4DANY Crouse Ronshausen, Germany and its DYS464=15-16-17-17 could maintain a link within the 2000 years, but within 37 markers the distance is of 23 out of 37 markers, and this demonstrates, I think, all the absurdity of comparing STRs and to do extrapolations about the origin without a Big Y or a Full Y.

P.S. The link between Castelli and Gail could be old also 5000 years and that has happened the other way around, that the German haplotype came from Italy.

GailT
03-02-2014, 06:17 PM
I compared the STR's on these 3 R-L2>DF103 kits:
37207 Crauss Germany
N81364 Bartold Poland
N115394 Castelli Italy

At 37 STR, I can't tell that one kit is more closely related to another. Crauss and Bartold share DYS458=18, but Bartold and Castelli share DYS576=18. In the 67 STR range, Crauss and Bartold share DYS520=21.

My guess is that we are likely to find that R-L2 expanded very rapidly, and that there will be a lot of very deep structure, with DF103 perhaps being nearly as old as L2.
1530

Kwheaton
03-02-2014, 06:34 PM
I compared the STR's on these 3 R-L2>DF103 kits:
37207 Crauss Germany
N81364 Bartold Poland
N115394 Castelli Italy

At 37 STR, I can't tell that one kit is more closely related to another. Crauss and Bartold share DYS458=18, but Bartold and Castelli share DYS576=18. In the 67 STR range, Crauss and Bartold share DYS520=21.

My guess is that we are likely to find that R-L2 expanded very rapidly, and that there will be a lot of very deep structure, with DF103 perhaps being nearly as old as L2.
1530
Gail,
That would make sense and explain how they are separated broadly geographically speaking. It will be interesting to see where the rest of us land in DF103 +/-. As you say it may be a very old subdivision. At 37 Markers the WHEATONs are quite removed from anyone else in the group---looks like the closest match about -14 @37 This match os from Algiers which is a long way from NW England and SW Wales. The one thing they have in common is lots of coastline.

I am so looking forward to seeing all the results as the line up or not.

R.Rocca
03-02-2014, 07:44 PM
I compared the STR's on these 3 R-L2>DF103 kits:
37207 Crauss Germany
N81364 Bartold Poland
N115394 Castelli Italy

At 37 STR, I can't tell that one kit is more closely related to another. Crauss and Bartold share DYS458=18, but Bartold and Castelli share DYS576=18. In the 67 STR range, Crauss and Bartold share DYS520=21.

My guess is that we are likely to find that R-L2 expanded very rapidly, and that there will be a lot of very deep structure, with DF103 perhaps being nearly as old as L2.
1530

Assuming my DF103- result holds up when my Full Genome results come in, my closeness to my two closest L2+ Z49- Z367- matches at 67 markers (Bartold=DF103+ and Solomon=Z49+) will be proven to be a fluke. It goes to show just how little STRs mean unless there is a very clear signature.

R.Rocca
03-05-2014, 12:54 AM
Great news for those that are L2+ Z49- Z367-...BritainsDNA Chromo 2 tests for both FGC4183/S14469 and FGC4166/S23682.

Seven anonymous Chromo 2 samples have tested FGC4183/S14469+ and of those four have been FGC4166/S23682+.

haleaton
03-05-2014, 03:46 AM
Great news for those that are L2+ Z49- Z367-...BritainsDNA Chromo 2 tests for both FGC4183/S14469 and FGC4166/S23682.

Seven anonymous Chromo 2 samples have tested FGC4183/S14469+ and of those four have been FGC4166/S23682+.

That is great news. Is Dr. Wilson also giving out more details when SNPs may not be private? I am still glad to keep my L2* status. Rich, I look forward to your Full Y hopefully in a few days.

R.Rocca
03-05-2014, 12:33 PM
That is great news. Is Dr. Wilson also giving out more details when SNPs may not be private? I am still glad to keep my L2* status. Rich, I look forward to your Full Y hopefully in a few days.

I don't know the answer Hal. A few weeks back he released the shared SNPs between 2000 anonymous people in his database and yesterday he released the Y-chromosome position of all the "S" series SNPs. Cross checking those two files is how I came up with the fact that FGC4183/S14469 and FGC4166/S23682 are tested. I'll be looking for more of these tonight.

angbg
03-10-2014, 10:18 PM
Hello, I'm kit N115394
Why DF130 is important? is an recent mutation? thanks

R.Rocca
03-10-2014, 11:48 PM
Hello, I'm kit N115394
Why DF130 is important? is an recent mutation? thanks

It is important because it looks like it is the 3rd most frequent L2 group after Z48 and Z367. It does look old because the STRs do not match very closely.

Alessio B. Bedini
03-11-2014, 07:41 AM
Ciao angbg, welcome here ;)

angbg
03-11-2014, 10:41 AM
Ciao angbg, welcome here ;)

Ciao Alessio!

tbartold
03-17-2014, 03:55 PM
I have now received analyses of my BigY BAM file from both FGC and YFull.

Comparing those analyses with the BigY analysis, I see a couple of differences.
1) Both FGC and YFull only call SNPs 'novel' when they are downstream of R-L2. The 'Novel SNPs in BigY are (in my opinion) misleading.
2) It's hard to say which of them is most conservative. Looking at all three results, and keeping any SNP that either called, I see a total of 36 Novel SNPs. Of the 36, YFull called 2 results ambiguous, FGC called 2 different SNPs with low reliability, and BigY also called all but 3 of them. So FTDNA was more conservative in one call.

Here's my novel SNPs with the names used by both FGCorp and YFull

ChrY FGCorp YFull
6870045 FGC8146 YFS052779
6997483 FGC8147 YFS052780
7268761 FGC8148 YFS052782
7535814 FGC8149 YFS052784
7600076 FGC8150 YFS052785
7614758 FGC8151 YFS052786
7867872 --N/A-- YFS052788
8535306 FGC8152 YFS052791
8911714 FGC8153 YFS052793
8968956 --N/A-- YFS052794
9113522 FGC8154 YFS052796
13493825 FGC8155 --N/A--
13685121 FGC4183 S14469
14224786 FGC8156 YFS053230
14809480 FGC8157 YFS053233
14927800 FGC8158 YFS053235
14983989 FGC8159 YFS053236
15165240 FGC8160 YFS053237
15360368 FGC8161 YFS053241
15517276 FGC8162 YFS053244
15621598 FGC8163 YFS053245
15754202 FGC8164 YFS053249
16900458 FGC8165 YFS053270
17153032 FGC8166 YFS053272
17853213 FGC8167 YFS053281
18219927 FGC8168 YFS053289
18760206 FGC8169 YFS053293
21467574 FGC8170 YFS053369
22189279 FGC8171 YFS053374
22459517 FGC8172 --N/A--
22459959 FGC8173 YFS053388
22594999 FGC8174 YFS053409
22830407 FGC8175 YFS053411
23463881 FGC8176 YFS053415
23649359 FGC8177 YFS053416
23891656 FGC8178 YFS053418

R.Rocca
04-05-2014, 01:19 PM
I compared the STR's on these 3 R-L2>DF103 kits:
37207 Crauss Germany
N81364 Bartold Poland
N115394 Castelli Italy

At 37 STR, I can't tell that one kit is more closely related to another. Crauss and Bartold share DYS458=18, but Bartold and Castelli share DYS576=18. In the 67 STR range, Crauss and Bartold share DYS520=21.

My guess is that we are likely to find that R-L2 expanded very rapidly, and that there will be a lot of very deep structure, with DF103 perhaps being nearly as old as L2.
1530

Gail, we can add another to the group...Simonetti (no. N68796) is DF103+ FGC4166+ FGC4220-

Rathna
04-05-2014, 02:34 PM
Gail, we can add another to the group...Simonetti (no. N68796) is DF103+ FGC4166+ FGC4220-

Thus, like I supposed, German DF103 derived from the Italian one, of course if we'll be able to demonstrate that Simonetti's ancestors lived in Italy and not elsewhere... a long long way to Tipperary yet!

R.Rocca
04-05-2014, 03:26 PM
Thus, like I supposed, German DF103 derived from the Italian one, of course if we'll be able to demonstrate that Simonetti's ancestors lived in Italy and not elsewhere... a long long way to Tipperary yet!

Let's not make premature assumptions...it could be that Simonetti belongs to a different subclade than the others. A classic example is the Z36 data that tells us that almost all Tuscans belong to the Z54 subclade. Does that mean that all of the Tuscans are derived from the Z36+Z54- non-Italians? Of course not. All we can deduce at this time is what the data tells us, that they match on two subclades but not a third.

Rathna
04-05-2014, 03:53 PM
Let's not make premature assumptions...it could be that Simonetti belongs to a different subclade than the others. A classic example is the Z36 data that tells us that almost all Tuscans belong to the Z54 subclade. Does that mean that all of the Tuscans are derived from the Z36+Z54- non-Italians? Of course not. All we can deduce at this time is what the data tells us, that they match on two subclades but not a third.

Of course, anyway the SNPs in between them demonstrate that the separation happened (probably) many thousands of years ago, and if we cannot say so far that Germans or Poles descend from Italians probably we say less the other way around.

GailT
04-15-2014, 02:11 AM
The BigY results are in for my R1b/L2/DF103 Johanne Crauss FGC kit E5G8W. I've requested the BAM file and it will be interesting to see how the FTDNA and FGC results compare.

BigY also tested positive for 21885515 C>T and 25 of the FGC private SNPs were in the BigY novel SNP list:


6943194 C A FG621
7521830 C T FG623
7740741 C T FG624
8149773 A T FG625
8348808 C G FG626
8597270 A C FG627
13685121 C T FG631
14406860 C G FG637
14641775 T C FG638
14945091 T C FG639
14978697 T C FG640
15264448 C G FG641
15895734 A G FG645
16234333 T G FG647
16982219 G A FG648
17239012 G A FG651
17285400 A T FG652
18631512 G A FG653
19542618 A G FG656
21259715 C T FG658
21369596 G A FG659
21696427 T C FG661
22572293 T C FG663
23118896 A G FG664
23777440 T A FG666

Rathna
04-15-2014, 05:05 AM
The BigY results are in for my R1b/L2/DF103 Johanne Crauss FGC kit E5G8W. I've requested the BAM file and it will be interesting to see how the FTDNA and FGC results compare.

BigY also tested positive for 21885515 C>T and 25 of the FGC private SNPs were in the BigY novel SNP list:

25 from Big Y as to 54 from FGC, thus less than the half.
Someone thought that 1 SNP from Big Y were worth 180 years and 1 SNP from FGC were worth 85 year, thus 170/180 years could be good.

Or am I wrong in understanding your posts?

GailT
04-15-2014, 04:52 PM
25 from Big Y as to 54 from FGC, thus less than the half.
There were about 80 novel SNPs in the BigY results, but I don't know which ones might be ancestral to L2 versus novel in my paternal line, so when I get the BAM file I'll ask FGC to compare it with the FGC test and have a better estimate than of the actual number of novel SNPs in each test.

Kwheaton
04-15-2014, 10:15 PM
Its important to remind ourselves that novel SNPs only remain so until they occur in other tests--- then they are no longer novel and we have to discern whether they are private or confirmed in broader groupings. As time goes on the number of novel SNPs will diminish. The thing that some of us found buggy was that Big Y was calling Novel SNPs that were not novel. If you want to ignore all other databases and say Big Y "discovered 114 novel SNPs" When it turns out there were only 25... well need I say more.

Its not that I do not value the Big Y. I believe the data numbers are awesome--- just that the hype does not match the output.

GailT
04-16-2014, 05:19 AM
Today I was able to download the BigY variants and BED files.

FGC identified 54 private SNPs and it appears that bigY did not have coverage for 29 of these, so bigY only confirmed 25 of the 54 private SNPs. I was hoping for better coverage than that. Also, 22% of the bigY variants were rejected. That is a higher failure rate than I expected.

It remains to be seen if bigY identified private SNPs in regions that FGC missed. I can't answer that yet because I don't know which of the bigY SNPs are ancestral versus private.

haleaton
04-16-2014, 07:52 AM
Today I was able to download the BigY variants and BED files.

FGC identified 54 private SNPs and it appears that bigY did not have coverage for 29 of these, so bigY only confirmed 25 of the 54 private SNPs. I was hoping for better coverage than that. Also, 22% of the bigY variants were rejected. That is a higher failure rate than I expected.

It remains to be seen if bigY identified private SNPs in regions that FGC missed. I can't answer that yet because I don't know which of the bigY SNPs are ancestral versus private.

So far I have not found any BigY SNP (called out as "Novel") that was not in the FGC BAM file, though two complex examples were not reported. I did not get a BAM versus BAM comparison by bp.

Alessio B. Bedini
07-25-2014, 11:52 AM
I just got a new result from FTDNA. I am DF103-
In summary: I am U152+ L2+ Z367- Z49- CTS5689- FGC5338- DF103- DF90- DF110- FGC10536- L135-

I'd like your opinions.
See you soon
Alessio

R.Rocca
07-25-2014, 01:59 PM
I just got a new result from FTDNA. I am DF103-
In summary: I am U152+ L2+ Z367- Z49- CTS5689- FGC5338- DF103- DF90- DF110- FGC10536- L135-

I'd like your opinions.
See you soon
Alessio

Alessio, sorry that you have had no luck finding your SNP below L2. Unfortunately all of the other branches below L2 that you have not tested for are not yet available for a la carte testing. Also, there is the possibility that you belong to a higher level SNP group above one you have already tested negative for. For example, you are negative for Montaguti's FGC5338, but you might be positive for any of the other SNPs in his group. Without better definition of certain subclades, it is hard to tell. Hopefully Big-Y will have a sale at some point and you will be able to test.

Alessio B. Bedini
07-25-2014, 02:32 PM
Rich do not worry I'll find out sooner or later my SNP;)
I think I belong to a clade not discovered yet.
Only BIG Y will tell me more.

The interesting thing is that I think more and more to be genetically linked with the kits B3002 (Burkart) and E4959 (Stampa).
Burkart is like me but also FGC10543- and FGC10516-
Stampa only, as far as I know, DF90- DF103- and DF110-
With them my distance is short and is made ​​up of many "DYS fast."

I think it would be appropriate to make in the "project U152" a group-Z49-Z367-DF90-DF103 and DF110-

haleaton
07-25-2014, 04:37 PM
Rich do not worry I'll find out sooner or later my SNP;)
I think I belong to a clade not discovered yet.
Only BIG Y will tell me more.

The interesting thing is that I think more and more to be genetically linked with the kits B3002 (Burkart) and E4959 (Stampa).
Burkart is like me but also FGC10543- and FGC10516-
Stampa only, as far as I know, DF90- DF103- and DF110-
With them my distance is short and is made ​​up of many "DYS fast."

I think it would be appropriate to make in the "project U152" a group-Z49-Z367-DF90-DF103 and DF110-

You bring up good point for alternate discussion thread of R-U152* (Kerchner remaining) and R-L2* and the meaning of a "*" as a useful designation as there are so many new downstream SNPs (with and without phylogenic value) and different test options with different coverage and costs.

It is an interesting sampling issue and question of after the expansion of U152 and L2 which subclades had significant expansion to show up in the data we have and the others which remained localized in under-sampled places with some migrations of much later descendants where they show up because of greater sampling, but match no one else currently.

R.Rocca
07-25-2014, 08:15 PM
You bring up good point for alternate discussion thread of R-U152* (Kerchner remaining) and R-L2* and the meaning of a "*" as a useful designation as there are so many new downstream SNPs (with and without phylogenic value) and different test options with different coverage and costs.

It is an interesting sampling issue and question of after the expansion of U152 and L2 which subclades had significant expansion to show up in the data we have and the others which remained localized in under-sampled places with some migrations of much later descendants where they show up because of greater sampling, but match no one else currently.

Hal, the real "asterisks" are extremely important to find. Unfortunately, grouping U152 project members by what they have tested negative for is an administrative nightmare and would produce almost as many groups as samples. Besides, putting people in "negative groups" is meaningless if they have not been, at minimum, Big-Y tested, since many SNPs cannot be Sanger tested. For that reason I've created the U152 tree with Full Genomes and/or Big-Y tested kits.

haleaton
07-26-2014, 07:17 PM
Hal, the real "asterisks" are extremely important to find. Unfortunately, grouping U152 project members by what they have tested negative for is an administrative nightmare and would produce almost as many groups as samples. Besides, putting people in "negative groups" is meaningless if they have not been, at minimum, Big-Y tested, since many SNPs cannot be Sanger tested. For that reason I've created the U152 tree with Full Genomes and/or Big-Y tested kits.

Oh, I agree. I meant for discussion thread on this forum, though I cannot think of something substantive to say to start it off.

Alessio B. Bedini
07-26-2014, 08:41 PM
In the "project FTDNA U152" there is a group negative for Z49 and a negative group for Z49/Z367

I would put even a negative group for Z49/Z367/DF103 because DF103 could be the third diffusion.

This can even trace the path to follow when someone is L2: before he tests Z49 then Z367 and finally DF103.

To conclude the group Z49/Z367 begins to be too large. It would be good to create a subgroup.

We are currently in 6 to be negative for DF103 but in the future we may grow.

Of course it is said that we all belong to the same SNP terminal but I think one thing to do. However, rather than leave us all in the mega group Z49/Z367

ChrisR
07-26-2014, 09:29 PM
For that reason I've created the U152 tree with Full Genomes and/or Big-Y tested kits.
May I ask for the link to this tree? I can not find a current one on https://www.familytreedna.com/public/R1b-U152/default.aspx?section=results or http://u152.org/

BTW: nice avatar ;-)

MitchellSince1893
07-27-2014, 12:39 AM
May I ask for the link to this tree? I can not find a current one on https://www.familytreedna.com/public/R1b-U152/default.aspx?section=results or http://u152.org/

BTW: nice avatar ;-) latest version I know of is here. Rich posts updated versions in this thread.
http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?2375-Updated-U152-Tree/page8

ChrisR
07-28-2014, 08:46 PM
I just like to thank here, seeing GoNL in Richard's trees I have searched and downloaded the GoNL Y-data and found some very interesting seldom lineages useful for J2 research. Great!
I will also use the U152 phylogeny to go over the groupings and suggestions in Alpine DNA (http://www.familytreedna.com/public/Alpine_DNA_Project_AlpGen_Genealogy/).

R.Rocca
08-01-2014, 12:25 PM
Kit no. N86065, MDKA Angelo Ardoino, b.1891, Bonassola, La Spezia, Italy is now DF103+. DF103+ is looking like a very important sub-branch of L2 in northern Italy. I expect that to extend into Switzerland and Germany as well.

Based on Y-STRs, the theme is still the same...there is no real way of distinguishing L2+DF103+ samples from L2+ samples.

Alessio B. Bedini
08-01-2014, 02:26 PM
DF103 mutation seems to be very old. Almost as old as L2.
Who belongs to this clade should examine SNP downstream as FGC4166
To date, however, it seems to me that no companies do the test of FGC4166

angbg
08-03-2014, 11:39 AM
Kit no. N86065, MDKA Angelo Ardoino, b.1891, Bonassola, La Spezia, Italy is now DF103+. DF103+ is looking like a very important sub-branch of L2 in northern Italy. I expect that to extend into Switzerland and Germany as well.

Based on Y-STRs, the theme is still the same...there is no real way of distinguishing L2+DF103+ samples from L2+ samples.

Hi,
how much is it the genetic distance with Giovanni Castelli kit N115394 ? thank you

R.Rocca
08-03-2014, 12:28 PM
As per FTDNA's GD calculator, their GD is 17 at 37 which is substantial.

Alessio B. Bedini
08-03-2014, 05:20 PM
In general, when with 37 markers the distance is 16-17, then with 111 markers can also get over 50.

This means that, as I said ,this mutation is very old

angbg
11-22-2014, 02:49 PM
HI!
I ordered BigY kit N115394

tbartold
03-30-2015, 09:27 PM
yfull has placed me in a new subgroup under L2: R-S14469 (formed 4600 ybp, TMRCA 4600 ybp)

Since S14469 is FGC4183, does that mean that they've finally listed DF103? And how to I find out who YF03106 is? (I'm YF01424).

R.Rocca
03-31-2015, 12:35 PM
yfull has placed me in a new subgroup under L2: R-S14469 (formed 4600 ybp, TMRCA 4600 ybp)

Since S14469 is FGC4183, does that mean that they've finally listed DF103? And how to I find out who YF03106 is? (I'm YF01424).

I'm not sure, but DF103 is really an STR. The reason why it is important is because FGC4183 cannot be tested for using PCR, so DF103 is a good proxy. For that reason, I don't think YFull will put it on their tree.

TigerMW
04-06-2015, 09:58 PM
From the first FTDNA Big-Y results of kit no. N81364 (Bartold, Poland), this is the revised tree for this group:

......U152
......|_____L2
.................|_____FGC4183, DF103
............................|_____FGC4166
............................|..........|_____FGC42 20 <<< kit no. N12648 (Crauss, Germany)
............................|__________14927800 (C/T), 23891656 (C/T), 23098660 (-/A)<<< kit no. N81364 (Bartold, Poland)

As I speculated previously, this group will likely make up a large chunk of northern L2+ Z49- Z367-. DF103 is really a very slow mutating STR and 23098660 is an insert...neither of which Big-Y reports on (I think), so Bartold's position is based on other published and unpublished samples.

Just checking. I've seen DF103 on some charts but I see it was removed from YBrowse by Thomas I guess. Is it slow enough to be useful on a tree?

Is FGC4183 equivalent to DF103?

Petr
04-06-2015, 10:54 PM
Hi Richard, you wrote
OK folks, the 9020396 INDEL has been given the name "DF103"some time ago, so it is not correct now? I have checked YFull U152 group for those positions and it looks like it works, I added 13685121 = FGC4183 = S14469 too:
http://i57.tinypic.com/2lve9a9.png

tbartold
03-04-2016, 05:54 PM
Finally, FTDNA has updated my listing from R-L2 to R-FGC8154, two branches below DF103/FGC4183 (almost as good as Richard's tree - he has me with CTS1276 below that).

Swankhuizen
06-18-2016, 09:50 AM
Hallo, could anyone give my any advise, i recently received my resuts from FTDNA, i am a R-DF103 see picture. Which SNP's test are availabe to continue my testing? thanks Robert 9831

Swankhuizen
06-22-2016, 09:34 PM
Hallo Alissio I am also a DF103 , but what does it means?