PDA

View Full Version : Ancien I1-M253>Z58



claudefrancis
09-11-2018, 03:32 PM
Hi everybody

first of all sorry for my english. I want to open this thread for the Z58 and all subclade under this.

In the first I make the test Geno 2.0 NG and after I transfer my data to FTDNA free and I order Family finder to have the raw data.

My father line is S6275 (Nord France) and my mother line is J1C2 (center Italy) for FTDNA now.

Last yesterday I buy to FTDNA some SNP pack (S20289+BY1+A6297) and Y-DNA67

I must wait about 2 month for the results

If I will find some subclade under S6275 Iwill buy new !

Now why I am confirmed by FTDNA S6275 and not S6270 ?

For you I am doing the good way for the tests ?

Last thing please I ask the administrator to modify my Gender into setting, I am M not F.

I send some message to administrator but no result !

Thanks for the help

spruithean
09-11-2018, 04:25 PM
You are S6270+, S6275 and S6270 are phyloequivalents as per YFull (https://www.yfull.com/tree/I-S6270/).

claudefrancis
09-11-2018, 04:34 PM
Thanks spruithean,

S6275 = S6270+ (this is just a new classification for FTDNA but not a new subclade) ?

Now I just wait new results for the new update info

spruithean
09-11-2018, 06:49 PM
Thanks spruithean,

S6275 = S6270+ (this is just a new classification for FTDNA but not a new subclade) ?

Now I just wait new results for the new update info


It's not necessarily a new subclade for FTDNA, but rather they've decided (for some reason or another) to refer to it by S6270 instead of S6275. Have you joined the Haplogroup I1 DNA Project (https://www.familytreedna.com/groups/y-dna-i1/about/background), or the I-Z138 DNA Project (https://www.familytreedna.com/groups/i1-z138y-dna/about)?

A famous example of companies differing on SNP designations for a haplogroup can be seen with haplogroup R-U106, which is sometimes called R-S21.

JonikW
09-11-2018, 07:14 PM
Hi everybody

first of all sorry for my english. I want to open this thread for the Z58 and all subclade under this.

In the first I make the test Geno 2.0 NG and after I transfer my data to FTDNA free and I order Family finder to have the raw data.

My father line is S6275 (Nord France) and my mother line is J1C2 (center Italy) for FTDNA now.

Last yesterday I buy to FTDNA some SNP pack (S20289+BY1+A6297) and Y-DNA67

I must wait about 2 month for the results

If I will find some subclade under S6275 Iwill buy new !

Now why I am confirmed by FTDNA S6275 and not S6270 ?

For you I am doing the good way for the tests ?

Last thing please I ask the administrator to modify my Gender into setting, I am M not F.

I send some message to administrator but no result !

Thanks for the help

It sounds like you've got a good plan and it's great to see a French I1 person testing despite the obstacles. spruithean's YFull link makes interesting viewing. I like the four A6397 samples: Russia, Germany, Scotland and Italy. Possibly a textbook example of some of the Germanic movements!

claudefrancis
09-12-2018, 06:01 AM
Hi JonikW,

At the moment S6275 for a french I don't know if is normal, but I know that my parternal family was in department Nord of France (documents) .
about 1600. Department of Nord was part of France in 1678. This area was sometime under influence of Germans, Flandres, spanish,
invasion Franks, Vikings and Hungarian. A lot of work. I am new of this research. This is not easy but interesting. After that I need
to analize my mother line. In center of Italy (Abruzzo - Chieti/Ortona) invasion of Vikings. Not easy but with patience I will try to understand.
I am enter into project I1 DNA and project I-Z138 DNA

JonikW
09-12-2018, 07:28 AM
Hi JonikW,

At the moment S6275 for a french I don't know if is normal, but I know that my parternal family was in department Nord of France (documents) .
about 1600. Department of Nord was part of France in 1678. This area was sometime under influence of Germans, Flandres, spanish,
invasion Franks, Vikings and Hungarian. A lot of work. I am new of this research. This is not easy but interesting. After that I need
to analize my mother line. In center of Italy (Abruzzo - Chieti/Ortona) invasion of Vikings. Not easy but with patience I will try to understand.
I am enter into project I1 DNA and project I-Z138 DNA

Good luck. I hope you will post your results here. I know Nord well because i enjoy a drive there sometimes on a Saturday with my family. The English are another foreign group that have passed through in a military capacity. I've been to pretty Cassel a few times, which according to one theory is the hill that the Grand Old Duke of York marched up in the 18th century in the English nursery rhyme. In any case, British forces were in the area then as well as in World War I. They're not as likely as some of your other ancestral candidates of course. A lot of people must have passed through over the millennia, as is stressed by the fact that driving around near Cassel you can really see that you're on Roman roads (my Dad taught me that trick as a kid: long straight narrow roads in the English countryside are often Roman in origin and easy to spot).

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_road_(Nord)

claudefrancis
09-12-2018, 08:51 AM
Hi

my family, in department Nord (59) in France I find direct parternal line around 1600, in St Vaast La haut (Valenciennes), Saint Souplet and Molain (02 Aisne).
Sure I will put here all what I will find, for the help of other persone.

claudefrancis
09-28-2018, 09:21 AM
Hi everybody,

today I receive of FTDNA a news of my request SNP, I am confirmed now A6397, the same day I order SNP S6402 just to know if I can be confirmed for this one.
I order 3 weeks ago Y-DNA67,I am waiting the result. Someone can help me about this new SNP A6397 !

Thanks for your help !

JonikW
09-28-2018, 02:41 PM
Hi everybody,

today I receive of FTDNA a news of my request SNP, I am confirmed now A6397, the same day I order SNP S6402 just to know if I can be confirmed for this one.
I order 3 weeks ago Y-DNA67,I am waiting the result. Someone can help me about this new SNP A6397 !

Thanks for your help !

I'm sure an expert will jump in to help out. In the meantime, I think you've done the right thing to test S6402 because you should be positive unless you're on an unknown line. From YFull I see that A6397 has a TMRCA of 3,000 ybp, so at the point where the Bronze Age was about to become the Iron Age in some cultures (it happened later in Scandinavia for example). That's given it plenty of time to spread around, as you can see from the country flags on YFull.

https://www.yfull.com/tree/I-A6397/

claudefrancis
10-01-2018, 09:31 AM
Hi everybody,

I explain last week that I am now A6397 of the tree I1, FTDNA under A6397 have
SNP S6402 and I buy it, but FTDNA have other 2 SNP, A6412 and A6613. But for the last two
you can't buy it. Maybe you can only test it with Y-DNAfull. What is you point of view
about it ?

Best

spruithean
10-01-2018, 02:05 PM
Maybe look for those SNPs at YSEQ? Or perhaps contact FTDNA?

claudefrancis
10-01-2018, 04:18 PM
Hi spruithean,

thanks for your help, I send an email to FTDNA for the clarification. But about YSEQ in I1 not exist A6412 and A6613 test !

Strange!!

Best

spruithean
10-01-2018, 04:31 PM
Are A6412/A6613 private SNPs, as in restricted to certain familial lineages? A6412 is located at chrY:13,319,662..13,319,662 on the Y-chromosome. You may want to contact YSEQ or FTDNA asking if they may offer a A6613 or A6412 SNP test.

Anyways here (https://www.yfull.com/tree/I-A6397/)is YFull's tree for I-A6397. It looks like it only branches into S6402, which then branches out further.

Did you do Big Y? Or are you doing SNP packs?

claudefrancis
10-01-2018, 04:44 PM
Hi

At the moment I make the Y-DNA67 test and I buy now SNP S6402 test.

After I will see

spruithean
10-01-2018, 05:06 PM
double post

EDIT: I would like to add YFull's tree for I-A6397 (https://www.yfull.com/tree/I-A6397/), once more for future reference.

claudefrancis
10-02-2018, 08:59 AM
Hi spruithean,

I don't understand the question is for me about the tree I-A6397 ?

JonikW
10-02-2018, 09:04 AM
Hi spruithean,

I don't understand the question is for me about the tree I-A6397 ?

I think spruithean added the link again to make it easy for us to find it. Then people here can look at it with you at a later date to help you decide how to test further.

claudefrancis
10-02-2018, 11:02 AM
I see the project I1 Z138 in FTDNA

under SNP S6402 positive there 3 direction
- scotisch (1950 TMRCA)
- scandinavian (1800/2200 TMRCA)
- hungarian/romenian (3000 TMRCA)

I remember Geno 2.0 NG inform me that I was 43% norvegian + danish but honestly I was surprise a little bit for
this result !
I know the Nord of France was under invasion of german, hungarian and vikings. But for me influence of german
are possible the rest is only dream.

spruithean
10-02-2018, 11:22 AM
Geno 2.0's "Scandinavian" estimate is actually reporting on your autosomal DNA which is inherited in a much different way from Y-DNA and mtDNA. Y-DNA and mtDNA are not involved in the estimates these companies make on your "ethnic" origins.

claudefrancis
10-04-2018, 11:45 AM
Hi spruithean,

after some analize if A6397 are positioned in end Nordic Bronze Age and start Germanic Iron Age expansion, I can say that maybe my ethnic
as more west nord german as scandinavian. If I will positive as S6402 or more maybe I will say my ethnic will be more scandinavian or
south Denmark. But at today this is just theory ! I make a test with Gedmatch with archaic DNA Cm3, I have a lot of maches with BR Hungary 3.2ky.

claudefrancis
10-05-2018, 07:09 AM
Hi

today I receive my results of Y DNA67 but honestly I don't understand
I have lot markers with 12 ancestral DNA and 25 but nothing 37 and 67.
This have a sense to buy Y DNA111 or Y DNA Full ?

JonikW
10-05-2018, 08:06 AM
Hi

today I receive my results of Y DNA67 but honestly I don't understand
I have lot markers with 12 ancestral DNA and 25 but nothing 37 and 67.
This have a sense to buy Y DNA111 or Y DNA Full ?

If you are positive for S6402 that's likely to be Bronze Age not Iron Age if it does have an origin in the Nordic region. That's because it has a TMRCA of 3,000 ybp. Don't forget that any signals you see in ancestry tests like Gedmatch (including archaic ones) may have nothing directly to do with your Y DNA so you won't find any clues there. Your autosomal DNA and Y DNA are different things requiring different tests. If you have the money, I would do Big Y and then upload to YFull. You might not find out everything you want to know now, but you will help to build the tree and could have new matches with other testers in future that will help you to discover more about where your ancestors lived. Oh, and I wouldn't pay too much attention to STRs. SNPs are what you need to focus on now.

claudefrancis
10-05-2018, 09:41 AM
Hi JonikW,
.
maybe now I will buy only YDNA111 to help me to clean some STR very far. I have a lot of matches Germany, Sweden, Norway and England.
After this analize I will concentrate my research for the SNP of this country with my A6397 or S6402 or more. My surname have a lot of evolution
variation this is not the way to find my genealogy origin. The only way is genetic. If I can't go down under 1600, I can try to go up. I am now
in nord Europe in bronze period with Y DNA I just must find the correct SNP to go up.

claudefrancis
10-05-2018, 09:41 AM
Hi JonikW,
.
maybe now I will buy only YDNA111 to help me to clean some STR very far. I have a lot of matches Germany, Sweden, Norway and England.
After this analize I will concentrate my research for the SNP of this country with my A6397 or S6402 or more. My surname have a lot of evolution
variation this is not the way to find my genealogy origin. The only way is genetic. If I can't go down under 1600, I can try to go up. I am now
in nord Europe in bronze period with Y DNA I just must find the correct SNP to go up.

JonikW
10-05-2018, 10:12 AM
Hi JonikW,
.
maybe now I will buy only YDNA111 to help me to clean some STR very far. I have a lot of matches Germany, Sweden, Norway and England.
After this analize I will concentrate my research for the SNP of this country with my A6397 or S6402 or more. My surname have a lot of evolution
variation this is not the way to find my genealogy origin. The only way is genetic. If I can't go down under 1600, I can try to go up. I am now
in nord Europe in bronze period with Y DNA I just must find the correct SNP to go up.

Hi again Claudefrancis. I wouldn't bother with more STRs, especially given what they've shown so far. If you do Big Y I believe it includes the other STR tests anyway. STR testing alone would still leave you needing to know more about SNPs. It could be that you and one of the existing testers will form a branch together. That might then tell you a lot.

claudefrancis
10-05-2018, 10:22 AM
Hi JonikW,
I will buy Y DNA111, now I am testing S6402. If S6402 will be postive a I will test the SNP branch of Sweden if S6402 will be negative I will test the SNP branch Germany and SNP branch Ireland/Scotland. But my opinion is that the way is Germany.
This is the result of Y DNA67 and will be more fine with Y DNA111.
If I have money next year I will test the Big Y, but honestly with the help of you and the forum all will be more easy. Thanks

JonikW
10-05-2018, 10:34 AM
Great. Keep us updated and I wish you all the best.

claudefrancis
10-07-2018, 02:36 PM
Hi

after a better analyse of ftdna I will change my tests in the futur.
At the moment I am A6397 and I am testing now S6402 with ftdna.
I buy Y dna111 and I buy mtdna. After the results of my Y DNA67
I was desapoited, no matches Y DNA37 and no matches Y DNA67.
People ask me to buy Big Y but sincerly after reflextion pay 449 USD
is a lot money to have what ?
Now I just wait the results of Y DNA111 but I am sure no matches or
maximum 2/3 matches very far.
About SNP I ask ftdna to buy under A6397 but the company inform me the new SNP are into
Big Y. I prefer try the way yseq. If S6402 will positive there is some subclade
to test. If S6402 negative there is A6412 and I can test it with yseq. If A6412 will be negative
there is the last one A6613 but at the moment yseq doens't have it I just must
wait. But 449 USD is a good reason to wait.

JonikW
10-07-2018, 09:04 PM
Hi

after a better analyse of ftdna I will change my tests in the futur.
At the moment I am A6397 and I am testing now S6402 with ftdna.
I buy Y dna111 and I buy mtdna. After the results of my Y DNA67
I was desapoited, no matches Y DNA37 and no matches Y DNA67.
People ask me to buy Big Y but sincerly after reflextion pay 449 USD
is a lot money to have what ?
Now I just wait the results of Y DNA111 but I am sure no matches or
maximum 2/3 matches very far.
About SNP I ask ftdna to buy under A6397 but the company inform me the new SNP are into
Big Y. I prefer try the way yseq. If S6402 will positive there is some subclade
to test. If S6402 negative there is A6412 and I can test it with yseq. If A6412 will be negative
there is the last one A6613 but at the moment yseq doens't have it I just must
wait. But 449 USD is a good reason to wait.

Yseq is a good choice in my experience, if you're not ready to do Big Y. You can "wish a SNP" there and they will test it for you:
http://www.yseq.net/product_info.php?products_id=108

claudefrancis
10-08-2018, 06:10 AM
Hi

At the moment I am waiting for SNP S6402 (FTDNA) if positive Yseq have SNP underclade of it.
If S6402 will be negative, Yseq have SNP A6412. But Yseq can create with Wish SNP a new SNP
with very low cost. If S6402 and A6412 will be negative Yseq will create SNP A6613 and he will
test it for me. I will pay max 40 EURO for the 2 tests.

claudefrancis
10-10-2018, 12:59 PM
Hi

Last day I ask the responsable of the project Z138 the situation of the clade A6397
Under clade A6397 (Bronze Nordic Age) there is 3 branches

S6402 – Sweden – Denmark - Norway
A6613 – Germany - Austria
A6412 - Ireland – Scotland - UK

This 3 branches arrive into the Germanic Iron Age expansion

Maybe S6402 will be viking influence, A6613 saxons – celtes influence
and A6412 english ?????

palamede
10-15-2018, 03:48 PM
I see the project I1 Z138 in FTDNA

under SNP S6402 positive there 3 direction
- scotisch (1950 TMRCA)
- scandinavian (1800/2200 TMRCA)
- hungarian/romenian (3000 TMRCA)

I remember Geno 2.0 NG inform me that I was 43% norvegian + danish but honestly I was surprise a little bit for
this result !
I know the Nord of France was under invasion of german, hungarian and vikings. But for me influence of german
are possible the rest is only dream.

What is the origin of your patrilinear line in North France ? Along the coast all is possible for the origin.

JonikW
10-15-2018, 08:01 PM
Hi

my family, in department Nord (59) in France I find direct parternal line around 1600, in St Vaast La haut (Valenciennes), Saint Souplet and Molain (02 Aisne).
Sure I will put here all what I will find, for the help of other persone.

This is his origin.

claudefrancis
10-17-2018, 10:00 AM
Hi,

but I know that Nord of France and in particulare area Cambresis near of Molain and Cambrai was invaded by vikings (Denmark/Nowegian) and normans.

claudefrancis
10-17-2018, 10:00 AM
Hi,

same for my mother line is born in Italy origin of Casalbordino near of Vasto, Ortona and Chieti. This city
was invaded by normans. In fact my mother haplogroup is J1c2t, genetic distance 1 from England, Scotland
and Ireland. I am very surprise.

claudefrancis
11-06-2018, 04:40 PM
Hi

today I received the result test of S6402 negative.
Now I want to test this of 2 SNP
A6613 – Germany - Austria (more probable)
A6412 - Ireland – Scotland - UK

But after some hours I receive this message of ftdna:
Haplogroup predictions are currently being updated using new data. Your haplogroup prediction may change upon completion.
I ask ftdna for clarification, ftdna are upgrade my haplogroup with new SNP maybe something can be change maybe not !

I will wait the updating because the SNP I want to test are not in ftdna but in yseq maybe now ftdna make it !

spruithean
03-07-2019, 06:42 PM
Haplotype convergence is your STRs, not SNPs. There can be near identical STR haplotypes between different haplogroup branches.

Are you doing these tests through Big Y? Or SNP packs? That could become a rather cumbersome way of testing.

claudefrancis
03-07-2019, 07:23 PM
Hi
This is the result of my Big Y700. I send my file BAM to Yfull. I observe that distant Srt I have 3 person with SNP very close but under S6402 better as my connection with A6397. It's strange I am A6397 and negative S6402 with ftdna. Now to be sure I will test again S6402 and A6469 but with yseq. To cross the result.

deadly77
03-08-2019, 09:31 AM
Hi
This is the result of my Big Y700. I send my file BAM to Yfull. I observe that distant Srt I have 3 person with SNP very close but under S6402 better as my connection with A6397. It's strange I am A6397 and negative S6402 with ftdna. Now to be sure I will test again S6402 and A6469 but with yseq. To cross the result.

Spruithean's comments on STR convergence are exactly why you are seeing this. STRs have different mutation rates to SNPs and each other. This can sometimes make the relationship via from a STR perspective appear closer than the relationship appears by SNP comparison. Here's a good article from 2017 with examples by Maurice Gleeson citing back mutations returning an STR to an ancestral value, parallel mutations and the term convergence to rationalize some of the false positives that can be observed in STR matching https://dnaandfamilytreeresearch.blogspot.com/2017/05/convergence-what-is-it.html

More recently, I've been reading Robin Spencer's Tracking Back website (a subsection of his Scaled Innovation webpages which focuses on Y-DNA genetic genealogy) and he argues that it's not technically convergence, but more of a lack of divergence away from the modal, which makes more sense if you look at it in the context of a population rather than directly comparing a few samples - see here for an overview of his points (well worth reading) http://scaledinnovation.com/gg/gg.html?rr=convergence

I'm coming towards agreeing with Robin Spencer's viewpoint that it's a lack of diversity rather than true convergence through back-mutations (although it's not impossible that is going on as well, especially with fast mutating STRs. However, the results and consequences are the same, regardless of method of how the convergence has happened. And it does happen - I'm seeing multiple examples of it in my Y111 STR results at FTDNA, even up matches at genetic distance 5-7 at the Y67 level. As expected, everyone has a lot more of these at the lower match levels (Y37, Y25, Y12). It's likely prevalent throughout branches of the I1 haplogroup in particular given our bottleneck to a relatively recent common ancestor approximately 5000-4100 years ago. Similar for some subclades of R1b, probably less of a problem for say, halpogroup E or Q.

Ideally the convergence filters out with more higher number of markers as there's less statistical noise - and you definitely see that sequentially from Y12 to Y25, Y37, Y67, Y111 levels. However, a lot of the post-Y111 STRs that are extracted from the BAM file of a NGS test are rather slow-mutating compared to the Y111, which means lost of similarities. For example, JonikW and I are both I-L338, but our common ancestors branch off from each other approximately 2900 years ago as he's on the I-S12289 branch and I'm not. But he does appear on my list of distant STR matches where we have 408 STRs that are the same and 37 that are different on the ones that can be compared.

The STR matching algorithm on YFull has undergone a few refinements over the last few weeks and will likely undergo a bit more tweaking in the future, so expect more changes in your match list. Right now, it doesn't take account of the different mutation rates of different STR markers, for example. If you want to explore STR comparison in more detail, I'd recommend checking out David Vance's SAPP utility which is a nice program that's easy to use. You can find SAPP here: http://www.jdvtools.com/SAPP/

In the majority of cases, if there's a conflict between matching on SNPs versus STRs, I'd say go with the SNP data. SNPs are biologically far more simple in my opinion, although STRs are often the "entry-level" Y-DNA test historically. All data is useful, I'm not at all saying ignore STRs - they have a lot of extremely interesting properties, and I think we'll see more of them used judicially in coming years. I missed the early years of consumer Y-DNA genetic genealogy and by the time I became interested and involved, there was a lot of dismissal of STRs as "yesterday's technology" with the advent of more accessible SNP data through NGS testing, so it's nice to see STRs making a comeback.

But specifically in your case - having STR matches at YFull who are on the I-S6402 branch doesn't make you I-S6402. If I'm reading the above, you're confirmed negative at that SNP through Big Y and individual SNP testing. In my opinion, there is no need to retest that at YSEQ. You can check the SNPs that are on the YFull tree downstream of I-S4602 such as A12110, Y18386, etc. in your own YFull results using the "Check SNPs" tab - I believe you will be negative for all of these. Instead of S6402, you'll have your own set of novel variants tracking your ancestors path from A6397 to the present day.

mwauthy
03-08-2019, 12:23 PM
Spruithean's comments on STR convergence are exactly why you are seeing this. STRs have different mutation rates to SNPs and each other. This can sometimes make the relationship via from a STR perspective appear closer than the relationship appears by SNP comparison. Here's a good article from 2017 with examples by Maurice Gleeson citing back mutations returning an STR to an ancestral value, parallel mutations and the term convergence to rationalize some of the false positives that can be observed in STR matching https://dnaandfamilytreeresearch.blogspot.com/2017/05/convergence-what-is-it.html

More recently, I've been reading Robin Spencer's Tracking Back website (a subsection of his Scaled Innovation webpages which focuses on Y-DNA genetic genealogy) and he argues that it's not technically convergence, but more of a lack of divergence away from the modal, which makes more sense if you look at it in the context of a population rather than directly comparing a few samples - see here for an overview of his points (well worth reading) http://scaledinnovation.com/gg/gg.html?rr=convergence

I'm coming towards agreeing with Robin Spencer's viewpoint that it's a lack of diversity rather than true convergence through back-mutations (although it's not impossible that is going on as well, especially with fast mutating STRs. However, the results and consequences are the same, regardless of method of how the convergence has happened. And it does happen - I'm seeing multiple examples of it in my Y111 STR results at FTDNA, even up matches at genetic distance 5-7 at the Y67 level. As expected, everyone has a lot more of these at the lower match levels (Y37, Y25, Y12). It's likely prevalent throughout branches of the I1 haplogroup in particular given our bottleneck to a relatively recent common ancestor approximately 5000-4100 years ago. Similar for some subclades of R1b, probably less of a problem for say, halpogroup E or Q.

Ideally the convergence filters out with more higher number of markers as there's less statistical noise - and you definitely see that sequentially from Y12 to Y25, Y37, Y67, Y111 levels. However, a lot of the post-Y111 STRs that are extracted from the BAM file of a NGS test are rather slow-mutating compared to the Y111, which means lost of similarities. For example, JonikW and I are both I-L338, but our common ancestors branch off from each other approximately 2900 years ago as he's on the I-S12289 branch and I'm not. But he does appear on my list of distant STR matches where we have 408 STRs that are the same and 37 that are different on the ones that can be compared.

The STR matching algorithm on YFull has undergone a few refinements over the last few weeks and will likely undergo a bit more tweaking in the future, so expect more changes in your match list. Right now, it doesn't take account of the different mutation rates of different STR markers, for example. If you want to explore STR comparison in more detail, I'd recommend checking out David Vance's SAPP utility which is a nice program that's easy to use. You can find SAPP here: http://www.jdvtools.com/SAPP/

In the majority of cases, if there's a conflict between matching on SNPs versus STRs, I'd say go with the SNP data. SNPs are biologically far more simple in my opinion, although STRs are often the "entry-level" Y-DNA test historically. All data is useful, I'm not at all saying ignore STRs - they have a lot of extremely interesting properties, and I think we'll see more of them used judicially in coming years. I missed the early years of consumer Y-DNA genetic genealogy and by the time I became interested and involved, there was a lot of dismissal of STRs as "yesterday's technology" with the advent of more accessible SNP data through NGS testing, so it's nice to see STRs making a comeback.

But specifically in your case - having STR matches at YFull who are on the I-S6402 branch doesn't make you I-S6402. If I'm reading the above, you're confirmed negative at that SNP through Big Y and individual SNP testing. In my opinion, there is no need to retest that at YSEQ. You can check the SNPs that are on the YFull tree downstream of I-S4602 such as A12110, Y18386, etc. in your own YFull results using the "Check SNPs" tab - I believe you will be negative for all of these. Instead of S6402, you'll have your own set of novel variants tracking your ancestors path from A6397 to the present day.

I agree with all of this. I look at STRs as guides for reaching out to potential recruits. However, because of the issues mentioned above I wait for SNP results prior to making any conclusions about paternal relatedness. Just to give my own personal example I have a 67 marker match with a genetic distance of 5 with whom the TMRCA of our common paternal ancestor is 1,950 ybp. There is another individual with whom the TMRCA of our common paternal ancestor is 1,400 ybp yet he is not an STR match at 12, 25, 37, 67, or 111 markers. I would never have known about him if it weren’t for snp testing. Even at 12 markers he is a genetic distance of 2.

spruithean
03-08-2019, 01:07 PM
I agree with all of this. I look at STRs as guides for reaching out to potential recruits. However, because of the issues mentioned above I wait for SNP results prior to making any conclusions about paternal relatedness. Just to give my own personal example I have a 67 marker match with a genetic distance of 5 with whom the TMRCA of our common paternal ancestor is 1,950 ybp. There is another individual with whom the TMRCA of our common paternal ancestor is 1,400 ybp yet he is not an STR match at 12, 25, 37, 67, or 111 markers. I would never have known about him if it weren’t for snp testing. Even at 12 markers he is a genetic distance of 2.

I have this as well, my two closest Big Y matches (who are actually downstream of my position) aren't anywhere to be found in my STR matches list (IIRC, maybe in my 12 markers), yet other members of I-Y7198 are relatively close STR matches yet we all diverge from the common line quite some time ago.

An example of such a match is JMcB (and his same surname matches) and me. We match on the 67 level within the accepted limit, yet our lines branched out from the common ancestor long ago. Pretty interesting stuff.

claudefrancis
03-08-2019, 02:16 PM
Hi

Thanks for the precious information. I will make the test yseq just to be sure. Now the A6397 SNP is the expension of germanic tribu (The celtics) into the period 2300 BC in Europe. This is the reason why we have about 10 people with A6397 (UK, Ile of man, Nord France, Suisse, Italy). But there is some downstream in Scandinavia (Vikings) under A6397.
The vikings his in part Celtics ?

deadly77
03-08-2019, 02:26 PM
I think the STR "convergence" is something that most folks in the I1 haplogroup are going to see in their results because of the bottleneck that lead to the overall I1/I-M253 ancestor - think of it as resetting the STR clock that all I1 folks descend from. Different subclades may see different levels of convergence - definitely within I-Z140 I see it at Y67 level among my own matches at I-L338 and as Spruithean says he and JMcB are observing it in I-Y7198. As I said above, convergence type results will likely be observed in the larger hapogroups that went through relatively recent bottlenecks. I think it's important to point out that these still do share paternal ancestry, just that it's a bit further back in time than the STR relationship indicates.

I think STRs are still useful, and should be used, but need to be considered with a degree of caution. I think it's easier to see in the context of a larger group or population, rather than comparing only two or three people as the latter view doesn't show the whole picture and you'll miss the statistical noise. Unfortunately, comparing two individuals is the main way that the data is presented to us in the context of a match list or the TiP calculator (and I feel the TiP calculator is mostly useless) so we become used to looking at that. I find SNPs are actually easier to explain in the latter view because in most cases it comes down to yes or no answers, while the STRs are a bit more complicated when you get into it. So for me in hindsight the tests are a little backward in how they should be read, but there's a historical reason for that.

deadly77
03-08-2019, 02:35 PM
Hi

Thanks for the precious information. I will make the test yseq just to be sure. Now the A6397 SNP is the expension of germanic tribu (The celtics) into the period 2300 BC in Europe. This is the reason why we have about 10 people with A6397 (UK, Ile of man, Nord France, Suisse, Italy). But there is some downstream in Scandinavia (Vikings) under A6397.
The vikings his in part Celtics ?

Personally, I wouldn't use those labels for the timeframes of these SNP mutations. I understand there is a desire to apply constructs of historical groups or peoples such as Vikings to rationalize, but I think it often leads to misconceptions. Looking at SNPs such as A6397 and S4602 the TMRCA (according to the YFull estimate, which it's important to remember is an estimate) dates to more than 2000 years ago, so significantly before what most people refer to as the Viking age in Europe. And not everybody in Scandinavia were Vikings.

claudefrancis
03-08-2019, 02:40 PM
Honestly,

A6397 is about 2300 the TMRCA in the Celtic era in Europe. About S6402 in A6469 there is some sweden people this is just a hypothese. Because a lot
of I1 are origin Scadinavia and Vikings.

mwauthy
03-08-2019, 02:48 PM
Honestly,

A6397 is about 2300 the TMRCA in the Celtic era in Europe. About S6402 in A6469 there is some sweden people this is just a hypothese. Because a lot
of I1 are origin Scadinavia and Vikings.

A few more points to add. The TMRCA estimates are based on very few samples. I prefer using their 95% confidence range which is 2700-1900 ybp. Also, where these kits are found today does not necessarily correlate to where this common ancestor was 2,700-1,900 years ago or where and when the branches afterwards deviated from each other. There is no “one size fits all” historical explanation that is going to apply to all downstream branches. It’s nice to try and guess how the story unfolded. Yet I am sure the reality of it all is probably stranger and more complicated than the fiction of our imaginations.

claudefrancis
03-08-2019, 03:29 PM
I agree with you 100% but at the moment this is just only what we have. Maybe step by step the story will be evolve as the woman viking warrior. 20 years ago nobody can be sure that the woman can be a warrior viking, today we can say maybe yes. But we must start an hypothese.

spruithean
03-08-2019, 06:23 PM
Hi

Thanks for the precious information. I will make the test yseq just to be sure. Now the A6397 SNP is the expension of germanic tribu (The celtics) into the period 2300 BC in Europe. This is the reason why we have about 10 people with A6397 (UK, Ile of man, Nord France, Suisse, Italy). But there is some downstream in Scandinavia (Vikings) under A6397.
The vikings his in part Celtics ?

The TMRCA date of 2300 ybp is not the same as 2300 BC. Also referring to people in these periods with our modern terms may or may not be appropriate. I would imagine like most I-DF29 clades I-A6397 has its origins in Northern Europe at some point.


I think the STR "convergence" is something that most folks in the I1 haplogroup are going to see in their results because of the bottleneck that lead to the overall I1/I-M253 ancestor - think of it as resetting the STR clock that all I1 folks descend from. Different subclades may see different levels of convergence - definitely within I-Z140 I see it at Y67 level among my own matches at I-L338 and as Spruithean says he and JMcB are observing it in I-Y7198. As I said above, convergence type results will likely be observed in the larger hapogroups that went through relatively recent bottlenecks. I think it's important to point out that these still do share paternal ancestry, just that it's a bit further back in time than the STR relationship indicates.

I think STRs are still useful, and should be used, but need to be considered with a degree of caution. I think it's easier to see in the context of a larger group or population, rather than comparing only two or three people as the latter view doesn't show the whole picture and you'll miss the statistical noise. Unfortunately, comparing two individuals is the main way that the data is presented to us in the context of a match list or the TiP calculator (and I feel the TiP calculator is mostly useless) so we become used to looking at that. I find SNPs are actually easier to explain in the latter view because in most cases it comes down to yes or no answers, while the STRs are a bit more complicated when you get into it. So for me in hindsight the tests are a little backward in how they should be read, but there's a historical reason for that.

STRs are useful still when it comes to genealogical relevance I feel, like determining certain STR mutations between familial lines, for example a line from a brother of my ancestor has a mutation on a marker that highlights their branch, that can be quite useful in the future.


Honestly,

A6397 is about 2300 the TMRCA in the Celtic era in Europe. About S6402 in A6469 there is some sweden people this is just a hypothese. Because a lot
of I1 are origin Scadinavia and Vikings.

A TMRCA of 2300 YBP puts that at around 282 B.C., which judging by these maps: http://worldhistorymaps.info/images/East-Hem_300bc.jpg, http://worldhistorymaps.info/images/East-Hem_200bc.jpg the Germanic people had a presence in Europe right where I would expect to find a significant population of I-DF29 clades.

It's also worth noting that formation and TMRCA time estimations are simply that, they are estimations based off of the sample sizes we have right now, they could be far older, or far younger.


I agree with you 100% but at the moment this is just only what we have. Maybe step by step the story will be evolve as the woman viking warrior. 20 years ago nobody can be sure that the woman can be a warrior viking, today we can say maybe yes. But we must start an hypothese.

I'm not sure that's necessarily true, I don't think we necessarily needed evidence of a Viking warrior being female, when we already know a lot of Scandinavian myths involve Valkyries and female warrior figures.

Agreed, we always must start with hypotheses and theories, that's what gets the ball rolling.

claudefrancis
03-08-2019, 07:11 PM
Sure, this is just theory, with period, TMRCA, clade. We need more samples of A6397 and downstream to explain better. 10 years ago people not agree with some theory. Today with technology, tests more deeper a lot of things change. In France this tests are not permitted this is the reason why I maked outside but a lot work must be make. But this is interesting to give point of view and introduce theory. Try to shot the stars to arrive to touch the moon.

claudefrancis
03-09-2019, 01:14 PM
Hi

about the convergence STR, I agree with you with the upstream is normal level Z58 or more
up I understand that. The problem is that I have convergence downstream under my SNP A6397.
Someone can say me one can be just execption but 3 persone no. Under SNP S6402. This is a fact
and the other problem is that into the distant STR classification. Into the best 6 distant STR
people, 3 of them are in the six, the first , third and four. The person has the same SNP A6397
as my is fift. Normaly if someone has the same SNP as my must be the best closer I think or
not ? This is for me a strange aspect because I am tested negative S6402, this is the reason
why I test again S6402 but other company, just to be sure. Now to return to The Celts the invasion
in Europe is about 1000 BC to 25 BC. If my SNP is aproximatly +/- 300 BC I can say with sure error
time maybe A6397 can be Celtic. About 10 people are A6397, Suisse, France, Italy, Germany, Autriche,
UK, Romania, Scotland this can be realist.

mwauthy
03-09-2019, 02:42 PM
Hi

about the convergence STR, I agree with you with the upstream is normal level Z58 or more
up I understand that. The problem is that I have convergence downstream under my SNP A6397.
Someone can say me one can be just execption but 3 persone no. Under SNP S6402. This is a fact
and the other problem is that into the distant STR classification. Into the best 6 distant STR
people, 3 of them are in the six, the first , third and four. The person has the same SNP A6397
as my is fift. Normaly if someone has the same SNP as my must be the best closer I think or
not ? This is for me a strange aspect because I am tested negative S6402, this is the reason
why I test again S6402 but other company, just to be sure. Now to return to The Celts the invasion
in Europe is about 1000 BC to 25 BC. If my SNP is aproximatly +/- 300 BC I can say with sure error
time maybe A6397 can be Celtic. About 10 people are A6397, Suisse, France, Italy, Germany, Autriche,
UK, Romania, Scotland this can be realist.

What part of France are you from? It’s possible that your common paternal ancestor was still in Scandinavia prior to branching off to all of these different countries. Your particular branch could have maybe entered France with the Belgae, Franks, Normans, Visigoths, Vandals, Saxons, or Burgundians?

claudefrancis
03-09-2019, 03:20 PM
My direct patern line in Nord pas de Calais nord of France in Molain about in 1705.
I find some Surname (very rare in Nord of France) in 1600 in Valenciennes but I am not sure about is connected with me is about 40 kms of last direct family connection father direct line city Bertry and 50 kms of Molain.

mwauthy
03-09-2019, 04:06 PM
My direct patern line in Nord pas de Calais nord of France in Molain about in 1705.
I find some Surname (very rare in Nord of France) in 1600 in Valenciennes but I am not sure about is connected with me is about 40 kms of last direct family connection father direct line city Bertry and 50 kms of Molain.

Based on that location the source of your I1 could be from a variety of historical influences including Belgae, Franks, Saxons, Normans, or other Viking influences. My own I1 entered the British Isles with the Anglo-Saxons or Great Heathen Army prior to relocating to Belgium during the Renaissance. Based on your location a similar British Isles entry first could have occurred with your paternal line.

claudefrancis
03-09-2019, 04:30 PM
Maybe Germans tribu arrived of east Europe, maybe Celtic migration and after go to Scandinavia. In 800 to
1000 AC a lot of invasion of Vikings in this area in particular The Cambresis in Nord of France.
For me is to urly to be sure but an interesting theory and possible.I have a lot of gd2 from UK and Scandinavia.

spruithean
03-09-2019, 04:51 PM
Hi

about the convergence STR, I agree with you with the upstream is normal level Z58 or more
up I understand that. The problem is that I have convergence downstream under my SNP A6397.
Someone can say me one can be just execption but 3 persone no. Under SNP S6402. This is a fact
and the other problem is that into the distant STR classification. Into the best 6 distant STR
people, 3 of them are in the six, the first , third and four. The person has the same SNP A6397
as my is fift. Normaly if someone has the same SNP as my must be the best closer I think or
not ? This is for me a strange aspect because I am tested negative S6402, this is the reason
why I test again S6402 but other company, just to be sure. Now to return to The Celts the invasion
in Europe is about 1000 BC to 25 BC. If my SNP is aproximatly +/- 300 BC I can say with sure error
time maybe A6397 can be Celtic. About 10 people are A6397, Suisse, France, Italy, Germany, Autriche,
UK, Romania, Scotland this can be realist.

You can share SNPs and not share SNPs and still be part of the same root haplogroup, take JMcB and myself for example we are both members of the I-Y7198 branch, however beyond that our lines diverge. Our lineages are still related, but not for a LONG time. This can be said about your matches with S6402 individuals, they are related to you, but not in a genealogical timeframe. You both share a common ancestor at A6397.


Please don't take the TMRCA estimations as gospel, they are estimations. You really can't know for sure if your branch of I-Z138 is Celtic or Germanic with these small samples. We can only hypothesize and that's about as far as we can go until (and this is a huge IF) we get more samples and more importantly, ancient examples of various I-Z58 clades throughout Europe. If I recall correctly, they found a medieval sample of I-Z58>Z59>Z2041>Z2040>Z382>Y5384 in Poland, who was dated to about 1000-1200 AD.

claudefrancis
03-09-2019, 05:20 PM
You have right this is the reason why I wrote this is theory.
At today I am A6397 and 10 people around Europe. The position SNP A6397 is about theorical old 2300 years into Celtics period. I have 48 contacts in GD 2 and about 30 come UK and Scandinavia. I just say it's possible nothing more. Maybe in the futur 10/20 years with more results we will make better analize. But at today this theory is possible not sure but just possible.

claudefrancis
03-10-2019, 08:22 AM
You say me that for y DNA is complicate datation because a lot of mutation and very far about 2500 years ago or less. OK I understand but datation mtdna in this case low mutation and not far are more correct with datation because 1000 years ago or less?

MacUalraig
03-10-2019, 09:58 AM
You say me that for y DNA is complicate datation because a lot of mutation and very far about 2500 years ago or less. OK I understand but datation mtdna in this case low mutation and not far are more correct with datation because 1000 years ago or less?

Best to not take either 100% seriously. mtDNA is very slow to mutate. Y is quicker but even so, you can go many hundreds of years without a mutation or get a bunch all at once. Over thousands or better still tens/hundreds of thousands Y dating isn't bad.

claudefrancis
03-10-2019, 03:03 PM
At today we have only some importants test Big y700, history, yfull, etc..... I am just wrtiting a possible story. Tomorrow all the story can be cancel. The point is into my matches Y DNA 25/37 I have 48 contacts, but 20 matches is from UK/Scandinavia in GD2. Some matches are between 1500 – 1700. My direct line father is in nord France 1700 and some surname (very rare in France) 1600 about 40 kms of my direct in Valenciennes (Nord France). I just say origin german tribu, maybe Celtics and in the end possible invasion Vikings. Maybe in the futur with more tests all the story can cancel or confirm. Look Cambresis in France the vikings inavision 800 to 1000.
I find some surname in Valenciennes in 1600 a lot of people go out of the city for the plague and go into little town. I have document migration of this periode go out of the city same for my surname about 40 kms. I just say is possible.

mwauthy
03-10-2019, 03:50 PM
At today we have only some importants test Big y700, history, yfull, etc..... I am just wrtiting a possible story. Tomorrow all the story can be cancel. The point is into my matches Y DNA 25/37 I have 48 contacts, but 20 matches is from UK/Scandinavia in GD2. Some matches are between 1500 – 1700. My direct line father is in nord France 1700 and some surname (very rare in France) 1600 about 40 kms of my direct in Valenciennes (Nord France). I just say origin german tribu, maybe Celtics and in the end possible invasion Vikings. Maybe in the futur with more tests all the story can cancel or confirm. Look Cambresis in France the vikings inavision 800 to 1000.
I find some surname in Valenciennes in 1600 a lot of people go out of the city for the plague and go into little town. I have document migration of this periode go out of the city same for my surname about 40 kms. I just say is possible.

An interesting coincidence is that Valenciennes, France is only 60 miles away from Gerpinnes, Belgium where my paternal ancestors first show up around 1650. Luckily, my family lore always stated we came from the British Isles prior to Belgium as religious refugees and it’s interesting to see the Y dna evidence confirm this family legend.

claudefrancis
03-10-2019, 03:56 PM
Bertry and Molain in France are about 40 kms of south Valenciennes. The history of this area is mix of invasions
Celtics, Vikings etc.... It's difficult to understand but very interesting!

claudefrancis
03-14-2019, 02:06 PM
Hi

yesterday night I have observed better my STR in Yfull. I am A6397 and tested negative
S6402. Now There is 2 point the best distant STR matches I have 29 matches. The best five
are 2 sweden, 1 german, 1 Isle of Man and 1 scotland. The 2 sweden the first and third are under S6402.
Casuality I don't know I have observed that into STR variants I have 9 STR in end mutation to
S6402. Maybe this is the reason why I am closer as a sweden men A6469 under S6402 and
closer as other sweden men Y18386 under S6402. I have studied a old theory about
Haplogroup I1 STR clusters of 2011 and updated 2013 about STR origin. All my STR tested
I arrive in I1 cluster ABB – Norway (perfect number). I don't know if this tests are to old or this
approach is just theory but maybe STR are correct for Y DNA origin/genealogy for 500 to
1500 years and deeper better SNP.

claudefrancis
03-15-2019, 04:43 PM
Hi

today I receive update of Yfull about my SNP I-A6397, now the postition time estimation passed
300 BC to about 900 BC. Honestly I am happy my SNP was composed of origin Italy, Russia,
France, UK to large distance for origin country. This now have more sense this was just tribes
in movement into Europe.This SNP need more people to break the branch to created new. But I
think the datation is more correct as before.

claudefrancis
03-18-2019, 11:22 AM
Hi

new broken under A6397 now we have S6402 - A6613 - A6412 and A6625.
The SNP A6397 was repositioned about 2900 TMRCA into migration tribes to Europe.
I am maked now 2 tests S6402 (again) and A6625 with Yseq. I am waiting the results.

spruithean
03-18-2019, 11:44 AM
Why would you test a SNP you were already confirmed negative for again? Did they test your sample for all SNPs below A6397 and confirm you were negative for anything downstream so far? That would place your position on the tree at I-A6397*.

claudefrancis
03-18-2019, 05:06 PM
Hi

FTDNA tested only A6397 postive and S6402 negative and after I have maked Big Y700 with 42 new SNP. But I study my file BAM with Yfull, 3 people with SNP under S6402 are best distant STR /0,63) - 3 sweden people with A6625. I want just be sure negative of S6402 and idem for A6625 under S6402. I will test SNP A6412 and A6613 the 2 branch under A6397. The problem with FTDNA that have nothing under A6397 to
test about new SNP. FTDNA is invested for STR nothing of new pack of SNP.

spruithean
03-18-2019, 05:55 PM
So you have your Big Y results? What did they say about your haplogroup? If Big Y confirmed that you are just I-A6397 then buying more SNP tests was a waste.

claudefrancis
03-18-2019, 07:53 PM
No Ftdna no make more test SNP. I am A6397, but I have 42 new SNP unnamed. If I am closer at some str and this str are S6402, A6625, A6613 or A6412. I want to know of is confidence or just casuality.

spruithean
03-18-2019, 11:33 PM
Your 42 Unnamed SNPs are not "on the tree" yet, and several may be private to your lineage. These unnamed variants are not to be confused with S6402, A6625, A6613 or A6412. They are their own entities until proven phyloequivalents or new branches.

mwauthy
03-19-2019, 01:49 AM
So you have your Big Y results? What did they say about your haplogroup? If Big Y confirmed that you are just I-A6397 then buying more SNP tests was a waste.

If it was a “no call” I would test at YSEQ. If he tested negative then I agree that it’s a waste of money. He should search the SNP on his Yfull account to see how many reads came in negative and if any reads came out positive.

claudefrancis
03-19-2019, 08:52 AM
I have downloaded the file no call SNP, but S6402, A6613, A6412 and A6625 are not included into this file.
No positive, no negative just not included. For me maybe not tested for FTDNA because not included into
Big Y700. In this case the test Yseq have a sense.

deadly77
03-19-2019, 09:31 AM
I will contact yfull to have the file no call SNP (problem to download file) but FTDNA no search new SNP named just inform about new SNP unnamed.

That won't get you the answer. You need to use the check SNPs utility at YFull. Go to your YFull homepage, and click on "Check SNPs" tab on the left hand menu (highlighted in yellow. 29449
Type in S6402 and hit "Go" - if SNP is in the database (which S6402 is), it will display the result - from my own results, a red minus sign for negative. 29451
Yours will probably look similar as you're S6402-. You can get a little more information about the number of reads as MWauthy suggested by clicking on the yellow magnifying glass to the left of S6402. 29452
This will tell you if you're negative, positive, ambiguous or no call. Repeat with SNPs that are downstream of S6402 such as A12110, Y18386 if you need convincing and also with the SNPs on the I-A6625 branch.

I fully agree with Spruithean that testing S6402 at YSEQ is a waste of money. You already have two tests (single SNP and Big Y Y700) and a third party analysis from YFull that says that you are negative for S6402. YSEQ will say the same. But if you really need to convince yourself, single SNP tests at YSEQ are not too expensive and it's your money. However, it's not logical when three pieces of information agree a negative result.

I also would not recommend testing A6625 at YSEQ. You should check the raw data in your BAM file as MWauthy recommended. Occasionally, ambiguous calls and no calls for a SNP can result in a sample not being placed onto a subclade branch. However, I-A6625 is defined by 17 SNPs in addition to A6625. It is unlikely that you will be a no call or ambiguous for all of these SNPs, especially when your kit has the third highest coverage in I-A6397 branch.

As Spruithean says, the I-S6402 and I-A6625 branches represent divergences from your own Y line ancestor, despite what you believe the STR result matches to people in these branches. You have 42 novel SNPs instead of these, 18 of which YFull deems acceptable for age estimation. These are the SNPs you should focus on rather than ones such as S4602 and A6625.

claudefrancis
03-19-2019, 10:59 AM
Hi

I have used what you explain me and you are right but one SNP is not tested:
S6402 - is negative idem downstream
A6613 - is negative
A6625 - is negative
A6412 - not used for analyse file Bam - no test yseq into yfull - I will test A6412 only.

About the 43 new SNP Yfull
30 best quality
03 acceptable
04 ambiguous
06 one read

Age estimation in yfull
Under A6397 there is 17 new SNP

I have used ybrowse to dermined the new 17 SNP under A6397
15 SNP - have code Y..........
but 2 SNP have named idem in Yfull
BY104255 - acceptable quality
BY111857 - best quality

What is the signification of Y...... but there is 2 SNP tested with Big Y same as my SNP is correct ?
In this case is a new branch ?

Last point 2 weeks ago FTDNA into my Big Y700 I have 42 SNP unnamed variants now 38.
But the 2 SNP following SNP has considered for FTDNA unnamed variant into the 38:
BY104255 - acceptable quality
BY111857 - best quality

deadly77
03-20-2019, 09:12 AM
I have downloaded the file no call SNP, but S6402, A6613, A6412 and A6625 are not included into this file.
No positive, no negative just not included. For me maybe not tested for FTDNA because not included into
Big Y700. In this case the test Yseq have a sense.

That's because they're not no calls - I can't see your data because it's your account, but you have reads for some of these SNPS (positive or negative) from posts as in this thread. I'm assuming that you're looking at the Hg and SNPs tab. This looks at the SNPs that are on every established branch upstream of you, in your case I-A6397 branch, I-S20289 branch, I-S6270 branch, all the way back through I-Z138, I1, I, IJ, and back to A0-T. It doesn't include novel SNPs or SNPs for haplogroups that you're negative for - so it wouldn't include SNPs on the I-S6402 branch or SNPs that are found in the R1b group for example. You can get a similar output to these SNPs as they're arranged on the YTree by clicking on the YReport, although this won't display the SNPs from that list that are not on the YFull tree (such as SNPs with a 1 star rating).

deadly77
03-20-2019, 09:58 AM
Hi

I have used what you explain me and you are right but one SNP is not tested:
S6402 - is negative idem downstream
A6613 - is negative
A6625 - is negative
A6412 - not used for analyse file Bam - no test yseq into yfull - I will test A6412 only.

About the 43 new SNP Yfull
30 best quality
03 acceptable
04 ambiguous
06 one read

Age estimation in yfull
Under A6397 there is 17 new SNP

I have used ybrowse to dermined the new 17 SNP under A6397
15 SNP - have code Y..........
but 2 SNP have named idem in Yfull
BY104255 - acceptable quality
BY111857 - best quality

What is the signification of Y...... but there is 2 SNP tested with Big Y same as my SNP is correct ?
In this case is a new branch ?

Last point 2 weeks ago FTDNA into my Big Y700 I have 42 SNP unnamed variants now 38.
But the 2 SNP following SNP has considered for FTDNA unnamed variant into the 38:
BY104255 - acceptable quality
BY111857 - best quality

When YFull lists a sample as "not used for analysis" it usually means that it's not on the YFull tree. YFull requires the SNP to be observed in two different samples in their database. So the reason A6412 has this message is most likely because either no one or just one person who is positive for A6412 has uploaded their BAM to YFull while there are three people positive for this SNP at FTDNA, so if there is a A6412+ individual at YFull, they will be in the I-A6397* branch until a new kit that is A6412+ joins YFull. Similar thing happened recently on your branch - YF09338 was in I-A6397* until YF18900 uploaded and established new branch I-A6625 with YF09338. Regardless, FTDNA doesn't have you on this branch, so you are likely negative for A6412 but you still need to click on the magnifying glass to see the reads. I can see it in my two kits and it's registered at YBrowse and it's in the CombBED region. "Not used for analysis" doesn't mean no call. Unlikely to be a candidate for testing for yourself at YSEQ.

For testing at YSEQ, good candidates are the novel SNPs that are in the ambiguous or one read category as this will clear up some of these calls one way or another. YSEQ won't add SNPs that are in certain categories, mostly based on their location on the Y chromosome (PAR, CEN, DYZ19, post palindromic region) so don't suggest any of the ones in those categories. You can look up the position at YFull, so for example SNPs in the DYZ19 region from 20054914 to 20351054 will be rejected by YSEQ. They may also reject SNPs that they consider homologous - YFull may flag these with a red box with "H" or a grey box with "MC". At some point in the future, will be able to upload YSEQ SNP results to YFull to override ambiguous, one read and no calls from the BAM but this feature not available yet. Most of the one reads are not worth it - I had 18 one reads in my YElite and cross checking them with WGS shows only one of them in genuine.

The age estimation tool under "x novels" will tell you why some of the novel SNPs are not used for age estimation. In most cased it's because the SNP is found outside of the CombBED region, but sometimes because it's found in too many different haplogroups, the quality (less than 90%), the number of reads (1 or 2 read SNPs excluded) or if it's a MNP like an indel.

Regarding the names of the SNPs, YFull checks against the Ybrowse database. If the SNP has been registered, they use the SNP name that is there. If not, they create a new name for the SNP with a Y prefix and register at YBrowse. SNPs with a BY prefix are named by FTDNA. A SNP being named does not mean a new branch. A new branch requires two or more kits to share the SNP and for it to be phylogenetically consistent and for it to be high enough quality (best or acceptable in the case of novel SNPs).

claudefrancis
03-20-2019, 10:51 AM
Dear Deadly77
All is clear but about the estimation age under A6397 there is 17 novel SNP unnamed but 2 of them start with
BY. This 2 SNP with BY are from FTDNA and are same
as my SNP, this is a new branch or a variant of A6397 ?
About the ambiguous are SNP in conflict with my branch?
The SNP one read are valid for new SNP or you need a minimum read to considere valid the SNP?

deadly77
03-20-2019, 11:41 AM
Dear Deadly77
All is clear but about the estimation age under A6397 there is 17 novel SNP unnamed but 2 of them start with
BY. This 2 SNP with BY are from FTDNA and are same
as my SNP, this is a new branch or a variant of A6397 ?
About the ambiguous are SNP in conflict with my branch?
The SNP one read are valid for new SNP or you need a minimum read to considere valid the SNP?

They are named, but the YFull age estimation tab may not display the name (it doesn't for mine) - but they have position in hg19 and hg38 so you know which ones they are.

No, these SNPs are not new branch yet. They are currently among your novel SNPs. Given that they are in the CombBED region and are registered at YBrowse, they would be used to form a new branch on the tree if someone else is shown to be positive for these SNPs in another sample and the SNPs are not rejected on other criteria. Currently neither BY104255 or BY111857 is listed on either FTDNA's public haplotree or YFull tree. Perhaps it will be in the future. I don't know what you mean by variant of A6397.

There's no way that I can know if the ambiguous SNPs are in conflict with your branch. You will need to look these up, cross reference with both trees, and ideally with the novel SNPs that are in the results of other people on your branch (with their cooperation since these SNPs are private to these individuals and not publicly available).

By themselves in isolation, the one-read SNPs are not valid. I'm pretty sure that neither YFull or FTDNA would use such a SNP to add a new branch to their trees. However, a SNP that is one read in your test may have multiple consistent reads in someone else's test. For upstream, established SNPs, individuals with one read can be assumed positive. It's a lot more shaky ground when you get off the established tree and into novel SNPs. One read SNPs can be false positives and so should be treated with caution, but they can be confirmed or rejected by Sanger sequencing at YSEQ, as long as they are in the regions that YSEQ approves for testing.

claudefrancis
03-20-2019, 12:17 PM
Deadly77

Very clear in all part. I must just wait now in the futur to find other people with some of my same SNP. I was a little optimist!
Thanks for all clarification.

deadly77
03-20-2019, 02:22 PM
Nothing wrong with being optimistic. But perhaps in a more realistic point of view comes with the understanding that the Y-DNA tested population is still pretty small, and the proportion of those that has undergone more extensive NGS testing is even smaller. Some people find close Y-DNA paternal matches within the times of paper records but the reality for a lot of us is finding that our common ancestor with other testers in databases is pretty far back in time. That's the case for me too. But the data available and the options to the customer has never been better, and will continue to increase in the future. Getting Y-DNA sequenced to high resolution and involving that data in relevant projects and databases as you have done is a good place to be for finding people who match you the closest, but nothing guaranteed. Some folks actively recruit descendants from surname projects, people who claim descent from a mutual ancestor, autosomal DNA matches, Y-STR matches who haven't tested to the same level with varying degrees of success. There are some who advocate testing known close patrilineal relatives to fill out your branch on the Y tree, but personally I don't see the point of that. So, no guarantees, but there's a fair bit to find out that is interesting.

claudefrancis
03-20-2019, 08:46 PM
Thank you for the explanation. It's great to have people like you! You have the patience to explain in all particular the tests. Thanks a lot, now I understand a little bit more this univers.

claudefrancis
03-28-2019, 02:13 PM
Hi

I have a question about the Y-DNA ancestral origins

To know the ancestral origin country is better to be related with ?

12 Markers – GD exact

or

25 Markers – GD -2

spruithean
03-28-2019, 05:33 PM
Hi

I have a question about the Y-DNA ancestral origins

To know the ancestral origin country is better to be related with ?

12 Markers – GD exact

or

25 Markers – GD -2

Neither. You cannot simply determine country of origin through matches and genetic distance. Country of origin is determined through paper trail, Y-DNA area of origin is based off educated guesses.

claudefrancis
03-28-2019, 10:07 PM
Hi

Sorry I not explain me perfect:

Is more closer a relation with 12 markers GD exact as 25 markers GD -2 ?

spruithean
03-29-2019, 02:22 AM
The more markers the more confident you can be in the match. However 12 and 25 markers are not as reliable as Y37, Y67, Y111, Y500, Y700.

mwauthy
03-29-2019, 03:39 AM
Hi

Sorry I not explain me perfect:

Is more closer a relation with 12 markers GD exact as 25 markers GD -2 ?

In my opinion 12 marker matches are useless especially for I1 since we share a relatively recent common ancestor around 4,600 years ago. I have a Y-12 match that is I-L22 meaning our most recent common ancestor is I-DF29.

Even at 67 markers convergence can be an issue. My first cousin has a 67 marker match with a genetic distance of 4 (5 for me). Our most recent subclade with this individual is between 1,500-2,000 years ago. I really only trust 111 markers and above. A lot of migrating can occur over 2,000 years so it’s very difficult to assign ancestral countries of origins for subclades that are millennia old based on where the tester lives today.

claudefrancis
03-29-2019, 07:38 AM
Hi
With 12 markers GD exact I tey to find
relation with M253 or Z138 or Z58 or more downstream!
I must make the research manually because FTDNA
software don't make it with tge entire database FTDNA.
This approach not give perfect relation but some indication. In fact when I arrive near of my SNP
the most part of people are Scandinavian!
about 1500/1000 BC of SNP. This is just an indication
I need more samples of other people to confirm.

claudefrancis
03-29-2019, 07:39 AM
Hi
With 12 markers GD exact I try to find only
relation with M253 or Z138 or Z58 or more downstream!
I must make the research manually because FTDNA
software don't make it with the entire database FTDNA.
This approach not give perfect relation but some indication. In fact when I arrive near of my SNP
the most part of people are Scandinavian!
about 1500/1000 BC of SNP. This is just an indication
I need more samples of other people to confirm. The other people are from UK or
nord Germany. This method are not scientific but give some tendencies!

mwauthy
03-29-2019, 01:44 PM
Hi
With 12 markers GD exact I try to find only
relation with M253 or Z138 or Z58 or more downstream!
I must make the research manually because FTDNA
software don't make it with the entire database FTDNA.
This approach not give perfect relation but some indication. In fact when I arrive near of my SNP
the most part of people are Scandinavian!
about 1500/1000 BC of SNP. This is just an indication
I need more samples of other people to confirm. The other people are from UK or
nord Germany. This method are not scientific but give some tendencies!

A Scandinavian/Northern Germany origin for many I1 subclades is a logical deduction prior to Germanic and Viking expansion. I thought you meant the origin for certain subclades within the past 1,000 years after Germanic and Viking expansion. If you look online at a map of the Nordic (Scandinavian) Bronze Age I think it covers many of the I1 subclade origins around 3,500 years ago. Also, because there are more people with British Isles ancestry that have tested at Ftdna it will skew the distribution analysis of downstream subclades.

To add a few more points about the variability of STRs and problems of convergence even at 67 markers let me provide you with a few more examples. I have a 67 marker match genetic distance of 3 that only becomes 5 at 111 markers because we most likely share a common ancestor within the past 500 years. I have three more 67 STR matches with genetic distances of 5, 7, and 7 that become 116,116, and 118 and 111 markers. My common ancestor with these folks is probably 1,500-2,000 years ago. If this kind of variability exists at 67 markers for I1 imagine the problems that arise with only analyzing 12 or 25 markers.

claudefrancis
03-31-2019, 08:37 AM
You have right, but we can say about 1000 BC, M253 was problably nord germanic tribles/scandinavian. Now between 1000 BC to 1000 AC there is an explosion of M253 and definition country origin popolation this will be the challenge for the futur tests. Maybe STR will be more necessary for 500 AC to 1500 AC for genealogy and the last origin country.
I have generation relation 84% to 64% with 2/3 sweden (same area - 100kms) persone with generation 10 - with Y37. Idem for UK persone about 85% same situation.
But the older person sweden has 1580 AC born in sweden near of a lake, there is 3 sweden person high generation relation same situation. This is the reason why STR can be more necessary as SNP.

claudefrancis
04-04-2019, 10:05 AM
Hi

now about convergence I observe that I am A6397 into Yfull under my SNP there 2 principale group, Scotland and Sweden.
The best 10 are from:
4 Scotland
3 Sweden
mix

Now about the convergence STR I have 10 people distant matchs but if I esclude all upstream A6397, there is 2 people under A6397 with STR convergent and this 2 people are fron Sweden and the best one is from Sweden.

If I observe my haplogroup with GD analyse same situation. Into GD -2 there is 2 big group with Y25/37 DNA:
UK
Scandinavia

I know this is just indcation but if M253 is an indicator about viking influence, and the area in UK an Scandinavia was under an influence of vkings and I have 2 people with STR distant STR convergent of Sweden and the area of Nord of France in particular Cambresis was under influence different time by vikings, maybe this group of information give an indication, sure not a certification but an indication or not ?

deadly77
04-04-2019, 11:25 PM
claudefrancis - please stop sending me private messages.

claudefrancis
04-05-2019, 12:43 PM
Hi deadly77,

sure I NEVER will send you again question or other by private messages.

claudefrancis
04-10-2019, 01:14 PM
Hi

Today I open my FTDNA and I read my new, but I don't know if is correct, new SNP I-BY104255 ?????????

I was A6397 - now under A6397 is FGC79161+FGC41662+FGC79162 and under I-BY10455+BY52113+FT14223+BY111857+BY62882

When I observe yfull into new SNP was I-BY10455+BY52113+FT14223+BY111857+BY62882

Just some questions:
My Big Y700 test open a new branch or new SNP under A6397 ?
there is other person with my SNP ?
Why FTDNA use Full Genomes codes or other company codes and not SNP number ?

Thanks for collaboration

claudefrancis
04-11-2019, 12:23 PM
Hi

the tree I1 under SNP A6397 (FTDNA) has changed, now we have:
A6397
-------- BY34656 (A6613 + A6625 + more) - Germany + Swizzerland
-------- FGC41661 + more - ??????????
------------------------- S6402 - Scotland + UK + Sweden
------------------------- A6412 + more - Scotland + UK
------------------------- BY104255 + more - France ??????

Now if we will have the origin of FGC41661 + FGC79161 + FGC41662 + FGC79162 maybe Nordic - the SNP BY104255 can be imported
in Nord of France by invasion.

spruithean
04-11-2019, 05:07 PM
We can't just simply assume an origin by looking at where other testers have their origins. We can only infer that groups of people from these lineages spread out to these countries.

claudefrancis
04-11-2019, 07:39 PM
You have right but if FGC41661will be more nordic and if
BY104255 will be more nordic, maybe, I say maybe this
SNP was influenced by invasion. I will contact people with this FGC..... to know the origin and inform!

claudefrancis
07-23-2019, 05:00 PM
Hi everybody,

some months ago FTDNA has discovered with my Big Y700 some new SNP
FGC41661 and BY104255.

We have now I-M253>Z258>Z138>A6397>FGC41661>BY104255

Yfull positioned FGC41661 about 2900 BCE

My last direct paternal line is born in 1705 in nord of France, I can say with little
mistake error that my origin is Germanic tribes. Now under this SNP FGC41661 there is a 3 split
Scotland/Germany/Poland/Hungary - Germanic/Sweden – France (BY104255). This area with
frisians (nord Germany + Holland) transform to franks go to south (Belgium + nord of France).
This is the reason I told my self, ok Germans tribes, frisians to franks into this area logic !
The last month I was to considered my origin more, german or more franks. But 2 weeks ago
I control better into Yfull distant STR. I haved 3 very close distant STR (0,062) contacts. 2 of them
are from Sweden. But one the closer has from Brazil but the origin of José Luis Medeiros born in
1720 is from Azores. I know that Azores was visited by vikings, there is some documents about that.
Very strange , SNP vikings are more Z140, Z63, Z59 etc..... but nothing about Z138 or under. I don't say
that I am origin vikings just german tribes but this close distant STR confuse me.

spruithean
07-23-2019, 06:04 PM
The Azores were settled more heavily by Flemings. Haplogroup I-Z140 in the Azores: https://phylogeographer.com/two-subclades-of-i1-z141-with-potential-to-be-viking-migrants-to-the-azores/

Not that Z140 is the same as Z138, just worth a read.

JonikW
07-23-2019, 07:14 PM
Hi everybody,

some months ago FTDNA has discovered with my Big Y700 some new SNP
FGC41661 and BY104255.

We have now I-M253>Z258>Z138>A6397>FGC41661>BY104255

Yfull positioned FGC41661 about 2900 BCE

My last direct paternal line is born in 1705 in nord of France, I can say with little
mistake error that my origin is Germanic tribes. Now under this SNP FGC41661 there is a 3 split
Scotland/Germany/Poland/Hungary - Germanic/Sweden – France (BY104255). This area with
frisians (nord Germany + Holland) transform to franks go to south (Belgium + nord of France).
This is the reason I told my self, ok Germans tribes, frisians to franks into this area logic !
The last month I was to considered my origin more, german or more franks. But 2 weeks ago
I control better into Yfull distant STR. I haved 3 very close distant STR (0,062) contacts. 2 of them
are from Sweden. But one the closer has from Brazil but the origin of José Luis Medeiros born in
1720 is from Azores. I know that Azores was visited by vikings, there is some documents about that.
Very strange , SNP vikings are more Z140, Z63, Z59 etc..... but nothing about Z138 or under. I don't say
that I am origin vikings just german tribes but this close distant STR confuse me.

Hi again. I can't find BY104255 or FGC41661on YFull. It said one isn't available and the other isn't on the tree. I can see them on FTDNA though.
No need to be confused about your STR matches. They mean nothing unless the match is also a close SNP match. SNPs are the only thing you need to look at. To show you what I mean: my terminal SNP match isn't a close STR match and some people match me quite closely on STRs even though SNPs prove they are more distant in reality.

paulcharles
07-24-2019, 06:58 AM
Dear JonikW

I am Paul I answer for my brother claudefrancis (banned) for a misunderstanding of him I hope this situation will be resolved soon. The SNP FGC41661 is same as FGC79161
but when my brother send the file BAM to Yfull - FTDNA coded FGC79161 now FTDNA updated it with FGC41661. But Yfull have the old code. Under FGC41661 my brother
is BY104255 but is alone, I not make test DNA to expensive for me Big Y700. I am at today I-Z138.

JonikW
07-24-2019, 08:15 AM
Dear JonikW

I am Paul I answer for my brother claudefrancis (banned) for a misunderstanding of him I hope this situation will be resolved soon. The SNP FGC41661 is same as FGC79161
but when my brother send the file BAM to Yfull - FTDNA coded FGC79161 now FTDNA updated it with FGC41661. But Yfull have the old code. Under FGC41661 my brother
is BY104255 but is alone, I not make test DNA to expensive for me Big Y700. I am at today I-Z138.

Hi Paul. Good to hear from you. I can see your SNP now and it has a TMRCA of 2,900 ybp. With Russia, Scotland and Italy above it, it looks very interesting. Perhaps it could have been spread a long time after that date by several Germanic tribes, some along the Baltic (Goths, Gepids and others for example or perhaps the later Vikings, who weren't a "tribe") and others down to Italy (Goths etc, Lombards or Vikings) with some ending up in Britain (Anglo-Saxons, Vikings or Normans). Downstream from you looks similar: Germanic tribes/Vikings. It's too early to say for sure but hopefully we'll get more evidence in time. These SNPs have a very wide geographical range compared with mine for example, which are focused on northwest Europe.

paulcharles
07-24-2019, 08:51 AM
Hi JonikW

about SNP and STR, my brother is BY104255 under FGC79161 or FGC41661.
Under FGC41661>A6469 there is Goran Brolin born in 1718 in Sweden. This
same Goran Brolin is into the second position of distant STR (0,068) of my brother.
The same person is in SNP and STR. I think he is connected but 2900 BCE. Is correct ?

JonikW
07-24-2019, 09:01 AM
Is your brother id:YF18785FRA? I can see the Swede at a SNP dated a few hundred years later.

paulcharles
07-24-2019, 09:09 AM
Hi JonikW


yes my brother is YF18785 from France of YFULL.

Goran Brolin is A6469 under S6402 under FGC41661

My brother is BY104255 under FGC41661

JonikW
07-24-2019, 09:21 AM
Hi JonikW


yes my brother is YF18785 from France of YFULL.

So your family branched off at 2,900 ybp, and then over the next 700 years or so other people descended from other lines after where he branched off ended up living in Sweden, Scotland, Poland etc today. So we can't say whether his line was actually in Sweden 3,000 years ago (we can't even say that about the Swede). We can only assume that your ancestors at around that time were among the Germanic tribes or other groups that would become them. I am on the ferry to your country and the internet in La Manche isn't good. But I'll check back later.:)

Helgenes50
07-24-2019, 09:33 AM
Hi JonikW


yes my brother is YF18785 from France of YFULL.

Goran Brolin is A6469 under S6402 under FGC41661

My brother is BY104255 under FGC41661

I don't remember the origin of your Paternal line .

paulcharles
07-24-2019, 09:47 AM
Hi JonikW,

My direct line paternal is André Dozière (documents) born in Molain (nord of France) in 1705 and died in 1741.
There are some Dozière born in Valenciennes (nord of France) in 1600 but I don't know if this Dozière of Valenciennes
was connected with my direct father line Dozière of Molain. But Molain is distant about 50kms of Valenciennes.
Not so far distance. My brother was right at today, origin Germanic tribes is correct about 2900 years ago.