PDA

View Full Version : U152+ L2+ PF7600+



R.Rocca
11-29-2013, 02:51 PM
Dr. Francalacci has confirmed that E11688 from Bologna, Italy shares the following ten SNPs with his two Sardinian L2+ Z49- Z367- samples:

FGC5336, FGC5338, FGC5344, FGC5345, FGC5351,
FGC5354, FGC5356, FGC5367, FGC5373, PF7600

Even though all three samples share those SNPs, the Sardinian samples form their own distinct subclade below E11688 and share the following 17 SNPs with each
other, but not E11688:

PF7599, PF7601, PF7603, PF7604, PF7605, 5858727 (T/C),
7558252 (G/A), 14496614 (T/G), 23390331 (C/T), 18729652 (G/A),
20824056 (T/A), 23021899 (G/A), 16370226 (G/A), 13500532 (T/G),
6056374 (A/G), 8343363 (A/T), 13691975 (A/T)

Aside from the reduced coverage of the Francalacci data, there were also many no-calls in his data due to the fact that his coverage was much lower (2x-4x versus 50x). So, it could still be that E11688 shares even more SNPs with the two Sardinian samples.

Even though no L2+ Z49- Z367- that took the Geno 2 test (myself included) has tested positive for PF7600, I am now hopeful that some of the SNPs shared between E11688 and the two Sardinian samples may be above PF7600 and below L2.

Rathna
11-29-2013, 03:48 PM
Dr. Francalacci has confirmed that E11688 from Bologna, Italy shares the following ten SNPs with his two Sardinian L2+ Z49- Z367- samples:

FGC5336, FGC5338, FGC5344, FGC5345, FGC5351,
FGC5354, FGC5356, FGC5367, FGC5373, PF7600

Even though all three samples share those SNPs, the Sardinian samples form their own distinct subclade below E11688 and share the following 17 SNPs with each
other, but not E11688:

PF7599, PF7601, PF7603, PF7604, PF7605, 5858727 (T/C),
7558252 (G/A), 14496614 (T/G), 23390331 (C/T), 18729652 (G/A),
20824056 (T/A), 23021899 (G/A), 16370226 (G/A), 13500532 (T/G),
6056374 (A/G), 8343363 (A/T), 13691975 (A/T)

Aside from the reduced coverage of the Francalacci data, there were also many no-calls in his data due to the fact that his coverage was much lower (2x-4x versus 50x). So, it could still be that E11688 shares even more SNPs with the two Sardinian samples.

Even though no L2+ Z49- Z367- that took the Geno 2 test (myself included) has tested positive for PF7600, I am now hopeful that some of the SNPs shared between E11688 and the two Sardinian samples may be above PF7600 and below L2.

All these shared SNPs should demonstrate a very recent common ancestor. How do you explain that samples from Bologna, Sicily, Sardinia have a recent common ancestor?
Usually we link Sardinians to an ancient origin from Italy, at least many thousands of years ago, even though some of them could be also recent ones. From some last autosomal tests it would seem that samples from Iberia to Scandinavia are linked to the Sardinian ones, even though someone is trying to link them to the spread of agriculture from East Mediterranean Sea. We'll see.

I think that many surprises will come from the paragroup L2*: see that of Bedini, who thinks to be of German origin, but he could be something else.

Acque agitate
11-29-2013, 05:14 PM
All these shared SNPs should demonstrate a very recent common ancestor. How do you explain that samples from Bologna, Sicily, Sardinia have a recent common ancestor?
Usually we link Sardinians to an ancient origin from Italy, at least many thousands of years ago, even though some of them could be also recent ones. From some last autosomal tests it would seem that samples from Iberia to Scandinavia are linked to the Sardinian ones, even though someone is trying to link them to the spread of agriculture from East Mediterranean Sea. We'll see.

I think that many surprises will come from the paragroup L2*: see that of Bedini, who thinks to be of German origin, but he could be something else.


Hello Rathna ,
I know your expertise on the subject.
Your answer is interesting and I would want to respond fully .
Unfortunately at the moment I'm busy and I have little time to respond.
Some brief remarks that I will integrate this weekend (when I have a little more time):
1 ) I consider likely to share with 2 samples Sardinian 25% of my snp private (almost 13 of 53);
2 ) The common ancestor lived no earlier than 4200 years ago (2200 before Christ ) ;
3 ) The common ancestor to all R- L2 is lived not earlier than 5600 years ago (3600 before Christ ). In my opinion, even more ancient times;
4 ) The link between me and the 2 samples Sardinian is simple and obvious: follow the people of the Beaker ;
5 ) I have no preferences on the origin of my ancestors , I would just like to know the truth. A few years ago, as far as R- U152 , I said to hold in high regard the Ligurian and the culture of Polada : it seems to me that the facts are giving me reason ;
6) Follow the spread of the "Vaso campaniforme" people on the coasts and in the islands of the sea meditteraneo and you will understand much better the origin of the Sea Peoples . Now everything seems much clearer. And I am convinced that you too do not agree with the oriental origin of the people of the sea .

Rathna
11-30-2013, 05:36 AM
And I am convinced that you too do not agree with the oriental origin of the people of the sea .

At least not SHKLSH, SHRDN and TWRSHSH. The best book I read on the argument (Woudhuizen, The Ethnicity of the Sea Peoples) seemed to think so.

R.Rocca
11-30-2013, 01:55 PM
Hello Rathna ,
I know your expertise on the subject.
Your answer is interesting and I would want to respond fully .
Unfortunately at the moment I'm busy and I have little time to respond.
Some brief remarks that I will integrate this weekend (when I have a little more time):
1 ) I consider likely to share with 2 samples Sardinian 25% of my snp private (almost 13 of 53);
2 ) The common ancestor lived no earlier than 4200 years ago (2200 before Christ ) ;
3 ) The common ancestor to all R- L2 is lived not earlier than 5600 years ago (3600 before Christ ). In my opinion, even more ancient times;
4 ) The link between me and the 2 samples Sardinian is simple and obvious: follow the people of the Beaker ;
5 ) I have no preferences on the origin of my ancestors , I would just like to know the truth. A few years ago, as far as R- U152 , I said to hold in high regard the Ligurian and the culture of Polada : it seems to me that the facts are giving me reason ;
6) Follow the spread of the "Vaso campaniforme" people on the coasts and in the islands of the sea meditteraneo and you will understand much better the origin of the Sea Peoples . Now everything seems much clearer. And I am convinced that you too do not agree with the oriental origin of the people of the sea .

As we have spoken in the past, it does look like L2 in Italy had a big part as per the eastern influenced Bell Beaker province and the influences were critical in the formation of the Polada Culture. In Italy, the areas with Iberian/French parallels are more U152(xL2). The Iberian/U152(xL2) influenced areas also seems to have a loose correlation with later Q-Italic areas and the Eastern Bell Beaker/L2 influenced areas with Paleo-Umbrian speakers.

Rathna
11-30-2013, 03:26 PM
As we have spoken in the past, it does look like L2 in Italy had a big part as per the eastern influenced Bell Beaker province and the influences were critical in the formation of the Polada Culture. In Italy, the areas with Iberian/French parallels are more U152(xL2). The Iberian/U152(xL2) influenced areas also seems to have a loose correlation with later Q-Italic areas and the Eastern Bell Beaker/L2 influenced areas with Paleo-Umbrian speakers.

Actually, from a linguistic point of view, it seems that the other way around had happened: Lusitanian language, which maintains p- like Ligurian, seems having come from Italy and not the other way around. I have spoken about this a lot in the past, and I don't know any Zilhao who has written that agriculturalists migrated from Iberia to Italy 7500 ya nor recently, and nobody remembers the paper about the "Tudorella sulcata" I spoke a lot about too.

R.Rocca
11-30-2013, 04:37 PM
Actually, from a linguistic point of view, it seems that the other way around had happened: Lusitanian language, which maintains p- like Ligurian, seems having come from Italy and not the other way around. I have spoken about this a lot in the past, and I don't know any Zilhao who has written that agriculturalists migrated from Iberia to Italy 7500 ya nor recently, and nobody remembers the paper about the "Tudorella sulcata" I spoke a lot about too.

I was talking about the retainment of of the *kʷ phoneme in Ligurian and Latin (as in Celto-Iberian languages) as opposed to the *p in Osco-Umbrian and Gaulish.

Rathna
11-30-2013, 09:59 PM
I was talking about the retainment of of the *kʷ phoneme in Ligurian and Latin (as in Celto-Iberian languages) as opposed to the *p in Osco-Umbrian and Gaulish.

Of course these are two different and independent phenomena;
1) the presence of p- in Ligurian and in Lusitanian demonstrates the link between these two languages and not with the Celt languages which lost p-.
2) the mutation from the labiovelar *kw- to /p/ is a phenomen so diffused all over the world that may be happened independent in Osco-Umbrian and in some Celt languages and doesn't demonstrate probably any link, if we don't want to accept the theory which attributes it to the influence of Etruscan language, but happened where? For Osco-Umbrian we could think to Italy, but we should presuppose that also the Celt languages were nearby in ancient times or probably due to Etruscans when it was Northward as to the historic times.

R.Rocca
11-30-2013, 10:07 PM
Of course these are two different and independent phenomena;
1) the presence of p- in Ligurian and in Lusitanian demonstrates the link between these two languages and not with the Celt languages which lost p-.
2) the mutation from the labiovelar *kw- to /p/ is a phenomen so diffused all over the world that may be happened independent in Osco-Umbrian and in some Celt languages and doesn't demonstrate probably any link, if we don't want to accept the theory which attributes it to the influence of Etruscan language, but happened where? For Osco-Umbrian we could think to Italy, but we should presuppose that also the Celt languages were nearby in ancient times or probably due to Etruscans when it was Northward as to the historic times.

I've mentioned it before, but you would think if the Etruscans were responsible for the *kw- to /p/ shift, then surely the Latini would have adopted it as they were one of the most Etruscan-influenced Italic tribes. Since that was not the case, then I find the Etruscan link rather suspect.

Rathna
11-30-2013, 10:27 PM
I've mentioned it before, but you would think if the Etruscans were responsible for the *kw- to /p/ shift, then surely the Latini would have adopted it as they were one of the most Etruscan-influenced Italic tribes. Since that was not the case, then I find the Etruscan link rather suspect.

1) this theory of the influence of Etruscan upon the mutation from *Kw to /p/ isn't mine and I quoted it only like an hypothesis
2) I don't know if it is reliable or not (but I do know very well that to demonstrate similar hypotheses is very difficult)
3) what you say about Latin, which should have taken the same mutation, isn't worth, because this isn't a rule, because there are infinite examples of the other way around and we don't know where Etruscans, Latins, Osco-Umbrians or Celts did live in previous times. This makes your hypothesis not demonstrable
4) more interesting seemed to me (and I wrote about this in the past) the hypothesis that Etruscan *puplu- may derive from Pre-Indo-European *kwekwlo-, the word for "cycle", and this is one of the possible proof for me of the link of Etruscan and Tyrrhenian languages with Pre-Indo-European.

R.Rocca
11-30-2013, 10:33 PM
1) this theory of the influence of Etruscan upon the mutation from *Kw to /p/ isn't mine and I quoted it only like an hypothesis
2) I don't know if it is reliable or not (but I do know very well that to demonstrate similar hypotheses is very difficult)
3) what you say about Latin, which should have taken the same mutation, isn't worth, because this isn't a rule, because there are infinite examples of the other way around and we don't know where Etruscans, Latins, Osco-Umbrians or Celts did live in previous times. This makes your hypothesis not demonstrable
4) more interesting seemed to me (and I wrote about this in the past) the hypothesis that Etruscan *puplu- may derive from Pre-Indo-European *kwekwlo-, the word for "cycle", and this is one of the possible proof for me of the link of Etruscan and Tyrrhenian languages with Pre-Indo-European.

Of course, the linguistic hypothesis of a wider Paleo-Umbrian speaking area is not mine, but that of Augusto Ancillotti.

Alessio B. Bedini
12-01-2013, 11:18 AM
I don't believe, as Rathna, in the Italian origin of L2.

I explained several times why: they are too popular in the British Isles and not very common in southern Italy. If the origin had been Italian it would have been otherwise. And more logical to hypothesize an origin in the valley of the Rhine.

Also I think the coming of L2 in Italy took place in very different periods.
Some came very early, even towards 3000-3500 before Christ. Others perhaps only in the Middle Ages.

As far as my line still did not really understand. With 111 markers, genetic distance is 37-39 with some english people but only 14 at 67 mrks with a German who unfortunately not test 111mrks. If the distance will be so low even with 111mrks would like to mean that my ancestors came from Germany in the Middle Ages ..

The fact that there have been early separations is visible also because with 111mrks my distance is 47 from Aque Agitate, that is Italian like me, and is only 40 from the Wheaton, that instead are British....

Rathna
12-01-2013, 01:15 PM
I don't believe, as Rathna, in the Italian origin of L2.

I explained several times why: they are too popular in the British Isles and not very common in southern Italy. If the origin had been Italian it would have been otherwise. And more logical to hypothesize an origin in the valley of the Rhine.

Also I think the coming of L2 in Italy took place in very different periods.
Some came very early, even towards 3000-3500 before Christ. Others perhaps only in the Middle Ages.

As far as my line still did not really understand. With 111 markers, genetic distance is 37-39 with some english people but only 14 at 67 mrks with a German who unfortunately not test 111mrks. If the distance will be so low even with 111mrks would like to mean that my ancestors came from Germany in the Middle Ages ..

The fact that there have been early separations is visible also because with 111mrks my distance is 47 from Aque Agitate, that is Italian like me, and is only 40 from the Wheaton, that instead are British....

Alessio, I have explained many times that to count mutations is a little worth, because markers mutate forwards and backwards and you may be closer, by chance, to many people who don't belong to your haplogroup or haplogroup's subclade rather than to your own.
After, for my three golden principles (mutations happen around the modal, mutations tend to the modal as time passes, only sometime mutations go for the tangent) it is very likely that mutations are much more than the counted ones, and pretty 50 mutations out of 111 markers are so many.
Of course there is a test which may resolve all our doubts: the Full Y, but also from the first results about L2 between Acque Agitate and Sardinians it seems to me that we can not exclude an origin of L2 in Italy. About R-U152 and more R1b1, R-M269, R-L23/Z2105*, L51 etc. of course I have no doubt.

Alessio B. Bedini
12-01-2013, 01:25 PM
I agree with you about the mutations and the fact that the origin of MRCA U152 and MRCA L2 are two different things.
In my opinion, however, in the distribution of L2 people is clear on the non-Italian origin.

However, it may be that MRCA U152 was born in Italy and MRCA L2 in the valley of the Rhine and then a my ancestor L2 went back in Italy (It's need to understand when)..

Rathna
12-01-2013, 01:44 PM
I agree with you about the mutations and the fact that the origin of MRCA U152 and MRCA L2 are two different things.
In my opinion, however, in the distribution of L2 people is clear on the non-Italian origin.

However, it may be that MRCA U152 was born in Italy and MRCA L2 in the valley of the Rhine and then a my ancestor L2 went back in Italy (It's need to understand when)..

Yes, I convinced myself that it may happen so just by examining for years the haplotypes of Belgieri and Grassi, and now we have the solution at hands: the Full Y. We'll be able to reconstruct any line of descent and also the times of separation. But we have had something similar already by the Francalacci's paper, and it seems that I-M26 but also G-L91 are very ancient in Italy. Why not R1b1* I think having demonstrated the highest variance in Italy, in spite of the many failed tests?

Bolgeris
12-01-2013, 07:18 PM
My and Grassi's ancestral village (resp. Sarzana and Civenna) were colonized for a Lumbard Fara http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fara_(Longobardi)
(Lumbards=Longobardi) and we are L20+..
Others L20+ in Italy . are .in Benevento - Spoleto and North Italy..
all land of Lumbard settlement..
http://r1b.org/?page_id=242
?!
May be only some L2+ and L20+ are Germanic or Lumbard in Italy.
And others, as spoke Rathna;):P, were Rhetic or Italic..

Claxon
12-02-2013, 04:59 PM
Jurgen Spanuth, in " Atlantis of the North" ( 1979) spoke of , and presents some evidence, of the people of Doggerland being the Sea Peoples. This is no "New Age" writer. He was a respected archeologist.hmmm, ok, Studied archeology and theology, and was a pastor. But, again, documents and presents his evidence well.
An interesting read, at any rate. I think it is available online.

Acque agitate
12-04-2013, 06:35 PM
I propose some considerations:
1) First, I believe that the common ancestor of R-U152 is much older than commonly believed. For various reasons; the first of which is that often it is assumed that the duration of a generation is equal to 25 years. I have reconstructed the genealogical tree of the family until 1100 A.C. (generation after generation) using only the documents and without any personal interpretation. This research has shown me that the average length of a generation is superior even to 30 years, at least for what concerns the male line (the female line is a different story). This fact alone leads to a lengthening of the age of the common ancestor of at least 20%. For this reason I believe that the age of R- L2 must be placed about 6400 years ago , however no less than 5600 years ago ;
2 ) Full Genomes has examined samples of R- U152 and of R -L2 . No snp intermediate was found. This means that R- L2 was born shortly after R- U152 (3-4 generations maximum). This period seems to me not enough to clearly separate the descendants of R -L2 from the other R- U152 ( different story for families born much later);
3 ) I totally agree with Rathna regarding STR mutations. In the study that I perform, I give more importance to rare mutations, and less on others. For this reason, I recommend to Alessio to reconsider its assessments of people closest to him. Consider only the no. STR mutation causes serious errors even for the mere fact of frequent mutations equate to rare mutations;
4) I found a list of people R-L2 which I think are closest to me but which have a number of mutations STR more than others which, however, proved to be very distant to me (Z49 + Z367 +, etc..). Unfortunately, these people have not been subjected to Big Y FTDNA (although I've offered him a contribution);
5) I do not want to participate in the religious war between those who assume an Italian source of R-U152 and those who assume a different origin. Personally I think that, based on the data that I have analyzed so far, it is more likely a Central European origin, but I think that, at present, the matter is very complex and we can not exclude different sources. For this reason I am very attentive to considerations Rathna offers on various forums, considerations to me very often useful to analyze in more depth the problem. I think that when there will be more people who will be subjected to the full test of Y (Full Genomes or Big Y) the answer will be easier;
6) About 2 weeks ago I received the test results of my test of Y-complete. Full Genomes announced to me that I possess 53 genuine snp places below L2 and that I do not agree with any of their databases except PF7600 which was found in Francalacci’s search for Sardinia. Subsequently Riccardo Rocca contacted Francalacci who reported that PF7600 was found in 2 samples (R-L2) that share with me other 9 snp and that between the two of them share other 17 snp;
7) This discovery led to idenficazione of a new family of R -L2 whose common ancestor, in my opinion, is lived before 4200 years ago (probably before you 4800 years ago) . This new family currently consists of only two subjects: me and the ancestor common to the two Sardinian (the other 17 snp shows that only recently have separated , probably after the end of the Roman Empire);
8) In my opinion the presence of PF7600 in Sardinia is to connect people to the "Vaso Campaniforme" who arrived in Sardinia in 2 different waves. The 1st wave is from the North-East of Spain and the French Midi after 2100 BC, and the 2nd wave was made later and is connected to the Culture of Polada coming from Swiss lakes. It seems to me that at the moment everything back (archaeological data and age of the common ancestor of mine and 2 Sardinians);
9) I do not believe that the current data shows that PF7600 is of Italian origin, or other geographic area. in Sardinia, in fact, it has been found only 1 sample PF7600 (I consider the two Sardinian samples, a single sample as a result of their recent relationship) and this represents 0.8 % of the presence of R- U152 in Sardinia (1.6% considering them all and 2), this means a percentage equal to or less than L20 and Z34 that currently have approximately the same age (10 snp under R -L2) . In addition, all the 5 Italian R -L2 * of Project R- U152 ( FTDNA ) who tested PF7600, were negative in this snp (similar to the other 3 French , 1 Spanish, 8 Germans, 1 Polish and 11 British). Also Francalacci, as far as I know , has not tested any STR so I can not even see if there is a STR driving (eg DYS19 = 13 for the group Z34 +) and then set a preliminary analysis of all the R -L2 * to do out a list of likely PF7600;
10) My only hope is that the largest possible number of R -L2 * is undergoing a complete test of Y to find other travel companions (also partial : sharing some of the 10 snp). Only when the number of PF7600 will be consistent and representative of each geographic area you can deal with the problem of its origin.

haleaton
12-04-2013, 07:03 PM
I have not been following all of the discussions of the # of Private mutations of SNPs & Indels from Full Genomes for timing counting purposes. For testing comparison and genealogy we us just the the 99% and 95% only, but for counting is the best number to use adding 40% of the ** and 10% of the *** numbers to get a total or upper bound error estimate. Interested in U152 group thoughts so we can compare apples to apples the number of Private SNPs found.

Alessio B. Bedini
12-04-2013, 08:46 PM
I have tested Geno 2.0, but if FTDNA inserts in the menu PF7600, I will test it again.

R.Rocca
12-30-2013, 04:23 AM
Some very good news for L2+ Z49- Z67- folks. Six of the SNPs that kit E11688 from Bologna, Italy shares with the two Sardinian samples from the Francalacci study are now available from Thomas Krahn's new company: http://shop.yseq.net/index.php

They are as follows:

FGC5336
FGC5338
FGC5344
FGC5354
FGC5356
FGC5367

Any one of these might be a high level SNP right below L2.

R.Rocca
12-30-2013, 01:37 PM
Some very good news for L2+ Z49- Z67- folks. Six of the SNPs that kit E11688 from Bologna, Italy shares with the two Sardinian samples from the Francalacci study are now available from Thomas Krahn's new company: http://shop.yseq.net/index.php

They are as follows:

FGC5336
FGC5338
FGC5344
FGC5354
FGC5356
FGC5367

Any one of these might be a high level SNP right below L2.

Just to show how significant these SNPs might be; Francalacci only had two L2+ Z49- Z367- samples and they both shared these SNPs. Montaguti, the only Full Genomes kit from Italy that has received his results so far, also has these SNPs. So, in Italy, that is 3 out of 3 kits with these SNPs!

Acque agitate
12-30-2013, 02:45 PM
Just to show how significant these SNPs might be; Francalacci only had two L2+ Z49- Z367- samples and they both shared these SNPs. Montaguti, the only Full Genomes kit from Italy that has received his results so far, also has these SNPs. So, in Italy, that is 3 out of 3 kits with these SNPs!

it is highly likely that the 2 Sardinians samples are father and son. Therefore it is possible that this new subclade is also present in other areas of Europe.

Rathna
12-30-2013, 04:21 PM
it is highly likely that the 2 Sardinians samples are father and son. Therefore it is possible that this new subclade is also present in other areas of Europe.

What to think about Montaguti's haplotype? And what about the fact that he shares some SNPs with a Tuscan of the 1KGP and with two Sardinians? And what about his thinking that those two Sardinians are father and sons? Of course one person with his history (a genealogy till 1100) may think to be of German origin, even though he wrote in his genealogy "a meno di scappatelle compiute dalle mie antenate", that that Englishmen call NPE. His haplotype, with many values in the modal, has also many weird values that make it with no close matches neither in Ysearch nor in YHRD or elsewhere:
DUYS389I=15
DYS438=13
DYS635=24
but also DYS456=17 and DYS458=15 (the other way around as to what we usually find) etc.

E11688 Portonarius De Portonariis (Montaguti after 1507), Italy R1b1a2a1a1b3c
13 24 14 11 11-14 12 12 11 15 13 31 15 9-10 11 11 25 15 19 31 14-14-16-17 11 10 19-23 17 15 16 17 36-40 12 13 11 9 15-16 8 11 10 8 10 10 12 22-23 16 10 12 12 14 8 10 22 20 13 12 11 13 11 11 12 12 35 14 9 16 12 28 26 19 12 11 13 12 10 9 12 12 10 11 11 31 12 13 24 13 10 10 21 15 19 13 24 15 12 15 24 12 24 18 10 14 18 9 12 11

More interesting the matches at 12 markers, with many people at a genetic distance of 1.
Amongst them my barber, I tested with a kit because his surname is rare, of ancient Tuscan origin (but there is a bough also in Bologna, the town of Montaguti) and whose haplotype I considered of no worth, if not for being the 5 R1b out of 5 samples tested:

H7ADU Coltelli Italy
13 24 14 11 11 14 12 12 11 14 13 30

Perhaps it would be interesting to upgrade his results.

Acque agitate
12-31-2013, 11:50 AM
What to think about Montaguti's haplotype? And what about the fact that he shares some SNPs with a Tuscan of the 1KGP and with two Sardinians? And what about his thinking that those two Sardinians are father and sons? Of course one person with his history (a genealogy till 1100) may think to be of German origin, even though he wrote in his genealogy "a meno di scappatelle compiute dalle mie antenate", that that Englishmen call NPE. His haplotype, with many values in the modal, has also many weird values that make it with no close matches neither in Ysearch nor in YHRD or elsewhere:
DUYS389I=15
DYS438=13
DYS635=24
but also DYS456=17 and DYS458=15 (the other way around as to what we usually find) etc.

E11688 Portonarius De Portonariis (Montaguti after 1507), Italy R1b1a2a1a1b3c
13 24 14 11 11-14 12 12 11 15 13 31 15 9-10 11 11 25 15 19 31 14-14-16-17 11 10 19-23 17 15 16 17 36-40 12 13 11 9 15-16 8 11 10 8 10 10 12 22-23 16 10 12 12 14 8 10 22 20 13 12 11 13 11 11 12 12 35 14 9 16 12 28 26 19 12 11 13 12 10 9 12 12 10 11 11 31 12 13 24 13 10 10 21 15 19 13 24 15 12 15 24 12 24 18 10 14 18 9 12 11

More interesting the matches at 12 markers, with many people at a genetic distance of 1.
Amongst them my barber, I tested with a kit because his surname is rare, of ancient Tuscan origin (but there is a bough also in Bologna, the town of Montaguti) and whose haplotype I considered of no worth, if not for being the 5 R1b out of 5 samples tested:

H7ADU Coltelli Italy
13 24 14 11 11 14 12 12 11 14 13 30

Perhaps it would be interesting to upgrade his results.


Hello Rathna ,
first of all, thanks for your interest in my case.
Some considerations:
1 ) I do not know there is a Toscano (of 1KGP ) who shares with me a snp . If you have different information I would like to know ;
2 ) Richard has informed us that, with regard to the study of Francalacci , there are 2 Sardinians samples (no. 1039 and 1040 ) who share with me 10 snp. They share another 17 snp . In a previous post I speculated that these 2 Sardinian samples are father and son. I can tell you that this is not my hypothesis but it is a possibility that a person who has directly participated in the study told me . This person also told me that he would monitor directly the high possibility but at the moment I still have not received any communication (I hope in the new year) . I'll do note that even for L20+ and Z34+ there are 2 Sardinian samples (it is no coincidence . There are reasons that I omit for the moment);
3) If in the future it should be confirmed that the two Sardinian samples are close relatives, my situation would change slightly. This would mean that in the 2 Sardinians samples were identified only 27 snp (below L2), while I have been identified 53 snp. This is due to the fact that the coverage of the Sardinian study was equal to 2x - 4x, while that of Full Genomes was equal to 50x (this increase coverage resulted in a doubling of the n of snp). This means that I share with 2 samples Sardinian a period of time (or a number of generations of Y) much longer. The separation may have occurred in a period between 2050 and 1350 BC.
4) You have assumed that my ancestors are Germanic origin . I will correct that there is no evidence to say that. In the past, some historians have argued that all Italians arimanni are of German origin. Recent studies have shown that this is patently untrue . there is obviously a chance, to prove genetically , but this is one of many hypotheses. The study that I have done on my genealogy has been very long since I have relied solely on the documents (my great good fortune was to have a well-stocked State Archives in Bologna and the fact that my family had founded a small church and this allowed my family to appoint the parish priest. Thus I could easily exceed the periods in which the name has changed: in the ancient ecclesiastical acts surname was always kept) . This study has taught me many things.
One of these is that reality follows rules much simpler than those dictated by our imagination. I have spoken with many person of Bologna who imagine they have exotic ancestry (Germanic ancestry , Oriental, etc ), but they are not able to provide any documentary evidence. These are all figments of imagination that I have checked through the documents but I do not refer to them as I do not want to disappoint their great imagination. My ancestors were part of the Cavalry of Matilda of Canossa, but this absolutely does not want to say that they were of German origin ( Lombard , etc. . ). I 've never understood why many Italians aspire to have German ancestry . When I was a child I imagined to be a descendant of a centurion of the army of Caesar (Caesar 's legions were recruited here , and many Antionio’s reservists were granted lands here) . It may be true but I do not think I will check it out (a little imagination never hurts, as long as you know that this is fantasy);
5 ) in respect of persons (R- L2) closest to me I can tell you that I have developed my own study (also based on the principles that you often sustain) that allowed me to hypothesize some people with a high probability of proximity with me. One of these is "Luke Misle" (no. 83527 ; project U152 of FTDNA), others are related to the study of Modena and the Study of Boattini . The STR on which I have focused are:
439 = 11
389/1 = 14-15
458 = 15-16
537 = 11
534 = 14
444 = 10-11
At the moment I feel that these STR may be useful. In the past I have tried to put myself in communication with the descendants of the "Luke Misle " giving them my contribution to participate in the test Big Y (I contacted the administrator of their project “Surname Mizell” at FTNA ) . But nobody answered . Lately I have discovered that there is also a dedicated website (http://mizell.info) . I will send to them a communication in which I will ask if they are willing to undergo the tests at the Thomas Krahn’s company( some of my snp ) . I hope for a response.
At the moment I am in this condition . I hope that soon others PF7600+ will emerge through Full Genomes and Big Y in order to ascertain whether my assumptions are correct. Otherwise I'll update them.

Rathna
12-31-2013, 12:14 PM
I reply to you on hurry, but I'll read and study your interesting letter later. It seemed to me that the SNP you share with a Tuscan was just PF7600, but perhaps I was wrong and on hurry also then.
The difference of SNPs found between you and the Sardinian guys was probably due to the fact that you had a Full Y and Sardinians were tested only for a part of it like the Big Y. But probably you share more SNPs.
P.S. I found too in Modena a match with my R-Z2105, but Dr Ferri couldn't put me in contact. Modena (Mutina) was an Etruscan town, like Bologna (Felsina).

R.Rocca
12-31-2013, 03:26 PM
As per Xue, Y. et al. there was a difference of 4 mutations between two 13th generation descendants. The two Sardinians have at least 4 singletons that they do not share with one another, so I think the researcher may have been thinking of other samples as these two cannot be father and son. Besides, it would have been a very big blunder for Francalacci to use these two samples to build up his tree if they were indeed father and son.

Either way, it is clear that the paternal ancestor of Montaguiti and the two Sardinians lived a very long time ago and any L2+ Z49- Z367- persons (especially Italians) should test for FGC5336, FGC5338, FGC5344, FGC5354, FGC5356 and FGC5367 without the fear that it is a family cluster.

Rathna
12-31-2013, 04:06 PM
It seemed to me that the SNP you share with a Tuscan was just PF7600, but perhaps I was wrong and on hurry also then.


Of course I was wrong:

Quote Originally Posted by Richard A. Rocca View Post
I think it is now clear that Z36+ Z54+ Z143+ is only common in a small area of Tuscany where the 1000 Genome Project samples were collected, which I suspect is near Florence (Firenze).

exactly: Sesto Fiorentino

Acque agitate
12-31-2013, 05:06 PM
As per Xue, Y. et al. there was a difference of 4 mutations between two 13th generation descendants. The two Sardinians have at least 4 singletons that they do not share with one another, so I think the researcher may have been thinking of other samples as these two cannot be father and son. Besides, it would have been a very big blunder for Francalacci to use these two samples to build up his tree if they were indeed father and son.

Either way, it is clear that the paternal ancestor of Montaguiti and the two Sardinians lived a very long time ago and any L2+ Z49- Z367- persons (especially Italians) should test for FGC5336, FGC5338, FGC5344, FGC5354, FGC5356 and FGC5367 without the fear that it is a family cluster.

Thanks Richard for the information.
If I have understood correctly by the information that you have:
1) I and 2 Sardinian samples share 10 snp;
2) the 2 Sardinian samples share another 17 snp;
3) each of the 2 Sardinian samples has 4 other personal snp who does not share with anyone;
4) each of the 2 Sardinian samples owns around 31 snp personal;
5) I own around 53 snp personal;

Is this correct?

R.Rocca
12-31-2013, 08:19 PM
Thanks Richard for the information.
If I have understood correctly by the information that you have:
1) I and 2 Sardinian samples share 10 snp;
2) the 2 Sardinian samples share another 17 snp;
3) each of the 2 Sardinian samples has 4 other personal snp who does not share with anyone;
4) each of the 2 Sardinian samples owns around 31 snp personal;
5) I own around 53 snp personal;

Is this correct?

I am not on my home computer, but that looks correct. As you know, the higher number of SNPs in your sample is due to the fact that Full Genomes is a true "Full Scan" whereas Francalacci only sequenced part of the Y-chromosome.

Happy New Year to you and your family!

Kwheaton
12-31-2013, 10:22 PM
Happy New Years to Rich and the L2 family!:party:
Kelly WHEATON

PS Any word rich on when your results might be due back in?

R.Rocca
01-01-2014, 02:51 PM
Happy New Years to Rich and the L2 family!:party:
Kelly WHEATON

PS Any word rich on when your results might be due back in?

Thanks Kelly, the same to you and your family.

Full Genomes was able to confirm that my sample passed the quality control step, so it looks like third time will indeed be a charm. I'm expecting the results in late February/early March.

razyn
01-01-2014, 07:56 PM
Full Genomes was able to confirm that my sample passed the quality control step, so it looks like third time will indeed be a charm. I'm expecting the results in late February/early March.

I guess you aren't technically part of Batch 5, as a 3rd-time tester from Batch 3 -- but do you have information more specific than Justin's statement (the day after Batch 5 was sent to BGI) that they expected results around Jan. 20? Even if that just begins their process of sorting and analysis, I'd think you would be at the front of the queue.

The Jan. 20 guesstimate was here: http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?742-Full-Y-Chromosome-Sequencing-Phase-III-Pilot&p=22023&viewfull=1#post22023

R.Rocca
01-01-2014, 08:23 PM
I guess you aren't technically part of Batch 5, as a 3rd-time tester from Batch 3 -- but do you have information more specific than Justin's statement (the day after Batch 5 was sent to BGI) that they expected results around Jan. 20? Even if that just begins their process of sorting and analysis, I'd think you would be at the front of the queue.

The Jan. 20 guesstimate was here: http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?742-Full-Y-Chromosome-Sequencing-Phase-III-Pilot&p=22023&viewfull=1#post22023

I was re-batched as batch 5. I think they expect the results by the end of January and for all the results to be given by March.

MitchellSince1893
01-01-2014, 09:13 PM
Full Genomes was able to confirm that my sample passed the quality control step, so it looks like third time will indeed be a charm. I'm expecting the results in late February/early March.

Congrats on getting over this hump!

Kwheaton
01-01-2014, 09:37 PM
Rich!

I am doing the Happy dance for you!!!! That is such good news. i have not heard yet that our sample has gone out so will be a ways behind you......hopefully 2014 will provide us with some news!

Alessio B. Bedini
01-02-2014, 12:37 PM
I also do the New Year's greetings to your families!
I also thank you for the work you do for our family L2!
If I want to test some SNP which should I test first?

R.Rocca
01-02-2014, 02:23 PM
Since DF103 has only been found north of the Alps to date and the FGC ones only south of the Alps, I suggest the following strategy:

1. Pick one or two from this group as they are of higher quality:

FGC5338
FGC5354
FGC5356
FGC5367

It really doesn't matter which two as we don't know their order yet, so FGC5338 and FGC5354 is a good start.

2. If you are negative for these two, then order DF103 from FTDNA.

3. If you are negative for DF103, then order the other FGC SNPs (FGC5356 and FGC5367) and then the other two that are of lesser quality:

FGC5336
FGC5344

It could be that by the time you get your first results, the results of some of the Big-Y and Full Genome testing will reveal more SNPs.

Alessio B. Bedini
01-02-2014, 08:59 PM
Thanks for the advices :)
I ordered FGC5338 to YSEQ
I am the customer number 84 then there should be a lot of traffic and I hope I do not wait long to know the results.
Of course I'll let you know.

Acque agitate
01-02-2014, 11:40 PM
Thanks for the advices :)
I ordered FGC5338 to YSEQ
I am the customer number 84 then there should be a lot of traffic and I hope I do not wait long to know the results.
Of course I'll let you know.

This is great news.
Thanks Alessio.

Alessio B. Bedini
01-29-2014, 05:53 AM
Finally i had my results.. but i do not understand fine ..

I am positive or negative to FGC5338?


My Allele Results
SampleID Marker+ Chr Start End Allele
84 CTS588 ChrY 6869463 6869463 A-
84 CTS589 ChrY 6869532 6869532 C-
84 FGC5338 ChrY 6869468 6869468 G-
84 FGC5338 ChrY 6869468 6869468 G-

Rathna
01-29-2014, 09:23 AM
Finally i had my results.. but i do not understand fine ..

I am positive or negative to FGC5338?

Like the sign - says you are negative, i.e. ancestral.

Rathna
01-29-2014, 09:57 AM
And now, for what Rocca said, you should test DF103. But compare yourself to these haplotypes:
D8: U152>L2> DF103> FGC4166> FGC4220> FGC668> FGC4167 et al. (SNPs phylogeny to be established)
N12648 Johannes Crauss born 4 Nov 1751, Ronshausen, Hesse Germany R1b1a2a1a1b3c
12 25 14 11 11-14 12 12 12 13 13 29
37207 Johannes Crauss born 4 Nov 1751, Ronshausen, Hesse Germany R1b1a2
12 25 14 11 11-14 12 12 12 13 13 29 18 9-10 11 11 24 15 19 29 15-16-17-17 11 11 19-22 15 14 17 17 38-42 12 12 11 9 15-16 8 10 10 8 10 10 12 23-23 16 10 12 12 14 8 12 22 21 14 12 11 13 11 11 12 12 33 15 9 16 12 27 26 19 12 11 14 12 11 9 12 12 10 10 11 30 13 13 24 13 10 11 21 15 18 12 23 17 13 15 24 12 23 18 10 14 18 9 12 11
284610 Pandolfo Guidi, b. ~1515, Ostra Vetere, Italy Italy R1b1a2a1a1b3c
13 24 14 12 11-14 12 12 12 13 13 29 16 9-10 11 11 25 15 19 30 15-15-17-17 11 11 19-23 16 15 19 16 36-38 13 12 11 9 15-15 8 10 10 8 10 10 12 23-23 16 11 12 12 16 8 12 22 20 13 12 11 13 11 11 12 12 33 15 9 16 12 26 26 19 12 11 12 12 10 9 11 12 10 11 11 31 12 14 24 13 10 10 20 15 21 12 23 16 12 14 25 12 23 18 10 14 17 9 12 11
D9: U152> L2> FGC5336 et al.> FGC5325 et al. (SNPs phylogeny to be established)
E11688 Portonarius De Portonariis (Montaguti after 1507), Italy R1b1a2a1a1b3c
13 24 14 11 11-14 12 12 11 15 13 31 15 9-10 11 11 25 15 19 31 14-14-16-17 11 10 19-23 17 15 16 17 36-40 12 13 11 9 15-16 8 11 10 8 10 10 12 22-23 16 10 12 12 14 8 10 22 20 13 12 11 13 11 11 12 12 35 14 9 16 12 28 26 19 12 11 13 12 10 9 12 12 10 11 11 31 12 13 24 13 10 10 21 15 19 13 24 15 12 15 24 12 24 18 10 14 18 9 12 11
D99: U152> L2> FGC5286> FGC5288 et al. (SNPs phylogeny to be established)
125963 Jonas Eaton,1637, Staple, England England R1b1a2a1a1b3c
13 24 14 11 11-15 12 12 11 13 13 29 18 9-10 11 11 25 15 19 30 15-15-16-17 12 11 18-23 16 15 18 19 38-39 12 12 11 9 15-16 8 10 10 8 9 10 12 23-23 17 11 12 12 15 8 12 22 20 13 12 11 13 11 11 12 12 37 15 9 16 12 26 26 19 12 11 13 12 10 9 12 12 10 11 11 30 12 13 24 13 10 10 21 15 19 14 24 17 14 15 25 12 23 18 10 15 17 9 12 11

Alessio B. Bedini
01-29-2014, 11:36 AM
I believe that i am in the same sub-group with Kit B3002 who from me is only 14/67
I know that it can be back-mutations but for now he is the closest to me and i want to think that it is important.
If he is DF103-, also I think to be, and I'll do not test DF103 for now.

I should be in the same sub-group also with Richard Rocca who from me is 20/67.
I'll wait Richard's Full Genome results and then I'll test the Richard's SNPs

R.Rocca
08-08-2014, 08:32 PM
Both FGC5338 and FGC5356 are now available for testing via FamilyTreeDNA. Anyone who is L2+ and has tested negative for the "Big 3" of Z49, Z367 or DF103 should test for it.