PDA

View Full Version : FGC5496 (L21>DF13>FGC5496) and Subclades



MJost
01-02-2014, 06:00 PM
This new thread is for L21>DF13>FGC5496 subclade information and discussion going forward. I initially announced its discovery HERE. (http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?1532-L21-Full-Genomes-Corp-tracking-and-results&p=22721&viewfull=1#post22721)

greystones22
01-05-2014, 10:37 AM
Congratulations on the successful result. Has anyone else tested yet?

Wolds Wanderer
01-05-2014, 11:59 AM
I'm awaiting a test kit from YSEQ.

Keith

JRW
01-06-2014, 06:28 PM
Having tested positive for S7958 in Chromo2, I ordered the test two weeks ago from YSEQ. I am hopeful that I, like Mark, will finally lose my DF13* status after testing for every other Y-SNP in the book (also have FTDNA's BigY on order).

Jim

MJost
01-06-2014, 07:39 PM
As known, I have two novel SNPs found in a Public dataset PGP50 sample. These were FGC5495 & FGC5496. The 5495 SNP failed on my Sanger Test due to an X-Cross over but the later SNP 5496 was went Gold as it validated as a clean and positive Sanger test.

Jim Wilson responded to my personal email I sent asking him about my two new SNPs. He replied that "the SNP you call FGC5495 we call S7958 and does indeed define a new clade in DF13, for which we have 12 members at the minute, including non-British Isles representation! FGC5496 did not get a good design score for the chip and so was not put forward for manufacture. ... For certain S530 samples do not carry S7958 and S7958 men do not carry S530. The other ones you list are a bit rare and we'd actually have to pull out specific samples to test them. Should be able to help show that S7958 men don't carry the other markers that are on the chip.

Feel free to share this information. None of your private SNPs are on our chip, which is no surprise given that your data were not available at the time it was designed.

Thanks again for sharing your markers.

Best wishes
Jim"


So I thank Jim Wilson for the info. Of 12 documented positive S7958 Chromo2 guys, two have checked their Chrom2 SNP list and notified us that they are positive for S7958/FGC5495 and have ordered SNP FGC5496 to help in the understanding of this new SNP's breath and depth.

Chromo2 kit 289737 KeithW , positive result for S7958 SNP. I calculated the TRMCA for 111 markers and there is at least 2,300 ybp TMRCA.

GD / GD-IAMMCM = 46 / 40
Mean Generations___StdDevInGen___YBP___+OR-YBP___Max-YBP
76.6___28.4___2,296.7___53.0___3,149.6

The second guy, JimW kit 65932 has a patrilineal line from Franconia with about a 1,800 ybp TMRCA.

GD / GD-IAMMCM = 31 / 29 and a

Mean Generations___StdDevInGen___YBP___+OR-YBP___Max-YBP

58.1___ 24.8___ 1,742.3___ 742.9___ 2,485.2

With my 69 new down stream SNPs, with only two positive, one no-read/no-call and 66 negative from PGP50, this appears to be an old subclade and Keith and Jim tests will help define the new clades boarders.

Thanks guys! Awaiting your results.

MJost

MacUalraig
01-07-2014, 08:03 AM
Good to see this level of cooperation between all the parties concerned.

Wolds Wanderer
01-07-2014, 01:22 PM
Mark, to clarify, is it known what the relationship is between FGC5495 and FGC5496; which is downstream of which ?

Keith

greystones22
01-07-2014, 05:11 PM
Interesting Mark thanks for sharing.
I think FGC5495 and FGC5496 are currently found together, but maybe more testing will resolve them to separate levels in the tree.

12 positives makes this sound a hefty branch. Franconia is interesting as well.....but remember we also have other central/easterly european members of DF13, so we're not all painted-bodied irish sea types ;-)

Brunetmj
01-07-2014, 06:36 PM
Should someone who tests postive for S7958+ on the chromo 2 test for FGC5495?

I just received my results back and tested positive for S7958. My ancestor was from Dieppe. Kit 198135

MJost
01-07-2014, 07:55 PM
Should someone who tests postive for S7958+ on the chromo 2 test for FGC5495?

I just received my results back and tested positive for S7958. My ancestor was from Dieppe. Kit 198135
Chromo2 did test for S7958 and is FGC5495 and it was Sanger Sequenced but failed due to an X-Crossover, FGC5496 needs tested. At 67 markers, you and I are:

2 HTs Only- GD / GD-IAMMCM = 30 / 24

IntraClade Coalescence (n-1) Age
Mean Generations___StdDevInGen___YBP___+OR-YBP___Max-YBP
68.6___26.9___2,059.1___807.6___2,866.7

Since PGP50 showed only two of 69 SNPs as being positive, this is an old subclade. So if one is tested negative for all the other DF13 subclades, testing is of interest to define the FGC5496 subclade. I recommend testing as we do not understand the edges of DF13* for this SNP. Expecially with the S7958/FGC5495 being positive between 12 britainsdna guys and me. Please test.

MJost

MJost
01-07-2014, 08:28 PM
I am looking for five more guys, one each from each of the below DF13 subclade for testing FGC5496. Please PM me if interested.

R1b1a2a1a2c1c L96
R1b1a2a1a2c1d L144.1/S175, L195/S354
R1b1a2a1a2c1h L371/S300
R1b1a2a1a2c1m CTS2457.2
R1b1a2a1a2c1n L679

MJost

greystones22
01-07-2014, 08:49 PM
Since PGP50 showed only two of 69 SNPs as being positive, this is an old subclade. ..... Especially with the S7958/FGC5495 being positive between 12 britainsdna guys and me. Please test.

MJost

Indeed one would expect quite a few branches to appear under FGC5495 &FGC5496 in time.

Did Jim Wilson say how many of his 12 had Scots ancestry?

Do your shared STRs with other S7958+ allow identification of a rudimentary modal haplotype?

MJost
01-07-2014, 11:24 PM
Indeed one would expect quite a few branches to appear under FGC5495 &FGC5496 in time.

Did Jim Wilson say how many of his 12 had Scots ancestry?

Do your shared STRs with other S7958+ allow identification of a rudimentary modal haplotype?

Andy,

JimW did say he had '12 members at the minute, including non-British Isles representation' but did not respond to the geographic breakdown question I had. There are now three S7958/FGC5496 guys, two have ordered FGC5496 and the third is considering it. These three have a continental ancestry; patrilineal line from Franconia, 16th century Berkshire, England & Dieppe, but JimW stated just a few non-isles Guys.


The four of us have a TMRCA of:
Mean Generations StdDevInGen YBP +OR-YBP Max-YBP
106.7 24.8 3,200.1 745.3 3,945.4

The Four Kits haplotype modal is:

Modal
393 390 19 391 385a 385b 426 388 439 389i 392 389ii-i 458 459a 459b 455 454 447 437 448 449 464a 464b 464c 464d 464e 464f 464g 460 GataH4 YCAIIa YCAIIb 456 607 576 570 CDYa CDYb 442 438 531 578 395s1a 395s1b 590 537 641 472 406s1 511 425 413a 413b 557 594 436 490 534 450 444 481 520 446 617 568 487 572 640 492 565
13 24 14 11 11 14 12 12 12 13 13 16 18 9 9 11 11 24 15 19 29 15 15 16 17 11 11 19 23 16 15 17 17 36 39 12 12 12 9 15 16 8 10 10 8 10 10 12 22 23 16 10 12 12 16 8 12 22 20 13 12 11 13 11 11 12 12

Off modal STRs
458 459b 447 449 464c 576 CDYb 531 413a 534
18 9 24 29 16 17 39 12 22 16<FGC5496
17 10 25 30 17 18 38 11 23 15< L21


MJost

Brunetmj
01-07-2014, 11:58 PM
Thank You. I ordered FGC5496

Wolds Wanderer
01-08-2014, 11:26 AM
There are now three S7958/FGC5496 guys, two have ordered FGC5496 and the third is considering it. These three have a continental ancestry; patrilineal line from Franconia, Germany & Dieppe, but JimW stated just a few non-isles Guys.

Mark,

If those three include me, my patrilineal line goes back to 16th century Berkshire, England.

Keith

(F289737 Willis)

MJost
01-08-2014, 01:24 PM
Mark,

If those three include me, my patrilineal line goes back to 16th century Berkshire, England.

Keith

(F289737 Willis)
My speed reading, sorry. Correcting my list.
I knew that.... :)

MJost

Wolds Wanderer
01-08-2014, 02:47 PM
No problem :thumb:

Keith

Mikewww
01-08-2014, 11:22 PM
From an "inside-out" point of view here are the closest people to Mark J FGC5496+ at 67 STRs. The GDs go 1 (to a Watterson) up to 15.

f148326 Watterson R1b-L21>DF13>FGC5496 FGC5496+ L21+ DF13+ L21+ L459+ Z245+ CTS4466- DF21- DF23- DF41- DF49- DF5- DF63- L130- L1334- L1335- L144- L159.2- L192.1- L193- L195- L226- L513- L526- L563- L96- M222- M37- P314.2- P66- Z251- Z253- Z254- Z255- FGC5495+ FGC5507+ FGC5508+ FGC5509+ FGC5516+ FGC5517+ FGC5518+ FGC5519+ FGC5520+ FGC5521+ FGC5522+ FGC5523+ FGC5524+ FGC5525+ FGC5526+ FGC5527+ FGC5528+ FGC5493+ FGC5529+ FGC5530+ FGC5531+ FGC5532+ FGC5533+ FGC5534+ FGC5535+ FGC5536+ FGC5537+ FGC5538+ FGC5539+ FGC5540+ FGC5541+ FGC5542+ FGC5543+ FGC5544+ FGC5550+ FGC5551+ FGC5552+ FGC5553+ FGC5554+ FGC5555+ FGC5556+ FGC5560+ L10- L144- L193- L195- L21+ L302- L319.1- L371- L555- L9- M37- P66- L130- L69- 3c1g (WTY) {FG} z1130-A1-A

f316063 Watterson zzL21suspect z1130-A1-A

fN41593 Cook R1b-L21 L21+ z1130-A1-A

f206731 Watterson R1b-L21 L21+ L144- L148- L159.2- L164- L176.2- L188- L193- L196- L217- L226- L96- M222- M37- P314.2- P66- z1130-A1-A

f260963 Curry zzL21suspect z1130-A1-A

f73430 Curry zzL21suspect z1130-A1-A

f155812 Ross R1b-L21 L21+ M222- M37- P66- 3c1g z1130-A1-A

f208357 Briggs zzL21suspect z1130-A1

f68079 Appleby zzL21suspect z1130-A1

f98213 Byrne zzL21suspect z1130-A1

f206703 Cawley zzL21suspect z1130-A1

f140678 Dealy R1b-L21 L21+ L144- L159.2- L176.2- L193- L196- L217- L226- L96- M222- M37- P314.2- P66- z1130-A1

f236390 Mitchell zzL21suspect z1130-A1

f162251 Appleby R1b-L21 L21+ M222- M37- P66- z1130-A1

f131975 Dewane R1b-L21 L21+ M222- M37- P66- z1130-A1

f52460 Harley R1b-L21 L21+ L144- L159.2- L193- L226- L96- M222- M37- P66- z1130-A1

f104939 Stewart zzL21suspect z1130-A1

f217197 zzzUnk(McCain) zzL21suspect z1130-A1

f135096 Mitchell zzL21suspect z1130-A1

After that, the next several groups of people are positive for other major subclades of DF13 that are known to be exclusive to FGC4596. That kind of puts a fence around this cluster/variety.

At GDs of up to 15 you may not think this is a strong variety but I think it is because the STR signature is fairly firm and unusual.
385=12,14 449>=30 531>=12 511>=11 (456>=17) & 19>=15
Plus there are no other signatures that are partial/half fits, etc.

BTW, Mark, if I've got the surnames wrong let me know.

Mikewww
01-08-2014, 11:32 PM
From an "inside-out" point of view here are the closest people to Mark J FGC5496+ at 67 STRs.....
z1130-A1 (variety label that Mark is in)

After that, the next several groups of people are positive for other major subclades of DF13 that are known to be exclusive to FGC4596. That kind of puts a fence around this cluster/variety.

At GDs of up to 15 you may not think this is a strong variety but I think it is because the STR signature is fairly firm and unusual.
385=12,14 449>=30 531>=12 511>=11 (456>=17) & 19>=15
...

The z1130-A1 variety is not that large. If Jim Wilson has presented he's found a number of equivalent derived people, the implication is that FGC5496 is quite old and any DF13* person is a candidate.

I sent him the list of surnames so he could check in his database if he is pulling from the same list as z1130-A1.

MJost
01-09-2014, 12:50 AM
Yes I accept the surname, but my wife just laughs when I tell her I am adding it as a dashed name. lol

There are 12 Britains DNA Chromo2 Chip showing positive for my failed Sanger Sequenced FGC5495 SNP AKA S7958, three interested DF13* guys came forward and have ordered FGC5496 to see if having S7958 is closely associated with FGC5496. This should confirm or deny how wide the net is. Note, there were 69 new SNPs and only two were in common with a public dataset so it will prove to be old.

Oh by the way. I have 11 more single asterisk Level (>90%) ranked SNPs to be tested along with three more originally submitted positions that the designed primers failed but should not have failed. Thomas and Astrid has fixed two of them so far.

MJost (-Watterson)

MJost
01-10-2014, 05:31 AM
From an "inside-out" point of view here are the closest people to Mark J FGC5496+ at 67 STRs. The GDs go 1 (to a Watterson) up to 15.
[FONT=Courier New][SIZE=2]

After that, the next several groups of people are positive for other major subclades of DF13 that are known to be exclusive to FGC4596. That kind of puts a fence around this cluster/variety.

At GDs of up to 15 you may not think this is a strong variety but I think it is because the STR signature is fairly firm and unusual.
385=12,14 449>=30 531>=12 511>=11 (456>=17) & 19>=15
Plus there are no other signatures that are partial/half fits, etc.

BTW, Mark, if I've got the surnames wrong let me know.

Mike,

GregM hasn't found any thing linking my HG to another known younger DF13 Subclades to date. I am now negative for all the 14 ISOGG listed DF13 subclades. Including my negative status for CTS1751, which is under investigation to be above L144. All these SNPs are negative via the Full Y results and 13 originally negative via FtDNA testing.

CTS2457-, Z253-, L513-, Z251-, DF21-, L96-, CTS4466-, Z255-, DF41-, L144-, DF49-, L1335-, L371-, L679-.

These DF13 subclades are negative for FGC5496 and the remainder of these new FGC SNPs.
0FW1RA's FGC5496 tested negative DF13 Subclades:

MRD4PA (R-DF49) R1b1a2a1a2c1a DF49/S474 MRD4PA
NA12399 (R-DF1) R1b1a2a1a2c1b DF1/L513/S215
HG00246 (R-S219) R1b1a2a1a2c1e Z255/S219
PY5HUA (R-S218) R1b1a2a1a2c1f Z253/S218 PY5HUA
P9UH4A (R-DF21) R1b1a2a1a2c1g DF21/S192 P9UH4
29FKDA (R-CTS2501) R1b1a2a1a2c1i DF41/S524/CTS2501 29FKD
NA11831 (R-Z251) R1b1a2a1a2c1j Z251
NA20278 (R-CTS4466) R1b1a2a1a2c1l CTS4466

The remaining Subclades are to be shortly tested for FGC5496. Other than the very large L1335 possibility having FGC5496 ancestral, the law of averages are becoming very low to find any of these positive but who knows until these subclades are tested.

1) R1b1a2a1a2c1c L96
2) R1b1a2a1a2c1d L144.1/S175, L195/S354
3) R1b1a2a1a2c1h L371/S300
4) R1b1a2a1a2c1k L1335/S530
5) R1b1a2a1a2c1m CTS2457.2
6) R1b1a2a1a2c1n L679

MJost

MJost
01-10-2014, 06:41 AM
Here are my next group of SNPs that primers are being ordered and testing to be completed.

FGC5505+
FGC5510+
FGC5511+
FGC5512+
FGC5513+
FGC5515+
FGC5545+
FGC5546+
FGC5557+
FGC5558+
FGC5559+

I am still awaiting new version primers for
FGC5516+
FGC5525+
FGC5542+

If all turn positive, it will be thirty three new testable SNPs.

MJost

Wolds Wanderer
01-10-2014, 05:35 PM
My test kit is now winging its way back across the Atlantic to Houston. An estimated 4 weeks turn around for the result once it reaches YSEQ. I think that's very good. My DF13 at FTDNA took nearly two months.

Mark, I don't suppose any of your FGC SNPs are an equivalent to PF5191, are they ? Geno 2.0 and Chromo2 showed me as PF5191+. Other than it being a novel SNP under L21 and that it also occurs under Haplogroup J2a, I can't find out much about it.

Keith

MJost
01-10-2014, 06:06 PM
My test kit is now winging its way back across the Atlantic to Houston. An estimated 4 weeks turn around for the result once it reaches YSEQ. I think that's very good. My DF13 at FTDNA took nearly two months.

Mark, I don't suppose any of your FGC SNPs are an equivalent to PF5191, are they ? Geno 2.0 and Chromo2 showed me as PF5191+. Other than it being a novel SNP under L21 and that it also occurs under Haplogroup J2a, I can't find out much about it.

Keith
Keith,

That is good to know its on its way. There is three FGC5496 on order and will be a big help.

As to the PF5191 SNP. It is not on the ISOGG Investigation list either but DaveR has it shown as a peer to L21. I checked and I am negative for it. So based on my negative it appears not to be equivalent to L21. I took a simple look at this SNP and it doesn't appear to have any X-Crossover issues. I would do a Wish List request and if they can create a primer, to do and then order it since you now have a sample head that way. But your correct is shows up in a HG J and that would make it PF5191.2 status if it works its way through the entire process.

Name: PF5191
Position: ChrY:18060844..18060844 (+ strand)

How many others do you know have PF5191?

MJost

Wolds Wanderer
01-10-2014, 06:32 PM
Name: PF5191
Position: ChrY:18060844..18060844 (+ strand)

How many others do you know have PF5191?

MJost

Thanks, Mark. I've not actually found anyone else who's tested positive for PF5191, under L21.

What would creating a primer and ordering it achieve ?

Keith

MJost
01-10-2014, 07:11 PM
Thanks, Mark. I've not actually found anyone else who's tested positive for PF5191, under L21.

What would creating a primer and ordering it achieve ?

Keith

A Sanger sequence can validate this SNP and it then can be ordered as a single item making it available to those (family or close clustered haplotypes etc) who wish to just test this one SNP instead of paying hundreds of bucks to get a Geno or Chromo chip. It has value if you chose it.

MJost

Wolds Wanderer
01-10-2014, 07:14 PM
That makes sense, thanks.

Keith

MJost
01-11-2014, 12:56 AM
Gregg Magoon from FGC, just informed me that he has another SNP that I now share with PGP50 which originally had been assigned a reliability of **. Thus it wasn't considered in my process. But he said on further investigation, this will be a good quality variant ... this will eventually be reclassified as *. It will be designated FGC7448.

19 validated
11 primers ordered
1 awaiting design
3 awaiting primer redesign.
34 Total

Oh my.

MJost



MJost

hoxgi
01-11-2014, 08:59 AM
Name: PF5191
Position: ChrY:18060844..18060844 (+ strand)
How many others do you know have PF5191?
MJost

Mark, there is one PF5191+ result from Chromo 2 in Mike's spreadsheet of SNPs. It is in Willis f289737, who is currently DF13*.

Greg H

Wolds Wanderer
01-11-2014, 09:51 AM
Mark, there is one PF5191+ result from Chromo 2 in Mike's spreadsheet of SNPs. It is in Willis f289737, who is currently DF13*.

Greg H

Greg,

That's me :)

Keith

JRW
01-11-2014, 03:49 PM
Mike,



The remaining Subclades are to be shortly tested for FGC5496. Other than the very large L1335 possibility having FGC5496 ancestral, the law of averages are becoming very low to find any of these positive but who knows until these subclades are tested.

1) R1b1a2a1a2c1c L96
2) R1b1a2a1a2c1d L144.1/S175, L195/S354
3) R1b1a2a1a2c1h L371/S300
4) R1b1a2a1a2c1k L1335/S530
5) R1b1a2a1a2c1m CTS2457.2
6) R1b1a2a1a2c1n L679

MJost

Mark,

If FGC5495/S7958 is a reliable predictor for, or equivalent to, FGC5496, then it is unlikely that FGC5496 is ancestral for L1335/S530 given that two Chromo2 kits (f48641 and f143812) are L1335/S530+ and FGC5495/S7958-. In fact, I haven't found (just through visual checking, so there could be errors) any Chromo2 tester who has been positive for any of the ISOGG DF13 subclades and FGC5495/S7958+. However, there is always the possibility that FGC5496 could be ancestral to what would be "brother" subclades of L1335/S530 and FGS5495/S7958 or possibly others. It certainly has the potential given its possible age (i.e., if the other 3 kits in addition to yours test FGC5496+). Further testing will indeed tell the story.

Best,

jrw

MJost
01-11-2014, 04:05 PM
Mark, there is one PF5191+ result from Chromo 2 in Mike's spreadsheet of SNPs. It is in Willis f289737, who is currently DF13*.

Greg H
So only one person has a PF5191+, so far PF5191 is derived from S7958/FGC5495 with three guys checked

Chromo2 kits
PF5191+
f289737 Keith Willis (Wolds Wanderer) 16th century Berkshire, England

PF5191-
f65932 Jim Wigand (Jim3719) Franconia
f198135 Brunet (Earthwindfire) Dieppe


MJost

MJost
01-11-2014, 04:22 PM
Mark,

If FGC5495/S7958 is a reliable predictor for, or equivalent to, FGC5496, then it is unlikely that FGC5496 is ancestral for L1335/S530 given that two Chromo2 kits (f48641 and f143812) are L1335/S530+ and FGC5495/S7958-. In fact, I haven't found (just through visual checking, so there could be errors) any Chromo2 tester who has been positive for any of the ISOGG DF13 subclades and FGC5495/S7958+. However, there is always the possibility that FGC5496 could be ancestral to what would be "brother" subclades of L1335/S530 and FGS5495/S7958 or possibly others. It certainly has the potential given its possible age (i.e., if the other 3 kits in addition to yours test FGC5496+). Further testing will indeed tell the story.

Best,

jrwThank you for doing a further check on that which confirms what Jim Wilson told me; 'For certain S530 samples do not carry S7958 and S7958 men do not carry S530.'

But I do have to test the six subclades I showed using Sanger Sequence method to make confirm the place on the tree. And the three Chromo2 kits that are positive with the S7958/FGC5495 testing further for FGC5496 will be great line in the sand to see if it can be crossed. The third novel just uncovered SNP yesterday by Greg Magoon, I have with the PGP50 guy, and just had a successful primer designed and has been ordered for my testing use. Increasing the length of the trunk to my leaf.

Thanks for looking.

MJost

Brunetmj
01-13-2014, 04:52 PM
What is the chromo 2 equivalent for DF13? According to the spreadsheet I found at yahoo groups it is suppose to be S521?
I have no results for S521. Am I missing something? Unfortunately I will be on the road for a couple of weeks so I will have limited access to things. I am kit number 198135 and I thought I was DF13* tested for all downstream SNP 's. My raw data was uploaded to yahoo groups

Wolds Wanderer
01-13-2014, 05:04 PM
As I understand it, Chromo2 doesn't actually test for DF13 or its equivalent. I don't know why; you would think it would be an obvious one to include.

Keith

MJost
01-13-2014, 05:13 PM
R1b1a2a1a2c1 CTS241/DF13/S521

I don't believe any of these designations are included in the Chromo2.

MJost

Brunetmj
01-13-2014, 06:49 PM
Thank you. That equivalency spread sheet at yahoo group files confused me because I know I tested DF13 positive at FTDNA. My test kit was mailed out Sunday for FGC5496.

MJost
01-13-2014, 07:24 PM
Thank you. That equivalency spread sheet at yahoo group files confused me because I know I tested DF13 positive at FTDNA. My test kit was mailed out Sunday for FGC5496.
That is great! Looking forward to the results.

MJost

MJost
01-14-2014, 01:56 PM
...
The remaining Subclades are to be shortly tested for FGC5496. Other than the very large L1335 possibility having FGC5496 ancestral, the law of averages are becoming very low to find any of these positive but who knows until these subclades are tested.
...
MJostWith contact with the Admin of the L21 project, Rich Stevens I have been able to arrange several volunteer testers. Thanks Rich.

Still need a few good men to be sponsored by me and volunteer testing FGC5496. I added #7 to the list of which I am negative for as well.

1) R1b1a2a1a2c1c L96
2) R1b1a2a1a2c1d L144.1/S175, L195/S354 (will need to also be negative for *CTS1751 if possible)
3) R1b1a2a1a2c1h L371/S300
4) R1b1a2a1a2c1k L1335/S530 <have volunteer
5) R1b1a2a1a2c1m CTS2457.2 <have volunteer
6) R1b1a2a1a2c1n L679 <have volunteer
7) *CTS3386
(*Added new DF13 subclade under ISOGG investigation to list to be tested)

MJost

Mikewww
01-14-2014, 02:11 PM
With contact with the Admin of the L21 project, Rich Stevens I have been able to arrange several volunteer testers. Thanks Rich.

Still need a few good men to be sponsored by me and volunteer testing FGC5496. I added #7 to the list of which I am negative for as well.

1) R1b1a2a1a2c1c L96
2) R1b1a2a1a2c1d L144.1/S175, L195/S354 (will need to also be negative for *CTS1751 if possible)
3) R1b1a2a1a2c1h L371/S300
4) R1b1a2a1a2c1k L1335/S530 <have volunteer
5) R1b1a2a1a2c1m CTS2457.2 <have volunteer
6) R1b1a2a1a2c1n L679 <have volunteer
7) *CTS3386
(*Added new DF13 subclade under ISOGG investigation to list to be tested)

MJost

Excellent progress.

Mark, who at ISOGG will you submit the results to in your request for positioning on their phylogenetic tree?

I'd like to start thinking about how this kind of request (with evidence) and approval can be saved in a sustainable, public forum so that it can easily be seen and reconfirmed if needed. ISOGG has a web site but I don't know if they have a system for documenting their approval process. Emails, stand-alone, aren't a great way to do this.

MJost
01-14-2014, 04:10 PM
Excellent progress.

Mark, who at ISOGG will you submit the results to in your request for positioning on their phylogenetic tree?

I'd like to start thinking about how this kind of request (with evidence) and approval can be saved in a sustainable, public forum so that it can easily be seen and reconfirmed if needed. ISOGG has a web site but I don't know if they have a system for documenting their approval process. Emails, stand-alone, aren't a great way to do this.

I am keeping a spreadsheet for my own purposes but we could come up standardized documentation format. I never inquired if ISOGG has one already that they can provide as I haven't started the official process with them. Here is an overall requirements.

ISOGG has defined a 'Listing Criteria' for SNP Inclusion into the their Y-DNA Haplogroup Tree. The inital contact person for this process is Alice Fairhurst. I have paraphrased the requirements.

Basically ISOGG has defined that a single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) or an insertion/deletion (indel), are two different types of binary polymorphism's (BP).

The main stated goal is that ISOGG requires that the BP under review has not been observed more than twice in human history, along with a clear view of how they relate to previously established binary polymorphisms.

An ISOGG committee will accept proposed new BPs in a two-step evaluation process using the appropriate haplogroup experts to review wheither or not they will allow its inclusion on the tree. Using STR Diversity or BP Frequency considerations, validating that the BP is observed in at least two individuals, and must meet either the minimum BP frequency requirement OR the STR diversity requirement that ISSOGG has defined further.

For the first of the two, minimum genetic distance is used to meet the diversity requirement unless the BP is a Non-Terminal Branch BP and thus de facto deversified. In the case where BP is a Terminal Branch BP diversity, two additional requirements must be met. They are:

1) At least one individual who is derived for the new BP is tested for every existing sub-branch (i.e. brother clade) defining BP and shown to be ancestral for these brother clade BPs. And

2) At least one individual who is derived for each brother clade BP is tested for new BP and shown to be ancestral for the new BP.

If the BP is a Non-Terminal Branch BP, it must be demonstrate that the new BP is downstream of an established BP and has been tested in individuals who have also been tested for all well established public downstream BPs.

ISOGG's entire process is to confirm whether or not a new BP is correctly placed on the cladogram.

Note: A cladogram is a diagram showing genetic relationships among a group of people. It depicts their commonalities and differences. "Phylogenetic tree" is a synonym for cladogram.

The entire ISOGG process is spelled out here:
http://www.isogg.org/tree/ISOGG_SNP_Requirements.html

MJost

MJost
01-15-2014, 03:30 PM
FGC5496 update.

I just heard some more exciting news this morning from Andy Grierson. He took a preliminary look at his data and has discovered some Welsh FGC5496+ samples. He now taking a deeper look over the next couple of weeks.

MJost

MJost
01-16-2014, 12:06 AM
DF13>FGC5496 Listing Criteria status. Need two more volunteers for sponsored testing.

Testing Negative via FGC
R1b1a2a1a2c1a DF49/S474 MRD4PA
R1b1a2a1a2c1b DF1/L513/S215 NA12399
R1b1a2a1a2c1d L144.1/S175, L195/S354 PGP126
R1b1a2a1a2c1e Z255/S219 HG0024
R1b1a2a1a2c1f Z253/S218 PY5HUA
R1b1a2a1a2c1g DF21/S192 P9UH4
R1b1a2a1a2c1i DF41/S524/CTS2501 29FKD
R1b1a2a1a2c1j Z251 NA11831
R1b1a2a1a2c1l CTS4466 NA20278

Sponsored Testing in Process
R1b1a2a1a2c1k L1335/S530
R1b1a2a1a2c1m CTS2457.2
R1b1a2a1a2c1n L679

Sponsored Testing Needed
R1b1a2a1a2c1c L96
R1b1a2a1a2c1h L371/S300
Investigating CTS3386

MJost

jdean
01-16-2014, 12:35 AM
FGC5496 update.

I just heard some more exciting news this morning from Andy Grierson. He took a preliminary look at his data and has discovered some Welsh FGC5496+ samples. He now taking a deeper look over the next couple of weeks.

MJost

Wow, that's really good news !!!

MJost
01-16-2014, 12:39 AM
Wow, that's really good news !!!

Yes this is great news. Andy stated that in Wales there are about 10 surnames accounting for >50% of the population. so bound to have some of these in the group.

Mark

JRW
01-16-2014, 02:04 AM
Yes this is great news. Andy stated that in Wales there are about 10 surnames accounting for >50% of the population. so bound to have some of these in the group.

Mark

Mark, that is very interesting. One of the surnames that shares the very rare allele DYS435=10 in DF13 with me is Lewis (f44048), who traces his ancestry to Wales. Lewis, BTW, is the 8th most common surname in Wales.

jrw

rms2
01-16-2014, 02:18 AM
The thing to remember about Welsh surnames is that many if not most of them are patronymic and stem originally from common and popular given names. Thus many Welshmen who share the same common patronymic surname will not share the same y-dna ancestry, and some Welshmen with different surnames will share the same y-dna ancestry. Fixed surnames only began to be adopted in Wales in the 15th century. Up until then, the patronymic naming system prevailed, with the prefixes ap and ab for "son of" (ab when the name that follows begins with a vowel).

For example, say a man named Hugh had four sons: John, Owen, Thomas, and William. All of them would be known by the surname ap Hugh (Pugh or Hughes), for son of Hugh. Their sons, however, would have the surnames ap John (Jones), ab Owen (Bowen), ap Thomas (Thomas), and ap William (Williams). Four different surnames, but the same y-dna ancestry. The confusion would only multiply with more sons, grandsons, and great grandsons, etc., and repeats of given names.

Likewise, any number of unrelated men named Hugh would all have sons with the same patronymic surname ap Hugh (Pugh or Hughes). Multiply that many times over, and one can see that many men with the same surname can have different y-dna ancestry.

Think of all the unrelated Welshmen named John who today have descendants with the surname Jones.

MJost
01-16-2014, 02:51 AM
Yea, that's what Andy said, "Welsh surnames are not useful" But I was excited anyway :)

MJost

jdean
01-16-2014, 02:52 PM
Yea, that's what Andy said, "Welsh surnames are not useful" But I was excited anyway :)

MJost

In 1881 over 1/4 of the population of Pwllheli went by the name of Jones, this amounted to almost 1500 of them compared to 17 Smiths : )

I read somewhere that Wales is the only place in the English speaking world where Smith isn't the most common surname, mind you there wouldn't have been many English speaking people living at Pwllheli then anyway : )

MJost
01-16-2014, 03:09 PM
In most cases, I believe we are going to find major sub branches in FGC5496. So we wait to see how all of this shakes out.

MJost

MJost
01-16-2014, 04:35 PM
DF13>FGC5496 Listing Criteria status. Need ONE more volunteer for sponsored testing.

Testing Negative via FGC
R1b1a2a1a2c1a DF49/S474 MRD4PA
R1b1a2a1a2c1b DF1/L513/S215 NA12399
R1b1a2a1a2c1d L144.1/S175, L195/S354 PGP126
R1b1a2a1a2c1e Z255/S219 HG0024
R1b1a2a1a2c1f Z253/S218 PY5HUA
R1b1a2a1a2c1g DF21/S192 P9UH4
R1b1a2a1a2c1i DF41/S524/CTS2501 29FKD
R1b1a2a1a2c1j Z251 NA11831
R1b1a2a1a2c1l CTS4466 NA20278

Sponsored Testing in Process
R1b1a2a1a2c1h L371/S300
R1b1a2a1a2c1k L1335/S530
R1b1a2a1a2c1m CTS2457.2
R1b1a2a1a2c1n L679

Sponsored Testing Needed
R1b1a2a1a2c1c L96

Investigating CTS3386

MJost

MJost
01-16-2014, 05:11 PM
DF13>FGC5496 Listing Criteria status. Need ONE more volunteer for sponsored testing.

Testing Negative via FGC
R1b1a2a1a2c1a DF49/S474 MRD4PA
R1b1a2a1a2c1b DF1/L513/S215 NA12399
R1b1a2a1a2c1d L144.1/S175, L195/S354 PGP126
R1b1a2a1a2c1e Z255/S219 HG0024
R1b1a2a1a2c1f Z253/S218 PY5HUA
R1b1a2a1a2c1g DF21/S192 P9UH4
R1b1a2a1a2c1i DF41/S524/CTS2501 29FKD
R1b1a2a1a2c1j Z251 NA11831
R1b1a2a1a2c1l CTS4466 NA20278

Sponsored Testing in Process
R1b1a2a1a2c1h L371/S300
R1b1a2a1a2c1k L1335/S530
R1b1a2a1a2c1m CTS2457.2
R1b1a2a1a2c1n L679
Private L526

Sponsored Testing Needed
R1b1a2a1a2c1c L96

Investigating CTS3386

MJost

rms2
01-16-2014, 07:23 PM
DF13>FGC5496 Listing Criteria status. Need ONE more volunteer for sponsored testing.

Testing Negative via FGC
R1b1a2a1a2c1a DF49/S474 MRD4PA
R1b1a2a1a2c1b DF1/L513/S215 NA12399
R1b1a2a1a2c1d L144.1/S175, L195/S354 PGP126
R1b1a2a1a2c1e Z255/S219 HG0024
R1b1a2a1a2c1f Z253/S218 PY5HUA
R1b1a2a1a2c1g DF21/S192 P9UH4
R1b1a2a1a2c1i DF41/S524/CTS2501 29FKD
R1b1a2a1a2c1j Z251 NA11831
R1b1a2a1a2c1l CTS4466 NA20278

Sponsored Testing in Process
R1b1a2a1a2c1h L371/S300
R1b1a2a1a2c1k L1335/S530
R1b1a2a1a2c1m CTS2457.2
R1b1a2a1a2c1n L679
Private L526

Sponsored Testing Needed
R1b1a2a1a2c1c L96

Investigating CTS3386

MJost

Mark,

I am pretty sure I can get that L96 volunteer you need.

I'll contact him.

rms2
01-16-2014, 07:31 PM
Mark,

I am pretty sure I can get that L96 volunteer you need.

I'll contact him.

I just finished emailing him. He has volunteered for this service before, so I think you will hear from him soon.

MJost
01-16-2014, 07:41 PM
I just finished emailing him. He has volunteered for this service before, so I think you will hear from him soon.

Hey, that's great. That would be my final test. THANK YOU!

MJost

MJost
01-17-2014, 02:49 PM
I just finished emailing him. He has volunteered for this service before, so I think you will hear from him soon.
Rich,

Thanks for you help here. I was just in contact with Mr. L96 and he agreed to be testing volunteer.

Outstanding!

MJost

MJost
01-17-2014, 02:59 PM
DF13>FGC5496 ISOGG Listing Criteria status.
All of the required DF13 subclades testing needed for ISOGG have now been secured.

Testing Negative via FGC
R1b1a2a1a2c1a DF49/S474 MRD4PA
R1b1a2a1a2c1b DF1/L513/S215 NA12399
R1b1a2a1a2c1d L144.1/S175, L195/S354 PGP126
R1b1a2a1a2c1e Z255/S219 HG0024
R1b1a2a1a2c1f Z253/S218 PY5HUA
R1b1a2a1a2c1g DF21/S192 P9UH4
R1b1a2a1a2c1i DF41/S524/CTS2501 29FKD
R1b1a2a1a2c1j Z251 NA11831
R1b1a2a1a2c1l CTS4466 NA20278

Sponsored Testing in Process
R1b1a2a1a2c1c L96
R1b1a2a1a2c1h L371/S300
R1b1a2a1a2c1k L1335/S530
R1b1a2a1a2c1m CTS2457.2
R1b1a2a1a2c1n L679
Private L526

Fourteen DF13 subclades are now covered for ISOGG Listing Criteria. I thank the six needed volunteers and the original four Full Genome YDNA testers, and of course the Public source kits.

Note: The person investigating CTS3386 should be consider testing FGC5496

MJost

MJost
01-19-2014, 07:12 PM
The variety that I am a part is called 1130-A1-A based on MikeQ's key STRs, and further these are part of a group 1130-A1. In this group we have several different Scottish surname that have an

IntraClade Coalescence (n-1) Age of
Mean Generations___ StdDevInGen___YBP___+OR-YBP___CI SD Gen (68.27-1 sigma)___CI +OR-YBP
17.2___13.5___ 517.2___404.8___8.99___269.8

Intraclade Founder's Modal Age
24.1___16.0___ 724.1___478.9___13.79__413.8

1130-A1 variety contains 13 haplotypes which contain mainly Irish surnames, and what I believe, are a branch off the same FGC5496 tree.

IntraClade Coalescence (n-1) Age of
Mean Generations___ StdDevInGen___YBP___+OR-YBP___CI SD Gen (68.27-1 sigma)___CI +OR-YBP
50.2___23.0___1,507.0___690.9___31.63___948.9

Intraclade Founder's Modal Age
60.9___25.4___1,827.6___760.9___40.58___1,217.5

When combining both branches, the numbers show

IntraClade Coalescence (n-1) Age of 1103-A1 and -A1-A's
Mean Generations___ StdDevInGen___YBP___+OR-YBP___CI SD Gen (68.27-1 sigma)___CI +OR-YBP
48.0___22.5___ 1,441.3___675.7___23.51___705.4

Intraclade Founder's Modal Age
59.1___25.0___ 1,774.0___749.6___31.29___ 938.7

When the two varieties are used to calculate an Interclade age, the result provides the capped age of the younger 1130-A1-A variety).

InterClade Coalescence (n-1) Age of
Mean Generations___ StdDevInGen___YBP___+OR-YBP___CI SD Gen (68.27-1 sigma)___CI +OR-YBP
53.1___23.7___ 1,594.2___710.6___28.1___842.9

Interclade Founder's Modal Age
50.4___14.8___ 1,510.8___444.1___11.87___356.1

The Interclade age is a indication of a max age when the variety split into two lines by 'fence in ages' as MikeW states.

I will be really interested in how the Welsh FGC5496's, found by Dr. Andy Grierson, fit into this TMRCA picture using SNP branch testing.

Ciick to get my TMRCA Estimator Interclade-1130-A1-01192014.pdf (https://drive.google.com/file/d/0By9Y3jb2fORNNzVyU3JiRllHMGc/edit?usp=sharing)


MJost

Brunetmj
01-20-2014, 01:47 AM
@Mjost
May I ask where your most distant known ancestor came from?

MJost
01-20-2014, 04:03 AM
@Mjost
May I ask where your most distant known ancestor came from? Yes but it convoluted but the experts have the lineage as follows:

MDKA:
•ID: I7911
•Name: William WATTERSON Sr
•Sex: M
•Birth: in Isles of Mann, Ireland
•Death: Nov 20 1703 in Isles of Mann, Ireland

•Note: From Susie Watterson Milam

"The Watterson family, who originated on the Isles of Mann, were living in Gracefield, County Down, Ireland when William, the son of William, decided to bring his wife and four of his sons to America. They came via Liverpool, England and landed in the port of Philadelphia in 1762. Several of their children evidently remained in Ireland as another son, George, came to America in 1807 and a daughter, Sarah Watterson Coats, wrote in 1803 from Ireland to her brother Edward and spoke of `Deare Brother, your sisters are a ll well and send their love to you in like manner`."

I was informed by my biological mother in my late 20's that I was paternal adopted by marriage prior to my birth by a Jost. I started testing my DNA in June 2008 to uncover my true biological paternal lineage. With time and further testing, it has now become clear that I am is the direct descendant of a Manx man who immigrated to the USA around 1764 with his wife and three sons. I have a GD6/67(GD8/111) Watterson born on the Isle of Man who I have know for over a year but did not have any clue how we might be related. I also had two of my largest aDNA matches on my paternal side, a 3rd cousin and a 4th cousin, match on 23andme and eventually found out that they both has the same MDKA who is the paternal line was a Watterson that had two son who's lines went to the two cousins. The third cousin and I have, on our largest segment, CHr1, contains the same type of non-European admixture. The forth cousin has the same admixture in another chromosome with about one generation smaller percentage. With this information I asked if the third cousin has a close male who could test their YDNA. Her brother's son was a male Watterson from the same MDKA. He ordered a 67 marker test and it came back a GD1 with a TMRCA of 2.6 +- 4 generations. He is currently upgrading to 111 markers.MJost

MJost
01-20-2014, 02:53 PM
Here are my next group of SNPs that primers are being ordered and testing to be completed.

FGC5505+
FGC5510+
FGC5511+
FGC5512+
FGC5513+
FGC5515+
FGC5545+
FGC5546+
FGC5557+
FGC5558+
FGC5559+

I am still awaiting new version primers for
FGC5516+
FGC5525+
FGC5542+

If all turn positive, it will be thirty three new testable SNPs.

MJost

My second batch list of SNPs is updated. Added two new SNPs, one is the 3rd novel SNP FGC7448 and one clean FGC5561 INSDel position. Two primer failures from my first group of SNPs were redesigned and in process of testing totaling 15 additional SNPs added to the original first group of 19. Grand total of 34 if all these new primers are successful. I have one original SNP FGC5525+ awaiting primer redesign .

FGC5505+
FGC5510+
FGC5511+
FGC5512+
FGC5513+
FGC5515+
FGC5545+
FGC5546+
FGC5557+
FGC5558+
FGC5559+
FGC5561+ Del
FGC7448 (novel with PGP50)
FGC5516+
FGC5542+

MJost

Brunetmj
01-20-2014, 03:48 PM
@mjost
Thank you. I was just thinking about the ancestry of possible candidates for this new subclade. I am aware it is way to early to speculate but still...

MJost
01-20-2014, 04:09 PM
@mjost
Thank you. I was just thinking about the ancestry of possible candidates for this new subclade. I am aware it is way to early to speculate but still...
I am wondering all about the person who is PGP50 who is lives near Boston, MA for which I have three novel SNPs with.

https://my.personalgenomes.org/profile/hu050E9C

Wish we could get further general information ie MDKA's and locations.

MJost

Wolds Wanderer
01-22-2014, 01:51 PM
According to the "Track and trace", my sample has been stuck at Chicago O'Hare for 8 days, now. I don't understand why it was sent through to Chicago when its destination is Houston, Texas.

I sent it by Royal Mail Airsure, which is expedited shipping, with a delivery aim of 4 days. 13 days later....

I've put in a complaint to Royal Mail and asked them to find out what's going on. I might as well have sent it standard Airmail.

Keith

MJost
01-22-2014, 02:27 PM
According to the "Track and trace", my sample has been stuck at Chicago O'Hare for 8 days, now. I don't understand why it was sent through to Chicago when its destination is Houston, Texas.

I sent it by Royal Mail Airsure, which is expedited shipping, with a delivery aim of 4 days. 13 days later....

I've put in a complaint to Royal Mail and asked them to find out what's going on. I might as well have sent it standard Airmail.

Keith

That's crazy. Maybe Yseq has already received it?

MJost

Wolds Wanderer
01-22-2014, 03:36 PM
Maybe Yseq has already received it?

Astrid said she would let me know once it had arrived. I've not heard from her, so I assume not.

Keith

MJost
01-22-2014, 04:00 PM
Guess ye ol' Royal Mail Airsure and the United States Postal Service had some connection problems.

Dang.

MJost

Brunetmj
01-22-2014, 09:47 PM
I asked yseq customer service a question over a week ago but havent heard back. Does anyone know if they store your sample or require a new kit for every test?

MJost
01-26-2014, 07:13 AM
I asked yseq customer service a question over a week ago but havent heard back. Does anyone know if they store your sample or require a new kit for every test?I am sure they are really buried with work now. I think I recall reading they -4 or lower degrees storage.

MJost

MJost
01-26-2014, 07:15 AM
FGC 5496 update.

L1065 is negative as per Thomas K. Four more subclades left and still awaiting testing, with one swab has now arrived in the lab.

MJost

MJost
01-28-2014, 09:42 PM
FGC5496 Update

Variety 1130-A1-A
FtDNA Kit 155812 Ross MDKA John Ross, Born: About 1753, Location: Braeno Glass, Latheron, Caithness

Has a GD9/67 (GD13/111) from me - f148326

Is now FGC5496 Positive, YSEQ # 113.

The FGC5496 SNP is now diverse

MJost

Mikewww
01-28-2014, 09:57 PM
Cool. Can I post that on the yahoo group or do you want to do that?

Did Thomas ever come up with a public display "opt in" method? I think he has the right idea, to include the kit # or Ysearch ID, etc.

MJost
01-28-2014, 10:02 PM
Cool. Can I post that on the yahoo group or do you want to do that?

Did Thomas ever come up with a public display "opt in" method? I think he has the right idea, to include the kit # or Ysearch ID, etc.
Yep I posted it previously.

Group public Alleles Browser link is:

http://shop.yseq.net/group_alleles.php?gid=1

Oh by the way I see another FGC5496 Positive guy. I will let him announce who it is for sure.

MJost

MJost
01-28-2014, 10:17 PM
FGC5496 Update.

The Primer for FGC5496 has now been designed with what Thomas and Astrid call a "nested PCR" since he personally was shown as a double peak but with this new primer is now confirmed he is negative along with L1065 by retesting, R1b-L526 (YSEQ#1) and R1b-L1335 (YSEQ#42) confirmed to be ancestral for FGC5496.

MJost


MJost

MJost
01-28-2014, 10:27 PM
FGC5496 Update

I note that another guy went positive today for FGC5496 along with Ross# 113. I will let ID 87 announce who he is.

MJost

Brunetmj
01-28-2014, 10:58 PM
Hi Mark
Yes that would be me. Mark Brunet F198135 unassigned variety ..this makes me happy to have a home...
Mark Brunet
earliest ancestor Pierre Brunet Dieppe

MJost
01-28-2014, 11:13 PM
Hi Mark
Yes that would be me. Mark Brunet F198135 unassigned variety ..this makes me happy to have a home...
Mark Brunet
earliest ancestor Pierre Brunet Dieppe

Welcome to the FGC5496 subclade. You, me and Ross.

I ran some TMRCAs Using 111 markers.

You and me have TMRCA of:

IntraClade Coalescence (n-1) Age
(age where we have the closest common ancestor)
2,059 = Coal. Ybp Age (n-1)GD
GD / GD-IAMMCM = 48 / 43

You and Ross have a TMRCA of:
IntraClade Coalescence (n-1) Age
2,455 = Coal. Ybp Age (n-1)
GD-IAMMCM = 51 / 47


Ross and I have a TRMCA of:
IntraClade Coalescence (n-1) Age
554 = Coal. Ybp Age (n-1)
GD-IAMMCM = 13 / 13

We three have a TRMCA of
IntraClade Coalescence (n-1) Age
Mean Generations___StdDevInGen___YBP___+OR-YBP___Max-YBP
75.1___28.2___2,252.7___844.7___3,097.4


MJost

Mikewww
01-29-2014, 05:10 AM
Welcome to the FGC5496 subclade. You, me and Ross.

I ran some TMRCAs Using 111 markers.

You and me have TMRCA of:

IntraClade Coalescence (n-1) Age
(age where we have the closest common ancestor)
2,059 = Coal. Ybp Age (n-1)GD
GD / GD-IAMMCM = 48 / 43

You and Ross have a TMRCA of:
IntraClade Coalescence (n-1) Age
2,455 = Coal. Ybp Age (n-1)
GD-IAMMCM = 51 / 47


Ross and I have a TRMCA of:
IntraClade Coalescence (n-1) Age
554 = Coal. Ybp Age (n-1)
GD-IAMMCM = 13 / 13

We three have a TRMCA of
IntraClade Coalescence (n-1) Age
Mean Generations___StdDevInGen___YBP___+OR-YBP___Max-YBP
75.1___28.2___2,252.7___844.7___3,097.4


MJost

I've created "5496" varieties in the spreadsheet. Brunet clearly stands as different than Watterson and Ross. The only markers out of 111 that I can see that are shared and off-modal are 531=12 and 513<=11.

I can't find much of anyone who looks like a good fit with Brunet.

It must be an old clade.

Wolds Wanderer
01-29-2014, 12:15 PM
Congratulations to the three of you, and well done to Astrid and Thomas for their quick turnaround !

With two results in, it's looking likely that a positive for S7958 (FGC5495) from Chromo2 is a good indicator of a positive for FGC5496.

My sample was finally received by Astrid last Monday, 27th January. 17 days for an expedited shipping that should have taken 4 days. Thanks USPS:\ Hopefully my sample proves to be good.

Keith

JRW
01-29-2014, 02:17 PM
After an initial inconclusive test result, YSEQ refined its protocol, retested my sample, and I am pleased to report that I (Wigand) am positive for FGC5496. At last, I am losing my DF13* status!

Given the GDs of those testing positive for this SNP, it would appear to be very old and without a clear STR signature -- even at 111 markers (and I have several very slow markers with off modal values compared to the others). I think the potential STR marker boundaries of this SNP are very broad.

Jim

MJost
01-29-2014, 05:44 PM
Congratulations to the three of you, and well done to Astrid and Thomas for their quick turnaround !

With two results in, it's looking likely that a positive for S7958 (FGC5495) from Chromo2 is a good indicator of a positive for FGC5496.

My sample was finally received by Astrid last Monday, 27th January. 17 days for an expedited shipping that should have taken 4 days. Thanks USPS:\ Hopefully my sample proves to be good.

Keith
Me too... since if its takes to long to get to the lab, they might be sequencing bacteria. but if its dried it should be ok.

I suspect you will be positive for FGC5496 since the other S7958/FGC5495+'s guys went plus. I would like to know about the other nine BISDNA kits.

MJost

MJost
01-29-2014, 05:47 PM
After an initial inconclusive test result, YSEQ refined its protocol, retested my sample, and I am pleased to report that I (Wigand) am positive for FGC5496. At last, I am losing my DF13* status!

Given the GDs of those testing positive for this SNP, it would appear to be very old and without a clear STR signature -- even at 111 markers (and I have several very slow markers with off modal values compared to the others). I think the potential STR marker boundaries of this SNP are very broad.

JimJim,

The Clade FGC5496 welcomes you into the fold.

Here is the TMRCA between us:

111 marker compared
IntraClade Coalescence (n-1) Age

f148326 f65932 Jost/Wigand
GD / GD-IAMMCM = 44 /42
2,300 = Coal. Ybp Age (n-1)

Thanks for Testing!!!

MJost

MJost
01-29-2014, 05:49 PM
After an initial inconclusive test result, YSEQ refined its protocol, retested my sample, and I am pleased to report that I (Wigand) am positive for FGC5496. At last, I am losing my DF13* status!

Given the GDs of those testing positive for this SNP, it would appear to be very old and without a clear STR signature -- even at 111 markers (and I have several very slow markers with off modal values compared to the others). I think the potential STR marker boundaries of this SNP are very broad.

Jim

Please post over on the Yahoo L21 board. Thx.

MJost

MJost
01-29-2014, 06:04 PM
FGC5496 Update

Noting that Brunet is now FGC5496+, over on the Yahoo L21 board, it was posted by NigelB that

"fB4810 Hammond and f198135 Brunet are S826+. Their GD67 is 32 (1-step) and 24 (infinite allele). S826 is therefore old. Brunet is DF13*. Hammond is DF13>L679.

Brunet is from Haute-Normandie. Hammond's line is linked to Normandy too through association with f162326 who is variety 679x and who is from Basse-Normandie. S826 therefore most likely has a France/Continental European origin.

Given that S826 is currently only available via Chromo2 ..."

I have sent Dr. Wilson an email about this connection to FGC5496+ Brunet. I am awaiting a response. Hammond should test for FGC5496.

AndyGrierson stated that further review, "In Wales I have a different group of samples derived for a novel SNP from the UK10K dataset, which we can now position below FGC5496."

Andy is running a few tests for several known unconfirmed DF13 subclades that I haven't proven yet that are negative for FGC5496. More info to come.

Exciting.

MJost

Wolds Wanderer
02-01-2014, 05:50 PM
Just received a positive result from YSEQ, so I'm another member of the FGC5496 clade :)

Mark, I think you said we have a GD of 46; this result should therefore go quite a way to confirm how ancient FGC5496 is.

I can't believe how quickly Astrid and Thomas carried out the test - less than one week.

Keith

MJost
02-01-2014, 06:36 PM
Just received a positive result from YSEQ, so I'm another member of the FGC5496 clade :)

Mark, I think you said we have a GD of 46; this result should therefore go quite a way to confirm how ancient FGC5496 is.

I can't believe how quickly Astrid and Thomas carried out the test - less than one week.

Keith
Congrates!!!

This is sure snowballing across western Europe. From far south to north edge, England, Highlands of Scotland and the Isle of Man. So Welcome to L21>DF13>FGC5496.

FGC5496 is on a Roll gathering moss... Thanks Keith for testing and Welcome to this diverse group of DF13 men. I am attempting to get an Irish 1130-A1 kit to test as well.

MJost

MJost
02-01-2014, 06:39 PM
FGC5496 Update

ISOGG List Criteria results of all 14 DF13 subclades testing against FGC5496. Two remaining to qualify to be officially recognized.


DF13>FGC5496
Testing Negative via FGC, Public, YSEQ.net Negative Sample
R1b1a2a1a2c1a DF49/S474 MRD4PA
R1b1a2a1a2c1b DF1/L513/S215 NA12399
R1b1a2a1a2c1c L96 YSEQ#112
R1b1a2a1a2c1d L144.1/S175, L195/S354 PGP126
R1b1a2a1a2c1e Z255/S219 HG0024
R1b1a2a1a2c1f Z253/S218 PY5HUA
R1b1a2a1a2c1g DF21/S192 P9UH4
R1b1a2a1a2c1h L371/S300 anonymous sample-tested By AndyG/YSEQ#111
R1b1a2a1a2c1i DF41/S524/CTS2501 29FKD
R1b1a2a1a2c1j Z251 NA11831
R1b1a2a1a2c1k L1335/S530 >1065 YSEQ#42
R1b1a2a1a2c1l CTS4466 NA20278
Private R1b-L526 YSEQ#1

Testing in Process
R1b1a2a1a2c1m CTS2457.2 YSEQ#107
R1b1a2a1a2c1n L679 YSEQ#106


MJost

rms2
02-02-2014, 12:08 AM
I went ahead and created a category for FGC5496 at the R-L21 Plus Project: x20. FGC5496+ (L21>DF13>FGC5496).

Sorry I had to slap it on at the end of the list. I wish FTDNA would go to a drag-and-drop system for ordering categories, so that alphanumeric prefixes would become unnecessary.

Thus far, I have Jost, kit 148326, and Wheeler, kit 289737, in it.

Please let me know if I am missing anyone (and please give me the kit number).

Note: Just saw the Ross, kit 155812, result a few posts back and added him to the FGC5496 category.

rms2
02-02-2014, 12:16 AM
I went ahead and created a category for FGC5496 at the R-L21 Plus Project: x20. FGC5496+ (L21>DF13>FGC5496).

Sorry I had to slap it on at the end of the list. I wish FTDNA would go to a drag-and-drop system for ordering categories, so that alphanumeric prefixes would become unnecessary.

Thus far, I have Jost, kit 148326, and Wheeler, kit 289737, in it.

Please let me know if I am missing anyone (and please give me the kit number).

Note: Just saw the Ross, kit 155812, result a few posts back and added him to the FGC5496 category.

Okay, I just found Wigand, kit 65932, and have added him, too.

MJost
02-02-2014, 12:18 AM
I went ahead and created a category for FGC5496 at the R-L21 Plus Project: x20. FGC5496+ (L21>DF13>FGC5496).

Sorry I had to slap it on at the end of the list. I wish FTDNA would go to a drag-and-drop system for ordering categories, so that alphanumeric prefixes would become unnecessary.

Thus far, I have Jost, kit 148326, and Wheeler, kit 289737, in it.

Please let me know if I am missing anyone (and please give me the kit number).

Note: Just saw the Ross, kit 155812, result a few posts back and added him to the FGC5496 category.
Here is the current list of positive FGC5496's.

Know FGC5496 Positive
65932 Wigand
148326 Watterson
155812 Ross
198135 Brunet
289737 Willis

MJost

rms2
02-02-2014, 12:19 AM
Just added Brunet, kit 198135, too.

Am I missing anyone?

Sorry for all these posts.

rms2
02-02-2014, 12:21 AM
Here is the current list of positive FGC5496's.

Know FGC5496 Positive
65932 Wigand
148326 Watterson
155812 Ross
198135 Brunet
289737 Willis

MJost

Thanks, Mark.

Got it now.

You're all in the category.

MJost
02-02-2014, 12:24 AM
Hey that feels good to be in my own group now.... Thanks!!!

MJost

rms2
02-02-2014, 12:28 AM
RE Hammond, kit B4810: Were you able to confirm that S826 is the same thing as FGC5496?

MJost
02-02-2014, 03:06 AM
RE Hammond, kit B4810: Were you able to confirm that S826 is the same thing as FGC5496?
No, S826 is at another Y position. Jim Wilson has confirmed that the only SNP, S7958 is equivalent to FGC5495. S7958/FGC5495 showed positive on the Chip. The Sanger Sequencing method primer did indeed fail as suspected due to a similar string on the X. There were no other Chromo2 SNP positions that matched my long list of FGC SNPs he reviewed including my two novel ones; FGC5496 and FGC7448.

MJost

Wolds Wanderer
02-02-2014, 09:21 AM
Thanks Keith for testing and Welcome to this diverse group of DF13 men.

MJost

And thank you to you, too, Mark, for your investment of both time and money which led to the discovery of FGC5496.

We certainly are a diverse group; geographically and by Haplotype.

What do you know of your FGC7448 ? Is it worthwhile any of us testing for it ? I'm willing to give it a go if you think it may be of benefit.

Keith

rms2
02-02-2014, 02:49 PM
No, S826 is at another Y position. Jim Wilson has confirmed that the only SNP, S7958 is equivalent to FGC6595. S7958/FGC6595 showed positive on the Chip. The Sanger Sequencing method primer did indeed fail as suspected due to a similar string on the X. There were no other Chromo2 SNP positions that matched my long list of FGC SNPs he reviewed including my two novel ones; FGC5496 and FGC7448.

MJost

So, what of Hammond, kit B4810? Has he ordered FGC5496?

MJost
02-02-2014, 05:27 PM
FGC5496 Update

More FGC private SNPs have been validated. In addition to my FGC5496 and 18 other private SNPs, I now have four more now validated and awaiting eight and 1 additional new novel SNP to be validated.

Sanger Validated
FGC5505+
FGC5510+
FGC5511+
FGC5513+

Awaiting Sanger
FGC5512+
FGC5515+
FGC5545+
FGC5546+
FGC5557+
FGC5558+
FGC5559+
FGC5561+ Del
FGC7448+(3rd Novel-PGP50)

MJost

MJost
02-02-2014, 05:45 PM
And thank you to you, too, Mark, for your investment of both time and money which led to the discovery of FGC5496.

We certainly are a diverse group; geographically and by Haplotype.

What do you know of your FGC7448 ? Is it worthwhile any of us testing for it ? I'm willing to give it a go if you think it may be of benefit.

Keith
Well, in my original FGC result, I had around 70 new SNPs, initially two were novel due to being found in a guy in the Personal Genome Project identified as #50. PGP50 did not share any other SNPs that I had at a high confidence level at or greater than 90%, nor did he match any SNPs defining nine of 14 major DF13 listed ISOGG subclades. These remain DF13 subclades are being testing against FGC5496 with just two remaining awaiting results as shown in my previous posting. Later my FGC7448 positive SNP was upgraded to High Quality and was added to my list to be tested.

Once the testing is completed on my remaining SNPs then plans are to expand tree position testing shortly.

MJost

MJost
02-02-2014, 06:37 PM
So, what of Hammond, kit B4810? Has he ordered FGC5496?

I haven't made a direct request to him, only via posting that he should consider testing for FGC5496. S826 is not yet understood fully. ANYONE who is not associate with a known DF13 Subclade variety should consider testing for FGC5496 as we now have a deep GD width.

All guys associated with Willis' variety z4871222, f60067 Carter and fB3802 Arnold should test for FGC546.

f148326 Jost (GD1 and a aDNA Predicted 3rd & 4th Cousin-Watterson IoM)
f289737 Keith Willis 16th century Berkshire, England
f65932 Jim R Wigand patrilineal line is from Franconia
f198135 Brunet France, Haute-Normandie, Seine-Maritime, Dieppe
f155812 Ross MDKA John Ross, Born: About 1753, Location: Braeno Glass, Latheron, Caithness

MJost

George Chandler
02-02-2014, 07:59 PM
It's going to be interesting to see if the rest of us 9919's test positive for FGC5496 or it's just a matter of convergence. The consolidated SNP spreadsheet Mike did is really helpful. It might be good to color code the new Sanger tested SNP's to keep track of that as well. One more month until I get my results back.

George

MJost
02-02-2014, 08:21 PM
It's going to be interesting to see if the rest of us 9919's test positive for FGC5496 or it's just a matter of convergence. The consolidated SNP spreadsheet Mike did is really helpful. It might be good to color code the new Sanger tested SNP's to keep track of that as well. One more month until I get my results back.

George
George,

PORTER, N8772, 9919B has ordered FGC5496 from YSEQ. Not sure his ID number yet. This will be an interesting.

MJost

George Chandler
02-02-2014, 08:41 PM
My "theory" is that 9919B is part of the 9919 A's and that DYS640 from 12 to 11 happened more recently when looking at the 111 marker pattern as a whole. I'm not quite as confident with the Wigand kit but looking at the age of FGC5496 anything is possible. Hopefully we can all fit under 5496 and divide up from there.

George

MJost
02-03-2014, 10:45 PM
FGC5496 Update

I have complied a 111 marker GD Matrix for the five FGC5496 guys.

f65932 Wigand Franconia
f148326 Jost William WATTERSON Sr b. IoM d: Nov 20 1703
f155812 Ross b. 1753, Braeno Glass, Latheron, Caithness
f198135 Brunet 1636 France, Haute-Normandie, Seine-Maritime, Dieppe
f289737 Willis 16th century Berkshire, England


FGC5496-----------------65932----148326------155812----198135----289737
GD/IAMMCM-------------Wigand---Watterson---Ross-------Brunet-----Willis
65932---Wigand----------NA-------34/33--------35/35-----44/42------50/48
148326--Watterson------34/33----NA-----------13/13------48/46-----46/43
155812--Ross------------35/35----13/13--------NA---------51/49-----45/42
198135--Brunet----------44/42----48/46--------51/49------NA--------42/41
289737--Willis------------50/48----46/43--------45/42-----42/41------NA

MJost

MJost
02-12-2014, 01:21 AM
Dr. Andy Grierson, University of Sheffield, has been involved in a long term DNA project which now has a large sample set of privately collected DNA as part of an ongoing research project in Wales, looking at history through genetics. This project has a minimum requirement for testing, the selected Father's father must be born in north Wales, (and a) Welsh surname.

Dr. Grierson gave me a little information that he has been chipping away at DF13 for the past couple of years. He stated, "I must have identified branches for more than half of the DF13s now, but still have >100 that remain DF13*. Your SNP (FGC5496) was one of the more common sub-branches, and as I mentioned it sits above another marker I had previously identified."

Grierson remarked that a good number of these samples are positive for FGC5496 at 'Roughly 4% of men with ancestry in north Wales' and there is no other data available.

When I asked, he stated, "You can certainly post to the genetic genealogy newsgroups about the approximate frequency. Maybe you will encourage some Welsh testers. I would say that a Welsh DF13* has an 8% chance of testing positive for your FGC marker (because 50% of Welsh samples are DF13+)"

A background article:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-north-east-wales-14173910

Dr Grierson leads research investigating the molecular basis of neurological disorders, including motor neuron disease and Alzheimer's disease.

He said he became interested in north Wales because of the unique genetic make-up, and because it offered an opportunity to investigate the history of the area using genetics.

"It provides a novel opportunity to look at past populations," he said.

"History and archaeology depend on surviving manuscripts and objects/landscapes. So it can be very limited.

"Genetics allows us to look at the historic population through their living descendants."


Another Welsh study article that might shed some additional light on the new DF13 subclade FGC5496 and how it might have relationship to the subject;

"Welsh people could be most ancient in UK, DNA suggests"

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-18489735


MJost

Brunetmj
02-12-2014, 02:00 AM
Grierson remarked that a good number of these samples are positive for FGC5496 at 'Roughly 4% of men with ancestry in north Wales' and there is no other data available.

Amazing! Did he say how many men are in this sample?
What are your thoughts on all of this?

MJost
02-12-2014, 04:41 AM
Amazing! Did he say how many men are in this sample?
What are your thoughts on all of this?

Well, the project data appears to have results that will help them establish where the Welsh originally came from. North Wales has been relative isolation due to geographical barriers and that 50% of Welsh samples are DF13+, begins to make me think a strong English Channel crossings and around 1,000 BC, the Iron Age proper had arrived in Wales; there, its people grouped themselves into large hill forts for protection. So much history. But FGC5496 might have been in north Wale for several thousands of years.

We await some Welsh guys testing.

MJost

Brunetmj
02-12-2014, 07:18 PM
Your SNP (FGC5496) was one of the more common sub-branches, and as I mentioned it sits above another marker I had previously identified."

I wonder what marker it sits above? Well I guess in time we will know..Waiting for test results is always the hardest but at least now I have a home.

MJost
02-19-2014, 04:17 PM
FGC5496 Update

Testing all the 14 known ISOGG DF13 subclade for FGC5496, here is a new surprising result.


Lunney f159823 DF13 > R1b1a2a1a2c1m CTS2457.2 ( R1b-P312>L21 L21+ L144-) ID:107

is now FGC5496 positive via YSeq as part of my DF13 subclade testing needed for ISOGG Listing Criteria requirements.

159823 Lunney GD/GDIAM-MCM 47 / 39 with me.

Note: DF13>L679 went negative so this finished the qualification requirements for ISOGG.

This keeps getting more exciting.

MJost


CTS2457.2 / Variety:2457-61713 looks mainly an Irish group.

f219153 Gardner zzL21suspect IS Eng z unk
f108630 Collins R1b-L21>DF13 IS Ire Ulster
f114938 Nugent R1b-L21>DF13>CTS2457.2+ IS Ire z unk
f133420 Nevin zzL21suspect IS Ire z unk
f159823 Lunney R1b-L21>DF13>CTS2457.2+ IS Ire Ulster
f159824 Lunney R1b-L21>DF13>CTS2457.2+ IS Ire Ulster
f96153 McDonnell R1b-L21>DF13>CTS2457.2+ IS Ire Leinster
fN112842 Lane R1b-L21>DF13>CTS2457.2+ IS Ire Connacht
f233258 McGrew zzL21suspect IS Ire z unk
f279962 O'Neill zzL21suspect IS Ire z unk
fN78670 Cunningham R1b-L21 IS Ire Ulster
f114664 McGrew R1b-L21 IS Sco North
f55457 MacGruar zzL21suspect IS Sco z unk

rms2
02-19-2014, 05:34 PM
Interesting! Can we get at least one more CTS2457+ individual tested for FGC5496 to firm that up?

MJost
02-19-2014, 05:47 PM
Interesting! Can we get at least one more CTS2457+ individual tested for FGC5496 to firm that up?

Yes someone could order FGC5496 that is positive for CTS2457.2 and that would be helpful. But its a solid confirmation as it is.

MJost

MJost
02-19-2014, 05:50 PM
AndyG,

Any testing knowledge of CTS2457.2+ in the existing FGC5496 Welsh guys?

MJost

rms2
02-19-2014, 07:29 PM
Yes someone could order FGC5496 that is positive for CTS2457.2 and that would be helpful. But its a solid confirmation as it is.

MJost

Maybe, but I have seen "solid" results turn out to be lab errors in the past, so two or three such results would be better and inspire more confidence.

Mikewww
02-19-2014, 07:33 PM
Yes someone could order FGC5496 that is positive for CTS2457.2 and that would be helpful. But its a solid confirmation as it is.

MJost

Congratulations on your findings. I especially appreciate that you were pragmatic. I tend to be a little Peteresque from time to time to time by getting very excited about the breadth/age of a potential subclade but you've been very pragmatic and dogged in getting the work done.

Particularly now that FGC5496 has a child, I'm going to declare it one of the "Big Ten" subclades of DF13. It deserves its own color too.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/17907527/R1b-L21_Tree_Chart.pdf

[[[ EDIT: RMS2, I had to read it slow to get what you meant but it sounded even worse than I imagined.:) ]]]

rms2
02-19-2014, 07:42 PM
Mark has done a great job in getting FG5496 recognized, and I suspect he has spent a fair amount of his own money in doing so, as well.

[Mike - I apologize, buddy, but I haven't laughed that hard in quite some time!]

MJost
02-19-2014, 09:02 PM
Congratulations on your findings. I especially appreciate that you were pragmatic. I tend to be a little Peteresque from time to time to time by getting very excited about the breadth/age of a potential subclade but you've been very pragmatic and dogged in getting the work done.

Particularly now that FGC5496 has a child, I'm going to declare it one of the "Big Ten" subclades of DF13. It deserves its own color too.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/17907527/R1b-L21_Tree_Chart.pdf

[[[ EDIT: RMS2, I had to read it slow to get what you meant but it sounded even worse than I imagined.:) ]]]
Yes I have funded a lot of this research, that's true. But I might die tomorrow and want have a bit of peace with some knowledge of my deep lineage. I have now found it

I am now wrapping up the ISOGG final data, since L679 went negative, to get it placed on the tree. All in the amazing 3 months since I received my FGC results on Nov 21, 2013.

Thanks all.

MJost

MJost
02-19-2014, 09:13 PM
FGC5496 Update.

I now have 21 newly Sanger Sequenced validated FGC SNPS below FGC5496. FGC7448 and FGC5496 are novel SNP's found in PGP50 dataset and FGC7488 is included when I requested a 24 SNP (DeepClade) panel created to test anyone that has the derived "G+" from the FGC5496 SNP. We had four paid orders and the results have just come in.

Here are the result of the four guys who tested my specific 24 SNP panel.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0By9Y3jb2fORNSWc3UENia3VEaTg/edit?usp=sharing


MJost

MJost
02-19-2014, 10:04 PM
FGC5496>CTS2457.2 Update

I am testing YSeq ID107 Lunney for the other novel SNP FGC7448 to make sure 200% that he is validated as a member of the FGC5496 subclade with CTS2457.2 below.

Should have the results in two weeks.

MJost

Mikewww
02-19-2014, 10:39 PM
FGC5496 Update.

I now have 21 newly Sanger Sequenced validated FGC SNPS below FGC5496. FGC7448 and FGC5496 are novel SNP's found in PGP50 dataset and FGC7488 is included when I requested a 24 SNP (DeepClade) panel created to test anyone that has the derived "G+" from the FGC5496 SNP. We had four paid orders and the results have just come in.

Here are the result of the four guys who tested my specific 24 SNP panel.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0By9Y3jb2fORNSWc3UENia3VEaTg/edit?usp=sharing


MJost

I have to pick out a "lead with" SNP for each branch. Hopefully it will be one of what the testing people are calling "high quality."

FGC5521 stands alone but are these two good signposts for their branches?
FGC5505
FGC5507

MJost
02-19-2014, 11:34 PM
I have to pick out a "lead with" SNP for each branch. Hopefully it will be one of what the testing people are calling "high quality."

FGC5521 stands alone but are these two good signposts for their branches?
FGC5505
FGC5507
Mike,

The list of SNPs positive for each branch is clustered, as we do not know what order they occurred. Only through the FGC5496 panel test can that be determined where presently you noted the branches fall.

All of these validated subclade SNPs had a reliability rank of over 99% likely genuine except these three listed below, which had an over 95% likely genuine status.

FGC5505+
FGC5510+
FGC5511+

FGC7448 (PGP50) was upgraded to High Quality, recently and was Sanger Sequenced and was Panel validated.

All have been validated with Sanger Sequencing and tested in a panel. Note there was a panel 'No Call' on two kits with FGC5552 but even then it was a 99%'er SNP.

MJost

Mikewww
02-20-2014, 01:52 AM
Mike,

The list of SNPs positive for each branch is clustered, as we do not know what order they occurred. Only through the FGC5496 panel test can that be determined where presently you noted the branches fall.

All of these validated subclade SNPs had a reliability rank of over 99% likely genuine except these three listed below, which had an over 95% likely genuine status.

FGC5505+
FGC5510+
FGC5511+

FGC7448 (PGP50) was upgraded to High Quality, recently and was Sanger Sequenced and was Panel validated.

All have been validated with Sanger Sequencing and tested in a panel. Note there was a panel 'No Call' on two kits with FGC5552 but even then it was a 99%'er SNP.

MJost

Just because we've been pushed to the terminal SNP labeling concept I have to pick one SNP for every branch... for consistency sake. This would probably be the one most people would order. Logically, I think it would be the SNP most widely available (most testing companies, etc.) Naturally, early on we'd probably want folks to order the most widely available AND reliable. I think this is what the "quality" ratings are about. Testing feasibility.

I can switch later, but what I'm asking is what our best guess of which of the "equivalent" SNPs will be most frequently tested and reliable?

From what I see, I'll choose
FGC5521, because it's only choice on this branch
FGC5510, because it of higher quality than FGC5505 and they appear equivalent right now.
FGC5507, because it would appear first alphabetically with its equivalents.

MJost
02-20-2014, 03:41 AM
Just because we've been pushed to the terminal SNP labeling concept I have to pick one SNP for every branch... for consistency sake. This would probably be the one most people would order. Logically, I think it would be the SNP most widely available (most testing companies, etc.) Naturally, early on we'd probably want folks to order the most widely available AND reliable. I think this is what the "quality" ratings are about. Testing feasibility.

I can switch later, but what I'm asking is what our best guess of which of the "equivalent" SNPs will be most frequently tested and reliable?

From what I see, I'll choose
FGC5521, because it's only choice on this branch
FGC5510, because it of higher quality than FGC5505 and they appear equivalent right now.
FGC5507, because it would appear first alphabetically with its equivalents.

Ok, I have been working with the expert and here are the talking points for working down the subclade branches with the list of SNPs that have the best quality. His expertise advice is what I wish to use:

FGC5521, FGC5539, FGC5538 for each down stepping subclade branch.

I just created a flow chart on the subject of how and what to test when.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0By9Y3jb2fORNaV9lczk1WU1qU3c/edit?usp=sharing

As the data develops with more test results it could change this recommendation.

MJost

Mikewww
02-20-2014, 02:48 PM
Ok, I have been working with the expert and here are the talking points for working down the subclade branches with the list of SNPs that have the best quality. His expertise advice is what I wish to use:

FGC5521, FGC5539, FGC5538 for each down stepping subclade branch.

I just created a flow chart on the subject of how and what to test when.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0By9Y3jb2fORNaV9lczk1WU1qU3c/edit?usp=sharing

As the data develops with more test results it could change this recommendation.

MJost

Okay, thanks. Apparently they think FGC5539 and FGC5538 are better than their phylogenetic equivalents (as far as we know). I'm just curious. Is this easy for the layman to see by looking at their quality score or are they looking at the physical segments of the Y chromosome and assessing one is more stable than another or do they have some other criteria?

rms2
02-22-2014, 06:38 PM
I moved FGC5496 to category 6 at the R-L21 Plus Project, formerly occupied by CTS2457. Since CTS2457 is apparently downstream of FGC5496, it is now category 6a.

MJost
02-26-2014, 04:40 PM
When I first started discussing my new SNPs reported back in Nov., two SNPs, FGC5493 and FGC5494 were marked as found in another clade A1 (M31) and the other was shown in my original haplogroupCompare report showed ambiguous 'x' calls in HG02051 and HG00115. GregM now has a new report (still hasn't been officially released, but they're working on it), using an improved variant calling algorithm, shows these correctly as clean '+' results for HG02051 and HG00115. This means these two SNPs are above FGC5495 and FGC5496.

Greg said: "... This seems highly likely to be upstream of your FGC5495 and FGC5496 and downstream of DF13, as it brings in the 1000 Genomes Project samples HG02051 and HG00115. As you've noted below, PGP50 has a no-call here. But since these two 1000 Genomes Project guys are DF13* (and negative for at least one of FGC5495 and FGC5496), it seems highly likely that this is an intermediate level between DF13 and FGC5495/FGC5496, with PGP50 being likely to be FGC5494+."

More to come.

MJost

MJost
02-26-2014, 05:19 PM
FGC5496>CTS2457.2 Update

I am testing YSeq ID107 Lunney for the other novel SNP FGC7448 to make sure 200% that he is validated as a member of the FGC5496 subclade with CTS2457.2 below.

Should have the results in two weeks.

MJost

Ok, Lunney is FGC7448 Positive along with FGC5539+. He is testing for FGC5521 now to see where CTS2457.2 may settle under FGC5496.

I expect, based on a Fluxus Tree I just ran on our charter six members he will be negative for FGC5521. Focus on the branches and note that M-L21 is the node for the MRCA.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0By9Y3jb2fORNeHhSV1FaV0pBd1k/edit?usp=sharing

My FGC5496 panel worksheet:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0By9Y3jb2fORNR3dYWmxiVGJLS1U/edit?usp=sharing

MJost

MJost
02-27-2014, 03:14 AM
FGC5496 Update.

With new SNP information pulled from the charter FGC5496 members, I have evaluated everyone's new Chromo2 SNPs under FGC5496 and have realigned the branches and rebuilt the tree and my suggested testing flow chart and will uploaded it to the file section.

My FGC5496 predicted tree panel worksheet:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0By9Y3jb2fORNR3dYWmxiVGJLS1U/edit?usp=sharing

Updated my suggested testing chart for FGC5496
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0By9Y3jb2fORNaV9lczk1WU1qU3c/edit?usp=sharing

MJost

MJost
02-28-2014, 02:09 PM
FGC5496 Update

Made some changes and now have the latest branching for FGC5496 into two major legs adding in the Chromo2 2000 v2 file results. This file now show two additional S7958/FGC5495 positives up to a total of 14. Three Chromo2 S7958/FGC5495 guys have come forward and identified themselves, ID 976, 979 & 982.

We would like to contact anyone who has the Chromo2 SNP S7958 as positive A+, their ID's are: 975-987, 1515 to included in our newest FGC5496 Subclade and those who are CTS2467.2 positive.

FGC5496 Tree
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0By9Y3jb2fORNYjhULXNuQURDVXc/edit?usp=sharing

FGC5496 SNP Analysis
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0By9Y3jb2fORNR3dYWmxiVGJLS1U/edit?usp=sharing

FGC5496 111Marker N=6 Fluxus tree
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0By9Y3jb2fORNeHhSV1FaV0pBd1k/edit?usp=sharing

FGC5496 S7958-From-C2-2000v2Report
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0By9Y3jb2fORNeTJtclU5UEZyckk/edit?usp=sharing

MJost

MJost
03-01-2014, 04:06 PM
I have taken the 49 kits at 67markers with FGC5496+ and suspects and ran a full Fluxus branching with age calculations on select nodes.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0By9Y3jb2fORNZEU2UGJNNUdWZlE/edit?usp=sharing

MJost




FGC5496 Update

Made some changes and now have the latest branching for FGC5496 into two major legs adding in the Chromo2 2000 v2 file results. This file now show two additional S7958/FGC5495 positives up to a total of 14. Three Chromo2 S7958/FGC5495 guys have come forward and identified themselves, ID 976, 979 & 982.

We would like to contact anyone who has the Chromo2 SNP S7958 as positive A+, their ID's are: 975-987, 1515 to included in our newest FGC5496 Subclade and those who are CTS2467.2 positive.

FGC5496 Tree
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0By9Y3jb2fORNYjhULXNuQURDVXc/edit?usp=sharing
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0By9Y3jb2fORNYjhULXNuQURDVXc/edit?usp=sharing

FGC5496 SNP Analysis
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0By9Y3jb2fORNR3dYWmxiVGJLS1U/edit?usp=sharing

FGC5496 111Marker N=6 Fluxus tree
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0By9Y3jb2fORNeHhSV1FaV0pBd1k/edit?usp=sharing

FGC5496 S7958-From-C2-2000v2Report
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0By9Y3jb2fORNeTJtclU5UEZyckk/edit?usp=sharing

MJost

George Chandler
03-01-2014, 04:27 PM
Hi Mark,

Really interesting. The FGC5496 Tree link won't open but the others open fine?

George

MJost
03-02-2014, 04:46 AM
Hi Mark,

Really interesting. The FGC5496 Tree link won't open but the others open fine?

George

Your the second person that said that. I re-loaded the image and re-shared it .

Let me know if it still doesn't work try downloading it and open it from its location on your computer.

MJost

MJost
03-18-2014, 04:49 PM
I pulled a BigY file and opened the Region.bed File which shows each of the tested ranges for our entire known set of SNPs.

All the BISDNA Guys will be really happy about the following information that suggests their S-SNPs should be discovered

by the BigY.

The BigY results will identify our subclade with FGC7448 as S7958/FGC5495 identified 14 BISDNA Kits, which are novel SNPs

with Public PGP50, along with the three BISDNA, one CTS2457 guys tested to confirm they were also positive for FGC7448.

These ranges are slightly different across several .bed files. I have compartmentalize branch SNPs and the 'x'leading SNPs I

did not find tested ranges for, yet.

So any new DF13* BigY guys should first look for being positive for the FGC7448 SNP listed. Then follow up with the

remaining SNPs to find their position in the FGC5496 Tree shown here:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0By9Y3jb2fORNYjhULXNuQURDVXc/edit?usp=sharing

Name Location BigYBegin BigYEnd
FGC7448 8501059 8498112 8501218
CTS2457 14313081 14312313 14313537
FGC5521 14863542 14860083 14866139
PF5191 18060844 18060342 18070660
S1079 14638135 14636365 14638977
S1088 16244170 16243162 16244791
S12547/M3669 9850574 9849835 9852658
S2202 16869829 16869591 16874731
S1105 21228506 21228315 21229861
S7953 21612040 21606253 21614630
FGC5510 7811639 7803118 7816235
FGC5511 7915429 7911239 7916946
FGC5522 14885358 14881915 14886227
FGC5530 17342711 17340813 17342847
FGC5533 18048085 18045401 18049693
FGC5534 18074610 18072952 18078025
FGC5539 18842540 18841148 18844010
FGC5541 21313657 21308896 21315018
FGC5543 21962352 21959377 21963581
FGC5544 22205752 22205629 22207217
FGC5551 22706864 22703630 22712877
FGC5552 22842754 22842394 22843666
FGC5557 23747059 23745701 23754795
FGC5507 6676738 6674886 6682007
FGC5508 6745642 6744645 6747047
FGC5523 14998294 14995645 15001423
FGC5524 15704259 15701164 15706885
FGC5537 18269066 18268099 18270000
FGC5554 22888810 22888604 22888966
FGC5495 x4310563 NA NA
FGC5496 x 7306721 NA NA
FGC5505 x5856921 NA NA
FGC5513 x9929665 NA NA
FGC5538 x18565974 NA NA
S1090/S7950 x17097548 NA NA
S17749 x15939294 NA NA


MJost

MJost
04-17-2014, 08:32 PM
FGC5496 has been developing nicely into two main branches mostly Sanger Sequence validate to date. New sub twigs from the BigY are currently being validated as well.

FGC5496 as it has developed over the last four months is seen here in these charts. This subclade now includes the existing DF13>CTS2453 as a subclade under FGC5496 and associated with the Ireland, Ulster, Co. Fermanagh guys.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0By9Y3jb2fORNYjhULXNuQURDVXc/edit?usp=sharing

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0By9Y3jb2fORNR3dYWmxiVGJLS1U/edit?usp=sharing


in the next PDF, I am in left branch (FGC5521) which is mainly Irish and later Scottish. Out of my 25 new validated SNP, my GD13/111 went positive for my FGC5496 SNP (f155812 Ross b. 1753, Braeno Glass, Latheron, Caithness) said his paternal line has been in the Highlands for ever and ever. Under DF13>FGC5496, Ross and I match on 17 of my initial 25 under DF13, validated SNPs (Ross didn't match eight of these). So that is inline for the 70-90 years per SNP occurrence or less that matches my STR calc's. I am Scottish for at least for 1000 years with migration to the Isle of Man 500-600 years ago. There are some Irish surnames in Ireland on the lower branches on the main left branch. The right branch has a considerable Wales/English surnames. It appears to be a large complement of Welsh (northern) who are looking FGC5521 but who will fill a yet undocumented third branch under this subclade (as per Dr. AndyG. who is currently digging deeper into this situation).

See my attached Zipped 67 marker FGC5521 Fluxus multi-page PDF with various branches and their time to visually see what I am discussing. A list of HTs on the last page.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0By9Y3jb2fORNMXUzWFZPdmtZTzA/edit?usp=sharing

MJost

George Chandler
04-18-2014, 04:14 PM
Mark,
If it's ok with you I'll attach the links you've posted to the 9919 RecLOH Project information for the Wigand kit?

Thanks
George

MJost
04-18-2014, 10:08 PM
No problem

MJost

Brunetmj
04-20-2014, 03:04 AM
I'm just curious as to why I am in an unassigned group ? is it because my subgroup hasn't been verified yet?

Mark B

MJost
04-20-2014, 03:13 AM
I'm just curious as to why I am in an unassigned group ? is it because my subgroup hasn't been verified yet?

Mark B

Are you talking about MikeW's variety assignment, 5496-uas?

MJost

MJost
04-20-2014, 03:24 AM
Mark, you have been tested FGC5521+ on 02/18/2014 along with three others and Chromo2 S2202+ with Sanger sequence validated on 4/11/2014. Plus you awaiting Sanger sequencing on your BigY SNPs. But to date you are FGC5494>FGC5521>S2202.

You may have been looking at my FGC5496 HTModal spreadsheet and, there I left the -uas designation and I will change that.

MJost

Brunetmj
04-20-2014, 12:09 PM
Mark,

Yes I was looking through Mike's spreadsheet when I noticed that. Thank you. I just wasn't quite sure.

Mark B

MJost
04-20-2014, 03:58 PM
Here are the tested Members in FGC5496 to date excluding anonymous Chromo2 IDs but includes these membes who have Chromo2 with BigY results being validated. MJost



f114938
Nugent
R1b-L21>DF13>FGC5496>S1088>CTS2457.2+
5496-61713
Ireland
Ireland


f159823
Lunney
R1b-L21>DF13>FGC5496>S1088>CTS2457.2+
5496-61713
Ireland
Ireland, Ulster, Co. Fermanagh, Kinawley Parish


f159824
Lunney
R1b-L21>DF13>FGC5496>S1088>CTS2457.2+
5496-61713
Ireland
Ireland, Ulster, Co. Fermanagh


f65932
Wigand
R1b-L21>DF13>FGC5496>S1088>CTS2457.2+
5496
Germany
Germany, Bavaria, Franconia, Würzburg


f96153
McDonnell
R1b-L21>DF13>FGC5496>S1088>CTS2457.2+
5496-61713
Ireland
Ireland, Leinster, Co. Dublin


fN112842
Lane
R1b-L21>DF13>FGC5496>S1088>CTS2457.2+
5496-61713
Ireland
Ireland, Connacht, Co. Roscommon, Athleague


f198135
Brunet
R1b-L21>DF13>FGC5496>FGC5521>S2202
5496
France
France, Haute-Normandie, Seine-Maritime, Dieppe


f289737
Willis
R1b-L21>DF13>FGC5496>FGC5521>PF5191.1
5496-48712
England
England


f148326
Watterson
R1b-L21>DF13>FGC5496>FGC5521>FGC5539>FGC5538+
5496-A1A
Scotland
Isle of Man (in Irish Sea near Scotland)


f155812
Ross
R1b-L21>DF13>FGC5496>FGC5521>FGC5539
5496-A1A
Scotland
Scotland, Highland, Sutherland


f98213
Byrne
R1b-L21>DF13>FGC5496
5496-A1
Ireland
Ireland

MJost
05-19-2014, 01:43 AM
I have received all the SNP results, save one for 306/206731 which I assume he would be negative for, to create a SGD (SNP Genetic Distance) comparison using FtDNA's 111 Marker TIP and number of SNP differences. See attached PDF.

Watterson b. USA - 263/316063 is a SGD=2,

Codere b.Isle of Man - 306/206731 is a SGD=3 and

Ross - MDKA Caithness, Scotland - 113/155812 is a SGD=9.

The TIP yellow cell color show the probability percentages that are in the range of 50 to 68% (1-sigma) that I preferred to use in comparing Kits and it appears close when you follow the rows into the SGD column.

Ross has 17 SNPs out of 25 of mine. Codere (Watterson) has 22 SNPs and Watterson has 23 out of 25.

The comparison chart showing a nice relationship between STRs and SNPs. I am a predicted 3rd Cousin to 263/316063's father's Aunt on 23andme as well.

A chart can be seen here:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0By9Y3jb2fORNWkdIUlRjYTlKQWs/edit?usp=sharing

MJost

MJost
06-11-2014, 06:20 PM
We now have over 22 kit either tested positive or have a leading SNP into FGC5496.

Here is the details of MDKA (Most Distant Know Ancestor) of the solidly tested FGC5496.

HG02051 (Afro-Caribbean) and HG00115 (Orkney) from the 1000 Genomes Project.
PGP50 MDKA unknown lives in Pennsylvania https://my.personalgenomes. org/profile/hu050E9C
f65932 Wigand Franconia
f159823 Lunney FGC5496>CTS2457.2+ 2457-61713 Ireland, Ulster, Co. Fermanagh, Kinawley Parish
fN112842 Andrew Lane b circa 1770 Athleague,County Roscommon,Ireland
f198135 Brunet 1636 France, Haute-Normandie, Seine-Maritime, Dieppe
f289737 Willis 16th century Berkshire, England
f155812 Ross b. 1753, Braeno Glass, Latheron, Caithness
f148326 Jost William WATTERSON Sr b. IoM d: Nov 20 1703
f98213 Byrn(e) 1806 Ireland
f206731 Codere(Watterson) b. IOM
f316063 Watterson Sr b. IoM d: Nov 20 1703
308064 Killey -Richard Killey married 1802, Liverpool, UK

And Mike shows over 50 - 5496 variety 67 marker haplotypes in the L21 Spread sheet that should be positive or are positive for FGC5496. We have two major subclades defined and three subclades under each mostly defined by Sanger testing.

The top listed guys are positive for FGC5494 but has been ruled out a 'Clean' SNP above FGC5496 but will be used as an indicator SNP that should belong under FGC5496 as does S7958/FGC5495. And the BigY has our FGC7448 SNP equal to the defining SNP FGC5496.

FGC5496 Chart Links

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0By9Y3jb2fORNYjhULXNuQURDVXc/edit?usp=sharing

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0By9Y3jb2fORNR3dYWmxiVGJLS1U/edit?usp=sharing

MJost

Yggdrasil
08-12-2014, 07:33 AM
If anyone is interested, after 3 months I am still waiting for the results of FGC5496 at FTDNA. The helpdesk replied last week "We have attempted to test this FGC5496 SNP for your kit and it has failed to pass the strict quality control standards set for our lab 6 times now due to sample performance. It is in the process of being re-run again on a new extraction. If everything goes well on this attempt, we should have your results in another 4-6 weeks. What does "sample performance" mean?

MJost
08-12-2014, 01:27 PM
If anyone is interested, after 3 months I am still waiting for the results of FGC5496 at FTDNA. The helpdesk replied last week "We have attempted to test this FGC5496 SNP for your kit and it has failed to pass the strict quality control standards set for our lab 6 times now due to sample performance. It is in the process of being re-run again on a new extraction. If everything goes well on this attempt, we should have your results in another 4-6 weeks." What does "sample performance" mean?

I ordered FGC5496, FGC7448 & FGC5521, my top tier SNPs, on May 5th and received the latter two positive but no results on FGC5496 yet. One other FGC5496+ guy with a BigY positive for FGC7448 also ordered it a batch before mine. He hasn't seen his results yet either. I missed you announcement that you had ordered it as well. FtDNA help desk stated they weren't able to tell me how many FGC5496 orders there were. I have had a FGC5496 project request in for eight months and it has not been approved, maybe since FtDNA hasn't actually reported a positive FGC5496 yet. I even suggested modifying the project name to include FGC7448 as a Co-SNP, which it just may be, but on have received responses, when I made follow up inquiries, its under advisement or the person was out of the office. FGC5496 now has TEN confirmed FGC5496 kits.

Of those ten, there are three that that have taken the Chromo2 and were shown positive for FGC5495 and me from my Full Y, that I can not get a good primer developed due to cross-over reads interfering but I know use a positive indication that one 'should' be a member of FGC5486. Those three did test for FGC5496 and went positive. Two of those also tested the BigY and have the other main SNP FGC7448 positive. There are over 11 more FGC5495 guys from the Chomo2 are positive and Should be positive for FGC5496.

I just don't understand why FGC5496 orders can not be completed by FtDNA either.

I also have shown positive for a upstream SNP between DF13 and FGC5496 called FGC5494. This SNP failed Sanger Sequencing though. But a very recent FULL Y kit went positive for it too and also showed positive for this SNP, FGC5521, which is a INDel and with him being negative for FGC5496 and FGC7448 and below SNPs, this is a indicator that we have a branch between DF13 and FGC5496 and 'Should' be a indicator of such but can not be Sanger Sequenced.

So I am not sure if you wish to, but you could consider testing FGC7448 at FtDNA since you started this trek.

MJost

Yggdrasil
08-12-2014, 02:19 PM
So it seems there is something particularly difficult with the test FGC5496?

I might test FGC7448, but quite frankly I´m getting a bit fed up. Most SNPs I tested with FTDNA took at least three months to complete. I already did Geno 2:0 for this kit and I was just randomly picking a leftover branch to test. During the last BigY sale I tried to persuade my STR matches to do the test with me, but there simply is no interest. None of the others have tested past M269. So instead I spent my BigY money on a I-L22 kit. I chose FGC5496 because a couple of your + results descend from the Norse areas, the STRs of my kit don´t hold any clues it seems.

MJost
08-14-2014, 06:43 AM
...

I also have shown positive for a upstream SNP between DF13 and FGC5496 called FGC5494. This SNP failed Sanger Sequencing though. But a very recent FULL Y kit went positive for it too and also showed positive for this SNP, FGC5521, which is a INDel and with him being negative for FGC5496 and FGC7448 and below SNPs, this is a indicator that we have a branch between DF13 and FGC5496 and 'Should' be a indicator of such but can not be Sanger Sequenced.

So I am not sure if you wish to, but you could consider testing FGC7448 at FtDNA since you started this trek.

MJost

fN55408 DF13** Smith z141121 ( I believe his closest 111 marker GD is over 10)

Full Y kit: TDB0O, FtDNA: N55408 (DF13** z141121) appears to be a upstream SNP above FGC5496.

These are the two Novel SNPs Greg, Andy and Thomas are discussing that I am positive via Full Y testing. FGC5494+ and now I discover that FGC5561 is above FGC5496 and Greg agrees as well. So all FGC5496+ people will be FGC5494+, but some people (like TDB0O, FtDNA: N55408 (DF13** z141121) ) who are FGC5494+ are FGC5496-.

I will add also these FGC5494+ will be FGC5561+. FGC5561 is a INDel but Thomas and Astrid could not successfully create primers for either but FGC5494 didn't go down with out a fight since the Anonymous researcher was involved with this one as well. Thomas created the best version between the two and then ordered them for my sample. It ultimately failed. But what I see is that these SNPs are above FGC5496 in the 'Cloud" under DF13 are most likely be an indicator SNP of high probability of being FGC5496 positive much as BISDNA's SNP S7958/FGC5495 has proven with three Chromo2 kits, except for our rare Mr. Smith.

Greg stated this about FGC5561, "That is an interesting observation about 22428331...I haven't looked closely, but it sounds like 22428331 might be approximately with FGC5494. (The indel is represented slightly differently in the two reports, but it is exactly the same mutation (i.e. deletion of C).)"

We are reviewing his list of private SNPs and may be able to suggest a leading SNP for other z141121's to start testing.

MJost

MJost
08-14-2014, 01:30 PM
In checking surnames of the other z141121's, again there appears to be a connection to Welsh Surnames, specifically Phillips (with some shown with England MDKA as well).

MJost

Dubhthach
08-15-2014, 01:37 PM
New FGC5496+ in the Ireland project namely:

279962 -- O'Neill

-Paul

Mikewww
08-15-2014, 01:44 PM
I hear that FGC5494 is showing to be upstream of FGC5496 and downstream of DF13. It may have a number of different components. Has anyone here looked at this lately?

Also, we probably need to get a formal project going for this. Is this is of interest? Let me know.

Yggdrasil
08-15-2014, 07:58 PM
My kit turned out negative for FGC5496, so it´s still homeless.

MJost
08-15-2014, 08:19 PM
New FGC5496+ in the Ireland project namely:

279962 -- O'Neill

-Paul
This is good news, a predicted CTS2457 lad too. I think this is the first FGC5496 from FtDNA!

Thanks for let us know.

MJost

MJost
08-15-2014, 08:49 PM
I hear that FGC5494 is showing to be upstream of FGC5496 and downstream of DF13. It may have a number of different components. Has anyone here looked at this lately?

Also, we probably need to get a formal project going for this. Is this is of interest? Let me know.

You thinking of a new project called FGC5494. I don't believe its in the FtDNA's BigY SNP Gold Bed ranges, are they? Chromo2 doesn't report it either.

FGC5494 is found in the Full Y Genome results (mine and Smith's) and two other guys: HG00115, HG02051. Not sure how this can be chip tested going forward if it can't be single tested. Technically it should be considered a indicator SNP but, in Smith's case, he is negative for FGC5496 and FGC7448. So I am thinking Semi-SNP but still a branch under DF13 but a branch onto its own vs FGC5496.

O'Neill's results are from a single test by FtDNA and their first positive so far. Whooo Hooo!

MJost

MJost

MJost
08-15-2014, 08:51 PM
My kit turned out negative for FGC5496, so it´s still homeless.

Darn it!!! Sorry, I know exactly how you feel being 14 negative tests under DF13 before my Full Y.

MJost

JRW
08-16-2014, 11:41 AM
Sorry to hear the news... it can be a very frustrating process at times. If you don't mind providing it, what is your ftdna kit number? There are several men with Norwegian ancestry on Mike Walsh's L21 spreadsheet who are not assigned to a "speculative variety." Just wondering how close your genetic signature is to those entries and other FGC5496-ers.

Yggdrasil
08-16-2014, 05:08 PM
Darn it!!! Sorry, I know exactly how you feel being 14 negative tests under DF13 before my Full Y.

MJost

Thanks for the sympathy. :)


Sorry to hear the news... it can be a very frustrating process at times. If you don't mind providing it, what is your ftdna kit number? There are several men with Norwegian ancestry on Mike Walsh's L21 spreadsheet who are not assigned to a "speculative variety." Just wondering how close your genetic signature is to those entries and other FGC5496-ers.

Kit 295903

MJost
09-04-2014, 03:55 PM
Major Update!!!

I am now "Officially" calling FGC5494 as the new father to our younger FGC5496 subclade.

Since the last posts, months ago, concerning my FGC5494 SNP which initially failed the Sanger sequencing due to a cross over issue. When AndyG stated that his version of the FGC5494 primer appeared to be showing results, Thomas and Astrid enhanced the reverse Primer design and tested my sample which subsequently went positive, but with its amplification a bit low suggesting, as per Thomas, possible clarity issues on other samples.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0By9Y3jb2fORNOThObUdKRHRKQW8/edit?usp=sharing

We also knew that our two BigY's that are FGC5496+, and originally BISDNA positive for

S7958 or FGC5495 as well, that are showing this same INDel: chrY 22428331 . TC> T 1484.13 REJECTED, this being my FGC5561. Then when Smith's FGC results came in he also was positive for FGC5494 and FGC5561 but negative for FGC5496, resulted in moving it down the trunk and produced a new branch under FGC5494>FGC5561.

Two guys, HG00115 and HG02051 are negative for FGC5561 but positive for FGC5494. I and TDB0O-Smith are both positive for FGC5494 and FGC5561. I am DF13>FGC5494>FGC5561>FGC5496+

Astrid and Thomas could not produce a viable primer to test FGC5561 and was relegated to the slag SNP pile. Now normally when an INDel such as FGC5561 shows up and is shown to be very similar with other segments on itself or other chromosomes, will most likely show positive on a Chip based test such as BISDNA's Chromo2 but it can not distinguish from where it was found. FGC and BigY does see it in the correct position. But if the area around this location is similar, as I mentioned, to other segments especially Chr X, we can not be sure if this is real or some sort of earlier crossover event. It could be used for a family marker but technically not everyone may continue to have this event in their Y through more recent mutations. Comparisons to the Human Y Chromosome Browser can and do tell much of the picture long with further knowledge of Human Y Chromosome's X-transposed regions, whether or not its in a highly reliable region. Pseudoautosomal, X-transposed, or heterochromatic and the portions of the ampliconic regions that harbor the palindromes are unreliable, although the X-degenerate regions are reliable.

Now, with the shear volume of both Full Y and BigY testing with these results being made public, the number of new DF13 subclade has rapidly expanded over the last eight months. Citizen Scientist's like Alex Williamson and others have been involved in the collection and analysis work that has been collating every reported new SNP below DF13.

For most of the Y-DNA citizen scientist's and hobbyist's, Sanger sequencing will retain its role for a long time for purposes of confirming new next-gen Y-Chromosome BP finds. Once a mutation variant is identified by Next Gen sequencing and confirmed by Sanger sequencing, there is no need to do a full scale sequencing for the remaining family members or confirming haplogroup membership. There is nothing close, yet, to produce the high confidence that Sanger sequencing can provide. That's what we are spelling out, is being able to validate and have single BP testing options economically.

The exception will be FGC5561 due to it relative position under DF13>FGC5494. This INDel has been around over 3500 ybp and thus appears to be very stable. With the excellent work of AlexW, those most recently completed FGC and BigY results are being sorted and matched up and now. Alex produces a nice overall DF13 SNP inheritance tree showing all the interrelatedness on his website. Thank you Alex for all your work programing this chart.

Here is a new FGC5494 section of the DF13 Tree showing the entire known branches of FGC5494>FGC5561.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0By9Y3jb2fORNVTlMeWpfcVR1akk/edit?usp=sharing

MJost

Little bit
09-04-2014, 05:09 PM
Congats on the new finds. :)

I just got my grandfather's negative result for FGC5496 today which I'm bummed about since it seemed like the best possibility. He's a Welsh Griffith, only one 12 marker match (fellow Griffith), 10 at 67 markers. Closest is 5 steps and he's an Allen. The rest are 2 Lewis's, 2 Brown's, 2 Jones, Owen, Scott, and Rowberry. 6 are predicted to be L21 and 4 are still just M269. I've run his data through all the predictors and no other snp shows likely. Is it possible he is just L21+ DF13+ and no further? My grandfather passed away last year so I can only order tests that the remaining sample will support.

Tests Taken
DF13+, L21+, FGC5496-, DF41-

MJost
09-04-2014, 08:42 PM
Heather sorry to hear that piece of news of FGC5496. Have you considered the BigY for his sample? I wonder if they would have enough sample left to do that one.

MJost

MJost
09-16-2014, 12:18 AM
We now have a new FtDNA FGC5494 SNP project for those positfixedive for FGC5494 or downstream SNP. There is an estimated initial size of around 160 haplotypes so far.

https://www.familytreedna.com/public/R-FGC5494

There is a Yahoo discussion group as well.

Corrected link:
https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/R1b-FGC5494/info


MJost

MJost
09-16-2014, 12:22 AM
Initially a novel SNP FGC5496 was found in 0FW1RA, a Full Genome NGS (NextGenSeq) Y-Chromosome tested DF13* person was matched to person with a public dataset: PGP50 (CG, R-DF13) along with FGC5494, 5495 & 5496. Also shown were two 1000 Genome kits were also + for FGC5494 but neg. for FGC5496.

YSeq.net utilized Sanger Sequencing and results confirmed that FGC5496 has a clearly G+ mutation. In testing a second 0FW1RA novel SNP also found in PGP50, FGC5495, had a high similarity to ChrX and resulted testing failure. FGC5494 was not tested initially due to exhibiting a similar issue.

There were 68 new YSNPs non-novel discovered in the FGC-0FW1RA. These and the novel SNPs were compared to other public datasets Haplogroups in the neighborhood of R-DF13 included 42 datasets covering the L21 Haplogroups w/9 DF13 subclades

In cross-subclade testing the remaining five, CTS2457 showed positive for FGC5496 and defined itself as a new subclade under FGC5496. It was noted by Thomas Krahn that the FGC5496 marker should be of interested for R1b-DF13 researchers and is certainly the SNP that would be preferred for phylogenetic purposes.

Since its original discovery in Nov. 2013, FGC5496 has expanded including Chromo2 S7958+ which later was reviewed and was the same position as FGC5495. Three + men then tested for FGC5496 and went positive and two further tested with the BigY and conducted further Sanger Sequencing. FGC5494 was later shown Sanger positive in 0FW1RA.

Subsequent FGC & BigY tests confirmed that 0FW1RA's FGC5561 formed a node between FGC5494 & 5496, with two 1000 Genome kits positive with FGC5494 and neg. for FGC5561, has, nine months later, re-defined the branch into DF13>FGC5494 forming seven branches.

Any person now classified as DF13* (Asterisk) should consider testing into this newly expanded 'Ancient' Subclade - FGC5494.

MJost
09-16-2014, 02:40 PM
Just received my FGC5494 positive results from Family Tree DNA. I now have NGS and two separately confirmed positive sources cementing FGC5494's place as a solid subclade under DF13.

There is one other new BigY FGC5521+ kit that is batched for FGC5494 .

MJost

Mikewww
09-16-2014, 02:53 PM
Just received my FGC5494 positive results from Family Tree DNA. I now have NGS and two separately confirmed positive sources cementing FGC5494's place as a solid subclade under DF13.

There is one other new BigY FGC5521+ kit that is batched for FGC5494 .

MJost

That's great. Hopefully, we'll see new low cost "package" products coming out and these SNPs will be included.

craigkg
09-29-2014, 07:28 PM
Mike,

First thank you for all the work you do related to L21. Your handle pops up all over the place when I've done my own preparatory research for ordering testing. This is my first post here at Anthrogenica, so I hope I'm posting in the right place given my question below, but first some background...

Over the last nine months I've been in the process of Y-DNA and autosomal DNA testing each of the lines of my four grandparents to capture each of those male lines. I've completed my paternal grandfather (using my father since my grandfather is deceased) and both maternal lines (using a maternal uncle and a 1st cousin once removed for the two lines) and am now completing the process for my maternal grandmother's line by testing her brother, my great uncle.

We know by looking in the surname project for his surname, Kendrick, that one of his second cousins was tested a number of years ago to 111 markers (f126179). I've been unable to contact that second cousin's niece (who is administering her now deceased uncle's kit) via email as the one I have for her is old as we last exchanged genealogy info at least 10 years ago. This cousin's kit is a 106 out of 111 marker match to another Kendrick kit, f118065 that had done extensive-for-the-time SNP testing and is a member of the L21 and Subclades project. He tested negative on all the major descendent SNPs of DF13 known at the time of his testing.

My uncle has completed the swabbing and sent his kit back (f360662) and we have already received the Family Finder results and the results of the two a la carte SNPs I ordered confirming L21+ and DF13+. I only ordered 37 STR markers since my uncle will be substantially similar to his known 2nd cousin, but in order to discover the deeper ancestral roots, because of the unusualness of some of the STR markers in my Kendrick grouping and the lack of placement below DF13, I went ahead and ordered the Big Y test during the recent sale before the STR markers even came back. The STRs should be back any time now and the Big Y results are expected in 5-7 more weeks. All the Kendricks in our grouping at the Kendrick Surname Project have a trio of unusual markers starting with DYS393=14, which by my quick calculation on the L21 project, is exhibited by only 5.1% of the members (with confirmed or predicted L21+). Next they all have DYS389i=14, which I computed to be shared by only 14.7% of L21 project members (not rare, but somewhat unusual). But most unusual of all, all nine Kendricks in the grouping have a DYS537 value of 9, which is only found in 0.71% of L21 project members (one of whom is a Kendrick surname project member). And no one else in the project has that combination of three markers except that Kendrick (1 out of 2520 in my spreadsheet with more all three markers tested).

In the Excel Haplotypes spreadsheet recently distributed on the Yahoo Group, you have that Kendrick (f118065) predicted as 5494-5561-z450611 and several other people not necessarily in the L21 group that are also 393=14 and 389i=14 . I assume that speculative STR based variety means my Kendricks are likely FGC5494 > FGC5561 (and hence my posting in this topic), but what is z450611? Is it an as of yet unnamed suspected SNP corresponding to a mutation at that location? My apologies as I'm still kinda of new to this.

MJost
11-02-2014, 05:30 PM
FGC5496 was a new Full Genome Y, mine, in Nov 13, but here are the latest very expanded preliminary FGC5494 Tree.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0By9Y3jb2fORNWER6TjBDMXB4T1k/view?usp=sharing

MJost

Mikewww
11-04-2014, 12:36 AM
Thanks, Mark.
Do you mind if I post this in the L21 group links under Tree Charts? Is this link permanent?

MJost
11-04-2014, 01:10 AM
Thanks. You can use this link, it's a permanent link. I try to just replace files and not create new links every time.

MJost

Brunetmj
12-09-2014, 03:13 AM
What ever happened to those 50 men from Wales ? No answer back from the good doctor?

ggbarber
06-13-2015, 09:46 AM
I have just had some tests at YSEQ organised by George Chandler as part of the L21 group on FamilyTreeDNA which he says confirms that I am FGC5496. I have copied the allele results below. I am not very knowledgeable in this area but would like to participate in any research on this line so please advise if interested and what I should do. I had previously done the FTDNA Y-111, the Genographic 2.0 test and tested for DF13 (+ve) and S1051 (-ve). FTDNA currently have me as R-DF13 and H6a1a.
Although not knowledgeable on DNA I am a very experienced family history researcher and just published a book on my unbroken paternal line going back to 1530 in Rotherfield, Sussex. I suspect they came from Kent before that.
What I would like to get out of it is a better understanding of my origins.
Regards
Geoff Barber
2460 A1506 ChrY 22735874 22735874 A-
2460 A295 ChrY 2699824 2699824 A-
2460 BY2571 ChrY 16992608 16992608 C-
2460 BY274 ChrY 16349083 16349083 C-
2460 BY404 ChrY 14658608 14658608 C-
2460 CTS10003 ChrY 19202083 19202083 C-
2460 CTS10736 ChrY 22735710 22735710 C-
2460 CTS11535 ChrY 23154134 23154134 T-
2460 CTS11536 ChrY 23154209 23154209 A-
2460 CTS1751 ChrY 14048611 14048611 A-
2460 CTS241 ChrY 2836431 2836431 C+
2460 CTS242 ChrY 2836569 2836569 C-
2460 CTS243 ChrY 2836659 2836659 C-
2460 CTS3386 ChrY 14885174 14885174 A-
2460 CTS4539 ChrY 15702659 15702659 G-
2460 CTS6581 ChrY 16992602 16992602 T-
2460 DF1 ChrY 7340450 7340450 C-
2460 DF13 ChrY 2836431 2836431 C+
2460 DF21 ChrY 9878915 9878915 C-
2460 DF41 ChrY 16992602 16992602 T-
2460 DF49 ChrY 22735599 22735599 G-
2460 F2140 ChrY 16349174 16349174 G-
2460 F271 ChrY 14885066 14885066 T-
2460 F3921 ChrY 14658617 14658617 C-
2460 F4220 ChrY 16992663 16992663 C-
2460 F498 ChrY 18656354 18656354 A-
2460 F923 ChrY 7192731 7192731 C-
2460 FGC11134 ChrY 21383466 21383466 T-
2460 FGC12814 ChrY 8736296 8736296 C-
2460 FGC13221 ChrY 17681789 17681789 A-
2460 FGC13518 ChrY 2699825 2699825 T-
2460 FGC21280 ChrY 14658972 14658972 G-
2460 FGC23590 ChrY 2836600 2836600 C-
2460 FGC24201 ChrY 7340212 7340212 G-
2460 FGC24779 ChrY 2836510 2836510 C-
2460 FGC26372 ChrY 14884998 14884998 C-
2460 FGC28660 ChrY 9878878 9878878 C-
2460 FGC29453 ChrY 14048653 14048653 G-
2460 FGC32493 ChrY 9878749 9878749 C-
2460 FGC33034 ChrY 21383457 21383457 G-
2460 FGC5150 ChrY 16349305 16349305 G-
2460 FGC5496 ChrY 7306721 7306721 G+
2460 FGC850 ChrY 2699978 2699978 T-
2460 FGC8994 ChrY 8736291 8736291 A-
2460 L1223 ChrY 23154231 23154231 A-
2460 L1249 ChrY 2836569 2836569 C-
2460 L1335 ChrY 23154201 23154201 A-
2460 L1446 ChrY 9878780 9878780 C-
2460 L1447 ChrY 9878916 9878916 C-
2460 L1493 ChrY 22735899 22735899 C-
2460 L371 ChrY 18656470 18656470 T-
2460 L513 ChrY 7340450 7340450 C-
2460 L535 ChrY 7340243 7340243 C-
2460 L536 ChrY 7340314 7340314 C+
2460 L838 ChrY 23154209 23154209 A-
2460 L847 ChrY 23154034 23154034 C-
2460 L858 ChrY 9879005 9879005 C-
2460 L956 ChrY 7340450 7340450 C-
2460 M2344 ChrY 23154209 23154209 A-
2460 M5379 ChrY 2836569 2836569 C-
2460 M5401 ChrY 7340243 7340243 C-
2460 M7917 ChrY 2836707 2836707 C-
2460 M8737 ChrY 14048765 14048765 A-
2460 M991 ChrY 14658970 14658970 G-
2460 MC14 ChrY 21724919 21724919 A-
2460 P297 ChrY 18656508 18656508 C+
2460 PF1451 ChrY 2836569 2836569 C-
2460 PF3161 ChrY 15702713 15702713 A-
2460 PF3841 ChrY 23154034 23154034 C-
2460 PF4851 ChrY 9879005 9879005 C-
2460 PF5860 ChrY 7340314 7340314 C+
2460 PF6398 ChrY 18656508 18656508 C+
2460 PH1420 ChrY 14658520 14658520 T-
2460 PH2212 ChrY 16349324 16349324 T-
2460 PH2743 ChrY 16992578 16992578 T-
2460 PH508 ChrY 7192839 7192839 A-
2460 PH509 ChrY 7193053 7193053 C-
2460 S1051 ChrY 16349104 16349104 C-
2460 S1141 ChrY 2836575 2836575 C-
2460 S1412 ChrY 7193170 7193170 C-
2460 S16264 ChrY 14658766 14658766 A-
2460 S17460 ChrY 15702722 15702722 T-
2460 S192 ChrY 9878915 9878915 C-
2460 S215 ChrY 7340450 7340450 C-
2460 S218 ChrY 7193034 7193034 G-
2460 S219 ChrY 15702775 15702775 T-
2460 S21918 ChrY 19202149 19202149 C-
2460 S2297 ChrY 2699962 2699962 A-
2460 S23472 ChrY 21724674 21724674 C-
2460 S300 ChrY 18656470 18656470 T-
2460 S3658 ChrY 14885174 14885174 A-
2460 S3666 ChrY 14048611 14048611 A-
2460 S470 ChrY 8736334 8736334 G-
2460 S474 ChrY 22735599 22735599 G-
2460 S521 ChrY 2836431 2836431 C+
2460 S524 ChrY 16992602 16992602 T-
2460 S530 ChrY 23154201 23154201 A-
2460 S8381 ChrY 2836725 2836725 G-
2460 SK1047 ChrY 21724801 21724801 G-
2460 SK1452 ChrY 21725035 21725035 C-
2460 SK390 ChrY 23154160 23154160 G-
2460 SK538 ChrY 21724700 21724700 G-
2460 Y10829 ChrY 16349324 16349324 T-
2460 Y13118 ChrY 16992762 16992762 T-
2460 Y13624 ChrY 9878899 9878899 T-
2460 Y3550 ChrY 21383466 21383466 T-
2460 Y5305 ChrY 17681656 17681656 C-
2460 Y8339 ChrY 16349083 16349083 C-
2460 YP1396 ChrY 9878878 9878878 C-
2460 YP2274 ChrY 2836510 2836510 C-
2460 YSC0000298 ChrY 23154034 23154034 C-
2460 Z11798 ChrY 14048765 14048765 A-
2460 Z14721 ChrY 7340532 7340532 C-
2460 Z15238 ChrY 17681683 17681683 C-
2460 Z16500 ChrY 17681656 17681656 C-
2460 Z16502 ChrY 2699825 2699825 T-
2460 Z19145 ChrY 7193234 7193234 T-
2460 Z21600 ChrY 16349381 16349381 A-
2460 Z23532 ChrY 2836659 2836659 C-
2460 Z251 ChrY 8736334 8736334 G-
2460 Z253 ChrY 7193034 7193034 G-
2460 Z255 ChrY 15702775 15702775 T-
2460 Z25644 ChrY 8736268 8736268 G-
2460 Z26644 ChrY 14048791 14048791 C-
2460 Z26829 ChrY 16349138 16349138 T-
2460 Z27220 ChrY 16992885 16992885 T-
2460 Z28194 ChrY 2836398 2836398 C-
2460 Z32161 ChrY 16992762 16992762 T-
2460 Z5683 ChrY 21383635 21383635 C-
2460 Z6059 ChrY 16349310 16349310 G-
2460 ZS1406 ChrY 23153969 23153969 T-
2460 ZS4053 ChrY 14658811 14658811 A-
2460 ZS4501 ChrY 16349280 16349280 A-
2460 ZS6937 ChrY 15702821 15702821 A-
2460 ZS7388 ChrY 22735630 22735630 G-

Mac von Frankfurt
08-21-2015, 12:44 PM
Is it possible to be positive for U106 and S12547? I am looking at FTDNA Kit #321411 and scratching my head. I was under the impression S12547 is under P312>L21>DF13.

MJost
08-21-2015, 01:14 PM
S12457 was originally shown positive in chromo2 kits for some FGC5496 guys. I used S12547 as a lead SNP on the FGC5494 tree to keep in sync with BISDNA. A162 will be a co-lead SNP now. There are also three U106 FtDNA kits with S12457+ YSeq reports that they do not like the S12547 segment. It's like the 47z segment. Hundreds of markers on a short sequence. Probably not very significant markers. Thus S12457 is found in multiple branches.

MJost

Huntergatherer1066
08-21-2015, 01:20 PM
Is it possible to be positive for U106 and S12547? I am looking at FTDNA Kit #321411 and scratching my head. I was under the impression S12547 is under P312>L21>DF13.

I just took a look at S12547 in ybrowse and noticed that at the same position there is another SNP that is a different mutation (not a synonym) that is an A>C change (Y5521) instead of the A>G mutation of S12547/m3369. This complicates things as some types of tests are less able to distinguish between the two mutations (chip based tests mainly) it should be investigated which mutation that kit really has.

Huntergatherer1066
08-21-2015, 01:25 PM
S12457 was originally shown positive in chromo2 kits for some FGC5496 guys. I used S12547 as a lead SNP on the FGC5494 tree to keep in sync with BISDNA. A162 will be a co-lead SNP now. There are also three U106 FtDNA kits with S12457+ YSeq reports that they do not like the S12547 segment. It's like the 47z segment. Hundreds of markers on a short sequence. Probably not very significant markers. Thus S12457 is found in multiple branches.

MJost

This makes sense. The chromo2 chip cannot distinguish between s12547 and y5521, so this adds to the recurrence issues if both mutations are being scored as s12547.

Pathfinder
10-03-2015, 02:41 AM
Hi

The recent FTDNA SNP bundle pack I ordered came up positive for FGC5494, and the L21-bundle offers testing for FGC5521 so... congrats.
Thanks for all your work on this, OP.

MJost
10-03-2015, 02:18 PM
Hi

The recent FTDNA SNP bundle pack I ordered came up positive for FGC5494, and the L21-bundle offers testing for FGC5521 so... congrats.
Thanks for all your work on this, OP.

Hello Pathfinder,

Please join the FtDNA FGC5494 DNA project. FYI, the new FtDNA L21 SNP panel has been populated with many new FGC5494 subclade SNPs. Although I wasn't consulted, they cover a some of the key SNPs but it is not all encompassing.

Latest FGC5494 can be found here:

https://drive.google.com/open?id=0By9Y3jb2fORNWER6TjBDMXB4T1k


MJost

Pathfinder
10-04-2015, 09:02 PM
I did (kit #342021).

So the new L21 SNP kit would be worth pursuing?

MJost
10-04-2015, 09:22 PM
Ah, now I know you! Ok, your such an outlier 5494-z617131922 that I suggest you take a NGS test. You could fit into the several Welsh varieties but have such a high GD differences. For the price, the FtDNA L21 panel with a lot of the FGC5494 subclade SNPs in it might be a good gamble.

MJost

Mikewww
10-04-2015, 09:25 PM
I did (kit #342021).

So the new L21 SNP kit would be worth pursuing?
It depends on your situation. If you are R-FGC5494 and have not tested downstream then the R1b-L21 SNP Pack is a great test because it includes 20 SNPs in the FGC5494 subclade so you'll get a good assessment all in one fell swoop.

This is also part of the process of getting the FGC5494 haplotree at FTDNA updated which will affect haplogroup labeling in projects and on matching screens.

However, as Mark mentioned, an NGS test like Big Y or FGC Elite is always preferrable as you discover your own lineage of SNPs no matter what. It's the $500 for Big Y on sale vs $99 on sale for the L21 Pack that weighs the value of that.

MJost
10-04-2015, 09:37 PM
You can check out the FGC5494 chart here:

https://drive.google.com/open?id=0By9Y3jb2fORNWER6TjBDMXB4T1k

MJost