I am L20+ and Unfortunately, Still waiting for FTDNA BIGY test results....

[Bolgeris]

In March Ftdna sent me another kit and i sent immediately, ..
but now are more than two months since my test Bigy is delayed.

So far there have been no replies to my emails by FTdna.
I hope the results come soon ..

Me and Mr. Stiefel we are the last two L20+ waiting for the BIGY results.

I hope to be at least confirmed CTS9733 =S3856
19045124C>T

I am already confirmed with BritainsDNA ..R1b-S3856+

Mah ?!
Who knows when it will end waiting ..?!

[Claxon]

And I was u152, then pf4363, then P 37 or something, and now I am M269.
I e mailed ftdna a week ago, and was told they would look into it.

I am still M269.

I have been looking to delete my FtDNA page completely, but apparently I can't do it.
Disgusted.
Rc

[Titus Valerius]

Ciao Giuseppe! A week ago, I did request to Yseq to test CTS9733 and Z1910 , but They do not have yet responded.
As You know I'm L20+ Z383+ Z291-
Best wishes! Marco Grassi

[Bolgeris]

Today my BIGY results .. arrived!!
Hurrah:)

[Bolgeris]

The "new" 94 SNP...!? 88 High!

Novel Variant,"28787141","","","","C","G","High"
Novel Variant,"28788643","","","","G","T","High" S4222 alias S4884
Novel Variant,"14399074","","","","A","G","High"
Novel Variant,"14590597","","","","T","C","High"
Novel Variant,"14630334","","","","T","C","High"
Novel Variant,"14644698","","","","C","T","High"
Novel Variant,"2708780","","","","C","G","High"
Novel Variant,"14630357","","","","T","C","High"
Novel Variant,"14644742","","","","C","T","High"
Novel Variant,"7610792","","","","T","C","High"
Novel Variant,"9296025","","","","G","A","High"
Novel Variant,"22318642","","","","G","A","High"
Novel Variant,"22293979","","","","C","A","Medium"
Novel Variant,"22302537","","","","C","T","High"
Novel Variant,"22346168","","","","A","T","High"
Novel Variant,"22444659","","","","A","T","High"
Novel Variant,"23758887","","","","C","T","High"
Novel Variant,"19047535","","","","T","G","High"
Novel Variant,"9316833","","","","A","G","High"
Novel Variant,"22229722","","","","T","A","High"
Novel Variant,"22233732","","","","C","G","High"
Novel Variant,"22235226","","","","C","T","High"
Novel Variant,"22316451","","","","C","G","High"
Novel Variant,"19842035","","","","G","T","High"
Novel Variant,"21035569","","","","T","C","High"
Novel Variant,"22259729","","","","T","C","High"
Novel Variant,"23813856","","","","A","G","High"
Novel Variant,"14709277","","","","C","G","High"
Novel Variant,"28787127","","","","G","A","High"
Novel Variant,"8805525","","","","A","G","High"
Novel Variant,"9227801","","","","A","T","High"
Novel Variant,"9239350","","","","T","C","High"
Novel Variant,"13887944","","","","C","A","High"
Novel Variant,"14398980","","","","A","G","High"
Novel Variant,"16494396","","","","T","G","High"
Novel Variant,"14367269","","","","C","A","High"
Novel Variant,"14399063","","","","A","G","High"
Novel Variant,"14630342","","","","T","C","High"
Novel Variant,"16891447","","","","C","A","High"
Novel Variant,"13142597","","","","G","T","High"
Novel Variant,"22293981","","","","C","G","Medium"
Novel Variant,"22318978","","","","T","C","High"
Novel Variant,"22319363","","","","T","A","High"
Novel Variant,"14399077","","","","G","A","High"
Novel Variant,"24453842","","","","G","T","High"
Novel Variant,"28788695","","","","T","A","High"
Novel Variant,"19968557","","","","G","C","High"
Novel Variant,"22228460","","","","C","T","High"
Novel Variant,"22319065","","","","T","C","Medium"
Novel Variant,"22436085","","","","T","G","High"
Novel Variant,"22460597","","","","C","A","High"
Novel Variant,"18684555","","","","C","G","High"
Novel Variant,"16393249","","","","T","A","High"
Novel Variant,"14399105","","","","G","A","High"
Novel Variant,"15824887","","","","A","T","High"
Novel Variant,"23896250","","","","A","C","High"
Novel Variant,"26123300","","","","C","T","High"
Novel Variant,"2716389","","","","G","T","High"
Novel Variant,"23354909","","","","A","C","High"
Novel Variant,"24447989","","","","A","C","High"
Novel Variant,"21605188","","","","A","G","High"
Novel Variant,"22246045","","","","C","G","High"
Novel Variant,"7321330","","","","A","C","High"
Novel Variant,"7702178","","","","G","A","High"
Novel Variant,"14543554","","","","A","T","High"
Novel Variant,"7035007","","","","A","G","High"
Novel Variant,"9374685","","","","G","C","High"
Novel Variant,"9973685","","","","T","C","High"
Novel Variant,"13687378","","","","A","T","High"
Novel Variant,"23301577","","","","T","C","High"
Novel Variant,"19936492","","","","T","C","High"
Novel Variant,"21853937","","","","T","C","High"
Novel Variant,"22229913","","","","C","G","High"
Novel Variant,"22269796","","","","T","A","High"
Novel Variant,"22318643","","","","A","C","High"
Novel Variant,"14071348","","","","A","T","High"
Novel Variant,"22319066","","","","A","T","Medium"
Novel Variant,"22319170","","","","A","T","High"
Novel Variant,"22319171","","","","G","T","High"
Novel Variant,"22319362","","","","A","T","High"
Novel Variant,"22436300","","","","A","C","High"
Novel Variant,"18174420","","","","G","A","High"
Novel Variant,"13271933","","","","T","A","High"
Novel Variant,"21952388","","","","T","C","High"
Novel Variant,"22246199","","","","G","A","High"
Novel Variant,"22262889","","","","A","T","High"
Novel Variant,"22269664","","","","C","G","High"
Novel Variant,"22318641","","","","A","C","High"
Novel Variant,"14709276","","","","A","T","High"
Novel Variant,"19108279","","","","G","A","High"
Novel Variant,"19225354","","","","G","T","High"
Novel Variant,"7730475","","","","C","G","Medium"
Novel Variant,"9882218","","","","G","A","High"
Novel Variant,"9992071","","","","A","C","Medium"

[R.Rocca]

The "new" 94 SNP...!? 88 High!

You are confirmed CTS9733+ and S1505- as per the Big-Y data. You do not share any downstream SNPs with the other CTS9733+ samples.

[Bolgeris]

You are confirmed CTS9733+ and S1505- as per the Big-Y data. You do not share any downstream SNPs with the other CTS9733+ samples.

OK

Thank you..
Grazie..

Sorry
but i don't see in my BIGY results..
19045124 or S3856 or CTS9733 SNP C T

Mah!
I see the new negative.. res..
L144-, F1230-, F1398-, F1948-, F2421-, CTS6911-, CTS8178-, CTS4069-, L739-,

[Rathna]

94 SNPs of Big Y, also at the lowest calculation of 150 years for SNP, are about 14,000 years. Only one SNP in common with the Isles. What does that mean?

[Bolgeris]

Ciao,
I think that only half of them are true new SNP..
others new only for Ftdna.

I think half new SNP should be shared with other haplogroups...

[Bolgeris]

I don't understand i am CTS9733 + (as to Britainsdna) or not?:(

SNP name derived on tree reference genotipe confidence

CTS9733 No(-) No C C High

[R.Rocca]

I don't understand i am CTS9733 + (as to Britainsdna) or not?:(

SNP name derived on tree reference genotipe confidence

CTS9733 No(-) No C C High

You are definitely positive. The reference human also has the 'C' value like you. All others who show as positive in their Big-Y results are in fact negative.

[Rathna]

Beppe, this is a back mutation, happened in the R-L20 line. In fact when Marco Grassi (and me) asked for that SNP to Yseq, they asked which mutation we are searching for, but we answered that they should have said which value Marco would have had. After we would have understand what we were searching for. In fact if you look at the Richard Rocca's tree, he signed not only the SNP, but also from T to C.
About the fact that only an half of your SNP will be confirmed we'll see. Anyway it would be 7,000 years, not a few, but the most important fact remains (for me and for my theories I have expressed to you in all these years): the link with the Isles comes back to at least 7,000 years ago, and this could mean anything, also that you descend from the original L20 of what is for me the Italian Refugium, and it isn't said that this haplotype reached the Isles from Central Europe, it is possible also through Iberia, as I think having demonstrated in this forum about R-L51. Of course next data will say something more careful.

[R.Rocca]

Beppe, this is a back mutation, happened in the R-L20 line. In fact when Marco Grassi (and me) asked for that SNP to Yseq, they asked which mutation we are searching for, but we answered that they should have said which value Marco would have had. After we would have understand what we were searching for. In fact if you look at the Richard Rocca's tree, he signed not only the SNP, but also from T to C.
About the fact that only an half of your SNP will be confirmed we'll see. Anyway it would be 7,000 years, not a few, but the most important fact remains (for me and for my theories I have expressed to you in all these years): the link with the Isles comes back to at least 7,000 years ago, and this could mean anything, also that you descend from the original L20 of what is for me the Italian Refugium, and it isn't said that this haplotype reached the Isles from Central Europe, it is possible also through Iberia, as I think having demonstrated in this forum about R-L51. Of course next data will say something more careful.

Gioiello, welcome back. Good to see you posting here again.

This is in fact not a back mutation. If this was a back mutation, it would be C>T>C, but in this case it only occured once, from T to C. It is just that the man that provided the reference for Build 37 is 'C' at this position. When any sample is compared against the reference, it looks like his is the ancestral value, when it is in fact the derived value.

As for SNP counting to determine age, while of some interest, it should be taken with a bit of caution. At this stage, I don't think it is any more or less reliable than calculating age based on STRs.

[Rathna]

Richard, I thank you for your welcome. Actually I didn't want to publish here again, but Giuseppe and Marco are old friends of mine and we are discussing about U152, L20, M228 and about the STRs values from at least 7 years. But let me know: if the reference sample was CTS9733=C it did mean that he was R-L20/CTS9733=C, and all the others are CTS9733=T, then T is the ancestral value and C the derived one. Or not?

19045124 S3856 CTS9733 SNP C T

S3856 AA AG AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA AA

P.S. I am seeing you responded when I was writing my post. Yes, T is ancestral and C is derived.

[Rathna]

About the second part of your answer I think that the skepticism is perhaps not justified: STRs have mutations forwards and backwards, the SNPs not, at least not so frequent like the STRs, thus the calculation based upon them should be more reliable (when we will have taken the measure), but if the range is between 14,000 and 7,000 years, probably we shouldn't go below this last.

[R.Rocca]

About the second part of your answer I think that the skepticism is perhaps not justified: STRs have mutations forwards and backwards, the SNPs not, at least not so frequent like the STRs, thus the calculation based upon them should be more reliable (when we will have taken the measure), but if the range is between 14,000 and 7,000 years, probably we shouldn't go below this last.

We can continue the discussion at STR Wars forum, but some SNPs are located in less stable parts of the Y, some SNP counting is done using studies that don't test the entire mapped Y-chromosome (e.g. Francalacci) etc., so there is still a lot of caution to be taken.

[R.Rocca]

...and some people's samples are of less quality as others. For example, one of the FGC's raw data I have studied is ~7 Gigabytes when most others are ~9 Gigabytes.

[Rathna]

Richard, in the language of your ancestors we say that "nel più ci sta il meno", i.e. if Giuseppe has 94 reliable SNPs, the fact that others have less doesn't abolish his SNPs, i.e. if the others have less we shouldn't not consider his. They are. The problem is to ascertain how much they are reliable etc. It is the same problem of the outliers about the STRs I have always considered very important: the problem aren't the more mutations but the less ones, just because due to back mutations etc. All this of course after having ascertained all the factors that may increase the mutations, like the multistep ones, the age of the father etc.
Of course much work to do.

[R.Rocca]

Richard, in the language of your ancestors we say that "nel più ci sta il meno", i.e. if Giuseppe has 94 reliable SNPs, the fact that others have less doesn't abolish his SNPs, i.e. if the others have less we shouldn't not consider his. They are. The problem is to ascertain how much they are reliable etc. It is the same problem of the outliers about the STRs I have always considered very important: the problem aren't the more mutations but the less ones, just because due to back mutations etc. All this of course after having ascertained all the factors that may increase the mutations, like the multistep ones, the age of the father etc.
Of course much work to do.

Just to point out, Giuseppe's 94 reliable markers are not less than the others, they are quite average to below average compared to other U152 project member Big-Y results that are getting in the high 90s and low 100s. But to your point, there is still much work to do in this area.

[Bolgeris]

Ok thank you very much..
I have seen that you have put, in U152 project, all Belgieri, Bolgeri in the same cluster
U152> L2> Z258/Z367/Z384> L20/Z383/CTS1939/PF129> CTS9733-.

Sorry but i see that you ,, forgotten another Belgeri the last kit 183488.
as others always L20+ and GD 11/110.

Ciao
Grazie.

[Bolgeris]

Wow..
Who knows
where it came the man that providerd the reference for build 37..?!
This man that is positive for L20 and CTR9733 ?.

I'm curious.

[Bolgeris]

Interesting that the TMRCA between all the "Bolgeri's" is always 660 / 825 years .. or 20 / 25 generations.. ?!
The time of birth of surnames in Northern Italy?!?

And the TMRCA between the "Bolgeri's" and other Swedish CTS9733 is always about 2000 / 2200 years ago .. or 63 / 67 generations?
The period when started the migration from Scandinavia?

http://www.mymcgee.com/tools/yutility111.html

Time to Most Recent Common Ancestor (Years)
183488 Belgeri R-L20 330 111 825 825 2079
N9198 Belgieri R-L20 660 825 111 891 2211
154083 Bolgeri R-L20 660 825 891 111 2079
212243 Sweden R-L20 1947 2079 2211 2079 111

Time to Most Recent Common Ancestor (Generations)
183488 10 111 25 25 63
N9198 20 25 111 27 67
154083 20 25 27 111 63
212243 59 63 67 63 111

Mah .. why not should be possibile and true a common Lombard (Longobards) origin.. ?!?

These are just ideas of course ..
everything is possible.
All suggestions are welcome.

[R.Rocca]

Wow..
Who knows
where it came the man that providerd the reference for build 37..?!
This man that is positive for L20 and CTR9733 ?.

I'm curious.

The human genome reference for homo sapiens is GRCh37/hg19 (build 37) and is derived from thirteen anonymous volunteers from Buffalo, New York. Another words, it is a "Frankenstein" genome. The reference is negative for Z367, L20 and CTS9733, which of course means that it is really positive when compared to the majority of humans.

This has made me think... since FTDNA Big-Y results are only showing positive SNPs, if you or any other CRS9733 share any negative SNPs with each other and the reference, I don't think they will show up in your results. Perhaps the best thing to do is to ask FTDNA for your BAM file (the real raw data) and have Full Genomes do an analysis on it???

[Bolgeris]

Ok i will ask my BAM file to Ftdna.
Thanks for sugg.
Ciao.
Giuseppe

[Open Genomes]

(SNPs in the callable regions from Poznik et al. (2013) (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4032117/) in bold)

Already identified SNPs listed as "novel" by the Big Y:



S4105/Y136/FGC21 [Y:7321330C>A]
rs6530623 (RefSeq allele)


S11962/FGC22 [Y:8805525A>G]
rs1264078


A125 [Y:9992071A>C]
rs78352238


A126 [Y:13271933T>A]
rs62599146


S23766/FGC26[Y:21952388T>C]
rs7067348


FGC1558 [Y:22233732C>G]
rs13305741


S2753/FGC1557 [Y:22246045C>G]
rs2704710


FGC1556 [Y:22246199G>A]
rs2704711


FGC7505 [Y:22262889A>T]
rs9775744


FGC186 [Y:22293981C>G]
rs7892914


S4344/FGC7450 [Y:23354909A>C]
rs9786198


FGC20 [Y:23813856A>G]
rs4088785/rs72615062


S26186/FGC15 [Y:24447989A>C]
rs6530626



Novel SNPs in "non-recurrent" regions:





novel [Y:2708780C>G](high)


novel [Y:2716389G>T](high)


novel [Y:7035007A>G](high)


novel [Y:7610792T>C](high)


novel [Y:7702178G>A](high)


novel [Y:7730475C>G](medium)


novel [Y:9882218G>A](high)


novel [Y:13887944C>A](high)


novel [Y:14543554A>T](high)


novel [Y:14590597T>C](high)


novel [Y:15824887A>T](high)


novel [Y:16393249T>A](high)


novel [Y:16891447C>A](high)


novel [Y:18174420G>A](high)


novel [Y:18684555C>G](high)


novel [Y:19047535T>G](high)


novel [Y:19108279G>A](high)


novel [Y:19225354G>T](high)


novel [Y:21035569T>C](high)


novel [Y:21605188A>G](high)


novel [Y:21853937T>C](high)


novel [Y:22228460C>T](high)


novel [Y:23301577T>C](high)


novel [Y:23758887C>T](high)


novel [Y:23896250A>C](high)


novel [Y:28787141C>G](high)






Recurrent SNPs, SNPs in X-homologous regions:

[Y:9227801A>T](high) recurrent
[Y:9239350T>C](high) near recurrent SNPs
[Y:9296025G>A](high) recurrent
[Y:9316833A>G](high) recurrent
[Y:9973685T>C](high) near recurrent SNPs
[Y:13142597G>T](high) recurrent
[Y:13687378A>T](high) bad region
[Y:16494396T>G](high) recurrent
[Y:19842035G>T](high) recurrent, palindromic P5
[Y:19936492T>C](high) bad site
[Y:19968557G>C](high) palindromic P5
[Y:22229722T>A](high) recurrent
[Y:22229913C>G](high) recurrent
[Y:22235226C>T](high) recurrent
[Y:22259729T>C](high) recurrent
[Y:22269664C>G](high) recurrent
[Y:22269796T>A](high) recurrent
[Y:22293979C>A](medium) near recurrent SNPs
[Y:22316451C>G](high) near recurrent SNPs
[Y:22318641A>C](high) recurrent
[Y:22318642G>A](high) recurrent
[Y:22318643A>C](high) recurrent
[Y:22318978T>C](high) recurrent
[Y:22319065T>C](medium) recurrent
[Y:22319066A>T](medium) recurrent
[Y:22319170A>T](high) recurrent
[Y:22319171G>T](high) recurrent
[Y:22319362A>T](high) recurrent
[Y:22319363T>A](high) recurrent
[Y:22346168A>T](high) recurrent
[Y:22436085T>G](high) recurrent
[Y:22436300A>C](high) recurrent
[Y:22444659A>T](high) near recurrent SNPs
[Y:22460597C>A](high) near recurrent SNPs

Using the Poznik et al. (2013) mutation rate, 23 novel SNPs * 122 years per SNP = 2806 years from your nearest match.

[Bolgeris]

Thanks..
Only.. I just do not know who will be nearest match to me .. (2806 years)
Just another Swedish gentleman.. he is tested CTS9733
but I do not know if he did the Bigy test.

[Rathna]

Of course I (and I think we all) thank "Open Genomes" for his/her analysis, and I'll study it very carefully, because it is clear that he/she is an expert of the matter. But who knows me probably knows that I don't like who hides him/herself. But am I not "Rathna"? But everybody knows I am Gioiello Tognoni (Gioiello, Maliclavelli, Rathna, Claire) and, as everyone may put his/her data on his/her account, I am R-Z2110* (S12460), K1a1b1e, Italian flag, born in 1948, a retired teacher of Italian, Latin, History and Geography on the High School. In Genetics an hobbyist (or perhaps a citizen scientist). I'd invite "Open Genomes" to declare his/her identity, perhaps his/her papers, etc. I could do some hypotheses, but I'd want that they were permitted from the moderators. Otherwise I keep them to myself.
And now we could discuss "Open Genomes" ' analysis.

[Rathna]

A few questions to "Open Genomes":
1) For excluding from the count the "Already identified SNPs listed as 'novel' by the Big Y" (13 SNPs), we should demonstrate that they are ancestral to R-CTS9733 or better to L20 (of course we should look at them one by one) and "Open Genomes", if he/she did that, could say it.
2) The "Novel SNPs in 'non recurrent' regions" are 26 and I'd ask him/her why he/she counted only 23. If because only 23 are in the David Poznik database, I'd ask why not the other 3, which should be more reliable like novel ones just because David Poznik didn't find them.
3) The "recurrent SNPs, SNPs in X-homologous regions" shouldn't be excluded like SNPs only because David Poznik didn't take them into account, and that a SNP is "recurrent" shouldn't exclude it from being a possible SNP.
4) That a SNP of the "9.99 million sites" tested by David Poznik is worth 122 years is based on many presuppositions of David Poznik as the out of Africa happened "approximately 50 kya" or as to the migration to America of the first people...

Thus... much work to do.

[Bolgeris]

1914
Dear Gioiello.
Please do not insist on wanting to reveal identity if one wants to remain anonymous, let him remain anonymous.
I thank the anonymous kindness instead of having done the calculations on my unique SNPs, etc. ..

Gioiello as we have always known and talked about for years ..
the complexity of the various Italian regions is remarkable.
As you can see and know from the italian linguistics map attached .

Gioiello I respect your theories ,
But sorry..
I always doubt that R1b was born in Italy .

AS i doubt also that all groups of U152 are only of Latin or Celtic origin.

I think that , being U152 much more ancient origin , only now we are beginning to realize the origin of the various subgroups of U152 .

As you know it is not for parochial reasons that i and Grassi we have doubt being of Lombard (longobards) origin ..
Only that ours small villages (SArzana and Civenna) in the North Italians mountains were Yes (founded) colonized from Farae Lombards ..
and only for this we think of being of Lombard origin.

Yes all should be possible .. that we instead originating in ancient Ligurians or Rhetians or Cisalpine Gauls or Latin colonists .. maybe..
I am not against any hypothesis .

Only that I ask you about the following assumptions:

- If another CTS9733 (as me) is of Swedish origin .. there may be a common origin between Longobards tribes ? CTS9733 all of us Lombard? ?
- Subdivisions with all other L20 always give ( about 110 STR) a TMRCA between us "Bolgeri"and other L20 ..at least 2000 years.
- If we (Grassi and Bolgeri) were from Latin or Celtic or Ligurian origin... there would be others L20 closer to us than 2000 years?

To finish...:
- or ancestors of me and Grassi were ancestrally from two Rhaetian communities remained isolated... in the mountains ?
- or ancestors of me and Grassi arrived with a Longobards FaRAE in Italy with the Lombards?

Who knows? but now the mysteries will be gradually revealing!?

ciao
Giuseppe

[Rathna]

1914
Dear Gioiello.
Please do not insist on wanting to reveal identity if one wants to remain anonymous, let him remain anonymous.
I thank the anonymous kindness instead of having done the calculations on my unique SNPs, etc. ..

Gioiello as we have always known and talked about for years ..
the complexity of the various Italian regions is remarkable.
As you can see and know from the italian linguistics map attached .

Gioiello I respect your theories ,
But sorry..
I always doubt that R1b was born in Italy .

AS i doubt also that all groups of U152 are only of Latin or Celtic origin.

I think that , being U152 much more ancient origin , only now we are beginning to realize the origin of the various subgroups of U152 .

As you know it is not for parochial reasons that i and Grassi we have doubt being of Lombard (longobards) origin ..
Only that ours small villages (SArzana and Civenna) in the North Italians mountains were Yes (founded) colonized from Farae Lombards ..
and only for this we think of being of Lombard origin.

Yes all should be possible .. that we instead originating in ancient Ligurians or Rhetians or Cisalpine Gauls or Latin colonists .. maybe..
I am not against any hypothesis .

Only that I ask you about the following assumptions:

- If another CTS9733 (as me) is of Swedish origin .. there may be a common origin between Longobards tribes ? CTS9733 all of us Lombard? ?
- Subdivisions with all other L20 always give ( about 110 STR) a TMRCA between us "Bolgeri"and other L20 ..at least 2000 years.
- If we (Grassi and Bolgeri) were from Latin or Celtic or Ligurian origin... there would be others L20 closer to us than 2000 years?

To finish...:
- or ancestors of me and Grassi were ancestrally from two Rhaetian communities remained isolated... in the mountains ?
- or ancestors of me and Grassi arrived with a Longobards FaRAE in Italy with the Lombards?

Who knows? but now the mysteries will be gradually revealing!?

ciao
Giuseppe

Giuseppe, of course to remain anonymous is a right of everyone, and I respect it. In fact I didn't do any hypothesis and I actually have no idea about him/her. Of course the origin may be important, because not everyone is open to all the possibilities.
After collecting more data I was more and more convincing myself that the K1c1f of my wife (and children) from Sicily is of Viking origin, and I'd be curious to know how a Viking woman was in Sicily at the Normans time, we all thought come from French women. Then I have been always open to every solution, only that were demonstrated by data and proofs.
About your case I think having always been open to a Longobard origin or others, but you will admit that to give to your haplotype 1400 years (as it seemed firstly) or 2000 as you seem to think now, or 2800 as "Open Genomes" seems to think, or 4000 or 6000 or more, makes us change our hypotheses.
I did some remarks and asked only explications. It seems to me having done "scientific" questions which would need "scientific" answers. Only this. And when I said that we need "much work" yet, it was because to say that if you share the SNP CTS7933 with some Englishmen and some Swedes, but if you differ in "93" SNPs, this wouldn't demonstrate a close link and above all this doesn't answer about the origin of your haplogroup.
If with more data certain proofs will come, I'll be glad to accept those results like I am glad that my children have a Viking mt.

[TigerMW]

Of course I (and I think we all) thank "Open Genomes" for his/her analysis, and I'll study it very carefully, because it is clear that he/she is an expert of the matter. But who knows me probably knows that I don't like who hides him/herself. But am I not "Rathna"? But everybody knows I am Gioiello Tognoni (Gioiello, Maliclavelli, Rathna, Claire) and, as everyone may put his/her data on his/her account, I am R-Z2110* (S12460), K1a1b1e, Italian flag, born in 1948, a retired teacher of Italian, Latin, History and Geography on the High School. In Genetics an hobbyist (or perhaps a citizen scientist). I'd invite "Open Genomes" to declare his/her identity, perhaps his/her papers, etc. I could do some hypotheses, but I'd want that they were permitted from the moderators. Otherwise I keep them to myself.
And now we could discuss "Open Genomes" ' analysis.
Open Genomes, there is no need to provide your identity. Please do not feel any pressure to do so. This forum's policies are intended to protect identities. The only exception might be in a case where someone is selling genetic genealogy services or products. I'm speaking as a moderator. M.W.

[Rathna]

Open Genomes, there is no need to provide your identity. Please do not feel any pressure to do so. This forum's policies are intended to protect identities. The only exception might be in a case where someone is selling genetic genealogy services or products. I'm speaking as a moderator. M.W.

Mike, don't you think that this is just the case?

Open Genomes
@OpenGenomes

Open Genomes Foundation Mission Statement: http://goo.gl/kI2cO
worldwide
facebook.com/Open.Genomes.F…
Follow Open Genomes

[Rathna]

Mike, don't you think that this is just the case?

Open Genomes
@OpenGenomes

Open Genomes Foundation Mission Statement: http://goo.gl/kI2cO
worldwide
facebook.com/Open.Genomes.F…
Follow Open Genomes

I apologize, but I didn't know "Open Genomes" before, but if it is a no profit foundation and if these are the people beyond it:
Nancy Grossman
Ted Kandell
Kemal Al Gazzah
Roy King
I completely agree with them, but a scientific answer to my questions from someone of them would be very well accepted.

[Muircheartaigh]

Ok i will ask my BAM file to Ftdna.
Thanks for sugg.
Ciao.
Giuseppe

You won't be disappointed. I've had my Big Y results analysed by FGC. Their presentation is streets ahead of FTDNA, with much more data extracted from the raw BigY Data and it's unbelievable that FTDNA don't follow the FGC example.

I recommend anyone who has done the Big Y to arrange to have their results analysed by FGC.

[Bolgeris]

Thanks..
I am waiting for my BAM file to Ftdna.
When will arrived i will send file to U152 project and Yfull etc..

I've already tried that, very important with the Y data, is to be able to make comparisons ..

Years ago we discovered L20 only by comparing the data received with 23andme, between me and Dr. Faux.

So I am absolutely in favor of making these comparisons.

A sad thing that Ftdna, with all the possibilities that would, not do it personally.
But this is another matter.

Saluti
Giuseppe

[R.Rocca]

Thanks..
I am waiting for my BAM file to Ftdna.
When will arrived i will send file to U152 project and Yfull etc..

I've already tried that, very important with the Y data, is to be able to make comparisons ..

Years ago we discovered L20 only by comparing the data received with 23andme, between me and Dr. Faux.

So I am absolutely in favor of making these comparisons.

A sad thing that Ftdna, with all the possibilities that would, not do it personally.
But this is another matter.

Saluti
Giuseppe

I think a better idea would be to send it to Full Genomes Corp ( https://www.fullgenomes.com/ ). I think they will do a much better job of telling you the negative SNPs, which is what you may be looking for below CTS9733.

[Bolgeris]

Ok
thanks Rich.
I will do.