PDA

View Full Version : Branches of Z142



Pages : 1 [2]

MitchellSince1893
12-09-2015, 04:04 PM
Just got another BigY match

Christopher Fookes. MRCA Thomas Foakes ~1660 - 1711, Peldon, Essex. He's U152> L2> Z49,Z68> Z142> Z150,Z12222,Z26720>L654

So on the FTDNA U152 project, it's probably either:
14879 Thomas Foakes, ~1660 - 1711 or
8642 Thomas Foakes, ~1660 - 1711, Essex

MitchellSince1893
12-12-2015, 05:30 AM
Update to the original post of this thread about the Value of DYS463 to predict which Z142 branch one may be on...assumes you know your are positive for Z142.

DYS463 is part of FTDNA's 111 marker test.

DYS463=22
Z142>L562,Z51,Z55: 4 of 9 111 marker tests.

DYS463=23
Z142>L562,Z51,Z55: 1 of 9

DYS463=24
Z142>FGC22963: 3 of 3 111 marker tests
Z142>L562,Z51,Z55: 2 of 9
Z142>Z150: 16 of 16

DYS463=25
Z142>L562: 2 of 9

So if you are positive for Z142 and have DYS463=24, odds are you are either on the FGC22963 or Z150 branch. In addition, if you have a micro allele of 13.2 at DYS385b it's a great indication you are positive for FGC2263.

If DYS=22, 23, or 25 odds are you are on the L562,Z51,Z55 branch of Z142.

However 2 of 9 L562,Z51,Z55 samples had DYS463=24, so it's not fullproof.

If in doubt, Z142+ folks can order single SNP tests form YSEQ for $17.50 each to determine which branch you are on.

kinman
12-13-2015, 10:04 PM
Hi All,
I'm happy to report that Alex has finalized the results for both Kinman and Langley (Matt) on the Big Tree. The other Langley (Barry) has been added to the tree, but the results are not yet finalized (once those results are finalized, the Langleys will then obviously be on a separate branch from me). Note that FGC22963 is still listed with FGC22940 and FGC22968, but that will change when either Bendell or Buffington get added to the tree.
And in addition to the 3 SNPs shared by me, the Langleys, and Rayhill, it shows that we also share a deletion, 21509434-TG-T.
Here's a weblink to the branch that includes us, plus Rayhill and Roelofs: http://ytree.net/DisplayTree.php?blockID=1095
---------Ken Kinman

kinman
12-23-2015, 05:32 PM
I just noticed that I got a new Big Y match today (James Michael Freeman).
He is a member of R-Z142, but not sure which branch he is in.

kinman
12-25-2015, 03:16 AM
Welcome to the Campbell line, who have now been added to the Rayhill-Bruegger clade at the U152 and Subclades Project.
The STR signature clearly shows that these Campbells are closer to Bruegger than to Rayhill.
------------Ken

kinman
12-28-2015, 09:07 PM
Hi All,
Alex has now finalized the results for the second Langley, and the Big Tree shows that two Langleys share three SNPs which I don't have.
There is still only one "named" SNP that is shared by the Langleys and Kinmans, and that is unfortunately a floating SNP with two names (M359 and P41).
I am not on the YFull tree, but when they do updated their tree in January, it will be interesting to see if they call the branch containing these two Langleys either P-M359 or P41. Or are they more likely to actually give a name to one of the three SNPs that the Langleys exclusively share?
http://ytree.net/DisplayTree.php?blockID=1224
------------------Ken
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Hi All,
I'm happy to report that Alex has finalized the results for both Kinman and Langley (Matt) on the Big Tree. The other Langley (Barry) has been added to the tree, but the results are not yet finalized (once those results are finalized, the Langleys will then obviously be on a separate branch from me). Note that FGC22963 is still listed with FGC22940 and FGC22968, but that will change when either Bendell or Buffington get added to the tree.
And in addition to the 3 SNPs shared by me, the Langleys, and Rayhill, it shows that we also share a deletion, 21509434-TG-T.
Here's a weblink to the branch that includes us, plus Rayhill and Roelofs: http://ytree.net/DisplayTree.php?blockID=1095
---------Ken Kinman

MattL
12-29-2015, 10:22 PM
Hi All,
Alex has now finalized the results for the second Langley, and the Big Tree shows that two Langleys share three SNPs which I don't have.
There is still only one "named" SNP that is shared by the Langleys and Kinmans, and that is unfortunately a floating SNP with two names (M359 and P41).
I am not on the YFull tree, but when they do updated their tree in January, it will be interesting to see if they call the branch containing these two Langleys either P-M359 or P41. Or are they more likely to actually give a name to one of the three SNPs that the Langleys exclusively share?
http://ytree.net/DisplayTree.php?blockID=1224
------------------Ken
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Very interesting. We share a lot of SNPs

kinman
12-29-2015, 11:55 PM
Hi Matt,
It's about what I expected. There are 23 shared SNPs for about 3,000 years of history, so that is about 130 years per SNP. YFull uses 144 years/SNP in its formula, but some variation from that average is to be expected. I only have 6 private SNPs left, and probably share 3 or 4 of those with Maynors and my distant Kinman cousin.
Anyway, since you and Barry Langley share 3 SNPs, I guess that would mean a common ancestor about 400 years ago, and therefore probably around 1615 (plus or minus a few decades). The Maynor-Kinman line probably split off from the Langleys around 200 years before that. And I said, about 3,000 years before that our group split away from the Rayhill-Bricker group.
----------------Ken
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Very interesting. We share a lot of SNPs

kinman
12-30-2015, 08:55 PM
Hi all,
Someone named Freeman was added today to Alex's "Big Tree", so I assume it is the same Freeman. Anyway, he is in our FGC22963 branch, although it is not yet clear if he is closer to Bendell or to Roelofs. Freeman has a very low FTDNA kit number, 6584, so he must have been tested a long time ago.
-----------------Ken
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


I just noticed that I got a new Big Y match today (James Michael Freeman).
He is a member of R-Z142, but not sure which branch he is in.

kinman
12-31-2015, 02:03 PM
Important correction:
I noted yesterday that the "Big Tree" presently shows Matt and Barry Langley sharing 3 SNPs. However, I have found that they apparently share 4 SNPs, because I could find no evidence that I have the mutation at 13471435. Therefore, that is a fourth SNP that the two Langleys share exclusively.
This is important because my estimate of 1615 for a common ancestor between the two Langleys will be pushed forward into the 1700s. I had been thinking that their immigrant ancestors were probably brothers or first cousins. However, now it is looking like they actually share the very same immigrant ancestor, and that their lines probably split in Virginia (not back in England).
--------------Ken


Hi Matt,
It's about what I expected. There are 23 shared SNPs for about 3,000 years of history, so that is about 130 years per SNP. YFull uses 144 years/SNP in its formula, but some variation from that average is to be expected. I only have 6 private SNPs left, and probably share 3 or 4 of those with Maynors and my distant Kinman cousin.
Anyway, since you and Barry Langley share 3 SNPs, I guess that would mean a common ancestor about 400 years ago, and therefore probably around 1615 (plus or minus a few decades). The Maynor-Kinman line probably split off from the Langleys around 200 years before that. And I said, about 3,000 years before that our group split away from the Rayhill-Bricker group.
----------------Ken
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

MattL
01-01-2016, 01:42 AM
Important correction:
I noted yesterday that the "Big Tree" presently shows Matt and Barry Langley sharing 3 SNPs. However, I have found that they apparently share 4 SNPs, because I could find no evidence that I have the mutation at 13471435. Therefore, that is a fourth SNP that the two Langleys share exclusively.
This is important because my estimate of 1615 for a common ancestor between the two Langleys will be pushed forward into the 1700s. I had been thinking that their immigrant ancestors were probably brothers or first cousins. However, now it is looking like they actually share the very same immigrant ancestor, and that their lines probably split in Virginia (not back in England).
--------------Ken

That would fit with my best guess looking at location of his furthest Langley ancestor. His tree dead ends pretty sharply with a very elusive William C (or G) Langley, who actually completely eludes any census records (something I haven't seen before, though found a post where someone said he was a sacred harp singer and traveled often to teach at singing schools which could explain). The only real record is his marriage record in Alabama, which other Langley descendants who likely descend from either South Carolina or Virginia land (so without further info I'd guess he descends from the same immigrant ancestor).

Titus Valerius
01-06-2016, 10:52 AM
Hi all! I just got the results from Yseq of my friend M. Corsi L2+ Z142+ , now we know he's FGC22956 - S23458 +.
I suppose a link with Mr. Langley, Mr.Kinman and Mr. Grazouille. But I noticed on www.mymcgee.com his D.G. from others are very high (18-20) and his TMRCA is between 1800 and 2850 years (50%-95%)

kinman
01-06-2016, 03:16 PM
Hi Titus,
There seem to be only three possibilities: (1) Corsi could be on the Langley branch and split off very early, or (2) he could still be on the Bricker branch and split off before the FGC22956 mutation happened, or (3) he split off before the Langley-Bricker split. Since the Langley-Bricker split probably happened about 3,500 years ago, I would guess possibilities (1) and (2) are more likely than (3).
Anyway, I am curious about your reference to www.mymcgee.com, since I could find no mention of Corsi at that website. Is there a misspelling in that weblink?
----------------Ken
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Hi all! I just got the results from Yseq of my friend M. Corsi L2+ Z142+ , now we know he's FGC22956 - S23458 +.
I suppose a link with Mr. Langley, Mr.Kinman and Mr. Grazouille. But I noticed on www.mymcgee.com his D.G. from others are very high (18-20) and his TMRCA is between 1800 and 2850 years (50%-95%)

Titus Valerius
01-06-2016, 04:31 PM
Hi Kinman, very likely it would be important that once you all (who don't like in general the theories that put the origin of hg. R1b, and others, in Italy) take in consideration also this possibility, which will be verified next with the announced aDNA from Mesolithic and EN from Italy, i.e. in this case that the most likable solution could be the third, i.e. that Corsi separated before the split between Bricker from Switzerland and Langley and the origin is Southward. Corsi is in the U152 FTDNA Project Group Z8 signed as M269 because he has been tested for the SNP from yseq and not from FTDNA, ID: 424754. As to mcgee I put the STRs values of Corsi, Kinman, Langley and Grazouille and the TMRCA resulted is very likely the oldest or perhaps much more. (over 2850 years) http://www.mymcgee.com/tools/yutility111.html

kinman
01-06-2016, 05:48 PM
Hi Titus,
The reason I think possibility (3) is the least likely is not where the splits occur, but when. YFull puts the split between Bricker and Langleys at 3,700 years ago (I say 3.400-3,500 years ago). If the 13.2 micro-allele arose about 4,100 years ago, that is a fairly short time frame for Corsi to have split off before the Langley-Bricker split (just a few centuries later). I would guess Corsi split off about 2,000-3,000 years ago (after the Langley-Bricker split), but that is just a guess.
-------------Ken
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Hi Kinman, very likely it would be important that once you all (who don't like in general the theories that put the origin of hg. R1b, and others, in Italy) take in consideration also this possibility, which will be verified next with the announced aDNA from Mesolithic and EN from Italy, i.e. in this case that the most likable solution could be the third, i.e. that Corsi separated before the split between Bricker from Switzerland and Langley and the origin is Southward. Corsi is in the U152 FTDNA Project Group Z8 signed as M269 because he has been tested for the SNP from yseq and not from FTDNA, ID: 424754. As to mcgee I put the STRs values of Corsi, Kinman, Langley and Grazouille and the TMRCA resulted is very likely the oldest or perhaps much more. (over 2850 years) http://www.mymcgee.com/tools/yutility111.html

kinman
01-06-2016, 05:53 PM
I forgot mention,
If you want to test other possible relatives at the www.mymcgee.com website, you might try comparing Corsi with the Withrow and Woodrow families (they also have the 13.2 micro-allele). Here is a weblink to their results:

https://www.familytreedna.com/public/withrowproject/default.aspx?section=ycolorized

MitchellSince1893
01-06-2016, 07:28 PM
I forgot mention,
If you want to test other possible relatives at the www.mymcgee.com website, you might try comparing Corsi with the Withrow and Woodrow families (they also have the 13.2 micro-allele). Here is a weblink to their results:

https://www.familytreedna.com/public/withrowproject/default.aspx?section=ycolorized

http://www.mymcgee.com/tools/yutility111.html is very easy to use. Just copy the rows you want from a FTDNA Y-dna classic or colored project chart, and paste them in the blank window with the one you want to compare to the rest on the top row.

Corsi has the following TMRCA with the Withrow and Woodrow families

258363=1350 years ago
206410-1620 years ago
82756=2430 years ago
200240=1470 years ago
203867=1470 years ago
202995=1680 years ago.

FWIW. I personally don't trust TMRCA dates derived from STRs, when they get beyond the genealogical time frame. I.e. 1200 year ago might actually be 3500 years ago if you compare it to SNP based testing.

GD are 14 and 15 for the 111 markers, 15 and 17 for the 67 markers, and 10 for the 37 marker samples.

Genealogical Time Frame: A time frame within the last 500 up to 1000 years since the adoption of surnames and written family records.
ISOGG 2015 Y-DNA Glossary

For example, here are the TMRCAs for my branch of Z150 using STRs: 1350 1290 1260 1740 1350 1260 years ago.

Using Yfull's SNP method of dating, our TMRCA is 3600 years ago.

Titus Valerius
01-06-2016, 11:02 PM
Hi! The reason for that I think that Corsi separated at the beginning of this subclade is because Corsi belongs to one haplotype (with DYS481=25 and DYS520=21) and all the others to another (with DYS481=24 and DYS520=20), for that I tested firstly the SNP FGC22956 for seeing if the split happened after that haplotype, but, resulting negative, it was clear to me that the split happened at the beginning. Of course that Corsi is positive for one of the three SNPs on the same level (S23458) isn’t resolutive, and only by testing at least the other two SNPs (FGC22942 and FGC22948) we could get a proof, because it is possible that he is negative for some of them. Anyway I think that what I said above may be a proof.

kinman
01-07-2016, 01:40 AM
Hi Titus,
I wouldn't trust the DYS481 at all, since it is known to be unstable (and Roelofs just outside our clade goes all the way down to DYS481=18). DYS520 is relatively stable, but it is not rare for it to increase to 21 or decrease to 19. If Corsi was at the origin of our subclade, I would find it very strange for those two values to increase by 1 from the modal values in Corsi and then reverse to decrease by 1 for the rest of the subclade. Seems more likely Corsi just increased those two values somewhere within the subclade.
Although I agree with Mitchell that TMRCA estimates based on STR values can be unreliable, I would trust the overall haplotype of 111 STRs to be more reliable than either DYS520 or DYS481. That is why I think the timing and genetic distances are more important here. Therefore, I strongly believe that Corsi would test positive for both FGC22942 and FGC22948, and that Withrows and Woodrows would as well (but admit that testing for those two SNPs wouldn't cost much). However, I would be more inclined to save up for a Big Y test. After three single SNP tests, I decided to save up a few months for the Big Y, and I am glad I did. But that is just my two cents worth on what worked best for me. It's certainly not a very exact science this early in such genetic predictions, so we just have to go with our hunches and hope we guessed right.
--------------Ken
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Hi! The reason for that I think that Corsi separated at the beginning of this subclade is because Corsi belongs to one haplotype (with DYS481=25 and DYS520=21) and all the others to another (with DYS481=24 and DYS520=20), for that I tested firstly the SNP FGC22956 for seeing if the split happened after that haplotype, but, resulting negative, it was clear to me that the split happened at the beginning. Of course that Corsi is positive for one of the three SNPs on the same level (S23458) isn’t resolutive, and only by testing at least the other two SNPs (FGC22942 and FGC22948) we could get a proof, because it is possible that he is negative for some of them. Anyway I think that what I said above may be a proof.

JamesFreeman
01-07-2016, 04:16 AM
Hi all,
Someone named Freeman was added today to Alex's "Big Tree", so I assume it is the same Freeman. Anyway, he is in our FGC22963 branch, although it is not yet clear if he is closer to Bendell or to Roelofs. Freeman has a very low FTDNA kit number, 6584, so he must have been tested a long time ago.
-----------------Ken
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


My original test was back in 2002. Looking forward to seeing where this takes me.

James Freeman

Titus Valerius
01-10-2016, 09:32 AM
Hi all!
Now My friend M. Corsi is in the right position on U152 project!

kinman
01-11-2016, 02:33 PM
Hi All,
The newest version of YFull tree is online. The two Langleys have been put into a new branch called Y19124. I don't think that I have that SNP, so it probably one which they share exclusively.
I didn't find it in the ISOGG SNP listing.
http://www.yfull.com/tree/R-Z142/
-----------Ken
P.S. They calculate TMRCA of the two Langleys as 211 years ago. That seems a bit low. I would guess it is closer to 300 years, but only time will tell.

MattL
01-15-2016, 07:45 AM
Hi All,
The newest version of YFull tree is online. The two Langleys have been put into a new branch called Y19124. I don't think that I have that SNP, so it probably one which they share exclusively.
I didn't find it in the ISOGG SNP listing.
http://www.yfull.com/tree/R-Z142/
-----------Ken
P.S. They calculate TMRCA of the two Langleys as 211 years ago. That seems a bit low. I would guess it is closer to 300 years, but only time will tell.

I'd guess anywhere from there range to yours. I'm not completely sure how these estimates work out, the birth of us to the birth of our common ancestor? Or the birth of our branching ancestor from our common ancestor?

I was born 1983, so 211 years before that would be 1772. 1772 was right around (I don't have an exactly time of birth but about 1775) of my second furthest concrete ancestor. Isham Langley born around 1770-1780 very likely in South Carolina. His father is the furthest ancestor I have a paper trail for, an Isham Langley Sr. whose first records are of land in 1774 on the border between Orangeburg/Lexington. There is no evidence for where he comes from... based on census records Isham Sr. was probably born between 1750-1760.

Their estimate would suggest either Isham Sr or Isham Jr are our common ancestor, both have children that are mostly unaccounted for minus my line (many of which make up the matches that trace back to South Carolina). So from a genealogical point their certainly are unaccounted spots that could lead to the other Langley's line back to either of those generations. Of course it could be further back, especially since I have no clue where my Langley cluster traces (I still have seen no evidence to point to the Norfolk Virginia Langleys that many trees commonly do, though they certainly could be my ancestors, this might be the case of so many records surviving from the Norfolk Langleys in 1600s-1700s that people just tend to point to them since they can).

kinman
01-15-2016, 05:36 PM
Hi All,

Alex Williamson examined my BAM file for FGC22969, and 3 out of the 4 reads show that I am positive. This and other available information indicates that YFull seems to be correct in including FGC22969 in the block with FGC22963. Thank you Alex for the information and also for adding FGC22969 to the Big Tree.
http://ytree.net/DisplayTree.php?blockID=1095
-----------------Ken
P.S. I still don't understand why FTDNA often misses such information and yet YFull finds it.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Hi All,
The YFull tree still shows that all of its members in Haplogroup FGC22963 also possess FGC22969. The position number for FGC22969 is apparently 22146356, but my Big Y results do not show any novel variants at that position (and all my other FGC-numbered SNPs are listed as novel variants).
So I am wondering if this is a case where borderline, low confidence calls are recognized by YFull, but rejected by FTDNA. Would my BAM file indicate how low the confidence was for the test at that position number?
-------------Ken
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

kinman
01-22-2016, 01:31 PM
Hi All,
I just noticed that there is a new entry in FGC22963 on the YFull tree, called YF05057. Not sure who this might be.
http://www.yfull.com/tree/R-Z142/
------------Ken

kinman
02-07-2016, 09:03 PM
Hi All,
Alex Williamson checked my BAM file and found that I am positive for 13471435(C/A), so the BigTree now has me as definitely positive for that SNP (rather than just "presumed positive"). Therefore that is another SNP that I share with the two Langleys. Hope to get that changed on the U152 and Subclades SNP tree (which currently shows me as being negative for that SNP).
-----------Ken

kinman
02-07-2016, 11:43 PM
The Big Tree shows our Langley clade (including Kinman) as having 26 SNPs (three of which I lack).
http://www.ytree.net/DisplayTree.php?blockID=1224&star=false
The YFull tree names our clade R-Y19124, including Y19124 and 30 other SNPs (and I would lack at least three of those), so it seems that YFull found 5 additional SNPs from the Full Genome data (vs. Big Y).
http://www.yfull.com/tree/R-Y19124/
However, all the 31 SNPs on YFull have been given Y____ numbers.
Is there some way online of finding out which Y_____ numbers go with which position numbers? Or would I have to get those from one of the Langleys?
I would especially like to know which Y____ number goes with M359 ( which is at position number 14491671 T->C )
--------------Ken

P.S. ISOGG has some Y____ numbers, but only up to Y18890. I wonder how long it will be before they get up to the Y19000 numbers?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

kinman
02-23-2016, 07:24 PM
Hi All,
YFull has updated its haplotree (version 4.02). It shows YF05057 in a new clade called R-Y20026 along with Bendell. So I assume YF05057 is probably either a Freeman or a Buffington.
http://www.yfull.com/tree/R-Z142/
--------------Ken
----------------------------------------------------------------------------


Hi All,
I just noticed that there is a new entry in FGC22963 on the YFull tree, called YF05057. Not sure who this might be.
http://www.yfull.com/tree/R-Z142/
------------Ken

JamesFreeman
03-11-2016, 06:55 PM
Yea, YF05057 is me.

James Freeman


Hi All,
YFull has updated its haplotree (version 4.02). It shows YF05057 in a new clade called R-Y20026 along with Bendell. So I assume YF05057 is probably either a Freeman or a Buffington.
http://www.yfull.com/tree/R-Z142/
--------------Ken
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

kinman
04-14-2016, 02:57 AM
I wish Yfull would get around to updating their haplotree. But I have a feeling there won't be anything new in our part of the tree anyway. Maybe things will pick up after DNA Day later this month. Noone wants to pay full price if some good coupons are to be announced in the next week or two.

Carloso972
04-17-2016, 07:13 AM
Hi again,
It appears that there might already be an M359.3, so probably best to call our group R-M359 to distinguish it from those outside of haplogroup R that have independently evolved the same mutation (two or three times). Anyway, it is uncertain whether Grazouille Michel-Etienne split off before or after the Langleys, so he may or may not test positive for M359. The same goes for our Stallings relatives. I suspect in both cases that they will test positive for M359 , and thankfully YSEQ.net already offers a single SNP test for M359. So it won't take a Big Y test to determine whether or not they are positive for M359. Maynor relatives will almost certainly test positive.
-------------Ken
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hello,

I have a new result from Yseq Dna. Your first idea was good for M349 and P41. Now, I'm M359 + and M359.2 +, P41.2 + (Haplogroup I2a1).

http://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplogroup_I2_Y-DNA.shtml : Haplogroup I2 is the most common paternal lineage in former Yugoslavia, Romania, Bulgaria and Sardinia, and a major lineage in most Slavic countries. Its maximum frequencies are observed in Bosnia (55%, including 71% in Bosnian Croats), Sardinia (39.5%), Croatia (38%), Serbia (33%), Montenegro (31%), Romania (28%), Moldova (24%), Macedonia (24%), Slovenia (22%), Bulgaria (22%), Belarus (18.5%), Hungary (18%), Slovakia (17.5%), Ukraine (13.5%), and Albania (13.5%). It is found at a frequency of 5 to 10% in Germanic countries.

Jean-Charles.

Carloso972
04-18-2016, 07:00 PM
Here's my results from AncestryDNA
8920

And my results from GEDmatch : 9.Eurogenes.K36
8921

Now I have (Europe only) :
- NORTH ATLANTIC : 115
- NORTH SEA : 78.4
- CENTRAL EUROPE : 73.5
- IBERIAN : 73
- FRENCH : 70.7
- EAST CENTRAL EUROPE : 69.4
- EASTERN EUROPE : 63.5
- WEST MED : 63.3
- ITALIAN : 55.2
- FENNOSCADIAN : 52.3
- BASQUE : 33.7
- WEST CAUCASIAN : 27.1
- ARMENIAN : 22.4
- EAST BALKAN : 21.2
- EAST MED : 19.8
- NORTH CAUCASIAN : 15.5
- VOLGA URAL : 12.1
- SIBERIAN : 3.4

I think it would be interesting to compare the same results from the others KIT. I can do the same with my KIT from Ftdna. I would like to see if we found the same order from NORTH ATLANTIC to SIBERIAN.

kinman
04-20-2016, 03:19 AM
Now we just need to have some of our Stallings family relatives tested for M359 or P41. If they are also positive, then Jean-Charles ancestors could have been Stallings rather than Langleys.

kinman
04-23-2016, 01:54 AM
Hi all,
The Big Y test is supposedly on sale for $460 for the next few days. However, it is not listed with the sale items in the e-mail that I got from FTDNA. Not sure if this was an oversight, or if there are restrictions connected with the Big Y sale price.

Armenis
04-25-2016, 08:42 AM
Hi All,
I'm happy to report that Alex has finalized the results for both Kinman and Langley (Matt) on the Big Tree. The other Langley (Barry) has been added to the tree, but the results are not yet finalized (once those results are finalized, the Langleys will then obviously be on a separate branch from me). Note that FGC22963 is still listed with FGC22940 and FGC22968, but that will change when either Bendell or Buffington get added to the tree.
And in addition to the 3 SNPs shared by me, the Langleys, and Rayhill, it shows that we also share a deletion, 21509434-TG-T.
Here's a weblink to the branch that includes us, plus Rayhill and Roelofs: http://ytree.net/DisplayTree.php?blockID=1095
---------Ken Kinman

Greetings, just to let you know that I have found a common novel SNP shared between Rayhill and a member of our group R-U152>L2>BY3485 (aka The FGC13620 Project).

Position: 22229426

Match: Manuel David Rabaez Diaz (Rabai N119885)

It may be irrelevant but I thought I would let you know anyway.

Regards,
Alex

kinman
04-26-2016, 01:08 PM
The newest updated (version 4.4) of the YFull tree has appeared: https://www.yfull.com/tree/R-Z142/

MitchellSince1893
05-09-2016, 04:58 PM
Using Richard Rocca's tree as a starting point, here is a chart I made for the Z142 branches. I used ancestry.com to attempt to make locations more specific, but there's bound to be errors so keep this in mind. A few of the paternal ancestors listed in the FTDNA U152 project had mutliple trees with different paternal lines...but I did my best with what I had.

I originally had the Yfull dates on it but it became a PITA so I removed them as there often was conflicting info between Yfull's organization of the tree and Richard's.

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/69/48/22/694822d37fcc381838b8753b969d0f96.png

Higher resolution located here https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/69/48/22/694822d37fcc381838b8753b969d0f96.png


Here's what the Z142 samples looks like in Britain. Again it's just an estimate based on available data.

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/76/75/6f/76756f9aee7d0dbdd5d7ba71988280cc.png

The pattern kinda reminds me of this Iron Age coin usage map of Britain.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e8/South.Britain.Late.Iron.Age.jpg

But it could be indicative of many different groups entering Britain at it's closest point to Continent and spreading out from there.

MitchellSince1893
05-09-2016, 09:35 PM
Z142 Subclade maps for Britain

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/e2/7c/f5/e27cf55b3fcb5e313186791cf1fbae54.png

MitchellSince1893
05-30-2016, 04:01 AM
One interesting tidbit about Z142 is how British it is compared to L2 and U152 as a whole in the FTDNA U152 project (after filtering for same/similar surnames).

From the U152 project,
U152 is 23.2% England
L2 is 26% England
Z36 is 6.7% England
Z56 is 21.9% England

By comparison 54.3% of Z142 is from England, or over two times L2's percentage

Scotland:
U152=5.2%
L2=5.4%
Z36=3.3%
Z56=2.7%

By comparison 8.7% of Z142 is from Scotland; or over 1.6 times L2's percentage

Currently no known Z142 from Wales or Ireland, but there are a few generic United Kingdom samples that I didn't include in the above numbers.

A similar trend was seen for France.
U152: 12.5% of project samples are from France
L2: 12.8%
Z142: 19.6% (over 1.5 times L2's percentage)

Bottomline: England, Scotland, and France appear to have disproportionate percentages for Z142 when compared to the U152 and L2 percentages.

MattL
05-31-2016, 06:48 PM
One interesting tidbit about Z142 is how British it is compared to L2 and U152 as a whole in the FTDNA U152 project (after filtering for same/similar surnames).

From the U152 project,
U152 is 23.2% England
L2 is 26% England
Z36 is 6.7% England
Z56 is 21.9% England

By comparison 54.3% of Z142 is from England, or over two times L2's percentage

Scotland:
U152=5.2%
L2=5.4%
Z36=3.3%
Z56=2.7%

By comparison 8.7% of Z142 is from Scotland; or over 1.6 times L2's percentage

Currently no known Z142 from Wales or Ireland, but there are a few generic United Kingdom samples that I didn't include in the above numbers.

A similar trend was seen for France.
U152: 12.5% of project samples are from France
L2: 12.8%
Z142: 19.6% (over 1.5 times L2's percentage)

Bottomline: England, Scotland, and France appear to have disproportionate percentages for Z142 when compared to the U152 and L2 percentages.

Very fascinating, definitely could fit with a migration through France to England. Maybe Gaulic/English expanding between those regions in the Late Bronze Age/Iron Age era? Really need more ancient DNA.

Certainly seems Z142 flourished on a path towards England.

MattL
06-07-2016, 11:39 PM
Using Richard Rocca's tree as a starting point, here is a chart I made for the Z142 branches. I used ancestry.com to attempt to make locations more specific, but there's bound to be errors so keep this in mind. A few of the paternal ancestors listed in the FTDNA U152 project had mutliple trees with different paternal lines...but I did my best with what I had.

I originally had the Yfull dates on it but it became a PITA so I removed them as there often was conflicting info between Yfull's organization of the tree and Richard's.

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/69/48/22/694822d37fcc381838b8753b969d0f96.png

Higher resolution located here https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/69/48/22/694822d37fcc381838b8753b969d0f96.png


Here's what the Z142 samples looks like in Britain. Again it's just an estimate based on available data.

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/76/75/6f/76756f9aee7d0dbdd5d7ba71988280cc.png

The pattern kinda reminds me of this Iron Age coin usage map of Britain.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e8/South.Britain.Late.Iron.Age.jpg

But it could be indicative of many different groups entering Britain at it's closest point to Continent and spreading out from there.

So going down the rabbit whole of reading far too much into modern population dispersal what pops out to me is the Catuvellauni tribal region in correlation to R-FGC22963 and R-L562 in particular. Purely out of speculative interest:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catuvellauni


The Catuvellauni are part of the Aylesford-Swarling archaeological group in Southern England often linked to Belgic Gaul and possibly to an actual Belgic conquest of the region alluded to by Caesar. John T. Koch conjectures that the Battle of the Catalaunian Plains and the modern name of ChÔlons-en-Champagne.[1] preserves the name of an original continental tribe of Catuvellauni, a name he derives from a compound of the ancient Celtic roots *katu- ("battle") and *wer-lo ("better"), thus meaning "excelling in battle", the same source as that of the later British and Breton personal name Cadwallon.[1]

kinman
06-19-2016, 03:26 PM
Hi all,
I was happy that FTDNA recently updated our part of their Haplotree. I guess it is nice to know that my clade has a name, R-BY5692. However, I can't figure out what position number this corresponds to. I assume ISOGG will eventually have that information, but that could be a while. Is there any other way to find the position number for BY5692 and other BY#### numbered SNPs?

kinman
07-03-2016, 12:18 AM
Hi All,
I see on the U152 group STR results that Roelofs now has a close match (descendant of a Francis Reid of Kirklinton, England). It is not yet on their tree, so it must be a fairly recent addition. This appears to be a Big Y test result, so I guess we have a potential new member who could join Williamson's Big Tree.
-------------Ken
P.S. There are already two additional members of FGC22963 (a Skinner and a Buffington) already in line to have their results finalized for the Big Tree: http://ytree.net/DisplayTree.php?blockID=1095

MitchellSince1893
07-03-2016, 02:32 AM
Hi All,
I see on the U152 group STR results that Roelofs now has a close match (descendant of a Francis Reid of Kirklinton, England). It is not yet on their tree, so it must be a fairly recent addition. This appears to be a Big Y test result, so I guess we have a potential new member who could join Williamson's Big Tree.
-------------Ken
P.S. There are already two additional members of FGC22963 (a Skinner and a Buffington) already in line to have their results finalized for the Big Tree: http://ytree.net/DisplayTree.php?blockID=1095

Looks like about 3 weeks out for Skinner and Buffington to be completed.

nroelofs
07-04-2016, 10:24 PM
From my quick check of unique mutations on Alex's table I (Roelofs) share 9 of 28 with Reid.

Shared positions:
15069888-A-G
15736174-G-A
23370562-G-A
18046811-A-G
23396752-A-G
16302028-T-C
7814735-T-C
21086632-A-C
8373227-C-T

Hopefully he will submit his results to Alex and a full analysis can be done.

kinman
07-07-2016, 12:51 AM
The Yahoo Group for the R1b-U152-Project shows that Reid has submitted his results there. So it is in the pipeline for the Big Tree.
That's the good news, but the bad news is that there is currently quite a backlog, so it will be quite a while before it is analyzed.
--------------Ken

beaugrandjacques
07-07-2016, 06:49 AM
Hi all,
I was happy that FTDNA recently updated our part of their Haplotree. I guess it is nice to know that my clade has a name, R-BY5692. However, I can't figure out what position number this corresponds to. I assume ISOGG will eventually have that information, but that could be a while. Is there any other way to find the position number for BY5692 and other BY#### numbered SNPs?

Bonjour Ó tous,

In their local tree at FTDNA, R-BY5692 corresponds to a node labelled 'R1b2a1a1h1a1a3a1h2a1b'

In order to find the label corresponding to a given SNP-node in the FTDNA classification:

1-go to your haplotree in your personal page at FTDNA;
2-save the page unto your PC as a HTML file;
3-open it as text using a plain text editor such as Sublime (do not use Word nor Excel);
4-search for the desired SNP;

Each branch of their tree is organized like this:

<li id="R1b2a1a1h1a1a3a1h3"><div class="snps"><span id="Z12222" class="snp pos">Z12222</span><a id="hiddenR-Z12222" class="hiddenSNPsExpand" href="javascript:void(0)">More...</a></div><label class="haploLabel">R-Z12222</label><ul>
<li id="R1b2a1a1h1a1a3a1h3a"><div class="snps"><span id="FGC12378" class="snp presNeg">FGC12378</span><a id="hiddenR-FGC12378" class="hiddenSNPsExpand" href="javascript:void(0)">More...</a></div><label class="haploLabel">R-FGC12378</label>
<ul class="drawLine">
<li id="R1b2a1a1h1a1a3a1h3a1"><div class="snps"><span id="FGC12401" class="snp presNeg">FGC12401</span><a id="hiddenR-FGC12401" class="hiddenSNPsExpand" href="javascript:void(0)">More...</a></div><label class="haploLabel">R-FGC12401</label><ul class="drawLine">
<li id="R1b2a1a1h1a1a3a1h3a1a"><div class="snps"><span id="BY5698" class="snp presNeg">BY5698</span></div><label class="haploLabel">R-BY5698</label></li></ul></li>
<li id="R1b2a1a1h1a1a3a1h3a2"><div class="snps"><span id="S20376" class="snp presNeg">S20376</span><a id="hiddenR-S20376" class="hiddenSNPsExpand" href="javascript:void(0)">More...</a></div><label class="haploLabel">R-S20376</label></li></ul></li>
<li id="R1b2a1a1h1a1a3a1h3b"><div class="snps"><span id="BY3616" class="snp pos">BY3616</span><a id="hiddenR-BY3616" class="hiddenSNPsExpand" href="javascript:void(0)">More...</a></div><label class="haploLabel">R-BY3616</label><ul class="drawLine"><li id="R1b2a1a1h1a1a3a1h3b1"><div class="snps confirmed"><span id="L552" class="snp pos">L552</span></div><label class="haploLabel confirmed">R-L552</label></li></ul></li><li id="R1b2a1a1h1a1a3a1h3c"><div class="snps"><span id="BY1542" class="snp presNeg">BY1542</span><a id="hiddenR-BY1542" class="hiddenSNPsExpand" href="javascript:void(0)">More...</a></div><label class="haploLabel">R-BY1542</label><ul class="drawLine"><li id="R1b2a1a1h1a1a3a1h3c1"><div class="snps"><span id="S42" class="snp presNeg">S42</span><a id="hiddenR-S42" class="hiddenSNPsExpand" href="javascript:void(0)">More...</a></div><label class="haploLabel">R-S42</label><ul class="drawLine"><li id="R1b2a1a1h1a1a3a1h3c1a"><div class="snps"><span id="CTS7197" class="snp presNeg">CTS7197</span></div><label class="haploLabel">R-CTS7197</label></li></ul></li><li id="R1b2a1a1h1a1a3a1h3c2"><div class="snps"><span id="BY5703" class="snp presNeg">BY5703</span></div><label class="haploLabel">R-BY5703</label></li></ul></li><li id="R1b2a1a1h1a1a3a1h3d"><div class="snps"><span id="CTS9490" class="snp presNeg">CTS9490</span></div><label class="haploLabel">R-CTS9490</label><ul><li id="R1b2a1a1h1a1a3a1h3d1"><div class="snps"><span id="CTS7970" class="snp presNeg">CTS7970</span></div><label class="haploLabel">R-CTS7970</label><ul class="drawLine"><li id="R1b2a1a1h1a1a3a1h3d1a"><div class="snps"><span id="CTS8125" class="snp presNeg">CTS8125</span></div><label class="haploLabel">R-CTS8125</label><ul class="drawLine"><li id="R1b2a1a1h1a1a3a1h3d1a1"><div class="snps"><span id="CTS11381" class="snp presNeg">CTS11381</span></div><label class="haploLabel">R-CTS11381</label></li></ul></li><li id="R1b2a1a1h1a1a3a1h3d1b"><div class="snps"><span id="BY3624" class="snp presNeg">BY3624</span><a id="hiddenR-BY3624" class="hiddenSNPsExpand" href="javascript:void(0)">More...</a></div><label class="haploLabel">R-BY3624</label><ul><li id="R1b2a1a1h1a1a3a1h3d1b1"><div class="snps"><span id="BY1350" class="snp presNeg">BY1350</span><a id="hiddenR-BY1350" class="hiddenSNPsExpand" href="javascript:void(0)">More...</a></div><label class="haploLabel">R-BY1350</label></li></ul></li></ul></li><li id="R1b2a1a1h1a1a3a1h3d2"><div class="snps"><span id="FGC37040" class="snp presNeg">FGC37040</span><a id="hiddenR-FGC37040" class="hiddenSNPsExpand" href="javascript:void(0)">More...</a></div><label class="haploLabel">R-FGC37040</label></li></ul></li></ul></li></ul></li><li id="R1b2a1a1h1a1a3a1i"><div class="snps"><span id="Y18894" class="snp presNeg">Y18894</span><a id="hiddenR-Y18894" class="hiddenSNPsExpand" href="javascript:void(0)">More...</a></div><label class="haploLabel">R-Y18894</label></li></ul></li><li id="R1b2a1a1h1a1a3a2"><div class="snps"><span id="M126" class="snp neg">M126</span></div><label class="haploLabel">R-M126</label></li><li id="R1b2a1a1h1a1a3a3"><div class="snps"><span id="L135" class="snp neg">L135</span></div><label class="haploLabel">R-L135</label><ul class="drawLine">

As you can see in the above HTML code, the nodal notation is coded but hidden.
In a taxonomy, nodes are used to drive the hierarchical structure.

Naturally, if two classifications do not rely exactly on the same SNP, their nodal notations (as with FTDNA and ISOGG) will not map unto each other exactly.



Avec mes salutations cordiales,

Jacques BEAUGRAND

R1b2a1a1h1a1a3a1h3b1


Glen Sutton
Missisquoi Valley

kinman
07-24-2016, 10:00 PM
Hi all,
Alex Williamson has apparently been working hard to catch up on the backlog of submissions to the Big Tree. And today he finalized the results for Skinner (and Buffington is not far behind):
http://www.ytree.net/DisplayTree.php?blockID=1095

----------------Ken

kinman
07-27-2016, 01:10 PM
Hi all,
Wow, this is very interesting.
Freeman and Buffington share a very long list of SNPs. Can't help but wonder if there is a non-paternal event in one of those lines.
-------------Ken
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Hi all,
Alex Williamson has apparently been working hard to catch up on the backlog of submissions to the Big Tree. And today he finalized the results for Skinner (and Buffington is not far behind):
http://www.ytree.net/DisplayTree.php?blockID=1095

----------------Ken

kinman
08-29-2016, 04:20 PM
Hi all,
I see that Reid is now up to #4 on the to-do list for Williamson's "Big Tree", so will probably be done in the next day or two.
Meanwhile, I see on the U152 Group results (in the group with Mason, Skinner, and Carter) there is now listed "Kazimierz Wladyczanski, ~1600 Bykowicze, WXL". I think Bykowicze is in Poland, but I'm not sure. Does anybody know what WXL stands for?

kinman
09-10-2016, 01:16 AM
Hi All,
I see on the U152 and Subclades website, that my ancestor John KINMAN and Michel-Etienne GRAZOUILLE are now listed together at the base of the R-BY5692 subclade, lacking the SNPs of the three Langleys (such as BY5694, BY5700). So this makes it much less probable (but still possible) Grazouille's ancestor was a Langley. Most likely his ancestor was a Maynor/Maner (just as my Kinman line probably was).
Anyway, I assume that his results came from Big Y or similar test, and that he will consider submitting his results to Alex Williamson's "Big Tree".
---------------Ken

MitchellSince1893
09-10-2016, 05:20 AM
...there is now listed "Kazimierz Wladyczanski, ~1600 Bykowicze, WXL". I think Bykowicze is in Poland, but I'm not sure. Does anybody know what WXL stands for?


The name of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, Ruthenia and Samogitia (the full official name) appears in three variants in its most popular abbreviated
form – the GDL (known in contemporary Latin, Polish and Ruthenian sources as MDL, W.X.L or ȼɄɅ) and also as the Duchy or simply as
Lithuania. https://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:16352/FULLTEXT01.pdf

The Grand Duchy of Lithuania, or the complete name, the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, Ruthenia and Samogitia. Present day Lithuania, Belarus, most of the Ukraine a small part of Russia bordering Belarus and Ukraine, and a small part of Latvia and Poland.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f3/Grand_Duchy_of_Lithuania_1430.png

MitchellSince1893
09-10-2016, 05:55 AM
Hi All,
I see on the U152 and Subclades website, that my ancestor John KINMAN and Michel-Etienne GRAZOUILLE are now listed together at the base of the R-BY5692 subclade, lacking the SNPs of the three Langleys (such as BY5694, BY5700). So this makes it much less probable (but still possible) Grazouille's ancestor was a Langley. Most likely his ancestor was a Maynor/Maner (just as my Kinman line probably was).
Anyway, I assume that his results came from Big Y or similar test, and that he will consider submitting his results to Alex Williamson's "Big Tree".
---------------Ken

Using the Yfull based SNP Age estimator spreadsheet provided the following info...calculating the split between your branch and the Langley branch at 481 years before the most recent common ancestor for the men of the Langley branch (95% CI range is 420-564 years).

So for example, if the common ancestor for the men in Langley branch lived in 1650 then the estimator says your branch and the Langley branch split somewhere between the late 11th century to the early 13th Century AD.


Number of SNPs in CombBED Region: 3

Calculated Age of Phylogenetic Block: 481.39 ybp
95% CI High = 563.91 ybp
95% CI Low = 419.93 ybp
The ybp values above do not take into consideration the private SNPs that occured between the present day and the Langley branch TMRCA.

kinman
09-15-2016, 03:04 AM
Dear All,
I am now even more convinced that Michel-Etienne Grazouille was a descendant of the Maynor/Maner line (as was my Kinman line). The Maynor-Kinman-Grazouille line is characterized by the unusual value of DYS438=13. The Langley line is characterized by the even more unusual DYS438=14 (as well as the additional SNPs).
Based on Mitchell's calculations, I would tentatively date the split between these two lines in the early 13th Century. However, as we get more results from more members (as well as from Stallings relatives), I would not be surprised if the split is more recent than that (14th-15th Centuries??). Only time will tell.
------------------Ken
P.S. The two Stallings who have been tested have the unusual DYS438=13, but not the even more unusual DYS438. Therefore they almost certainly did not have Langley ancestors. The most likely scenario is that the Stallings were the first to develop the unusual DYS438=13 (from ancestors with DYS438=12). They then gave rise to the Maynor-Kinman-Grazouille line (which retained DYS438=13) as well as the Langley line (which then evolved the even more unusual DYS438=14). But still cannot rule out the possibility that a Stallings became a Maynor, and that a Maynor then gave rise to the Langleys. We need a lot more testing from more Maynors and especially more Stallings.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Hi All,
I see on the U152 and Subclades website, that my ancestor John KINMAN and Michel-Etienne GRAZOUILLE are now listed together at the base of the R-BY5692 subclade, lacking the SNPs of the three Langleys (such as BY5694, BY5700). So this makes it much less probable (but still possible) Grazouille's ancestor was a Langley. Most likely his ancestor was a Maynor/Maner (just as my Kinman line probably was).
Anyway, I assume that his results came from Big Y or similar test, and that he will consider submitting his results to Alex Williamson's "Big Tree".
---------------Ken

MitchellSince1893
10-06-2016, 04:26 PM
Got a new generic R-Z142 BigY match. Last name is Vidgren so it may be Swedish and might be a new branch of Z142.

If so I believe it's the first known Z142 from Sweden. We do have one R-Z142》L562 from Norway and one R-Z142* from Finland. Maybe the new match and the Finnish match together form a new branch.

MitchellSince1893
10-08-2016, 02:47 AM
Got a new generic R-Z142 BigY match. Last name is Vidgren so it may be Swedish and might be a new branch of Z142.

If so I believe it's the first known Z142 from Sweden. We do have one R-Z142》L562 from Norway and one R-Z142* from Finland. Maybe the new match and the Finnish match together form a new branch.

Looking at the SNPs available on the BigY match list it appears Vidgren matches the Stewart group on FTDNA's U152 project of Z142 as 199841 (John Stewart, ca 1725 NC) and Vidgren both share SNP CTS2819, position 14502839 (G->A)

kinman
11-26-2016, 04:44 PM
I see that Alex Williamson has finalized the results for Mason. The close relationship between Mason and Skinner confirms what had been seen in their similar STR results.
http://ytree.net/DisplayTree.php?blockID=1246

MitchellSince1893
12-09-2016, 01:02 AM
Got a new generic R-Z142 BigY match. Last name is Vidgren so it may be Swedish and might be a new branch of Z142.

If so I believe it's the first known Z142 from Sweden. We do have one R-Z142》L562 from Norway and one R-Z142* from Finland. Maybe the new match and the Finnish match together form a new branch.

I feel like I'm playing the lottery every time I get a new "We found a new Big Y match" email from FTDNA. Unfortunately I've hit a BigY R-Z142 drought of late. Since my last match two months ago, I''ve had 58 new BigY matches, none of which were positive for R-Z142.

kinman
12-09-2016, 09:26 PM
Yes, definitely a drought. I really don't see it ending until they have another Big Y sale. But with the current sale on Y37, Y67, and Y111, I am hoping for some Z142 matches on the STR tests a couple of months from now.

-------------------------------------------------


I feel like I'm playing the lottery every time I get a new "We found a new Big Y match" email from FTDNA. Unfortunately I've hit a BigY R-Z142 drought of late. Since my last match two months ago, I''ve had 58 new BigY matches, none of which were positive for R-Z142.

kw5368
12-10-2016, 06:03 PM
How often do they check for Big Y matches? I recently (11/29) got my results, but they do not show that I have any matches. I know that I have at least one match that is positive for CTS7197. I have uploaded my results to the U152 group at Yahoo and I have been listed on the Big Tree, although my data have not been totally analyzed yet. Should I contact FTDNA, or wait a while?

Ken

MitchellSince1893
12-10-2016, 08:33 PM
How often do they check for Big Y matches? I recently (11/29) got my results, but they do not show that I have any matches. I know that I have at least one match that is positive for CTS7197. I have uploaded my results to the U152 group at Yahoo and I have been listed on the Big Tree, although my data have not been totally analyzed yet. Should I contact FTDNA, or wait a while?

Ken

They post matches as soon as the results are made available. Recently I have BigY matches on these date: 12/7, 12/6, 12/5, 12/4, 12/3, 12/2, 12/1, 11/30, 11/29, 11/15, 11/13, 11/11, 11/3, 11/2, 11/1, 10/19, 10/18, 10/7, 10/6, 10/5.

kw5368
12-10-2016, 11:29 PM
Thanks Mitchell. That's interesting. I wonder how they missed my one match? I thought they would at least match me to the people that tested positive for S42.

Ken

MitchellSince1893
12-11-2016, 12:06 AM
Thanks Mitchell. That's interesting. I wonder how they missed my one match? I thought they would at least match me to the people that tested positive for S42.

Ken

There may be a delay if you recently got your results. You may want to ask FTDNA about it.

I did a search of my own matches and only had one match with SNP CTS7197, a Mr. James Ward, who also had SNPs S42 and L654. Our match date is 10/9/2014.

kw5368
12-14-2016, 01:57 PM
There may be a delay if you recently got your results. You may want to ask FTDNA about it.

I did a search of my own matches and only had one match with SNP CTS7197, a Mr. James Ward, who also had SNPs S42 and L654. Our match date is 10/9/2014.

Sorry I missed your last post till now. I contacted FTDNA and they populated my matches. James Ward is another direct descendant of John C Ward of England who was my GGG Grandfather. I think that we are the only ones in R1b who are positive for CTS7197.

I have uploaded my data to the U-152 project on Yahoo Groups and I have been added to the ytree with Le Compte and Hill. I think that I will eventually be put on my own branch after he completely analyzes my data.

Do you think my next step should be to send my BAM file to YFull?

Thanks for your help,
Ken

MitchellSince1893
12-14-2016, 02:43 PM
Sorry I missed your last post till now. I contacted FTDNA and they populated my matches. James Ward is another direct descendant of John C Ward of England who was my GGG Grandfather. I think that we are the only ones in R1b who are positive for CTS7197.

I have uploaded my data to the U-152 project on Yahoo Groups and I have been added to the ytree with Le Compte and Hill. I think that I will eventually be put on my own branch after he completely analyzes my data.

Do you think my next step should be to send my BAM file to YFull?

Thanks for your help,
Ken
Learned something new...you now appear in my match list, but the date of your match is 11/29/2016. So the date of match isn't always the same as the date it appears.

Welcome to the R-Z142 club.

kw5368
12-14-2016, 03:52 PM
They only added my matches yesterday after I contacted them.

Ken

MitchellSince1893
02-25-2017, 05:52 PM
Got a new generic R-Z142 BigY match. Last name is Vidgren so it may be Swedish and might be a new branch of Z142.

If so I believe it's the first known Z142 from Sweden. We do have one R-Z142》L562 from Norway and one R-Z142* from Finland. Maybe the new match and the Finnish match together form a new branch.
Turns out he was from Finland and is a member of the FTDNA U152 proeject.
U152> L2> Z41150> Z49,Z68> Z142> CTS2819 et al.
491792 Sipi Erkinpoika (Pietilń) b.abt.1560 Pirkkala,FIN

However I see a sample from Sweden has appeared in the U152> L2> Z41150> Z49,Z68> Z142> Z12222,Z150,Z26720 section of the FTDNA U152 project.
561148 Per Reelsson, ca 1600-1670, Karlskoga (T), Sweden.

In summary for Scandinavian Z142, there are currently 2 from Finland, 1 from Norway and 1 from Sweden in the U152 project.

U152> L2> Z41150> Z49,Z68> Z142
295388 Samuel Eriksson,1637- 25.8.1726,Pyhńlt÷,Lieto,FIN

U152> L2> Z41150> Z49,Z68> Z142> CTS2819 et al.
491792 Sipi Erkinpoika (Pietilń) b.abt.1560 Pirkkala,FIN

U152> L2> Z41150> Z49,Z68> Z142> Z51> L562> Z57,~23718872> Z147,Z148 et al.> Z52,Z149 et al.
273531 Sakse Ottarsen Balle ab1535 Bj°rkedal, Volda MRO Norway R-Z149

Based on http://www.mymcgee.com/tools/yutility111.html tool, 295388 has a 11 step genetic distance from 491792 so odds are he's probably also on the CTS2819 et al. branch

By comparison the U152> L2> Z41150> Z49,Z68> rs200511657> S8183,BY3626> Y4356> Y4353,FGC31475 has 9 Scandinavian samples. And others from Germany and other Central European countries.



I'm still amazed at the lack of a single Z142+ sample from Germany as that country has 7 samples in the smaller populated Z49+ Z142- subclades.

As I've stated before, Z142+ seems more Western shifted compared to Z49+ Z142- subclades.

Z49+ Z142- subclades currently has 57 European located samples of which 20 (35%) are from Czech Rep., Finland, Germany, Poland, Serbia, and Sweden.

While there are 97 Z49+ Z142+ European located samples in the FTDNA U152 project of which 6 (6%) are from this same area (Finland=2, Germany=0, Hungary=2, Poland=1, Sweden=1 ).

So currently Z49+ Z142- subclades are nearly 6 times more likely to have Central/Eastern European samples compared to Z142+

kinman
02-27-2017, 05:29 PM
I suspect that the Z142 men in Finland, Sweden, and Poland may have gotten there from the west by sea from Netherlands or Denmark (who came from Z142 ancestors who went down the Rhine River from the Black Forest area). That might help explain the lack of German Z142 men (although I wouldn't be surprised if some eventually show up in that Black Forest area).
--------------Ken
P.S. I don't know if there are many men from Denmark in the U152 project, but I wouldn't be surprised to eventually see Z142 men there as well.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------




I'm still amazed at the lack of a single Z142+ sample from Germany as that country has 7 samples in the smaller populated Z49+ Z142- subclades.

As I've stated before, Z142+ seems more Western shifted compared to Z49+ Z142- subclades.

Z49+ Z142- subclades currently has 57 European located samples of which 20 (35%) are from Czech Rep., Finland, Germany, Poland, Serbia, and Sweden.

While there are 97 Z49+ Z142+ European located samples in the FTDNA U152 project of which 6 (6%) are from this same area (Finland=2, Germany=0, Hungary=2, Poland=1, Sweden=1 ).

So currently Z49+ Z142- subclades are nearly 6 times more likely to have Central/Eastern European samples compared to Z142+

MitchellSince1893
02-27-2017, 05:42 PM
I suspect that the Z142 men in Finland, Sweden, and Poland may have gotten there from the west by sea from Netherlands or Denmark (who came from Z142 ancestors who went down the Rhine River from the Black Forest area). That might help explain the lack of German Z142 men (although I wouldn't be surprised if some eventually show up in that Black Forest area).
--------------Ken
P.S. I don't know if there are many men from Denmark in the U152 project, but I wouldn't be surprised to eventually see Z142 men there as well.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I fully expect German and Danish Z142 to appear...just surprised how long the former is taking.

kinman
03-15-2017, 06:15 PM
After many, many months, a couple days ago I finally got a new, fairly close, Big Y match who apparently is positive for Z142. His name is Orin Adamthwaite. Does anybody know which branch of Z142 he belongs to?

nroelofs
03-16-2017, 01:07 AM
After many, many months, a couple days ago I finally got a new, fairly close, Big Y match who apparently is positive for Z142. His name is Orin Adamthwaite. Does anybody know which branch of Z142 he belongs to?

It shows that he is positive for R-FGC12384 which would put him in here:
http://ytree.net/DisplayTree.php?blockID=1806&star=false

MitchellSince1893
03-17-2017, 04:29 AM
After many, many months, a couple days ago IM finally got a new, fairly close, Big Y match who apparently is positive for Z142. His name is Orin Adamthwaite. Does anybody know which branch of Z142 he belongs to?

He's on my branch. http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?7479-New-branch-under-R-FGC12401-FGC12384&p=220458#post220458

MitchellSince1893
09-09-2017, 12:33 AM
We have a new branch (and sub branch) of Z142>Z12222 and our first German Z142 member out of 143 members of Z142 in the U152 project. The Fortineux/Fortney men list Germany but I've found they came from the Netherlands prior to living in Germany.

U152> L2> Z41150> Z49,Z68> Z142> Z12222,Z150,Z26720> 8161012 et al.
B192133 Kemper is from Germany

U152> L2> Z41150> Z49,Z68> Z142> Z12222,Z150,Z26720> 8161012 et al.> 8070327 et al
298893 Holly from England
216783 Hobbs from Somerset, England


In summary: 4 current Z142 Branches
CTS2819 et al.
FGC22963,FGC22969
Z12222,Z150,Z26720
Z51

5 current Z12222 branches
8161012 et al.
BY1701
BY3616, L553,22467553
CTS9490
FGC12378

tsneely
09-09-2017, 01:35 AM
My Big Y results came in a couple of days ago and FTDNA has now assigned me to Haplogroup Z12222; my results have been posted with the R U152 and Subclades DNA results (U152>L2>Z49,Z68>Z142>Z12222,Z150,Z26720). Kemper appears in the same group with me and the data shows that he and I share 12 unnamed SNPs. I don't know if I am on the same branch (8161012 et al.) with him yet. I have requested a download of my BAM file that will be forwarded when it arrives (2 to 4 weeks) for further analysis which I hope will reveal more about our relationship.

MitchellSince1893
09-09-2017, 01:52 AM
My Big Y results came in a couple of days ago and FTDNA has now assigned me to Haplogroup Z12222; my results have been posted with the R U152 and Subclades DNA results (U152>L2>Z49,Z68>Z142>Z12222,Z150,Z26720). Kemper appears in the same group with me and the data shows that he and I share 12 unnamed SNPs. I don't know if I am on the same branch (8161012 et al.) with him yet. I have requested a download of my BAM file that will be forwarded when it arrives (2 to 4 weeks) for further analysis which I hope will reveal more about our relationship.

Steve Gilbert had a look at your results and he didn't see where you matched any other BigY tested Z12222 men i.e. Pigmon or MICHEL
The 12 SNPs you share with Kemper are shared by 408 BigY testers. They aren't novel to you and Kemper
Recommend you send your results to U152 yahoo project (for inclusion on McDonald's P312 tree which includes a dating) https://www.familytreedna.com/groups/r-1b-u152/about/news

and to Alex Williamson for inclusion on his BigTree. http://www.ytree.net/Instructions.html

Both are free. Alex will be able to find any shared SNPs that FTDNA may have missed, and that U152 project admin can't see via FTDNA tools.

tsneely
09-09-2017, 02:59 AM
Many thanks to you and Steve for reviewing my results. I'm sorry for creating any confusion but I don't understand how I don't have some level of match with the other Z12222 tested men. FTDNA has identified Z12222 as my new haplogroup and the R U152 DNA spreadsheet has placed me in the same grouping as them so I assumed it implied a connection. I do see that the group classification states that we belong to unknown subclades so apparently, I am not as connected as I thought. My BAM files will be forwarded to Dr. McDonald for additional interpretation and placement on his P312 tree. I will also send my file to Alex Willliamson as you suggest. I hope the subsequent analysis yields information that can be helpful in your various ongoing analyses.

MitchellSince1893
09-09-2017, 01:01 PM
Many thanks to you and Steve for reviewing my results. I'm sorry for creating any confusion but I don't understand how I don't have some level of match with the other Z12222 tested men. FTDNA has identified Z12222 as my new haplogroup and the R U152 DNA spreadsheet has placed me in the same grouping as them so I assumed it implied a connection. I do see that the group classification states that we belong to unknown subclades so apparently, I am not as connected as I thought. My BAM files will be forwarded to Dr. McDonald for additional interpretation and placement on his P312 tree. I will also send my file to Alex Willliamson as you suggest. I hope the subsequent analysis yields information that can be helpful in your various ongoing analyses.

Think of it this way. You are the 1st person of a newly discovered branch of Z12222 to test. Once another person matches you on this new branch it will receive a name (once the shared SNPs are identified). I was the first on my branch of Z12222 to test with FTDNA...it's lonely for a while, but now there are 18 members....eventually you will get a shared match and your branch will grow.

MitchellSince1893
10-19-2017, 12:38 PM
Alex Williamson's ages for Z142 and branches

Z142: Median age of this block is 4192.38 YBP (2243 BC). The 95% confidence interval (CI) is 2746 BC to 1779 BC.http://ytree.net/BlockInfo.php?blockID=421

CTS2819 et al.: 1491 BC. 95% CI (2254 BC to 708 BC). http://ytree.net/BlockInfo.php?blockID=2053
FGC22963,FGC22969: 2073 BC (2620 BC to 1535 BC). http://ytree.net/BlockInfo.php?blockID=1095
Z12222,Z150,Z26720: 1880 BC (2475 BC to 1318 BC). http://ytree.net/BlockInfo.php?blockID=423
Z51, L562: 1998 BC (2581 BC to 1402 BC). http://ytree.net/BlockInfo.php?blockID=422

Looking at the 95% CI ranges as a whole, Z142's branches are in the 2254 to 1535 BC range.


For comparison Iain McDonald has http://www.jb.man.ac.uk/~mcdonald/genetics/p312/table.html
Z142: 2556 BC (3148 BC — 1979 BC)

CTS2819: 1238 BC (2220 BC — 310 BC)
FGC22968, FGC22963: 2305 BC (2981 BC — 1575 BC)
Z12222: 2394 BC (3026 BC — 1743 BC)
Z51, L562: 2085 BC (2821 BC — 1333 BC)

Looking at the 95% CI ranges as a whole, Z142's branches are in the 2220 BC to 1743 BC range.


Finally Yfull's method causes them to have the same date ranges for Z142 and all branches: https://www.yfull.com/tree/R-Z142/

Z142: 2450 BC (2950 - 2050 BC)

CTS2819: 2450 BC (2950 - 2050 BC)
FGC22968, FGC22963: 2450 BC (2950 - 2050 BC)
Z12222: 2450 BC (2950 - 2050 BC)
Z51, L562: 2450 BC (2950 - 2050 BC)

MitchellSince1893
11-30-2017, 12:30 AM
I think when I joined the U152 project back in Dec 2012 there were 12 members of Z142...no subgroups just one Z142 group.

5 years later we have 169 members and 48 different Z142 groups.

MitchellSince1893
12-08-2017, 03:13 AM
Looking through the FTDNA and ytree data, I'm struck by how "international" the members are for Z142 subclades with TMRCA dates ~1000 BC (using ytree's dates).

For example:

R-Z142> Z51> L562> Z57,~23718872> Z147,Z148 et al. *2877.48 YBP (928 BC). The 95% confidence interval is 1766 BC to 164 BC.
England
France
Germany
Hungary
Ireland
Norway
Scotland
Spain
Sweden

R-Z142> Z12222,Z150,Z26720> FGC12378 et al.> S20376,BY5702 2973.81 YBP (1024 BC). The 95% confidence interval is 1741 BC to 285 BC.
England
France
Germany
Netherlands

R-Z142> Z12222,Z150,Z26720> FGC12378 et al.> FGC12401 et al. 3121.58 YBP (1172 BC). The 95% confidence interval is 1793 BC to 612 BC.
England
Hungary
Italy
Spain

R-Z142> FGC22963,FGC22969> FGC22968,ZP67> FGC22942,S18325 et al.> FGC22952,FGC22956 3037.84 YBP (1089 BC). The 95% confidence interval is 1843 BC to 352 BC.
England
France
Northern Ireland
Poland
Switzerland

It's entirely possible the above subclades originated from different cultures that later spread out across Europe, or mostly from a single culture that spread out after 1000 BC.

If it was the later, then the Urnfield Cultural spread could have gotten to all the above countries except for England, Ireland, Norway, Scotland, and Sweden

Hallstaat and La Tene spread to all the above countries except for Ireland, Norway, Scotland, and Sweden.

Taken separately Hallstaat, and/or La Tene could mostly explain the present day distribution of
R-Z142> Z12222,Z150,Z26720> FGC12378 et al.> S20376,BY5702
R-Z142> Z12222,Z150,Z26720> FGC12378 et al.> FGC12401 et al.
R-Z142> FGC22963,FGC22969> FGC22968,ZP67> FGC22942,S18325 et al.> FGC22952,FGC22956

But R-Z142> Z51> L562> Z57,~23718872> Z147,Z148 et al. with its Norway and Sweden samples doesn't neatly lend itself to a simple, single cultural explanation.

And then you have U152> L2> Z41150> Z49,Z68> Z142> BY15558,CTS2819 et al. with its three samples from Finland.

From what I can gather very little is known about ancient Finnish history...next to nothing was written about Finland prior to 1000 AD.
From wiki
The Pre-Roman period of the Finnish Iron Age is scarcest in findings, but the known ones suggest that cultural connections to other Baltic cultures were already established

Migration period: 400 AD – 575 AD. The Migration period saw the expansion of land cultivation inland, especially in Southern Bothnia, and the growing influence of Germanic cultures, both in artifacts like swords and other weapons and in burial customs.
My guess is Z142 was a late arrival to Finland.

I know it's way too early in this process to try to assign these Z142 subclades to a particular culture, but it is fun to think about the possibilities.

Pylsteen
12-08-2017, 09:53 AM
Looking through the FTDNA and ytree data, I'm struck by how "international" the members are for Z142 subclades with TMRCA dates ~1000 BC (using ytree's dates).


I get the same impression with Z56 subclades; seems to me mostly Urnfield/Hallstatt/La TŔne/Villanova etc. but also some strange things; one subclade below S47 contains according to ytree a Swede and Ukrainian, tmrca ca. 1382 BC (based on only these two); only thing I can imagine is that this branch split off already during the Tumulus culture and ended up in its NE area (perhaps close to the Lusatian area). I think the important thing is that many branches seem already quite established at the beginning of Urnfield (or even before), and then ended up in the same or different subsequent migrations, therefore having a wide geographical distribution.

jbarry6899
12-08-2017, 12:57 PM
It's entirely possible the above subclades originated from different cultures that later spread out across Europe, or mostly from a single culture that spread out after 1000 BC.

If it was the later, then the Urnfield Cultural spread could have gotten to all the above countries except for England, Ireland, Norway, Scotland, and Sweden

Hallstaat and La Tene spread to all the above countries except for Ireland, Norway, Scotland, and Sweden.



Very interesting, Mark. The Irish men in S8183 are actually Anglo-Norman and their place of origin probably was Flanders. The geographic midpoint of origins for the men in that subclade is somewhere around modern Belgium/Netherlands, consistent with your speculation.

MitchellSince1893
12-08-2017, 02:15 PM
I get the same impression with Z56 subclades; seems to me mostly Urnfield/Hallstatt/La TŔne/Villanova etc. but also some strange things; one subclade below S47 contains according to ytree a Swede and Ukrainian, tmrca ca. 1382 BC (based on only these two); only thing I can imagine is that this branch split off already during the Tumulus culture and ended up in its NE area (perhaps close to the Lusatian area). I think the important thing is that many branches seem already quite established at the beginning of Urnfield (or even before), and then ended up in the same or different subsequent migrations, therefore having a wide geographical distribution.

IIR there hasn't been any R1b found in it yet but the Unetice culture (2300–1600 BC) is another possibility. It overlapped the later Lusatian cultural area (1300 BCE – 500 BCE) and is well positioned for descendants to end up in Urnfield/Hallstatt/LaTene as well as in Scandinavia.
https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-nh53BSO3brg/VZG2fOcED5I/AAAAAAAAErY/vlYGk0FK5cs/s640/amber%2Broad.jpg

http://oldeuropeanculture.blogspot.com/2015/07/

MitchellSince1893
12-08-2017, 07:24 PM
IIR there hasn't been any R1b found in it yet but the Unetice culture (2300–1600 BC) is another possibility...

Of the 88 samples in Jean Manco's ancient dna list http://www.ancestraljourneys.org/copperbronzeagedna.shtml labeled "Unetice" or "Unetice?"

84 have no y-dna haplogroup listed.
3=I2 haplgroup
1=K haplroup

They had mt-dna results for all 88 of them


So of the 88 samples they were able to get 88 mtdna result and only 4 y-dna results? That doesn't seem right. What are the odds 84 of them were women...or that they were successful in getting mtdna results from 100% of them and y-dna results from less than 10% of the men? (assuming 50% of the 88 were men).

I can't help but think there is unpublished y-dna data in this group.

MitchellSince1893
01-17-2018, 05:13 AM
Been working on updating the Z49 maps in the FTDNA U152 project and while there aren't a lot of samples on the map I noticed some small clustering as it relates to England (where most Z142 samples MRCAs are from).

80% of the Z142 samples (20 of 25) are on the south side of this line
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/82/fe/c2/82fec28cf2e09aa414ee3ac69cf9b069.jpg
For those interested, this article discusses the cultural difference of these two "Englands" http://bigthink.com/strange-maps/193-the-border-between-the-two-englands. I don't think it relates too much to Z142, but it does provide a convenient boundary of where Z142 is common and uncommon in England.

Z142>Z51. Of the 9 samples on the map, 6 are in southeastern England. Iron Age arrivals?

Z142>FGC22963. Unfortunately a large portion of these samples are generic England or UK. The 3 samples in England are in SW, SE, and Northern England (Cornwall, Carlisle, and Buckinghamshire). Outside of Britain there are 3 samples in Flanders, Belgium (Only Z142 subclade with samples in study), which might indicate a potential source for some of the FGC22963 in Britain.

Z142>Z150. Widespread throughout most of southern England. However the Z150 subclades do have distinct clusters
Z142>Z150>CTS9490 tends to cluster in Cornwall & Devon (4 samples), and to a lesser extent in Northamptonshire (2 samples)
Z142>Z150>FGC12378 has 2 samples in Dorset/Somerset, 5 in the London/Middlesex/Essex area, and 2 in Westmorland.

Interestingly while there are 3 Z150/Z12222 samples from the Netherlands (all are FGC12378), there are no Z150/Z12222 samples from the Flanders, Belgium dna study, "Defining Y-SNP variation among the Flemish population (Western Europe) by full genome sequencing, Larmuseau, Maarten H.D. et al. Forensic Science International: Genetics , Volume 31 , e12 - e16 permanent link to the paper is: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fsigen.2017.10.008 "

Pylsteen
01-18-2018, 12:02 PM
Interestingly while there are 3 Z150/Z12222 samples from the Netherlands (all are FGC12378), there are no Z150/Z12222 samples from the Flanders

Are these the family with the French name from Leiden? My experience from such cases is that they would likely be Walloon or Northern French originally and left in the late 1500s because of their faith, either directly to Holland or through a pit-stop like Cologne or Frankenthal.

MitchellSince1893
01-18-2018, 05:32 PM
Are these the family with the French name from Leiden? My experience from such cases is that they would likely be Walloon or Northern French originally and left in the late 1500s because of their faith, either directly to Holland or through a pit-stop like Cologne or Frankenthal.

One is French sounding, the other 2 are anonymous from the Brabant study.

MitchellSince1893
01-20-2018, 05:54 PM
Z142>Z51. Of the 9 samples on the map, 6 are in southeastern England. Iron Age arrivals?

Z142>FGC22963. Unfortunately a large portion of these samples are generic England or UK. The 3 samples in England are in SW, SE, and Northern England (Cornwall, Carlisle, and Buckinghamshire). Outside of Britain there are 3 samples in Flanders, Belgium (Only Z142 subclade with samples in study), which might indicate a potential source for some of the FGC22963 in Britain.

Z142>Z150. Widespread throughout most of southern England. However the Z150 subclades do have distinct clusters
Z142>Z150>CTS9490 tends to cluster in Cornwall & Devon (4 samples), and to a lesser extent in Northamptonshire (2 samples)
Z142>Z150>FGC12378 has 2 samples in Dorset/Somerset, 5 in the London/Middlesex/Essex area, and 2 in Westmorland.

Interestingly while there are 3 Z150/Z12222 samples from the Netherlands (all are FGC12378), there are no Z150/Z12222 samples from the Flanders, Belgium dna study, "Defining Y-SNP variation among the Flemish population (Western Europe) by full genome sequencing, Larmuseau, Maarten H.D. et al. Forensic Science International: Genetics , Volume 31 , e12 - e16 permanent link to the paper is: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fsigen.2017.10.008 "

Found this article of interest as it relates to the above. Nice summary of the evolving/competing theories of Iron Age incursions into Britain from Western Europe
http://daleydellsarchaeology.blogspot.com/2009/02/iron-age-invasions-of-britain.html


Hawkes {ABC] hypothesis was that three phases of migration/invasion can be discerned from the evidence:-

1. Iron Age A: being Hallstatt migrants arriving as a result of pressure from German tribal advances down the course of the Rhine. These people settled in Southern and Eastern England during the sixth century, occupying the territory, virtually undisturbed, until the first century. These people were associated with Univallate hillforts.

2. Iron Age B: formed two prongs of early and middle La Tene culture people, the first arriving in the fourth century from Spain and Brittany into South West England, associated with Multivallate hillforts. The second occurring in the third century from Gaul (the Marnians) into Yorkshire and associated with cart/chariot burials. Both prongs linked up encircling the earlier Iron Age A people, in some instances dislocating them.

3. Iron Age C: the late La Tene Belgae from Gaul, who arrived in two waves, the first C.75BCE into Kent and the Thames Valley seeking 'lebensraum' and in the process dislocating, or absorbing, the earlier Iron Age A people and introducing in process, pedestal urns. Roman advances into Gaul were the causal factor of a further influx into Dorset, Hampshire and Wiltshire, dislodging, or absorbing, indigenous populations and introducing Normandy bead ware. The Iron Age C people were also credited with the introduction of the potters wheel and Oppida.


it is tempting to see the particularly large hillforts located along the Welsh Marches as an attempt to hold a boundary against external incursions. Bradley argues that in the late Iron Age exotic imports to the 'core' area of eastern England and the Thames Valley, were paid for by a "purely local aggrandisement" [17] outwards into the periphery zones to provide the trade goods required by importers (continental Europe and Rome) of slaves, cattle, gold, silver, iron, corn, hunting dogs [18], copper, lead and salt [19]. "This list is revealing for the number of commodities which could not be obtained in the core area ..... hillforts outside the core area might be a response to this threat ..... some of these were attacked at this time.

One area with evidence of widespread destruction is the Welsh Marches" [20]. Evidence from slaving in West Africa suggests that slaving is normally undertaken against people that the native slavers see as 'other', which would add support to a core zone population of non-indigenous settlers.


Caesar described the inhabitants of Britain thus "while the people of the interior believed themselves to be aboriginal, the 'maritime part' was inhabited by men who had crossed over for warfare and plunder 'ex-Belgio' and settled down permanently to till the land, still bearing, for the most part, their ancestral tribal names." [22]. Tribal names found both sides of the channel are the Parisii (see above), Artebrates and Catuvellauni (it should be remembered that Caesar sometimes got his Gauls, Celts and Germans mixed up, and never ventured further than Kent or the Thames Valley).


It would appear that archaeological material and historical evidence does point to invasive cultures penetrating the British Isles over a long period of time, probably stretching from the late Bronze Age (or before if the Beakers are intrusive), up to the Claudian invasion in CE 43. Whether these were large scale, to what extent the aboriginal peopled contested, or welcomed, the intrusion is not easily determined. It is possible that most migrations took the form of elite group movements, rather than large scale population disruptions, leading to cultural mixing rather than swamping of the indigenous people*. It is almost certain that large scale incursions occurred during the final century, or so, before the Roman advance into the island. A non-Roman source supports the 'invasion hypothesis', the 'Book of Invasions', tells of the "Mil or Milesius, the ancestor of the Gaels of Ireland, came from Spain ..... people ..... could have come from Spain in the wake of the Roman conquest there in 133 BCE. Such a possibility is strengthened by the presence of chevaud-de frise stones at (e.g.) Dun Aenglus ....... similar examples occur in Spain and Northern Portugal"[23]. The 'Book of Invasions' tells of earlier invaders, including the Fir Bolg and the Tuatha De Danainn

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_Yw3k9aBSObM/SaG3H8Ny9mI/AAAAAAAAAMU/XoD5ubPNc7Y/s400/003.jpg
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_Yw3k9aBSObM/SaHAPWIwBGI/AAAAAAAAAM8/yVnhYTMfk2k/s1600-h/008.jpg
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_Yw3k9aBSObM/SaHBDv763AI/AAAAAAAAANE/g9L5DgMz2c0/s1600-h/009.jpg

MattL
01-31-2018, 10:57 PM
Though it doesn't really impact anything, figured I'd share I upgraded from 37 marker to 111 marker Y DNA test recently (I've already been Big Y tested for a while now). Since they bundle it with the Big Y they offered a pretty big discount for those who already Big Y tested so figured why not.

Other Langleys relatively closely related to me had already been 111 tested (one who is at furthest a 5th cousin), so again don't think it adds any information.

I will add that via my STR tested cluster it's looking like we are getting a few more results that break down a cluster mostly of Langleys, the of Maynard/Minor/Miner/Maynors who relate somehow pre-immigration into the US in England... and of course Kinman who relates somewhere back there

Here's my 67 marker Kinman Tips from FTDNA

4 9.66%
8 47.9%
12 79.81%
16 93.95%
20 98.47%
24 99.66%

A recent Maynard matches the cluster (adding to the Miner branch and it's spelling variations)... he traces to a John Maynard m. Elizabeth Ashton of Cambridge, England

kinman
02-02-2018, 02:39 PM
Hi Matt,
Various online trees claim that John Maynard was born in Bassingbourn, Cambridgeshire. However, "The Great Migration Directory" (Anderson, 2015), page 224 lists his origin as "Unknown". So I guess the Cambridgeshire origin of John Maynard is not certain.
---------------Ken
---------------------------------------------------



Though it doesn't really impact anything, figured I'd share I upgraded from 37 marker to 111 marker Y DNA test recently (I've already been Big Y tested for a while now). Since they bundle it with the Big Y they offered a pretty big discount for those who already Big Y tested so figured why not.

Other Langleys relatively closely related to me had already been 111 tested (one who is at furthest a 5th cousin), so again don't think it adds any information.

I will add that via my STR tested cluster it's looking like we are getting a few more results that break down a cluster mostly of Langleys, the of Maynard/Minor/Miner/Maynors who relate somehow pre-immigration into the US in England... and of course Kinman who relates somewhere back there

Here's my 67 marker Kinman Tips from FTDNA

4 9.66%
8 47.9%
12 79.81%
16 93.95%
20 98.47%
24 99.66%

A recent Maynard matches the cluster (adding to the Miner branch and it's spelling variations)... he traces to a John Maynard m. Elizabeth Ashton of Cambridge, England

Titus Valerius
02-04-2018, 06:26 PM
Hi all , recetly I received the results of Big Y of a friends of mine and now we know he's U152+ L2+ Z142+ FGC2963+ FGC22969+
But I had previously found two other friends of mine L2+ Z142+ FGC22963+ S22963+ and one of them has DYS 385 a,b = 11-13.2 , other has 11-14.2

MitchellSince1893
03-10-2018, 07:00 AM
I've updated the geographic midpoints for 3 of the Z142 branches

Z49> Z142> FGC22963. Latitude: 49.45873 Longitude: 7.266518, near Bubach, Saarland, Germany (40 miles East of the pt where France, Luxembourg, and Germany meet, 53 miles West of the Rhine River)
Z49>Z142>Z150,Z12222. Latitude: 47.967871 Longitude: 5.534955, near Avrecourt, Haute-Marne, France ( 95 miles West of the French/German border i.e. the Rhine River)
Z49>Z142>Z51. Latitude: 50.65159, Longitude: 6.01144, near Gemehret, Belgium (7 miles south of where the pt where Belgium, the Netherlands, and Germany meet, 48 miles West of Bonn, Germany/the Rhine River)

The center point for all three of these branches i.e. the center point for Z142 is Latitude: 49.361723, Longitude: 6.265715 near Valmestroff, Moselle, France (8 miles SW of the pt where France, Luxembourg, and Germany meet, 87 miles Northwest of the Rhine River)

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/5d/7a/cb/5d7acb799c527926d326a23e8c206487.png

Each time I do this exercise the pt moves further east as more samples come in

Here were the pts in Oct 2015 when I previously did this.
https://anthrogenica.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=6356&d=1445135806
https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?2924-Branches-of-Z142&p=115255&viewfull=1#post115255

kinman
03-12-2018, 11:43 AM
Excellent!!!
A lot closer to the area of Strasbourg and Freiburg (that area of the Rhine River that I think is probably the birthplace of Z142).
I think the FGC22963 midpoint would be a bit further south with more sampling in northern Africa by researchers (probably not many FGC22963 in northern Africa that would be testing themselves compared to Europeans).

Titus Valerius
03-14-2018, 08:55 PM
Kinman what do you think about my three friends of mine FGC 22963+ and so different from each other!?!

nroelofs
03-15-2018, 05:56 PM
Titus, are your friends planning to add their results to The Big Tree to compare our FGC22963+ results?

Titus Valerius
03-15-2018, 10:13 PM
Hi nroelofs, one of them is on Yfull and his id is YF11950 on ysearch :vvqzg - on U152 project as E19140
another is on U152 project as 424754 he's S23458+ tested by Yseq in addition his DYS 385 b is 13.2 ON YSEARCH as 9AG8F
another is FGC 22942+ tested by Yseq, on Ysearch as 5PXF4 and his DYS 385 b is 14.2

kinman
03-16-2018, 02:59 PM
I just took a quick look, and since 424754 (Corsi) has the 13.2 at DYS385b, he would almost certainly be positive for S18325 and FGC22942. Therefore, he would be on the S18325 branch in the YFull tree.
I see that U152 group recommends that he get the Big Y test, but if it were me, I would just get FGC22942 tested at Yseq. Once that was confirmed positive, he could test for its subgroups ( FGC22952 or BY5692 ).

I looked at 424754 (Corsi) results more carefully, and I really doubt that he is in subgroup BY5692. I would predict he is almost certainly in FGC22942, and most likely in subgroup FGC22952.

P.S. The third friend who tested positive for FGC22942 and has DYS385b = 14.2 is a combination I have never seen before. I suppose it is possible he is on a very early branch of FGC22942 before the 13.2 mutation arose.

---------------------------------------------------------------------


Hi nroelofs, one of them is on Yfull and his id is YF11950 on ysearch :vvqzg - on U152 project as E19140
another is on U152 project as 424754 he's S23458+ tested by Yseq in addition his DYS 385 b is 13.2 ON YSEARCH as 9AG8F
another is FGC 22942+ tested by Yseq, on Ysearch as 5PXF4 and his DYS 385 b is 14.2

MitchellSince1893
07-15-2018, 02:16 PM
An update on the "international" flavor of Z142.

Z142 (No branch identified yet)
England
Finland
France
Hungary

Z142> BY15558,CTS2819 et al.
England
Finland

Z142> FGC22963, FGC22969
England
Italy
Netherlands
N. Ireland
Poland
Scotland
Switzerland

Z142> Z12222,Z150,Z26720
Czech Republic
England
France
Germany
Hungary
Ireland
Italy
Netherlands
Scotland
Spain
Sweden

Z142> Z51
England
Finland
France
Hungary
Germany
Greece
Ireland
Italy
Norway
Scotland
Spain
Sweden
Switzerland

Current Z142 age estimates:
Yfull 4500 YBP (2550 BC) 95% confidence interval 3450-1650 BC
Ytree.net 4192.38 YBP (2243 BC). 95% confidence interval is 2746 BC to 1779 BC.
McDonald 2535 BC 95% confidence interval is 3128 BC — 1963 BC

So current best guess is Z142 formed during the Bell Beaker Period, which may explain why it's widespread.

kinman
07-25-2018, 01:07 AM
Glad to see YFull has adjusted its Z142 age estimate to an earlier date. It's now just 100 years away from my estimate (4600 YBP).

Ravai
08-21-2018, 08:55 PM
Hello,

Leto is a match of mine, with 67 STR, I have 6 genetic distance with him. It also has the marker DYS450 = 9 as 100% of the BY3485 and very unusual (only two cases) in the rest of the L2.

E5448 Antonino Leto b 1787 Monreale. d 8/7/1837 Monreale

Regards

tsneely
10-07-2018, 04:31 PM
This won't help advance the understanding of the origins of Z142 but it may add to the international flavor. My YDNA results are:

Z142> Z12222, CTS9490, BY33528, BY33530

Although my MDKA is from the USA, the individual I matched at BY33528 is known to be from Northern Ireland in the late 1600's. We have yet to identify the specific ancestor who migrated to America in the early 1700's but it is clear that our shared ancestor(s) were from Northern Ireland.

MitchellSince1893
10-07-2018, 05:16 PM
Most of the N Ireland immigrants during that period were Ulster Scots/Scot-Irish, so your paternal line may end up from Scotland.

Various source give different figures


An estimated 80% + of the Protestant settlers in Ulster were Scots, the rest being English along with smaller numbers of French Huguenot, Welsh, Manx, German, Dutch and Danish.
https://www.theulsterscots.com/


The ‘planters’ were to come as part of an organized settlement scheme that operated between 1605 and 1697. The majority of these immigrants to Ulster were settlers from England and Scotland, although the Scots outnumbered those from England by a ratio of 20:1.http://www.harlanddiaspora.net/page91.html


estimating the number of Protestants in the island at 200,000, he thought there were 100,000 Scots and 20,000 English in the north in 1640.
http://www.tara.tcd.ie/bitstream/handle/2262/69022/v6n21975_1.pdf;sequence=1


The ratio of Scottish to English settlers in Ulster during the 17th century has often been put at five or six to one, with one rough estimate reckoning there were 100,000 Scots and 20,000 English at the time of the rebellion of 1641. The proportion would have been much higher in Antrim and north Down and more evenly balanced in the six west Ulster counties involved in the official Plantation scheme. The Gaelic-speaking Irish still formed a significant majority in most parishes in those counties by mid-century. Demographic patterns established by Plantation settlements ensured that there were two, often three, cultural traditions in contact in much of the province.http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/british/plantation/ulsterscots/


beginning in 1717 and continuing up to the 1770s. Scots-Irish from Ulster and Scotland, and British from the borders region comprised the most numerous group of immigrants from Great Britain and Ireland to the colonies in the years before the American Revolution. An estimated 150,000 left northern Ireland. They settled first mostly in Pennsylvania and western Virginia, from where they moved southwest into the backcountry of upland territories in the South, the Ozarks and the Appalachian Mountains.
https://wikivisually.com/wiki/Plantation_of_Ulster


When religious affiliation was first determined in the census of 1861, the respective proportions of Catholic, Presbyterian, and Protestant in Antrim
were 28, 20, and 48 percent.http://members.tripod.com/data_mate/irishgen/County.txt

MitchellSince1893
07-19-2019, 03:36 AM
FYI and for easy reference: Couple of the samples from the Viking DNA study are Z142+ https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?17812-Population-genomics-of-the-Viking-world-(bioxiv-2019-Copenhagen)

U152>L2>Z49>Z142
VK138 Denmark_Galgedil AQQ Denmark Funen Galgedil 9-11th centuries CE 0.39 Male R1b1a1b1a1a2b1c1 T2b5

U152>L2>Z49>Z142>Z150/Z12222
VK40 Sweden_Skara 106 Sweden Skara Varnhem 10-12th centuries CE 1.874 Male R1b1a1b1a1a2b1c1b


Here's the ancestry estimates for VK40...VK138 didn't have an estimate
Sample "British-like""Danish-like""" "Swedish-like""Norwegian-like""Polish-like""Southern European-like""Finnish-like""
VK40 0.205 0.668 0.038 0.032 0.001 0.055 0

VK40 is mostly Danish like (67%) with British-like making up another 20%

Hopefully additional downstream SNPs will be found once the raw data is released,

teepean47
08-13-2019, 03:04 PM
Hello from Finland!

I have been wondering what kind of connection our small branch has to the rest of the world. Most of the non-Finnish matches seem to have Scottish roots and one in England. Haven't had any luck contacting the English match but Stewarts seem to reside in the United States.

https://yfull.com/tree/R-CTS2819

http://www.ytree.net/DisplayTree.php?blockID=2053

MitchellSince1893
04-11-2020, 08:36 PM
As some of you may know there has been ancient U152 discovered in an upcoming paper Ancient genomes reveal social and genetic structure of Late Neolithic Switzerland
11 ancient samples tested positive for L2 as listed here
https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?20055-Ancient-genomes-reveal-social-and-genetic-structure-of-Late-Neolithic-Switzerland&p=658422&viewfull=1#post658422

MX252 R1b-L2
MX254_2 R1b-L2
MX257 R1b-L2
MX270 R1b-L20
MX275 R1b-L2
MX279 R1b-L2
MX283 R1b-L2
MX286 R1b-L2
MX288 R1b-L2
SNPRA63 R1b-L2
SNPRA64 R1b-L2

Unfortunately, due to the limitations of the testing chip used, we aren't able to learn much more e.g. whether any of the 10 non L20 samples above are positive for any of the subclades directly below L2.

We do know that the following samples are negative for L2>S255/Z367
MX254_2, MX275, MX286, MX288, and SNPRA64

With the exception of MX270, any of the above 11 samples could be positive for U152>L2>Z49; we just don't know.

As it pertains to the U152>L2>Z49>Z142 subclades (it doesn't appear Z142 was tested)

We know SNPRA64 is negative of for U152>L2>Z49>Z142>S369/Z51 and;

MX252, MX254_2, MX257, MX275, MX279, MX283, and MX286 were negative for U152>L2>Z49>Z142>Z12222/S7402

Wish I had more to share.

Scaperbzh
05-03-2020, 12:13 AM
Hi everyone,

23andme gave me Z57 which seems to fall under this thread :)
Thanks Mitchell for posting news about it!

MitchellSince1893
05-23-2020, 04:41 AM
When comparing the largest two Z142 subclades Z12222/Z150, & Z51 in the FTDNA database, they have distinctive distributions

Excluding the British Isles and New World Samples

Z12222/Z150: 54 samples
51.9% (28 samples) are from France
16.7% (9 samples) are from Germany
9.3% (5 samples) are from Italy
5.6% (3 samples) are from Netherlands and same for Sweden
3.7% (2 samples) are from Switzerland
1.9% (1 sample) are from Czech and same for Hungary, Spain, and Portugal

Z51: 46 samples
37.0% (17 samples) are from Germany
15.2% (7 samples) are from France
10.9% (5 samples) are from Spain
8.7% (4 samples) are from Russia
6.5% (3 samples) are from Sweden
4.3% (2 samples) are from Finland, and same for Norway
2.2% (1 sample) are from Switzerland, and same for Hungary, Greece, and Poland


The Z12222 branch is presently more prevalent in France, while Z51 is more prevalent in Germany

Also of note is Z12222 appears more common in Italy, while Z51 is more common in Spain

Z142 total (122 samples)
France 32.8%
Germany 23.8%
Italy 7.4%
Finland 7.4%
Sweden 4.9%
Spain 4.9%
Switzerland 4.1%
Netherlands 3.3%
Russia 3.3%
Hungary 2.5%
Poland 1.6%
Norway 1.6%
Czech Republic 0.8%
Portugal 0.8%
Greece 0.8%

Z49 (299 samples)
Germany 26.1%
France 22.7%
Ireland 10.4%
Italy 7.0%
Sweden 4.7%
Switzerland 4.3%
Finland 4.0%
Spain 3.3%
Poland 2.7%
Norway 2.3%
Netherlands 2.3%
Russia 2.0%
Czech Republic 1.7%
Austria 1.0%
Portugal 1.0%
Hungary 0.7%
Belgium 0.7%
Greece 0.7%
Slovenia 0.3%
Serbia 0.3%
Armenia 0.3%
Morocco 0.3%
Algeria 0.3%
Liechtenstein 0.3%
Bulgaria 0.3%
Slovakia 0.3%

L2 (1029 samples from Europe, Former USSR, other countries along the Mediterranean)
Germany 25.4%
France 20.3%
Italy 12.1%
Switzerland 9.9%
Sweden 4.3%
Poland 3.5%
Spain 2.7%
Netherlands 2.3%
Belgium 1.9%
Austria 1.8%
Norway 1.8%
Czech Republic 1.7%
Russia 1.4%
Finland 1.4%
Denmark 1.3%
Hungary 1.1%
Greece 0.8%
Romania 0.8%
Portugal 0.8%
Lebanon 0.6%
Belarus 0.5%
Slovenia 0.4%
Turkey 0.4%
Slovakia 0.4%
Lithuania 0.4%
Ukraine 0.3%
Serbia 0.3%
Luxembourg 0.3%
Morocco 0.2%
Montenegro 0.2%
Algeria 0.2%
Latvia 0.2%
Kazakhstan 0.1%
Estonia 0.1%
Armenia 0.1%
Liechtenstein 0.1%
Bulgaria 0.1%
Bosnia and Herzegovina 0.1%

U152 (1746 samples from Europe, Former USSR, other countries along the Mediterranean)
Germany 25.4%
France 17.4%
Italy 15.0%
Switzerland 11.4%
Poland 3.6%
Sweden 3.5%
Spain 3.1%
Netherlands 2.3%
Belgium 1.8%
Hungary 1.8%
Austria 1.7%
Czech Republic 1.7%
Norway 1.3%
Portugal 1.1%
Denmark 1.0%
Finland 1.0%
Ukraine 0.9%
Lithuania 0.7%
Romania 0.7%
Belarus 0.6%
Greece 0.6%
Lebanon 0.4%
Slovakia 0.3%
Turkey 0.3%
Luxembourg 0.3%
Latvia 0.2%
Slovenia 0.2%
Bulgaria 0.2%
Malta 0.2%
Liechtenstein 0.2%
Serbia 0.2%
Algeria 0.2%
Estonia 0.1%
Morocco 0.1%
Montenegro 0.1%
Bosnia and Herzegovina 0.1%
Palestinian Territory 0.1%
Kazakhstan 0.1%
Azerbaijan 0.1%
Armenia 0.1%
Egypt 0.1%
Syria 0.1%
Croatia 0.1%


It also appears that as you go down the tree older to newer e.g. from U152 to L2 to Z49 to Z142 to Z12222, there is a shift to the west. The French percentage keeps increasing

U152 France: 17.4% of all samples (in Europe excluding British Isles, along Mediterranean, and former USSR)
L2 France: 20.3%
Z49 France: 22.7%
Z142 France: 32.8%
Z12222 France: 51.9%

Swedish samples also slowly increase (similar to the Finnish samples which may be related)
U152 Sweden: 3.5% of all samples (in Europe excluding British Isles, along Mediterranean, and former USSR)
L2 Sweden: 4.3%
Z49 Sweden: 4.7%
Z142 Sweden: 4.9%
Z1222 Sweden: 5.6%
See post #353 above about Z142 samples in Viking era graves.

Also the Swiss percentages keep dropping
U152 Switzerland: 11.4% of all samples (in Europe excluding British Isles, along Mediterranean, and former USSR)
L2 Switzerland: 9.9%
Z49 Switzerland: 4.3%
Z142 Switzerland: 4.1%
Z12222 Switzerland: 3.7%

By comparison the German percentages stay pretty consistent until you get below Z142.
U152 Germany: 25.4% of all samples (in Europe excluding British Isles, along Mediterranean, and former USSR)
L2 Germany: 25.4%
Z49 Germany: 26.1%
Z142 Germany: 23.8%

MitchellSince1893
02-24-2021, 09:38 PM
In this thread TigerMW posted a link to the Allen Ancient DNA Resource (AADR): Downloadable genotypes of present-day and ancient DNA data, V44.3: New data release: Jan 20 2021
https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?20310-L51-into-Europe-West-of-the-Steppe-Via-Corded-Ware/page123

https://reich.hms.harvard.edu/allen-ancient-dna-resource-aadr-downloadable-genotypes-present-day-and-ancient-dna-data

I was going through it and found this ancient (2000-1800 BC) sample from western Prague, Czech Republic, which is apparently U152>L2>Z49>Z142>Z12222,Z150>S42 i.e. R1b1a1b1a1a2b1c1b2a according to 2019 ISOGG.


206 I7202 I7202 Grave 94 petrous 2018 OlaldeNature2018 Pinhasi, Ron Context: Archaeological period 4250 289 2800-1800 BCE Czech_EBA Prague 5, Jinonice, ZahradnictvÝ Czech Republic 50.0504153 14.3667267 1240K 1 0.861185 547724 .. M Czech Republic, Prague 5, Jinonice Family C (2 members) (I7202-I15824 have a 2d or 3d relationship) R1b1a1b1a1a2b1c1b2a 110 U5a1a2b .. .. [0.986,0.998] 0.136 0.439 1045 0.00824 2.328662443 [0.001,0.015] -0.015 0.009 None [0,0.003] ds.half S7202.E1.L1 QUESTIONABLE (extraction.negative.flag)

Not sure what the significance of "QUESTIONABLE (extraction.negative.flag)" is.

If this is a valid call, and based on the right ISOGG version, it would be the oldest U152>L2>Z49>Z142>Z12222,Z150, and it would be dated very close to yfull's formation date of 2250 BC (2550-350 BC) for U152>L2>Z49>Z142>Z12222,Z150>S42. The carbon dating would narrow this further to 2550-1800 BC.

Webb
02-25-2021, 02:17 PM
In this thread TigerMW posted a link to the Allen Ancient DNA Resource (AADR): Downloadable genotypes of present-day and ancient DNA data, V44.3: New data release: Jan 20 2021
https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?20310-L51-into-Europe-West-of-the-Steppe-Via-Corded-Ware/page123

https://reich.hms.harvard.edu/allen-ancient-dna-resource-aadr-downloadable-genotypes-present-day-and-ancient-dna-data

I was going through it and found this ancient (2000-1800 BC) sample from western Prague, Czech Republic, which is apparently U152>L2>Z49>Z142>Z12222,Z150>S42 i.e. R1b1a1b1a1a2b1c1b2a according to 2019 ISOGG.



Not sure what the significance of "QUESTIONABLE (extraction.negative.flag)" is.

If this is a valid call, and based on the right ISOGG version, it would be the oldest U152>L2>Z49>Z142>Z12222,Z150, and it would be dated very close to yfull's formation date of 2250 BC (2550-350 BC) for U152>L2>Z49>Z142>Z12222,Z150>S42. The carbon dating would narrow this further to 2550-1800 BC.

Which link did you download and how did you open the file? Thanks.

asquecco
02-25-2021, 02:56 PM
... it would be the oldest U152>L2>Z49>Z142>Z12222,Z150...
And would it also be the oldest Z49 found until now?

MitchellSince1893
02-25-2021, 03:58 PM
And would it also be the oldest Z49 found until now?
I believe so.

MitchellSince1893
02-25-2021, 04:00 PM
Which link did you download and how did you open the file? Thanks.

The top left one labeled anno

MitchellSince1893
02-25-2021, 06:53 PM
206 I7202 I7202 Grave 94 petrous 2018 OlaldeNature2018 Pinhasi, Ron Context: Archaeological period 4250 289 2800-1800 BCE Czech_EBA Prague 5, Jinonice, ZahradnictvÝ Czech Republic

If this is a valid call, and based on the right ISOGG version, it would be the oldest U152>L2>Z49>Z142>Z12222,Z150, and it would be dated very close to yfull's formation date of 2250 BC (2550-350 BC) for U152>L2>Z49>Z142>Z12222,Z150>S42. The carbon dating would narrow this further to 2550-1800 BC.



Not sure what the significance of "QUESTIONABLE (extraction.negative.flag)" is.

If this is a valid call, and based on the right ISOGG version, it would be the oldest U152>L2>Z49>Z142>Z12222,Z150, and it would be dated very close to yfull's formation date of 2250 BC (2550-350 BC) for U152>L2>Z49>Z142>Z12222,Z150>S42. The carbon dating would narrow this further to 2550-1800 BC.

That ô4250 289ö in bold letĺs us narrow the dates down even further

4250 years before 1950AD is 2300 BC, plus or minus 289 years (2589-2011 BC). I think itĺs safe to assume the upper range is going to be 2300s to 2400s

MitchellSince1893
02-28-2021, 04:21 AM
In this thread TigerMW posted a link to the Allen Ancient DNA Resource (AADR): Downloadable genotypes of present-day and ancient DNA data, V44.3: New data release: Jan 20 2021
https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?20310-L51-into-Europe-West-of-the-Steppe-Via-Corded-Ware/page123

https://reich.hms.harvard.edu/allen-ancient-dna-resource-aadr-downloadable-genotypes-present-day-and-ancient-dna-data



Here's another ancient Z142. Germany Bell Beaker Also ~2300 BC

U152>L2>Z49>Z142>Z51>L562/S213/Z50 aka R1b1a1b1a1a2b1c1a1
I0805 2015 MathiesonNature2015 4252 92 (2394-2210 BC) 2465-2142 calBCE (3839┬▒55 BP, Erl-8558) Germany_BellBeaker_contam Quedlinburg Site VII Germany 51.79 11.14 1240K 1 0.232 225361 .. M n/a (no relatives detected) R1b1a1b1a1a2b1c1a1 199 H1 .. .. [0.981,0.992] 0.094 0.143 .. .. .. .. 0.053 0.027 None [0,0.106] ds.half S0805.L1 QUESTIONABLE_CRITICAL (sexratio=0.143)

So we have ~2300 BC Z142>Z150 in In Prague, Czech Rep. and ~2300 BC Z142>Z51 in Quedlinburg, Germany in Bell Beaker setting.
And then 3300 years later we have Z142 in Denmark and Z142>Z150 in Sweden, both in a Viking setting.

asquecco
02-28-2021, 08:23 AM
And perhaps in the meantime Z49>S8183 stayed east, moving north and south along the Amber road.

MitchellSince1893
03-01-2021, 05:44 AM
And would it also be the oldest Z49 found until now?

If valid, this one would be older, but he's on a different branch of Z49 (not Z142 branch). He on your S8183 branch of Z49 :)

R1b1a1b1a1a2b1c2b1a2 aka U152>L2>Z49>S8183>BY3626>Y4356>Y4353>Y4354>S8172, BY44305


I7278 Grave 71 4333 (2383 BC) 49 (2432-2334 BC) 2462-2298 calBCE (3890┬▒20 BP, PSUAMS-4349) Czech_BellBeaker Brand├Żsek Czech Republic 50.19 14.158 R1b1a1b1a1a2b1c2b1a2

I say if valid because it appears to be a little too old to be S8172,BY44305, but it's not out of the question as Yfull has formation 4200 ybp (2250 BC), 95% confidence interval of 2950 BC to 1650 BC. So it may be valid.

If so then U52>L2>Z49 was in Czech Bell Beaker ~2400 BC.
In FTDNA data base, this S8172 branch is presently found in Austria, Bulgaria, England, Czech Rep, Germany, Italy, Norway, Poland, Russia, Switzerland.

asquecco
03-03-2021, 02:53 PM
In my opinion YFull could underestimate both formed and TMRCA dates.
For example I BIG Y tested a couple of paternal cousins with genealogical connection between us dating back to between 1500 and 1600.
We have 3, 2 and 1 private mutations: the average is 2 and the estimated TMRCA is 250 ybp.
Considering instead the longest mutation path (3) you get 501 ybp, that is a better estimate.
So that's why perhaps the real formed dates could be older.
By the way, one my 23andme matches from Italy/Friuli is R-S8172, but again from Friuli I have many more matches belonging to the R-Y4355 group.
Based on that and also considering the strong presence there of R-S20782, I think the overall presence of Z49>S8183 in the Northeast part of Italy should be above the average.

Acque agitate
03-03-2021, 10:44 PM
From the data in my possession, S8183 is the most widespread branch of Z49 in Italy. High presence especially in the Adriatic area of central Italy (Abruzzo)

MitchellSince1893
03-05-2021, 09:11 PM
If valid, this one would be older, but he's on a different branch of Z49 (not Z142 branch). He on your S8183 branch of Z49 :)

R1b1a1b1a1a2b1c2b1a2 aka U152>L2>Z49>S8183>BY3626>Y4356>Y4353>Y4354>S8172, BY44305



I say if valid because it appears to be a little too old to be S8172,BY44305, but it's not out of the question as Yfull has formation 4200 ybp (2250 BC), 95% confidence interval of 2950 BC to 1650 BC. So it may be valid.

If so then U152>L2>Z49 was in Czech Bell Beaker ~2400 BC.
In FTDNA data base, this S8172 branch is presently found in Austria, Bulgaria, England, Czech Rep, Germany, Italy, Norway, Poland, Russia, Switzerland.
I need to make a possible correction here. Not sure where I was getting Bell Beaker from...maybe I assumed it. Anyway the Jinonice, Czech Rep. location appears to be a ┌nětice site.

RonW
03-24-2021, 06:51 AM
New here.

I don't know if this helps in your discussion. My test came back as:


R-M269>R-L23>R-L51>R-P310>R-L151>
R-P312>R-U152>R-L2>R-Z49>R-Z142>
R-Z51>R-L562>R-Z57>R-S1491>
R-Y23962>R-Y23964>R-Y23824>
R-FT109056>R-FT253357>R-FT253331>
R-M7964

Rufus191
04-08-2021, 08:45 PM
New here.

I don't know if this helps in your discussion. My test came back as:


R-M269>R-L23>R-L51>R-P310>R-L151>
R-P312>R-U152>R-L2>R-Z49>R-Z142>
R-Z51>R-L562>R-Z57>R-S1491>
R-Y23962>R-Y23964>R-Y23824>
R-FT109056>R-FT253357>R-FT253331>
R-M7964
Was this a FTDNA test? Mine was 23andme and gave

R-Z49>
R-Z142>
R-Z12222>
R-CTS9490>
CTS7970

Furthest ancestor traced to the 18th century in Essex, south east England.

ScottB
05-08-2021, 02:23 PM
Hi, it's been a long time, about 6 years maybe, just curious if the Kinman hypothesis got closer to being proved? (Normans bringing FGC29963 to England) I was reading an interesting article by David Faux about the Cimbri tribes in Jutland merging with the Angles and Jutes making their way to England, but I'm not sure if that included FGC22963 since testing has expanded since that article was written, any thoughts on this? Thanks- Scott Bendell R-U152>R-L2>R-Z49>R-Z142>R-FGC22963>R-Y20026>R-Y55766

MitchellSince1893
05-08-2021, 03:58 PM
Hi, it's been a long time, about 6 years maybe, just curious if the Kinman hypothesis got closer to being proved? (Normans bringing FGC29963 to England) I was reading an interesting article by David Faux about the Cimbri tribes in Jutland merging with the Angles and Jutes making their way to England, but I'm not sure if that included FGC22963 since testing has expanded since that article was written, any thoughts on this? Thanks- Scott Bendell R-U152>R-L2>R-Z49>R-Z142>R-FGC22963>R-Y20026>R-Y55766

Just looking at where FGC22963 samples are listed in the FTDNA Haplotree tree

6 England
6 N Ireland
4 United Kingdom
1 Scotland
1 Poland
1 Switzerland
1 France

Hard to make any conclusions from this, but none so far from Scandinavian countries.

There have been quite a few Viking samples out now, but off the top of my head I don’t recall any of them being FGC22963.

https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?36-R1b-U152-Updates-News&p=702801&viewfull=1#post702801

But VK40 was Z142>Z12222>FT38430>BY1701>BY166438
and
VK138 was Z142>Z51>L562>Z57>S1491

so we now know Z142 existed in a Viking setting.

ScottB
05-08-2021, 07:29 PM
Thank you for your reply. I did My True Ancestry and they came up with Norwegian Vikings and Gaulish as the closest ancient match, and an equal match with Norwegian Vikings and Franks.
Modern day populations were strongest for West Germany and Flemish.
Not sure if this helps with anything or if they are determining that based on Y DNA only.

MitchellSince1893
05-16-2021, 06:10 PM
And would it also be the oldest Z49 found until now?

Another ancient Z49 found. This one in Italy.

BRC003 L2 > Z49 > Y4353/FGC20796+ S12993- (1532–1452 cal BC)

https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?36-R1b-U152-Updates-News/page39&p=771778#post771778

asquecco
05-16-2021, 07:04 PM
Another ancient Z49 found. This one in Italy.


https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?36-R1b-U152-Updates-News/page39&p=771778#post771778

Really interesting.
I was told a new study to be published this year will include aDNA from Italy/Friuli (NE Italy) in the period between 2000-800 BC.
I hope some interesting results will come out.

MitchellSince1893
07-18-2021, 07:10 PM
In this thread, member ph2ter was kind enough to do a U152 MRCA chart.
https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?23595-New-Samples-from-Migration-Era-and-Early-Medieval-Moravia&p=785083&viewfull=1#post785083

I asked if he could also do one for this thread for Z142.

Keep in mind this is based only on samples submitted to yfull, and yfull dates so it's not going to be as complete of a picture as what is in the FTDNA database. Also, be aware that there is a British Isles/US testing bias...but if one is focused on when Z142 may arrived/expanded in the Isles, this is less of a concern.

Once FTDNA posts their own TMRCA dates, we can revisit this with additional details.

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/63/4c/1a/634c1ad5c9ebdda2719a25da6b12565e.jpg

larger image here
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/63/4c/1a/634c1ad5c9ebdda2719a25da6b12565e.jpg

MitchellSince1893
07-18-2021, 07:25 PM
He also did charts for the 3 largest Z142 subclades. For your viewing pleasure, but honestly, I don't think there is enough data here to draw any conclusions.

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/50/7b/9d/507b9d05a3631b111dd58f54f2a97251.jpg
Larger image here https://i.pinimg.com/originals/50/7b/9d/507b9d05a3631b111dd58f54f2a97251.jpg

ph2ter
07-18-2021, 07:34 PM
In this thread, member ph2ter was kind enough to do a U152 MRCA chart.
https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?23595-New-Samples-from-Migration-Era-and-Early-Medieval-Moravia&p=785083&viewfull=1#post785083

I asked if he could also do one for this thread for Z142. I added the larger date fonts at the top of some of the columns for readability

Keep in mind this is based only on samples submitted to yfull, and yfull dates so it's not going to be as complete of a picture as what is in the FTDNA database. Also, be aware that there is a British Isles/US testing bias...but if one is focused on when Z142 may arrived/expanded in the Isles, this is less of a concern.

Once FTDNA posts their own TMRCA dates, we can revisit this with additional details.



larger image here
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/6a/97/92/6a9792b78e03b0834378d7cd03f8a7f6.jpg
On the horizontal axis are not years before present (ybp), but normal years. The minus sign is for BCE and without the sign is CE.

MitchellSince1893
07-18-2021, 07:45 PM
On the horizontal axis are not years before present (ybp), but normal years. The minus sign is for BCE and without the sign is CE.

Thanks, I will fix that.

RonW
07-27-2021, 06:04 AM
Was this a FTDNA test? Mine was 23andme and gave

R-Z49>
R-Z142>
R-Z12222>
R-CTS9490>
CTS7970

Furthest ancestor traced to the 18th century in Essex, south east England.

FTDNA