PDA

View Full Version : I am Rb1 but can I find my subclade without further testing?



Peccavi
03-23-2015, 08:40 PM
In 2005, I submitted my swab to Nat Geographic and got the result - Rb1 (M343).

Unfortunately I have lost my ID, so I can't participate in any further studies without getting a new test done.

As I have a printout and the 12 STRs identified, I have tried to find out my subclade but without success.

I tried an online predictor but all this told me was that I am Rb1.

So a two fold question:

- do I have enough information to find out my subclade?

- if not, what is the best test; my interest lies in the area of historical movement of peoples with my genetic make-up and not developing my family tree.

On my father's side, there are a lot of Irish and I have identified a patriarchal line to 1813, Waterford, Ireland. On my mother's they are all pure English - English surnames to be exact (within a remote part of the Pennine of 10 to 20 miles) ever since 1705 (on unbroken matriarch to matriarch line).

Happy to publish my STRs if this aids the response.

Thanks for any help

Krefter
03-23-2015, 08:58 PM
You can look for 12-STR matches in Ireland, and whatever R1b subclade they have you may also have. Besides that there's no way to find what subclade you are without further testing. The vast majority of Irish R1b is in the subclade L21.

Alpine Hominin
03-23-2015, 10:32 PM
A 12 marker test is minimal and will give you almost no information of value. Most 12 marker matches break down at the 25 marker level and beyond. I match 7 Pierce's 100% at 12 markers and none at 25.

You'll need further testing to tell you much of anything I'm afraid. 23andME will give you more general information, such as Y and mt haplogroups and admixture. FamilyTreeDNA is good for deeper testing of specific lines (Paternal or Maternal). Unfortunately knowing the migrations of your ancestors requires a measure of fleshing out your family tree, especially with an R1b haplotype.

Peccavi
03-23-2015, 11:20 PM
Thanks to both for your replies - I confess I am really at sea here. Mr Alpine - You have 12 makers and a good fit, add a further 13 and nothing fits, if I understand you correctly.

With the 12 marker and following Krefter's advice L11 seems the nearest so far - perfect for the first seven but drifts a bit for the last five.

So it looks like I will need to dig into my pocket. Problem is that there are so many tests even within each offering - would 64 markers on the Family Tree be a good one to choose?

miiser
03-24-2015, 12:18 AM
I recommend the 67 marker Y-DNA test from Family Tree DNA if you can afford it. If that is too expensive, the 37 marker Y-DNA test is a pretty decent alternative. 37 markers is usually (but not always) enough to identify your subclade with reasonable confidence. 67 markers will provide even more confidence of your subclade, and if you get any surname matches, 67 markers will do a better job of estimating how closely related they are. In the event that one of these tests isn't sufficient to identify your subclade with confidence (which is a slight possibility), then you can follow it up later with a $39 SNP test to nail it down for sure.

GTC
03-24-2015, 12:35 AM
As others have said, 12 markers are not very useful for the purpose of haplogroup prediction, and getting a 67 or 37 marker test is recommended, but meanwhile you could have a play with this predictor to get an idea of probabilities:

http://www.hprg.com/hapest5/

jhhaze
06-18-2015, 08:13 PM
Hello Group,

I came across this post and was hoping you could help me with a similar issue.

I originally participated in the Nat. Geo Genome project 1.0 and was classified as a R-M343. I then transferred my results to Familytreedna and recently upgraded and purchased a 67 marker Y-DNA STR test. I am still only shown as a M269 on the family tree site after my 67 marker test.

Unfortunately, I am disappointed with the results. This is pretty complicated stuff and I really didn't learn anything new after spending hundreds of dollars. I was hoping to get deeper on my haplogroup three and subclade. I am just starting now to learn the difference between STR and SNPs and it seems like I just wasted a bunch of money.

My recent ancestry is 100% Polish (Both Parents and all 4 grandparents). However, I am less interested in finding living or recently deceased relatives than knowing about my my paternal lineage in regards to haplogroup, subclade, etc.

I was wondering if you could help me or if you could provide any links to tools that might be able to use my 67 marker STR data to predict SNPs, deeper Haplogroup, subclades, etc. Any and all relevant advice, thoughts, links, etc. would be greatly appreciated. I hope to hear back from you.

Best Regards,

Jack

jhhaze
06-18-2015, 08:21 PM
Here is a copy of my results, in case it is helpful.

4944

Joe B
06-18-2015, 09:19 PM
Hello Group,

I came across this post and was hoping you could help me with a similar issue.

I originally participated in the Nat. Geo Genome project 1.0 and was classified as a R-M343. I then transferred my results to Familytreedna and recently upgraded and purchased a 67 marker Y-DNA STR test. I am still only shown as a M269 on the family tree site after my 67 marker test.

Unfortunately, I am disappointed with the results. This is pretty complicated stuff and I really didn't learn anything new after spending hundreds of dollars. I was hoping to get deeper on my haplogroup three and subclade. I am just starting now to learn the difference between STR and SNPs and it seems like I just wasted a bunch of money.

My recent ancestry is 100% Polish (Both Parents and all 4 grandparents). However, I am less interested in finding living or recently deceased relatives than knowing about my my paternal lineage in regards to haplogroup, subclade, etc.

I was wondering if you could help me or if you could provide any links to tools that might be able to use my 67 marker STR data to predict SNPs, deeper Haplogroup, subclades, etc. Any and all relevant advice, thoughts, links, etc. would be greatly appreciated. I hope to hear back from you.

Best Regards,

Jack


Here is a copy of my results, in case it is helpful.

4944
Hello Jack and welcome to Anthrogenica,

You have not wasted a dime. 67 STRs are essential even if you do know your haplogroup and clade. It's a must and good science to confirm your haplgroup with SNP testing because of STR convergence within the huge R1b-M269 haplogroup. A good mid-point for phylogenetic bracketing when predicted R1b-M269 are SNPs U106 and P312. Upstream or downstream of those two SNPs will tell you what direction to go. You are probably not U106+ because of your DYS492=12, but you never know because SNPs and STRs are coinicidental of each other. Start out with P312 and see what happens.

If you can do it, next generation sequencing (NGS) testing is the way to go. There is the BIG Y test from Family Tree DNA and the Y-Prime and Y-Elite tests from Full Genomes Corporation. You will know your haplogroup branch down to the twig level and find a bunch of new novel SNPs for future tester to compare too.

Please join the R R1b ALL Subclades gateway project more specific advice.
https://www.familytreedna.com/groups/r-1b/about/background
Pretty sure they will want you to join up at the Polish FTDNA project too. They are pretty good with SNP advice too.
https://www.familytreedna.com/groups/polish/about/background

Good luck.

jhhaze
06-18-2015, 09:54 PM
Hello Jack and welcome to Anthrogenica,

You have not wasted a dime. 67 STRs are essential even if you do know your haplogroup and clade. It's a must and good science to confirm your haplgroup with SNP testing because of STR convergence within the huge R1b-M269 haplogroup. A good mid-point for phylogenetic bracketing within R1b-M269 are SNPs U106 and P312. Upstream or downstream of those two SNPs will tell you what direction to go. You are probably not U106+ because of your DYS492=12, but you never know because SNPs and STRs are coinicidental of each other. Start out with P312 and see what happens. If you can do it, next generation sequencing (NGS) testing is the way to go. You will find your haplogroup branch down to the twig level and find a bunch of new novel SNPs for future tester to compare too.

Please join the R R1b ALL Subclades gateway project more specific advice.
https://www.familytreedna.com/groups/r-1b/about/background

Thanks for the response...

So, let me see/know if I have this correct? (Also, thank you for being so patient with a newbie).

1. My 67 Marker test results cannot be used and input into a tool to predict a more detailed haplogroup and subclade. However, My DYS492=12, while not conclusive, is a strong indicator that I may be P312 and not U106+.

2. If I would have been smarter I would have used the $200+ I spent on the 67 STR test and used it towards a next generation sequencing (NGS) test, which would have told me everything in the 67 STR test, along with my exact subclass? Is that the $575 test on Family Tree DNA that they call Big Y? Unfortunately, that may be a bit out of my price range for now, but are you saying that I can order a test to only test whether or not I have P312 and that can help a little bit with getting me closer to my sub-clade?

3. How far back would I have to go to determine what ancient civilization my paternal side belonged to like the Celts, Germanic tribes, etc. and can that be determined with a test yet? My surname is Hejza, which is likely the Polish spelling of a German surname like Hess, Heise, Hesse, etc. It would be interesting to determine if I have Germanic indicators in my YDNA STPs, even though most of the information that I have received thus far is pointing to England (which is super interesting)

4. Would I benefit from Nat. Geo 2.0 genome product at all?

5. The only new results I found from my 67-marker Family Tree DNA test were that I have, no 67 marker matches, 1 37 marker match (distance 3) and 3 25-marker matches (1 distance 1 and 2 distance 2s). I can see the names, but, unfortunately, I have not found a way to contact these matches to see if I can uncover anything useful.

Again, thank you for your response and advice.

Kind Regards,

Jack

lgmayka
06-19-2015, 01:16 AM
I can see the names, but, unfortunately, I have not found a way to contact these matches to see if I can uncover anything useful.
You can click on a match's envelope icon to send email to that match.

lgmayka
06-19-2015, 01:56 AM
1. My 67 Marker test results cannot be used and input into a tool to predict a more detailed haplogroup and subclade. However, My DYS492=12, while not conclusive, is a strong indicator that I may be P312 and not U106+.
I think that your
DYS437 = 14
DYS448 = 18
GATA-H4 = 10
usually indicates DF27 > Z196 > Z220. Take a look at the Z220 entries in the DF27 Project (https://www.familytreedna.com/public/R1b-DF27?iframe=yresults).

In fact, you seem to fit the criteria of what used to be called the R1b-North-South cluster.

Peccavi
07-18-2015, 05:38 AM
Well three months later, probably nearer to four, and having shelled out a couple of hundred dollars on the 67 marker test with Familytree, I am wishing I had spent the money more wisely with Mystic Meg, the fortune teller.

It appears, like jhhaze, I am M269 - period - no mention of any of the one thousand and one subclades. Virtually no other information from this illustrious money making institute but apparently there are just 4 other individuals (or as I prefer it suckers) with an exact match to me, no one of whom share my surname.

As I have the Norman Irish, surname - Burke - and can trace my paternal line back to Edmund Burke born 1806 in Waterford, Ireland, I had thought I might at least be sublade U106 since I saw this is mentioned in an Irish Website in connection with my surname.

VinceT
07-18-2015, 06:39 AM
Well three months later, probably nearer to four, and having shelled out a couple of hundred dollars on the 67 marker test with Familytree, I am wishing I had spent the money more wisely with Mystic Meg, the fortune teller.

It appears, like jhhaze, I am M269 - period - no mention of any of the one thousand and one subclades. Virtually no other information from this illustrious money making institute but apparently there are just 4 other individuals (or as I prefer it suckers) with an exact match to me, no one of whom share my surname.

As I have the Norman Irish, surname - Burke - and can trace my paternal line back to Edmund Burke born 1806 in Waterford, Ireland, I had thought I might at least be sublade U106 since I saw this is mentioned in an Irish Website in connection with my surname.
As mentioned to jhhaze, it will be to your great advantage to join the R1b Gateway Project and advise us of your kit# so we can take a look at your haplotype. (https://www.familytreedna.com/groups/r-1b/about/background)

If you have four close/exact matches (at 67 markers???), have any of them tested SNPs beyond M269, and if so, what are their results?

GTC
07-18-2015, 09:42 AM
it will be to your great advantage to join the R1b Gateway Project and advise us of your kit#

Best advice given your results to date.

FTDNA gave up trying to predict below M269 as there are too many variables. The experts behind the R1b Gateway are better placed to do that.

Peccavi
07-21-2015, 12:33 PM
Well GTC and VinceT, I do thank you for taking the trouble to advise me on how to glean something from the FamilyTree results but I am still sore that this organisation can claim so much and deliver so little ( I can see that one guy even paid for the marker 111 analysis but still only got the same limited info as me, indicating M269!). Question - did I choose the wrong testing organisation?

My kit is 410584. and I have posted it on the R1B gateway but am happy to post my results here, if it helps.

Trawling through the internet I found a site for U106 which seemed to indicate that 66th STR (492) marker should be 13 or higher in order to belong to this group. As mine is only 12, can I deduce that I am not U106?

ADW_1981
07-21-2015, 12:46 PM
Well GTC and VinceT, I do thank you for taking the trouble to advise me on how to glean something from the FamilyTree results but I am still sore that this organisation can claim so much and deliver so little ( I can see that one guy even paid for the marker 111 analysis but still only got the same limited info as me, indicating M269!). Question - did I choose the wrong testing organisation?

My kit is 410584. and I have posted it on the R1B gateway but am happy to post my results here, if it helps.

Trawling through the internet I found a site for U106 which seemed to indicate that 66th STR (492) marker should be 13 or higher in order to belong to this group. As mine is only 12, can I deduce that I am not U106?

STR markers are great for determining a patrilineal connection, but you need far more than 12 markers to draw any sort of conclusions. In a database of 400,000+ at FTDNA I don't have an immediate patrilineal relative closer than 2000 years or maybe even more. You may be better off testing SNPs. Some intelligent folks here can give you the shortest path. U106 or P312 sound like a good start and go from there. (just my 2 cents)

GTC
07-21-2015, 01:05 PM
Question - did I choose the wrong testing organisation?

...

Trawling through the internet I found a site for U106 which seemed to indicate that 66th STR (492) marker should be 13 or higher in order to belong to this group. As mine is only 12, can I deduce that I am not U106?

What I can say is that FTDNA, whose original purpose is folks finding family, probably pushes autosomal testing (i.e. Family Finder) most strongly these days.

Back before they launched Big Y, they had a product called the Deep Clade test in which they would test for various key SNPs based on their prediction from your STR results and would confirm your haplogroup to a particular level on their own Y Haplotree, which I might add they did not update for many years (not until after the Geno 2 project was underway).

After that you were on your own as far as testing deeper was concerned and, usually guided by haplogroup project administrators, you would buy individual SNP tests and hope that you got your test strategy at least half right. I gather that the Deep Clade process was very labor intensive and thus costly for FTDNA. I guess at some point they decided to cut their losses on that product. It's a pity that it was killed off because it was useful for taking customers to (at least) the first key branch in their haplogroup (e.g. R1b-U106, R1b-P312, R1b-U198, etc).

Administrators of the large haplogroup projects are very well versed in "divining" possible subclades from the STR data, especially if a kit has tested out to 111 markers. Nonetheless, it remains a hit-or-miss process and some who look to be 'certain bets' for U106 turn out to be P312, and vice versa. Ultimately, the only way of determining haplogroup is SNP testing.


My kit is 410584

I'm sure you'll get a response from the Gateway guys when they have a chance to look at your haplotype data.

VinceT
07-21-2015, 09:26 PM
Well GTC and VinceT, I do thank you for taking the trouble to advise me on how to glean something from the FamilyTree results but I am still sore that this organisation can claim so much and deliver so little ( I can see that one guy even paid for the marker 111 analysis but still only got the same limited info as me, indicating M269!). Question - did I choose the wrong testing organisation?

My kit is 410584. and I have posted it on the R1B gateway but am happy to post my results here, if it helps.

Trawling through the internet I found a site for U106 which seemed to indicate that 66th STR (492) marker should be 13 or higher in order to belong to this group. As mine is only 12, can I deduce that I am not U106?

A DYS492 value of 12 indicates a less than 10%, maybe less than 5% chance of being in R-U106. It's not impossible to have DYS492=12 and be in R-U106, but it is quite rare. If someone had DYS492=12 and is also U106+, they might consider testing U106 at a different lab such as YSEQ.net to ensure that FTDNA didn't screw up.

The odds being what they are, P312 would be a better guess with DYS492=12, but it should be considered in context with the other STR markers as well.

I am looking for kit 410584 in the R1b Project, but do not see it yet.