PDA

View Full Version : How to tell FTDNA to put DF27 subclades where they belong?



lgmayka
08-20-2015, 11:43 PM
Kit N17254 of Poland received his R1b SNP Pack results. He belongs to the rare and mysterious L617 clade (http://yfull.com/tree/R-L617/):


DF27+, M173+, M269+, M343+, M207+, P25+, M269+, P312+, L23+, L278+, L389+, L617+, P297+, P310+, P311+, L51+, L513-, L584-, PF3252-, PF331-, PF6610-, PF6714-, PF7562-, PF7589-, PF7600-, S1026-, S1051-, S11493-, S11601-, S12025-, S1567-, S16264-, S1688-, S18632-, S18827-, S7721-, V88-, Y5058-, Z156-, Z16500-, Z17-, Z17300-, Z18-, Z1862-, Z195-, Z198-, Z209-, Z2103-, Z2109-, Z225-, Z251-, Z253-, Z2542-, Z255-, Z2573-, Z295-, Z296-, Z301-, Z302-, Z36-, Z367-, Z381-, Z49-, Z8-, Z8052-, Z8056-, Z9-, L881-, M1994-, M335-, MC14-, L408-, L47-, L48-, L371-, L238-, L21-, Z326-, Z196-, P107-, U106-, U152-, U198-, P66-, SRY2627-, M222-, M37-, M65-, M73-, M18-, M126-, M153-, M160-, A1773-, A2150-, A274-, A4670-, A517-, BY2823-, BY2868-, BY575-, BY653-, CTS10429-, CTS11567-, CTS11994-, CTS1751-, CTS3386-, CTS4466-, CTS4528-, CTS5330-, CTS5689-, CTS6937-, CTS7763-, DF103-, DF110-, DF17-, DF19-, DF21-, DF41-, DF49-, DF63-, DF81-, DF83-, DF88-, DF95-, DF99-, F2691-, F2863-, FGC10516-, FGC11134-, FGC13620-, FGC20761-, FGC22501-, FGC396-, FGC5301-, FGC5336-, FGC5344-, FGC5345-, FGC5351-, FGC5354-, FGC5356-, FGC5367-, FGC5373-, FGC5494-, FGC5798-, L1335-, L2-


But FTDNA's haplotree has L617, BY653, and DF83 directly under P312 instead of where they belong, downstream from DF27. Who will FTDNA listen to about this?

REWM
08-20-2015, 11:50 PM
http://www.ytree.net/DisplayTree.php?blockID=618&star=false

Earl Davis
08-21-2015, 08:19 AM
John Marsh has been doing a lot of work on L617. See

http://www.kin.marshdna.com/DNAresultsL617.htm

GoldenHind
08-23-2015, 12:58 AM
I just encountered someone in the R1b-P312 and Subclades Project who got a L617+ result in the R1b backbone test, and I was completely confused by where FTDNA has listed it on their tree. I then checked the ISOGG R1b tree, and found it listed under DF27. Someone needs to contact FTDNA about this.

razyn
08-23-2015, 02:20 AM
Or you could just ignore the FTDNA and ISOGG trees, which will presumably catch up sometime after we have all joined the Silent Majority (which term, btw, originally meant "dead people," not alleged conservatives in the US). Anyway, for more current news about L617, not that mysterious, try this thread:

http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?4959-Z2552-%28DF81-L617-YP4295-and-Z15001%29

Ignore the part about Z15001, that was a ghost, but the rest is about as complete as the available data.

In the DF27 project, I'll move your N17254 guy from group Aa (where I just put him two days ago) to Ga.

lgmayka
08-23-2015, 02:14 PM
Anyway, for more current news about L617, not that mysterious, try this thread:
Ah, but it is mysterious! The references you cite state with great certainty that L617 is Iberian. One must then explain how and why a Spaniard moved to northeastern Poland 3200-3800 years ago (http://yfull.com/tree/R-L617/) and spawned a lineage that barely survived (neither expanding nor becoming extinct) for several millennia.

Webb
08-23-2015, 05:16 PM
Ah, but it is mysterious! The references you cite state with great certainty that L617 is Iberian. One must then explain how and why a Spaniard moved to northeastern Poland 3200-3800 years ago (http://yfull.com/tree/R-L617/) and spawned a lineage that barely survived (neither expanding nor becoming extinct) for several millennia.

Which is why I rarely post anymore. Until the imbalance of testing between Western Europe and Eastern Europe is remedied, I find it premature to list any clade under DF27 as specific to a geographic region.

razyn
08-23-2015, 06:26 PM
Ah, but it is mysterious! The references you cite state with great certainty that L617 is Iberian.

Actually I didn't cite John Marsh, Earl did. And I disagree with John (and agree with you) that L617 -- and the other mutations below Z2552 -- probably had happened before its bearers ever got to Iberia. If there is an exception, DF81 is a much better candidate, its known bearers being mostly Basque (but in subclades that are younger than basal DF81).

On the other hand, the possibility exists that somebody from Iberia, the Low Countries, England or elsewhere went to Poland and made babies, a long time ago. I am not too worked up about that issue, in any one specific lineage; but more broadly, the tree model persuades me that DF27 subclades (like other subclades, and major divisions, under R1b, L11, P312 et al) were generally part of a big old tree with roots and trunk well to the east of the Urals. Foot bone connected to the ankle bone, and so on. Farther back is more eastern. OK?