PDA

View Full Version : New DF27 SNPs and subclades



Gray Fox
11-14-2012, 08:48 PM
Any and all info pertaining to this subclade of P312.

breckenheimer
11-22-2012, 04:01 PM
David F Reynolds provided a list of SNPs which are tested in the Geno 2.0 here: https://www.dropbox.com/s/j8yel8ddsq5o3rl/Geno-Y-SNPs.txt

DF27 is not listed but a number of downstream SNPs are: Z195, Z274 (upstream from both DF17 and Z209), Z220 and others.

curiousII
03-20-2016, 10:52 AM
Old thread, same topic: P312, DF27, and whatever else is found downstream. I'm R-Z2573; what does that tell me? Where in Iberia did this come from?

Lugus
03-20-2016, 12:23 PM
Old thread, same topic: P312, DF27, and whatever else is found downstream. I'm R-Z2573; what does that tell me? Where in Iberia did this come from?

We're not much more advanced today than we were in 2012. No one really knows where DF27 came from or how and when it got where it is today. No aDNA DF27 has yet been found. Iberia is just where you can find today a lot of DF27 but that doesn't mean it originated there. It probably didn't. My favourite fantasy is a tale of 3 tribes that lived somewere in Central Europe and one day (quarreled?) and decided to part ways in different directions. One went west to the Islands (L21), another moved a bit south and west (U152) and the third went southwest far from all the others (DF27). Each tribe was joined by small groups of malcontents from the other two tribes. Does anyone know a better story? ;)

Lugus
03-20-2016, 12:32 PM
It seems that DF27s had more troublemakers than the other tribes, as more of them are found today elsewhere.

Ric
03-20-2016, 02:16 PM
We're not much more advanced today than we were in 2012. No one really knows where DF27 came from or how and when it got where it is today. No aDNA DF27 has yet been found. Iberia is just where you can find today a lot of DF27 but that doesn't mean it originated there. It probably didn't. My favourite fantasy is a tale of 3 tribes that lived somewere in Central Europe and one day (quarreled?) and decided to part ways in different directions. One went west to the Islands (L21), another moved a bit south and west (U152) and the third went southwest far from all the others (DF27). Each tribe was joined by small groups of malcontents from the other two tribes. Does anyone know a better story? ;)

The 3 brothers (or snp) have to originate from an ancestor who is in neither of these locations (West Islands/South West Italy/ Spain) and this ancestor has to be M343/M269/P312.
in this link you can find a list of ancient DNA. http://www.ancestraljourneys.org/ancientdna.shtml
M269 is already present in Russia Yamnaya 2900/3300bc and P312 is present later in Germany Bell Beaker 2400bc.
So DF27 grand grand....dad was in South Germany, fine. From there in my opinion, it all depends on how you travel. If you are a single man on horse or boat, you can go wherever you want but if you are a full clan with children, elderly people and cattle herds, it is easier, in my opinion, to move North to the European low plains and flat lands where you will contact inevitably with the shore of the Northern Sea. From there, you are now in shorter range of the British Isles and Scandinavia than Spain.
Perhaps both situations occurred. Some DF27 adventurers went through the mountains or the sea to reach Spain while some Df27 families moved north to the plains.
But nothing says that the 3 brothers have to appear at the same time. As long as the P312 ancestral gene pool stays in South Germany, you can imagine one L21-carrying son (or clan) took his mutation with him to the British Isles, then 500 years another mutation pops up from the P312 gene pool, say it was DF27, whose carrying clan decided to take a different route etc.
If the appearance of the Df27, U152 and L21 is spread over 500 years, that doesn't make them really brothers anymore.

I can remember a documentary where they found a jewel made of amber in a city of the near East, older than Ur I recall, like 4000bc. Well the amber was from Scandinavia which shows people moved a lot already by that time.

ADW_1981
03-20-2016, 02:30 PM
I think DF27 has a Copper Age spread from Central Europe -> Iberia. During the Bronze Age, I'm envisioning trade routes along the Atlantic back north into NW Europe and Scandinavia.

REWM
03-20-2016, 02:53 PM
I'm R-Z2573; what does that tell me?

The Z2573 mutation was only recently discovered in 2015 by Ray Banks from samples of the 1000 Genomes project. YFull age estimation for Z2573 is 4300 years ago. So far the known main next downstream SNPs for Z2573 are Z29620 and Z29624/FGC32092 that branch off from there.

http://www.ytree.net/DisplayTree.php?blockID=640&star=false

FTDNA started testing Z2573 this past Oct. and a few downstream SNPs only in there pack test's for $119.

YSEQ.net has Sanger Sequenced testing for Z2573 and the downstream SNP's that are known.

http://www.yseq.net/product_info.php?products_id=11335

http://www.yseq.net/advanced_search_result.php?keywords=FGC32092&search_in_description=1&x=5&y=7

curiousII
03-20-2016, 04:33 PM
The Z2573 mutation was only recently discovered in 2015 by Ray Banks...
FTDNA started testing Z2573 this past Oct. and a few downstream SNPs only in there pack test's for $119.
YSEQ.net has Sanger Sequenced testing for Z2573 and the downstream SNP's that are known.

Thanks for that one, REWM! FTDNA Admins told me that I'm downstream as far as I can get when it comes to additional snip tests, so that YSEQ link is much appreciated.

razyn
03-20-2016, 06:48 PM
YSEQ tests quickly, responds nimbly to new SNP discoveries (unless they are discovered in a region Thomas and Astrid don't want to fool with), and has somewhat lower prices than FTDNA. However, YSEQ test results aren't reported to FTDNA project admins, let alone logged by its computers. They won't be visible in your displayed results (in FTDNA haplogroup or surname projects), even if you tell us what results you got. If you have tested any STRs at FTDNA (to make you visible in a project) we can manually move you into the right subgroup, assuming we have one. But that's about it.

REWM likes to promote YSEQ (and complain about FTDNA); and I may agree with some of it. But he doesn't have to juggle the 1400+ people in their DF27 project -- nor stay within their corporate guidelines for admins (not promoting their competitors, respecting project members' privacy, and so on).

curiousII
03-21-2016, 02:24 AM
Just bought a Z29620 test, have to wait for the kit to get here. Talked to Astrid Krahn on the phone after placing my order online; Astrid was quite kind and verified my order and took a moment to explain what YSEQ was. I posted a quick question on the FTDNA's DF27 Project about YSEQ, but haven't gotten an answer yet so I'll ask here: Are the two companies compatible science-wise? Even if FTDNA doesn't use the same Tree as YSEQ, if I post my results in the Project's forum will they be received well or mocked by the other project members? DF27 being the rough crowd that it is and all.

Paid $17.50 plus $5.00 shipping all told once this is a done deal, and Astrid confirmed the online information that shipping is deferred on subsequent orders. I think that last part's nice.

Táltos
03-21-2016, 03:01 AM
Just bought a Z29620 test, have to wait for the kit to get here. Talked to Astrid Krahn on the phone after placing my order online; Astrid was quite kind and verified my order and took a moment to explain what YSEQ was. I posted a quick question on the FTDNA's DF27 Project about YSEQ, but haven't gotten an answer yet so I'll ask here: Are the two companies compatible science-wise? Even if FTDNA doesn't use the same Tree as YSEQ, if I post my results in the Project's forum will they be received well or mocked by the other project members? DF27 being the rough crowd that it is and all.

Paid $17.50 plus $5.00 shipping all told once this is a done deal, and Astrid confirmed the online information that shipping is deferred on subsequent orders. I think that last part's nice.

You are in good hands. Thomas Krahn was FTDNA's lead Y chromosome scientist a few years ago. :)

ArmandoR1b
03-21-2016, 03:55 AM
Just bought a Z29620 test, have to wait for the kit to get here. Talked to Astrid Krahn on the phone after placing my order online; Astrid was quite kind and verified my order and took a moment to explain what YSEQ was. I posted a quick question on the FTDNA's DF27 Project about YSEQ, but haven't gotten an answer yet so I'll ask here: Are the two companies compatible science-wise? Even if FTDNA doesn't use the same Tree as YSEQ, if I post my results in the Project's forum will they be received well or mocked by the other project members? DF27 being the rough crowd that it is and all.

Paid $17.50 plus $5.00 shipping all told once this is a done deal, and Astrid confirmed the online information that shipping is deferred on subsequent orders. I think that last part's nice.

No, you won't be mocked by project members. You will be reminded that you aren't supposed to mention the competition but that is why this forum so great. Knowledgeable people are here ready to help inform people of other choices. The problem about asking for other testing options in the Activity Feed of DF27 is that it's like going to a Ford dealership and asking what other choices for vehicles there are from other companies. The moderator on the FTDNA forum isn't as heavy handed, he just deletes links, but this is a better place anyway. Just so you know though, you could end up testing another 20 SNPs at YSEQ and still not be at a level you would like to be. At $17.50 each that's $350 so in the long run the BigY, when on sale and a coupon, is a better deal.

REWM
03-21-2016, 09:52 PM
Thanks for that one, REWM! FTDNA Admins told me that I'm downstream as far as I can get when it comes to additional snip tests, so that YSEQ link is much appreciated.

Your Welcome! FTDNA Admins may just not of knew. Because of how new and few men there are.

REWM
03-21-2016, 09:54 PM
Just bought a Z29620 test, have to wait for the kit to get here. Talked to Astrid Krahn on the phone after placing my order online; Astrid was quite kind and verified my order and took a moment to explain what YSEQ was. I posted a quick question on the FTDNA's DF27 Project about YSEQ, but haven't gotten an answer yet so I'll ask here: Are the two companies compatible science-wise? Even if FTDNA doesn't use the same Tree as YSEQ, if I post my results in the Project's forum will they be received well or mocked by the other project members? DF27 being the rough crowd that it is and all.

Paid $17.50 plus $5.00 shipping all told once this is a done deal, and Astrid confirmed the online information that shipping is deferred on subsequent orders. I think that last part's nice.

Good luck in your testing.

ximocarr
03-27-2016, 10:48 AM
Hi all I have just received my snp Terminal from FTDNA DF 27 pack, here is my results:A2145-, A2146-, A431-, A432-, A433-, A434-, A4658-, A4659-, A4670-, A6104 *, A6456-, A6458-, A7014-, A7380-, A7385-, BY2285-, BY3232-, BY3233-, BY3235-, BY3286-, BY3287-, BY3288-, BY3289-, BY3290-, BY3291-, BY3292-, BY3327-, BY3328-, BY3329-, BY3330-, BY3331 *, BY3332-, BY653-, BY834-, CTS1090-, CTS11567-, CTS1643-, CTS416-, CTS5885-, CTS6578-, CTS7768-, CTS9952-, DF17-, DF19-, DF27+, DF27+, DF79-, DF81-, DF83-, DF83-, DF84-, FGC11369-, FGC11414-, FGC11419-, FGC13109-, FGC13110 *, FGC13125-, FGC14113-, FGC14114-, FGC14115 *, FGC14124-, FGC14126-, FGC14934-, FGC14951-, FGC17099-, FGC17102-, FGC17112-, FGC17114-, FGC20556-, FGC20747-, FGC20748-, FGC20755-, FGC20761-, FGC20764-, FGC20767-, FGC20816-, FGC21115-, FGC21124-, FGC21129-, FGC23066-, FGC23071-, FGC23074-, FGC23079-, FGC23083-, FGC30918-, FGC30962-, FGC30964-, FGC30993-, FGC30994-, FGC31068-, FGC8127-, L165-, L176-, L21-, L617-, L881-, M153-, M222-, M225-, M269+, M65-, M756-, P312+, P312+, PH133-, PH2047-, S1041-, S400-, S7432-, SK2109-, SRY2627-, U106-, U152-, Y13115-, Y14084-, Y14468-, Y14469-, Y15636-, Y15637-, Y15639-, Y15924-, Y15926-, Y16018-, Y16863-, Y17221-, Y17446-, Y17787-, Y4865-, Y4867-, Y5058-, Y5072-, Y5077-, Y6949-, Y6951-, Y7363-, Y7364-, YP4295-, Z1513-, Z1899-, Z195-, Z196-, Z196-, Z198 *, Z209-, Z20907-, Z220-, Z223-, Z225-, Z226-, Z229-, Z2543-, Z2545-, Z2547-, Z2549 *, Z2556-, Z2560-, Z2563-, Z2564-, Z2566-, Z2567-, Z2571-, Z2573-, Z268-, Z274-, Z296-, Z29614-, Z29624-, Z29875-, Z29878-, Z29884-, Z32156-, Z32164-, Z34609-, Z37492-, ZZ12_1+, ZZ12_2-, ZZ19_1+, ZZ20_1-. So, that means I'm zz 19-1 positive. Can anyone help me please with "No call or heterozygous call" for * results like A6104 * and the others. I'm from flemish ancestry.
cheers
ximo.

Webb
03-27-2016, 12:52 PM
Hi all I have just received my snp Terminal from FTDNA DF 27 pack, here is my results:A2145-, A2146-, A431-, A432-, A433-, A434-, A4658-, A4659-, A4670-, A6104 *, A6456-, A6458-, A7014-, A7380-, A7385-, BY2285-, BY3232-, BY3233-, BY3235-, BY3286-, BY3287-, BY3288-, BY3289-, BY3290-, BY3291-, BY3292-, BY3327-, BY3328-, BY3329-, BY3330-, BY3331 *, BY3332-, BY653-, BY834-, CTS1090-, CTS11567-, CTS1643-, CTS416-, CTS5885-, CTS6578-, CTS7768-, CTS9952-, DF17-, DF19-, DF27+, DF27+, DF79-, DF81-, DF83-, DF83-, DF84-, FGC11369-, FGC11414-, FGC11419-, FGC13109-, FGC13110 *, FGC13125-, FGC14113-, FGC14114-, FGC14115 *, FGC14124-, FGC14126-, FGC14934-, FGC14951-, FGC17099-, FGC17102-, FGC17112-, FGC17114-, FGC20556-, FGC20747-, FGC20748-, FGC20755-, FGC20761-, FGC20764-, FGC20767-, FGC20816-, FGC21115-, FGC21124-, FGC21129-, FGC23066-, FGC23071-, FGC23074-, FGC23079-, FGC23083-, FGC30918-, FGC30962-, FGC30964-, FGC30993-, FGC30994-, FGC31068-, FGC8127-, L165-, L176-, L21-, L617-, L881-, M153-, M222-, M225-, M269+, M65-, M756-, P312+, P312+, PH133-, PH2047-, S1041-, S400-, S7432-, SK2109-, SRY2627-, U106-, U152-, Y13115-, Y14084-, Y14468-, Y14469-, Y15636-, Y15637-, Y15639-, Y15924-, Y15926-, Y16018-, Y16863-, Y17221-, Y17446-, Y17787-, Y4865-, Y4867-, Y5058-, Y5072-, Y5077-, Y6949-, Y6951-, Y7363-, Y7364-, YP4295-, Z1513-, Z1899-, Z195-, Z196-, Z196-, Z198 *, Z209-, Z20907-, Z220-, Z223-, Z225-, Z226-, Z229-, Z2543-, Z2545-, Z2547-, Z2549 *, Z2556-, Z2560-, Z2563-, Z2564-, Z2566-, Z2567-, Z2571-, Z2573-, Z268-, Z274-, Z296-, Z29614-, Z29624-, Z29875-, Z29878-, Z29884-, Z32156-, Z32164-, Z34609-, Z37492-, ZZ12_1+, ZZ12_2-, ZZ19_1+, ZZ20_1-. So, that means I'm zz 19-1 positive. Can anyone help me please with "No call or heterozygous call" for * results like A6104 * and the others. I'm from flemish ancestry.
cheers
ximo.

If you have not done so, please join the DF27 project at FTDNA. You are Z195/Z196-. This is important as these two represent almost half of the DF27 lineages. These two are just below DF27. You are ZZ12+. This snp is just below DF27 and represents just about the other half of DF27. So imagine that everyone who is DF27+, is either Z195/Z196 or ZZ12. You are also ZZ19, which is just below ZZ12. Please see Alex Williamson's website, Ytree.net for a good layout of these snps. Earl Davis posts here regularly and is very up to date on the ZZ12 side of DF27.

curiousII
04-09-2016, 02:19 AM
Just got my Z29620 test back from YSEQ today: FGC13088 ChrY 16273295-16273295, C-; M9889 ChrY 16273318-16273318 G-; PF780 ChrY 16273318-16273318 G-; Z29620 ChrY 16273345-16273345 C-. I believe that means I'm negative for all these. Correct?

What now? Anything left testable? Mrs. Krahn said: "You've ordered Z29620. Let's wait for the result. In case you're Z29620+ I recommend to test Z29623 (or CTS1090) and A6104. Z29624 and FGC32092 are equivalent to Z29620." Notice she didn't give me any options should I come back negative.

As far as hit-and-miss testing goes, YSEQ is much cheaper than FTDNA.

razyn
04-09-2016, 03:58 AM
Well, she did give you the option of waiting for the results, from tests already in the pipeline. I don't understand why so many people resist that (waiting). I recognize that, statistically, some of us are not long for this world -- but not all that many of us actually assume it. Mostly, people just don't seem to make a distinction between a couple of months and a long time.

4900 years is a long time. If you are talking about SNPs, 200 years is not. And if you are talking about tests for newly discovered SNPs, a year is not. It just seems long, because most things in our immediate experience happen faster than SNP tests.

curiousII
04-09-2016, 01:53 PM
Well, she did give you the option of waiting for the results, from tests already in the pipeline...4900 years is a long time. If you are talking about SNPs, 200 years is not. And if you are talking about tests for newly discovered SNPs, a year is not.You're right, but I left out that the excerpt of hers was from an earlier email. I have a new one from her confirming there's nowhere else for me to go after Z2573*, but I should try back in three months as "Maybe some novel markers have been discovered by then."

Good advice, and I think I should order a Z2573 test from her company, also. Comparison purposes and all that. I'm completely happy with both YSEQ and FTDNA, but I've read discrepancies do occur at times.

Is the 4900 year reference to DF27 or Z2573?

edit: Is your avatar from the Leatherstocking Tales?

thetick
04-09-2016, 02:29 PM
You're right, but I left out that the excerpt of hers was from an earlier email. I have a new one from her confirming there's nowhere else for me to go after Z2573*, but I should try back in three months as "Maybe some novel markers have been discovered by then."

Good advice, and I think I should order a Z2573 test from her company, also. Comparison purposes and all that. I'm completely happy with both YSEQ and FTDNA, but I've read discrepancies do occur at times.

Is the 4900 year reference to DF27 or Z2573?


Below are two different trees currently showing the known branches under Z2573. There are two trees. Ytree is free but only users who submit Big Y raw details are added. Yfull is a private company and costs $49. They will have slightly different trees depending on who submitted their results to the two different trees.

http://ytree.net/DisplayTree.php?blockID=640

Age estimation ( extra emphasis on estimation as the accuracy is debatable) is from yfull

https://www.yfull.com/tree/R-Z2573

Not to take anything away from YSEQ as they offer a great service, but your next step is to get a Big Y test as you have exhausted all currently known branches. The cost of the Big Y is high so it's not an option for everyone, but the Big Y test is the only way to discover new branches.

razyn
04-09-2016, 03:26 PM
You're right, but I left out that the excerpt of hers was from an earlier email. I have a new one from her confirming there's nowhere else for me to go after Z2573*, but I should try back in three months as "Maybe some novel markers have been discovered by then."

Good advice, and I think I should order a Z2573 test from her company, also. Comparison purposes and all that. I'm completely happy with both YSEQ and FTDNA, but I've read discrepancies do occur at times.

Is the 4900 year reference to DF27 or Z2573?

edit: Is your avatar from the Leatherstocking Tales?
Well, there's nowhere else for you to go that she knows about yet; but that doesn't mean there's no place. As her email also said. Z2573 seems pretty old and widespread, and not very well tested yet with NextGen sequencing.

I agree with most of what The Tick just said (posting in answer to this before I did), but BigY is not the only choice (there is FGC); you already have a sample at YSEQ, and they can test new discoveries nimbly. But if your terminal SNP has yet to be discovered, an obvious place to look for it more carefully is in your own sample (and then hope somebody else matches it). Somewhat expensive and time consuming, but at least possible.

4900 reference is just a random number representing a long time, but I guess I did sort of have DF27 in mind -- as recently guesstimated by YFull. And it may for all I know be fairly close; but I wouldn't bet the farm (because they still think an average rate for mutations is meaningful, and I don't).

My avatar is a keelboat or "batteau" in the Shenandoah River, detail from an 1816 print that closely follows its original: a painting of Harper's Ferry, (now West) Virginia that was given to Thomas Jefferson during his presidency, and for some years hung in the White House dining room. Not recently.

thetick
04-09-2016, 04:31 PM
Well, there's nowhere else for you to go that she knows about yet; but that doesn't mean there's no place. As her email also said. Z2573 seems pretty old and widespread, and not very well tested yet with NextGen sequencing.

I agree with most of what The Tick just said (posting in answer to this before I did), but BigY is not the only choice (there is FGC); you already have a sample at YSEQ, and they can test new discoveries nimbly. But if your terminal SNP has yet to be discovered, an obvious place to look for it more carefully is in your own sample (and then hope somebody else matches it). Somewhat expensive and time consuming, but at least possible.


Oh yes sorry to the FGC guys here at this forum. What I should have said Next Gen Sequencing is the only option for more discovery. Big Y and FGC are your options. Since I forgot FGC I'll post a plug, but in full disclosure I have not tested with them. I likely will in the future when the whole genome sequencing 30x is a little cheaper.

https://www.fullgenomes.com

curiousII
04-21-2016, 05:19 PM
I just read that Family Tree's set to offer discounts on it's tests in a day or two. Nice if the bigY gets cut down to the low $400 range; nicer still if it hits $390 or so.

My L150 SNP came in positive. I'd take a ZZ12_1 individual SNP test if it was offered, but that's doubtful for some reason. I don't think YSEQ offers that individually either. And, my Z2573 hasn't come in there yet, either. It's only been a week-and-a-half since I ordered it, but I know they're quite a bit faster than Family Tree.
TEST
If I could figure out how to balance these tests between these two companies I should be able to stay a few dollars ahead while, at the same time, figure out where my heritage began. Affordable and informative all at once, nice pipe dream.

An edit: Just found the new prices on FTDNA. Not as cheap as hoped, but still a discount. The post there I got this from says these prices are good until "Tuesday evening," and I think that refers to April 26th. Here's the tests, the regular prices, and the sales prices:

Family Finder: $99, $79

mtDNA Full Sequence: $199, $149

YDNA 37: $169, $129

YDNA 67: $268, $199

YDNA 111: $359, $289

BigY: $575, $460

YDNA SNP Packs: $119, $109

curiousII
04-23-2016, 05:04 PM
I think my Z2573 test results are in at YSEQ. I have new entries on "My Allele Results" page even though I haven't gotten a confirmation email from the company. Two new additions: Z2573, ChrY 21600064-21600064, A+, and Z14377, ChrY 21600052 -21600052 , G-. So, out of the six alleles I've had tested there, I'm positive for one: Z2573. That confirms FTDNA's conclusion of that being my haplogroup. That appears to be where I am, there's nothing downstream for me to test for now. Is there?

Unless I can spring for a discounted FTDNA bigY test that'll find something entirely new, of course. Their discounts are nice, but they'd be even nicer if the bigY could be under $400 for a day or so. $390 would be quite nice.

razyn
04-23-2016, 05:55 PM
There is a little more downstream detail, if you want to chase it. YSEQ and FTDNA don't entirely agree, but anyway there is some. I have left them all in group K, so far. There was a post about it today by Ryan Morris on the "Activity Feed" of the FTDNA DF27 project, and I replied. The Big Tree shows way more SNPs than either testing company looks for. http://www.ytree.net/DisplayTree.php?blockID=640&star=false

I haven't checked YFull or FGC for this SNP.

REWM
04-23-2016, 11:10 PM
There is a little more downstream detail, if you want to chase it. YSEQ and FTDNA don't entirely agree, but anyway there is some. I have left them all in group K, so far. There was a post about it today by Ryan Morris on the "Activity Feed" of the FTDNA DF27 project, and I replied. The Big Tree shows way more SNPs than either testing company looks for. http://www.ytree.net/DisplayTree.php?blockID=640&star=false

I haven't checked YFull or FGC for this SNP.

razyn,
Ryan is one of my son's. His Y-DNA should mirror mine as they do at YSEQ. I did not have a explanation for him as to why they vary between YSEQ and FTDNA. So he posted the question about his DF27 pack results. I do find FTDNA's findings for P312*, DF27* and A6104* to be odd since I'm positive for them at FTDNA and YSEQ. I don't think I would recommend chasing SNPs of others.

curiousII
04-25-2016, 08:14 PM
OK, I just ordered a Z29624 test. Mrs. Krahn states:

"The next possible marker is Z29624. http://www.yseq.net/product_info.php?products_id=11046

There are two more SNPs for testing in case you're positive for Z29624."

I'm good with that. It seems her company takes maybe 12 days to process an order. Hopefully I'll hit a positive in here somewhere as at $17 a whack it's semi-affordable. Yes, I know I'm missing out on the FTDNA sale, but that's only got maybe 30 hours left now. I'll wait 'til Santa leaves me a bigY coupon in my stocking for that one.

REWM
04-25-2016, 09:42 PM
OK, I just ordered a Z29624 test. Mrs. Krahn states:

"The next possible marker is Z29624. http://www.yseq.net/product_info.php?products_id=11046

There are two more SNPs for testing in case you're positive for Z29624."

I'm good with that. It seems her company takes maybe 12 days to process an order. Hopefully I'll hit a positive in here somewhere as at $17 a whack it's semi-affordable. Yes, I know I'm missing out on the FTDNA sale, but that's only got maybe 30 hours left now. I'll wait 'til Santa leaves me a bigY coupon in my stocking for that one.

Z29624/FGC32092 is phylogenetically equivalent to Z29620 so you will likely be negative. If so I would strongly recommend you not test SNPs downstream of them and wait for more NGS testing.
There are two other Z2573 men with NGS testing that are Z29624/FGC32092- and Z29620- with no matching SNPs. If you did NGS test you may or may not be a match to one of them. The Big Y test does not cover Z2573 so there could be men who are Z2573 and not know it unless their lucky and test Z29624/FGC32092+.

If you do test Z29624/FGC32092+ these can be tested at YSEQ.

Confirmed SNP's for downstream of Z2573

19181539-T-A Z29624/FGC32092
16273345-C-T Z29620
4169515-G-T A6086
23013627-C-A A6104
13716860-T-A A6265
9407778-T-C A6266
21987310-A-C A6286
9744031-T-A A6287
24427512-C-G A6288
8399030-G-A A7088
4460308-A-G A8688
7194007-C-T CTS1090
14296030-C-T FGC32104
14455187-C-A FGC32105
14486802-A-T FGC32106
14998514-C-T FGC32107
15364113-C-T FGC32108
15746560-C-A FGC32109
15910386-T-A FGC32110
17102893-A-G FGC32111
17674889-T-C FGC32112
8674807-G-A FGC32093
2806793-A-G FGC32094
2810636-G-A FGC32095
2886614-C-A FGC32096
7796067-A-T FGC32097
7825794-A-G FGC32098/Y18001
7975724-C-A FGC32099
8184489-C-T FGC32100
8262336-G-A FGC32101
18872732-A-C FGC32113
19313560-A-G FGC32114
21824964-G-A FGC32115
22932564-C-T FGC32117
23064225-C-T FGC32118
23164896-A-T FGC32119
23524628-C-G FGC32120
23954298-A-G FGC32121
18404076-G-A S20941
8422618-A-T Z29614
8427039-C-T Z29615
8627694-A-T Z29616
14241224-G-A Z29618
15753554-T-C Z29619
17242912-T-G Z29621
17816865-T-C Z29622
18863549-C-T Z29623
21408755-T-A Z29625
23768425-C-T Z29626
8439156-G-A V1978/Z8854

curiousII
04-30-2016, 02:19 PM
If you do test Z29624/FGC32092+ these can be tested at YSEQ...Well, guess I won't have to worry about any of that now. My YSEQ results, in their entirety:

BZ233 ChrY 19181470 19181470 G-
CTS9977 ChrY 19181600 19181600 T-
FGC13088 ChrY 16273295 16273295 C-
FGC29815 ChrY 19181529 19181529 T-
FGC32092 ChrY 19181539 19181539 T-
FGC32179 ChrY 19181453 19181453 A-
M9889 ChrY 16273318 16273318 G-
PF780 ChrY 16273318 16273318 G-
PH4307 ChrY 19181517 19181517 A-
Y18498 ChrY 19181744 19181744 T-
Z14377 ChrY 21600052 21600052 G-
Z2573 ChrY 21600064 21600064 A+
Z29620 ChrY 16273345 16273345 C-
Z29624 ChrY 19181539 19181539 T-
ZS6524 ChrY 19181453 19181453 A-

The only positive I see in there anywhere is Z2573. So I guess this narrows my SNP search down to just about nothing. Luckily I found out about YSEQ so this dead end wasn't nearly as costly as it would have been elsewhere.

REWM
04-30-2016, 04:31 PM
Well, guess I won't have to worry about any of that now. My YSEQ results, in their entirety:

BZ233 ChrY 19181470 19181470 G-
CTS9977 ChrY 19181600 19181600 T-
FGC13088 ChrY 16273295 16273295 C-
FGC29815 ChrY 19181529 19181529 T-
FGC32092 ChrY 19181539 19181539 T-
FGC32179 ChrY 19181453 19181453 A-
M9889 ChrY 16273318 16273318 G-
PF780 ChrY 16273318 16273318 G-
PH4307 ChrY 19181517 19181517 A-
Y18498 ChrY 19181744 19181744 T-
Z14377 ChrY 21600052 21600052 G-
Z2573 ChrY 21600064 21600064 A+
Z29620 ChrY 16273345 16273345 C-
Z29624 ChrY 19181539 19181539 T-
ZS6524 ChrY 19181453 19181453 A-

The only positive I see in there anywhere is Z2573. So I guess this narrows my SNP search down to just about nothing. Luckily I found out about YSEQ so this dead end wasn't nearly as costly as it would have been elsewhere.
Your Z29624/FGC32092- came back as I expected it would. At least you now know you are not part of that downstream branch of Z2573.

On the bright side it did'nt cost you much for reliable results. You could have did FTDNA's R1b-DF27 pack test and received results like this, where as FTDNA can't even get P312, DF27 and A6104 correct.

YSEQ vs FTDNA

9091
9092

curiousII
05-14-2016, 04:16 PM
I look like this in YSEQ now:

BZ233 ChrY 19181470 19181470 G-
CTS9977 ChrY 19181600 19181600 T-
DF27 ChrY 21380200 21380200 R+
FGC1180 ChrY 21380376 21380376 A-
FGC13088 ChrY 16273295 16273295 C-
FGC29815 ChrY 19181529 19181529 T-
FGC32092 ChrY 19181539 19181539 T-
FGC32179 ChrY 19181453 19181453 A-
M9889 ChrY 16273318 16273318 G-
PF780 ChrY 16273318 16273318 G-
PH4307 ChrY 19181517 19181517 A-
Y18498 ChrY 19181744 19181744 T-
Y9262 ChrY 21380376 21380376 A-
Z14377 ChrY 21600052 21600052 G-
Z2573 ChrY 21600064 21600064 A+
Z29620 ChrY 16273345 16273345 C-
Z29624 ChrY 19181539 19181539 T-
Z33647 ChrY 21380183 21380183 C-
Z6923 ChrY 21380398 21380398 T-
ZS6524 ChrY 19181453 19181453 A-


DF27 is R+ because it's "reverse primer." That's the only way to test this SNP? Of course I looked that up on Wikipedia, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primer_%28molecular_biology%29, but of course I have no idea what that means.

Coincidence abounds: On my FTDNA Dashboard page I've got a new DF27 SNP ad for 161 SNPs tested for only $119. I mentioned this on that project's forum and double-checked my Haplotree where I found dozens of new SNPs in light purple or lavender, with the SNP ad repeated below the DF27 spot on the Tree. The new lavender SNPs begin below DF27 and end not far above U106. I also have A6104 in blue now, signifying an "available test" for this SNP. I imagine that means it's not included in the 161 SNPs the new test covers.

Does this mean there's been a new scientific discovery of a scad more DF27-type SNPs? Why wasn't this included in the recent FTDNA sale, if that's what it is? Wouldn't the YSEQ mention this somewhere? I imagine they'd wish their customers to know that there'd be more tests available, but I see no mention of it in their "Upcoming Products" box.

So, that's me according to YSEQ. With the two results from these two companies, I believe I can now state with assurance that my Y-DNA haplogroup is R-Z2573 and that I'm R-DF27 positive. Right? And FTDNA's new test is interesting or just a rehash of already-discovered SNPs that everybody's probably already taken at some point?

REWM
05-14-2016, 05:32 PM
I look like this in YSEQ now:

BZ233 ChrY 19181470 19181470 G-
CTS9977 ChrY 19181600 19181600 T-
DF27 ChrY 21380200 21380200 R+
FGC1180 ChrY 21380376 21380376 A-
FGC13088 ChrY 16273295 16273295 C-
FGC29815 ChrY 19181529 19181529 T-
FGC32092 ChrY 19181539 19181539 T-
FGC32179 ChrY 19181453 19181453 A-
M9889 ChrY 16273318 16273318 G-
PF780 ChrY 16273318 16273318 G-
PH4307 ChrY 19181517 19181517 A-
Y18498 ChrY 19181744 19181744 T-
Y9262 ChrY 21380376 21380376 A-
Z14377 ChrY 21600052 21600052 G-
Z2573 ChrY 21600064 21600064 A+
Z29620 ChrY 16273345 16273345 C-
Z29624 ChrY 19181539 19181539 T-
Z33647 ChrY 21380183 21380183 C-
Z6923 ChrY 21380398 21380398 T-
ZS6524 ChrY 19181453 19181453 A-


DF27 is R+ because it's "reverse primer." That's the only way to test this SNP? Of course I looked that up on Wikipedia, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primer_%28molecular_biology%29, but of course I have no idea what that means.

Coincidence abounds: On my FTDNA Dashboard page I've got a new DF27 SNP ad for 161 SNPs tested for only $119. I mentioned this on that project's forum and double-checked my Haplotree where I found dozens of new SNPs in light purple or lavender, with the SNP ad repeated below the DF27 spot on the Tree. The new lavender SNPs begin below DF27 and end not far above U106. I also have A6104 in blue now, signifying an "available test" for this SNP. I imagine that means it's not included in the 161 SNPs the new test covers.

Does this mean there's been a new scientific discovery of a scad more DF27-type SNPs? Why wasn't this included in the recent FTDNA sale, if that's what it is? Wouldn't the YSEQ mention this somewhere? I imagine they'd wish their customers to know that there'd be more tests available, but I see no mention of it in their "Upcoming Products" box.

So, that's me according to YSEQ. With the two results from these two companies, I believe I can now state with assurance that my Y-DNA haplogroup is R-Z2573 and that I'm R-DF27 positive. Right? And FTDNA's new test is interesting or just a rehash of already-discovered SNPs that everybody's probably already taken at some point?

I've have not seen it posted R+ before for DF27. You also don't show S250 that is the same as DF27. This is how I have results posted at YSEQ for them. You may want to ask YSEQ about it. You should have A+ someone may have hit the wrong key when it was entered.

DF27 ChrY 21380200 21380200 A+
S250 ChrY 21380200 21380200 A+


This is what is shown for the R1b - DF27 SNP Pack
It was on sale for $109 and is not a new test.

Includes the following SNPs on the haplotree:
P312, Z195, Z274, Z220, Z268, CTS7768, Z229, Z225, CTS11567, Z223, Z226, DF27, A4670, DF17, DF81, DF83, FGC20761, L617, L881, Y5058, Z198, Z209, Z2573, BY653, BY3232, Y15924, BY3233, BY3235, A2145, A2146, A431, A432, A434, A4658, A4659, ZZ20_1, ZZ19_1, ZZ12_1, BY2285, BY834, CTS1090, CTS1643, CTS416, CTS5885, CTS6578, CTS9952, DF79, DF84, Z37492, Z34609, Z32156, Z29884, FGC11369, FGC11414, FGC11419, FGC13109, FGC13110, FGC14113, FGC14114, FGC14115, FGC14124, FGC14126, FGC14934, FGC14951, FGC17099, FGC17102, FGC20747, FGC20748, FGC20755, FGC20764, FGC20816, FGC21115, FGC21124, FGC23066, FGC23079, FGC23083, FGC30918, FGC30964, FGC30993, FGC30994, FGC31068, Z29878, Z29875, Z29624, Z29614, M756, PH2047, S1041, SK2109, Y13115, Y14468, Y14469, Y15636, Z2571, Z2566, Z2564, Z2563, Y15637, Y15639, Y15926, Y4865, Y4867, Z2560, Y5077, Y6949, Y6951, Y7363, YP4295, Z1513, Z1899, Z196, Z2547, Z2545, A7385, Z20907, Y17221, FGC21129, BY3286, BY3287, BY3288, BY3290, BY3291, BY3292, FGC13125, FGC17114, Z2567, FGC20556, A433, Y14084, Y5072, A6456, Y17446, FGC23074, Z2556, Y16018, PH133, Z2543, S7432, FGC30962, A7014, Y17787, A7380, FGC17112, Z32164, A6458, Y16863, FGC20767, Y7364, FGC23071, BY3327, BY3328, BY3329, BY3330, BY3331, BY3332

Includes the following SNPs that are NOT on the haplotree:
Z296, ZZ12_2, FGC8127, M225, BY3289, S400

The relevant SNPs for you are P312, DF27, ZZ12_1, Z2573, Z29624, Z29614 and CTS1090.
As you can see A6104 is no longer tested in the pack test. I had pay for A6104 to be tested as a single SNP at FTDNA by selecting it from my haplotree because of only having three + reads in my Big Y for it.

YSEQ is a separate company from FTDNA and also has their own Panel Test for DF27 for $88
https://www.yseq.net/product_info.php?cPath=27&products_id=10749

9307


This photo shows how it looks on FTDNA's Haplotree.
9305

razyn
05-14-2016, 05:35 PM
I went through this whole thread, and I don't see that you (curiousII) have ever mentioned your FTDNA kit number. If you are a member of the DF27 project, I can look at your FTDNA results to see if there is anything worth recommending. But only if I know who the heck you are.

You already knew when you posted on 3/20 that you were Z2573+, so I'm not sure we have reason to move you within the DF27 project anyhow, if you are already in it.

The different companies make somewhat different choices about what they want to test, or can test using their considerably different technologies. FTDNA and YSEQ have so far told you the same thing, about your "terminal" SNP -- though YSEQ has told you many more things for which you are negative. If that helps.

curiousII
05-14-2016, 10:35 PM
I went through this whole thread, and I don't see that you (curiousII) have ever mentioned your FTDNA kit number...You already knew when you posted on 3/20 that you were Z2573+...The different companies make somewhat different choices about what they want to test, or can test using their considerably different technologies. FTDNA and YSEQ have so far told you the same thing, about your "terminal" SNP -- though YSEQ has told you many more things for which you are negative. If that helps.Hi! At FTDNA I'm kit #406669, Group K in the DF27 Project. You don't have to move me if I fit there, I'm fine with all that. Nor am I disputing FTDNA's findings about my test; I was told about YSEQ here on this site and when I found out how cheap their tests are I had to take a couple just to see what's what.


I've have not seen it posted R+ before for DF27. You also don't show S250 that is the same as DF27...You may want to ask YSEQ about it...[FTDNA]R1b - DF27 SNP Pack It was on sale for $109 and is not a new test...The relevant SNPs for you are P312, DF27, ZZ12_1, Z2573, Z29624, Z29614 and CTS1090.

I'll send them an email about that reverse primer finding. Double checked my FTDNA Dashboard and Haplotree pages and that's the quoted price, $119. If that's a good test for me a $10 difference isn't enough to keep me off of it. Of course, YSEQ's a bit lower than either of FTDNA's prices. And right, there's that ZZ12_1 SNP again, relevant but with no way to test for it. Other than a bigY, of course.

I've read about the Full Genomes Y Elite 2 test for $775 and how it tests for even more SNPs than the bigY does. That is a couple hundred dollars more, but honestly once a person jumps into this and finds how deep the gene pool goes, it's almost worth it to take the expensive tests even if they become obsolete a year or two later due to scientific advances. Actually that's a good analogy, too, as I went sky diving once and got to see the kind of people who do that recreationally. They pack their chutes, go up, jump down, and repeat the whole thing maybe a dozen times a day. Jump right in.

Haven't found a "Philosophy" forum on this site yet, but I haven't looked all that hard. The concept of our chromosomes constantly mutating every century or so means what, I wonder? Is it still evolution, are we still evolving? Or, if a person is religious-minded, is it some kind of reaction within us by the directive of a deity? Brings us closer to or moves us farther away from a god or gods? I found a post that kind of touched upon that subject on the FTDNA site, I think it was in the DF27 Project but it's deleted now. So, if we're still constantly mutating somehow and for some reason, Z2573 being maybe 4,400 years old is older or younger than the norm? If older, the lack of recent mutations means that it's a fairly good chromosome and needs no improvement? Maybe those who are Z2573 live in climates that don't require changes in our internals to compete with the environment and whatever it is that shares it with us. Or that's not the way to look at things at all? But that does touch upon the debate whether or not the individual ethnic groups were designed to remain at the point of their origins on the planet, or if migratory habits were permissible by whatever it is that controls the mutations in our genes.

Thanks much to both of you.

curiousII
05-16-2016, 10:12 AM
An email I got from YSEQ:

R stands for the mixed base "A or G" in IUPAC code.
http://www.bioinformatics.org/sms/iupac.html

9336

In the sequencing trace we see both bases for most people that are DF27+. All ancestral testers have only a G-. The A+ allele could be potentially as well on the X chromosome. We try to filter this out by our primer design, but we can't exclude that there is a mutation at the primer binding site as well. To make you aware of this, we report the mixed base R.

I hope this helps,


Thomas

____________________________________

Really, no one's seen a result like this before? First!

razyn
05-16-2016, 01:03 PM
I think what many of us haven't seen is an email from Thomas explaining this detail. YFull uses those IUPAC codes, if you look up any unstable or recurrent SNP position in their chromosome browser. FTDNA assumes most customers aren't interested in that level of detail, and just reports something like "no-call or heterozygous call," in a footnote explaining the asterisk in a call such as DF27*. In this case, I assume he's explaining why you see an R where you expect to see C, A, T or G.

But we've known since its discovery that DF27 is hard to call. After about the first year, FTDNA started charging an extra ten bucks to test it. And that was while Thomas still ran their lab.

Ric
05-16-2016, 02:05 PM
To the admin: If curiousII or I, create an Evolution thread in a relevant section, i'll move this message to this tread.

PS, to curiousII : what about in the General section, something like : "Mechanisms of Evolution" ?

I created the thread "Philosophy and Mechanisms of Evolution" and copy pasted my message there.

curiousII
05-29-2016, 06:24 PM
PS, to curiousII : what about in the General section, something like : "Mechanisms of Evolution" ?

I created the thread "Philosophy and Mechanisms of Evolution" and copy pasted my message there.

Thanks, that's an interesting thread.

I just ordered a CTS623 test from YSEQ for a paltry $17.50 as this is a rare and lonely gold colored SNP on my Haplotree. I just posted a long and involved comment about the DF27 SNP test at FTDNA and its great color coding, then I noticed I already mentioned it here a while back. As I believe most of the included SNPs in that test would be negative for me, I've held back until I have a whole lot of extra $100 bills to throw around before taking it.

REWM
05-30-2016, 08:11 PM
Do you still have the blue for A6104 on FTDNA's Tree?

I just ordered A6266 from YSEQ to confirm my Big Y that I should be negative for it as I already tested positive for FGC32106.

I'm hoping to adding more men to the R-Z2573 group with YSEQ's updated R1b-DF27 Panel for Z2573.
9530

https://www.yseq.net/product_info.php?products_id=10749

curiousII
05-30-2016, 09:00 PM
Do you still have the blue for A6104 on FTDNA's Tree?Yes, it's still bright blue. Speaking of which, I just found this on YSEQ: https://www.yseq.net/product_info.php?products_id=21375

I've been browsing around FTDNA's family surname projects and I noticed there's a Morris Project there. I'm in a Harris Project, but Harris is a fairly common name and I don't know how specific it is. I do have a couple of Harris matches at 37 Markers, and I think I'm related somehow to two who trace their line to a Harris from Bristol, England, in 1700. That is really great, if true, and I'd like to find the common denominator there.

I'm in an mtDNA project on my mom's side, but that's not even on the FTDNA website and the only project I've found that has an external forum. I do have a couple of mtDNA 0 GD hits and I've been in touch with one who must be a relation as we're an exact mtDNA match, mutations and all. But he has a different surname.

Anyhow, if you're the same fellow I've been speaking with at the FTDNA DF27 Project, I'd like to get involved with the DF27 Yahoo group, but like I said I had such drama back when I first got a computer and before I found out about tracking cookies and sp@m I really need to think about it.

I've looked at the Z2573 SNP results and we seem to have a lot of negatives, comparatively. Our R1b hits go so far but then really hit a blank wall. Is that the same for, say, M222 or U106 subclades? Have you figured out if we're French or something? Without talking too much about myself, I had an insurance company go bankrupt on me back in the '90s when that happened a lot to American business. My account survived but only after Credit Lyonnaise bought it after the bankruptcy proceedings. I live in a small apartment complex now with a fairly high percentage of Frenchmen in it, which I find interesting. My father was a Normandy Beach vet, which always has French interest and is nice for me to mention on Memorial Day and all, but this interest in the money that he generated is from what? His military service or because we're French ourselves?

REWM
05-30-2016, 11:08 PM
Yes, it's still bright blue. Speaking of which, I just found this on YSEQ: https://www.yseq.net/product_info.php?products_id=21375

I've been browsing around FTDNA's family surname projects and I noticed there's a Morris Project there. I'm in a Harris Project, but Harris is a fairly common name and I don't know how specific it is. I do have a couple of Harris matches at 37 Markers, and I think I'm related somehow to two who trace their line to a Harris from Bristol, England, in 1700. That is really great, if true, and I'd like to find the common denominator there.

I'm in an mtDNA project on my mom's side, but that's not even on the FTDNA website and the only project I've found that has an external forum. I do have a couple of mtDNA 0 GD hits and I've been in touch with one who must be a relation as we're an exact mtDNA match, mutations and all. But he has a different surname.

Anyhow, if you're the same fellow I've been speaking with at the FTDNA DF27 Project, I'd like to get involved with the DF27 Yahoo group, but like I said I had such drama back when I first got a computer and before I found out about tracking cookies and sp@m I really need to think about it.

I've looked at the Z2573 SNP results and we seem to have a lot of negatives, comparatively. Our R1b hits go so far but then really hit a blank wall. Is that the same for, say, M222 or U106 subclades? Have you figured out if we're French or something? Without talking too much about myself, I had an insurance company go bankrupt on me back in the '90s when that happened a lot to American business. My account survived but only after Credit Lyonnaise bought it after the bankruptcy proceedings. I live in a small apartment complex now with a fairly high percentage of Frenchmen in it, which I find interesting. My father was a Normandy Beach vet, which always has French interest and is nice for me to mention on Memorial Day and all, but this interest in the money that he generated is from what? His military service or because we're French ourselves?

Yes, I added that panel.


I'm in the Morris project. I have the same problem that it's a common surname and mostly English. It's not a very active group.
There are very few who have done any SNP testing. The R-M269 men who have only seem to have tested for L21, U106 and U152 but not DF27. I can see where some are likely to be DF27+.

The mtDNA project that I'm in my closet is 1 GD.

Yes I am, but I'm only a member of the group.

I don't know about other subclade results but Z2573 has only been known recently and is about 4000 years old.
There is no way to know if we are French or not, but it would not surprise me. My Morris surname is said to be from an Old French personal name Maurice introduced to Britain by the Normans. It looks to be Western European so far to me.

curiousII
06-02-2016, 01:33 AM
Pretty fast YSEQ results. This is what I look like there now:

A5692 ChrY 6913026 6913026 G-
BZ233 ChrY 19181470 19181470 G-
CTS622 ChrY 6912974 6912974 C-
CTS623 ChrY 6912992 6912992 G+
CTS9977 ChrY 19181600 19181600 T-
DF27 ChrY 21380200 21380200 R+
FGC1180 ChrY 21380376 21380376 A-
FGC13088 ChrY 16273295 16273295 C-
FGC29815 ChrY 19181529 19181529 T-
FGC32092 ChrY 19181539 19181539 T-
FGC32179 ChrY 19181453 19181453 A-
FGC37 ChrY 6912992 6912992 G-
JN36 ChrY 6913142 6913142 G-
M1999 ChrY 6912974 6912974 C-
M9889 ChrY 16273318 16273318 G-
PF6419 ChrY 6912992 6912992 G+
PF780 ChrY 16273318 16273318 G-
PH4307 ChrY 19181517 19181517 A-
Y18498 ChrY 19181744 19181744 T-
Y9262 ChrY 21380376 21380376 A-
YP1130 ChrY 6912929 6912929 C-
Z14377 ChrY 21600052 21600052 G-
Z2573 ChrY 21600064 21600064 A+
Z29620 ChrY 16273345 16273345 C-
Z29624 ChrY 19181539 19181539 T-
Z33647 ChrY 21380183 21380183 C-
Z6923 ChrY 21380398 21380398 T-
ZS6524 ChrY 19181453 19181453 A-


By my count that's 8 more SNPs tested in my CTS623 order, and the two positives in it are CTS623 and PF6419; the latter I haven't been able to find on FTDNA's Haplotree yet. Now, CTS623 is on the Haplotree, and I should be able to contact the DF27 admins to have YSEQ's results added to my Tree there.

You know, REWM, I've been reading all the comments about the Yahoo groups and The Big Tree, and it all sounds really interesting. But you know, our results get posted around on other sites that I, for one, didn't know about. I guess I should have if I'd read all the information on the FTDNA's project's sites, but some didn't sink in. Like Glen Gohr's Harris website: http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~gohrpage/harris.html

It took me a while to realize that my test results were posted there, and that it was a public site. Meaning, of course, that a viewer doesn't need to be registered in a project to view the DNA results page. I doubt that it's all that difficult to match the kit numbers up with the persons behind them.

Sounds like you people are having fun in those groups, but I don't know. Us being Z2573: is it important to things overall to have our results added to the rest? Aren't there that many of that haplogroup? But those projects are all bigY and the comparable tests from other companies, aren't they?

edit: I just notice that YSEQ has a test for A6104 so I ordered one. If I'd of known that a few days ago I could have added it to my last order, but it must be a new add-on since the Morris Panel got started. Anyway, now I get to see what that SNP and whatever other ones are included in that test'll look like. Nice to get another positive once in a while.

REWM
06-03-2016, 07:34 PM
I suppose it's like that for anything that is posted on the internet. I don't post anything I would'nt want known.

I do think it's important to add our results for comparison. Especially for Z2573 which their are so few of us and so much that is yet unknown. Not all project groups are for Big Y. On YSEQ there is a private group for Z2573 that I run that uses kit numbers not names to compare what has been tested or should be within our group.

A6266 ChrY 9407778 came back from YSEQ T- as expected. Since A6266 and FGC32106 are parallel SNPs under A6104 and it's equivalents. Using YFull's age estimation methodology that would have had to occur within the last 225 years.

BTW - A6104 has been available for a about a year along with many other downstream Z2573 SNPs. Your test should come back A6104-.
I ordered V1978 today that Big Y has us positive for from Trombetta et al (2015).

curiousII
06-04-2016, 01:18 AM
I do think it's important to add our results for comparison. Especially for Z2573 which their are so few of us and so much that is yet unknown.OK, I follow your lead.
Your test should come back A6104-.Great, more red numbers.

I ordered V1978 today that Big Y has us positive for...That's what I just did, too. A $35 price tag at YSEQ means what, I wonder?

This is an email I got from an admin at the FTDNA DF27 Project. It's kind of self-explanatory; I thought YSEQ results could be punched into the Haplotree there:

If the result is from YSEQ, YFull or FGC analysis, or BritainsDNA, or the Big Tree (from the BigY .vcf file, but not visible to the customer or a admin, until Alex or somebody picks it out) — those things aren’t known to the FTDNA computer. And it generates those red or green haplogroup numbers, from what it does know. So I can move you to a better group, if YSEQ results indicate I should — but I can’t make that result (from YSEQ) visible in your FTDNA display. You can, by typing it in to your “Paternal Ancestral Name” field — if you want it visible to other project members. So far, only a few people have bothered to do that.

edit: I saw that I'd ordered two V1978 tests rather than the one I'd meant to. I thought I'd caught this as I've almost ordered multiple SNPs before. Need to watch the cart contents as you put your order through.

razyn
06-04-2016, 03:01 AM
(from the BigY .vcf file, but not visible to the customer or a admin, until Alex or somebody picks it out)

I should have said, "an" admin. At least now I know who curiousII is.

curiousII
06-04-2016, 02:57 PM
I should have said, "an" admin. At least now I know who curiousII is.Awww...Good grammar is important, though. Personally, I'm not too overly concerned about writing in the active voice. And, I like "to be." It's so Shakespearean I don't know why using it now brands a soul permanently as a writer in the passive voice.

"It was a dark and stormy evening" is a lot of fun, too: http://www.bulwer-lytton.com/

REWM
06-04-2016, 08:00 PM
I hope you didn't take that as a suggestion to test for V1978. I was only mentioning it as a SNP of interest that I wanted tested.

curiousII
06-05-2016, 05:14 AM
I hope you didn't take that as a suggestion to test for V1978.Too late, done deal. No problem, though, as these are cheap and YSEQ's letting me leave my overpayment there to apply toward my next SNP test, whatever that might be.

I notice that Morris Panel is $300+. Lot of SNPs in there? I didn't count.

REWM
06-05-2016, 02:27 PM
Too late, done deal. No problem, though, as these are cheap and YSEQ's letting me leave my overpayment there to apply toward my next SNP test, whatever that might be.

I notice that Morris Panel is $300+. Lot of SNPs in there? I didn't count.

Glad they are crediting you the money.
Yes there is 30 SNPs in the Morris Panel. Still much less than paying $575 for the BigY.

curiousII
06-05-2016, 04:26 PM
Yes there is 30 SNPs in the Morris Panel. Still much less than paying $575 for the BigY.I really regret not taking the bigY; I had the money for it, too, but I don't think I saw any ads for it anywhere when I chose FTDNA for my y and mtDNA tests. But it's all still good, and I'm really appreciative of being steered to YSEQ.

I've made note of my new positive in the "About Me" blurb box in the FTDNA Personal Profile page. Not as pretty as a multi-colored Haplotree, but still OK.

On YSEQ there is a private group for Z2573 that I run...Keep an eye on my results. If you think they'd be of any assistance to your group, great.

jeanL
06-06-2016, 07:43 PM
So all of you know that yseq offers the R1b-DF27 panel. (https://www.yseq.net/product_info.php?cPath=27&products_id=10749) Thing is that through single SNP testing I found out I am R1b-Z296. Thus I'm wondering if is more economical to simply take the panel test and get a final SNPs or if I should test for R1b-Z209 and R1b-DF17. As you can see in the following tree R1b-Z209 is quite bushy.

9669

What do you fellows recommend I do? I was thinking perhaps they do a sale for father's day and then I can go for the panel; but any input would be appreciated. FWIW my paternal lineage is Basque; but from 23andme I know that I am not on the R1b-M153 branch because I tested negative for that SNP.

ADW_1981
06-07-2016, 01:03 AM
So all of you know that yseq offers the R1b-DF27 panel. (https://www.yseq.net/product_info.php?cPath=27&products_id=10749) Thing is that through single SNP testing I found out I am R1b-Z296. Thus I'm wondering if is more economical to simply take the panel test and get a final SNPs or if I should test for R1b-Z209 and R1b-DF17. As you can see in the following tree R1b-Z209 is quite bushy.

9669

What do you fellows recommend I do? I was thinking perhaps they do a sale for father's day and then I can go for the panel; but any input would be appreciated. FWIW my paternal lineage is Basque; but from 23andme I know that I am not on the R1b-M153 branch because I tested negative for that SNP.

Do you match the NS cluster markers? Especially for DYS448 = 18? That would be a good indicator to test Z209 panel.

Webb
06-07-2016, 03:40 AM
Do you match the NS cluster markers? Especially for DYS448 = 18? That would be a good indicator to test Z209 panel.

It is actually this combination for the North/South Cluster or as Richard Rocca wants to rename it, the South/Sothwest Cluster. I guess Nordtvedt was confused when he coined the term. Heavy sarcasm. Anyway:

dys437 = 14
dys448 = 18
Y-GATA H4 = 10

ADW_1981
06-07-2016, 03:53 AM
It is actually this combination for the North/South Cluster or as Richard Rocca wants to rename it, the South/Sothwest Cluster. I guess Nordtvedt was confused when he coined the term. Heavy sarcasm. Anyway:

dys437 = 14
dys448 = 18
Y-GATA H4 = 10

I only mentioned 1 marker because it was the most reliable one. ie: my H4 is 11 instead of 10

ArmandoR1b
06-07-2016, 04:48 AM
So all of you know that yseq offers the R1b-DF27 panel. (https://www.yseq.net/product_info.php?cPath=27&products_id=10749) Thing is that through single SNP testing I found out I am R1b-Z296. Thus I'm wondering if is more economical to simply take the panel test and get a final SNPs or if I should test for R1b-Z209 and R1b-DF17. As you can see in the following tree R1b-Z209 is quite bushy.

9669

What do you fellows recommend I do? I was thinking perhaps they do a sale for father's day and then I can go for the panel; but any input would be appreciated. FWIW my paternal lineage is Basque; but from 23andme I know that I am not on the R1b-M153 branch because I tested negative for that SNP.
It's a lot more economical to get the DF27 Panel than to do individual testing. That's why the panel was created.

Webb
06-07-2016, 02:01 PM
So all of you know that yseq offers the R1b-DF27 panel. (https://www.yseq.net/product_info.php?cPath=27&products_id=10749) Thing is that through single SNP testing I found out I am R1b-Z296. Thus I'm wondering if is more economical to simply take the panel test and get a final SNPs or if I should test for R1b-Z209 and R1b-DF17. As you can see in the following tree R1b-Z209 is quite bushy.

9669

What do you fellows recommend I do? I was thinking perhaps they do a sale for father's day and then I can go for the panel; but any input would be appreciated. FWIW my paternal lineage is Basque; but from 23andme I know that I am not on the R1b-M153 branch because I tested negative for that SNP.

Lets everyone take a step back for a second. According to YFull, Z296 is at the same level as Z209. So if this is the case, and you tested positive for Z296, then you are most likely positive for SZ209 and I would take that pack or panel. Keep in mind that the North/South Cluster starts at Z209 and ends at M153, or at least a few snps below M153. So in this run, Z209 is the oldest and most spread out, while M153 is one of the youngest and seems concentrated in the Basque region. If you tested negative for M153, you could still be positive for say Z214, which is just up from M153 and has a strong presence in Spain and surrounding areas including the Basque region. I am sure ArmandoR1b will chime in with something witty, but this is the gist. So again, if you are for sure positive for Z296, which according to YFull is at the same location as Z209, then we already know that if you tested Z209, you would most likely test positive for it. So you next choice would be a test to isolate which branch you are off of the North/South Cluster. I know FTDNA has a Z209 pack. I don't know about Yseq.

ArmandoR1b
06-07-2016, 02:14 PM
Lets everyone take a step back for a second. According to YFull, Z296 is at the same level as Z209. So if this is the case, and you tested positive for Z296, then you are most likely positive for SZ209 and I would take that pack or panel. Keep in mind that the North/South Cluster starts at Z209 and ends at M153, or at least a few snps below M153. So in this run, Z209 is the oldest and most spread out, while M153 is one of the youngest and seems concentrated in the Basque region. If you tested negative for M153, you could still be positive for say Z214, which is just up from M153 and has a strong presence in Spain and surrounding areas including the Basque region. I am sure ArmandoR1b will chime in with something witty, but this is the gist. So again, if you are for sure positive for Z296, which according to YFull is at the same location as Z209, then we already know that if you tested Z209, you would most likely test positive for it. So you next choice would be a test to isolate which branch you are off of the North/South Cluster. I know FTDNA has a Z209 pack. I don't know about Yseq.
I already had taken a step back so another one is not needed. jeanL hasn't tested with FTDNA and has not indicated a desire to do so and I already knew that. Yseq does not have a Z209 Panel and I already knew that. His best option under those circumstances is the DF27 SNP panel.

Z296 is an ancestor of Z209. They aren't on the same level. See Alex Williamson's tree. It shows Z296 on the same level as Z272 and Z209 is one level down. http://www.ytree.net/DisplayTree.php?blockID=188&star=false

The DF27 SNP panel shows the same - https://www.yseq.net/product_info.php?cPath=27&products_id=10749

Alex Williamson's tree also shows Iberians and Latin Americans in a lot of different subclades of Z296 including DF17 which is another reason getting an SNP panel test is the cheapest way to go.

razyn
06-07-2016, 03:02 PM
It is actually this combination for the North/South Cluster or as Richard Rocca wants to rename it, the South/Southwest Cluster.

I don't recall having seen Richard Rocca suggest that, but it is somewhat true that this cluster is quite prominent within that subset of DF27 that made it all the way southwest to Iberia.

However, it's also pretty prominent in the parts of DF27 that never got there in the first place, as it's older than that Copper Age (and later) migration.

When Z196 was offered as a test, five or six months before DF27 was announced as its parent, the first positives found among those P312* people testing for it were almost all N/S Cluster members. For a few months in 2011 it was primarily people with that signature of STR off-modals (or at least a couple of them) who were ordering the Z196 test, and finding that they were in fact Z196+. After the original Geno2 chip was introduced, and it became obvious that Z195 was easier to test, that was the SNP of choice for identifying the same level of the tree. Nowadays we have a Z209 SNP Pack, which finds most of the same people -- to a much higher state of subclade resolution, thanks in large part to the Zenker family's generosity in funding NextGen tests for bearers of this STR pattern from all over Europe.

But the Z195- side of the DF27 tree (aka ZZ12+) is also found north, south, east and west of pretty much any place in Europe one stands, and looks around. It just has had more successful competitors, farther east. Some subclades of ZZ12, also, can be found in the south and southwest extremities of Europe. And some can't. This depends on where the migrating patrilineal ancestors fell off the cart, or out of the boat; stopped to dig ore, found grass for their cattle, planted their grape vines -- whatever. Migrations cause messy genetic maps, and make footnotes longer than most people want to read.

With respect to Armando's post while I was writing this:
Z296 is an ancestor of Z209. They aren't on the same level. See Alex Williamson's tree. It shows Z296 on the same level as Z272 and Z209 is one level down. http://www.ytree.net/DisplayTree.php...188&star=false

That's true, but it appears to be true only for DF17 -- which almost never has the full STR signature of the N/S/E/W Cluster. [The most stable difference is that DF17+ nearly always has DYS437=15; but none of the three Cluster off-modals is the modal value for DF17.] So if you have the three off-modals mentioned by Webb, and already know you're Z296+, you should get a much better return on your investment with the Z209 SNP Pack. Only DF17+ people would be Z296+, and also find it more economical to take the DF27 SNP Pack. Everybody else would learn from the latter that they were Z209+, and still needed to buy another SNP Pack.

Finally, it should be noted that this advice about the three off-modals applies to males who know they are not U106+. About nine years ago, the N/S cluster was something to look for if you had already taken a "Deep Clade Test," and were P312+ but nothing positive below that.

ArmandoR1b
06-07-2016, 03:17 PM
That's true, but it appears to be true only for DF17 -- which almost never has the full STR signature of the N/S/E/W Cluster. [The most stable difference is that DF17+ nearly always has DYS437=15; but none of the three Cluster off-modals is the modal value for DF17.] So if you have the three off-modals mentioned by Webb, and already know you're Z296+, you should get a much better return on your investment with the Z209 SNP Pack. Only DF17+ people would be Z296+, and also find it more economical to take the DF27 SNP Pack. Everybody else would learn from the latter that they were Z209+, and still needed to buy another SNP Pack.
That would be great info for jeanL if he had tested at FTDNA, or had indicated a desire to, or if Yseq offered a Z209 SNP Panel.

Webb
06-07-2016, 03:21 PM
That would be great info for jeanL if he had tested at FTDNA, or had indicated a desire to, or if Yseq offered a Z209 SNP Panel.

Yes, but all options are better than just a few. This might be enough information to sway him to test the Z209 snp pack at FTDNA. While more expensive, it might give him more information. Plus, he never said he was never going to test with FTDNA, he never mentioned FTDNA, just Yseq. But before he pulls that trigger, it might be useful for him to know that FTDNA offers the Z209 snp pack.

ArmandoR1b
06-07-2016, 03:39 PM
Yes, but all options are better than just a few. This might be enough information to sway him to test the Z209 snp pack at FTDNA. While more expensive, it might give him more information. Plus, he never said he was never going to test with FTDNA, he never mentioned FTDNA, just Yseq. But before he pulls that trigger, it might be useful for him to know that FTDNA offers the Z209 snp pack.The Z209 SNP pack at FTDNA might give him more info than the Yseq DF27 SNP panel but there is no guarantee and he would have to spend more money and wait longer for the results because he would he would have to buy a 12 marker test first for $59 plust $10 shipping then order the Z209 SNP pack at a higher price than than the Yseq DF27 SNP panel. So at least $70 more to maybe find a few more SNPs at FTDNA. I think that should help him make up his mind.

jeanL
06-07-2016, 03:47 PM
That would be great info for jeanL if he had tested at FTDNA, or had indicated a desire to, or if Yseq offered a Z209 SNP Panel.

Would I have to buy an STR Panel with FTDNA? Or can I do a SNP Panel 'a la carté'?

EDIT: Never Mind! I see the response above! Thanks!

Can anyone provide the link to the SNP panel at FTDNA.

PS: I think I'm gonna wait til father's day to see if they(FTDNA or yseq) do a sale. Otherwise, I'll probably just go with the DF27 panel then.

razyn
06-07-2016, 04:14 PM
It's my assumption that JeanL isn't the only person who will ever read this thread, and YSEQ customers aren't the only ones who will see the advice here about where to test for new DF27 SNPs and subclades. So, that part of my post is for the broader group.

ArmandoR1b
06-07-2016, 04:21 PM
Would I have to buy an STR Panel with FTDNA? Or can I do a SNP Panel 'a la carté'?

EDIT: Never Mind! I see the response above! Thanks!

Can anyone provide the link to the SNP panel at FTDNA.

PS: I think I'm gonna wait til father's day to see if they(FTDNA or yseq) do a sale. Otherwise, I'll probably just go with the DF27 panel then.

FTDNA never has a sale on the 12 marker STR test. So you would have to buy a 37 marker test or better so the cost goes up for a slightly better pack, compared to just the Yseq DF27 pack, but you get the addition of seeing if you match anyone STR wise. Mikewww posted info about the Z209 SNP pack here (http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?5731-SNP-pack-for-Z209-%28N-S-cluster-Z210-Z220-etc-%29&p=118537&viewfull=1#post118537). The price is at $119 right now. You would have to have an FTDNA account to see the page that has the Z209 SNP pack - https://www.familytreedna.com/upgrades.aspx?ot=ADV

If FTDNA has a sale on the Z209 pack you might be able to call FTDNA and have them sell you the 12 marker test and the Z209 SNP pack, at the same time, after telling them that you have tested down to Z296 at Yseq. Otherwise, you would have to wait for the next sale that includes the SNP packs. FTDNA sales don't always include SNP packs.

REWM
06-07-2016, 10:47 PM
Pretty fast YSEQ results. This is what I look like there now:

A5692 ChrY 6913026 6913026 G-
BZ233 ChrY 19181470 19181470 G-
CTS622 ChrY 6912974 6912974 C-
CTS623 ChrY 6912992 6912992 G+
CTS9977 ChrY 19181600 19181600 T-
DF27 ChrY 21380200 21380200 R+
FGC1180 ChrY 21380376 21380376 A-
FGC13088 ChrY 16273295 16273295 C-
FGC29815 ChrY 19181529 19181529 T-
FGC32092 ChrY 19181539 19181539 T-
FGC32179 ChrY 19181453 19181453 A-
FGC37 ChrY 6912992 6912992 G-
JN36 ChrY 6913142 6913142 G-
M1999 ChrY 6912974 6912974 C-
M9889 ChrY 16273318 16273318 G-
PF6419 ChrY 6912992 6912992 G+
PF780 ChrY 16273318 16273318 G-
PH4307 ChrY 19181517 19181517 A-
Y18498 ChrY 19181744 19181744 T-
Y9262 ChrY 21380376 21380376 A-
YP1130 ChrY 6912929 6912929 C-
Z14377 ChrY 21600052 21600052 G-
Z2573 ChrY 21600064 21600064 A+
Z29620 ChrY 16273345 16273345 C-
Z29624 ChrY 19181539 19181539 T-
Z33647 ChrY 21380183 21380183 C-
Z6923 ChrY 21380398 21380398 T-
ZS6524 ChrY 19181453 19181453 A-





My last two orders from YSEQ came back in four days.

My results are back for V1978 G to A ChrY 8439156 A+

curiousII
06-08-2016, 12:07 AM
My last two orders from YSEQ came back in four days.

My results are back for V1978 G to A ChrY 8439156 A+Mine are in, too. They must have had a good holiday as their return time has been halved.

All mine are negative, nothing new to add. Doesn't look like a DF27 test at either company will do me much good, I'm stuck for the time being.

A5692 ChrY 6913026 6913026 G-
A6104 ChrY 23013627 23013627 C-
A8974 ChrY 23013635 23013635 C-
BY654 ChrY 8439096 8439096 G-
BZ233 ChrY 19181470 19181470 G-
CTS11208 ChrY 23013686 23013686 G-
CTS622 ChrY 6912974 6912974 C-
CTS623 ChrY 6912992 6912992 G+
CTS9977 ChrY 19181600 19181600 T-
DF27 ChrY 21380200 21380200 R+
FGC1180 ChrY 21380376 21380376 A-
FGC13088 ChrY 16273295 16273295 C-
FGC17501 ChrY 8438883 8438883 C-
FGC29815 ChrY 19181529 19181529 T-
FGC32092 ChrY 19181539 19181539 T-
FGC32179 ChrY 19181453 19181453 A-
FGC34573 ChrY 23013809 23013809 C-
FGC37 ChrY 6912992 6912992 G-
FGC39866 ChrY 8438924 8438924 G-
FGC42418 ChrY 23013635 23013635 C-
JN36 ChrY 6913142 6913142 G-
M1999 ChrY 6912974 6912974 C-
M970 ChrY 8438823 8438823 G-
M9889 ChrY 16273318 16273318 G-
PF6419 ChrY 6912992 6912992 G+
PF7124 ChrY 8439009 8439009 C-
PF780 ChrY 16273318 16273318 G-
PH4307 ChrY 19181517 19181517 A-
V1978 ChrY 8439156 8439156 G-
Y12912 ChrY 23013800 23013800 C-
Y18298 ChrY 23013536 23013536 T-
Y18498 ChrY 19181744 19181744 T-
Y9262 ChrY 21380376 21380376 A-
YP1130 ChrY 6912929 6912929 C-
Z14377 ChrY 21600052 21600052 G-
Z2573 ChrY 21600064 21600064 A+
Z29620 ChrY 16273345 16273345 C-
Z29624 ChrY 19181539 19181539 T-
Z31670 ChrY 23013870 23013870 T-
Z33647 ChrY 21380183 21380183 C-
Z6923 ChrY 21380398 21380398 T-
Z8854 ChrY 8439156 8439156 G-
ZS6524 ChrY 19181453 19181453 A-

curiousII
06-09-2016, 12:29 AM
I used my overpayment to YSEQ for an L151 SNP test. It appears I'm not getting too far downstream so maybe I should double-check some upstreams. L151 is one of my "presumed positives" and my P310 is green. But double-checking at this price doesn't hurt much.

Plus I'm curious about how many SNPs will be tested with this one order. P310'll be included, I imagine. That's one reason I've been posting all my results here, in case anyone was wondering how many SNPs were tested in each order.

thetick
06-12-2016, 12:36 AM
Nowadays unless you are very deep in SNP tests I always recommend the Big Y or FCS if the price is not a deterrent. I found it much better to save for years for the Big Y... yes I did just that and am VERY happy I did as Alex found multiple previously unknown subclades. If I did the SNP guessing game I would have spent more money, known less and left multiple unfound SNPs for others to find later.

Note how deep in DF27 my current terminal SNP is:
DF27/S250 > Z195/S355 > Z198 > ZS312 > Z262 > M167 > Z264 > Z205 > Z206/S235 > Z208/S362 > Z207/S251 > CTS9762 > CTS4299 > ZZ42 > FGC11245 > A7080

Again Big Y and FCS are not for everyone as the price is very high.

curiousII
06-29-2016, 08:58 PM
Got the latest back from YSEQ: My L151's positive. Like I didn't think it would be (not), but there's nothing left for me to test downstream now. I get to see everyone else find new subclades and all, but I'm bottomed out so there's nothing left for me to waste my dimes on except random spots upstream, which L151 is. I imagine I'll do the FTDNA DF27 test before the year's out, but I doubt that I'll get even one positive.

So, here's me at YSEQ now. If you read this, REWM, thanks for the response on the other thread. Obviously I'm still having problems reading my Haplotree, and I thought FGC 20747 was downstream instead of being branched off like it is. That SNP sure caught a lot of conversation, didn't it?

Anyway:

A5692 ChrY 6913026 6913026 G-
A6104 ChrY 23013627 23013627 C-
A8974 ChrY 23013635 23013635 C-
A9306 ChrY 16492288 16492288 A-
BY654 ChrY 8439096 8439096 G-
BZ233 ChrY 19181470 19181470 G-
CTS11208 ChrY 23013686 23013686 G-
CTS5820 ChrY 16492269 16492269 C-
CTS5821 ChrY 16492382 16492382 A-
CTS622 ChrY 6912974 6912974 C-
CTS623 ChrY 6912992 6912992 G+
CTS9977 ChrY 19181600 19181600 T-
DF27 ChrY 21380200 21380200 R+
FGC1180 ChrY 21380376 21380376 A-
FGC13088 ChrY 16273295 16273295 C-
FGC17501 ChrY 8438883 8438883 C-
FGC20494 ChrY 16492450 16492450 A-
FGC29815 ChrY 19181529 19181529 T-
FGC32092 ChrY 19181539 19181539 T-
FGC32179 ChrY 19181453 19181453 A-
FGC34573 ChrY 23013809 23013809 C-
FGC37 ChrY 6912992 6912992 G-
FGC39866 ChrY 8438924 8438924 G-
FGC40311 ChrY 16492431 16492431 G-
FGC42418 ChrY 23013635 23013635 C-
JN36 ChrY 6913142 6913142 G-
L151 ChrY 16492547 16492547 T+
L210 ChrY 16492197 16492197 A-
L254 ChrY 16492652 16492652 T-
L626 ChrY 16492529 16492529 C-
L673 ChrY 16492382 16492382 A-
L731 ChrY 16492454 16492454 G-
M1999 ChrY 6912974 6912974 C-
M970 ChrY 8438823 8438823 G-
M9889 ChrY 16273318 16273318 G-
PF4015 ChrY 16492382 16492382 A-
PF6419 ChrY 6912992 6912992 G+
PF6542 ChrY 16492547 16492547 T+
PF7124 ChrY 8439009 8439009 C-
PF780 ChrY 16273318 16273318 G-
PH4307 ChrY 19181517 19181517 A-
S6321 ChrY 16492320 16492320 G-
V1978 ChrY 8439156 8439156 G-
Y12912 ChrY 23013800 23013800 C-
Y18298 ChrY 23013536 23013536 T-
Y18498 ChrY 19181744 19181744 T-
Y9262 ChrY 21380376 21380376 A-
YP1130 ChrY 6912929 6912929 C-
Z14377 ChrY 21600052 21600052 G-
Z2573 ChrY 21600064 21600064 A+
Z29620 ChrY 16273345 16273345 C-
Z29624 ChrY 19181539 19181539 T-
Z31670 ChrY 23013870 23013870 T-
Z33647 ChrY 21380183 21380183 C-
Z6923 ChrY 21380398 21380398 T-
Z8854 ChrY 8439156 8439156 G-
ZS6524 ChrY 19181453 19181453 A-
ZS891 ChrY 16492601 16492601 A-

razyn
06-29-2016, 10:31 PM
I guess this thread is about as good a place as any to cross-post something I said today on the Facebook YFull group. Doing so, and cross-posting it, was prompted by the Yahoo [R1b-YDNA] group's recent discussion, to me rather appalling, of ISOGG criteria -- and closely related preferences of our several testing companies, analysis teams or individuals, for exclusion of problematic SNPs. Basically, if testing for a SNP is difficult, or there is some other reason (however remote, or overly general) to doubt its Gibraltar-like stability, they intend ipso facto to leave it off their tree. And the attitude runs very deeply in their veins:
I've done this long enough to know what is accepted and what isn't. You won't get far trying to correct me. A smart person said that yesterday, to another smart person; it hardly matters who, since the attitude is broadly shared. But then they all set their own (different) criteria.

Anyway, here's the illustration of why that's a problem, that I posted earlier today:

I'd like to express my discontent with the [YFull] positioning of Y17221 directly below P312. This SNP is below DF27 (which usually is not called in BigY tests); ZZ12 (on the P5 palindrome, so you don't display it); and the triple-nyet position that includes A6387 (on the P1 palindrome), BY3235 (in the DYZ19 repeat region), and A6137 (an Indel). I'll paste in a picture of Alex Williamson's analysis of that problematic level. Be that as it may, a growing number of members of the DF27 project's subgroup N have tested positive for Y17221, and that is their terminal SNP displayed in green by FTDNA.

9997

Menchaca
06-30-2016, 03:00 AM
So, in my case, if Alex has me as P312>DF27>ZZ12_1>FGC20747>FGC20764>ZZ57 I will only be a P312>FGC20747>FGC20764 at Yfull. This only means loosing information.

lgmayka
06-30-2016, 09:32 AM
I'd like to express my discontent with the [YFull] positioning of Y17221 directly below P312. This SNP is below DF27 (which usually is not called in BigY tests);
If you have evidence (e.g., FTDNA Y-SNP results) that an R-Y17221 man is also DF27+ , I suggest you submit it to YFull. The email address on YFull's web site is acgt@yfull.com .

I did this for R-Y18894 (https://yfull.com/tree/R-Y18894/) as soon as I submitted the BAM file for a member of that clade. I knew that the BAM file had no result for Z49, but the clade member had previously tested positive in an individual Z49 SNP test.

razyn
06-30-2016, 01:12 PM
The comment I posted was sufficient, and Vladimir has already replied that he will move that SNP under DF27. YFull at least has a DF27. The other two levels between it and Y17221 presumably still won't appear at YFull, though.

I think Alex Williamson's more open-minded interpretation of what constitutes a branching point makes phylogenetic sense; and arbitrary exclusion* of phylogenetically determinative events, that have clearly happened, is an example of having "thrown out the baby with the bath water." It makes some branches appear younger than they really are, and the tree less bushy than it really is. The very strict rules for exclusion of a SNP, e.g. from the ISOGG tree (but that is far from being the only such example), were designed to keep us from wasting our time on irrelevancies. Getting the tree right is not irrelevant. My own preferences have more to do with sorting the DF27 project; but finding the branching points that are real (or were real, when the branch grew off its trunk or larger branch) is also necessary for observing migratory patterns, counting SNPs, using the late Bill Howard's RCC method for dating of clades, and so on.

*Usually because they can back-mutate; or are harder to find, with the technology preferred by the person or organization making the decision to exclude them.

lgmayka
06-30-2016, 03:25 PM
I think Alex Williamson's more open-minded interpretation of what constitutes a branching point makes phylogenetic sense;
That depends on the purpose of the tree.

As I have explained before, one of the main purposes of a haplotree is to classify lineages for which high-quality full-Y sequencing is impossible or prohibitively expensive:
- An archaeologist with an ancient DNA sample
- An anthropologist with hundreds of research samples
- A third-world consumer who cannot afford the Big Y.
These people need a tree with reliable branching structure, not flaky locations prone to back-mutation or misinterpretation.

I have previously given the example of ZZ11, which has back-mutated at least 3 times (just among samples tested so far!).


phylogenetically determinative events, that have clearly happened
Some are not so clear. The last I heard was that Alex Williamson himself was not sure whether ZZ12 was one event or two.


It makes some branches appear younger than they really are
I would say just the opposite. The most defensible way to calibrate a haplotree is by adopting a clear, uniform, algorithmic standard for all SNPs. The unacceptable way is to give in to special pleading by financially or politically powerful subhaplogroups.


the tree less bushy than it really is.
YFull is trialing an interesting new approach for this: listing the Y-STR transitions associated with a tree node. For example, go to R-Z192 (https://yfull.com/tree/R-Z192/), click on Info, then STRs. You see this entry:


DYS512 shared with YF02736 **** 11 → 10

In other words, R-Z192 (https://yfull.com/tree/R-Z192/) shares a slow/reliable Y-STR step-mutation with YF02736, which is otherwise classified as R-U152* (https://yfull.com/tree/R-U152*/). The implication is that the DYS512 11=>10 transition probably constitutes an intermediate node between U152 and Z192.

I could imagine YFull extending this concept to indels and other mutations that do not qualify as full-fledged SNP nodes.


The very strict rules for exclusion of a SNP, e.g. from the ISOGG tree (but that is far from being the only such example), were designed to keep us from wasting our time on irrelevancies.
I disagree. I think that the #1 purpose of strict rules is to prevent misinterpretation of limited data, and to meet academia's need for the publication of defensible results.

I do recognize that other constituencies have different sets of needs. Ideally, a haplotree could present different views, depending on one's chosen parameters (i.e., based on one's needs).

razyn
06-30-2016, 06:52 PM
I disagree.
Well, good to have that cleared up. I stand by what I said, and am OK with the fact that there are other points of view. Historically, we've agreed about several other things.

The one that I think matters is the question of a SNP's dating, or relative timing vis-a-vis other SNPs. Leaving out the "flaky" ones makes a SNP like Y17221 appear to have branched much closer to the "trunk" of the DF27 tree than it actually did. ZZ12 happened some four to five thousand years ago, and in the lineage from which Y17221 descends. That it happened on a palindrome -- and thus may, in some lineages, have disappeared (or doubled itself) via RecLOH -- does not cause it to have un-happened several thousand years ago. Other things have just happened to obscure it somewhat.

And a similar sad tale could be told about the three unacceptable SNPs on the same level, directly above Y17221. They are in the photo (screen shot from Alex's Big Tree) that I attached. There may be a good SNP, somewhere, that marks the same level. There may not be. I don't feel much need to satisfy you, or some committee at ISOGG, before I can recognize that branching point.

Back when we were using Nordtvedt's and Heinela's methods, calculating age from variance, these questions about the branching points may have mattered more. On the other hand, if we had been basing our guesses on SNP-counting in 2011, pretty much everything would have had far fewer SNPs to count. I retain some fond hope that we will get a proper tree that can be used to good effect with Bill Howard's RCC method. But I don't think a bunch of hidebound exclusion rules will lead us in that direction.

REWM
06-30-2016, 09:01 PM
curiousII FGC 20747 is parallel under ZZ12 in Alex's tree.
Anything downstream so far for Z2573 from NGS testing.
http://www.ytree.net/DisplayTree.php?blockID=640&star=false

Personally I think it would be a waste of money doing the DF27 pack test.It will only tell you what you already know. Your best bet would be to do a NGS test, or wait and see if someone shares one of kit N8921 novels.Then you could also do a wish a SNP for N8921 novels yourself with YSEQ.
These are results from YSEQ. Most are from before Big Y testing.
A431 ChrY 8463781 G-
A6104 ChrY 23013627 A+
A6266 ChrY 9407778 T-
A6286 ChrY 21987310 C+
A6288 ChrY 24427512 G+
A7088 ChrY 8399030 A+
A7107 ChrY 28654900 G-
BY654 ChrY 8439096 G-
CTS11208 ChrY 23013686 G-
CTS12647 ChrY 28654796 T-
CTS251 ChrY 2843995 T-
CTS2792 ChrY 14486803 T-
CTS9977 ChrY 19181600 T-
DF27 ChrY 21380200 A+
DF79 ChrY 2843950 C-
DF84 ChrY 7730269 C-
F1175 ChrY 8399197 G-
F1224 ChrY 8463868 C-
F3630 ChrY 24427266 G-
F3816 ChrY 24427416 G-
F4097 ChrY 8399394 G-
FGC1180 ChrY 21380376 A-
FGC13088 ChrY 16273295 C-
FGC13660 ChrY 23076120 del-
FGC1546 ChrY 8399088 C-
FGC17501 ChrY 8438883 C-
FGC25704 ChrY 8399208 G+
FGC29815 ChrY 19181529 T-
FGC30596 ChrY 9407694 A-
FGC32092 ChrY 19181539 A+
FGC32106 ChrY 14486802 T+
FGC32179 ChrY 19181453 A-
FGC34573 ChrY 23013809 C-
FGC39866 ChrY 8438924 G-
FGC5040 ChrY 14486780 T-
FGC9657 ChrY 28654947 A-
L1381 ChrY 14487143 T-
L1445 ChrY 7730233 C-
L629 ChrY 14487023 A-
M11739 ChrY 28655176 T-
M5872 ChrY 8463883 C-
M6370 ChrY 8399337 A-
M649 ChrY 9407722 A-
M6931 ChrY 14486866 A-
M7376 ChrY 22062818 C-
M7583 ChrY 2844095 G-
M8555 ChrY 8399006 C-
M9347 ChrY 22062727 T+
M9551 ChrY 7730226 C-
M970 ChrY 8438823 G-
M9889 ChrY 16273318 G-
PF259 ChrY 7730226 C-
PF3942 ChrY 2843995 T-
P57 ChrY 14487066 T-
P58 ChrY 14486667 T-
PAGES00008 ChrY 14486667 T-
PF4698 ChrY 14486667 T-
PF6169 ChrY 9407722 A-
PF7022 ChrY 28655211 C-
PF7124 ChrY 8439009 C-
PF780 ChrY 16273318 G-
PH4307 ChrY 19181517 A-
S26380 ChrY 28654986 G-
S20941 ChrY 18404076 A+
S400 ChrY 22062818 C-
S250 ChrY 21380200 A+
S7174 ChrY 8463972 C-
SK1347 ChrY 8463970 C-
SK1985 ChrY 8463720 C-
SK854 ChrY 8463767 T-
V1883 ChrY 8399039 G-
V1978 ChrY 8439156 A+
Y11478 ChrY 21987247 A-
Y12693 ChrY 24427362 C-
Y12912 ChrY 23013800 C-
Y16904 ChrY 9407770 C-
Y670 ChrY 24427412 T-
Y9262 ChrY 21380376 A-
YP1823 ChrY 8399208 G+
YP4115 ChrY 8399079 C-
YSC0000657 ChrY 14487077 G-
Z14377 ChrY 21600052 G-
Z2049 ChrY 2843995 T-
Z2571 ChrY 23076115 C-
Z2573 ChrY 21600064 A+
Z29162 ChrY 21408686 C-
Z29620 ChrY 16273345 T+
Z29623 ChrY 18863549 C-
Z29624 ChrY 19181539 A+
Z29625 ChrY 21408755 T-
Z30461 ChrY 21987247 A-
Z31544 ChrY 9407663 C-
Z31670 ChrY 23013870 T-
Z32745 ChrY 21987242 T-
Z3849 ChrY 22062985 A-
Z6923 ChrY 21380398 T-
Z8086 ChrY 18863506 C-
Z8854 ChrY 8439156 A+
ZS1117 ChrY 21987428 G-
ZS2718 ChrY 8399071 G-
ZS3501 ChrY 28654850 A-

lgmayka
07-01-2016, 02:17 AM
Leaving out the "flaky" ones makes a SNP like Y17221 appear to have branched much closer to the "trunk" of the DF27 tree than it actually did.
That's not true. Let me explain again.

Every subhaplogroup presumably has some flaky SNPs such as the ones you favor. If you can put together a coherent set of automatically applicable rules that can be applied across the entire human Y-haplotree, that's great--propose it! Your proposal will almost certainly require the use of multiple mutation rates for different regions of the Y chromosome. But theoretically, it could all be made to work--but it would have to be explained thoroughly in a research paper acceptable to all major stakeholders, including academia.

In short, your proposal needs to:
- Clearly and unambiguously define exactly what these flaky SNPs are, so that an automatic algorithm can find them, across the Y chromosome and across the Y-haplotree
- Set a mutation rate for these flaky SNPs, presumably based on adequate sampling statistics.

Needless to say, special handling just for the R-P312 subhaplogroup would tend to skew time estimates, not improve them.

razyn
07-01-2016, 05:41 AM
Your proposal will almost certainly require the use of multiple mutation rates for different regions of the Y chromosome.

I disagree.

If I were to make some such proposal, and I have no desire nor intention to do so, it would not include any such imaginary construct as a mutation rate. That is a statistical approximation, only meaningful (and not massively so) with large numbers from which to derive such a "rate." Mostly, we (admins of haplogroup projects) are dealing with matching pairs; or perhaps half a dozen, if the new SNP is discovered within a reasonable pool of guys who have had NextGen sequencing (e.g. the recently discovered and rapidly blooming FGC20747 pool). We don't have large numbers, for most branches of the DF27 tree, and may not have them in what remains of my life span. But it's a large and growing tree, and currently I'm much more interested in drawing it (my job) than in pruning its weaker branches (your job, if that's what floats your boat).

Actually the image I had in mind (from seeing Y17221 directly below P312, yesterday, because of all the "flaky" SNPs YFull prefers to ignore) was the 2011 ISOGG tree, on which M153 was directly below P312. Thereby appearing
to have branched much closer to the "trunk" of the DF27 tree than it actually did.

curiousII
07-01-2016, 06:47 AM
FGC 20747 is parallel under ZZ12 in Alex's tree. Anything downstream so far for Z2573 from NGS testing...Personally I think it would be a waste of money doing the DF27 pack test. It will only tell you what you already know.Thanks for the link, and I agree, there doesn't seem to be much for me to hunt around for. With Z29620-, FGC32092-, and Z29624-, I'm shut out of all of the downstream that you got to test for. That's it, I'm bottomed out.
Your best bet would be to do a NGS test, or wait and see if someone shares one of kit N8921 novels.Then you could also do a wish a SNP for N8921 novels yourself with YSEQ.Good idea. I met a Crump once, potentially an interesting story now.

But you've got a new haplogroup now, don't you? Both your son and you are A6104? Rather, FGC32106 as it states here? What led you to test for that SNP? Random, or did you follow a trail of sorts?

JamesKane
07-01-2016, 11:18 AM
The one that I think matters is the question of a SNP's dating, or relative timing vis-a-vis other SNPs. Leaving out the "flaky" ones makes a SNP like Y17221 appear to have branched much closer to the "trunk" of the DF27 tree than it actually did. ZZ12 happened some four to five thousand years ago, and in the lineage from which Y17221 descends. That it happened on a palindrome -- and thus may, in some lineages, have disappeared (or doubled itself) via RecLOH -- does not cause it to have un-happened several thousand years ago. Other things have just happened to obscure it somewhat.

If most of the algorithms that attempt to date branches avoid the same regions that contain these SNPs, how do they impact age estimation? YFULL methodology limits the estimation to combBED regions. By definition these Y DNA segments have less than 96% similarity with other regions and do not fall in DYZ19, palindromes or STRs. That sounds similar to another set of guidelines. Iain McDonald's age analysis is also avoiding problematic regions but I don't recall seeing exactly what his definition of those is.

These mutations are largely curiosities that help reduce the bushiness at some levels. I suspect there are more to be found, which will reduce the number of direct branches under DF13 for instance. This will require more tests on instruments other than Big Y and a different set of reference aligners. Perhaps the most popular aligner in academic circles, BWA-MEM, marks these ambiguous sites with a failed quality score. This is the correct behavior because you don't know which site the reads actually belong. Because the alignment is failed the callers also ignore them, so you wouldn't have seen them at all in the 1KG set and likely we aren't seeing them in Y-Elite.

I'm not saying either direction is right or wrong as I'm largely indifferent. The information provided by including the variants isn't enhancing our knowledge of age. At best they refine a 150 year window that is insignificant compared to the std dev in the age calculation to begin with. You need an NGS test and ignore the quality warnings to detect them. The real use I have for them is that they help to improve the odds of detecting more suitable SNPs in the sparse part of the call matrix.

REWM
07-02-2016, 01:10 AM
Thanks for the link, and I agree, there doesn't seem to be much for me to hunt around for. With Z29620-, FGC32092-, and Z29624-, I'm shut out of all of the downstream that you got to test for. That's it, I'm bottomed out.Good idea. I met a Crump once, potentially an interesting story now.

But you've got a new haplogroup now, don't you? Both your son and you are A6104? Rather, FGC32106 as it states here? What led you to test for that SNP? Random, or did you follow a trail of sorts?

Unfortunately as it stands now you must be part of a yet to be discovered branch.I was hoping you would have been positive for Z29620 or Z29624/FGC32092.

Yes, my son and I have a new Terminal SNP FGC32106.
We share A6104+ along with about 35 other equivalents with FTDNA kit: 364759 who's Terminal SNP is A6266 which we are negative for.
What led me to testing for FGC32106 was by using YFull's tools which I can compare bam files with Z2573 men. Then used YSEQ's wish a SNP to test and confirm with the help from kit: 364759 also testing.

razyn
08-03-2016, 07:29 AM
We have had a couple of threads relating to A431, but I believe both of them focused initially on Armenia, and it is a good bit more widespread than that. Recently a little brother clade has popped up, although the known parent they share (below the very large Z31644 clade) is an indel (at 8742535, G-GT) so it may never show up on some trees, that are considered canonical by some researchers. The little brother was previously known (and was group F7 in the R1b-DF27 project, until a few hours ago when I renamed it F1b).

This was part of a more extensive reconstruction of F1 subclades, to agree better with Alex Williamson's Big Tree, and to see if any interesting patterns of shared off-modal STR values might turn up.

jtlefebvre
08-19-2016, 09:22 AM
A post to the original thread topic - New DF27 SNPs and Subclades.

New DF27 Subclade
The Big Tree: R-DF27>ZZ12>CTS3919
YTree: R-DF27>S4381
FTDNA: R-DF27>ZZ12_1>S4381

SNPs
CTS3919
CTS8308/S4392
Y23651
S4381
14217388-C-T

Kits
HG01518-Spain (anonymous recent)
481082-West-Flanders (Lefebure 1680s)
207754-Maryland (Wilson 1720s, probable origin in Scotland)

Any comments on how far back these men are related, or additional interpretation are greatly appreciated.

Ric
08-19-2016, 06:01 PM
A post to the original thread topic - New DF27 SNPs and Subclades.

New DF27 Subclade
The Big Tree: R-DF27>ZZ12>CTS3919
YTree: R-DF27>S4381
FTDNA: R-DF27>ZZ12_1>S4381

SNPs
CTS3919
CTS8308/S4392
Y23651
S4381
14217388-C-T

Kits
HG01518-Spain (anonymous recent)
481082-West-Flanders (Lefebure 1680s)
207754-Maryland (Wilson 1720s, probable origin in Scotland)

Any comments on how far back these men are related, or additional interpretation are greatly appreciated.

Are you a STR match with them ?

jtlefebvre
08-19-2016, 06:54 PM
Out of 111 markers, Wilson and Lefebure share mutations on DYS447, Y-GATA-H4, DYS710, Y-GATA-A10, and DYS513. However, Wilson has 16 and Lefebure 18 non-shared mutations. In Big-Y we share 20 novel variants; have one non-matching SNP (F884), and share 26,374 SNPs.

So no, not a close STR match.

Ric
08-19-2016, 11:21 PM
Out of 111 markers, Wilson and Lefebure share mutations on DYS447, Y-GATA-H4, DYS710, Y-GATA-A10, and DYS513. However, Wilson has 16 and Lefebure 18 non-shared mutations. In Big-Y we share 20 novel variants; have one non-matching SNP (F884), and share 26,374 SNPs.

So no, not a close STR match.

So you are a GD =16 or 18 at 111 maker ?

Regarding the BigY, are these shared variants real, I mean did you check that (in the pop up windows fro your BigY match) ?
If it is T to T, or X to X in general, it is not a real variant. For example, I have some BigY matchs that are announced to share 26 new variants with me, but that number falls to zero for REAL new variants.
Also, you may check the list razyn has provided to see which of the non-matching SNPs are relevant. I have a few myself that are totally irrelevant. So when FTDNA announces '3 known SNP difference', this can include such dubious SNP.

And finally, I can't be sure of that because I don't have enough data, but based on my own BigY matchs, I believe the best indicator of closeness for a BigY match is the total number of shared SNP. To me, the person I share the most SNPs is also in my df27 subgroup here, with around 27,011 SNPs. The correlation is not perfect, but in general those with the highest total number of shared snps tend to be in my clade CTS4065 (3900 years old) and those with 'only' 26000 shared total tend to be out of it. It would make sense if these numbers were clade-dependent since clades have a different age and history. Obviously, with only my own results I can't make statistics, but ~26000 seems low to me, or indicative of a relatively older common ancestor. My total number of SNP entries is 36,335 by the way.

The statistics we could do if we'd share our results...

jtlefebvre
08-21-2016, 09:17 PM
Hello Ric - I am 18 at 111.

One out of 20 novel variants is A to G - the others are T to T, C to C, G to G, etc.

I have 26,734 matching SNPs with Mr. Wilson.

Since our surnames are not based on a shared root word, and we probably were in West-Flanders and Scotland in the late 17th century, I imagine our shared ancestor was quite some time ago.

Ric
08-22-2016, 12:11 AM
Hello Ric - I am 18 at 111.

One out of 20 novel variants is A to G - the others are T to T, C to C, G to G, etc.
That makes it a 1 NV shared then, not 20. That's why you cannot use the ftdna sorting by default, which sorts first by increasing number of Different Known SNP (some being irrelevant) and then by increasing number of Shared Novel Variants.
The total number of Shared known SNP gives a better ranking of your matchs, IMO.

razyn
08-22-2016, 02:33 AM
That makes it a 1 NV shared then, not 20. That's why you cannot use the ftdna sorting by default, which sorts first by increasing number of Different Known SNP (some being irrelevant) and then by increasing number of Shared Novel Variants.
The total number of Shared known SNP gives a better ranking of your matchs, IMO.

Nah, most of the 26,000 or whatever just mean that both he and Wilson are closer kin to a monkey than to a fish. Of the ones limited to humanity, quite a few would suggest that they are more likely to be European than Asian or African. About a hundred may be more interesting than that, and of those, the ones shared with a half dozen or fewer guys (if the SNPs are real, and not recurrent) are the important ones. The bottom of the "Shared Novel Variants" list, not the top. And throw out the ones in which the known differences include the fact that the other guy is U152, L21 or U106 -- that sort of thing suggests a recurrent mutation.

Wilson and Lefebure have a number of actual SNPs in common with each other (and with one anonymous guy from 1000 Genomes):
http://www.ytree.net/DisplayTree.php?blockID=1609&star=false

I agree that their relationship is ancient, and distant, and that surnames wouldn't be much help. Also, STRs tend to become unreliable as markers of kinship (or a lack of it), as time to the MRCA increases by many centuries (let alone millennia). A strong pattern of shared off-modal values, for STRs that are slow to mutate, can be pretty good evidence of a shared SNP that is much younger than the haplogroup that established the modal (from which they differ, at those markers). Even so, the SNP is more important than some STR -- mutates less, determines more, probably marks a branch of the DF27 tree rather than a recent branch within your surname project.

Ric
08-22-2016, 01:53 PM
That's probably why ftdna doesn't include a monkey in the Y database, some people would be offended to be a match. Hmm... but they would probably sue ftdna for racism. :eyebrows:
Although if we compare with 23&me who give a % Neanderthal, nobody has ever complained or sued 23&me for being told they were 2% Neanderthal. Actually most of the time people brag about it.

Tomenable
10-27-2017, 11:27 PM
According to YSEQ, I just tested positive (C+) for FGC31068.

Should I order also M225 & S14003, or are these equivalents?

WilliamBruce
11-03-2017, 03:16 PM
I recently tested positive for S6218 (S7432) and S6219 by YSEQ. Does anyone know where these subclades of DF27 originated?

Osiris
11-03-2017, 07:47 PM
Hi, my father-in-law is under ZZ41 like you but in BY3291. On your side looks like all the members of S6219 are from the British Isles with other S7432 men in Puerto Rico and Norway. But the SNPs are several thousand years old so it's hard to estimate when they moved into the areas they are now.

curiousII
06-23-2018, 01:52 PM
Got some YFull results now that they've had time to get into my BAM file. I'm R1b>P312*>DF27*>Z2573*>Z2552* with the Z2552 being new and all the asterisks meaning I don't know what. From what I can tell Z2552 is downstream somehow from Z2573 but I thought asterisks meant that's where the SNP stopped; there's nothing under it.

When I click on my STR's I still have the VCF file, not my BAM file results which I think is interesting as, since they've gotten into my BAM file to verify my haplogroup, it seems they'd have my STR's, too. When I check the group I'm in, I still can't compare STR's with the other members as many of my STR's don't show.

Anyway, that was worth the wait, I guess. I wonder why I'm still Z2573 at Family Tree and The Big Tree?

lgmayka
06-23-2018, 07:09 PM
I'm R1b>P312*>DF27*>Z2573*>Z2552* with the Z2552 being new and all the asterisks meaning I don't know what. From what I can tell Z2552 is downstream somehow from Z2573 but I thought asterisks meant that's where the SNP stopped; there's nothing under it.
The notice from FTDNA probably said (emphasis mine):
---
NOTE: All changes such as new subclade, new SNPs, the sample position on the YTree will be available after update of the YTree.
---

So the next version of YFull's tree should straighten things out.

curiousII
06-24-2018, 01:11 AM
The notice from FTDNA probably said (emphasis mine):
---
NOTE: All changes such as new subclade, new SNPs, the sample position on the YTree will be available after update of the YTree.
---

So the next version of YFull's tree should straighten things out.

Right, thanks. I found out from REWM that I'm not positive for Z2552 as it's a "different parallel subclade" from my Z2573, which I've backed up with SNP's from both YSEQ and FTDNA. He explained to me that, due to its position in an area that "can't be tested by Sanger sequencing," it's not available at YSEQ for individual testing.

He also explained the intent of the asterisks, so it appears I'm still at Z2573. Hit that 'way back when I took my M343 backbone pack, but this has all been fun anyway. I guess my next shot is saving up for sequencing from either YSEQ or Full Genomes.