PDA

View Full Version : Any members of the I-Z140 Project here?



Pages : [1] 2

spruithean
10-18-2016, 06:37 PM
Just wanted to see how many I-Z140 members we have on these boards. Anyone I-Z140 with roots in the British & Irish Isles or elsewhere?

I haven't heard much about the origins of Z140 and his descendants, although I would imagine they are Germanic.

JMcB
10-19-2016, 02:53 AM
Hello spruithean,

I'm predicted: Z140>F2642>Y3649. I haven't bothered to confirm any of them because they all seem to be pretty solid from what I understand. And also because I'm just about to send out my LivingDNA sample and probably will eventually take a BigY test, too.

I haven't found a lot of infornation on it but this - which I suspect you've already seen - is what William Hartley has to say on it:

History and Geography: The I1-Z140 family has its paternal roots in Northern Europe, in particular the British Isles, Doggerland, Scandinavia, the Baltic and North European Coastal regions. However, many I1-Z140 ancestors migrated to other parts of Europe and beyond, throughout the past thousands of years, thus I1-Z140 folk can now be found in many areas of the world. MRCA of I1-Z140: depending on method used, SNPs/genomes method is approx. 4,000 to 4,500 BP; M253 7,500 to 8,000 BP

spruithean
10-20-2016, 02:15 AM
If I recall correctly I am also predicted to be Y3649, I'm grouped in with names seemingly from the UK. It seems Y3649 is seen on both sides of the north sea however.

JMcB
10-20-2016, 03:24 AM
That would make sense. According to Yfull, Y3649's TMRCA is 2700 ybp. Which is long before any of the major migrations into the Isles. So they could have spread all over the place.

rivergirl
10-20-2016, 07:01 AM
My paternal line is Z140, L338, S12289, S1990/Y4015, A1631
Trace back to Essex England

Hamptonian
10-25-2016, 05:47 AM
Hi,

I'm a member of said Project. So far I-S12289, but awaiting Big-Y results.
Paternal line stuck stubbornly in Holborn, London (1859). I don't think Y DNA is going to demolish this brick wall any time soon.

JonikW
10-30-2016, 11:29 PM
My paternal line is Z140, L338, S12289, S1990/Y4015, A1631
Trace back to Essex England

Nice to see someone who matches me on both S12289 and V. First I've come across.

spruithean
12-02-2016, 09:11 PM
That would make sense. According to Yfull, Y3649's TMRCA is 2700 ybp. Which is long before any of the major migrations into the Isles. So they could have spread all over the place.

It would be interesting to see one map showing all the locations of Z140+ F2642+ AS5, AS6 and the 14/22 Complex. From what I've seen of the individual maps they are pretty spread out.

JMcB
12-03-2016, 03:50 AM
It would be interesting to see one map showing all the locations of Z140+ F2642+ AS5, AS6 and the 14/22 Complex. From what I've seen of the individual maps they are pretty spread out.

Yeah, and their distribution is pretty similar, too. I just noticed that AS 6 has quite a cluster there in Northern England & a minor presence in Denmark. I've got some matches in Denmark myself, for whatever it's worth. Apparently, very few people have tested in Denmark for some reason. Whereas the Swedes seem to be enthusiastic when it comes to having their DNA tested.


12851

12852

deadly77
12-11-2016, 11:36 PM
Plugging my recent Y-STR results into the Nevgen predictor gave Z140 and L338. FTDNA I1 and Z140 projects have grouped me into 1-Z140 L338/YSC261+ AS-114 [Z60+,Z140+, Z2535+, L338/YSC261+ S12289- A1944+] Test A1944 on comparison with other members. All my paper genealogy is within the British Isles.

JMcB
12-12-2016, 01:19 AM
Interestingly, A1944 has subclades in Scotland & the Czech Republic.

13009

Here's the I1 project's map.

13010

deadly77
12-14-2016, 06:07 AM
From what I can see the A1944 group is pretty small. It looks like only three people have tested positive SNP for A1944. The Z140 project has divided two of them off into a subclade with SNP A2398 (and a few more) with earliest known ancestor Czech Republic and England (latter doesn't appear to be on YFull). Apart from those two, it's a group with one SNP tested (presumably SCO on YFull) and nine others predicted but not tested (including me). Most are confirmed to L338 and one to Z140. Some people are in the I1 project and some in the Z140 project but not a perfect overlap. In both of them Scotland comes up a lot and the surname Gordon. My own paper genealogy, I got back to my ggg-grandfather in Gateshead, County Durham, England in 1831 but I am fairly sure he was illegitimate. I get a lot of matches in the 5-7 range and more than half of them are Gordon, and several with Scotland as earliest ancestor. Within L338, S12289+ seems to have a lot more people and subclades. I'm not sure if that's down to larger percenatge of L338 or more people testing. Fairly new to this and trying to learn as I go along.

ronzo
06-08-2017, 03:00 AM
I am I1-Z2535/S1953+ [04dgpy] A2094+ A2108+ A2084+ Branch [S2001+ S1990+ FGC13287/Y4015+] . I am American but my ancestry is Danish and I have a close match who is Danish. The only other two relatively close matches we have are Swedish but probably from 1500- 2000 years ago.

spruithean
07-20-2017, 02:58 AM
Upon the recent discoveries in Poland of I-Z59 and I-Z63 it has raised my hopes for a possible discovery of I-Z140 (or perhaps its downstream SNPs) in some ancient DNA somewhere.

Anyone know of any good readings pertaining to I-Z140 or any closely related SNP, be it downstream or upstream?

JonikW
10-28-2017, 09:44 AM
Hi all,
I'm S12289 according to my Britain's DNA results and would like to get downstream of this, avoiding the FTDNA route. The YSEQ Z140 panel in the link below looks like a good choice, which I could later supplement by buying individual SNPs such as the Y7198 that I see some of you guys have. Can anyone give me some advice? I'm on a tight budget...

http://www.yseq.net/product_info.php?currency=GBP&products_id=43453

deadly77
10-29-2017, 07:09 AM
Hi all,
I'm S12289 according to my Britain's DNA results and would like to get downstream of this, avoiding the FTDNA route. The YSEQ Z140 panel in the link below looks like a good choice, which I could later supplement by buying individual SNPs such as the Y7198 that I see some of you guys have. Can anyone give me some advice? I'm on a tight budget...

http://www.yseq.net/product_info.php?currency=GBP&products_id=43453

In my opinion, YSEQ is the best option for customized SNP testing. Often less expensive than FTDNA, faster turnaround times and more options.

The Z140 panel that you mention is a good coverage test that gets you a lot of bang for your buck if SNPs downstream of Z140 are unknown. However, since you know you're S12289 from Britain's DNA, I'd recommend a different approach. On the the YSEQ panel, downstream of S12289 are two branches - BY461/Y8333 (followed by 1 more SNP) and S1990 (followed by a lot more SNPs).

In your case, I'd recommend ordering a single SNP test for S1990 from YSEQ for $18 plus $5 shipping. After this, they will have your sample in storage and you can order extra tests on the same sample.

If you're positive for S1990, then order the Z140 panel to take advantage of the downstream SNPs available under that panel. If you're negative for S1990, the only possibilities under the panel are BY461 which you can then test for with an individual SNP test for less money than the panel and if you're negative for that one, then you can take the option to test the other known branches of S12289 which are A12704, A12722 and A4577.

If you're negative for all of these, then you'll be on a previously undiscovered branch of S12289 and then the only way forward would be a NGS test or wait for someone to establish a new branch via NGS and then test their SNPs.

Good luck - I'm L338+ but S12289- the Y7198 that you mentioned above is in the F2642 group so you won't be positive for that SNP.

JonikW
10-29-2017, 08:31 AM
In my opinion, YSEQ is the best option for customized SNP testing. Often less expensive than FTDNA, faster turnaround times and more options.

The Z140 panel that you mention is a good coverage test that gets you a lot of bang for your buck if SNPs downstream of Z140 are unknown. However, since you know you're S12289 from Britain's DNA, I'd recommend a different approach. On the the YSEQ panel, downstream of S12289 are two branches - BY461/Y8333 (followed by 1 more SNP) and S1990 (followed by a lot more SNPs).

In your case, I'd recommend ordering a single SNP test for S1990 from YSEQ for $18 plus $5 shipping. After this, they will have your sample in storage and you can order extra tests on the same sample.

If you're positive for S1990, then order the Z140 panel to take advantage of the downstream SNPs available under that panel. If you're negative for S1990, the only possibilities under the panel are BY461 which you can then test for with an individual SNP test for less money than the panel and if you're negative for that one, then you can take the option to test the other known branches of S12289 which are A12704, A12722 and A4577.

If you're negative for all of these, then you'll be on a previously undiscovered branch of S12289 and then the only way forward would be a NGS test or wait for someone to establish a new branch via NGS and then test their SNPs.

Good luck - I'm L338+ but S12289- the Y7198 that you mentioned above is in the F2642 group so you won't be positive for that SNP.

Thanks so much for your detailed reply. I really appreciate it and will start with S1990 as you recommend. I'll let you know how I get on.

deadly77
11-09-2017, 04:50 AM
Sounds good. Good luck in getting downstream. We also have a Z140 facebook page for discussing results, which you're welcome to. It's mostly FTDNA based but the admin is really good and will take data from FGC, YSeq and Britain's DNA as well. Go here if you're interested: https://www.facebook.com/groups/I1.Z140.YDNA.Project/

JonikW
11-09-2017, 11:53 PM
Sounds good. Good luck in getting downstream. We also have a Z140 facebook page for discussing results, which you're welcome to. It's mostly FTDNA based but the admin is really good and will take data from FGC, YSeq and Britain's DNA as well. Go here if you're interested: https://www.facebook.com/groups/I1.Z140.YDNA.Project/

Cheers. Much appreciated. Had an email from YSEQ today saying they've received my kit.

JonikW
11-14-2017, 10:59 PM
Hi again. Surprisingly got my results back already but don't know how to interpret them. Can someone help and advise me what to test next?
Quick results summary:
S1990 G-

12695 FGC30202ChrY14576661 14576661 C-12695 FGC50958ChrY14576664 14576664 C-12695 PH2445ChrY14576704 14576704 G-12695S1990ChrY14576643 14576643 G-12695Y34386ChrY14576534 14576534 T-12695Z10761ChrY14576678 14576678 G-12695ZS10516ChrY14576757 14576757 A-

deadly77
11-15-2017, 02:50 AM
They are usually extremely quick at turning around results as long as they have the requisite primers in stock. Future results may be even quicker now that they have your sample in storage you can order extra tests on that sample and you don't need to pay shipping

I'll have a go at explaining your results. The main piece of data is that you're negative for S1990 - that's what the G- means. If you had been positive for S1990 it would have said A+.

The other data that you receive is because YSEQ scan a region around the Y chromosome for the SNP that you ordered (in this case S1990), and if a known marker pops up, they report it. They say that in most cases this data is not very useful to the tester, but they provide it on the off chance that it is.

This means that when you look at the tree diagram on YSEQ's Z140 panel, you can ignore all the SNPs in blue that come after S1990 (A1631, A8601, A375, etc.) so the single SNP test was a good idea since you already knew you were S12289 - would have good a lot of negative results for your $88.

From here there are four possibilities on the known Z140 haplotree that are S12289+ and S1990-. There is also a fifth possibility - you may be on a branch of S12289 that isn't known yet, so be prepared for that.

The four known SNP divisions are A4577, A12722, A12704, A1818. There are several SNPs that are currently phyloequivalent in each of the groups as the current tree hasn't broken them up yet. You can see on the YFull tree here https://www.yfull.com/tree/I-Z140/ but also bear in mind that not everyone has uploaded to YFull, so it's a partial picture.

If you wanted to try and refine further, the first one I'd suggest would be the SNPs in the A1818 group. My reasoning is that has the most testers and definition compared to the other three subgroups. A1818 is available as a single SNP from YSEQ. Interestingly, the SNP BY461/Y8333 (they are the same SNP with different names - confusing) which is the branch point on the YSEQ Z140 SNP pack, I can't find that one available as a single SNP on YSEQ's website, but they must clearly have the primers since it's part of their Z140 SNP pack.

JonikW
11-15-2017, 07:52 AM
They are usually extremely quick at turning around results as long as they have the requisite primers in stock. Future results may be even quicker now that they have your sample in storage you can order extra tests on that sample and you don't need to pay shipping

I'll have a go at explaining your results. The main piece of data is that you're negative for S1990 - that's what the G- means. If you had been positive for S1990 it would have said A+.

The other data that you receive is because YSEQ scan a region around the Y chromosome for the SNP that you ordered (in this case S1990), and if a known marker pops up, they report it. They say that in most cases this data is not very useful to the tester, but they provide it on the off chance that it is.

This means that when you look at the tree diagram on YSEQ's Z140 panel, you can ignore all the SNPs in blue that come after S1990 (A1631, A8601, A375, etc.) so the single SNP test was a good idea since you already knew you were S12289 - would have good a lot of negative results for your $88.

From here there are four possibilities on the known Z140 haplotree that are S12289+ and S1990-. There is also a fifth possibility - you may be on a branch of S12289 that isn't known yet, so be prepared for that.

The four known SNP divisions are A4577, A12722, A12704, A1818. There are several SNPs that are currently phyloequivalent in each of the groups as the current tree hasn't broken them up yet. You can see on the YFull tree here https://www.yfull.com/tree/I-Z140/ but also bear in mind that not everyone has uploaded to YFull, so it's a partial picture.

If you wanted to try and refine further, the first one I'd suggest would be the SNPs in the A1818 group. My reasoning is that has the most testers and definition compared to the other three subgroups. A1818 is available as a single SNP from YSEQ. Interestingly, the SNP BY461/Y8333 (they are the same SNP with different names - confusing) which is the branch point on the YSEQ Z140 SNP pack, I can't find that one available as a single SNP on YSEQ's website, but they must clearly have the primers since it's part of their Z140 SNP pack.
That's very useful indeed and thanks again for such informed guidance. I'll start with A1818 and post the result here when I receive it.

JonikW
11-15-2017, 09:08 AM
Update: I could see BY461/Y8333 as a single SNP test and so ordered that. Thanks again and I'll post my result when it's in.

deadly77
11-16-2017, 06:55 AM
I must have missed it - that's the right choice. So far everyone who is A1818+ is BY461+.

JonikW
11-18-2017, 02:32 PM
I must have missed it - that's the right choice. So far everyone who is A1818+ is BY461+.

Well, this is interesting and I hope I can get some help again. I've already come back Y8333 C-. Would you advise testing one of A4577, A12722 or A12704 next? The prices and turnaround times are fantastic so I'd like to keep going. I realise I may be on an undiscovered line though, as you pointed out. My father's line has deep roots in the Peak District (Anglian Mercia) but I have no idea if that makes one of the above SNPs more likely. My goal really is to get to a TMRCA comfortably into the migration period rather than a genealogical timeframe. I'm still hoping an Olalde-scale dream paper lands in my lifetime covering that period across the whole North Sea region with some Z140 in it!

deadly77
11-19-2017, 12:44 AM
I'd go with A12722 next. It's the largest of the the three remaining. I'm not sure if that's because of abundance or just more people have tested. From looking at the self reported most distant Y-ancestor, the majority in that group trace back to late 1600s Virginia, although most of them list England as country of origin - there is one guy in that group who reports an ancestor in Staffordshire, England and another from Sweden.
The TMRCA time frame as estimated in the YFull link for these SNPs are in the 2500-2800 years ago range - maybe a bit earlier than what you're looking for. Of course some of those could get closer in time as we learn more, more people test and we can fill in more blanks.
This reminds me a bit of a discussion I had earlier this year with someone who was helping a descendant of George Soule of the Mayflower. He ended up doing the YSEQ Z140 pack which got him to S12289 and then he went and tested the three additional SNPs that were not part of the pack - negative for all three. I believe they were going to do a Big Y, so that would be at least one new branch of S12289.
I'm in a similar position - I'm one step above you on the tree at L338 - I tested negative at YSEQ for S12289 and the other known branches below L338. That subgroup of YSC261+ and L338+ is actually the largest subgroup in the Z140 project. Some of them will be S12289 or other known branches (just not tested yet) and some will be new branches of L338.

JonikW
11-19-2017, 03:49 AM
I'd go with A12722 next. It's the largest of the the three remaining. I'm not sure if that's because of abundance or just more people have tested. From looking at the self reported most distant Y-ancestor, the majority in that group trace back to late 1600s Virginia, although most of them list England as country of origin - there is one guy in that group who reports an ancestor in Staffordshire, England and another from Sweden.
The TMRCA time frame as estimated in the YFull link for these SNPs are in the 2500-2800 years ago range - maybe a bit earlier than what you're looking for. Of course some of those could get closer in time as we learn more, more people test and we can fill in more blanks.
This reminds me a bit of a discussion I had earlier this year with someone who was helping a descendant of George Soule of the Mayflower. He ended up doing the YSEQ Z140 pack which got him to S12289 and then he went and tested the three additional SNPs that were not part of the pack - negative for all three. I believe they were going to do a Big Y, so that would be at least one new branch of S12289.
I'm in a similar position - I'm one step above you on the tree at L338 - I tested negative at YSEQ for S12289 and the other known branches below L338. That subgroup of YSC261+ and L338+ is actually the largest subgroup in the Z140 project. Some of them will be S12289 or other known branches (just not tested yet) and some will be new branches of L338.

That's all very interesting. Thanks once again for your advice as well as the fascinating extra info. Staffordshire also sounds hopeful given my background. I've ordered A12722 and will let you know the result.

JonikW
11-21-2017, 05:51 PM
I'd go with A12722 next. It's the largest of the the three remaining. I'm not sure if that's because of abundance or just more people have tested. From looking at the self reported most distant Y-ancestor, the majority in that group trace back to late 1600s Virginia, although most of them list England as country of origin - there is one guy in that group who reports an ancestor in Staffordshire, England and another from Sweden.
The TMRCA time frame as estimated in the YFull link for these SNPs are in the 2500-2800 years ago range - maybe a bit earlier than what you're looking for. Of course some of those could get closer in time as we learn more, more people test and we can fill in more blanks.
This reminds me a bit of a discussion I had earlier this year with someone who was helping a descendant of George Soule of the Mayflower. He ended up doing the YSEQ Z140 pack which got him to S12289 and then he went and tested the three additional SNPs that were not part of the pack - negative for all three. I believe they were going to do a Big Y, so that would be at least one new branch of S12289.
I'm in a similar position - I'm one step above you on the tree at L338 - I tested negative at YSEQ for S12289 and the other known branches below L338. That subgroup of YSC261+ and L338+ is actually the largest subgroup in the Z140 project. Some of them will be S12289 or other known branches (just not tested yet) and some will be new branches of L338.

Once again, a very fast turnaround from YSEQ and once again ancestral, with a T- for A12722. I'm starting to feel like I am indeed on an unknown branch. However, I'm delighted to have eliminated the two biggest branches as well as the latest one. I hope that one day I may be able to afford a full Y test, but in the meantime I'm happy to pay only 28GBP to test the remaining two SNPs that you know of. So, would you go for A4577 or A12704 next, and are these also in the 2500-2800 years ago range? Many thanks again for all your help

deadly77
11-22-2017, 04:49 AM
Good to hear that you're positive about eliminating possibilities - that's a great attitude to have. I would go for A4577 next ahead of A12704, but I guess once you have done one then there is no other choice until other branches are established. If you're willing to sling an extra SNP, it may be worth checking S12289 at YSEQ to verify the Scotland's DNA result. I got a bit concerned when I was turning up negative for most of the branches below L338, so I tested that one and that came out L338+.

JonikW
11-22-2017, 09:56 AM
Good to hear that you're positive about eliminating possibilities - that's a great attitude to have. I would go for A4577 next ahead of A12704, but I guess once you have done one then there is no other choice until other branches are established. If you're willing to sling an extra SNP, it may be worth checking S12289 at YSEQ to verify the Scotland's DNA result. I got a bit concerned when I was turning up negative for most of the branches below L338, so I tested that one and that came out L338+.
Thanks again for your thoughtful advice. I've ordered A4577. If it comes to A12704 next I think I will indeed also order S12289 just to verify. Yes, I'm very happy to have discovered what I'm not derived for (previously I'd assumed S1990 was most likely with my background), as well as having not spent out a bigger sum on negative results by avoiding the Z140 panel from the start. I'll post my result here...

JonikW
11-24-2017, 08:13 PM
Good to hear that you're positive about eliminating possibilities - that's a great attitude to have. I would go for A4577 next ahead of A12704, but I guess once you have done one then there is no other choice until other branches are established. If you're willing to sling an extra SNP, it may be worth checking S12289 at YSEQ to verify the Scotland's DNA result. I got a bit concerned when I was turning up negative for most of the branches below L338, so I tested that one and that came out L338+.

I'm delighted to say that persistence has paid off. I am A4577 G+. Interestingly, A19286 has "del+" in the allele field of my results. I don't know what that means... Could you please tell me the TMRCA for A4577 and anything you know about today's distribution? I'd love to test further downstream if SNPs become identified that I could "wish" on YSEQ. Their service is not only incredible value but I've been getting 48 hour turnarounds. I am seriously impressed.

deadly77
11-25-2017, 12:25 AM
Ah excellent - that's great to hear that you got to a positive result. Right now in the Z140 project at FTDNA there are 8 folks who are confirmed or predicted as A4577+ and it looks like two of them have uploaded to YFull so they must have done Big Y or equivalent. If you look at the YFull tree, you can see that YFull is estimating A4577 (along with currently phyloequivalent SNPs Y16135 and A4586 - which they have designated the branch after) as formed 2800 years ago and TMRCA as 2600 years ago: https://yfull.com/tree/I-L338/. It's a small sample size for sure and may get better with more.

On the FTDNA project, the A4577+ people are currently in two groups - both groups appear to be positive for A4577 and A4586 and then one group of six is positive for A14184 and the other group of two has A4578+, so it seems that they branch of from each other after A4577 and A4586 and then go in different directions. YFull hasn't split them up because they need to have two people with the same downstream SNP to form a branch. The two who have done Big Y will have a list of novel variant SNPs that as far as now no one shares which makes them difficult to categorize.

The first group of six appears to be mostly colonial settlers in NY State in the US originating in England or Ireland, and the second group appears to trace back to either Germany or unknown. Even if you're not a member of FTDNA, you can probably browse the project pages here https://www.familytreedna.com/groups/z140/dna-results - if you then go to DNA results, then Classic Chart, you should be able to scroll down to the relevant section (L338 sections colour coded green).

I'd recommend getting in contact with the Z140 project admin - he's very knowledgeable and helpful. He's probably looked at the Big Y BAM files for those and identified some of their novel variants. The main project is FTDNA but he also takes results from Britain's DNA, FGC, YSEQ, etc. His email is on the FTDNA page. There is also a Z140 group at YSEQ - if you sign in to your YSEQ account and then look under "My Groups" then "Group Browser", you will be able to find I1-Z140 project and he should be able to see your results from there.

Good to hear you liked the YSEQ experience - mine has been pretty similar to yours - fast turnaround, more choices and very reasonable prices in a niche market. FTDNA seem a little behind on their internal Y-haplotree - the A4577+ people are just showing up as S12289 so not sure if that's on theirs. But the Z140 admin does a really good job of reading the novel variants and grouping people accordingly.

JMcB
11-25-2017, 01:03 AM
Ah excellent - that's great to hear that you got to a positive result. Right now in the Z140 project at FTDNA there are 8 folks who are confirmed or predicted as A4577+ and it looks like two of them have uploaded to YFull so they must have done Big Y or equivalent. If you look at the YFull tree, you can see that YFull is estimating A4577 (along with currently phyloequivalent SNPs Y16135 and A4586 - which they have designated the branch after) as formed 2800 years ago and TMRCA as 2600 years ago: https://yfull.com/tree/I-L338/. It's a small sample size for sure and may get better with more.

On the FTDNA project, the A4577+ people are currently in two groups - both groups appear to be positive for A4577 and A4586 and then one group of six is positive for A14184 and the other group of two has A4578+, so it seems that they branch of from each other after A4577 and A4586 and then go in different directions. YFull hasn't split them up because they need to have two people with the same downstream SNP to form a branch. The two who have done Big Y will have a list of novel variant SNPs that as far as now no one shares which makes them difficult to categorize.

The first group of six appears to be mostly colonial settlers in NY State in the US originating in England or Ireland, and the second group appears to trace back to either Germany or unknown. Even if you're not a member of FTDNA, you can probably browse the project pages here https://www.familytreedna.com/groups/z140/dna-results - if you then go to DNA results, then Classic Chart, you should be able to scroll down to the relevant section (L338 sections colour coded green).

I'd recommend getting in contact with the Z140 project admin - he's very knowledgeable and helpful. He's probably looked at the Big Y BAM files for those and identified some of their novel variants. The main project is FTDNA but he also takes results from Britain's DNA, FGC, YSEQ, etc. His email is on the FTDNA page. There is also a Z140 group at YSEQ - if you sign in to your YSEQ account and then look under "My Groups" then "Group Browser", you will be able to find I1-Z140 project and he should be able to see your results from there.

Good to hear you liked the YSEQ experience - mine has been pretty similar to yours - fast turnaround, more choices and very reasonable prices in a niche market. FTDNA seem a little behind on their internal Y-haplotree - the A4577+ people are just showing up as S12289 so not sure if that's on theirs. But the Z140 admin does a really good job of reading the novel variants and grouping people accordingly.

That was a very nice and helpful rundown; deadly!

JonikW
11-25-2017, 07:22 AM
Ah excellent - that's great to hear that you got to a positive result. Right now in the Z140 project at FTDNA there are 8 folks who are confirmed or predicted as A4577+ and it looks like two of them have uploaded to YFull so they must have done Big Y or equivalent. If you look at the YFull tree, you can see that YFull is estimating A4577 (along with currently phyloequivalent SNPs Y16135 and A4586 - which they have designated the branch after) as formed 2800 years ago and TMRCA as 2600 years ago: https://yfull.com/tree/I-L338/. It's a small sample size for sure and may get better with more.

On the FTDNA project, the A4577+ people are currently in two groups - both groups appear to be positive for A4577 and A4586 and then one group of six is positive for A14184 and the other group of two has A4578+, so it seems that they branch of from each other after A4577 and A4586 and then go in different directions. YFull hasn't split them up because they need to have two people with the same downstream SNP to form a branch. The two who have done Big Y will have a list of novel variant SNPs that as far as now no one shares which makes them difficult to categorize.

The first group of six appears to be mostly colonial settlers in NY State in the US originating in England or Ireland, and the second group appears to trace back to either Germany or unknown. Even if you're not a member of FTDNA, you can probably browse the project pages here https://www.familytreedna.com/groups/z140/dna-results - if you then go to DNA results, then Classic Chart, you should be able to scroll down to the relevant section (L338 sections colour coded green).

I'd recommend getting in contact with the Z140 project admin - he's very knowledgeable and helpful. He's probably looked at the Big Y BAM files for those and identified some of their novel variants. The main project is FTDNA but he also takes results from Britain's DNA, FGC, YSEQ, etc. His email is on the FTDNA page. There is also a Z140 group at YSEQ - if you sign in to your YSEQ account and then look under "My Groups" then "Group Browser", you will be able to find I1-Z140 project and he should be able to see your results from there.

Good to hear you liked the YSEQ experience - mine has been pretty similar to yours - fast turnaround, more choices and very reasonable prices in a niche market. FTDNA seem a little behind on their internal Y-haplotree - the A4577+ people are just showing up as S12289 so not sure if that's on theirs. But the Z140 admin does a really good job of reading the novel variants and grouping people accordingly.

Thanks so much. Once again your time and detailed advice is invaluable. I will contact the FTDNA project admin. I transferred my 23andme results to FTDNA some months back and have already joined the Z140 project. I'll also check out the YSEQ group. I look forward to seeing what I can do next.

deadly77
11-26-2017, 09:07 AM
No worries - I'm happy to hear that you got in the right direction. You asked a good question early on regarding the YSEQ panel (which I still think is a good test for folks who aren't sure where they are on the tree), but in your case, since you already knew you were S12289, the most benefit of the panel in that case is if you're S1990+, and that's why I recommended that first.

From what I can see on YFull, the two individuals have either 16 or 17 novel SNPs. It seems they both share A4586 as well as A4577 and Yfull has Y16135. After that, there isn't a lot of information because they have a bunch of novel variants that we don't yet know how to group.

At some point it becomes a numbers game - 17 SNPs at $18 plus $1 wish = 323. That's less expensive than something like the Big Y. But at some point you're going to max out and your own novel variants branch off. Let's say for example that you test positive for 5 of the other persons novel variants but negative for the other 12 that's a fair chunk of change. And you don't get your own novel variants.

If you want to go a little further with YSEQ, you could wish A14184 and A4578. I haven't gone through that procedure yet, but Thomas and Astrid Krahn at YSEQ are pretty responsive via email.

JonikW
11-26-2017, 07:46 PM
No worries - I'm happy to hear that you got in the right direction. You asked a good question early on regarding the YSEQ panel (which I still think is a good test for folks who aren't sure where they are on the tree), but in your case, since you already knew you were S12289, the most benefit of the panel in that case is if you're S1990+, and that's why I recommended that first.

From what I can see on YFull, the two individuals have either 16 or 17 novel SNPs. It seems they both share A4586 as well as A4577 and Yfull has Y16135. After that, there isn't a lot of information because they have a bunch of novel variants that we don't yet know how to group.

At some point it becomes a numbers game - 17 SNPs at $18 plus $1 wish = 323. That's less expensive than something like the Big Y. But at some point you're going to max out and your own novel variants branch off. Let's say for example that you test positive for 5 of the other persons novel variants but negative for the other 12 that's a fair chunk of change. And you don't get your own novel variants.

If you want to go a little further with YSEQ, you could wish A14184 and A4578. I haven't gone through that procedure yet, but Thomas and Astrid Krahn at YSEQ are pretty responsive via email.
Thanks very much for that. I had a reply from the Z140 project admin which was very helpful and repeated much of what you'd already told me regarding possible downstream SNPs etc. I think it's time for me to get the money together and test Big Y, partly because we benefit so much from each other's results. I'd like to help with the grouping that you mention. Whatever happens, I'm glad to have supported YSEQ because what they do is incredible. I've ordered an initial STR test as an entry point to FTDNA.

deadly77
11-27-2017, 12:44 AM
Good to hear - if he's saying a lot of the same things that I am, then that makes me feel good because he really knows his stuff. He'll be able to take your initial Y-STR data and couple that with the YSEQ results to place you in the Z140 FTDNA project.

Also, good to hear that you're considering the Big Y. I understand it's a big investment (especially earlier in the thread where you said you had limited funds), but it's from people taking Big Y that we establish branches such as A4577. It's very much a team sport. If you can afford it, it is a good time to do the Big Y as it's currently on sale. They are also doing a pretty good deal with a free upgrade to 111 Y-STR markers when the Big Y is ordered - see here: https://dna-explained.com/2017/11/15/best-big-y-deal-ever-includes-free-111-upgrade-at-family-tree-dna/

Also, be sure to check out this spreadsheet - there are a lot of coupons that are given out during FTDNA's end of year sale and the spreadsheet is a repository for people to share coupons that they are not going to use which can bring the cost down a little further: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1CgXRKz2TySvRqSInveSIYoslO7yexAc9d-BzpNhaY1c/edit#gid=852393030

JonikW
02-08-2018, 11:59 PM
As a follow up from my last Z140 post, I am feeling confused after getting initial FTDNA results today. Apologies in advance for a long and convoluted post. As outlined earlier, I have tested SNPs elsewhere and know I am I1 Z140+ and A4577+, the latter of which has a TMRCA of about 2,600BP. I have just received 37 STR results and still have 111 STR and big Y results pending. I have deep Y origins in the Peak District of Derbyshire (1300 AD at the latest) and on the paternal line am mainly interested in where my ancestors were immediately before coming to England. In conjunction with a scarcity of Norse placenames in my ancestral area, which was heavily settled by Angles and similar, the SNP results I already have appear to make an Anglo Saxon origin the most parsimonious one rather than Viking or Norman. My question relates to this: my two closest Y STR matches of today have a genetic distance of 4 at 37 STRs (Cambridgeshire and unknown origin but with an apparently Dutch surname that I see from Google can also be Irish although I'd never heard of it) but when I open YDNA Ancestral Origins, on 12 markers I have one match from England and one from Ireland as exact matches (can't see who they are for some reason); but at a distance of 1, I have 24 from England and 23 from Germany (a country that shows half the number in the Country Total column vs England, at 20,000 odd against 40,000; the next highest number is the "UK" with 11). Does this German weighting bolster my Anglo Saxon theory or will these people be upstream of my known SNP results? I hope someone can help because STRs are a mystery to me at this stage. Incidentally, when I go back to Y DNA matches, I have seven at 12 markers; most look British at a distance of 0, along with the one with the Dutch (or Irish) surname. A German match and a French one show up as the sole matches at a distance of 1. The German match apparently has a 91.4% chance of being related in the last 24 generations, although in reality this is presumably longer. I also don't understand why there are more matches at 12 under Ancestral Origins than at Matches, where I have seven. Any help would be much appreciated right now...

spruithean
02-09-2018, 01:16 AM
Interestingly enough 12 marker matches could be totally unrelated or be on the same branch of the tree as you.

Judging by STRs I would have expected that I'd fit into the group that I have 37/67 marker matches with, however Big Y has revealed that two individuals that I don't have STR matches with beyond the Y12 level belong to the same branch as me, though my line appears to have branched off early while the other two continued on.

I can't comment on whether your lineage is Anglian or Norse/Norman, but I know it is believed that many of the Z140 related clades in Britain and Ireland probably descend from Anglo-Saxons, Norsemen, Normans and other Germanic groups.

JonikW
02-09-2018, 10:03 AM
Interestingly enough 12 marker matches could be totally unrelated or be on the same branch of the tree as you.

Judging by STRs I would have expected that I'd fit into the group that I have 37/67 marker matches with, however Big Y has revealed that two individuals that I don't have STR matches with beyond the Y12 level belong to the same branch as me, though my line appears to have branched off early while the other two continued on.

I can't comment on whether your lineage is Anglian or Norse/Norman, but I know it is believed that many of the Z140 related clades in Britain and Ireland probably descend from Anglo-Saxons, Norsemen, Normans and other Germanic groups.

Thanks Spruithean. It's just that if the German matches really mean anything I'd be thinking Saxon or Frisian might be a more likely origin than Angle or other. I'm glad I've got more results to come and hope to find out more.

JMcB
02-09-2018, 08:42 PM
Thanks Spruithean. It's just that if the German matches really mean anything I'd be thinking Saxon or Frisian might be a more likely origin than Angle or other. I'm glad I've got more results to come and hope to find out more.

Hello JonikW,

Are you by any chance in the I1-Z140 Project and if so, how did William Hartley group you over there? That might give you a clue, by seeing who he’s grouped you with and where their MDKAs come from. If you aren’t in the Project yet, I would join and see where he places you. He’ll also be able to read your Big Y results when they come in and give you his opinion about their significance, while answering any questions you have about your results

JonikW
02-09-2018, 08:56 PM
Hello JoniW,

Are you by any chance in the I1-Z140 Project and if so, how did William Hartley group you over there? That might give you a clue, by seeing who he’s grouped you with and where their MDKAs come from. If you aren’t in the Project yet, I would join and see where he places you. He’ll also be able to read your Big Y results when they come in and give you his opinion about their significance, while answering any questions you have about your results

I am in the Z140 project and William has been incredibly helpful. There is one German A4577 member and one English so we're waiting to see where I fit in.

JMcB
02-09-2018, 09:11 PM
I am in the Z140 project and William has been incredibly helpful. There is one German A4577 member and one English so we're waiting to see where I fit in.

Well, good luck with your upcoming tests! Hopefully, with all the new Big Y results coming in you’ll get a little more clarity. That’s an interesting and very mixed part of the tree.

https://www.yfull.com/tree/I-S12289/

deadly77
02-11-2018, 06:58 AM
Yes, I'll agree with JMcB - William is very helpful in Z140. We're all very happy to have someone like him as the main admin.

After our initial discussions, there has been a fair few updates that occurred as FTDNA moves from hg19 to hg38 reference. BAM files have been unavailable for a few months, which restricts the deep analysis, but it seems that FTDNA has updated their own internal haplotree on a few branches. It looks like FTDNA is now differentiating the two A4577 groups that William had separated from each other. Amongst the Big Y testers, the smaller "German" group is showing as A4577 and the other group which appears to be colonial American and lists England as an origin is now showing up with the two who did Big Y as BY31729. Your own Big Y when it comes in will show which one you're closer to - or if you are on an as yet undiscovered branch of A4577.

Regarding your STR results, I agree with Spruithean that they the Y12 matches could be real matches or false positives. The greater number of STR markers tested mean that some of the false positives can be weeded out. However, within the L338 subgroup of Z140, I've noticed that we have a lot of STR convergence within the project. STRs tend to have a faster mutation rate than SNPs. Within L338, we see a lot of the STRs can back-mutate, which can make the connection look a lot closer in time than it actually is. I have similar ones to you at Y37 - I have four matches at GD4, but then I have 48 matches when compared at the higher marker level of Y67 (all GD 5-7) - none of my Y67 matches show at Y37 and none of my Y67 matches appear in my Y37 list. I know at least 8 of my Y67 matches are false positives based on the fact that they are positive for SNPs that I'm tested negative for.

I'd wait for your Y111 and BigY results to come in before making any assumptions. More data leads to better conclusions. One of our other project members has a pretty involved surname project and he's able to do some great analysis on a large number of people - here's a link to one of his blog posts: https://linealarboretum.blogspot.com/2018/02/the-strange-case-of-missing-y37-match.html and this one also a good read https://linealarboretum.blogspot.com/2014/06/is-genetic-distance-adequate-predictor.html

JonikW
02-11-2018, 10:46 PM
Yes, I'll agree with JMcB - William is very helpful in Z140. We're all very happy to have someone like him as the main admin.

After our initial discussions, there has been a fair few updates that occurred as FTDNA moves from hg19 to hg38 reference. BAM files have been unavailable for a few months, which restricts the deep analysis, but it seems that FTDNA has updated their own internal haplotree on a few branches. It looks like FTDNA is now differentiating the two A4577 groups that William had separated from each other. Amongst the Big Y testers, the smaller "German" group is showing as A4577 and the other group which appears to be colonial American and lists England as an origin is now showing up with the two who did Big Y as BY31729. Your own Big Y when it comes in will show which one you're closer to - or if you are on an as yet undiscovered branch of A4577.

Regarding your STR results, I agree with Spruithean that they the Y12 matches could be real matches or false positives. The greater number of STR markers tested mean that some of the false positives can be weeded out. However, within the L338 subgroup of Z140, I've noticed that we have a lot of STR convergence within the project. STRs tend to have a faster mutation rate than SNPs. Within L338, we see a lot of the STRs can back-mutate, which can make the connection look a lot closer in time than it actually is. I have similar ones to you at Y37 - I have four matches at GD4, but then I have 48 matches when compared at the higher marker level of Y67 (all GD 5-7) - none of my Y67 matches show at Y37 and none of my Y67 matches appear in my Y37 list. I know at least 8 of my Y67 matches are false positives based on the fact that they are positive for SNPs that I'm tested negative for.

I'd wait for your Y111 and BigY results to come in before making any assumptions. More data leads to better conclusions. One of our other project members has a pretty involved surname project and he's able to do some great analysis on a large number of people - here's a link to one of his blog posts: https://linealarboretum.blogspot.com/2018/02/the-strange-case-of-missing-y37-match.html and this one also a good read https://linealarboretum.blogspot.com/2014/06/is-genetic-distance-adequate-predictor.html

Thanks for such a helpful post. You and everyone else who's posted here, have provided so many insights. Does anyone know how many Z140 people have done Big Y?

deadly77
02-12-2018, 05:13 AM
As of August last year, the Z140 project had 613 members and 194 of them had done Big Y, so at that time almost 32%. There have been two big sales since then so numbers are now likely higher. We're up to 699 members now and a lot of people have ordered Big Y or another NGS test (eg. YElite or Whole Genome Sequencing). Glad to have you along and look forward to your own Big Y results adding to the tree

JonikW
03-03-2018, 12:11 PM
Does anyone here know the proportion of Z140 within I1? That is, what percentage of M253 testers at the right level turns out to be Z140?

spruithean
03-03-2018, 01:28 PM
Does anyone here know the proportion of Z140 within I1? That is, what percentage of M253 testers at the right level turns out to be Z140?

That's a good question, but I don't know the answer... unfortunately.

deadly77
03-05-2018, 06:34 AM
Does anyone here know the proportion of Z140 within I1? That is, what percentage of M253 testers at the right level turns out to be Z140?

Like Spruithiean, I don't know the answer. It's difficult to assess without a complete dataset. We have 716 kits in the I-Z140 project at FTDNA as of today but that's not a true reflection of all Z140 people. Looks like the I1 project has 7311 members. You could make rough calls on those numbers at the 10% mark but I'd put massive error bars on both sides to that assessment. I'm not sure how many STRs are needed to make an accurate prediction on Z140, but lets say Y37 - then the number drops to 6329 and if it's Y67 the number drops to 4445. And that's just in from people who have proactively joined FTDNA projects on a STR result basis without knowing their SNP testing status. I imagine there are several people in the FTDNA database who probably have no idea they are Z140 - I have 49 Y-STR matches at Y67 level (most are false positive) and nine of them are in the Z140 project and 17 are in the I1 project. So you can see how the data analysis can get skewed by sample size. It's always going to be a problem of do we have a biased testing population. And that's just going of the FTDNA data - doesn't include Ancestry, 23andme, LivingDNA, Geno 2.0, FGC, YSEQ which all test Z140 on their latest tests. Another one to look at is this map from one of the I-M253 facebook admins where he's estimating the amount of people per country in Europe that are I1 here https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=802455919789621&set=g.5478499658&type=1&theater&ifg=1 - it becomes a difficult assessment against the small sample size.

JonikW
03-05-2018, 12:31 PM
I've also found 2013 FTDNA data for Germany cited on eupedia for Z58 -- so upstream of Z140 -- and putting Z58 at 6% of I1 in the country at that time. I don't know how accurate that was of course

I'm particularly interested in possible ancient distribution. For anyone else who's curious, the following is a back-of-the envelope calculation for I1 and a hypothetical 10% subclade (which Z140 might conceivably represent), based on best-guess estimates from books by Todd, Wolfram and Drinkwater, on the ancient population size of Germania (defined broadly as today's Germany, Netherlands, Southern Scandinavia and part of Poland).

This is purely a fun exercise because it's interesting to try to get some kind of possible picture. I am fully aware of the many assumptions involved.

Wolfram, and using the same methodology, Drinkwater, estimate the biggest Germanic tribes had a maximum of 100,000 members at any one time during the Roman Empire. This was done partly by taking some of the Roman accounts for war host numbers and assuming four dependants for each warrior. Todd had a stab at estimating extremely rough minimum population numbers in 6AD and maximum numbers in 300AD, although he warns on its accuracy.

I've taken Todd's estimates and assumed the I1 haplogroup made up 50% of the ancient population, based on the roughly 55% proportion of I1 finds so far in ancient Germanic cemeteries from Poland (from the study on Kowalewko and other burials) and Germany (Goerzig). This is higher than the current German population of I1 but close to some estimates for modern Southern Sweden.

Lastly, I've divided the population numbers by two, assuming a 50:50 male/female split.

The result:
6AD: 1 million Germani total population
of which:
500,000 men
250,000 men with I1,
25,000 men with the hypothetical "10% subclade" of I1 that could be Z140 in this instance

300AD: 3 million Germani,
1.5 million men
750,000 I1,
75,000 subclade

Any thoughts, improvements? I stress again that this is purely hypothetical but fun...

spruithean
03-05-2018, 10:11 PM
Your guess is as good as any IMHO. Are those I1 finds in Germany the ones belonging to the Saxon graves? There was also one (one tested at least) I-Z59 individual in Poland along with I-Z63 (and subclades of Z63) found alongside him.

I-DF29+ subclades certainly had to be at some level of majority in various Germanic tribes. How much of those subclades were Z140+ I'm not sure. Though I think a fair bit were I-L338+, that subclades seems a fair bit more common than most Z140 clades.

JonikW
03-05-2018, 10:58 PM
Your guess is as good as any IMHO. Are those I1 finds in Germany the ones belonging to the Saxon graves? There was also one (one tested at least) I-Z59 individual in Poland along with I-Z63 (and subclades of Z63) found alongside him.

I-DF29+ subclades certainly had to be at some level of majority in various Germanic tribes. How much of those subclades were Z140+ I'm not sure. Though I think a fair bit were I-L338+, that subclades seems a fair bit more common than most Z140 clades.

The Germans were found near Magdeburg and I'm not sure if they were classed as Saxons. There's little online about them. The Polish finds were among what you mentioned. Hope we'll get some more aDNA soon including the Alemanni who were flagged up from a conference last year. They got Y results but I don't think they've been released.

spruithean
03-06-2018, 12:11 AM
Ah right, I was misremembering Saxony-Anhalt as Saxon.

Well that is the first I've heard of Alemanni Y-DNA, I hope they release the results!

JonikW
03-06-2018, 07:49 AM
Here's a link for the Alemannic study on this site. Would be great if there was some Z140 of course.

https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?12623-Abstracts-from-Human-Evolution-2017-conference

JonikW
04-02-2018, 10:08 AM
Yes, I'll agree with JMcB - William is very helpful in Z140. We're all very happy to have someone like him as the main admin.

After our initial discussions, there has been a fair few updates that occurred as FTDNA moves from hg19 to hg38 reference. BAM files have been unavailable for a few months, which restricts the deep analysis, but it seems that FTDNA has updated their own internal haplotree on a few branches. It looks like FTDNA is now differentiating the two A4577 groups that William had separated from each other. Amongst the Big Y testers, the smaller "German" group is showing as A4577 and the other group which appears to be colonial American and lists England as an origin is now showing up with the two who did Big Y as BY31729. Your own Big Y when it comes in will show which one you're closer to - or if you are on an as yet undiscovered branch of A4577.

Regarding your STR results, I agree with Spruithean that they the Y12 matches could be real matches or false positives. The greater number of STR markers tested mean that some of the false positives can be weeded out. However, within the L338 subgroup of Z140, I've noticed that we have a lot of STR convergence within the project. STRs tend to have a faster mutation rate than SNPs. Within L338, we see a lot of the STRs can back-mutate, which can make the connection look a lot closer in time than it actually is. I have similar ones to you at Y37 - I have four matches at GD4, but then I have 48 matches when compared at the higher marker level of Y67 (all GD 5-7) - none of my Y67 matches show at Y37 and none of my Y67 matches appear in my Y37 list. I know at least 8 of my Y67 matches are false positives based on the fact that they are positive for SNPs that I'm tested negative for.

I'd wait for your Y111 and BigY results to come in before making any assumptions. More data leads to better conclusions. One of our other project members has a pretty involved surname project and he's able to do some great analysis on a large number of people - here's a link to one of his blog posts: https://linealarboretum.blogspot.com/2018/02/the-strange-case-of-missing-y37-match.html and this one also a good read https://linealarboretum.blogspot.com/2014/06/is-genetic-distance-adequate-predictor.html

I've received my Big Y results and have written to William to see what he can make of them. My terminal SNP is the A4577 that I'd already discovered. I also have A4586, like the A4577+ German and English testers, but don't seem to match them after that. I have no matches and 24 unnamed variants. I lack the expertise to work out anything else myself. Is there anything that anyone here can tell me?

spruithean
04-02-2018, 10:23 AM
I would wait for William's response. I am in the same boat and find my lack of expertise and the clunkiness of FTDNA's Big Y Results/Matches page to be very limiting in attempting to understand it myself.

deadly77
04-04-2018, 05:28 AM
I've received my Big Y results and have written to William to see what he can make of them. My terminal SNP is the A4577 that I'd already discovered. I also have A4586, like the A4577+ German and English testers, but don't seem to match them after that. I have no matches and 24 unnamed variants. I lack the expertise to work out anything else myself. Is there anything that anyone here can tell me?

Good to hear that your Big Y results are in. From our facebook discussion group (which you're welcome to join if you use it), it's clear which of the two branches of A4577 that you're on. William is pretty sure that you're A4578+, but would require your BAM file to confirm. Unfortunately, FTDNA is not releasing BAM files currently (this has been going on for several months) so we can't get into the deep analysis until that happens.

JonikW
04-04-2018, 10:28 AM
Good to hear that your Big Y results are in. From our facebook discussion group (which you're welcome to join if you use it), it's clear which of the two branches of A4577 that you're on. William is pretty sure that you're A4578+, but would require your BAM file to confirm. Unfortunately, FTDNA is not releasing BAM files currently (this has been going on for several months) so we can't get into the deep analysis until that happens.

I really appreciate you telling me that, and just asked my son to dig up the discussion you mentioned (I'm not on Facebook).

JonikW
04-04-2018, 11:19 AM
... I see William has now moved me to the A4578+ section of the project page tree with Tenbroek and Timbrook.

deadly77
04-08-2018, 09:22 PM
Yep, I saw that too. You could have your son join the Z140 facebook group by proxy - it's a closed group. But I can paraphrase too - he said you were definitely A4577+ (which we already knew from your YSEQ testing) and A4586+ (which both groups have). He's pretty sure that you're A4578+, but would need your BAM file to confirm. You don't match any of the known Allison/Ellison SNPs such as A14814+ or FTDNA's BY31729+ (which Tenbroeck/Timbrook don't have).

Around October 2017 (if I recall correctly), FTDNA announced that it was changing it's reference from hg19 to hg38. You can read a bit more about the human genome reference from the blog that Roberta Estes run here https://dna-explained.com/2018/01/12/working-with-the-new-big-y-results-hg38/ - while the conversion was in progress, FTDNA removed the option to download the BAM files as they needed to recalculate SNP positions against the new hg38 and they needed to do this for every BigY in their database. Their initial estimation of completing this in 5-7 days proved to be rather optimistic and then several two week extensions, followed by spring, and the most recent communications say late spring. Without the BAM files, the third party analysis by the likes of admin William or YFull doesn't give the whole picture, so everyone is in the same boat on waiting for the new hg38 BAM files to be released by FTDNA.

JonikW
04-09-2018, 08:13 PM
Yep, I saw that too. You could have your son join the Z140 facebook group by proxy - it's a closed group. But I can paraphrase too - he said you were definitely A4577+ (which we already knew from your YSEQ testing) and A4586+ (which both groups have). He's pretty sure that you're A4578+, but would need your BAM file to confirm. You don't match any of the known Allison/Ellison SNPs such as A14814+ or FTDNA's BY31729+ (which Tenbroeck/Timbrook don't have).

Around October 2017 (if I recall correctly), FTDNA announced that it was changing it's reference from hg19 to hg38. You can read a bit more about the human genome reference from the blog that Roberta Estes run here https://dna-explained.com/2018/01/12/working-with-the-new-big-y-results-hg38/ - while the conversion was in progress, FTDNA removed the option to download the BAM files as they needed to recalculate SNP positions against the new hg38 and they needed to do this for every BigY in their database. Their initial estimation of completing this in 5-7 days proved to be rather optimistic and then several two week extensions, followed by spring, and the most recent communications say late spring. Without the BAM files, the third party analysis by the likes of admin William or YFull doesn't give the whole picture, so everyone is in the same boat on waiting for the new hg38 BAM files to be released by FTDNA.

As always, I appreciate your feedback. I can always wish a SNP from yseq if this goes on too long.:)

deadly77
04-10-2018, 05:21 AM
Going back to one of your earlier discussions on this thread, regarding proportions of I-Z140 in I-M253, I saw something I hadn't seen before that was posted on one of the LivingDNA Facebook groups about Y haplogroup frequency in the British Isles: 22579

I would guess this came from the now defunct Britain's DNA (also Scotland, Cymru, etc.) from the BDNA label at the top, the S-series SNPs and the group names. Among the I1 categories - Teutonic I-M253 5.1%, Scandinavian I-S142 (also known as L22) 2.5%, Anglo-Saxon I-S197 (aka L338) 0.2%. While L338 is the largest subgroup of Z140, it doesn't cover the other groups such as F2642 and also won't include the L338 or M253 people outside of the British Isles.

JonikW
04-10-2018, 08:16 AM
Fascinating, thanks. It's great to now have some idea of scale. I think you're right about Britain's DNA. I tested with them and remember the terminology but didn't see that chart among the excellent ones they supplied before closing down. They got me to S12289+.

deadly77
04-10-2018, 04:04 PM
Yes - I've always known that R1b was rather dominant in the population but this demonstrates it pretty effectively.

Caveat is that we don't know when those percentages were determined and that diagram may be out of date. Also, don't know the sample size or how the data was collected. An early dataset was probably this one http://www.cell.com/current-biology/pdf/S0960-9822(03)00373-7.pdf given that James Wilson of Britain's DNA is a co-author on the paper. However, that paper is from 2003 and we didn't know as much about the phylotree as we do now, so the haplogroup designations are rather basic and that's also likely because they assembled the data using STR results.

JonikW
06-04-2018, 10:06 AM
I posted on this thread six months or so ago when I decided to go for Big Y. I'd got my terminal SNP to A4577 using YSEQ, and Big Y gave me the same result. At that time I had no matches as such, although William at the Z140 project pointed out that my nearest A4577 match was with a family from near Munster in Germany. That meant a TMRCA of about 600 BC. However, as of yesterday I now have my first proper match, who William says is estimated to share a common ancestor with me in the past 750 to 1,000 years. He's from southern Sweden and traces his earliest ancestor there back to the 18th century. Moreover, he and I form a new branch, A21901. I'm delighted about this and assume our TMRCA is actually somewhat earlier. The area where my family came from in the Peak District had both Anglian and Norse settlement, and I suppose our last common ancestor could have been either. In any case, given my interest in ancient origins this is exactly why I decided to do Big Y and I wasn't expecting a match so soon...

spruithean
06-04-2018, 10:24 AM
Congrats!

That's fascinating. Looks like your paternal line came from Scandinavia in one of the Germanic incursions into Britain.

My two Big Y matches are downstream of my terminal SNP and the TMRCA is calculated to be 1,700 to 1,850 years ago. Which isn't exactly genealogically relevant, but I guess it is something.

JonikW
06-04-2018, 10:46 AM
Thanks! Did you see last week's Icelandic study? I think one of the ancient samples was on your branch.

spruithean
06-04-2018, 07:30 PM
Thanks! Did you see last week's Icelandic study? I think one of the ancient samples was on your branch.

I had read a bit about it, but I had not seen any Y-chromosome haplogroup data. But in the supplemental PDF provided I noticed one of the samples, SBT-A1 was I1a2a1a2, which shorthand is I-F2642. Which is very interesting to see! On top of that SBT-A1 has a significantly larger amount of Gaelic (3/4) ancestry compared to Norse (1/4) ancestry. The plot thickens!

JMcB
06-04-2018, 08:13 PM
Congratulations JonikW, thatís good news! Sometimes it takes a while but hopefully Big Y is going to pay off for all of us!

On a slightly related note, in case you havenít heard, everyone needs to update their Project Privacy settings because of the new EU law thatís just come into effect.

See Williamís posting from a few days ago:

You may have recently read about or heard of a number of changes to projects and privacy settings of all FTDNA Testers. (This is a new law - GDPR - which has begun). You can read more about it here https://dna-explained.com/

[...]

We have all heard the story of Goldilocks and the three bears. You, as a consumer, have been empowered by this new law, to decide which of three levels of access to give to project administrators: Full Access, Limited Access, or Group Project Access. None of the Administrators needs full access -that is too much. If you give an Administrator only Group Project access -that is too little & renders your participation in the project moot. By this I mean, if you only give us Group Project Access, your participation doesn't help the project, and we, as admins, can't help you. The Limited Access level is just right, and is the same as the Administrator rights were before the law went into effect.

The most important thing you can do for the Z140 Project right now is to log into your FTDNA personal home page and hover your cursor over your name on the top right hand side and click on <Privacy and Sharing> and work through the privacy options.

When complete, click on the tab right next to the <Privacy and Sharing> called <Project Preferences>
Please click on ďEDITĒ then grant the Administrators & co-admins ĎLimited Accessí.

If you do not do this, your administrators will not be able to help you nor see who you match nor anything else. Please do this for every kit that you manage.

JonikW
06-04-2018, 08:43 PM
Thanks! I've done it. Gave full permission to William.

deadly77
06-04-2018, 10:58 PM
Good to hear and congratulations on your new match, JonikW - it looks like your new Swedish match has uploaded his BAM file to YFull as there is a new kit in that position on the YFull tree https://www.yfull.com/tree/I-A4586/

JonikW
06-04-2018, 11:31 PM
Thanks deadly77. He told me he'd done that. Is that a free service? I can't seem to find a straightforward guide online. One link mentioned them sending you an invoice.

JMcB
06-05-2018, 12:03 AM
Thanks deadly77. He told me he'd done that. Is that a free service? I can't seem to find a straightforward guide online. One link mentioned them sending you an invoice.

Hello JonikW

YFullís service costs $49 and in my opinion, itís well worth the cost. If you would like to learn more about their service, you can find their FAQ link at the bottom of this page:

https://www.yfull.com

deadly77
06-05-2018, 06:32 AM
I agree with JMcB - the YFull analysis is very good and well worth the $49. I recently had YFull analyze my YSEQ WGS Y Chromosome BAM file and I'm really impressed by their results presentation and the tools that they offer. They are in Russia so the best way to pay them for the analysis is through PayPal - maybe worth setting up a PayPal account if you don't already have one before ordering. You would also need to request your BAM file from FTDNA - might take them a couple of days to do that. There is a list of instructions from YFull here: https://www.yfull.com/faq/how-do-i-order-yfull-interpretation-my-bigy-or-full-genomes-resu/ - generally the advice should apply but it was composed prior to the FTDNA BigY BAM file blockade. That leads me into my next point - FTDNA recently released a lot of BAM files after withholding them for best part of nine months. YFull is currently dealing with a massive influx of uploaded BAM files from that period, so you may not get results very quickly. But they seem happy with all the new submissions.

JonikW
06-05-2018, 11:31 AM
I've ordered with YFull now. I'd seen their haplogroup trees online but hadn't realised how they were compiled. I would have gone for it anyway, but having my Swedish match on there is an added incentive. It will be interesting to see where they date our split.

NiamhWitch
06-05-2018, 05:00 PM
Hello. My father recently tested with 23andMe and it told him his Y-Haplogroup was I-M253. With some help from another user here, I looked through his raw data files and was able to narrow his Haplogroup down to I-Z140. He tested positive on rs768549242 (Z140), but negative for Z2535, A196, and F2642. "Z141" came up as "not determined".

I do plan to get him a more comprehensive Y-DNA test (for Christmas, so it'll be a while)... either the 37 or 67 from FTDNA. However, YSEQ offers a (much cheaper) I-Z140 pack, and since my father already tested positive for I-Z140, I'm wondering if I should go with that instead?
That said, FTDNA has the surname projects, which is of particular interest to me as one of the main reasons we want to have these results is to help solve an old adoption mystery in our family (my father's father's father was adopted and we don't know who the birth father was). I'm hoping a combination of Y-DNA and atDNA will help solve this mystery (we've already determined the birth mother via atDNA), but if I can go with a cheaper option and get the same benefits, well, obviously that would be preferred.

Am I on the right track here or should I be going a different direction? Should I go with FTDNA or YSEQ?
Thanks for any help anyone can provide. I'm a bit new to genetic genealogy, so I'm learning as I go...

JonikW
06-05-2018, 05:26 PM
Sounds like you already know the pros and cons of YSEQ and FTDNA, which is a good start. Are there FTDNA surname projects for families you might be interested in? I've had a positive experience of both companies for what it's worth...

NiamhWitch
06-05-2018, 05:35 PM
Sounds like you already know the pros and cons of YSEQ and FTDNA, which is a good start. Are there FTDNA surname projects for families you might be interested in? I've had a positive experience of both companies for what it's worth...

Well, we have three strong candidates for the potential father. The only clue we have is a likely first name, which is an ethnic Swedish name, so our guess was that he was of Swedish origin. After searching census records for the area where my great-grandfather was born, there were three men with that first name. Two of them were of a Swedish background, and their surnames were Backman and Lindberg. I have lots of records for these two men, plus I've been in contact with one of the descendants of Mr. Backman. The other one has an unknown background and I could only find one record for him, his surname was Henderson.

I've searched surname projects on FTDNA. Backman seems to be lumped in with the Bachmann project, Lindberg is under the Lind* Project. Neither seem to be connected to the Z140 line.

Edit: Also, the problem I'm running into is with Scandinavian surnames being patrilineal, so they keep changing every generation. I know that the practice mostly stopped in Sweden about 100 years ago, but that's almost exactly when my great-grandfather was born (1914), lol... so the practice was still being used.

spruithean
06-05-2018, 06:14 PM
Welcome Niamh to the Z140 branch of the tree!

There are still a few more SNPs downstream of Z140 that could be tested: A1605, Y6231 and Y15150. However given the undetermined result at Z141 there is a chance your father is I-Z140*.

YSEQ is brilliant for the much more palatable prices, however FTDNA has a SNP pack for Z140 I believe, and with the Father's Day Sale happening soon the prices could be somewhat less daunting. However you mention you will be doing these tests around Christmas time, which is when the Holiday Sale takes place, so you'll still see lower prices!

NiamhWitch
06-05-2018, 06:36 PM
Welcome Niamh to the Z140 branch of the tree!

There are still a few more SNPs downstream of Z140 that could be tested: A1605, Y6231 and Y15150. However given the undetermined result at Z141 there is a chance your father is I-Z140*.

YSEQ is brilliant for the much more palatable prices, however FTDNA has a SNP pack for Z140 I believe, and with the Father's Day Sale happening soon the prices could be somewhat less daunting. However you mention you will be doing these tests around Christmas time, which is when the Holiday Sale takes place, so you'll still see lower prices!

Oh I didn't know FTDNA had a specific pack for Z140. I will have to find that, thanks! Where is that located on their site?

Unfortunately, the SNPs for A1605, Y6231 and Y15150 aren't tested for on 23andMe, so they don't even show up. :-(

Thanks for the welcome! :-)

JonikW
06-05-2018, 09:07 PM
Oh I didn't know FTDNA had a specific pack for Z140. I will have to find that, thanks! Where is that located on their site?

Unfortunately, the SNPs for A1605, Y6231 and Y15150 aren't tested for on 23andMe, so they don't even show up. :-(

Thanks for the welcome! :-)

We're a nice bunch, us Z140 folk, as spruithean demonstrates perfectly. Not so many of us and perhaps not as glamorous as some of the bigger haplogroups. But to adapt an old and somewhat controversial quote, to be born Z140 is to have won first prize in the lottery of life.:beerchug: Keep us posted about how you proceed next with your Dad. It should be interesting, and there are lots of people here who are much better informed than me and always keen to help.

JonikW
06-05-2018, 09:13 PM
On another note, somewhat incredibly I've already had this from YFull. So only a few hours after I sent my BAM link they've already got me to where my Swedish match and the other two testers are on the link that deadly77 posted above. Amazing.

For sample YF13910, haplogroup I-A4586 is preliminarily determined.
https://www.yfull.com/tree/I-L338/
NOTE: All changes such as new subclade, new SNPs, the sample position on the YTree will be available after completion of batch processing and update of the YTree version.
We try to update monthly..
* Based on YFull YTree v6.02 at 02 April 2018

spruithean
06-05-2018, 10:03 PM
Oh I didn't know FTDNA had a specific pack for Z140. I will have to find that, thanks! Where is that located on their site?

Unfortunately, the SNPs for A1605, Y6231 and Y15150 aren't tested for on 23andMe, so they don't even show up. :-(

Thanks for the welcome! :-)

When you sign in to your FTDNA account at the top right hand corner there should be a blue button that says "Upgrade". From there there should be a list of various Y-DNA and mtDNA tests, we will ignore those for right now, from this page you'll see on the bottom left "Advanced Tests" click that link and you should be sent to a page with the ability to search for various advanced tests from X-DNA, X-STR and SNPs and finally SNP packs. The I1-Z140 SNP pack is $119.00 USD.

Hope this helps.

NiamhWitch
06-06-2018, 12:29 AM
When you sign in to your FTDNA account at the top right hand corner there should be a blue button that says "Upgrade". From there there should be a list of various Y-DNA and mtDNA tests, we will ignore those for right now, from this page you'll see on the bottom left "Advanced Tests" click that link and you should be sent to a page with the ability to search for various advanced tests from X-DNA, X-STR and SNPs and finally SNP packs. The I1-Z140 SNP pack is $119.00 USD.

Hope this helps.

Hmm, I can't seem to find "Advanced Tests". Here is a screenshot of what I see:

<nevermind, I am not yet allowed to post images or links, do you mind if I private message the image to you?>

I also Googled "FTDNA Advanced Tests" and only got the typical Y-37, 67, 111, etc. No specific tests. I wonder if they've recently removed the option? Or maybe I'm just inept, which seems more likely. :biggrin1:

spruithean
06-06-2018, 01:57 AM
Hmm, I can't seem to find "Advanced Tests". Here is a screenshot of what I see:

<nevermind, I am not yet allowed to post images or links, do you mind if I private message the image to you?>

I also Googled "FTDNA Advanced Tests" and only got the typical Y-37, 67, 111, etc. No specific tests. I wonder if they've recently removed the option? Or maybe I'm just inept, which seems more likely. :biggrin1:

Hmm, that's odd. No worries, send a screenshot.

NiamhWitch
06-06-2018, 11:40 AM
Well... this was an adventure. I couldn't post pictures because I didn't have enough posts yet, so I went to PM you... and apparently I need 10 posts to PM people, LOL! At that point it was midnight and I zonked out. This morning, I'm trying to find ANY thread I can reply to, to get my post count up. I got nothin'. Saw "The Lounge" and thought "great! perfect!", then saw that it said that any posts made in the Lounge don't count toward your post count. :doh:

Anyway, finally managed to get to 10 posts so maybe I can post pictures now:

https://i.imgur.com/2MfOMPK.jpg

Can't find the "Advanced Tests" option, and it's not showing up in Google either for some reason. :-/

Torc Seanathair
06-06-2018, 12:34 PM
YSEQ has been helpful to me, but another thing that FTDNA has that I really like is Y matches and matches maps. If YSEQ has these, I missed it. Some of FTDNA's project administrators are incredibly helpful, a few - not as much. You should focus on FTDNA, then fill in gaps with YSEQ.

JMcB
06-06-2018, 03:21 PM
On another note, somewhat incredibly I've already had this from YFull. So only a few hours after I sent my BAM link they've already got me to where my Swedish match and the other two testers are on the link that deadly77 posted above. Amazing.

For sample YF13910, haplogroup I-A4586 is preliminarily determined.
https://www.yfull.com/tree/I-L338/
NOTE: All changes such as new subclade, new SNPs, the sample position on the YTree will be available after completion of batch processing and update of the YTree version.
We try to update monthly..
* Based on YFull YTree v6.02 at 02 April 2018

Hello JonikW,

Congratulations! Fortunately, YFull is able to place people on their tree very quickly these days. If you know you MDKA’s country of origins you can enter it under the “Settings” heading, when you sign in. It’s on the upper right. YFull will then post your Country of Origins flag next to your sample. And if you join their Z140 Project - which William also manages - people will be able to see who your MDKA is.

Good luck with your results!

JonikW
06-06-2018, 03:37 PM
I was wondering how to post a flag! Thanks. Have done it now.

JMcB
06-06-2018, 04:14 PM
I was wondering how to post a flag! Thanks. Have done it now.

It will be interesting to see how your two new samples, both of which are from Bam files, effect your TMRCA.

JonikW
06-06-2018, 05:51 PM
Sorry, double posted

JonikW
06-06-2018, 05:52 PM
I'm looking forward to seeing what they make of it! I assume they'll agree with William that we form a new A21901 branch. The TMRCA is what interests me most and I have no idea whether their methodology is the same as William's, which put it at 750 to 1,000 ybp. Any thoughts?

spruithean
06-06-2018, 06:25 PM
Well... this was an adventure. I couldn't post pictures because I didn't have enough posts yet, so I went to PM you... and apparently I need 10 posts to PM people, LOL! At that point it was midnight and I zonked out. This morning, I'm trying to find ANY thread I can reply to, to get my post count up. I got nothin'. Saw "The Lounge" and thought "great! perfect!", then saw that it said that any posts made in the Lounge don't count toward your post count. :doh:

Anyway, finally managed to get to 10 posts so maybe I can post pictures now:

https://i.imgur.com/2MfOMPK.jpg

Can't find the "Advanced Tests" option, and it's not showing up in Google either for some reason. :-/

Okay, when you sign in to your account it should automatically redirect you to your "myFTDNA" dashboard? From there at the top of the screen, I believe on the right there is a blue button labeled "Upgrade" and to the right of that there is a "My Cart". The blue Upgrade button will bring you to the correct page. Unfortunately as I try to load these pages to take a screenshot FTDNA apparently is down for maintenance.

EDIT: okay I just checked, you definitely have to be on your personal, or the kit you manages profile dashboard page (where you can go to see your matches and what not) in order to be directed to the right page from the blue Upgrade button. The FTDNA homepage when signed in will direct you to your shopping cart it seems.

NiamhWitch
06-06-2018, 06:55 PM
Okay, when you sign in to your account it should automatically redirect you to your "myFTDNA" dashboard? From there at the top of the screen, I believe on the right there is a blue button labeled "Upgrade" and to the right of that there is a "My Cart". The blue Upgrade button will bring you to the correct page. Unfortunately as I try to load these pages to take a screenshot FTDNA apparently is down for maintenance.

EDIT: okay I just checked, you definitely have to be on your personal, or the kit you manages profile dashboard page (where you can go to see your matches and what not) in order to be directed to the right page from the blue Upgrade button. The FTDNA homepage when signed in will direct you to your shopping cart it seems.

I think I know what may be going on. I don't actually have a kit on FTDNA. I have an account and kit # because after I tested at 23andMe, I wanted to upload my results to FTDNA, so they gave me a kit# and log-in. However, since my 23andMe was with their V5 chip, I couldn't upload, so it's basically an empty kit. I'm thinking that in order to have access to the SNP packs, I have to have a kit fully uploaded or bought from there, which is why my only options for "upgrading" are to their base kits. (did any of that make sense? LOL...)

I contacted William Hartley and have been accepted in the I-Z140 FB group & the project group at FTDNA. He suggested getting Y-12 from FTDNA (so that I have an STR test and will be part of their system), and the I-Z140 panel test from YSEQ. I just can't afford things like the Big-Y test or the like. Way out of my budget, unfortunately. But I think I can manage the Y-12 and the YSEQ test. :) (still have to wait until around Xmas time though...)

JMcB
06-06-2018, 07:32 PM
I'm looking forward to seeing what they make of it! I assume they'll agree with William that we form a new A21901 branch. The TMRCA is what interests me most and I have no idea whether their methodology is the same as William's, which put it at 750 to 1,000 ybp. Any thoughts?

If William thinks so, I would think so. He’s always been right in my case. They use a slightly different age calculation but when I formed my most recent branch, William told me he thought it dated to around 780 AD and then rounded it up to 800 AD and that’s what YFull gave me (1200 ybp). They do differ at times, though, so time will tell. I would check back periodically because YFull is getting some things done very quickly these days. Even though they must be getting swamped with Bam files.

I recently had a new sample added to my then 2 man sub-clade and within a day or two, they split the branch because my two mates shared some Novel Variants together. So they’re now in their own branch right below me. They were both VCF file submissions, so I’m not sure how that may have effected things, as I think they’re easier to read. At any rate, it’ll be interesting to see what happens.

JMcB
06-06-2018, 07:51 PM
I contacted William Hartley and have been accepted in the I-Z140 FB group & the project group at FTDNA. He suggested getting Y-12 from FTDNA (so that I have an STR test and will be part of their system), and the I-Z140 panel test from YSEQ. I just can't afford things like the Big-Y test or the like. Way out of my budget, unfortunately. But I think I can manage the Y-12 and the YSEQ test. :) (still have to wait until around Xmas time though...)

Hello Niamh,

Welcome to the forum! I would take William’s advice, he’s the expert in our neck of the woods and that’s the cheapest way to accomplish, what you want to accomplish. Once he has all that information, he’ll be able to place you correctly in your area of the Project.

Good luck!

JonikW
06-06-2018, 08:37 PM
If William thinks so, I would think so. He’s always been right in my case. They use a slightly different age calculation but when I formed my most recent branch, William told me he thought it dated to around 780 AD and then rounded it up to 800 AD and that’s what YFull gave me (1200 ybp). They do differ at times, though, so time will tell. I would check back periodically because YFull is getting some things done very quickly these days. Even though they must be getting swamped with Bam files.

I recently had a new sample added to my then 2 man sub-clade and within a day or two, they split the branch because my two mates shared some Novel Variants together. So they’re now in there own branch right below me. They were both VCF file submissions, so I’m not sure how that may have effected things, as I think they’re easier to read. At any rate, it’ll be interesting to see what happens.

OK, might get a bit sentimental here, heaven forbid. What I was hoping for from Y testing back in 2015 was to get clues about where my forefathers came from, whether they were in Britain before the Romans or arrived later. Discovering I was I1 on 23andme back in 2015 really interested me. I've spent so much time visiting sites linked to various Germanic peoples of the past (I love the Celts, Romans and others too, but that's another story) and so this looked like a genetic link with them. I've done most of my travelling by car with my family as the cheapest way to get around, and have enjoyed seeking out obscure Nordic Bronze Age rock carving sites in Norway and Sweden over a few rainy visits as well as Roman-era and later Germanic sites including the Teutoburger Wald and the terpen of Friesland (Freeze-land as my kids called it that March day). I've been entranced by many museums with Germanic collections on the continent (Copenhagen especially), as well as English museums and evocative places including Sutton Hoo. I think the fall of Rome and the migration period are what fascinates me most, but I've also driven to such Viking-era sites as Thingvellir and Borg in Iceland, Borre in Norway, Lindholm Hoje in Denmark and Staraya Ladoga in Russia. I hope my poor family has enjoyed at least some of it...
Back to the DNA: now that I've tested deeper at FTDNA I've got a better chance of actually discovering who my I1 forefathers were at the time they came to England. I'm fortunate because my family has lived in the same Peak District village since at least around 1200 and we still have the Medieval land documents and wills in the family's keeping. That is unusual even in England and so I'm confident of deep ancestry in a spot of land that was settled by I1 carriers the Angles, then the Norse (some from the Great Heathen Army that wintered 30 miles away in Repton and many of whom are believed to have settled throughout Mercia as farmers later) and then and in smaller numbers by the Normans. My grandfather was the last to live in the big family hall in the village (part of which was a remnant from our Medieval home) but they were forced to sell in the 1930s and build a lovely, smaller house a few minutes' walk away. My father's cousin this year sold that house and left the village to move nearby, so at last our ancient, direct tie with the village and land has been broken, possibly for ever.
What I'm leading up to is this: when I discovered I was A4577 with a TMRCA with German testers of 1,600 ybp I felt an Anglian origin was the most parsimonious explanation of where my first forefather to land in England came from. But if my new Swedish match and I really do have a most likely TMRCA of around 750 to 1,000 ybp I'll be thinking that it's actually a bit earlier and if they finally get around to releasing aDNA from the Repton army, some people who at least knew my forefather by sight may be among them. Perhaps even the Scandinavian Kolli who was the landholder in our village just over 100 years before my ancestors are first known to have held the land there was my forefather all along. It's an intriguing thought at least and I hope the YFull TMRCA will help me learn one way or the other.

JMcB
06-07-2018, 03:58 PM
OK, might get a bit sentimental here, heaven forbid. What I was hoping for from Y testing back in 2015 was to get clues about where my forefathers came from, whether they were in Britain before the Romans or arrived later. Discovering I was I1 on 23andme back in 2015 really interested me. I've spent so much time visiting sites linked to various Germanic peoples of the past (I love the Celts, Romans and others too, but that's another story) and so this looked like a genetic link with them. I've done most of my travelling by car with my family as the cheapest way to get around, and have enjoyed seeking out obscure Nordic Bronze Age rock carving sites in Norway and Sweden over a few rainy visits as well as Roman-era and later Germanic sites including the Teutoburger Wald and the terpen of Friesland (Freeze-land as my kids called it that March day). I've been entranced by many museums with Germanic collections on the continent (Copenhagen especially), as well as English museums and evocative places including Sutton Hoo. I think the fall of Rome and the migration period are what fascinates me most, but I've also driven to such Viking-era sites as Thingvellir and Borg in Iceland, Borre in Norway, Lindholm Hoje in Denmark and Staraya Ladoga in Russia. I hope my poor family has enjoyed at least some of it...
Back to the DNA: now that I've tested deeper at FTDNA I've got a better chance of actually discovering who my I1 forefathers were at the time they came to England. I'm fortunate because my family has lived in the same Peak District village since at least around 1200 and we still have the Medieval land documents and wills in the family's keeping. That is unusual even in England and so I'm confident of deep ancestry in a spot of land that was settled by I1 carriers the Angles, then the Norse (some from the Great Heathen Army that wintered 30 miles away in Repton and many of whom are believed to have settled throughout Mercia as farmers later) and then and in smaller numbers by the Normans. My grandfather was the last to live in the big family hall in the village (part of which was a remnant from our Medieval home) but they were forced to sell in the 1930s and build a lovely, smaller house a few minutes' walk away. My father's cousin this year sold that house and left the village to move nearby, so at last our ancient, direct tie with the village and land has been broken, possibly for ever.
What I'm leading up to is this: when I discovered I was A4577 with a TMRCA with German testers of 1,600 ybp I felt an Anglian origin was the most parsimonious explanation of where my first forefather to land in England came from. But if my new Swedish match and I really do have a most likely TMRCA of around 750 to 1,000 ybp I'll be thinking that it's actually a bit earlier and if they finally get around to releasing aDNA from the Repton army, some people who at least knew my forefather by sight may be among them. Perhaps even the Scandinavian Kolli who was the landholder in our village just over 100 years before my ancestors are first known to have held the land there was my forefather all along. It's an intriguing thought at least and I hope the YFull TMRCA will help me learn one way or the other.

Hello JonikW,

That was very nicely said! Thank you for sharing the background of your quest.

On another note; I think your ship has come in: https://www.yfull.com/tree/I-A4586/

No date as of yet but I assume that’ll come when they update their tree. Although, I would check back periodically because they also seem to be updating things as they go along.

JonikW
06-07-2018, 05:53 PM
Hello JonikW,

That was very nicely said! Thank you for sharing the background of your quest.

On another note; I think your ship has come in: https://www.yfull.com/tree/I-A4586/

No date as of yet but I assume that’ll come when they update their tree. Although, I would check back periodically because they also seem to be updating things as they go along.

Thanks JMcB! That's great to see and I'll definitely check back. The subclade is exactly what William said it would be of course.

JonikW
06-13-2018, 08:11 AM
I haven't paid for my YFull test yet, but they've put up a TMRCA for my Swedish match and me of 700 ybp. That compares with William's 750 to 1,000 ybp. So either someone in the family moved from England to Sweden after a limit of about 1300, or somone moved from Scandinavia to England up to about 1,000 years ago. I see the Scandinavian flags feature a fair bit on YFull below L338 (https://www.yfull.com/tree/I-L338) and personally feel a Danelaw period or Norman move to Derbyshire in my case is pretty likely. But could both the TMRCA estimates be out enough to take us back to the migration period, or is that impossible? I'm sure the dating methods have been backtested through genealogy on some people's family trees. I remember reading something very interesting on a blog once but can't recall enough to find it again through Google.
EDIT: will the TMRCA change in any case once YFull has processed my results?

JonikW
06-13-2018, 09:18 AM
There's also this confidence info although I'm not quite sure what it means....

23933

deadly77
06-13-2018, 05:42 PM
Wow, they're moving pretty fast through processing your Swedish cousin and your BAM files, especially considering the sheer number of BAM file submissions that YFull is currently seeing after FTDNA started to release the hg38 BAM files.

If you go to your homepage, on the left hand menu at the bottom there is a FAQ which is quite useful in helping understand what YFull do and some of the terms that they use. The page on their subclade age estimation is here https://www.yfull.com/faq/how-does-yfull-determine-formed-age-tmrca-and-ci/ - the way I understand it is that the main number for formed and TMRCA is a midpoint or average of where they calculate your branch broke off from the parent A4586, etc. and when the two of you branch off from each other based on the six shared SNPs. I think they put this main number in there to make it easier to read, but it's an estimate, not an absolute. When you hover your cursor over those numbers, it gives you a range - essentially the standard deviation or error bars. 95% confidence interval means that they are 95% certain that the formed and TMRCA fall within those ranges. So TMRCA is listed as 700 ybp, but 95% CI lists it could be between 1650 ybp and 250 ybp. Part of the reason why it's a large range for the confidence interval is the small number of samples (in this case, 2) - more samples would give a tighter confidence interval.

JonikW
06-13-2018, 07:05 PM
Much appreciated, as usual. I was curious too that we don't match on STRs. Don't know if that really tells me anything though.

JMcB
06-13-2018, 08:09 PM
I haven't paid for my YFull test yet, but they've put up a TMRCA for my Swedish match and me of 700 ybp. That compares with William's 750 to 1,000 ybp. So either someone in the family moved from England to Sweden after a limit of about 1300, or somone moved from Scandinavia to England up to about 1,000 years ago. I see the Scandinavian flags feature a fair bit on YFull below L338 (https://www.yfull.com/tree/I-L338) and personally feel a Danelaw period or Norman move to Derbyshire in my case is pretty likely. But could both the TMRCA estimates be out enough to take us back to the migration period, or is that impossible? I'm sure the dating methods have been backtested through genealogy on some people's family trees. I remember reading something very interesting on a blog once but can't recall enough to find it again through Google.
EDIT: will the TMRCA change in any case once YFull has processed my results?

To be honest, I donít know for sure but I did notice that when you click on the little white box that sayís [info] on the far right. Thereís no dating information in there at all. No sample numbers, no SNPs for dating, etc. So it looks like they havenít totally finished either of your samples yet. So I would keep an eye out. Once you see both of your samples listed in that little box, youíll know theyíve finished, as far as their dating calculations are concerned. As an example, take a look at the info box just above for I-A4586. Your box should look something like that.

https://www.yfull.com/tree/I-A4586/

JonikW
06-13-2018, 08:33 PM
Thanks JMcB! Given I match the Germans at 2,300 ybp (it was 2,600 previously when we were A4577+) and now the Swedish cousin more recently, I think it's already safe to assume my forefather came over as part of a Germanic wave. Perhaps the Danelaw is already looking like the most likely route given that tallies better with the A21901 dating as it currently stands. I'm certainly glad I've tested so deeply, particularly as my Swedish cousin and I coincidentally tested at the same time. I've certainly come a long way from my initial I1 on 23andme. In fact I probably couldn't have a more informative match than my Swedish one. Perhaps I'll even get another match on the continent that will help me to refine the picture one day. Here's hoping!

deadly77
06-15-2018, 06:29 AM
I had a look at how your STRs compare in the FTDNA Z140 project and it seems that he has a lot of extra markers on the multi-marker STRs - for example you have four markers for DYS464, he has six. At you have two markers at CDY (a known fast mutating marker) and he has three. I'm not sure how if FTDNA's algorithm is capable of handling that discrepancy. It will be interesting to see when Yfull finishes processing on how your shared STRs match up - I can see your Swedish cousin in my distant STR matches at YFull but not you yet - that's usually the last thing to come from YFull. If you're interested you could try putting the data of yourselves and the German branch into SAPP - I've played with this tool a bit lately and it's pretty nice http://www.jdvtools.com/SAPP/

JonikW
06-18-2018, 08:13 AM
I've paid now and can see my Swedish cousin as my closest STR match. Can you tell anything useful from this screenshot? Also, do you see me as a distant match deadly? Thanks

24099

deadly77
06-18-2018, 11:38 PM
Ah, I see you're now solid on the YFull tree - nice. It looks like YFull is classifying you as a close STR match to your Swedish cousin. From the screenshot, it looks like they compared 345 STRs that you both have and you differ on 32 of them. They calculate distance by the number of differences divided by the number of compared STRs, so that's where the 0.093 number comes from. YFull define close STR matches as distance less than 0.1 and distant matches as distance between 0.1-0.2.

And yes, you popped up as a distant match in my STR matches list - you're actually my sixth closest match, with 45 differences from 362 STRs, which puts us at a distance of 0.124. I don't have any close matches at STR or SNP - I'm the billy-no-mates at I-L338*.

I've been thinking about this a bit more after I suggested looking into the STRs that YFull pulls out of your BigY - there's a fair bit of good data on the 111 STRs that FTDNA offers as there's been a lot of analysis over the last few years, so we have a fairly good idea of the mutation rates of these STRs, especially among the first Y67. If you look at the FTDNA Z140 project, the markers at the top of the page that are fast mutating markers such as DYS385 and CDY that are coloured burgundy. Thinking about it a bit more, I don't think we have enough knowledge of the mutation rates of the extra STRs to say how effective they are at judging genetic distance. That seemed to be one of the things that came out when FTDNA released their Y500 - it seems like a lot of the extra STRs that came with Y500 appear to be very slow mutating with the results that people wouldn't differ too much from other people as a lot of their STRs were the same, even between different haplogroups (which makes you wonder what it the data is worth). I know that David Vance (he's the guy who writes the SAPP tool that I mentioned above) was collecting data from Big Y Y500 and from that we may be able to figure out which of the newer STRs are worth considering for analysis and which can be ignored - markers that mutate too slowly are not very helpful because everyone will essentially be the same, markers that mutate too fast are not helpful because you don't know if the mutation was random and could have occurred in both lines after the common ancestor - and also back -mutations which may make the relationship appear closer than it is. Same applies to the extra STRs that YFull pulls out in their analysis - you and I share 317 STR markers where we match the same. Although YFull are able to differentiate between a closer match such as your Swedish cousin (looks like he's your only close STR match), so there's clearly something in there. I think we'll have a better idea in the future when we understand this in more detail. But it's also pretty neat to be right on the cutting edge and see the field as it develops.

One thing to point out - the BigY test doesn't always read all of the STRs well, especially the longer repeating ones. I think the average amount of STRs pulled out of the BigY BAM file was 96 out of Y111. I read that FGC's YElite grabs on average 107 out of the Y111. My YSEQ WGS pulled out 106 of the Y111 STRs and 104 of them matched the FTDNA Y111 result. You can check your own under STR results.

But on a different point - rather validates your choice to take a NGS like a Big Y - if you and your Swedish cousin had just both done Y111 you wouldn't have matched because you're outside of the 10 STR genetic distance so that data alone is giving you a false negative result that only the SNPs from BigY can tell you. In my STR matches, I have a lot of false positives at the Y67 level as they're positive for downstream SNPs that I'm negative for. So while the STRs are useful, we should treat them with caution.

I have read a bit about using the extra STRs in some of the other haplogroups (specifically some of the R1b subclades) and it said that they were sometimes useful in branching. I haven't seen a great deal of discussion about it in the I1 haplogroup. I feel that's mostly down to a numbers game - R1b as a population is just so much larger than the I1 population, so they have a lot more data which helps with cutting down the outliers and statistical noise, so predictions have a lot more confidence. Also in I1 we have a more recent common ancestor - haplogroup is often called I-M253 but there is a block of over 300 SNPs that everyone so far in the I1 database shares which means the common ancestor for all I1 alive today (so far) has a common ancestor 5000 years ago. These factors may mean that the STRs beyond Y111 may be less useful for I1 folks compared to R1b folks, although our SNP tree is less cluttered. Testing and analysis seem to be speeding up, right now I'm not sure the interpretation of that data and analysis is caught up, so there may very well be better answers the more we look at this.

JonikW
06-19-2018, 12:44 AM
You've given me a lot to ponder and digest there, as always. Thanks deadly. Much appreciated.

deadly77
06-19-2018, 05:55 AM
Sorry that was a bit stream of consciousness from me - tend to ramble if I'm thinking while I write. I guess we'll see if I look like a numpty when this is reviewed in the future. ;)

JonikW
06-19-2018, 10:09 AM
That was very helpful! I see you're my 31st more distant match out of 500. Interesting. I'm looking forward to YFull finalising my SNP data.

JonikW
06-20-2018, 11:51 PM
The YFull TMRCA for me and my Swedish cousin is now 1050 ybp, or 968 AD. It does fit remarkably well with the Danelaw given that the village where my forefathers lived from at least around 1200 was in that area, with Scandinavian place names within a couple of miles. I'll hope for further matches, but in the meantime the most parsimonious assumption as far as I'm concerned is that my ancestor came over with the Danes (rather than one of my lot going over there). I only hope he was a nice chap, at least by the standards of the times. I've always felt more sympathy for the I1 carrying early Angles than the Danes. I suppose given the fact that I1 was carried by so many invaders, the only possible clue to origin could come from the latest possible continental match. I'd never thought of that before.... Once again, I'm certainly glad I pushed the boat out and did the Big Y.

kujira692
07-05-2018, 03:46 PM
Hi everyone,

I've had my Y haplogroup tested at FTDNA and have gotten as far as I1-Z59, but I had transfered my father's Ancestry DNA over to WeGenes (where they give you a Y Haplogroup estimate as well). For a long time it guessed I1-Z60, but I just checked last week and they must have refined it because it is now giving I1a2a1a1~ (which comes out as I1-Z2535, which is downstream of I1-Z140 I believe).

Anywho, my question is would does that grouping, I1-Z2535, make sense with having an Irish ancestry from Tipperary and the last name McBride?

Thank you for any assistance or thoughts!

spruithean
07-05-2018, 04:28 PM
Well, the thing is with surnames is they don't necessarily correlate with surnames. My surname is Scottish Gaelic, yet my Y-Haplogroup is I-A14097 which is downstream of I-A13241 which is also part of the larger I-Z140 umbrella. There is another McBride group with roots in both Scotland and Northern Ireland who belong to I-A13248 which is also downstream of I-A13241.

There are various reasons ones surname may not line up with their Y-Haplogroup, it could be through adoption, Non-parental events, adoption of a maternal surname (to inherit titles, hide from authorities, etc) or changing your surname to match that of a local lord as a show of allegiance, etc.

JonikW
07-05-2018, 07:07 PM
Well, the thing is with surnames is they don't necessarily correlate with surnames. My surname is Scottish Gaelic, yet my Y-Haplogroup is I-A14097 which is downstream of I-A13241 which is also part of the larger I-Z140 umbrella. There is another McBride group with roots in both Scotland and Northern Ireland who belong to I-A13248 which is also downstream of I-A13241.

There are various reasons ones surname may not line up with their Y-Haplogroup, it could be through adoption, Non-parental events, adoption of a maternal surname (to inherit titles, hide from authorities, etc) or changing your surname to match that of a local lord as a show of allegiance, etc.

Very true. Plus there was Norse and Norman settlement in Ireland at an early date.

spruithean
07-05-2018, 07:11 PM
Very true. Plus there was Norse and Norman settlement in Ireland at an early date.

Not to mention the quick adoption of Gaelic culture by both the Norse and the Normans in certain areas of Ireland and Western Scotland.

There are a number of Irish septs with Norman origins that eventually became "More Irish than the Irish themselves".

deadly77
07-06-2018, 08:20 AM
Hi everyone,

I've had my Y haplogroup tested at FTDNA and have gotten as far as I1-Z59, but I had transfered my father's Ancestry DNA over to WeGenes (where they give you a Y Haplogroup estimate as well). For a long time it guessed I1-Z60, but I just checked last week and they must have refined it because it is now giving I1a2a1a1~ (which comes out as I1-Z2535, which is downstream of I1-Z140 I believe).

Anywho, my question is would does that grouping, I1-Z2535, make sense with having an Irish ancestry from Tipperary and the last name McBride?

Thank you for any assistance or thoughts!

I've seen WeGene give some erroneous results with European haplogroups, so I'd recommend double checking that one. It's pretty easy to do since you have downloaded the raw data from Ancestry - open up the raw data in some text reader such as Notepad. Ancestry lists the Y-SNP markers it tests for under Chromosome 24. Easiest way to find would be to use "ctrl+f" to bring up the finder and then type in either rs765711588 (rsid#)or 22142382 (position). If the allele is G, you're negative for Z2535. If it's positive, the allele will be T.

If you're positive and seeing as you have results from FTDNA, you're welcome to join the I1-Z140 project at FTDNA here https://www.familytreedna.com/groups/z140/about and the Facebook discussion group here https://www.facebook.com/groups/I1.Z140.YDNA.Project/ and you may get a better idea of who you're more closely related to among our subclade.

I had a look at the FTDNA project, and don't see any McBrides (or spelling variations) under Z2535. We do have some members with those surnames under F2642 (also downstream of Z140, but parallel to Z2535) which spruithean mentions in his reply - another reason to verify the WeGene prediction.

kujira692
07-08-2018, 12:02 PM
Wow, thank you for that information about the alleles! It looks like (if I've done it correctly, hah), that it's a "G", so negative then.

Well thank you for the insight before I spent too much time going down this wrong rabbit hole *haha*. Back to the drawing board. I'm currently getting LivingDNA done, maybe they'll have a more accurate stab at it!

Thank you again for all the replies!

JonikW
07-08-2018, 02:28 PM
Wow, thank you for that information about the alleles! It looks like (if I've done it correctly, hah), that it's a "G", so negative then.

Well thank you for the insight before I spent too much time going down this wrong rabbit hole *haha*. Back to the drawing board. I'm currently getting LivingDNA done, maybe they'll have a more accurate stab at it!

Thank you again for all the replies!

Good luck. Living DNA put me at Z2535 which has a TMRCA of 4,100 ybp. Still, at least that's slightly downstream of Z140.

JMcB
07-08-2018, 02:50 PM
Wow, thank you for that information about the alleles! It looks like (if I've done it correctly, hah), that it's a "G", so negative then.

Well thank you for the insight before I spent too much time going down this wrong rabbit hole *haha*. Back to the drawing board. I'm currently getting LivingDNA done, maybe they'll have a more accurate stab at it!

Thank you again for all the replies!

Hello kujira692,

I’m one of the Z140 McBrides and I’ve also tested with LivingDNA. And while their Haplogroup results aren’t what I’d call refined, they should be deep enough in your case. They gave me I-S2169 (aka I-F2642) which should be enough to steer you in the right direction. Although, judging from the explanation of deadly77, it looks like you may be in with us.

https://www.familytreedna.com/public/Z140?iframe=ycolorized

If you scroll down to the bottom of the page and hit page 2, we’re the 13th group down from the top.

When it comes to LivingDNA’s autosomal readings, in my case; their broad numbers were spot on and were the best of any of the three companies I’ve tested with. So I hope they’re the same for you!

Good luck!

JMcB
07-08-2018, 03:29 PM
I've seen WeGene give some erroneous results with European haplogroups, so I'd recommend double checking that one. It's pretty easy to do since you have downloaded the raw data from Ancestry - open up the raw data in some text reader such as Notepad. Ancestry lists the Y-SNP markers it tests for under Chromosome 24. Easiest way to find would be to use "ctrl+f" to bring up the finder and then type in either rs765711588 (rsid#)or 22142382 (position). If the allele is G, you're negative for Z2535. If it's positive, the allele will be T.

If you're positive and seeing as you have results from FTDNA, you're welcome to join the I1-Z140 project at FTDNA here https://www.familytreedna.com/groups/z140/about and the Facebook discussion group here https://www.facebook.com/groups/I1.Z140.YDNA.Project/ and you may get a better idea of who you're more closely related to among our subclade.

I had a look at the FTDNA project, and don't see any McBrides (or spelling variations) under Z2535. We do have some members with those surnames under F2642 (also downstream of Z140, but parallel to Z2535) which spruithean mentions in his reply - another reason to verify the WeGene prediction.

Hello deadly77,

Do you happen to know what the rs or position number is for F2642/S2169? It would be nice to see what kujira692 gets there.

spruithean
07-08-2018, 04:27 PM
I believe F2642 is 15,824,399...15,824,399. If YBrowse is correct. I cannot find the rs number there though.

deadly77
07-08-2018, 05:19 PM
Hello deadly77,

Do you happen to know what the rs or position number is for F2642/S2169? It would be nice to see what kujira692 gets there.

Sure - looking up F2642 in my own results the rsid# is rs376636841 and the position number is 17936279. I have a G in my results as I'm negative. Should be an A if positive.

Spruithean is correct for the position number of 15824399 for F2642 - that's the position number for the new hg38 reference. The position 17936279 that I gave just above here applies to the older hg19 reference, but I'm not sure what reference that AncestryDNA is using. My raw data was downloaded prior to the changeover to hg38 reference that FTDNA, YSEQ and YFull have switched over to, so mine clearly hg19.

kujira692
07-08-2018, 06:37 PM
I have a "G" at that location. I'm not even sure if I AM z140: likely not since it was WeGene that suggested it, and we've proved the initial assessment of Z3525 (I think that was it *hah*) incorrect.

As a side note, does anyone get an accurate or even relevant guess for their Haplogroup from Nevgen? I run mine through and it always comes back as 99.8% unmatchable or similar. Ugh. Well that LivingDNA results will help I'm sure.

Thank you again everyone for the assistance! it's been a big help!

JMcB
07-08-2018, 06:48 PM
Deleted cross posted out of sync reply.

JMcB
07-08-2018, 06:56 PM
I have a "G" at that location. I'm not even sure if I AM z140: likely not since it was WeGene that suggested it, and we've proved the initial assessment of Z3525 (I think that was it *hah*) incorrect.

As a side note, does anyone get an accurate or even relevant guess for their Haplogroup from Nevgen? I run mine through and it always comes back as 99.8% unmatchable or similar. Ugh. Well that LivingDNA results will help I'm sure.

Thank you again everyone for the assistance! it's been a big help!

Well, it looks like we’re back to the drawing board. Thanks for checking kujira692. Hopefully, LivingDNA will straighten everything out.

deadly77
07-09-2018, 07:46 AM
I have a "G" at that location. I'm not even sure if I AM z140: likely not since it was WeGene that suggested it, and we've proved the initial assessment of Z3525 (I think that was it *hah*) incorrect.

As a side note, does anyone get an accurate or even relevant guess for their Haplogroup from Nevgen? I run mine through and it always comes back as 99.8% unmatchable or similar. Ugh. Well that LivingDNA results will help I'm sure.

Thank you again everyone for the assistance! it's been a big help!

Well, in for a penny, in for a pound - let's take a look at Z140 - that one is rs768549242 position 17863355, negative will be G, positive will be A.

Exactly the same thing happened with WeGene's analysis of 23andme results from NiamhWitch's (she's also in this thread a bit earlier) father - prediction of I1a2a1a1 (I-Z2535) but when we looked up the raw data Z2535 came out negative, although Z140 was positive. You could also try the Morley predictor which seems to give less false positives compared to WeGene. That one is here: http://www.geneticgenealogist.net/2017/08/updated-method-to-get-ydna-haplogroup.html

With regards to Nevgen, first time I used it (somewhere around end of 2016/early 2017) it gave me a high confidence result of Z140 and L338 with 111 Y-STR markers, which was bang on. They've since updated it and it predicts me as S12289+ but from SNP testing I know I'm S12289-. However, I can't really fault them as several of my matches at FTDNA at 67 STR level are S12289+, most likely due to STR convergence.

Living DNA will test Z140, Z2535, F2642 on their chip so hopefully that will provide further confirmation. It's difficult to say what their chip does cover because they only give results arising from positive SNPs and don't report negative results or no calls. Their Y-DNA analysis can sometimes be a mess. For example, among two brothers in Z140, LivingDNA gave one I-Z2535 and the other I-M253 - this made them concerned that they weren't actually brothers. From looking at both sets of raw data, the I-M253 brother was positive for both Z140 and Z2535, but had a no call at Z60. I think that LivingDNA works down the Y-SNPs in a stepwise manner, and when they got to the no call at Z60 and all other I-M253 options were negative (or no call), they stopped and didn't go any further down the haplotree. LivingDNA had a lot of major problems with their Y-DNA analysis early on (you can read some of the threads in the LivingDNA section of the Anthrogenica forum), although for myself, JMcB and JonikW, it did get us to the right place.

spruithean
07-09-2018, 11:26 AM
Nevgen was fairly accurate for me before I received my Big Y results. It predicted me with fairly high confidence to be I-CTS6772, which is a bit upstream of my current terminal SNP.

LivingDNA will certainly give a better prediction than WeGene I feel. Good luck!

kujira692
07-09-2018, 04:38 PM
Hah, okay so the Z140 reference was a "G" as well, so I'd like to thank everyone for their assistance in debunking WeGene's prediction.

This was actually very informative, so thank you again for all of your help and direction!

spruithean
08-01-2018, 02:07 PM
I think it is worth mentioning that one of the aDNA samples found in Iceland, individual dubbed SBT-A1, belonged to haplogroup I1a2a1a1a2 (I-F2642).



65. Smyrlaberg
70
Grave 1: A male skeleton (aged 46+), orientated NW-SE
Position: supine but positioned slightly towards the left, arms and legs extended
Grave measurement: 200 x 60-70cm, 70cm deep.
Grave type: Traces of wood and six iron nails were found, possibly the remains of a
wooden coffin.
Location: in an old gravel quarry on a rise c. 300 m east of the farm.
A few small stones were placed at the foot end.
Grave-goods: iron knife.
Excavated by: KristjŠn EldjŠrn in 1954
Another burial was investigated in this site by řůr Magnķsson in 1969, but only
fragments of bone and iron were recovered.

Although this burial seemed to be facing directly Kagaūarhůll farm, it was located
outside the boundary of Kagaūarhůll. This grave was probably associated with
Smyrlaberg farm and it looked away. It also seems that the grave was following the
old track and looking inland.

SBT-A1 - 65. Smyrlaberg
Haplogroup: I1a2a1a1a2 (I-F2642)
Ethnic breakdown: ~75% "Gaelic", ~25% Norse
Here is a map (https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?14451-New-Study-on-Iceland&p=407076&viewfull=1#post407076) from the original thread
SBT-A1 appears to plot closely to England, perhaps with British Celtic regions? Perhaps he wasn't necessarily of Gaelic descent?

JonikW
08-10-2018, 07:55 AM
I think it is worth mentioning that one of the aDNA samples found in Iceland, individual dubbed SBT-A1, belonged to haplogroup I1a2a1a1a2 (I-F2642).




SBT-A1 - 65. Smyrlaberg
Haplogroup: I1a2a1a1a2 (I-F2642)
Ethnic breakdown: ~75% "Gaelic", ~25% Norse
Here is a map (https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?14451-New-Study-on-Iceland&p=407076&viewfull=1#post407076) from the original thread
SBT-A1 appears to plot closely to England, perhaps with British Celtic regions? Perhaps he wasn't necessarily of Gaelic descent?

Thanks for such a detailed post. Can't believe I missed it earlier. He certainly does look more English than Gaelic.

spruithean
08-11-2018, 03:56 AM
Thanks for such a detailed post. Can't believe I missed it earlier. He certainly does look more English than Gaelic.

I'm wondering if despite his "Englishness" he still may have some aspect of Celtic ancestry, he still plots close to Scotland, perhaps he had roots in the Danelaw or Jůrvik?

I-F2642 is certainly not a haplogroup I'd expect to find in a supposed Norse-Gael in Iceland of all places!

It's a good I-Z140 aDNA find though, we still need more of these!

JonikW
08-11-2018, 08:20 AM
I'm wondering if despite his "Englishness" he still may have some aspect of Celtic ancestry, he still plots close to Scotland, perhaps he had roots in the Danelaw or Jůrvik?

I-F2642 is certainly not a haplogroup I'd expect to find in a supposed Norse-Gael in Iceland of all places!

It's a good I-Z140 aDNA find though, we still need more of these!

Yes, he's the one and only Z140 aDNA result to date as far as I remember. I don't recall seeing any others on our ancient I1 thread or elsewhere. I like your thinking on his possible origin. Let's hope for some more results soon!

JonikW
10-11-2018, 08:02 AM
I'm excited to announce that I have a second Big Y match. This one has an English surname and I've sent an email to him. We share 342387 variants compared with 355946 for my Swedish match and I. I'm still getting my head around this stuff, but am I right in assuming my new match is more distant from me? I'm hoping to find out where he came from to add to the origins picture.

JonikW
10-11-2018, 01:40 PM
Just to add: When I look at my two matches and go to the non-matching variants column, the Swedish tester has 20 and the other 29. Is that of any help?

JMcB
10-11-2018, 02:31 PM
Just to add: When I look at my two matches and go to the non-matching variants column, the Swedish tester has 20 and the other 29. Is that of any help?


Hello JonikW

According to Roberta Estes, the one with 29 non-matching variants is the one who is furthest away. Approximately, 1450 years ago, as opposed to 1000 years ago for the Swede.


“In the current Big Y version, a person is considered a match to you if they have BOTH of the following:

30 or fewer differences in total SNPs (named and unnamed variants combined.)
Their haplogroup is downstream from your terminal SNP haplogroup or downstream from your four closest parent haplogroups, meaning any of the 5 haplogroups shown on your 5 step mini-tree.

Here’s the logic behind the new matching algorithm threshold.


https://dnaexplained.files.wordpress.com/2018/01/big-y-38-logic.png


SNP mutations happen on the average of one every 100 years. This number is still discussed and debated, but this estimate is as good as any. [Emphasis mine]

If your common ancestor through two men had two sons, 1500 years ago, and each line incurred 1 mutation every hundred years, at the end of 1500 years, the number of mutations between the two men would be approximately 30.

Family Tree DNA felt that 1500 years was a reasonable cutoff for a genealogical timeframe, hence the new matching threshold of 30 mutations difference.

The new match criteria is designed to reflect your matches that are most closely related to you. In other words, the people on your match list should be related to you within the last approximate 1500 years, and people not on your match list who have taken the Big Y are separated from you by at least 30 mutations”.


https://dna-explained.com/2018/01/12/working-with-the-new-big-y-results-hg38/

JonikW
10-11-2018, 03:14 PM
Hello JonikW

According to Roberta Estes, the one with 29 non-matching variants is the one who is furthest away. Approximately, 1450 years ago, as opposed to 1000 years ago for the Swede.


In the current Big Y version, a person is considered a match to you if they have BOTH of the following:

30 or fewer differences in total SNPs (named and unnamed variants combined.)
Their haplogroup is downstream from your terminal SNP haplogroup or downstream from your four closest parent haplogroups, meaning any of the 5 haplogroups shown on your 5 step mini-tree.

Here’s the logic behind the new matching algorithm threshold.


https://dnaexplained.files.wordpress.com/2018/01/big-y-38-logic.png


SNP mutations happen on the average of one every 100 years. This number is still discussed and debated, but this estimate is as good as any. [Emphasis mine]

If your common ancestor through two men had two sons, 1500 years ago, and each line incurred 1 mutation every hundred years, at the end of 1500 years, the number of mutations between the two men would be approximately 30.

Family Tree DNA felt that 1500 years was a reasonable cutoff for a genealogical timeframe, hence the new matching threshold of 30 mutations difference.

The new match criteria is designed to reflect your matches that are most closely related to you. In other words, the people on your match list should be related to you within the last approximate 1500 years, and people not on your match list who have taken the Big Y are separated from you by at least 30 mutations.


https://dna-explained.com/2018/01/12/working-with-the-new-big-y-results-hg38/

Really appreciate that JMcB. I've written to my STR matches following William's advice, in case this encourages them to test.

JMcB
10-11-2018, 03:50 PM
Really appreciate that JMcB. I've written to my STR matches following William's advice, in case this encourages them to test.

Good luck!

I’ve had some luck getting STR matches to test my SNP Pack at YSEQ but unfortunately, no one seems to be interested in tests like Big Y. So my Big Y matches were surprises, that came out of the blue. Actually, on second thought; I paid for one person to test my SNP Pack, so there was no luck involved there. ;-)

Do you know if your new match is in the Z140 Project?

deadly77
10-11-2018, 05:02 PM
Congratulations JonikW - good to hear that you're getting more Big Y matches.

It looks like your new match is has joined the FTDNA I1-Z140 project - there are now three kits in your branch. It looks like it's listing you and the gent from Sweden as I-Y98720 (I think that has changed from what it was before?) while the new match is listed as I-A21901.

From the YFull branch of the tree (which just has you and your Swedish match), it's listing your branch as I-A21901 after you break off from I-A4586 and the two of you share 8 SNPs in that phylogenetic block (including the Y98720). With just the two of you, you don't really know which of those eight SNPs are older or younger relative to each other. With the third match, it looks like you might be able to put some of them in order. For example, it could be from the FTDNA results that A21901 is further back in time than Y98720 assuming new match is probably not positive for Y98720.

FTDNA's haplotree currently has the same eight SNPs that YFull has at the same level - it will probably update and reorder in the next few days.

But you can ask the new match to check his Big Y SNPs for those eight SNPs and see which ones he's positive or negative for. It's probably not a bad idea if he's comfortable navigating his Big Y results to have him check to make sure. No calls or low read SNPs in Big Y can appear as false negatives on paper.

If he's interested in uploading his BAM to YFull, that will also get captured on their tree. You and Swedish match would then move to a new branch and it would adjust the formed and TMRCA dates accordingly closer to the present.

JonikW
10-11-2018, 05:18 PM
Thanks guys. I don't claim to understand this but our project manager (who's been wonderful today as always) says I have 10 unshared variants; the latest English match has nine and our Swedish match five. This gives him a TMRCA for the three of us of 1,120 ybp. For me and my Swedish match, the estimated TMRCA is 1,050 ybp. I guess William has looked at the SNPs in the way you describe, deadly77. I really hope the new match sends his BAM to YFull.

JMcB
10-11-2018, 06:05 PM
Thanks guys. I don't claim to understand this but our project manager (who's been wonderful today as always) says I have 10 unshared variants; the latest English match has nine and our Swedish match five. This gives him a TMRCA for the three of us of 1,120 ybp. For me and my Swedish match, the estimated TMRCA is 1,050 ybp. I guess William has looked at the SNPs in the way you describe, deadly77. I really hope the new match sends his BAM to YFull.

I hope he does, too!

Personally, I wish everyone would send their results to YFull. The data is important for them to have and the cost is a bargain, compared to all the other tests we take. Plus, it helps the community at large. Fortunately, my two matches sent their bam files right away and were on the tree the next day. Which allowed me to see what was happening very quickly, two new subclades forming. It took three months for FT to make the adjustment in the first case. Although, they were better with the second. And as always, William was on top of everything right away, thankfully.

JonikW
10-11-2018, 07:10 PM
I hope he does, too!

Personally, I wish everyone would send their results to YFull. The data is important for them to have and the cost is a bargain, compared to all the other tests we take. Plus, it helps the community at large. Fortunately, my two matches sent their bam files right away and were on the tree the next day. Which allowed me to see what was happening very quickly, two new subclades forming. It took three months for FT to make the adjustment in the first case. Although, they were better with the second. And as always, William was on top of everything right away, thankfully.

The good news is the kit is managed by a relative who's actually an expert on DNA. So they're doing YFull, which will give a new terminal SNP and TMRCA. Like me, my latest match is from a part of the Danelaw that was settled by Angles and then the Danes. I've certainly been very fortunate with doing Big Y at the time I did. It's also exciting to contribute to actually building our Z140 tree.

spruithean
10-11-2018, 09:27 PM
Nice to see more matches rolling in for the Z140 crew. I've yet to see any new matches with Big Y at the moment, my two closest matches are of British origin and downstream of my position. TMRCA was estimated to be sometime around 1,700-1,850 ybp. That's a little outside the arrival of the Angles and quite some time before the Vikings. I often wonder "early Germanic foederati?" or "rough estimate, probably Angles anyway?"

I've also been extremely slow getting myself to send my BAM to YFull. Some busy times can certainly get in the way!

JonikW
10-11-2018, 10:43 PM
Nice to see more matches rolling in for the Z140 crew. I've yet to see any new matches with Big Y at the moment, my two closest matches are of British origin and downstream of my position. TMRCA was estimated to be sometime around 1,700-1,850 ybp. That's a little outside the arrival of the Angles and quite some time before the Vikings. I often wonder "early Germanic foederati?" or "rough estimate, probably Angles anyway?"

I've also been extremely slow getting myself to send my BAM to YFull. Some busy times can certainly get in the way!

Thanks spruithean. In case it helps, here are some notes I made a while back on Germanic movements into Britain under the Romans that sum up a good deal of reading that I did:

"Myres points out the following: according to Dio, Marcomanni were settled in Britain by Marcus Aurelius; Zosimus says Burgundians were settled under the leader Igillus in the third century; and Ammianus Marcellinus says Alamanni were settled under Fraomar in the fourth. Moreover, Erocus, king of the Alamanni, engineered the election of Constantine at York (Victor, Ep. de Caesaribus). Myres concludes that wheel-made late Roman pottery with Germanic styling around the Saxon shore forts, ports and the walled towns that would have formed part of the supply system suggests the presence of these Germanic people in the late fourth century."

deadly77
10-11-2018, 11:28 PM
Ah, that's good to hear that they're keen on having a YFull analysis. I think it's great value for what you pay for - I find their tools and analysis are very useful. I think FTDNA are getting better, but I don't think that they are a one stop shop, especially in the analysis. For many years, FTDNA's approach was very much "here's your SNPs from your Big Y results - enjoy!" with very little in the way of analysis. They heavily relied on volunteer project admins like William to organize how a lot of this fits together, and that had a big part in driving the market. Third party analysis like YFull and Big Tree (for some subclades of R1b) filled a niche that FTDNA wasn't offering at the time. It seems FTDNA has changed their approach and they're doing a lot better with what they offer, but I still think the analysis of YFull is useful and I also like the flexibility of YSEQ as well for what they offer.

Plus as I'm not a Big Y tester, for me one of the big advantages is that YFull is the only real cross vendor comparison platform for all Y-DNA haplogroups. It allows me to compare my WGS from YSEQ with people who have done NGS tests at FTDNA, FGC, YSEQ, Dante and any other company that offers that in the future. I think that's extremely valuable. Of course, the genetic testing lottery means I'm solo on my own branch of I-L338 for the time being, so I don't have a lot to compare to within the last 2900 years, but progress in other branches gives me hope for the future.

I think you made a good investment with the Big Y at the time that you did it JonikW - and I think it'll continue to pay dividends in future too as the Y-DNA database grows.

Also, make sure you look into the Groups function at YFull - a bit like projects at FTDNA. From left hand menu of the YFull homepage, if you click on Groups, there's a list that will come up. I'm in I1-Z140, I-Z58 and the Anglo-Saxon Norman Heritage groups.

JonikW
10-11-2018, 11:42 PM
Ah, that's good to hear that they're keen on having a YFull analysis. I think it's great value for what you pay for - I find their tools and analysis are very useful. I think FTDNA are getting better, but I don't think that they are a one stop shop, especially in the analysis. For many years, FTDNA's approach was very much "here's your SNPs from your Big Y results - enjoy!" with very little in the way of analysis. They heavily relied on volunteer project admins like William to organize how a lot of this fits together, and that had a big part in driving the market. Third party analysis like YFull and Big Tree (for some subclades of R1b) filled a niche that FTDNA wasn't offering at the time. It seems FTDNA has changed their approach and they're doing a lot better with what they offer, but I still think the analysis of YFull is useful and I also like the flexibility of YSEQ as well for what they offer.

Plus as I'm not a Big Y tester, for me one of the big advantages is that YFull is the only real cross vendor comparison platform for all Y-DNA haplogroups. It allows me to compare my WGS from YSEQ with people who have done NGS tests at FTDNA, FGC, YSEQ, Dante and any other company that offers that in the future. I think that's extremely valuable. Of course, the genetic testing lottery means I'm solo on my own branch of I-L338 for the time being, so I don't have a lot to compare to within the last 2900 years, but progress in other branches gives me hope for the future.

I think you made a good investment with the Big Y at the time that you did it JonikW - and I think it'll continue to pay dividends in future too as the Y-DNA database grows.

Also, make sure you look into the Groups function at YFull - a bit like projects at FTDNA. From left hand menu of the YFull homepage, if you click on Groups, there's a list that will come up. I'm in I1-Z140, I-Z58 and the Anglo-Saxon Norman Heritage groups.

Thanks for all that. I had no idea about the groups so will check that out now. I remember sitting in a Belgian hotel lobby with a beer one night and corresponding with you almost a year ago, and that launched me on my Big Y journey (after your invaluable Yseq advice), for which I'm very grateful.

deadly77
10-12-2018, 10:53 AM
Thanks for all that. I had no idea about the groups so will check that out now. I remember sitting in a Belgian hotel lobby with a beer one night and corresponding with you almost a year ago, and that launched me on my Big Y journey (after your invaluable Yseq advice), for which I'm very grateful.

Ah yes, I was probably having a beer in Southern California at the same time while were corresponding :beerchug: - I've since moved back home to the UK.

I really like a lot of what YSEQ do, and I did a similar thing with testing around the branches below L338 while I was impatient waiting for my YElite results from Full Genomes. It didn't cost a lot at YSEQ and I was able to get a sample in YSEQ's storage for future tests. The turnaround on results is pretty fantastic and the flexibility with being able to order new SNPs that aren't in their catalogue is very nice too. FTDNA does offer single SNP tests and packs but they don't update their catalogue regularly and they're a bit more expensive than YSEQ, so I think YSEQ fulfill a little niche of stuff for stuff like that. I did their 30x WGS which is their foray into the next generation sequencing market and I'm very happy with that. Obviously FTDNA has the largest Y-DNA database and some people like having everything in one place but I like having options at both.

But you can already see the advantages of having done the Big Y in comparison - your novel variants are captured, in a database and can be matched against future tests more readily than testing individual SNPs one at a time, hence your matches with the Swedish guy and the new English guy.

Not to say that your testing with YSEQ wasn't of value - I think it got you interested in seeing what was a bit further downstream of the assignment of I-S12289 that you got from Britain's DNA, which eventually prompted getting into the Big Y. And now you and the other two fellows have established a branch below S12289 and A4586 that wasn't previously known. I think it's pretty exciting to be part of building the tree - and it helps a lot of things in the future too - it helped me a lot when I was looking into the BAM file for the ancient Icelandic individual SBT-A1 who was I-F2642+ as I had a pretty robust template of where I should be looking.

I think there's also value for YSEQ after a test like Big Y. The Big Y test covers a lot of the Y chromosome, but it's not complete and there are some gaps. There are parts of the Y chromosome that are not well read in the Big Y test and show up as no calls or with a low number of reads. Tests like YElite and WGS can read some of these SNPs better so if you later match with someone who has taken one of these tests, and they're positive for a SNP that is a no call in your Big Y results, you could test that SNP at YSEQ for $18 and get a yes or no answer.

Also can be good for verifying a SNP that is showing as "ambiguous" - one of my novel SNPs has this category in the YFull analysis. I've tested this at YSEQ and it came out as positive, so I can move that SNP from ambiguous to something that I'm a lot more confident in. YFull also reflects that with a green shield with a tick mark which shows that it's been Sanger tested and found positive: 26621

You can also lay some breadcrumbs for people in the future by adding your SNPs to YSEQ's catalogue. You could for example add the eight SNPs that are on YFull's tree and FTDNA's haplotree that you and your Swedish match share. Imagine there's someone in the position that you were in about a year ago, looking at the phylogenetic trees and testing SNPs at YSEQ. Adding a SNP to YSEQ's catalogue only costs $1 per SNP and you can get the information that they require from your YFull results - for example A21901, ChrY position (Hg38):7038530, ancestral C, derived T. Just make sure that they're not in any of the regions that YSEQ doesn't offer (PAR, CEN, DYZ19, post palindromic region - YSEQ lists those on their Wish a SNP order page). Small investment that can have dividends.

deadly77
02-06-2019, 05:30 PM
I was talking with one of the I-P109 folks and he was sharing how they have a representation of their phylogenetic tree using a "coggle" - which admittedly I had not heard of. It's a pretty cool visualization of how the subclades are arranged that's a bit different to how YFull and FTDNA display their Y-DNA phylogenetic trees but also a diagram that can be updated more frequently than the Eupedia phylogenetic trees. You can view the I-P109 coggle diagram here: https://coggle.it/diagram/Wzv296_5PV2rX1XO/t/i-p109?fbclid=IwAR06ep_Z1syRcpBB0Jwy4ioMjDSkLMsYTM-zIpiIRUJk5Hj4lL_VeCEEaZw and he's got an overall I-M253 coggle here: https://coggle.it/diagram/XC0kaeCE6k5gQ6JE/t/i-m253/48ca2c7b3cb685789669f84c904320503c3b8e92685ae75370 61c481ff9b6dbb?fbclid=IwAR205qkhgcCbKF3yrroiayEzKs 4VPryK093lCEryozBj4N0juoDRxoDGwmY

He asked me if I'd be interested on working on a I-Z140 coggle diagram, and I said I'd give it a go. I didn't get round to it, so the I-P109 fellow made a I-Z140 coggle of his own using the YFull tree as a template. After he made the initial diagram, he gave me editing access - I've gone in and edited the coggle to add some branches that aren't on the YFull tree (such as on the FTDNA public haplotree, or from the I-Z140 project) - these are mostly from branches where the representatives haven't uploaded to YFull (or if there's only one of them at YFull - need two to make a branch...).

Since we have a few I-Z140 folks on here who are active on Anthrogenica, I'd like you guys to take a look before I throw it out to the main I-Z140 group on Facebook - I'd be interested to hear thoughts, mistakes, etc. Also good to get an idea of other things that you might want to see on there - flags for countries, age estimate dates, alternate names for SNPs eg. S2169/F2642 where FTDNA and YFull use different ones, phyloequivalent SNPs on branches or anything else. Although I don't want to overload it with too much information as that's going to affect the visual representation.

You can check out the I-Z140 coggle here (very much a work in progress...) https://coggle.it/diagram/XDJKdd50UG0tpuWt/t/i-z140/2d43e6c50995c688ca8fbe69c675fa6c65699627548d71e939 20d97af2e0c101?fbclid=IwAR1nbjC6Y4RJkZcrDATROBdry4 74H_tm1wrnzn2_CB0HDrM0XA1M_mVKdbc

JMcB
02-06-2019, 06:50 PM
Hello deadly,

I saw the Z140 version when he posted it on the I-M253 Page and took a couple a screen shots for my own use. I was planning on altering it to include 5 of my NVs that have now been matched via a SNP Pack at YSEQ. Forming two more branches coming out of I-A13248, (I-A13242 & I-A13243). Unfortunately, this is private information so it’s not on FT’s or YFull’s tree, so it probably shouldn’t be added onto the public version. Nevertheless, it is a nice looking format and a nice addition to what we already have.

As always, thank you for all of your efforts!

28789

deadly77
02-06-2019, 11:04 PM
Hi JMcB - yes, I figured that there's some information that's not in the public domain such as the YFull tree and FTDNA haplotree - the Sanger SNP testers at YSEQ would fall into this category. It's up to you and your branchmates - I can add these, but as you say it's private information, and I definitely wouldn't want to be displaying such information without consent. Mine is easy - stuck at estimated 2900 ybp...

spruithean
02-06-2019, 11:32 PM
Awesome!

Nice to see something like this. While YFull does a good job and FTDNA's new block tree helps, this gives a cleaner visual representation.

Thanks for sharing your work!

JMcB
02-07-2019, 01:53 AM
Hi JMcB - yes, I figured that there's some information that's not in the public domain such as the YFull tree and FTDNA haplotree - the Sanger SNP testers at YSEQ would fall into this category. It's up to you and your branchmates - I can add these, but as you say it's private information, and I definitely wouldn't want to be displaying such information without consent. Mine is easy - stuck at estimated 2900 ybp...

Personally, I donít have any privacy concerns and I doubt the guys who tested my NVs would be concerned either. As there isnít any personal information displayed, only our SNP assignments. When I said it was private imformation, I only meant that it wasnít on FT or YFullís public trees, and couldnít be verified by looking at either of them. So those two SNPs wonít be searchable (except on YBrowse), in the extremely unlikely case, that anyone would want to find out more about them. So if you donít mind adding them and donít think that last point is a barrier, I would be glad to see them acknowledged somewhere besides my lowly photo album. ;-)

If you think itís alright, hereís the sequence. Weíre all positive for I-A13248. Tester #1 tested seven of my NVs and was only positive for one, I-A13242. Tester #2 tested the same seven NVs and was positive for five of the seven, including I-A13242. On Williamís advice we called the second branch I-A13243 because it was next in line and we donít know how the others will fall sequentially, until someone else matches them later on.

P.S. If you need any approximate dates for spacing reasons, theyíre listed in my signature based on YFullís unrounded ybp numbers for I-A13248.

deadly77
02-07-2019, 08:07 AM
Personally, I don’t have any privacy concerns and I doubt the guys who tested my NVs would be concerned either. As there isn’t any personal information displayed, only our SNP assignments. When I said it was private imformation, I only meant that it wasn’t on FT or YFull’s public trees, and couldn’t be verified by looking at either of them. So those two SNPs won’t be searchable (except on YBrowse), in the extremely unlikely case, that anyone would want to find out more about them. So if you don’t mind adding them and don’t think that last point is a barrier, I would be glad to see them acknowledged somewhere besides my lowly photo album. ;-)

If you think it’s alright, here’s the sequence. We’re all positive for I-A13248. Tester #1 tested seven of my NVs and was only positive for one, I-A13242. Tester #2 tested the same seven NVs and was positive for five of the seven, including I-A13242. On William’s advice we called the second branch I-A13243 because it was next in line and we don’t know how the others will fall sequentially, until someone else matches them later on.

P.S. If you need any approximate dates for spacing reasons, they’re listed in my signature based on YFull’s unrounded ybp numbers for I-A13248.

Ah I see - given the dates for age estimate I can see it's less of a concern. I'm most concerned with SNPs that are closer to the present day or specifically unique within the times of genealogical records. Basically, can it be used to identify an individual. SNPs that aren't even on the YFull tree or FTDNA public haplotree that may be shared by several people on separate lines of descent. And I can understand that there's no home for the data - can't go on YFull as it's NGS tests only, can't go on FTDNA public haplotree as the data was generated at YSEQ. Ok, I'll add the branch to the coggle.

Oh, and the spacing of where the branch points are on the coggle is in most cases due to me moving them around so that branches don't clash into each other. Definitely not "calibrated" haha. Although that might not be a bad idea as subclades are going to be a little different to each other based on the amount of phylogenetic SNPs on a branch point.

JMcB
02-07-2019, 03:43 PM
Ah I see - given the dates for age estimate I can see it's less of a concern. I'm most concerned with SNPs that are closer to the present day or specifically unique within the times of genealogical records. Basically, can it be used to identify an individual. SNPs that aren't even on the YFull tree or FTDNA public haplotree that may be shared by several people on separate lines of descent. And I can understand that there's no home for the data - can't go on YFull as it's NGS tests only, can't go on FTDNA public haplotree as the data was generated at YSEQ. Ok, I'll add the branch to the coggle.

Oh, and the spacing of where the branch points are on the coggle is in most cases due to me moving them around so that branches don't clash into each other. Definitely not "calibrated" haha. Although that might not be a bad idea as subclades are going to be a little different to each other based on the amount of phylogenetic SNPs on a branch point.

Thank you deadly77, I really appreciate it. It’s nice to see the results listed somewhere and that’s a pleasing format to have. Unfortunately, cost restraints make it difficult to get people to do NGS tests, so YSEQ is a very useful and cost effective alternative. With the only downside being, no one knows about the information, except you and the person you tested. Hopefully, some day YFull will figure out a way to put NV SNP Packs on their tree but at this point, I think it’s probably too complicated for them to consider it.

Here’s my slightly altered version of your work:

28798

Thanks again!

deadly77
02-07-2019, 05:06 PM
Oh yeah, I agree - YSEQ is great and it's good to have the knowledge, but unfortunately there is a bit of a limit on where this can be displayed or used on either of the two most up-to-date Y-DNA trees.

To be fair to YFull though, their tree is a compilation of NGS tests so only includes Big Y, YElite and WGS datasets. It looks like they ask for: .BAM file; depth of coverage min 15X; read length min 100 bp on their order page. It would likely mess with their subclade age estimations as well. And then there's the possibility of recurrent SNPs occurring in more than one haplogroup. So I can see why they don't go for it. For FTDNA it's direct competition for testing. Interestingly, you might have more of a case with getting these branches on the ISOGG tree, where Sanger sequencing is considered best for confirmation.

I've seen some talk of being able to upload Sanger SNP data from YSEQ to YFull in the future for NGS testers. Say if you have ambiguous, one-read or no calls for SNPs according to your Big Y or equivalent, then you'll be able to add those to YFull, and I think that's useful. I think this will be similar to YFull's recently introduced option to upload FTDNA STR results to YFull and replace STRs that were called from the BAM as not read or uncertain. But I think it's unlikely that they open up an option to create a YFull ID without NGS data and add YSEQ data to that. But you never know how things may be in the future.

JMcB
02-07-2019, 06:05 PM
Oh yeah, I agree - YSEQ is great and it's good to have the knowledge, but unfortunately there is a bit of a limit on where this can be displayed or used on either of the two most up-to-date Y-DNA trees.

To be fair to YFull though, their tree is a compilation of NGS tests so only includes Big Y, YElite and WGS datasets. It looks like they ask for: .BAM file; depth of coverage min 15X; read length min 100 bp on their order page. It would likely mess with their subclade age estimations as well. And then there's the possibility of recurrent SNPs occurring in more than one haplogroup. So I can see why they don't go for it. For FTDNA it's direct competition for testing. Interestingly, you might have more of a case with getting these branches on the ISOGG tree, where Sanger sequencing is considered best for confirmation.

I've seen some talk of being able to upload Sanger SNP data from YSEQ to YFull in the future for NGS testers. Say if you have ambiguous, one-read or no calls for SNPs according to your Big Y or equivalent, then you'll be able to add those to YFull, and I think that's useful. I think this will be similar to YFull's recently introduced option to upload FTDNA STR results to YFull and replace STRs that were called from the BAM as not read or uncertain. But I think it's unlikely that they open up an option to create a YFull ID without NGS data and add YSEQ data to that. But you never know how things may be in the future.

Yes, I agree and can certainly understand YFull’s position. As I said, I think it involves to many complications for them to consider it and they’re busy doing other things right now. I wasn’t aware of the ISOGG’s policy but if dealing with them is anything like maneuvering through their tree, I’m inclined to leave it as it is. On the hand, sending them an email wouldn’t hurt. We’ll see.

deadly77
02-09-2019, 05:21 PM
YFull announced a little over a week ago that they would be adding slow mutating STRs to the YFull tree to create branches. As part of I-Z140, JMcB and Spruithean may be interested to see that they have now included a branch for DYS559=9 after the I-Y3647 branch. The vast majority of other people in I-Z140 (at least the ones in the YFull group) are DYS559=8. 28827

deadly77
02-09-2019, 06:03 PM
Other STRs added to the YFull tree in I1:

DYS426=10 in I-Y7297 (also part of I-Z140, although doesn't make any changes to the tree).
DYS436=11 in I-L1237 branch.
DYS598=8 in I-Y3000 branch.
DYS645=9 in I-Y11067 branch.
DYR85=7 in I-M227 branch.
DYS575=11 in I-S9318 branch.
DYR113=9 in I-Y31125 branch. DYR113 = FTY32 in FTDNA's Big Y Y500.
DYR258=6 in I-S14887 branch.
DYS492=13 in I-Y13039 branch.
DYR273=9 in I-Y13391 branch. DYR273 = FTY185 in FTDNA's Big Y Y500.

JMcB
02-09-2019, 06:36 PM
YFull announced a little over a week ago that they would be adding slow mutating STRs to the YFull tree to create branches. As part of I-Z140, JMcB and Spruithean may be interested to see that they have now included a branch for DYS559=9 after the I-Y3647 branch. The vast majority of other people in I-Z140 (at least the ones in the YFull group) are DYS559=8. 28827

Hello deadly,

So, if I’m understanding correctly, it looks like YF10253 is helping to define two new sub-branches of Y3647 (Y3647 & 3647a) because he is 8 @ DYS559. While the rest of us are presumably 9. Curiously, when I check my STRs at YFull, I don’t have a result @ DYS559, it’s blank. So I guess they’re assuming I’m 9 because I’m below most of the others.

deadly77
02-09-2019, 10:55 PM
Hello deadly,

So, if I’m understanding correctly, it looks like YF10253 is helping to define two new sub-branches of Y3647 (Y3647 & 3647a) because he is 8 @ DYS559. While the rest of us are presumably 9. Curiously, when I check my STRs at YFull, I don’t have a result @ DYS559, it’s blank. So I guess they’re assuming I’m 9 because I’m below most of the others.

Yep JMcB - that's how I read it as well. You can look in the Groups view - from your homepage, go to Groups under Others on the left hand tabs. Then go to I1-Z140 project, then go to YTree on the top tabs. From there you can select STR name from the drop down menu at the top, type in DYS559 and hit search. Then you'll see a representation of the YTree with STR value next to each kit number. If they haven't joined into the I1-Z140 project at YFull, then you won't see them in this view compared to the public view of the YFull tree - this looks to be the case for 3 individuals. In Groups view it looks like four kits are reading DYS559=9, but some of the kits that aren't displayed in the project must have that too. It looks like one kit has "n/a" but three kits including yours, the HG02433 sample and the YF11572 individual who uploaded a VCF file but hasn't done the free upgrade with the BAM file yet.

JMcB
02-10-2019, 04:47 AM
Yep JMcB - that's how I read it as well. You can look in the Groups view - from your homepage, go to Groups under Others on the left hand tabs. Then go to I1-Z140 project, then go to YTree on the top tabs. From there you can select STR name from the drop down menu at the top, type in DYS559 and hit search. Then you'll see a representation of the YTree with STR value next to each kit number. If they haven't joined into the I1-Z140 project at YFull, then you won't see them in this view compared to the public view of the YFull tree - this looks to be the case for 3 individuals. In Groups view it looks like four kits are reading DYS559=9, but some of the kits that aren't displayed in the project must have that too. It looks like one kit has "n/a" but three kits including yours, the HG02433 sample and the YF11572 individual who uploaded a VCF file but hasn't done the free upgrade with the BAM file yet.

That’s a nice feature. They’re really rolling out some nice improvements lately. What’s again curious, is I can’t seem to find DYS559 in my results at Family Tree. So I’m wondering if they’re using a different nomenclature or if YFull has extracted it from our bam files, while FT has chosen to leave it out for some reason. Any thoughts?

deadly77
02-10-2019, 09:51 AM
That’s a nice feature. They’re really rolling out some nice improvements lately. What’s again curious, is I can’t seem to find DYS559 in my results at Family Tree. So I’m wondering if they’re using a different nomenclature or if YFull has extracted it from our bam files, while FT has chosen to leave it out for some reason. Any thoughts?

Yes, I like some of the new features that they are bringing out - likely why they have been pretty quiet over the last few months.

Not sure if DYS559 has a FTY prefix in your FTDNA results. As far as I am aware, FTDNA hasn't published any of the FTY marker co-ordinates or locations. There's definitely some redundancy, and it seems that YFull has been able to reverse engineer some of these markers by folks uploading the Y500 CSV file from FTDNA and the YFull team can then compare those across with the data extracted from BAM files of the same individuals, and cross check with other samples for the same differences across kits. If you go to the "STR Results" tab and then select any of the levels to display results, scroll below the table there is a link "STRs Synoms List" which brings up a pop-up window and some of the FTY markers are listed with a synom, for example: DYS679 = FTY214, DYR2 = FTY144 and so on but I guess they don't have all yet.

It looks like DYS599 location is known as you can search for it at ybrowse.org - if you go to that site, type DYS559 in the landmark or region box and hit search you get this:
2885328854
I guess you could look up the region from chrY:13,585,155 to 13,585,292 in your BAM file using YFull or IGV (or even the Big Y BAM viewer, although as a non-Big Y tester I have no idea how to use that) and see if it's got any readings or if it's got breaks which make reading a STR sequence unreliable - or if it's a barren landscape.

JMcB
02-10-2019, 05:02 PM
Yes, I like some of the new features that they are bringing out - likely why they have been pretty quiet over the last few months.

Not sure if DYS559 has a FTY prefix in your FTDNA results. As far as I am aware, FTDNA hasn't published any of the FTY marker co-ordinates or locations. There's definitely some redundancy, and it seems that YFull has been able to reverse engineer some of these markers by folks uploading the Y500 CSV file from FTDNA and the YFull team can then compare those across with the data extracted from BAM files of the same individuals, and cross check with other samples for the same differences across kits. If you go to the "STR Results" tab and then select any of the levels to display results, scroll below the table there is a link "STRs Synoms List" which brings up a pop-up window and some of the FTY markers are listed with a synom, for example: DYS679 = FTY214, DYR2 = FTY144 and so on but I guess they don't have all yet.

It looks like DYS599 location is known as you can search for it at ybrowse.org - if you go to that site, type DYS559 in the landmark or region box and hit search you get this:
2885328854
I guess you could look up the region from chrY:13,585,155 to 13,585,292 in your BAM file using YFull or IGV (or even the Big Y BAM viewer, although as a non-Big Y tester I have no idea how to use that) and see if it's got any readings or if it's got breaks which make reading a STR sequence unreliable - or if it's a barren landscape.

First of all, I have to say you are a wealth of information! I keep learning knew things about YFull’s applications, I never knew existed.

I checked their "STRs Synoms List" and couldn’t find DYS559 there. However, I did find it listed under the “STR Variants,” tab. Where it says only 0.73% of I1 men have that mutation.

28866

28867


It also looks like my “red labeled” STRs have come in, whereas they were all blank the other day. Which has improved my statistics a decent amount:

STRs (all): 780
Reliable alleles: 602 (77.18%)
Uncertain alleles: 38 (4.87%)
N/A: 140 (17.95%)

As William likes to say, a work in progress.

Thanks for all of your help!

deadly77
02-10-2019, 07:48 PM
Ah, good to see that your extra STRs came in. I believe it's a continuous roll out across samples - I've noticed that my STR match list of "close" (and by that I mean not really) matches grows every time I check it. You're probably seeing the same thing. I guess with an increased number of STRs to compare there's more that can sneak under the 0.1 genetic distance threshold - say 50 differences in 500 STRs. I think they're probably going to adjust the criteria when everyone is done.

Yeah, it looks like that STR mutation is pretty rare, so it's a bit like a SNP and YFull incorporating it as such in tree branching. I guess if the BAM file doesn't look like it has a good read for your sample, one other option would be to Wish a STR at YSEQ since the STR is characterized by position and motif at YBrowse. Same price as for Wishing a SNP and the price per STR in their catalog appears to be between $9.95 and $15. In your case, it's only if you really want to know - your position in the tree is defined by several SNPs so it's not really necessary.

I'd highly recommend playing with the YFull system - I think as long as you don't delete your kit then it's pretty impossible to break it. There's a lot more to it than a phylogenetic tree. Even though FTDNA have improved their tools and phlyogenetic tree over the past couple of years, in my opinion the tools and analysis at YFull are still superior. Their FAQ section at the bottom left of their homepage is well worth a read and Linda Jonas has an excellent blog which has some informative articles about the YFull interface - this one is not recent but gives a good introduction and there are a few other articles on her site (including YFull as well as other platforms): https://ultimatefamilyhistorians.blogspot.com/2017/10/what-are-benefits-of-yfull.html

deadly77
02-20-2019, 09:07 AM
JonikW - it appears that there is a new individual in your subgroup at I-Y98720 at the I1-Z140 project page at FTDNA. William says this is a new result and it's Big Y Y700. Not finished all processing yet so doesn't have the full list of novel SNPs, etc. but based on where FTDNA have him right now, looks closer to the other fellow from Cambridgeshire than yourself and your match from Sweden. Still, be interesting to see if he breaks up the block at I-A21901 further and might give us a better idea if Big Y Y700 is much of an improvement on Big Y Y500 compared to you and the other two once he's fully done.

JonikW
02-20-2019, 06:47 PM
JonikW - it appears that there is a new individual in your subgroup at I-Y98720 at the I1-Z140 project page at FTDNA. William says this is a new result and it's Big Y Y700. Not finished all processing yet so doesn't have the full list of novel SNPs, etc. but based on where FTDNA have him right now, looks closer to the other fellow from Cambridgeshire than yourself and your match from Sweden. Still, be interesting to see if he breaks up the block at I-A21901 further and might give us a better idea if Big Y Y700 is much of an improvement on Big Y Y500 compared to you and the other two once he's fully done.

Thanks for that deadly77. My Swedish match contracted me and the Cambridgeshire one about it and one of them is writing to the new match. It will be interesting to see what we find out.

spruithean
02-23-2019, 04:29 AM
Interesting. So I haven't found any DYS559 in my results, is it an extra marker that you go about ordering?

deadly77
02-23-2019, 10:53 AM
Interesting. So I haven't found any DYS559 in my results, is it an extra marker that you go about ordering?

Spruithean, are you at YFull? I had a look on the tree and I can see A14097 is listed in a block of 13 SNPs at I-A14094. There's two kits on that branch at YFull and I these look like the two I-M4050 individuals in the I1-Z140 project at FTDNA. In the YFull groups viewer, YF10856 has DYS559=9 while YF11572 doesn't have a reading. The latter is most likely because YF11572 uploaded a VCF file to YFull during the time that FTDNA was restricting access to BAM files, but YF11572 hasn't uploaded the BAM file yet. That also explains why the TMRCA is 50 ypb, as it's based on YF10856 alone as that's from a BAM file.

A YFull analysis would be the easiest way to check for DYS559 although as shown in JMcB's results it's not guaranteed to be found given the coverage of a Big Y test. You may be able to make an educated guess at how well your test covered the region that DYS559 occupies by looking at your Big Y BAM using IGV (which is what I've been using to analyze the ancient I1 samples) or in the Big Y BAM viewer at FTDNA. I can help with IGV but I have no experience of using the FTDNA Big Y tools as I went elsewhere for my NGS testing.

As I said to JMcB above in post #162, it may be that FTDNA has DYS559 with a different name as FTYxxx somewhere in the Big Y Y500 STR but as FTDNA hasn't published any of the FTY marker co-ordinates or locations it's not easy to tell. At least we know DYS559 is at YBrowse, so location is known.

YSEQ has an option where you can "Wish a STR" for $1 https://www.yseq.net/product_info.php?cPath=26&products_id=109&osCsid=9d531e6b8dc8cd30624506b6b7d2e3a3 and you could send YSEQ the screencaptures from post #162 about DYS559 so they know what to design their test around. After that, DYS559 would be available as a single STR test at for you or anyone else to order. Based on the prices of their currently available STRs, they charge between $9.95-19 for single STR.

deadly77
03-06-2019, 11:25 PM
I added a few branches of the I-Z140 tree to the I-Z140 Coggle diagram - additional new branches at YFull, branches on the FTDNA haplotree that are not at YFull, shared branches at the I-Z140 project. It'll never be complete (nor would I want it to be) but it's at least got some structure that is a composite of the main ones out there with a bit of a different visualization. As a result, it's "public" and Darin Flansburg, who very kindly hosts the Coggle has linked it to an overall I-M253 Coggle that he has been working on where I-Z140 and I-P109 are clickable links to more detailed subclade Coggles. To view the I-M253 coggle go here https://coggle.it/diagram/XC0kaeCE6k5gQ6JE/t/i-m253/48ca2c7b3cb685789669f84c904320503c3b8e92685ae75370 61c481ff9b6dbb?fbclid=IwAR1LJedLezESwqS2S0LHvhGik9 yLE-CfQqZh-ZkZXf0LU5YgkZkZH3mlCFo

JMcB
03-07-2019, 12:55 AM
I added a few branches of the I-Z140 tree to the I-Z140 Coggle diagram - additional new branches at YFull, branches on the FTDNA haplotree that are not at YFull, shared branches at the I-Z140 project. It'll never be complete (nor would I want it to be) but it's at least got some structure that is a composite of the main ones out there with a bit of a different visualization. As a result, it's "public" and Darin Flansburg, who very kindly hosts the Coggle has linked it to an overall I-M253 Coggle that he has been working on where I-Z140 and I-P109 are clickable links to more detailed subclade Coggles. To view the I-M253 coggle go here https://coggle.it/diagram/XC0kaeCE6k5gQ6JE/t/i-m253/48ca2c7b3cb685789669f84c904320503c3b8e92685ae75370 61c481ff9b6dbb?fbclid=IwAR1LJedLezESwqS2S0LHvhGik9 yLE-CfQqZh-ZkZXf0LU5YgkZkZH3mlCFo

As always nice work on both of your parts!

Is there a link to the Z140 portion of the tree? Unfortunately, his clickable link doesn’t seem to work on an iPad. Perhaps, because it’s clickable but not touchable. ;-)

spruithean
03-07-2019, 01:51 AM
As always nice work on both of your parts!

Is there a link to the Z140 portion of the tree? Unfortunately, his clickable link doesn’t seem to work on an iPad. Perhaps, because it’s clickable but not touchable. ;-)

It worked on my cell phone by touching the "Z140" and not the X, whether that's uniform among OS's I don't know.

Thanks for passing this along Deadly77, hopefully there can be amendments made to the Phylogeographer for the one error on the map. Nice to see some mapping of the ancient I1 so far!

JMcB
03-07-2019, 04:30 AM
It worked on my cell phone by touching the "Z140" and not the X, whether that's uniform among OS's I don't know.

Thanks for passing this along Deadly77, hopefully there can be amendments made to the Phylogeographer for the one error on the map. Nice to see some mapping of the ancient I1 so far!

There you go, that’s the trick!

Thanks, spruithean!

JonikW
03-07-2019, 11:40 PM
I added a few branches of the I-Z140 tree to the I-Z140 Coggle diagram - additional new branches at YFull, branches on the FTDNA haplotree that are not at YFull, shared branches at the I-Z140 project. It'll never be complete (nor would I want it to be) but it's at least got some structure that is a composite of the main ones out there with a bit of a different visualization. As a result, it's "public" and Darin Flansburg, who very kindly hosts the Coggle has linked it to an overall I-M253 Coggle that he has been working on where I-Z140 and I-P109 are clickable links to more detailed subclade Coggles. To view the I-M253 coggle go here https://coggle.it/diagram/XC0kaeCE6k5gQ6JE/t/i-m253/48ca2c7b3cb685789669f84c904320503c3b8e92685ae75370 61c481ff9b6dbb?fbclid=IwAR1LJedLezESwqS2S0LHvhGik9 yLE-CfQqZh-ZkZXf0LU5YgkZkZH3mlCFo

Thanks deadly77 and thanks too for the tip spruithean. This is great work and nice to see my own terminal SNP there. Much appreciated.

JonikW
03-16-2019, 02:46 PM
JonikW - it appears that there is a new individual in your subgroup at I-Y98720 at the I1-Z140 project page at FTDNA. William says this is a new result and it's Big Y Y700. Not finished all processing yet so doesn't have the full list of novel SNPs, etc. but based on where FTDNA have him right now, looks closer to the other fellow from Cambridgeshire than yourself and your match from Sweden. Still, be interesting to see if he breaks up the block at I-A21901 further and might give us a better idea if Big Y Y700 is much of an improvement on Big Y Y500 compared to you and the other two once he's fully done.

A week after this post I received an email from my Swedish match saying we now have a second new match at the I-Y98720 level in addition to this February one. So our small tree is growing fast. One of the new matches is going through the process on YFull, which is exciting and we're in contact with each other. I still don't see them on my Big Y matches list however. Is this because they've taken the BY700 test?

deadly77
03-16-2019, 02:56 PM
A week after this post I received an email from my Swedish match saying we now have a second new match at the I-Y98720 level in addition to this February one. So our small tree is growing fast. One of the new matches is going through the process on YFull, which is exciting and we're in contact with each other. I still don't see them on my Big Y matches list however. Is this because they've taken the BY700 test?

Good to hear - some nice progress on your little twig on the tree, congrats - I saw this one in the I1-Z140 project.

Yes, I think you're not seeing him in your Big Y match list because it's a Big Y Y700. From what I've read, FTDNA is currently sticking to their less than 30 non-matching variants threshold. The Big Y Y700 has coverage in regions that the Big Y Y500 doesn't cover, so there will be SNPs in those regions that you won't be able to match just because your test doesn't read those SNPs. Also, not all of his non-matching variants will be downstream of I-Y98720 - some may be upstream but weren't found in FTDNA tests before but they'll count towards the 30 threshold. Until FTDNA adjusts the threshold criteria for the match list to compensate for this (which I'm sure they will, but it may take a while) or adds the upstream SNPs to the correct positions on their haplotree, the matching for Y700 vs. Y500 kits is going to be a bit off kilter.

deadly77
04-02-2019, 12:17 PM
I noticed recently that the YFull analysis of my FGC YElite BAM have added a new SNP in the "low quality' section of the novel SNP results, named FT35578 which isn't listed on the current YFull tree. My YElite has 16T reads (derived allele, 2A reads (ancestral allele) and 1 DEL, giving a quality score of 82, hence YFull's assignment of low quality.

Interestingly, this doesn't appear in the results for my YSEQ 30x WGS, but if I look for that position in the BAM file, that shows 9A reads and 13T reads, which is classified as ambiguous at YFull.

I'd heard that FTDNA were going to assign SNPs discovered in Big Y700 with the FT-prefix (replacing the BY-prefix for Big Y500) - looking up FT35578 at YBrowse, that appears to be the case - reference FTDNA (2019), I-Z2535>I-YSC0000261 https://ybrowse.org/gb2/gbrowse_details/chrY?ref=chrY;start=6221755;end=6221755;name=FT355 78;class=Sequence;feature_id=469520;db_id=chrY%3Ad atabase. On looking at the FTDNA public Y-DNA haplotree, FTDNA have listed FT35578 as one of the phyloequivalent variants on the I-YSC0000261 branch.

Anyone else on the I-YSC0000261 or I-L338 branch seeing this SNP in their NGS results? Presumably this isn't a position that is consistently read in Big Y500 (or it would have been on the tree previously), but may show up more in Big Y700, YElite or WGS kits. I'm just curious as to if this is a reliable SNP in other kits on the I-YSC0000261 branch.

Position for FT35578 is at ChrY position (Hg38):6221755 if anyone wants to check.

deadly77
04-02-2019, 12:23 PM
Looking at the I1-Z140 group view at YFull, looks like position 6221755 not read in most kits in the group with grey "N". All of the I-Z140 kits on YSC0000261- branches are "A" if there's any reading. Under I-YSC0000261 branch, 48 kits with grey "N", two kits with derived allele T, one "W", two "X" and one "B". Some of these seem to be ambiguous calls - W represents nucleotides A and T, B represents C/G/T (but not A). Seems a bit like an unreliable one to me but only small sample size where this is being read. Perhaps FTDNA's larger database means that they have more kits than give a more conclusive call. I think we'll see a fair bit of this type of thing - newly discovered SNPs with FT prefix not really being SNPs that "novel" and rather fitting in upstream on branches of the tree.

deadly77
04-02-2019, 12:37 PM
JonikW - there's 3 of these new SNPs with an FT prefix that FTDNA has added to their haplotree a couple of branches above you at I-Y98720:

FT35577 10093549 G A CEN aka Y168219 registered at YBrowse by YFull
FT3681 3746430 C T Yp11.2
FT5175 12013675 T G Yq11.21

Not sure if any of these are in your Big Y500 results - most likely came out of the recent Big Y700 testers on your branch. Also not sure if all of these are reliable for phylogeny - FT35577 is in the centromere.

JonikW
04-02-2019, 07:53 PM
JonikW - there's 3 of these new SNPs with an FT prefix that FTDNA has added to their haplotree a couple of branches above you at I-Y98720:

FT35577 10093549 G A CEN aka Y168219 registered at YBrowse by YFull
FT3681 3746430 C T Yp11.2
FT5175 12013675 T G Yq11.21

Not sure if any of these are in your Big Y500 results - most likely came out of the recent Big Y700 testers on your branch. Also not sure if all of these are reliable for phylogeny - FT35577 is in the centromere.

Thanks again deadly77. One of the people in my group is now looking into this. How do I see the haplotree by the way?

deadly77
04-02-2019, 11:32 PM
Thanks again deadly77. One of the people in my group is now looking into this. How do I see the haplotree by the way?

Go to your FTDNA homepage - scroll down to the bottom of the page where is has the category "Partner Applications and Other Tools", click on the button that says "Public Haplotrees" - there's a couple of search bars - in the one that says "Go to Branch Name" type in the branch that you're going to eg. I-Z140, I-L338, I-Y98720. You can expand downstream branches from the branch that you're at by clicking on the "+" button to the left of the branch name. To see phyloequivalent SNPs on a branch, scroll back up to the top left and change "view by countries" to "view by variants". You can also use the public haplotree without logging in: https://www.familytreedna.com/public/y-dna-haplotree/A

An alternative view is also from your homepage if you look in the Y-DNA section there's a button called "Haplotree and SNPs" - this one will zoom in on your terminal and has the advantage that it's colour coded to shows SNPs in your own results that you're positive (green) and negative (red) for. You can view phyloequivalent SNPs by clicking on the "More..." next to a branch. Advantages and disadvantages to both views - the Haplotree and SNPs view shows your own results on the haplotree, the public haplotree you can see the countries that other people who have tested to that branch level are from so try both.

For looking up these in your own Big Y results, there's probably a facility to search the BAM viewer by SNP name or position. I have no idea how the Big Y tools are for this, but you can do this at YFull using their tools. The easiest way is to select "Check SNPs" option on the left hand menu of your homepage - just type in the SNP that you're interested in into the box (eg. FT35577) hit "Go" and it will bring up the result. You can click on the magnifying glass to the left of the SNP name and that will bring up more information (position, region, reads, etc.). If it's a SNP that's not listed at YBrowse or at YFull, you can instead go down to "browse raw data" on the left hand menu and type in the position and hit "Go".

deadly77
04-03-2019, 06:24 PM
On the subject of FT35578, I sent a request to YSEQ under their Wish a SNP option to see what they thought. They responded pretty quickly and said "unfortunately your wished SNP is located in a region which shows a very high homology to a fragment on the X chromosome. We do not recommend this SNP. We are sorry! Best, the YSEQ team!"

FT35578 6221755 A to T 97.7% chrX + 93107222 93108190 969

I'm happy to pay less than a quid to find out that FT35578 isn't really worth worrying about too much.

deadly77
04-06-2019, 11:34 PM
William the admin from the I-Z140 project recently posted some STR based dendrogram diagrams on the I-Z140 Facebook page - plan was to encourage some folks in the basecamp at I-F2642 and I-Z2535 (the two largest subgroups of I-Z140) who they match the closest on STR basis and where they might want to look for testing downstream SNPs. If you've done Big Y, YElite or WGS you don't need to worry about downstream SNP testing, but it can also maybe point you towards folks that you might want to encourage. Of course, it goes without saying that SNP matches override STR matches - convergence (or more likely a lack of divergence) is an issue in our haplogroup.

I think at least a couple of you aren't involved in the Facebook group, but William's posts reminded me of when I played with some of these tools last year, so I thought I'd share here as well. The tools are pretty easy to use, the analysis is fast and also free. It comes from a website called Scaled Innovation by Robin Spencer, and he has a subsection based on genetic genealogy called Tracking Back which can be found here: http://scaledinnovation.com/gg/gg.html

You can use any project at FTDNA, although some of the bigger ones might be problematic. I tried the main I1 FTDNA project and it took a long time and then crashed, but the I-Z140 project works fine. You can get some more visual representations of the project that look a bit prettier than a list of results.

Cladogram for the I-Z140 project: 29686
Umbrella 1 is the main I-Z140 branch that almost everyone falls into. Some folks are a little diverged from the main I-Z140 STR signature and some folks have joined the FTDNA project who are not I-Z140. Under the umbrella there are a few distinct STR clades - some of these overlap with downstream SNP clades but there are also some people who fall outside by not diverging enough and looking like they are closer to someone else. If there's a conflict, go with the SNPs rather than the STRs in >99% of cases.
For the regular readers and commenters on this thread, JonikW and myself are under umbrella 24 which corresponds largely (although not perfectly) with the I-L338 group, although we don't fall into any of the smaller umbrellas beneath that. JMcB and his close STR matches fall under umbrella 13 and with Spruithean under the larger umbrella 12 above that.
Also generate distance distribution: 29687
Branched dendrograms: 29688
Circular dendrograms: 29689

In some of these I had to do a screencapture to show the structure and that loses some of the detail. It's best if you load the data into your tool and process on your own computer as then you'll be able to zoom in closer and there is an option in Robin's tools to highlight one kit which makes it easier to find on the dendrogram. Have a go and let me know if you need help processing.

deadly77
04-06-2019, 11:58 PM
Can also do this at with the data in the I1-Z140 group at YFull. There are less people in the I1-Z140 group at YFull than the group at FTDNA, and not everyone who has uploaded to YFull has joined the I1-Z140 group. But it does allow comparison using the extra post Y111 STRs at YFull (up to 780 STRs). Again, if there's a discrepancy between SNP data and STR data, go with the SNP data. STRs don't override SNPs.
As it's a smaller sample size, some of the diagrams are a little less crowded.
Cladogram: 29690
Again, the "1" umbrella is I-Z140 overall, JonikW sneaks into smaller umbrella 5 although he doesn't match a lot of the other folks under 5 based on SNP data. JMcB fits under number 3 on that cladogram, again with quite a few who don't match SNPs. I'm not close enough with anyone to get included in the smaller groups. I think the greater number of STRs that are slow mutating means that there are less differences and therefore the relationships appear closer than they are. Again, if there's a conflict, go with the SNP data.
Distance distribution: 29691
branched dengram: 29692
Circular dendogram: 29693

JMcB
04-07-2019, 12:06 AM
Those are cool!

I’ll have to check out his site and see how my iPad handles it

deadly77
04-07-2019, 12:22 AM
Those are cool!

I’ll have to check out his site and see how my iPad handles it

They are cool - they're pretty easy to do on my computer, but I don't know how this works on an iPad. My guess is not well. I can think of a couple of potential workarounds if you get stuck but I don't have an iPad of my own to troubleshoot on. Give it a try and we can talk more about potential ways to get this working if you're having no joy.

deadly77
04-07-2019, 12:36 AM
General instructions for FTDNA project:

Go to any FTDNA project page (as long as you have access or it is public), then DNA Results, then Classic Chart.
If the results go on for more than one page adjust page size to 1000 on top left above the results. If you want, you can eliminate the lower marker matches (Y12, Y25, etc.) on the filter to the left of page size.
Hit ctrl+A or select all.
Hit ctrl+c or copy.
Go to Scaled Innovation Tracking Back webpage, then Tools, then YSTR Clustering and Dendrogram Generation here http://scaledinnovation.com/gg/yClustering.html
Hit "Clear" or delete the text in the "input data" box.
Hit ctrl+v or paste into the "input data" box.
Hit "Start the Analysis" blue button. Should be fast. May be longer if a lot of kits.
Once in, toggle through the options, especially on the Dendrogram header - you can chose to display by kit number, name, SNP, etc and you'll be able to highlight your kit or whichever one you're trying to find.

deadly77
04-07-2019, 12:45 AM
For YFull, go to I1-Z140 YFull group from your YFull homepage.
From top menu in Groups view, go to Y Results and the drop-down menu, select "view Y-STRs classic"
Default is 12 STRs - click on the "All" button next to view. This may take a while to load.
Download the results (button to the right of the buttons that select the number of STRs).
Open the downloaded xls file.
Save the file as a csv file.
Go to http://scaledinnovation.com/gg/yClustering.html
Drag and drop the csv file into the "input data" box.
Once it's finished importing, hit "Start the Analysis" blue button.

deadly77
04-15-2019, 07:57 AM
Robin Spencer's Scaled Innovation website has a new tool: SNP Tracker: http://scaledinnovation.com/gg/snpTracker.html

Easy to use - type in a branch or terminal SNP in the box at the top left and hit "Go" - it'll display a migration pathway based on the upstream SNPs that lead to the terminal.

It uses FTDNA's public Y-DNA haplotree so make sure that you use the FTDNA nomenclature (eg. CTS10937 rather than Z2538). It won't find novel SNPs/private variants that are not on the FTDNA haplotree and if there's not enough geographical data associated SNP (say if all testers have "unknown" as their paternal ancestor location) then it might not display.

It's pretty similar in principle to Hunter Provyn's Phylogeographer/Mygrations website and it tags locations based on an average of the locations where FTDNA testers have self reported their locations. So if you're part of a branch of I-Z140 that includes testers in the British Isles, Scandinavia, Continental Europe then you may find your branch appearing in the North Sea. This doesn't mean Doggerland - it's just down to averaged out locations on different sides of the North Sea.

Also like Hunter's tool, it's based on self-reported locations from modern testers and subject to potential errors from data source and the theoretical migration paths are inferred from the data of modern testers - the actual route taken may not have been the one displayed. Think of it as a guide rather than "proof". But it's a nice tool and you can overlay different migration pathways, so have a play with it if you're interested.

JMcB
04-15-2019, 04:29 PM
That’s pretty cool!

Here’s mine:


29825


Considering the information we currently have, it seems just about right.

As William likes to say, a work in progress.

spruithean
04-15-2019, 07:01 PM
So far my route ends in the North Sea. I guess A14097 isn't in the tree yet.

deadly77
04-15-2019, 09:49 PM
So far my route ends in the North Sea. I guess A14097 isn't in the tree yet.

A14097 is on the tree, although the SNP Tracker tool displays one step up as I-Y7198. If it's a SNP that's not on the FTDNA haplotree, then the tool will give you an error message that says "scaledinnovation.com says You did not enter a SNP present in the FTDNA Y Tree." try one of your private SNPs (or just make up a fake one) to see what I mean.

So the tool is recognizing A14097, but I think it's most likely that there is not enough geographical information associated with the branch - you're the only one on the branch and two kits below you at I-M4050 but the two kits on that branch have "unknown" as their paternal ancestor location. Maybe it doesn't count branches where there's only a single data point. Compare with JMcB's branch - he's the only one on that one but on the downstream branches three kits from England, one from USA, none unknown.

I-Y7198 is in the middle of the North Sea as the average gets pulled there by the kits at downstream branch I-F2735 in Netherlands and France as well as the ones in the Britain. Hunter Provyn's Phylogeographer/Mygrations tool does that as well. Hunter said the other option was to move it to the nearest coastline, but of course that introduces bias.

JMcB
04-16-2019, 03:21 PM
Having too much time on my hands, I decided to altered mine to include some information that’s not on FT’s tree. I also threw bias to the wind and put I-Y7198 back on the coast, instead of leaving it in the North Sea.

29845

spruithean
04-27-2019, 11:31 PM
Interesting read in regards to I-Z141 found in the Azores.

https://phylogeographer.com/two-subclades-of-i1-z141-with-potential-to-be-viking-migrants-to-the-azores/#comments

JonikW
06-21-2019, 10:31 AM
Here's a bit of Midsummer entertainment for you. I've been pondering the Angles, Z140 and its S12289 subclade and have come to the conclusion that Scotland might provide a clue that reveals a link between them. This might sound a little counterintuitive so bear with me for a minute. This is really a fun exercise given the lack of news here recently but hopefully will be of interest to some and may even be informative.

This started because I've often thought that the flags and branches on my YFull matches look consistent with an Anglian focus and a spread to England through that people. For those who don't know, the tribe of the Angles was mentioned by Tacitus in his Germania work as being in the North Sea area (actually centred around the base of the Jutland peninsula) around 98AD, and is later cited by Bede and others as being among the main Migration Period settlers of England.

I wondered if I could develop that initial take on my matches, thinking that there might be a simple way to try this using modern distribution and given the absence of aDNA.

As a starting point I took Bede's pattern of Angle distribution: in the East Angles, Middle Angles and whole Northumbrian folk (those Angles living north of the Humber) because there's solid evidence to back it up, including in the distribution of diagnostic material finds. There's never been a serious attempt at discrediting this distribution as far as I know, although there were obviously some members of other groups among the predominantly Anglian settlers, as occasional archaeological finds such as pottery and stray brooches suggest.

Bede sent a draft of his English history, the Historia Ecclesiastica, to Ceolwulf, king of the Anglian Northumbrians, for revision. Stenton says of Bede's book: it "satisfied a king of the Northumbrians in an age when kings were accustomed to listen to heroic verse covering all the nations of the Germanic world. It was the work of a cautious scholar, who had known eminent persons and was in communication with friends in many different parts of England. Its precision in regard to the obscure race of the Jutes, who had not given their name to any English kingdom, proves the care with which it was written ... In representing the gens Anglorum as a composite people drawn from three distinct Germanic nations Bede was reflecting the common opinion of his time, and the vitality of tradition makes it very unlikely that this opinion was fundamentally mistaken".

Angulus, the area where the Angli or Angles came from, was said by Bede to have remained deserted to the time of his writing. This is the area around today's Angeln, spreading north up the peninsula, east into the Danish islands and possibly as far as Scania (there's an Angelholm there). The complete abandonment of the area is likely to be a simplification but the movement to England was surely a mass exodus over some decades.

I'm aware it can be risky to extrapolate pictures of past settlement from modern distribution. But the modern DNA broadly has to come from somewhere so let's go with it (we've seen from R1b L21 and others than this can be informative) and see if something potentially significant emerges.

I hope one day we'll have enough aDNA to know more; it's unfortunate on that score that the Angles favoured cremation...

What follows is a small snapshot of FTDNA's haplotree data, which handily breaks down the largest database of its kind by modern population. Here I've decided to look at just four regions: England, Scotland, Germany and Sweden. I've chosen to deduct Denmark and instead include Sweden and Germany, the nearest neighbouring regions, as being informative of the situation in the lands both immediately north and south of the Angles' cultural horizon and overlapping with it to some extent.

(Denmark and Holland show up at various low levels in the haplogroups or subclades below and I don't think I'd be adding anything informative by including them. You can look them up if you're interested.)

I've taken the four countries and pulled out their share of testers' results (self-reported but we can assume any misreporting is distributed evenly). England is chosen for obvious reasons and has the biggest share in percentage terms in all cases except one. Scotland is picked for a reason you may have guessed: the Anglian kingdom of Northumbria stretched well into today's southeast Scotland. As the furthest region geographically from the Saxons and others (including the Jutes in Hampshire and Kent) it's perhaps a more reliable indicator of the I1 Angles than English samples. Many of the latter would be from non-Anglian areas of settlement because the overall England category doesn't discriminate. As we all know, something of that old culture survived in the former Anglian part of Scotland in the Scots language and there seems no reason not to assume that the descendants of the Angles often remained in situ, given that this area was less affected by later movements from Ireland.

Lastly, on the numbers; I'm no mathematician but it seems to me that looking at the percentages for each haplogroup or subclade at least offers the advantage of a level playing field. There will be fewer testers of Swedish origin than English, for example, and more U106 than Z140, but the percentages should be representative of the overall population and show its share of a given marker.

So here are the numbers:

Z140 and downstream
England: 173 samples; 20.47 percent of the total (largest share)
Scotland 101; 11.95 percent
Germany 137: 16.21 percent
Sweden 52: 6.15 percent

S12289
England 37; 22.98 percent (largest share)
Scotland 30; 18.63 percent
Germany 15; 9.32 percent
Sweden 10; 6.21 percent

M253
England 2,224; 19.95 percent (largest share)
Scotland 815; 7.31 percent
Germany 1,311; 11.76 percent
Sweden 1,373; 12.32 percent

Next, by way of comparison, here's L22, which might reasonably be used as a proxy for I1 movement from mainland Nordic Scandinavia, predominantly but not exclusively, in the centuries after the Anglo-Saxon movements, starting from about 865AD with the mixed Danish/Nordic armies:

L22
England 241; 11.27 percent (third, after Finland then Sweden)
Scotland 90; 4.21 percent
Germany 87; 4.07 percent
Sweden 454; 21.23 percent

And here's R1b U106. I've included this for obvious reasons. It's been found alongside I1 aDNA samples, and modern distribution also shows it's a Germanic haplogroup. My hunch is that if we ever have enough ancient data, U106 will be shown to have its focal point slightly south of the Angles a couple of thousand years ago, in the Saxon and adjoining areas, mainly north of the Rhine. I think it's a good proxy for the overall pagan Anglo-Saxon folk.

R-U106
England 1,654; 25.04 percent (largest)
Scotland 556; 8.42 percent
Germany 885; 13.40 percent
Sweden 298; 4.51 percent

Finally, I'll include one of the R1a subclades, R-L664, because it looks like it was spread from our region to England. Perhaps there's a more informative R1a subclade; if so please let me know.

England 80: 30.19 percent (largest)
Scotland 10; 3.77 percent
Germany 29; 10.94 percent
Sweden 27; 10.19 percent

I'll next just break out Scotland separately, starting with the highest percentage, for ease of comparison:

S12289: 18.63 percent
Z140: 11.95 percent
R-U106: 8.42 percent
M253: 7.31 percent
L22: 4.21 percent
R-L664 3.77 percent

So it's striking that Scotland is somewhat elevated in the case of Z140, and particularly so for S12289, where it's proportionally more than double the percentage of U106 (although that's a much bigger haplogroup and the overall numbers are far higher just as they are everywhere else). Z140 is also found in a higher proportion of German testers than the downstream S12289 is, perhaps because its earlier TMRCA means it's had more time to disperse.

To sum up, it looks to me that Z140 and in particular S12289 (YFull TMRCA 2,800bp) may have been largely carried to England by the Angles (who of course will also have borne other haplogroups and other I1 subclades). The Vikings were in both England and Scotland, but their settlement of the latter was less pronounced and mainly Norse, so far more likely to be L22 and others (R1a?) than Z140 in my opinion.

Anyway, I hope for some views from the community here. Has anyone got a better way of understanding Z140 or the Angles in Britain until we get a solid aDNA dataset?

Edited for clarity.

spruithean
06-21-2019, 04:23 PM
In regards to I-Z140, it has a rather wide distribution and last I had seen it wasn't very focused in that we couldn't label it "Scandinavian-esque" or what have you. There are several Z140 related clades found in areas where the Norse were known to have been in the Irish Sea region, like the A196 subclades found in the Isle of Man, but also Z140 (Z141+) found in some Hebridean families as well, unfortunately the large I1 DNA Project at FTDNA won't load properly likely due to the size of the project, in terms of Ancient I1, we do have a Z140+ sample from Iceland (https://science.sciencemag.org/content/360/6392/1028)who belongs to an F2642 subclade of I-FGC74500 (https://www.yfull.com/tree/I-FGC74500/), ID name SBT-A1, he appeared to have majority "Gaelic" ancestry and the remainder was "Norse". You can see in these figures (https://science.sciencemag.org/content/sci/360/6392/1028/F2.large.jpg?width=800&height=600&carousel=1) that he plots near some of the English population (and also this figure (https://science.sciencemag.org/content/sci/360/6392/1028/F3.large.jpg?width=800&height=600&carousel=1)).

Because of I-Z140's quasi-Scandinavian distribution it could be difficult to determine if the majority of it was brought to Britain & Ireland with Angles or with later movements of people like Norse Vikings or Danish Vikings. To further complicate this matter some maps such as this one (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/cd/Anglo.Saxon.migration.5th.cen.jpg/507px-Anglo.Saxon.migration.5th.cen.jpg) show that there was some population movement from more northerly locations in Scandinavia, there are also early signs of Scandinavians in Anglo-Saxon Britain (https://www.caitlingreen.org/2016/01/oxygen-isotope-scandinavia.html). On top of that we might have an even more complicated matter if the Germanic newcomers (and perhaps settled foederati/laeti) to post-Roman Britain weren't necessarily of the North Sea variety of Germanic tribes (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/gloucestershire/8298825.stm).

There definitely could be something to the data you've collected, but thanks to the lack of aDNA sources for the various subclades of I1 it makes it really difficult to come to anything conclusive IMO. While we do have a decent amount of ancient I1 (well, more like Medieval) it still is a very short list in comparison to R1a, R1b and others. I think the soil conditions of Northern Europe and the burial practices definitely don't lend themselves to making it any easier for finding the right ancient I1 in the "right place at the right time". We do have at least one Anglo-Saxon Y-DNA sample, NO3423, who thanks to Deadly77's analysis was most likely I-DF29 (no surprise there), unfortunately that's as far down the SNP list we can go, I've wondered if there were other Anglo-Saxon remains of the same decent quality in that same vicinity in England that could have been tested, perhaps there could be I-Z140 ancient Y-DNA there. I'm hoping the eventual release of the Repton DNA information will provide us with more ancient I1, and hopefully some I-Z140 aDNA.

JonikW
06-21-2019, 07:11 PM
I agree with a lot of what you say. I didn't mention the aDNA Iceland Z140 sample because I don't think he provides anything to go on regarding where his Y ancestor was generations before. I hadn't heard of A196 so look forward to looking it up.:)

spruithean
06-21-2019, 07:37 PM
I agree with a lot of what you say. I didn't mention the aDNA Iceland Z140 sample because I don't think he provides anything to go on regarding where his Y ancestor was generations before. I hadn't heard of A196 so look forward to looking it up.:)

Fair enough, I mentioned it because I figured he fit with the wide distribution of Z140 clades. A196 is especially prominent in the McCaighin/Kaighin family of the Isle of Man, I imagine their founder was a Norsemen, though with Man's eventful history anything is possible. I suppose having a paper trail that gives you specific locations in the Isles at least provides extra clarity in terms of ones own ancestry. My own theory for my clade is sort of in limbo between what Mr. Hartley has said and others.

Edit: here is the Kaighin family page: http://www.kaighin.com/FamilyHistory/kaighin.htm

There is also the Runciman family who are I-Z60+ A11399+ & A11400+ with roots in East Lothian & Berwickshire as well as Fairbairns who are I-Z140+ Y7277+ with roots in Roxburghshire & Berwickshire.

Runciman: https://www.familytreedna.com/public/runciman?iframe=ycolorized
Fairbairn: https://www.familytreedna.com/public/fairbairn?iframe=yresults

I seem to recall the Beardsley family from England were I-L338 or something like that... I'll look for their projects.

Edit2: found it:
Beardsley/Beardslee: https://www.familytreedna.com/public/Beardsley_Beardslee?iframe=yresults

JonikW
06-21-2019, 07:49 PM
Fair enough, I mentioned it because I figured he fit with the wide distribution of Z140 clades. A196 is especially prominent in the McCaighin/Kaighin family of the Isle of Man, I imagine their founder was a Norsemen, though with Man's eventful history anything is possible. I suppose having a paper trail that gives you specific locations in the Isles at least provides extra clarity in terms of ones own ancestry. My own theory for my clade is sort of in limbo between what Mr. Hartley has said and others.

What's your theory for yours? For mine I'm leaning towards Angle rather than later Dane. My Big Y match (in my signature) is from Scania (where Angelholm is), but there are a handful of us at the level below. He has 9 unnamed variants while the rest of us have 14, 15 and 18. So I think he may be an outlier that skews the TMRCA. Plus, two of us are firmly from the Anglian area of England on our paternal lines and one is from Scotland. I hope for more data soon!

spruithean
06-21-2019, 08:09 PM
What's your theory for yours? For mine I'm leaning towards Angle rather than later Dane. My Big Y match (in my signature) is from Scania (where Angelholm is), but there are a handful of us at the level below. He has 9 unnamed variants while the rest of us have 14, 15 and 18. So I think he may be an outlier that skews the TMRCA. Plus, two of us are firmly from the Anglian area of England on our paternal lines and one is from Scotland. I hope for more data soon!

Right now my theory is mainly based off of the info that I've gleaned from Mr. Hartley and his assessment of my clade. I've not uploaded anything to YFull (because in all honesty I'm lazy :lol: ), but my results would split their tree at the I-A14094 level as I'm negative for all the SNPs YFull lists there except for A14097. The TMRCA between me and my closest (downstream) matches is somewhere around 150-300 AD (or so), which is well before any Viking activity and also before any Anglo-Saxon migrations, however I wouldn't be surprised if the TMRCA was later, say around 500 AD. Unfortunately due to the brickwall I have with my MDKA I can't quite place the exact location of where my paternal line is from in Scotland (it's either close to Argyll or Galloway). So right now I feel an origin either within the Kingdom of Northumbria or Mercia is possible, with an eventual trek northward to Scotland either pre-1066 or post-1066, though I'm still open to a Viking arrival, but that's probably my own fascination with Norse activity in Scotland and the Irish Sea region taking over. I also have kept my "theory" open to a Norman arrival, though the evidence for that so far is not really there.

So I guess in short I suspect an origin among the Angles as of right now.

JonikW
06-21-2019, 08:21 PM
Right now my theory is mainly based off of the info that I've gleaned from Mr. Hartley and his assessment of my clade. I've not uploaded anything to YFull (because in all honesty I'm lazy :lol: ), but my results would split their tree at the I-A14094 level as I'm negative for all the SNPs YFull lists there except for A14097. The TMRCA between me and my closest (downstream) matches is somewhere around 150-300 AD (or so), which is well before any Viking activity and also before any Anglo-Saxon migrations, however I wouldn't be surprised if the TMRCA was later, say around 500 AD. Unfortunately due to the brickwall I have with my MDKA I can't quite place the exact location of where my paternal line is from in Scotland (it's either close to Argyll or Galloway). So right now I feel an origin either within the Kingdom of Northumbria or Mercia is possible, with an eventual trek northward to Scotland either pre-1066 or post-1066, though I'm still open to a Viking arrival, but that's probably my own fascination with Norse activity in Scotland and the Irish Sea region taking over. I also have kept my "theory" open to a Norman arrival, though the evidence for that so far is not really there.

So I guess in short I suspect an origin among the Angles as of right now.

Sounds a reasonable theory to me. The Angles were obviously a big folk. Thanks for adding those links btw. Fascinating.

spruithean
06-21-2019, 08:43 PM
I have more links :lol:

Aberlady Angles, fascinating Anglo-Saxon discovery in Aberlady, Scotland
https://aberladyangles.com/anglo-saxons/

Anglo-Saxon Aberlady:
https://aberladyangles.com/anglo-saxon-aberlady/

Oswald & the Irish
http://www.heroicage.org/issues/4/ziegler.html

The Anglo-British Cemetery at Bamburgh
http://www.heroicage.org/issues/4/Bamburgh.html

What's in a name?
http://www.heroicage.org/issues/4/Matthews.html

Post-Severan Cramond:
http://www.heroicage.org/issues/4/Cessford.html

The Anglo-Saxon Runic Inscriptions
http://www.arild-hauge.com/eanglor.htm

Heroes, Saints, and Martyrs: Holy Kingship from Bede to Aelfric
http://www.heroicage.org/issues/9/hare.html

Bernicia/Bryneich
https://hefenfelth.wordpress.com/200...niciabryneich/

Dictionary of the Scots Language (Dictionar o the Scots Leid)
http://www.dsl.ac.uk/about-scots/his...scots/origins/
Fairly interesting information here, I'm most interested in some of the mentions of early Anglo-Saxon involvement in Scotland and early cultural syncretism of Anglo-Saxons and Cumbrians.

EDIT: http://www.heroicage.org/issues/4/letter.html

JonikW
06-21-2019, 09:51 PM
I look forward to going through this. Much appreciated.

spruithean
06-22-2019, 06:22 PM
I'm going to add this link to a PDF, which I'll be reading later (I've taken a peek already): http://etudesindoeuropeennes.fr/articleContent/706

JonikW
06-22-2019, 11:43 PM
I'm going to add this link to a PDF, which I'll be reading later (I've taken a peek already): http://etudesindoeuropeennes.fr/articleContent/706

I've just been looking through this and there's some good stuff in it. I did download it onto a former device a couple of years ago but didn't manage to read it. I have a feeling someone here posted it at that time. JMcB perhaps? Anyway, it's much appreciated.
While we're on the subject, the books I've returned to most on the Anglo-Saxons are Myres' The English Settlements for an overview of everything including the basics on the artefact styles (he's still acknowledged as an authority on pottery and much else even if modern archaeologists try to find flaws in his approach; I've read at least one recent site report that spends pages attempting to do this while reluctantly acknowledging his expertise) and Stenton's classic book on Anglo-Saxon England, again still a standard work.
Another incredibly good book, which I fortuitously came across in Blackwells on a visit to Oxford a few years ago, is Edge of Empire: Rome's Frontier on the Lower Rhine, by Lendering and Bosman. This is beautifully presented and illustrated; perfect for when you just feel like dipping in and out of something and is remarkable for its extensive quotation of some lesser known primary sources on the continental homelands at the time of Rome. I can't remember whether I've posted this before or just told someone about it, but I love this epitaph of Soranus, a Batavian who served with the legions:
"I am the man that was once known to everyone in Pannonia. From 1000-strong Batavians, I was the very best. Under the attentive eye of Hadrian, I succeeded in swimming across the water of the Danube in full military kit. With my arrow, I could cleave a launched arrow in flight. Nobody could outdo this feat: no Roman soldier with his spear and no Parthian barbarian with his bow.
Here I lie now, my deeds immortalized in stone. Is there anyone who might be able to rival my achievements? I do not think so, but, should they succeed, remember: I set the precedent, I was the first."
Who wouldn't want to read a book packed with goodies like that?

deanovermont
06-23-2019, 01:43 AM
Greetings, all. I subscribed to this thread a while back but was having some issues with my account. It appears those have cleared up.I was happy to see the email about the new posts and start to catch up. I'm a Z140 > etc > L338 > S12289 > BY461> BY463 > PH4462 > A18477, all per FTDNA. I'm
also on Yfull but listed as A 18483 My gggg-grandfather was born in Ireland and came to America in time to fight in the Revolutionary war. My closest YDNA match traces his Y lineage to Marnhull in Dorset in 1555. Not much is known of the match's Y ancestor except that he married someone thought to be of Norman descent. So perhaps he was Norman too? My other close-ish matches trace to Netherlands and Sweden. I have tons to learn, of course. So I appreciate the links to reading materials and enjoy hearing theories. Wish I had the smarts to develop some of my own!

JonikW
06-23-2019, 09:50 AM
Greetings, all. I subscribed to this thread a while back but was having some issues with my account. It appears those have cleared up.I was happy to see the email about the new posts and start to catch up. I'm a Z140 > etc > L338 > S12289 > BY461> BY463 > PH4462 > A18477, all per FTDNA. I'm
also on Yfull but listed as A 18483 My gggg-grandfather was born in Ireland and came to America in time to fight in the Revolutionary war. My closest YDNA match traces his Y lineage to Marnhull in Dorset in 1555. Not much is known of the match's Y ancestor except that he married someone thought to be of Norman descent. So perhaps he was Norman too? My other close-ish matches trace to Netherlands and Sweden. I have tons to learn, of course. So I appreciate the links to reading materials and enjoy hearing theories. Wish I had the smarts to develop some of my own!

Great to have you on board! We're all learning from each other here, and this thread has been very helpful to me. I look forward to more of your posts in future!

deanovermont
06-23-2019, 12:40 PM
Great to have you on board! We're all learning from each other here, and this thread has been very helpful to me. I look forward to more of your posts in future!

Thanks, JonikW.

Given that for many of us our YDNA line passes through the British Isles, I will also share my LivingDNA results. They do a poor job with my French Canadian / French ancestry. But I'm hopeful I might learn something useful from the UK/Ireland break down.

JonikW
06-23-2019, 12:48 PM
Thanks, JonikW.

Given that for many of us our YDNA line passes through the British Isles, I will also share my LivingDNA results. They do a poor job with my French Canadian / French ancestry. But I'm hopeful I might learn something useful from the UK/Ireland break down.

Thanks for that; it's always good to have some autosomal clues. Who is your earliest known Y ancestor? It certainly looks as if you've got a fair bit of southern England of various kinds.

JonikW
06-23-2019, 12:58 PM
... oops, sorry. I guess he was the one from Ireland, reading your first post again. Any clues in your surname? Is it Irish or English?

deanovermont
06-23-2019, 06:20 PM
Yes, my guy is a John Pierce/Peirce b. circa 1746 who after reaching North America settled initially in what is now Biddeford/Saco, Maine.

Pierce is one of those surnames ( as well as given name) that shows up in good numbers in England, Wales, and Ireland. Unfortunately I don't have evidence to suggest if the name joined my Y line before reaching Ireland or after. There's also the question ' When did the line reach Ireland?' Was it someone raiding in the 800s? Probably not likely, imo. Could it be in the 1100s with the first Anglo Norman invasion? Maybe, but I have no evidence of that. Or could it be during the Plantation period or even as result of land received by Cromwellian era soldiers? Again maybe but again no proof.

One thing about the Biddeford/Saco area is that it's known to have had a number of early Scots-Irish settlers (from 1718 on). So maybe the line was in Scotland after working its
way north through England.

One of the few concrete things I know is that a majority of men in the FTDNA Pierce surname groups are R rather than I1. And many of them seem to have English or Welsh roots rather than Irish roots. I haven't worked any theory to explain that. But I do keep pondering it.

As for the extensive southern England autosomal DNA, yes that is true. I assume it is par for the course for many descendants of early New England settlers.

spruithean
06-23-2019, 10:28 PM
Nice to see another Z140 member here! There is an I-F2642 Pearse in the Z140 project, though he is related to the Irish I-F2642 Bowes. I think most surname projects have an abundance of R1 clades, especially R1b. My own surname project is fairly diverse with R1a & R1b types still as the majority. My own subclade of I1 isn't even the leading clade of I1 for the surname project, which at first was a bit disappointing :lol:.

Do you have any shared surname Y-DNA matches? Have any of them done BigY?

When it comes to my theory, it really is just a theory. I'm just basing it off of what I've been told my the Z140 admin and the data currently available to my subclade, which isn't a whole lot of information, so this "theory" remains flexible and open to new information if it appears.

JonikW
06-23-2019, 11:27 PM
Nice to see another Z140 member here! There is an I-F2642 Pearse in the Z140 project, though he is related to the Irish I-F2642 Bowes. I think most surname projects have an abundance of R1 clades, especially R1b. My own surname project is fairly diverse with R1a & R1b types still as the majority. My own subclade of I1 isn't even the leading clade of I1 for the surname project, which at first was a bit disappointing :lol:.

Do you have any shared surname Y-DNA matches? Have any of them done BigY?

When it comes to my theory, it really is just a theory. I'm just basing it off of what I've been told my the Z140 admin and the data currently available to my subclade, which isn't a whole lot of information, so this "theory" remains flexible and open to new information if it appears.

I like your approach. Having a working theory is good, and changing it with the evidence essential, as you appreciate. Some people seem to jump to massive conclusions about their Big Y results. My own latest theory is very much a work in progress. I'm dearly hoping for some informative aDNA results soon, especially Repton and Winchester as well as that Anglo-Saxon cemetery, which I remember was somewhere in southern England. Where was that again?

spruithean
06-24-2019, 12:18 AM
I like your approach. Having a working theory is good, and changing it with the evidence essential, as you appreciate. Some people seem to jump to massive conclusions about their Big Y results. My own latest theory is very much a work in progress. I'm dearly hoping for some informative aDNA results soon, especially Repton and Winchester as well as that Anglo-Saxon cemetery, which I remember was somewhere in southern England. Where was that again?

I always felt sort of "uncomfortable" giving a definitive route for a Y-DNA lineage. Especially when there isn't enough information quite yet on a haplogroup, and in my case there isn't a whole a lot of information and hopefully Repton, Winchester and that Anglo-Saxon Cemetery yield some good ancient I1 data for us to look over.

I've been browsing through People of Medieval Scotland's website (https://www.poms.ac.uk/) as well as the English counterpart (http://domesday.pase.ac.uk/) of that website, mostly out of curiosity, but also as a way to see where I might find unusual names in certain parts of Britain. So far I've found a lot of mixed Gaelic/Anglo-Saxon/Norman/Norse names in Scotland in places I least expected, which is quite interesting, but certainly fits with King David of Scots (and various Scottish lords) bringing "Anglo-Normans"* to Scotland. There is a similar case in England as well (only minus the Gaelic sounding names), although it is a bit more spread-out through the country, which makes sense given what we know about post-1066 England.

* = I use this term to include Anglo-Saxons, Anglo-Scandinavians, Flemings, Bretons, French and Normans.

deanovermont
06-25-2019, 12:33 AM
Nice to see another Z140 member here! There is an I-F2642 Pearse in the Z140 project, though he is related to the Irish I-F2642 Bowes. I think most surname projects have an abundance of R1 clades, especially R1b. My own surname project is fairly diverse with R1a & R1b types still as the majority. My own subclade of I1 isn't even the leading clade of I1 for the surname project, which at first was a bit disappointing :lol:.

Do you have any shared surname Y-DNA matches? Have any of them done BigY?

When it comes to my theory, it really is just a theory. I'm just basing it off of what I've been told my the Z140 admin and the data currently available to my subclade, which isn't a whole lot of information, so this "theory" remains flexible and open to new information if it appears.

Unfortunately I have no shared surname matches, neither SNP nor STR. ( My autosomal matches include 4th cousin Pierces, so I'm pretty sure no NPEs in the line going to my John Pierce. But who knows if before? ) My problem is that my STR testing has no one closer than GD 4 at 37 markers. The two I do match have the surnames Dye and Braun. Dye is in southern US via South Carolina. Braun is in Sweden.

deanovermont
06-25-2019, 12:43 AM
I always felt sort of "uncomfortable" giving a definitive route for a Y-DNA lineage. Especially when there isn't enough information quite yet on a haplogroup, and in my case there isn't a whole a lot of information and hopefully Repton, Winchester and that Anglo-Saxon Cemetery yield some good ancient I1 data for us to look over.

I've been browsing through People of Medieval Scotland's website (https://www.poms.ac.uk/) as well as the English counterpart (http://domesday.pase.ac.uk/) of that website, mostly out of curiosity, but also as a way to see where I might find unusual names in certain parts of Britain. So far I've found a lot of mixed Gaelic/Anglo-Saxon/Norman/Norse names in Scotland in places I least expected, which is quite interesting, but certainly fits with King David of Scots (and various Scottish lords) bringing "Anglo-Normans"* to Scotland. There is a similar case in England as well (only minus the Gaelic sounding names), although it is a bit more spread-out through the country, which makes sense given what we know about post-1066 England.

* = I use this term to include Anglo-Saxons, Anglo-Scandinavians, Flemings, Bretons, French and Normans.

I don't know those web sites but will check them out, too. And yes, it would be great if tests of unearthed remains helped fill in some (read: any) of the many gaps.

spruithean
06-29-2019, 06:26 PM
Unfortunately I have no shared surname matches, neither SNP nor STR. ( My autosomal matches include 4th cousin Pierces, so I'm pretty sure no NPEs in the line going to my John Pierce. But who knows if before? ) My problem is that my STR testing has no one closer than GD 4 at 37 markers. The two I do match have the surnames Dye and Braun. Dye is in southern US via South Carolina. Braun is in Sweden.

Ah,okay. It can be a long time until you finally manage to acquire meaningful STR matches, but they eventually come at some point. Although, hopefully the match is someone who is very open to responding. My most recent potentially meaningful match has not responded to any of my messages in 2 years at this point.


I don't know those web sites but will check them out, too. And yes, it would be great if tests of unearthed remains helped fill in some (read: any) of the many gaps.

Some studies so far have presented variously interesting takes on history so far, in the case of the ancient DNA of Britain & Ireland it seems to follow history quite well, however we are still missing some portions of history.

In other news, the aDNA drought for I1 (and everything else) is making things rather uninteresting lately... oh well.

JonikW
07-17-2019, 10:12 PM
Am I right in thinking there are four positively identified Z140 samples in the new Viking paper? Looks that way to me:
1. Denmark_Ribe 6 from 9th to 11th century Ribe, Jutland, Denmark
2. Oland_1064 from 858 + 68 CE Oland, Sweden.
3. Oland_1097, 1053 Ī 60 CE, Oland, Sweden
4. Denmark_Bogovej BT, 10th century, Denmark, Langeland
Truly exciting.

deadly77
07-17-2019, 11:02 PM
Am I right in thinking there are four positively identified Z140 samples in the new Viking paper? Looks that way to me:
1. Denmark_Ribe 6 from 9th to 11th century Ribe, Jutland, Denmark
2. Oland_1064 from 858 + 68 CE Oland, Sweden.
3. Oland_1097, 1053 Ī 60 CE, Oland, Sweden
4. Denmark_Bogovej BT, 10th century, Denmark, Langeland
Truly exciting.

Good call. If I'm reading their longhand designation correctly, and assuming that they are using the 2019 version of the ISOGG tree as they claim (argh, how much I hate longhand haplogroup names...)

Denmark_Ribe 6 I1a2a1a1a1a I-YSC0000261
Oland_1064 I1a2a1a1a I-Z140
Oland_1097 I1a2a1a1a I-Z140
Denmark_Bogovej BT I1a2a1a1a I-Z140

So far there is no raw data to check, but if and when it comes in, I'll move these to the top of the queue. ;)

spruithean
07-18-2019, 12:37 AM
Good call. If I'm reading their longhand designation correctly, and assuming that they are using the 2019 version of the ISOGG tree as they claim (argh, how much I hate longhand haplogroup names...)

Denmark_Ribe 6 I1a2a1a1a1a I-YSC0000261
Oland_1064 I1a2a1a1a I-Z140
Oland_1097 I1a2a1a1a I-Z140
Denmark_Bogovej BT I1a2a1a1a I-Z140

So far there is no raw data to check, but if and when it comes in, I'll move these to the top of the queue. ;)

They are indeed using the 2019 ISOGG designations. Nice to see some more ancient I-Z140.

JonikW
07-18-2019, 02:17 PM
Here's a summary I've compiled of the four Z140 and below samples. Let me know if I've introduced any errors.

Denmark_Ribe 6 (Denmark_Ribe_K1586; VK327)
Avg depth (X) 1.164;
990-1020 CE;
I1a2a1a1a1a (Z140 >S1954/I-YSC0000261)
Additional info: the body is pictured in supplementary material

Ribe (Denmark) description
Samples come from 483 Christian burials at the cathedral at Ribe, Jutland, which was founded AD 860. A large archaeological dataset including stratigraphy, preservation, grave customs and coffin types dates the burials between c. 850 and 1050 AD.

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

Oland_1064 (VK337)
Avg depth (X) 2.042;
858 Ī 68 AD
I1a2a1a1a (Z140)
Additional info: local mature male

Oland 1097 (VK357)
Avg depth (X) 1.387;
1053 Ī 60 CE
I1a2a1a1a (Z140)
Additional info: VK357 is listed as a non local "female?" elsewhere in supplementary material

÷land (Sweden) description
Samples come from 29 individuals from 20 sites on the island of ÷land in the Baltic Sea. Isotope results were interpreted to show extensive immigration to the island with 68% non-local individuals in the Late Iron Age. The immigrants appear to be both regional and interregional, so this has been interpreted as population of mixed provenance resulting in a creolized society with a mixing of different non-local and local traditions for burial and subsistence practice.

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

Denmark_Bogoveij BT (VK363)
Avg depth (X) 1.337;
10th century
I1a2a1a1a (Z140)

BogÝvej (Denmark) description
A total of 49 graves have been excavated on a small hill 500 m south of Lidelse Nor, of which three were double graves. Some of the inhumation graves contained grave goods: knife- , whetstones, buckles, glass beads. A male burial contained an axe dated to the late Viking Age period, a strike-a-light and an Arabic silver coin. One skeleton was decapitated.

Edit: added a missing sample ID.

spruithean
07-20-2019, 01:01 AM
Yeah, I'm not sure what is going on with that. Perhaps initial archaeological work assumed the remains were female, but DNA testing proved otherwise?

On another note, I wonder what user BillMC is up to. I recall he was I-S1954 just like VK327 and his roots were from the Scottish Highlands IIRC. This would certainly show why BritainsDNA's "Anglo-Saxon" label for S1954 is a bit much.

deadly77
07-20-2019, 01:41 AM
Yeah, I'm not sure what is going on with that. Perhaps initial archaeological work assumed the remains were female, but DNA testing proved otherwise?

On another note, I wonder what user BillMC is up to. I recall he was I-S1954 just like VK327 and his roots were from the Scottish Highlands IIRC. This would certainly show why BritainsDNA's "Anglo-Saxon" label for S1954 is a bit much.

I'd say the same regarding the female designation - I haven't looked into the archeological reports but perhaps they were initially assigned as female based on bone structure before DNA. The supplementary information lists it as "Female?" - which I think suggests a question on the part of the authors. Then again, we've seen one individual on Anthrogenica trying to assign a Y-DNA haplogroup to females based on a single read (which was probably a false positive read) and there's a number of individuals on Facebook trying to apply to Morley predictor to females.

On a different angle, there was an sample (YGS-B2) on the ancient Icelanders paper that was XXY. Something like that would probably throw the genetic analysis off. Something else to consider, but we'll get a better idea once we get the raw data to have a look at.

Britain's DNA took a lot of liberties with their haplogroup nicknames. Nat Geo and 23andme are also guilty of a lot of the same nonsense in some of their reports. It's rather meaningless to assign a cultural group to a haplogroup or subclade that significantly predates it. Especially if the group contains other haplogroups and subclades.

BillMC
07-21-2019, 11:36 PM
Yeah, I'm not sure what is going on with that. Perhaps initial archaeological work assumed the remains were female, but DNA testing proved otherwise?

On another note, I wonder what user BillMC is up to. I recall he was I-S1954 just like VK327 and his roots were from the Scottish Highlands IIRC. This would certainly show why BritainsDNA's "Anglo-Saxon" label for S1954 is a bit much.

According to some members of this board and also William Hartley from the I1-z140 project Britain'sDNA were wrong about my 'Anglo Saxon' subclad. According to these people my subclad should be S12289.

It may also interst you to know that when I did the DNA test with Ancestry.com 57% of my autosominal DNA is alledged to be from that West Germanic region i.e Low Countries, NW Germany and Denmark.

BTW BritainsDNA and MyGlobalDNA have both closed down their sites and I lost all my data. Mind you after reading posts on this board and on the I1-z140 project concerning BritainsDNA I wish I had shopped around for a more comptent and complete analysis. I wish I took up the offer of doing the Big Y Family DNA test when they had it at its sale price. It is now at its normal high price. Unless anyone can recomend a good but less expessive company then I will just have to go for the Big Y Family DNA test.

deadly77
07-22-2019, 10:09 AM
According to some members of this board and also William Hartley from the I1-z140 project Britain'sDNA were wrong about my 'Anglo Saxon' subclad. According to these people my subclad should be S12289.

It may also interst you to know that when I did the DNA test with Ancestry.com 57% of my autosominal DNA is alledged to be from that West Germanic region i.e Low Countries, NW Germany and Denmark.

BTW BritainsDNA and MyGlobalDNA have both closed down their sites and I lost all my data. Mind you after reading posts on this board and on the I1-z140 project concerning BritainsDNA I wish I had shopped around for a more comptent and complete analysis. I wish I took up the offer of doing the Big Y Family DNA test when they had it at its sale price. It is now at its normal high price. Unless anyone can recomend a good but less expessive company then I will just have to go for the Big Y Family DNA test.

I wouldn't definitively associate either I-Z140, I-S1954/YSC0000261 or I-S12289 as Anglo-Saxon, as the estimated TMRCA for all of those branches predates the earliest recorded mentions of Anglo-Saxons by several centuries, indeed millenia. I think that there were undoubtably I-Z140, I-S1954/YSC0000261 or I-S12289 among the Anglo-Saxons, but I also thing those subclades are prevalent in other groups outside the Anglo-Saxons and the Anglo-Saxons had other subclades and haplogroups that weren't these either.

Britain's DNA was (at the time) a solid SNP test that gave a lot of good information, but unfortunately they also talked a lot of rubbish and conjecture in their interpretations.

I wouldn't marry your autosomal DNA ethnicity percentages to your Y-DNA subclade as there are contributions from all of your other ancestors and going back only four generations to a great-great-grandfather, the expected contribution of a Y-DNA ancestor to an autosomal percentage would be in the region of 6.25%. Going back more generations, especially to the times of Anglo-Saxons, the autosomal contribution of a single Y-DNA ancestor would be neglible. 31948

I'd look around at the options available. FTDNA has the largest Y-DNA database, but in my opinion for what you pay for compared to what you get isn't the best value. In recent years they have improved the test compared to the earlier version and they have added additional analysis tools, but I still think they're the weaker than other options for raw data and analysis. The biggest advantages of FTDNA are the largest commercial Y-DNA database and the hosting of projects that are run by volunteers. For a more cost effective option, Full Genomes offers the YElite at a rather competitive price compared to the FTDNA's Big Y700, and they also throw in the mtDNA (valued at $199 by FTDNA) that is removed from the Big Y Y700. The disadvantage of the YElite is that you don't get access to FTDNA's database and while you can extract a lot of the Y111 STRs from the BAM file, you won't get all of them.

With the prices on WGS going down all the time, I'd be more likely to consider that route than the Big Y 700 or the YElite if I was looking for an extensive Y chromosome test (plus other stuff) today. For me the best options are Full Genomes and YSEQ. These are still relatively expensive, but offer timely delivery of resuts after submission and a packaging of raw data that is more helpful to genetic genealogists (separate Y, mt, autosomal BAM files; reports; gedmatch compatible autosomal files; easy transfer to YFull). Dante are offering a much less expensive WGS that appears to go on sale on a regular basis. From what I've seen of the data, it gives solid results but there also seems to be a bit of effort required into translating the data output which I feel would be challenging for an inexperienced customer. Also reports about long wait times and poor customer services from some people who have ordered their test. There's a few others offering WGS to customer but worth checking what the read depth of their test is and what form the raw data comes in (Veritas for example provide VCF files but not BAM files). The advantage of the WGS is all the data - Y, mt, autosomal sequenced to very high resolution. The disadvantage is there's not a lot of infrastructure available yet to handle and interpret such analysis widely available yet, especially for autosomal, but it's an investment for the future as those develop. From a Y perspective, the biggest disadvantage of a WGS is no integration with FTDNA's largest Y-DNA database.

So shop around, and have a think what's right for you. Lots of discussion of the merits and drawbacks of different testing strategies on other threads in the Anthrogenica forum and it's worth having a read of those, as everybody has different goals, expectations and budgets.

BillMC
07-22-2019, 01:02 PM
I wouldn't definitively associate either I-Z140, I-S1954/YSC0000261 or I-S12289 as Anglo-Saxon, as the estimated TMRCA for all of those branches predates the earliest recorded mentions of Anglo-Saxons by several centuries, indeed millenia. I think that there were undoubtably I-Z140, I-S1954/YSC0000261 or I-S12289 among the Anglo-Saxons, but I also thing those subclades are prevalent in other groups outside the Anglo-Saxons and the Anglo-Saxons had other subclades and haplogroups that weren't these either.


Yes, but could it not have been from the ancesters of the AS? Someone once refered to these peoples as the Ingvaeones ranging between today's Holland and Denmark on the North Sea coast. This was the same place where the 5th century AD AS came from.

Of course there could have been earlier migrations to the British Isles from this area. This was one of the points Stephen Oppenhiemer made in his 'Origins of the British' book. Nevertheless since I came on to this board I've came across my people who have dismissed this by saying that Oppenhiemer's work was inaccurate or incomplete.

BTW Alistair Moffat in his book 'The Scots: A Genetic Journey' made reference to the physical appearance of the Caledonain tribes as described by the Roman historian Tacitus in his book 'Britain and Germany' as confirmation of the M253 subclads in Scotland. According to Tacitus The Roman historian Tacitus tells us that the inhabitants of Caledonia had ‘red hair and large limbs which point clearly to a German origin. So maybe Tacitus was right enough and this must surely be confirmed by the appearence of older subclads of M253 in Scotland.

JonikW
07-22-2019, 02:22 PM
Yes, but could it not have been from the ancesters of the AS? Someone once refered to these peoples as the Ingvaeones ranging between today's Holland and Denmark on the North Sea coast. This was the same place where the 5th century AD AS came from.

Of course there could have been earlier migrations to the British Isles from this area. This was one of the points Stephen Oppenhiemer made in his 'Origins of the British' book. Nevertheless since I came on to this board I've came across my people who have dismissed this by saying that Oppenhiemer's work was inaccurate or incomplete.

BTW Alistair Moffat in his book 'The Scots: A Genetic Journey' made reference to the physical appearance of the Caledonain tribes as described by the Roman historian Tacitus in his book 'Britain and Germany' as confirmation of the M253 subclads in Scotland. According to Tacitus The Roman historian Tacitus tells us that the inhabitants of Caledonia had ‘red hair and large limbs which point clearly to a German origin. So maybe Tacitus was right enough and this must surely be confirmed by the appearence of older subclads of M253 in Scotland.

I think deadly is right, but that doesn't mean an Anglo-Saxon origin isn't a distinct possibility for you. As for Tacitus, it would be reckless to interpret the appearance of ancient people in Scotland as suggesting they were I1. In my view, there may have been some pre-AS I1 people in Britain, but most will have arrived after the Roman retreat. I'll be interested to see whether you turn out to be S12289 like many of us with roots in northern England and Scotland.

Edited for SNP correction.

BillMC
07-22-2019, 05:28 PM
I'll be interested to see whether you turn out to be S12289 like many of us with roots in northern England and Scotland.


I'll certainly let you and others on this board know the outcome of my next DNA test.

deadly77
07-23-2019, 08:56 AM
Yes, but could it not have been from the ancesters of the AS? Someone once refered to these peoples as the Ingvaeones ranging between today's Holland and Denmark on the North Sea coast. This was the same place where the 5th century AD AS came from.

Of course there could have been earlier migrations to the British Isles from this area. This was one of the points Stephen Oppenhiemer made in his 'Origins of the British' book. Nevertheless since I came on to this board I've came across my people who have dismissed this by saying that Oppenhiemer's work was inaccurate or incomplete.

BTW Alistair Moffat in his book 'The Scots: A Genetic Journey' made reference to the physical appearance of the Caledonain tribes as described by the Roman historian Tacitus in his book 'Britain and Germany' as confirmation of the M253 subclads in Scotland. According to Tacitus The Roman historian Tacitus tells us that the inhabitants of Caledonia had ‘red hair and large limbs which point clearly to a German origin. So maybe Tacitus was right enough and this must surely be confirmed by the appearence of older subclads of M253 in Scotland.

I could have been all sorts of things. Please don't take my answer as saying that your Y-DNA ancestor from that time period definitively was not an Anglo-Saxon - it may well have been so (as JonikW said), I'm just trying to stem the tide of misinformation that Britain's DNA and others peddle, and being I1, I-M253, I-S1954, I-S12289 doesn't neccesariy mean Anglo-Saxon.

I agree with JonikW's point that invoking Tacitus to suggest confirmation of I1 (or M253) in ancient Caledonians is reckless. There's no evidence of I1 in any of the ancient DNA from that time period that I have seen from that region so far.

I wouldn't consider Alistair Moffat as a reliable source either. Moffat was one of the founders of Britain's DNA, and responsible for a lot of their more sensational claims. You may want to have a read of this article for some of his more dubious assertions https://www.mdpi.com/2313-5778/2/4/47 I haven't read Moffat's book on The Scots: A Genetic Journey. I have read his book "The Reivers: The Story of the Border Reivers" - some parts were good, others not so good and there was a lot of things said in that book that are best described as a leap of faith.

I definitely wouldn't associate red hair with M253. The variants that I'm aware of that are associated with red hair are all on chromosome 16, so it's autosomal rather than Y. I believe Britain's DNA included a number of variants on the MC1R (Melanocortin 1 Receptor) gene in their test that was separate to their Y-DNA test.

JonikW
08-26-2019, 11:22 PM
Some good news for me and for a twig of our Z140 branch as all of us here build it together. I'm fortunate to be in a group discussion with my downstream match and closest upstream ones, and moreover we have an extremely knowledgeable FTDNA admin from another project among our number. Our latest recruit is being processed at YFull and was until today down as A21901 with a TMRCA of 1,750ybp. He's now been moved upstream to A21908, which was previously thought to be an equivalent SNP to A21901. The net result so far is that our upstream A4586/A4577 has been shifted slightly from 2,600ybp to 2,500ybp. At that level we English (from Angle areas where it can be established, including one YSEQ tester) and Swedish lines are joined by Germans. Very interesting. I still suspect our A4586 ancestor lived somewhere around Denmark, and his descendants have ended up where we are today for obvious reasons (it's amazing to think that this "SNP" was once a man with a name). Perhaps something else will change because this match is still down as "new". Anyway, I had no matches when I did Big Y so I'm happy. It's irksome (always wanted to use that word) how none of the BY700 testers shows up as a match on my FTDNA service though.

JMcB
08-27-2019, 12:20 AM
Some good news for me and for a twig of our Z140 branch as all of us here build it together. I'm fortunate to be in a group discussion with my downstream match and closest upstream ones, and moreover we have an extremely knowledgeable FTDNA admin from another project among our number. Our latest recruit is being processed at YFull and was until today down as A21901 with a TMRCA of 1,750ybp. He's now been moved upstream to A21908, which was previously thought to be an equivalent SNP to A21901. The net result so far is that our upstream A4586/A4577 has been shifted slightly from 2,600ybp to 2,500ybp. At that level we English (from Angle areas where it can be established, including one YSEQ tester) and Swedish lines are joined by Germans. Very interesting. I still suspect our A4586 ancestor lived somewhere around Denmark, and his descendants have ended up where we are today for obvious reasons (it's amazing to think that this "SNP" was once a man with a name). Perhaps something else will change because this match is still down as "new". Anyway, I had no matches when I did Big Y so I'm happy. It's irksome (always wanted to use that word) how none of the BY700 testers shows up as a match on my FTDNA service though.

Congratulations and now that you mention it, irksome is a great word! Iíll have to go find someone to use it on. ;-)

Y700 has also proved interesting for me, as itís added some new Novel Variants for me to include in my SNP Pack at YSEQ. Iím now waiting to see how many of the 3 new ones my closest match is positive for. He previously matched 5 of my then 7 Novel Variants. Plus, the added NVs have also pushed my (personal) lineís date back from 830 AD to 620 AD and my branchís date to circa 870 AD. While the branch I descend from has also been moved back to 200 AD because of another testerís results. Time for some new calculations. ;-)

JonikW
08-27-2019, 12:55 AM
Congratulations and now that you mention it, irksome is a great word! I’ll have to go find someone to use it on. ;-)

Y700 has also proved interesting for me, as it’s added some new Novel Variants for me to include in my SNP Pack at YSEQ. I’m now waiting to see how many of the 3 new ones my closest match is positive for. He previously matched 5 of my then 7 Novel Variants. Plus, the added NVs have also pushed my (personal) line’s date back from 830 AD to 620 AD and my branch’s date to circa 870 AD. While the branch I descend from has also been moved back to 200 AD because of another tester’s results. Time for some new calculations. ;-)

That's exciting news. Are you on YFull? I couldn't find I-A13243. Where are your closest matches from and have you gained any insights on ancestral migration?

JonikW
08-27-2019, 10:33 AM
That's exciting news. Are you on YFull? I couldn't find I-A13243. Where are your closest matches from and have you gained any insights on ancestral migration?

Sorry, I forgot you'd posted on this at #152.;) I've just reread and taken a look at the Y3647 branch on YFull. I can see Staffordshire, Yorkshire and Scotland there, and it broadly looks like another Angle candidate to me. Interesting stuff.

spruithean
08-27-2019, 11:50 AM
Interestingly, A13241, the upstream position of Y3647 presents an even broader distribution. We have some A13241 branches from Sweden, Finland, Britain, combine that with the distribution for Y3647 subclades and it gives a rather expected distribution. FTDNA also has some Y3647 people with roots in French Flanders and the Netherlands. It certainly seems like an Angle distribution is possible for Y3647, as it seems to (so far) lack that Scandinavian distribution, and perhaps for some it is a Flemish connection vs. an Anglian connection.

Although, perhaps as more people take Big Y and related tests we'll see wider distribution.

JMcB
08-27-2019, 02:30 PM
That's exciting news. Are you on YFull? I couldn't find I-A13243. Where are your closest matches from and have you gained any insights on ancestral migration?

Yes I am but my terminal SNP on YFull is A13248. Unfortunately, neither YFull or FT know about my later matches as they were discovered by testing two other men against a Custom Panel of my Novel Variants at YSEQ. One of them is a surname match who tested positive for 5 of my Novel Variants and the other is a non surname match who tested positive for one. So there are really two branches under A13248 that YFull doesn’t know about. One’s MDKA is from Ayr and the other’s is from Northern Ireland, while mine is from Galloway. Although, the one from Northern Ireland was probably originally from Scotland, too. At this point, it looks like A13248 may have formed in North Yorkshire sometime around 620 AD and then split into four subclades later on. With two of them staying in Yorkshire and one moving into Scotland before splitting there. At least, that’s my theory until something irksome comes along and upends it. ;-)

A13248 is towards the bottom with the Scottish flag.

https://www.yfull.com/tree/I-Y3647/


Edit: My mistake. I replied to your post before reading any further.

spruithean
08-27-2019, 03:03 PM
Yes I am but my terminal SNP on YFull is A13248. Unfortunately, neither YFull or FT know about my later matches as they were discovered by testing two other men against a Custom Panel of my Novel Variants at YSEQ. One of them is a surname match who tested positive for 5 of my Novel Variants and the other is a non surname match who tested positive for one. So there are really two branches under A13248 that YFull doesn’t know about. One’s MDKA is from Ayr and the other’s is from Northern Ireland, while mine is from Galloway. Although, the one from Northern Ireland was probably originally from Scotland, too. At this point, it looks like A13248 may have formed in North Yorkshire sometime around 620 AD and then split into four subclades later on. With two of them staying in Yorkshire and one moving into Scotland before splitting there. At least, that’s my theory until something irksome comes along and upends it. ;-)

A13248 is towards the bottom with the Scottish flag.

https://www.yfull.com/tree/I-Y3647/


Edit: My mistake. I replied to your post before reading any further.

I can't help but think that these subclades of Y3647 may have all originated in what would become Northumbria (Bernicia & Deira) or Mercia, at least that's according to the information we have at this point... which could change.

I have yet to acquire any more Big Y matches, which is disappointing at this point. Sort of lonely on the A14097* branch.

JonikW
08-27-2019, 03:24 PM
Yes I am but my terminal SNP on YFull is A13248. Unfortunately, neither YFull or FT know about my later matches as they were discovered by testing two other men against a Custom Panel of my Novel Variants at YSEQ. One of them is a surname match who tested positive for 5 of my Novel Variants and the other is a non surname match who tested positive for one. So there are really two branches under A13248 that YFull doesn’t know about. One’s MDKA is from Ayr and the other’s is from Northern Ireland, while mine is from Galloway. Although, the one from Northern Ireland was probably originally from Scotland, too. At this point, it looks like A13248 may have formed in North Yorkshire sometime around 620 AD and then split into four subclades later on. With two of them staying in Yorkshire and one moving into Scotland before splitting there. At least, that’s my theory until something irksome comes along and upends it. ;-)

A13248 is towards the bottom with the Scottish flag.

https://www.yfull.com/tree/I-Y3647/


Edit: My mistake. I replied to your post before reading any further.

Your theory looks sound and I hope you'll have no call to be irked later. ;-) I agree with spruithean re Northumbria/Mercia.

JMcB
08-27-2019, 03:39 PM
I can't help but think that these subclades of Y3647 may have all originated in what would become Northumbria (Bernicia & Deira) or Mercia, at least that's according to the information we have at this point... which could change.

I have yet to acquire any more Big Y matches, which is disappointing at this point. Sort of lonely on the A14097* branch.

Yes, it does seem to look that way, at this point. Although, their presence may have predated any of those polities. At any rate, we’ve got a long way to go and as you said, things could change. We’ll see. Am I remembering correctly, that all of your cousins are fairly close relations? If you have or can find a more distant one you can always make up a Custom Panel at YSEQ and tests them against that. Unfortunately, as it stands now, NGS testing still requires a lot of luck and a lot of patience. Hopefully, your ship will come in soon.

spruithean
08-27-2019, 04:26 PM
Yes, it does seem to look that way, at this point. Although, their presence may have predated any of those polities. At any rate, we’ve got a long way to go and as you said, things could change. We’ll see. Am I remembering correctly, that all of your cousins are fairly close relations? If you have or can find a more distant one you can always make up a Custom Panel at YSEQ and tests them against that. Unfortunately, as it stands now, NGS testing still requires a lot of luck and a lot of patience. Hopefully, your ship will come in soon.

Yes, my cousins and I come from two lines of our MDKA (closest cousin is 2C2R, and furthest is 3C3R for Y testing at least). Our MDKA had 4 sons, and so far we've only found 2 of those lineages with surviving descendant male lineages, others seem to have daughtered out, disappeared or gone extinct thanks to disease (2nd born son of the MDKA died at 18 it seems). That or lineages that appeared to be from the same male-line were actually sons of daughters who maintained their maternal surname. Couple aĺl of this with the many families in our area of Nova Scotia with the same name and it just gets hectic :lol:.

I do have a match (not Big Y, yet and at this rate I doubt the match will ever respond to my inquiries) to a person with essentially the same surname from Co. Down, NI so there seems to be some back and forth between Scotland and Ireland, which perhaps might provide some support for the suspicion my relatives have of a somewhat strong connection to Northern Ireland, which could explain our ancestors choice of settlement in an area predominantly settled by people from Ulster.

JMcB
08-27-2019, 05:15 PM
So, if I’m remembering correctly, you and your 3rd Cousin would share 2cd Great Grandparents. While testing him might be interesting, it wouldn’t tell you anything new. It’s too bad that other fellow never got back to you but who knows what his story is. Maybe he’s gotten too old to pay attention. Either way, it would be nice to see your block of SNPs start breaking up. Hopefully, something will happen soon.

JonikW
08-27-2019, 06:10 PM
Yes, my cousins and I come from two lines of our MDKA (closest cousin is 2C2R, and furthest is 3C3R for Y testing at least). Our MDKA had 4 sons, and so far we've only found 2 of those lineages with surviving descendant male lineages, others seem to have daughtered out, disappeared or gone extinct thanks to disease (2nd born son of the MDKA died at 18 it seems). That or lineages that appeared to be from the same male-line were actually sons of daughters who maintained their maternal surname. Couple aĺl of this with the many families in our area of Nova Scotia with the same name and it just gets hectic :lol:.

I do have a match (not Big Y, yet and at this rate I doubt the match will ever respond to my inquiries) to a person with essentially the same surname from Co. Down, NI so there seems to be some back and forth between Scotland and Ireland, which perhaps might provide some support for the suspicion my relatives have of a somewhat strong connection to Northern Ireland, which could explain our ancestors choice of settlement in an area predominantly settled by people from Ulster.

What's the best SNP we can check out for your case on YFull? You and JMcB seem to bolster my Angle theory for Z140 (set out in post #194) although I think that most particularly applies to S12289. We may all have come over in the same fleet. :)My money would be on an arrival in the Humber, with my forefather then heading down the Trent from there while others went north. I'm concentrating on reading site reports on cemeteries in that region to see what clues they give about origin in the homelands. Myres, for example, points out that pots at Sancton, on the Humber gateway into England, parallel examples from Borgstedt and Funen. I'm also interested in the fact that a 6th century Scandinavian scutiform pendant was found in the Peak District village where my family has been since before 1300. Although "had" been is probably better. My father's cousin actually moved away from there last year so the family tie has finally been broken. My great great grandfather wrote a book about our family and the village where he set out how he still owned tiny named parcels of land that had been passed on to our family in the 13th century. We've all been handed down copies of the book from the original printing but you can check it out here (http://books.google.co.uk/books/about/LONGSTONE_RECORDS_DERBYSHIRE.html?id=zEUqvgAACAAJ&source=kp_book_description&redir_esc=y) if you're interested. My father's cousin still has the original medieval sealed documents with the bequests in Latin (they're reproduced in the book too) but is planning to pass them into official care. I have great memories of the wonder I felt on seeing them for the first time as a kid. Sorry for rambling but I hope this highlights the importance of the Y quest for many of us.

JMcB
08-27-2019, 07:18 PM
What's the best SNP we can check out for your case on YFull? You and JMcB seem to bolster my Angle theory for Z140 (set out in post #194) although I think that most particularly applies to S12289. We may all have come over in the same fleet. :)My money would be on an arrival in the Humber, with my forefather then heading down the Trent from there while others went north. I'm concentrating on reading site reports on cemeteries in that region to see what clues they give about origin in the homelands. Myres, for example, points out that pots at Sancton, on the Humber gateway into England, parallel examples from Borgstedt and Funen. I'm also interested in the fact that a 6th century Scandinavian scutiform pendant was found in the Peak District village where my family has been since before 1300. Although "had" been is probably better. My father's cousin actually moved away from there last year so the family tie has finally been broken. My great great grandfather wrote a book about our family and the village where he set out how he still owned tiny named parcels of land that had been passed on to our family in the 13th century. We've all been handed down copies of the book from the original printing but you can check it out here (http://books.google.co.uk/books/about/LONGSTONE_RECORDS_DERBYSHIRE.html?id=zEUqvgAACAAJ&source=kp_book_description&redir_esc=y) if you're interested. My father's cousin still has the original medieval sealed documents with the bequests in Latin (they're reproduced in the book too) but is planning to pass them into official care. I have great memories of the wonder I felt on seeing them for the first time as a kid. Sorry for rambling but I hope this highlights the importance of the Y quest for many of us.

That’s very interesting and you’re very fortunate to have such a nice family history. Coincidentally, one of the reasons I suspect my branch may have formed in North Yorkshire is because two of the fellows in the subclades that flows out of mine, have longstanding ties to that area. They believe going back a thousand years and their surnames (Leeming) reflect that belief. As they were taken from the name of a river and two nearby settlements there. While the third person’s surname probably comes from two towns in the same general area, Great and Little Busby. Plus, the way my personal line (under A13248) split so quickly into A13248 & A13242 (approximately 144 years after 620 AD), would imply that my people were already in Scotland when that happened, circa 800 AD. As everyone is Scottish in those two branches (A13242 & A13243). Needless to say, that last part is far more speculative. As the dates have already shown themselves subject to change and there’s a lot more supposition involved.

spruithean isn’t on YFull but the branch that comes right out of his is A14094. So he would split that branch and probably be right below Y3647a and just above A14094.

https://www.yfull.com/tree/I-Y3647/

spruithean
08-27-2019, 09:43 PM
That’s very interesting and you’re very fortunate to have such a nice family history. Coincidentally, one of the reasons I suspect my branch may have formed in North Yorkshire is because two of the fellows in the subclades that flows out of mine, have longstanding ties to that area. They believe going back a thousand years and their surnames (Leeming) reflect that belief As they were taken from the name of a river and two nearby settlements there. While the third person’s surname probably comes from two towns in the same general area, Great and Little Busby. Plus, the way my personal line (under A13248) split so quickly into A13248 & A13242 (approximately 144 years after 620 AD), would imply that my people were already in Scotland when that happened, circa 800 AD. As everyone is Scottish in those two branches (A13242 & A13243). Needless to say, that last part is far more speculative. As the dates have already shown themselves subject to change and there’s a lot more supposition involved.

spruithean isn’t on YFull but the branch that comes right out of his is A14094. So he would split that branch and probably be right below Y3647a and just above A14094.

https://www.yfull.com/tree/I-Y3647/

I suspect that A14097 and A13248 related lineages, or at least the founding lineage in this case, developed within the same area, which could explain the distribution in both Scotland & England.

On FTDNA you can see the way they've gone about the tree at A14097, I'll post a screenshot later (this is also visible with the coggle tree too):

-I-Y7198
-- I-A14097
---- I-A14097* (private variants)
---- I-M4050 (A14094, etc)

Hopefully over time with more Big Y tests, someone from my neck of the woods on the Y-chromosome tree will help split things up, I've wondered if my branch of A14097 is the northern branch, while M4050 (A14094) is the southern branch. The Angle theory has certainly held strong after all these years, I remember early on when A13241 was discovered the idea was that those grouped under it with roots in the Isles were considered to have their origins in Northumbria, that seems to have held on a fair bit.

JonikW
08-27-2019, 11:06 PM
That’s very interesting and you’re very fortunate to have such a nice family history. Coincidentally, one of the reasons I suspect my branch may have formed in North Yorkshire is because two of the fellows in the subclades that flows out of mine, have longstanding ties to that area. They believe going back a thousand years and their surnames (Leeming) reflect that belief As they were taken from the name of a river and two nearby settlements there. While the third person’s surname probably comes from two towns in the same general area, Great and Little Busby. Plus, the way my personal line (under A13248) split so quickly into A13248 & A13242 (approximately 144 years after 620 AD), would imply that my people were already in Scotland when that happened, circa 800 AD. As everyone is Scottish in those two branches (A13242 & A13243). Needless to say, that last part is far more speculative. As the dates have already shown themselves subject to change and there’s a lot more supposition involved.

spruithean isn’t on YFull but the branch that comes right out of his is A14094. So he would split that branch and probably be right below Y3647a and just above A14094.

https://www.yfull.com/tree/I-Y3647/

That's all extremely interesting JMcB. It's amazing how much you can learn from looking at and thinking about Y SNPs. Thanks too for your words on my family. I think clues about long-standing ties to land such as your Leemings can be crucial. My own Y lot were yeomen in medieval times, so not rich and not poor, and being in the Peak District we were blessed in that our only overlord was the king. One of my ancestors was an archer at Agincourt, and I've enjoyed researching him with some expert help, as well as visiting the battle site with my son one October day some years ago. spruithean: interesting that A13241 looks as Angle as it's possible to get. We haven't seen any firmly Saxon Z140 members here yet but perhaps we will one day. I have a hunch they'll always be outnumbered by Angles though.

spruithean
08-28-2019, 08:00 PM
That is quite an impressive paper trail you have for your paternal lineage. I'm stuck in the late 1790s for my paternal lineage, with not much to go on. Seems to be a combination of lack of records in Canada and Scotland, most documents list my ancestor as born in Scotland and that he was "Scottish", but it seems specifics were not important, unfortunately I've not been able to locate any family bible's that would possibly reveal anything. I've been quite successful with my maternal family (both my grandfather and grandmother) have fairly well documented paper trails stretching quite far back, and in my maternal grandfather's case it really highlights how intermarried the families of his family's region are (pedigree collapse found throughout several families).

A13241 certainly has a Fennoscandian branch and a North Sea-British Isles branch. It looks like it originated in Southern Sweden-Denmark area and spread out from there with one branch heading further in Sweden + Finland, and another heading toward the Isles & Flanders/Netherlands area. I think there are some Saxon Z140 clades for sure, we just can't quite distinguish them easily.

JonikW
08-28-2019, 09:19 PM
That is quite an impressive paper trail you have for your paternal lineage. I'm stuck in the late 1790s for my paternal lineage, with not much to go on. Seems to be a combination of lack of records in Canada and Scotland, most documents list my ancestor as born in Scotland and that he was "Scottish", but it seems specifics were not important, unfortunately I've not been able to locate any family bible's that would possibly reveal anything. I've been quite successful with my maternal family (both my grandfather and grandmother) have fairly well documented paper trails stretching quite far back, and in my maternal grandfather's case it really highlights how intermarried the families of his family's region are (pedigree collapse found throughout several families).

A13241 certainly has a Fennoscandian branch and a North Sea-British Isles branch. It looks like it originated in Southern Sweden-Denmark area and spread out from there with one branch heading further in Sweden + Finland, and another heading toward the Isles & Flanders/Netherlands area. I think there are some Saxon Z140 clades for sure, we just can't quite distinguish them easily.

Cheers Spruithean. You're right of course that there must be some Saxon subclades given what we think we know of Z140's dating. It'll be interesting what the Danish data throw up, if a DNA study follows on from the latest paper as expected. We couldn't ask for anything better to potentially inform us about I1 and Z140. If the results are detailed enough we'll also be able to see how well our subclade dating estimates stand up to radiocarbon data. For example, something completely unexpected like S12289 in Battle Axe Culture would shake things up considerably. I predict Z140 will be found again to add to the five samples in the Viking paper.

JonikW
08-28-2019, 09:34 PM
By the way, I was just looking at our first dozen or so posts from when spruithean started this thread. Check it out. It's very endearing in a newbie way and is a nice reminder of how much we've learned since.;) One thing hasn't changed: "I'm on a tight budget" from me at #15.

JMcB
08-28-2019, 09:50 PM
By the way, I was just looking at our first dozen or so posts from when spruithean started this thread. Check it out. It's very endearing in a newbie way and is a nice reminder of how much we've learned since.;) One thing hasn't changed: "I'm on a tight budget" from me at #15.

Look at that! All the usual suspects were in attendance! ;-)

deadly77
08-30-2019, 08:05 AM
Yes I am but my terminal SNP on YFull is A13248. Unfortunately, neither YFull or FT know about my later matches as they were discovered by testing two other men against a Custom Panel of my Novel Variants at YSEQ. One of them is a surname match who tested positive for 5 of my Novel Variants and the other is a non surname match who tested positive for one. So there are really two branches under A13248 that YFull doesnít know about. Oneís MDKA is from Ayr and the otherís is from Northern Ireland, while mine is from Galloway. Although, the one from Northern Ireland was probably originally from Scotland, too. At this point, it looks like A13248 may have formed in North Yorkshire sometime around 620 AD and then split into four subclades later on. With two of them staying in Yorkshire and one moving into Scotland before splitting there. At least, thatís my theory until something irksome comes along and upends it. ;-)

A13248 is towards the bottom with the Scottish flag.

https://www.yfull.com/tree/I-Y3647/


Edit: My mistake. I replied to your post before reading any further.

I know we've discussed this a few times before regarding incorporating single SNP tests from Sanger by YSEQ into YFull. You might be interested in this post and especially the reply comments from Thomas Krahn on YSEQ's Facebook group (group is public, so should be able to read it). https://www.facebook.com/groups/YSEQDNA/permalink/2339067002839017/

There's a lot of understandable interest in adding YSEQ results from non-NGS testers to YFull, such as your situation with the folks who match some of your novel variants but haven't done Big Y. What's interesting in Thomas Krahn's reply is that he thinks YFull may be convinced to do this in the future. I know that YSEQ and YFull do have some history and interest in collaborating together, so it may be worth watching this space for future developments.

But this won't be immediately - as Thomas says the first stage is adding the option of importing Sanger results from YSEQ to YFull to supplement the data of NGS testers. They've already incorporated the option to add STR results from FTDNA to supplement the STRs extracted from a BAM file, such as STRs among the Y111 markers that are not read or low confidence. I can see that the option to add Sanger results would be good for NGS testers in order to supplement SNPs that were ambiguous, no call or one read SNPs in the BAM file. This would be pretty neat by itself.

But it's interesting that Thomas thinks that the option to add results from non-NGS testers could be included in the future (albeit after the option for NGS testers has been incorporated). It would be YFull's call - I can see why they may not be keen as their tree is currently only made from NGS tests which means that everything is high quality data that is directly comparable. But as Thomas says, perhaps they could be convinced of benefits - for example breaking up phylogenetic blocks of SNPs. It would have to be made clear what a non-NGS uploader would get out of the YFull upload - understandably they wouldn't get the full bells and whistles of YFull analysis as there's no BAM file. Probably a place on the tree would be achievable but wouldn't result in a direct contribution to the TMRCA calculation, as YFull wouldn't be able to use their method of counting reliable novel plus known SNPs back to a branch. Similar to how YFull current treat the ancient samples and VCF uploads which don't directly contribute to TMRCA calculations.

However, it must be stressed that despite their collaborations, Thomas Krahn and YSEQ are not YFull, so the YFull folks would be the ones that need to be convinced (and I can see a lot of reasons why YFull may not go for it). But it's interesting that Thomas thinks that it's possible and useful.

deadly77
08-30-2019, 09:02 AM
What's the best SNP we can check out for your case on YFull? You and JMcB seem to bolster my Angle theory for Z140 (set out in post #194) although I think that most particularly applies to S12289. We may all have come over in the same fleet. :)My money would be on an arrival in the Humber, with my forefather then heading down the Trent from there while others went north. I'm concentrating on reading site reports on cemeteries in that region to see what clues they give about origin in the homelands. Myres, for example, points out that pots at Sancton, on the Humber gateway into England, parallel examples from Borgstedt and Funen. I'm also interested in the fact that a 6th century Scandinavian scutiform pendant was found in the Peak District village where my family has been since before 1300. Although "had" been is probably better. My father's cousin actually moved away from there last year so the family tie has finally been broken. My great great grandfather wrote a book about our family and the village where he set out how he still owned tiny named parcels of land that had been passed on to our family in the 13th century. We've all been handed down copies of the book from the original printing but you can check it out here (http://books.google.co.uk/books/about/LONGSTONE_RECORDS_DERBYSHIRE.html?id=zEUqvgAACAAJ&source=kp_book_description&redir_esc=y) if you're interested. My father's cousin still has the original medieval sealed documents with the bequests in Latin (they're reproduced in the book too) but is planning to pass them into official care. I have great memories of the wonder I felt on seeing them for the first time as a kid. Sorry for rambling but I hope this highlights the importance of the Y quest for many of us.

That's really neat to have a paper trail back that far, especially with some ancedotal data about land ownership. As I've said before, my Y line paper trail runs out in about 1831 due to likely illegitimacy, but so far the Y-DNA hasn't thrown up anything that gives firm clues of his parentage. But it has given me a lot of other things to think about so it has been useful in that regard and potential for that to change in the future. Some other lines can get a lot further back on paper trail but in some cases they are just names - some parish records are rather brief. Some are pretty good, listing parents, occupations, where they were from and their parents as well. Sometimes unexpected bonuses - while looking through a parish register for Norfolk I found a rather lengthy and sanctimonius diatribe about the perceived unfavourabality of character and actions of the locals by one of the clerics. Most amusing, but perhaps I'm easily amused.

deadly77
08-30-2019, 09:45 AM
By the way, I was just looking at our first dozen or so posts from when spruithean started this thread. Check it out. It's very endearing in a newbie way and is a nice reminder of how much we've learned since.;) One thing hasn't changed: "I'm on a tight budget" from me at #15.

I just went and had a look - ha, I think #10 on this thread was one of my first posts on the Anthrogenica forum. I got my first DNA results through 23andme a few months before that which told me that I was I1 for the first time. While trying to figure out what that might involve, took Y111 from FTDNA to see if that gave me some more information. William initially put me in I-A1944 (as that post says) and I was looking to find out more about that (not a lot at the time) and understand genetic genealogy and population genetics in general a bit more which led to me discovering the Anthrogenica forum. I recall in my early weeks/months on this forum, I'd just ordered the LivingDNA test which had just launched as a company and there was a lot of buzz and discussion on here about the anticipation of results and then when the early results started coming out - bit of a difference to the opinion of LivingDNA today... I also spent a lot of time reading about the differences between FTDNA's Big Y and FGC's YElite while trying to decide what to do to go deeper down the rabbit hole. WGS was a bit expensive and I wasn't sure it was what I wanted at the time. Ended up going for FGC's YElite, largely due to some of the comments on here. There was a rather long wait for the YElite results to come out - they were going through a bit of a rough patch at the time and had a big backlog, although I think having the company rep here on the forum for updates and answers to questions was helpful.

While I was waiting for the YElite results to come in, I took a similar path to JonikW with single SNP testing using YSEQ. Thought this would be confirm the I-A1944 placement in the I-Z140 project from my STR results, but it came back as A1944 C- which surprised me. Since quite a lot of my Y67 matches were confirmed I-S12289 or lower, I thought I must be I-S12289, but YSEQ then came back S12289 C-. Got a bit concerned I was barking up the wrong tree completely so went a step back, but YSEQ confirmed L338 T+, so I was looking in the right area. By then given the flexibility and relatively low cost of YSEQ, I spent a little more exploring the limited options at L338+ A1944- S12289- on the tree at the time and that all confirmed I was negative for all the known branches below I-L338. So the YElite results came in later confirming I-L338* and novel variants. By this time YSEQ started to offer a WGS which (as expected) gave the same designation while cleaning up some of the ambiguous and one reads plus a few more novel variants. And that's where I am today at I-L338*.

It is nice to see how your branch on the tree has expanded, JonikW. I think you made the right decision taking the Big Y when it was on the deal with upgrade to Y111 thrown in (probably the best deal that FTDNA have offered). Hopefully continues to be a good investment for the future as more matches come in over time.