PDA

View Full Version : L21* (the real deal) (L21+ DF13- DF63-)



Mikewww
06-06-2013, 03:20 PM
I need to start up a thread on this. Hopefully it is not redundant. I see have a potential new member.

Great news! N90495 Passmore is DF13-! Our assumptions were correct.

rms2
06-06-2013, 03:29 PM
I mentioned Passmore over in the DF63 thread when his DF13- result first came in. He has a DF63 test underway but no result yet. Is he expected to go DF63-?

He lists an mdka from Devon, which will make him the most westerly of either L21* or DF63+, whichever way he goes, I believe.

Mikewww
06-06-2013, 03:34 PM
N90495 Passmore fits with an STR signature I call X1363-219 so the chances may be he is really DF63+. However, that signature is pretty loose and has wide GDs so it is not for sure.

That leaves the following as the true L21* people.


f37201 Berry L21+ Z290+ DF13- DF63- L69- L144- L195- 3c1g X13- uas England, Yorkshire and Humber, West Yorkshire, Almondbury Huddersfield
f25304 Maddox L21+ DF13- DF63- L144- X13- uas France
f26883 Tupper L21+ DF13- DF63- X13- uas England, South East, West Sussex, Bury
fN49494 (Wildes) L21+ DF13- DF63- X13- uas zzzUnkOrigin
f8814 Blancett L21+ DF13- DF63- L144- L195- X13-1011 zzzUnkOrigin
f236395 Bishop L21+ DF13- DF63- X13-1313 England
fN80403 Bishop L21+ Z290+ DF13- DF63- Z2542- X13-1313 England, London
f94428 Meadows L21+ Z290+ DF13- DF63- L144- X13-1313 UK

If we choose f94428 Meadows to represent the X13-1313 variety, the modal for these L21* folks have a GD=4 from the L21 modal @67.

The GDs between themselves as individuals generally range up to 30 @67. The GDs between each to the L21 modal range from 8 to 18 @67.

Mikewww
07-02-2013, 10:20 PM
I think we've found some new L21** folks, a Davis family. This group below has a pretty strong STR signature with L21** Maddox.

I'm calling it variety X13-131411 with these off-modals: 385=13,14 426=11 439<=11 458>=17 576<-17 557<-17 (464=14,14,15,17)

f25304 Maddox R1b-P312>L21** L21+ DF13- DF63- L144-
f226438 Maddox zzL21suspect
f117433 Davis zzL21suspect
f178565 Davis zzL21suspect
f36001 Davis zzL21suspect
f15580 Davis zzL21suspect
fN82291 Davis zzL21suspect
f52253 Davis zzL21suspect
f47238 Davis zzL21suspect

They have some differences too, but with GD's in the 8-9 range at 67 these guys look like good suspects

RobertCasey
07-03-2013, 04:30 PM
We really need one L21+, DF13- and DF63- submission to test via the Full Genomes test. We currently have three DF13** testers but need a L21** test in order to sort out pre-DF13 SNPs from post-DF13 SNPs. L21** is probably a much smaller group than DF13** but we do not want to DF13 testers to be testing DF13 novel SNPs if they are really pre-DF13 in origin. There is a P312** submission in the testing queue as well but this is not a very good substitute for a L21** tester. Having a P312** tester will help sort out novel SNPs for any L21** tester and we have three DF13** testers as well. Here are the L21 submissions in the queue for the Full Genomes test:

DF13* 186947 Edgecombe
DF13* N55408 Smith
DF13* 148326 Jost
DF21/L658 28714 Cain
DF21/L627 20437 Reynolds
DF21/S190 19604 Williamson
DF21* N3362 Maher
DF49/DF23- 129036 Harrison
DF49/DF23- 117117 Holladay
DF49/M222 8999 Wilson
DF49/M222 (2nd) Unk Unk
DF49/M222 8999 Wilson
DF49/Z2961* 159039 Trainor
Z253/L226 77349 Casey
Z253/Z2534* 233265 Le Gall
DF41 240201 Walker
DF41 (3rd) 176148 Duffy
DF41 (2nd) Unk Unk
Z251 139697 Munn
Z251/L583 193834 Yurzditsky
L513* 228772 Reid
L1335/L1065 107327 Iles
L1335/L1065 258447 Taylor

MJost
07-03-2013, 04:48 PM
Also add to the L21 ordered list
Self reported in the L21 Yahoo forum, Ray Murta 205635 Z253+ Z2534-, L1308-, F4036-. Mike's variety 253-1716-11 Leinster Ireland.

MJost

bmattox
07-17-2013, 05:12 PM
Hello, Maddox here kit 25304. Is the genome test something that would be helpful and what would be gleaned from the results? Thanks.

bmattox
07-17-2013, 05:25 PM
Yikes, I saw the price. Are there any grants to help defray the cost? Thanks.

Mikewww
08-19-2013, 03:42 PM
Hello, Maddox here kit 25304. Is the genome test something that would be helpful and what would be gleaned from the results? Thanks.

I finally got something useful accomplished re: L21*. I was able to get the Davis project admin to forward to the below a request to test for both L21 and DF13. (EDIT: New news: and 3 of these guys responded)

47238 Theodorus Davis b1775 VA
52253 Francis Davis, b.c.1765,SC
178565 Abel Davis b 1799 SC d. 1866 MS
N82291 Philip Davis, 1816- 1888
36001 Abner Hanford Davis b c 1852 Jackson Co MS. In TX
117433 Abner Hanford Davis 1854 Jackson CO. MS
15580 Daniel Davis 1858 Ind < Daniel Davis 1827 Ind

Hopefully, one will take up the tests. I think they are a potentially important group with a possible deep ancestral connection with Maddox, who is L21*.

I have 7 Davis's and 2 Maddox's assigned to variety X13-131411. They all have 385=13,14 426=11 439<=11 458>=17 576<-17 557<-17 (464=14,14,15,17), which is a pretty strong STR signature so I think odds are good they are in the same subclade.

However, the Maddox's also have 389b=17 520=21 572=10 while the Davis' have instead 390=23 392=14. It is not a given they are of the same subclade and this could be outstanding example of convergence. If the Davis folks end up L21*, it would be nice to know of any suspected Old World origins they have. We know Davis is a common Welsh name, but they don't have any MDKA's listed across the pond.

Bmattox, as far as the costs of the SNP tests, I don't know of any grants or anything like that. There are occasions where people pool their money though.

k.o.gran
08-22-2013, 11:54 AM
Has anyone done any analysis on testing of phylogenetically equivalent SNPs around L21? I know some of the L21* persons have tested a lot of these. The SNPs are:
L459 (L21)
Z245 (L21)
Z260 (L21)
Z290 (L21)
Z2542 (DF13)

-Kai

MJost
08-22-2013, 01:33 PM
Morley's EXPERIMENTAL COMPUTER-GENERATED Y-CHROMOSOMAL PHYLOGENY
shows:

R1b1a2a1a2c1–2
Z260 might be a DF13 subclade

R1b1a2a1a 53 L11/PF6539/S1276 [876/876],
(Cannot resolve: CTS65195 [5/876], CTS71417 [6/876],
YSC0000239741 [3/876], Z225/S22537 [9/876], Z229/S359997 [9/876], Z290 [362/876])

R1b1a2a1a2c1k1 L1065/CTS1172214 [3/27]
---R1b1a2a1a2c1k1–2 Z2542/CTS8221523 [1/1]

http://ytree.morleydna.com/ExperimentalGenoPhylogeny20130808.pdf

MJost

k.o.gran
08-22-2013, 02:15 PM
Interesting, thanks for sharing. I was not aware of that report. I see that it gets some weird results with only Geno 2.0 as a source. I am Z260+, DF13-, DF63+, so Z260 is not a DF13 subclade.

-Kai

cmorley
08-22-2013, 07:32 PM
Interesting, thanks for sharing. I was not aware of that report. I see that it gets some weird results with only Geno 2.0 as a source. I am Z260+, DF13-, DF63+, so Z260 is not a DF13 subclade.

-Kai

Agreed that Z260 is not a DF13 subclade. My latest phylogeny (a working version, not yet released) also picks up Z260 under DF63. Supporting the conclusion that Z260 is ancestral to DF13 and DF63.

Mikewww
08-22-2013, 11:54 PM
Agreed that Z260 is not a DF13 subclade. My latest phylogeny (a working version, not yet released) also picks up Z260 under DF63. Supporting the conclusion that Z260 is ancestral to DF13 and DF63.
Thanks for your work on this stuff, Chris. It is very helpful. I try to follow your work, David Reynold's comparison that include WTY and the latest project results and graphically display L21 the best as I understand it. I've had Z260 in a cloud behind L21, representing that it is approximately equivalent, best we know to day.
http://tinyurl.com/R1b-L21-Tree

Let me know if you see errors.

DRMoore
09-09-2013, 08:10 AM
Has anyone done any analysis on testing of phylogenetically equivalent SNPs around L21? I know some of the L21* persons have tested a lot of these. The SNPs are:
L459 (L21)
Z245 (L21)
Z260 (L21)
Z290 (L21)
Z2542 (DF13)

-Kai


Wildes, kit 290662, is L21+, L459+, Z245+, Z260+, DF13-, DF63-, Z2542- with Z290 still pending several weeks after the other SNPs came back.

All L21** kits that have been tested are Z290+ so expect Wildes will be also be Z290+ also. However as noted earlier, Wildes, 290662, is a large GD (e.g. 20 to 32/67) from all the others in the cluster except for N49494, Hollister (adopted Wildes) who is his kinsman.

David R Moore

cmorley
09-09-2013, 07:25 PM
Thanks for your work on this stuff, Chris. It is very helpful. I try to follow your work, David Reynold's comparison that include WTY and the latest project results and graphically display L21 the best as I understand it. I've had Z260 in a cloud behind L21, representing that it is approximately equivalent, best we know to day.
http://tinyurl.com/R1b-L21-Tree

Let me know if you see errors.

Mikewww,

Thank you for the feedback. I recently released a new version (http://ytree.morleydna.com/experimental-phylogeny). This version furthers the fusion of Geno and non-Geno data which was started in the previous version. I reckon that, by extension, my algorithm will now be able to incorporate (with minimal adjustments) WTY calls and calls extracted from full or partial genomes.

R1b-L21 now has its own section in the report. I think this will make the individual branches easier to monitor.

I've also found your diagrams very helpful. I don't use them as inputs -- just the ISOGG tree (which is of course influenced by your research). Rather, I've been using your diagram to spot-check that my algorithm (recently adjusted) is classifying non-Geno SNPs properly. Consistent with your findings, my algorithm now places Z260 at the L21 level, with "cannot resolve" status because there are only six Z260+ results and zero Z260- results in my collection. I have also adjusted how my algorithm reports which kits need further testing.

DRMoore
09-09-2013, 11:37 PM
Chris Morley or any one else,

A kit I control, Wildes, 290662, which just came back L21+, L459+, Z245+, Z260+, DF13-, DF63-, Z2542-, with results for Z290 still to come, placing it in the small cluster of L21**.
Looking at line 2322 in your tree, would you recommend testing for any of these SNPs: L346, L356, L564, or F3901? Or is a full Y genome test the most reasonable place to go from here? Any suggestions are appreciated.

David R Moore, 122847 (L1402+)

k.o.gran
09-10-2013, 03:47 PM
Chris Morley or any one else,

A kit I control, Wildes, 290662, which just came back L21+, L459+, Z245+, Z260+, DF13-, DF63-, Z2542-, with results for Z290 still to come, placing it in the small cluster of L21**.
Looking at line 2322 in your tree, would you recommend testing for any of these SNPs: L346, L356, L564, or F3901? Or is a full Y genome test the most reasonable place to go from here? Any suggestions are appreciated.

David R Moore, 122847 (L1402+)

Hi David,

L564 is under DF13 and F3901 is under DF63, so those are not relevant. I can't find L346 or L356 on ytree, so I don't know about them.

-Kai

RobertCasey
09-10-2013, 06:00 PM
L346 and L356 were declared by David Reynolds as being "highly recurrent or in unstable areas." Once David makes this kind of analysis available, Mike W., myself and many others leave these unstable YSNPs off of our summaries. Unfortunately, it does includes some major YSNPs such as L69 (which is known to have at least two different mutations under L21). See David's web site for more details for L346 and L356 (and many other unstable YSNPs):

http://daver.info/geno/results/R-L21.pdf

cmorley
09-10-2013, 09:20 PM
I'm not familiar with this section of the Y-tree, so I will defer to the R1b-L21 experts. (It's a bit like asking a Google Maps engineer for directions: the engineer built the system, but doesn't have local knowledge of all the areas mapped.)

In general, SNPs marked "cannot resolve" in my phylogeny are SNPs which my algorithm cannot conclusively place, due to conflicting or incomplete information. The local experts may have additional information, or be more familiar with these SNPs (and their corresponding STR signatures). For example, in reference to Robert's post on the R-L21 Yahoo group, my algorithm had no way of knowing that the son of the L564 gentleman had tested DF13+.

DRMoore
09-11-2013, 08:38 PM
Thanks every one.

Looks like those in this L21** haplogroup are stuck for now in a cluster that is so old it does not tell us much, but I guess it is good that it is a small group.

David M

bmattox
10-25-2013, 02:54 PM
Does anyone know if one of the Davis DF13-, DF63- family submitted for the full genome test. Thanks. Bob.

rms2
01-03-2014, 12:51 AM
There is an interesting new L21+ DF13- result today: Bigazzi, kit 267719, whose y-dna mdka was born in Certignano, Italy (http://goo.gl/maps/c6ZED). He has no matches at 67 or 37 markers.

Of course, Bigazzi has not yet been tested for DF63 (he has it on order, though).

Yggdrasil
01-31-2014, 02:00 PM
So my Geno 2.0 results finally came in and disappointingly it looks like my kit is negative for everything below L21. At Ysearch GD is 21 to the L21 modal and and 23 to the DF13 modal. Still, I have already ordered DF13 at FTDNA. How do I figure out if I have any other interesting positive SNPs in the Geno 2.0 results?

MikeWhalen
01-31-2014, 04:31 PM
I had the same question Ygg...you might have already done this, but this is what I ended up doing...

I ended up looking for all the SNP's under my last known terminal SNP (L513)-I got that from MikeWWW wonderful L21 tree

I then looked up and double checked what my results were using (from downloading the raw data from FTdna after having transfered the NG Geno 2 results there) the ISOGG list of mutations-just going by memory, I think the Geno 2 test had 8 of the 11 SNP's that are underneath L513
It turns out it was good that I did, my Geno 2 results contradict previous testing results from FTdna so I sent them an email and they said they will double check both tests

the bottom line is this exercise spotted an error in something, either my a la cart snp test from a few years ago, or my new geno 2 tests-so now I wait to see if I have a new terminal SNP (I suspect not, I think the Geno 2 test is in error, but...)

hope this helps

Mike



So my Geno 2.0 results finally came in and disappointingly it looks like my kit is negative for everything below L21. At Ysearch GD is 21 to the L21 modal and and 23 to the DF13 modal. Still, I have already ordered DF13 at FTDNA. How do I figure out if I have any other interesting positive SNPs in the Geno 2.0 results?

MJost
01-31-2014, 04:38 PM
I had the same question Ygg...you might have already done this, but this is what I ended up doing...

I ended up looking for all the SNP's under my last known terminal SNP (L513)-I got that from MikeWWW wonderful L21 tree

I then looked up and double checked what my results were using (from downloading the raw data from FTdna after having transfered the NG Geno 2 results there) the ISOGG list of mutations-just going by memory, I think the Geno 2 test had 8 of the 11 SNP's that are underneath L513
It turns out it was good that I did, my Geno 2 results contradict previous testing results from FTdna so I sent them an email and they said they will double check both tests

the bottom line is this exercise spotted an error in something, either my a la cart snp test from a few years ago, or my new geno 2 tests-so now I wait to see if I have a new terminal SNP (I suspect not, I think the Geno 2 test is in error, but...)

hope this helps

Mike
Hey Mike,

What SNP are you checking?

MJost

alan
01-31-2014, 04:41 PM
Interesting that although L21 has very little presence in Italy, the same sort of area does keep coming up.


There is an interesting new L21+ DF13- result today: Bigazzi, kit 267719, whose y-dna mdka was born in Certignano, Italy (http://goo.gl/maps/c6ZED). He has no matches at 67 or 37 markers.

Of course, Bigazzi has not yet been tested for DF63 (he has it on order, though).

Yggdrasil
01-31-2014, 06:26 PM
I had the same question Ygg...you might have already done this, but this is what I ended up doing...

I ended up looking for all the SNP's under my last known terminal SNP (L513)-I got that from MikeWWW wonderful L21 tree

I then looked up and double checked what my results were using (from downloading the raw data from FTdna after having transfered the NG Geno 2 results there) the ISOGG list of mutations-just going by memory, I think the Geno 2 test had 8 of the 11 SNP's that are underneath L513
It turns out it was good that I did, my Geno 2 results contradict previous testing results from FTdna so I sent them an email and they said they will double check both tests

the bottom line is this exercise spotted an error in something, either my a la cart snp test from a few years ago, or my new geno 2 tests-so now I wait to see if I have a new terminal SNP (I suspect not, I think the Geno 2 test is in error, but...)

hope this helps

Mike

Thanks Mike! I have tried something like that, but I will certainly go through the results more thoroughly now.

Anyway Geno 2.0 wasn´t an absolute disappointment as we did get assigned to a subclade below P312. And ofcourse all the negatives helps rule out some expensive SNP-testing mistakes. I guess a GD of 21 to the L21 means there has to be a subclade somewhere for me in the future.

MikeWhalen
01-31-2014, 06:28 PM
Hi Mark
the a la cart FTdna test from a few years ago has me as L705.2 -
but the Geno 2 test has me as L705.2 and L706.2 +
(assuming a 'TT" and 'AA' respectively Geno 2 gives me are derived as per the ISOGG mutation chart)

Mike


Hey Mike,

What SNP are you checking?

MJost

MJost
01-31-2014, 07:18 PM
Hi Mark
the a la cart FTdna test from a few years ago has me as L705.2 -
but the Geno 2 test has me as L705.2 and L706.2 +
(assuming a 'TT" and 'AA' respectively Geno 2 gives me are derived as per the ISOGG mutation chart)

Mike
I hadn't really looked at this before, but the position on the Y for L705/L706 would be problematic in verification process. Which I could see the Geno2 Chip getting a hit but from some other position on the Y or X. Same thing is occurring on these chips and are having to be removed. I sure FtDNA has it right with the Single SNP testing earlier. One of my novel FGC SNPS that I was positive for, failed the Sanger Sequencing, but also showed up on the Chromo2 chip as positive for 12 guys. Three are testing for my other 'Clean' novel SNP and two so far are positive for it. These odd positives are being thrown off these chips but still be a good SNP for clusters of men.

MJost

Mikewww
01-31-2014, 07:30 PM
Hi Mark
the a la cart FTdna test from a few years ago has me as L705.2 -
but the Geno 2 test has me as L705.2 and L706.2 +
(assuming a 'TT" and 'AA' respectively Geno 2 gives me are derived as per the ISOGG mutation chart)

Mike

Mike, I don't remember the details, but David Reynolds and Thomas Krahn discussed this a year or two ago. L705 and L706 were showing up as positive on every Geno 2 test. There were some technical issues but, unfortunately for me, they were blacklisted. I was hoping Chromo 2 would cover them but it doesn't seem to.

Mike, can you send me your Geno 2 raw results file. I'd like to upload it into the Geno 2 folder on the yahoo group for good of the community and then get, upload and compare with L513+ Watkins, who I think is L706.2+ L705.2+.

MikeWhalen
01-31-2014, 08:03 PM
Sure Mike, I will be happy to send you my raw results...do you have an email or do you want me to sent it to you via message here?

Thats interesting about the Reynolds/Krahn discussion, I had picked up tidbits over time there might be some problem with L705 & L706 but yours and Marks info helps....I did suspect the a la cart result was going to be the correct one and FTdna has told me they are checking both tests and will get back to me

Mike one W


Mike, I don't remember the details, but David Reynolds and Thomas Krahn discussed this a year or two ago. L705 and L706 were showing up as positive on every Geno 2 test. There were some technical issues but, unfortunately for me, they were blacklisted. I was hoping Chromo 2 would cover them but it doesn't seem to.

Mike, can you send me your Geno 2 raw results file. I'd like to upload it into the Geno 2 folder on the yahoo group for good of the community and then get, upload and compare with L513+ Watkins, who I think is L706.2+ L705.2+.

rms2
02-01-2014, 12:44 AM
Interesting that although L21 has very little presence in Italy, the same sort of area does keep coming up.

I wish we knew more about the 24% L21+ (n=51) in Val Gardena, Italy, in the South Tyrol from this study (http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0081704#pone.0 081704.s012) (Ladin speakers).

Then there's argiedude, whose y-dna mdka came from Como in Lombardy. He is DF13+ but has the oddest haplotype ever.

As of a few minutes ago, there are only 4,224 men in FTDNA's Ancestral Origins database who identify Italy as their y-dna ancestral homeland. Compare that to 30,371 who name England as y-dna ancestral homeland.

rms2
02-28-2014, 06:47 PM
There is an interesting new L21+ DF13- result today: Bigazzi, kit 267719, whose y-dna mdka was born in Certignano, Italy (http://goo.gl/maps/c6ZED). He has no matches at 67 or 37 markers.

Of course, Bigazzi has not yet been tested for DF63 (he has it on order, though).

At long last, Bigazzi has his DF63 result, and he is - drumroll - DF63-.

So, yes, he is DF13- and DF63-. B)

Hmmm . . .

Mikewww
02-28-2014, 11:31 PM
At long last, Bigazzi has his DF63 result, and he is - drumroll - DF63-.

So, yes, he is DF13- and DF63-. B)

Hmmm . . .

Cool, remember the Italian study that had a surprisingly high frequency for L21 in Bologna? I wonder if they are mostly DF13- DF63-.

Bigazzi is a good example of the problem we have with French L21. They are hard to cluster with anybody. I can find GD's of 13 to 16 at 67 for Bigazzi but those are all known DF13+ types so that is STR convergence.

rms2
03-01-2014, 02:26 PM
Cool, remember the Italian study that had a surprisingly high frequency for L21 in Bologna? I wonder if they are mostly DF13- DF63-.

Bigazzi is a good example of the problem we have with French L21. They are hard to cluster with anybody. I can find GD's of 13 to 16 at 67 for Bigazzi but those are all known DF13+ types so that is STR convergence.

I was wondering the same thing about those other Italian L21s. It sure would be nice to know.

I think there is a lot we are missing because of the relative dearth of continental data.

Rathna
03-01-2014, 02:44 PM
At long last, Bigazzi has his DF63 result, and he is - drumroll - DF63-.

So, yes, he is DF13- and DF63-. B)

Hmmm . . .

Do you feel always well, Rich?

P.S. Probably I studied his haplotype in the past, but I don't remember when: nothing to be signaled, exept DYS436=10 as to the usual 12, and this is one of the slowest mutating markers. But, as always, SNPs are worth more than STRs.

This I wrote:
What to say? This is the haplotype:
267719 Lorenzo Bigazzi, d 1706 Italy R1b1a2a1a1b4
13 24 15 11 11-14 12 12 12 13 13 30 15 9-9 11 11 25 15 19 28 15-15-17-17 10 11 19-23 15 14 19 17 36-39 12 12 11 9 15-16 8 10 10 8 10 10 12 23-23 16 10 10 12 16 8 12 22 20 13 12 11 13 11 11 12 12
not particularly interesting, if not for DYS436=10. This is one of the slowest mutating markers and its modal is 12. How many people are tested for R-L21? Many thousands I think. I have counted, beyond 12, 10 (2), 11 (2), 13 (12), 14 (2). It seems that the mutation upstream is easier. Very low downstream (11) and we should think that 10 and 14 are due to a multistep mutation so rare like the downstream one. The only other sample with 10 is this:
199714 John Shaw, 1740 - 1810 Scotland R1b1a2a1a1b4
13 24 14 11 12-15 12 12 11 13 14 29 17 9-10 12 11 25 15 19 31 15-16-16-16 11 11 20-23 17 15 16 18 37-38 12 12 11 9 15-16 8 10 10 8 10 10 12 22-23 16 10 10 12 15 8 11 22 20 12 12 11 13 11 11 12 12
probably not linked. The hamlet of origin (Certignano) is very little (a few houses), in a place with Etruscan and Roman place names, but also with Medieval new towns. The surname? Typical Tuscan, and pretty diffused in Tuscany. Castelfranco di Sopra, the Medieval town nearest to Certignano, is one of the place where the surname is more diffused:
[...]
Probably the Bigazzis belong to different descents. If they were all Bretons or Normans, there would be many (too many) in Tuscany to be believable. Of course many could be of Langobard descent, but we should find some close haplotype there for being sure.
Of course to know the final SNPs could be important. The recent Sardinians DF1/L513 and the case of Rutelli, beyond those we knew, like that of Argiedude (and my old Soncina: but who knows if he is actually R-L21), leaves open the door to my old theory that also R-L21 may have come from Italy or at least to be present in Italy with its oldest form from very ancient times.

George Chandler
03-01-2014, 03:40 PM
Cool, remember the Italian study that had a surprisingly high frequency for L21 in Bologna? I wonder if they are mostly DF13- DF63-.

Bigazzi is a good example of the problem we have with French L21. They are hard to cluster with anybody. I can find GD's of 13 to 16 at 67 for Bigazzi but those are all known DF13+ types so that is STR convergence.

I recall seeing an article (I'll try and see if I can find the link) and it involved 3 small communities north of Bologna which were more isolated and "supposedly" from a tribe of Gauls. The communities were "I think" from around Asiago or Gallio - I always thought it would be interesting for Nat Geno to go in and sample there to prove or disprove the lore with DNA.

George

George Chandler
03-01-2014, 03:45 PM
Here is a link http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cimbri

George

George Chandler
03-01-2014, 03:49 PM
Not sure how the article related to the Gauls other than the name Cimbri in which the article mentions the origins of the name Cimbri being more Germanic than Celtic in origin. Interesting though none the less.

George

George Chandler
03-01-2014, 03:55 PM
A quote from the article "A German ethnic minority speaking the Cimbrian language have settled in the mountains between Vicenza, Verona and Trento in Italy (also known as Seven Communities) is also called the (Cimbri). For hundreds of years this isolated population consisting now of 4.400 inhabitants, has claimed to be the direct descendant of the Cimbri retreating in this area after the Roman aftermath. However it was more probably settlers from Bavaria in the Middle Ages. Most linguists remains committed to the hypothesis of medieval (11th to 12th century) immigration, to explain the presence of small German-speaking communities in the north of Italy.[17] Some genetic studies seem to prove a Celtic descendence of most inhabitants in the region, but not Germanic in fact,[18] that is reinforced by the Gaulish toponyms such as those ending with the suffix -ago < Celtic -*ako(n) (f.e. Asiago is clearly the same place-name as the numerous Azay, Aisy, Azé, Ezy in France, all from *Asiacum < Gaulish *Asiāko(n)). The Cimbrian origin is a myth that was popularized by the humanists in the 14th century.

On one occasion in 1709, for instance, Frederick IV of Denmark, also paid them a visit and he was greeted as their king. The population, which kept its independence during the Venice Republic, was later severely devastated by World War I. As a result, many Cimbri have left the mountain region and are dispersed around the world, in places such as the Rio Grande do Sul state in Southern Brazil."

I haven't seen who did the genetic studies for that area - anyone know?

George

rms2
03-01-2014, 03:57 PM
Here's the paper Mike and I were talking about earlier, which found L21 at about 24% in Val Gardena in the South Tyrol in Italy:

http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0081704#pone.0 081704.s012

Wish we could get them tested for DF13 at least.

Rathna
03-01-2014, 04:16 PM
All the people tested so far for L21 (xDF13, DF63) seem to belong to 7 haplotypes: 1 (94428, 236395), 2 (290660, N49494, 290662 ), 3 (37201), 4 (26883), 5 (25304), 6 (12733, 8814, 29568, 41108), 7 (267719). These are the series:
1)
8 11 10 8 10 10
11 14 11 11 12 12
2)
8 10 10 8 9 10
11 13 11 11 12 12
3)
8 10 10 8 10 10
11 13 11 11 12 12
4)
no data
5)
8 10 10 8 10 11
11 13 10 11 12 12
6a)
8 10 10 8 11 11
11 13 11 11 12 12
6b)
8 10 10 8 12 11
11 13 11 11 12 12
7)
8 10 10 8 10 10
11 13 11 11 12 12

We can count 10 mutations as to the modal
8 10 10 8 10 10
11 13 11 11 12 12
unchanged in 3 and 7 out of 14 series. I'd say that, if they presuppose L21*, it is not so old, perhaps less than 4000 years.

Rathna
03-01-2014, 04:37 PM
Perhaps it is worth to compare the two haplotypes with no mutation in the series (Berry and Bigazzi). They have many similarities and also probably two rare multistep mutations in DYS392 and DYS436. By counting them for 1, I'd say that they could have a common ancestor in the migrations period of the German peoples: amongst 50 and 60 generations ago:

37201 John Berry d.1502 Almondbury, W.Yorks, England England R1b1a2a1a1b4
13 24 14 11 11-14 12 12 12 13 15 29 16 9-10 11 11 25 15 19 31 15-15-17-17 11 11 19-23 16 14 18 16 37-39 12 12 11 9 15-16 8 10 10 8 10 10 12 23-23 16 10 12 12 15 8 12 22 20 13 12 11 13 11 11 12 12 33 15 9 16 12 27 26 19 11 11 13 12 11 9 12 12 10 11 11 31 12 13 24 13 10 10 21 15 18 14 24 17 12 15 24 12 23 18 10 13 18 9 12 11
267719 Lorenzo Bigazzi, b. 1646 and d. 1706 Italy R1b1a2a1a1b4
13 24 15 11 11-14 12 12 12 13 13 30 15 9-9 11 11 25 15 19 28 15-15-17-17 10 11 19-23 15 14 19 17 36-39 12 12 11 9 15-16 8 10 10 8 10 10 12 23-23 16 10 10 12 16 8 12 22 20 13 12 11 13 11 11 12 12

P.S. Probably this cluster will find soon an its own SNP (or more) beyond DF13 and DF63, and it is very likely that its origin is in Continental Europe.

George Chandler
03-01-2014, 06:10 PM
Here's the paper Mike and I were talking about earlier, which found L21 at about 24% in Val Gardena in the South Tyrol in Italy:

http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0081704#pone.0 081704.s012

Wish we could get them tested for DF13 at least.

Interesting results on ISITA for these studies. The Val Gardena almost look like 1335-1065 maybe, but given there isn't much variation with the STR's the MRCA doesn't look too far back (hard to tell with 13 markers though). The results for all studies and samples taken in the northern alpine region being L21*are as follows:

Adige Valley 1 of 57 sampled
Gardena Valley 12 of 51 sampled
Badia Valley 2 of 44 sampled
Fassa Valley 1 of 44 sampled
Fersina Valley 0 of 25 sampled
Giudicarie Valley 0 of 50 sampled
Lessinia Cimbrians 0 of 24 sampled
Luserna Cimbrians 0 of 25 sampled
Non valley 0 of 47 sampled
Primero Valley 0 of 47 sampled
Sappada 0 of 38 sampled
Sauris 0 of 29 sampled
Sole valley 0 of 65 sampled
Timaru 0 of 24 sampled

What I found really interesting were the number of M269*+ (21 of 25 sampled) for the Luserna Cimbrians.

George

rms2
03-01-2014, 11:13 PM
Hmmm . . .

All those H4=12 values make me wonder about what lab convention they were using. There have been issues with reporting H4 in the past.

Lots of 390=25.

George Chandler
03-01-2014, 11:43 PM
Hmmm . . .

All those H4=12 values make me wonder about what lab convention they were using. There have been issues with reporting H4 in the past.

Lots of 390=25.

I can't access the page right now but the research for Gardena Valley for the 11 didn't test for DYS390 did they? Was the 390=25 from on the other papers or a different site?

If you search Mike's L21 spreadsheet of 111 markers there are quite a few with an H4 value of 12. I did notice that on the ISITA page that many of the STR values did not line up with the actual STR at the top of the page. There are a few M222's etc as well as 1335-1065's among others - can't really say if they would be pos for 1335 as it may be upstream somewhere.

George

George Chandler
03-01-2014, 11:50 PM
I got in..see the 390 results.

rms2
03-02-2014, 12:38 AM
It looks to me like those with 390=25 and 448=20 are the result of a Founder Effect, but there is a weird one with 392=10 in there.

The two with 390=24 don't seem to be part of the cluster, although I am just eyeballing things and not running any comparisons.

JRW
03-05-2014, 02:21 PM
I recall when Rich first posted the recent paper and was very surprised by the L21 hotspot in Val Gardena. Initially, I thought this was (and still might be) the result of the valley's proximity to the Brenner Pass, which historically has been one of the key travel routes crossing the Alps. But after reading George's post on the "Cimbri" community in Italy, I am having second thoughts.

Some of you may recall another L21 hotspot surrounded by mountains: Alpes-de-Haute-Provence in the 2011 Myres study, where 19.4% of the sample was L21. I pulled out my copy of Barry Cunliffe's Oxford Illustrated Prehistory of Europe, copied his map of the Cimbri Teutones migrations, and superimposed Val Gardena, the "Seven Communities" area, and Alpes-de-Haute-Provence (see attached image).

1552

The locations of these communities to Cunliffe's plotted Cimbri and Teutones migration routes, and terminal battle locales, is striking.

The other element that resonated with me is the debate over the language characteristics of the Seven Communities population -- mostly Germanic, but with Celtic elements -- all the more surprising in an Italic region. Recall the Nordwestblock linguistic debate? From the time of Caesar up the present, the language characteristics of pre-historic period continental North Sea coastal populations from west of the Rhine (present-day Belgium) to Jutland has been an open question with no consensus. This article on the Cimbri and Teutonnes, http://www.historyfiles.co.uk/KingListsEurope/BarbarianTeutones.htm references the debate over the Germanic vs Celtic character of the tribes:

"A good deal of controversy exists as to whether particular tribes were German or Gaulish (Celtic). Both the Cimbri and Teutones appear to have borne some elements of Celtic society, although they were primarily Germanic. This trait seems to have been common with all Germanic peoples in the Cimbric Peninsula, with them straddling both definitions. The subject is discussed in greater detail in the accompanying feature. The Cimbri tribal name is wholly Celtic, and means 'compatriots' or 'companions' in the sense that they were people with a common background and heritage. So was the tribe itself really Celtic, or perhaps Germanic with a Celtic elite ruling it? Its ruler, Boiorix, had a name which meant literally 'king of the Boii'. The Boii were a tribe of Celts that occupied a wide swathe of central Europe at this time, which raises the possibility that the driving force behind this migration was the Boii themselves, which is backed up by Julius Caesar's own thoughts on the matter."

Considering the similarities of these communities with the known historic migration paths/terminal battles of the Cimbri and Teutones, and the similarity of the linquistic debate of the current Seven Communities population with the Nordwestblock debate, you have to wonder if the L21 Val Gardena hotspot actually could be a legacy of Cimbri and Teutones.

rms2
04-06-2014, 08:10 PM
We have a new member of the R L21 and Subclades Project with the Italian surname Martini, although he himself is German and lists a German mdka with that surname (kit 276580). He does belong to the Italy DNA Project, though. Anyway, I mention him in this thread because he has no matches at 111, 67, or 37 markers, although I do not know that he is L21*, just that he is L21+.

It does seem that Italy is home to a few unique L21 haplotypes, though.

rms2
04-19-2014, 11:03 AM
There's a new L21+ DF13- DF63- this morning: Davis, kit N82291. That's a Welsh surname, but his listed mdka was born in Indiana in the USA.

gaijin
08-08-2014, 12:20 PM
Bigazzi from proto-germanic bi (close to, around, with, english by) + proto-germanic gaizaz (spear), Spear-Bearer - Heer Mann - Arimanno

R. Walker
11-23-2014, 07:41 PM
Not sure if this is the right place to ask, but here goes.
I manage the kit for X Uren, #N69669. He is classified L21. He has tested to 67, and taken deep clade, and Geno 2.0, and is positive for P37. He has no matches at 67 or 37, at 25 he has one exact match (who has done 111), and the rest (6) GD 2 most of whom have only done 37.
Could someone take a look and give me an idea where he fits in? There won't be any Big Y or Chromo2, or whatever, but we could order individuals if indicated. I don't see DF13 anywhere on his list, or DF63, should we order one of those?

His paternal line is listed as England, but Uren is a name very common in Cornwall.
Thanks much,
R. Walker

MJost
11-23-2014, 07:52 PM
I notice he has test most of the DF13 subclades and is all negative so far. With all the newer subclades he should consider the SuperClade panel at YSeq.

MJost

R. Walker
11-24-2014, 03:53 AM
Thanks Mike. I'll check that out.
R. Walker

bmattox
02-08-2015, 02:14 AM
Hello, Maddox here, kit 25304. L21, -df13, -df63. There is a new test available testing for r- f4006. I can not find anything at all about it. Can anyone help me with this. Thanks!

MJost
02-08-2015, 04:43 AM
Hello, Maddox here, kit 25304. L21, -df13, -df63. There is a new test available testing for r- f4006. I can not find anything at all about it. Can anyone help me with this. Thanks!
You might test BigY since there are two other guys have completed theirs.

MJost

JohnStorch
08-29-2015, 04:30 PM
I'm a newbie here in terms of this website and genetic genealogy trying to navigate through the volumes of information here and elsewhere. Some guidance would be appreciated.

I did the National Geographic test and the yDNA came back as R-L21. I uploaded it to FamilyTreeDNA and took a closer look at the R HaploTree. I see where I tested positive for L21, but then right next to it is the word "more". Clicking on that, I see Z290 also listed as positive. So, first of all, does that mean Z290 is the equivalent to L21? Or is Z290 a minor subclade of L21? I guess what I'm trying to figure out is... Is it worth it to also take DF13 and DF63 SNP tests? I see I am already negative for a number of subclades under DF13 and also negative for the only one I see under DF63. Would the M343 Backbone SNP Pack be a little overkill?

And then, just for curiosity: When testing of additional SNPs is conducted, is that done from the raw data already uploaded? Or is a new swab/spit test required?

Additional information: FamilyTreeDNA Kit# N138095. Paternal Line R-L21. My father, grandfather and great grandfather in my male lineage were all born in the US, but my great great grandfather, and presumably his ancestors, came from Dipperz, a municipality in the district of Fulda in Hesse, Germany.

Mac von Frankfurt
08-29-2015, 04:46 PM
Welcome. My Y-DNA is also from Germany and I am waiting to see where I land below DF13. So far I am negative for 18 of 19 SNPs below DF13. There are folks here familiar with the new M343 Backbone SNP Pack that I am sure will chime in.

JRW
08-29-2015, 05:47 PM
L21 has been around the area of what is present day Germany for a very long time. In fact, there is some rather convincing evidence to suggest that present day Germany was the area of early expansion of the subclades under L21. Accordingly, in addition to the well-recognized L21 subclades frequently observed, L21 men of German ancestry may belong to one of the newly identified subclades or even to one that has yet to be identified. The YSEQ L21 panel does not test for FGC5494, which several L21 men of German ancestry have who are DF13+. Mac von Frankfurt, you may want to try your luck on that SNP if the outstanding L21 panel SNP result comes back negative.

Mac von Frankfurt
08-29-2015, 05:53 PM
The YSEQ L21 panel does not test for FGC5494, which several L21 men of German ancestry have who are DF13+. Mac von Frankfurt, you may want to try your luck on that SNP if the outstanding L21 panel SNP result comes back negative.

The YSEQ L21 panel does include FGC5496, for which I am negative. I suppose I could slip between the two. I really don't want to get into a long dragged-out search and I am willing to plunk down the dollars for NGS. I just have to decide which company.

Mikewww
08-29-2015, 07:42 PM
I'm a newbie here in terms of this website and genetic genealogy trying to navigate through the volumes of information here and elsewhere. Some guidance would be appreciated.

I did the National Geographic test and the yDNA came back as R-L21. I uploaded it to FamilyTreeDNA and took a closer look at the R HaploTree. I see where I tested positive for L21, but then right next to it is the word "more". Clicking on that, I see Z290 also listed as positive. So, first of all, does that mean Z290 is the equivalent to L21? Or is Z290 a minor subclade of L21? I guess what I'm trying to figure out is... Is it worth it to also take DF13 and DF63 SNP tests? I see I am already negative for a number of subclades under DF13 and also negative for the only one I see under DF63. Would the M343 Backbone SNP Pack be a little overkill?

And then, just for curiosity: When testing of additional SNPs is conducted, is that done from the raw data already uploaded? Or is a new swab/spit test required?

Additional information: FamilyTreeDNA Kit# N138095. Paternal Line R-L21. My father, grandfather and great grandfather in my male lineage were all born in the US, but my great great grandfather, and presumably his ancestors, came from Dipperz, a municipality in the district of Fulda in Hesse, Germany.
Welcome to L21 land, John!

Z290 is equivalent to L21. You for qualify for our subclade. Please join the R-L21 project. RMS is the admin and I am a co-admin.
https://www.familytreedna.com/groups/r-l21/about

We have many British Isles based ancestors among us so it is always good to see a continental European too.

Under DF13 are many subclades so testing top down, one by one, does not necessarily make sense. The best course of action is Big Y or any Next Generation Sequencing test as that can discover your line of SNPs down into the modern timeframe.

Big Y is about $500 (depending on sales) and the others are a little more expensive so if that doesn't make sense, you might consider the L21 SNP pack that should be available at any time. If you haven't, I highly recommend going to 67 STRs or even 111. If you go to 67 STRs and find good matches that have already tested SNPs more deeply than you have then you might be able to skip a pack type test and go right to the more youthful SNPs in your subclade (downstream of L21 that you haven't identified yet.)

rms2
08-29-2015, 07:48 PM
I'm a newbie here in terms of this website and genetic genealogy trying to navigate through the volumes of information here and elsewhere. Some guidance would be appreciated.

I did the National Geographic test and the yDNA came back as R-L21. I uploaded it to FamilyTreeDNA and took a closer look at the R HaploTree. I see where I tested positive for L21, but then right next to it is the word "more". Clicking on that, I see Z290 also listed as positive. So, first of all, does that mean Z290 is the equivalent to L21? Or is Z290 a minor subclade of L21? I guess what I'm trying to figure out is... Is it worth it to also take DF13 and DF63 SNP tests? I see I am already negative for a number of subclades under DF13 and also negative for the only one I see under DF63. Would the M343 Backbone SNP Pack be a little overkill?

And then, just for curiosity: When testing of additional SNPs is conducted, is that done from the raw data already uploaded? Or is a new swab/spit test required?

Additional information: FamilyTreeDNA Kit# N138095. Paternal Line R-L21. My father, grandfather and great grandfather in my male lineage were all born in the US, but my great great grandfather, and presumably his ancestors, came from Dipperz, a municipality in the district of Fulda in Hesse, Germany.

Please tell me you are related to Larry Storch (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larry_Storch) because I would love to think he is L21+! F Troop (https://youtu.be/zVwFADi4Y38) is one of my favorite tv shows of all time.

JRW
08-29-2015, 11:11 PM
The YSEQ L21 panel does include FGC5496, for which I am negative. I suppose I could slip between the two. I really don't want to get into a long dragged-out search and I am willing to plunk down the dollars for NGS. I just have to decide which company.
There are several lines of ancestral German L21 men who are FGC5494+ and FGC5496-, so it does occur. However, an NGS test definitely would be the best approach.

Mikewww
08-30-2015, 02:06 AM
The YSEQ L21 panel does include FGC5496, for which I am negative. I suppose I could slip between the two. I really don't want to get into a long dragged-out search and I am willing to plunk down the dollars for NGS. I just have to decide which company.
By all means do the do a Next Generation Sequencing test. Whatever way you go please share your results and make sure we get them on the Big Tree. If you go with FGC Elite, please get your terminal public SNP also tested at FTDNA so it shows up in the matching database there.

MacUalraig
08-30-2015, 03:59 PM
Welcome to L21 land, John!

Z290 is equivalent to L21. You for qualify for our subclade. Please join the R-L21 project. RMS is the admin and I am a co-admin.
https://www.familytreedna.com/groups/r-l21/about

We have many British Isles based ancestors among us so it is always good to see a continental European too.

Under DF13 are many subclades so testing top down, one by one, does not necessarily make sense. The best course of action is Big Y or any Next Generation Sequencing test as that can discover your line of SNPs down into the modern timeframe.

Big Y is about $500 (depending on sales) and the others are a little more expensive so if that doesn't make sense, you might consider the L21 SNP pack that should be available at any time. If you haven't, I highly recommend going to 67 STRs or even 111. If you go to 67 STRs and find good matches that have already tested SNPs more deeply than you have then you might be able to skip a pack type test and go right to the more youthful SNPs in your subclade (downstream of L21 that you haven't identified yet.)

The options/companies not mentioned above are, for sequencing, Full Genomes Inc Y Elite 2.0 at www.fullgenomes.com and various SNP panels at shop.yseq.net - they already have an L21 orientation pack
http://www.yseq.net/product_info.php?products_id=4321

data can be shared all over the internet here, Facebook, spreadsheets etc without feeling the need to have it recorded in any proprietary databases IMHO.

Mikewww
08-30-2015, 07:38 PM
I still recommend Next Generation Sequencing (i.e. Big Y / FGC Elite) since it is the only way to discover your own lineage of SNPs.

I will explain better why 67 STRs or 111 STRs are a good investment as that relates to the pack/panel offerings of fixed SNPs.

Fixed SNP packs/panels compete directly with NGS tests. They are much cheaper but they can't discover your own SNPs. They test you on "known" SNPs only, in other words other peoples' already discovered SNPs.

However, if you decide that NGS testing is too expensive, the fixed SNP packs/panels become the primary consideration. You will probably have to take take two such packs/panels to get to your terminal (most youthful) public haplogroup. If you have 67 or 111 STRs, you have a good chance of fitting into one of the common STR modal haplotype groups. For instance, there is a Irish IV haplotype. If you fit that you can skip the L21 "orientation" panel that has been mentioned and go right to the Z253 panel(YSEQ) or Z253 pack(FTDNA). FTDNA's version of an L21 top-layer SNP Pack has yet to come out, but it will have a lot of SNPs. It's a moot point anyway, if your STRs in one of the big haplogroup modals, which a lot of people do.

In any case, NGS testing, packs or panels or whatever, having at least 67 STRs registered in the large matching database is good. That way people can find you and you can find people you didn't know about. Here is a description of the matching database and why it is important.
https://www.familytreedna.com/why-ftdna.aspx

Mac von Frankfurt
08-30-2015, 08:27 PM
Here is how I look at it. While Y Elite 2.0 may maximize the number of private SNPs (and potentially provide needed STRs), those SNPs will not provide much information until I find other folks who have them as well. I can join a Yahoo Group, be part of the Big Tree, upload info to Ysearch, and pay for a Yfull evaluation and inclusion on the Yfull tree. I can talk-up my little trig on various forums. But if I completely ignore FtDNA I am ignoring a huge number of people. A lot of those folks may not be very active anymore but it is still a large number of people.

Using the Lewis and Clark analogy. I can hop a clipper ship for the California gold fields but if I want my family to join me someone has to help the Conestoga wagons across the Mississippi and along the California trail. We may have a transcontinental railroad someday but the golden spike has yet to be driven at promontory point.

MacUalraig
08-31-2015, 09:04 AM
My attempt at running a SNP only surname project has worked pretty well so far. Normally I start at L21 and to date I've only had one person who 'failed' at that level (who I left on the backburner whilst Thomas developed his next level up orientation panel).

I have just finished testing a man from Co. Derry who described himself as native Irish. In his case I took a further slight gamble and did a single SNP test for DF49 first which was positive then ran the DF49 panel which gave him his terminal SNP.

The false postive/false negative rate for this system is zero. The rate for an STR matching system is non-zero. For example I took one of my closest STR matches at the company Mikewww is plugging (based on GD AND OMMs) and tested him for FGC4077. I was sufficiently sure of the result that I paid for it. Guess what, he came back negative.

Mikewww
08-31-2015, 12:52 PM
.. Mikewww is plugging (based on GD AND OMMs) and tested him for FGC4077. I was sufficiently sure of the result that I paid for it. Guess what, he came back negative.
I'm very surprised you follow my STR speculative variety assignments as I've been told in the past that you don't use FTDNA and that you don't believe in STRs. Maybe I'm confusing you ...

You can cherry pick cases but I've always been very, very clear that those STR cluster/variety assignments in the large R1b-L21_Haplotypes spreadsheet are "speculative" and I revise them constantly.

The relevance to this conversation was related to being able to "skip a pack". There is no standard FGC4077 pack or panel but there are both M222 packs/panels from both vendors. The NW Irish Haplotype Modal is quite sufficient, so far, to guide someone to buy one those packs. I was not proposing that we chase SNPs one at a time like you described in your case. Is your case hypothetical or is it real? What's the kit? If you give me the kit # I can go back to my spreadsheet and update the STR signature varieties. You'd be helping with what you've learned.

This is irony as everything seems to go back Star Wars, and the Rebel Alliance seems argue both sides of the fence.

Here is the master of the Alliance and founder of YSEQ on August 25th. Thomas Krahn wrote,
"Most people have already 37 or more STR markers tested. It just takes a few minutes to compare the profile with STR profiles from people who tested the key SNPs already. In more than 95% of the cases you can predict the correct SNP and confirm it with a single SNP test."
https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/R1b-L21-Project/conversations/messages/29705

It must be mental telepathy as Thomas is arguing on my behalf against you, but you can see I actually have a much better balanced and realistic view. I replied in the same thread. Mikewww wrote,
"I am not smart enough to predict SNP testing solely based on STR results in many if not most cases. In fact, I've told FTDNA that with less than 67 STRs they should not predict haplogroup labels of anything more youthful than R-M269 within the scope of R1b. There are exceptions but it is better to be conservative in my opinion. I consider STR based cluster assignments at 37 or less STRs as speculative. I even consider many attempted assignments at 67 STRs as speculative. Some people just don't fit into cluster at all."
https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/R1b-L21-Project/conversations/messages/29707

Please try to show more consistency in logic. You should take your case against STRs up with Thomas.

Either way you look at it, you are not viewing genetic genealogy in full recognition as a "team sport." The fixed SNP packs and panels will constantly change, but everyone gets tested at the same STR locations so the matching database of hundreds of thousands of people all measured at the same STR locations is very helpful for finding people, and people finding you.

Mac von Frankfurt
08-31-2015, 01:16 PM
My attempt at running a SNP only surname project has worked pretty well so far. Normally I start at L21 and to date I've only had one person who 'failed' at that level (who I left on the backburner whilst Thomas developed his next level up orientation panel).

I have just finished testing a man from Co. Derry who described himself as native Irish. In his case I took a further slight gamble and did a single SNP test for DF49 first which was positive then ran the DF49 panel which gave him his terminal SNP.

The false postive/false negative rate for this system is zero. The rate for an STR matching system is non-zero. For example I took one of my closest STR matches at the company Mikewww is plugging (based on GD AND OMMs) and tested him for FGC4077. I was sufficiently sure of the result that I paid for it. Guess what, he came back negative.

That appears to be an effective approach for an M222 surname project. However, if someone from Germany has taken an L21 Panel or similar and is L21* or, as I am likely to be, DF13* or CTS3386 they are going to have to look high and low for folks to come join them on their little twig. I could recruit a dozen L21 with German ancestors and perhaps one might end up on my twig with the rest scattered around DF13 and perhaps one DF63. If I just take Y Elite 2.0 and nothing else I am likely to be sitting on my twig for a long time with just me a Frenchman and a Spaniard hypothesizing on the Celtic homeland for our 4300 year old SNP and watching the part of our branch from the Isles grow and grow.

Mikewww
08-31-2015, 02:08 PM
That appears to be an effective approach for an M222 surname project. However, if someone from Germany has taken an L21 Panel or similar and is L21* or, as I am likely to be, DF13* or CTS3386 they are going to have to look high and low for folks to come join them on their little twig. I could recruit a dozen L21 with German ancestors and perhaps one might end up on my twig with the rest scattered around DF13 and perhaps one DF63. If I just take Y Elite 2.0 and nothing else I am likely to be sitting on my twig for a long time with just me a Frenchman and a Spaniard hypothesizing on the Celtic homeland for our 4300 year old SNP and watching the part of our branch from the Isles grow and grow.
Another problem is that there is no M222 surname project (at FTDNA). There is the big M222 haplogroup project. There are surname projects but they often have every haplogroup under the sun, at least mine does. The Kennedy surname has been brought up. Here is the project:
https://www.familytreedna.com/public/kennedy/default.aspx?section=yresults
Besides NW Irish Modal M222 but you also have 11-13 L193, Irish III L226, DF27, a lot of M269 undifferentiated and even non R1b things like L and J. People need some general testing of some sort to figure out even roughly what haplogroup they are in before they get specific on terminal haplogroup testing.

MacUalraig
09-01-2015, 06:43 AM
That appears to be an effective approach for an M222 surname project. However, if someone from Germany has taken an L21 Panel or similar and is L21* or, as I am likely to be, DF13* or CTS3386 they are going to have to look high and low for folks to come join them on their little twig. I could recruit a dozen L21 with German ancestors and perhaps one might end up on my twig with the rest scattered around DF13 and perhaps one DF63. If I just take Y Elite 2.0 and nothing else I am likely to be sitting on my twig for a long time with just me a Frenchman and a Spaniard hypothesizing on the Celtic homeland for our 4300 year old SNP and watching the part of our branch from the Isles grow and grow.

Well a 'largely L21' surname project rather than just M222 but I take your point.

MacUalraig
09-01-2015, 06:48 AM
Another problem is that there is no M222 surname project (at FTDNA). There is the big M222 haplogroup project. There are surname projects but they often have every haplogroup under the sun, at least mine does. The Kennedy surname has been brought up. Here is the project:
https://www.familytreedna.com/public/kennedy/default.aspx?section=yresults
Besides NW Irish Modal M222 but you also have 11-13 L193, Irish III L226, DF27, a lot of M269 undifferentiated and even non R1b things like L and J. People need some general testing of some sort to figure out even roughly what haplogroup they are in before they get specific on terminal haplogroup testing.

Nice try but there are as you well know two Kennedy DNA projects. One is run by an Ulster Scot guy in Austin Texas United States of America and the other is run by myself residing in Glasgow Scotland. It is to be expected that their hg breakdowns will differ and they do. I also used Chromo2 as an entry point when it came out and before the YSEQ panels were produced and that covered everything I threw at it.

Mikewww
09-01-2015, 11:26 PM
Okay, I missed the other project. I guess it is on Facebook or a private web site. Do you have a continuity plan for its support?

FTDNA's project and individual web applications are improving but still need lots of work. The good news is the work is in progress and it is a self-sustaining enterprise. And it is good that their project system involves massive data sets that are growing.... which is all good for genetic genealogy and finding people.

The point I was trying to make is that there a number of haplogroups represented by the Kennedy's or almost any common surname. STRs are a great way to discern a first step for SNP testing testing since everyone gets tested on the same STRs. This in keeping with what Mr. Krahn has espoused.

Here is a real example of one way their systems can help. The pdf screenshot below is what I look at. It is my 67 STR and 111 STR matches. Every now and then I get an email notification that someone new has appeared. I don't even look at the 37 and 25 STR matching screens other than see if there are good prospects there that I need to ask to upgrade.

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/17907527/FTDNA_Y_Matches_Example.pdf

I've grayed out the contact names/emails so you are only seeing what you can see on project screens.

If you've upgraded to 111 or 67 and you are on my matches screen you can contact me or anyone on the list to ask for help or to inquire. If you pull out up the Y DNA tree and look for these SNPs you can see pretty quickly what is going on. Ever heard of the SNPs ZW02 or ZW04? They are probably both less than 600 years old. ZW02 could be about 300-400 years old.

Probably everyone on both of these match lists is Z16400+ along with equivalents CTS6621+ and a few more. By default/presumption, the Haplotree will tell you everyone will be L513+ DF13+ L21+ P312+ P311+ L51+ L23+ M269+ etc. going back up our ancestry's ancient lineage.

The real SNP testing questions for those on my match lists that haven't done SNP testing is do they do Z17909, ZW04, ZW02 or play it safe and test Z16400 first. None of these are going to be in anyone's L21 or M343/M269 Pack or Panel test. I hope I got lucky and one of these is in Geno 2 Next Gen but I doubt I will be lucky on that. Of course, a Big Y test would preempt any of that decision-making and be smarter.

I want everyone in R1b to have this experience with their matching web pages. We should be able to sit around and drink our coffee or tea and see if someone new has shown up. Of course, a team sport requires hard work too. We need to go over to the 25 and 37 STR matches and recruit and cajole them to upgrade.

MacUalraig
09-03-2015, 07:35 AM
Okay, I missed the other project. I guess it is on Facebook or a private web site.

I've been running a multi-disciplinary Kennedy One-name study including DNA project since January 2006 at www.kennedydna.com (http://www.kennedydna.com). That's the same site that hosts my M222 chart (http://www.kennedydna.com/M222.pdf) if you ever viewed that. It is focussed heavily on testing in Scotland and Ireland.

MacUalraig
09-03-2015, 10:47 AM
I can't comment on your match list of course but I have seen very close false positive matches in M222 and others have posted examples on the L21 forum recently after you said you'd never seen one.

I don't have permission to show the match page in question but this is the email I sent regarding it which will have to suffice.

5772

Mac von Frankfurt
09-03-2015, 01:38 PM
I view the two approaches in terms of precision versus accuracy. The FTDNA approach provides a high level of precision for a large number of people. The FGC based approach is more accurate. What is relevant to this thread on L21*, or in my case DF13*, is I felt the potential for greater accuracy was worth the price differential.

Edit: Just to clarify that I am talking about precision verses accuracy relative to the structure of the Y-DNA tree, not the precision or accuracy of NGS testing methods. More coverage leads to more SNPs leads to a more accurate tree.

Mikewww
09-04-2015, 01:04 AM
... but I have seen very close false positive matches in M222 and others have posted examples on the L21 forum recently after you said you'd never seen one....
Wonders never cease. I'm not sure what this does for L21* to bring in personal attacks, I think you are taking this out of context of 111 STRs vis-a-vis Bronze Age and ancient SNPs, the kinds packs and panels would be build around. Anyway, if you want to attack, please quote me specifically and provide a reference to the link.

GDs are rough tools. I've said that many times. Of course they are not reliably accurate at the 200-300 year level and should be used in context.

You sure know seem to know a lot about FTDNA systems and STRs for someone being avowed not to use them.

I guess I need to walk on eggshells and double qualify every caveat for every statement I make so as not to be attacked. It won't work.

errett
09-24-2015, 02:18 PM
Greetings All---My first post here---looking for any advice---I am R-L21*, df13-,df63-,F4006-, surname Bradford and most of my matches in the FTDNA database are with Glenn, Gordon, Hawkins, Peverley, Proudfoot-----really don't have much of a foundation in this area----seems that R-L21* is a very small group at this point and will require much more testing on the "Continent"-----is that the basic current situation? Any help is sincerely appreciated. Nevada, USA

JohnStorch
09-29-2015, 08:42 PM
My initial testing was through National Geographic Geno 2.0 where my y-DNA haplogroup was identified as R-L21. I figured that wasn’t my terminal SNP because they don’t even test for DF13 or DF63. I took the M343 SNP Pack test from FamilyTreeDNA and was moved down one subclade to Z2542.

First of all, is Z2542 really an equivalent to DF13 such that I can say I am DF13+? Or should I still run a DF13 test to confirm it?

Then, if I do that much, should I right away go for other SNPs too? From what I see, I have two choices so far. The first is to continue with FamilyTreeDNA. However, the only two SNPs that I have not already tested negative for that show up on their haplotree as being available for purchase are FGC17059 and L1444. Then there is the R-L21 Superclade test from YSEQ. In addition to DF13 itself, the only additional tests would be either F3901 and Z16245 if DF13 came back negative or FGC5496 and Z16502 if DF13 came back positive. And none of those SNPs from the YSEQ testing even appear on the FamilyTreeDNA haplotree.

The other thing I am not as familiar with is the y-DNA testing from FamilyTreeDNA which tests STR instead of SNPs. Would running one of these tests get me to the same place as far as haplogroups go?

Opinions?

Huntergatherer1066
09-29-2015, 10:35 PM
My initial testing was through National Geographic Geno 2.0 where my y-DNA haplogroup was identified as R-L21. I figured that wasn’t my terminal SNP because they don’t even test for DF13 or DF63. I took the M343 SNP Pack test from FamilyTreeDNA and was moved down one subclade to Z2542.

First of all, is Z2542 really an equivalent to DF13 such that I can say I am DF13+? Or should I still run a DF13 test to confirm it?

Then, if I do that much, should I right away go for other SNPs too? From what I see, I have two choices so far. The first is to continue with FamilyTreeDNA. However, the only two SNPs that I have not already tested negative for that show up on their haplotree as being available for purchase are FGC17059 and L1444. Then there is the R-L21 Superclade test from YSEQ. In addition to DF13 itself, the only additional tests would be either F3901 and Z16245 if DF13 came back negative or FGC5496 and Z16502 if DF13 came back positive. And none of those SNPs from the YSEQ testing even appear on the FamilyTreeDNA haplotree.

The other thing I am not as familiar with is the y-DNA testing from FamilyTreeDNA which tests STR instead of SNPs. Would running one of these tests get me to the same place as far as haplogroups go?

Opinions?

While Geno 2 didn't test DF13 itself, it does test many of the main subclades beneath DF13 so you can potentially eliminate those. There is a very small chance you could Z2542+/DF13- but as far as I know no one has ever been that. Personally if I were in your shoes I would save my money for one of the NGS tests (BigY or FGC Elite), or take the YSEQ L21 panel, or wait for the imminent L21 Panel at FTDNA (the last two are significantly cheaper than NGS testing but won't discover anything new).

errett
09-29-2015, 11:32 PM
JohnStorch----I used YSEQ and completed their R1B-L21 Super Clade orientation panel-----they didn't test for Z2542------I was positive for the following S-145, L-21, L-536, M-529, PF5860------negative for DF13 and DF63---------------------------cost was $88.00----------------also results from YSEQ will not be accepted by FTDNA for their projects----they will put you in the L-21 project (or others), but will show you as a M-269, and even though I am L-21* , I am excluded from that category L-21*----------my understanding is that Z2542 is equivalent to L-21-----I have seen it listed on trees next to L-21.

Hope this helps somewhat----GL

JohnStorch
09-30-2015, 05:39 PM
From discussions elsewhere, we figured out where some of those SNPs are positioned and it seems like all subclades currently tested with the YSEQ L21 Superclade pack would come back negative. I will hold off on further testing for now. We'll see what tests pop up in the future.

George Chandler
10-01-2015, 12:00 AM
If you have the money to risk my suggestion is to double check DF13 even if there is only a slight chance of being positive. I've run into multiple tests now (none from the R1b backbone yet)where reliable SNP's that "should be positive" in the results but are not there. It's only when the people have been tested a second time that the results have come back positive for that specific SNP.

George

George Chandler
10-01-2015, 12:05 AM
How about this. If you want to submit a join request to the R-S1051 Project even though you aren't S1051. I'll retest test you for DF13 and pay for it myself. I will have to get an email stating you give me permission to order the test once you join and I will have to be the one placing the order so I can use project funds to do it.

How is that for putting your money where your mouth is? Interested?

George

gaijin
10-02-2015, 11:16 AM
@errett Hi, did u join the L21 project on FTDNA?

errett
10-03-2015, 02:15 PM
@gaijin----Hi----yes I joined that project---my FTDNA # B17094---

JohnStorch
10-04-2015, 09:04 PM
George Chandler : I don't have enough posts on Anthrogenica to qualify for private messaging, so if you wouldn't mind, contact me at john.storch@sbcglobal.net

errett
10-05-2015, 08:54 PM
George Chandler-----Any idea where I would find the largest collection of L-R21* (DF13-, DF63-) haplotypes -----other than FTDNA-----Thanks for your time. Errett

Mikewww
10-06-2015, 04:49 AM
JohnStorch----I used YSEQ and completed their R1B-L21 Super Clade orientation panel-----they didn't test for Z2542------I was positive for the following S-145, L-21, L-536, M-529, PF5860------negative for DF13 and DF63---------------------------cost was $88.00----------------also results from YSEQ will not be accepted by FTDNA for their projects----they will put you in the L-21 project (or others), but will show you as a M-269, and even though I am L-21* , I am excluded from that category L-21*----------my understanding is that Z2542 is equivalent to L-21-----I have seen it listed on trees next to L-21.

Hope this helps somewhat----GL
DF13 and Z2542 are considered phylogenetic equivalents. DF13/Z2542 is the by far the biggest subclade of L21.

For people who really think they are L21* or DF13* and think NGS (Big Y or FGC Elite) is too expensive, the test to take is the R1b-L21 SNP Pack. It's like a shotgun blast across the top layers of L21 with a good dose of several misc. subclades to go along, such as Z251, DF63, FGC5494, S1026.

Even Alex's Big Tree ZZ10_1 and ZZ10_2 are included as "investigatory SNPs".

DF13/Z2542 and DF63 and the following direct sons of L21 are tested:
A5846
F4006
BY2899

Under the DF13 subclade (although I think FTDNA is actually using Z2542), besides ZZ10 these are direct sons that are tested:
BY2868
BY575
CTS11994
CTS1751
CTS3386
DF21
DF41
DF49
FGC11134
FGC13780
FGC35995
FGC5494
L1335
L371
L513
MC14
S1026
S1051
S16264
Z16500
Z17300
Z251
Z253
Z255

errett
10-06-2015, 01:45 PM
Mikewww---Thanks much for that info----and the correction on Z2542/DF13----I will definitely look into the R1b SNP Pack----and just to insure that I am clear about what you are saying----these so called "direct sons" of DF13 that you have listed were not tested when I used YSEQ for their R1b-L21 panel------and even though YSEQ has produced the R-L21* result in my case, that in fact may not have covered all the possibilities under DF13--------so there still exist known SNPs under DF13 that were not accounted for using YSEQ's test. Thanks for your time---I'm obviously new at this and still trying to find my way.

George Chandler
10-06-2015, 02:52 PM
George Chandler-----Any idea where I would find the largest collection of L-R21* (DF13-, DF63-) haplotypes -----other than FTDNA-----Thanks for your time. Errett

That's a good list that Mike posted for you but there are more. The only thing is that their test results are so unique that they have no matches.. so you can't place an SNP to add to the existing list Mike provided. I tested someone through FGC who was DF13+ and at last check (unless something has come up recently) his list of SNP's below DF13 was completely unique.

George

MJost
10-06-2015, 02:54 PM
Mikewww---Thanks much for that info----and the correction on Z2542/DF13----I will definitely look into the R1b SNP Pack----and just to insure that I am clear about what you are saying----these so called "direct sons" of DF13 that you have listed were not tested when I used YSEQ for their R1b-L21 panel------and even though YSEQ has produced the R-L21* result in my case, that in fact may not have covered all the possibilities under DF13--------so there still exist known SNPs under DF13 that were not accounted for using YSEQ's test. Thanks for your time---I'm obviously new at this and still trying to find my way.
When you test the YSeq YSEQ R1b-L21 Super-Clade Orientation Panel, you are tested in stages. The first stage contains DF13. If you were DF13+, it would be reported. If you were DF13 derived, the test would test for the listed DF13 subclades. If you received only a L21* (it would be DF13-, DF63-) then you are one of a rare few. You would be wasting time testing any more panels and I HIGHLY suggest a NGS. One man who has a L21 xDF13,DF63 who is: R-P312/S116 > L21/S145 > Mattox (FTDNA: 25304). Do you have 67 marker results to compare to him to see if you can test into his SNPs?

http://www.ytree.net/SNPinfoForPerson.php?personID=1374

MJost

errett
10-06-2015, 03:49 PM
My FTDNA # B17094-----results Y-67-----I apologize for my limited knowledge in this area---can you explain testing into Mattox's SNP's----i.e., the process----or direct me to a site that will explain the process--thanks


Standard Y-STR Values

PANEL 1 (1-12)

Marker

DYS393

DYS390

DYS19**

DYS391

DYS385

DYS426

DYS388

DYS439

DYS389I

DYS392

DYS389II***


Value
13 24 14 11 11-14 12 12 11 13 13 31


PANEL 2 (13-25)

Marker

DYS458

DYS459

DYS455

DYS454

DYS447

DYS437

DYS448

DYS449

DYS464


Value
17 8-10 11 11 25 15 19 29 15-15-16-17


PANEL 3 (26-37)

Marker

DYS460

Y-GATA-H4

YCAII

DYS456

DYS607

DYS576

DYS570

CDY

DYS442

DYS438


Value
10 11 19-23 17 16 17 17 35-38 12 13



PANEL 4 (38-47)

Marker

DYS531

DYS578

DYF395S1

DYS590

DYS537

DYS641

DYS472

DYF406S1

DYS511


Value
11 9 15-16 8 10 10 8 9 10


PANEL 4 (48-60)

Marker

DYS425

DYS413

DYS557

DYS594

DYS436

DYS490

DYS534

DYS450

DYS444

DYS481

DYS520

DYS446


Value
12 22-23 17 10 12 12 15 8 13 22 21 12


PANEL 4 (61-67)



Marker

DYS617

DYS568

DYS487

DYS572

DYS640

DYS492

DYS565


Value
12 11 14 11 11 12 12

MJost
10-06-2015, 04:32 PM
Look at your distances from Maddox, who is the closest to you at 23 GD's, I highly suggest a NGS test as you mostly likely are a unique L21 xDF13xDF63 branch. You could share a few SNPs with Maddox but it wouldn't help identifying other close paternal kits And you would then be a reference for others in the future helping others and could assist in L21's origin .






Slow GD
67 GD



fB17094

Bradford
R1b-L21
0
0



fN25406
Adkins/Meadows
zzL21suspect
3
23


f25304
Maddox
R1b-L21
3
23


f226438
Maddox
zzL21suspect
3
23


f176877
Wilson
zzL21suspect
3
24


f94428
Meadows
R1b-L21
3
25



f220223

zzzUnk(Thompson)
zzL21suspect
3
25


f236395
Bishop
R1b-L21
3
26


f23955
Hale
zzL21suspect
3
26


f210615
Lyles
zzL21suspect
3
26


f224598
Meadows
zzL21suspect
3
26


fN82291

Davis
R1b-L21
4
26


f290662
Wildes
R1b-L21
4
26


fN80403
Bishop
R1b-L21
3
27


f280782
Hale
zzL21suspect
3
27


f47238
Davis
R1b-L21
4
27


f15580

Davis
zzL21suspect
4
27


f178565
Davis
zzL21suspect
4
27


f36001
Davis
zzL21suspect
4
27


f52253
Davis
zzL21suspect
4
27


f299739
Wildes
R1b-L21
4
27


fN49494
Wildes
R1b-L21
4
27


f299741

Wildes
zzL21suspect
4
27


f231839
Thompson
zzL21suspect
4
28


f44113
zzzUnk(Hale)
zzL21suspect
4
28


f44114
zzzUnk(Hale)
zzL21suspect
4
28


f117433
Davis
zzL21suspect
4
28


f195051

Wildes
zzL21suspect
5
28


f267719

Bigazzi
R1b-L21
4
28




MJost

errett
10-06-2015, 06:47 PM
MJost----Thanks very much---very surprising that my GD is so far from that group-----I will contact FTDNA concerning their BigY---Thanks again for your help---errett

WOLFF éric
10-29-2015, 02:40 PM
Hello,

I´m from Alsace-Lorraine and have Y14240/FGC35995 and Y14049/FGC35996 as terminal snp´s,any informations about these snp´s ? :beerchug:

rms2
12-27-2015, 07:09 PM
Hello,

I´m from Alsace-Lorraine and have Y14240/FGC35995 and Y14049/FGC35996 as terminal snp´s,any informations about these snp´s ? :beerchug:

The only other person in the FGC35995 category in the R L21 and Subclades Project is a Swede.

JohnStorch
01-07-2016, 10:14 PM
Update: After National Geographic Geno 2.0, I was originally listed as L21. Now,with FamilyTreeDNA M343 Backbone SNP Pack and YSEQ L21 Super-Clade Panel testing, my terminal SNP stands at DF13*. That’s enough SNPs for now. Maybe it’s time to take a look at some STR tests.

Is DF13 still considered proto-Celtic like L21? My male lineage comes from Dipperz, Hesse, Germany. It would be interesting to know if they simply stayed in Continental Europe or if they traveled to the Isles before their descendants returned to the mainland.

JohnStorch
01-08-2016, 04:22 AM
At this point, I guess I will move over to the DF13* thread. And probably the L21 in the Rhineland thread, too.

WOLFF éric
02-07-2016, 07:26 PM
rms2: No the first Y14240/FGC35995 tested is a Mexican from Los Angeles (with 1000 Genomes) and now i think one man from Ireland too by Alex Williamson Big tree. :3

WOLFF éric
02-07-2016, 07:36 PM
:argue: But i hope becoming more infos in the future.Thanks.

rms2
02-07-2016, 07:52 PM
rms2: No the first Y14240/FGC35995 tested is a Mexican from Los Angeles (with 1000 Genomes) and now i think one man from Ireland too by Alex Williamson Big tree. :3

Okay, but in the R L21 and Subclades Project the only other person in the FGC35995 category is a Swede.

I would be happy if those other two joined, too.

Mailman
05-02-2016, 03:55 PM
STRs may put you in the ballpark but SNPs will define what your Haplogroup and subgroups actually are. STR matches are totally useless in my case as they match me with other haplo groups and subgroups.

swid
06-27-2016, 02:30 PM
A recent Big Y result broke up the Mattox/Davis block...while Alex hasn't finished his analysis yet, B100046 (Haley) shares A7905 with that block (http://ytree.net/DisplayTree.php?blockID=1663).

Edit: Alex mentioned on the L21 Yahoo group (https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/R1b-L21-Project/conversations/messages/32509) that B100046 likely shares a half-dozen SNPs with Mattox/Davis.

Dr. O
06-28-2016, 03:40 PM
I'm a newbie here; I just received my FTDNA L21 SNP results. I am DF63. My ancestor was Cayetano de Otero born 1701 Galicia Spain, came to New Mexico c. 1730. All my matches are Ireland/Scotland and one in Spain. Any Sephardic df63 out there?

swid
06-28-2016, 05:41 PM
Welcome!

I see you're already a member of the L21 and DF63 FTDNA projects, so that's a good start. In addition, you'll want to take a look at the DF63-specific subforum (http://www.anthrogenica.com/forumdisplay.php?124-DF63) and DF63 thread (http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?940-DF63-(L21-gt-DF63)).

Edit: I see you're negative for all three known SNPs directly below DF63, and have a very large number of SNPs tested. Are those results from a Big Y test?

Dr. O
06-28-2016, 06:55 PM
No, FTDNA had a downstream L21 SNP test that I was advised to take.

WOLFF éric
08-15-2016, 06:31 PM
Okay, but in the R L21 and Subclades Project the only other person in the FGC35995 category is a Swede.

I would be happy if those other two joined, too.

FGC35995 : we are now 4 the Mexican,one Swede,one from Wales (not Ireland) and me.B)

WOLFF éric
03-13-2017, 03:18 PM
[QUOTE=WOLFF éric;179759]FGC35995 : we are now a little more: any from Ireland, the Mexican,one Swede,one from Wales,one from Croatia and me from Vosges-Alsace,France. B)

swid
02-09-2018, 03:57 PM
The Big Tree has a new clade directly below L21 (http://ytree.net/DisplayTree.php?blockID=3221). The FTDNA haplotree (where this clade is called R-BY24776) has more branching available on it than Alex' tree does, and implies that at least four Big Y kits are BY24776+.

RonaldG123
04-24-2018, 07:16 PM
What is the extent of BY3070 in DF21 men? What groupings of these people are getting this mutation from DF63?

RonaldG123
04-24-2018, 07:17 PM
This may have been the wrong project😀