U5a1c - Anyone else?

[agil]

I have yet to find someone with this MtDNA.

[Jdevenney]

Hello. I have U5a1c1. Family female Surnames: Mullen(GM), Montgomery(GGM), McElheny(GGM). The biggest problem I find is that there don’t appear to be any operational databases for mitochondrial DNA.

[GailT]

The best online resource is Ian Logan's web page that lists GenBank samples by haplogroup. There are many people who have tested the full mtDNA sequence at FTDNA whose results are not in GenBank, so If you tested the full sequence at FTDNA, the best resource is your match list (assuming you have exact or very close matches), and you can also join the FTDNA U5 project.

Jdevenney - hopefully there will eventually be new samples who share your extra mutations. For people who do not have close matches, really all we can do is wait for more people to test.

[jellybee]

Hi, with my Geno 2.0/Helix test, I was designated U5a1c, based on having the 16320T marker. When I use James Lick's Mtdna tool, it gives me U5a1c as second choice though due to the fact I have 16192C, so firstly suggests that my haplogroup is U5a1(T16192C). If anyone knows, does my having the 16320T marker outweigh the fact I have 16192C? On the U5a1c tree, it shows it should be 16192T. When looking at the other related haplogroup trees, as far as I can tell, haplogroup U5a1a and U5a1g have the 16192C, but I'm negative for both of those, so I'm hoping to get some clarification.

https://dna.jameslick.com/mthap/
http://www.ianlogan.co.uk/sequences_..._sequences.htm

[GailT]

Hi, with my Geno 2.0/Helix test, I was designated U5a1c, based on having the 16320T marker. When I use James Lick's Mtdna tool, it gives me U5a1c as second choice though due to the fact I have 16192C, so firstly suggests that my haplogroup is U5a1(T16192C). If anyone knows, does my having the 16320T marker outweigh the fact I have 16192C?

16192 is an extremely unstable marker in U5, so it has very little predictive values for subclade assignments. 16320 is much more stable, but it is also found in a few people in U5a1b, so you would probably need the full sequence test to certain and to identify a more specific subclade of U5a1c. If you have any other HVR mutations included in your results, they might be useful for a better prediction.

[jellybee]

Hi, thank you Gail for answering I checked the markers from that U5a1c page and I don't match with the subclades listed, so is it pretty safe to say then that I'm just U5a1c? Or do you think if I do the full test, it would tell me something different?

Subclades from the page
U5a1c1 T195C C13802T - mine 195T 13802C

U5a1c1a A153G - mine 153A

U5a1c2 T961C - mine 961T

U5a1c2a A183G C10544T - mine 183A 10544C

U5a1c2a1 C16286T - mine 16286C

U5a1b A9667G - mine 9667A

[GailT]

Hi, thank you Gail for answering I checked the markers from that U5a1c page and I don't match with the subclades listed, so is it pretty safe to say then that I'm just U5a1c? Or do you think if I do the full test, it would tell me something different?

Yes, probably unclassified U5a1c*. There are two groups in U5a1c that have not yet been assigned subclade names:

One U5a1c* group includes includes several people from Sweden, Italy, Portugal and also an ancient Scythian sample, with these extra mutations: T152C, A6752G, T7080C, A14274G, A16180G

There is a smaller U5a1c* group of samples from France and Germany with extra mutations T152C and 16316G, plus additional extra mutations. You can see these "proposed new subclades" HVR results listed on the FTDNA U5 project results page.

You can see the GenBank U5a1c sample on Ian Logan's webpage.

[jellybee]

Hi Gail, thanks for your confirmation and all of the information It looks like I have four of those mutations you mentioned: 152C, 6752G, 14274G, 7080C. I have 16180A though, and for the other one, I have 16316A.

These actually were my extras as listed in James Lick's tool.

152C 6752- 13965C 14274G 16189C

I'm not sure why though 6752 is listed like that, but in my raw data it shows it's a G. In the raw data, from 6744-6862, 6752 is the only one with a result actually. The rest have hyphens.

For 7080, though Nat Geo tested 6863-7372, that one got a hyphen, but it shows as 7080C in my 23andMe data.

[GailT]

This would place you in what I would call U5a1c* Group 4. Group 4a shares the extra mutations you listed but is defined by the extra mutation at 16180, which you lack. There is one other person in Group 4 who also lacks 16180 and has German maternal ancestry. I'll send you a PM with a bit more info.

Hi Gail, thanks for your confirmation and all of the information It looks like I have four of those mutations you mentioned: 152C, 6752G, 14274G, 7080C. I have 16180A though, and for the other one, I have 16316A.

These actually were my extras as listed in James Lick's tool.

152C 6752- 13965C 14274G 16189C

[jellybee]

Thank you