Portuguese I1 - How common is it?

[deadly77]

I've made a brutal mistake. It's actually I1a2a2. Check the photograph in the link. I also get I-S2078 in cladefinder. http://prntscr.com/ushjvu

Ah, ok. I didn't click on any of your links - I generally don't until I can see where those lead. Not accusing of anything malicious, just a bit extra paranoid on my part. Once you get more than 10 posts you can share images on here which is a little easier to follow.

However, Spruithean says you're positive for several of the SNPs on the I1 level and that's phylogenetically consistent, so you can be fairly sure that you are I1. In that regard, it's accurate, but perhaps not very precise (I find a lot of folks say one when they mean the other). In regard to where you are downstream of I1, that very much depends on what SNPs the Ancestry chip covers. It's not very comprehensive and to be fair to Ancestry, they don't market their test as providing you with this data. So think of it as a bonus. With the S2078+ result, there's less corroborating SNPs in the Ancestry chip at that level, and there are sometimes false positives (I have at least three in my Ancestry data). You should at least be seeing a positive result for Z63 in your test - that's at hg19 position 14401486 on chromosome 24 (what Ancestry labels as the Y chromosome in their raw data file) - if you're Z63+, you'll have T, if you're Z63-, you'll have C. If that matches up, you can be a lot more confident in the S2078+ result. Although as several others have said, if you want further refinement or validation, you're really going to need to take a more suitable Y-DNA test. But at least the Ancestry data has got you to a certain point.

[gabbobler]

Ah, ok. I didn't click on any of your links - I generally don't until I can see where those lead. Not accusing of anything malicious, just a bit extra paranoid on my part. Once you get more than 10 posts you can share images on here which is a little easier to follow.

However, Spruithean says you're positive for several of the SNPs on the I1 level and that's phylogenetically consistent, so you can be fairly sure that you are I1. In that regard, it's accurate, but perhaps not very precise (I find a lot of folks say one when they mean the other). In regard to where you are downstream of I1, that very much depends on what SNPs the Ancestry chip covers. It's not very comprehensive and to be fair to Ancestry, they don't market their test as providing you with this data. So think of it as a bonus. With the S2078+ result, there's less corroborating SNPs in the Ancestry chip at that level, and there are sometimes false positives (I have at least three in my Ancestry data). You should at least be seeing a positive result for Z63 in your test - that's at hg19 position 14401486 on chromosome 24 (what Ancestry labels as the Y chromosome in their raw data file) - if you're Z63+, you'll have T, if you're Z63-, you'll have C. If that matches up, you can be a lot more confident in the S2078+ result. Although as several others have said, if you want further refinement or validation, you're really going to need to take a more suitable Y-DNA test. But at least the Ancestry data has got you to a certain point.

I have I1-Z63 as an avaliable panel.

[deadly77]

I have I1-Z63 as an avaliable panel.

Yes, that's what the YSEQ cladefinder is designed to do - direct you to the appropriate panel test at YSEQ, which is the I-Z63 panel. My recommendation was that you should check your AncestryDNA results for Z63 (I checked mine and Z63 is on their chip) - if you have positive results for both Z63 and S2078, you can be fairly confident. If you have positive result for S2078 and a negative result for Z63, you can be less confident in the S2078 result (although still I1).

The YSEQ panel is a relatively inexpensive way of figuring out where downstream of I-S2078 you are, and YSEQ are a good company for Y-DNA testing. The panel only tests against the known tree and doesn't give you any of your novel variants that tests such as the Big Y, YElite or WGS will do. But all of those latter tests are considerably more expensive. It very much depends on individual interest and resources. Have a read of the options, consider your budget and what you want to find out. If the question is just "am I really I1?" the answer is has most likely already been answered in the affirmative from the AncestryDNA test. If the question is where you fit in below I1 or I-S2078, that's going to need something further than the AncestryDNA test.

[gabbobler]

Yes, that's what the YSEQ cladefinder is designed to do - direct you to the appropriate panel test at YSEQ, which is the I-Z63 panel. My recommendation was that you should check your AncestryDNA results for Z63 (I checked mine and Z63 is on their chip) - if you have positive results for both Z63 and S2078, you can be fairly confident. If you have positive result for S2078 and a negative result for Z63, you can be less confident in the S2078 result (although still I1).

The YSEQ panel is a relatively inexpensive way of figuring out where downstream of I-S2078 you are, and YSEQ are a good company for Y-DNA testing. The panel only tests against the known tree and doesn't give you any of your novel variants that tests such as the Big Y, YElite or WGS will do. But all of those latter tests are considerably more expensive. It very much depends on individual interest and resources. Have a read of the options, consider your budget and what you want to find out. If the question is just "am I really I1?" the answer is has most likely already been answered in the affirmative from the AncestryDNA test. If the question is where you fit in below I1 or I-S2078, that's going to need something further than the AncestryDNA test.

Thank you. I'll check out the Big Y test, but its quite expensive. Any cheaper alternatives?

[deadly77]

Thank you. I'll check out the Big Y test, but its quite expensive. Any cheaper alternatives?

The Big Y is expensive (especially in my opinion for what you get), but it is the best selling Y-DNA specific test on the market. The test itself has been improved considerably, but the main benefits have always been the Y-DNA projects that FTDNA hosts (generally run by volunteer admins rather than FTDNA themselves) and the largest Y-DNA database of commercial testers. For the expensive concern, it's often on sale and there are options for spreading the cost by buying the test in increments - portions of the Y-STR markers and then opting for the Big Y portion as a later upgrade. it does work out less expensive in the long run to do it in one go.

The most comparable test to the Big Y is the YElite from Full Genomes Corp. This is generally priced a lower than the Big Y, but there are a few other benefits - you don't have to pay extra to access the raw data in your BAM file (FTDNA charges $100 extra for this) and the assay captures your mitochondrial DNA - the Big Y does this as well, but FTDNA strips this data. It might not read every part of your mtDNA, since it's not specifically targeted for that, but in my case the YElite read all of my mtDNA. The main disadvantage is missing out on FTDNA's large Y-DNA database and you can't transfer your results, so you might be a bit more reliant on third party analysis (eg. YFull). FGC provide a good data package, but perhaps it's not the easiest to follow for a less experienced customer.

Better than both of these tests are the whole genome sequencing (WGS) tests, which scan all of your DNA - Y chromosome, mitochondrial DNA and autosomal chromosomes in good detail, while the Big Y and YElite are Y-enrichment tests. The best commercial WGS available are from YSEQ and Full Genomes Corporation who provide a good quality product, decent turnaround times and good data options for processing. However, both of these are more expensive than the Big Y, but you're getting a lot more for your money. Like the YElite, there's a lot of data which can be pretty daunting although third party analysis can help with the Y and mt analysis. I'd say the tools for autosomal interpretation haven't yet caught up. Also, like the YElite, you're missing out on the largest Y-DNA database at FTDNA, which is the main disadvantage. There are some lower cost WGS options out there - Dante Labs offer a WGS which is less expensive than the YSEQ and FGC WGS - and also the Big Y - but there's a fair bit of mixed opinion out there on turnaround times, data availability and quality. Some people have had positive experiences testing WGS with Dante, others considerably less so. There are a few other providers out there starting to offer WGS, but several of them are "too new" to know much about how reliable they are. Stay away from the low read depth (ie, 0.4x) WGS - often very cheap, but also very useless.

Ultimately it comes down to what your interest level is and how much you're willing to spend - and everyone is different in that regard. Costs will continue to come down if now is not the time, but that just keeps you where you are right now.