# Thread: A Z251+ Cluster with 459a=7 and 413b=25?

1. ## A Z251+ Cluster with 459a=7 and 413b=25?

I may be way behind the times in posting this, but has anyone else noticed a little group with 459a=7 and 413b=25, two of whom have tested Z251+? I just picked up on this today in checking for matches within the R L21 and Subclades Project for a brand new member. Here is the group thus far:

Blair kit 186657 (Z251+)
Norman kit 24273 (Z251+)
McDonald kit 255219
Dvorak kit 136561
Dew kit N5199

I didn't go over each marker with a fine tooth comb, but I did notice that Dvorak has 439=13, and Blair has 439=14. The other three guys have the usual, 439=12. All five of these gentlemen also have 456=16 or higher.

Anyway, if this is old news, sorry, but I just noticed it.

2. They all have 406S1=11, too, but 617=12 (406S1=11 and 617=13 comprise a combination that often indicates L513+ status).

3. Originally Posted by rms2
I may be way behind the times in posting this, but has anyone else noticed a little group with 459a=7 and 413b=25, two of whom have tested Z251+? I just picked up on this today in checking for matches within the R L21 and Subclades Project for a brand new member. Here is the group thus far:

Blair kit 186657 (Z251+)
Norman kit 24273 (Z251+)
McDonald kit 255219
Dvorak kit 136561
Dew kit N5199

I didn't go over each marker with a fine tooth comb, but I did notice that Dvorak has 439=13, and Blair has 439=14. The other three guys have the usual, 439=12. All five of these gentlemen also have 456=16 or higher.

Anyway, if this is old news, sorry, but I just noticed it.
Summing up the values for this cluster, they seem to be 459a=7, 413b=25, 406S1=11, 439=12 or greater, and 456=16 or greater.

McDonald (above) now has Z251 on order, so we should soon see if I am right.

4. I just tested Z251+ this week. My kit number is 255219. Can someone tell me what this indicates?
DJ McDonald

5. ## The Following User Says Thank You to DJMcD For This Useful Post:

rms2 (06-19-2014)

6. Originally Posted by DJMcD
I just tested Z251+ this week. My kit number is 255219. Can someone tell me what this indicates?
DJ McDonald
Well, I think Z251 is a very old SNP. Your result and STR markers mean that you are more closely related (but still not very close) to kit #24273 than others in the Z251 grouping and since kit #24273 appears to be positive for SNPs S11556 and S9294, it is likely that you are too. You are probably in some kind of identifiable cluster downstream from S9294 with kit #24273, but this may not mean much genealogically because S9294 might be 5,000 years old. Kit #24273 shows up with more than 30 novel variants in Big Y not shared by any others in Z251 that you might also be positive for as well. If you took a Big Y test, you would be able to find out how many new SNPs you share, and that can provide some clues to how long ago your common ancestor lived.

These two kits share a lot of off-modal markers as rms2 points out reinforcing the relationship, including:

459a=7
576=20
481=21
522=12
533=14
513=13
561=16
643=9

7. ## The Following User Says Thank You to seferhabahir For This Useful Post:

rms2 (06-19-2014)

8. Dvorak, kit 136561, also recently got a Z251+ result. He's in this cluster. His mdka was born in what is now the Czech Republic.

9. Originally Posted by seferhabahir
Well, I think Z251 is a very old SNP. Your result and STR markers mean that you are more closely related (but still not very close) to kit #24273 than others in the Z251 grouping and since kit #24273 appears to be positive for SNPs S11556 and S9294, it is likely that you are too. You are probably in some kind of identifiable cluster downstream from S9294 with kit #24273, but this may not mean much genealogically because S9294 might be 5,000 years old. Kit #24273 shows up with more than 30 novel variants in Big Y not shared by any others in Z251 that you might also be positive for as well. If you took a Big Y test, you would be able to find out how many new SNPs you share, and that can provide some clues to how long ago your common ancestor lived.

These two kits share a lot of off-modal markers as rms2 points out reinforcing the relationship, including:

459a=7
576=20
481=21
522=12
533=14
513=13
561=16
643=9
Your BIG Y results show you are indeed S11556 and S9294 and share a large number of SNPs downstream from S9294 with kit #24273. I don't have a count at the moment about how many you share, but there are quite a few. I asked Chris McCown to update his spreadsheet for Z251 downstream SNPs and that will help determine a chronological timeframe for your relationship to #24273.

10. ## The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to seferhabahir For This Useful Post:

DJMcD (08-21-2014),  rms2 (08-20-2014)

11. Originally Posted by seferhabahir
Your BIG Y results show you are indeed S11556 and S9294 and share a large number of SNPs downstream from S9294 with kit #24273. I don't have a count at the moment about how many you share, but there are quite a few. I asked Chris McCown to update his spreadsheet for Z251 downstream SNPs and that will help determine a chronological timeframe for your relationship to #24273.
Where can I view Chris McCown's spreadsheet? I am curious where I am at on a chronological time frame.

12. Originally Posted by DJMcD
Where can I view Chris McCown's spreadsheet? I am curious where I am at on a chronological time frame.
On the R1b-L21 Haplogroup project page go to the "Files" and locate "NGS L21 Downstream". Open it and look for "NGS Downstream 251 SNP" and you can download the spreadsheet.

13. Based on recent Sanger SNP results from both FTDNA and YSEQ, we now know that there are individuals who are

S9294+ Z18092- FGC11986- (true S9294*, so far these are the McCall or MacKall descendents)
S9294+ Z18092+ FGC11986- (these are people who seem to have the STR off-modals discussed in this thread)
S9294+ FGC11986+ Z18092- (a collection of widely disparate S9294 types, including A555)

Therefore, we can conclude that the elusive FGC11986 SNP (only sporadically reported in Big Y) is not phylo-equivalent to S9294, and should now be listed as a recognizable sub-clade under S9294 and parallel to Z18092 (with A555 still as a sub-clade under FGC11986).

I have suggested we fix the various trees to show FGC11986 as a brother subclade to Z18092 under S9294, with A555 still underneath FGC11986. Anyway, rms2 was right about this being an identifiable cluster and it now associated with Z18092. Because it lacks FGC11986 which we know is several thousand years old, this cluster is derived from a very old line, although the TMRCA for this group might be much more recent as seems to be the case with A555.

#### Posting Permissions

• You may not post new threads
• You may not post replies
• You may not post attachments
• You may not edit your posts
•