Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 69

Thread: DF19 (P312>DF19) & Subclades L644, Z302, etc.

  1. #21
    Junior Member
    Posts
    3
    Sex
    Y-DNA (P)
    R1b-P312 DF19 L644
    mtDNA (M)
    H11a

    Belgium Netherlands
    Quote Originally Posted by RCAndrew View Post
    Received my Big Y results on Monday
    We've already analysed your results and they look great! Now we are waiting for the Big-Y reports for all remaining DF19+ samples (about 30 in total), to be able to draw general, final conclusions. What we can already say is that you (and probably all other L644+ samples) belong to a new subclade below DF19 and DF88, which is characterised by the S4281 mutation that was recently also found in the Chromo2 test. Downstream from S4281 your sub-subclade is S4268, and downstream from that you have the S10076, S10771 and S17075 mutations, which will probably also be present in (all?) other L644+ samples. As soon as we receive the Big-Y data for the other DF19+ samples we should be able to tell more about these new likely sub-subclades below DF19 and DF88, about their hierarchy, and how exactly they relate to the previously known SNPs that have already been placed onto the ISOGG haplotree (such as DF88, L644, L719, L1199, etc). Hopefully we'll be able to collect enough information to reliably position those new SNPs onto the haplotree very soon.

    Overall the quality of the data seems to be quite good for the Big-Y results we've seen so far, for three DF19+ DF88+ samples: at this point they share 19 novel SNPs that seem to be specific for the DF19 subclade (i.e. not found in any of the DF19- samples). SNPs of this category are either slightly older than DF19 and/or DF88, or they originated at a time point between DF19 and the last common ancestor that was shared by the 3 investigated lineages (in any case before the origin of L644, because from these 3 samples only your sample is positive for that SNP). In addition to that, each sample has at least 20 - 30 novel SNPs that are "private" (i.e. only found in that specific sample, although this number can still decrease when they are compared to more DF19+ samples). SNPs of the latter category are generally younger than the rest, and some of them may be specific for one family, or for a group of families that e.g. shared an early-medieval ancestor. We'll definitely learn a lot from these analyses!

    Wim (co-administrator P312 & Subclades Project, with focus on DF19).

  2. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Wim_DF19 For This Useful Post:

     faulconer (03-19-2014),  palamede (03-20-2014),  RCAndrew (03-21-2014)

  3. #22
    Junior Member
    Posts
    2
    Sex
    Location
    Paris
    Ethnicity
    Germanic Celtic
    Nationality
    French
    Y-DNA (P)
    R-P312
    mtDNA (M)
    H1e1

    France-Ile-de-France Belgium France Paris1
    Vikings who settled in Normandy were quite all of them from Denmark.
    DF19/DF88 arised in south Denmark / northern Germany, and may have been sent to northern France, low countries and Germany by Frankish invasions (3rd-5th centuries). Then by Saxons defeated families by Charlemagne which have been settled in many places in orther and western France and in the low countries (9th century). And finally by Norman people who settled in Normandy (Treaty of St Clair-sur-Epte, 911).

  4. #23
    Junior Member
    Posts
    17
    Sex
    Location
    Wilmington, NC
    Ethnicity
    English
    Nationality
    American (US)
    Y-DNA (P)
    U106>Z159>S3251+
    mtDNA (M)
    H2a3b

    United States of America England Scotland Wales
    Waiting on a few more Big Y's to come through (3 of our 5 DF88+ kits are in) for the Grant DNA Project and beginning to gather data now. Seems like a good time to ask a few dumb questions:

    Do we know any additional SNPs below DF88 besides L644, L1199, L719 and 464QuadC??
    Do we know any that branch of the 4 mentioned above?
    Do we have a birth date yet on DF88 and/or any below SNPs?

    Regarding the Big Y, should I be more focused on the SNPs listed in the "Haplogroups and SNPs" link from each kit's main page or am I correct that these are only the ones on FTDNA's current tree and are about to be VERY incomplete in comparison with the SNPs listed within the Big Y results?

    Cross-checking SNPs now with our 3/5 results and I am seeing a few things I didn't expect, such as two different branches of Grants that share exclusive SNPs with the senior line (the Clan Chief) that they don't share with each other (this doesn't make sense to me if these lines are from different branches of a family tree and leads me to believe some of the data we are getting is unreliable).

    Any and all thoughts/ideas/help will be greatly appreciated!

  5. #24
    Junior Member
    Posts
    3
    Sex
    Y-DNA (P)
    R1b-P312 DF19 L644
    mtDNA (M)
    H11a

    Belgium Netherlands
    Quote Originally Posted by gigrant74 View Post
    Do we know any additional SNPs below DF88 besides L644, L1199, L719 and 464QuadC??
    Do we know any that branch of the 4 mentioned above?
    Do we have a birth date yet on DF88 and/or any below SNPs?
    We currently estimate DF19 to be about 2300 years old, DF88 and Z302 are both slightly younger (presumably ca. 2200 years), and L644 should be between about 1300 and 1500 years old. I have already analysed 18 Big-Y datasets for DF19+ samples (17 of which are also DF88+), and have indeed identified lots of previously unknown SNPs downstream from DF88. See my post from 19 March above for more details on the oldest ones below DF88. We have also found robust SNPs downstream from L644 and L1199, and others that are closely associated with the QuadC feature.

    The most important advise I can give you is that the majority of SNPs reported in the "novel variants" section are older than P312 (I'm keeping an overview of those), and that sequencing coverage is not identical is each sample. The absence of a specific SNP in one dataset does not automatically mean that this SNP is truly absent in the investigated Y-chromosome, it could simply have been missed due to incomplete coverage of that chromosomal region. This could be the reason for your unexpected observations in the Grant samples. I could try to help you with these issues and with the analysis, please contact me through private message if you're interested!

    Best regards,

    Wim.

  6. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Wim_DF19 For This Useful Post:

     gigrant74 (04-19-2014),  RCAndrew (04-29-2014)

  7. #25
    Junior Member
    Posts
    3
    Sex
    Location
    San Diego, CA USA
    Nationality
    USA
    Y-DNA (P)
    R-DF19
    mtDNA (M)
    H

    United States of America Scotland Germany
    Wim, See where L719 test is available at FTDNA, as a DF19'r, is it one that I should order? Thanks!
    FTDNA: 55699
    YSearch: XCTSR

    P312+ DF19+ +L644 U152- U106- SRY2627- M65- M153- L21- L20- L2- L176.2- L165- Z302-
    ILLUMINA PF 91.15% European (Western European) 7.61% Middle East

    HVR1 results:
    Halogroup H. HVR1 differences from rCRS: 16079T 16278T 16519C HVR1 differences from RSRS: C16079T A16129G T16187C C16189T T16223C G16230A C16311T
    HVR2 differences rCRS: 262A 263G 309.1C 309.2C 315.1C NHV2 differences from RSRS: G73A C146T C152 T C195T A247G C262a 309.1C 309.2C 315.1C 522.1A 522.2C

  8. #26
    Junior Member
    Posts
    4
    Sex

    Quote Originally Posted by Mikewww View Post
    I had an inquiry from the Grant's and I found a whole series of Grant's that are great DF19 suspects so I'm adding them to the spreadsheet. Hopefully, a few more of them test for DF19 and join the P312 project, assuming they come up DF19+.
    I have concerns about your methodology linking surname groups as close family members based on DF19+ alone. I have tested as DF19- but can explain this with over 600 years of mutation separation and localised mutation in Ireland. I have a paper trail and other supporting DNA which confirms I am a Strathavon Grant.

    As a professional academic Chaos theorist I cannot accept your method premiss. All P312 and DF19+ proves is the estimated area of journey without reference to localised mutation even in the SNP residue. You have to restate the caveats to your theories. The facts of DF19+ are being manipulated to meet individual research so to match their views of close Grant family relationships in the last 400 years. This is totally false science

  9. #27
    Gold Class Member
    Posts
    1,025
    Sex
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Ethnicity
    100% European
    Nationality
    American
    Y-DNA (P)
    DF27>FGC23196
    mtDNA (M)
    U5a1a2a

    United States of America United Kingdom Germany Ireland Scotland Wales
    Quote Originally Posted by SLIMER64 View Post
    I have concerns about your methodology linking surname groups as close family members based on DF19+ alone. I have tested as DF19- but can explain this with over 600 years of mutation separation and localised mutation in Ireland. I have a paper trail and other supporting DNA which confirms I am a Strathavon Grant.

    As a professional academic Chaos theorist I cannot accept your method premiss. All P312 and DF19+ proves is the estimated area of journey without reference to localised mutation even in the SNP residue. You have to restate the caveats to your theories. The facts of DF19+ are being manipulated to meet individual research so to match their views of close Grant family relationships in the last 400 years. This is totally false science
    Mike is not saying every Grant in existence is DF19. He is stating that there is a group one particular group bearing the Grant surname who look to be DF19 based on their str string. There are almost 40 unrelated Webb lineages. Most are P312, but several a are not. There is no way that every person with the Webb surname are related just as there is no way that everyone with the Grant surname is related.

  10. The Following User Says Thank You to Webb For This Useful Post:

     gigrant74 (09-18-2014)

  11. #28
    Junior Member
    Posts
    4
    Sex

    Quote Originally Posted by Webb View Post
    Mike is not saying every Grant in existence is DF19. He is stating that there is a group one particular group bearing the Grant surname who look to be DF19 based on their str string. There are almost 40 unrelated Webb lineages. Most are P312, but several a are not. There is no way that every person with the Webb surname are related just as there is no way that everyone with the Grant surname is related.
    That is not what I am saying. The DF19+ is being used to link certain individuals through direct lineage to the chiefly line. That is to say anyone DF19- is not related. Which is wrong when you take localised mutation into account and over 650 years of separation. Geoff is saying I am not related to the Chiefly line even though I have documentary proof and other DNA to prove it.

  12. #29
    Gold Class Member
    Posts
    1,025
    Sex
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Ethnicity
    100% European
    Nationality
    American
    Y-DNA (P)
    DF27>FGC23196
    mtDNA (M)
    U5a1a2a

    United States of America United Kingdom Germany Ireland Scotland Wales
    Quote Originally Posted by SLIMER64 View Post
    That is not what I am saying. The DF19+ is being used to link certain individuals through direct lineage to the chiefly line. That is to say anyone DF19- is not related. Which is wrong when you take localised mutation into account and over 650 years of separation. Geoff is saying I am not related to the Chiefly line even though I have documentary proof and other DNA to prove it.
    I get what you are saying. If you read up a little higher, you will see that as of now the rough age estimate for DF19 is 2300 years old. Therefore, because you are DF19- and the, I am assuming, Grant Clan is DF19+, there is no way you and "them" share a common male ancestor anymore recently than 2300 years ago. I am not saying that they are true "Grants" and you are not or that you are a true "Grant" and they are not. Unfortunately, if the current Clan Grant Chief is DF19+, then he can claim only those people who match his line genetically on the "Y" are true Grants, even he or his line are a product of a NPE. He is the chief after all. However, if the majority of Grants are some other SNP than DF19, then you would have some evidence to perhaps support the fact that perhaps the Chief line of Grant is a NPE and you and several other Grants are not.

  13. The Following User Says Thank You to Webb For This Useful Post:

     gigrant74 (09-18-2014)

  14. #30
    Junior Member
    Posts
    3
    Sex
    Y-DNA (P)
    R1b-P312 DF19 L644
    mtDNA (M)
    H11a

    Belgium Netherlands
    Quote Originally Posted by SLIMER64 View Post
    That is not what I am saying. The DF19+ is being used to link certain individuals through direct lineage to the chiefly line. That is to say anyone DF19- is not related. Which is wrong when you take localised mutation into account and over 650 years of separation. Geoff is saying I am not related to the Chiefly line even though I have documentary proof and other DNA to prove it.
    First of all, DF19 predates the origin of the Grant surname. There is no doubt about that, because our age estimate of ca. 2300 years for this SNP is continuously being corroborated by all experimental observations (i.e. new samples testing positive for DF19). From this it follows that anyone who is DF19- cannot have a common male ancestor during the past ca. 2300 years with a family that is DF19+. If these genetically unrelated people have the same surname, they must either belong to independent families (having adopted the same surname independently of each other), or for (at least) one of the two lines the biological ancestry does not match the paper trail. The latter scenario involves non-paternal events (with the classic example of the stable-boy who helps to ensure the continuity of a nearly-extinct male line of a noble family), or cases of rape or adultery. Such events will never have been documented in writing, but modern genetic analysis will expose them nevertheless. In your case, as far as I am aware, the majority of Grant lineages claiming the same distant male ancestor as yourself is positive for DF19. Logic dictates that – if one of the two main lines truly descends from that illustrious ancestor – the DF19+ branch is the most likely candidate for this, especially because this group also comprises the Clan Chief’s male line, and the genetic variation in their STR-profiles is consistent with a medieval or post-medieval MRCA. These lines are thus all consistently related to each other, and thus likely represent the Y-chromosome of the medieval Grant ancestors.

    You seem to suggest that DF19 could revert back to its ancestral state within a few generations. In the many dozens of cases which I have investigated, I have not once observed such a thing. Mutations are indeed unpredictable, but they are not magic. SNPs are generally very stable mutations, that simply do not revert. This is especially the case for the major SNPs that have been tested hundreds of times (such as DF19), and that are known to be located in stable regions of the Y-chromosome. The Y-chromosome consists of ca. 58 million base pairs, and if one of those 58 million positions changes due to a mutation event, the chance that the exact same position will mutate again in the “opposite direction” shortly thereafter is infinitesimally low, unless it is located in a mutational hotspot region. For DF19 this is decidedly not the case, it is entirely stable. The situation is quite different for STR mutations, which have actually been selected for their relatively high mutation rates, and which can be regarded as mutational hotspots due to the repetitive nature of their sequences. But SNPs are not STRs.

    If, for the sake of argument, we would assume that you are an extremely rare example (with a chance of 1 in many millions) of a DF19+ Y-chromosome that suddenly became DF19- during the past 6 centuries, then surely your STR profile should still reveal a relatedness to that of the other Grant lineages. As I do not know your STR-profile, I cannot investigate this for you, but as a rule-of-thumb I would roughly expect a genetic distance of about 10 - 14 for 111 STRs, or in the range of 7-10 for 67 STRs, when assuming an MRCA who lived during the 14th century. With this information you can check for yourself whether your Y-chromosome STR-data are indicative of a shared male ancestry with the other Grants, who are DF19+.

    Please feel free to assess your own specific situation with the information provided above. I can assure you that the methodology we use for interpreting Big-Y and other results within the DF19 haplogroup is scientifically correct, and that I am always very cautious with my interpretations and predictions. For Big-Y I e.g. only take into account stable SNPs that are 100% reliably detected in all related samples. In my opinion, it is great when genetic facts support a paper trail, but if they are not in agreement the genetic results will always take precedence over paper trails, no matter how well they have been researched, simply because some biological events have never been documented in writing for posterity. Our ancestry is not something that we can choose.

    You mentioned that you have "other DNA to prove" that you descend from the Grant clan. Which type of results are you referring to exactly?

  15. The Following User Says Thank You to Wim_DF19 For This Useful Post:

     gigrant74 (09-18-2014)

Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

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