R-L21: New SNP Z253 found in Iberians, ancestral for L226

[OConnor]

yes Richard i remember meeting you in the FTDNA Batch forum. I believe you were waiting for your first results. I may have ordered just before you..looking at my order history's ealiest date.. 22/10/2005.

Thanks for all the continuing L21 detective work. I'm sure many of our questions will be answered over time. Probably more complicated questions will arise as a result.

[rms2]

yes Richard i remember meeting you in the FTDNA Batch forum. I believe you were waiting for your first results. I may have ordered just before you..looking at my order history's ealiest date.. 22/10/2005.

Thanks for all the continuing L21 detective work. I'm sure many of our questions will be answered over time. Probably more complicated questions will arise as a result.

You were a good six months ahead of me. I ordered my first 37-marker test in April of 2006 and got the results on 19 May 2006. I remember you already knew you were R1b.

[rms2]

Good Luck Rich.

Though I am happy to have your company at DF13*

I'm not sure whats next for me.

Thanks, Mike. I'm not sure what my chances of being Z253+ are. Probably not good.

Thus far, you and I have kept pace since 2006 with always the same results. I remember you were one of the first to congratulate me when I got my first 37-marker results and was told I was "R1b1".

Z253 is full of surprises so you never know...

I hope so. It would be nice to get a positive result.

With DF13 I was pretty sure I would be positive. With this one, I just don't know. I kind of have the feeling I will be Z253+, but that could just be wishful thinking trying to masquerade as premonition.

[rms2]

I noticed some at least superficial similarities between my haplotype and that of Mulholland, Ysearch YGJ9A, kit 10900, who is R-Z253. We're a gd of 26 at 67 markers, but he has 390=23 and 385=11-11, like me. There are plenty of significant differences, of course, but I don't usually find anyone in any of the subclades whose haplotype even superficially resembles mine.

It's a thin reed, but better than nothing.

[rms2]

I noticed some at least superficial similarities between my haplotype and that of Mulholland, Ysearch YGJ9A, kit 10900, who is R-Z253. We're a gd of 26 at 67 markers, but he has 390=23 and 385=11-11, like me. There are plenty of significant differences, of course, but I don't usually find anyone in any of the subclades whose haplotype even superficially resembles mine.

It's a thin reed, but better than nothing.

Hmmm . . .

A cursory inspection of the R-Z253 (xL226) category seems to reveal that the 11-11 RecLoH at 385 is somewhat more common than in other groups. I didn't make a count, but it does seem noticeable that there are a few more 385=11-11 guys than is usual.

[Mark Jost]

I ran your variety with and without Kit 10900 to see if it would help your analysis.

f59080   Stevens
f208061   Stephens
yVT2R6   Beddoes
f88034   Stevens
f212967   Stevens
f163684   Webb
f57563   Cooper
f109000   Mulholland
fN40760   Stevens
f124786   Stevens
f102653   French
f191492   Stevens

Gen111T mod to 37 markers of 1123-16's With Kit 10900
YrsPerGen*   Count   Coalescence Age   Generations   StdDev   YBP   + - YBP   Founder's Age   Generations   StdDev   YBP   + - YBP   Max
30   N=12   1123-16  GA coal=   40.6   22.5   1,217.9   676.3   GA=   44.9   23.7   1,345.7   710.9   2,056.5
YrsPerGen*   Count   Coalescence Age   Generations   StdDev   YBP   + - YBP   Founder's Age   Generations   StdDev   YBP   + - YBP   Max
30   N=2647   L21GB coal=   109.1   36.9   3,272.1   1,108.5   GB=   116.1   38.1   3,482.5   1,143.6   4,626.1
      Diff =   68.5      2,054.2      Diff =   71.2      2,136.8      
26/37Markers                                    
   TRUE   TMRCA Founder   Generations   StdDev   YBP   + - YBP        Coalescence Age = Variance of Whole Population (n)               
30      GAB=   135.4   8.2   4,062.1   246.8        Founder's Age = Variance from Modal               


Without 10900

YrsPerGen*   Count   Coalescence Age   Generations   StdDev   YBP   + - YBP   Founder's Age   Generations   StdDev   YBP   + - YBP   Max
30   N=11   1123-16  GA coal=   14.3   13.4   428.3   401.0   GA=   15.9   14.1   477.9   423.7   901.6
YrsPerGen*   Count   Coalescence Age   Generations   StdDev   YBP   + - YBP   Founder's Age   Generations   StdDev   YBP   + - YBP   Max
30   N=2647   L21GB coal=   109.1   36.9   3,272.1   1,108.5   GB=   116.1   38.1   3,482.5   1,143.6   4,626.1
      Diff =   94.8      2,843.8      Diff =   100.2      3,004.5      
26/37Markers                                    
   TRUE   TMRCA Founder   Generations   StdDev   YBP   + - YBP        Coalescence Age = Variance of Whole Population (n)               
30      GAB=   129.1   8.0   3,871.9   241.0        Founder's Age = Variance from Modal               

MJost

[rms2]

Thanks, Mark!

I missed French, who is also Z253+. His result gives me added hope for a positive hit at Z253.

We'll see.

[Mark Jost]

Your welcome. Hope it helps. Mulholland is the outlier of the group with the some of the opposite direction of off modal faster STRs and, as you can see the big swing of intraclade founders age with or with out him.

MJost

[rms2]

Your welcome. Hope it helps. Mulholland is the outlier of the group with the some of the opposite direction of off modal faster STRs and, as you can see the big swing of intraclade founders age with or with out him.

MJost

Thanks again!

I'm hoping my Z253 result comes back quickly. My DF13 test took about a week or thereabouts from the time it got to the lab, so my hopes are high.

[rms2]

I am foolishly becoming kind of excited over the possibility of a Z253+ result. It's foolish because I'll probably get just the opposite, and because there doesn't seem to be a lot known about Z253, anyway.

It's not like it will get me right to the village or farm where my immigrant ancestor was born.

Still waiting for whole genome testing (like I'll be able to afford it when it comes!).

[Mike Forsyth]

I think at one point you guessed it at possibly around $1000...Any idea when this test may be made available..
I have upgraded to 67 markers, and am DF13+  DF49- with no other options that I know of...

[rms2]

I think at one point you guessed it at possibly around $1000...Any idea when this test may be made available..
I have upgraded to 67 markers, and am DF13+  DF49- with no other options that I know of...

I read somewhere it might become available in the next two or three years at $1,000.

I could pay that, but I'm not sure the wife would let me live long enough to see the results.

[Warrior1]

It's good to see your interest in hoping for a Z253+ result and just as you said, you'll find it won't really answer much and it will be on to further snp testing. I'm currently awaiting the results of what is left under Z253, already being L226- and L894-. The Casey predictor pretty much had negative predicted and that really leaves DF73, which I wouldn't hold my breath on...Then I've got these wacky YCA II a/b markers of 22/23....anyone have any thoughts on this combo?? It's not very common that is for sure.

[rms2]

It's good to see your interest in hoping for a Z253+ result and just as you said, you'll find it won't really answer much and it will be on to further snp testing. I'm currently awaiting the results of what is left under Z253, already being L226- and L894-. The Casey predictor pretty much had negative predicted and that really leaves DF73, which I wouldn't hold my breath on...Then I've got these wacky YCA II a/b markers of 22/23....anyone have any thoughts on this combo?? It's not very common that is for sure.

Thanks. I was hoping for a fast result, too, but it hasn't come in yet. It's only been a couple of weeks, but it was faster than that for DF13, so I was hoping for a repeat performance.

Still waiting.

[Warrior1]

I hear you, SNP results a month back were coming through in about 1.5 weeks and now I have a L1066 from batch 470 that still hasn't completed. That was batched on 06/27...

[Frances James]

IThen I've got these wacky YCA II a/b markers of 22/23....anyone have any thoughts on this combo?? It's not very common that is for sure.

I have a few men in a project with YCA II a/b =22/23  and 390 =21.
There are a few other surnames with this combo.

[Warrior1]

IThen I've got these wacky YCA II a/b markers of 22/23....anyone have any thoughts on this combo?? It's not very common that is for sure.

I have a few men in a project with YCA II a/b =22/23  and 390 =21.
There are a few other surnames with this combo.

Greetings:

Thank you for your reply. May I ask which project you are referring to? I have seen a small number of 22/23's but only as a fractional minority among hundreds or thousands of other L21's having the typical 19/23 combo..

Thanks.

[Frances James]

Warrior

There are a few Whalens, also Fitpatricks, Daltons, Brennans with YCAII a/b = 22/23,
 They all have 390 = 21 aswell,  which you dont appear to have.
I havnt tested whalen for Z253 yet, that might be the next move.

[Warrior1]

I'm requesting from FTDNA the YCAII a/b be reviewed as I'm not confidient they are accurate however it is a bit comforting to know there are others having these markers. I have to know for certain though since my most distant relations is only speculative, being from Scotland in the mid 1600's and can't afford the inconvenience of inaccurate markers in trying to confirm the lineage.

Feel free to refer to me as Bill as well.

Cheers,

Bill

[Warrior1]

Warrior

There are a few Whalens, also Fitpatricks, Daltons, Brennans with YCAII a/b = 22/23,
 They all have 390 = 21 aswell,  which you dont appear to have.
I havnt tested whalen for Z253 yet, that might be the next move.

I wanted to add, even among the Z253+ group thus far, the 22/23 str combo is about non-existent. This combo must be more recent, or several of us have an error in our resluts. My guess is there is some type of minority group within the British Isles, perhaps Pictish (I don't believe for one minute the Scot's modal is Pictish). Time will tell.

Bill

[rms2]

I'm guessing 23-23 at YCAII is a RecLoH, and 22-23 just represents a one-step move down on one of those values that make up that duplicate marker.

SMGF's entry for YCAII indicates that 22-23 occurs 1.67% of the time in its database or in 608 of its samples. That actually makes it one of the more frequent values at that marker. That's not the same as saying it occurs commonly; it doesn't. It only occurs 1.67% of the time over the whole SMGF database.

Of course, that is the total for all of SMGF's database, and not just for L21 or for Z253.

[Warrior1]

I'm guessing 23-23 at YCAII is a RecLoH, and 22-23 just represents a one-step move down on one of those values that make up that duplicate marker.

SMGF's entry for YCAII indicates that 22-23 occurs 1.67% of the time in its database or in 608 of its samples. That actually makes it one of the more frequent values at that marker.

Of course, that is the total for all of SMGF's database, and not just for L21 or for Z253.

Thank you, yes, I do see this: 22-23   608   . It's good to know, other than the mutant piece. I guess we are all mutants to a certain degree.

[rms2]

I'm guessing 23-23 at YCAII is a RecLoH, and 22-23 just represents a one-step move down on one of those values that make up that duplicate marker.

SMGF's entry for YCAII indicates that 22-23 occurs 1.67% of the time in its database or in 608 of its samples. That actually makes it one of the more frequent values at that marker.

Of course, that is the total for all of SMGF's database, and not just for L21 or for Z253.

Thank you, yes, I do see this: 22-23   608   . It's good to know, other than the mutant piece. I guess we are all mutants to a certain degree.

It's still not exactly a common value (I amended my original post above to indicate that). It only occurs 1.67% of the time throughout SMGF's entire database. That's not a lot really.

[Warrior1]

One other question though, don't want to hi-jack the thread, but wouldn't a recLOH event have affected other twin allele markers and not just YCAII? For instance 385, 464, cdy, etc. I'm not seeing anything that would indicate they had an event. I could be wrong but when I researched a little it seems like more than one set of markers would be affected by the event at the same time.

Cheers.

[rms2]

One other question though, don't want to hi-jack the thread, but wouldn't a recLOH event have affected other twin allele markers and not just YCAII? For instance 385, 464, cdy, etc. I'm not seeing anything that would indicate they had an event. I could be wrong but when I researched a little it seems like more than one set of markers would be affected by the event at the same time.

Cheers.

One RecLoH doesn't necessarily mean you'll have others.

A RecLoH to 23-23 from 19-23 at YCAII is a one-step mutation. Down to 22-23 makes that just two steps. It seems more likely than three steps up from 19-23.