World Families Forums - R-Z156, a Subclade of U106: What is Known?

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
October 22, 2014, 10:06:13 PM
Home Help Search Login Register

+  World Families Forums
|-+  General Forums - Note: You must Be Logged In to post. Anyone can browse.
| |-+  R1b General (Moderator: rms2)
| | |-+  R-Z156, a Subclade of U106: What is Known?
« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 Go Down Print
Author Topic: R-Z156, a Subclade of U106: What is Known?  (Read 8535 times)
Mike Walsh
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2964


WWW
« Reply #50 on: August 07, 2012, 11:08:17 PM »

We have SNP based Z14 interclade calcs (using Ken's spreadsheet) that predate these !!

What do you mean by "SNP based?"  Ken's Generations methods are based on STRs. Mark J is using Ken's latest version. I think he is only using 111 STR haplotypes though so there won't be the same sample sizes. 

All of those in the file that Mark has are SNP confirmed, and very recently updated from the projects.
Logged

R1b-L21>L513(DF1)>S6365>L705.2(&CTS11744,CTS6621)
Mark Jost
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 707


« Reply #51 on: August 08, 2012, 10:12:43 AM »

We have SNP based Z14 interclade calcs (using Ken's spreadsheet) that predate these !!

I did not, as an oversite, run Z14  but here it is.
YrsPerGen*   Count   Coalescence Age   Generations   StdDev   YBP   + - YBP   Founder's Age   Generations   StdDev   YBP   + - YBP
30   N=320   Clade A: U106 ALL  GA Coal.=   115.4   21.8   3,461.1   653.4   GA=   127.0   22.8   3,809.3   685.4
YrsPerGen*   Count   Coalescence Age   Generations   StdDev   YBP   + - YBP   Founder's Age   Generations   StdDev   YBP   + - YBP
30   N=29   Clade B: Z14 All  GB Coal.=   65.8   16.4   1,972.6   493.2   GB=   81.1   18.3   2,432.8   547.8
      Diff =   49.6      1,488.6      Diff =   45.9      1,376.5   
   TRUE   TMRCA Founder   Generations   StdDev   YBP   + - YBP               
30      Interclade GAB: U106* for U106 ALL & Z14 All   87.7   6.6   2,631.7   198.7               
                                 
                                 
YrsPerGen*   Count   Coalescence Age   Generations   StdDev   YBP   + - YBP   Founder's Age   Generations   StdDev   YBP   + - YBP
30   N=320   Clade A: U106 ALL  GA Coal.=   115.4   21.8   3,461.1   653.4   GA=   127.0   22.8   3,809.3   685.4
YrsPerGen*   Count   Coalescence Age   Generations   StdDev   YBP   + - YBP   Founder's Age   Generations   StdDev   YBP   + - YBP
30   N=21   Clade B: L257  GB Coal.=   36.7   12.3   1,100.7   368.4   GB=   46.6   13.8   1,399.5   415.5
      Diff =   78.7      2,360.5      Diff =   80.3      2,409.8   
YrsPerGen*   TRUE   TMRCA Founder   Generations   StdDev   YBP   + - YBP               
30      Interclade GAB: U106* for U106 ALL & L257   82.6   6.4   2,477.2   192.8               
Logged

148326
Pos: Z245 L459 L21 DF13**
Neg: DF23 L513 L96 L144 Z255 Z253 DF21 DF41 (Z254 P66 P314.2 M37 M222  L563 L526 L226 L195 L193 L192.1 L159.2 L130 DF63 DF5 DF49)
WTYNeg: L555 L371 (L9/L10 L370 L302/L319.1 L554 L564 L577 P69 L626 L627 L643 L679)
Mark Jost
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 707


« Reply #52 on: August 08, 2012, 10:16:54 AM »

We have SNP based Z14 interclade calcs (using Ken's spreadsheet) that predate these !!

What do you mean by "SNP based?"  Ken's Generations methods are based on STRs. Mark J is using Ken's latest version. I think he is only using 111 STR haplotypes though so there won't be the same sample sizes. 

All of those in the file that Mark has are SNP confirmed, and very recently updated from the projects.

Correct. I have used variety HTs, such as my own, Scots etc due to unknow SNPs, but if a known subclade being looked at it seems only reasonable to use SNP proven HTs.

MJost
Logged

148326
Pos: Z245 L459 L21 DF13**
Neg: DF23 L513 L96 L144 Z255 Z253 DF21 DF41 (Z254 P66 P314.2 M37 M222  L563 L526 L226 L195 L193 L192.1 L159.2 L130 DF63 DF5 DF49)
WTYNeg: L555 L371 (L9/L10 L370 L302/L319.1 L554 L564 L577 P69 L626 L627 L643 L679)
stoneman
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 141


« Reply #53 on: August 08, 2012, 02:27:58 PM »

I think that Z156 is at least 4000 ybp. You are good at maths but your using the wrong method.
Logged
Mike Walsh
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2964


WWW
« Reply #54 on: August 08, 2012, 02:36:00 PM »

I think that Z156 is at least 4000 ybp. You are good at maths but your using the wrong method.

I would say there is a very good chance you are correct. However, a simple expression of opinion is of little help in the conversation.

Can you explain with any greater specificity?

The method that Mark is using is documented by Ken Nordtvedt here: http://knordtvedt.home.bresnan.net/

Here is Ken's background: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kenneth_Nordtvedt
Part of his work related to NASA has been called "a fiendish piece of mathematics."
« Last Edit: August 08, 2012, 02:37:49 PM by Mikewww » Logged

R1b-L21>L513(DF1)>S6365>L705.2(&CTS11744,CTS6621)
stoneman
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 141


« Reply #55 on: August 09, 2012, 03:37:49 PM »

M222 is thought to be around 3,400 ybp right.There are only three SNPs found downstream of it. U106 isnt much older and yet there are 100 + SNPs downstream.Something is not right .SNPs are supposed to be unique events that happened over thousands of years.
I have read up on Ken. He is a brilliant at maths.
Logged
Mike Walsh
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2964


WWW
« Reply #56 on: August 09, 2012, 05:30:28 PM »

M222 is thought to be around 3,400 ybp right.There are only three SNPs found downstream of it. U106 isnt much older and yet there are 100 + SNPs downstream.Something is not right .SNPs are supposed to be unique events that happened over thousands of years.
I have read up on Ken. He is a brilliant at maths.

Where are you getting M222's TMRCA as 3400ybp?  Generally, I hear M222 folks talk about much younger, like 1500-2000 ybp, at least for a coalescence age. They may have branched off from the rest of DF23* 3400 ybp. That much may be true as they have a distinctive haplotype (with low diversity) while having large genetic distances from other L21 people.

As far as comparing SNP counts, we don't know if our (generally available) current discovery of SNPs and coverage of the Y chromosome is unbiased.  This is the general area that Ken Nordtvedt questions.
« Last Edit: August 09, 2012, 05:33:49 PM by Mikewww » Logged

R1b-L21>L513(DF1)>S6365>L705.2(&CTS11744,CTS6621)
F.E.C.
Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 23


« Reply #57 on: August 27, 2012, 08:53:08 AM »

Hello everybody, for those who remember me it's F.E.C. from dna-forums. I see that many who were once contributing to that forum have now migrated here. Glad to see they're fine, especially my old friends Richard and Gioiello.

In the last one/two years I have been kept away from genetic genealogy mainly due to work/personal life, but also because I thought that I had reached the end of the line with being a R-U106* guy.

What brought me back here, probably for a short time, is that a few days ago I have received an e-mail from Richard Rocca of the Italy DNA Project at FTDNA who kindly offered me to test for this new Z156 SNP. I don't know if he saw some telling marker in my haplotype or the fact that I'm an Italian R-U106* was enough to make a good candidate out of me.

I had absolutely no idea of what is the significance of Z156, so I have been collecting some info about it and I now seem to gather that it's potentially an Irish clade, in that case odds are I will come up negative to it.

Anyway I'll keep you guys updated, ciao for now.
Logged
Maliclavelli
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2151


« Reply #58 on: August 27, 2012, 09:33:23 AM »

Hello everybody, for those who remember me it's F.E.C. from dna-forums. I see that many who were once contributing to that forum have now migrated here. Glad to see they're fine, especially my old friends Richard and Gioiello.

F., glad to hear you again. Also Costa asks me frequently if I have news about you. We knew of your work. To recover the lost time, I think you should read the paper that Richard Rocca and colleagues has just written and look at the map of the SNPs lastly discovered about U106.
Unfortunately in the 1 thousand Genomes Project the 51 Tuscans (the only Italians tested), who always get the most ancient haplotype of every haplogroup, as to U106 are very recent: see the paper p. 5 (NA20524 and NA20586). Z156 would be one of the most ancient SNPs of this subclade after Z381. You know (from many years) that I haven’t ever excluded that also U106 could be ancient Italian and not necessarily a recent introgression of Middle Ages German people, but seen these Tuscans I have some doubts. The problem is that Italians have mostly DYS390=24 and not the modal 23 of U106, and this makes us hope that also U106 could be ancient in Italy. Probably Richard Rocca has seen by your haplotype that it merits you test for this SNP, and for $29  I’d do.
Logged

Maliclavelli


YDNA: R-S12460


MtDNA: K1a1b1e

rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #59 on: August 27, 2012, 09:21:11 PM »

Hello everybody, for those who remember me it's F.E.C. from dna-forums. I see that many who were once contributing to that forum have now migrated here. Glad to see they're fine, especially my old friends Richard and Gioiello.

In the last one/two years I have been kept away from genetic genealogy mainly due to work/personal life, but also because I thought that I had reached the end of the line with being a R-U106* guy.

What brought me back here, probably for a short time, is that a few days ago I have received an e-mail from Richard Rocca of the Italy DNA Project at FTDNA who kindly offered me to test for this new Z156 SNP. I don't know if he saw some telling marker in my haplotype or the fact that I'm an Italian R-U106* was enough to make a good candidate out of me.

I had absolutely no idea of what is the significance of Z156, so I have been collecting some info about it and I now seem to gather that it's potentially an Irish clade, in that case odds are I will come up negative to it.

Anyway I'll keep you guys updated, ciao for now.

Hi, Francesco. Good to see you here.

Z156 is not even remotely "an Irish clade".

It includes Germans, Belgians, and English, and even the English royal line (German in origin) of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha.
Logged

stoneman
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 141


« Reply #60 on: August 28, 2012, 06:43:40 AM »

23 is the most common value for U106 at present. 24 is the ancestral value because it is the modal value for L11 and most Eastern Europeans have it. Most of the L48 subclade have 23 and they are two SNPs downstream of U106. The modal value for Z156 is 24.



Hello everybody, for those who remember me it's F.E.C. from dna-forums. I see that many who were once contributing to that forum have now migrated here. Glad to see they're fine, especially my old friends Richard and Gioiello.

F., glad to hear you again. Also Costa asks me frequently if I have news about you. We knew of your work. To recover the lost time, I think you should read the paper that Richard Rocca and colleagues has just written and look at the map of the SNPs lastly discovered about U106.
Unfortunately in the 1 thousand Genomes Project the 51 Tuscans (the only Italians tested), who always get the most ancient haplotype of every haplogroup, as to U106 are very recent: see the paper p. 5 (NA20524 and NA20586). Z156 would be one of the most ancient SNPs of this subclade after Z381. You know (from many years) that I haven’t ever excluded that also U106 could be ancient Italian and not necessarily a recent introgression of Middle Ages German people, but seen these Tuscans I have some doubts. The problem is that Italians have mostly DYS390=24 and not the modal 23 of U106, and this makes us hope that also U106 could be ancient in Italy. Probably Richard Rocca has seen by your haplotype that it merits you test for this SNP, and for $29  I’d do.

Logged
F.E.C.
Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 23


« Reply #61 on: August 28, 2012, 08:59:35 AM »

Thank you Maliclavelli, Rich and stoneman.

I see that the consensus about R-U106's origin and expansion hasn't changed in the last two years. For the record I'm DYS390=24, like most Italian R-U106 people.

G. could you please provide me the links to Richard Rocca's study and maps concerning U106?
« Last Edit: August 28, 2012, 09:00:03 AM by F.E.C. » Logged
Mike Walsh
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2964


WWW
« Reply #62 on: August 28, 2012, 09:32:35 AM »

Thank you Maliclavelli, Rich and stoneman.

I see that the consensus about R-U106's origin and expansion hasn't changed in the last two years. For the record I'm DYS390=24, like most Italian R-U106 people.

G. could you please provide me the links to Richard Rocca's study and maps concerning U106?

I'm not sure if we've ever reached a consensus on U106's origin, I don't think its Germany or the Nordic countries though which some might expect. I don't know the answer, though.

For the U106 discussion group and some TMRCA things they are doing, I keep a spreadsheet of all the U106 I can find in FTDNA projects. Here it is.
https://dl.dropbox.com/u/17907527/R1b-U106_Haplotypes.zip

The most up to date phylogeny tree that I know of is Clinton P's (SGrikes) in the U106 group. It's at:
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/R1b1c_U106-S21/files/R-U106%20Haplo%20Tree/
Logged

R1b-L21>L513(DF1)>S6365>L705.2(&CTS11744,CTS6621)
Maliclavelli
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2151


« Reply #63 on: August 28, 2012, 12:30:17 PM »

G. could you please provide me the links to Richard Rocca's study and maps concerning U106?
It has been discussed a lot here. See

Rich Rocca et al: R1b1a2 Y Chromosome Variants
« Last Edit: August 28, 2012, 12:35:54 PM by Maliclavelli » Logged

Maliclavelli


YDNA: R-S12460


MtDNA: K1a1b1e

Richard Rocca
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 523


« Reply #64 on: August 28, 2012, 01:06:43 PM »

FEC, you are right, U106 in Italy is of interest because unlike many other areas, it seems lower in L48. Someone that posts here anonymously donated the funds to help test Z156 and the suspicion is that most samples (including yours) will be Z156+.
Logged

Paternal: R1b-U152+L2*
Maternal: H
F.E.C.
Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 23


« Reply #65 on: August 29, 2012, 08:24:03 AM »

I'm not sure if we've ever reached a consensus on U106's origin, I don't think its Germany or the Nordic countries though which some might expect. I don't know the answer, though.
I'm afraid it was a poor choice of words. What I really meant was that not much seem changed in the last two years in respect to the theories concerning the origin of U106.

FEC, you are right, U106 in Italy is of interest because unlike many other areas, it seems lower in L48. Someone that posts here anonymously donated the funds to help test Z156 and the suspicion is that most samples (including yours) will be Z156+.
Thank you Richard and thank you to whoever was so kind to donate the funds for the test. I'm very excited about this new development and should I come up Z156+ I will definitely test for the downstream SNPs too.

Also, in the scenario that most samples are Z156+ (as you have posited), I'm curious as to how making sense of the fact that the Italian R-106 is so overwhelmingly Z156+.
« Last Edit: August 29, 2012, 08:40:50 AM by F.E.C. » Logged
Maliclavelli
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2151


« Reply #66 on: August 29, 2012, 11:00:25 AM »

Also, in the scenario that most samples are Z156+ (as you have posited), I'm curious as to how making sense of the fact that the Italian R-106 is so overwhelmingly Z156+.

I think that if Italians would be above all Z156 (and I think also to Brazilian Zeni from Trentino) we should become to think that they are here from ancient times and not due to recent German introgression. We know that your surname and the place of origin of your family didn’t fit with a German origin. And we should think also to the huge presence of U106 in Austria, easily thought like a German origin, and the massive presence in the Ancient Rhaetia of R1a*/R1a1* I spoke about in another thread: you know that there I put the “Italian Refugium”.
Logged

Maliclavelli


YDNA: R-S12460


MtDNA: K1a1b1e

Richard Rocca
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 523


« Reply #67 on: August 29, 2012, 11:27:26 AM »

I'm not sure if we've ever reached a consensus on U106's origin, I don't think its Germany or the Nordic countries though which some might expect. I don't know the answer, though.
I'm afraid it was a poor choice of words. What I really meant was that not much seem changed in the last two years in respect to the theories concerning the origin of U106.

FEC, you are right, U106 in Italy is of interest because unlike many other areas, it seems lower in L48. Someone that posts here anonymously donated the funds to help test Z156 and the suspicion is that most samples (including yours) will be Z156+.
Thank you Richard and thank you to whoever was so kind to donate the funds for the test. I'm very excited about this new development and should I come up Z156+ I will definitely test for the downstream SNPs too.

Also, in the scenario that most samples are Z156+ (as you have posited), I'm curious as to how making sense of the fact that the Italian R-106 is so overwhelmingly Z156+.

FEC, the thinking is that "perhaps" Z156 in Italy might be pre-Germanic expansion, "perhaps" related to Hallstatt or "perhaps" even earlier. Your result will be interesting as will the result of Zeni which is the only other sample that has accepted the offer thus far.

Once we get enough results, we can match them up with other Z156 results from outside of Italy and consult with the U106 experts to see what they think.
Logged

Paternal: R1b-U152+L2*
Maternal: H
Jarman
Senior Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 58


« Reply #68 on: August 29, 2012, 12:31:51 PM »

Also, in the scenario that most samples are Z156+ (as you have posited), I'm curious as to how making sense of the fact that the Italian R-106 is so overwhelmingly Z156+.

How about the Lombards? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lombards

Logged
Maliclavelli
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2151


« Reply #69 on: August 29, 2012, 01:04:15 PM »

The Lombards are the "German people introgression" during the Middle Ages I spoke above, but if Italians would be above all Z156 we should demonstrate that Lombards were above all Z156, and this seems very unlikely. For this we should think to more ancient times.
Logged

Maliclavelli


YDNA: R-S12460


MtDNA: K1a1b1e

F.E.C.
Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 23


« Reply #70 on: August 29, 2012, 01:08:11 PM »

We know that your surname and the place of origin of your family didn’t fit with a German origin.
Indeed, my surname sounds very Italian.

However, we know of another Italian R-U106 man carrying my same relatively uncommon surname (although our haplotypes are too different to be related within a genealogical timeframe) and whose paternal line hails from Central Italy like mine. It is a very strange coincidence if you ask me.

On the other hand, as you know I have taken the 23andMe test and what I find most surprising is that Germany is my second best match at the Ancestry Finder, with several German "relatives" with whom I share relatively big chunks of genome which should indicate a relatively recent common ancestor (and even a few more distant Baltic and Scandinavian relatives). I know for sure that these "relatives" are inherited from my Central Italian side - paternal - because my Northern Italian mother doesn't show any of them in Ancestry Finder. Hence I wonder if the introduction of my y-dna line to Italy is more recent than I thought and if there was a surname change or italianisation at some point in the last few centuries.

I really can't tell, anyway exciting stuff.
« Last Edit: August 29, 2012, 01:10:40 PM by F.E.C. » Logged
Richard Rocca
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 523


« Reply #71 on: August 29, 2012, 01:36:02 PM »

We know that your surname and the place of origin of your family didn’t fit with a German origin.
Indeed, my surname sounds very Italian.

However, we know of another Italian R-U106 man carrying my same relatively uncommon surname (although our haplotypes are too different to be related within a genealogical timeframe) and whose paternal line hails from Central Italy like mine. It is a very strange coincidence if you ask me.

On the other hand, as you know I have taken the 23andMe test and what I find most surprising is that Germany is my second best match at the Ancestry Finder, with several German "relatives" with whom I share relatively big chunks of genome which should indicate a relatively recent common ancestor (and even a few more distant Baltic and Scandinavian relatives). I know for sure that these "relatives" are inherited from my Central Italian side - paternal - because my Northern Italian mother doesn't show any of them in Ancestry Finder. Hence I wonder if the introduction of my y-dna line to Italy is more recent than I thought and if there was a surname change or italianisation at some point in the last few centuries.

I really can't tell, anyway exciting stuff.

Indeed, surnames can be deceiving as you match Zeni more than you do the other kit that you share a surname with.
Logged

Paternal: R1b-U152+L2*
Maternal: H
Maliclavelli
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2151


« Reply #72 on: August 29, 2012, 02:01:15 PM »

We know that your surname and the place of origin of your family didn’t fit with a German origin.
Indeed, my surname sounds very Italian.

However, we know of another Italian R-U106 man carrying my same relatively uncommon surname (although our haplotypes are too different to be related within a genealogical timeframe) and whose paternal line hails from Central Italy like mine. It is a very strange coincidence if you ask me.

On the other hand, as you know I have taken the 23andMe test and what I find most surprising is that Germany is my second best match at the Ancestry Finder, with several German "relatives" with whom I share relatively big chunks of genome which should indicate a relatively recent common ancestor (and even a few more distant Baltic and Scandinavian relatives). I know for sure that these "relatives" are inherited from my Central Italian side - paternal - because my Northern Italian mother doesn't show any of them in Ancestry Finder. Hence I wonder if the introduction of my y-dna line to Italy is more recent than I thought and if there was a surname change or italianisation at some point in the last few centuries.

I really can't tell, anyway exciting stuff.

I have your 23andMe on my sharing, and looking at your Ancestry Finder I don’t think that the link with Germans and Swiss demonstrate an your ancient link with Germans, because, even though you were of Lombard origin, it wouldn’t be detectable after 1500 years. I think that your links are with Americans who have German but also Italian origin and the link is by the Italian side. The link with Switzerland may be by your mother side, because it is above all in the X, and your X comes from your mother.

« Last Edit: August 29, 2012, 02:03:07 PM by Maliclavelli » Logged

Maliclavelli


YDNA: R-S12460


MtDNA: K1a1b1e

F.E.C.
Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 23


« Reply #73 on: August 29, 2012, 03:24:00 PM »

I have your 23andMe on my sharing, and looking at your Ancestry Finder I don’t think that the link with Germans and Swiss demonstrate an your ancient link with Germans, because, even though you were of Lombard origin, it wouldn’t be detectable after 1500 years. I think that your links are with Americans who have German but also Italian origin and the link is by the Italian side. The link with Switzerland may be by your mother side, because it is above all in the X, and your X comes from your mother.
Sorry G. but I don't think you can see your contacts' Ancestry Finder since it's private.

These are my top 3 Ancestry Finder results (that is distant "relatives" taking the test) percentage-wise:
Italy
1.3%
Germany
0.4%
United Kingdom
0.2%
Switzerland
0.2%
Portugal
0.2%
Poland
0.2%

Anyway I'm not reading too much into it, just tossing there some elements to try to make some sense as I still can't see much of it.
« Last Edit: August 29, 2012, 03:30:01 PM by F.E.C. » Logged
stoneman
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 141


« Reply #74 on: August 29, 2012, 05:13:27 PM »

Z156 could be as old as 5400 ybp.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 Go Up Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


SEO light theme by © Mustang forums. Powered by SMF 1.1.13 | SMF © 2006-2011, Simple Machines LLC

Page created in 0.137 seconds with 19 queries.