World Families Forums - R-L21: DF41 another new subclade to watch - it is old!

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
October 22, 2014, 02:38:31 AM
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-L21: DF41 another new subclade to watch - it is old!
« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 20 Go Down Print
Author Topic: R-L21: DF41 another new subclade to watch - it is old!  (Read 40797 times)
Dubhthach
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 273


« Reply #75 on: September 07, 2012, 12:01:16 PM »

I would imagine one STR alone won't be enough to detect, still it's interesting way both McMillian and the Stewarts come back at 15, it could be due to "parallel evolution" or it may show a deeper connection between the two.

Regarding Hall, I see from the Alex Williamson tree that he belongs to variety:
[41-1411], interesting enough there is a Dwyer nearby to him. Will have to see if I can get him to order DF41.

-Paul
(DF41+)
Logged
rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #76 on: September 07, 2012, 03:12:45 PM »

I would imagine one STR alone won't be enough to detect, still it's interesting way both McMillian and the Stewarts come back at 15, it could be due to "parallel evolution" or it may show a deeper connection between the two.

Regarding Hall, I see from the Alex Williamson tree that he belongs to variety:
[41-1411], interesting enough there is a Dwyer nearby to him. Will have to see if I can get him to order DF41.

-Paul
(DF41+)

I don't know. Sometimes one str can be pretty reliable. Not 100%, certainly, but maybe still a pretty good indicator. Taken 492=13 for U106, for example, and 481=25 for M222. They are strong clues, though not infallible.

I'm not saying 534 is definitely like that, but as time goes on it might be worthwhile to monitor 534<=14 and see what percentage of those L21+ guys who have it turn out to be DF41+.
Logged

Dubhthach
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 273


« Reply #77 on: September 07, 2012, 05:35:42 PM »

I've setup a R-DF41 project on FTDNA. It's fairly bare bones at the moment, I will admit I did rip off the R-DF21 project, as they say "imitation is the sincerest form of flattery", I do see the DF21 project as been a role-model and hopefully we can follow in their footsteps in providing a useful resource for men who are DF41+

http://www.familytreedna.com/public/R-DF41

-Paul
(DF41+)
Logged
Jdean
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 678


« Reply #78 on: September 07, 2012, 06:50:14 PM »

I've setup a R-DF41 project on FTDNA. It's fairly bare bones at the moment, I will admit I did rip off the R-DF21 project, as they say "imitation is the sincerest form of flattery", I do see the DF21 project as been a role-model and hopefully we can follow in their footsteps in providing a useful resource for men who are DF41+

http://www.familytreedna.com/public/R-DF41

-Paul
(DF41+)

Good news !!

If you add DF41 and any other pertinent SNP names to the 'surnames' tab in your GAP settings this will allow people to find the project via a search from their FTDNA page, it doesn't work from FTDNA's main page though.

You can find this under 'PROJECT ADMINISTRATION' and then ' Project Profile'
Logged

Y-DNA R-DF49*
MtDNA J1c2e
Kit No. 117897
Ysearch 3BMC9

df.reynolds
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 126


« Reply #79 on: September 07, 2012, 07:24:12 PM »

I've setup a R-DF41 project on FTDNA. It's fairly bare bones at the moment, I will admit I did rip off the R-DF21 project, as they say "imitation is the sincerest form of flattery", I do see the DF21 project as been a role-model and hopefully we can follow in their footsteps in providing a useful resource for men who are DF41+

http://www.familytreedna.com/public/R-DF41

-Paul
(DF41+)

Thank you. :)

Much of what I did with the DF21 project was heavily influenced by what Rich had done with the L21 project and Charles Moore's work with the U106 project.

--david
Logged
rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #80 on: September 07, 2012, 07:32:32 PM »

Thank you, David. And I've got to admit I was heavily influenced by Charles Moore myself. He has really upgraded the R1b-U106 Research Project. It used to be all geographic, and that was okay when U106+ was as far as things went. Same with L21. A geographic emphasis was fine before things got broken down into so many different subclades.
Logged

rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #81 on: September 07, 2012, 07:48:46 PM »

I've setup a R-DF41 project on FTDNA. It's fairly bare bones at the moment, I will admit I did rip off the R-DF21 project, as they say "imitation is the sincerest form of flattery", I do see the DF21 project as been a role-model and hopefully we can follow in their footsteps in providing a useful resource for men who are DF41+

http://www.familytreedna.com/public/R-DF41

-Paul
(DF41+)

I sent out a bulk email to the DF41+ guys asking them to join your project. FTDNA has to approve it first, but it should go out tomorrow.

Hope I get a DF41+ result soon, so I can join, too.
Logged

rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #82 on: September 08, 2012, 07:38:20 PM »

Here's an update on DF41 testing from the R-L21 Plus Project. There are currently 47 DF41 tests on my "Pending Lab Results" page and 5 on my "Pending Shipment to Lab" page. In other words, we can expect to see at least 52 new DF41 test results in the next few weeks.

There are some continental DF41 tests to watch for:

Hebert, kit 4568 - France
Hamon, kit 84034 - France
Chartier, kit N54989 - France
Moreno, kit 131334 - Spain
Escalante, kit N10695 - Spain
Snyder, kit 98020 - Germany
Reith, kit 208773 - Germany
Krueger, kit 140503 - Germany
Vennemoe, kit 229805 - Norway
Erickson, kit N5620 - Sweden

Should be interesting.
Logged

rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #83 on: September 08, 2012, 08:15:35 PM »

If my personal observation that 534<=14 might be an indicator of DF41+ status means anything, then the following folks awaiting DF41 test results should have an advantage:

Chartier, kit N54989
Dugger, kit 85107
Hosie, kit 84796
MacPhee, kit 145001
McDonald, kit 104528
Rose, kit 32119 (L513+, should not have ordered DF41)
Self, kit 53479
Stevens, kit 59080
Thayer, kit N91203
Walker, kit 240201
Warren, kit N55401
Webb, kit 163684
White, kit 21834 (L513+, should not have ordered DF41)

It should be interesting to see how those turn out, and if 534<=14 holds up as the modal for DF41 (xL744).

Of course, Stevens is me. Self, Webb, and I are in a cluster that has one DF41+ result already, so we should be DF41+. Walker's cluster already has a number of DF41+ results.

The rest, however, are pretty much shots in the dark, although Thayer and Dugger are in the DF41+ section of Alex Williamson's Neighbor-Joining tree at the link posted by Paul earlier in this thread.

I'm going to go out on a limb and bet that most of those above get a DF41+ result. It should be fun to see whether or not I am right.

Note: List above edited 11 Sep 2012 to eliminate the two L513s who should not have ordered DF41.
« Last Edit: September 11, 2012, 07:49:26 AM by rms2 » Logged

rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #84 on: September 09, 2012, 08:04:40 PM »

If my personal observation that 534<=14 might be an indicator of DF41+ status means anything, then the following folks awaiting DF41 test results should have an advantage:

Chartier, kit N54989
Dugger, kit 85107
Hosie, kit 84796
MacPhee, kit 145001
McDonald, kit 104528
Rose, kit 32119
Self, kit 53479
Stevens, kit 59080
Thayer, kit N91203
Walker, kit 240201
Warren, kit N55401
Webb, kit 163684
White, kit 21834

It should be interesting to see how those turn out, and if 534<=14 holds up as the modal for DF41 (xL744).

Of course, Stevens is me. Self, Webb, and I are in a cluster that has one DF41+ result already, so we should be DF41+. Walker's cluster already has a number of DF41+ results.

The rest, however, are pretty much shots in the dark, although Thayer and Dugger are in the DF41+ section of Alex Williamson's Neighbor-Joining tree at the link posted by Paul earlier in this thread.

I'm going to go out on a limb and bet that most of those above get a DF41+ result. It should be fun to see whether or not I am right.




I guess no one wants to talk about DF41 but me. I was hoping to get some comments on what I wrote above. Agree? Disagree?

Logged

rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #85 on: September 09, 2012, 08:51:11 PM »

What about Richard Scott, the 10th Duke of Buccleuch and his DF41+ L744+ L745+ results?

Can Paul get him to test with FTDNA and join the new R-DF41 and Subclades Project? ;-)

Let us know how your visits with the Duke at Drumlanrig Castle go, Paul!
« Last Edit: September 09, 2012, 08:51:30 PM by rms2 » Logged

Larry Walker
Senior Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 59


« Reply #86 on: September 09, 2012, 08:53:24 PM »

If my personal observation that 534<=14 might be an indicator of DF41+ status means anything, then the following folks awaiting DF41 test results should have an advantage:

Chartier, kit N54989
Dugger, kit 85107
Hosie, kit 84796
MacPhee, kit 145001
McDonald, kit 104528
Rose, kit 32119
Self, kit 53479
Stevens, kit 59080
Thayer, kit N91203
Walker, kit 240201
Warren, kit N55401
Webb, kit 163684
White, kit 21834

It should be interesting to see how those turn out, and if 534<=14 holds up as the modal for DF41 (xL744).

Of course, Stevens is me. Self, Webb, and I are in a cluster that has one DF41+ result already, so we should be DF41+. Walker's cluster already has a number of DF41+ results.

The rest, however, are pretty much shots in the dark, although Thayer and Dugger are in the DF41+ section of Alex Williamson's Neighbor-Joining tree at the link posted by Paul earlier in this thread.

I'm going to go out on a limb and bet that most of those above get a DF41+ result. It should be fun to see whether or not I am right.




I guess no one wants to talk about DF41 but me. I was hoping to get some comments on what I wrote above. Agree? Disagree?



OK, I will take pity on you. LOL
I am a member of a group of 9 folks with a GD of 5 or less at Y67. We all match 6 of 6 of the DF41 signature, and two have tested positive so far. We all are 534 = 14.
Logged
rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #87 on: September 09, 2012, 09:00:01 PM »

If my personal observation that 534<=14 might be an indicator of DF41+ status means anything, then the following folks awaiting DF41 test results should have an advantage:

Chartier, kit N54989
Dugger, kit 85107
Hosie, kit 84796
MacPhee, kit 145001
McDonald, kit 104528
Rose, kit 32119
Self, kit 53479
Stevens, kit 59080
Thayer, kit N91203
Walker, kit 240201
Warren, kit N55401
Webb, kit 163684
White, kit 21834

It should be interesting to see how those turn out, and if 534<=14 holds up as the modal for DF41 (xL744).

Of course, Stevens is me. Self, Webb, and I are in a cluster that has one DF41+ result already, so we should be DF41+. Walker's cluster already has a number of DF41+ results.

The rest, however, are pretty much shots in the dark, although Thayer and Dugger are in the DF41+ section of Alex Williamson's Neighbor-Joining tree at the link posted by Paul earlier in this thread.

I'm going to go out on a limb and bet that most of those above get a DF41+ result. It should be fun to see whether or not I am right.




I guess no one wants to talk about DF41 but me. I was hoping to get some comments on what I wrote above. Agree? Disagree?



OK, I will take pity on you. LOL
I am a member of a group of 9 folks with a GD of 5 or less at Y67. We all match 6 of 6 of the DF41 signature, and two have tested positive so far. We all are 534 = 14.


Hi, Larry! Thanks for taking pity on me! :-)

So far my cluster has just one DF41+, but he is the only member of our cluster with a DF41 result, so I am cautiously optimistic about my own chances, since I believe our cluster is only about one third the age of DF41.

I do think Paul should try to talk the Duke of Buccleuch into transferring his results over to FTDNA and joining the project. ;-)

Logged

Heber
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 448


« Reply #88 on: September 10, 2012, 01:50:18 AM »

What about Richard Scott, the 10th Duke of Buccleuch and his DF41+ L744+ L745+ results?

Can Paul get him to test with FTDNA and join the new R-DF41 and Subclades Project? ;-)

Let us know how your visits with the Duke at Drumlanrig Castle go, Paul!

I understand Richard Scott the Duke of  Buccleuch is descended from Clan Scott.

"One of the most powerful of the Border families, the name was derived from the Scots who invaded Dalriada (Argyll) from Ireland and the surname is found in all parts of Scotland. However in the Borders, an area that was never fully Gaelic speaking, it may have meant a Scottish Gaelic speaker."

However I also believe he is part of the Stewart cluster DF41+ L744+ L745+ claiming descent from the Royal Stewart line. Can anyone explain the connection.
Logged

Heber


 
R1b1a2a1a1b4  L459+ L21+ DF21+ DF13+ U198- U106- P66- P314.2- M37- M222- L96- L513- L48- L44- L4- L226- L2- L196- L195- L193- L192.1- L176.2- L165- L159.2- L148- L144- L130- L1-
Paternal L21* DF21


Maternal H1C1



rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #89 on: September 10, 2012, 07:34:25 AM »

What about Richard Scott, the 10th Duke of Buccleuch and his DF41+ L744+ L745+ results?

Can Paul get him to test with FTDNA and join the new R-DF41 and Subclades Project? ;-)

Let us know how your visits with the Duke at Drumlanrig Castle go, Paul!

I understand Richard Scott the Duke of  Buccleuch is descended from Clan Scott.

"One of the most powerful of the Border families, the name was derived from the Scots who invaded Dalriada (Argyll) from Ireland and the surname is found in all parts of Scotland. However in the Borders, an area that was never fully Gaelic speaking, it may have meant a Scottish Gaelic speaker."

However I also believe he is part of the Stewart cluster DF41+ L744+ L745+ claiming descent from the Royal Stewart line. Can anyone explain the connection.


The 1st Duke of Buccleuch, James, as the illegitmate son of Charles II and his mistress, Lucy Walter, took his wife's surname, which was Scott. In his y-dna line, Richard Scott, the 10th and current Duke of Buccleuch, is a Stewart, not a Scott, even though he is currently the Clan Scott Chief (go figure).
Logged

rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #90 on: September 10, 2012, 07:57:01 AM »

Well, I guess the obvious answer to my "go figure" above is that Richard Scott has a connection to Clan Scott by descent from Anne Scott, the wife of James, the 1st Duke of Buccleuch, who is his y-dna ancestor.
Logged

Dubhthach
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 273


« Reply #91 on: September 10, 2012, 01:13:57 PM »

I believe there is also another "aristocratic" line that was tested with connections to the Stewarts these also came up with L744+/L746+/L745+ but I could be wrong on this. I've been offline due to work emergency all weekend, so no visits to fancy castles for me just let anyways!

-Paul
(DF41+)
Logged
rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #92 on: September 10, 2012, 08:03:06 PM »

I believe there is also another "aristocratic" line that was tested with connections to the Stewarts these also came up with L744+/L746+/L745+ but I could be wrong on this. I've been offline due to work emergency all weekend, so no visits to fancy castles for me just let anyways!

-Paul
(DF41+)

Well, if you do manage to finagle an invite to Drumlanrig Castle, see if you can get the Duke to sponsor an annual DF41 gathering, with food, beverages, Celtic music, and the like. ;-)
Logged

k.o.gran
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 104


« Reply #93 on: September 11, 2012, 06:58:46 AM »

85107 - Dugger just tested DF41+. I initially contacted him in my research of L563. I've adviced him to join the DF41 project. :)

-Kai
Logged

R-DF63+
rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #94 on: September 11, 2012, 07:38:27 AM »

If my personal observation that 534<=14 might be an indicator of DF41+ status means anything, then the following folks awaiting DF41 test results should have an advantage:

Chartier, kit N54989
Dugger, kit 85107
Hosie, kit 84796
MacPhee, kit 145001
McDonald, kit 104528
Rose, kit 32119
Self, kit 53479
Stevens, kit 59080
Thayer, kit N91203
Walker, kit 240201
Warren, kit N55401
Webb, kit 163684
White, kit 21834

It should be interesting to see how those turn out, and if 534<=14 holds up as the modal for DF41 (xL744).

Of course, Stevens is me. Self, Webb, and I are in a cluster that has one DF41+ result already, so we should be DF41+. Walker's cluster already has a number of DF41+ results.

The rest, however, are pretty much shots in the dark, although Thayer and Dugger are in the DF41+ section of Alex Williamson's Neighbor-Joining tree at the link posted by Paul earlier in this thread.

I'm going to go out on a limb and bet that most of those above get a DF41+ result. It should be fun to see whether or not I am right.



As Kai mentioned in his post, Dugger is DF41+. White and Rose, however, are DF41-. One thing I hadn't noticed before was that Rose and White had already tested L513+, so their DF41 tests were a waste of time and money. Had I noticed that when they ordered, I would have advised them to cancel the orders.

I guess I should stop assuming that people usually only order tests they have some chance of getting a positive hit on. When I sent out my bulk email on DF41, I addressed it only to the guys in the DF13+ but-still-looking category, not to any of the other categories.

When I went looking at the STRs of those who had ordered DF41, it didn't occur to me that I might be looking at some folks who should not have ordered it.

Logged

rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #95 on: September 11, 2012, 07:46:59 AM »

When I looked at Received Lab Results this morning and immediately saw some DF41 results, I was hoping mine might be among them, but no such luck. Anyway, most of the DF41 results are still pending. Just a few came in late last night.
Logged

Dubhthach
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 273


« Reply #96 on: September 11, 2012, 11:30:59 AM »

Good to hear that Dugger came back as DF41+, he's part of the same cluster as McCrere [41-1411]. From looking at Alex Willamson's tree it looks like quite an old branching moment between them.

-Paul
(DF41+)
Logged
k.o.gran
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 104


« Reply #97 on: September 11, 2012, 05:06:08 PM »

Good to hear that Dugger came back as DF41+, he's part of the same cluster as McCrere [41-1411]. From looking at Alex Willamson's tree it looks like quite an old branching moment between them.

-Paul
(DF41+)

I'm also trying to get hold of Nuckolls in that variety to suggest a DF41 test possibly followed up by a L563 test if DF41 is positive. We're running out of options for getting L563 out of the private status. Dugger is L563-.

-Kai
Logged

R-DF63+
Dubhthach
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 273


« Reply #98 on: September 11, 2012, 05:14:18 PM »

Indeed well I agree the more of the 1411 we can get tested for DF41 the better, getting a positive result there will probably make several of them amiable to ordering L563. Even if L563 does turn out to be private it may be quite usefull for reasearch in genealogical timeframe for certain members of that cluster.

-Paul
(DF41+)
Logged
rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #99 on: September 13, 2012, 07:56:59 AM »

Well, I was hoping to see some DF41 results this morning, especially my own, but no cigar. Sigh . . .

It's only been a week since Batch 480 went to the lab, but I've been spoiled by the rapid turnaround times of late.

Still waiting.
Logged

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 20 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 0.108 seconds with 19 queries.