World Families Forums - National Geographic and Family Tree DNA Announce Geno 2.0

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
July 31, 2014, 02:18:08 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)
| | |-+  National Geographic and Family Tree DNA Announce Geno 2.0
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 9 10 [11] Go Down Print
Author Topic: National Geographic and Family Tree DNA Announce Geno 2.0  (Read 29355 times)
Jean-Pierre
Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 9


« Reply #250 on: January 15, 2013, 10:52:08 PM »

According to your results, your last SNP is R-M228.2
Logged
1790Noll
Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 28


« Reply #251 on: January 16, 2013, 02:23:57 AM »

Yes i am M228.2 and it is private SNP.. only in Belgieri family branch..
Others Bolgeri or Belgeri are only L20+..
ciao.
Logged
rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #252 on: January 17, 2013, 05:03:44 AM »

I'm starting to see people join the R-L21 Plus Project because of their Geno 2.0 results who do not have any STR markers. That's fine as long as they are L21+ or positive for one of the downstream SNPs. The big problem is that they are like ghosts when it comes to the project's public web site, because men without STRs don't show up.

They're hovering there in the project but are otherwise invisible.
Logged

Dubhthach
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 273


« Reply #253 on: January 17, 2013, 05:30:59 AM »

I'm starting to see people join the R-L21 Plus Project because of their Geno 2.0 results who do not have any STR markers. That's fine as long as they are L21+ or positive for one of the downstream SNPs. The big problem is that they are like ghosts when it comes to the project's public web site, because men without STRs don't show up.

They're hovering there in the project but are otherwise invisible.

We've seen a couple of these in Ireland project as well, only thing I could suggest is that when the next sale comes in to recommend that they order STR's, the old analogy of the STR's been the leaves on the tree (as oppose to SNP's been the branch) and only way to find close matches may help.

-Paul
(DF41+)
Logged
Degredado
Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 5


« Reply #254 on: January 17, 2013, 07:45:58 PM »

Well this is funny.

Last year, I got tested with Genebase, and the results showed I was S116/P312+ (L21-, U152-, Z196-).

I've recently got my Geno 2.0 results, which confirmed I am P310 (it doesn't test for P312 or U106), but here's the funny thing - my terminal SNP's are L493+/L477+, which, according to the ISOGG Y-SNP tree, are defining mutations of R1b1a2a1a1a3b2a1a1 - which falls under U106.

My question is: is it possible to be P312+, even with these SNP's, or did one of the 2 tests necessarily screw up? :S
Logged
rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #255 on: January 17, 2013, 09:09:26 PM »

Well this is funny.

Last year, I got tested with Genebase, and the results showed I was S116/P312+ (L21-, U152-, Z196-).

I've recently got my Geno 2.0 results, which confirmed I am P310 (it doesn't test for P312 or U106), but here's the funny thing - my terminal SNP's are L493+/L477+, which, according to the ISOGG Y-SNP tree, are defining mutations of R1b1a2a1a1a3b2a1a1 - which falls under U106.

My question is: is it possible to be P312+, even with these SNP's, or did one of the 2 tests necessarily screw up? :S

I'm guessing Genebase screwed up.
Logged

Degredado
Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 5


« Reply #256 on: January 17, 2013, 10:03:57 PM »

Hmmm, I see that on the previous page of this thread, there's a guy who's U152+ and who also tested positive for L493 and L477. What the heck? How can that be?

http://www.isogg.org/tree/ISOGG_HapgrpR.html
« Last Edit: January 17, 2013, 10:04:45 PM by Degredado » Logged
rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #257 on: January 18, 2013, 04:59:47 AM »

Hmmm, I see that on the previous page of this thread, there's a guy who's U152+ and who also tested positive for L493 and L477. What the heck? How can that be?

http://www.isogg.org/tree/ISOGG_HapgrpR.html

It's possible that L493 and L477 have occurred in more than one haplogroup and perhaps are unstable or at least should be labeled L493.1, L493.2, etc.
Logged

rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #258 on: January 21, 2013, 07:53:32 PM »

I keep getting folks joining my projects without STR test results. They only have Geno 2.0 results and so won't show up on our Y-DNA Results pages.

I'm having to tell them what STRs are and asking them to order yet another test on top of their expensive Geno 2.0 test.

But I am going whole hog and recommending 111 markers.

Might as well.
Logged

gtc
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 238


« Reply #259 on: January 21, 2013, 10:44:11 PM »

I keep getting folks joining my projects without STR test results. They only have Geno 2.0 results and so won't show up on our Y-DNA Results pages.

I'm having to tell them what STRs are and asking them to order yet another test on top of their expensive Geno 2.0 test.

But I am going whole hog and recommending 111 markers.

Might as well.

Yes, we test 111 markers as normal now (saves having to "gee" them up for further STR tests) and then suggest individual SNPs depending on how they cluster.

I'm not yet convinced of the value of Geno 2. I think I'd prefer a "deeper" deep clade.
Logged

Y-DNA: R1b-Z12* (R1b1a2a1a1a3b2b1a1a1) GGG-GF Ireland (roots reportedly Anglo-Norman)
mtDNA: I3b (FMS) Maternal lines Irish
Mike Walsh
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2963


WWW
« Reply #260 on: January 22, 2013, 11:58:12 PM »

I keep getting folks joining my projects without STR test results. They only have Geno 2.0 results and so won't show up on our Y-DNA Results pages.

I'm having to tell them what STRs are and asking them to order yet another test on top of their expensive Geno 2.0 test.

But I am going whole hog and recommending 111 markers.

Might as well.

Yes, we test 111 markers as normal now (saves having to "gee" them up for further STR tests) and then suggest individual SNPs depending on how they cluster.

I'm not yet convinced of the value of Geno 2. I think I'd prefer a "deeper" deep clade.

Some 111 marker results from the December sale are now coming in.

I agree that the 111 markers is going to be a great thing. I've got several examples now where they've told a different story than at 67 markers. One in particular for an L513+ L706.2- Connell who I would have pretty heavily bet as being L706.2+.  In fact, i thought his L706.2- was an error. Now that he has 111 markers, we can see the L706.2- reading looks right on. It just seems weird, that you could match on six fairly slow off-modal markers at 67 STRs and be GDs of 7 through 10, but be off as much as 20 additional steps on the last 44 markers (68-111) and still be under L513+.
Logged

R1b-L21>L513(DF1)>L705.2
Heber
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 448


« Reply #261 on: February 21, 2013, 04:00:19 PM »

Here are my Geno 2.0 results.

46% Northern European
35% Meditteranean
18% Southwest Asian

http://pinterest.com/gerardcorcoran/genographic/

These are very g-eneric and reflect ancient admixture between Hunter Gather, Neolithic and Bronze Age settlers. Like 23andme they have a long way to go in getting more detail of regional populations. I can get far better definition by combining analysis from Geno 2.0, AC, RF and HTMM.

http://pinterest.com/gerardcorcoran/23andme/


I believe Paternal and Maternal Haplogroups and their matching frequency can tell us a very interesting story about my deep ancestry of Ireland but also can give clues to my more recent ancestors migratory experience.

I do not believe the power of this analysis is used to the full extent by 23andme, FTDNA or by Geno 2.0 for that matter.

First it is interesting to see what the latest research says about our ancestors migrations. In my case I use the latest data from J.P.Mallorys book "The Origin of the Irish". It tells the following story.

Table 8.1 mtDNA of Modern Irish Population

H 39%
U 13%
K 11%
J 10%
V 4%
T 2%
X 2%

Table 8.2 Subgroups of mtDNA haplogroup H

H1, H3, H4, H5a, H6, H7, H13
Table 8.3 mtDNA haplogroups of Ireland
Haplogroup. Home In Ireland (KYA)

U Greece. 7.3
X. Caucasus 5.5
H. S. France 5.5
V. N. Iberia. 5.5
T. N. Italy. 5.5
K. N. Italy 5.5
J. Near East 4.0

Table 8.4 genetic composition of modern Irish according to mtDNA haplogroups

Pre-farming
D, H, HV, I, K, T, T2, T4, U, U2, U4, U5, U5a, U5a1, U5b, V, W, X

Farming
J, J1a, J1b, J2, T1, U3

8.5 The proposed migration of R1b-14 ("Rory") from Iberia to Ireland.
Shows a clear migration route along the Atllantic facade from Iberia to Ireland

Table 8.5 Major Y chromosome halpogroups in Ireland
Pre-farming
R1a, R1a1, R1b3, IJK, PN3, N3, I1a, I1b2, I1c
Farming
E3b, G, J

Table 8.6 Distribution of Y chromosome haplogroup R1b among populations in Ireland. Irish surnames were compared to non Irish surnames.

Source. %R1b
Connacht. 98
Munster. 95
Ulster. 81
Leinster. 73
English. 63
Scottish. 53
Norman/Norse. 83

The Irish modal haplogroup (M222) and its ancestors
Shown the haplogroup tree from M269 > L11 > U106, P312 > L21, U152 > M222
M222 accounts for about 5% of Irishmen

Distribution of L21 (M529)
Map with peak in Ireland and distribution along the Atlantic Facade

Next I look at my over 1,000 Relative Finder matches and create a Network Diagram mapping Paternal Haplogroup to Maternal Haplogroup and Maternal Haplogroup to Paternal Haplogroup. This is consistent with the findings of Mallory but in addition it gives me clues to the more recent migrations of my ancestors.
The dominant L21 Paternal and H1 Maternal who stayed in Ireland is reflected in the diagram. Those ancestors who migrated to the US and were the earliest settlers of Minnesota and married with other Irish families or with the local German families in Minnesota as reflected in the U106 matches.
Again this is entirely consistent with my knowledge of my ancestors story and with the latest scientific studies.

The Paternal analysis gives the following picture.
RF Paternal Haplogroup Mapped to Maternal Haplogroup Matches. R 373, R1a 29, R1b 373, M269 1, L23 3, L11 44, U106 51, U152 25, P312 20, L21 124, M222 63, J24, I115, G11, E11, U106 51.

http://pinterest.com/pin/32721534764829573/

The Maternal Analysis gives the following picture.
RF Maternal Haplogroup Mapped to Paternal Haplogroup Matches. Matches 1048 H 461, H1 119, H2 31, H3 45, H4, 23, H5 32, H6 24, H7 15, J 101, K 79, T 102, U 134.

http://pinterest.com/pin/32721534764829567/

My conclusion is that our Paternal and Maternal Haplogroups and their matches tell us a much more powerful story than is currently available with Haplogroup Analysis alone or Ancestry Composition.
Even Geno 2.0 which is the benchmark for deep ancestry does not exploit this capability.

There is a case to be made for integrating the data available from RF and AC and Haplogroup Tree Mutation Mapper to give a more accurate picture of our ancestors migrations.

http://pinterest.com/pin/32721534764374874/

http://pinterest.com/pin/32721534763591605/

http://pinterest.com/gerardcorcoran/celtic-migrations-dna/

http://pinterest.com/gerardcorcoran/
« Last Edit: February 21, 2013, 04:19:43 PM by Heber » 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



Mike Walsh
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2963


WWW
« Reply #262 on: February 25, 2013, 02:16:17 PM »

Table 8.6 Distribution of Y chromosome haplogroup R1b among populations in Ireland. Irish surnames were compared to non Irish surnames.

Source. %R1b
Connacht. 98
Munster. 95
Ulster. 81
Leinster. 73
English. 63
Scottish. 53
Norman/Norse. 83

Thanks, Heber. You are a wealth of information.

I just want to make sure I understand the numbers above from Mallory's Table 8.6.

When it lists Connacht at 95%, are they saying
that 95% of all men in Connacht are R1b?
or 95% of the men with Irish surnames in Connacht are R1b?
or 95% of Irish men with Connacht based surnames are R1b?

The Scottish 53% number seems a little low. Are these Scottish surnames in Ireland?
Logged

R1b-L21>L513(DF1)>L705.2
Heber
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 448


« Reply #263 on: February 25, 2013, 02:45:30 PM »

Table 8.6 Distribution of Y chromosome haplogroup R1b among populations in Ireland. Irish surnames were compared to non Irish surnames.

Source. %R1b
Connacht. 98
Munster. 95
Ulster. 81
Leinster. 73
English. 63
Scottish. 53
Norman/Norse. 83

Thanks, Heber. You are a wealth of information.

I just want to make sure I understand the numbers above from Mallory's Table 8.6.

When it lists Connacht at 95%, are they saying
that 95% of all men in Connacht are R1b?
or 95% of the men with Irish surnames in Connacht are R1b?
or 95% of Irish men with Connacht based surnames are R1b?

The Scottish 53% number seems a little low. Are these Scottish surnames in Ireland?

Mike,

The most basic attempt to relate surnames to the Y Chrosomone was undertaken in 2000, when DNA samples were drawn from males with Irish surnames and then arranged according to province and compared with those of men living in Ireland whose surnames were not Irish. This is what is shown in table 8.6.
The highest frequency of R1b occurs in Ireland and the highest frequence of R1b and sub clades in Ireland occurs in the West of Ireland.
This was later confirmed by Busby and Myres.

http://pinterest.com/pin/32721534763811258/
http://pinterest.com/pin/32721534764801408/

I know you are interested in the Walshes of the mountains. I am putting together a board on the Wine Geese, those Irish who left following the defeat at Aughrim and Limerick for the continent (Wild Geese) and who distinguished themselves in European armies and settled down as owners of wine chateaux.
Several of the Grand Chateaux belonged to the Walsh-Serrant who are apparently directly descended from Walsh of the Mountains, so maybe you might pay a visit on you next trip to France. These are not "Vin de Table". These are amongst the "Grand Cru" of France.

http://pinterest.com/gerardcorcoran/irish-chateaux-the-wine-geese/

« Last Edit: February 25, 2013, 03:17:33 PM by Heber » 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



Mike Walsh
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2963


WWW
« Reply #264 on: February 25, 2013, 02:54:34 PM »

Table 8.6 Distribution of Y chromosome haplogroup R1b among populations in Ireland. Irish surnames were compared to non Irish surnames.

Source. %R1b
Connacht. 98
Munster. 95
Ulster. 81
Leinster. 73
English. 63
Scottish. 53
Norman/Norse. 83

Thanks, Heber. You are a wealth of information.

I just want to make sure I understand the numbers above from Mallory's Table 8.6.

When it lists Connacht at 95%, are they saying
that 95% of all men in Connacht are R1b?
or 95% of the men with Irish surnames in Connacht are R1b?
or 95% of Irish men with Connacht based surnames are R1b?

The Scottish 53% number seems a little low. Are these Scottish surnames in Ireland?

Mike,

This most basic attempt to relate surnames to the Y Chrosomone was undertaken in 2000, when DNA samples were drawn from males with Irish surnames and then arranged according to province and compared with those of men living in Ireland whose surnames were not Irish. This is what is shown in table 8.6. The highest frequency of R1b occurs in the West of Ireland.....

Thank you.

I'm still unclear on the Scottish and Norman/Norse categories. Of course they are NOT Irish provinces of so are those two categories of surnames. In other words, 53% of the men in Ireland with Scottish surnames are R1b and 83% of the men in Ireland with Norman/Norse surnames are R1b?  Is that what this is saying?
« Last Edit: February 25, 2013, 02:55:04 PM by Mikewww » Logged

R1b-L21>L513(DF1)>L705.2
Heber
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 448


« Reply #265 on: February 25, 2013, 04:23:36 PM »

Table 8.6 Distribution of Y chromosome haplogroup R1b among populations in Ireland. Irish surnames were compared to non Irish surnames.

Source. %R1b
Connacht. 98
Munster. 95
Ulster. 81
Leinster. 73
English. 63
Scottish. 53
Norman/Norse. 83

Thanks, Heber. You are a wealth of information.

I just want to make sure I understand the numbers above from Mallory's Table 8.6.

When it lists Connacht at 95%, are they saying
that 95% of all men in Connacht are R1b?
or 95% of the men with Irish surnames in Connacht are R1b?
or 95% of Irish men with Connacht based surnames are R1b?

The Scottish 53% number seems a little low. Are these Scottish surnames in Ireland?

Mike,

This most basic attempt to relate surnames to the Y Chrosomone was undertaken in 2000, when DNA samples were drawn from males with Irish surnames and then arranged according to province and compared with those of men living in Ireland whose surnames were not Irish. This is what is shown in table 8.6. The highest frequency of R1b occurs in the West of Ireland.....

Thank you.

I'm still unclear on the Scottish and Norman/Norse categories. Of course they are NOT Irish provinces of so are those two categories of surnames. In other words, 53% of the men in Ireland with Scottish surnames are R1b and 83% of the men in Ireland with Norman/Norse surnames are R1b?  Is that what this is saying?

Mike,
Correct. That is what he is saying but he continues,
 "In short at this degree of resolution (year 2000) we can only say that an Irish identity has been mapped onto the distribution of an earlier genetic type, not that the genetic type is in any way associated with being Irish."

We know that there was a lot of admixture between the majority Irish and the minority Normans, so that the Normans became "More Irish than the Irish themselves". Moffat and Wilson also tells us that Scotland has a very diverse Haplogroup mix so that R1b did not reach the frequencies it did in Ireland.
In any event the later more detailed Myres and Busby data confirms the higher frequencies of R1b and subclades in Ireland and in particular the West of Ireland.

One of the problems with the Mallory book and others eg Catherine Nash, Of Irish Origins, is that they depend on old studies eg Underhill,  and relatively few STRs. I don't criticise these studies. They were the pioneers. However, the industry has moved on and Autosomal studies are widely available, and Next Generation Sequencing is now the benchmark.
I would have more confidence in Tyler Smith and Patterson. Unfortunately they do not interpret the Irish context or Archealogy and Language.
« Last Edit: February 25, 2013, 04:25:46 PM by Heber » 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



Mike Walsh
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2963


WWW
« Reply #266 on: February 25, 2013, 05:55:49 PM »

Mike,
Correct. That is what he is saying but he continues,
 "In short at this degree of resolution (year 2000) we can only say that an Irish identity has been mapped onto the distribution of an earlier genetic type, not that the genetic type is in any way associated with being Irish."

We know that there was a lot of admixture between the majority Irish and the minority Normans, so that the Normans became "More Irish than the Irish themselves". Moffat and Wilson also tells us that Scotland has a very diverse Haplogroup mix so that R1b did not reach the frequencies it did in Ireland.
In any event the later more detailed Myres and Busby data confirms the higher frequencies of R1b and subclades in Ireland and in particular the West of Ireland.

One of the problems with the Mallory book and others eg Catherine Nash, Of Irish Origins, is that they depend on old studies eg Underhill,  and relatively few STRs. I don't criticise these studies. They were the pioneers. However, the industry has moved on and Autosomal studies are widely available, and Next Generation Sequencing is now the benchmark.
I would have more confidence in Tyler Smith and Patterson. Unfortunately they do not interpret the Irish context or Archealogy and Language.

I wonder if I can that 2000 DNA/Irish surname study. Did he cite it in the references?
« Last Edit: February 25, 2013, 05:59:55 PM by Mikewww » Logged

R1b-L21>L513(DF1)>L705.2
Heber
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 448


« Reply #267 on: February 25, 2013, 06:44:07 PM »

Mike,
Correct. That is what he is saying but he continues,
 "In short at this degree of resolution (year 2000) we can only say that an Irish identity has been mapped onto the distribution of an earlier genetic type, not that the genetic type is in any way associated with being Irish."

We know that there was a lot of admixture between the majority Irish and the minority Normans, so that the Normans became "More Irish than the Irish themselves". Moffat and Wilson also tells us that Scotland has a very diverse Haplogroup mix so that R1b did not reach the frequencies it did in Ireland.
In any event the later more detailed Myres and Busby data confirms the higher frequencies of R1b and subclades in Ireland and in particular the West of Ireland.

One of the problems with the Mallory book and others eg Catherine Nash, Of Irish Origins, is that they depend on old studies eg Underhill,  and relatively few STRs. I don't criticise these studies. They were the pioneers. However, the industry has moved on and Autosomal studies are widely available, and Next Generation Sequencing is now the benchmark.
I would have more confidence in Tyler Smith and Patterson. Unfortunately they do not interpret the Irish context or Archealogy and Language.

I wonder if I can that 2000 DNA/Irish surname study. Did he cite it in the references?

Mike,

I believe it is Hill et al (2000)

Y-chromosome variation and Irish origins

Emmeline W. Hill1, Mark A. Jobling2 & Daniel G. Bradley1

Ireland's position on the western edge of Europe suggests that the genetics of its population should have been relatively undisturbed by the demographic movements that have shaped variation on the mainland. We have typed 221 Y chromosomes from Irish males for seven (slowly evolving) biallelic and six (quickly evolving) simple tandem-repeat markers. When these samples are partitioned by surname, we find significant differences in genetic frequency between those of Irish Gaelic and of foreign origin, and also between those of eastern and western Irish origin. Connaught, the westernmost Irish province, lies at the geographical and genetic extreme of a Europe-wide cline.

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v404/n6776/abs/404351a0.html

Other related papers are:

http://www.le.ac.uk/ge/maj4/SurnamesForWeb.pdf

http://www.le.ac.uk/ge/maj4/KingJoblingRevisedWeb.pdf

Edit: Year of hill study is 2000
« Last Edit: February 26, 2013, 12:15:48 PM by Heber » 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



Dubhthach
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 273


« Reply #268 on: February 26, 2013, 05:56:02 AM »

The days when 13 STR's were deemed sufficient, awh well.

What's funny I think is to remove a norse name they removed anyone called Doyle. Personally I think that people read to much into meaning of a surname and do direct translation.

For example does Ó Dubhghaill (O'Doyle/McDowell, MacDougal etc.) mean "descendant of a Black-Foreigner" (eg. Norse Viking) or does it mean descendant of a man called Dubhghall. After all as a personal name it still survived today anglisced as Dougal. My feeling is that people are reading the name literally which might not be the case at all.

Another prime example is MacManus. Maghnus as a first name derives from Viking usage and was introduced into Ireland and adopted by "Native Irish" as a name to give their sons -- just as today for example I gave my own son the good "Roman name" of Marcus.
Logged
Heber
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 448


« Reply #269 on: February 27, 2013, 03:23:36 AM »

Mike,
If you want to catch up with Dr Emmeline Hills latest research here is a recent presentation on horse pedigrees and the speed gene. Interesting stuff.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=plpp&v=XB-VDhXnn4g
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



Pages: 1 ... 9 10 [11] 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 0.084 seconds with 19 queries.