DF13* (xSubclades) What's The Status?

[Mark Jost]

With all the new DF13 subclades there hasn't much discussion on the ASTERISK cluster. This sizable group containing over 600 with the major groups such as 1030-A-SC's, 1511-A-T2's, 9919-A's included and many smaller varieties including my own which is part of the 1130-A's.

I would like to open up a discussion and work through this segment of haplotypes here in this thread.

MJost

[rms2]

Mark,

Do you have a list of R-L21 Plus Project members' kit numbers who have actually tested negative for all the known DF13+ branch subclades or who very closely match someone with the same or a similar surname who has?

I don't want to do the clusters thing with project categories for all sorts of reasons.

I may be joining you in the DF13* club soon.

[rms2]

I just combed through the "C. DF13+ (L21>DF13; Check your DF13+ subclades status)" category and managed to find 13 guys who have tested negative for all the known DF13+ branch SNPs: DF49, L513, L96, L144, Z255, Z253, DF21, L371, and DF41.

So I created a category for them: "Ca. DF13* (L21>DF13; Negative for the known DF13+ subclades)".

I realize, as Mark said, these men may represent haplotype clusters that as a consequence can be inferred to be entirely DF13*, but I don't want to get into the cluster-shuffling business (although I have to admit I have done a limited amount of that).

[Mikewww]

I just combed through the "C. DF13+ (L21>DF13; Check your DF13+ subclades status)" category and managed to find 13 guys who have tested negative for all the known DF13+ branch SNPs: DF49, L5313, L96, L144, Z255, Z253, DF21, L371, and DF41.

So I created a category for them: "Ca. DF13* (L21>DF13; Negative for the known DF13+ subclades)".

I realize, as Mark said, these men may represent haplotype clusters that as a consequence can be inferred to be entirely DF13*, but I don't want to get into the cluster-shuffling business (although I have to admit I have done a limited amount of that).

Thanks, Rich. I think these true DF13* to go with the true L21* people are special and need to be highlighted.  It seems like FTDNA ought to have a special asterisk icon or avatar to stick on these peoples' FTDNA screens. Forget the Nials and WAMH avatars.

[Jdean]

I just combed through the "C. DF13+ (L21>DF13; Check your DF13+ subclades status)" category and managed to find 13 guys who have tested negative for all the known DF13+ branch SNPs: DF49, L5313, L96, L144, Z255, Z253, DF21, L371, and DF41.

So I created a category for them: "Ca. DF13* (L21>DF13; Negative for the known DF13+ subclades)".

I realize, as Mark said, these men may represent haplotype clusters that as a consequence can be inferred to be entirely DF13*, but I don't want to get into the cluster-shuffling business (although I have to admit I have done a limited amount of that).

Thanks, Rich. I think these true DF13* to go with the true L21* people are special and need to be highlighted.  It seems like FTDNA ought to have a special asterisk icon or avatar to stick on these peoples' FTDNA screens. Forget the Nials and WAMH avatars.

WAMH is particularly meaningless !!

[Mark Jost]

Good question. This is a thin group who have tested DF13** but a few more that are DF13* as per MikeW's L21 spreadsheet.

Assuming one ASTERISK has tested negative the big five (now Six?) and double ASTERISK is all ten, I will have to look a little deeper but I have a feeling that there is not that many associated with the five or so main clusters I saw in my more recent Fluxus of the the DF13*. But I need to rerun it since there have been quite a few DF13-'s.

Eight guys so far. And, hard to believe, but not one 1030-A-SC yet.

fN59178   Carroll   R-L21/DF13*  1511-A-T2-D
DF13+ L513- DF21- DF49- Z253- Z255- DF41- L144- L371- L96- L130- L192.1- L195-

f16114   MacLea   R-L21/DF13*  9919-A-1
DF13+ L513- DF21- DF49- Z253- Z255- DF41- 2c

f26059   Durall   R-L21/DF13**  101922
DF13+ L513- DF21- DF49- Z253- Z255- DF41- L144- L371- L555- L96- L69- L195-
L319.1- L302- 4c

fN55408   Smith   R-L21/DF13**  1114
DF13+ L513- DF21- DF49- Z253- Z255- DF41- L144- L371- L555- L96- L743- L130- L192.1- L195- L319.1- L302- L526- L557- L561- L563- L564- L580- L583- L643- L679-

f148326   MJost   R-L21/DF13**  1130-A-1-A
DF13+ L513- DF21- DF49- Z253- Z255- DF41- L144- L371- L555- L96- L130- L192.1- L195- L319.1- L302- L526- L563- L69- 3c1g

f210257   Matrois(Nakskov)   R-L21/DF13**  1511-A-T2*
DF13+ L513- DF21- DF49- Z253- Z255- DF41- L144- L371- L555- L96- L743- L583- L679-

f19706   Price   R-L21/DF13** 1810-W2
DF13+ L513- DF21- DF49- Z253- Z255- DF41- L144- L371- L555- L96- L743- L130- L195- L319.1- L302- L526- L557- L563- L564- L580- L583- L643- L679-

fN8772   Porter   R-L21/DF13** 9919-B
DF13+ L513- DF21- DF49- Z253- Z255- DF41- L144- L371- L555- L96- L69- L130- 3c1g


MJost

[Mark Jost]

I want to change the * to another character.... Asterisk causes search issues because it is assumed to be a 'Wild Card' indicator.

[rms2]

I have 13 in the DF13* category.

Regarding Price, kit 19706: I don't see an L371- result for him. Is that info you have from the WTY?

[rms2]

I have 13 in the DF13* category.

Regarding Price, kit 19706: I don't see an L371- result for him. Is that info you have from the WTY?

Also, I did not require an L555- result, since that seems to be a Clan Irwin thing.

That could change, I guess.

[df.reynolds]

64047 (Lurz) is R-DF13** (and is also private SNP L526+).  See:
http://daver.info/WTY/R-L21.pdf

--david

[Mark Jost]

L371 and L555, in my case, was from the WTY and MikeW included it and he might have got that info from Dave R. That eight guys SNPs was pulled from Mike's spreadsheet.

FtDNA would add it to my tree since it wasnt in the Deepclade test. Thats how I got M222, ect added though.

So are you adding kits that are in the same variety assuming that they will match another who tested negative like my 1130-A's guys?

MJost

[df.reynolds]

I want to change the * to another character.... Asterisk causes search issues because it is assumed to be a 'Wild Card' indicator.

How about R-DF13$$ -- indicates both your status, and what you had to do to get there. :)

--david

[Mark Jost]

I want to change the * to another character.... Asterisk causes search issues because it is assumed to be a 'Wild Card' indicator.

How about R-DF13$$ -- indicates both your status, and what you had to do to get there. :)

--david

OMG Thats It!  As much as I have spent.... Can We get it in a Gold font color toooo???  

DF13$$

[seferhabahir]

64047 (Lurz) is R-DF13** (and is also private SNP L526+).  See:
http://daver.info/WTY/R-L21.pdf

--david

Well,

So am I (i.e., R-DF13** and "private" SNP L583+), but much refer to have my own little Group D with Burde (and the third L583+ who I still haven't gotten to join the project, but still working on it).

[Mark Jost]

I would think that all private SNPs be given their own variety name and their offmodal subID such as 526-xxxx.

[Mark Jost]

I forgot Yvonne, who's brother is Scots modal, ordered DF13 yesterday.


>Re:  Robert Keith Patterson - #65511, K4466 - 1030-A-Sc-2415  Just ordered DF13 >SNP test.
>Yvonne Patterson Watkin

MJost

[Mikewww]

64047 (Lurz) is R-DF13** (and is also private SNP L526+).  See:
http://daver.info/WTY/R-L21.pdf

--david

Well,

So am I (i.e., R-DF13** and "private" SNP L583+), but much refer to have my own little Group D with Burde (and the third L583+ who I still haven't gotten to join the project, but still working on it).

I think that's the way we have to look at it.  Everybody has true private SNPs. We just haven't discovered them yet so the asterisk and haplogroup labeling schemes are related to very stable, non-private SNPs that can be positioned on the Y DNA tree.

Hence, a terminal SNP is not really the youngest SNP in a lineage but the youngest public/recognized SNP one is derived for.

However, as we all know, one surprise test result can move a (false) private SNP to a non-private status.

[seferhabahir]

I would think that all private SNPs be given their own variety name and their offmodal subID such as 526-xxxx.

I think this would be OK, but only if they have tested all the big 10 (or 9 or whatever else might have been given a designation in the ISOGG tree, like L555) under DF13, and thus look something like this:

C.  DF13+ (L21>DF13; check your DF13+ subclades status)

Ca. DF13* (L21>DF13; Negative for the known DF13+ subclades)

Cb. DF13* (L21>DF13>L526; Negative for the known DF13+ subclades)

Cc. DF13* (L21>DF13>L583; Negative for the known DF13+ subclades)

Need to be sure that the private SNPs are not actually under a known DF13+ subclade. So Norris (L580+) would almost qualify to be listed like this after testing for DF49- which I think is the only one missing. I would think Rich does not want to go down the off-modal subID path, since it would be like recognizing clusters again.

[df.reynolds]

I would think that all private SNPs be given their own variety name and their offmodal subID such as 526-xxxx.

That could make sense for SNPs under investigation, that at least have a hope of making it to "official" status. For the ones that that are limited a small family group, I don't know that it makes sense to fracture things by separating them out. After all, we all have private SNPs, it is just some of us haven't found them yet.

Certainly I would not want to be pulled out of the already small R-L627 cluster and moved to a separate, much smaller, L625+ cluster dedicated to the male Reynolds descendants of my Dad and two of his brothers...

I think my preference, though, is for the purposes of "clustering," only look at SNPs that are "official" (i.e., on the ISOGG tree).

--david

[seferhabahir]

I think DF13* (or DF13** or DF$$ or whatever you choose to call it) is for now just as important as DF13-, DF63+, and L21* to determine a history and structure of L21. At least until some more major subclades under L21 or DF13 appear.

Can someone list for me the consensus age estimates for the first appearances of L459/Z245, L21, DF13 and DF63?

[Mark Jost]

I was really just thinking of the spreadsheet variety naming scheme and not the R-L21 DNA project web page. The reason is to have the ablilty to remove selected varieties to help analyzing a groups related data easier like GD or copying haplotype to another tool.

Mike's spreadsheet has a Downstream SNP column but it is SNP tree based. Where as the Variety column is less detailed but needs the private SNPs identified in format the known subclade SNPs variety is shown. Thats what I was refering to and should have been more clearer.

Private SNPs should be well identified though but out of the scope of Steve's website needs.

MJost

[Mark Jost]

I did post a Gen111T on the DF13* varieties that did not include Known Subclades over on the L21 Yahoo forums.

http://f1.grp.yahoofs.com/v1/QGglULaRONavdV92xXReNgYfwyv5lndMjMHGywlmExcgnTpKvDakjrv2nGp7W6BPIkbzkdkxY4tKIgCc_T7f2IsJJF0PXA/TMRCA-Gen111T_Estimator_ModMJost-111M-SubcladesAndVariety.pdf


I really should run this again soon with the newest Haplotypes.

MJost
 

[rms2]

64047 (Lurz) is R-DF13** (and is also private SNP L526+).  See:
http://daver.info/WTY/R-L21.pdf

--david

Thanks. I'll move him and the other one. ;-)

[rms2]

I would think that all private SNPs be given their own variety name and their offmodal subID such as 526-xxxx.

I think this would be OK, but only if they have tested all the big 10 (or 9 or whatever else might have been given a designation in the ISOGG tree, like L555) under DF13, and thus look something like this:

C.  DF13+ (L21>DF13; check your DF13+ subclades status)

Ca. DF13* (L21>DF13; Negative for the known DF13+ subclades)

Cb. DF13* (L21>DF13>L526; Negative for the known DF13+ subclades)

Cc. DF13* (L21>DF13>L583; Negative for the known DF13+ subclades)

Need to be sure that the private SNPs are not actually under a known DF13+ subclade. So Norris (L580+) would almost qualify to be listed like this after testing for DF49- which I think is the only one missing. I would think Rich does not want to go down the off-modal subID path, since it would be like recognizing clusters again.

I think I will leave things basically the way I have them. I don't want to get into categorizing all the private SNPs. I created an L583+ category because, even though you two are a very close match, at least there are two different surnames involved.

I would do that for L555, too, if we could ever get a non-Irwin to test positive for it and join the R-L21 Plus Project.

I hope you can get your third L583+ guy to join soon.

[Mark Jost]

Rich,

I like the new format along with the notes for needs to test which may get some to do some additional testing.

MJost