World Families Forums - Y marker both U106 and U152?

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
July 13, 2014, 07:27:30 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)
| | |-+  Y marker both U106 and U152?
« previous next »
Pages: [1] Go Down Print
Author Topic: Y marker both U106 and U152?  (Read 738 times)
gunslingingardener
Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 32


« on: November 01, 2012, 07:51:59 PM »

I found this on eupedia and found it interesting, since both U106 and U152 came from the Alps.

Here it is:

A U152* from FTDNA has been given a U106* result at 23andMe!

 I hope the new V.3 hasn't awakened something!

 I have questioned this result and await their response.

 I have also sent the raw data to those in the know for analysis.
Logged
Mike Walsh
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2963


WWW
« Reply #1 on: November 02, 2012, 11:49:29 AM »

I found this on eupedia and found it interesting, since both U106 and U152 came from the Alps.

Here it is:

A U152* from FTDNA has been given a U106* result at 23andMe!

 I hope the new V.3 hasn't awakened something!

 I have questioned this result and await their response.

 I have also sent the raw data to those in the know for analysis.

U106 and U152 are no more closely related than 3-5 thousand years ago. U152 definitely is of higher frequency in the Alpine area.

U106 has much higher frequencies further north, towards the North and Baltic Seas. Perhaps U106 did come from the Alpine region. We don't know.

However, the strange reports from the two different testing companies means there is a testing error. That's about all it probably means.
Logged

R1b-L21>L513(DF1)>L705.2
Black Taylor
Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 10


« Reply #2 on: November 02, 2012, 01:19:00 PM »

I looked up the original reference and it's from nearly two years ago.  Like Mike said, unless this is a read error with the Illumina chip my guess is that this is the result of the predicted haplogroup (U152) based on FTDNA Y-STR typing contradicting the SNP based results at 23andme.  Two years is a long time in this field and if the results were going to shake up the Y tree we probably would have heard something about it by now.  This certainly would have been an interesting result.
Logged

Y-DNA: R-L48
mtDNA: H
Solothurn
Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 20


« Reply #3 on: November 11, 2012, 09:53:05 AM »

Hi

It was me who posted it.  I think 23andMe made the error and corrected it.

One of my distant cousins has now sadly passed on but has U106. They have stored DNA at FTDNA and the GenoChip could be an option if they ever get an agreement to test via FTDNA that is.

Funds are limited, so can somebody here suggest an an SNP to test by looking at their haplotype?

Ysearch 8ZN8K http://www.ysearch.org/search_view.asp?uid=8ZN8K&viewuid=8ZN8K&p=1#

New evidence gives 'Raisbeck' before Mason c1753!

I found this on eupedia and found it interesting, since both U106 and U152 came from the Alps.

Here it is:

A U152* from FTDNA has been given a U106* result at 23andMe!

 I hope the new V.3 hasn't awakened something!

 I have questioned this result and await their response.

 I have also sent the raw data to those in the know for analysis.
Logged

U152*
H1c3b
ysearch JSN4E
Pages: [1] 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 0.097 seconds with 17 queries.