World Families Forums - About Brewerton/Brereton Big Y

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
September 22, 2014, 04:01:32 AM
Home Help Search Login Register

+  World Families Forums
|-+  Family Boards
| |-+  Surname Projects Starting With 'B'
| | |-+  Brereton (Moderator: breretonadmin)
| | | |-+  About Brewerton/Brereton Big Y
« previous next »
Pages: [1] Go Down Print
Author Topic: About Brewerton/Brereton Big Y  (Read 677 times)
Maliclavelli
Guru
*****
Online Online

Posts: 2151


« on: April 16, 2014, 05:48:55 AM »

Hi msandford, I answer you here because you can see that Anthrogenica suspended me for a month. It is always dangerous to be too much smart.
1) I have explained in very deep way which is the situation of these three haplotypes on Anthrogenica in the thread you read.
2)These haplotypes (and these people) are very closely related and it is useless (only an useless expense) to test them further.The Big Y that one of them had has given us all the information we needed.
3) It isn't necessary to test him for Z2113, because he is positive at least for Z2111 to Z2119. We could have a doubt about Z2120, because the Tuscan of the 1 Thousand Genome Project is negative for this SNP, in fact he is ancestral to all the other who are Z2120+.
4) I presupposed that these people are of Irish descent (not recent, but probably many thousands of years ago), because in my theory this haplotype R-L51 migrated the first time 7500 years ago from Italy to Iberia and after from Iberia to Ireland. In fact the two Tuscans and these Brewertons are CTS6889-, whereas all the other R-L51 from Switzerland to the Isles are CTS6889+.
5) We know from the other L51 tested with Big Y that the Brewertons are separated from them at least from 7500 years, as to my theory. I think that you should only wait that other Irish L51 or Tuscan/Italian ones are tested for Big Y or Full Y, so we'll be able to see how long ago they separated, but we already know  a large part of this by the exam that smal did on the thread on Anthrogenica about the two Tuscans tested and also a Puerto Rican, but who is more closely linked to the other Europeans than to these Tuscan and Irish ones.
Kind Regards, Gioiello Tognoni, here Maliclavelli, on Anthrogenica Rathna.
 
« Last Edit: April 16, 2014, 10:06:35 PM by Maliclavelli » Logged

Maliclavelli


YDNA: R-S12460


MtDNA: K1a1b1e

Michael Sandford
Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 7


« Reply #1 on: April 16, 2014, 05:44:10 PM »

Gioiello, Thank you very much for taking the trouble to reply here to my question on Anthrogenica at
http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?2370-R1b-L51-Results-discussion&p=37332&viewfull=1#post37332

If I understand the discussion correctly you are saying that the Big-Y result implies that Brewerton is postive for Z2111 to Z2119. How have you arrived at this conclusion?

I see that Cofgene has put up a speadsheet comparing 216502(Brewerton) Big-Y results with with 3 others. How  did he derive all those readings for 216502? When I look at the Big-Y results on 216502's FTDNA page, I can't find all the results which are quoted on the spread sheet. But then I dont know where to go to find a key to which SNP names are equivalent.  I certainly cant see where someone has obtained all the chromosome position data  for the "Singletons". Has someone been able to access BAM files or VCF files which I read about, but dont really know details of their content and use?

I have read something of your interesting theories about the ancient migrations of these early L51 haplotypes. However, the aims of this project are primarily to sort out what has happened in the last 800 years or so in Cheshire when English men gradually started using surnames. There are two mail goals:
1. To link together Brereton/Brewerton families that share a common y-line ancestor since then.
2. To find out how many different family lines adopted those surnames.

Basically we need advice as to which tests would be most useful. Maybe we have to wait a little until a new phylogenetic tree incorporating the conclusions of all the recent and current research is published. It is hard for novices to follow all the discussion amongst experts on diverse forums. Maybe FTDNA will come to our rescue with a new haplo tree which is simple to follow.
 
Logged
Maliclavelli
Guru
*****
Online Online

Posts: 2151


« Reply #2 on: April 16, 2014, 09:58:01 PM »

You may find all these information on the thread on Anthrogenica dedicated to R-L51 and began from an L51, Schumacher, which I replied to.
1) smal (a Russian of my haplogroup: R-Z2110, now after Chromo2 Z-S12460, whose real name is Malyshev and is a friend of one of the best expert of this matter: Semargl, aka Tagankin) read the BAM files of the people tested also from 1KGP, and demonstrated that all are positive for these SNP from Z2111 to Z2119, so also the Brewertons will be: as I think that they are linked to the Tuscan one, for the theory I exposed above, and as at least one Tuscan, the other is uncertain, is negative for Z2120, the unique SNP of this series that merits to be tested is this, but so far it isn't offered for what I know, but even though it were offered, I think it wouldn't merit to spend 35$ c/o Yseq to know it: it wouldn't add anything to what we know.
2) You could get the BAM file of Brewerton by asking it to FTDNA, but in the Cofgene spreadsheet you already have its result and you cannot desire more, also because the BAM file has to be read, and it isn't easy: we need programs, powerful PC, etc. You already have all the data of Brewerton.
3) For what you need, i.e. to know the recent history of the Brewertons, there are many ways:
a) first of all the paper trails
b) by the STRs you have for them, we may calculate when they have the Most Recent Common Ancestor (MRCA), even though it isn't easy to do it. There are many theories, but in a short time the calculation is reliable, even though with an high range of probabilities
c) to test also the others for a Big Y, so we'll be able to see how many singletons they have in common and calculate from how long they are separated, but there are many theories for calculating this, so I'd wait to spend other money
d) I'll let you know which is for me the MRCA of these three haplotypes, even though one of them had a RecLOH in DYS464, i.e. the markers "e" and "f", and the calculation isn't easy, but at a first glance it seems to me that they are very closely related.
« Last Edit: April 16, 2014, 10:17:17 PM by Maliclavelli » Logged

Maliclavelli


YDNA: R-S12460


MtDNA: K1a1b1e

Maliclavelli
Guru
*****
Online Online

Posts: 2151


« Reply #3 on: April 16, 2014, 11:00:36 PM »

216052 and N66729 seem the closest related. They differ:
in DYS389I (N66729 had a mutation from 13 to 14: DYS389II hasn't to be counted),
in CDY a and b which may be reconstructed, also by comparing with B7015, like
37 -38
thus 216052 would have had: CDYb from 38 to 37
and N66729 CDYa from 37 to 36.
These last two markers are very fast mutating ones.
Also counting for 1 mutation the RecLOH in DYS464, we'd had 4 mutations out of 67 markers. For the usual calculations:
(454 x 4): 134= 13.5 generations at 25 years for generations = 337.5 years, but they could be also less, because two mutations happened in very fast mutating markers and we don't know how to count the RecLOH. Thus that William Brewerton/Brereton, born about 1755/1765, could be also the same person and the common ancestor. But about this the paper trail is worth more than genetics.

Also B7015 could descend from the same William and Arthur Brereton, born about 1791, to be one of his sons and to demonstrate that the original surname was Brereton and not Brewerton. But at this level paper trails are more worth than genetics.

By counting all three together we'd have
(454x8): 201= about 450 years ago the MRCA.
 
« Last Edit: April 16, 2014, 11:10:20 PM by Maliclavelli » Logged

Maliclavelli


YDNA: R-S12460


MtDNA: K1a1b1e

Michael Sandford
Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 7


« Reply #4 on: April 17, 2014, 04:05:45 AM »

Thank you very much, for the detailed information.

Smal's spread sheet shows 21650 as positive for Z2118 and Z2119, but there is no mention of the others the range Z2111 to Z2117, or indeed the Z2110 which you have as your haplogroup.

What would help me to understand would be a tree showing the descent of these SNPs. The following is my understanding:

Is this correct?

One of the Brereton project's top priorities is to get more Brereton's from Cheshire to test, since matches may point the way for more genealogical research, which is our main interest, rather than the origins of the tribes which populated Britain in the Dark Ages (pre-1000AD). After all whereas the y-signature comes from a single pedigree line, ones cultural inheritance is some merged combination from all ones ancestral lines.

Logged
Maliclavelli
Guru
*****
Online Online

Posts: 2151


« Reply #5 on: April 17, 2014, 05:18:28 AM »

The tree should be different:
Z2103-Z2105 (and subclades: Z2110, but also L277, L584 etc) is a subclade of R-L23* (which like L23* doesn't exist)
Z2111-Z2119 (and subclades: Z2120, then CTS6889+ etc) is a subclade of R-L23* through R-L51* (which like L51* doesn't exist)
from an R-L51* derived R-L11* (which like L11* doesn't exist) from which the subclades U106* and P312* (which in the * form don't exist).

Yo are right to test other Breretons and to understand why a Brereton was named Brewerton even though not having anything to do with that family. The last thing to do is to upgrade to 111 markers, but I'd wait to spend money that other results of Big Y and Full Y do come in.
« Last Edit: April 17, 2014, 05:20:33 AM by Maliclavelli » Logged

Maliclavelli


YDNA: R-S12460


MtDNA: K1a1b1e

Maliclavelli
Guru
*****
Online Online

Posts: 2151


« Reply #6 on: April 17, 2014, 06:07:25 AM »

Certainly you do know this book:
Brereton a family history, By J. Brereton
It seems that the surname was taken from a place name: Brere-ton.
Many times happens that noble and not noble lines carry the same surname, but only genetics could demonstrate a link, even though it seems that the noble Breretons are extinct.
Probably the Y Brereton line is rooted in Cheshire. My hypothesis about an old Irish origin was based only upon my theory of the diffusion of the L51 haplogroup, which is documented many thousands of years ago in the places I said above. Anyway also the most ancient Celt peoples of the Isles may derive from there, whereas it seems that another migration from the Italian Refugium came to the Isles from Switzerland and Central Europe (the difference between who is CTS6889+ and -).
Of course your studies are important also for me, i.e. to demonstrate the probable ethnic origin of an Y.
Logged

Maliclavelli


YDNA: R-S12460


MtDNA: K1a1b1e

Michael Sandford
Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 7


« Reply #7 on: April 17, 2014, 12:07:44 PM »

Thanks. I have had another go at incorporating the details you give:

Is this better?
Also you are saying that based on one FullGenome reference  all 9 of the SNPs Z2111 to Z2119 are present together, or not present at all?
Checking on FTDNA SNPs available to order, I see only Z2113 is available, so until others become available it does seem to me that ordering Z2113 for 216052 is the best route for confirm a close haplogroup match with N66729   who has already tested Z2113+.

I am bit worried that there may be something wrong with my understanding that all of Z2111 to Z2119 are present together or not at all. Looking at the Big-Y results for 216052 I see:
Z2111   ?   No   G   ?   Unknown
Z2112   ?   No   T   ?   Unknown
Z2113   ?   No   G   ?   Unknown
Z2114    ?   No   C   ?   Unknown
Z2117    No(-)   No   C   C   Unknown
                
and the following which I take to be a synonym for Z2118               
PF7589   Yes(+)   No   A   G   High

Smal's spread sheet gives Z2118+ and Z2119+, so presumably he also got Z2119 from somewhere else in the big-Y results.

It is the Z2117- that worries me a bit, although perhaps if the confidence is unknown it is just a miss call.

Turning to your point about the Brereton History. We are well aware of the work you quote which is partly based on a work by my great great Brereton Uncle Robert Maitland Brereton, who published in 1904 a family history, which shows my Norfolk line of Breretons connecting back to the noble line in Cheshire. So we claim the noble line is not extinct, and very recently a cousin of mine has had a Y-test (kit 307937) and is definitely in a distinct R1b grouping with many mismatches with the 3 we discuss above. This is consistent with your observation that non-noble inhabitants living near place named Brereton in Cheshire might have independently adopted the same surname as the noble family. The spelling variations can easily arise especially with illiteracy and variations in pronunciation/accent. The Church ministers recording names in the parish registers were educated at Oxford and Cambridge and could obtain parish appointments anywhere in the country where the accents may have been less familiar.
« Last Edit: April 17, 2014, 12:10:14 PM by Michael Sandford » Logged
Maliclavelli
Guru
*****
Online Online

Posts: 2151


« Reply #8 on: April 17, 2014, 12:56:25 PM »

OK, now the tree is right. Only that L277 and L584 aren't in the same line but they are two different ones and certainly there are other subclades.
I'll look at the Brewerton's Big Y, even though I cannot upload to Anthrogenica until I am suspended, but I printed the data. Anyway to test Z2113 is probably completely useless, because he is pretty certainly positive. Look at the Morley's tree...which reads by a computer program the data. Anyway that  216052  and N66729 are closely related is demonstrated also from their STRs. Thus no doubt. If you want to spend some money, do it, but I'd use them for a most important purpose, for instance to upgrade to 111 or to test Z2120 when it is at our disposal: there isn't only FTDNA to test for SNPs, but also Yseq of Thomas Krahn, who worked at FTDNA and was responsible just of the SNPs tests.
Anyway I'd wait next results of Big Y and Full Y. Certainly there will be some SNP to test downstream Z2119 ... but, having done Big Y, Brewerton has so many singletons which already are downstream SNPs. We have only to wait that some of them is shown from other people tested. At this point Z2113 is completely useless.
But at this point, if you are linked to 307937, you should test that line which is yours. For instance to know which is the sublcade. Certainly he isn't R-L51, not having DYS426=13.
13    24    14    11    11 -15    12    12    12    13    13    29    17    9 -10    11    11    25    15    19    29    15 -15 -17 -18    10    12    19 -24    16    15    17    17    35    40    14    13
Difficult to say which subclade from these data, even though in the Isles could be L21. I did Chromo2, only the raw data and a little expensive, and for who is of British descent is so far the best, if one doesn't want to spend for a Big Y or a Full Y.                                                                                                                                                                                                      
Logged

Maliclavelli


YDNA: R-S12460


MtDNA: K1a1b1e

Maliclavelli
Guru
*****
Online Online

Posts: 2151


« Reply #9 on: April 18, 2014, 06:06:19 AM »

From the Morley's tree we see that
2170 R1b1a2a1–1–1 CTS2484 [1/1], CTS6397 [1/1], Z2113 [1/1]
2171 N66729 GB-E
i.e. N66729 has been tested for Geno 2.0 and not only he is Z2113+, but also CTS2484+ and CTS6397+.
Of course you should see if Brewerton has been tested from Big Y for these SNPs.
These are the positions:
 
CTS2484         12835871   14325871   no      no      yes   no   no      A -> G                                                                                                                                                      
 
CTS6397         15379577   16870183   no      no      yes   no   no      G -> C                                                                                                                                                      

Brewerton has both these SNPs amongst his singletons.

Do you need more?
Logged

Maliclavelli


YDNA: R-S12460


MtDNA: K1a1b1e

Michael Sandford
Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 7


« Reply #10 on: April 18, 2014, 09:47:34 AM »

Thank you so much for finding this. I am struggling to follow everything, but at least I have checked for myself the presence of these SNPs in the results of the two project members, and I see for myself that it is exactly as you report.

A question: where do I find Morley's tree?

A puzzle: On the webpage http://www.semargl.me/de/dna/ydna/item-snp/5270/
I see CTS6397 is recorded positive for N66729 who is R1b-L51 but is  also present in 5 kits in the haplogoup I1-M253+,Z131+,CTS6397+ 
Surely then this means that the snp CTS6397 occurred sometime before the haplogroups I and R split. However, the smeargl page shows some I1-M253+ who are CTS6397-
It therefore appears that CTS6397 has occurred independently in two different haplogroups. Surely this is very unlikely to happen by chance. Is my interpretation correct?
Logged
Maliclavelli
Guru
*****
Online Online

Posts: 2151


« Reply #11 on: April 18, 2014, 11:01:56 AM »

I saw this too, and I thought that the first SNP is more reliable, as practically unique, but that a SNP is recurrent in many haplogroups doesn't mean that it isn't reliable in some subclade of other haplogroups.

Morley5 is here:
http://Ytree.MorleyDNA.com
« Last Edit: April 18, 2014, 11:07:13 AM by Maliclavelli » Logged

Maliclavelli


YDNA: R-S12460


MtDNA: K1a1b1e

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 0.082 seconds with 18 queries.