World Families Forums - R-L21 Clusters - can we identify a few?

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
September 20, 2014, 01:24:15 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)
| | |-+  R-L21 Clusters - can we identify a few?
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 5 Go Down Print
Author Topic: R-L21 Clusters - can we identify a few?  (Read 10758 times)
Mike Walsh
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2964


WWW
« on: March 17, 2009, 04:33:41 PM »

Does it make sense to start trying to identify different "clusters" of probably related haplotypes for R-L21? Is there a good way to about this?  They might be the beginning of finding new sub-clades.

Obviously, the sub-SNP M222 would have its own modal, but perhaps it should have multiple clusters (maybe it has I don't know them.)

Here are some Ysearch ID's that are supposed to represent some L21 clusters.  Are these correct?  Should we scrap them and just look at the L21 haplotype data we have?

Cluster X   4RWQG
R1b-STR 43   9FBY4
Wales/Native Briton  S9R4J
Wales Type III   KEFGX
Irish Type III  NT4BZ
South Irish   XREMB
Leinster  B9NW4
Irish M222   M5UKQ
Logged

R1b-L21>L513(DF1)>S6365>L705.2(&CTS11744,CTS6621)
rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #1 on: March 17, 2009, 04:38:49 PM »

I'm more than a little leery of some of these clusters. The Scots Modal and the NW Irish (Niall) Modal I think are fairly well established, and maybe some of the others are, too, but I don't know.

Some of them may be more widespread than their authors imagine. Some of these modals may not be restricted to Scotland or Ireland. That means that where they are found outside of Scotland or Ireland they should not automatically and reflexively be attributed to immigrants from those places.
« Last Edit: March 17, 2009, 05:35:42 PM by rms2 » Logged

Mike Walsh
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2964


WWW
« Reply #2 on: March 17, 2009, 05:48:41 PM »

I'm more than a little leery of some of these clusters. The Scots Modal and the NW Irish (Niall) Modal I think are fairly well established, and maybe some of the others are, too, but I don't know.

Some of them may be more widespread than their authors imagine. Some of these modals may not be restricted to Scotland or Ireland. That means that where they are found outside of Scotland or Ireland they should not automatically and reflexively be attributed to immigrants from those places.
I agree that the modals are typically mis-labeled, being based on the initial (and incomplete) findings.  However, it seems like clusters that did have geographic patterns could be useful.
« Last Edit: March 26, 2009, 08:54:16 AM by Mike » Logged

R1b-L21>L513(DF1)>S6365>L705.2(&CTS11744,CTS6621)
vtilroe
Project Coordinator
Old Hand
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 150


« Reply #3 on: March 22, 2009, 09:57:43 PM »

I ran the R-L21 data through McGee and SplitsTree today.

http://vince.tilroe.ca/P312/L21_2009_03_22.png

Read whatever you want into it.  Interestingly, the SplitsTree graph placed Kehoe, Powell, and two Scandinavians as flanking the M222+ cluster.
Logged

YSearch & MitoSearch: 2GXWW


yDNA: R-U106*


mtDNA: U5a1a1 (Genbank# GQ368895)


R-P312-WTY Project Admin http://tinyurl.com/daertg

susanrosine
Senior Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 76


« Reply #4 on: March 22, 2009, 10:59:22 PM »

POWELL is likely of Welsh origin (from "ap Howell"). I am the new co-admin for the Wales DNA project, and expect that as more of my R1b1b2 project members do deep clade testing, we will see the majority be L21+.  We have a few M222+ men in our project, which completely surprised me. I thought M222+ was only in Ireland and Scotland.
Susan
Logged

Dad: JAMES:  Ysearch QSCQ3;  R-P312, L21+ (R1b1b2a1b5*)
Dad: mitosearch QSCQ3; T1a; no matches HVR2 or FGS
Mom's brother: LEWTER: Ysearch FYFDA;  R-U106, L48+ (R1b1b2a1a*)
Mom's brother: mitosearch FYFDA, U5b2; 1 exac
rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #5 on: March 23, 2009, 07:25:49 AM »

I ran the R-L21 data through McGee and SplitsTree today.

http://vince.tilroe.ca/P312/L21_2009_03_22.png

Read whatever you want into it.  Interestingly, the SplitsTree graph placed Kehoe, Powell, and two Scandinavians as flanking the M222+ cluster.


Nice work, Vince. I see myself there, but I'll have to check those kit numbers to see who is around me.

I've been in those kinds of diagrams before and have seen them set me in proximity to people who weren't all that close to me and who eventually were even found to belong to a different subclade, just as those Scandinavian guys and Powell, who are all M222-, flank the M222+ group.

They must have some value, but I guess it's probably relative to who and how many are included.
« Last Edit: March 23, 2009, 07:28:31 AM by rms2 » Logged

rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #6 on: March 23, 2009, 07:33:08 AM »

Closest to me on that fluxus diagram are Gibson (England) and Grant (unknown, but a Scottish surname). On the next set of spokes are Churchman (England) and Heron (Ireland).

Interesting.
Logged

eochaidh
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 400


« Reply #7 on: March 23, 2009, 10:48:21 AM »

POWELL is likely of Welsh origin (from "ap Howell"). I am the new co-admin for the Wales DNA project, and expect that as more of my R1b1b2 project members do deep clade testing, we will see the majority be L21+.  We have a few M222+ men in our project, which completely surprised me. I thought M222+ was only in Ireland and Scotland.
Susan

I found seven "Howeles" on the M222+ Project results site. These guys could have originally been "ap Howells".

I also found an M222+ member, "Skaar" , from Norway, nearby the L21+ members who are close to M222+


thanks,  Miles
« Last Edit: March 23, 2009, 10:52:22 AM by eochaidh » Logged

Y-DNA: R1b DF23
mtDNA: T2g
rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #8 on: March 23, 2009, 07:15:40 PM »

POWELL is likely of Welsh origin (from "ap Howell"). I am the new co-admin for the Wales DNA project, and expect that as more of my R1b1b2 project members do deep clade testing, we will see the majority be L21+.  We have a few M222+ men in our project, which completely surprised me. I thought M222+ was only in Ireland and Scotland.
Susan

I found seven "Howeles" on the M222+ Project results site. These guys could have originally been "ap Howells".

I also found an M222+ member, "Skaar" , from Norway, nearby the L21+ members who are close to M222+


thanks,  Miles

They are M222-, which means they belong to an entirely different subclade.

One isn't "close to M222" because he has a haplotype that brings him next to some M222 guys on a fluxus diagram. You either are M222+ or not.

Before I tested U106- I was told by several people, some of them very knowledgeable, that I would probably be U106+ because my haplotype is very "Frisian" looking. In fact, as far as Oppenheimer's book is concerned, I have the "Frisian Modal Haplotype."

But that doesn't make me "close to U106." I'm U106-. Different subclade.
« Last Edit: March 23, 2009, 07:19:54 PM by rms2 » Logged

Mike Walsh
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2964


WWW
« Reply #9 on: March 23, 2009, 08:04:34 PM »

POWELL is likely of Welsh origin (from "ap Howell"). I am the new co-admin for the Wales DNA project, and expect that as more of my R1b1b2 project members do deep clade testing, we will see the majority be L21+.  We have a few M222+ men in our project, which completely surprised me. I thought M222+ was only in Ireland and Scotland.
Susan
I found seven "Howeles" on the M222+ Project results site. These guys could have originally been "ap Howells".
...
  They are M222-, which means they belong to an entirely different subclade. ...
Umm...  I was going to say something about the "Howeles" supporting the Welsh origin hypothesis but the different SNP value dissuaded me...  However, if they are really M222-, am I jumping in since I'm L21+ but M222-.  "Howell" is Welsh sounding.  My "Walsh of the Mountain" (reported) ancestral clan has two possible declared progenitors (who could be father/son or grandfather/grandson). One is Philip, the other is Howell Walsh and they are definitely supposed to be Welsh (frequently called "Philip the Welshman".)   Our claim to fame ancestral home was Castle Hoel, aka as Castle Hale.. named after Howell Walsh.  They had it great until the Plague and Cromwell got there.    http://homepages.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~walsh/cstlhale.html
Logged

R1b-L21>L513(DF1)>S6365>L705.2(&CTS11744,CTS6621)
eochaidh
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 400


« Reply #10 on: March 23, 2009, 09:07:49 PM »

POWELL is likely of Welsh origin (from "ap Howell"). I am the new co-admin for the Wales DNA project, and expect that as more of my R1b1b2 project members do deep clade testing, we will see the majority be L21+.  We have a few M222+ men in our project, which completely surprised me. I thought M222+ was only in Ireland and Scotland.
Susan

I found seven "Howeles" on the M222+ Project results site. These guys could have originally been "ap Howells".

I also found an M222+ member, "Skaar" , from Norway, nearby the L21+ members who are close to M222+


thanks,  Miles

They are M222-, which means they belong to an entirely different subclade.

One isn't "close to M222" because he has a haplotype that brings him next to some M222 guys on a fluxus diagram. You either are M222+ or not.

Before I tested U106- I was told by several people, some of them very knowledgeable, that I would probably be U106+ because my haplotype is very "Frisian" looking. In fact, as far as Oppenheimer's book is concerned, I have the "Frisian Modal Haplotype."

But that doesn't make me "close to U106." I'm U106-. Different subclade.

Just going by something Vince T. posted on another forum. He suggested that three other L21+ Project members, and I might have split from the tree just prior to the origin of M222+ because of our close proximity to M222+ on his tree.

Mike, the Howeles are M222+ and from the M222+ Project.


Thanks,  Miles
Logged

Y-DNA: R1b DF23
mtDNA: T2g
eochaidh
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 400


« Reply #11 on: March 23, 2009, 09:47:10 PM »



[/quote]
________________________________________________________________________

They are M222-, which means they belong to an entirely different subclade.

One isn't "close to M222" because he has a haplotype that brings him next to some M222 guys on a fluxus diagram. You either are M222+ or not.

Before I tested U106- I was told by several people, some of them very knowledgeable, that I would probably be U106+ because my haplotype is very "Frisian" looking. In fact, as far as Oppenheimer's book is concerned, I have the "Frisian Modal Haplotype."

But that doesn't make me "close to U106." I'm U106-. Different subclade.
[/quote]
________________________________________________________________________





Wouldn't U106 be quite different in comparison to L21* then M222+ to L21*. U106 isn't even on the same branch as P312+, where as M222+ is downstream of L21*.

There are M222+ members found on the L21+ Project, so yes, it is a differnt subclade but no where near as different as U106+ is to L21*. Perhaps you should remove the M222+ members from the L21+ Project if they are a different subclade, but I wouldn't. I may be either M222+ or not, but all of us are L21+, and at some point M222+ broke off from L21+.

Since M222+ originated from an L21+ man, I think it may be significant to find those nearest M222+ on the tree. When I compare myself to other L21* members on Ysearch I come up with three Irish guys (Huey, Rock and Traynor) and Montanez (Puerto Rico) with a GD of -17 as my closest matches. When I compare myself to M222+ guys on Ysearch I come up with three Irish guys (Donohoe, Miller and O'Saughnessy) who are also a GD of -17.

I think Vince T. is on to something.

Thanks,  Miles
« Last Edit: March 23, 2009, 09:48:54 PM by eochaidh » Logged

Y-DNA: R1b DF23
mtDNA: T2g
vtilroe
Project Coordinator
Old Hand
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 150


« Reply #12 on: March 23, 2009, 10:20:11 PM »

Well, just so that it's said, I can't rationally say for certain that I'm on to something, but intuition says there's something there.  I have a few ideas, but only experimentation and exploration can say for sure if they'll pan out to anything.

Hopefully as the project grows, things will resolve further.
Logged

YSearch & MitoSearch: 2GXWW


yDNA: R-U106*


mtDNA: U5a1a1 (Genbank# GQ368895)


R-P312-WTY Project Admin http://tinyurl.com/daertg

eochaidh
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 400


« Reply #13 on: March 23, 2009, 10:47:23 PM »

Well, just so that it's said, I can't rationally say for certain that I'm on to something, but intuition says there's something there.  I have a few ideas, but only experimentation and exploration can say for sure if they'll pan out to anything.

Hopefully as the project grows, things will resolve further.

You and I each had the idea that M222+ was downstream of L21+ and it turned out to be the case. I always looked at my DYS390=25 and 389ii= 30 and thought it looked to be in between M222+ and the Scots Modal. Plus most of my matches were from Scotland and the north of Ireland. At that time people seemed to have no doubt that M222+ had originated in Irleand, si I got the idea that I (and others like me) might be a "pre-M222+".

Well, you put all that with your nifty tree and I'm going to go with that gut feeling. Yes, M222+ and L21* are different subclades, but for now they are right next to each other, sort of father and son. I think there has to be significance to your findings.

I think with the new FTDNA Deep Clade tests the L21+ Project is bound to grow! Plus, I'm always hoping for a new SNP!

Thanks,  Miles
Logged

Y-DNA: R1b DF23
mtDNA: T2g
jr9162
Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 9


« Reply #14 on: March 24, 2009, 12:49:50 AM »

Plus, I'm always hoping for a new SNP!

Thanks,  Miles

Yeah, one that divides M222!
Logged

Y-DNA R-M222+
DYS 385a/b(K) 13-11
DYF 371X 10c-12t-14c
DYF 385 11
DYF 397 12-14-14
DYF 399X 25c-26.1t
DYF 401 16
DYF 408 188-8-15
DYF 411 11-11
DYS 413 21-23
DYS 464X 16g-17c
DYS 724 39
DYS 725 31-32

mtDNA U5b2
HVR1 16184T 16213A 16286T
HVR2 073G 150T 263G 315.1C
vtilroe
Project Coordinator
Old Hand
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 150


« Reply #15 on: March 24, 2009, 02:46:46 AM »

(sigh) Some people don't ask for much.  :)
Logged

YSearch & MitoSearch: 2GXWW


yDNA: R-U106*


mtDNA: U5a1a1 (Genbank# GQ368895)


R-P312-WTY Project Admin http://tinyurl.com/daertg

rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #16 on: March 24, 2009, 08:08:48 AM »

Well, you can end up next to someone on a fluxus diagram without being all that close to his haplotype in reality.

I'm not all that close to my neighbors on Vince's fluxus diagram, and I've been on them before next to people who really are fairly distant from me.

I haven't checked the genetic distance between the M222 group and those who flank them on that diagram. How far off are they?

Even if those Scandinavians were some kind of "pre-M222" (which I strongly doubt), what would that prove? The ancestor they share with the M222+ group could have been an L21+ who lived several thousand years ago on the Continent.
« Last Edit: March 24, 2009, 11:04:38 AM by rms2 » Logged

rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #17 on: March 24, 2009, 08:21:08 AM »

I just took a quick look (all I have time for right now) at the two Norwegians, Nilssen and Igland (8EQYZ, V3228) and their two nearest neighbors in the M222+ group, Blanchard and McKenzie (NUKXT, 4K975) in YSearch.

They aren't all that close, and their haplotypes are distinctly different. I'll take a closer look later, but I suspect fluxus puts people together based on relative proximity rather than absolute proximity. In other words, it groups what it's got.

I'm no expert on using fluxus and interpreting it, but I don't see any great resemblance between the haplotypes of Nilssen and Igland and Blanchard and McKenzie.

Neither McKenzie nor Blanchard has updated his YSearch entry to include all 67 markers. I'll have to write them and ask them to do that. I'm at work and looking at this stuff only on my short breaks, so I don't have time right now to put them all into McGee's Utility and see how they come out. Still Nilssen and Blanchard were 15 off at Blanchard's 63 markers that he currently has in YSearch. That's not close, and the two haplotypes don't appear to share any unique characteristics that I could detect with a quick look.

Interestingly, Nilssen and Igland are only 8 off each other at 67 markers.
« Last Edit: March 24, 2009, 11:08:18 AM by rms2 » Logged

rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #18 on: March 24, 2009, 11:32:03 AM »

Try running Nilssen (8EQYZ) in YSearch. His closest match is Igland ("Berge" V3228) at 8 away. After that there are some at 16 away, none of whom appears to be an M222+ or even an Irishman. The closest person of Irish descent is Bisset, at 17 away, and his haplotype does look like it is probably M222+.

But 17 away is quite distant. It's not close, and Nilssen has an R1b1b2a1b3 (Bailey 7UDT7) who is that close.

I think fluxus takes whatever haplotypes are put into it and groups them. They don't have to be close in reality at all apparently. They just have to be close relative to the other haplotypes that make up the diagram.

I don't think there is anything Irish or British or M222ish about those two Norwegians at all.
« Last Edit: March 24, 2009, 11:33:15 AM by rms2 » Logged

rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #19 on: March 24, 2009, 01:35:25 PM »

I've been calling Vince's SplitsTree diagram "fluxus." I should have written SplitsTree.

Anyway, the two guys on either side of me on the tree are Gibson (3E6AQ) and Grant (RKCNM).

They are a gd of 20 and 22 from me respectively.

That is what I have been talking about: relative proximity rather than absolute proximity. They aren't close to me at all really, but they flank me on the SplitsTree diagram.

The same is true with respect to Nilssen and Igland and the M222+ group.
Logged

susanrosine
Senior Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 76


« Reply #20 on: March 24, 2009, 08:14:23 PM »

You and I each had the idea that M222+ was downstream of L21+ and it turned out to be the case. I always looked at my DYS390=25 and 389ii= 30 and thought it looked to be in between M222+ and the Scots Modal. Plus most of my matches were from Scotland and the north of Ireland. At that time people seemed to have no doubt that M222+ had originated in Irleand, si I got the idea that I (and others like me) might be a "pre-M222+".

Well, you put all that with your nifty tree and I'm going to go with that gut feeling. Yes, M222+ and L21* are different subclades, but for now they are right next to each other, sort of father and son. I think there has to be significance to your findings.

Thanks,  Miles
There should be a good method, whether splits tree, fluxus, etc. to see which L21* men are truly the closest to M222+ men.  Obviously there once was a L21+ man, and he had a son who was the first M222+. But wouldn't their haploTYPES have been identical, or maybe 1 off?  If you have an approx date for the appearance of M222+, calculate the possible mutations since then-- Voila! The "pre M222+" group--descendants of the L21*'s other sons.  Sounds easy, doesn't it? LOL :-)
Logged

Dad: JAMES:  Ysearch QSCQ3;  R-P312, L21+ (R1b1b2a1b5*)
Dad: mitosearch QSCQ3; T1a; no matches HVR2 or FGS
Mom's brother: LEWTER: Ysearch FYFDA;  R-U106, L48+ (R1b1b2a1a*)
Mom's brother: mitosearch FYFDA, U5b2; 1 exac
vtilroe
Project Coordinator
Old Hand
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 150


« Reply #21 on: March 24, 2009, 09:42:31 PM »

I've been calling Vince's SplitsTree diagram "fluxus." I should have written SplitsTree.

Anyway, the two guys on either side of me on the tree are Gibson (3E6AQ) and Grant (RKCNM).

They are a gd of 20 and 22 from me respectively.

That is what I have been talking about: relative proximity rather than absolute proximity. They aren't close to me at all really, but they flank me on the SplitsTree diagram.

The same is true with respect to Nilssen and Igland and the M222+ group.

As I said before, SplitsTree uses a matrix of MRCA values generated by McGee's utility.  It doesn't matter if those MRCA values are in generations or years, it would scale the same.

The biggest question is that MRCA is calculated using mutation rates that are assumed to be constant regardless of lineage, allele score, historical environmental conditions, and so on.

Also, the same MRCA calculations have a very large confidence interval (about 30% plus or minus, apparently).  If the MRCA calculates to 3500 years ago, then realistically he could have lived anywhere from 2500 to 4500 years ago.

U106, U152, P312, L21, U198, and so on all happened within a very brief period of time, and their descendant populations appear to have flourished magnificently.  So yes, interclade drift happened since the founding family was so young, so large, and experienced very high survival rates.

That's why we need to find and test as many of those older SNPs as possible, because they can be used like filters to screen out the noise of similar haplotypes in brother clades.

The best clusters are those that have gone through a bottle-neck caused by a high extinction rate of cousin lineages.  It's one of the reasons that the NW-Irish/Niall modal (M222) stands out so well and looks so distinctive on the graph, whereas the rest are much more ambiguous.


Logged

YSearch & MitoSearch: 2GXWW


yDNA: R-U106*


mtDNA: U5a1a1 (Genbank# GQ368895)


R-P312-WTY Project Admin http://tinyurl.com/daertg

rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #22 on: March 25, 2009, 07:20:35 AM »

The problem I see is that you have people who look at a SplitsTree diagram like this, say on a web site like dna forums, and they jump to the conclusion that Nilssen and Igland must be "close to M222" and therefore somehow Irish or British. Then in their minds the diagram becomes of a piece with all the other flotsam used to bolster the "out-of-Ireland" argument or the "randy Irish monks" or "British thralls" arguments.

But in reality, Nilssen and Igland aren't really anything like M222 nor do they bear any special relationship to M222 (that we know of anyway).

Now that's not to say L21 in Scandinavia isn't of British provenance. I doubt it, but maybe it is or maybe some of it is, here and there. It could be that some of the Scandinavian L21 is of German provenance, or maybe all of it is homegrown Scandinavian. Time will tell.

I remember when U106 and U152 were brand new. Even though they were overwhelmingly British to begin with, I don't remember all the same sorts of arguments. There were one or two people who tried to argue they originated in Britain, but they didn't get too far. For some reason, perhaps because we have so much Irish L21 and everyone seems to want to relegate the Irish to "aborigine" status, there are many people who like the "L21-is-British/Irish" idea regardless of how the early returns are stacking up.
« Last Edit: March 25, 2009, 07:42:07 AM by rms2 » Logged

eochaidh
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 400


« Reply #23 on: March 25, 2009, 11:56:41 AM »

The problem I see is that you have people who look at a SplitsTree diagram like this, say on a web site like dna forums, and they jump to the conclusion that Nilssen and Igland must be "close to M222" and therefore somehow Irish or British. Then in their minds the diagram becomes of a piece with all the other flotsam used to bolster the "out-of-Ireland" argument or the "randy Irish monks" or "British thralls" arguments.

But in reality, Nilssen and Igland aren't really anything like M222 nor do they bear any special relationship to M222 (that we know of anyway).

Now that's not to say L21 in Scandinavia isn't of British provenance. I doubt it, but maybe it is or maybe some of it is, here and there. It could be that some of the Scandinavian L21 is of German provenance, or maybe all of it is homegrown Scandinavian. Time will tell.

I remember when U106 and U152 were brand new. Even though they were overwhelmingly British to begin with, I don't remember all the same sorts of arguments. There were one or two people who tried to argue they originated in Britain, but they didn't get too far. For some reason, perhaps because we have so much Irish L21 and everyone seems to want to relegate the Irish to "aborigine" status, there are many people who like the "L21-is-British/Irish" idea regardless of how the early returns are stacking up.

I think people are trying to find the relationship between L21* and M222+, which makes perfect sense. Since M222+ is downstream of L21+, the more we find out how present M222+ results relate to present L21+ results, the more we may find out about L21+

There was a time when M222+'s origin in Ireland was accepted as fact, but I think there are very few who would say that now. It seems within weeks of the L21 discovery that M222+'s origin moved to the Continent. I think Alan was the first one I recall moving M222+'s origin to the east. So, now, when people are tying L21* with M222+. I really don't think it is because they are promoting the "out-of-Ireland" argument. I think I know of one person who still holds on to that belief (It is NOT me!!!). Others might, but certainly they wouldn't post it. Just throwing the theory out for discussion can cause one to be called a "jingoist".

It really comes down to trying to find out when and where the split from L21+ to M222+ took place. Age intervals and split-trees may help. Ultimately Germany will be the only accepted answer.


Thanks,  Miles
Logged

Y-DNA: R1b DF23
mtDNA: T2g
Mike Walsh
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2964


WWW
« Reply #24 on: March 25, 2009, 10:56:24 PM »

There should be a good method, whether splits tree, fluxus, etc. to see which L21* men are truly the closest to M222+ men.  Obviously there once was a L21+ man, and he had a son who was the first M222+. But wouldn't their haploTYPES have been identical, or maybe 1 off?  If you have an approx date for the appearance of M222+, calculate the possible mutations since then-- Voila! The "pre M222+" group--descendants of the L21*'s other sons.  Sounds easy, doesn't it? LOL :-)
Smarter people than me have looked at Vince's diagrams and are noticing there may be a strong off-modal pattern for some L21* folks at 617 and 406S1 locii that has not been found at all in M222+, so I guess that means we'd be the opposite of "pre M222+".
Logged

R1b-L21>L513(DF1)>S6365>L705.2(&CTS11744,CTS6621)
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 5 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 0.1 seconds with 19 queries.