World Families Forums - R-L21* Walk The Y Project

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
July 24, 2014, 10:17:01 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)
| | |-+  R-L21* Walk The Y Project
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2 Go Down Print
Author Topic: R-L21* Walk The Y Project  (Read 2929 times)
Mike Walsh
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2963


WWW
« on: April 29, 2009, 10:28:12 PM »

I was told that my fit into one of the clusters of R-L21* makes me a good candidate for a Walk The Y project.

Well, anyway, I joined and contributed.   My understanding is that this kind of analysis can help find new SNP's downstream of L21.  Does anyone else have experience with this?  Any comments?  If you go to the web site you can see the haplotypes of those who have joined.  Are there particular haplotype types that we want to see join for sure?

http://www.familytreedna.com/public/RL21WTY2009/
Logged

R1b-L21>L513(DF1)>L705.2
cmblandford
Senior Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 85


« Reply #1 on: April 30, 2009, 01:48:49 AM »

I joined the L21 WTY also but now I wonder if it makes sense.  All of the clusters are Irish, Scot or Welsh and I don't fit any of them (although I don't know what a good fit is quantitatively).  I was interested in finding downstream SNP's to better understand my family origins since specific SNP's may occur in specific areas.  I don't understand how being a "good fit" increases the probability of finding key SNP's; I would think diversity would increase the chances.  If L21 originated on the continent, I would think several continental Europeans should be tested.  Or am I missing the point?
Logged

Y-DNA:  R-DF13*


Surname Project:  Blandford

Kit:  ft115893   Ysearch:  EYSPZ


Earliest Known Ancestor:  Thomas Blanford; Dorset, England; born 1648


GoldenHind
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 731


« Reply #2 on: April 30, 2009, 02:18:04 PM »

I joined the L21 WTY also but now I wonder if it makes sense.  All of the clusters are Irish, Scot or Welsh and I don't fit any of them (although I don't know what a good fit is quantitatively).  I was interested in finding downstream SNP's to better understand my family origins since specific SNP's may occur in specific areas.  I don't understand how being a "good fit" increases the probability of finding key SNP's; I would think diversity would increase the chances.  If L21 originated on the continent, I would think several continental Europeans should be tested.  Or am I missing the point?
Your reasoning appears sound to me.
Logged
Mike Walsh
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2963


WWW
« Reply #3 on: April 30, 2009, 02:31:27 PM »

This
.. I don't understand how being a "good fit" increases the probability of finding key SNP's; I would think diversity would increase the chances.  If L21 originated on the continent, I would think several continental Europeans should be tested.  Or am I missing the point?
First, please note I'm not any kind of a Walk the Y expert which is why I created this thread... to find out more.

My understanding is the goal is to find new SNP's downstream of L21+ beyond M222 that breakdown L21* into deeper sub-clades.   In that case, what's important is to try to identify haplotype "clusters" that have some common off-modal markers.  Then you'd want at least one haplotype per cluster, but not necessarily more than one investigated fully with the "Walk the Y" FTDNA testing.   Hopefully,  then a likely SNP will come out that other people in the cluster can then test for individually at a much lower cost.

I am not sure if geographic origin is as important as getting one person tested from each cluster, but what's most important is properly grouping similar haplotypes into clusters.

My reference to "fit" is my own term, but what this is in reference to is that my haplotype fits a specific "cluster" nicely.   I was also told that because of the nature of my cluster and myself this somehow helps the 464xccgg project.  I don't understand why or even what 464xccgg is all about.

Any comments from anyone who knows this stuff?
Logged

R1b-L21>L513(DF1)>L705.2
Mike Walsh
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2963


WWW
« Reply #4 on: April 30, 2009, 02:45:31 PM »

My reference to "fit" is my own term, but what this is in reference to is that my haplotype fits a specific "cluster" nicely.
Let me clarify.  A project administrator who is interested in something she called the "super combo" cluster said my haplotype was representative of that specific  cluster.  I use the word "fit" because I fit into that cluster cleanly.  I don't necessarily fit the R-L21* modal closely although I'm still in the WAMH ranges.
Logged

R1b-L21>L513(DF1)>L705.2
cmblandford
Senior Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 85


« Reply #5 on: April 30, 2009, 05:23:11 PM »

I am new to this WTY concept as well and I have some "points of confusion".  I think WTY is a great thing if it comes up with some new SNP's downstream of L21* and M222.  From what I see on the project website the clusters are all Irish, Welsh and Scot.  Downstream SNP's will show those who came after the migration to these areas.  It seems to me that the more interesting is where the source of L21 was such as the Rhine Valley etc.  Therefore shouldn't some "clusters" from the continent be investigated?
Logged

Y-DNA:  R-DF13*


Surname Project:  Blandford

Kit:  ft115893   Ysearch:  EYSPZ


Earliest Known Ancestor:  Thomas Blanford; Dorset, England; born 1648


Mike Walsh
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2963


WWW
« Reply #6 on: April 30, 2009, 06:07:07 PM »

I am new to this WTY concept as well and I have some "points of confusion".  I think WTY is a great thing if it comes up with some new SNP's downstream of L21* and M222.  From what I see on the project website the clusters are all Irish, Welsh and Scot.  Downstream SNP's will show those who came after the migration to these areas.  It seems to me that the more interesting is where the source of L21 was such as the Rhine Valley etc.  Therefore shouldn't some "clusters" from the continent be investigated?
If anyone has any real experience with WTY please chime in.   
 
cmblandford, I agree that it would be good to get more people from the continent with testing done, period, and some of those should do a WTY.

...but I think I mean something different than you when I use the word cluster.  You seem to associate clusters with geographic locations and I agree that somewhere back in time any single L21* subclade (which is really what we are trying to find here) had an origin and there is a good chance that is back in the Rhine Valley or possibly even further east or some think even south.   However that is not where those those L21* people live today.  I live in the US today, but I can trace back to Ireland.  Not sure, but before that I would say Wales, but I have no doubt on the continent before that.  The cluster I'm in has a number of people who say they are Norman.  They could be from France or even from Scandinavia.   

So what's my point?   My point is our current genealogical timeframes (last couple hundred years) are probably irrelevant to the time and therefore the location of the origination of L21*'s major undiscovered subclades.

I don't look at it like there is a Irish cluster or a Leinster cluster, in fact I don't fit well with those modals even though I am from there.  Ireland is a mix of people that came there over a long period of time in different migrations.

What is important, I think, (again I'd appreciate input from someone who has done this) is that L21* folks, to the extent it is possible, find a "cluster" of people with similar haplotypes, particularly ones that are off modal (off the L21* modal which happens to be WAMH) with the same slow to medium moving STR markers.   Of course haplotypes should be tested to 67 markers and known L21* before making comparisons.      Then, if I understand it, I can see the value of a WTY test for one individual in any of the identified clusters.  If a couple of new SNP's turn up, which they probably will, then the rest of that respective group (cluster) can get tested just for that new major SNP (at a much lower cost.)    Does that make sense?    If the "cluster" of similar haplotypes turns out positive to the new SNP...  fantastic, as you have identified a new subclade.

The critical success factor is identifying clusters of similar haplotypes that have a high odds of identifying a real world subclade that might have a unique SNP.

If two people are from Germany but their haplotypes are way off, having one person WTY tested for the sake of the other is probably a waste of money.   On the other hand, if one of the guys from Germany has a set of close matches with a bunch from Ireland then the German guy should "team" up with his Irish brethren.  At that point, I don't see how it matters who is tested on the full WTY.  One gets tested.  I do not see why the German guy has any more odds of having the critical SNP than any of the others.   In this example, a really cool result is that all of the Irish guys (if there all then found to have that new unique SNP) might find out where their deep ancestral ties are back on the continent.  The German guy would also benefit (as would all) if some kind of historical or prehistorical migration could be identified from the German location to the Irish location... we'd figure out a tribe, maybe  .... still probably too early for that but we are getting closer.

This is a little off on a tangent, but the moral of the story remains the same, R1b1b2 folks need 67 STR markers tested to have have much of prayer of finding a brother subclade, I think.  The more folks with 67 markers wherever they are, the better the chance for discovery of new clusters and then new subclade defining SNP's.
« Last Edit: May 01, 2009, 11:16:17 AM by Mike » Logged

R1b-L21>L513(DF1)>L705.2
cmblandford
Senior Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 85


« Reply #7 on: April 30, 2009, 07:58:57 PM »

Right on, I think it is a far superior way to look for new SNP's than letting things go as they will and hoping to find something.  Let us carry on with all due vigor.
Logged

Y-DNA:  R-DF13*


Surname Project:  Blandford

Kit:  ft115893   Ysearch:  EYSPZ


Earliest Known Ancestor:  Thomas Blanford; Dorset, England; born 1648


embPA
Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 30


« Reply #8 on: May 02, 2009, 02:37:33 PM »

The new classifications of the L21 WTY Project participants are getting interesting. McLaughlin, documented 19th century Ulster, is now Leinster.   Kehoe and Walsh, documented Leinster, are now Irish Unclassified.   

http://www.familytreedna.com/public/RL21WTY2009/default.aspx?section=yresults

The Leinster Modal and their royal pedigree

http://clanmaclochlainn.com/leinster.htm

Logged
NealtheRed
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 930


« Reply #9 on: May 02, 2009, 04:49:14 PM »

I am new to this WTY concept as well and I have some "points of confusion".  I think WTY is a great thing if it comes up with some new SNP's downstream of L21* and M222.  From what I see on the project website the clusters are all Irish, Welsh and Scot.  Downstream SNP's will show those who came after the migration to these areas.  It seems to me that the more interesting is where the source of L21 was such as the Rhine Valley etc.  Therefore shouldn't some "clusters" from the continent be investigated?
If anyone has any real experience with WTY please chime in.   
 
cmblandford, I agree that it would be good to get more people from the continent with testing done, period, and some of those should do a WTY.

...but I think I mean something different than you when I use the word cluster.  You seem to associate clusters with geographic locations and I agree that somewhere back in time any single L21* subclade (which is really what we are trying to find here) had an origin and there is a good chance that is back in the Rhine Valley or possibly even further east or some think even south.   However that is not where those those L21* people live today.  I live in the US today, but I can trace back to Ireland.  Not sure, but before that I would say Wales, but I have no doubt on the continent before that.  The cluster I'm in has a number of people who say they are Norman.  They could be from France or even from Scandinavia.   

So what's my point?   My point is our current genealogical timeframes (last couple hundred years) are probably irrelevant to the time and therefore the location of the origination of L21*'s major undiscovered subclades.

I don't look at it like there is a Irish cluster or a Leinster cluster, in fact I don't fit well with those modals even though I am from there.  Ireland is a mix of people that came there over a long period of time in different migrations.

What is important, I think, (again I'd appreciate input from someone who has done this) is that L21* folks, to the extent it is possible, find a "cluster" of people with similar haplotypes, particularly ones that are off modal (off the L21* modal which happens to be WAMH) with the same slow to medium moving STR markers.   Of course haplotypes should be tested to 67 markers and known L21* before making comparisons.      Then, if I understand it, I can see the value of a WTY test for one individual in any of the identified clusters.  If a couple of new SNP's turn up, which they probably will, then the rest of that respective group (cluster) can get tested just for that new major SNP (at a much lower cost.)    Does that make sense?    If the "cluster" of similar haplotypes turns out positive to the new SNP...  fantastic, as you have identified a new subclade.

The critical success factor is identifying clusters of similar haplotypes that have a high odds of identifying a real world subclade that might have a unique SNP.

If two people are from Germany but their haplotypes are way off, having one person WTY tested for the sake of the other is probably a waste of money.   On the other hand, if one of the guys from Germany has a set of close matches with a bunch from Ireland then the German guy should "team" up with his Irish brethren.  At that point, I don't see how it matters who is tested on the full WTY.  One gets tested.  I do not see why the German guy has any more odds of having the critical SNP than any of the others.   In this example, a really cool result is that all of the Irish guys (if there all then found to have that new unique SNP) might find out where their deep ancestral ties are back on the continent.  The German guy would also benefit (as would all) if some kind of historical or prehistorical migration could be identified from the German location to the Irish location... we'd figure out a tribe, maybe  .... still probably too early for that but we are getting closer.

This is a little off on a tangent, but the moral of the story remains the same, R1b1b2 folks need 67 STR markers tested to have have much of prayer of finding a brother subclade, I think.  The more folks with 67 markers wherever they are, the better the chance for discovery of new clusters and then new subclade defining SNP's.


Somehow I figured you were a cynic of clusters, and I concur to a certain degree; however:

The CCGG "Leinster" cluster is significant because members share the CCGG mutation on 464x. So it's not completely based on STR analysis (it's actually in between STR and SNP mutation rates), yet STRs can give us a clue to whom is CCGG. Therefore, it is far from being an empty tool for analysis since we have identified a cluster around Northern England, Leinster, Wales, and well-known Norman names that arrived with the Cambro-Norman invasion.

Don't throw out the possibility of finding significant relationships between the early P-Celtic speakers of Ireland and Old Welsh/Brythonic. And don't try to make me look like an idiot.
Logged

Y-DNA: R-Z255 (L159.2+) - Downing (Irish Sea)


MTDNA: HV4a1 - Centrella (Avellino, Italy)


Ysearch: 4PSCK



Mike Walsh
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2963


WWW
« Reply #10 on: May 02, 2009, 07:53:04 PM »

Somehow I figured you were a cynic of clusters, and I concur to a certain degree; however:

The CCGG "Leinster" cluster is significant because members share the CCGG mutation on 464x. So it's not completely based on STR analysis (it's actually in between STR and SNP mutation rates), yet STRs can give us a clue to whom is CCGG. Therefore, it is far from being an empty tool for analysis since we have identified a cluster around Northern England, Leinster, Wales, and well-known Norman names that arrived with the Cambro-Norman invasion.

Don't throw out the possibility of finding significant relationships between the early P-Celtic speakers of Ireland and Old Welsh/Brythonic. And don't try to make me look like an idiot.
I'm not so much a cynic on clusters as you might think, per se, in fact if you look at the thread I started on "R-L21 Clusters - can we identify a few?" you'll see I'm bit anxious to try to identify clusters and even have gone to a lot of work to download L21* haplotypes and look for clusters.  I do agree that STR's are important, that's why I paid for 67 of them and ask others to do the same.

Now, I am cynical on some of the older modals as they were "identified" before we had the depth of SNP defined deep clades that we now have.  As such, I have been uneducated on the Leinster. If I thought it was worthless, I wouldn't have compared myself to Leinster, which I have.  It is intriguing to me because of the Cambro-Norman aspects but I am wary of it as it is important to consider modals in the context of deep clades, I think.  Shouldn't Leinster include the Old Irish there as well?  Maybe the labeling is confusing me.

As far as the 464x project, you were successful in convincing me it was worth looking into and in fact I placed the advanced order for that last night.   My perceived skepticism was just an effort to understand before investing time or money.

As far as trying to "make you look like an idiot", I'm not sure what it was that I wrote that triggered that.  I apologize.  I don't think I ridiculed anyone.  Anyway, please note that there is a wide audience to any blog from the super-experienced to the novice so I try to explain myself as well as I can.  No intent to "talk down" or anything like.   If you are angered in terms of the request for input from a  expert, that is in reference to Walk The Y.   I don't know of anyone who has been in one of those projects and I am trying to learn about it since I was asked to join one.   If you are have prior experience with Walk The Y or are an administrator for one, I didn't know that.    I still have the same thrust of a question.... has anyone been in a Walk The Y project before and what do they think?  What's important in the process?  If you have been in one that's great, just say you have so I know where you are coming from.   That must be what's bothering, the request for help from someone who knows Walk The Y.  If you are an expert on that, I'm sorry, I had wrongly assumed you were like me and hadn't been involved in it.
« Last Edit: May 02, 2009, 08:48:17 PM by Mike » Logged

R1b-L21>L513(DF1)>L705.2
Mike Walsh
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2963


WWW
« Reply #11 on: May 03, 2009, 12:26:15 AM »

I found this from another forum.   I think I'm understanding a little better.  They are trying to find new SNP's but ones that will be common and not private/unique to the individual.
Quote from: MMadi
My understanding is that for the WTY to work best there are two or more men in the same cluster suspected to harbor a new SNP as participants. Each individual will have the same section of their yDNA sequenced. Then if a novel SNP is found in one (which is ascertained by comparing the results to the results for the same section of HUGO), sequencing the same section in the other man in the suspected cluster will reveal whether it's a private SNP in the first man or a new subclade-defining SNP. So, if both men have this new SNP, it would seem to be a new phylogenetically significant SNP. If the second man doesn't have the same SNP as the first man, it seems to be a private SNP in the first man. Of course, that seemingly private SNP can be offered by FTDNA and perhaps with testing from the Advanced Orders menu, it may turn out that someone else has this SNP.

In the R1b-L48 WTY Project, we actually have two sets of three men each, all L48+. One set is "plain vanilla" L48, but with the three men having a fair genetic distance between the pairs of the three. This ensures the widest possible coverage of R1b-L48 and means that there are several potential outcomes. There's a second set of three men who are L48+ and members of the null 425 cluster, which may or may not have a defining SNP, either for the entire cluster or part of the cluster. There are two cluster members who are close to each other on a phylogenetic tree, but with different surnames and ethnic backgrounds (Belgium and Germany) and a third cluster member who is closer to the trunk of the tree, so he is at a fair genetic distance from the other two. So, if all three have the same newly-discovered SNP found in the WTY, that probably indicates a SNP defining the entire cluster. If the two who are close to each other share a new SNP, which the third doesn't have, that new SNP probably defines part of the cluster around the two members close to each other. If only one of those close to the other has a new SNP, it's probably a private SNP, although if FTDNA offers that seeming new private SNP on the Advanced Orders menu, it may turn out that someone else has that new SNP. It's also possible that a new SNP may be found that's upstream of L48, but downstream of U106. This would define a new subclade between U106 and L48 that may include some U106+/L48- men. Again, FTDNA can offer this new SNP on the Advanced Orders menu and U106+/L48- can test it to see if the SNP is intermediate between U106 and L48.
Logged

R1b-L21>L513(DF1)>L705.2
cmblandford
Senior Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 85


« Reply #12 on: May 03, 2009, 01:53:13 AM »

This sounds to me like an excellent strategy.  The testing discovers whether the known cluster shares the same SNP and thus is a "valid" cluster and it also tests for SNPs that exist outside known clusters.  This strategy can be expanded where more clusters exist and where there are men who do not fit any known cluster ie. "plain vanilla".  That seems to me to be the best of all possible scenarios:  men within clusters are tested for inclusion and men outside of known clusters are tested for possible unknown clusters that contain a common SNP.  :-)

 
Logged

Y-DNA:  R-DF13*


Surname Project:  Blandford

Kit:  ft115893   Ysearch:  EYSPZ


Earliest Known Ancestor:  Thomas Blanford; Dorset, England; born 1648


cmblandford
Senior Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 85


« Reply #13 on: May 27, 2009, 02:52:26 PM »

Shouldn't we be receiving some of the early L-21 WTY results soon?  Any early comments on whether they have found some new SNP's?
Logged

Y-DNA:  R-DF13*


Surname Project:  Blandford

Kit:  ft115893   Ysearch:  EYSPZ


Earliest Known Ancestor:  Thomas Blanford; Dorset, England; born 1648


KeithM
Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 6


« Reply #14 on: June 14, 2009, 01:42:00 PM »

Joining the WTY project may not pay off for you right now, but it will. I think when it is all said and done, the Y tree will look a lot different than it does now and relationships among sub groups will be clearer. We are so far ahead of where we were 5 or 10 years ago, and we will keep having surprises as we forge ahead.
Logged
cmblandford
Senior Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 85


« Reply #15 on: July 31, 2009, 07:34:57 PM »

I see there is a completed L-21 WTY test.  Will the results be made public?
« Last Edit: July 31, 2009, 07:35:31 PM by cmblandford » Logged

Y-DNA:  R-DF13*


Surname Project:  Blandford

Kit:  ft115893   Ysearch:  EYSPZ


Earliest Known Ancestor:  Thomas Blanford; Dorset, England; born 1648


Mike Walsh
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2963


WWW
« Reply #16 on: August 01, 2009, 11:36:01 AM »

On the ISOGG we site I noticed this footnote at the bottom of the Hg R page, "L9 and L10 are located under L21."
http://www.isogg.org/tree/ISOGG_HapgrpR09.html

I've also read notes about L21 people testing for L130.

I'm not sure if the Walk The Y project found these or what.   Anyone have any more information?
Logged

R1b-L21>L513(DF1)>L705.2
vtilroe
Project Coordinator
Old Hand
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 150


« Reply #17 on: August 04, 2009, 07:53:31 PM »

L130 is not a Walk The Y SNP; it was found during standard deep-clade testing of an L21* individual a few months ago, in the M222 segment.

L9 and L10 were both found in July 2008 in a single L21* individual who was testing for P312.
Logged

YSearch & MitoSearch: 2GXWW


yDNA: R-U106*


mtDNA: U5a1a1 (Genbank# GQ368895)


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

jr9162
Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 9


« Reply #18 on: August 05, 2009, 10:57:31 AM »

So L130 is above or below M222 on the tree?
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
jr9162
Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 9


« Reply #19 on: August 05, 2009, 10:58:58 AM »

So L130 is above or below M222 on the tree?
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
Jdean
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 678


« Reply #20 on: August 05, 2009, 12:53:23 PM »

L130 is not a Walk The Y SNP; it was found during standard deep-clade testing of an L21* individual a few months ago, in the M222 segment.

L9 and L10 were both found in July 2008 in a single L21* individual who was testing for P312.

Sorry to be a pedant but I think it was L96 that was discovered whilst looking at somebody’s M222 status, presumably something this gentleman was negative for.
Logged

Y-DNA R-DF49*
MtDNA J1c2e
Kit No. 117897
Ysearch 3BMC9

vtilroe
Project Coordinator
Old Hand
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 150


« Reply #21 on: August 06, 2009, 07:45:08 PM »

So L130 is above or below M222 on the tree?
L130 was discovered in a L21+ M222- man, so above.  Well, actually it's at the same level as M222 (a "brother clade" to M222, if more than one man has it).

See http://www.dna-fingerprint.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=21&mode=thread&order=0&thold=0
Logged

YSearch & MitoSearch: 2GXWW


yDNA: R-U106*


mtDNA: U5a1a1 (Genbank# GQ368895)


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

vtilroe
Project Coordinator
Old Hand
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 150


« Reply #22 on: August 06, 2009, 07:50:57 PM »

L130 is not a Walk The Y SNP; it was found during standard deep-clade testing of an L21* individual a few months ago, in the M222 segment.

L9 and L10 were both found in July 2008 in a single L21* individual who was testing for P312.

Sorry to be a pedant but I think it was L96 that was discovered whilst looking at somebody’s M222 status, presumably something this gentleman was negative for.

Oops, you're right -- my bad.  L130 on the L23 segment of what presumably was a deep-clade R test.  Why they were looking at L23 specifically is a bit of a mystery to me.
Logged

YSearch & MitoSearch: 2GXWW


yDNA: R-U106*


mtDNA: U5a1a1 (Genbank# GQ368895)


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

Mike Walsh
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2963


WWW
« Reply #23 on: November 05, 2009, 10:16:24 AM »

My understanding from notes on other forums is that the R-L21* WTY project has found at least two new SNP's that might be significant.

1) L159 which is also found in Hg I so it is labeled L159.2 in Hg R.  This so far is relegated apparently very cleanly to to the Leinster Cluster.  A lot of those people are 448=18 449>=30 389i=14,15 442=11. Also, they seem to be 464x=2c2g.  For a label name, I've called them 1830's in my spreadsheet, although the Beatty portion of this group seems to have "back-mutated" to 449=29.  Common surnames appaear to be Beatty, Byrnes, Kavanaugh and McLaughlin but there are others.  Geographically, they are bit hard to pinpoint as folks show up from Connacht, Leinster, Munster, Ulster and western/southern Scotland although there may be some English in the mix.   I don't think this guy tested for the SNP so he may not have it, but there is a Leinster cluster person from Ranville-Breuillaud, France.  Kirsten S knows a lot about this group of people.  Perhaps she will comment.

2) L226, which apparently has been found in the one Irish Type III WTY.  This is jumping the gun as we don't know how prevalent this might be.   FYI, Irish Type III often are 459=8,9 439=11 456=15 464=13,13,$,$.  I labeled them as 1189's in my spreadsheet.Surnames include O'Connor, O'Brien, O'Hara, O'Reilly, Ware, Wright, Kennedy and a wide variety of names including an Anderson, Roger and Walker.  Geographically I see a lot (at least of the L21+ tested) that are Munster, but also a couple of English.  Dennis W knows a lot about this group of people. Perhaps he will comment.

Logged

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

Posts: 707


« Reply #24 on: November 05, 2009, 12:06:37 PM »

The Irish type III is an older group, correct? If so, this could produce a larger group of down stream positives.
Logged

148326
Pos: Z245 L459 L21 DF13**
Neg: DF23 L513 L96 L144 Z255 Z253 DF21 DF41 (Z254 P66 P314.2 M37 M222  L563 L526 L226 L195 L193 L192.1 L159.2 L130 DF63 DF5 DF49)
WTYNeg: L555 L371 (L9/L10 L370 L302/L319.1 L554 L564 L577 P69 L626 L627 L643 L679)
Pages: [1] 2 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 0.129 seconds with 18 queries.