World Families Forums - Common haplotype modals that turned out to be L21+

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
September 21, 2014, 04:53:18 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)
| | |-+  Common haplotype modals that turned out to be L21+
« previous next »
Pages: [1] Go Down Print
Author Topic: Common haplotype modals that turned out to be L21+  (Read 2468 times)
Mike Walsh
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2964


WWW
« on: October 06, 2009, 11:17:49 AM »

It appears that the following "old" haplotype modals are L21+ based:

Northwest Irish (M222+ and its neighbors)
Irish Type II/South Irish
Irish Type III
Irish Type IV/Continental
Leinster/Irish Sea (which may be L159+ and includes the Beatty/Byrnes group)
Scots Classic
Unknown Scotts (MacWho)
Wales I / Ancient Briton 17-14-10
Wales II Cadwgon
11-13 Combo (which includes the Ross-Mascie SF and Wales III)

Here are a couple of the new modals that also are L21+
Wales and SW England
East Europe Ashkenazi

Take this thought with a splash of humour.  Looking at the above, if I was to rename things now the one thing that seems ironic is I'd probably name the "Northwest Irish" as the "Scotti" or the "Irish Scotti" while I'd probably name the "Scots" as "Northern Briton" or "British Scott" or something like that... or may be "Pict."    Did anyone ever figure out what a Pict was anyway?
Logged

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

Posts: 930


« Reply #1 on: October 06, 2009, 11:41:06 AM »

They were the Caledonians, right? The Romans described them as red-headed and having huge limbs.

I believe the Pictish language can be classified as P-Celtic.
Logged

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


MTDNA: HV4a1 - Centrella (Avellino, Italy)


Ysearch: 4PSCK



cmblandford
Senior Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 85


« Reply #2 on: October 07, 2009, 08:42:05 PM »

Quote
It appears that the following "old" haplotype modals are L21+ based

Mike, could you give the Ysearch number or a website for these modals?  Also, how far off at 67 markers is considered "close"?  Does "close" include both slow and fast markers?

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: 2964


WWW
« Reply #3 on: October 08, 2009, 01:10:00 AM »

Quote
It appears that the following "old" haplotype modals are L21+ based

Mike, could you give the Ysearch number or a website for these modals?  Also, how far off at 67 markers is considered "close"?  Does "close" include both slow and fast markers?



Here are some of the modals I've kept in my notes, although I'm not saying all of these are R-L21 based.

C7BED - The WAMH (Western Atlantic Modal Haplotype) R1b Modal
55GU9 - The 67-marker R1b Project Modal (exactly like the one above for the first 40 markers)
PYP6F/S9R4J – Welsh - Wales Modal 1 – the most common Welsh R-M269 haplotype has the 17-14-10 beyond WAMH.  S9R4J is 67 [Robert Hughes]
WFF6T – Welsh – Wales Modal 2 – The Cadwgond of Wales modal [Robert Hughes]
UZ2MM – Scots Modal
XREMB – Irish – Type II South Irish R1b Haplotype [Ken Nordtvedt]
NT4BZ - Irish - Type III R1b Modal Haplotype [Ken Nordtvedt]
 - Irish Continental? [Ken Nordtvedt]
M5UKQ – Irish - NW Irish R1b/M222 Modal Haplotype
BFHRM - Irish – Leinster Modal
AQ7B8 – Irish – Lagin [Kirsten Saxe]
XN33E - L21 Combo Cluster  /  Ros Mascy - Q69ZC [Ann Starnsbarger]
KEFGX – Wales Modal 3 (Walsh, Morgan, Evans, Petterson, Lewis) [Robert Hughes]
E866V – Iberian Modal
M2QET - Norwegian Modal? (Note the question mark after this one.)
2B9H5 - North Sea Modal (found 08/25/06 by griffj3)
N3GFD – Pretani - Ethoancestry
QJETR – Pict - Ethoancestry
Logged

R1b-L21>L513(DF1)>S6365>L705.2(&CTS11744,CTS6621)
Mike Walsh
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2964


WWW
« Reply #4 on: October 08, 2009, 01:13:39 AM »

....  Also, how far off at 67 markers is considered "close"?  Does "close" include both slow and fast markers?
"close" is a relative term.  It's like horseshoes versus hand grenades.   In R1b1b2, to be 65 of 67 is saying a lot from a true genealogical perspective.   Deep ancestry and membership in a potential sub-clade is a different matter.
« Last Edit: October 08, 2009, 01:14:02 AM by Mike » Logged

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

Posts: 707


« Reply #5 on: October 10, 2009, 03:22:23 AM »

http://www.familytreedna.com/genetic-distance-markers.aspx?testtype=67
This Document discusses "Interpreting Genetic Distance"

Also here is a list of Ysearch Id's that you can enter in the Research User Id field. you can add a user such as yourself and a comma in front of the list to see how you or another Id matches up.

C2B9H5,3JCSW,55GU9,6JCR7,6JMAK,A5KEN,ANJNY,BFHRM,BUNM5,C27GY,C57NK,C7BED,D6US8,E866V,EX9ZC,
HKGXS,HX838,JAH5C,JHPBK,M5UKQ,MFWN8,NT4BZ,PB595,PYP6F,QB382,QHHDF,QJJNX,S9R4J,TDKYT

Quote
It appears that the following "old" haplotype modals are L21+ based

Mike, could you give the Ysearch number or a website for these modals?  Also, how far off at 67 markers is considered "close"?  Does "close" include both slow and fast markers?
« Last Edit: October 10, 2009, 03:22:58 AM by mjost » 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)
Mike Walsh
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2964


WWW
« Reply #6 on: October 15, 2009, 06:26:10 PM »

Quote
It appears that the following "old" haplotype modals are L21+ based
Mike, could you give the Ysearch number or a website for these modals?  Also, how far off at 67 markers is considered "close"?  Does "close" include both slow and fast markers?
Here are some of the modals I've kept in my notes, although I'm not saying all of these are R-L21 based.

C7BED - The WAMH (Western Atlantic Modal Haplotype) R1b Modal
55GU9 - The 67-marker R1b Project Modal (exactly like the one above for the first 40 markers)
PYP6F/S9R4J – Welsh - Wales Modal 1 – the most common Welsh R-M269 haplotype has the 17-14-10 beyond WAMH.  S9R4J is 67 [Robert Hughes]
WFF6T – Welsh – Wales Modal 2 – The Cadwgond of Wales modal [Robert Hughes]
UZ2MM – Scots Modal
XREMB – Irish – Type II South Irish R1b Haplotype [Ken Nordtvedt]
NT4BZ - Irish - Type III R1b Modal Haplotype [Ken Nordtvedt]
 - Irish Continental? [Ken Nordtvedt]
M5UKQ – Irish - NW Irish R1b/M222 Modal Haplotype
BFHRM - Irish – Leinster Modal
AQ7B8 – Irish – Lagin [Kirsten Saxe]
XN33E - L21 Combo Cluster  /  Ros Mascy - Q69ZC [Ann Starnsbarger]
KEFGX – Wales Modal 3 (Walsh, Morgan, Evans, Petterson, Lewis) [Robert Hughes]
E866V – Iberian Modal
M2QET - Norwegian Modal? (Note the question mark after this one.)
2B9H5 - North Sea Modal (found 08/25/06 by griffj3)
N3GFD – Pretani - Ethoancestry
QJETR – Pict - Ethoancestry

These two don't look like R-L21* although the Pretani could be anything since it follows WAMH.
2B9H5 - North Sea Modal
N3GFD – Pretani - Ethoancestry

but I did find a couple of matches for this
QJETR – Pict - Ethoancestry

Any thoughts on why this is so supposed to be Pictish?
« Last Edit: October 15, 2009, 06:26:29 PM by Mike » Logged

R1b-L21>L513(DF1)>S6365>L705.2(&CTS11744,CTS6621)
Mike Walsh
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2964


WWW
« Reply #7 on: October 15, 2009, 11:02:54 PM »

Just in case you don't have it, the R-L21* modal haplotype is in Ysearch ID K9VGV.  it is WAMH except at 449=30 (instead of 29) and 456=15 (instead of 16).  

The actual mean (average) at these two DYS locations rounds to 449=29 and 456=16 so you can see that we are WAMH-ish indeed.  The median for R-L21* turns out to be WAMH except that only 449=30 while 456 sticks to WAMH (16.)

I don't think that info is too terribly useful except when looking at haplotype off-modal signatures. When doing that keep in mind that 449=29/30 and 456=15/16 are not really "off-modal" in either cases.   Other than that, WAMH is WAMH and R-L21* is WAMH.

I just confirmed the ysearch data -  R-L21* modal of K9VGV has a genetic distance of 2 from the R1b modal of C7BED.
« Last Edit: October 15, 2009, 11:07:03 PM by Mike » Logged

R1b-L21>L513(DF1)>S6365>L705.2(&CTS11744,CTS6621)
alan trowel hands.
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2012


« Reply #8 on: October 16, 2009, 07:22:03 AM »

Is the 'almost M222' group you mentioned on rootsweb an M222 negative L21 positive group?  What surnames and ancestral origin points are in this group?  Someone months ago posted a 'pre-M222' group on one of the DNA discussion websites and it appeared to be dominated by surnames that were not NW Irish or even Irish Gaelic ones.  I have no idea how they got this group together or if it was valid.  Nevertheless, the names and ancestral locations of a group whose STRs are similar to classic M222 but are negative for that SNP could perhaps provide a clue to the earliest origin of the L21* cluster in which the M222 SNP later occurred.  Clearly if the pre-M222 is similar to M222 in terms of ancestral locations it is no big surprise but if the two are different in distribution then that could possibly be taken evidence for a change in location of the lineage between the pre-M222 period and the M222 period i.e. an ancient migration.  

The same logic could be applied to L21* and even S116 as a whole i.e. you could look upstream for people with STRs that are similar but who dont have the SNP and possibly get some sort of idea of ancient movements from it.  I suppose the problem with that would be that L21 and S116 STRs are basically the same and of course S116* is a paragroup rather than always being an upstream clade.
« Last Edit: October 16, 2009, 07:23:44 AM by alan trowel hands. » Logged
Mike Walsh
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2964


WWW
« Reply #9 on: October 16, 2009, 09:38:20 AM »

Is the 'almost M222' group you mentioned on rootsweb an M222 negative L21 positive group?  What surnames and ancestral origin points are in this group?  Someone months ago posted a 'pre-M222' group on one of the DNA discussion websites and it appeared to be dominated by surnames that were not NW Irish or even Irish Gaelic ones.  I have no idea how they got this group together or if it was valid.  Nevertheless, the names and ancestral locations of a group whose STRs are similar to classic M222 but are negative for that SNP could perhaps provide a clue to the earliest origin of the L21* cluster in which the M222 SNP later occurred.  Clearly if the pre-M222 is similar to M222 in terms of ancestral locations it is no big surprise but if the two are different in distribution then that could possibly be taken evidence for a change in location of the lineage between the pre-M222 period and the M222 period i.e. an ancient migration.  

The same logic could be applied to L21* and even S116 as a whole i.e. you could look upstream for people with STRs that are similar but who dont have the SNP and possibly get some sort of idea of ancient movements from it.  I suppose the problem with that would be that L21 and S116 STRs are basically the same and of course S116* is a paragroup rather than always being an upstream clade.
Yes, the "almost M222" group I mentioned is R-L21*.

I just decided to upload all of the R-L21* data I could find into a spreadsheet.  I posted it at the FILES section of this Yahoo group.
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/RL21Project/
BTW, if you don't want to receive emails from that forum.  You can "turn off" emails and just read the group message board from the web page only whenever you want.

That spreadsheet is only R-L21* "real" people with two exceptions.   I included one artificial modal, the NW Irish/M222+ modal.    I also have the L21* L159.2+ people.  Officially they (Leinster folks) are still R-L21* but L159.2 seems to be a valid SNP identifiable sub-clade of R-L21+.

And yes, I am one of the guilty parties who have tried to identify R-L21* haplotypes that seemed "pre-M222".   My prior attempt, which probably still has  validity, was based on R-L21* folks with high at DYS481.... 481>=24.  Vince V feels 481=25 is the predominant marker discerning NW Irish/M222+.

In the current version of the spreadsheet, I started over, cleared the deck and did an exhaustive review of slow to medium moving markers looking for signature patterns.  I started calling this R-L21* group "almost M222" rather than "pre M222" because in fact their haplotypes are not older than M222+, they are modern men's.  It's just they are similar to M222+ folks and therefore probably closely related, deep ancestry-wise.

Here is how the methodology** to "almost-M222" goes:
1. Of the 509 67 length R-L21* (actually 508 since I'm counting the M222+ modal) folks, only 26 (5.1%) have what I call "1416", or 392>=14 534>=16.
2. Of the 26, 13 (50%) have 413a<=22.  These are what I call "1416-A" guys.  (FYI: There is a "1416-B" group that has 385=11/12,15/16.)
3. Of the 13 that were also 413a<=22, there are 6 that have 481>=24.  One of those 6 is the M222+ Modal.   This is my version of an "R-L21-1416-A-NW" variety. 

M222+ just happens to be one very large branch of this variety, the rest of which are "almost M222." I guess the other five (M222-) are R-L21-1416-A-NW*.   We have to get the asterisk in there, I suppose.

** Note: The caveat is that there is risk that a haplotype(s) converged "out" of this variety because one of these markers had a recent mutation or that a haplotype(s) converged "into" this variety as well.   The more people tested, and tested to deeper levels and the longer the signatures, the more this risk will be reduced.
Logged

R1b-L21>L513(DF1)>S6365>L705.2(&CTS11744,CTS6621)
alan trowel hands.
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2012


« Reply #10 on: October 16, 2009, 02:38:48 PM »

Mike

Got to say that is a very interesting spreadsheet.  As for the 'almost M222' lot, again its very interesting that it not NW Irish geographically speaking.  There is a heavy link with SW Scotland, Wales and western England.  Where it appears in Ireland, its in Leinster not the NW and looks like s spill over the Irish Sea.  That is very much an Irish Sea distribution with more on the British side.  The presence of lots of M222 linked to a dynasty in NW Ireland but lack of 'almost M222' suggests that the lineage arrived in NW Ireland in M222 form but its pre-M222 SNP history lay elsewhere.  

Of those places, you would have to say the most likely origin point for M222 is where 'almost M222' and M222 both coincide in decent numbers.  I lack detailed M222 facts at my fingertips but I recall SW Scotland has a lot of M222 and also has a lot of 'almost M222' on the spreadsheet.  This apparently makes SW Scotland the only place to have both in good numbers suggesting M222 arose among the 'almost M222' people there.  That would not be a huge surprise to historians, some of whom have thought the Ui Neill origin stories suggest a link with late Roman Britain.  

I would also observe that the Dumnoni tribe of SW England, the Damnoni of SW Scotland, the Fir Domnain element among the Leinster people and NW Connaught could provide an Iron Age or even Roman period tribal  link between western Britain, SE Scotland, Leinster and the general area where the Ui Neill arose in Ireland.   Perhaps the Ui Neill are just a lineage who arose among the Fir Domnainn in NW Connaught who in turn perhaps were derived from the Damnoni of SW Scotland.    
« Last Edit: October 17, 2009, 04:54:57 AM by alan trowel hands. » Logged
alan trowel hands.
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2012


« Reply #11 on: October 16, 2009, 02:47:47 PM »

The above would potentially explain why neither the places where M222 is found in Ireland or where it is found in Scotland are in the correct places to be explained by historic period Irish Dal Riadic settlments.  The latter actually connected NE Ireland and the west highlands/Hebrides of Scotland NOT NW Ireland to SW Scotland.     
Logged
Mike Walsh
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2964


WWW
« Reply #12 on: October 16, 2009, 04:20:42 PM »

...  Of those places, you would have to say the most likely origin point for M222 is where 'almost M222' and M222 both coincide in decent numbers.  I lack detailed M222 facts at my fingertips but I recall SW Scotland has a lot of M222 and also has a lot of 'almost M222' on the spreadsheet.  This apparently makes SW Scotland the only place to have both in good numbers suggesting M222 arose among the 'almost M222' people there.  That would not be a huge surprise to historians, some of whom have thought the Ui Neill origin stories suggest a link with late Roman Britain.  ...
I'm trying to find it, but I've recently read an article on the origins of the Scottish where they made the argument that the real dividing line is the Scottish Highlands.  The Irish Sea was not really a divider at all...  the essences is there may have been more folk movement (at least prehistorically) from SW Scotland to NE Ireland than the other way around.   I will say that there is a spot where Argyll is only 13 miles across the Irish Sea to Northern Ireland.
Logged

R1b-L21>L513(DF1)>S6365>L705.2(&CTS11744,CTS6621)
alan trowel hands.
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2012


« Reply #13 on: October 17, 2009, 05:07:02 AM »

Mike

That is true but the M222 area of Ireland and the M222 area of Scotland are in the wrong places to correlate with the well known Irish Dalriada movement.  The latter went from the north-east top of Ireland to Argyll and the Hebrides in Scotland.  In other words it did not leave the M222 epicentre of NW Ireland and it did not arrive in the M222 epicentre of southern/SW Scotland.  So, the correlation with that historic movement is very poor.  

That may look like splitting hairs but these are much bigger distances on the ground and major differences historically.  The M222 concentration is essentially on the opposite coast of Ulster from the NE of Ireland.  The M222 in Scotland is mostly concentrated south of the Clyde (which was a major cultural divide) in the lands of the Strathclyde P-Celtic Britons who had formerly been the Damnoni.  This lies to the south of the area settled by the Irish Dalriadans in Argyll.  So, if you look at it in detail, there is really no case to connect most M222 with the historic Dalriada movement from NE Ireland to western Scotland.

My conclusion is that this probably therefore relates to a movement that happened before the full light of history and which did link the SW of Scotland with NW Ireland.  As I posted above, the pre-M222 disribution would support the case for a movement from rather than to Scotland.
« Last Edit: October 17, 2009, 05:10:12 AM by alan trowel hands. » Logged
Mike Walsh
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2964


WWW
« Reply #14 on: October 17, 2009, 01:59:09 PM »

Mike

That is true but the M222 area of Ireland and the M222 area of Scotland are in the wrong places to correlate with the well known Irish Dalriada movement.  The latter went from the north-east top of Ireland to Argyll and the Hebrides in Scotland.  In other words it did not leave the M222 epicentre of NW Ireland and it did not arrive in the M222 epicentre of southern/SW Scotland.  So, the correlation with that historic movement is very poor.  

That may look like splitting hairs but these are much bigger distances on the ground and major differences historically.  The M222 concentration is essentially on the opposite coast of Ulster from the NE of Ireland.  The M222 in Scotland is mostly concentrated south of the Clyde (which was a major cultural divide) in the lands of the Strathclyde P-Celtic Britons who had formerly been the Damnoni.  This lies to the south of the area settled by the Irish Dalriadans in Argyll.  So, if you look at it in detail, there is really no case to connect most M222 with the historic Dalriada movement from NE Ireland to western Scotland.

My conclusion is that this probably therefore relates to a movement that happened before the full light of history and which did link the SW of Scotland with NW Ireland.  As I posted above, the pre-M222 disribution would support the case for a movement from rather than to Scotland.
That's what I got out of the article... this relationship is prehistoric and that the movement was from Scotland to Ireland, not the other way around.
Logged

R1b-L21>L513(DF1)>S6365>L705.2(&CTS11744,CTS6621)
alan trowel hands.
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2012


« Reply #15 on: October 17, 2009, 03:57:55 PM »

The movements did vary in direction. I do genuinely believe the Dalriada thing was Ireland to Scotland and not the other way.  There is just too much about it in terms of style of the kingdom's name, the Gaelic language, the type of names in the early royal lines, the names of the local saints etc that clearly made Scottish Dalriada (Argyle and the Inner Hebrides) look very like on offshoot of Ireland.  

I think there is a trend in the Glasgow University school of thought (Cowan etc) to minimise or reverse the Irish angle to makes the Scots rather more like the Picts but this is revisionism at its worst and the evidence in the historic period is overwhelmingly Ireland to Scotland and not the other way.  Put it this way, if in the Dark Ages all Ireland is Gaelic speaking while only one modest bit of Scotland is Gaelic AND that very bit of Scotland is also the very area where all histories say an Irish kingdom was founded, then its peverse to not put 2 and 2 together and accept that the two things are closely connected.  

All I am saying is that in the Iron Age and Roman periods (and probably also in earlier periods like the Neolithic and Bronze Age) the traffic may well have been mainly Scotland to Ireland.  This then reversed as Roman power ebbed and Irish settlements in Britain commenced including Dalriada.
« Last Edit: October 17, 2009, 04:02:15 PM by alan trowel hands. » Logged
Mike Walsh
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2964


WWW
« Reply #16 on: October 18, 2009, 02:01:57 AM »

The movements did vary in direction. I do genuinely believe the Dalriada thing was Ireland to Scotland and not the other way.  There is just too much about it in terms of style of the kingdom's name, the Gaelic language, the type of names in the early royal lines, the names of the local saints etc that clearly made Scottish Dalriada (Argyle and the Inner Hebrides) look very like on offshoot of Ireland.  

I think there is a trend in the Glasgow University school of thought (Cowan etc) to minimise or reverse the Irish angle to makes the Scots rather more like the Picts but this is revisionism at its worst and the evidence in the historic period is overwhelmingly Ireland to Scotland and not the other way.  Put it this way, if in the Dark Ages all Ireland is Gaelic speaking while only one modest bit of Scotland is Gaelic AND that very bit of Scotland is also the very area where all histories say an Irish kingdom was founded, then its peverse to not put 2 and 2 together and accept that the two things are closely connected.  

All I am saying is that in the Iron Age and Roman periods (and probably also in earlier periods like the Neolithic and Bronze Age) the traffic may well have been mainly Scotland to Ireland.  This then reversed as Roman power ebbed and Irish settlements in Britain commenced including Dalriada.
I wonder how much genetic change occurred with the Dalraida appearance in Scotland?    Before the Dalraida showed up in Scotland, were the inhabitants in this area of Scotland speaking Q Celtic or P?
« Last Edit: October 18, 2009, 01:52:07 PM by Mike » Logged

R1b-L21>L513(DF1)>S6365>L705.2(&CTS11744,CTS6621)
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 0.108 seconds with 18 queries.