World Families Forums - Whats your closest match at R-L21 67 Markers?

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
September 15, 2014, 10:09:24 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)
| | |-+  Whats your closest match at R-L21 67 Markers?
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2 3 Go Down Print
Author Topic: Whats your closest match at R-L21 67 Markers?  (Read 9445 times)
Mark Jost
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 707


« on: October 11, 2009, 11:11:15 AM »

I am looking at a deeper ancestry connections and I just recently found  a close Gd9 in 67 match. In our GD 9 (each loci allele are single steps -1 or +1 only) there is 1 slow (393) marker, 3 medium markers: 460,607,439 (but these are the fastest 3 in the medium group) and five fast markers (456,570,458,449 & CDYb). (For deeper ancestry these three would not be even be considered along with all the fast mutators). This guy states he lives in Scotland and he has traced his ancestor going back to around 1760 [so far].

Age in generations for 67 markers after removing DYS 385, DYS 395, DYS 413, DYS 425, DYS 459, DYS 464, YCA II, and CDY: 17.155620.11658 (30yrs Each).
Corrected Age in generations for 67 markers: 16.1556 (30yrs Each)

Age in years for 67 markers after removing DYS 385, DYS 395, DYS 413, DYS 425, DYS 459, DYS 464, YCA II, and CDY: 514.668 years.
Corrected Age in years for 67 markers: 484.668.

In essence, five fast and three medium (remember these are the fastest) basically I consider are eight fast mutators with only one slow mutator; each with only one step mutations. All remaining markers match.

FtDNA order
DYS Mine His Modal L21
393 13* 14 13
439 11 12* 12
458 18 17* 17
449 31 32 29
460 12 11* 11
456 18 17 16
607 15* 16 15
570 17* 16 17
CDYb 41 40 38

* matches L21 Modal
« Last Edit: October 11, 2009, 11:20:43 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)
alan trowel hands.
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2012


« Reply #1 on: October 11, 2009, 11:20:04 AM »

Sorry but where is your male line ancestral place and what is the Scottish guys surname? 
Logged
Mark Jost
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 707


« Reply #2 on: October 11, 2009, 11:23:21 AM »

Rhine-Plaz, Germany and Ross.
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)
Mark Jost
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 707


« Reply #3 on: October 11, 2009, 11:30:54 AM »

This question is due to my unique haplotype. Here is the full 35 markers values and the remainder match 100%.

   393   390   19   391   385a   385b   426   388   439   389i   392   389ii-i   458   459a   459b   455   454   447   437   448   449   464a   464b   464c   464d   460   GataH4   YCAIIa   YCAIIb   456   607   576   570   CDYa   CDYb
   Slow                        M            F                        F               M            F   M      F      F
148326   13   24   15   11   12   14   12   12   11   13   13   29   18   9   10   11   11   24   15   19   31   14   15   17   18   12   11   19   23   18   15   17   17   38   41
155812   14   24   15   11   12   14   12   12   12   13   13   29   17   9   10   11   11   24   15   19   32   14   15   17   18   11   11   19   23   17   16   17   16   38   40
« Last Edit: October 11, 2009, 11:33:33 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)
rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #4 on: October 11, 2009, 11:39:27 AM »

If he is part of that Ros-Mascy group, I think they trace their ancestry back to Normandy and from there to Britain.

I'm not sure I understand the reasoning behind removing markers to calculate TMRCA in this case. It seems to me under 500 years is far too close for a genetic distance of 9 at 67 markers.

I think 1500-2000 years is more likely.
« Last Edit: October 11, 2009, 11:41:36 AM by rms2 » Logged

alan trowel hands.
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2012


« Reply #5 on: October 11, 2009, 12:21:57 PM »

The Normans really were an incredible phenonemon.  I personally think most were Frankised Gallo-Romans Latinate speakers who were then ruled by Vikings before the Frankish/Latinate culture again predominated.  To me, there was little Viking about the Normans culturally by 1066, they were essentially Franks/French perhaps with a more adventurous military tradition inherited from the Vikings.  Genetically I suspect the viking element was a small minority even in Normandy judging by lack of a large lasting cultural or linguistic impact. I also think the same about the Franks so I generally consider the French as overwhelmingly Gallo-Roman Latin and before that Gaulish in origin.  I dont think we have enough really detailed regional studies using all the new SNPs for the different haoplogroups to be sure about that but I suspect that regardless of who the rulers were, the French are largerly descended from the prehistoric peoples of France and I dont think the bulk of the Norman population were any different in this respect. 
Logged
Mark Jost
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 707


« Reply #6 on: October 11, 2009, 02:39:45 PM »

This is calculated using Tim Janzen's variance calculator results which remove fast markers for a more corrrect TMRCA.

 
If he is part of that Ros-Mascy group, I think they trace their ancestry back to Normandy and from there to Britain.

I'm not sure I understand the reasoning behind removing markers to calculate TMRCA in this case. It seems to me under 500 years is far too close for a genetic distance of 9 at 67 markers.

I think 1500-2000 years is more likely.

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 #7 on: October 12, 2009, 01:58:53 PM »

The Normans really were an incredible phenonemon.  I personally think most were Frankised Gallo-Romans Latinate speakers who were then ruled by Vikings before the Frankish/Latinate culture again predominated.  To me, there was little Viking about the Normans culturally by 1066, they were essentially Franks/French perhaps with a more adventurous military tradition inherited from the Vikings.  Genetically I suspect the viking element was a small minority even in Normandy judging by lack of a large lasting cultural or linguistic impact. I also think the same about the Franks so I generally consider the French as overwhelmingly Gallo-Roman Latin and before that Gaulish in origin.  I dont think we have enough really detailed regional studies using all the new SNPs for the different haoplogroups to be sure about that but I suspect that regardless of who the rulers were, the French are largerly descended from the prehistoric peoples of France and I dont think the bulk of the Norman population were any different in this respect.  
Yes, the Normans are a bit of an enigma.  Perhaps the Gaulish origin is evidenced by their ability to integrate with others.... at least other Celtics.

This is just one point of evidence.  The Norman Marcher Lords who came into the frontier of Wales, post-1066, did deals with and intermarried with the Welsh royalty. who were always fighting each other (um.. a familiar occurrence for Celtics - definitely not a Celtic "nation".)

The resulting "Cambro-Norman" families of Wales invaded Ireland c. 1170.  Once again, an integration took place.  So much to the point that the English royalty became concerned.  The concept expressed was that these Cambro-Normans became "more Irish than the Irish themselves."  Some even took Gaelic surnames to spite the authorities back in England.  

They are a labeled as Anglo-Normans but I believe this was just because they spoke English.  Is that right?  Did they speak English or French or a blend of English and French?


« Last Edit: October 12, 2009, 01:59:58 PM by Mike » Logged

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

Posts: 707


« Reply #8 on: October 12, 2009, 03:15:25 PM »

Well my 23andme results are in and I just ran my Family inheritance -Advanced and I found myself in the middle of the England box and fringe in Germany, French and Norwegian. Just a smig north of PatricK Tagert. Will share to see what I mean.



Closest Matches
Tadgh Smith 74.56%
John montgomery 74.49%
Michael McConnell 74.49%
Kathryn Johnston 74.48%
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)
rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #9 on: October 12, 2009, 06:06:39 PM »

This is calculated using Tim Janzen's variance calculator results which remove fast markers for a more corrrect TMRCA.

Hmmm . . .

9 off at 67 markers with a TMRCA of under 500 years?
Logged

Mark Jost
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 707


« Reply #10 on: October 12, 2009, 06:14:12 PM »

Here is the McGee calc, which is at 50% at 67 markers. Edit: Using McDonald's rates


   Modal   148326   155812
Modal   67   390   480
148326   390   67   840
155812   480   840   67

Modal   148326   155812
67   4   5
4   67   9
5   9   67
« Last Edit: October 12, 2009, 06:26:04 PM 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)
rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #11 on: October 12, 2009, 06:24:02 PM »

Here is the McGee calc, which is at 50% at 67 markers


   Modal   148326   155812
Modal   67   390   480
148326   390   67   840
155812   480   840   67

Modal   148326   155812
67   4   5
4   67   9
5   9   67


Try it at 95% and see what you get.
Logged

Mark Jost
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 707


« Reply #12 on: October 12, 2009, 06:35:46 PM »

Sure that would raise the Max number listed at 95% probability that the MRCA was no longer than the specified number of years or generations, which is 1380 year at 95%. I do not think its going to matter at 1380 yrs. I am not looking to match paper.
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)
Mark Jost
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 707


« Reply #13 on: October 12, 2009, 06:45:48 PM »

Stevo, tell me what your really thinking?
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)
Mark Jost
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 707


« Reply #14 on: October 12, 2009, 06:53:02 PM »

Here is the McGee's 95% detail

modal   67   780   900
148326   780   67   1380
155812   900   1380   67
- Infinite allele mutation model is used
- Average mutation rate varies: 0.0027 to 0.0027
     rates derived by Doug McDonald from the Sorenson database
- Values on the diagonal indicate number of markers tested
- Probability is 95% that the TMRCA is no longer than indicated
- Average generaton: 30 years
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)
rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #15 on: October 12, 2009, 07:01:49 PM »

Stevo, tell me what your really thinking?

I am really thinking that you and Ross are not likely to share a common ancestor as recently as under 500 years ago. I think the 1,380 figure is far more likely.

9 off at 67 markers isn't all that close, in my opinion.

I also think convergence is a real issue that bedevils any kind of R1b1b2, especially young clades like R-L21*.
« Last Edit: October 12, 2009, 07:23:28 PM by rms2 » Logged

Jdean
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 678


« Reply #16 on: October 12, 2009, 07:32:52 PM »

This has been bugging me, and I shouldn't be bringing this up here, these people are U106, but it is germane to the direction of the thread.

All of these people are from the Stedman surname project, there are 2364 surnames more common than this in the UK, they all spell there name in exactly the same way, and none of them have closer matches in Ysearch at 67 loci, and yet they are miles apart.

No1    37   1   2   5   6   5   6
No2    1   67   1   4   9   5   6
No3    2   1   67   3   9   5   6
N04    5   4   3   37   7   5   6
N05    6   9   9   7   67   2   4
N06    5   5   5   5   2   37   2
No7    6   6   6   6   4   2   37


No2 and 3 have paper trails, as do No5,6 & 7 plus 4,5,6&7 all have paper trails to the same county in the UK, I used the infinite model BTW

any comment
Logged

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

Mark Jost
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 707


« Reply #17 on: October 12, 2009, 08:25:51 PM »

 I would run all these haplotypes using the first 37 markers and see what it looks like. You can use TimJ.'s variance calc on this group at 37 as well and see if it looks simular as well.
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)
Mark Jost
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 707


« Reply #18 on: October 12, 2009, 08:31:39 PM »

Steve, Using McGee with different settings FtDNA derived rates:

I get 930 years with:
- Infinite allele mutation model is used
- Average mutation rate varies: 0.0041 to 0.0041, from FTDNA derived rates
- Values on the diagonal indicate number of markers tested
- Probability is 95% that the TMRCA is no longer than indicated
- Average generaton: 30 years

I got 570 years with:

- Infinite allele mutation model is used
- Average mutation rate varies: 0.0041 to 0.0041, from FTDNA derived rates
- Values on the diagonal indicate number of markers tested
- Probability is 50% that the TMRCA is no longer than indicated
- Average generaton: 30 years
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)
Jdean
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 678


« Reply #19 on: October 12, 2009, 08:40:32 PM »

this is what they look like at 37

N1    37   1   2   5   6   5   6
N2    1   37   1   4   6   5   6
N3    2   1   37   3   6   5   6
N4    5   4   3   37   7   5   6
N5    6   6   6   7   37   2   4
N6    5   5   5   5   2   37   2
N7    6   6   6   6   4   2   37

N7 is in the process of upgrading to 67, and shall probably be 1 closer to N2 than N5, N6 will be getting his 67 in shortly and will be most likely be 3 closer to N2 than N7.
Logged

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

Mark Jost
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 707


« Reply #20 on: October 12, 2009, 11:01:56 PM »

What does the variance calc show at 37?
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)
Jdean
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 678


« Reply #21 on: October 13, 2009, 06:10:33 AM »

What does the variance calc show at 37?

Thanks for the tip, I had heard of this type of calculation, but didn't know how to do it.

Age using Ken Nordtvedt's methods:   518 yrs

Age using Ken Nordtvedt's methods after removing CDYa, CDYb, and DYS 464:   896
yrs
Age using Ken Nordtvedt's methods after removing DYS 464:   591 yrs

Age using Ken Nordtvedt's methods after removing CDYa and CDYb:   714 yrs

Age using James Heald's methods:   349 yrs

Age using James Heald's methods after removing CDYa, CDYb, and DYS 464:   403 yrs

Age using James Heald's methods after removing DYS 385, DYS 459, DYS 464, YCA II, and CDY:   500 yrs

Age using Ken Nordtvedt's methods after removing DYS 385, DYS 459, DYS 464, YCA II, and CDY:   1005 yrs
« Last Edit: October 13, 2009, 06:40:07 AM by Jdean » Logged

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

alan trowel hands.
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2012


« Reply #22 on: October 13, 2009, 06:46:31 AM »

Much as I have great respect for Ken, the dates he comes up for most of the western and central European clades of R1b are a problem to tally with the archaeological record.  They imply that most western R1b people (probably nearly half the population of western Europe) shared a single common ancestor in the mid-late Bronze Age.  In some countries like Ireland his dating would indicate majority population replacement at a relatively late date. That makes little sense when compared to the normal interpretation of the archaeological record. 

I have an open mind though and its possible that Ken is right and the way the archaeological record is looked at is wrong but it would require a huge u-turn.  Kind of like everything you have ever been taught and all the normal approaches to reasoning with the archaeological recotrd being torn up and thrown out.  It would also require a reversion to the 'waves of Celts' in the late Bronze Age and Iron Age idea that has been out for about half a century due to lack of evidence.  Certainly, in places like the isles, the Late Bronze Age archaeological record is one of distintively local isles cultures with some trade and contact and is not a period you would ever interpret as a period of major population change.  The Iron Age in most areas of the isles is also not exactly offering a clear cut invason-like aspect.  However its probably not as unlikely as the Late Bronze Age.  The real shock would be the degree of population input, most people thinking it was a minor few % one but the DNA requiring (ultimatley) a major populatoin repalcement. 

I suppose it is possible that the Celtic lineages (if we can interpret L21 as such) had very small beginings (and therefore low visibility in the archaeological recrod) and the real reason the count is so high in Ireland, Scotland and Wales is simply because they were cut short by the Romans and Germanics elsewhere but their hegemony lasted another 1500 years in the Celtic fringe of the isles.  That is a long period for small elites that remained intact to slowly grow into large chunks of the population.  The real problem is we have not for most of the isles ever found really strong evidence for the landfall and early strongholds of an invasion of continental Celts in the Late Bronze Age or Iron Age, such as forts or burials with clear;ly intrusive material.  That is why most archaeologists would tend to be more comfortable with a Neolithic origin fro the bulk of y-DNA, a period where  the begining and to a lesser degree end present sharp cultural changes.
Logged
Jdean
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 678


« Reply #23 on: October 13, 2009, 07:05:04 AM »

So you think Ken's estimates are on the low side, I have heard a theory that mutation rates could vary between families with some having unusually unstable DNA.

An alternative could be the name was drawn from a place thus allowing people to share a name but have a common ancestor before surnames were introduced, there is a candidate village in the area called Stedham but it sounds a bit neat for my liking.
Logged

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

Mark Jost
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 707


« Reply #24 on: October 13, 2009, 10:38:13 AM »

Using Tim Janzen's variance calc you can remove the odd haplotype(s) from the mix and then see if the TMRCA changes significantly.  If it does then that would need more research as to why it changed that much, meaning it may be an NPE not in the main line.

Then would use McGee's .YCH data result to generate Fluxus phylogenetic network to see how everyone is connected.


What does the variance calc show at 37?

Thanks for the tip, I had heard of this type of calculation, but didn't know how to do it.

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 3 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 0.128 seconds with 19 queries.