World Families Forums - Hopes for 2011 in terms of y DNA?

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
December 21, 2014, 10:07:46 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)
| | |-+  Hopes for 2011 in terms of y DNA?
« previous next »
Pages: [1] Go Down Print
Author Topic: Hopes for 2011 in terms of y DNA?  (Read 1380 times)
alan trowel hands.
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2012


« on: January 03, 2011, 04:34:00 PM »

It seems to me that the STRs at 67 markers are not capable of resolving the complex phylogeny of L21 into a tree.  I assume that we are not going to see a dramatic increase in typical numbers of STRs tested for this year.  So, my main hope is that SNP-hunting improves.  I really do not understand the WTY techniques but I do get the impression from others that the SNPs needed to unravel the story in much more detail do exist and its just that the methodology is not such that we will generally find them.  is that a reasonable understanding? 

Logged
Mike Walsh
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2964


WWW
« Reply #1 on: January 06, 2011, 02:45:22 PM »

It seems to me that the STRs at 67 markers are not capable of resolving the complex phylogeny of L21 into a tree.  I assume that we are not going to see a dramatic increase in typical numbers of STRs tested for this year.  So, my main hope is that SNP-hunting improves.  I really do not understand the WTY techniques but I do get the impression from others that the SNPs needed to unravel the story in much more detail do exist and its just that the methodology is not such that we will generally find them.  is that a reasonable understanding?  
I don't know if the SNP hunting has improved, but it goes on. It seems like discoveries are made almost every month and there are some who will order anything that might apply.

I think it is exciting that they may have found an SNP (L371) for the R-L21 Wales Modal 1 or 17-14-10 guys.

Advanced STR testing continues as well.  I think we are starting to build momentum to for 76 markers, rather than "just" 67.

Beyond 67, here the common ones being ordered:
461(A7.2), 462, A10, 635(C4), 1B07, 441, 445, 452, 463 (getting you to 76) and also 522, 549, 556, 643, 714

The STR's before the "and" allow you to do full searches in SMGF's database so it opens up more potential for matches. There are now  at least 189 P312 (and subclade) deep clade tested folks who have 76 markers tested.

There is alway hope for finding an STR like 492=13, that delineates U106 fairly well, or 490=10 that divides SRY2627 cleanly.  

Don't get me wrong, the more SNP's the better... I just hope they are stable.   L159.2, L176.2 and P314.2 still haven't been able to break into the ranks of "officialdom" yet.

Regards, Mike
« Last Edit: January 06, 2011, 02:48:28 PM by Mikewww » Logged

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

Posts: 678


« Reply #2 on: January 06, 2011, 03:17:30 PM »

Any idea when FTDNA are going to get round to reporting micro-allele values, I think it must have been about 9 months ago when they said they were going to do this :)
Logged

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

GoldenHind
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 731


« Reply #3 on: January 06, 2011, 07:42:33 PM »

Don't forget P312 subclade L238/S182. AFAIK the only people who have tested positive for it are members of Nordtvedt's R1b Norse cluster. Despite rumors that FTDNA was going to offer it, it hasn't yet done so. EA offers it as S182, but it doesn't seem to have attracted much interest, which seems odd in light of the lure of Viking ancestry. Apparently not many will test for it until FTDNA starts offering it. Perhaps 2012 will be the year they finally do so.

Incidentally, 14 at 441, the SMFG marker mentioned above, is one of the characteristics of the Norse modal. It seems to be fairly rare, occurring in only about 7% of R1b.
« Last Edit: January 06, 2011, 07:58:43 PM by GoldenHind » Logged
alan trowel hands.
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2012


« Reply #4 on: January 07, 2011, 02:13:09 PM »

Several times just when i had thought new angles looked unlikely and the interest in this hobby would fade, a new paper or breakthrough has happened.  The biggest thing last year was undoubtedly academia finally publishing papers that agreed with the hobbiest position that European R1b is no earlier than the Neolithic. 

My main hope and interest is in ancient y-DNA.  Inference from modern populations has not produced any real answers.  All we really know is western European R1b is common (among other peoples) in the Celtic fringe and ex-Celtic areas, all areas where it seems impossible that its presence is due to historical period movements and must at least be prehistoric in origin.  However, beyond the fact that a lot of it must have arrived in prehistory, I dont think any other inference based on modern distribution is safe or clear.
Logged
rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #5 on: January 07, 2011, 09:22:24 PM »

I keep hoping to see an update that includes L21 and P312* results on that fairly recent study of French R1b1b2 out of the University of Santiago de Compostela in Spain. That would be double nice.

I would also like to see something better done on European R1b1b2 than the Myres thing. It was disappointing, to say the least.
Logged

Jdean
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 678


« Reply #6 on: January 07, 2011, 10:48:30 PM »

Not really germane to this thread, but the recent update has knocked out the 'Current Balance' from the project fund (this has effected other projects as well).

Clearly this is a bug which ought to be reported to FTDNA as us casual observers can't tell if the fund is in need of a leg up.


Logged

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

GoldenHind
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 731


« Reply #7 on: January 09, 2011, 04:08:40 PM »

Don't forget P312 subclade L238/S182. AFAIK the only people who have tested positive for it are members of Nordtvedt's R1b Norse cluster. Despite rumors that FTDNA was going to offer it, it hasn't yet done so. EA offers it as S182, but it doesn't seem to have attracted much interest, which seems odd in light of the lure of Viking ancestry. Apparently not many will test for it until FTDNA starts offering it. Perhaps 2012 will be the year they finally do so.

Incidentally, 14 at 441, the SMFG marker mentioned above, is one of the characteristics of the Norse modal. It seems to be fairly rare, occurring in only about 7% of R1b.

It appears that FTDNA is in fact now offering L238, though it appears at the bottom of their advanced SNP orders page and not under R1b-P312. Perhaps now a few more people will test for it, though it seems to have gotten no publicity from the company.
« Last Edit: January 09, 2011, 04:11:47 PM by GoldenHind » Logged
jerome72
Senior Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 64


« Reply #8 on: January 10, 2011, 02:00:41 AM »

Several times just when i had thought new angles looked unlikely and the interest in this hobby would fade, a new paper or breakthrough has happened.  The biggest thing last year was undoubtedly academia finally publishing papers that agreed with the hobbiest position that European R1b is no earlier than the Neolithic. 

My main hope and interest is in ancient y-DNA.  Inference from modern populations has not produced any real answers.  All we really know is western European R1b is common (among other peoples) in the Celtic fringe and ex-Celtic areas, all areas where it seems impossible that its presence is due to historical period movements and must at least be prehistoric in origin.  However, beyond the fact that a lot of it must have arrived in prehistory, I dont think any other inference based on modern distribution is safe or clear.

I think the studies that have been made in Europe are not serious ...
 I feel we take random samples regardless of whether these samples are representative of a population.

 What seems important is combining genealogy and genetics.
 For each sample, we should know where the life of his agnatic ancestor (y chomosome) or cognatic (mtDNA) at least until 1800: Before the Industrial Revolution and before the emergence of the train.

 And of course, have a sufficient amount of sample with good geographical distribution.

 As this study will not aspect strict, then yes, the results are neither clear nor safe
Logged
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 0.069 seconds with 18 queries.