World Families Forums

General Forums - Note: You must Be Logged In to post. Anyone can browse. => R1b General => Topic started by: Mike Walsh on May 16, 2012, 08:49:40 AM



Title: R-DF27/Z196: The Z209 subclade - what do we know about it?
Post by: Mike Walsh on May 16, 2012, 08:49:40 AM
Underneath P312 is descendant DF27 and under DF27 is Z196.  A significant component of Z196 appears to be Z209.  Z209 has a high correlation with the North-South Cluster so far.  This is also where the M153+ people sit.  Although multiple subclades of P312 are found among the Basques, M153 is known as the diagnostic "Basque Marker."

What do we know about Z09 and its phylogenetic structure and distribution?


Title: Re: R-DF27/Z196: The Z209 subclade - what do we know about it?
Post by: Mike Walsh on May 16, 2012, 09:00:11 AM
This is also where the M153+ people sit.  Although multiple subclades of P312 are found among the Basques, M153 is known as the diagnostic "Basque Marker."

As far as our DNA projects go, here is the info I have

fE8053   Aburruza Gogenola   zzzUnkOrigin
f74765   Baerga   zzzUnkOrigin
f95895   Cordova   Spain
f76019   De Aguirregoitia   Spain, Basque Country, Vizcaya, Erandio
f174994   De Madalan   Spain, Basque Country, Vizcaya, Rigoitia
f88532   Guerra   Spain, Asturias, Llanes
f121879   Huancayo   zzzUnkOrigin
y9CM6V   Jimenez   zzzUnkOrigin
f71688   Mendez-Fortun   Spain, Andalucía, Malaga, Ardales
f113915   Monesterio   Spain (Basque project)
yM7NB5   Ozuna   zzzUnkOrigin
yUGPCK   Padilla   zzzUnkOrigin
f63121   Trujillo   Spain
fE7992   zzzUnkName   zzzUnkOrigin
fN66037   Bravo   Spain, Castilla y León, León
yYFTYV   Cordova   Spain
f209822   Crespin   Spain
f158036   Jimenez   zzzUnkOrigin
f83573   Padilla   Spain
f159918   Quijano Y Jimenez    Spain, Galicia
f85359   Sallaberry   France, Aquitane, Pyrénées-Atlantiques, Bidache (Basque project)
f97776   Sallaberry   Spain
fE14422   zzzUnkName   zzzUnkOrigin


I'm not saying this is a broadly representative picture, but based on the haplotypes I have the following STR variance calculations relative to P312. The top couple of numbers are with fewer haplottypes but more STRs, and the bottom are with fewer STRs but more haplotypes.

R-M153______________:  Var=0.22 [Linear 36]  (N=9)
R-M153______________:  Var=0.31 [Mixed 49]  (N=9)
R-M153______________:  Var=0.43 [Linear 16]  (N=19)
R-M153______________:  Var=0.44 [Mixed 24]  (N=19)


So according to these rough calculations, M153 would be anywhere from 20% to 40% of the age of P312.  If you think P312's TMRCA is 10K ybp (which I don't) then you would get M153 ad 2K-4K ybp.  If you think P312 is 4.5K ypb, then you would get M153's TMRCA as 1K-2K ybp.  Let me re-iterate, these are just rough numbers and not necessarily representative of all of M153.


Title: Re: R-DF27/Z196: The Z209 subclade - what do we know about it?
Post by: A_Wode on May 16, 2012, 09:19:11 AM
F174994 is my closest match at 67 markers in the YSearch database. I turned out to be Z216- to my disappointment. I'm still waiting on Z220...but I will probably be positive.

Do you have 67 markers for any of these others? The other M153+ haplotypes in the Ysearch database seem to only be 37 and are not directly comparable.


Title: Re: R-DF27/Z196: The Z209 subclade - what do we know about it?
Post by: Mike Walsh on May 16, 2012, 09:30:45 AM
...  What do we know about Z09 and its phylogenetic structure and distribution?
Below are the Z209+ M153- guys as I have them.  Most people would think of these folks as the R1b North-South cluster.  Very geographically spread....

The two/one digit numbers after the geographic locations are the GDs at 67 from the modal for the group.

f195834   Hulan   R-DF27/Z196/Z209/Z220*   UK   20   z1418*   6UUM5

f90025   Vivies   R-DF27/Z196/Z209   France, Aquitane, Midi-Pyrénées, Haute-Garonne, Pouze   xx   z1418*   5G5W9

fN48992   Wood   R-DF27/Z196/Z209   England   18   z1418*   H2MVW

fN87857   Yriarte   R-DF27/Z196/Z209   Spain (Basque project)   8   z1418-BA   

f1401   Chernik   R-DF27/Z196/Z209   Ukraine, Khmelnytskyi Oblast, Krasilov (Jewish project)   16   z1418-NS*   YHP6P

f193827   Hjelt(Torku)   R-DF27/Z196/Z209   Finland, Finland Proper, Turku   14   z1418-NS*   9XE2U

fN92079   Mansilla   R-DF27/Z196/Z209   Spain   xx   z1418-NS*   CQYU6

f51074   McElyea   R-DF27/Z196/Z209   Ireland   10   z1418-NS*   CDKZW

fN86315   Rose   R-DF27/Z196/Z209/Z220*   England   12   z1418-NS*   23D7G

f109279   Van den Vliet   R-DF27/Z196/Z209/Z220*   Netherlands   12   z1418-NS*   7JDMG

f6324   Van Der Hoeven(Beesd)   R-DF27/Z196/Z209   Netherlands, Gelderland, Beesd   7   z1418-NS*   PMUB5

fN38446   Watkins   R-DF27/Z196/Z209   Ireland, Leinster, Co. Wexford   17   z1418-NS*   7X9ZG

fE6393   Wollenberg   R-DF27/Z196/Z209   Germany   xx   z1418-NS*   FB65P

f97920   Zencker   R-DF27/Z196/Z209/Z220*   Czech Republic, Bohemia, Waltersdorf   16   z1418-NS*   EP96D

fE11427   zzzUnkName   R-DF27/Z196/Z209   Spain   12   z1418-NS*   

f123539   Bjorkman(Kågeröd)   R-DF27/Z196/Z209   Sweden, Skåne län, Malmöhus, Kågeröd   15   z1418-NS-A   MHH4M

f76755   Björkman(Sjöstorp)   R-DF27/Z196/Z209/Z220   Sweden, Skåne län, Malmöhus, Dalby, Sjöstorp   14   z1418-NS-A   C5QQ7

fN16822   Klaasen   R-DF27/Z196/Z209/Z220   Netherlands, North Brabant, Grave   10   z1418-NS-A   6GZHN

f148469   Parker   R-DF27/Z196/Z209   zzzUnkOrigin   15   z1418-NS-A   XUQ36

f72190   Nuccol   R-DF27/Z196/Z209   England   9   z1418-NS-B   7GE4Q

f99668   Parramore   R-DF27/Z196/Z209   England, South East, Kent, Thanet   13   
z1418-NS-B   Q96DX

f81973   Winter   R-DF27/Z196/Z209/Z220*   England, London (? or Norfolk)   21   z1418-NS-B   KT43P

f27539   Leyton   R-DF27/Z196/Z209/Z220/Z216/Z278*   Ireland, Leinster, Co. Dublin   12   z1418-NS-C   C6EY6

fN50965   Trinquier   R-DF27/Z196/Z209   France, Languedoc-Roussillon, Pyrénées-Orientales, Tarerach   7   z1418-NS-C   5SCVD

f109430   Larkin   R-DF27/Z196/Z209   England   7   z1418-NS-E   9NXJJ
 


Everyone has 437=14 448=18 and most of the non-M153's have H4=10 while a minority of the M153's have H4=10.  On the other hand, a lot of the M153's are 460=10 while a only minority of the non-M153's are 460=10.

I think Z209 is significantly older than M153.
R-Z209+ M153-_______:  Var=0.74 [Linear 36]  (N=22)
R-Z209+ M153-_______:  Var=0.89 [Mixed 49]  (N=22)


Caveat: I'm not claiming this is scientifically representative. This is just FYI.


Title: Re: R-DF27/Z196: The Z209 subclade - what do we know about it?
Post by: JeanL on May 16, 2012, 09:33:29 AM

I'm not saying this is a broadly representative picture, but based on the haplotypes I have the following STR variance calculations relative to P312. The top couple of numbers are with fewer haplottypes but more STRs, and the bottom are with fewer STRs but more haplotypes.

R-M153______________:  Var=0.22 [Linear 36]  (N=9)
R-M153______________:  Var=0.31 [Mixed 49]  (N=9)
R-M153______________:  Var=0.43 [Linear 16]  (N=19)
R-M153______________:  Var=0.44 [Mixed 24]  (N=19)



Uhm, I find it interesting that the variance decreases as the number of markers increases. Also Mike, why are my calculations of variance of 37 markers for paragroup R1b-M269(xL23) from the ht35 project useless because the sample sizes are 15(For Europe) and 7(For West Asia) respectively, yet yours (n=9 for 36 linear, and 49 mixed) get to be rough calculations? 

Something else that I’m wondering is if when you do relative variance to P312, is the variance of M153 Linear 36 markers relative to the variance of P312 Linear 36 Markers, and Linear 16 Markers relative to the variance of P312 Linear 16 Markers?


Title: Re: R-DF27/Z196: The Z209 subclade - what do we know about it?
Post by: Mike Walsh on May 16, 2012, 09:49:30 AM
I'm not saying this is a broadly representative picture.....

R-M153______________:  Var=0.22 [Linear 36]  (N=9)
R-M153______________:  Var=0.31 [Mixed 49]  (N=9)
R-M153______________:  Var=0.43 [Linear 16]  (N=19)
R-M153______________:  Var=0.44 [Mixed 24]  (N=19)

So according to these rough calculations, .... Let me re-iterate, these are just rough numbers and not necessarily representative of all of M153.
Uhm, I find it interesting that the variance decreases as the number of markers increases.
This is anecdoctal to this set of cases.  I don't remember that as a general trend in all of the cases I've done comparing shorter haplotypes.  The key is that there is greater inconsistency when using fewer STRs with U198 being a prime example.

Also Mike, why are my calculations of variance of 37 markers for paragroup R1b-M269(xL23) from the ht35 project useless because the sample sizes are 15(For Europe) and 7(For West Asia) respectively, yet yours (n=9 for 36 linear, and 49 mixed) get to be rough calculations?  
I emphasized my quotes to highlight the intentions.

I'm not sure the M153 results are representative which is why I said that.  That's what I meant by "rough numbers" as well.  I typically would not even display the lesser STR marker results (for 16 and 24 STRs) for reasons discussed in the STR Wars thread. However, I only have 9 haplotypes of 67 STRs and I feel that is too small a number as well.  As another look, I provided the shorter haplotype variance because I had up to about 20 haplotypes. It is what it is. I just provided it for full disclosure as a cross-check. I agree it is not necessarily useful, but I don't think there is much doubt that the TMRCA of the M153 guys in our FTDNA projects is quite a bit younger than the P312 TMRCA.

I don't think a broad paragroup of M269xL23 people is analagous to a specific ethnic group of M153+ people, but if it makes you feel better, I think your M269xL23 calculations are "rough calculations" too. If you wish to discuss more detail, please let's go to the STR Wars thread.

Something else that I’m wondering is if when you do relative variance to P312, is the variance of M153 Linear 36 markers relative to the variance of P312 Linear 36 Markers, and Linear 16 Markers relative to the variance of P312 Linear 16 Markers?  
Yes, everything is consistently treated to the same scale (calculate via the same methods.)


Title: Re: R-DF27/Z196: The Z209 subclade - what do we know about it?
Post by: JeanL on May 16, 2012, 10:01:34 AM
Is the variance of P312 calculated as the variance of anything that is downstream of P312(i.e. P312+) or is it of the paragroup P312*(i.e. P312(xU152,L21,DF27,etc))?


Title: Re: R-DF27/Z196: The Z209 subclade - what do we know about it?
Post by: razyn on May 16, 2012, 11:42:01 AM
I don't think any Z209+ person has tested Z220- (most of them just haven't tested Z220 at all, and the rest of us are positive for both).  If Rich Rocca's chart last year was right, and Z220 is down another level, then Z220 should be discussed as the "terminal" N/S Cluster SNP.  However, at the moment, Thos. Krahn's draft tree shows Z209 and Z220 on the same level.  Here is just the DF27 part of it:

http://ytree.ftdna.com/index.php?name=Draft&parent=99813460


Title: Re: R-DF27/Z196: The Z209 subclade - what do we know about it?
Post by: Mike Walsh on May 16, 2012, 04:31:52 PM
Is the variance of P312 calculated as the variance of anything that is downstream of P312(i.e. P312+) or is it of the paragroup P312*(i.e. P312(xU152,L21,DF27,etc))?
It's P312 "all."

Generally, when I refer to a paragroup I'll use the asterisk notation, i.e. P312*, or more explicitly P312xL21xU152xZ196 which would be P312+ L21- U152- Z196-.

As a side note, it does matter, particularly in a case like M222, which is so large compared to DF23+ M222- that it sways the intraclade variance of DF23 "all" to being meaningless or roughly equivalent to M222.  This points out the need for interclade variance types of calculations like what Ken Nordtvedt has developed where separate known groups of related people compared with each other.


Title: Re: R-DF27/Z196: The Z209 subclade - what do we know about it?
Post by: spanjool on May 24, 2012, 06:01:33 AM
Is DF27 found recently and only/mainly in Iberian samples of the 1000 genomes because it presents itself solely in these samples; or..does the recent finding imply that earlier/other 1000 genome samples will have to be checked again for DF27?
May be can Richard Rocco (or the anonymous researcher who is responsable for already so many DnaForum SNPs) answer this question.

Hans


Title: Re: R-DF27/Z196: The Z209 subclade - what do we know about it?
Post by: Mike Walsh on May 24, 2012, 09:36:15 AM
Is DF27 found recently and only/mainly in Iberian samples of the 1000 genomes because it presents itself solely in these samples; or..does the recent finding imply that earlier/other 1000 genome samples will have to be checked again for DF27?
May be can Richard Rocco (or the anonymous researcher who is responsable for already so many DnaForum SNPs) answer this question.

Hans
I don't think the 1000 Human Genome project provided a representative sample so I don't know what to make of the distribution of DF27+ from it.

We are seeing apparent DF27* people from other geographies in our DNA projects so DF27* is not restricted to Iberia by any means.


Title: Re: R-DF27/Z196: The Z209 subclade - what do we know about it?
Post by: Maliclavelli on May 24, 2012, 10:06:23 AM
I don't think the 1000 Human Genome project provided a representative sample so I don't know what to make of the distribution of DF27+ from it.
We are seeing apparent DF27* people from other geographies in our DNA projects so DF27* is not restricted to Iberia by any means.
Certainly Richard Rocca could respond better than me, but it seems to me he said that Tuscan R-P312-s in 1KGP were DF27+, then no subclade, then the most ancient, seen that it seems that R-P312* hasn't been found so far. This of course is a good sound for my ears.


Title: Re: R-DF27/Z196: The Z209 subclade - what do we know about it?
Post by: Richard Rocca on May 24, 2012, 10:27:25 AM
Is DF27 found recently and only/mainly in Iberian samples of the 1000 genomes because it presents itself solely in these samples; or..does the recent finding imply that earlier/other 1000 genome samples will have to be checked again for DF27?
May be can Richard Rocco (or the anonymous researcher who is responsable for already so many DnaForum SNPs) answer this question.

Hans
I don't think the 1000 Human Genome project provided a representative sample so I don't know what to make of the distribution of DF27+ from it.

We are seeing apparent DF27* people from other geographies in our DNA projects so DF27* is not restricted to Iberia by any means.

44% of the Iberian 1KG samples were DF27+ and Iberia is by far the largest area of P312* in academic studies. DF27 may not be restricted to Iberia, but it certainly is to Iberia what L21 is to the British Isles. The SW corner of France is probably the next 'layer' of DF27+ frequency.


Title: Re: R-DF27/Z196: The Z209 subclade - what do we know about it?
Post by: Maliclavelli on May 24, 2012, 10:31:31 AM
44% of the Iberian 1KG samples were DF27+ and Iberia is by far the largest area of P312* in academic studies. DF27 may not be restricted to Iberia, but it certainly is to Iberia what L21 is to the British Isles. The SW corner of France is probably the next 'layer' of DF27+ frequency.
And how many of the Tuscan ones? Probably 100%.

This writes Kaser:
“My DF27 result showed up yesterday; I am DF27+ and Z196-. My paternal line is Swiss (family tradition, census and naturalization records plus I have a 12/12 STR match with a cousin who descends from a different son of my immigrant ancestor). The probable family in Switzerland seems to go back as far as the church records go. Before that - who knows? So if you are looking for non Iberian DF27+, I'm one.
Owen Kaser, N17543”

If he is ySearch J4PTU, amongst values close to the modal, he has also
DYS448=20
DYS462=13
GATAA10=14
DYS635=24


Title: Re: R-DF27/Z196: The Z209 subclade - what do we know about it?
Post by: Maliclavelli on May 24, 2012, 10:41:20 AM
On SMGF these values, or closer to them, are diffused above all from Italy to Switzerland and Germany beyond a few in South America, of probably Spanish origin. Others are in Mongolia and Asia but probably they belong to another hapogroup. Then I'd be cautious to think that R-P312* was born in Iberia.


Title: Re: R-DF27/Z196: The Z209 subclade - what do we know about it?
Post by: Mike Walsh on May 25, 2012, 10:59:15 AM
On SMGF these values, or closer to them, are diffused above all from Italy to Switzerland and Germany beyond a few in South America, of probably Spanish origin........Then I'd be cautious to think that R-P312* was born in Iberia.
I agree with you.  I think SE France, Switzerland, N. Italy and other Alpine regions as well as possibly along the Danube are all candidates, still.  I guess we need to include Anatolia and the Black Sea region.


Title: Re: R-DF27/Z196: The Z209 subclade - what do we know about it?
Post by: Maliclavelli on May 25, 2012, 11:25:31 AM
“If he is ySearch J4PTU, amongst values close to the modal, he has also
DYS448=20
DYS462=13
GATAA10=14
DYS635=24”

Of course these values are very rare and could be a sign to follow this R-DF27, but someone I have extracted from SMGF are resulted some hg. Q (I have put on ySearch: VWZWS, Montelongo from Mexico) or hg. R2, which have the very rare DYS462=13. But the interesting thing to meditate is just how J4PTU could get these values, i.e. in how much time. Also R-P312/DF27* could be older that it is usually thought.


Title: Re: R-DF27/Z196: The Z209 subclade - what do we know about it?
Post by: Arch Y. on June 02, 2012, 01:45:38 PM
Everyone has 437=14 448=18 and most of the non-M153's have H4=10 while a minority of the M153's have H4=10.  On the other hand, a lot of the M153's are 460=10 while a only minority of the non-M153's are 460=10.

I think Z209 is significantly older than M153.
R-Z209+ M153-_______:  Var=0.74 [Linear 36]  (N=22)
R-Z209+ M153-_______:  Var=0.89 [Mixed 49]  (N=22)


Caveat: I'm not claiming this is scientifically representative. This is just FYI.

I compared the min, max and modal for SRY2627.

DYS437 Min. = 14
DYS437 Max. = 16
DYS437 Modal = 15

For DYS448 which is of particular interest to me, as myself and one other person are the only SRY2627 people to have this result, which is also rare in other subclades.

DYS448 Min. = 17
DYS448 Max. = 20
DYS448 Modal = 19

DYS460 as follows:

DYS460 Min. = 9
DYS460 Max. = 12
DYS460 Modal = 11.

I thought it was interesting to see DYS460 at 9 and the modal at 11.

It doesn't seem like SRY2627 is too far off from the age estimation of M153?

BTW, H-4 Max = 12 for SRY2627, Min. 10, Modal is 11.

This is starting to look weird. M153 younger than SRY2627?

Arch


Title: Re: R-DF27/Z196: The Z209 subclade - what do we know about it?
Post by: spanjool on June 03, 2012, 11:13:42 AM
Here is wat Nordtvedt's calculations say about A=M153 and B=SRY2627.


Interclade AB:  &          176   
Interclade MRCA Estimate   GABw   SigmaGABn      
Generations to A-B Interclade Common Ancestor   115   19      
Years bef. pres. A-B Interclade Common Ancestor   3461   4024   2897   
Date of  A-B Interclade Common Ancestor   1461 BC         
            
Clade A:          8   
Intraclade MRCA Estimate   GA   SigmaGA      
Generations for A using Intraclade Variance   37   7      
Years before present to A MRCA   1098   1318   878   
Best Estimated Date of A MRCA   902 AD         
Intraclade Coalescence Estimate   GACoal   SigmaGA      
Generations for A using Intraclade Variance   30   7      
Years before present To A Coalescence   894   1114   674   
Best Estimated Date of A Coalescence   1106 AD         
            
Clade B:          168   
Intraclade MRCA Estimate   GB   SigmaGB      
Generations for B using Intraclade Variance   111   10      
Years before present B MRCA   3340   3644   3036   
Best Estimated Date of B MRCA   1340 BC         
Intraclade Coalescence Estimate   GBCoal   SigmaGB      
Generations for B using Intraclade Variance   98   10      
Years before present to B Coalescence   2950   3254   2646   
Best Estimated Date of B Coalescence   950 BC         


The 3.3K of SRY2627 is similar to the age of Z209: also 3.3K.
Z196 is around 3.6K as is L176.2.
I guess that the interclade age mentioned below is pointing to the age of DF17.
Earlier I found that the interclade of Z196 and L176.2 was 3.9K: a nice age for DF27.

Hans


Title: Re: R-DF27/Z196: The Z209 subclade - what do we know about it?
Post by: spanjool on June 03, 2012, 11:35:24 AM
Underneath P312 is descendant DF27 and under DF27 is Z196.  A significant component of Z196 appears to be Z209.  Z209 has a high correlation with the North-South Cluster so far.  This is also where the M153+ people sit.  Although multiple subclades of P312 are found among the Basques, M153 is known as the diagnostic "Basque Marker."

What do we know about Z09 and its phylogenetic structure and distribution?

Here a network analysis of the Z196xL76.2 samples:

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/74936451/z196xz176%20mei12%20v3.pdf
The kits aboven median vector 6 are all Z1518 (Mikes spreadsheet) subjects.

And the pair wise mismatch of these samples:
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/74936451/z196xl176%20pwmm.jpg

And also I like to include a CDF made by Marko:
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/74936451/67run1Z196clades.pdf

Hans


Title: Re: R-DF27/Z196: The Z209 subclade - what do we know about it?
Post by: Jason Bourgeois on June 03, 2012, 08:24:35 PM
This is starting to look weird. M153 younger than SRY2627?

Arch

I might be wrong on this, but it seems to me that this very conclusion had been reached quite a while ago by expert members of this type of forum!


Title: Re: R-DF27/Z196: The Z209 subclade - what do we know about it?
Post by: Mike Walsh on June 03, 2012, 11:02:21 PM
This is starting to look weird. M153 younger than SRY2627?

I might be wrong on this, but it seems to me that this very conclusion had been reached quite a while ago by expert members of this type of forum!

I'm no expert, but from the long haplotype data available, there is no doubt that R-M153, the so-called Basque marker, is quite young when compared to SRY2627.  M153 is comparable to M222, the young and explosive NW Irish group.  M153 wasn't as explosive in growth but was about the same age, diversity-wise.

The assumption is that you accept that STR diversity increases with age.

Since we are on the topic of comparative ages, according to STR diversity among long haplotypes, ironically, the L165 brothers of SRY2627, which are (L165) supposed to be Nordic, appear to be old like SRY2627.


Title: Re: R-DF27/Z196: The Z209 subclade - what do we know about it?
Post by: Arch Y. on June 04, 2012, 03:01:57 AM
Here is wat Nordtvedt's calculations say about A=M153 and B=SRY2627.


Interclade AB:  &          176   
Interclade MRCA Estimate   GABw   SigmaGABn      
Generations to A-B Interclade Common Ancestor   115   19      
Years bef. pres. A-B Interclade Common Ancestor   3461   4024   2897   
Date of  A-B Interclade Common Ancestor   1461 BC         
            
Clade A:          8   
Intraclade MRCA Estimate   GA   SigmaGA      
Generations for A using Intraclade Variance   37   7      
Years before present to A MRCA   1098   1318   878   
Best Estimated Date of A MRCA   902 AD         
Intraclade Coalescence Estimate   GACoal   SigmaGA      
Generations for A using Intraclade Variance   30   7      
Years before present To A Coalescence   894   1114   674   
Best Estimated Date of A Coalescence   1106 AD         
            
Clade B:          168   
Intraclade MRCA Estimate   GB   SigmaGB      
Generations for B using Intraclade Variance   111   10      
Years before present B MRCA   3340   3644   3036   
Best Estimated Date of B MRCA   1340 BC         
Intraclade Coalescence Estimate   GBCoal   SigmaGB      
Generations for B using Intraclade Variance   98   10      
Years before present to B Coalescence   2950   3254   2646   
Best Estimated Date of B Coalescence   950 BC         


The 3.3K of SRY2627 is similar to the age of Z209: also 3.3K.
Z196 is around 3.6K as is L176.2.
I guess that the interclade age mentioned below is pointing to the age of DF17.
Earlier I found that the interclade of Z196 and L176.2 was 3.9K: a nice age for DF27.

Hans

Hans,

Thank you.  Very informative and it really seems to be almost right on target to the Hurles MRCA estimate for SRY2627 done back in 1999.  Dienekes was right about how the authors of the papers produced in 2008/2009 about SRY2627 emerging in the Late Neolithic that they should follow Hurles in his calculations instead.

Arch


Title: Re: R-DF27/Z196: The Z209 subclade - what do we know about it?
Post by: Mike Walsh on June 04, 2012, 09:29:46 AM
What do we know about Z09 and its phylogenetic structure and distribution?

I just looked at ISOGG and I see that Z209 and its downstream and peer SNPs are not on the chart.
http://isogg.org/tree/ISOGG_HapgrpR.html
Quote from: ISOGG
R1b1a2a1a1b2   Z196
•    R1b1a2a1a1b2*   -
•    R1b1a2a1a1b2a   M153
•    R1b1a2a1a1b2b   L176.2/S179.2
•    •    R1b1a2a1a1b2b*   -
•    •    R1b1a2a1a1b2b1   M167/SRY2627
•    •    R1b1a2a1a1b2b2   L165/S68

Is anyone pursuing getting Z209 and it descendants on the tree properly?  If Z209's status with M153 and L176.2 are validated within FTDNA's testing we should be able to get Z209 added quickly. It can only help your cause to be officially recognized by ISOGG!

Here is FTDNA's draft tree.
http://ytree.ftdna.com/index.php?name=Draft&parent=99813059
Quote from: Thomas Krahn
Root = Approx. hg: R-P312 (ISOGG: R1b1a2a1a1b2) Z196   
. R1b1a2a1a1b5 (ISOGG: R1b1a2a1a1b2b) L176.2
. . R1b1a2a1a1b5a (ISOGG: R1b1a2a1a1b2b1) SRY2627, M167
. . . Approx. hg: R-M167 L276
. . . Approx. hg: R-M167 L628
. . . Approx. hg: R-M167 L659   
. . R1b1a2a1a1b5b (ISOGG: R1b1a2a1a1b2b2) L165
Approx. hg: R-P312 Z209, Z220
. Approx. hg: R-P312 Z278         
. . R1b1a2a1a1b2 (ISOGG: R1b1a2a1a1b2a) M153
. . Approx. hg: R-Z196 L629

I typically get confused looking at Krahn's draft tree so I may not have it right.

I don't see why Z209 is not properly placed yet.  There are Z209- folks downstream of Z196 so it is clearly a Z196 subclade somewhere. L176.2+ folks are Z209- so Z209 is clearly parallel to L176.2. We have an M153+ guy that is Z209+ and we have Z196+ M153- guys that are Z209- so Z209 has a clearly known position.

Is anyone communicating with ISOGG and Thomas Krahn on making sure all of the SNP testing bases are covered and documented as such?

Do we know for sure where L629 fits? We know we have a Z278+ guy who is L629+ ? Do we have any that are L629-?   What's the status of L629 in M153 people?


Title: Re: R-DF27/Z196: The Z209 subclade - what do we know about it?
Post by: razyn on June 04, 2012, 10:07:16 AM
Is anyone communicating with ISOGG and Thomas Krahn on making sure all of the SNP testing bases are covered and documented as such?

Do we know for sure where L629 fits? We know we have a Z278+ guy who is L629+ ? Do we have any that are L629-?   What's the status of L629 in M153 people?

I think the ISOGG thing is handled by Brian P. Swann and Vince Tilroe, and they are pretty current on the stuff under DF27 that is missing from one or both of the trees you have referenced.  There is an issue Vince has (at least) involving Sanger-testing.  I can't explain it, I just mention it.  Thomas Krahn does his thing, and I think any other people (who have Finch2 access and know what to do with it) need to go through the aforementioned guys to get new results accepted and posted by ISOGG.  This may only apply to new results like these, that lie outside the existing major projects (such as U106, L21, U152).

I can't address the specific L629 questions.


Title: Re: R-DF27/Z196: The Z209 subclade - what do we know about it?
Post by: Mike Walsh on June 04, 2012, 11:56:40 AM
Is anyone communicating with ISOGG and Thomas Krahn on making sure all of the SNP testing bases are covered and documented as such?

Do we know for sure where L629 fits? We know we have a Z278+ guy who is L629+ ? Do we have any that are L629-?   What's the status of L629 in M153 people?

I think the ISOGG thing is handled by Brian P. Swann and Vince Tilroe, and they are pretty current on the stuff under DF27 that is missing from one or both of the trees you have referenced.  There is an issue Vince has (at least) involving Sanger-testing.  I can't explain it, I just mention it.  Thomas Krahn does his thing, and I think any other people (who have Finch2 access and know what to do with it) need to go through the aforementioned guys to get new results accepted and posted by ISOGG.  This may only apply to new results like these, that lie outside the existing major projects (such as U106, L21, U152).

I can't address the specific L629 questions.
Thanks for responding but it would be cool to find hobbyist advocates for these new SNPS.

Occasionally I hear complaints that some subclade, i.e. Z196, don't get their just credit in terms of research and reporting.  People like Brian, Vince and Thomas are very busy handling a multitude of of new SNPs.

If you want some attention, it pays to have an advocate who does things like...
1) identifies and recruits people for targeted SNP testing,
2) raises funds for specific cases of targeted SNP testing, and
3) maintains and communicates a scorecard of the status of SNP testing by targeted kit # so it will be clear when a new SNP qualifies for the official Y DNA tree.


Title: Re: R-DF27/Z196: The Z209 subclade - what do we know about it?
Post by: Arch Y. on June 04, 2012, 09:51:44 PM
This is starting to look weird. M153 younger than SRY2627?

Arch

I might be wrong on this, but it seems to me that this very conclusion had been reached quite a while ago by expert members of this type of forum!

I'm not aware of it!  Furthermore, if M-153 is younger than SRY2627 then where's the published results of such?  I would really like to know how all the research data supports the conclusion.

Arch


Title: Re: R-DF27/Z196: The Z209 subclade - what do we know about it?
Post by: Richard Rocca on June 05, 2012, 08:47:29 AM
This is starting to look weird. M153 younger than SRY2627?

Arch

I might be wrong on this, but it seems to me that this very conclusion had been reached quite a while ago by expert members of this type of forum!

I'm not aware of it!  Furthermore, if M-153 is younger than SRY2627 then where's the published results of such?  I would really like to know how all the research data supports the conclusion.

Arch

Arch, I don't know if there are published studies or not, but it would take a few seconds to eyeball the STRs and conclude that M153 is the younger of the two just based on its lack of diversity.


Title: Re: R-DF27/Z196: The Z209 subclade - what do we know about it?
Post by: Mike Walsh on June 05, 2012, 04:21:09 PM
This is starting to look weird. M153 younger than SRY2627?

Arch

I might be wrong on this, but it seems to me that this very conclusion had been reached quite a while ago by expert members of this type of forum!

I'm not aware of it!  Furthermore, if M-153 is younger than SRY2627 then where's the published results of such?  I would really like to know how all the research data supports the conclusion.

Arch

Arch, I don't know if there are published studies or not, but it would take a few seconds to eyeball the STRs and conclude that M153 is the younger of the two just based on its lack of diversity.

Arch, it's true. M153 definitely looks less diverse than SRY2627 and U152 and L21.  It's probably quite a bit younger, more like M222's age (the Northwest Irish).

I have a spreadsheet of all the of the long M153 ht's I can find in the P312 Yahoo group.  That's where I get all of the data. There are allele distribution tables, means, modes, variance, etc.

 It is what is and whether a professor blesses it or not won't change the obvious.


Title: Re: R-DF27/Z196: The Z209 subclade - what do we know about it?
Post by: rms2 on June 05, 2012, 06:55:30 PM
This is starting to look weird. M153 younger than SRY2627?

Arch

I might be wrong on this, but it seems to me that this very conclusion had been reached quite a while ago by expert members of this type of forum!

I'm not aware of it!  Furthermore, if M-153 is younger than SRY2627 then where's the published results of such?  I would really like to know how all the research data supports the conclusion.

Arch

Arch, I don't know if there are published studies or not, but it would take a few seconds to eyeball the STRs and conclude that M153 is the younger of the two just based on its lack of diversity.

Arch, it's true. M153 definitely looks less diverse than SRY2627 and U152 and L21.  It's probably quite a bit younger, more like M222's age (the Northwest Irish).

I have a spreadsheet of all the of the long M153 ht's I can find in the P312 Yahoo group.  That's where I get all of the data. There are allele distribution tables, means, modes, variance, etc.

 It is what is and whether a professor blesses it or not won't change the obvious.

What do you all get as an estimate of M153's age?

Some M153 was found in remains from the Aldaieta Cemetery in the Basque Country, dated to the 6th century, if I recall correctly. So, we know it was around by then.


Title: Re: R-DF27/Z196: The Z209 subclade - what do we know about it?
Post by: JeanL on June 05, 2012, 07:04:35 PM
I might be wrong on this, but it seems to me that this very conclusion had been reached quite a while ago by expert members of this type of forum!

I'm not aware of it!  Furthermore, if M-153 is younger than SRY2627 then where's the published results of such?  I would really like to know how all the research data supports the conclusion.

Arch

In this study:


In search of the Pre- and Post-Neolithic Genetic Substrates in Iberia: Evidence from Y-Chromosome in Pyrenean Populations (http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1469-1809.2008.00478.x/pdf)


Figure-3, they show R1b-M153 to be slightly older than R1b-SRY2627 in Pyrenean Populations, however it doesn't mean that R1b-M153 is older than R1b-SRY2627 overall.

From the paper:

Quote from: Lopez-Parra.et.al.2008

However comparing the average STR variances of the R1b1b2c (0.243), R1b1b2d (0.207) and I2a2 (0.278) lineages considered in this study and given the replicated estimates pointing to a Mesolithic time frame for the origin, diversification and diffusion of the I2a2 clade (Rootsi et al. 2004), the temporal interpretation here provided
for R1b1b2c seems reliable.

R1b1b2c==>R1b-M153 (var=0.243)
R1b1b2d==>R1b-SRY2627 (var=0.207)
I2a2==>I-M26 (var=0.278)

Now this is interesting:

Quote from: Lopez.Parra.et.al.2008

Two R1b1b2c haplotypes from Biscay were found to be molecularly very differentiated from any other lineage, which surely accounts for the large average variance across Y-STR detected in Biscay (0.388) compared to Cinco Villas (0.185). The detection of such divergent haplotypes can indicate that many intermediate R1b1b2c haplotypes were either lost or still remain unsampled.


Title: Re: R-DF27/Z196: The Z209 subclade - what do we know about it?
Post by: razyn on June 05, 2012, 08:20:43 PM
What do you all get as an estimate of M153's age?

Some M153 was found in remains from the Aldaieta Cemetery in the Basque Country, dated to the 6th century, if I recall correctly. So, we know it was around by then.

Well, we'd know that if in fact you remember correctly.  If you are remembering this study, it was about mtDNA, not M153:

http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/read/GENEALOGY-DNA/2006-02/1138987458

I'm just guessing, I wasn't into genetic genealogy in 2006.


Title: Re: R-DF27/Z196: The Z209 subclade - what do we know about it?
Post by: rms2 on June 05, 2012, 09:02:47 PM
What do you all get as an estimate of M153's age?

Some M153 was found in remains from the Aldaieta Cemetery in the Basque Country, dated to the 6th century, if I recall correctly. So, we know it was around by then.

Well, we'd know that if in fact you remember correctly.  If you are remembering this study, it was about mtDNA, not M153:

http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/read/GENEALOGY-DNA/2006-02/1138987458

I'm just guessing, I wasn't into genetic genealogy in 2006.

No, not at all. There was y-dna recovered at Aldaieta, and it included some M153. If I am off, it is only in the estimated date. I remember 6th century, but it might have been 5th century.

Update: Check Jean Manco's Ancient Eurasian DNA site (http://www.buildinghistory.org/distantpast/ancientdna.shtml). Scroll down to the medieval period and look for Aldaieta. It's 6th - 8th centuries.


Title: Re: R-DF27/Z196: The Z209 subclade - what do we know about it?
Post by: JeanL on June 05, 2012, 09:14:02 PM
Well, we'd know that if in fact you remember correctly.  If you are remembering this study, it was about mtDNA, not M153:

http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/read/GENEALOGY-DNA/2006-02/1138987458

I'm just guessing, I wasn't into genetic genealogy in 2006.

Here you go:

http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2007/02/ancient-basque-dna.html (http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2007/02/ancient-basque-dna.html)




Title: Re: R-DF27/Z196: The Z209 subclade - what do we know about it?
Post by: razyn on June 06, 2012, 12:32:16 PM
Hans van Vliet (spanjool, here) has within the past week estimated the TMRCA date of the M153 SNP as 1750 to 1800 years before present, or about 250-300 AD.  That was on the Yahoo group, not this thread.  But it stands as a tentative terminus post quem.

Given that the Aldaieta remains may be only two or three hundred years later than that -- and M153 found in two of the males there gives us a terminus ante quem -- this is closing in on calibration of the variance-based method of estimating SNP age with other, somewhat less groundbreaking methods of dating (such as carbon 14, dendrochronology, and tombstones).


Title: Re: R-DF27/Z196: The Z209 subclade - what do we know about it?
Post by: spanjool on June 07, 2012, 09:58:19 AM

In search of the Pre- and Post-Neolithic Genetic Substrates in Iberia: Evidence from Y-Chromosome in Pyrenean Populations (http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1469-1809.2008.00478.x/pdf)

It would be nice if I could get hold of Supplementary info of this article (S2) where e.o. mismatch analysis are mentioned.
Where can I find these?
Hans








Title: Re: R-DF27/Z196: The Z209 subclade - what do we know about it?
Post by: spanjool on June 08, 2012, 11:16:04 AM
Z209 amid his family

The Z196 population sprung forward in a period just before a fast growth of the world population between 1400 and 600 BC (Keinan and Clark 2012). The first carriers of this UEP must be born in 3600 ybp. The mismatch patterns indicate a fast growing population with a bottleneck of 500 years; quickly followed by a second UEP: L176.2: a less fast growing population with a similar bottleneck period. As these populations were ahead of the general growth spurt they must have had an advantage. The until then existing relation between economy and health of living must have gotten a boost.   Generally trade and manufacture enhanced by maritime possibilities not been there before is the reason.

The birth of SRY2627 was within the 1400-600 BC period between 3.4K and 3.3K ybp: a less fast growing society without a bottleneck. Z209 also came forward in the same period around 3.K ybp; the mismatch patterns indicate a wide spread, steady growing society without bottleneck indications.
Both clades present a similar abnormal shoulder pattern in the mismatch graphs around 20-21 mutation steps. Indicative for RecLOH events (pointed to by Dick Hulan) or multi step mutations (DYS460: reference of Didier Vernade)? Or a common disaster leading to high metabolic stress, or a infectious disease..?
The SRY2627 society looks must more homogeneous, living in large agglomerates avoiding the effects of genetic stress.
The Z209 clade gives quicker offspring to new subclades due to live in more smaller compact societies and so encouraging perseverance of mutations.
Larger inland living  agglomerates in the SRY2627 case versus coastal villages in the Z209 folks.
Hans


Title: Re: R-DF27/Z196: The Z209 subclade - what do we know about it?
Post by: Mike Walsh on June 08, 2012, 11:20:10 AM
The Z209 clade gives quicker offspring to new subclades due to live in more smaller compact societies and so encouraging perseverance of mutations.

What do you mean by this?


Title: Re: R-DF27/Z196: The Z209 subclade - what do we know about it?
Post by: razyn on June 12, 2012, 09:01:50 AM
Yesterday Thomas Krahn updated this part of the draft Y-tree of FTDNA.  Presumably the ISOGG tree will get this, or very similar, info very shortly, to be incorporated the next time the ISOGG tree is updated:

http://ytree.ftdna.com/index.php?name=Draft&parent=99813460

On a post to the Yahoo group (R-P312) Vince Tilroe mentioned today that on the ISOGG site there could be notes for some of the SNPs (such as Z209/Z220) that appear to be equivalent, and aren't; but their apparent hierarchy (based on 1K Genomes data) hasn't been confirmed with lab testing to date (i.e., finding someone positive for one and negative for the other).  The idea would be to fast-track acceptance by ISOGG of what is known, instead of waiting indefinitely for resolution of some relatively minor ambiguities.  I hope his proposal is accepted.


Title: Re: R-DF27/Z196: The Z209 subclade - what do we know about it?
Post by: spanjool on June 17, 2012, 03:47:34 AM
The Z209 clade gives quicker offspring to new subclades due to live in more smaller compact societies and so encouraging perseverance of mutations.

What do you mean by this?
Smaller populations are  affected by the sampling effect; arising mutaions either quickly disappear or are fixed.
Hans
live has to be life


Title: Re: R-DF27/Z196: The Z209 subclade - what do we know about it?
Post by: Arch Y. on June 22, 2012, 02:54:19 AM
I might be wrong on this, but it seems to me that this very conclusion had been reached quite a while ago by expert members of this type of forum!

I'm not aware of it!  Furthermore, if M-153 is younger than SRY2627 then where's the published results of such?  I would really like to know how all the research data supports the conclusion.

Arch

In this study:


In search of the Pre- and Post-Neolithic Genetic Substrates in Iberia: Evidence from Y-Chromosome in Pyrenean Populations (http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1469-1809.2008.00478.x/pdf)


Figure-3, they show R1b-M153 to be slightly older than R1b-SRY2627 in Pyrenean Populations, however it doesn't mean that R1b-M153 is older than R1b-SRY2627 overall.

From the paper:

Quote from: Lopez-Parra.et.al.2008

However comparing the average STR variances of the R1b1b2c (0.243), R1b1b2d (0.207) and I2a2 (0.278) lineages considered in this study and given the replicated estimates pointing to a Mesolithic time frame for the origin, diversification and diffusion of the I2a2 clade (Rootsi et al. 2004), the temporal interpretation here provided
for R1b1b2c seems reliable.

R1b1b2c==>R1b-M153 (var=0.243)
R1b1b2d==>R1b-SRY2627 (var=0.207)
I2a2==>I-M26 (var=0.278)

Now this is interesting:

Quote from: Lopez.Parra.et.al.2008

Two R1b1b2c haplotypes from Biscay were found to be molecularly very differentiated from any other lineage, which surely accounts for the large average variance across Y-STR detected in Biscay (0.388) compared to Cinco Villas (0.185). The detection of such divergent haplotypes can indicate that many intermediate R1b1b2c haplotypes were either lost or still remain unsampled.

That divergence has always baffled me. Why are the Basque so different from the rest of us? It seems like study after study across the Pyrenees that Catalans at the eastern portion of the range and Basques at the western portion are quite spread apart. Yet, it appears to be less diverse than SRY2627 and therefore presumed as being younger, but I can't get my head wrapped around why the Basques seem in so many ways to be unique, e.g., DNA, cultural and linguistic history. I still can't get over how they would dominate such a specific region, yet being so young and then retain their very own distinct language that is not Indo-European. I imagine maybe M-153 arose in the Basque Country at a very young age, probably around the time the Romans were aware of Aquitania. The young man carrying M-153 grew up in the Basque Country learning Basque and also spawning a lot of offspring. Then it might make sense perhaps SRY2627 was populating the Cantabrian mountains around that same time frame. I'm guessing the approach was from the south.

Arch


Title: Re: R-DF27/Z196: The Z209 subclade - what do we know about it?
Post by: OConnor on June 27, 2012, 10:40:51 AM
I think it's possible for new people to adopt the language where they settle.
I'm not saying this is the case with Basque People. It was just a thought.


Title: Re: R-DF27/Z196: The Z209 subclade - what do we know about it?
Post by: razyn on June 29, 2012, 10:01:39 AM
Yesterday Thomas Krahn updated this part of the draft Y-tree of FTDNA.  Presumably the ISOGG tree will get this, or very similar, info very shortly, to be incorporated the next time the ISOGG tree is updated:

http://ytree.ftdna.com/index.php?name=Draft&parent=99813460

On a post to the Yahoo group (R-P312) Vince Tilroe mentioned today that on the ISOGG site there could be notes for some of the SNPs (such as Z209/Z220) that appear to be equivalent, and aren't; but their apparent hierarchy (based on 1K Genomes data) hasn't been confirmed with lab testing to date (i.e., finding someone positive for one and negative for the other).  The idea would be to fast-track acceptance by ISOGG of what is known, instead of waiting indefinitely for resolution of some relatively minor ambiguities.  I hope his proposal is accepted.

Just thought I should report here that in the update of the ISOGG tree that has just happened, Vince's suggestion has been followed:

http://www.isogg.org/tree/ISOGG_HapgrpR.html

One must click on the link for Private SNPs, Notes and References (Papers), and scroll down to find what is currently the latest Note:

Quote
Data from the 1000 Genomes Project suggests that Z220 is downstream from Z209 and Z278 is downstream of Z216. Listed 26 June 2012.


Title: Re: R-DF27/Z196: The Z209 subclade - what do we know about it?
Post by: razyn on July 07, 2012, 05:57:56 PM
This weekend there is a little movement within this subclade.  Yesterday morning Hans van Vliet (Spanjool on this forum) posted to the Yahoo R-P312 group a very extensive new tree diagram of a parsimony analysis of 650 Z196xL176.2 67-marker haplotypes, based on all markers (slow or fast), and without consideration of tested SNPs -- apart from the already mentioned Z196 and L176.2.  He found significant clustering of 95% of the tested Z209 samples (or Z220, they are considered as one group).  An interesting revelation was that Moscia (141935) clusters with these Z209 people -- though his DYS 437-15 and 448-19, which are modal, don't match the N/S clade's 14-18.  If you would like to see the diagram as a .pdf, here is a link to it.  I had to click on the "enlarge" button eight or nine times (and scroll to the right a lot) to be able to read individual kit numbers or ancestral names:

http://tinyurl.com/7h9nhj2

Moscia and I had previously been linked by virtue of sharing L484+ results at 23andMe.  About two weeks ago, in order to get this SNP visible in my projects, I ordered L484 at FTDNA.  I got a positive result within six days of batching.  This, plus Moscia's known L484+ (and clustering with the Z209 group), led Hans to suggest to the Yahoo group that people who fall within the orange highlighted area of his new tree might want to order L484.  At least seven people have already done so, that I know of.  If anybody reading this would like to be a pioneer, you have until Wednesday evening to join the first batch.

I just checked Gbrowse, and as of today there have been 12 positives out of 19 tests for L484.  Eleven of them are visible in the project for M223 (in Hg I2b1), where L484 is found beneath P78:

http://www.familytreedna.com/public/M223-Y-Clan/default.aspx?section=ysnp

I'm the twelfth, and so far the only one (tested at FTDNA) from Z209.  It remains to be seen whether L484 will helpfully split Z209.  At the very least, with a few more positive tests from our Z209 subclade it should get a decimal, to distinguish it from instances of L484 within other haplogroups.  A few negatives would make it more certain where it fits; that will be needed to get it onto the ISOGG tree and so on.


Title: Re: R-DF27/Z196: The Z209 subclade - what do we know about it?
Post by: Bennymosh on July 09, 2012, 04:29:08 PM
Somebody mention me?

I'll try and study some of the new developments and see if I can contribute.
I have done the WTY, a couple of years ago. They didn't find anything new then.
Please feel free to contact me with some guidance, and we'll see what we can do.


Title: Re: R-DF27/Z196: The Z209 subclade - what do we know about it?
Post by: razyn on July 09, 2012, 06:33:59 PM
Somebody mention me?

I'll try and study some of the new developments and see if I can contribute.
I have done the WTY, a couple of years ago. They didn't find anything new then.
Please feel free to contact me with some guidance, and we'll see what we can do.

Well, dang.  I thought I sent you a link to this, this afternoon.  But it turns out that the url I pasted into that email was to Krahn's Draft Tree, instead of this thread.  (I had both of those tabs open, and pasted in the wrong one.  A senior moment.)

Anyway -- I'm otherwise known as Dick Hulan, and the email you got from me today contains about all the guidance I can offer.  (For others who may be puzzled by this exchange -- Bennymosh appears to be Moscia 141935, my fellow L484+ dude.  And btw a noted student of the X chromosome, in the halcyon days of DNA-Forums.)

If it were I who faced your happy choices, I'd order the Z220 or the Z209, cutting through a lot of fog layers for 29 bucks.  If you want your known L484+ visible in FTDNA projects, you need it tested there, too.  There's no need for you to test DF27 or Z196 if you are positive for something downstream. You would probably need Z216- to prove your "terminal" SNP, if you care.

And btw the FTDNA lab is less busy this week than it will be when all those sale orders hit, in the next batch.


Title: Re: R-DF27/Z196: The Z209 subclade - what do we know about it?
Post by: Bennymosh on July 09, 2012, 07:15:50 PM
Yes, I am the Moscia that we are speaking of! Not a very common surname.


Title: Re: R-DF27/Z196: The Z209 subclade - what do we know about it?
Post by: razyn on July 21, 2012, 02:55:17 PM
As of last night we have three tested Z220+ guys (Hulan, Hall, Reno), plus Moscia (whose Z220 test is still pending), who are L484+.  Five other Z220+ guys tested L484-; so this SNP will presumably get a decimal (L484.2, or whatever), and will split the Z220 lineage into three distinct groups:  Z220*; Z216+ (with descendants Z278, Z214, M153); and L484.x+.  I'll be curious to see whether this creates nodes that are of any use for interclade TMRCA refinements.

So far, the level of Z220 has not been distinguished from that of Z209, except in 1000 Genomes testing.  All of the guys who have tested positive for one (at FTDNA) have tested positive for the other.  (A number of people have only tested one or the other, not both.)  For the purpose of very recent L484 test recruitment, I've assumed that Z220 is younger than Z209.


Title: Re: R-DF27/Z196: The Z209 subclade - what do we know about it?
Post by: df.reynolds on July 21, 2012, 04:13:56 PM
As of last night we have three tested Z220+ guys (Hulan, Hall, Reno), plus Moscia (whose Z220 test is still pending), who are L484+.  Five other Z220+ guys tested L484-; so this SNP will presumably get a decimal (L484.2, or whatever), and will split the Z220 lineage into three distinct groups:  Z220*; Z216+ (with descendants Z278, Z214, M153); and L484.x+.  I'll be curious to see whether this creates nodes that are of any use for interclade TMRCA refinements.

So far, the level of Z220 has not been distinguished from that of Z209, except in 1000 Genomes testing.  All of the guys who have tested positive for one (at FTDNA) have tested positive for the other.  (A number of people have only tested one or the other, not both.)  For the purpose of very recent L484 test recruitment, I've assumed that Z220 is younger than Z209.

Looks like L484 has been found in E, I, R, and T to date. Thomas' db lists this as a recurrent SNP, "Dinucleotide STR mechanism!" The fact that it is not included on his Draft Tree is a good indicator that he thinks it is unstable, as well as the fact that he has not assigned names (i.e., L484.1, L484.2, etc.) to the multiple states.

In general, ISOGG is attempting to avoid adding unstable SNPs; you will likely face an uphill battle should you try to get L484 placed on the ISOGG tree.

Regards,
david


Title: Re: R-DF27/Z196: The Z209 subclade - what do we know about it?
Post by: razyn on July 21, 2012, 05:43:38 PM
Well, it's been an uphill battle to get DF27/Z196 subdivided, and ISOGG-treed, but we did that.  Our unstable little batch of R-P312 L484s, under Z220, has been around for at least some hundreds of years; is found in families with roots in England, France, Prussia and Italy; and appears to be phylogenetically meaningful.  (As is the unstable little batch of I-M223 L484s, under P78, that has recently engaged the attention of Ken Nordtvedt, among others.)  Some pretty orderly minds are addressing this question, and I'm confident that L484 will get sorted, to the extent that it deserves -- whether or not that includes assignment of decimal suffixes, placement on the ISOGG tree, etc.  It deserves something, besides your comment that it's in a frequently mutating location -- which was already in the notes on Adriano Squecco's spreadsheet a year ago.  Once it mutates, the descendants carry the mutation; so it's still a branch of that tree, even if it happens on several trees.

[Edited 8/9, striking through "and Italy" because Moscia's L484+ turned out to be Z220- and therefore a separate occurrence of the SNP.]


Title: Re: R-DF27/Z196: The Z209 subclade - what do we know about it?
Post by: Jdean on July 21, 2012, 05:46:06 PM
As of last night we have three tested Z220+ guys (Hulan, Hall, Reno), plus Moscia (whose Z220 test is still pending), who are L484+.  Five other Z220+ guys tested L484-; so this SNP will presumably get a decimal (L484.2, or whatever), and will split the Z220 lineage into three distinct groups:  Z220*; Z216+ (with descendants Z278, Z214, M153); and L484.x+.  I'll be curious to see whether this creates nodes that are of any use for interclade TMRCA refinements.

So far, the level of Z220 has not been distinguished from that of Z209, except in 1000 Genomes testing.  All of the guys who have tested positive for one (at FTDNA) have tested positive for the other.  (A number of people have only tested one or the other, not both.)  For the purpose of very recent L484 test recruitment, I've assumed that Z220 is younger than Z209.

Looks like L484 has been found in E, I, R, and T to date. Thomas' db lists this as a recurrent SNP, "Dinucleotide STR mechanism!" The fact that it is not included on his Draft Tree is a good indicator that he thinks it is unstable, as well as the fact that he has not assigned names (i.e., L484.1, L484.2, etc.) to the multiple states.

In general, ISOGG is attempting to avoid adding unstable SNPs; you will likely face an uphill battle should you try to get L484 placed on the ISOGG tree.

Regards,
david

Is there any information about what is going on in cases like this, I've asked several times about the area around L564, which is evidently unstable, but I've yet to receive any sort of explanation.



Title: Re: R-DF27/Z196: The Z209 subclade - what do we know about it?
Post by: df.reynolds on July 21, 2012, 08:33:01 PM
As of last night we have three tested Z220+ guys (Hulan, Hall, Reno), plus Moscia (whose Z220 test is still pending), who are L484+.  Five other Z220+ guys tested L484-; so this SNP will presumably get a decimal (L484.2, or whatever), and will split the Z220 lineage into three distinct groups:  Z220*; Z216+ (with descendants Z278, Z214, M153); and L484.x+.  I'll be curious to see whether this creates nodes that are of any use for interclade TMRCA refinements.

So far, the level of Z220 has not been distinguished from that of Z209, except in 1000 Genomes testing.  All of the guys who have tested positive for one (at FTDNA) have tested positive for the other.  (A number of people have only tested one or the other, not both.)  For the purpose of very recent L484 test recruitment, I've assumed that Z220 is younger than Z209.

Looks like L484 has been found in E, I, R, and T to date. Thomas' db lists this as a recurrent SNP, "Dinucleotide STR mechanism!" The fact that it is not included on his Draft Tree is a good indicator that he thinks it is unstable, as well as the fact that he has not assigned names (i.e., L484.1, L484.2, etc.) to the multiple states.

In general, ISOGG is attempting to avoid adding unstable SNPs; you will likely face an uphill battle should you try to get L484 placed on the ISOGG tree.

Regards,
david

Is there any information about what is going on in cases like this, I've asked several times about the area around L564, which is evidently unstable, but I've yet to receive any sort of explanation.



If you look up L564 in ymap.ftdna.com, you'll see that it is in the midst of a very crowded segment, lots SNPs, many of which are recurrent. I believe the theory here is that this segment ("47z") is subject to recombination with the X Chromosome. If you google on L319 or L342, which are nearby, you may be able to find some discussion on this.

L484 is a case where one is actually looking at an STR, not an SNP, so one sees multiple "state" changes as the repeat count goes up/down.

--david


Title: Re: R-DF27/Z196: The Z209 subclade - what do we know about it?
Post by: Jdean on July 22, 2012, 02:37:16 AM
As of last night we have three tested Z220+ guys (Hulan, Hall, Reno), plus Moscia (whose Z220 test is still pending), who are L484+.  Five other Z220+ guys tested L484-; so this SNP will presumably get a decimal (L484.2, or whatever), and will split the Z220 lineage into three distinct groups:  Z220*; Z216+ (with descendants Z278, Z214, M153); and L484.x+.  I'll be curious to see whether this creates nodes that are of any use for interclade TMRCA refinements.

So far, the level of Z220 has not been distinguished from that of Z209, except in 1000 Genomes testing.  All of the guys who have tested positive for one (at FTDNA) have tested positive for the other.  (A number of people have only tested one or the other, not both.)  For the purpose of very recent L484 test recruitment, I've assumed that Z220 is younger than Z209.

Looks like L484 has been found in E, I, R, and T to date. Thomas' db lists this as a recurrent SNP, "Dinucleotide STR mechanism!" The fact that it is not included on his Draft Tree is a good indicator that he thinks it is unstable, as well as the fact that he has not assigned names (i.e., L484.1, L484.2, etc.) to the multiple states.

In general, ISOGG is attempting to avoid adding unstable SNPs; you will likely face an uphill battle should you try to get L484 placed on the ISOGG tree.

Regards,
david

Is there any information about what is going on in cases like this, I've asked several times about the area around L564, which is evidently unstable, but I've yet to receive any sort of explanation.



If you look up L564 in ymap.ftdna.com, you'll see that it is in the midst of a very crowded segment, lots SNPs, many of which are recurrent. I believe the theory here is that this segment ("47z") is subject to recombination with the X Chromosome. If you google on L319 or L342, which are nearby, you may be able to find some discussion on this.

L484 is a case where one is actually looking at an STR, not an SNP, so one sees multiple "state" changes as the repeat count goes up/down.

--david

Many thanks David.

I'll have a hunt through google later, but do you have any thoughts on how useful these 'SNPs' may be in more resent genealogy.


Title: Re: R-DF27/Z196: The Z209 subclade - what do we know about it?
Post by: df.reynolds on July 22, 2012, 03:15:15 AM
As of last night we have three tested Z220+ guys (Hulan, Hall, Reno), plus Moscia (whose Z220 test is still pending), who are L484+.  Five other Z220+ guys tested L484-; so this SNP will presumably get a decimal (L484.2, or whatever), and will split the Z220 lineage into three distinct groups:  Z220*; Z216+ (with descendants Z278, Z214, M153); and L484.x+.  I'll be curious to see whether this creates nodes that are of any use for interclade TMRCA refinements.

So far, the level of Z220 has not been distinguished from that of Z209, except in 1000 Genomes testing.  All of the guys who have tested positive for one (at FTDNA) have tested positive for the other.  (A number of people have only tested one or the other, not both.)  For the purpose of very recent L484 test recruitment, I've assumed that Z220 is younger than Z209.

Looks like L484 has been found in E, I, R, and T to date. Thomas' db lists this as a recurrent SNP, "Dinucleotide STR mechanism!" The fact that it is not included on his Draft Tree is a good indicator that he thinks it is unstable, as well as the fact that he has not assigned names (i.e., L484.1, L484.2, etc.) to the multiple states.

In general, ISOGG is attempting to avoid adding unstable SNPs; you will likely face an uphill battle should you try to get L484 placed on the ISOGG tree.

Regards,
david

Is there any information about what is going on in cases like this, I've asked several times about the area around L564, which is evidently unstable, but I've yet to receive any sort of explanation.



If you look up L564 in ymap.ftdna.com, you'll see that it is in the midst of a very crowded segment, lots SNPs, many of which are recurrent. I believe the theory here is that this segment ("47z") is subject to recombination with the X Chromosome. If you google on L319 or L342, which are nearby, you may be able to find some discussion on this.

L484 is a case where one is actually looking at an STR, not an SNP, so one sees multiple "state" changes as the repeat count goes up/down.

--david

Many thanks David.

I'll have a hunt through google later, but do you have any thoughts on how useful these 'SNPs' may be in more resent genealogy.

No, sorry, I don't have enough info on either to have a valid opinion as to their potential usefulness.

--david


Title: Re: R-DF27/Z196: The Z209 subclade - what do we know about it?
Post by: razyn on August 03, 2012, 06:42:49 PM
Might as well keep my L484 propaganda where I started it.  Here's a post I made earlier today to the Yahoo R-P312 Project (and list):

Off-modal markers of the L484+ subclade of Z220+

This group was originally identified early in 2011 (by Lawrence Mayka) as a variant of the "1418" N/S cluster, with RecLOH values at DYS 385ab of 10,11 (and with 11 at GATA-H4 -- which turns out to be modal for the N/S cluster, except for the Iberian branch, below Z216). After the respective tests became available, it was determined that the N/S cluster as a whole is positive for DF27, Z196, Z209 and Z220. The additional SNPs Z216, Z278, Z214 and M153 form one downstream sequence; on another sequence that is negative for all of those, the RecLOH values of 10,11 at DYS385 seem confined to those members of the Z220+ population who are positive for L484.

Henry Zenker was kind enough to group together those of us whose haplotypes fit this pattern (group Pabd); and with a number of long haplotypes now available, it is becoming apparent that the L484+ group shares several other values that are off-modal for the bulk of Z209/Z220. Here is a brief summary:

[Edit: At DYS393, all members have 14; haplogroup modal is 13, with three exceptions -- one of whom (Doble) has a mutation to 14 here not shared by his immediate family.]
At DYS392, all members have 14; haplogroup modal is 13. [DYS392 is a slow mutator.]
At DYS447, this subclade is <=23; haplogroup is >=24. [Only exception under Z209 is Rose, not tested for L484.]
At DYS444, the subclade's unanimous 14 is found in only a few other Z220 individuals.
At DYS572, the subclade's unanimous 10 is off-modal, though not quite rare, in the rest of the haplogroup.
At DYS636, the subclade's unanimous 11 is found in only one other example under DF27. [Brickell.]
At DYS445, the subclade has 11, the rest of DF27 prefers 12.
At GATA-A10, the subclade has 12; the bulk of DF27 has 13.
At Y-GGAAT-1B07, the subclade's modal is 8; one member has the haplogroup modal 10. [Small sample, at this testing level.]
At DYS650, the subclade's unanimous 17 is rare elsewhere in DF27.
At DYS643, the subclade's unanimous 11 is found in only two other DF27 haplotypes. [Z220 Nuccol, and DF17 Hart.]

A few of these anomalies may break down, or become less pronounced, as more 111-marker results are posted. But the general pattern is consistent, and it is much deeper than the simple off-modal at DYS385ab that has been so easy to spot (since those values fall within a 12-marker test).


Title: Re: R-DF27/Z196: The Z209 subclade - what do we know about it?
Post by: razyn on November 01, 2012, 08:16:24 PM
Bringing this forward since David Reynolds and Mike are online this evening.  I have never heard back from my emails to Thomas Krahn -- but some of you may see him in a couple of weekends, and I want it to be at least in the back of somebody's mind to try to get a discovery sequence for the several instances of L484.  Because I still want my instance of it (the one under Z220+ that is shared by four or more families from Poland, France and England with a MRCA date around 700 AD) placed on the ISOGG tree, and painted into Mike's graphic descendancy chart of DF27.  It doesn't belong on the ISOGG tree until it has a decimal place and a sequence number after that.  I believe it's met all the other criteria.


Title: Re: R-DF27/Z196: The Z209 subclade - what do we know about it?
Post by: chris1 on November 03, 2012, 06:16:51 PM
Bringing this forward since David Reynolds and Mike are online this evening.  I have never heard back from my emails to Thomas Krahn -- but some of you may see him in a couple of weekends, and I want it to be at least in the back of somebody's mind to try to get a discovery sequence for the several instances of L484.  Because I still want my instance of it (the one under Z220+ that is shared by four or more families from Poland, France and England with a MRCA date around 700 AD) placed on the ISOGG tree, and painted into Mike's graphic descendancy chart of DF27.  It doesn't belong on the ISOGG tree until it has a decimal place and a sequence number after that.  I believe it's met all the other criteria.
Can I ask about the story of L484, will it turn out to be a large group? I see there are seven tested positive so far, represented in the 'Pabd. R-L484 (Subclade of Z220)' section of the FTDNA P312 and Subclades Project. How was the date to MRCA of 700 AD arrived at? Is there any speculation as to the background and place of origin for the MRCA?


Title: Re: R-DF27/Z196: The Z209 subclade - what do we know about it?
Post by: razyn on November 04, 2012, 10:58:32 AM
Sorry, my Internet connection is cut (tree on neighbor's property knocked it down, and then cars running over it for four days finally broke it).  So my visits to these forums are much less frequent, until Verizon gets to us.  As I recall, only three of us in the Pabd group are actually SNP tested (Hall, Hulan and Reno), but the rest are known kin to a tested person except for the Richert -- who is grouped in there because of all the shared, wacky off-modals with the rest of us.

The MRCA dating for Z220/L484 was done by Hans van Vliet, using a paired mismatch technique of his own.


Title: Re: R-DF27/Z196: The Z209 subclade - what do we know about it?
Post by: df.reynolds on November 04, 2012, 11:11:52 PM
Bringing this forward since David Reynolds and Mike are online this evening.  I have never heard back from my emails to Thomas Krahn -- but some of you may see him in a couple of weekends, and I want it to be at least in the back of somebody's mind to try to get a discovery sequence for the several instances of L484.  Because I still want my instance of it (the one under Z220+ that is shared by four or more families from Poland, France and England with a MRCA date around 700 AD) placed on the ISOGG tree, and painted into Mike's graphic descendancy chart of DF27.  It doesn't belong on the ISOGG tree until it has a decimal place and a sequence number after that.  I believe it's met all the other criteria.

Speaking only for myself (i.e. not ISOGG), I would say the odds are unlikely you will see any action/discussion on L484 until after the initial dust for Geno 2.0 settles.

FTDNA has hinted there are recurrent markers they will be removing from their tree based on Geno 2.0 data, and if that is indeed the case, they would be unlikely to support adding any additional. We'll see when they publish their new tree.

And while what FTDNA does or doesn't do with their tree is not binding upon ISOGG, ISOGG has tried to avoid arbitrary differences with the FTDNA tree when possible. In any event, the net is that you are unlikely to find any interest in discussing L484 while the Geno 2.0 changes are still up in the air.

Regards,
david



Title: Re: R-DF27/Z196: The Z209 subclade - what do we know about it?
Post by: razyn on November 05, 2012, 09:47:41 PM
Speaking only for myself (i.e. not ISOGG), I would say the odds are unlikely you will see any action/discussion on L484 until after the initial dust for Geno 2.0 settles.

Well, you already weren't interested in it July 21 (on this same thread), but I still am, and still disagree with the cavalier dismissal of Z220/L484 while those other wheels grind along (currently, Geno 2.0)... and all the L21 stuff still gets updated weekly, if need be.  I don't think a mutation found in multiple lines since 700 AD is really unstable, it's just non-numerous.  But, whatever.  Geno 2.0 doesn't even know about Z220.


Title: Re: R-DF27/Z196: The Z209 subclade - what do we know about it?
Post by: samIsaack on November 07, 2012, 07:18:02 PM
Speaking only for myself (i.e. not ISOGG), I would say the odds are unlikely you will see any action/discussion on L484 until after the initial dust for Geno 2.0 settles.

Well, you already weren't interested in it July 21 (on this same thread), but I still am, and still disagree with the cavalier dismissal of Z220/L484 while those other wheels grind along (currently, Geno 2.0)... and all the L21 stuff still gets updated weekly, if need be.  I don't think a mutation found in multiple lines since 700 AD is really unstable, it's just non-numerous.  But, whatever.  Geno 2.0 doesn't even know about Z220.

We may as well stick to the P312 group over at facebook or where ever we have a majority. As you and I have pointed out numerous times, if it isn't L21 related there's no point in posting about it here. The group may not be as "educated" as some of the people on here, but at least we have an interest in what your talking about.


Title: Re: R-DF27/Z196: The Z209 subclade - what do we know about it?
Post by: Mike Walsh on November 08, 2012, 01:48:24 PM
Speaking only for myself (i.e. not ISOGG), I would say the odds are unlikely you will see any action/discussion on L484 until after the initial dust for Geno 2.0 settles.

Well, you already weren't interested in it July 21 (on this same thread), but I still am, and still disagree with the cavalier dismissal of Z220/L484 while those other wheels grind along (currently, Geno 2.0)... and all the L21 stuff still gets updated weekly, if need be.  I don't think a mutation found in multiple lines since 700 AD is really unstable, it's just non-numerous.  But, whatever.  Geno 2.0 doesn't even know about Z220.

We may as well stick to the P312 group over at facebook or where ever we have a majority. As you and I have pointed out numerous times, if it isn't L21 related there's no point in posting about it here. The group may not be as "educated" as some of the people on here, but at least we have an interest in what your talking about.

We could also look at the positive aspects of this "R1b and Subclades" forum.  We have a number of people who care greatly about the whole thing. It's not about timeshare or mind-share, I don't think. We all have time constraints, but its of our own initiative to bring information.

Richard R is a great example of a broader commitment to us, as well as other citizen-scientists on his paper. He is keenly interested in U152 but that didn't stop him from writing papers that have helped document and position lineages outside of U152, including my own. There are others with him on this and I am very grateful to the whole bunch.

David R is another great example. He spends a lot of time on the whole R1b section of the ISOGG tree even though his paternal lineage is of only one type.

I'm very interested in P312 as a whole, including DF27 and U152.  I'm not trying to brag, but I just want you to realize how much time people spend outside their own narrow lineage. I maintain a file of P312*, U152 and DF27 types and keep a simplified graphic of the branching. Look at the data on this site:
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/R1b-P312-Project/
I'm also working on a major revamp to the R1b and Subclades project to change its function/purpose to help all of the subclades.  If you don't post here, I may miss something important about DF27. (see below)

I don't always comment. Sometimes it is because I've already said everything I have to say on a topic and prefer to wait until I have new information OR someone else comes up with new information. Probably most of this forum wishes I was a little more faithful to that approach. LOL.

Disagreement is okay, but let's look positively on what new information or analysis each of us can bring forward, particularly related to areas we think need more focus.


------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

RE: DF27
I need help here for a R1b project "Results" web page. I'm trying to help Tibor on this. He wrote this back in January.
Quote from: Tibor
R1b1a2a1a1b (P312 or S116) is the South-Western subgroup of L11, the most common in Western Romance and Celtic-speaking areas. It has several subclades which have clear geographic pattern, the biggest being U152 and L21 (see later below). In its P312* (U152- L21-) form, it is most common in Iberia (35-50%) and France (20-35%), but also occurs frequently in Ireland, England and Switzerland (10-20%). It is less frequent (5-10%) in Northern Italy, Germany, the Netherlands and Scandinavia. Its small subgroup M153 is only found among Basques, while subgroup L176 consists of a Scandinavian (L165) and a Mediterranean (M167=SRY2627) branch. Its estimated age is similar to that of U106, approx 5500-4000 years BP or 3500-2000 BCE. Diversity points on France as the likely place of origin, and it is usually connected to the spread of Celto-Italic speaking populations. However, it may represent a more ancient folk (related to Basques) who only adopted Celtic languages and culture later.

I'm working on an update to the P312 and DF27 paragraphs to account for DF27. Here's what I've got so far.
Quote from: Mikes draft
R1b-P312 (old R1b1a2a1a1b [S116 is equivalent])
R1b-P312 is the Western subgroup of L11, the most common in Western Romance and Celtic-speaking areas. It has several subclades which have clear geographic pattern, the biggest being U152 and L21 (see later below). In its P312* (U152- L21-) form, it is most common in Iberia (35-50%) and France (20-35%), but also occurs frequently in Ireland, England and Switzerland (10-20%). It is less frequent (5-10%) in Northern Italy, Germany, the Netherlands and Scandinavia. Its small subgroup M153 is only found among Basques, while subgroup L176.2 consists of a Scandinavian (L165) and a Mediterranean (SRY2627/M167) branch. Its estimated age is similar to that of U106, approximately 5500-4000 years before present (ybp) or 3500-2000 BCE. Diversity points on France as the likely place of origin, and it is usually connected to the spread of Celto-Italic speaking populations. However, it may represent a more ancient folk (related to Basques) who only adopted Celtic languages and culture later.

R1b-DF27 (formerly the majority of the R1b1a2a1a1b* or R1b-P312* paragroup)
R1b-DF27 is a recently discovered subclade of R1b-P312 that has been found to encompass all of R1b-SRY2627 and R1b-M153. These have been considered Iberian Peninsular subclades but they do spread as far north as Scandinavia and as far east as Poland. The old R1b North-South cluster is now also classified under R1b-DF27.

I'm cutting DF27 short here because I'm not sure what to write. Due to space constraints I need to keep DF27's overview to a paragraph but I can get in a couple of additional sentences and fix things. Tibor has to agree with whatever we come up with, but how would you overview DF27 in a paragraph?


Title: Re: R-DF27/Z196: The Z209 subclade - what do we know about it?
Post by: Richard Rocca on November 08, 2012, 02:12:50 PM

We could also look at the positive aspects of this "R1b and Subclades" forum.  We have a number of people who care greatly about the whole thing. It's not about timeshare or mind-share, I don't think. We all have time constraints, but its of our own initiative to bring information.

Richard R is a great example of a broader commitment to us, as well as other citizen-scientists on his paper. He is keenly interested in U152 but that didn't stop him from writing papers that have helped document and position lineages outside of U152, including my own. There are others with him on this and I am very grateful to the whole bunch.

David R is another great example. He spends a lot of time on the whole R1b section of the ISOGG tree even though his paternal lineage is of only one type.

I'm very interested in P312 as a whole, including DF27 and U152.  I'm not trying to brag, but I just want you to realize how much time people spend outside their own narrow lineage. I maintain a file of P312*, U152 and DF27 types and keep a simplified graphic of the branching. Look at the data on this site:
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/R1b-P312-Project/

I don't always comment. Sometimes it is because I've already said everything I have to say on a topic and prefer to wait until I have new information OR someone else comes up with new information. Probably most of this forum wishes I was a little more faithful to that approach. LOL.

Disagreement is okay, but let's look positively on what new information or analysis each of us can bring forward, particularly related to areas we think need more focus.

Some of the more downstream markers (i.e. Z209) will only be of interest to those who belong to it, unless the downstream marker has a very strong geographic distribution (i.e. M153). Then there is of course the lack of samples for the newer 'Z' SNPs. I can guarantee that if a study came out tomorrow on DF27 and downstream markers we would find a lot to talk about. Unfortunately, at the moment there isn't much going on.

Naturally L21 is always going to generate a lot of interest in an English speaking forum. It's just a numbers game and nobody should feel slighted by it...I know I don't. And for all the 'discontent', I can tell you that my work on the 1000 Genomes data has not benefited me in the least (still U152+L2*). But, it sure is nice to help others out :)


Title: Re: R-DF27/Z196: The Z209 subclade - what do we know about it?
Post by: samIsaack on November 09, 2012, 12:30:27 AM
Mikewww and Rich Rocca, I wasn't trying to be hateful, just stating what is true of these forums. Whenever Dna-forums died off, all of the L21 guys seem to have migrated here. Thats fine. I was just stating that we kind of have our own little corner on the P312 facebook page. Mostly Z220 guys and couple of SRY2627 here and there. Of course I had a bit of an attitude about it, gotta keep you guys level-headed! Of course the only people who commented are the ones who actually realize there are other branches of P312 besides L21.. Again I'm just kidding, but in a sarcastic way.

I'm very greatful for the both of you. You've both reached far out of your respective haplogroups and have probably done more in some respects for those outside of your groups than you have for those in your groups.


Title: Re: R-DF27/Z196: The Z209 subclade - what do we know about it?
Post by: chris1 on November 09, 2012, 10:31:46 AM
I agree that lack of DF27 discussion is probably mainly down to numbers, I don't feel slighted being L21- either. Maybe L21 appears so well represented because such large numbers of L21 emigrated from the west of the British Isles/Ireland to America, where most of the present day genetic genealogist are. Americans obviously have shared culture and language. Many L21 originate in the same relatively local area of north western Europe. There's an immediate rapport, understandably leading to easy communication. The more easterly continental European P312 subclades don't particularly have the numbers yet, or the common language/culture that L21 Americans have. I'm looking forward to new developments within DF27, they'll probably just take longer to turn up. In comparison, DF27 seems a more widespread and continental European leaning subclade of P312.


Title: Re: R-DF27/Z196: The Z209 subclade - what do we know about it?
Post by: Richard Rocca on November 09, 2012, 10:35:46 AM
I agree that lack of DF27 discussion is probably mainly down to numbers, I don't feel slighted being L21- either. Maybe L21 appears so well represented because such large numbers of L21 emigrated from the west of the British Isles/Ireland to America, where most of the present day genetic genealogist are. Americans obviously have shared culture and language. Many L21 originate in the same relatively local area of north western Europe. There's an immediate rapport, understandably leading to easy communication. The more easterly continental European P312 subclades don't particularly have the numbers yet, or the common language/culture that L21 Americans have. I'm looking forward to new developments within DF27, they'll probably just take longer to turn up. In comparison, DF27 seems a more widespread and continental European leaning subclade of P312.

It's even more important than that - it may be the most frequent P312 subclade in continental Europe.


Title: Re: R-DF27/Z196: The Z209 subclade - what do we know about it?
Post by: razyn on November 17, 2012, 11:50:02 AM
I agree that lack of DF27 discussion is probably mainly down to numbers, I don't feel slighted being L21- either. Maybe L21 appears so well represented because such large numbers of L21 emigrated from the west of the British Isles/Ireland to America, where most of the present day genetic genealogist are. Americans obviously have shared culture and language. Many L21 originate in the same relatively local area of north western Europe. There's an immediate rapport, understandably leading to easy communication. The more easterly continental European P312 subclades don't particularly have the numbers yet, or the common language/culture that L21 Americans have. I'm looking forward to new developments within DF27, they'll probably just take longer to turn up. In comparison, DF27 seems a more widespread and continental European leaning subclade of P312.

It's even more important than that - it may be the most frequent P312 subclade in continental Europe.

But it's looking even more neglected than usual on Thos. Krahn's Draft Tree.  This morning I just noticed that our Basque colleagues of M153 have fallen right off the tree.  And there are other stems below DF27, currently leading to nowhere.

http://ytree.ftdna.com/

And here was me hoping that L484.x would be visible under Z220, along with (but separate from) Z216.

On the plus side, one may now see the testing data for a SNiP (or "an EssEnPee") by clicking on it.  I didn't know that, before today; had been going through a complicated routine with Gbrowse to find it.  It only works for the SNPs that have been placed on the tree (and haven't fallen back off) -- but one may still find the testing data about many other SNPs, via Gbrowse.

While this has the outward appearance of untidy DF27 housekeeping by Thomas or his lab, I must say that the A00 stuff he's been working on is more important -- and really fascinating.  I was just reading Roberta Estes's blog about that, today.  And I expect the GenoChip is keeping them hopping, too.  Maybe they are waiting for its results to start pouring in, before spending time on this nickel and dime stuff that interests us, individually or collectively.  I haven't seen much to make me think the GenoChip will help sort DF27, but I'm willing to be proven unnecessarily pessimistic.

[Edit:  I haven't time to rewrite this whole message, but David Reynolds has pointed out (elsewhere) that the invisible SNPs at the ends of those truncated stems become visible if one looks at a smaller segment, e.g. in this case just the R tree, rather than the whole thing.  The problem is apparently a failure to communicate, between Firefox and the software in which that Draft Tree lives.]


Title: Re: R-DF27/Z196: The Z209 subclade - what do we know about it?
Post by: Webb on February 04, 2013, 03:56:22 PM
I tested positive for Z220 back on December 11th, and tested negative for Z216 on January 19th.  My last name is Webb, which is Old English, however, there was a NPE sometime just before my ancestors came to America or just after.  I match a large number of individuals with the last name Wilder.  My closest Wilder match is a step four at 67 markers, this puts a shared ancestor probability of 90% at 20 generations and around 99% at 24 generations.  The Wilder group I match are claiming a British origin as well.


Title: Re: R-DF27/Z196: The Z209 subclade - what do we know about it?
Post by: razyn on February 08, 2013, 04:35:05 PM
As I recall, only three of us in the [Pabd renamed Jda] group are actually SNP tested (Hall, Hulan and Reno), but the rest are known kin to a tested person except for the Richert -- who is grouped in there because of all the shared, wacky off-modals with the rest of us.

We added another Richert (Rychert) to the group in December, an upgrade from 37 to 111 markers was ordered for his sample #44479, and results for that upgrade are beginning to post today.  [Edit: 67 markers completed, 2/12/13, with one apparent no-call at DYS534.]  So far, Rychert's off-modals are consistent with those of the rest of this subclade; the newly visible ones are at DYS444 and DYS572.  About eight more are expected to be off-modal (from Z220) in the markers from 68 through 111.

Rychert #44479 was also SNP tested for DF27 and L484; no results are yet reported.  When these tests are completed we'll have one representative from each of the four known (or assumed) L484+, N/S cluster families SNP tested, and with 111 marker STR values.

And then I'll pester the ISOGG folks to give our instance of L484 a decimal point and another digit, and hang us on the tree under Z220.


Title: Re: R-DF27/Z196: The Z209 subclade - what do we know about it?
Post by: razyn on February 17, 2013, 06:49:49 PM
A few days ago we got a result for the first new L484+ tested family since July 21, 2012 -- 44479 Richert.  That haplotype is in process of an upgrade to 111 markers, but only the panels up through 67 markers have posted, to date.  Anyway, I've been revising the list of off-modals for our Z220+, L484+ subclade, which is currently called Group Jda in the R1b-P312 and Subclades project:
http://www.familytreedna.com/public/atlantic-r1b1c/

With a number of long haplotypes now available, it is becoming apparent that our L484+ group shares a substantial number of values that are off-modal for the bulk of Z209/Z220. Here is a more complete analysis of our off-modals, from left to right in the order in which the STR markers are sorted in FTDNA projects:

At DYS393 we are ≥ 14; Z220 modal is 13.
At DYS385a we are 10; modal is 11.
At DYS385b we are 11; modal is 14.
At DYS392 we are 14; modal is 13. [DYS392 is a slow mutator.]
At DYS447 we are ≤ 23; modal is ≥ 24.
At GATAH4 we are 11; Z209/Z220 modal is 10, and we probably have a back mutation from 10 to the higher value that was normal, earlier on our tree.
At DYS444 we are ≥ 14; Z220 modal is 12.
At DYS572 we are 10; modal is 11, though 10 is not quite rare in clades above ours.
At DYS636 we are 11; modal is 12.  [Only one other known example under DF27, Brickell, has 11.]
At DYS445 we are 11; modal is 12.
At GATA-A10 we are 12; modal is 13.
At Y-GGAAT-1B07 our modal is 8; one member has the haplogroup modal 10.
At DYS525 we are ≥ 11; modal is 10.
At DYS650 we are 17; modal is ≥ 18.
At DYS532 we are ≥ 14; modal is 13.  [One member has the modal value.]
At DYS643 we are 11; modal is 10.

This updates, revises slightly, and therefore supersedes what I posted last Aug. 3rd on this thread.

At least 12 more members of these tested families may be found in the various FTDNA surname projects, especially those of Hall (family 006), Blanchard (group 11), and Hulin.  There is one Brown (33668) who may belong with the Halls; and a Dyer (40295) who may represent a fifth L484+ lineage, not yet tested.  There are a few other examples in the SMGF files, and perhaps in other databases to which I have no access.

Application for inclusion of this subclade on the ISOGG tree will proceed in the near future.  We may wait for the 111 marker results for Richert to post, so we can demonstrate the required 15% diversity at the highest level currently possible.  [Edit 3/1/13: the Richert markers 68-111 have begun to post; the first panel has no off-modals, and the fourth confirms DYS650=17.  DYS532 is modal 13 in this sample, and may be removed from our list.  At the moment, I'll just annotate it.]


Title: Re: R-DF27/Z196: The Z209 subclade - what do we know about it?
Post by: Webb on February 19, 2013, 01:05:38 PM
A few days ago we got a result for the first new L484+ tested family since July 21, 2012 -- 44479 Richert.  That haplotype is in process of an upgrade to 111 markers, but only the panels up through 67 markers have posted, to date.  Anyway, I've been revising the list of off-modals for our Z220+, L484+ subclade, which is currently called Group Jda in the R1b-P312 and Subclades project:
http://www.familytreedna.com/public/atlantic-r1b1c/

With a number of long haplotypes now available, it is becoming apparent that our L484+ group shares a substantial number of values that are off-modal for the bulk of Z209/Z220. Here is a more complete analysis of our off-modals, from left to right in the order in which the STR markers are sorted in FTDNA projects:

At DYS393 we are ≥ 14; Z220 modal is 13.
At DYS385a we are 10; modal is 11.
At DYS385b we are 11; modal is 14.
At DYS392 we are 14; modal is 13. [DYS392 is a slow mutator.]
At DYS447 we are ≤ 23; modal is ≥ 24.
At GATAH4 we are 11; Z209/Z220 modal is 10, and we probably have a back mutation from 10 to the higher value that was normal, earlier on our tree.
At DYS444 we are ≥ 14; Z220 modal is 12.
At DYS572 we are 10; modal is 11, though 10 is not quite rare in clades above ours.
At DYS636 we are 11; modal is 12.  [Only one other known example under DF27, Brickell, has 11.]
At DYS445 we are 11; modal is 12.
At GATA-A10 we are 12; modal is 13.
At Y-GGAAT-1B07 our modal is 8; one member has the haplogroup modal 10.
At DYS525 we are ≥ 11; modal is 10.
At DYS650 we are 17; modal is ≥ 18.
At DYS532 we are ≥ 14; modal is 13.
At DYS643 we are 11; modal is 10.

This updates, revises slightly, and therefore supersedes what I posted last Aug. 3rd on this thread.

At least 12 more members of these tested families may be found in the various FTDNA surname projects, especially those of Hall (family 006), Blanchard (group 11), and Hulin.  There is one Brown (33668) who may belong with the Halls; and a Dyer (40295) who may represent a fifth L484+ lineage, not yet tested.  There are a few other examples in the SMGF files, and perhaps in other databases to which I have no access.

Application for inclusion of this subclade on the ISOGG tree will proceed in the near future.  We may wait for the 111 marker results for Richert to post, so we can demonstrate the required 15% diversity at the highest level currently possible.

What was the outcome of Moscia, Ysearch ID#9GZFW?  I notice on semargl they have him as L484+ Z220-.  Is that correct, or a mistake?


Title: Re: R-DF27/Z196: The Z209 subclade - what do we know about it?
Post by: razyn on February 19, 2013, 02:53:42 PM
What was the outcome of Moscia, Ysearch ID#9GZFW?  I notice on semargl they have him as L484+ Z220-.  Is that correct, or a mistake?

It's correct, L484 has been found twice under P312.  Also once under I2a (M223+ and P78+).  And in three other haplogroups (so far).  So we need a decimal point and another digit.  Mike W's descendancy chart calls ours "L484NS" because we're in the old North/South cluster.  Moscia is not.


Title: Re: R-DF27/Z196: The Z209 subclade - what do we know about it?
Post by: Webb on February 19, 2013, 03:08:14 PM
What was the outcome of Moscia, Ysearch ID#9GZFW?  I notice on semargl they have him as L484+ Z220-.  Is that correct, or a mistake?

It's correct, L484 has been found twice under P312.  Also once under I2a (M223+ and P78+).  And in three other haplogroups (so far).  So we need a decimal point and another digit.  Mike W's descendancy chart calls ours "L484NS" because we're in the old North/South cluster.  Moscia is not.

Interesting, particularly because I believe he is DF27+.


Title: Re: R-DF27/Z196: The Z209 subclade - what do we know about it?
Post by: Webb on February 21, 2013, 12:44:53 PM
I was bored so I noticed that there have been several North/South cluster Geno 2.0 results posted at semargl.me.  I copied and pasted into a spreadsheet the results for a Z220 in one column, a Z278 in another, and a Z214 in a third and then did a comparison, looking for snp's that were found in one but not others.  This is what I found.
CTS12074 was found in both the Z278 and Z214 results, but not in the Z220 results.
There are a number of errors, as M269 and M173 were found in the Z214 results but not the other two.  Also P25 was found in the Z220 and Z214 results but not the Z278 results.
But now for the most important snp's, the z's.
These were positive in the Z220 results:  Z148+, Z191+, Z195+, Z196+, Z209+, Z210+, Z215+, Z220+, Z268+, Z274+, Z365+.  Notice the presence of Z215 and Z210, which I believe Rich Rocca has on his chart down below Z220 and clustered around Z216.
These are the snp's that are found in the Z278 results NOT FOUND IN Z220:  Z211+, Z212+, Z216+, Z270+, Z273+, Z278+, and Z295+.
And finally, these are the snp's that are found in the Z214 results NOT FOUND in either Z220 or Z278:  Z214+, Z279+, and Z299+.
The next thing I am going to accomplish is a side by side comparison of multiple Z220 results looking for the same thing.


Title: Re: R-DF27/Z196: The Z209 subclade - what do we know about it?
Post by: razyn on March 04, 2013, 01:10:43 PM
A few days ago we got a result for the first new L484+ tested family since July 21, 2012 -- 44479 Richert.  That haplotype is in process of an upgrade to 111 markers...
I'm refreshing the post instead of simply editing it again.  With the referenced 111-marker upgrade (for a Richert) now posted, it is clear that our subclade shares strong off-modal values at fourteen of the sixteen markers I previously listed.  I am deleting DYS532 and GGAAT1B07 as non-unanimous.  (In both cases at least one member has the Z220 modal value.)  Here is the latest version:

At DYS393 we are ≥ 14; Z220 modal is 13.
At DYS385a we are 10; modal is 11.
At DYS385b we are 11; modal is 14.  The combination at DYS385ab appears to reflect a RECLOH event, also documented at this palindromic marker in other haplogroups.
At DYS392 we are 14; modal is 13. [DYS392 is a slow mutator.]
At DYS447 we are ≤ 23; modal is ≥ 24.
At GATAH4 we are 11; Z209/Z220 modal is 10.  We appear to have a back mutation from 10 to the value (11) that was modal higher on our tree.
At DYS444 we are ≥ 14; Z220 modal is 12.
At DYS572 we are 10; modal is 11. [10 is not unknown in clades above ours.]
At DYS636 we are 11; modal is 12.
At DYS445 we are 11; modal is 12.
At GATA-A10 we are 12; modal is 13.
At DYS525 we are ≥ 11; modal is 10.
At DYS650 we are 17; modal is ≥ 18.
At DYS643 we are 11; modal is 10.

At least one kit (40295 Dyer) that may represent a fifth Z220+, L484+ lineage remains untested for the terminal L484 SNP, and for eight of our off-modals that lie beyond the 37th marker position.

Edited 3/8/2013: wording in first paragraph slightly modified, after results for #44479 to the 111 marker level finished posting last night (except for a no-call at DYS534).  That sample has also tested Z220+ and L484+.


Title: Re: R-DF27/Z196: The Z209 subclade - what do we know about it?
Post by: paulmize on June 01, 2013, 02:28:47 AM
Hello Mike,
Hope this finds you well.
There is a bit of grouping inside the P-312 DF27 area at the FTDNA project.
All the below have the same off-modal of 25 @DYS390 and other matching off modals and non matching .....
I do not have the technical skills to analyze ...
Could you take a look and provide me with your thoughts or comments?

Thank you,
Paul Mize FTDNA 157507  paul@paulmize.net
239858   John Tarr, d 1695 in Somerset Co., Maryland, USA   R1b1a2a1a1b                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  
226144   William Wright,1803-1865, Sudbourne, Suffolk, Engl   R1b1a2a1a1b                                                                                                                                                                              
157507   Peter Rucker, ? - 1752   R1b1a2a1a1b   
E8202   Augustin Scholz, 1780 Oberprausnitz, L1231+   R1b1a2a1a1b                                                                                                                                                                                  
N41015   Robert Brown, b. 1899 & d. 1972, Dungannon   R1b1a2a1a1b                                                                                                                                                                               
E15081   Fernando Serrano, b.1805 (Santaella)   R1b1a2a1a1b                                                                                                                                                                               
212887   George Henry Parker, 1860   R1b1a2a1a1b                                                                                                                                                                                  
155150   Jefferson Butler, b: MAY 8, 1802; of Bryan Co., GA   R1b1a2a1a1b   
207164   John Cannady, Kennedy, b 1777 SC d 1873 GA   R1b1a2a1a1b   
187084   Philip-Jakob Caspary, bc 1760, Frankfurt-Eckenheim   R1b1a2a1a1b                                                                                                                                                                                  
N77159       R1b1a2a1a1b                                                                                                                                                                               
121153   Francis Wilkinson, Stockton-on-Tees, Eng. b. 1763   R1b1a2a1a1b                                                                                                                                                                                  
172132   Francis Wilkinson b. 1763 Stockton-on-Tees, Englan   R1b1a2a1a1b   
198624   Edmond Carroll, Stonepark, Limerick 1835-1906   R1b1a2a1a1b   
101748   William Parkison, d. 1802, Cumberland Co., PA.   R1b1a2a1a1b   
59598   David MonroeGillespie b5.29.1858 AndersonCoSC   R1b1a2a1a1b   
138763   Philip Ryan b. c. 1780, Glenough Lower, Tipperary   R1b1a2a1a1b                                                                                                                                                                              
255382   Henry Gibson abt. 1664 and d. 1710 ........(DF27+)   R1b1a2                                                                                                                                                                                  
89283       R1b1a2a1a1b                                                                                                                                                                            
N106213   Franciszek Elget, 1792   R1b1a2a1a1b                                                                                                                                                                           
169776   William Cahoo, 1810 - 1852, Ireland   R1b1a2a1a1b


Title: Re: R-DF27/Z196: The Z209 subclade - what do we know about it?
Post by: GoldenHind on June 09, 2013, 03:31:21 PM
Hello Mike,
Hope this finds you well.
There is a bit of grouping inside the P-312 DF27 area at the FTDNA project.
All the below have the same off-modal of 25 @DYS390 and other matching off modals and non matching .....
I do not have the technical skills to analyze ...
Could you take a look and provide me with your thoughts or comments?

Thank you,
Paul Mize FTDNA 157507  paul@paulmize.net
239858   John Tarr, d 1695 in Somerset Co., Maryland, USA   R1b1a2a1a1b                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  
226144   William Wright,1803-1865, Sudbourne, Suffolk, Engl   R1b1a2a1a1b                                                                                                                                                                              
157507   Peter Rucker, ? - 1752   R1b1a2a1a1b   
E8202   Augustin Scholz, 1780 Oberprausnitz, L1231+   R1b1a2a1a1b                                                                                                                                                                                  
N41015   Robert Brown, b. 1899 & d. 1972, Dungannon   R1b1a2a1a1b                                                                                                                                                                               
E15081   Fernando Serrano, b.1805 (Santaella)   R1b1a2a1a1b                                                                                                                                                                               
212887   George Henry Parker, 1860   R1b1a2a1a1b                                                                                                                                                                                  
155150   Jefferson Butler, b: MAY 8, 1802; of Bryan Co., GA   R1b1a2a1a1b   
207164   John Cannady, Kennedy, b 1777 SC d 1873 GA   R1b1a2a1a1b   
187084   Philip-Jakob Caspary, bc 1760, Frankfurt-Eckenheim   R1b1a2a1a1b                                                                                                                                                                                  
N77159       R1b1a2a1a1b                                                                                                                                                                               
121153   Francis Wilkinson, Stockton-on-Tees, Eng. b. 1763   R1b1a2a1a1b                                                                                                                                                                                  
172132   Francis Wilkinson b. 1763 Stockton-on-Tees, Englan   R1b1a2a1a1b   
198624   Edmond Carroll, Stonepark, Limerick 1835-1906   R1b1a2a1a1b   
101748   William Parkison, d. 1802, Cumberland Co., PA.   R1b1a2a1a1b   
59598   David MonroeGillespie b5.29.1858 AndersonCoSC   R1b1a2a1a1b   
138763   Philip Ryan b. c. 1780, Glenough Lower, Tipperary   R1b1a2a1a1b                                                                                                                                                                              
255382   Henry Gibson abt. 1664 and d. 1710 ........(DF27+)   R1b1a2                                                                                                                                                                                  
89283       R1b1a2a1a1b                                                                                                                                                                            
N106213   Franciszek Elget, 1792   R1b1a2a1a1b                                                                                                                                                                           
169776   William Cahoo, 1810 - 1852, Ireland   R1b1a2a1a1b

My suspicion is that the Wilkinsons will prove to be DF27-, so perhaps some of the others will be as well.


Title: Re: R-DF27/Z196: The Z209 subclade - what do we know about it?
Post by: chris1 on June 09, 2013, 03:54:35 PM
"172132   Francis Wilkinson b. 1763 Stockton-on-Tees, England   R1b1a2a1a1b" is DF27+/Z196-/L86.2+. 


Title: Re: R-DF27/Z196: The Z209 subclade - what do we know about it?
Post by: GoldenHind on June 10, 2013, 03:01:07 PM
"172132   Francis Wilkinson b. 1763 Stockton-on-Tees, England   R1b1a2a1a1b" is DF27+/Z196-/L86.2+. 

My apologies. I was confusing him with another Wilkinson.


Title: Re: R-DF27/Z196: The Z209 subclade - what do we know about it?
Post by: Webb on June 11, 2013, 10:36:36 AM
There has been another clarification made on the Phylogenic tree for the North/South Cluster.  First Z210 was included in the Geno 2.0 test.  It was discovered by Richard Rocca and company during their first round of gleaming info from the 1000 genomes project.  Due to the testing of this SNP by Geno 2.0 it has been placed below Z220 and above Z278/Z216.  The next discovery was made by a Geno 2.0 result of Richard Hulan's cousin.  He came back positive for L484 and a few other SNP's that the other North/Cluster Geno 2.0 participants did not.  The biggest one being Z295.  It now appears that Z295 is below Z210, but above Z278/Z216 and the L484 group, being Z295 positive and Z278/Z216 negative branch off the North/South tree below Z295, but above Z278/Z216.