View Single Post
  #5  
Old 25th July 2016, 09:50 AM
MMaddi MMaddi is offline
yDNA: R-CTS2509; mtDNA: T2e
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 3,391
Quote:
Originally Posted by LeFoeil22 View Post
Thanks Armando, this is also my thought and why i posted the above to confront with others here. In fact i was amazed by the match between Tim Janzen markers said to be "U106" markers and mine. I might have been a bit too confident indeed in this figures game.

I ordered a BIG-Y, so let wait for it (patience is surely what is needed in this adventure ). I will post the results when known.
Tim Janzen is a very knowledgeable genetic genealogist. However, his rule of thumb for distinguishing P312 and U106 is not the best.

To my knowledge, DYS576 and CDYa vary too much, even within the same subclade, to be useful for distinguishing P312 and U106. DYS390 is a relatively slowly mutating marker, but only about half of U106+ men have 23 as the modal for their subclade. You'll also find a small percentage of P312+ men with DYS390=23. This gives you a good idea of what Armando posted about FTDNA's failed attempt to predict R-M269 subclades with STRs. It failed because there's too many exceptions to what seem to be rules.

The best indicator of U106 is DYS492=13. It's accurate about 95% of the time. Also, DYS492=12 is also a strong indicator in R-M269 men that they are U106- and probably P312+.
Reply With Quote