Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

FTDNA Y Classic Chart

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by 1798 View Post
    I didn't say M269 was 4000 years old? You must think then that your line is the one true line of the Grogan's. Is that it? Name callers are bullies. If you disagree with me then put me on the right track.

    "We hear first of the sept in 1265 under which date the Four Masters and other annalists record the death of Maelbrighde Ó Grugáin (or Ó Grocan) of Elphin (Roscommon)."
    There are six men with the name Grogan at ysearch and it looks like five different branches. I have spent eight years on ysearch looking for matches so I have learned a lot about the different branches.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by B52 View Post
      OK, I'm in this group:

      https://www.familytreedna.com/public...ction=yresults

      And I've yet to have an exact match with another person with my last name. There are multiple people with 3 different last names that match me from 0 - 3 difference in yDNA at both the 37 & 67 Marker tests. We think it is one or more paternal events in colonial (Revolutionary) times in North Carolina as a map of property boundaries shows the families as neighbors.

      However, due to physical appearance, family oral history, and written history it is very likely Grogan for myself is an uninterrupted male paternal lineage and not one of the other 3 families. Also, Grogan is know via Irish university research as a last name that originated in Connaught (County Roscommon) and finally the FTDNA Niall of the Nine Hostages also points to County Roscommon and Connaught as the origin of my yDNA haplogroup.

      So now to the reason I post. The link above.

      0) My entry, (10668 Merle Grogan, 1670-1735, Kings Co, Ireland Ireland R-M222). Nothing else really can be said in addition that is relevant, fact, and that I haven't stated here.

      1) OK, there is one entry, (256507 John (Patt) Grogan, b. c1800 Ireland I-L104) that shows a likely origin in a port city and migration to Ireland from elsewhere but the STR numbers don't look so different than my STR numbers. What determines the haplogroup?

      2) This entry, (269057 Thomas Grogan B. 1727 Ireland R-M269) is interesting because it differs in so many STR markers but R-M269 is a predecessor branch of R-M222. Is it possible for my branch and another branch of Grogan's to have diverged in STR so much in at least 800 years? Maybe 900 or 1000 but only about 800 have been documented. Also I am descended from the same Thomas Grogan, born 1727 this entry descends from and I think it's not possible for yDNA STRs to diverge that quickly so maybe this is another non-paternal event.

      3) Finally, (B2672 Moses Cohen, 1804 - 1872 United Kingdom -) why does the kit number begin with a B? I'm not sure why this result is in this project except I'm sure people converting to a new religion and taking a new last name happens all the time so no surprise there. I guess the DNA matched mine more than other branches they found at ftDNA. So what's the B for?

      4) This entry is the only last name that matched me closely in the list up to 37 & 67 although they don't list their last name, (185891 Unknown Origin R-M222). They are members of another FTDNA group for their legal last name.
      269057 has 164 matches at 12 markers at ysearch and none are M222. L21 is the most likely common ancestor. L21 could be 5000 years old according to some L21 people so I don't see any reason why this man can be called an NPE.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by B52 View Post
        OK, I'm in this group:

        https://www.familytreedna.com/public...ction=yresults

        And I've yet to have an exact match with another person with my last name. There are multiple people with 3 different last names that match me from 0 - 3 difference in yDNA at both the 37 & 67 Marker tests. We think it is one or more paternal events in colonial (Revolutionary) times in North Carolina as a map of property boundaries shows the families as neighbors.

        However, due to physical appearance, family oral history, and written history it is very likely Grogan for myself is an uninterrupted male paternal lineage and not one of the other 3 families. Also, Grogan is know via Irish university research as a last name that originated in Connaught (County Roscommon) and finally the FTDNA Niall of the Nine Hostages also points to County Roscommon and Connaught as the origin of my yDNA haplogroup.

        0) My entry, (10668 Merle Grogan, 1670-1735, Kings Co, Ireland Ireland R-M222).

        2) This entry, (269057 Thomas Grogan B. 1727 Ireland R-M269) is interesting because it differs in so many STR markers but R-M269 is a predecessor branch of R-M222. Is it possible for my branch and another branch of Grogan's to have diverged in STR so much in at least 800 years? Maybe 900 or 1000 but only about 800 have been documented. Also I am descended from the same Thomas Grogan, born 1727 this entry descends from and I think it's not possible for yDNA STRs to diverge that quickly so maybe this is another non-paternal event.
        Originally posted by 1798 View Post
        269057 has 164 matches at 12 markers at ysearch and none are M222. L21 is the most likely common ancestor. L21 could be 5000 years old according to some L21 people so I don't see any reason why this man can be called an NPE.
        He is stating that it is possibly an NPE because their STR markers do not match alluding to the fact that they belong to different lines even though they supposedly descend from the same Thomas Grogan, born 1727. If they both descend from the same man then they should match by 33 or more markers out of the 37 that they have tested or in a rare case 30 out of 37. They have a difference of about 12 markers which is too many for them to both descend from the same Thomas Grogan, born 1727.

        He was not interested in knowing if 269057 is L21 or that the common ancestor is from 5,000 years ago. But since you brought up using ysearch.org I'll use 269057 as an example of why ysearch.org isn't as useful as you want to make it out to be.

        1. Most people haven't tested to their terminal subclade. Out of the 164 matches only 26 people tested past R1b1a2**or R1b1b.

        2. There are a large number of people that have only uploaded 12 of their markers even when they have tested to 37 markers. 269057 is one of those people. 12 markers aren't enough to prove a recent common ancestor or that a person belongs to the same subclade.

        3. Most of the 26 people have a longhand subclade from an ISOGG tree older than the 2014 tree and the name changes every year with new SNPs being discovered and placed on the tree every year. Ysearch and the testees that have uploaded their data aren't keeping up with the changes. In order to find each of the SNPs associated with each longhand name you have to search multiple ISOGG trees or do multiple Internet searches.

        4. A 12 marker match is not a good way to try to determine which subclade or SNP a person belongs to. Out of the 26 subclades there are four that are completely different - U106, U152, L21, and SRY2627. There is no way to know for sure which one 269057 is positive for. Only individual testing, the future Deep Clade 2.0 test, a very close match on 67 markers with another person that has tested to their terminal SNP, or NGS testing would provide that information. The only reason he would be slightly more likely to be L21 is because L21 exists at a higher percentage among people from Ireland and Great Britain. He could almost as likely be U106 and U152 isn't that uncommon. SRY2627 has been found all over western Europe although at a much lower percentage.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by Armando View Post
          He is stating that it is possibly an NPE because their STR markers do not match alluding to the fact that they belong to different lines even though they supposedly descend from the same Thomas Grogan, born 1727. If they both descend from the same man then they should match by 33 or more markers out of the 37 that they have tested or in a rare case 30 out of 37. They have a difference of about 12 markers which is too many for them to both descend from the same Thomas Grogan, born 1727.

          He was not interested in knowing if 269057 is L21 or that the common ancestor is from 5,000 years ago. But since you brought up using ysearch.org I'll use 269057 as an example of why ysearch.org isn't as useful as you want to make it out to be.

          1. Most people haven't tested to their terminal subclade. Out of the 164 matches only 26 people tested past R1b1a2**or R1b1b.

          2. There are a large number of people that have only uploaded 12 of their markers even when they have tested to 37 markers. 269057 is one of those people. 12 markers aren't enough to prove a recent common ancestor or that a person belongs to the same subclade.

          3. Most of the 26 people have a longhand subclade from an ISOGG tree older than the 2014 tree and the name changes every year with new SNPs being discovered and placed on the tree every year. Ysearch and the testees that have uploaded their data aren't keeping up with the changes. In order to find each of the SNPs associated with each longhand name you have to search multiple ISOGG trees or do multiple Internet searches.

          4. A 12 marker match is not a good way to try to determine which subclade or SNP a person belongs to. Out of the 26 subclades there are four that are completely different - U106, U152, L21, and SRY2627. There is no way to know for sure which one 269057 is positive for. Only individual testing, the future Deep Clade 2.0 test, a very close match on 67 markers with another person that has tested to their terminal SNP, or NGS testing would provide that information. The only reason he would be slightly more likely to be L21 is because L21 exists at a higher percentage among people from Ireland and Great Britain. He could almost as likely be U106 and U152 isn't that uncommon. SRY2627 has been found all over western Europe although at a much lower percentage.
          I only used the first 12 markers as an example. The M222 line is very easy to see at 12 markers. I think that some people use the NPE term too easily and I didn't mean to upset him in any way.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by 1798 View Post
            I only used the first 12 markers as an example.
            That doesn't invalidate what I wrote. It can also happens at 37 markers albeit a lower degree. Additionally, If you put all 37 markers from 269057 in ysearch.org and look for a match with a difference of 5 markers there are no matches. Again, ysearch.org is a poor substitute for FTDNA.

            When doing a search in ysearch.org based on a a kit such as XDCA6 (269057) the results have a column in the far right called Markers Compared and in that column it tells you how many markers were compared. That maxes out at the number of markers the person uploaded and in the case of XDCA6 (269057) it maxes out at 12 because that is all that 269057 uploaded. When doing a search of another person that tested to 37 markers 250 people out of 360 matches (69%) have only tested to 25 or fewer markers

            Originally posted by 1798 View Post
            The M222 line is very easy to see at 12 markers. I think that some people use the NPE term too easily and I didn't mean to upset him in any way.
            It might be true that M222 is easy to spot with 12 markers although most R1b subclades can't be predicted with just 12 markers as proven in two different studies the most recent being Solé-Morata et al (2014) and from what I have seen from people trying to determine their subclade.

            Assuming that M222 positive matches should have shown up for 269057 if that were his subclade that means that he is not a descendant of the same Thomas Grogan, born 1727 and there is a possible NPE. It doesn't matter that the NPE term is being used too easily, it certainly can apply here.

            Comment


            • #21
              I am able to find some subgroups at ysearch and semargl with just a few specific markers.

              Comment

              Working...
              X