Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

37 Marker Question

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

  • Arch Yeomans
    replied
    yeah but these are not deep subclade markers...

    Originally posted by vineviz
    I did a search on 37 markers.

    http://www.ysearch.org/search_result...haplo=&region=

    There is one person identified as R1b1c6 at 33/37. Everyone else lists their haplogroup as unknown, R1b, R1b1, or R1b1c. I wouldn't say he is conclusively R1b1c6, or even probably R1b1c6, but I'd feel comfortable saying he is possibly R1b1c6.

    Besides, I think he is a lot closer to the R1b1c6 modal than to the R1b1c7 modal.
    I did the same type of guesswork and was proven way wrong. I'd just suggest the gentleman invests some money into deep SNP testing and for obvious reasons if Family Tree DNA can't find anything then go with Ethno-ancestry since they can test for all of the known Deep SNPs.

    Leave a comment:


  • Arch Yeomans
    replied
    I think your quote is probably more on the mark...

    Originally posted by Rick
    I believe the R1b1c16 you referred to is not a subclade, but is actually his R1b cluster #16, which he calls R1bSTR16, based on STR marker values only. The clusters he's identified number about 50 or so. In some cases they correspond to - but are not based upon - SNP-defined subclades, such as his cluster 19 corresponding to R1b1c7 (M222+). In most cases they are merely statistical aggregations of similar haplotypes that in most cases represent more recent genealogical relationships than SNP-based subclades. However, in the absence of SNPs, the STR-based clusters sometimes provide inaccurate grouping solutions, as a result of poor sampling, hapoltype convergence, excessive divergence, and other phenomena such as prolonged bottlenecks, line extinctions, etc, which are at variance with assumptions underlying the analyses. The cluster analyses can be very useful tools, but IMO are no substitutes for SNP-based clade assignment. Back to the point, R1b1c16 would be an actual SNP-based subclade of R1b1c. I think we're only up to R1b1c10 (defined by the SNP S28) so far.
    I've only seen it up to R1b1c10 myself. As far as being modal with R1b1c6, I could say that with the aggregation mentioned by another poster that R1b1c5 and R1b1c7 are modal. To me it doesn't make sense.

    I'd just get the Deep SNP test done and have an answer once and for all (whether through EA or Family Tree). It sure beats the heck out of having guesses and stabs at it.

    I did the same kind of speculation and thought I'd have a Saxon-Frisian related modal haplogroup based upon the numbers I had with 25 markers; and before Deep SNP tests came along. I was way off.

    Leave a comment:


  • Rick
    replied
    Originally posted by SaintManx
    I believe that Dr. John McEwan is conducting extensive research on R1b1's and has identified that the subclades are rapidly diversifying. Based on only seeing my DYS scores he has me in R1b1c16-which is apparently only developing now. Of course, to verify this a deep snp test will have to be conducted. I would suggest contacting him through the Ethnoancestry site.
    I believe the R1b1c16 you referred to is not a subclade, but is actually his R1b cluster #16, which he calls R1bSTR16, based on STR marker values only. The clusters he's identified number about 50 or so. In some cases they correspond to - but are not based upon - SNP-defined subclades, such as his cluster 19 corresponding to R1b1c7 (M222+). In most cases they are merely statistical aggregations of similar haplotypes that in most cases represent more recent genealogical relationships than SNP-based subclades. However, in the absence of SNPs, the STR-based clusters sometimes provide inaccurate grouping solutions, as a result of poor sampling, hapoltype convergence, excessive divergence, and other phenomena such as prolonged bottlenecks, line extinctions, etc, which are at variance with assumptions underlying the analyses. The cluster analyses can be very useful tools, but IMO are no substitutes for SNP-based clade assignment. Back to the point, R1b1c16 would be an actual SNP-based subclade of R1b1c. I think we're only up to R1b1c10 (defined by the SNP S28) so far.

    Leave a comment:


  • SaintManx
    replied
    Originally posted by Rick
    Is there a distinctive R1b1c6 modal haplotype? I read somewhere that R1b1c6 is indistinguishable from R1b1c* on the basis of STR values alone.
    I believe that Dr. John McEwan is conducting extensive research on R1b1's and has identified that the subclades are rapidly diversifying. Based on only seeing my DYS scores he has me in R1b1c16-which is apparently only developing now. Of course, to verify this a deep snp test will have to be conducted. I would suggest contacting him through the Ethnoancestry site.

    Leave a comment:


  • vineviz
    replied
    Originally posted by Rick
    Is there a distinctive R1b1c6 modal haplotype? I read somewhere that R1b1c6 is indistinguishable from R1b1c* on the basis of STR values alone.
    By my calculation the modal for R1b1c6 is about 10 steps away from the modal for R1b1c7 at 37 markers.

    In this case, RJKGE is four steps away from the R1b1c6 modal and 13 steps from the R1b1c7 modal. That's not conclusive evidence of being R1b1c6, but it clearly raises the possibility.

    Whether these two subclades can be distinguished based on STRs more generally, I couldn't say.

    Leave a comment:


  • Rick
    replied
    Originally posted by vineviz

    Besides, I think he is a lot closer to the R1b1c6 modal than to the R1b1c7 modal.
    Is there a distinctive R1b1c6 modal haplotype? I read somewhere that R1b1c6 is indistinguishable from R1b1c* on the basis of STR values alone.

    Leave a comment:


  • vineviz
    replied
    Originally posted by Arch Yeomans
    I checked his results on ysearch, and his results come nowhere close to R1b1c6. I had selected a minimum of 8 markers, and genetic distance of 3, 4, but when I selected 5 he only showed with 3 folks from R1b1c6. At genetic distance 6, he came up with around 6 of R1b1c6 folk (that's less than half the persons listed as R1b1c6). I don't think he's R1b1c6, is he?
    I did a search on 37 markers.

    http://www.ysearch.org/search_result...haplo=&region=

    There is one person identified as R1b1c6 at 33/37. Everyone else lists their haplogroup as unknown, R1b, R1b1, or R1b1c. I wouldn't say he is conclusively R1b1c6, or even probably R1b1c6, but I'd feel comfortable saying he is possibly R1b1c6.

    Besides, I think he is a lot closer to the R1b1c6 modal than to the R1b1c7 modal.

    Leave a comment:


  • SaintManx
    replied
    Originally posted by lgmayka
    Easily. Although 'random convergence' can cause almost unrelated men to have fairly similar haplotypes, it is usual for almost unrelated men to have a large genetic distance between them.

    In your case, I agree with your assessment: If the genetic distance between you and other alleged members of your family is 10 in 25 markers, your most recent common patrilineal ancestor was probably several thousand years ago. I hope that this is not a painful shock to you.

    Of course, it's theoretically possible that your sample was mixed up with someone else's, etc.
    Thanks for the clarification.

    Painful shock? Mmm, not really, this is something that I have been dealing with for quite sometime. My family is quite stoic, and go to their graves with their dna and their secrets. I have been under scrutiny within my family for quite sometime and I may just be beginning to discern why. The only problem is that I cannot get a sample from my father so for the time I have to find another backdoor. Perhaps matching up with my sibling could verify our relationship and the likeliness of our relationship with my father. We are six years apart so this could shed some light upon probabilities of my or he being born out of wedlock.

    Leave a comment:


  • lgmayka
    replied
    Originally posted by SaintManx
    I am at a distance of 10 in a 25 marker with members of my own family(whom I am of the mindset that I am probably not in this family) but share the same haplogroup, how is this possible?
    Easily. Although 'random convergence' can cause almost unrelated men to have fairly similar haplotypes, it is usual for almost unrelated men to have a large genetic distance between them.

    In your case, I agree with your assessment: If the genetic distance between you and other alleged members of your family is 10 in 25 markers, your most recent common patrilineal ancestor was probably several thousand years ago. I hope that this is not a painful shock to you.

    Of course, it's theoretically possible that your sample was mixed up with someone else's, etc.

    Leave a comment:


  • SaintManx
    replied
    Originally posted by vineviz
    It depends on what you mean by meaningful.

    A genetic distance of 4-6 with people in your haplogroup is not at all uncommon. One of your closest matches is reported on ySearch as R1b1c6 (the most common Western European sublcade in ySearch is R1b1c7), and if you are R1b1c6 then this would indeed be "atypical" in Europe.

    http://www.geocities.com/mcewanjc/m167.htm

    If you are curious about your haplogroup, you could take a SNP test.

    http://www.familytreedna.com/deepclade.html#deepR1b

    I'd recommend joining the R1b project as well.

    http://www.familytreedna.com/public/r1b/index.aspx
    I am at a distance of 10 in a 25 marker with members of my own family(whom I am of the mindset that I am probably not in this family) but share the same haplogroup, how is this possible?

    Leave a comment:


  • lgmayka
    replied
    Originally posted by bob_chasm
    In my opinion, T246R with a 25/25 match and the same haplogroup sub clade as you, is far more likely to have shared a recent common paternal ancestor (less than 300 years and possibly only a 100 years ago) with you than someone with a 33/37 match.
    This is true, but since he is of a variety of R1b not found in the Middle East, perhaps he is trying to figure out where and when the fateful intermarriage of his R1b ancestor and a Jewish woman occurred.

    My own reading of his near neighbors (Germans in Ysearch) is that the intermarriage probably occurred north of the Alps (German Rhineland or Switzerland). Historically, the most logical time for this would be around the founding of the Ashkenazi Jewish community there in the 9th and 10th centuries.

    Leave a comment:


  • Arch Yeomans
    replied
    Deep SNP test

    Originally posted by lapp15
    I am Ashkenazi Jewish. The 25/25 match and a 33/37 match from Hungary is Jewish also. Another 30/32 from Jazlowiec, Galicia/Galizien/Halychyna, Austria could be Jewish
    .
    Have you done the deep SNP test yet?? This would be more revealing.

    Leave a comment:


  • Arch Yeomans
    replied
    huh?

    Originally posted by vineviz
    It depends on what you mean by meaningful.

    A genetic distance of 4-6 with people in your haplogroup is not at all uncommon. One of your closest matches is reported on ySearch as R1b1c6 (the most common Western European sublcade in ySearch is R1b1c7), and if you are R1b1c6 then this would indeed be "atypical" in Europe.

    http://www.geocities.com/mcewanjc/m167.htm

    If you are curious about your haplogroup, you could take a SNP test.

    http://www.familytreedna.com/deepclade.html#deepR1b

    I'd recommend joining the R1b project as well.

    http://www.familytreedna.com/public/r1b/index.aspx
    I checked his results on ysearch, and his results come nowhere close to R1b1c6. I had selected a minimum of 8 markers, and genetic distance of 3, 4, but when I selected 5 he only showed with 3 folks from R1b1c6. At genetic distance 6, he came up with around 6 of R1b1c6 folk (that's less than half the persons listed as R1b1c6). I don't think he's R1b1c6, is he?

    Leave a comment:


  • bob_chasm
    replied
    meaningful match

    Originally posted by lapp15
    I am Ashkenazi Jewish. The 25/25 match and a 33/37 match from Hungary is Jewish also. Another 30/32 from Jazlowiec, Galicia/Galizien/Halychyna, Austria could be Jewish.
    In my opinion, T246R with a 25/25 match and the same haplogroup sub clade as you, is far more likely to have shared a recent common paternal ancestor (less than 300 years and possibly only a 100 years ago) with you than someone with a 33/37 match.

    regards,

    bob

    Leave a comment:


  • lapp15
    replied
    37 Marker Question

    Originally posted by bob_chasm
    T246R is a 25/25 match with you and belongs to your haplogroup R1b1c. I dont know if it gets much more meaningful than that. He is Jewish. Are you? By the way, I dont even have a single 12/12 match.

    regards,

    bob
    I am Ashkenazi Jewish. The 25/25 match and a 33/37 match from Hungary is Jewish also. Another 30/32 from Jazlowiec, Galicia/Galizien/Halychyna, Austria could be Jewish
    .

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X