Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Astonishing J1 results

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

  • Astonishing J1 results

    My new deep snp results came back today - I'm J1e. This wouldn't be so strange in and of itself, except that there are now confirmed J1e's with DYS388 = 13, 15, 16, and 17 in the J project! It's also cutting across all the YCAII boundaries that the project was using to define people. I called the office, and they said they don't have enough confirmed cases yet to address the issue.

    My questions are: Is it possible that P58 is upstream of 304 and not downstream? Is it possible that DYS388 mutates a lot faster than has been believed? Is it possible that DYS388 mutates independently so that different subclades can share the same values? Any thoughts, anyone?

    Vinnie

  • #2
    Originally posted by vinnie
    My new deep snp results came back today - I'm J1e. This wouldn't be so strange in and of itself, except that there are now confirmed J1e's with DYS388 = 13, 15, 16, and 17 in the J project! It's also cutting across all the YCAII boundaries that the project was using to define people. I called the office, and they said they don't have enough confirmed cases yet to address the issue.

    My questions are: Is it possible that P58 is upstream of 304 and not downstream? Is it possible that DYS388 mutates a lot faster than has been believed? Is it possible that DYS388 mutates independently so that different subclades can share the same values? Any thoughts, anyone?

    Vinnie
    Hi Vinnie. I guess no one knows how far upstream P58 is, but it must be so far that it will not prove useful in our research.

    I also wonder if J1e will last as a subclade designation.

    I have that deep SNP test on order, and I'm thinking I should have saved my money.

    Regards,
    Jim
    J1 w/DYS388=13

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by vinnie
      My questions are: Is it possible that P58 is upstream of 304 and not downstream? Is it possible that DYS388 mutates a lot faster than has been believed? Is it possible that DYS388 mutates independently so that different subclades can share the same values? Any thoughts, anyone?

      Vinnie
      I was still quite surprised when I wrote this - what I mean to question is whether P58 is upstream of 267, but still separate from 172 (J2).

      Comment


      • #4
        Astonishing news !
        J1b (M365+) is negative to P58 (P58-), what is one more proof that SNP's are far more important than STR's in the determination of genetic distances.
        So it seems J1e* will be the vast majority of the former J1 clusters, but will we find any J1* (P58-) or are they going to be as rare as the J* ones ?

        Comment


        • #5
          Vinnie,

          The latest news from the J Project administrator is that the supposed subgroup J1 with DYS388=13 now has one member positive for P58 and one negative for it.

          I'm not sure what to make of that.

          Regards,
          Jim

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Jim Honeychuck
            Vinnie,

            The latest news from the J Project administrator is that the supposed subgroup J1 with DYS388=13 now has one member positive for P58 and one negative for it.

            I'm not sure what to make of that.

            Regards,
            Jim
            Really, Jim !
            Very interesting !

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Jim Honeychuck
              Vinnie,

              The latest news from the J Project administrator is that the supposed subgroup J1 with DYS388=13 now has one member positive for P58 and one negative for it.

              I'm not sure what to make of that.

              Regards,
              Jim
              Having just finished posting a followup question about J1 and the DYS338=13 cluster on the other thread, I wonder now if I have to re-think it already. If SNPs are definitive, then does this imply that J1 with DYS388=13 subcluster can no longer be considred a subcluster? It doens't make sense to divide that J1 388=13 cluster further into P58+ and P58-, since as a SNP, it should be higher on the hierarchy. So will clusters instead now be defined by P58, and only then subclusters be idenfitied, say those with DYS388=13 and those with some other value (within each P58 outcome)?.

              Is there any info on the project member that is positive for P58 and on the one that is negative for it (i.e. the ones with DYS338=13)? Do we know where their ancestors were from?

              Just when I thought I was getting somewhere- I knew I should have stuck to mtDNA.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Jim Honeychuck
                Vinnie,

                The latest news from the J Project administrator is that the supposed subgroup J1 with DYS388=13 now has one member positive for P58 and one negative for it.

                I'm not sure what to make of that.

                Regards,
                Jim
                Jim,

                Assuming that P58 is downstream of 267, I would think that most of J1 is probably J1e, as Bracari said; all of the snp-tested people, except for the J1b folks, have tested negative for all the other snps, right? (I have wondered why NONE of the snp-tested members have tested positive as J1a, b, c, d...) So the only thing I can think of regarding these two specific cases is that one of them may not be a "true" 13; i.e., if the majority of the Pontic cluster came back either positive or negative for P58, then the outlier(s) could be the result of convergence, no matter how slowly 388 is supposed to mutate. What do you think? Also, if you think that no one really knows how far upstream P58 is, how can FTDNA use it to define subclades downstream of 267? And do you happen to know how many more project members have ordered the test?
                Last edited by vinnie; 12 June 2008, 10:28 PM.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by penguin
                  Just when I thought I was getting somewhere- I knew I should have stuck to mtDNA.
                  Penguin, look at it this way - we're helping to make scientific history!

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by penguin
                    Having just finished posting a followup question about J1 and the DYS338=13 cluster on the other thread, I wonder now if I have to re-think it already. If SNPs are definitive, then does this imply that J1 with DYS388=13 subcluster can no longer be considred a subcluster? It doens't make sense to divide that J1 388=13 cluster further into P58+ and P58-, since as a SNP, it should be higher on the hierarchy. So will clusters instead now be defined by P58, and only then subclusters be idenfitied, say those with DYS388=13 and those with some other value (within each P58 outcome)?.

                    Is there any info on the project member that is positive for P58 and on the one that is negative for it (i.e. the ones with DYS338=13)? Do we know where their ancestors were from?

                    Just when I thought I was getting somewhere- I knew I should have stuck to mtDNA.
                    The positive and the negative J1 w/DYS388=13 cases are both from Germany.

                    Their STR numbers show that they are not related.

                    I have not figured out how those two lines got from eastern Anatolia or the Transcaucasus to Germany.

                    One of the Germans seems to be related within about 750 years to a northwestern Polish case. My guess is they are both descended from a medieval soldier recruited from the north shore of the Black Sea.

                    The other German is a puzzle, except that he seems to be related to a British case.

                    Regards,
                    Jim

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      J1e's with DYS388 = 16

                      I am an Arab and J1e with DYS388=16 and YCAIIa,b 20,22 what this mean ?

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Gulf
                        I am an Arab and J1e with DYS388=16 and YCAIIa,b 20,22 what this mean ?
                        Gulf,

                        The only thing we know at this point is that people who test positive for J1e share a common distant ancestor, but I don't think anyone knows how far back the ancestor lived. The FTDNA office told me that the test for J1e has been a popular test for people to order, but I don't know exactly how many people have ordered it. However, a lot more people will have to test for it before the FTDNA researchers can begin to understand its meaning for all of us.

                        Vinnie

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Thank,s Vinnie .

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            See "Problems with P58" in the Background section of the J project website and the new Fluxus network in the Results section: http://www.familytreedna.com/public/Y-DNA_J/

                            Has anyone heard of "unstable snps" capable of mutating more than once within a haplogroup?
                            Last edited by vinnie; 24 June 2008, 08:05 AM.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              P58 is a mystery ?

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X