Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Question on Further Understanding 12 Marker Matches

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

  • Question on Further Understanding 12 Marker Matches

    One of my Y-DNA 12 marker matches is confirmed to belong to R1b1b2a1a. Based on the limited testing I have undergone, it only puts me in the range of R1b1b2. Can this discrepancy be explained by the fact that he has possibly undergone more testing that places him in a separate classification? I am assuming he has done the Deep Clade test? If I were to undergo further testing (the Deep Clade test) could I potentially be placed in a different range from him? (I tested through the Genographic Project.)
    Last edited by Asturianu; 8 May 2009, 04:28 PM. Reason: Cleared up some of the confusion.

  • #2
    Originally posted by Asturianu View Post
    If I were to undergo further testing (the Deep Clade test) could I potentially be placed in a different range from him? (I tested through the Genographic Project.)
    You can certainly wind up with a different subclade designation after the Deep Clade test. I had my father's ydna tested, and the first test, before we did a Deep Clade test, placed him in R1b1b2, IIRC. The Deep Clade test identified him positively as R1b1b2a1b5b.

    Comment


    • #3
      Genographic only tested (or predicted) you to the R1b1b2 level.

      There are many subclades (subgroups) of R1b1b2, and you probably belong to one of them. The only way to find out which one is to take the deep-clade SNP test, which FTDNA offers on your Haplotree page.

      Your 12-marker match has already taken the deep-clade SNP test to get his refined haplogroup assignment.

      In some haplogroups, it's possible to predict a person's subclade through comparison with his 12-marker matches, but unfortunately that usually can't be done in R1b. Members of different subclades can match each other at 12 markers -- these are coincidental matches, since a different subclade trumps a 12-marker match. So you can't assume that you'll be in the same subclade as your match -- the only way to know your own subclade is to take the deep-clade test for yourself.

      In case you don't already know, subclades indicate deep ancestry -- thousands of years.

      STR markers are used for genealogical matching. 12 markers are OK to rule out a potential connection with someone, or to help prove a connection when you already have a hypothesis that two people are related. However, when you're taking a stab in the dark in a database, 12 markers simply isn't enough -- many of your 12-marker matches could be very ancient connections.

      To identify your matches within genealogical timeframe (hundreds of years vs thousands of years), you will need to compare at 37 markers or more.

      Genographic only tests 12 markers because that project is only studying ancient ancestry. It's just the tip of the iceberg. If you want to know more, then doing additional testing through FTDNA is definitely the way to go.

      Whether you upgrade to 37 markers or order the deep-clade test depends on your goals. You might want to do both, since they provide different levels of information. But if you can only do one at a time, then decide whether you're more interested in ancient ancestry or genealogical connections, and order the corresponding upgrade first.

      Elise
      Last edited by efgen; 8 May 2009, 04:47 PM.

      Comment


      • #4
        Thank you both for your informative replies.

        I see what you're saying. Now does the fact we both match at 12 markers and he is defined as R1b1b2a1, give some sort of indication as to where my specific subclade might be placed? For instance, I just learned that, within the R1b1b2 haplogroup, there is a split in the subclades: R1b1b2a1a (and its variants) and R1b1b2a1b (and its variants). Is the 12 marker match enough to place me within one of these groups or is a 12/12 match not enough to determine which one of these subclade classes I will fall into?

        I certainly plan going through with the additional testing provided here.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Asturianu View Post
          Thank you both for your informative replies.

          I see what you're saying. Now does the fact we both match at 12 markers and he is defined as R1b1b2a1, give some sort of indication as to where my specific subclade might be placed? For instance, I just learned that, within the R1b1b2 haplogroup, there is a split in the subclades: R1b1b2a1a (and its variants) and R1b1b2a1b (and its variants). Is the 12 marker match enough to place me within one of these groups or is a 12/12 match not enough to determine which one of these subclade classes I will fall into?

          I certainly plan going through with the additional testing provided here.
          No. Just having a 12/12 with this R1b1b2a1 isn't enough to classify you a R1b1b2a1. As he could have tested more markers, plus the SNPs.

          With a person in the R1b haplogroup area its very difficult (if not impossible) to predict what clade you belong too.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by spruithean View Post
            No. Just having a 12/12 with this R1b1b2a1 isn't enough to classify you a R1b1b2a1. As he could have tested more markers, plus the SNPs.

            With a person in the R1b haplogroup area its very difficult (if not impossible) to predict what clade you belong too.
            Interesting. So, whilst I might share a 12/12 genetic commonality with such an individual, it's still not enough to determine whether or not I will fall within some variant of R1b1b2a1a or R1b1b2a1b, etc.

            So then my question becomes, what test does one find to me of more value in determining a less abstract account of one's ancestral heritage? Is the Deep Clade more valuable or are the 25+ upgrades?

            Comment


            • #7
              You won't know your subclade without the deepclade R. If you want to know more about people you match with, then you'd likely need a minimum of 37 markers, but 67 is the usual must for R1bs.

              If you have an excellent STR match with someone that is an R-L21+, and you have not tested with the deepclade R, you might or might not be an R-L21+. Too many haplotypes look the same in R1b.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Asturianu View Post
                So then my question becomes, what test does one find to me of more value in determining a less abstract account of one's ancestral heritage? Is the Deep Clade more valuable or are the 25+ upgrades?
                Did you read my entire post above? I explained the difference between the deep-clade test and the marker upgrade. To summarize again:

                Deep-Clade: Ancient ancestry (thousands of years)
                37+ Markers: Genealogical Matches (hundreds of years)

                They're both valuable, it just depends on what information you're looking for.

                Elise
                Last edited by efgen; 8 May 2009, 09:25 PM.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by efgen View Post
                  Did you read my entire post above? I explained the difference between the deep-clade test and the marker upgrade. To summarize again:

                  Deep-Clade: Ancient ancestry (thousands of years)
                  37+ Markers: Genealogical Matches (hundreds of years)

                  They're both valuable, it just depends on what information you're looking for.

                  Elise
                  Hey Elise,

                  I somewhat glossed over those points, though I have had this explained before. (Please forgive my illiteracy on this subject.)

                  Based upon my current matches -who are far from sharing such unifying qualities as my nationality- I doubt I will find any matches beyond 12 markers. Therefore, I think it would probably not be worth going forward with that test before a Deep Clade.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    "when you're taking a stab in the dark in a database, 12 markers simply isn't enough -- many of your 12-marker matches could be very ancient connections"

                    According to FTDNA, 29 generations exactly (95% probability that the MRCA was no longer than this number of generations)

                    http://www.familytreedna.com/faq-markers.aspx

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Asturianu View Post
                      Hey Elise,

                      I somewhat glossed over those points, though I have had this explained before. (Please forgive my illiteracy on this subject.)

                      Based upon my current matches -who are far from sharing such unifying qualities as my nationality- I doubt I will find any matches beyond 12 markers. Therefore, I think it would probably not be worth going forward with that test before a Deep Clade.
                      Well what is your nationality?

                      My paternal ancestor was Scottish... yet I don't have near as many matches as you would expect for someone with roots in Scotland. 12 markers is not enough to determine relationships anyway. Sure you have 12 marker matches but without going to further markers you won't be able to distinguish between ancient connections and recent connections.

                      Good luck

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by spruithean View Post
                        Well what is your nationality?

                        My paternal ancestor was Scottish... yet I don't have near as many matches as you would expect for someone with roots in Scotland. 12 markers is not enough to determine relationships anyway. Sure you have 12 marker matches but without going to further markers you won't be able to distinguish between ancient connections and recent connections.

                        Good luck
                        My nationality/ethnicity is Asturian (Asturies is a region in the north of Spain). Its history is rather complex and area itself has been home to many different peoples, including: ethnic Basques, Celtiberians (basically, just Iberians/Basques with some Gaulish input), Romans and lesser contributions of Visigoths and Sephardi Jews.

                        I'm not particularly interested in recent matches -if by that you mean familial connections of only a few generations. I'm more interested in being able to distinguish which of the numerous ethnic groups that inhabited Asturies my Y-lineage may belong to. Applying obvious things such as history and geography, I am assuming that my lineage is most likely derived from the neighboring Basques. However, my 12 marker matches threw me off somewhat, due to the fact that none are Iberian, French, etc. and are instead Germanic.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Asturianu View Post
                          I'm not particularly interested in recent matches -if by that you mean familial connections of only a few generations. I'm more interested in being able to distinguish which of the numerous ethnic groups that inhabited Asturies my Y-lineage may belong to. Applying obvious things such as history and geography, I am assuming that my lineage is most likely derived from the neighboring Basques. However, my 12 marker matches threw me off somewhat, due to the fact that none are Iberian, French, etc. and are instead Germanic.
                          Hmm. I know what you mean. That was my main reason to do a test too.
                          And one reason why I picked iGENEA, who claims to have found singularity patterns in ancient corpses/bones and put you into one of these boxes. (they put me into the "Teuton" (continental Germanic tribes) box)

                          They claim Goth are in the Teuton box too, not in the Viking box. Because the Viking patterns they look for are younger than the Goth migration.

                          Their claim for the lineages in Spain is:

                          40% Celts
                          30% Iberian
                          15% Teuton
                          7% Phoenician
                          7% Undecided
                          1% Arabs

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Interesting Daniel,

                            I wonder where I would fit in iGENEA's box thing.

                            Teuton or Viking....

                            There was a lot of Germanic influence in Spain. Some people think that Celts descend from Basques.... or are related to.

                            Good luck to all

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Daniel72 View Post
                              Hmm. I know what you mean. That was my main reason to do a test too.
                              And one reason why I picked iGENEA, who claims to have found singularity patterns in ancient corpses/bones and put you into one of these boxes. (they put me into the "Teuton" (continental Germanic tribes) box)

                              They claim Goth are in the Teuton box too, not in the Viking box. Because the Viking patterns they look for are younger than the Goth migration.

                              Their claim for the lineages in Spain is:

                              40% Celts
                              30% Iberian
                              15% Teuton
                              7% Phoenician
                              7% Undecided
                              1% Arabs
                              Interesting accounting of Spain's lineages. I wouldn't have thought that the Phoenician contribution was so great. I can actually understand well how the "Arab" contribution was somewhat marginal, as most of the Moorish occupation was Berber. And therefore I assume that much of that "undecided" would likely be a mixture of Berber E3b contributions, as well as some J contributions from the Sephardi population.

                              I am curious as to how they determine what constitutes a Celtic contribution. I would imagine that it has something to do with specific R1b subclades that have their origins in Central Europe.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X