Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

R1a1 Haplogroup Question

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

  • Paul_Johnsen
    replied
    Originally posted by RussellL View Post
    Paul, you mention going to 67 markers to see where my nearest matches are concentrated as being helpful to determining origins. That makes sense to me. What I'm wondering is this: right now at 25 markers I have the one exact match to someone with my surname who I know to be related to me. I have two matches at a genetic distance of 1 -- one of them also has my surname (and I know to be related); the other has a corruption of my surname, and clearly he is likely related way back. I await the 37-marker results. I've been told that this combination of markers is very unusual. In the FTDNA R1a project, for instance, there are only 3 people who have the 393=15 value: myself; someone else with my surname; and an unnamed individual. How exactly does one 'widen one's net' in such a case? I would be interested in determining as much as I can about the origins of the family beyond the British Isles, if at all possible. I'm a newbie so go easy on me!
    At 67-marker you can "go beyond" the DYS 393 =15 which means that you have very few matches. If you had ignored that marker, your haplotype wouldn't really be that unusual as far as I can see.

    Leave a comment:


  • RussellL
    replied
    Question for Paul

    Paul, you mention going to 67 markers to see where my nearest matches are concentrated as being helpful to determining origins. That makes sense to me. What I'm wondering is this: right now at 25 markers I have the one exact match to someone with my surname who I know to be related to me. I have two matches at a genetic distance of 1 -- one of them also has my surname (and I know to be related); the other has a corruption of my surname, and clearly he is likely related way back. I await the 37-marker results. I've been told that this combination of markers is very unusual. In the FTDNA R1a project, for instance, there are only 3 people who have the 393=15 value: myself; someone else with my surname; and an unnamed individual. How exactly does one 'widen one's net' in such a case? I would be interested in determining as much as I can about the origins of the family beyond the British Isles, if at all possible. I'm a newbie so go easy on me!

    Leave a comment:


  • RussellL
    replied
    Thank you, Paul. Right now at 25 markers I have only one exact match in the FTDNA data bank, and that is to a person with my surname who was the brother of my ancestor 13 generations back. So I think that precludes it being a recent mutation, does it not? Incidentally, the same 15 value shows up in all Y-DNA samples of the male descendants of my ancestor who arrived in the U.S. circa 1634. I do think you're right about going out to 67 markers. Thank you for that suggestion.

    Leave a comment:


  • Paul_Johnsen
    replied
    Originally posted by RussellL View Post
    This is interesting about the 393=15 locations. I saw on one chart quite a number of the 15 values in England. Paul, are there other locations where such a value is common, and if so, does that say anything about my ancestory? Or is it just a genetic fluke that isn't territorial specific?
    My hunch would be that your DY393: 13 => 15 is a quite recent mutation, so it might not be "good" for deep ancestry, but "useful" for "close relationship". I could be wrong of course. You could try to upgrade to 67-marker and see where your nearest matches are concentrated (in the end that will be far more accurate than any hunches I or any other might have based on a single STR).

    Leave a comment:


  • RussellL
    replied
    This is interesting about the 393=15 locations. I saw on one chart quite a number of the 15 values in England. Paul, are there other locations where such a value is common, and if so, does that say anything about my ancestory? Or is it just a genetic fluke that isn't territorial specific?

    Leave a comment:


  • Paul_Johnsen
    replied
    Originally posted by Daniel72 View Post
    What makes you think this?
    Austria and the southern coats of Sweden are full of R1a types.
    Well England... could be Vikings or Scythian mercenaries from the Romans....
    Yes, there are lots of people who are R1a in Sweden and Austria. However I think the Swedish YHRD samples you refer to come from the study "Y-chromosome diversity in Sweden – A long-time perspective". None of the tested people with DYS 393 = 15 were R1a.
    Last edited by Paul_Johnsen; 3 July 2009, 01:22 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Daniel72
    replied
    Originally posted by Paul_Johnsen View Post
    I don't think many of these are R1a1.
    What makes you think this?
    Austria and the southern coats of Sweden are full of R1a types.
    Well England... could be Vikings or Scythian mercenaries from the Romans....

    Leave a comment:


  • Paul_Johnsen
    replied
    Originally posted by Daniel72 View Post
    You might try to make a YSearch account.

    One can also pretty nice toy around with http://www.yhrd.org too.

    I checked where in Europe a DYS393=15 is most common.

    Its England, Gotland (Swedish island), Blekinge (southern coast of Sweden) and the north of Austria.
    I don't think many of these are R1a1.

    Leave a comment:


  • RussellL
    replied
    More than likely the descent would be through a Norman, whose roots would have been essentially Viking. After all, Normandy was named after the Northmen.

    Leave a comment:


  • spruithean
    replied
    Perhaps.....

    Originally posted by RussellL View Post
    Thanks for the reply. My ancestor was also English, born in 1608, likely Anglo-Norman ancestry.
    Perhaps R1a1 confirms this likely Anglo-Norman ancestry?

    Perhaps your Anglo-Norman ancestor descended from a Angle or maybe a Norman, both apparently had roots in Scandinavia....

    Leave a comment:


  • RussellL
    replied
    Thanks for the reply. My ancestor was also English, born in 1608, likely Anglo-Norman ancestry.

    Leave a comment:


  • lionstail
    replied
    Originally posted by RussellL View Post
    Very interesting, thanks. Out of curiosity, is your ancestry from England or....?
    Actually unsure, but I think my ancestor was thomas smith who was born in essex england in the early 1600's. The near ancestory was 3 mutations at 37 markers.

    Leave a comment:


  • RussellL
    replied
    Very interesting, thanks. Out of curiosity, is your ancestry from England or....?

    Leave a comment:


  • lionstail
    replied
    I2b1 and I have 15 on allele 393 (England my only near ancestory match at 37 markers)

    Leave a comment:


  • RussellL
    replied
    Thank you again for the link as well as the guidance. This is all new to me so any tips are much appreciated.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X