Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Estimated SNP Ages Downstream of L1335

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

  • Estimated SNP Ages Downstream of L1335

    I was hoping that someone might be able to tell me the estimated ages of any of the following SNPs:

    1. L1335
    2. L1065
    3. S744
    4. S7370
    5. L143
    6. S756
    7. S691

    I have seen a couple of different estimates for L1335 and L1065, however the different estimates seemed to have a fairly large spread. Any assistance would be greatly appreciated.

  • #2
    Absent just the right ancient DNA or similar evidence, and not just single points, the whole chronology thing must have a huge uncertainty. If the suggested dates were not vague, I wouldn't be inclined to believe them at all.

    Comment


    • #3
      I thought the latest estimation was 90 years per SNP?

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Peter MacDonald View Post
        I was hoping that someone might be able to tell me the estimated ages of any of the following SNPs:

        1. L1335
        2. L1065
        3. S744
        4. S7370
        5. L143
        6. S756
        7. S691

        I have seen a couple of different estimates for L1335 and L1065, however the different estimates seemed to have a fairly large spread. Any assistance would be greatly appreciated.
        There are 37 SNPs on average in the U106 branch from the Big-Y results so P312 must be similar. Some people say that for Big-Y SNPs it is 150 years per generation and For FGC SNPs 90 years. When you estimate the age for P312 it should give you an idea of the age of the SNP branches down stream. It is probably not the most accurate method but it is a start.

        Comment


        • #5
          Some S744 Calculations

          23 Big Y published results give 11+/-4 SNPs downstream of S744.Using 141.5 years per Big Y SNP(median figure used by others on Anthrogenica etc)gives 414+/-565 AD
          Plugging 27 known S744 haplotypes in to various coalescence tools gives
          KK Tool 650+/-400 AD at 95%
          Nordvedt 620 AD
          M Jost 560+/- 430 at 68%

          These numbers may be thought to be consistent with current estimated ages of L21 in the range 2500-3000 BC.

          cambron

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by 1798 View Post
            There are 37 SNPs on average in the U106 branch from the Big-Y results so P312 must be similar. Some people say that for Big-Y SNPs it is 150 years per generation and For FGC SNPs 90 years. When you estimate the age for P312 it should give you an idea of the age of the SNP branches down stream. It is probably not the most accurate method but it is a start.

            Thank you for the advice 1798.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by cambron View Post
              23 Big Y published results give 11+/-4 SNPs downstream of S744.Using 141.5 years per Big Y SNP(median figure used by others on Anthrogenica etc)gives 414+/-565 AD
              Plugging 27 known S744 haplotypes in to various coalescence tools gives
              KK Tool 650+/-400 AD at 95%
              Nordvedt 620 AD
              M Jost 560+/- 430 at 68%

              These numbers may be thought to be consistent with current estimated ages of L21 in the range 2500-3000 BC.

              cambron

              Cambron, thank you for passing along the calculated age estimates for S744 from the various methods currently being used. Much appreciated.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by 1798 View Post
                There are 37 SNPs on average in the U106 branch from the Big-Y results so P312 must be similar. Some people say that for Big-Y SNPs it is 150 years per generation and For FGC SNPs 90 years. When you estimate the age for P312 it should give you an idea of the age of the SNP branches down stream. It is probably not the most accurate method but it is a start.
                Some of the U106 Big-Y testers have more SNPS downstream of U106 than others. If one assumes that U106 is 6000 ybp then they should divide the number of downstream SNPs from their Big-Y test results into 6000 to get the average years per SNP that is specific to their Y-line.
                The same can be done with P312 or any other YDNA group.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Peter MacDonald View Post
                  I was hoping that someone might be able to tell me the estimated ages of any of the following SNPs:

                  1. L1335
                  2. L1065
                  3. S744
                  4. S7370
                  5. L143
                  6. S756
                  7. S691

                  I have seen a couple of different estimates for L1335 and L1065, however the different estimates seemed to have a fairly large spread. Any assistance would be greatly appreciated.
                  I tested positive for S756 at YSEQ. I'm quite curious of what the estimated age is for this SNP. Is it much younger than S744? Three other surnames (MacDonald, McCoy and Bissett) are associated with this SNP. So, it must be from before the time surnames were being adopted?

                  I'm still looking for my actual Scottish surname. I'm Dutch and the name changed quite a bit during the years in Holland.

                  Kind regards, Remko Mikkenie

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    It's my impression that most or perhaps all of the R-L21 SNP's placed on the tree so far date from before surnames became fixed, in the sense that they followed the line of paternal descent. Exactly when that happened is not entirely clear to me. It might have been as late as the beginning of the 18th Century for some families, because I have heard of Irish families using more than one surname (and not for nefarious purposes) even later than that.

                    The history of surnames in the British Isles, as I understand it, is that some families used surnames perhaps as far back as the 12th Century, but children did not always use the surname of their fathers. They might use the surname of their mother or some other relative, or the surname might be something entirely different, or a family might use more than one surname. Gradually, more people used surnames, and even more gradually, the custom of taking your father's surname became the norm. In other parts of Europe where I am more familiar with the history and the documents, surnames became more or less fixed and dependable as indicators of paternal descent sometime in the 16th Century.

                    SNP's originating after surnames became fixed may have been discovered, but they probably haven't been placed on the haplotree yet, because most of the recently discovered terminal branches are represented by only a few DNA samples. I'm at the end of one of those branches at YFULL, all by myself, so there's no way to know if my current terminal SNP there arose before surnames became fixed. If about 10 times as many samples were available for analysis, the answers might be clearer!

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      John, thank you for the reply.

                      I know how it worked in the Netherlands. In the Northern part of the country surnames became fixed after 1811, because of some law from Napoleon. Before 1811 they used patronyms (like ...son).

                      In the southern part of the Netherlands there were already fixed surnames in the 16th century and maybe well before. From the 16th century on catholic priests had to write down all the baptism records, with fixed surnames. But only the south was catholic.

                      I actually thought that Scottish surnames were fixed well before 1600, making it really old surnames. Thanks for your clarification about that matter!

                      I noticed that there are three McCoy's and two MacDonalds who are S756+. That's no coincidence, I think. The three McCoy's also share a SNP marker, A33. So maybe the mutation in that marker occurred after the surnames became fixed?

                      But I agree with you, there must be thousands of people who are S756+, and maybe they would have dozens of different surnames. I think I just have to wait until the 'to be discovered' SNP's enter the era after 1600.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        SNP ages

                        I have also wondered about the ages of these SNP's. My terminal SNP is S695 (just downstream of S691). I have observed quite a few different names who also share S695 as their terminal SNP. This indicates to me that S695 isn't very recent--and by definition, S691 would be older still.

                        We need more downstream SNP's!

                        Comment

                        Working...
                        X