Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

R1b1c9 now R1b1b2g

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

  • R1b1c9 now R1b1b2g

    Hi,

    Now I am realy confused as there seem to be no description of this new group breakout.

    Any input would be appreciated since I have kinda of been out of the loop for a few months here.

    Thanks again for your imput.


    Patrick

  • #2
    Originally posted by Patrickwallner
    Hi,

    Now I am realy confused as there seem to be no description of this new group breakout.

    Any input would be appreciated since I have kinda of been out of the loop for a few months here.

    Thanks again for your imput.


    Patrick
    It gets even more confusing, Patrick, if you look at ISOGG's latest classification scheme, because there, R1b1c9 is now R1b1b2a1.

    The problem is that these revised trees become out of date almost as soon as they are published, so you really just need to decide which version you feel most comfortable with. For me, it's ISOGG's tree, as that one is more up-to-date than the one that FTDNA (based on Karafet et al 2008) recently released. FTDNA won't make any further changes to their tree until the mutations that define them are officially published.

    You can see ISOGG's version of the new phylogenetic tree here:

    http://www.isogg.org/tree/ISOGG_HapgrpR08.html

    Comment


    • #3
      my R1a1 is being tested for...

      With R1a1 found everywhere between Iceland and Sri Lanka, I'm glad to see that some attention is being given to breaking it down to sub-groups. Now that two new SNPs have been found for R1a1, I'm having mine updated for those two markers. Even if neither of them is mine, at least it'll show a bit of progress!

      R1a11 & U5b2

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by GhostX
        It gets even more confusing, Patrick, if you look at ISOGG's latest classification scheme, because there, R1b1c9 is now R1b1b2a1.

        The problem is that these revised trees become out of date almost as soon as they are published, so you really just need to decide which version you feel most comfortable with. For me, it's ISOGG's tree, as that one is more up-to-date than the one that FTDNA (based on Karafet et al 2008) recently released. FTDNA won't make any further changes to their tree until the mutations that define them are officially published.

        You can see ISOGG's version of the new phylogenetic tree here:

        http://www.isogg.org/tree/ISOGG_HapgrpR08.html
        What does "publish" entail, and when?

        I just ordered a deep clade test that will declare me "R1b1b2h" and probably wasted almost $40 by ordering an rs34276300 test.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Itzhak Epstein
          What does "publish" entail, and when?

          I just ordered a deep clade test that will declare me "R1b1b2h" and probably wasted almost $40 by ordering an rs34276300 test.
          I believe "publish" in this sense means in a scientific paper that is peer reviewed and accepted by the scientific community. That can take some time.

          In the meantime, ISOGG's 2008 Y Haplogroup Tree is the most up to date.

          If you turn out to be rs34276300+, whether via the R1b1b2h (U152+ and old R1b1c10) route or otherwise, please join the new R1b-rs34276300+ Project.

          You can join by clicking on the "Join" icon on the left side of your FTDNA personal homepage. From there, click on "y-haplogroup projects," then on "R", and on "R1b-rs34276300+." Finally, scroll down and click on "Join."

          We'd love to have you as a member!

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Stevo
            I believe "publish" in this sense means in a scientific paper that is peer reviewed and accepted by the scientific community. That can take some time.

            In the meantime, ISOGG's 2008 Y Haplogroup Tree is the most up to date.

            If you turn out to be rs34276300+, whether via the R1b1b2h (U152+ and old R1b1c10) route or otherwise, please join the new R1b-rs34276300+ Project.

            You can join by clicking on the "Join" icon on the left side of your FTDNA personal homepage. From there, click on "y-haplogroup projects," then on "R", and on "R1b-rs34276300+." Finally, scroll down and click on "Join."

            We'd love to have you as a member!
            I will bet anybody that my results will be "R1b1b2h". A man who shares my surname and who, according to FTDNA, is 99.45% likely to share a common ancestor with me within 24 generations, was thus identified by FTDNA. My personal page confirms it but my "public data" on the charts says "R1b1". See http://www.familytreedna.com/public/...xed_columns=on .

            I maxed out (2) on my "y-haplogroup projects" and will have to drop out of Kerchner's R1b project. I am not considering dropping out of Silver's Jewish R1b. FTDNA should have a more liberal participation policy for 67 markers customers.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Itzhak Epstein
              I will bet anybody that my results will be "R1b1b2h". A man who shares my surname and who, according to FTDNA, is 99.45% likely to share a common ancestor with me within 24 generations, was thus identified by FTDNA. My personal page confirms it but my "public data" on the charts says "R1b1". See http://www.familytreedna.com/public/...xed_columns=on .

              I maxed out (2) on my "y-haplogroup projects" and will have to drop out of Kerchner's R1b project. I am not considering dropping out of Silver's Jewish R1b. FTDNA should have a more liberal participation policy for 67 markers customers.
              If you want to join our project, I think we can get you in without your having to drop out of any other projects. Just let me know, and I will email a request to FTDNA.

              I think Kerchner now has an R1b1b2h Project, as well. You may also want to join that one once your U152+ status is confirmed.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Stevo
                I believe "publish" in this sense means in a scientific paper that is peer reviewed and accepted by the scientific community. That can take some time.
                .....snip........
                Does anybody know who is working on such a (S116) scientific paper, and when might it be published? From what I read, I suspect Dr. Jim Wilson at EthnoAncestry. Is it academically legit for somebody to beat him to the punch?

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Patrickwallner
                  Now I am realy confused as there seem to be no description of this new group breakout.

                  Any input would be appreciated since I have kinda of been out of the loop for a few months here.

                  Thanks again for your imput.
                  As most have doubtless noticed FTDNA has updated all Ysearch entries to conform to the new Hammer phylogeny. You can sign with that tag, or the ISOGG tag, or sign with your furthest downstream SNP (R269 e.g.) but the best way to let others know exactly where you stand is to copy the SNP results from your FTDNA Haplogroup page and paste it into your Ysearch page text box 'Additional information about paternal line.'

                  Comment

                  Working...
                  X