Still stuck at R-M269

[bvlenci FTDNA Customer Find all posts View Profile Close bvlenci]

<< FTDNA's Big Y has a regular price of $575. >>

That's misleading, because you can order Big Y only if you've already ordered another Y DNA test.

I've already sunk a lot of money in this testing, and the upgrade from 67 to 111 markers yielded me nothing at all, and cost me a lot of time.

[gtc FTDNA Customer Find all posts View Profile Close gtc]

I've already sunk a lot of money in this testing, and the upgrade from 67 to 111 markers yielded me nothing at all, and cost me a lot of time.

Not sure how it cost you time, unless your income stream stopped while you waited for the test results.

What in particular were you trying to achieve by upgrading from 67 markers?

[Sarmat R1a-YP444*, H2a2a1 Find all posts View Profile Close Sarmat]

According to YFull's haplotree, your lineage diverged from (what would become) YP445 roughly 1300 years ago.

As soon as another Big Y participant matches one of your "Novel" (unshared) SNPs, you and he will belong to a new subclade.

Right.

And I should say that while I stated earlier that I haven't really gotten much "utility" out of Big Y -- as in genealogical usefulness -- it does very much help to satisfy my curiosity about my deep ancestry, and I'm also quite happy to be able to add to our understanding of the R1a family.

In that respect, it's much like the full mito sequence test I had done a few years back. It's really given me nothing genealogically, but it helps satisfy my inner anthro-nerd.

[lgmayka FTDNA Customer Find all posts View Profile Close lgmayka]

<< FTDNA's Big Y has a regular price of $575. >>

That's misleading, because you can order Big Y only if you've already ordered another Y DNA test.

Y-DNA12 is $59 + $10 shipping. A $20-off coupon (now expired) brought that down to $49 total.

But I sincerely sympathize with your dismay at paying $$ for 111 Y-STRs, only to learn that you really need the Big Y, which reads 100 out of 111 Y-STRs anyway.

Frankly, I now discourage 67-to-111 upgrades. I advise project members (who ask) that they would be better off saving up for the Big Y.

[gtc FTDNA Customer Find all posts View Profile Close gtc]

And I should say that while I stated earlier that I haven't really gotten much "utility" out of Big Y -- as in genealogical usefulness -- it does very much help to satisfy my curiosity about my deep ancestry, and I'm also quite happy to be able to add to our understanding of the R1a family.

I think the trick with Big Y is to try to get male parent or sibling to do Big Y also. That way you and he will layer out your familial SNPs right up to modern times.

[Sarmat R1a-YP444*, H2a2a1 Find all posts View Profile Close Sarmat]

Can you elaborate, please? My initial thought is that that seems like an awfully large outlay of money for what will mostly be duplicative data.

[John McCoy FTDNA Customer Find all posts View Profile Close John McCoy]

The result from Big Y that I find valuable is that it vastly narrows the search for a "real" Y chromosome match. I can immediately rule out ALL of the other McCoy families tested so far, and I can also rule out a McMillan NPE (most numerous surname among my "almost" matches), because I'm way out on a little twig in the R-L1335 cluster. I already knew from STR testing that there must be a large number of unrelated McCoy families, but the Big Y results and the very helpful interpretations from YFull and others make it easy to grasp the nature of the problem.

[dna FTDNA Customer Find all posts View Profile Close dna]

The result from Big Y that I find valuable is that it vastly narrows the search for a "real" Y chromosome match. I can immediately rule out ALL of the other McCoy families tested so far, and I can also rule out a McMillan NPE (most numerous surname among my "almost" matches), because I'm way out on a little twig in the R-L1335 cluster. I already knew from STR testing that there must be a large number of unrelated McCoy families, but the Big Y results and the very helpful interpretations from YFull and others make it easy to grasp the nature of the problem.

Exactly, with STRs it is more of the guess, with Big Y it is knowledge.

For a cheap (and used to be quicker than Big Y!) comparison, Y-DNA37 can rule out close relationships. Especially, if both parties inform each other about their STR values.

W. (Mr.)

[gtc FTDNA Customer Find all posts View Profile Close gtc]

Can you elaborate, please? My initial thought is that that seems like an awfully large outlay of money for what will mostly be duplicative data.

Actually, it's duplication that is the solution.

In your Big Y data there will be lots of so-called "novel" SNPs. They are only "novel" because they don't match anybody else -- yet.

As soon as you and one other tester match on a given SNP, it's no longer novel. It's now a known SNP.

Now, if you test a very close male relative, when your SNPs are lined up next to each other there should be plenty of new "known" ones. Those are your familial SNPs. And the ones that are still "novel" after that are yours alone. If you have male offspring, then with yet another Big Y test you can go even further in the layering process.

But, yes, at today's price it's a pretty expensive exercise to do all of that.

[bvlenci FTDNA Customer Find all posts View Profile Close bvlenci]

If one can say "I spent my time [doing something]", then one can also say that "[waiting futilely for something] cost me time". I don't believe that time is money, but I do believe in spending my time wisely. To me time is even more precious than money.

R-M269 is the most common haplogroup in Ireland. In Northwestern Ireland, over 95% of the men are R-M269. Since I can trace my Vaughan family back over 200 years in Northwestern, I was hoping to get just a little further back than that.

I had upgraded from 67 markers to 111 markers. I realize now that it wasn't likely to benefit me, because I had only one match at 37 markers, at a genetic distance of 3. However, I was a novice, and realized almost as soon as I had ordered the upgrade that it wasn't likely to yield any useful information. However, I patiently waited (7 months!) for the test results, hoping that at least I might learn that we were in a subclade of R-M269. Instead, I know nothing now that I didn't know 7 months ago.

[gtc FTDNA Customer Find all posts View Profile Close gtc]

I had upgraded from 67 markers to 111 markers. I realize now that it wasn't likely to benefit me, because I had only one match at 37 markers, at a genetic distance of 3. However, I was a novice, and realized almost as soon as I had ordered the upgrade that it wasn't likely to yield any useful information. However, I patiently waited (7 months!) for the test results, hoping that at least I might learn that we were in a subclade of R-M269. Instead, I know nothing now that I didn't know 7 months ago.

So I take it that your haplogroup status is predicted M269.

Have you joined any FTDNA projects? If so, and the project Admin is keeping on top of administration tasks, then your haplotype should be showing among other men with a similar haplotype, some of whom hopefully have confirmed haplogroups.

I should also add that sometimes the best clues to predicting sub-haplogroup from STRs are found in those panels that are included in the 111 upgrade so, in that sense, the more markers the better.

[bvlenci FTDNA Customer Find all posts View Profile Close bvlenci]

Yes, my brother is predicted to be R-M269. I've joined his surname project (where almost all of the participants are Americans, and my brother is "ungrouped"), the Ireland Y-DNA project, and the R1b and subclades project.

[lgmayka FTDNA Customer Find all posts View Profile Close lgmayka]

I think the trick with Big Y is to try to get male parent or sibling to do Big Y also.

I do not recommend this--the results will be essentially identical.

Instead, I recommend that you persuade a distant patrilineal relative (but still within a genealogical timeframe) to order the Big Y along with you. Then, when both your results are analyzed by YFull, all your shared SNPs will define a new subclade for your clan; whereas your unshared ("novel") SNPs will distinguish one patrilineage from the other.

An almost ideal example is N-Y13977, a subclade of N-L551. Notice that N-Y13977 branched off from the rest of N-L551 about 1700 years ago, but the two men tested have a TMRCA of only 475 years ago. Their shared SNPs define their subclade; their unshared SNPs distinguish their individual lineages.

[gtc FTDNA Customer Find all posts View Profile Close gtc]

the two men tested have a TMRCA of only 475 years ago.

What is their relationship degree?

[lgmayka FTDNA Customer Find all posts View Profile Close lgmayka]

What is their relationship degree?

I don't know the precise number of generations back to the common patrilineal ancestor, but I know that their genealogy says he lived about 700 years ago. Their genealogy says that they descend from the medieval Polish-Lithuanian royal family (before the country switched to an elected constitutional "king" in 1569).