Some calculations of statistical significance levels :
CDYa = 37
Ewings 15/22 .6818
Cowans 18/25 .7200
Other M222+ 124/380 .3263
Total 157/427 .3677
Is .6818 significantly different to .3263? Using a binomial distribution
with a mean frequency of .3263, the probability of 15/22 or higher is
.000682. So it's significant at the 0.07% level.
Is 18/25 significantly different to .3263? Yes, at the .006% level.
What this suggests is that the probability of Ewings and Cowans exhibiting
15/22 and 18/25
In a message dated 4/19/2009 5:11:13 A.M. Central Daylight Time,
dan_jenkins66@hotmail.com writes:
John,
Thanks for all your hard work . Would it be too much to ask , for you to
list the surnames that appeared at each GD level say to 6 at most, as rest
would ne somewhat too far back in time .
Dan, you can sort or rearrange the results in almost anyway you want to
from the spreadsheet I posted. The GDs listed should agree with FTDNA and
Ysearch but will be different from those returned b
I worked through most of the M222 project checking origins for the surnames
with 37 marker or better tests.
Australia (1) This is an Irish surname (Reilly)
China (1) This surname is probably McKenzie
England (18)
France (1)
Germany (3)
Ireland (214)
N. Ireland (15)
Norway (1)
Scotland (.71)
Spain (1)
U.S. (1) probably Scottish - Alexander
UK (14)
Unknown (90)
Wales (1)
I made no attempt to adjust these totals based on surnames. N. Ireland
mostly seems to be code for "I think I'm Scottish." Some
I would be interested. I would be happy to put in $25 if I could narrow
down my Dunbar branch in Scotland and Ireland.
Thanks; Billy Dunbar
In a message dated 4/21/2009 10:39:13 P.M. Central Daylight Time,
Lochlan@aol.com writes:
I think I mentioned this before but we have two M222 project members
interested in the Walk on the Y project. The surnames are Megonnigil and
Mannion. Both are from Ireland. The Megonnigils are probably from
Donegal; the
Mannion sample is from Galway. Bo
An interesting exercise. I ran 27 M222 37-marker haplotypes from my Byrne/Burns/Beirne project, and it appears that we are much younger that the overall M222 group's average.
Abbreviated, my results were:
KN's method and J Chandler's mutation rates 25.4 gens 762 years
Minus CDY and 464 31.6 949
Minus 464 only 26.1 784
Minus CDY 29.4 881
Minus 385, 459, 464, YCA II, CDY
Hi John
>
No one has yet discovered any way to sub-divide M222
based on STR analysis. All we see are a lot of family modals.
>
I've made some progress on this but there's still a long way to go. Consider for example Maclaughlin. What you can do is to calculate, for all M222+ participants, their mean gd from M222+ as a whole. You can then, again for all M222+ participants, do the same thing again, but this time relative to McLaughlins rather than M222+ as a whole. The idea is to be able to see which M
Hi David
The method set out in my posting at 15:43 on 16 Apr 2009 was never intended
to be the answer to all questions. It is merely a starting point to
indentify family groupings that seem to be close to each other. For example,
the 'closeness to Ewings' table :
Cowan 6.272
McGonagill 6.187
McLaughlin 4.299
Dunbar 3.156
Daugherty 2.970
McCord 2.419
Burns 1.914
suggests that Cowan may be close. A closer look identified DYS449 and CDYa
as the two main causes of this, with the other markers al
In a message dated 4/15/2009 6:57:07 A.M. Central Daylight Time,
grierson@melbpc.org.au writes:
and the
very solid 458 at 18 for all bar one of the M222s seem the most
significant.
Interesting analysis. I've wondered about DYS 458 = 18 myself. That
occurs very strongly in the Doherty and McLaughlin samples. In fact it's modal
in both although not every sample has it. I do see it popping up here and
there in other M222 surname groupings, in Griersons, Dunbars, and other
surnames. I don'
Is mtHV the mate of R1b1c7?
I saw a remark recently that implied that that is what is assumed.
Anyone else have something to say on the matter,
other than berating me for introducing extraneous considerations and disturbing
the blessed quietude this list has imposed on itself?
We now have two M222 people who will be ordering the Walk on the Y test
search for new SNPS.
The first is one of the Megonnigil or variant surnames in the M222
project. The second is a Mannion ( Kit137003 - M222 Project.
I know the Mannion sample is from Ireland (Connacht). The location is not
far from Roscommon but possibly in Galway. I don't think the Megonnigils
know exactly where they're from but McGonigal and variants are common to
Donegal.
For what it's worth, Mannion in Ireland (O'M
Boy, am I torn. I have been reading this thread with interest and aching to
put in my two cents, but I have not spent enough time crunching general
R:M222 data to be confident of making a worthwhile contribution.
That said, I think we are barking up the wrong tree by comparing histograms
of raw genetic distance for various putative places of origin. Consider that
we could have two very tight clusters within R:M222 such that the haplotypes
within each cluster were all identical, but each of the clusters dif
I, too, am not certain that the ancestral value among Ewings was not DYS391
= 10, and for me this would justify considering two alternative Ewing
modals, one with DYS391 = 10 and the other with DYS391 = 11. Still, I think
that comparing percentages of off-modal matches between individual
haplotypes is an exercise in futility, because as John says, it will make
too much of parallel mutations.
Have a look at this comparison table of modals for the various Ewing Groups,
including those NOT in M222+:
http://dl
John,
As you know, I am null at 425, which is a rarity for R1b. Two other members of the Byrne project have 425=11. All the rest are 12.
According to an article that Phillip Goff and Whit Athey published in the JOGG several years ago, 98.1% of R1b have a 12 value for that marker, 1.3% have 13, 0.2% have 11, and 0.4% are null.
Checking your M222 project, I see that I am the only null 425, and one of my 11s (39360) is your project's only 11. I have sent you a request for the other 11 (117643) to join
In a message dated 4/26/2009 7:57:31 A.M. Central Daylight Time,
equisand@equiformratings.com writes:
If you want two M222+ participants, McCord (kit no 44803) is the greatest
gd
from Conroy at 25 and has been SNP tested.
We already have two self-funded participants. That means it is their DNA
to be checked. They surely won't pay $750 to check someone else's DNA.
That is the reason I've been following this Walk on the Y initiative. I
learned through Pat Tagart that an M222 had sprung for t
I think I mentioned this before but we have two M222 project members
interested in the Walk on the Y project. The surnames are Megonnigil and
Mannion. Both are from Ireland. The Megonnigils are probably from Donegal; the
Mannion sample is from Galway. Both have been SNP tested.
One of the ambitions of this project is to uncover new SNPS. It is
possible some kind of sub-clade dividing SNP could be found through the test. Of
course it could also just find some new SNPs further subdividing
Hi John
>
I think you are seeing a connection between Cowans and Ewings because you
assume both surnames were derived from a common ancestor named Eoghan. If
you read through the material on the Clan Ewing web site though I think
you'll see this a doubtful proposition. In the Surname Profiler the name
Cowan is common all over Scotland except in the north. Heaviest in
Galloway
and Dumfriesshire. Perhaps Ayrshire as well. I'm not to good at picking
out
Scottish counties from their map.
>
Hi John
>
I don't think that's correct because there are plenty of GDs in the
chart higher than 10 when compared not to the modal but against each
other. Just to pick one example a Bookout and a Doherty are a GD of 15.
>
I think we're talking at cross purposes. Bookout and Doherty are separated
from each other by a gd of 15, yes. But Bookout is separated from the modal
by a gd of 7 and Doherty is separated from the modal by a gd of 10. What
I've calculated for each M222+ participant is simply the sum o
I haven't heard that Yair. As for quietude, sometimes you just have to sit around and wait on results. I've a few I'm waiting on including one from Brittany I've been trying to connect with for a number of years. It could prove my surname origin and of course pinpoint another M222 to another time and place, Brittany, some 500 years ago. This is a project that will probably run my lifetime as it will others so there will be periods of quiet.
Regards, Steve
> Date: Tue, 7 Apr 2009 14:30:33 -0400
> F
My paper trail go back to but not beginning with Anthony Ashley / Anthony
Ashley Cooper.John Ashley Married his cousin lady Jane Cooper and moved to
Virginia .From England.
_http://homepages.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~lksstarr/reports/perduecommen.txt_
(http://homepages.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~lksstarr/reports/perduecommen.txt)
Quote " Doesn't the sheer number of royal lines in one family seem
somewhat hard to believe? These families count amongst their ancestors powerful
clan chieftains, extraordi
In a message dated 4/20/2009 2:42:36 A.M. Central Daylight Time,
equisand@equiformratings.com writes:
I don't think we should just ignore the faster moving markers. For example,
Ewing 65018 has no fewer than 5 off-modal matches with Henry 105286 :
Perhaps not. Everything's relative. 385ab is supposed to be a fast
moving marker but 92% of M222 has the tell tale 13 at 385b. The next highest
value is 12 at 5.4%.
Like David, I too compared the M222 family modals identified so far. The
closes
Hi John
>
I think it's going to be a while before we figure out anything definite
about the Scottish Maclachlans.
>
Probably. I get the strong feeling that the Argyllshire McLachlans were
quite small in number compared to the Irish McLaughlins. If so, I guess we
shouldn't be too surprised that there are as yet very few (if any) samples
from Argyll.
Sandy
I had a reply from Thomas Krahn.
Dear John,
M222 is a very young haplogroup. Sorting out STRs is probably useless
because of high convergence. Geographic origin is difficult to interpret
(if not Ireland) as you said, but if there is nothing else then I would
go for that. Try to find the most trust-worthy non-Irish M222 and give
it a shot. However more than 2-3 participants are not necessary for now.
If a new question arises on the horizon you can still run a WTY to solve
that later. First let
Do you realize how small (or large, depending on perspective) your chances
are of finding a new snp within M222?
It's a rather young clade.
----- Original Message -----
From:
To:
Sent: Saturday, April 25, 2009 5:55 PM
Subject: Re: [R-M222] Walk on the Y Project
> Here's part of a post by Pat Tagart on a different list. He is
> suggesting
> that people go ahead and contribute funds to the general fund. The only
> problem I see with that is I've been told