GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2005-06 > 1118024173


From: "Glen Todd" <>
Subject: RE: [DNA] It's official -- I'm weird
Date: Sun, 5 Jun 2005 20:16:13 -0600
In-Reply-To: <LPBBIOAAMGMFKIJPLJBCCELLDMAA.dclwilson@earthlink.net>


> I hope you will let the list know the results of the SNP test
> when it comes in.

You'd better believe that I will. I ordered the test last week (they've
already got my sample, of course). I don't know how long SNP tests take
for I, but I'll post just as soon as I have something.

> If you are in haplogroup I, I'm not sure I see a likely subclade.
> Without 8 at DYS455, you are probably not I1a1. Some of the values are
> consistent with I1b and I2 (formerly I1c), but others are unusual for
those

Bonnie thinks that she's onto something with some work that she and Ken are
doing (you've probably already seen her post), so that may produce some
interesting results.

> subclades. FTDNA is pretty cautious with its projections, so
> they probably have reason not to propose haplogroup J. (I
> don't follow I and J closely, but I recall that there is potential
> confusion between subclades of each.)

I don't know their particular reasoning, but in my case there's IMO
substantial reason to believe that J is not a viable option. DNAPrint
shows NO Semitic background, and family ancestry is northern England on that
line (and many others).

> FTDNA calls I1b when they can. If they didn't do it here,
> they probably think this is not I1b. That kind of leaves I2 (or I1c
> in the old terminology.)

As I said, Bonnie thinks that she's onto something solid, and having taken a
quick look at what she sent, I'm inclined to agree.

Glen Todd


This thread: