GENEALOGY-DNA-L ArchivesArchiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2005-06 > 1119015891
From: "Sharon Bryant" <>
Subject: SNP'd I (was) Re: [DNA] sub rugrat level
Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2005 09:44:51 -0400
References: <email@example.com> <001901c57332$971b1260$5a579045@Ken1> <008001c57333$d6c83ae0$7302a8c0@YOURF8387228BF> <000f01c57336$19de8990$5a579045@Ken1>
You're looking for a haplogroup designation down to the sub-clades, right? I
ask because one of my participants is an I1c according to our calculations
but was SNP'd and confirmed only as an "I" by FTDNA.
If this would be acceptable, let me know and I will send the data.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ken Nordtvedt" <>
Sent: Friday, June 17, 2005 8:14 AM
Subject: Re: [DNA] sub rugrat level
> Phil, I think I looked through that message and examples. Many
> have haplogroup labels by owner estimate or assignment by testing company.
> Those don't count; they are often wrong in the tough cases. Just
> someone presented a "classic" I1c assigned I1b by FTDNA according to its
> We need haplogroup designation by confirmed SNP test.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Phil Goff" <>
> To: <>
> Sent: Friday, June 17, 2005 5:58 AM
> Subject: Re: [DNA] sub rugrat level
>> See my June 10 post below where I think I found a SNP-tested result
>> to Glen Todd's result.
>> While you wait for your SNP results, I looked in some databases for
>> haplotypes. In Sorenson (see link at bottom), I found the following were
>> closest matches:
>> (All with DYS455=10)
>> 22/25 Clason/Clawson, 1633, Fairfield, CT, USA
>> 21/25 Tavernier, 1783, France
>> 20/25 Myers, before 1857, TN, USA
>> 20/25 Unknown (Ellifritt), ~1818, VA, USA
>> In FTDNA, take a look kit 22789 in the Brooks project at
>> http://www.familytreedna.com/public/BrooksSurnameDNAProject/. This kit
>> have been SNP tested. Also, take a look at the five kits in the Daniel
>> project at http://www.danieldna.50g.com/results.htm. Kit 6266 in the
>> DNA study appears to have been SNP tested as "I." All of these have
>> and many other similarities to your haplotype.
>> Once I started looking, I have found quite a few examples of 455=10, but
>> have only included a sample above. Based on what I've seen, I suspect
>> you will come out as "I," but which subclade? If you started collecting
>> of these samples, you may begin to see some patterns, which may assist in
>> geographical analysis of the haplotype. For example, many of the
>> I viewed had 393=13 and the rest were 393=14. Good luck!
>> Phil Goff
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Ken Nordtvedt" <>
>> To: <>
>> Sent: Friday, June 17, 2005 6:49 AM
>> Subject: Re: [DNA] sub rugrat level
>> > While we wait for some SNP tests to be done on the new clade (probably
>> > I), I'm interested in why you believe it has a Norman character?
>> > Concerning its "I" status, has anyone found one of these haplotypes
>> > with
>> > confirmed basic M170+ or other "I" SNP test result?
>> > Ken
>> Jumpstart your genealogy with OneWorldTree. Search not only for
>> ancestors, but entire generations. Learn more:
> Search Family and Local Histories for stories about your family and the
> areas they lived. Over 85 million names added in the last 12 months.
> Learn more: http://www.ancestry.com/s13966/rd.ashx