GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2005-06 > 1119992492


From: "Ken Nordtvedt" <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] P49 distinctions in R1b -- watch 393 and 461
Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2005 15:01:32 -0600
References: <42C0AA19.60908@comcast.net> <02c501c57c20$44e9d520$d5dc2f50@Masterbedroom>


I have a set from Rootsi. They did not type their entire set of haplotypes
which count in the European table


----- Original Message -----
From: "gareth.henson" <>
To: <>
Sent: Tuesday, June 28, 2005 2:25 PM
Subject: Re: [DNA] P49 distinctions in R1b -- watch 393 and 461


> Bonnie & David
>
> my preference would be DYS1 which is the original designation for the
locus
> (now known to be loci) being detected by the 49a and 49f probes and
chopped
> up into different size chunks by the TaqI enzyme. Technically that's
> probably inaccurate because the test only detects specific variations at
> DYS1.
>
> For me the benefits of the test would be detecting the rarer haplotypes
> which are marginal (one-step?) variations on the major haplogroups (e.g.
the
> spread of haplotypes in J2 in the Al-Zahery paper, or the ht39 in R1a) -
> unusual, but nowhere near as rare as private SNPs. As far as I can tell
> there has never been any testing in connection with genealogy and I am
very
> very curious as to whether the unusual 49a,f/DYS1 haplotypes run in
families
> or coincide with particular combinations of STR alleles.
>
> Did anyone ever request the full set of 49a,f results for the Rootsi
> haplogroup I paper?
>
> Gareth
> (weather here in South Wales - hot & dry this morning, now torrential rain
&
> thunder 9.20pm BST)
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Bonnie Schrack" <>
> To: <>
> Sent: Tuesday, June 28, 2005 2:38 AM
> Subject: Re: [DNA] P49 distinctions in R1b -- watch 393 and 461
>
>
> > David Wilson wrote:
> >
> > > Is there some kind of shorthand we can agree to use for "P49a,f/TaqI
> > > system" so that I don't have to keep looking up how it is spelled and
> > > worrying that I can't italicize the part that gets special treatment
> > > in the
> > > journals? Maybe everyone will cut me some slack and know what I mean
if
> I
> > > just call it the P49 system.
> >
> > Sure, if you like, but I've been calling it 49a,f -- to me, calling it
> > P49 sounds too much like a regular SNP, while this is a whole series of
> > loci, as you know.
> >
> > > At any rate, with reference to the P49 distinction within R1b, I want
to
> > > observe that if you compare the Ht35 and Ht15 haplotypes in Cinnioglu
> > > (which I think is the only place where comparative data like this can
be
> > > easily found), there is a tendency for DYS393 to be 12 in Ht35, but it
> is
> > > pretty strongly 13 in Ht15. Similarly, DYS461 (or A7.2 as Cinnioglu
> terms
> > > it) is very frequently 9 in Ht35 (though you occasionally see 10),
> > > while it
> > > is pretty consistently 10 in Ht15.
> >
> > Thank you, thank you, David, for pointing this out! Somehow, I hadn't
> > noticed the DYS461 distinction in R1b! This is exciting.
> >
> > OK, all you hordes of R1b guys -- while you're waiting for David Faux's
> > company to develop the 49a,f test, you can sign up to have DYS461 tested
> > at biotix, and find out whether you're more likely ht15 or ht35! I
> > know there's a whole group of R1b Border Reivers out there who have 12
> > at DYS393. For a while, a theory was going around that they might
> > have had the eastern, ht9 form of R1b. Here's a chance to test that
> > theory! In Cinnioglu, while there are a few ht35 (eastern) who have 10
> > (11 at biotix, 12 at DNAH), most of them have 9 at 461 (10 at biotix, 11
> > at DNAH); those that tested as ht15 (western) are *all* 10 at 461.
> >
> > Other haplogroups that commonly have the same 9 at 461 (10 biotix, 11
> > DNAH) are J1, K2, and R1a, so it could be used to help clarify
> > haplotypes that might be one of those.
>
> >
> > Bonnie Schrack
>
>
>
> ==============================
> Search the US Census Collection. Over 140 million records added in the
> last 12 months. Largest online collection in the world. Learn more:
http://www.ancestry.com/s13965/rd.ashx
>
>



This thread: