RootsWeb: GENEALOGY-DNA-L Re: Felstead TMRCA, hg E3b (was Re: [DNA] SMGF adjustments to FTDNA values)

GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2005-09 > 1127347451

From: "David F Reynolds" <>
Subject: Re: Felstead TMRCA, hg E3b (was Re: [DNA] SMGF adjustments to FTDNA values)
Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2005 17:04:11 -0700
References: <380-220059220214337977@M2W087.mail2web.com> <43308839.6020402@dna-fingerprint.com> <REME20050920182157@alum.mit.edu> <op.sxfa9wsxpqnhvj@pablo> <009001c5be39$39effe50$0100a8c0@chrissam> <op.sxfdbclzpqnhvj@pablo> <00c101c5be3e$424f7300$0100a8c0@chrissam> <001c01c5beb5$a6d62fe0$0100a8c0@chrissam> <op.sxg1kudbpqnhvj@pablo> <003e01c5bf02$b79062e0$0100a8c0@chrissam>
In-Reply-To: <003e01c5bf02$b79062e0$0100a8c0@chrissam>

A haplotype is a specific set of marker values, i.e. the four Felstead entries discussed below are four separate haplotypes, as they are four distinct sets of values. Your son and yourself, assuming that all marker values match exactly, would share a single haplotype. Your specific haplotype consists of the marker values returned by FTDNA & SMGF for your genetic sample. A haplogroup is a set of haplotypes that is defined by specific slowly mutating markers. In the case of you and your distant cousins, even though your haplotypes are slightly different, you are all likely in haplogroup E3b. The common ancestor for haplogroup E3b lived many thousands of years ago, so two people both being in haplogroup E3b does not guarantee any genealogical connection, though. But if a Felstead is not in E3b, you are absolutely not related to them, within any meaningful timeframe. Given enough data points from living descendants, the haplotype for the common ancestor can sometimes be deduced. In your case, because you and the other three gentlemen have exact matches on 33/36 markers, then the odds are extremely high that your mutual common ancestor would have the same have same values as the four of you on those 33 markers. For the other three markers, given the small number of datapoints, with values evenly split between the four of you, it is impossible to say what the value was for your common ancestor. For DSY448, for example, some descendants have a value of 20, some a value of 21, so the most likely scenario is that your common ancestor had one or the other. (This is deliberately ignoring complicating factors which can occur, such as parallel or back mutations.) In any event, given the closeness of the matches and the even split between the differing values, it really doesn't make any difference in your case -- all three of the other Felstead lines are definitely worth following up on. Regards, david On Wed, 21 Sep 2005 16:18:03 -0700, Edward Felstead <> wrote: > Thank you David. > I am getting into this little by little. > If you bear with me for one more question please - > "What is an ancestral haplotype and how is it determined"? > I am getting confused between an HAPLOGROUP and an HAPLOTYPE. > Thanks again. > Best wishes > Edward > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "David F Reynolds" <> > To: <> > Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2005 10:20 PM > Subject: Felstead TMRCA, hg E3b (was Re: [DNA] SMGF adjustments to FTDNA values) > > >> Edward, >> >> I'm assumming this is your ysearch record: >> http://www.ysearch.org/lastname_view.asp?viewuid=HPF4Y&p=0 >> >> There appears to be four lines of interest in the SMGF database; all match on 33 markers >> (36 alleles), with 3 more varying between the four. >> #1 yours, going back five generations to William Felstead >> (DYS448=21, DYS449=31, Y-GATA-C4=22) >> #2 an English one, going back five generations to Joseph Felstead >> (DYS448=21, DYS449=32, Y-GATA-C4=22) >> #3 a Canadian one, going back three generations to a George Felstead >> (DYS448=20, DYS449=31, Y-GATA-C4=23) >> #4 an English one, going back five generations to another George Felstead >> (DYS448=20, DYS449=32, Y-GATA-C4=23) >> >> One point of interest is that all of these Felstead lines appear to be haplogroup E3b, >> which is relatively uncommon in Great Britain. I don't think there can be any doubt that >> all are descended from a common ancestor. >> >> SMGF's TMRCA calculation between yourself and #2 shows there is a 25% chance that you >> have common ancestor within 6 generation, 50% within 11 generations, and 75% within 17 >> generations. Depending on who does the calculation (and the mutation rate and >> years/generation numbers they use), the numbers will vary, but the answer will always be >> in terms of a probability for a number of generations -- there is no way to calculate a >> precise answer. >> >> Question to TMRCA experts on the list: Given the above, how might one calculate a TMRCA >> for a common ancestor to all four lines, given that an ancestral haplotype cannot be >> deduced from the above data. >> >> Regards, >> david >> >> On Wed, 21 Sep 2005 07:06:24 -0700, Edward Felstead <> wrote: >> >>> Dear David >>> I followed the procedure as you outlined and it worked perfectly. >>> I now have a 36/36 with my son and a 35/36 match with another participant with the SAME >>> NAME and from the SAME COUNTRY. >>> I am not well versed re DNA match's so I wonder if you could give me your opinion >>> with regard to my relationship with the person who I match 35/36. >>> I believe this is known as the MOST RECENT COMMON ANCESTOR and is expressed in >>> GENERATIONS? >>> Thank you for your help. >>> Best Wishes >>> Edward >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: "Edward Felstead" <> >>> To: <> >>> Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2005 12:51 AM >>> Subject: Re: [DNA] SMGF adjustments to FTDNA values >>> >>> >>>> Thanks David -I will have a go at that! >>>> Edward >>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>> From: "David F Reynolds" <> >>>> To: <> >>>> Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2005 12:39 AM >>>> Subject: Re: [DNA] SMGF adjustments to FTDNA values >>>> >>>> >>>>> There are 11 values which do not have FTDNA equivalents (i.e., FTDNA does not test >>>>> for >>>>> them). To find out what those values are is basically a trial-and-error process. The >>>>> way I do it to look at the values for each marker listed at: >>>>> http://smgf.org/marker_details.html >>>>> and start with the most common value for the particular marker, and then cycle from >>>>> there. Usually takes about 15-30 minutes, depending on how unusual some of the values >>>>> are. >>>>> >>>>> Regards, >>>>> david >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, 20 Sep 2005 16:15:44 -0700, Edward Felstead <> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Hi David >>>>>> I was just reading your posting Re FTDNA and SMGF. >>>>>> I wonder if you could help me. >>>>>> I have a full 37 marker test with FTDNA but when I enter my values on SMGF I can >>>>>> only >>>>>> use 25 of the box's to enter my values as I don't have the FTDNA equivalents to >>>>>> SMGF. >>>>>> How did you manage to enter 36! >>>>>> Thanks >>>>>> Best wishes >>>>>> Edward >>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>>>> From: "David F Reynolds" <> >>>>>> To: <> >>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2005 11:54 PM >>>>>> Subject: [DNA] SMGF adjustments to FTDNA values >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> If I tick "Family Tree DNA" on the SMGF search page, I get these results: >>>>>>> http://tinyurl.com/due6n >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Equivalent search if I tick "Do not convert (use SMGF standard)": >>>>>>> http://tinyurl.com/d57vu >>>>>>> >>>>>>> SMGF applies the following adjustments if "Family Tree DNA" is selected: >>>>>>> DYS19 +1 >>>>>>> DYS448 +3 >>>>>>> DYS461 -1 >>>>>>> DYS463 +2 >>>>>>> Y-GATA-H4 +1 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The 36/36 match is me, the 35/36 (with the missing DYS463) match is my son. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Regards, >>>>>>> david >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ============================== >>>>>>> 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 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> No virus found in this incoming message. >>>>>>> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. >>>>>>> Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 267.11.3 - Release Date: 9/19/2005 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> ============================== >>>>> 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 >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> No virus found in this incoming message. >>>>> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. >>>>> Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 267.11.3 - Release Date: 9/19/2005 >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> No virus found in this outgoing message. >>>> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. >>>> Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 267.11.3 - Release Date: 9/19/2005 >>>> >>>> >>>> ============================== >>>> 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 >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> No virus found in this incoming message. >>>> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. >>>> Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 267.11.3 - Release Date: 9/19/2005 >>>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> >> ============================== >> 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 >> >> >> >> -- >> No virus found in this incoming message. >> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. >> Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 267.11.3 - Release Date: 9/19/2005 >> > > >