Archiver > Y-DNA-HAPLOGROUP-I > 2008-10 > 1223944560

From: "Ken Nordtvedt" <>
Subject: [yDNAhgI] Random Comments on the state of y "I"
Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2008 18:36:00 -0600

Things are so glacially slow right now in y haplogroup "I" studies and data flow, its a good time for a review of where things are at.

All haplogroups below identified according to the ISOGG tree (not the FTDNA tree)

1. The new P109+ subhaplogroup I1c of M253+ I1 is now pretty well defined. I know of 21 P109+ haplotypes out of a couple hundred folks tested. P109+ is a fractional population of the I1-Norse. P109+ generally has 13 at DYS462, 10 at DYS511, 23 at DYS390, and 14-14 at DYS385. Unfortunately, a larger I1-Norse clade with P109-, (as the rest of I1 is P109-), has the same characteristics. P109+ from the variance of this limited population looks about as old as I1-Norse and I1-generic. Only the major clade I1-ultraNorse, centered in Norway, looks substantially younger. The P109+ population presently has a respectably diverse Norwegian, Dane, Swede, and Finn included, it has several Germans and the usual glut of British Isles members. One would have to think its origin was not deep into Scandinavia, but rather something more like Schleswig-Holstein or Pomerania, etc.

2. I have collected three 23andMe reports for their ydna SNPs. And there is a fourth such report on a slightly shorter set of SNPs. On comparison, only one of these four shows a novel SNP. It is promising as a new SNP to divide I1, but it needs to be tested for not being an error and for not being a very down stream, private-like SNP. Hopefully, two labs are presently doing that. This promising SNP is rs34626372 and happens to have a novel derived state reported in someone (from Denmark) who is also P109+

If anyone has 23andMe results and are in y haplogroup I, I'd appreciate having your results to compare to other I persons. This is one of the best ways we can ourselves discover new SNps within haplogroup I and not have to wait for testing companies to present them to us.

The flow of new 67 marker extended haplotypes coming out of the testing companies has really slowed. So further isolation of new clades has also dramatically slowed. The major clade structure of y haplogroup I is pretty much complete; a view of that structure along with the estimated times when the various clade ancestral lines branched off from each other can be seen in warpedfounderstree file at the site http://knordtvedt.bresnan.net

3. y haplogroup I began branching apart over 20,000 years ago. Haplogroup I stands a better chance being a paleolithic resident in Europe than do the clades of haplogroup R. While haplogroup F can not be ruled out as one of the earliest residents in Europe, places in central Europe (I2b*) and even the British Isles (I2a1-Isles) could very well have had their earliest post-LGM residents being specific clades of haplogroup I. And I2a2 M26+ is an early post-LGM Mediterranean resident by anyone's measure; and it even looks old further north in Europe. If one had to make a best guess as to the place that haplogroup I began, Anatolia may be the place. But we have never found an I* haplotype; more thorough ydna collection and analysis from that part of the world is needed to explore those very earliest times for I.

4. Folks in haplogroup I must do more of their own research work. While new SNPs in haplogroup R are typically explored first on the dime of some testing company in order to see if they are useful, new SNPs in haplogroup I have most of the time been offered to us as blank slates which we in our testing orders have had to find out whether they were of phylogenetic value. We have had a number of duds in the sense that they have turned out phylogenetically equivalent, so far, to older existing SNPs. Most of the other useful new SNPs in
haplogroup I --- M284, M423, P78 --- were discovered to have their phylogenetic significance because of hobbyist interest and testing actions. Because the companies don't consider haplogroup I to be the lucrative market that R is, we will probably have to continue to drive things on our own to a greater degree.

5. Kittler tests which spell out the distinctions between the two orders of DYS385 results (when the two repeats are different) have proved very helpful in a number of haplogroup I clades. This is because quite a few clades have their DYS385 repeats equal or close together. I am surprised more folks have not purchased their Kittler order tests from Dr. Krahn's FTDNA Houston lab.

6. It has always seemed easier to get folks with rather common or generic haplotypes in I to purchase more markers, while those in the more exotic clades are harder to motivate. I find this odd. Many people with short haplotypes but placed in the rarer clades should, in my view, be the ones to purchase the 67 markers, the selected SNPs, the Kittler tests when appropriate, in order to better understand their unusual clades. This especially seems so to me for the upstream,very old,and very geographically dispersed I2* haplogroup.

This thread: