Y-DNA-HAPLOGROUP-I-L Archives

Archiver > Y-DNA-HAPLOGROUP-I > 2009-06 > 1246226082


From: "Ken Nordtvedt" <>
Subject: Re: [yDNAhgI] They're Heeeere! New Hg I SNPs
Date: Sun, 28 Jun 2009 15:54:42 -0600
References: <000801c9f73c$6c89fa10$6400a8c0@Ken1><5C06BD6C5297465C83C17F1F5ED03054@whifflepoof><CB87B93B65BE4E769785FC9CF3C0E97F@KV><001401c9f826$d2010e20$6400a8c0@Ken1><B5237A2011BF46099AD4445963C9532E@KV>


Maybe we're cross talking. The four new snps found from walk the y searches
are L158, L159, L160, L161

L158, L159, L160 are derived for the I2a1 donor; they are ancestral for the
I2a2-Isles-D donor

L161 is just the opposite --- derived for I2a2-Isles-D donor and ancestral
for the I2a1 donor.

M161 is an old snp found downstream of M26 and therefore a subhaplogroup
I2a1a

L161 is the new snp which really is the only one of interest to you. You
could go either way, depending on how far downstream or upstream on the I2a2
branch line leading to the Isles-D donor it occured. I agree: you are a
classic I2a2-Isles-A haplotype. Looking at the warpedfounderstree at
http://knordtvedt.home.bresnan.net I'd estimate your chances of being
derived for L161 as 3/4 and ancestral 1/4.

Ken


----- Original Message -----
From: "Fred Kinley" <>
To: <>
Sent: Sunday, June 28, 2009 2:50 PM
Subject: Re: [yDNAhgI] They're Heeeere! New Hg I SNPs


> OK; I "expect" to be (-) on the 3 found ancestral in Isles, and
> objectively
> I "have no idea" on M161 but "hope" to be (-) as well! ;-)
>
> What is total sample size and clades of those tested at this point?
> ~ Fred
>
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From:
>> [mailto:] On Behalf Of
>> Ken Nordtvedt
>> Sent: Sunday, June 28, 2009 12:30 PM
>> To:
>> Subject: Re: [yDNAhgI] They're Heeeere! New Hg I SNPs
>>
>> Three of the four derived for I2a1 were found ancestral
>> for the I2a2-Isles-D, so you must be also ancestral for
>> them unless there were snp back mutations somewhere,
>> or some mistakes were made in the previous measurements.
>>
>> But I don't understand why you would "expect" to be ancestral
>> for the snp found derived in the Isles-D person? That would
>> be actually nice if true, but it is probably not the "expected"
>> outcome given present information.
>>
>> Ken
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Fred Kinley" <>
>> To: <>
>> Sent: Sunday, June 28, 2009 12:03 PM
>> Subject: Re: [yDNAhgI] They're Heeeere! New Hg I SNPs
>>
>>
>> > Just to let you know, we went ahead and ordered these 4
>> > new SNPS, although we "expect" all to be (-). At this early
>> > stage some (-) results from closely related clades would
>> > certainly help validate and localize these new (+) results,
>> > and of course any (+) results would be "interesting". Not
>> > sure when the results will be in, as our Y-67 "promo" results
>> > to join FTDNA aren't expected until early August. Previous
>> > testing with Ancestry.com Y-46 and 23andMe has me firmly
>> > in I2a2-Isles-A*.
>> >
>> > The FTDNA P-215 set is the cheapest price for the 4 new
>> > SNPs, but also includes 3 others in I2b (L35, L37) and I2
>> > (L68), which are redundant with 23andMe. So that will be
>> > another cross-check...
>> >
>> > Best regards,
>> >
>> > ~ Fred Kinley & Sally Kinley (sister)
>> > Ysearch N7FK5
>
>
> -------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
> with the word 'unsubscribe'
> without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message
>



This thread: