Re: New Big-Y files needed
Hi Jared, ? Thanks for the email and thanks for your analyses. ? The other file was too big. I’ll try in a separate email, but the message told me to put it in a shared location. ? Joel ? ?
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Jared Smith
Sent: Tuesday, November 14, 2017 10:44 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: [Z16357] New Big-Y files needed ? Hello fellow Z16357 cousins! Things have been relatively quiet around here - no new matches in quite some time. Now's a great time to recruit those STR matches of ours = Big-Y is on sale for?$475. For Big-Y customers, you've probably seen that FTDNA has made notable updates to their Big-Y tools. There are some nice improvements (though still some issues they are working through). FTDNA has also moved to a new Y-DNA reference - hg19 to hg38. At it's most basic level, this is an adjustment of the numeric values that are used to represent different 'markers' on the Y-chromosome. Z16357, for example, is a G to T allele change at position?22,512,912 when using the older hg19 reference, but it's G to T at position?20,351,026 using the hg38 reference. So all of the SNP and variant numbering at? will need to be updated. The new reference provides us some opportunity to find new shared or novel variants.
To update my research and reference numbers, I need your updated FTDNA Results and VCF files.
Please take a few moments to download and e-mail them to me. This will be incredibly helpful to our research. 3. Click "Export Results" at the top right and save the .csv file 4. Click "Download Raw Data" at the top right. 5. Click "Download VCF" at the bottom and save the .zip file. 6. Attach both the .csv and .zip files to a new e-mail and send to me off-list - jared@... Once I have everyone's updated results, I'll analyze them, update the web site, and let you know if I find anything interesting.
|
Hello fellow Z16357 cousins! Things have been relatively quiet around here - no new matches in quite some time. Now's a great time to recruit those STR matches of ours = Big-Y is on sale for?$475.
For Big-Y customers, you've probably seen that FTDNA has made notable updates to their Big-Y tools. There are some nice improvements (though still some issues they are working through).
FTDNA has also moved to a new Y-DNA reference - hg19 to hg38. At it's most basic level, this is an adjustment of the numeric values that are used to represent different 'markers' on the Y-chromosome. Z16357, for example, is a G to T allele change at position?22,512,912 when using the older hg19 reference, but it's G to T at position?20,351,026 using the hg38 reference. So all of the SNP and variant numbering at? will need to be updated. The new reference provides us some opportunity to find new shared or novel variants. To update my research and reference numbers, I need your updated FTDNA Results and VCF files.
Please take a few moments to download and e-mail them to me. This will be incredibly helpful to our research.
1. Log in to FTDNA. 2. Go to 3. Click "Export Results" at the top right and save the .csv file 4. Click "Download Raw Data" at the top right. 5. Click "Download VCF" at the bottom and save the .zip file. 6. Attach both the .csv and .zip files to a new e-mail and send to me off-list - jared@...
Once I have everyone's updated results, I'll analyze them, update the web site, and let you know if I find anything interesting.
Thanks!
Jared Smith
|
I forgot to mention – I checked the L513 Yahoo Forum and didn’t see mention of this study. I would have thought that it would have been big news there. ? Joel ?
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Jared Smith
Sent: Monday, July 24, 2017 11:10 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: [Z16357] New aging estimates ? Iain McDonald has just published a new project analyzing all of the P312 Big-Y results. P312 is much older than our Z16357. The general heredity is P312 > L21/Z290 > L513 > S5668 > Z16357. He places the 95% reliability date of Z16357 being formed 2528BC — 1177BC with a central date of 1873BC. This is quite a bit older than the estimates I've been using. I generally run two sets - one at 1000BC and one at 500BC. He places Z17911 as formed 310BC — 713AD with a central date of 252AD. This is also quite a bit older than the 1000AD date I've calculated. As for our more recent haplogroups, his estimates are only slightly older than mine. Of note is that he did not include our recent Smith?BY19970 data. If he had, I think this would have pushed his dates a bit more recent. Does this mean that his estimates are right and mine wrong? We all perform mathematical analysis within certain constraints and assumptions. And the variability is notable. He certainly applies a strong methodology. You can check out Iain's excellent work at?
|
Thanks Jared, ? I don’t have a lot of backup, but I have thought that perhaps some of your dates were too recent. I’m guessing the truth could be in the middle between you and McDonald. My thought was that the trend has been that some of our SNPs could be more recent than previously thought. My recollection was that this applied to the L513 SNPs in general, but I’m not sure. A third opinion would be the YFull YTree update which should be coming out shortly. Dating can be one of the more fascinating aspects of YDNA. ? Joel ?
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Jared Smith
Sent: Monday, July 24, 2017 11:10 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: [Z16357] New aging estimates ? Iain McDonald has just published a new project analyzing all of the P312 Big-Y results. P312 is much older than our Z16357. The general heredity is P312 > L21/Z290 > L513 > S5668 > Z16357. He places the 95% reliability date of Z16357 being formed 2528BC — 1177BC with a central date of 1873BC. This is quite a bit older than the estimates I've been using. I generally run two sets - one at 1000BC and one at 500BC. He places Z17911 as formed 310BC — 713AD with a central date of 252AD. This is also quite a bit older than the 1000AD date I've calculated. As for our more recent haplogroups, his estimates are only slightly older than mine. Of note is that he did not include our recent Smith?BY19970 data. If he had, I think this would have pushed his dates a bit more recent. Does this mean that his estimates are right and mine wrong? We all perform mathematical analysis within certain constraints and assumptions. And the variability is notable. He certainly applies a strong methodology. You can check out Iain's excellent work at?
|
Thanks for the notification, Jared. Yes, great work Iain McDonald is doing. I wonder, however, why he doesn't use the widely accepted BCE/CE?dating standard?rather than the old BC/AD. It's not a big thing but it?would seem more scientific to me to use BCE/CE.
Charles Thomas
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
Iain McDonald has just published a new project analyzing all of the P312 Big-Y results. P312 is much older than our Z16357. The general heredity is P312 > L21/Z290 > L513 > S5668 > Z16357.
He places the 95% reliability date of Z16357 being formed 2528BC — 1177BC with a central date of 1873BC. This is quite a bit older than the estimates I've been using. I generally run two sets - one at 1000BC and one at 500BC.
He places Z17911 as formed 310BC — 713AD with a central date of 252AD. This is also quite a bit older than the 1000AD date I've calculated.
As for our more recent haplogroups, his estimates are only slightly older than mine.
Of note is that he did not include our recent Smith?BY19970 data. If he had, I think this would have pushed his dates a bit more recent.
Does this mean that his estimates are right and mine wrong? We all perform mathematical analysis within certain constraints and assumptions. And the variability is notable. He certainly applies a strong methodology.
You can check out Iain's excellent work at?
|
www.jb.man.ac.uk
I have a side interest in genetic genealogy, for which I am Honorary Research Fellow in Genenealogy, Paleography and Heraldry at the Centre for Lifelong Learning at ...
|
Jared
|
Iain McDonald has just published a new project analyzing all of the P312 Big-Y results. P312 is much older than our Z16357. The general heredity is P312 > L21/Z290 > L513 > S5668 > Z16357.
He places the 95% reliability date of Z16357 being formed 2528BC — 1177BC with a central date of 1873BC. This is quite a bit older than the estimates I've been using. I generally run two sets - one at 1000BC and one at 500BC.
He places Z17911 as formed 310BC — 713AD with a central date of 252AD. This is also quite a bit older than the 1000AD date I've calculated.
As for our more recent haplogroups, his estimates are only slightly older than mine.
Of note is that he did not include our recent Smith?BY19970 data. If he had, I think this would have pushed his dates a bit more recent.
Does this mean that his estimates are right and mine wrong? We all perform mathematical analysis within certain constraints and assumptions. And the variability is notable. He certainly applies a strong methodology.
You can check out Iain's excellent work at?
Jared
|
Re: New major Smith branch!
FTDNA has now had these Smith SNPs named. The new haplogroup label is R-BY19970. The FTDNA tree has been updated, as well as the terminal SNP identifier for Sylvia's and Lenita's kits. I've also updated my charts at?
Jared
On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 10:40 PM, Jared Smith <jared@...> wrote: We have a new, significant branching under Z16357. Up to this point Sylvia Smith was the only person truly at Z16357 - meaning that her kit had tested positive for Z16357, but for no shared SNPs downstream from there. If we think of Z16357 as the trunk or base of our part of the tree, there has thus far been only one branch (Z16343) coming from that trunk, which then split into two sub-branches (Z17911 and Z16854), which split into the various sub-sub-branches below them.
The Big-Y results for Lenita's brother (Leonard Ellwin Smith) are in and they create a 2nd major branch from the Z16357 trunk for Lenita and Sylvia. This Smith branch is VERY long - extending from a common (yet unknown) Smith ancestor that lived a few hundred years ago all the way back to Z16357 (probably 2500 years ago or so). It's pretty incredible to think that nobody else on this family line has done DNA testing to this level yet.
To avoid potential confusion, while my surname is Smith, it's only coincidental - this new Smith line and my Smith line below Z17911 are very distant - connecting at Z16357 around 2500 years ago.
I've updated my charts at? so you can see the new branching.
Lenita and Sylvia share 24 SNPs/variants. This represents around 2000 years of their family line with no known branching. This new branch has yet to be named - but I suspect that FTDNA will submit these 24 shared SNPs for naming - and one of them will be chosen as the designator for this branch of the tree.
Sylvia has the following 4 novel variants (meaning mutations that are unique to her, so they occurred more recently than Lenita's and Sylvia's common ancestor): 14703381-T-A
21734697-A-G 22102505-G-T 23817871-G-A
Lenita has the following 3 novel variants: 7676708-T-A
15315228-G-A 19139648-C-T
If I apply my aging methodology, this would suggest that their common Smith ancestor was born between 333 and 383 years ago (sometime in the mid- to late-1600s). However, these two Smiths have fewer variants/mutations (28 and 27)?than is the average for our group (35.2), so this might suggest that their common ancestor is a bit more distant than this. But these are just VERY rough estimates, so their ancestor could also be more recent. As we get more Smith testers, this will be refined.
This is a very notable addition to our tree! Thank you Sylvia and Lenita for investing in Big-Y! We're trying to identify other distant Smith cousins to take Big-Y to help us better define this new Smith branch.
Thanks,
Jared Smith
|
We have a new, significant branching under Z16357. Up to this point Sylvia Smith was the only person truly at Z16357 - meaning that her kit had tested positive for Z16357, but for no shared SNPs downstream from there. If we think of Z16357 as the trunk or base of our part of the tree, there has thus far been only one branch (Z16343) coming from that trunk, which then split into two sub-branches (Z17911 and Z16854), which split into the various sub-sub-branches below them.
The Big-Y results for Lenita's brother (Leonard Ellwin Smith) are in and they create a 2nd major branch from the Z16357 trunk for Lenita and Sylvia. This Smith branch is VERY long - extending from a common (yet unknown) Smith ancestor that lived a few hundred years ago all the way back to Z16357 (probably 2500 years ago or so). It's pretty incredible to think that nobody else on this family line has done DNA testing to this level yet.
To avoid potential confusion, while my surname is Smith, it's only coincidental - this new Smith line and my Smith line below Z17911 are very distant - connecting at Z16357 around 2500 years ago.
I've updated my charts at? so you can see the new branching.
Lenita and Sylvia share 24 SNPs/variants. This represents around 2000 years of their family line with no known branching. This new branch has yet to be named - but I suspect that FTDNA will submit these 24 shared SNPs for naming - and one of them will be chosen as the designator for this branch of the tree.
Sylvia has the following 4 novel variants (meaning mutations that are unique to her, so they occurred more recently than Lenita's and Sylvia's common ancestor): 14703381-T-A
21734697-A-G 22102505-G-T 23817871-G-A
Lenita has the following 3 novel variants: 7676708-T-A
15315228-G-A 19139648-C-T
If I apply my aging methodology, this would suggest that their common Smith ancestor was born between 333 and 383 years ago (sometime in the mid- to late-1600s). However, these two Smiths have fewer variants/mutations (28 and 27)?than is the average for our group (35.2), so this might suggest that their common ancestor is a bit more distant than this. But these are just VERY rough estimates, so their ancestor could also be more recent. As we get more Smith testers, this will be refined.
This is a very notable addition to our tree! Thank you Sylvia and Lenita for investing in Big-Y! We're trying to identify other distant Smith cousins to take Big-Y to help us better define this new Smith branch.
Thanks,
Jared Smith
|
I'm happy to welcome Rachel to the list. She administers the C.
Pillsbury Big-Y test that is a new close match to us. She shares a
relative with Fran Pillsbury dating to 1605. They both fall onto the
BY13850 haplogroup of our tree. This is below the Z16854 block on the
tree that represents their common Hays/Pillsbury ancestry (see
).
The two Pillsbury men share the following "good" variants:
18770840-C-T (BY13850)
9496274-C-A (BY13851)
14811392-G-T
These are solid SNPs that indicate their shared Pillsbury ancestry
AFTER the Hays/Pillsbury ancestor, but before their Pillsbury lines
split in the 1600s. This does not change my SNP chart at all -
(with the exception of adding the 3rd
SNP above to the Pillsbury block).
I've only been able to identify one good novel variant for the C.
Pillsbury line:
18839503-C-A
A novel variant is a mutation not shared with anyone else that has tested.
This also leaves Fran's Pillsbury line with only 1 good novel variant
(and I'm being a bit liberal with that one because it's a bit
questionable). This is a bit peculiar, because the 12 of us under
Z16357 average around 75 years per variant - and the Pillsburys have
only one identified in almost 400 years. This highlights the
difficulty with few testers in each haplogroup/block. Michael, Alex,
and YFull have better mechanisms for identifying "good" novel
variants, so they might find some I'm missing.
One problem with so few novel variants is that it makes it more
difficult to generate a basic Y-DNA test for people to determine which
side of the Pillsbury line they fall on.
Another is that it throws a bit of a wrench into my age estimations.
With only 1 novel variant each, this would suggest that the most
recent shared ancestor for the Pillsbury's was born 2-3 generations
ago - but we know he was instead born over 400 years ago. This likely
sways my age estimates to be more recent that is reality for that part
of the tree. My math puts the common Hays/Pillsbury ancestor being
born 626-734 years ago. Overall, this impacts my aging estimates for
the entire tree very negligibly - only .5 years more per variant. The
more testers we get, the more accurate this value becomes.
We'll have some other big news for our part of the tree soon!
Jared
|
Re: John Hartley A11132 Positive
Joel -
This is great news! Another person on our branch!
If desired, you could "Wish a SNP" at YSEQ for some of the other Hartley SNPs. If they can test them, then John could take some additional tests (at $17.50 each) to discover where his branch falls.
It's difficult to know which SNPs to recommend to test. We know that in addition to A11132, you and Michael share A11134, A11135, A11137, A11139, and A11140. Based on the age predictions (I have these SNPs as being between 912 and 395 years ago), most or all of these probably pre-date the Hartley surname, so it's most likely that John has these too.
You could instead (or in addition) "Wish a SNP" for some of your and Michael's novel variants to see if John falls on your or Michael's Hartley branch. A11133, A11136, A11130, A11131 would be the best ones from your branch. I could recommend some for Michael too.
If there was a prospect of several more Hartley testers, we could put together a Hartley SNP Panel with maybe 8-12 SNPs (at $116-$169) that would be a good set for Hartley people to get good fidelity for where they fall on the Hartley branches. With a few testers, we'd almost certainly find some new branches this way, though no new SNPs (Big-Y's the only path to these).
Thanks,
Jared
On Sat, May 13, 2017 at 4:18 AM, Joel Hartley <joel@...> wrote: Hi again,
John Hartley just notified me of the following:
? ? ? ? "I have received my YSEQ results and the summary is A11132 T+ and Z17912 C+."
Joel Hartley
-----Original Message-----
From: Joel Hartley [mailto:joel@...]
Sent: Tuesday, May 02, 2017 7:18 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Z16357] DNA Day Sale - Big-Y $150 off
Hi Jared,
I was notified on the Hartley Family Tree Genealogy Facebook page that John Hartley has ordered an A11132 Test from YSEQ.
Joel
On 4/29/2017 7:49 PM, Jared Smith wrote:
> Fran -
>
> That's excellent news! This will be a very nice addition to that
> portion of the tree. I'll keep an eye out for the results, but when
> you see them come in, ping me and I'll take a close look. It would be
> especially helpful if I can get their raw data files to analyze.
>
> It would be wonderful if this tester would join the group here.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jared Smith
>
>
> On Sat, Apr 29, 2017 at 4:40 PM, Fran Pillsbury <franp1@...> wrote:
>> Happy to report that Kit 601582, my new project member, ordered Big-Y
>> last Thursday. So there will soon be a Pillsbury SNP below the
>> Hays-Pillsbury node on the R1b-L513 Tree.!
>>
>> He is currently a member of R1b (Y-111 ), but not L21 or L513. His
>> MDKA is the same as? mine: Wm. Pilsbury, b. 1605 -- not yet updated on his account.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Fran Pillsbury
>>
>> At 06:23 PM 4/22/2017 -0600, you wrote:
>>
>> I hope everyone is doing well. We haven't had any new tests on our
>>
>>
>
>
|
Re: John Hartley A11132 Positive
Hi again,
John Hartley just notified me of the following:
"I have received my YSEQ results and the summary is A11132 T+ and Z17912 C+."
Joel Hartley
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
-----Original Message----- From: Joel Hartley [mailto:joel@...] Sent: Tuesday, May 02, 2017 7:18 AM To: [email protected]Subject: Re: [Z16357] DNA Day Sale - Big-Y $150 off Hi Jared, I was notified on the Hartley Family Tree Genealogy Facebook page that John Hartley has ordered an A11132 Test from YSEQ. Joel On 4/29/2017 7:49 PM, Jared Smith wrote: Fran -
That's excellent news! This will be a very nice addition to that
portion of the tree. I'll keep an eye out for the results, but when
you see them come in, ping me and I'll take a close look. It would be
especially helpful if I can get their raw data files to analyze.
It would be wonderful if this tester would join the group here.
Thanks,
Jared Smith
On Sat, Apr 29, 2017 at 4:40 PM, Fran Pillsbury <franp1@...> wrote:
Happy to report that Kit 601582, my new project member, ordered Big-Y
last Thursday. So there will soon be a Pillsbury SNP below the
Hays-Pillsbury node on the R1b-L513 Tree.!
He is currently a member of R1b (Y-111 ), but not L21 or L513. His
MDKA is the same as mine: Wm. Pilsbury, b. 1605 -- not yet updated on his account.
Cheers,
Fran Pillsbury
At 06:23 PM 4/22/2017 -0600, you wrote:
I hope everyone is doing well. We haven't had any new tests on our
|
Re: DNA Day Sale - Big-Y $150 off
Hi Jared,
I was notified on the Hartley Family Tree Genealogy Facebook page that John Hartley has ordered an A11132 Test from YSEQ.
Joel
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On 4/29/2017 7:49 PM, Jared Smith wrote: Fran -
That's excellent news! This will be a very nice addition to that
portion of the tree. I'll keep an eye out for the results, but when
you see them come in, ping me and I'll take a close look. It would be
especially helpful if I can get their raw data files to analyze.
It would be wonderful if this tester would join the group here.
Thanks,
Jared Smith
On Sat, Apr 29, 2017 at 4:40 PM, Fran Pillsbury <franp1@...> wrote:
Happy to report that Kit 601582, my new project member, ordered Big-Y last
Thursday. So there will soon be a Pillsbury SNP below the Hays-Pillsbury
node on the R1b-L513 Tree.!
He is currently a member of R1b (Y-111 ), but not L21 or L513. His MDKA is
the same as mine: Wm. Pilsbury, b. 1605 -- not yet updated on his account.
Cheers,
Fran Pillsbury
At 06:23 PM 4/22/2017 -0600, you wrote:
I hope everyone is doing well. We haven't had any new tests on our
|
Re: DNA Day Sale - Big-Y $150 off
Fran -
That's excellent news! This will be a very nice addition to that
portion of the tree. I'll keep an eye out for the results, but when
you see them come in, ping me and I'll take a close look. It would be
especially helpful if I can get their raw data files to analyze.
It would be wonderful if this tester would join the group here.
Thanks,
Jared Smith
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Sat, Apr 29, 2017 at 4:40 PM, Fran Pillsbury <franp1@...> wrote: Happy to report that Kit 601582, my new project member, ordered Big-Y last
Thursday. So there will soon be a Pillsbury SNP below the Hays-Pillsbury
node on the R1b-L513 Tree.!
He is currently a member of R1b (Y-111 ), but not L21 or L513. His MDKA is
the same as mine: Wm. Pilsbury, b. 1605 -- not yet updated on his account.
Cheers,
Fran Pillsbury
At 06:23 PM 4/22/2017 -0600, you wrote:
I hope everyone is doing well. We haven't had any new tests on our
|
Re: DNA Day Sale - Big-Y $150 off
Happy to report
that Kit 601582, my new project member, ordered Big-Y last
Thursday. So there will soon be a Pillsbury SNP below the
Hays-Pillsbury node on the R1b-L513 Tree.!
He is currently a member of R1b (Y-111 ), but not L21 or L513.
His MDKA is? the same as? mine: Wm. Pilsbury, b. 1605 -- not yet
updated on his account.
Cheers,
Fran Pillsbury
At 06:23 PM 4/22/2017 -0600, you wrote:
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
I hope everyone is doing well. We haven't had
any new tests on our
|
Re: New Hartley/Smith SNP block?
Thanks, Jared for the fast response! Also thanks for roaming around YBrowse to find Michael Hartley's named SNP.
It looks like for now, Michael's A15733 could be called the Quaker Hartley Line SNP.
I know that Michael Walsh had mentioned that it would be good if the Hartleys could continue on with the 'A' named SNPs, so I'm happy that Michael got a SNP starting with 'A'.
Joel
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On 4/24/2017 10:28 AM, Jared Smith wrote: I searched Michael's novel variants at yBrowse.org and see that
William Hartley submitted at least one of them for naming.
14806931-C-G is named A15733 - so I propose that this be the
designator for Michael's novel branch.
If you've not used yBrowse before, it's a bit clunky, but very
powerful. To search for an SNP name at the position above, you'd
search for "ChrY:14806931..14806931". After the results load, there is
an SNP area of the page. Click on the SNP name (if present) to get the
details (such as who submitted it).
You need to make sure that the mutation is correct. For example,
Michael also has 14403766-C-A. Searching this position shows SNP
ZS1551 here, but it is C-G, not C-A.
You can also search an SNP name to find its position.
Another of Michael's novel variants was already named some time ago
-19110373-C-T is Y30173. So this one aligns with an SNP in another
haplogroup.
I don't see any other "good" SNPs of his that have been named. William
submits the variants to YSEQ.net for analysis and naming. I suspect
that William probably submitted the others of Michael's variants to
YSEQ, but I think they only submit ones to ISOGG for naming that can
be adequately tested with their current test panels. William's
subscribed here, so can probably provide better insight into this
process.
The SNP prefix indicates who submitted it for naming. A=YSEQ.net,
BY=FTDNA (Big-Y), FGC=Full Genomes Corp., and Y=Y Full. The full list
is at
So A15733 is our current best SNP for Michael's branch.
Jared
On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 7:30 AM, Joel Hartley <joel@...> wrote:
Hi Jared,
What is the process for giving Michael Hartley a provisional identifying
named SNP (or SNPs) of his own? Are we waiting for the best SNP before we
name one? Also who does the naming? I think that when I did my BigY, William
Hartley, the administer of the Hartley YDNA Project went in and named a
bunch of my SNPs. I'm not sure why this didn't happen for Michael.
Joel
On 3/25/2017 11:13 AM, Jared Smith wrote:
It's official - my terminal SNP is now A11138! FTDNA did a BAM analysis to
verify this and has added this SNP to the tree. I've updated my charts at
I also added a bit more aging info.
Because we now know that A11138 is above the A11132 block and not below it
as a novel variant with Joel, this does decrease the number of novel
variants Joel has, effectively moving the shared Hartley ancestor date for
Joel and Michael back a bit (at least according to the math of my
calculations).
This also places the Hartley/Smith ancestor just below Z17911 somewhere
around 800 years ago (give or take a century or so).
It is quite incredible that just a few months ago we had no branches below
Z17911, and now we have 7 downstream branches with 13 known shared SNPs!
Jared
On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 12:24 PM, Joel Hartley <joel@...> wrote:
Hi Jared,
I'm never sure when this YFull analysis is finalized or not. At any rate,
on my list of SNPs, A11138 is the first one that is not listed as private.
So I assume that means I share it with you. If we hadn't done the YFull
analysis, I'm not sure if anyone would've picked up on this branching SNP.
Also it appears that the Z16357 SNP Tree needs to be modified again. It
looks like everyone has left Z17911 behind and that it is now a "ghost
town".
Joel
On 3/21/2017 8:03 AM, Jared Smith wrote:
No, I don't show A11138 as being a matching SNP with you. That's what is
particularly confusing to me.
But I clearly show positive for A11138 in my SNP list in my "Hg and SNPs"
list. A11138 is the very first one on my list.
I'm pretty sure the light green + indicates that there was only one read
at that location, so it is only suspected positive.
Jared
On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 5:44 AM, Joel Hartley <joel@...> wrote:
Hi Jared,
This is all very interesting. I wonder if my YFull has not been updated
yet. Do you show me as an A11138 match under the SNP Matches Tab?
I see A11138 under my Hg and SNPs but not at the SNP Matches.
Do you know what the light green + means compared to the dark green +?
Joel
On 3/20/2017 10:12 PM, Jared Smith wrote:
First, I see that FTDNA has pushed the updates to the tree for the
Hartley branch. Joel and Michael, your terminal SNP is now recorded as
A11132.
I just got my YFull results processed and they show me as positive for
A11138 (19477032-A-T). This is an SNP that Joel has, but that Michael
did not test positive for. However, it is right on the edge of a read
area for Michael, so it's quite possible that he also has A11138.
On the other hand, it's right in the middle of a read area for me, so
I would have thought I was negative because FTDNA didn't report it,
but it seems YFull's BAM analysis shows me as positive for it with a 5
star rating.
If this holds up, then this will make a small A11138 Hartley/Smith SNP
block just below Z17911 and above the Hartley A11132 block. This also
means that Michael has to be positive for this SNP (he can't be
downstream of this block and not have this SNP), which will increase
your shared SNPs by one and decrease Joel's novel variants by one -
effectively moving your shared ancestor closer to present day than
previously estimated by maybe 50-100 years.
I'm going to run all this past Mike W. He can request that FTDNA to a
BAM analysis on this region to see if I and Michael are both A11138.
Jared
|
Re: New Hartley/Smith SNP block?
I searched Michael's novel variants at yBrowse.org and see that
William Hartley submitted at least one of them for naming.
14806931-C-G is named A15733 - so I propose that this be the
designator for Michael's novel branch.
If you've not used yBrowse before, it's a bit clunky, but very
powerful. To search for an SNP name at the position above, you'd
search for "ChrY:14806931..14806931". After the results load, there is
an SNP area of the page. Click on the SNP name (if present) to get the
details (such as who submitted it).
You need to make sure that the mutation is correct. For example,
Michael also has 14403766-C-A. Searching this position shows SNP
ZS1551 here, but it is C-G, not C-A.
You can also search an SNP name to find its position.
Another of Michael's novel variants was already named some time ago
-19110373-C-T is Y30173. So this one aligns with an SNP in another
haplogroup.
I don't see any other "good" SNPs of his that have been named. William
submits the variants to YSEQ.net for analysis and naming. I suspect
that William probably submitted the others of Michael's variants to
YSEQ, but I think they only submit ones to ISOGG for naming that can
be adequately tested with their current test panels. William's
subscribed here, so can probably provide better insight into this
process.
The SNP prefix indicates who submitted it for naming. A=YSEQ.net,
BY=FTDNA (Big-Y), FGC=Full Genomes Corp., and Y=Y Full. The full list
is at
So A15733 is our current best SNP for Michael's branch.
Jared
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 7:30 AM, Joel Hartley <joel@...> wrote: Hi Jared,
What is the process for giving Michael Hartley a provisional identifying
named SNP (or SNPs) of his own? Are we waiting for the best SNP before we
name one? Also who does the naming? I think that when I did my BigY, William
Hartley, the administer of the Hartley YDNA Project went in and named a
bunch of my SNPs. I'm not sure why this didn't happen for Michael.
Joel
On 3/25/2017 11:13 AM, Jared Smith wrote:
It's official - my terminal SNP is now A11138! FTDNA did a BAM analysis to
verify this and has added this SNP to the tree. I've updated my charts at
I also added a bit more aging info.
Because we now know that A11138 is above the A11132 block and not below it
as a novel variant with Joel, this does decrease the number of novel
variants Joel has, effectively moving the shared Hartley ancestor date for
Joel and Michael back a bit (at least according to the math of my
calculations).
This also places the Hartley/Smith ancestor just below Z17911 somewhere
around 800 years ago (give or take a century or so).
It is quite incredible that just a few months ago we had no branches below
Z17911, and now we have 7 downstream branches with 13 known shared SNPs!
Jared
On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 12:24 PM, Joel Hartley <joel@...> wrote:
Hi Jared,
I'm never sure when this YFull analysis is finalized or not. At any rate,
on my list of SNPs, A11138 is the first one that is not listed as private.
So I assume that means I share it with you. If we hadn't done the YFull
analysis, I'm not sure if anyone would've picked up on this branching SNP.
Also it appears that the Z16357 SNP Tree needs to be modified again. It
looks like everyone has left Z17911 behind and that it is now a "ghost
town".
Joel
On 3/21/2017 8:03 AM, Jared Smith wrote:
No, I don't show A11138 as being a matching SNP with you. That's what is
particularly confusing to me.
But I clearly show positive for A11138 in my SNP list in my "Hg and SNPs"
list. A11138 is the very first one on my list.
I'm pretty sure the light green + indicates that there was only one read
at that location, so it is only suspected positive.
Jared
On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 5:44 AM, Joel Hartley <joel@...> wrote:
Hi Jared,
This is all very interesting. I wonder if my YFull has not been updated
yet. Do you show me as an A11138 match under the SNP Matches Tab?
I see A11138 under my Hg and SNPs but not at the SNP Matches.
Do you know what the light green + means compared to the dark green +?
Joel
On 3/20/2017 10:12 PM, Jared Smith wrote:
First, I see that FTDNA has pushed the updates to the tree for the
Hartley branch. Joel and Michael, your terminal SNP is now recorded as
A11132.
I just got my YFull results processed and they show me as positive for
A11138 (19477032-A-T). This is an SNP that Joel has, but that Michael
did not test positive for. However, it is right on the edge of a read
area for Michael, so it's quite possible that he also has A11138.
On the other hand, it's right in the middle of a read area for me, so
I would have thought I was negative because FTDNA didn't report it,
but it seems YFull's BAM analysis shows me as positive for it with a 5
star rating.
If this holds up, then this will make a small A11138 Hartley/Smith SNP
block just below Z17911 and above the Hartley A11132 block. This also
means that Michael has to be positive for this SNP (he can't be
downstream of this block and not have this SNP), which will increase
your shared SNPs by one and decrease Joel's novel variants by one -
effectively moving your shared ancestor closer to present day than
previously estimated by maybe 50-100 years.
I'm going to run all this past Mike W. He can request that FTDNA to a
BAM analysis on this region to see if I and Michael are both A11138.
Jared
|
Re: New Hartley/Smith SNP block?
Hi Jared,
What is the process for giving Michael Hartley a provisional
identifying named SNP (or SNPs) of his own? Are we waiting for the
best SNP before we name one? Also who does the naming? I think
that when I did my BigY, William Hartley, the administer of the
Hartley YDNA Project went in and named a bunch of my SNPs. I'm not
sure why this didn't happen for Michael.
Joel
On 3/25/2017 11:13 AM, Jared Smith wrote:
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
It's official - my terminal SNP is now A11138!
FTDNA did a BAM analysis to verify this and has added this SNP
to the tree. I've updated my charts at?
I also added a bit more aging info.
Because we now know that A11138 is above the A11132 block
and not below it as a novel variant with Joel, this does
decrease the number of novel variants Joel has, effectively
moving the shared Hartley ancestor date for Joel and Michael
back a bit (at least according to the math of my
calculations).
This also places the Hartley/Smith ancestor just below
Z17911 somewhere around 800 years ago (give or take a century
or so).
It is quite incredible that just a few months ago we had no
branches below Z17911, and now we have 7 downstream branches
with 13 known shared SNPs!
Jared
|
DNA Day Sale - Big-Y $150 off
I hope everyone is doing well. We haven't had any new tests on our
branch of the tree lately, but now is the optimal time for us to
recruit new Big-Y testers. Big-Y is on sale for only $450 through
Thursday of this week.
If everyone on this list would send just a couple e-mails to some of
their close Y-DNA matches, we likely could recruit several new
testers.
Someone asked for some positive messaging to help recruit Big-Y
testers, so I wrote the following, in case you'd like to use or modify
it:
Big-Y testing maps the genetic tree of humanity. We're slowly mapping
every Y-DNA mutation to particular ancestors - some known by name and
some too ancient to be known. Even for very old common ancestors,
these markers provide a unique identifier for them - a way to identify
family tree connections that could not possibly be made using
genealogical records.
Traditional genealogy works from modern day and builds the tree
backward from us to our ancestors. Y-DNA genealogy works in reverse -
we've identified mutations in our ancient ancestors and are
identifying new cousin relationships, new branches, and more defined
family timelines with each new Big-Y test. For many family lines,
we're still very much in the early days of this research, but each new
test provides better clarity.
On our own Z16357 part of the Y-DNA tree
(), we are getting much better defined
branches. We're getting closer to knowing geographies of some of our
ancestors - where and when they lived in the British Isles in the last
few thousand years. As we define and verify the individual mutations
that form new branches on our tree, we are paving the path for others
to eventually take very inexpensive DNA tests to see how their direct
male line connects with the rest of humanity. This future is only
possible if we pave the way by investing in Big-Y!
Thanks,
Jared Smith
|
Hey Jared, I was looking for something online?in addtion to dna-explained.com to send to an autosomal DNA match of mine for explanation of the possibilities of the match and I found the following nice page of yours:
I recommend it to others here looking?to understand?autosomal matches. Thanks, Charles Thomas
|
Re: New Hartley/Smith SNP block?
Congrats on the new discovery, Jared! With your extensive knowledge and help I hope there are many more discoveries for each of us in the group.
Charles Thomas
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
It's official - my terminal SNP is now A11138! FTDNA did a BAM analysis to verify this and has added this SNP to the tree. I've updated my charts at?
I also added a bit more aging info.
|
dna.smithplanet.com
SNP Overview. By analyzing certain SNP mutations that developed in men long ago and were then passed to their descendants today, we can begin to build a family tree ...
|
Because we now know that A11138 is above the A11132 block and not below it as a novel variant with Joel, this does decrease the number of novel variants Joel has, effectively moving the shared Hartley ancestor date for Joel and Michael back a bit (at least
according to the math of my calculations).
This also places the Hartley/Smith ancestor just below Z17911 somewhere around 800 years ago (give or take a century or so).
It is quite incredible that just a few months ago we had no branches below Z17911, and now we have 7 downstream branches with 13 known shared SNPs!
Jared
|
Jared Smith