DNA-R1B1C7-L Archives

Archiver > DNA-R1B1C7 > 2008-01 > 1201482777


From: "Paul Conroy" <>
Subject: Re: [DNA-R1B1C7] FTDNA Panel 4 Stability
Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2008 20:12:57 -0500
References: <479C2931.7030006@melbpc.org.au>
In-Reply-To: <479C2931.7030006@melbpc.org.au>


David,

The "16616 Conroy" is probably me, as I have the 13 value at DYS442 & DYS444
(I'm actually kit# 16646). My Y-Search # is DFG6F, and the County Laois
Conroy clan is a splinter of the Laois/Offaly Dunne (Gaelic: O'Duinn) clan
from 400 years ago. My nearest DNA match is a Dunne with GD=1 at 25 markers.

The Dunne name is native Irish, but there is a similar sounding name, Dunn,
found in Scotland, which may be related? Some of the Irish Dunne's with
descendants in the US, now spell their name Dunn - so things are a little
mixed.

The Dunne's occupied a territory called Ui Reagan and were said to be
descendants of the Southern O'Neill...

Cheers,
Paul


On Jan 27, 2008 1:48 AM, J. David Grierson <> wrote:

> These questions are for David Wilson, but I think they are of general
> interest, and I would value comment from anybody.
>
> I have a number of what I identify as "Celtic" Grier(son)/Greers with
> the Panel 4 (ie loci 38-67) results almost identical to the R1b1c7 modal
> from YSearch. The only difference is in DYS444, which in ALL members of
> the Grier(son)Greer project is 13, a very rare result. Indeed, there
> appears to be only one other R1b1c7 member (16616 Conroy) with this
> score. As it happens, he also has DYS442 at 13, as I do, another
> extremely rare count; however, in spite of these pairings, we otherwise
> have a GD of 15, so our joint ancestry must actually go back to near the
> beginnings of M222+, and I think this is a very good example of
> convergence in the midst of divergence. Now, the aforementioned Greers
> with Panel 4 results that match the modal (DYS444 excluded) have been
> assessed by the FTDNA algorithm(s) as R1b in all cases.
>
> My first question, then, is:
> Are the DYS values at the loci covered by FTDNA Panel 4 so stable that
> they likely predate M222+, or does the exact (or almost exact) match
> with the R1b1c7 modal - and a very large number of R1b1c7 members -
> belie the FTDNA statement "Please note that for any predicted results we
> see no reason for ordering a SNP test to confirm the Haplogroup", and
> and also enable us to confidently predict R1b1c7 for these individuals,
> given that they exactly match me in almost all cases, and I am SNP M222+?
>
> Second question:
> Given that every member of this name-group tested at DYS444 has an
> identical, but rare, allele count, but that also there is an internal GD
> of up to 6 or more between the individuals, how far away is the MRCA,
> assuming that somehow or other DYS444=13 is a family identifier?
>
> I am fascinated by the notion that, given the internal GD which I think
> is likely to take our combined MRCA back to well before the surname era,
> somehow all these families chose a varient of the same name, despite
> doubtless by the beginnings of surnames being well separated in
> location. It suggests that there was some kind of family identifier
> passed on through the generations.
>
> David, I will send you my spreadsheet in case my questions need
> elaboration.
> David Grierson in Melbourne
>
>
>
> -------------------------------
> 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: