DNA-R1B1C7-L Archives

Archiver > DNA-R1B1C7 > 2008-01 > 1201537696


From: "David Wilson" <>
Subject: Re: [DNA-R1B1C7] FTDNA Panel 4 Stability
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 08:28:16 -0800
References: <479C2931.7030006@melbpc.org.au>
In-Reply-To: <479C2931.7030006@melbpc.org.au>


Weighing in late on this discussion. Sorry.

Markers 38-67 interest me a lot. With only three exceptions, the R1b1c7
modal values for these markers are the same as for mainstream R1b. The
differences are these:

413a = 21 instead of 23
534 = 16 instead of 15
481 = 25 instead of 22

These last 30 markers are in general slow moving markers, which means we
should expect to see little variance in any relatively young population. But
as we know, mutations do happen. If two individuals share a non-modal value
in one of the latter markers but do not share other non-modal markers
elsewhere in the haplotype, one should think of IBS rather than IBD
(identity by state, identity by descent). In short, we would be dealing with
coincidence or convergent evolution.

As to the question about MRCA, I have seen a genetic distance of 6 manifest
itself in as little as 350 to 400 years -- 10 to 12 generations. If that
seems like fast evolution, remember that half of them could occur in one
line and the others in the other line, so you're actually talking about a
total travel distance of 20 or more generations.

Just a first quick response. I'll try to have further ideas later.

David W.



-----Original Message-----
From:
[mailto:] On Behalf Of J. David Grierson
Sent: Saturday, January 26, 2008 10:48 PM
To: DNA R1b1c7
Subject: [DNA-R1B1C7] FTDNA Panel 4 Stability

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: