Hmm! That is interesting news! Then just how could Englands/Irelands/ScotlandsDNA continue to do business? After all, a liquid sample is what drives their business. On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 2:27 PM, Aidan Byrne <[email protected]>wrote: > Hi. > > This is just a heads up for anyone from the Republic of Ireland (southern > Ireland) who is testing with BritainsDNA. > > Liquids are no longer allowed to be sent through regular post to mainland > UK. This is due to restrictions placed by the airlines that deliver mail. > > You have to pay a delivery charge (£13). BritainsDNA arrange for UPS to > deliver the kit to your house. When your sample is ready to be sent back, > you ring BritainsDNA and they will arrange for the courier to pick up your > sample from your house. This is very handy. And you don't have to pay when > returning the sample as the return delivery is included. > > - Aidan. > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

Malcolm I would caution that there is some very skewed sampling in the diagram so far. A lot of the 'Male Something' people were names supplied to Sandy during a discussion about who the Ui Neill names were. And a lot of the DF97 names of course are from Susan's cluster. Some parts of the diagram had groups of Scottish and English names but we haven't gone after their identities. Iain > From: [email protected] > To: [email protected] > Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2013 19:58:55 +0000 > Subject: Re: [R-M222] Revised M222 tree > > Iain > > My interest is in the aspect that might confirm Donegal family's > descent from Niall, as tradition suggests. > It seems to me that S668 contains very distinctly Donegal names; S588 > predominantly Inishowen, Derry and Tyrone names. Most of the other > DF85 and DF97 names appear to be alien to northwest Ireland in their > origin. > —For what it's worth— > > M. > On 19 Nov 2013, at 18:20, Iain Kennedy wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > List > > > > I have several updates to the M222 tree this evening. Jim Wilson has > > provided a list of SNPs which he considers phylogenetically > > equivalent to M222 and are (mostly) on the Chromo2 chip. As the list > > is now too long to force into a personal name in my tree I have also > > posted the raw tree diagram he sent me which primarily shows the top > > level above and below, so it is not a replacement for the whole > > earlier diagram. > > > > There are three features in his new diagram: > > 1. What appears to be a new hg between S474/DF49 and S193/DF23 > > called S476 which is not on the ISOGG tree. > > 2. The new list of M222 equivalents > > 3. A new SNP below M222 called S7073. > > > > I have moved everything at the root of M222 below S7073 but having > > not seen Steve Lominac's raw file yet I can't confirm that he is > > positive for it. I am as is Rob McBride too of course. > > > > The other change to the diagram, which Rob McBride spotted and > > neither Jim nor I did is that he is positive for F3952, one of the > > SNPs we got off Geno 2.0 which previously only a Mitchell was > > positive for. I have double checked with Jim and he reviewed the raw > > genotype and agrees with this placement. My checking procedures have > > been amended accordingly and I have added Mitchell to the diagram too. > > > > Upper tree update: > > > > http://www.kennedydna.com/S474.jpg > > > > Main tree from M222: > > > > http://www.kennedydna.com/M222.pdf > > > > Iain > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] > > with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and > > the body of the message > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

I can understand that people are looking for their English, Irish and Scottish roots, but a couple of thousand years ago they were all referred to as the British Isles, having mostly European immigration. And so perhaps a modern genetics company could have but ONE name? On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 8:56 AM, Mike W <[email protected]> wrote: > Other people are referring to the conglomeration as BISDNA (for British > Isles DNA). It took me a while to figure out they were doing but it works > for me. > > > On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 11:53 PM, tuulen <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Yes, I agree. > > > > Perhaps for ease of reference the name could be reduced to BISDNA, EISDNA > > or something like that? I, for one, prefer a single name of reference, > > please! > > > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

Iain My interest is in the aspect that might confirm Donegal family's descent from Niall, as tradition suggests. It seems to me that S668 contains very distinctly Donegal names; S588 predominantly Inishowen, Derry and Tyrone names. Most of the other DF85 and DF97 names appear to be alien to northwest Ireland in their origin. —For what it's worth— M. On 19 Nov 2013, at 18:20, Iain Kennedy wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > List > > I have several updates to the M222 tree this evening. Jim Wilson has > provided a list of SNPs which he considers phylogenetically > equivalent to M222 and are (mostly) on the Chromo2 chip. As the list > is now too long to force into a personal name in my tree I have also > posted the raw tree diagram he sent me which primarily shows the top > level above and below, so it is not a replacement for the whole > earlier diagram. > > There are three features in his new diagram: > 1. What appears to be a new hg between S474/DF49 and S193/DF23 > called S476 which is not on the ISOGG tree. > 2. The new list of M222 equivalents > 3. A new SNP below M222 called S7073. > > I have moved everything at the root of M222 below S7073 but having > not seen Steve Lominac's raw file yet I can't confirm that he is > positive for it. I am as is Rob McBride too of course. > > The other change to the diagram, which Rob McBride spotted and > neither Jim nor I did is that he is positive for F3952, one of the > SNPs we got off Geno 2.0 which previously only a Mitchell was > positive for. I have double checked with Jim and he reviewed the raw > genotype and agrees with this placement. My checking procedures have > been amended accordingly and I have added Mitchell to the diagram too. > > Upper tree update: > > http://www.kennedydna.com/S474.jpg > > Main tree from M222: > > http://www.kennedydna.com/M222.pdf > > Iain > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] > with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and > the body of the message

I read a post where I just contradicted another person somewhat that I hadn't read yet. Sorry about that. I don't care what we call them. I just want to go with something we stay consistent with. I started using BISDNA because others were using it and my login account screen is the British Isles version. Mike W On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 7:51 PM, tuulen <[email protected]> wrote: > I can understand that people are looking for their English, Irish and > Scottish roots, but a couple of thousand years ago they were all referred > to as the British Isles, having mostly European immigration. > > And so perhaps a modern genetics company could have but ONE name? > > > On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 8:56 AM, Mike W <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Other people are referring to the conglomeration as BISDNA (for British > > Isles DNA). It took me a while to figure out they were doing but it works > > for me. > > > > > >

I am DF97-, F1265+. David

From: [email protected] To: [email protected] Subject: RE: [R-M222] Revised M222 tree Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2013 19:34:26 +0000 OK I'll have another go at replying :-) I was confused by you using the word 'now' twice. All I did was insert S7073 between M222 and all the tree below (plus the minor insertion of F3952). The relationship between all the SNPs you list is unchanged. Your description is in fact correct apart from using the word 'now' which implies the relationship was previously different. You had me worried I had somehow screwed it up as I had to detach some children and reattach them to a different parent (S7073 instead of M222). Iain > Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2013 13:58:26 -0500 > From: [email protected] > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [R-M222] Revised M222 tree > > Very Interesting, Iain, and good going with that find, Rob McBride! > > The tree now would suggest, if I'm understanding it, that df97 and S668 > are brothers both descending from S673/known as df85 (what happened to > S675 ?); and S673/df85 and S588 are also brothers descending from either > S660 or S659...is that correct or are these artifacts of how the tree is > now represented? > > I very much look forward to Further clarifications of this with the > ongoing testing. > > Thank you Iain, Susan Hedeen > > On 11/19/2013 1:20 PM, Iain Kennedy wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > List > > > > I have several updates to the M222 tree this evening. Jim Wilson has provided a list of SNPs which he considers phylogenetically equivalent to M222 and are (mostly) on the Chromo2 chip. As the list is now too long to force into a personal name in my tree I have also posted the raw tree diagram he sent me which primarily shows the top level above and below, so it is not a replacement for the whole earlier diagram. > > > > There are three features in his new diagram: > > 1. What appears to be a new hg between S474/DF49 and S193/DF23 called S476 which is not on the ISOGG tree. > > 2. The new list of M222 equivalents > > 3. A new SNP below M222 called S7073. > > > > I have moved everything at the root of M222 below S7073 but having not seen Steve Lominac's raw file yet I can't confirm that he is positive for it. I am as is Rob McBride too of course. > > > > The other change to the diagram, which Rob McBride spotted and neither Jim nor I did is that he is positive for F3952, one of the SNPs we got off Geno 2.0 which previously only a Mitchell was positive for. I have double checked with Jim and he reviewed the raw genotype and agrees with this placement. My checking procedures have been amended accordingly and I have added Mitchell to the diagram too. > > > > Upper tree update: > > > > http://www.kennedydna.com/S474.jpg > > > > Main tree from M222: > > > > http://www.kennedydna.com/M222.pdf > > > > Iain > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Hi. This is just a heads up for anyone from the Republic of Ireland (southern Ireland) who is testing with BritainsDNA. Liquids are no longer allowed to be sent through regular post to mainland UK. This is due to restrictions placed by the airlines that deliver mail. You have to pay a delivery charge (£13). BritainsDNA arrange for UPS to deliver the kit to your house. When your sample is ready to be sent back, you ring BritainsDNA and they will arrange for the courier to pick up your sample from your house. This is very handy. And you don't have to pay when returning the sample as the return delivery is included. - Aidan.

Those relationships haven't changed although as the diagram clutters up the lines get harder to follow. Your description doesn't correspond to the diagram. Iain http://www.kennedydna.com > Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2013 13:58:26 -0500 > From: [email protected] > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [R-M222] Revised M222 tree > > Very Interesting, Iain, and good going with that find, Rob McBride! > > The tree now would suggest, if I'm understanding it, that df97 and S668 > are brothers both descending from S673/known as df85 (what happened to > S675 ?); and S673/df85 and S588 are also brothers descending from either > S660 or S659...is that correct or are these artifacts of how the tree is > now represented? > > I very much look forward to Further clarifications of this with the > ongoing testing. > > Thank you Iain, Susan Hedeen > > On 11/19/2013 1:20 PM, Iain Kennedy wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > List > > > > I have several updates to the M222 tree this evening. Jim Wilson has provided a list of SNPs which he considers phylogenetically equivalent to M222 and are (mostly) on the Chromo2 chip. As the list is now too long to force into a personal name in my tree I have also posted the raw tree diagram he sent me which primarily shows the top level above and below, so it is not a replacement for the whole earlier diagram. > > > > There are three features in his new diagram: > > 1. What appears to be a new hg between S474/DF49 and S193/DF23 called S476 which is not on the ISOGG tree. > > 2. The new list of M222 equivalents > > 3. A new SNP below M222 called S7073. > > > > I have moved everything at the root of M222 below S7073 but having not seen Steve Lominac's raw file yet I can't confirm that he is positive for it. I am as is Rob McBride too of course. > > > > The other change to the diagram, which Rob McBride spotted and neither Jim nor I did is that he is positive for F3952, one of the SNPs we got off Geno 2.0 which previously only a Mitchell was positive for. I have double checked with Jim and he reviewed the raw genotype and agrees with this placement. My checking procedures have been amended accordingly and I have added Mitchell to the diagram too. > > > > Upper tree update: > > > > http://www.kennedydna.com/S474.jpg > > > > Main tree from M222: > > > > http://www.kennedydna.com/M222.pdf > > > > Iain > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Yes there was a note of an unnamed Scot who is S7073- but it wasn't clear if he is the sole person in this group, my guess is that he is for the time being. Iain > Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2013 19:04:22 +0000 > From: [email protected] > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [R-M222] Revised M222 tree > > I'm assuming some M222+/S7073- have been found in Chromo2.0 results to > result in new phylogeny. Otherwise they would have had it equivalent to > M222. > > The new SNP between DF23 and DF49 will be useful for those DF49+ who have > tested DF23-, that's for sure! > > -Paul > (DF41+) > > > On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 6:20 PM, Iain Kennedy <[email protected]>wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > List > > > > I have several updates to the M222 tree this evening. Jim Wilson has > > provided a list of SNPs which he considers phylogenetically equivalent to > > M222 and are (mostly) on the Chromo2 chip. As the list is now too long to > > force into a personal name in my tree I have also posted the raw tree > > diagram he sent me which primarily shows the top level above and below, so > > it is not a replacement for the whole earlier diagram. > > > > There are three features in his new diagram: > > 1. What appears to be a new hg between S474/DF49 and S193/DF23 called S476 > > which is not on the ISOGG tree. > > 2. The new list of M222 equivalents > > 3. A new SNP below M222 called S7073. > > > > I have moved everything at the root of M222 below S7073 but having not > > seen Steve Lominac's raw file yet I can't confirm that he is positive for > > it. I am as is Rob McBride too of course. > > > > The other change to the diagram, which Rob McBride spotted and neither Jim > > nor I did is that he is positive for F3952, one of the SNPs we got off Geno > > 2.0 which previously only a Mitchell was positive for. I have double > > checked with Jim and he reviewed the raw genotype and agrees with this > > placement. My checking procedures have been amended accordingly and I have > > added Mitchell to the diagram too. > > > > Upper tree update: > > > > http://www.kennedydna.com/S474.jpg > > > > Main tree from M222: > > > > http://www.kennedydna.com/M222.pdf > > > > Iain > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > > quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

I'm assuming some M222+/S7073- have been found in Chromo2.0 results to result in new phylogeny. Otherwise they would have had it equivalent to M222. The new SNP between DF23 and DF49 will be useful for those DF49+ who have tested DF23-, that's for sure! -Paul (DF41+) On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 6:20 PM, Iain Kennedy <[email protected]>wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > List > > I have several updates to the M222 tree this evening. Jim Wilson has > provided a list of SNPs which he considers phylogenetically equivalent to > M222 and are (mostly) on the Chromo2 chip. As the list is now too long to > force into a personal name in my tree I have also posted the raw tree > diagram he sent me which primarily shows the top level above and below, so > it is not a replacement for the whole earlier diagram. > > There are three features in his new diagram: > 1. What appears to be a new hg between S474/DF49 and S193/DF23 called S476 > which is not on the ISOGG tree. > 2. The new list of M222 equivalents > 3. A new SNP below M222 called S7073. > > I have moved everything at the root of M222 below S7073 but having not > seen Steve Lominac's raw file yet I can't confirm that he is positive for > it. I am as is Rob McBride too of course. > > The other change to the diagram, which Rob McBride spotted and neither Jim > nor I did is that he is positive for F3952, one of the SNPs we got off Geno > 2.0 which previously only a Mitchell was positive for. I have double > checked with Jim and he reviewed the raw genotype and agrees with this > placement. My checking procedures have been amended accordingly and I have > added Mitchell to the diagram too. > > Upper tree update: > > http://www.kennedydna.com/S474.jpg > > Main tree from M222: > > http://www.kennedydna.com/M222.pdf > > Iain > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

I maintain my hunch on the DF97 modal and DYS 385 values of 11-12. 6% of M222 as a whole is quite a coincidence to have such a showing with five results in. I bet Strain is going to be positive as well. On 19 November 2013 18:40, Susan Hedeen <[email protected]>wrote: > The age may go up a little bit...there's lots to sort out yet previous > to that, though. Through the testing, the down streams need be better > assessed and fully positioned. It is very interesting, none the less.... > > On 11/19/2013 6:35 PM, Marcus McNeely wrote: > > What a mutant bunch the R1b folks are. M222 is not very terminal at all > > anymore, is it??? Will the age of M222 itself need to be adjusted if > > subordinate SNPs have such a wide variance in STRs? > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

I don't subscribe to it, but do read it online from time to time. There was a bit on the Geno website to that end some time ago (the Mayo visit), but I'll assume that was precursory to what's coming. They highlighted a few notables: Enda Kenny's test results, a footballer, etc. I suppose Mayo alone wouldn't be enough for an Irish reference population. I wonder what sample size was necessary in their minds to coin a British or German reference population, for example? On 19 November 2013 16:48, Bernard Morgan <[email protected]> wrote: > Does anyone read the Western People? For they are advertising tomorrow's > paper stories include: "National Geographic reveals results of genetic > study in Mayo." > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

The age may go up a little bit...there's lots to sort out yet previous to that, though. Through the testing, the down streams need be better assessed and fully positioned. It is very interesting, none the less.... On 11/19/2013 6:35 PM, Marcus McNeely wrote: > What a mutant bunch the R1b folks are. M222 is not very terminal at all > anymore, is it??? Will the age of M222 itself need to be adjusted if > subordinate SNPs have such a wide variance in STRs? > > >

What a mutant bunch the R1b folks are. M222 is not very terminal at all anymore, is it??? Will the age of M222 itself need to be adjusted if subordinate SNPs have such a wide variance in STRs? On 19 November 2013 13:20, Iain Kennedy <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > List > > I have several updates to the M222 tree this evening. Jim Wilson has > provided a list of SNPs which he considers phylogenetically equivalent to > M222 and are (mostly) on the Chromo2 chip. As the list is now too long to > force into a personal name in my tree I have also posted the raw tree > diagram he sent me which primarily shows the top level above and below, so > it is not a replacement for the whole earlier diagram. > > There are three features in his new diagram: > 1. What appears to be a new hg between S474/DF49 and S193/DF23 called S476 > which is not on the ISOGG tree. > 2. The new list of M222 equivalents > 3. A new SNP below M222 called S7073. > > I have moved everything at the root of M222 below S7073 but having not > seen Steve Lominac's raw file yet I can't confirm that he is positive for > it. I am as is Rob McBride too of course. > > The other change to the diagram, which Rob McBride spotted and neither Jim > nor I did is that he is positive for F3952, one of the SNPs we got off Geno > 2.0 which previously only a Mitchell was positive for. I have double > checked with Jim and he reviewed the raw genotype and agrees with this > placement. My checking procedures have been amended accordingly and I have > added Mitchell to the diagram too. > > Upper tree update: > > http://www.kennedydna.com/S474.jpg > > Main tree from M222: > > http://www.kennedydna.com/M222.pdf > > Iain > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

List I have several updates to the M222 tree this evening. Jim Wilson has provided a list of SNPs which he considers phylogenetically equivalent to M222 and are (mostly) on the Chromo2 chip. As the list is now too long to force into a personal name in my tree I have also posted the raw tree diagram he sent me which primarily shows the top level above and below, so it is not a replacement for the whole earlier diagram. There are three features in his new diagram: 1. What appears to be a new hg between S474/DF49 and S193/DF23 called S476 which is not on the ISOGG tree. 2. The new list of M222 equivalents 3. A new SNP below M222 called S7073. I have moved everything at the root of M222 below S7073 but having not seen Steve Lominac's raw file yet I can't confirm that he is positive for it. I am as is Rob McBride too of course. The other change to the diagram, which Rob McBride spotted and neither Jim nor I did is that he is positive for F3952, one of the SNPs we got off Geno 2.0 which previously only a Mitchell was positive for. I have double checked with Jim and he reviewed the raw genotype and agrees with this placement. My checking procedures have been amended accordingly and I have added Mitchell to the diagram too. Upper tree update: http://www.kennedydna.com/S474.jpg Main tree from M222: http://www.kennedydna.com/M222.pdf Iain

Iain, I just want to go on record to state that my "Male MacAdam" is not in the group you mention to Malcolm. My g-g-grandfather, Donald MacAdam, was born in Prince Edward Island a few years after the Adamson/MacAdam group arrived there. He was a generation younger than the other five heads of families, and I know his father came to PEI, but I'm not absolutely certain of his given name, so I used "Unknown" later changed here to "Male." Allene ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2013 21:02:35 +0000 From: Iain Kennedy <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [R-M222] Revised M222 tree To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Message-ID: <[email protected]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Malcolm I would caution that there is some very skewed sampling in the diagram so far. A lot of the 'Male Something' people were names supplied to Sandy during a discussion about who the Ui Neill names were. And a lot of the DF97 names of course are from Susan's cluster. Some parts of the diagram had groups of Scottish and English names but we haven't gone after their identities. Iain

Only one missing: 43598 Jeffrey Lane 13 Nov 2013 ordered BIG Y Mikes thanks for watching over these and including them in your worksheets. Linda

Sorry about that, Iain for my bad grammar:-D)))! Thank you for looking again and thank you for keeping up the tree and talking w/James Wilson on the clarifications. It is interesting how this is playing out none the less and I'm happy that despite my bad wording that I was seeing your interpretation correctly. Thanks again, Susan On 11/19/2013 2:34 PM, Iain Kennedy wrote: > From: [email protected] > To: [email protected] > Subject: RE: [R-M222] Revised M222 tree > Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2013 19:34:26 +0000 > > > > > OK I'll have another go at replying :-) > > I was confused by you using the word 'now' twice. All I did was insert S7073 between M222 and all the tree below (plus the minor insertion of F3952). > > The relationship between all the SNPs you list is unchanged. Your description is in fact correct apart from using the word 'now' which implies the relationship was previously different. > > You had me worried I had somehow screwed it up as I had to detach some children and reattach them to a different parent (S7073 instead of M222). > > Iain > > > > > >> Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2013 13:58:26 -0500 >> From: [email protected] >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: Re: [R-M222] Revised M222 tree >> >> Very Interesting, Iain, and good going with that find, Rob McBride! >> >> The tree now would suggest, if I'm understanding it, that df97 and S668 >> are brothers both descending from S673/known as df85 (what happened to >> S675 ?); and S673/df85 and S588 are also brothers descending from either >> S660 or S659...is that correct or are these artifacts of how the tree is >> now represented? >> >> I very much look forward to Further clarifications of this with the >> ongoing testing. >> >> Thank you Iain, Susan Hedeen >> >> On 11/19/2013 1:20 PM, Iain Kennedy wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> List >>> >>> I have several updates to the M222 tree this evening. Jim Wilson has provided a list of SNPs which he considers phylogenetically equivalent to M222 and are (mostly) on the Chromo2 chip. As the list is now too long to force into a personal name in my tree I have also posted the raw tree diagram he sent me which primarily shows the top level above and below, so it is not a replacement for the whole earlier diagram. >>> >>> There are three features in his new diagram: >>> 1. What appears to be a new hg between S474/DF49 and S193/DF23 called S476 which is not on the ISOGG tree. >>> 2. The new list of M222 equivalents >>> 3. A new SNP below M222 called S7073. >>> >>> I have moved everything at the root of M222 below S7073 but having not seen Steve Lominac's raw file yet I can't confirm that he is positive for it. I am as is Rob McBride too of course. >>> >>> The other change to the diagram, which Rob McBride spotted and neither Jim nor I did is that he is positive for F3952, one of the SNPs we got off Geno 2.0 which previously only a Mitchell was positive for. I have double checked with Jim and he reviewed the raw genotype and agrees with this placement. My checking procedures have been amended accordingly and I have added Mitchell to the diagram too. >>> >>> Upper tree update: >>> >>> http://www.kennedydna.com/S474.jpg >>> >>> Main tree from M222: >>> >>> http://www.kennedydna.com/M222.pdf >>> >>> Iain >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> ------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >>> >> >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

Does my list below look about right for M222? The "8" for Lally is just so these guys sort out correctly on the spreadsheet and Lally is known DF85+. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: <[email protected]> Date: Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 2:49 PM To: [email protected] Thank you for the update, Linda. Here's who I have for Big Y from M222. Does this look about right? f88905 Degnen 49-2329222- uas f56598 Dunbar 49-2329222-1111 f12701 Ferguson 49-2329222- uas f56154 Howle 49-2329222- uas f181933 Lally 49-23292228- uas f47582 Leonard 49-2329222- uas f135550 Milligan 49-2329222- uas f229652 Williams 49-2329222- uas