<http://us.mc1254.mail.yahoo.com/mc/showMessage;_ylc=X3oDMTBrZ28zdG8wBF9TAzM5ODMwMTAyNwRhYwNGbGFn?sMid=0&fid=Sent&filterBy=&.rand=457779509&midIndex=0&mid=1_76273_AGziimIAAXGtTkiuXwk85GpkyG8&f=1&fromId=frmid2va%40yahoo.com&m=1_76273_AGziimIAAXGtTkiuXwk85GpkyG8%2C1_75893_AGjiimIAAAFFTkhFFQGYrgIUjf0%2C1_75510_AHHiimIAAJatTkajwwyuUDQJp0E%2C1_278_AGjiimIAANsdTkaZ4gQmTUD64OY%2C1_659_AEriimIAAFYtTkXsqwnoVi%2B8Cjs%2C1_1020_AEriimIAABvXTkXj%2BQXX%2Bjv23Hw%2C&sort=date&order=down&startMid=0&hash=13257c9050d03433a295a149a20ca132&.jsrand=4657804&acrumb=JV7QM4b%2FYIa&mcrumb=1xR1rtu2PRO&enc=auto&cmd=msg.flag> I have a question which I've searched for an answer or even a discussion of in all the reading lists, message boards, papers, and web sites; and I'm either a total moron or the answers just are not discussed. Our M222 signature is a bit off model yet remains with-in profile. For some of the marker variance, the 1 pt off is among those markers which may mutate faster and/or more easlily than others. Our test result shows a dys 392 value at 15 which is yet with-in profile while also considered off model. This particular marker is considered one of the more stable markers tested. Of further interest to me is this combination of dys 392=15 and 389-2=28. In all of FTDNA data base and Y search, our test subject sample has NO exact matches at the 12 marker panel. It fits the M222 profile as well as has several close matches at 67 (by close I'm referring to 3 or 4 gd @ 67). One of those matches is with-in the surname while all the rest are with a majority surname and and a few others in the same parent project we tested under. I suppose what I'm really trying to figure out is whether that dys 392 value of 15 is a mutation from 14, if the 14 we see as the highest percentage value consistent with the M222 model signature today (in the here and now) is the mutation from 15, OR if our test subject's particular signature may represent a transitional model yet not defined. I have seen other R1b's with a DYS 392 = 15 -- not many I might add, and by enlarge those I have found have a dys 389-2 value at 29 rather than the 28 as our result shows. I did some critical looks at all the papers on line I could find, looked at all the literature I could understand; found 1 website only which even mentioned dys 392 = 15, and it was a one liner suggesting, don't know. The one thing that seems clear is that that particular value among all the R1b's is well in the minority. I did one of the online analysis of haplotypes to get a result back that read 50% old Irish, 50% Ulster Irish what ever that means -- I'm kidding, I know what that means, but it didn't do a thing to answer my question. We joined the genographic project hoping they might shed some light on the subject. In a word, NOPE! I'm trying to entice one of two male 3rd cousins to do a Y12 to see if the signature is the same. That may or may not shed light on the subject depending; but I'd guess that since all the male ancestors are the same up until the last 3 generations that it's likely to be identical. Does anyone have any ideas or can point me in the direction of someone? You notice that I didn't get overly involved in the terminology. I really believe that we can explain very well in simple terms and that may also benefit those who are not fully up to speed on the terminology -- and although I get most of it, it also really is much easier to understand in basic everyday language. frmid2va@yahoo.com or chantillycarpets@earthlink.net

Hi, Susan, I am a DNA noob, one of the R-M222 group, and I do appreciate the "plain language" discussion, thank you! Doug On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 2:07 AM, Susan Hedeen < chantillycarpets@earthlink.net> wrote: > > < > http://us.mc1254.mail.yahoo.com/mc/showMessage;_ylc=X3oDMTBrZ28zdG8wBF9TAzM5ODMwMTAyNwRhYwNGbGFn?sMid=0&fid=Sent&filterBy=&.rand=457779509&midIndex=0&mid=1_76273_AGziimIAAXGtTkiuXwk85GpkyG8&f=1&fromId=frmid2va%40yahoo.com&m=1_76273_AGziimIAAXGtTkiuXwk85GpkyG8%2C1_75893_AGjiimIAAAFFTkhFFQGYrgIUjf0%2C1_75510_AHHiimIAAJatTkajwwyuUDQJp0E%2C1_278_AGjiimIAANsdTkaZ4gQmTUD64OY%2C1_659_AEriimIAAFYtTkXsqwnoVi%2B8Cjs%2C1_1020_AEriimIAABvXTkXj%2BQXX%2Bjv23Hw%2C&sort=date&order=down&startMid=0&hash=13257c9050d03433a295a149a20ca132&.jsrand=4657804&acrumb=JV7QM4b%2FYIa&mcrumb=1xR1rtu2PRO&enc=auto&cmd=msg.flag > > > > > I have a question which I've searched for an answer or even a > discussion of in all the reading lists, message boards, papers, and > web sites; and I'm either a total moron or the answers just are not > discussed. > > > Our M222 signature is a bit off model yet remains with-in profile. For > some of the marker variance, the 1 pt off is among those markers which > may mutate faster and/or more easlily than others. > > Our test result shows a dys 392 value at 15 which is yet with-in profile > while also considered off model. This particular marker is considered > one of the more stable markers tested. > > Of further interest to me is this combination of dys 392=15 and > 389-2=28. In all of FTDNA data base and Y search, our test subject > sample has NO exact matches at the 12 marker panel. It fits the M222 > profile as well as has several close matches at 67 (by close I'm > referring to 3 or 4 gd @ 67). One of those matches is with-in the > surname while all the rest are with a majority surname and and a few > others in the same parent project we tested under. > > I suppose what I'm really trying to figure out is whether that dys 392 > value of 15 is a mutation from 14, if the 14 we see as the highest > percentage value consistent with the M222 model signature today (in the > here and now) is the mutation from 15, OR if our test subject's > particular signature may represent a transitional model yet not defined. > > I have seen other R1b's with a DYS 392 = 15 -- not many I might add, and > by enlarge those I have found have a dys 389-2 value at 29 rather than > the 28 as our result shows. > > I did some critical looks at all the papers on line I could find, looked > at all the literature I could understand; found 1 website only which > even mentioned dys 392 = 15, and it was a one liner suggesting, don't > know. The one thing that seems clear is that that particular value > among all the R1b's is well in the minority. I did one of the online > analysis of haplotypes to get a result back that read 50% old Irish, 50% > Ulster Irish what ever that means -- I'm kidding, I know what that > means, but it didn't do a thing to answer my question. > > We joined the genographic project hoping they might shed some light on > the subject. In a word, NOPE! > > I'm trying to entice one of two male 3rd cousins to do a Y12 to see if > the signature is the same. That may or may not shed light on the > subject depending; but I'd guess that since all the male ancestors are > the same up until the last 3 generations that it's likely to be identical. > > Does anyone have any ideas or can point me in the direction of someone? > You notice that I didn't get overly involved in the terminology. I > really believe that we can explain very well in simple terms and that > may also benefit those who are not fully up to speed on the terminology > -- and although I get most of it, it also really is much easier to > understand in basic everyday language. frmid2va@yahoo.com or > chantillycarpets@earthlink.net > R1b1c7 Research and Links: > > http://clanmaclochlainn.com/R1b1c7/ > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > DNA-R1B1C7-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message >