Hi Iain, According to Jim Wilson, one person had 2 mutations compared to his father. One of the mutations was S668 and the other was DF97. So in the sense that everyone with S668 also has DF97, they can be taken as equivalent, but they are actually two separate mutations that occurred in the same person. Best, Sandy -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Iain Kennedy Sent: 06 November 2013 12:25 To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [R-M222] Chromo2 and DF97 Larry, We don't yet know the answer to the question as there is a marker (S668) on Chromo2 that may be directly equivalent to DF97. The only way we will resolve it is if people test Chromo2 and are also DF97+. >From the point of view of the M222 diagram I'm maintaining I would personally want to be very sure the two markers in question are equivalent before I merge the two sub-branches if only because it would be a right pain to have to de-merge them later. And that needs lots of people to test. Iain http://www.kennedydna.com/M222.pdf > Date: Wed, 6 Nov 2013 06:17:14 -0600 > From: [email protected] > To: [email protected] > Subject: [R-M222] Chromo2 and DF97 > > For those keeping track, I mailed my vial of spit back to Nottingham for the Chromo2 test on October 23. > > Also, I was DF85+ at FTDNA but didn't order DF97 at the time. From what I've gathered from the list (and I haven't been following terribly closely the past few weeks as fatigue has set in), Chromo2 doesn't test DF97. Is there much value in going ahead with the DF97, or should I just wait to see what the Chromo2 test tells us? Thanks. > > Larry > > ------------------------------- > 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 Sandy, Thanks for the extra clarification - that sounds a bit like the public domain Gates snr and jnr genomes. Hopefully the first few samples will demonstrate this and they can be formally merged. best Iain > From: [email protected] > To: [email protected] > Date: Wed, 6 Nov 2013 13:31:33 +0000 > Subject: Re: [R-M222] Chromo2 and DF97 > > Hi Iain, > > According to Jim Wilson, one person had 2 mutations compared to his father. > One of the mutations was S668 and the other was DF97. So in the sense that > everyone with S668 also has DF97, they can be taken as equivalent, but they > are actually two separate mutations that occurred in the same person. > > Best, > > Sandy > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Iain Kennedy > Sent: 06 November 2013 12:25 > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [R-M222] Chromo2 and DF97 > > Larry, > > We don't yet know the answer to the question as there is a marker (S668) on > Chromo2 that may be directly equivalent to DF97. The only way we will > resolve it is if people test Chromo2 and are also DF97+. > > >From the point of view of the M222 diagram I'm maintaining I would > personally want to be very sure the two markers in question are equivalent > before I merge the two sub-branches if only because it would be a right pain > to have to de-merge them later. And that needs lots of people to test. > > Iain > > http://www.kennedydna.com/M222.pdf > > > > > > > Date: Wed, 6 Nov 2013 06:17:14 -0600 > > From: [email protected] > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: [R-M222] Chromo2 and DF97 > > > > For those keeping track, I mailed my vial of spit back to Nottingham for > the Chromo2 test on October 23. > > > > Also, I was DF85+ at FTDNA but didn't order DF97 at the time. From what > I've gathered from the list (and I haven't been following terribly closely > the past few weeks as fatigue has set in), Chromo2 doesn't test DF97. Is > there much value in going ahead with the DF97, or should I just wait to see > what the Chromo2 test tells us? Thanks. > > > > Larry > > > > ------------------------------- > > 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

YEP...it really is unfortunate that the df97 did not make the Chromo2 chip, because being 2 separate SNPs as we've discussed previously, for these M222 populations who test positive for both df85 (S675 and by Wilson's draft tree of M222+ possibly ancestral to S668) and df97 (not represented on Chromo2 but speculatively in the neighborhood of S668) df97's disposition in relation to S668 may be further enlightening in helping us determine which lineages belong to what groups and where divergence between the groups may be. I see this as a primary important reason for the df85+ df97- and the df85+ df97+ in addition to the df85- result holders to test Chromo2. Furthermore since S673, and S675 (df85) are seemingly separate SNPs, with sufficient numbers of tests we may be able to determine whether or not both SNPs will be found within all who test positive for df85 or if there is separation of them (S673 from S675) among the results and if S668 is more directly associated with one of them--either S673 or S675--or if both are present among those who test positive for S668. I see the importance in being able to determine this in light of migration in addition to which groups may belong to who. I'm hoping that these explanations underpin the need to test. If there were ever a question of "should I? or should I not? test Chromo2" IMO the latter should be disregarded. We need testing in sufficient numbers to attempt know these things in best clarity. In particular, we need Chromo2 results from the O'Dochartaigh (the Doherty/O'Doherty groups)---several results---and from the different branches as seen within their project pages reflecting the different haplotype affinities. Susan Hedeen On 11/6/2013 9:00 AM, Iain Kennedy wrote: > Hi Sandy, > > Thanks for the extra clarification - that sounds a bit like the public domain Gates snr and jnr genomes. Hopefully the first few samples will demonstrate this and they can be formally merged. > > best > > Iain > > > > >> From: [email protected] >> To: [email protected] >> Date: Wed, 6 Nov 2013 13:31:33 +0000 >> Subject: Re: [R-M222] Chromo2 and DF97 >> >> Hi Iain, >> >> According to Jim Wilson, one person had 2 mutations compared to his father. >> One of the mutations was S668 and the other was DF97. So in the sense that >> everyone with S668 also has DF97, they can be taken as equivalent, but they >> are actually two separate mutations that occurred in the same person. >> >> Best, >> >> Sandy >> >> >> >> >>