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 >
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