I took a second glance at Z16323 and question it now. 24293374G>C Z16323 In Ybrowse it shows up on an Palindrome segment which is not good for stability. Palindrome segments are subject to recLOH events that can wipe out SNPs. A second clue is that f27202 Cunniff is FGC4087+, which appears equivalent to FGC4077 and FGC4078, I think. The Milligan's are not FGC4087+ so that would make Z16323 phylogenetically inconsistent with FGC4078. Regards, Mike W On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 8:01 AM, Mike W <mwwdna@gmail.com> wrote: > I also just noticed this in the R1b-L21_SNP_Tree_Discovery spreadsheet. > Have we discussed Z16323 yet? > > These three are the only people of the 24 M222+ folks that are derived at > Z16323: > > f27202 Cunniff > f12068 Milligan > f135550 Milligan > > It appears to be downstream of DF109/S660 and A1. BTW, A1 is something to > discuss too. > > Beyond that the two Milligan's are exclusive in being the only people to > have these four variants from Big Y gold regions: > > 22471633CT>C > 24447754C>T FGC4133 > 24481701TTCC>T > 25088392G>A FGC4134 > > You can see that FGC4133 and FGC4134 are point SNPs and must also be found > in an FGC tester. If he's a Milligan too then we may Milligan surname > markers. > > Regards, > Mike W > >