We have three complete 111-marker panels in the Ewing project, now. The results on markers 68-111 can be seen at http://dl.dropbox.com/u/431003/111-markerTable.pdf I am happy to send an Excel or csv file of these to anyone who would like to have that. The two of us in Group 1b ( http://dl.dropbox.com/u/431003/Group1bRelationshipDiagram.pdf) are known to be 6th cousins, once removed. We differ at three loci. The third man is in Group 1a, and though we know the men in that Group are closely related to the other Group 1 men, we do not know the conventional genealogical relationship. He differs from the two men in Group 1b at two and three loci, respectively. I have calculated a Ewing modal for the extended panel on the basis of just these three haplotypes. Two of the testees are at genetic distance 1 from this Ewing modal (considering just markers 68-111) and the third is at genetic distance 2. All three of these men exactly match one another at markers 38-67. These preliminary results suggest that this panel might be very useful to our project, if enough of our participants were willing to spring for the extra couple of hundred dollars it would cost to upgrade from 37 markers. Markers 38-67 have not been particularly helpful to us, partly because the Ewing modal exactly matches the R:M222+ modal at these markers and partly because there are no off-modal matches in markers 38-67 among any of the 24 men in the closely related Ewing Groups 1 and 2. I would be very interested to learn whether anyone has collected enough R:M222+ 111-marker haplotypes to calculate a credible R:M222+ modal for the extended panel, and if so, what it may be. David Ewing

I had a look on the FTDNA R:M222 Project website and captured 18 complete 111-marker haplotypes. I calculated a modal on just these for markers 68 - 111. The result is at http://dl.dropbox.com/u/431003/68-111_M222Modal.xls Then I compared this R:M222 modal with the Ewings at http://dl.dropbox.com/u/431003/111-markerTable.pdf Clearly, we don't have enough data to reach anything like reliable conclusions, but it looks like at least the branch of Ewings represented by the three Ewing men who have full 111-marker results have two additional markers off-modal for R:M222. It looks like some partial results on the extended panel are coming in, so maybe we'll have more M222 haplotypes soon, and we are also expecting a couple of more Ewings to upgrade soon. We'll see how this holds up. David Ewing