Those are two separate men, actually. I'll ask them both to test. Kyle DePew FTDNA Kit# N113849 On Sat, Apr 26, 2014 at 6:34 PM, David Wilson <dcw1000@live.com> wrote: > That is possible, but I wouldn't be too quick to dismiss its potential > significance. I see that you have a GD of 0/67 and 3/111 from a man named > Gray. If there was a possibility of a SNP match, I would think this man > would be a test candidate for both DF105 and Z70, > > David Wilson > > -----Original Message----- > From: dna-r1b1c7-bounces@rootsweb.com > [mailto:dna-r1b1c7-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Kyle DePew > Sent: Saturday, April 26, 2014 2:39 PM > To: dna-r1b1c7@rootsweb.com; dna-r1b1c7@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [R-M222] The 24 FTDNA SNPs below M222; Locations proposed for > PF3292 and Z70, and rough locations for others. > > I'm one of the supposed Z70+ individuals, and over the last couple months > narrowed down my matches to a couple of families named Feeney and Connolly > that carry most or all of my off-modals over 67 markers. (All of these > individuals are from Connemara according to the kit administrators and none > of them are in the M222 Project, if I remember correctly.) At least one of > these Feeneys had Geno 2.0 testing and, though I haven't seen his actual > file, his list of positive SNPs does not include Z70. I would think maybe > Z70 under M222 is unreliable as well? > > Kyle > > ------------------------------- > 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 >