We're all related to each other, so pileups are still relatives even though it might back a very long time! See the WAAH on CHR 2 as an example Andreas > On 19 Dec 2015, at 02:01, David Schroeder via <genealogy-dna@rootsweb.com> wrote: > > Dave, > > "I was wondering what you were defining as a 'pile-up.'?" I am defining a > pileup as an extraordinary number of matches on a particular segment region. > These matches are with people I am not related to. Form me, it is chromosome > 15 from positions 233,000 to 293,000 where I have several hundred matches. > > "I am curious if you have crossed checked the reductions against what > surnames go missing?" Not yet, in the planning stages after the holidays. > > "Alternatively, have you counted the number of the pile-up of surnames as > well?" Not yet. I have explored enough matches in my pileup region to know > that there is no way most, if not all, of these people are related to me. > The pileups seem to show up in gedmatch, but it looks like 23andme > eliminated my pileup matches in DNA Relatives. > > David > > > Ann, > "You speak of fixing errors -- I assume you're referring to no-calls rather > that outright errors (miscalls)?" Yes fixing no-calls. There were only 106 > wrong-call between Ancestry and 23. Since I had over 3500 AA, TT, CC and GG > that were no-calls in either 23 or ancestry, I would think that a > significant number would be opposite homozygote which would break the > segment, and reduce the number of matches. > > David > > Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2015 15:15:34 -0500 > From: Dave Hamm <odoniv@earthlink.net> > Subject: Re: [DNA] My Raw Data Files - Comparison 23andme vs, > AncestryDNA > To: genealogy-dna@rootsweb.com > Message-ID: <567317E6.2010300@earthlink.net> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed > > Hi David, > > Oh, I was wondering what you were defining as a 'pile-up.' > > I did not appear to be having such a problem, and could think of several > scenarios of what you could be referring to. I was thinking of your > efinition of a 'pile-up' as in the HLA regions. (I identify those with a > simple calculation that includes the number of SNPS....) > > Now I get it. > > I am now thinking that you are looking at your surname signature(?). > Or, at worst, haplotype group signature(?). > > I get chromosomes with a high density of matching (tiny) segments on > chromosomes 1 and 11 when using autosomal sampling from my Y-DNA surname > project. > > I am thinking that I am looking at that as a basic signature for my surname, > because of the criteria I use to match each segment triad. > > Those segments that I do not use in the triad include at least one HLA > region on chromosome 6. That HLA region (in my small study) occurs in about > 25% of my sampling (after processing). Hence the confusion for me in what > you were using for the term 'pile-up.' Apparently, I would gather that a > pile-up such as in an HLA region is not what you are referring to. > > I would think that you may be working on a method that might very well > refine your targeted matching segments. > > I am curious if you have crossed checked the reductions against what > surnames go missing? > > Alternatively, have you counted the number of the pile-up of surnames as > well? > > (I am thinking that losing a random pool of names might be an indication of > progress.) > > Or am I still not understanding the definition (as used here) for a pile-up > region? > > - Dave Hamm > > > Message: 3 > Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2015 13:32:05 -0800 > From: Ann Turner <dnacousins@gmail.com> > Subject: Re: [DNA] My Raw Data Files - Comparison 23andme vs > AncestryDNA > To: David Schroeder <dschroed991@sbcglobal.net>, DNA Genealogy > Mailing > List <genealogy-dna@rootsweb.com> > Message-ID: > <CAA-Ub_AMPi1C0iL97yx4joW7k--BSP99_TszhRM+BjSg1RerRw@mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 > > GEDmatch "tokenizes" the data in an attempt to make it more uniform across > platforms, so that should not be an issue for most SNPs. All C's are > converted to G's and all A's are converted to T's (or maybe the opposite > direction, but you get the idea). That fixes any strand orientation > problems, but it introduces a few cases where the alternative alleles are > also complementary base pairs in the double helix. The next effect of that > is to give you a free ride for those few SNPs where you and your match are > really opposite homozygotes. > > You speak of fixing errors -- I assume you're referring to no-calls rather > that outright errors (miscalls). No-calls don't break up segments, just > opposite homozygotes (e.g. CC in one party and TT in the other party). > GEDmatch doesn't give any credit for the SNP threshold (although 23andMe and > FTDNA do). For that reason, I predicted you might have a small increase in > the number of matches, and I am puzzled as to why you saw a decrease. > > Ann Turner > > > On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 11:39 AM, David Schroeder via < > genealogy-dna@rootsweb.com> wrote: > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to GENEALOGY-DNA-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Fascinating! The Irish population in Newfoundland is sourced from only a couple of specific areas: 1. Waterford, Wexford and Kilkenny in the Irish South East, mostly 2. Cork in the Irish South, to a lesser extent Both my parents show some Newfoundland relatives from SE Ireland. At one time many of these Irish people spoke Irish Gaelic (Gaeilge). In fact the last speaker of the Leinster dialect of Irish Gaelic, died in St John's some years ago. The dialect had died out in Ireland decades before that. Cheers, Paul On Thursday, December 17, 2015, Ann Turner via <genealogy-dna@rootsweb.com> wrote: > Genetic structure is detectable based on religious background in this study > of Newfoundland and Labrador. That could be a consequence of marrying > someone with the same religion, even though the general geographic > background might not be that different. > > http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/ejhg2015256a.html > > Genetic structure of the Newfoundland and Labrador population: founder > effects modulate variability. > > Zhai G(1), Zhou J(2), Woods MO(1), Green JS(1), Parfrey P(2), Rahman P(2), > Green RC(1). > > Author information: (1)Discipline of Genetics, Faculty of Medicine, > Memorial University of Newfoundland, St John's, Newfoundland and Labrador, > Canada. (2)Discipline of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Memorial > University, St John's, Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada. > > The population of the province of Newfoundland and Labrador (NL) has been a > resource for genetic studies because of its historical isolation and > increased prevalence of several monogenic disorders. Controversy remains > regarding the genetic substructure and the extent of genetic homogeneity, > which have implications for disease gene mapping. Population substructure > has been reported from other isolated populations such as Iceland, Finland > and Sardinia. We undertook this study to further our understanding of the > genetic architecture of the NL population. We enrolled 494 individuals > randomly selected from NL. Genome-wide SNP data were analyzed together with > that from 14 other populations including HapMap3, Ireland, Britain and > Native American samples from the Human Genome Diversity Project. Using > multidimensional scaling and admixture analysis, we observed that the > genetic structure of the NL population resembles that of the British > population but can be divided into three clusters that correspond to > religious/ethnic origins: Protestant English, Roman Catholic Irish and > North American aboriginals. We observed reduced heterozygosity and an > increased inbreeding coefficient (mean=0.005), which corresponds to that > expected in the offspring of third-cousin marriages. We also found that the > NL population has a significantly higher number of runs of homozygosity > (ROH) and longer lengths of ROH segments. These results are consistent with > our understanding of the population history and indicate that the NL > population may be ideal for identifying recessive variants for complex > diseases that affect populations of European origin.European Journal of > Human Genetics advance online publication, 16 December 2015; > doi:10.1038/ejhg.2015.256. > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > GENEALOGY-DNA-request@rootsweb.com <javascript:;> with the word > 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

Thank you. I got the code I needed.It is greatlly appreciated. Angelia

South American and Mayan DNA discovered in Southern Appalachians Richard Thornton, January 10, 2012, [1]http://www.examiner.com/article/south-american-and-mayan-dna-discove red-southern-appalachians Southeastern Indians were irate after several non-Native Americans mocked their traditions while commenting on an archaeological discovery of Maya place names and apparent Itza Maya ruins in the Georgia Mountains. The Creek Indians of Georgia went on the warpath after an Atlanta Journal-Constitution article about the discovery only interviewed four non-Native Americans, who had no professional backgrounds in Mesoamerican archaeology and architecture. The Native Americans' weapon of choice in the 21st century is the DNA test. The initial results of this technological offensive have not been quite what was expected. HIAWASSEE, GA - January 10, 2012 -- A picturesque mountain resort town, surrounded by indigo blue Lake Chatuge has become the next scene of a unanticipated revolution in the understanding of North America's past. Hiawassee is the county seat of Towns County, the home of the Georgia Mountain Fair. The fair began in the 1960s as an amateurish event held in an old school house that was hosted by mountain belles in bonnets and dresses made from flour sacks. Now it is a sophisticated entertainment complex. The people of Towns County have always been aware that they had a sizable percentage of their population, who looked "Indian." Even if these old mountain families did not look like the Cherokees in North Carolina, the county's residents assumed they were Cherokees, since the Cherokees controlled the area in the 1700s and early 1800s. The handsome Towns County Indians really didn't look like the Upper Creek Indians either, whose descendants live in Union and Fannin Counties to the west. Upper Creeks are extremely tall and slim. It is not uncommon for their women to be 5"- 10" to six feet tall (1.78-1.83 m.) Towns County is immediately east of Brasstown Bald Mountain and the Track Rock Gap Archaeological Zone, where a 200+ acre complex of stone retaining walls, hydraulic structures and buildings have been identified. However, United States Forest Service archaeologist Jack T. Wynn identified dozens of important Native American town and settlement sites in Towns County. At approximately the same time that the Track Rock terraces were probably built, the 10th and 11th centuries, agricultural peoples established towns and villages in the fertile Hiawassee River, Brasstown Creek and Hightower Creek bottomlands of Towns County. Wynn assumed that these newcomers were ancestors of the Creeks Indians because surviving artifacts and architectural footprints were similar to those of the great town of Etalwa (Etowah Mounds) about 80 miles (128 km) to the southwest. These sophisticated farmers probably were ancestors of the Creek Indians, but the Creek's family tree just became much more complex. Widespread presence of Maya DNA among Creek Indians Three archaeologists from Florida, Georgia and South Africa stated emphatically to the Examiner, ABC News and the Atlanta Journal-Constitution that no Mexican Indians had ever migrated to the Southeastern United States. If this is the case, then apparently the indigenous peoples of the Americas had very advanced technology for artificial insemination and the transportation of human ova (eggs) and semen across the Gulf of Mexico. Many readers of the archaeologist's comments sent emails to the Examiner stating that Maya DNA markers had showed up in their DNA tests. Maya DNA markers are common among Creek Indians, but also can be found in Cherokee families, whose ancestors lived on the Hiwassee River, Valley River or Brasstown Creek valleys in North Carolina. The Cherokees call this region Itsayi, which means "Place of the Itza Maya." Protestant missionaries mistranslated Itsayi to mean "brass" and gave Brasstown Bald Mountain its modern name. Paul Williams of Atlanta wrote the Examiner that he had grown up in the county where the Track Rock Terrace Complex is located. He stated that he had forwarded a copy of the Examiner article on Track Rock to his father, who confirmed that he and a Dr. Little of Blairsville had explored caves in the vicinity of the site that contained Maya writing on the cave walls. Ric Edwards' letters to the Examiner were typical of readers, but since he uses genetics in his forensic work for law enforcement agencies, his comments carry a degree of professional authority. Edwards is a member of the Star Clan of Creek Indians, based in southeastern Alabama, but he traces his Native ancestry to central Georgia. He currently lives in Texas. Edwards furnished the Examiner with a copy of his DNA test to prove that his genetic makeup contained DNA markers from two Mexican ethnic groups. Edwards stated that he was mildly surprised to find Maya DNA markers in his DNA test, but was not expecting at all to find Pima Indian DNA markers. At first he thought the lab had made a mistake. The Pima Indians live in the Desert Plateau region of northwestern Mexico, over 1700 miles from the former homeland of the Creek Indians in the Southeastern United States. The presence of a Mexican desert DNA in someone whose Native ancestors lived in Georgia can not be explained, but further retesting has confirmed the original test's accuracy. Edwards wrote the Examiner on January 9, 2012 that a neighbor had just received similar DNA results to his test. She read the Examiner series and suspected that she might have had some Creek Indian ancestors who immigrated to Texas. Her DNA test showed the expected types of DNA markers, plus Maya and Pima Indians. Currently, there is no explanation for the Pima-Creek Indian connection. First warning came from Virginia Several persons who read the articles in the Examiner about the archeological discoveries in the Georgia Mountains, placed comments on articles or sent emails to the Examiner stating that they were from locations in the Southern Highlands and that their DNA tests had showed them to be part South American Indian. None of these messages included copies of the tests. The statements seemed so improbable that they were not investigated. Eventually an email was sent to the Examiner from a reader in southern Virginia. She was a member of the Saponi tribe, a Siouan ethnic group also known as the Eastern Blackfoot. People with Native American decent from an area of southwestern Virginia, once occupied by the mound-building Tamahiti (Tomahitans) were receiving DNA test results that stated that their Native ancestry was from a South American tribe known as the Purepecha, not the Saponi. The reader forwarded a video on YouTube that provided visual proof of this claim. The video is attached to this article. The Tamahiti were a division of the Creek Indian Confederacy that moved back to Georgia in the mid-1700s. Most Virginia scholars describe them as an extinct Algonquian tribe. In the Itsate-Creek language, their name means "Merchant People." The Purepecha are believed to have been part of the Moche Civilization that preceded the Incas in Peru. At least some of the Purepecha migrated up the Pacific Coast to the Mexican state of Michoacan, where they still live today. Technologically, they were the most advanced people in the Americas. They had just entered the Bronze Age about 20 years before Columbus "discovered" America. Dr. James Q. Jacobs is a professional anthropologist and expert on genetic analysis of populations. He was asked to give his thoughts on the South American DNA being found in the Virginia Mountains. He responded: "We must recall when analyzing DNA today, anywhere the Spaniards ventured, slaves were either captured or put to work. In the course of a lifetime, any one slave could be traded all about. The displaced have families too, and the cycle continues until very recent time, post Spanish colonialism inside the USA and even post War on Mexico in the SW. To make secure inferences of pre-Hispanic migrations from DNA sampling, the sample needs to be pre-Hispanic. One very important thing to keep in mind is the numbers involved as temporal depth increases. As you can see, the probabilities become dizzyingly immense quite quickly that we are all related." On January 9, 2012 the Examiner received the following email message: "We were very excited to learn of your recent Mayan findings in the North Georgia Mountains! My paternal grandparents and their ancestors are from Hiawassee, Towns County, in the Georgia Mountains. Last year, my wife and I decided to have DNA testing done, and my results show that I am at least 1/4 Purepeche and Mayan Native American Indian. My family always believed that we were Cherokee, but my DNA results only showed South American and Mexican Native American. Since my family was from the Georgia Mountains, the Mayan ruins found on Brasstown Bald would certainly fit in with my DNA results. I would be willing to share my DNA results if you are interested in seeing them." Sincerely, Patrick Welch Other readers from the Towns County, GA area have claimed Maya, Purepecha or "South American" DNA markers. Small percentages of an unusual ancestry may reflect inaccuracies of the testing procedure, and thus these claims were not initially taken seriously. Many of those making such claims also did not provide the Examiner with collaborating evidence. However, with Welch's willingness to provide information on his heritage, the public now has genetic proof that in the year 2012, there are people whose family roots were located near a probable Itza Maya terrace complex, who are at least 1/4th Maya and South American Indian. Sonya Hendrickson is on the staff of the Towns County Herald newspaper in Hiawassee, GA. She is also of Creek Indian heritage. She grew up near Horseshoe Bend National Military Park in eastern Alabama. Hendrickson stated that she did not know of any immigration of Indians from Mexico or South America into the county during the 1800s when farmsteads were being established. The presence of Mexican and South American DNA markers in long time residents of a region suggests that the history of North America is far more complex than currently presented in the text books. DNA analysis is one of many techniques that archaeologists, historians, historic preservation architects and archivists utilize to understand the past. Maya and Purepecha DNA in a modern population, does not prove that Maya or Purepecha Indians built the terrace complex near Brasstown Bald, Georgia. It does prove that at sometime in the past, these ethnic groups, whom some archaeologists assume to have never migrated to North America, were indeed living in the Southern Highlands of what is now the United States. References 1. http://www.examiner.com/article/south-american-and-mayan-dna-discovered-southern-appalachians

Angelia, I have a $20 coupon for you. Please send a reply to my email with a personal email so I can send it directly to you. John M Rhodes Sent from my iPad > On Dec 18, 2015, at 1:39 PM, Angelia via <genealogy-dna@rootsweb.com> wrote: > > Does anyone have a $20 ydna coupon code left for this week?I have an elderly cousin who has (finally) agreed to testing and I want to strike while it's hot.Funds are limited, so every bit helps! > Thanks in advance. > Angelia > PS - I have already checked the page at this link and they have all been taken.https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1CgXRKz2TySvRqSInveSIYoslO7yexAc9d-BzpNhaY1c/edit?usp=sharing > https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1CgXRKz2TySvRqSInveSIYoslO7yexAc9d-BzpNhaY1c/edit#gid=579783531 > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to GENEALOGY-DNA-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Does anyone have a $20 ydna coupon code left for this week?I have an elderly cousin who has (finally) agreed to testing and I want to strike while it's hot.Funds are limited, so every bit helps! Thanks in advance. Angelia PS - I have already checked the page at this link and they have all been taken.https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1CgXRKz2TySvRqSInveSIYoslO7yexAc9d-BzpNhaY1c/edit?usp=sharing https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1CgXRKz2TySvRqSInveSIYoslO7yexAc9d-BzpNhaY1c/edit#gid=579783531

Dave, "I was wondering what you were defining as a 'pile-up.'?" I am defining a pileup as an extraordinary number of matches on a particular segment region. These matches are with people I am not related to. Form me, it is chromosome 15 from positions 233,000 to 293,000 where I have several hundred matches. "I am curious if you have crossed checked the reductions against what surnames go missing?" Not yet, in the planning stages after the holidays. "Alternatively, have you counted the number of the pile-up of surnames as well?" Not yet. I have explored enough matches in my pileup region to know that there is no way most, if not all, of these people are related to me. The pileups seem to show up in gedmatch, but it looks like 23andme eliminated my pileup matches in DNA Relatives. David Ann, "You speak of fixing errors -- I assume you're referring to no-calls rather that outright errors (miscalls)?" Yes fixing no-calls. There were only 106 wrong-call between Ancestry and 23. Since I had over 3500 AA, TT, CC and GG that were no-calls in either 23 or ancestry, I would think that a significant number would be opposite homozygote which would break the segment, and reduce the number of matches. David Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2015 15:15:34 -0500 From: Dave Hamm <odoniv@earthlink.net> Subject: Re: [DNA] My Raw Data Files - Comparison 23andme vs, AncestryDNA To: genealogy-dna@rootsweb.com Message-ID: <567317E6.2010300@earthlink.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Hi David, Oh, I was wondering what you were defining as a 'pile-up.' I did not appear to be having such a problem, and could think of several scenarios of what you could be referring to. I was thinking of your efinition of a 'pile-up' as in the HLA regions. (I identify those with a simple calculation that includes the number of SNPS....) Now I get it. I am now thinking that you are looking at your surname signature(?). Or, at worst, haplotype group signature(?). I get chromosomes with a high density of matching (tiny) segments on chromosomes 1 and 11 when using autosomal sampling from my Y-DNA surname project. I am thinking that I am looking at that as a basic signature for my surname, because of the criteria I use to match each segment triad. Those segments that I do not use in the triad include at least one HLA region on chromosome 6. That HLA region (in my small study) occurs in about 25% of my sampling (after processing). Hence the confusion for me in what you were using for the term 'pile-up.' Apparently, I would gather that a pile-up such as in an HLA region is not what you are referring to. I would think that you may be working on a method that might very well refine your targeted matching segments. I am curious if you have crossed checked the reductions against what surnames go missing? Alternatively, have you counted the number of the pile-up of surnames as well? (I am thinking that losing a random pool of names might be an indication of progress.) Or am I still not understanding the definition (as used here) for a pile-up region? - Dave Hamm Message: 3 Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2015 13:32:05 -0800 From: Ann Turner <dnacousins@gmail.com> Subject: Re: [DNA] My Raw Data Files - Comparison 23andme vs AncestryDNA To: David Schroeder <dschroed991@sbcglobal.net>, DNA Genealogy Mailing List <genealogy-dna@rootsweb.com> Message-ID: <CAA-Ub_AMPi1C0iL97yx4joW7k--BSP99_TszhRM+BjSg1RerRw@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 GEDmatch "tokenizes" the data in an attempt to make it more uniform across platforms, so that should not be an issue for most SNPs. All C's are converted to G's and all A's are converted to T's (or maybe the opposite direction, but you get the idea). That fixes any strand orientation problems, but it introduces a few cases where the alternative alleles are also complementary base pairs in the double helix. The next effect of that is to give you a free ride for those few SNPs where you and your match are really opposite homozygotes. You speak of fixing errors -- I assume you're referring to no-calls rather that outright errors (miscalls). No-calls don't break up segments, just opposite homozygotes (e.g. CC in one party and TT in the other party). GEDmatch doesn't give any credit for the SNP threshold (although 23andMe and FTDNA do). For that reason, I predicted you might have a small increase in the number of matches, and I am puzzled as to why you saw a decrease. Ann Turner On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 11:39 AM, David Schroeder via < genealogy-dna@rootsweb.com> wrote:

In looking at comparisons of my WGS sequence with the Altai Neanderthal sequence, with the help of the 1000 Genomes frequency data, I realized that there is a span of 16,813 bases on chromosome 1 over which 73 of my 83 Neanderthal SNPs are also shared by some Africans. This seems to indicate introgression into Africans from an unknown hominin which differed from Neanderthal in only 20 SNPs (10 on each side from their common ancestor) out of 16,813 bases, or 0.11%. This contrasts with the circa 83 differences (0.49%) between humans and Neanderthals over this same span. The current dogma is that the Neanderthal introgression into humans excluded Africans because it occurred after the involved humans had left Africa. The above data doesn't contradict this, but does indicate that Africans were also involved in introgression with hominins. This has already been seen by Bonnie and Thomas in the Y chromosome and maybe by others in the autosomes, but I thought the above chromosome 1 data is nevertheless interesting. I am attempting to paste the data below, and I hope it is readable. The chimp data was also obtained from 1000 Genomes. The Altai Neanderthal data is from the downloaded BAM file of the Prufer et al. 2013 Nature paper. Abbreviations: EUR=Europeans; AFR= Africans; SAS= South Asians; EAS= East Asians From 1000 Genomes data). The GRCh 37 human reference sequence is used for comparison. SNP Location Alleles Neanderthal reads Minor allele frequencies in modern humans Chimp (ancestral?) allele (maj/min) (Altai) (*=minor allele) rs138362218 13996258 G/A 4A EUR .0169, AFR .0242, SAS .1483, EAS .0208 G rs114817378 13996689 C/T 4T EUR .0169, AFR .0303, SAS .1483, EAS .0208 C rs116756003 13997067 G/A 5A EUR .0169, AFR .0242, SAS .1483, EAS .0208 A* rs192026872 13997273 G/A 1A EUR .0169, AFR 0 , SAS .1237, EAS .0208 G rs371294415 13997279 C/T 2T EUR .0169, AFR .0303, SAS .1483, EAS .0208 C rs114853943 13997512 G/C 1C EUR .0169, AFR .0234, SAS .1299, EAS .0208 G rs140454319 13997848 T/C 1C EUR .0169, AFR .1036, SAS .1472, EAS .0208 C* rs184828566 13998383 T/C 4C EUR .0169, AFR 0 , SAS .1217, EAS .0218 T rs145025374 13998735 A/C 3C EUR .0209, AFR .0182, SAS .1483, EAS .0218 A rs116406995 13998735 T/C 3C3T EUR .0209, AFR 0 , SAS .1227, EAS .0218 T rs143118004 13999113 G/A 2A EUR .0209, AFR .0386, SAS .1472, EAS .0218 G rs138394326 13999121 G/T 2T EUR .0209, AFR .0386, SAS .1472, EAS .0209 G rs142386605 13999153 C/T 3T EUR .0209, AFR .0386, SAS .1472, EAS .0218 C rs141590326 13999256 G/A 8A EUR .0209, AFR .0393, SAS .1472, EAS .0218 G rs77005299 13999364 A/G 3G EUR .0209, AFR .0393, SAS .1472, EAS .0218 G* rs113235120 13999614 A/G 4G EUR .0209, AFR .0401, SAS .1472, EAS .0218 A rs111871728 13999619 T/C 4C EUR .0209, AFR .0401, SAS .1472, EAS .0218 C* rs143266882 14000071 T/C 1C EUR .0209, AFR .0401, SAS .1472, EAS .0218 C* rs4421585 14000722 T/C 2C EUR .0209, AFR .0227, SAS .1472, EAS .0218 C* rs4480350 14000765 G/C 3C EUR .0209, AFR .0227, SAS .1472, EAS .0218 C* rs80104731 14000782 C/T 1T EUR .0209, AFR .0401, SAS .1472, EAS .0218 C rs78565867 14001635 C/T 3T EUR .0209, AFR .0234, SAS .1472, EAS .0218 T* rs77349561 14001835 T/G 3G EUR .0209, AFR .0234, SAS .1472, EAS .0218 T rs112032437 14002009 G/A 3A EUR .0209, AFR .0234, SAS .1472, EAS .0218 G rs74826526 14002168 C/A 3A EUR .0209, AFR .0234, SAS .1472, EAS .0218 C rs113475021 14002412 C/T 2T EUR .0209, AFR .0234, SAS .1472, EAS .0218 C rs116606690 14002571 T/C 4C EUR .0209, AFR .0234, SAS .1227, EAS .0218 T rs148169628 14002643 C/T 3T EUR .0209, AFR .0234, SAS .1472, EAS .0218 C rs148883391 14002843 -/C 9C EUR .0209, AFR 0 , SAS .1227, EAS .0218 - rs112170681 14003344 T/C 2C EUR .0209, AFR .0234, SAS .1472, EAS .0218 C* rs112331292 14003485 G/A 5A EUR .0209, AFR .0234, SAS .1472, EAS .0218 G rs111277821 14003646 C/G 2G EUR .0209, AFR .0234, SAS .1472, EAS .0218 C rs74569552 14003770 T/C 4C EUR .0209, AFR .0234, SAS .1472, EAS .0218 C* rs111569874 14003858 A/G 1G EUR .0209, AFR .0234, SAS .1472, EAS .0218 G* rs78623804 14004003 T/C 5C EUR .0209, AFR .0234, SAS .1472, EAS .0218 T rs149459157 14004004 G/A 5A EUR .0209, AFR 0 , SAS .1227, EAS .0218 G rs78823979 14004054 A/G 5G EUR .0209, AFR .0234, SAS .1472, EAS .0218 G* rs76069246 14004191 C/A 4A EUR .0209, AFR .0234, SAS .1472, EAS .0218 C rs116523708 14004332 T/A 5A EUR .0209, AFR .025 , SAS .1472, EAS .0218 A* rs116077027 14004401 C/T 5T EUR .0209, AFR .0234, SAS .1472, EAS .0218 C rs116295581 14004402 A/G 5G EUR .0209, AFR .0234, SAS .1472, EAS .0218 A rs75346192 14004433 A/C 3C EUR .0209, AFR .0234, SAS .1472, EAS .0218 C* rs75825134 14004513 T/C 2C EUR .0209, AFR .0234, SAS .1472, EAS .0218 C* rs112618706 14004630 T/G 4G EUR .0209, AFR .0234, SAS .1472, EAS .0218 T rs2487649 14004982 T/C 2C EUR .0378, AFR .0628, SAS .1616, EAS .0248 C* rs147830865 14005032 A/T 4T EUR .0209, AFR 0 , SAS .1227, EAS .0218 A rs113266271 14005174 G/A 6A EUR .0209, AFR .0234, SAS .1483, EAS .0218 G rs115968025 14005294 A/G 5G EUR .0209, AFR .0234, SAS .1472, EAS .0218 G* rs116376107 14005460 C/A 6A EUR .0209, AFR 0 , SAS .1227, EAS .0218 C rs79261491 14006205 T/C 5C EUR .0209, AFR 0 , SAS .1227, EAS .0218 T rs76470348 14006526 A/G 3G EUR .0209, AFR .0234, SAS .1472, EAS .0218 A rs77839177 14006530 A/T 3T EUR .0209, AFR .0234, SAS .1472, EAS .0218 T* rs150413585 14006543 G/T 1T EUR .0268, AFR .0091, SAS .1258, EAS .0218 G rs145192738 14006733 C/T 5T EUR .0234, AFR .0234, SAS .1452, EAS .0218 C rs193063159 14006737 T/G 4G EUR .0199, AFR .0242, SAS .1452, EAS .0228 G* rs112459033 14006924 G/A 3A EUR .0209, AFR .0234, SAS .1472, EAS .0218 A* rs115179140 14006949 C/T 3T EUR .0219, AFR .0234, SAS .1472, EAS .0218 T* rs139346965 14007017 A/- 3- EUR .0209, AFR .0234, SAS .1472, EAS .0218 ? rs112856063 14007101 G/A 2A EUR .0209, AFR .0234, SAS .1472, EAS .0218 G rs79816977 14007170 T/A 3A EUR .0209, AFR .0234, SAS .1472, EAS .0218 A* rs76862812 14007243 C/T 4T EUR .0209, AFR .0234, SAS .1472, EAS .0218 T* rs75110225 14007348 C/A 2A EUR .0209, AFR .0234, SAS .1472, EAS .0218 C rs142167205 14007398 A/C 3C EUR .0209, AFR .0234, SAS .1472, EAS .0218 A rs141676355 14007466 A/G 3G EUR .0209, AFR .0234, SAS .1472, EAS .0218 G* rs147434972 14007584 G/A 2A EUR .0209, AFR .0234, SAS .1472, EAS .0218 A* rs139736364 14007611 G/A 3A EUR .0209, AFR .0234, SAS .1472, EAS .0218 G rs112213639 14007698 A/G 2G EUR .0209, AFR .0234, SAS .1472, EAS .0218 G* rs140541215 14007782 -/C 2C EUR .0209, AFR .0234, SAS .1483, EAS .0218 ? rs75283449 14007885 G/A 3A EUR .0209, AFR .0234, SAS .1472, EAS .0218 A* rs78991687 14007903 C/T 4T EUR .0209, AFR .0234, SAS .1472, EAS .0218 T* rs113346922 14008623 A/G 3G EUR .0209, AFR .0408, SAS .1472, EAS .0218 A rs79514290 14009214 T/C 8C EUR .0209, AFR .0234, SAS .1472, EAS .0218 T rs76112447 14009354 C/T 6T EUR .0209, AFR .0303, SAS .1472, EAS .0218 T* rs116062697 14009532 C/A 1A EUR .0209, AFR .0083, SAS .1472, EAS .0218 A* rs115061187 14009638 G/A 10A EUR .0209, AFR 0 , SAS .1227, EAS .0218 G rs2487652 14009859 G/A 3A EUR .0378, AFR .0877, SAS .137 , EAS .0248 G rs80009382 14010855 T/C 4C EUR .0209, AFR .0083, SAS .1524, EAS .0218 C* rs142445912 14010936 T/- 1- EUR .0209, AFR .0106, SAS .1544, EAS .0218 ? rs143728452 14011257 A/G 2G EUR .0209, AFR 0 , SAS .1227, EAS .0218 A rs143810446 14011863 CTGA/- 2- EUR .0209, AFR .0083, SAS .1524, EAS .0218 ? rs75012279 14011918 T/G 2G EUR .0209, AFR .0083, SAS .1524, EAS .0218 T rs117406744 14013026 A/G 3G EUR .0209, AFR .0083, SAS .1524, EAS .0218 A rs114006744 14013070 G/T 4T EUR .0209, AFR .0083, SAS .1524, EAS .0218 G

Here's a $10 off for Y. R11AXGC39YYX Judy On 12/18/2015 10:39 AM, Angelia via wrote: Does anyone have a $20 ydna coupon code left for this week?I have an elderly cou sin who has (finally) agreed to testing and I want to strike while it's hot.Fund s are limited, so every bit helps! Thanks in advance. Angelia PS - I have already checked the page at this link and they have all been taken.h ttps://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1CgXRKz2TySvRqSInveSIYoslO7yexAc9d-BzpNhaY 1c/edit?usp=sharing [1]https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1CgXRKz2TySvRqSInveSIYoslO7yexAc9d-Bzp NhaY1c/edit#gid=579783531 ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [2]GENEALOGY-DNA-request@r ootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and th e body of the message References 1. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1CgXRKz2TySvRqSInveSIYoslO7yexAc9d-BzpNhaY1c/edit#gid=579783531 2. mailto:GENEALOGY-DNA-request@rootsweb.com

Thank you, Margo. Coupons are a good recruiting tool. I hope to persuade as many cousins as possible to test. Lindsey

FF coupons 10.00. R11QH3HX078Z Sorry I didn't get to computer this morning!! Margo ---------- Original Message ---------- From: John M Rhodes via <genealogy-dna@rootsweb.com> To: Lindsey Britton <lplantagenet@aol.com>, genealogy-dna@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [DNA] Any Extra FF Coupons? Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2015 21:44:33 -0500 Lindsey, Try these. R111XBROX4GF R118PVH55914 Sent from my iPad > On Dec 17, 2015, at 9:18 PM, Lindsey Britton via <genealogy-dna@rootsweb.com> wrote: > > > I'm still hoping to get a $10 Family Finder coupon for my cousin if anyone has an extra. > > Lindsey > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to GENEALOGY-DNA-request@rootsweb.com 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 GENEALOGY-DNA-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message ____________________________________________________________ Having 1 Of These 7 Credit Cards Means You Have ... These responses are not provided or commissioned by the credit card issuer. ... http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/567380ac4176cac3df2st04duc

Lindsey, Try these. R111XBROX4GF R118PVH55914 Sent from my iPad > On Dec 17, 2015, at 9:18 PM, Lindsey Britton via <genealogy-dna@rootsweb.com> wrote: > > > I'm still hoping to get a $10 Family Finder coupon for my cousin if anyone has an extra. > > Lindsey > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to GENEALOGY-DNA-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

I'm still hoping to get a $10 Family Finder coupon for my cousin if anyone has an extra. Lindsey

There were 2745 pairs that were no-calls in 23andme, but were homologous in AncestryDNA There were 2320 pairs that were no-call in AncestryDNA, but were homologous in 23andme David From: Ann Turner [mailto:dnacousins@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, December 17, 2015 3:32 PM To: David Schroeder; DNA Genealogy Mailing List Subject: Re: [DNA] My Raw Data Files - Comparison 23andme vs AncestryDNA GEDmatch "tokenizes" the data in an attempt to make it more uniform across platforms, so that should not be an issue for most SNPs. All C's are converted to G's and all A's are converted to T's (or maybe the opposite direction, but you get the idea). That fixes any strand orientation problems, but it introduces a few cases where the alternative alleles are also complementary base pairs in the double helix. The next effect of that is to give you a free ride for those few SNPs where you and your match are really opposite homozygotes. You speak of fixing errors -- I assume you're referring to no-calls rather that outright errors (miscalls). No-calls don't break up segments, just opposite homozygotes (e.g. CC in one party and TT in the other party). GEDmatch doesn't give any credit for the SNP threshold (although 23andMe and FTDNA do). For that reason, I predicted you might have a small increase in the number of matches, and I am puzzled as to why you saw a decrease. Ann Turner On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 11:39 AM, David Schroeder via <genealogy-dna@rootsweb.com> wrote: Kitty, I did flip the orientation as I noticed there were C-Gs and G-Cs on AncestrDNA files when I loaded them to a database. 23 only had C-Gs so I wanted it to look like 23 raw data. I see there is more to it than a simple ordering. I did not flip the orientation back when I recreated the fixed ANCDNA file. I wonder if that causes any issues? David

Thanks, Ann, for posting about this paper. I live in Newfoundland but was not born here. My wife and her family have been Newfoundlanders for several generations. The island's historical isolation tends to lead to Matrix Charts such as the one for my wife's Family Finder results show at this URL: http://www.erbland.org/post/MDHMatrix.jpg I've come to learn that it's not uncommon for Newfoundlanders to be connected to a single ancestor by more than one path; often by more than two paths. My wife, a sister and their mother are part of the 534 members in the FTDNA Project "NfldLab-FamilyFinder". There is also a 317 member FTDNA Project, "NfldLab-mtDNA. The results for my wife, sister and their mother are on GEDmatch; F396629, F396628 and F396626 respectively. The study that Ann cited in her post is http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/ejhg2015256a.html The article talks about using "Newfoundland and Labrador (NL)" "...for identifying recessive variants for complex diseases...". One such disease is "Bardet-Biedl syndrome" (BBS). BBS has been studied extensively by researchers at Memorial University of Newfoundland (MUN). In fact, the above cited paper shares some MUN co-authors with this paper: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15637713 One of those authors, "Jane S Green", does genetic testing for families of Newfoundlanders who have BBS. One thing I don't understand about the 2015 paper is the use of "Newfoundland and Labrador (NL)" as the geographical area of the study. (Caveat: the paper is behind a paywall, so I've only read the abstract.) "Newfoundland and Labrador" is the name of the Canadian province that encompasses both the geographically isolated Island of Newfoundland as well as part of the North America mainland known as Labrador. I would think that the population genetics of Newfoundland differs significantly from Labrador. For example, Labrador's proportion of people with Innu, Inuit, and Mi'kmaq heritage is far higher than on the Island. Even without having read the full paper, I'm not sure that Ann's statement that " Genetic structure is detectable based on religious background..." is a significant finding of the paper. Anyone who lives in Newfoundland understands the significant impact on population genetics of the Catholic/Protestant division without the need for DNA testing. Even the Provincial Archives files BMD records according to religion. In any event, I agree that Newfoundland is an interesting place to do genetic genealogy. - Mardon -----Original Message----- From: genealogy-dna-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:genealogy-dna-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Ann Turner via Sent: Thursday, December 17, 2015 10:10 AM To: DNA Genealogy Mailing List <GENEALOGY-DNA@rootsweb.com> Subject: [DNA] Genetic structure in Newfoundland and Labrador Genetic structure is detectable based on religious background in this study of Newfoundland and Labrador. That could be a consequence of marrying someone with the same religion, even though the general geographic background might not be that different. http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/ejhg2015256a.html <*snip*>

FYI http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/science-news/12052798/Dog-has-been-mans-best-friend-for-33000-years-DNA-study-finds.html Andreas

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MDStH49W5Hk -----Original Message----- From: Sam Sloan via <genealogy-dna@rootsweb.com> To: jlerch1 <jlerch1@lighttube.net>; genealogy-dna <genealogy-dna@rootsweb.com> Sent: Thu, Dec 17, 2015 1:39 pm Subject: Re: [DNA] Dog has been man's best friend for 33, 000 years, DNA study finds There are pictures on youtube of an orangutan and his dog. The orangutan takes care of the dog, brings food for the dog and they act in every way like a human with his dog. They live together in the jungles of Borneo. Perhaps this relationship predated Man. Sam Sloan On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 1:15 PM, jlerch1 via <genealogy-dna@rootsweb.com> wrote: > It seems to me that genetic diversity is a measure of man's initial > ancestry in Africa since the barriers to migration there are so great. The > same cannot be said of southeast Asia. > John L > > Andreas wrote > Subject: [DNA] Dog has been man's best friend for 33, 000 years, DNA > study finds > To: "genealogy-dna@rootsweb.com" <genealogy-dna@rootsweb.com> > Message-ID: <9D1F2033-D568-4988-ADB8-D6BB4BC90B6B@awest.de> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > > FYI > > > http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/science-news/12052798/Dog-has-been-mans-best-friend-for-33000-years-DNA-study-finds.html > > Andreas > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > GENEALOGY-DNA-request@rootsweb.com 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 GENEALOGY-DNA-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

We too in the large R1a Clan Donald BigY project have found people with much larger than expected numbers of SNPs under YP274 (which happened about AD 1100). HOWEVER, we have enough that the distribution is, within reasonable error, the expected Poisson one. Doug McDonald -----Original Message----- From: genealogy-dna-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:genealogy-dna-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Marleen Van Horne via Sent: Wednesday, December 16, 2015 1:02 PM To: Genealogy Subject: [DNA] yDNA Terminal SNP Y10633 T+ Those of you who have been on the Genealogy-DNA list for awhile will remember a couple of years ago when I commissioned a TMRCA Challenge on three surnames that yDNA testing indicated had a common ancestor. The three surnames were Group 20 in the Walker Project and Christensen and Van Horne in the Van Horne Project. Earlier this year, a member of the Walker Group 20 did advanced yDNA testing in which the SNP Y10633 T+ was identified as the terminal SNP. Subsequently a Christensen and a Van Horne have been tested, they are both positive for the SNP. The Walker family lived in Britain probably for several hundred years before immigrating to North America. The Christensen immigrant ancestor arrived in the US in 1905 from Denmark. The Van Horne immigrant ancestor arrived in North America in 1663 from Denmark. I have not corresponded with Ken Nordtvedt, it is my understanding he places the original male ancestor of these three families as living in Norway about 2200 years ago. This also confirms and extends the estimates from the TMRCA Challenge. It was noted in the Challenge report that a node of three individuals in the Van Horne family had a higher than expected rate of mutation. It was suggested these men were not members of the Van Horne family, and that the conventional research was incorrect. The member of the Van Horne family who did the SNP test was from this node. In fact, he was the family member with the most mutations. Those of you who have high mutation nodes in your families should not discount these men, without doing additional testing to confirm or disprove the relationship. Now, can anyone tell me how we get this yDNA terminal SNP documented in the yDNA Phylogenetic Tree. Marleen Van Horne ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to GENEALOGY-DNA-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

It seems to me that genetic diversity is a measure of man's initial ancestry in Africa since the barriers to migration there are so great.  The same cannot be said of southeast Asia. John L Andreas wrote Subject: [DNA] Dog has been man's best friend for 33, 000 years, DNA study finds To: "genealogy-dna@rootsweb.com" <genealogy-dna@rootsweb.com> Message-ID: <9D1F2033-D568-4988-ADB8-D6BB4BC90B6B@awest.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii FYI http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/science-news/12052798/Dog-has-been-mans-best-friend-for-33000-years-DNA-study-finds.html Andreas

Hi David, Oh, I was wondering what you were defining as a 'pile-up.' I did not appear to be having such a problem, and could think of several scenarios of what you could be referring to. I was thinking of your efinition of a 'pile-up' as in the HLA regions. (I identify those with a simple calculation that includes the number of SNPS....) Now I get it. I am now thinking that you are looking at your surname signature(?). Or, at worst, haplotype group signature(?). I get chromosomes with a high density of matching (tiny) segments on chromosomes 1 and 11 when using autosomal sampling from my Y-DNA surname project. I am thinking that I am looking at that as a basic signature for my surname, because of the criteria I use to match each segment triad. Those segments that I do not use in the triad include at least one HLA region on chromosome 6. That HLA region (in my small study) occurs in about 25% of my sampling (after processing). Hence the confusion for me in what you were using for the term 'pile-up.' Apparently, I would gather that a pile-up such as in an HLA region is not what you are referring to. I would think that you may be working on a method that might very well refine your targeted matching segments. I am curious if you have crossed checked the reductions against what surnames go missing? Alternatively, have you counted the number of the pile-up of surnames as well? (I am thinking that losing a random pool of names might be an indication of progress.) Or am I still not understanding the definition (as used here) for a pile-up region? - Dave Hamm RE: On 12/17/2015 2:59 AM, genealogy-dna-request@rootsweb.com wrote: > Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2015 14:41:33 -0600 > From: "David Schroeder"<dschroed991@sbcglobal.net> > Subject: Re: [DNA] My Raw Data Files - Comparison 23andme vs > AncestryDNA > To:<genealogy-dna@rootsweb.com> > Message-ID: <000001d13842$28cac770$7a605650$@net> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > Continuing with my analysis of raw data files that have been 'fixed' for > no-calls using SNP information from matching RSIDs found in 23andme and > AncestryDNA. > > I uploaded the fixed files to gedmatch. My original kit from my 23andme was > already in place. I used the Tier 1 utility, "Matching Segment Search." I > used a minimum segment size of 5 cm without graphic. I downloaded the > matching list of segments into an Excel Spreadsheet. I used the segment > matches as I feel I get better information than the "one-to-many." > > Here are my results: > > 1925 gedmatch_segment_matches_M080859 (original 23andme kit with a 2.2 % > error rate) > > 1741 gedmatch_segment_matches_M306764 (fixed 23andme kit with a 1.5 % error > rate- about a 10% reduction in segment matches) > > 1263 gedmatch_segment_matches_A146269 (fixed Ancestry kit with a 1.0% error > rate - I haven't uploaded my original AncestryDNA file) > > I do have issues with a lot of pileups on chromosome 15: > > Number of Segment Matches on Chromosome 15 - large number of pileups > Original 23andme: 603 > Fixed 23andme: 482 > Fixed Ancestry: 197 > > Compared to number of Segment Matches on Chromosome 6: > Original 23andme: 75 > Fixed 23andme: 82 > Fixed Ancestry: 84 > > It is an interesting situation. I expected fewer matches on my fixed kit, > but I did not expect so much less on my ancestry kit. Any ideas why? I am > going to dig deeper into the data. > > David --