Kenneth, Has anything been revealed for I-M223 branches? On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 10:37 AM, Kenneth Nordtvedt <[email protected]>wrote: > I am comparing anonymous Chromo2 results for raw data. The I1 AS1 > YSC00261/Z2535 clade has been divided into at least 6 branches with their > new snps. > > And Z138+ has been divided into quite a few branches. These are main > things I have worked out so far from this anonymous raw data collection. > > See "Chromo2I1work" updated file at my website given below. > > > > There's much work to do. > > > > Kenneth Nordtvedt > > Haplogroup I Clade Modalities and Trees at: > http://knordtvedt.home.bresnan.net > > > ------------------------------- > 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

Hello Ken, Could you please give some explanations about your “Chromo2I1work” sheet? What does "Chromo2 identification numbers 138" means? What do numbers like "123-127 129 130 132 134-137 139-142" or "128k" mean? I have ordered the Chromo2 test in December, as soon as I will get the results, I will send them to you. Best regards, Francois Marquis -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Kenneth Nordtvedt Sent: mercredi 29 janvier 2014 01:38 To: [email protected] Subject: [yDNAhgI] Chromo2 divides clades I am comparing anonymous Chromo2 results for raw data. The I1 AS1 YSC00261/Z2535 clade has been divided into at least 6 branches with their new snps. And Z138+ has been divided into quite a few branches. These are main things I have worked out so far from this anonymous raw data collection. See “Chromo2I1work” updated file at my website given below. There’s much work to do. Kenneth Nordtvedt Haplogroup I Clade Modalities and Trees at: http://knordtvedt.home.bresnan.net ------------------------------- 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

Some of the Chromo2 raw data files I obtain are anonymous without surname. The identification numbers replace surname; they are like a kit number. Kenneth Nordtvedt Haplogroup I Clade Modalities and Trees at: http://knordtvedt.home.bresnan.net -----Original Message----- From: Francois Marquis Sent: Tuesday, January 28, 2014 9:42 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [yDNAhgI] Chromo2 divides clades Hello Ken, Could you please give some explanations about your “Chromo2I1work” sheet? What does "Chromo2 identification numbers 138" means? What do numbers like "123-127 129 130 132 134-137 139-142" or "128k" mean? I have ordered the Chromo2 test in December, as soon as I will get the results, I will send them to you. Best regards, Francois Marquis -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Kenneth Nordtvedt Sent: mercredi 29 janvier 2014 01:38 To: [email protected] Subject: [yDNAhgI] Chromo2 divides clades I am comparing anonymous Chromo2 results for raw data. The I1 AS1 YSC00261/Z2535 clade has been divided into at least 6 branches with their new snps. And Z138+ has been divided into quite a few branches. These are main things I have worked out so far from this anonymous raw data collection. See “Chromo2I1work” updated file at my website given below. There’s much work to do. Kenneth Nordtvedt Haplogroup I Clade Modalities and Trees at: http://knordtvedt.home.bresnan.net ------------------------------- 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

I thought a positive had also been reported in a P109+ Chromo2 result.

I see several CTS6364+ L69+ results who are also CTS10028-. If M227 is in fact downstream of L69 as suggested by a previous thread, then M227 should be CTS10028-. I believe CTS10028/Z2337 would then be positioned CTS6364/Z2336 and L22. If I recall correctly, there is a CTS10028+ and L22- sample which would show that the two are not phyloequivalent. Now if we could get more info on CTS11651/Z2338 which, as far as I'm aware, appears phyloequivalent to L22.

It shortly will beyond what is already online. Kenneth Nordtvedt Haplogroup I Clade Modalities and Trees at: http://knordtvedt.home.bresnan.net -----Original Message----- From: Wayne R. Roberts Sent: Tuesday, January 28, 2014 6:07 PM To: y-dna-haplogroup-i Subject: Re: [yDNAhgI] Chromo2 divides clades Kenneth, Has anything been revealed for I-M223 branches? On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 10:37 AM, Kenneth Nordtvedt <[email protected]>wrote: > I am comparing anonymous Chromo2 results for raw data. The I1 AS1 > YSC00261/Z2535 clade has been divided into at least 6 branches with their > new snps. > > And Z138+ has been divided into quite a few branches. These are main > things I have worked out so far from this anonymous raw data collection. > > See "Chromo2I1work" updated file at my website given below. > > > > There's much work to do. > > > > Kenneth Nordtvedt > > Haplogroup I Clade Modalities and Trees at: > http://knordtvedt.home.bresnan.net > > > ------------------------------- > 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

I am comparing anonymous Chromo2 results for raw data. The I1 AS1 YSC00261/Z2535 clade has been divided into at least 6 branches with their new snps. And Z138+ has been divided into quite a few branches. These are main things I have worked out so far from this anonymous raw data collection. See “Chromo2I1work” updated file at my website given below. There’s much work to do. Kenneth Nordtvedt Haplogroup I Clade Modalities and Trees at: http://knordtvedt.home.bresnan.net

According to my one M227+ Chromo2 raw data, it is ancestral for CTS10028. I'm trying to confirm the M227+ label Britains DNA put on the dna sample. Kenneth Nordtvedt Haplogroup I Clade Modalities and Trees at: http://knordtvedt.home.bresnan.net -----Original Message----- From: Steve Trangsrud Sent: Tuesday, January 28, 2014 12:57 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [yDNAhgI] M227 and L69 & CTS10028. Ken Do you know of any CTS10028 results for M227+ ? Steve Trangsrud ________________________________ From: Kenneth Nordtvedt <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Tuesday, January 28, 2014 11:31 AM Subject: [yDNAhgI] M227 and L69 Was there a recent discussion about whether M227+ was L69 derived or ancestral. I found from M227+ raw data for Chromo2 that M227+ is L69 AA+, although I think lab has that positive/negative designation backwards. Kenneth Nordtvedt Haplogroup I Clade Modalities and Trees at: http://knordtvedt.home.bresnan.net ------------------------------- 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

I have only one CTS11651 result within L22+, and it is far downstream, being a uN L813+ person. Do you know of any further upstream cases of CTS11651 test? I don't see why it is necessarily phyloequivalent to L22 at this early point. Kenneth Nordtvedt Haplogroup I Clade Modalities and Trees at: http://knordtvedt.home.bresnan.net -----Original Message----- From: Peterson, Phillip R. Sent: Tuesday, January 28, 2014 2:37 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [yDNAhgI] M227 and L69 & CTS10028. I see several CTS6364+ L69+ results who are also CTS10028-. If M227 is in fact downstream of L69 as suggested by a previous thread, then M227 should be CTS10028-. I believe CTS10028/Z2337 would then be positioned CTS6364/Z2336 and L22. If I recall correctly, there is a CTS10028+ and L22- sample which would show that the two are not phyloequivalent. Now if we could get more info on CTS11651/Z2338 which, as far as I'm aware, appears phyloequivalent to L22. ------------------------------- 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

>From looking all across haplogroup I, it looks like they are reading the minus strand Kenneth Nordtvedt Haplogroup I Clade Modalities and Trees at: http://knordtvedt.home.bresnan.net -----Original Message----- From: Obed W Odom Sent: Tuesday, January 28, 2014 12:53 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [yDNAhgI] M227 and L69 L69 is G ancestral to T derived on the + DNA strand, or C ancestral to A derived on the - DNA strand, so a reading of A would be derived if they are reading the minus DNA strand. On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 1:31 PM, Kenneth Nordtvedt <[email protected]>wrote: > Was there a recent discussion about whether M227+ was L69 derived or > ancestral. I found from M227+ raw data for Chromo2 that M227+ is L69 AA+, > although I think lab has that positive/negative designation backwards. > > ------------------------------- 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

L69 is G ancestral to T derived on the + DNA strand, or C ancestral to A derived on the - DNA strand, so a reading of A would be derived if they are reading the minus DNA strand. On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 1:31 PM, Kenneth Nordtvedt <[email protected]>wrote: > Was there a recent discussion about whether M227+ was L69 derived or > ancestral. I found from M227+ raw data for Chromo2 that M227+ is L69 AA+, > although I think lab has that positive/negative designation backwards. > >

Was there a recent discussion about whether M227+ was L69 derived or ancestral. I found from M227+ raw data for Chromo2 that M227+ is L69 AA+, although I think lab has that positive/negative designation backwards. Kenneth Nordtvedt Haplogroup I Clade Modalities and Trees at: http://knordtvedt.home.bresnan.net

Ken Do you know of any CTS10028 results for  M227+ ?   Steve Trangsrud ________________________________ From: Kenneth Nordtvedt <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Tuesday, January 28, 2014 11:31 AM Subject: [yDNAhgI] M227 and L69 Was there a recent discussion about whether M227+ was L69 derived or ancestral.  I found from M227+ raw data for Chromo2 that M227+ is L69 AA+, although I think lab has that positive/negative designation backwards. Kenneth Nordtvedt Haplogroup I Clade Modalities and Trees at: http://knordtvedt.home.bresnan.net ------------------------------- 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

Do you know if the researchers identified any additional mutations not present in the modern I-M423 population that would confirm the mesolithic line is indeed parallel and not ancestral to them? Or is it just so statistically unlikely that the lineage of one of these remains established the modern line?

Ken, From the Haplogroup I page at www.isogg.org three contacts are listed: Contact People for Haplogroup I: Phil Goff, Steve Trangsrud, and Aaron Salles Torres Their email links are active on that page. John M Rhodes On 2014-01-27, at 8:52 PM, "Kenneth Nordtvedt" <[email protected]> wrote: > I have urgent need to contact person[s] who run the Y-SNPs “approved” or “accepted” list. I did not find the ISOGG website helpful in providing this contact information. > > > > Kenneth Nordtvedt > > Haplogroup I Clade Modalities and Trees at: > http://knordtvedt.home.bresnan.net > > > ------------------------------- > 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

No specialist for the I2-P37+ branch of the I Tree? Kenneth Nordtvedt Haplogroup I Clade Modalities and Trees at: http://knordtvedt.home.bresnan.net -----Original Message----- From: John M Rhodes Sent: Monday, January 27, 2014 8:31 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [yDNAhgI] ISOGG contact people? Ken, >From the Haplogroup I page at www.isogg.org three contacts are listed: Contact People for Haplogroup I: Phil Goff, Steve Trangsrud, and Aaron Salles Torres Their email links are active on that page. John M Rhodes On 2014-01-27, at 8:52 PM, "Kenneth Nordtvedt" <[email protected]> wrote: > I have urgent need to contact person[s] who run the Y-SNPs “approved” or > “accepted” list. I did not find the ISOGG website helpful in providing > this contact information. > > > > Kenneth Nordtvedt > > Haplogroup I Clade Modalities and Trees at: > http://knordtvedt.home.bresnan.net > > > ------------------------------- > 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

The mesolithic line is derived for some of snps which used to be phyloequivalent to M423 and ancestral to other snps which used to be phyloequivalent to M423 as seen in Geno2 data. That means the branch line leading to the some of the remains in Luxuemberg and Sweden left the tree prior to the node where lines to L161 and L621 parted ways. See "Tree and Map for haplogroup I". Since the branch line to the remains is several thousand years long, I would think there are snps unique to that branch line and not seen in any present day dna represented in our databases right now. But those unique snps would have to be looked for in the full genomes reconstructed from the 8000 year old bones. Now that I understand your "parallel" versus "not ancestral" comment, I would agree the probability of the former is just way higher than the latter, especially finding these remains several hundred of miles apart, and also after consideration of the timelines. The bones found are 8000 years old. The node where L161 and L621 branch lines part ways is estimated to be 12,000 years ago. The split of once M423 equivalent snps between ancestral and derived as seen in the bone samples is roughly 50/50. So the timing is thousands of years wrong for those bones being from people right in the common ancestral line of L161 and L621. Kenneth Nordtvedt Haplogroup I Clade Modalities and Trees at: http://knordtvedt.home.bresnan.net -----Original Message----- From: Peterson, Phillip R. Sent: Monday, January 27, 2014 7:53 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [yDNAhgI] Chromo2 and Hg I Do you know if the researchers identified any additional mutations not present in the modern I-M423 population that would confirm the mesolithic line is indeed parallel and not ancestral to them? Or is it just so statistically unlikely that the lineage of one of these remains established the modern line? ------------------------------- 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

I have urgent need to contact person[s] who run the Y-SNPs “approved” or “accepted” list. I did not find the ISOGG website helpful in providing this contact information. Kenneth Nordtvedt Haplogroup I Clade Modalities and Trees at: http://knordtvedt.home.bresnan.net

How did you establish they all were phyloequivalent to M423? What was your pool of comparison full genomes? The people of the paper for 8000 year old dna do not do indels to my knowledge, so I don't think they are useful for present purposes Anyway, Lorschbour man from Luxuemberg and Motala12 man from Sweden match exactly on the very long list of phyloequivalent snps you provided and which they could read (still a very long list!). The split is about 2/3 derived, 1/3 ancestral, confirming the Geno2 work that this is an extinct but separate branch somewhat upstream node from the L161/L621 node. Kenneth Nordtvedt Haplogroup I Clade Modalities and Trees at: http://knordtvedt.home.bresnan.net -----Original Message----- From: John O'Grady Sent: Monday, January 27, 2014 5:42 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [yDNAhgI] Chromo2 and Hg I Ken, I sent you the list that I extracted from my Full Genomes results. I can send you a list of additional M423 phyloequivalents, including indels, if you are interested. John O'Grady > > John, I am confused as to how I got a file of snps (I believe they are > from > your full genome) which were alleged to be phyloequivalent to > M423/L161/L178. Did you send it, or did I try to make it from having your > full genome? > > The problem I have with me making that list is I don't know which upstream > or downstream full genomes there are to compare you with so as to isolate > the M423 phyloequivalents? > > Anyway, I sent it to the 8000 year old bone people, and they were able to > read and returned status for many of your snps. For Motala3 man some were > derived, some ancestral. Same for Lorschbour man. Motala 2 and Motala 9 > men were ancestral for all of your snps on "your" list, but I had > suspected > both these guys were from elsewhere in haplogroup I already. They are > still > not pinned down, but I think we can learn more about those two as well. > > Kenneth Nordtvedt ------------------------------- 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

John, I am confused as to how I got a file of snps (I believe they are from your full genome) which were alleged to be phyloequivalent to M423/L161/L178. Did you send it, or did I try to make it from having your full genome? The problem I have with me making that list is I don't know which upstream or downstream full genomes there are to compare you with so as to isolate the M423 phyloequivalents? Anyway, I sent it to the 8000 year old bone people, and they were able to read and returned status for many of your snps. For Motala3 man some were derived, some ancestral. Same for Lorschbour man. Motala 2 and Motala 9 men were ancestral for all of your snps on "your" list, but I had suspected both these guys were from elsewhere in haplogroup I already. They are still not pinned down, but I think we can learn more about those two as well. Kenneth Nordtvedt Haplogroup I Clade Modalities and Trees at: http://knordtvedt.home.bresnan.net -----Original Message----- From: John O'Grady Sent: Saturday, January 11, 2014 10:37 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [yDNAhgI] Chromo2 and Hg I Full Genomes doesn't cover the high S SNPs such as S7725, because Wilson hasn't published the positions. My G- for PF6143 agrees with the majority CC- (reverse strand), so PF6143 could split Isles-D. My T+ for PF2642 matches AA+ (reverse strand). I guess we will have to wait for more results. John O'Grady ---------------------------------------- > > Since you have the other D2 Isles raw data, you can see first hand the > clash > between you two. Looking at all 9 I can only add: > > Everyone is CC- for PF6143 except Woods who shows AA+ > > PF2642 is a misbehaving snp, showing AA for a I1 person, GG- for most > everyone, but AG for Woods. > > How about S7725? Are you in agreement with Woods on that snp? > > Kenneth Nordtvedt ------------------------------- 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