My Hg I1 "character matrix" may help. It was up to date as of a few weeks ago. I'm in the process of updating it, again, right now: http://dgmweb.net/DNA/General/SNP-maxout-HgI1.html Exactly what you test depends on whether you are content with assuming the status of upstream SNPs or deductions based the STR haplotype with regard to upstream SNPs, or whether you want to confirm the major "forks" in the tree. I would say that decision is a personal one based on your level of curiosity, that is, whether knowing for certain is worth the expense to you, or not. Diana > From: Behalf Of Peter and Connie Bradish > Sent: Friday, March 09, 2012 8:31 AM > To: y-dna-haplogroup-i@rootsweb.com > > It would be very helpful if some one made a chart for > which SNPs should be tested for which subgroup of I. > If there is such a chart, please give us the link. > If not it would be appreciated if such a chart was > developed and a link placed so we could refer to it. > > Thank you, Connie Bradish

Believe it or not, this often works when you need to locate a Kit# at FTDNA... Go to Google and search on the kit number and this term: site:familytreedna.com It the Kit# is on a visible page at FTDNA, it should turn up. Diana > From: Sam Eaton > Sent: Thursday, March 08, 2012 4:42 PM > > According to FTDNA, I'm still enrolled in the I1 project and > according to the new ISOGG tree I should be I1f Z58+ Still I can't > find kit number anywhere in the project spreadsheet >

- - - - Kenneth Nordtvedt See: "Tree for I1" "Tree and Map for haplogroup I" "I1modalities" at http://knordtvedt.home.bresnan.net showing my working tree for YDNA haplogroup I. These files are periodically updated as new information is obtained. -----Original Message----- From: Aaron Salles Torres DF29 is supposedly upstream from Z58, Z63 and L22. We have many DF29 tests on order for the latter two branches, so I think we should wait for those results first before encouraging further testing for individuals who are Z58+. Aaron Torres [[ Considering all the wholesale snp tests you have encouraged, this message is a surprise. I have been focusing on one special place in the tree which all the other DF29 tests under the Sun would not help us, I believe. Question 1: Is there any person confirmed Z58+ but negative for Z59 and Z138/or/Z139? I think such people are extremely rare or not yet seen. Question 2: That seems the only kind of person who could put the DF29 definitely upstream of Z58 --- as long as we still wait to position L22 relative to DF29. KN ]]

But not so cheap as to put money on the L338 long, long shot. Only thing we are certain of is more taxes and public spending. - - - - Kenneth Nordtvedt See: "Tree for I1" "Tree and Map for haplogroup I" "I1modalities" at http://knordtvedt.home.bresnan.net showing my working tree for YDNA haplogroup I. These files are periodically updated as new information is obtained. -----Original Message----- From: Dr. James M. Owston Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2012 11:44 AM To: y-dna-haplogroup-i@rootsweb.com Subject: [yDNAhgI] Ordered SNPs Since I am in the 14/22 complex, I have pretty good idea to which SNPs will shake out, so I skipped over some to get to the heart of the matter in ordering these last night. Plus, I am cheap. I ordered both Z140 and L338. I anticipate L338 will be negative, but cannot be certain. Plus, I ordered DF29 to add to the body of knowledge about this SNP. Jim -- *James M. Owston, EdD* Dean of Distance Learning Associate Professor of Communication and Media Mountain State University PO Box 9003 Beckley, WV 25802-9003 304-929-1356 800-766-6067, x.1356 ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to Y-DNA-HAPLOGROUP-I-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

That's essentially automatic; Z58, Z63, and Z131 are parallel. We want someone Z58+ but ancestral for any further downstream known snp. That I put such a branch in my tree suggests I found one, but I see no easy way to search my many thousand hap database to refind him. - - - - Kenneth Nordtvedt See: "Tree for I1" "Tree and Map for haplogroup I" "I1modalities" at http://knordtvedt.home.bresnan.net showing my working tree for YDNA haplogroup I. These files are periodically updated as new information is obtained. -----Original Message----- From: Hopsandmelb@aol.com Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2012 11:45 AM To: y-dna-haplogroup-i@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [yDNAhgI] Z58+ but negative thereafter? Ken What about Z58+and Z63-, Z131- Mel In a message dated 3/22/2012 1:41:54 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, knordtvedt@bresnan.net writes: Does anyone know of the key but elusive Z58+ but Z59- Z138-/Z139- person? They should be testing for DF29. - - - - Kenneth Nordtvedt See: "Tree for I1" "Tree and Map for haplogroup I" "I1modalities" at http://knordtvedt.home.bresnan.net showing my working tree for YDNA haplogroup I. These files are periodically updated as new information is obtained. ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to Y-DNA-HAPLOGROUP-I-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 Y-DNA-HAPLOGROUP-I-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Does anyone know of the key but elusive Z58+ but Z59- Z138-/Z139- person? They should be testing for DF29. - - - - Kenneth Nordtvedt See: "Tree for I1" "Tree and Map for haplogroup I" "I1modalities" at http://knordtvedt.home.bresnan.net showing my working tree for YDNA haplogroup I. These files are periodically updated as new information is obtained.

In the example below, I seem to have gotten my numbers slightly garbled and also flipped the alleles L22+ and L22- by mistake. Corrections as follows: For: "L22+ with 99% accuracy (250 out of 252 samples ..." Read "L22- with 99% accuracy (462 out of 464 samples ..." For: "L22- with 83% accuracy (462 out of 557 samples ..." Read "L22+ with 72% accuracy (250 out of 345 samples ..." For: "So it would get L22- status wrong 17% of the time." Read "So it would get L22+ status wrong 28% of the time." For: "improves the L22- prediction to 94% accuracy (412 out of 436 ..." Read "improves the L22+ prediction to 89% accuracy (196 out of 220 ..." Thought I should correct that because the L22+ and L22- were flipped. Otherwise it was just an example. If one used more than three levels of branching to make predictions (I1.110* is three levels), then SNP predictions would get even better. But the L22+ figure in the example is just the accuracy based on only looking at three levels of the branch code. Terry On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 4:55 PM, Terry <tdrobb@gmail.com> wrote: > I have had some questions about the difference between the "I1 STR > Decision Tree Method" at > http://www.goggo.com/terry/HaplogroupI1/ > and the "I1,I2 STR Branch Code Method" at > http://www.goggo.com/cgi-bin/branchFind.cgi > > The Decision Tree Method is really just a quicker way of working out where > you fit into the structure of Haplogroup I1 and how parts of I1 are > geographically distributed. Useful for getting a sense of what other people > are reporting as their place of origin. > > The Decision Tree Method (which anyone can apply for themselves) shows the > geographic frequency distribution of the various clusters that are defined > by the Decision Tree for haplogroup I1. In many cases, the STR > clusters/clans are associated with specific SNP alleles. It does make > mistakes though. For instance, the first decision point of DYS390>22 versus > DYS390<=22 can predict L22 status with the following accuracy: > L22+ with 99% accuracy (250 out of 252 samples with 12 or more markers) > L22- with 83% accuracy (462 out of 557 samples with 12 or more markers). > So it would get L22- status wrong 17% of the time. Such errors are > ultimately unavoidable when using STR values to predict SNP allele status. > > The Branch Code Method (which is available via the on-line tool) would > improve the accuracy of such predictions in most cases. For instance, it > improves the L22- prediction to 94% accuracy (412 out of 436 samples with > 67 or more STR markers). > > ... >

DF29 is supposedly upstream from Z58, Z63 and L22. We have many DF29 tests on order for the latter two branches, so I think we should wait for those results first before encouraging further testing for individuals who are Z58+. Aaron Torres Re: [yDNAhgI] First DF29 results Thursday, March 22, 2012 8:54 AM From: "Kenneth Nordtvedt" <knordtvedt@bresnan.net> To: y-dna-haplogroup-i@rootsweb.com Cc: I1-Z58andZ63@yahoogroups.com.au, genealogy-dna@rootsweb.com Is not 12459 in AS3 and therefore also Z59+ and Z382+ ? One other df29+ is also Z138+ Z139+ as well as Z58+ So we need more upstream results on the Z58+ portion of the tree to pin this branch down. Maybe a Z58+ Z59- Z138- could be df29- ???

Is not 12459 in AS3 and therefore also Z59+ and Z382+ ? One other df29+ is also Z138+ Z139+ as well as Z58+ So we need more upstream results on the Z58+ portion of the tree to pin this branch down. Maybe a Z58+ Z59- Z138- could be df29- ??? - - - - Kenneth Nordtvedt See: "Tree for I1" "Tree and Map for haplogroup I" "I1modalities" at http://knordtvedt.home.bresnan.net showing my working tree for YDNA haplogroup I. These files are periodically updated as new information is obtained. -----Original Message----- From: Aaron Salles Torres Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2012 6:29 AM To: y-dna-haplogroup-i@rootsweb.com Cc: I1-Z58andZ63@yahoogroups.com.au ; genealogy-dna@rootsweb.com Subject: [yDNAhgI] First DF29 results We got our first DF29 results last night: Kit#12479 is DF29+. He is in the Z58 branch of the tree. Let's wait to see how other I1 branches will do with regards to this SNP: http://bit.ly/Z58Z63ClassicResults Aaron Torres ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to Y-DNA-HAPLOGROUP-I-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

The only point against the 68-111 markers panel (but is it against the markers ??) is the absence of many on ysearch database. From: Dora Smith : I'm outright discouraging the 111 marker test on my projects. There's not enough known about the results for them to contribute anything but confusion, and most of my project members find the results they've got confusing enough. Dora Ken wrote : [[68-111 is much more informative than 38-67; and if the hobby had started over a decade ago with 68-111 instead of 1-67, we'd have about the same discrimination between haplogroups, clades, and branches, etc. For ancient clade identification (before the genealogical era) the 68-111 markers are very helpful. So I really don't understand your confusion, and it’s too bad you discourage 68-111 measurement. KN ]]

We got our first DF29 results last night: Kit#12479 is DF29+. He is in the Z58 branch of the tree. Let's wait to see how other I1 branches will do with regards to this SNP: http://bit.ly/Z58Z63ClassicResults Aaron Torres

May I ask if anyone dared to check what the Klyosov approach "branch by branch" is predicting for I1 , using the tree provided ? My point is that it seems that A. Klyosov is publishing a lot and no one (besides him) is using it. Recently, I realized that a paper published in 2011 (work from 2010) : Increased Resolution of Y Chromosome Haplogroup T Defines Relationships among Populations of the Near East, Europe, and Africa Fernando L. Mendez, Tatiana M. Karafet, Thomas Krahn, Harry Ostrer, Himla Soodyall, and Michael F. Hammer Human Biology 83(1):39-53. 2011 is using Zhivotovsky mutation rates and a Batwing analysis; please notice that Th. Krahn is a co-author. Are we in such a wild world ? People know how much Ken explained here and there how to use ASD and "the last maximal ice refuigium" died out (not for everyone around). A. Klyosov is now providing another approach . I hope one day we can find a coherent timing. Thank you Ken for the efforts towards a I1 tree. > > I have rebuilt in what I hope is a more streamlined (less cluttered) format the clade modalities in y haplogroup I1. I eventually want to do this for all y haplogroup I. File is “I1modalities.xls” at http://knordtvedt.home.bresnan.net and it is a work in progress. I will finish and then update it from time to time as the data comes in. Only the STRs for which a clade has different modality than “standard/basic I1*” are indicated. 111 STR markers are included. The 68-111 markers are often quite informative for identifying clades. Originally I was going to delay this rebuild until the new z series snps were all understood with regard to the clades. But FTDNA is surely in no rush to get the ordered test results out, so I will put out this incomplete file. Interclade node age estimates are entirely different things than clade tmrca estimates. See “Tree for I1” to get a sense of the interclade node ages. - - - - Kenneth Nordtvedt See "Tree for I1" and "Tree and Map for haplogroup I" at http://knordtvedt.home.bresnan.net showing my working tree for YDNA haplogroup I. These files are periodically updated as new information is obtained.

My immigrant ancestor Matthy Cornelissen is I1 generic. In the Van Horne project, we have recently had some 67 marker matches with some Walkers who descend from the Walker family of Pilkington, Lancashire. Matthys Cornelissen is documented as having come from Jutland in 1663, to New Netherlands. We have a match with a man whose grandfather, born 1873, in Denmark, immigrated to California in 1905. We not only have documentation of Danish origin, but we have a DNA match with a man who comes from Denmark. These men had to have had a common ancestor born before 1640. I submitted the Walker and Van Horne test results to Ken. He gave me a time to the common ancestor of about 1100 years. This correlates to the Danish settlement of Jorvik, in what is now the City of York, England. Marleen Van Horne

Is it possible to quantify the preference for 68-111 ? By the way , this is saying that FTDNA's competitors made a better choice but the 38-67 panel somehow won ... The 68-111 panel is mostly made out of markers from DNA-Heritage and other companies. > > FTDNA should not be demanding customers do the 38-67 panel of STRs before ordering the 68-111 panel of STRs. The latter are much more informative; customers can get much more bang for their buck. > > And of course it goes without saying, various project and other public databases should include space for the 68-111 STRs. > > > > - - - - > Kenneth Nordtvedt > See "Tree for I1" and "Tree and Map for haplogroup I" as well as "I1modalities" at http://knordtvedt.home.bresnan.net > showing my working tree for YDNA haplogroup I. These files are periodically updated as new information is obtained. > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to Y-DNA-HAPLOGROUP-I-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

Dora - re your comments about York being a Roman site. Yes it was, you can see examples of Roman columns there today. But you can also go through the Jarvik exhibit of the old Viking settlement There are still Hg I1 folks in the area around York. There is a higher density of I1's there than nearly any other spot in England. I visited there a few years back just to see the Viking exhibit.

- - - - Kenneth Nordtvedt See: "Tree for I1" "Tree and Map for haplogroup I" "I1modalities" at http://knordtvedt.home.bresnan.net showing my working tree for YDNA haplogroup I. These files are periodically updated as new information is obtained. -----Original Message----- From: Dora Smith Who are the other surnames? And their emigrant ancestry, if they all came to the colonial U.S.? [[Surnames in this clade other than Bradford are Bretton, Whatley, Lake, Holmes, Laird, Gray, Tyner, plus two from smgf with surnames not given. They did not necessarily join Bradford in going to New England. KN ]]

- - - - Kenneth Nordtvedt See: "Tree for I1" "Tree and Map for haplogroup I" "I1modalities" at http://knordtvedt.home.bresnan.net showing my working tree for YDNA haplogroup I. These files are periodically updated as new information is obtained. -----Original Message----- From: Dora Smith Sent: Monday, March 19, 2012 9:32 AM To: y-dna-haplogroup-i@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [yDNAhgI] I1-T2 has a companion clade Ken, did you actually attend a school where they made you learn the names of the colonial governors of Massachsuetts? [[No, but those among the Mayflower Pilgrims I recognized KN ]] Of course there are one or two that a school child should recognize. So the governor's identity could not be more relevant. Inquiring minds are burning to know. [[ Bradford ]]

- - - - Kenneth Nordtvedt See: "Tree for I1" "Tree and Map for haplogroup I" "I1modalities" at http://knordtvedt.home.bresnan.net showing my working tree for YDNA haplogroup I. These files are periodically updated as new information is obtained. -----Original Message----- From: Dora Smith I'm outright discouraging the 111 marker test on my projects. There's not enough known about the results for them to contribute anything but confusion, and most of my project members find the results they've got confusing enough. Dora [[68-111 is much more informative than 38-67; and if the hobby had started over a decade ago with 68-111 instead of 1-67, we'd have about the same discrimination between haplogroups, clades, and branches, etc. For ancient clade identification (before the genealogical era) the 68-111 markers are very helpful. So I really don't understand your confusion, and it’s too bad you discourage 68-111 measurement. KN ]]

I stand corrected. The I2b1/M223 and the I1>Z58+ and I1>Z63+ projects combined sent 14 participants to the "Walk Through the Y" program. Aaron Torres --- On Wed, 3/21/12, Aaron Salles Torres <sallfertorr@yahoo.com> wrote: From: Aaron Salles Torres <sallfertorr@yahoo.com> Subject: Re: [yDNAhgI] [DNA] Roche 454 Sequencer Results To: y-dna-haplogroup-i@rootsweb.com Date: Wednesday, March 21, 2012, 4:57 PM We always strive for positive outcomes. Thanks, Aaron Torres From: "Kenneth Nordtvedt" <knordtvedt@bresnan.net> To: y-dna-haplogroup-i@rootsweb.comWell, I hope $9000 of customer money achieves something? - - - - Kenneth Nordtvedt See: "Tree for I1" "Tree and Map for haplogroup I" "I1modalities" at http://knordtvedt.home.bresnan.net showing my working tree for YDNA haplogroup I. These files are periodically updated as new information is obtained. -----Original Message----- From: Aaron Salles Torres Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2012 3:18 PM To: genealogy-dna@rootsweb.com Cc: y-dna-haplogroup-i@rootsweb.com ; I1-Z58andZ63@yahoogroups.com.au Subject: Re: [yDNAhgI] [DNA] Roche 454 Sequencer Results Sorry, that was probably my fault. I sent 12 members to "Walk Through the Y" recently and I was informed today that the WTY's have created a jam in the FT DNA labs... Aaron Torres Message: 4 Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2012 16:23:26 -0500 From: "Lawrence Mayka" <lgmayka@ieee.org> Subject: Re: [DNA] Roche 454 Sequencer Results To: <genealogy-dna@rootsweb.com> Message-ID: <08e401cd0616$86045350$920cf9f0$@org> Content-Type: text/plain;    charset="us-ascii" Presumably, the remodeling is the reason we have had no new SNP results since March 10. > From: genealogy-dna-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:genealogy-dna- > bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Ray Banks > Thomas indicated also that remodeling of the Family Tree DNA lab was a factor in > the long time it took to get output on these early samples and that he would be > scoring the data for each participant. ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to Y-DNA-HAPLOGROUP-I-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

I have had some questions about the difference between the "I1 STR Decision Tree Method" at http://www.goggo.com/terry/HaplogroupI1/ and the "I1,I2 STR Branch Code Method" at http://www.goggo.com/cgi-bin/branchFind.cgi The Decision Tree Method is really just a quicker way of working out where you fit into the structure of Haplogroup I1 and how parts of I1 are geographically distributed. Useful for getting a sense of what other people are reporting as their place of origin. The Decision Tree Method (which anyone can apply for themselves) shows the geographic frequency distribution of the various clusters that are defined by the Decision Tree for haplogroup I1. In many cases, the STR clusters/clans are associated with specific SNP alleles. It does make mistakes though. For instance, the first decision point of DYS390>22 versus DYS390<=22 can predict L22 status with the following accuracy: L22+ with 99% accuracy (250 out of 252 samples with 12 or more markers) L22- with 83% accuracy (462 out of 557 samples with 12 or more markers). So it would get L22- status wrong 17% of the time. Such errors are ultimately unavoidable when using STR values to predict SNP allele status. The Branch Code Method (which is available via the on-line tool) would improve the accuracy of such predictions in most cases. For instance, it improves the L22- prediction to 94% accuracy (412 out of 436 samples with 67 or more STR markers). Other SNP markers, such as L338, L258, Z63 etc can be predicted with varying degrees of accuracy as well from just knowing your position in the computed STR tree. The main use of either the Decision Tree method or the Branch Code method is not for SNP prediction though, but instead for showing maps of the geographic frequency distribution of the various clusters/clans or branches. So SNP status is used as part of an independent validation test of the methods. Given that some STR markers may have mutated several times over the timeframe of I1 and I2, one cannot expect perfect SNP predictions. STR values can independently mutate and reach the same value as someone else's without that value being inherited from a common ancestor. That convergence of STR values is the main limitation of the two methods, or any other STR based method. For SNP prediction, prior knowledge is important. So if you know the status of some SNP allele for even a distance relative (with a common male-line ancestor), then such prior knowledge is very valuable. The I1,I2 STR Branch Code tool may help you with quickly identifying such distant relatives, and seeing their SNP status. Finally, the STR tree structure of haplogroups I1 and I2, as well as the TMRCA of the branches, is computed as a side effect of the Branch Code Method calculation. As always, there will be inherent and unavoidable errors though. Despite that, I hope either of the two methods will be of use in either confirming what you already know, or in giving you some ideas for further investigation. Terry