On DNA-forums "Lappa" posted a very nice tree for R1a . A possible example for other groups. > > > [[ And there is the giant AS2 clade which seems also to be Z139+ and Z138 > status still unknown! Suppose AS2 turns out Z138+? Then people like you > and I are Z138+/Z139+ generics not affiliated with any clade, but just known > to be descendants of the Z138+ Z139+ founder, whereas we were descendants of > the overall I1 founder. > > By the way; any AS2 out there with Z138 result? I can see only the I1 > project member results list by online manipulations. > > I'm not that interested in definitions per se, but more in understanding the > history of the male lines back "then" --- i.e. the temporal as well as > logical and geographical structure of the y tree. > > I think I put it this way several days ago in another post: ".....the > I1xL22 generics will probably end up being mainly broken up into a number of > separate and smaller generic populations, each tagged a little differently > by the new > downstream snps and thus necessarily traced back to a more recent founder. > With the help of these new snps we may (and it’s only a may) be able to > discern connections of some of the generics with known clades, these > connections not seen or overlooked based just on looking at the STRs. > Ken ]] > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Obed W Odom > Sent: Monday, December 05, 2011 10:48 AM > To: y-dna-haplogroup-i@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [yDNAhgI] Tree for I1 with new Z snps > > Ken, are you and I the only generic I1's who have tested positive for > Z-138 and Z-139 so far? If these SNP's are ancestral in a significant > portion (or would it need to be a majority?) of generic I1's, it seems > to me that you and I would by definition no longer be in the generic > category, and this would be a case where classification by SNP has > trumped classification by STR. > > On 12/5/2011 10:16 AM, Kenneth Nordtvedt wrote: > > That sure is interesting to find another one negative for all three. But > > by > > itself it is not what makes someone generic or non-generic. "generic" > > means > > I can't see the person's haplotype as part of a clade. They seem to go > > back > > to the founder of I1 as their first recognizable common ancestor. But I > > notice that in my 68-111 markers collection I have this Bowman in a > > cluster > > with 25 at 714 and 18 at 650. Those are not rare values, just off modal > > one > > step. But > > I'll keep my eye on the cluster. > > > > WE're not getting the Z information in very large quantity from FTDNA, > > unfortunately. > > > > Ken > > ------------------------------- > 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

Is there a direct link? --- On Mon, 5/12/11, Didier VERNADE <didier.vernade@orange.fr> wrote: > From: Didier VERNADE <didier.vernade@orange.fr> > > On DNA-forums "Lappa" posted a very nice tree for R1a . A > possible example for other groups.