A snp which has been around awhile and in the FTDNA catalog, L380, has been found ancestral in 7 of 7 I1xL22 folks. It now has been found derived in 2 of 2 I1d L22+ people --- one being I1d1 P109+ and the other from uN2 clade. A garden variety, basic L22+ haplotype (dare I call it generic L22+?) not of those special clades should test for L380 to see if we can separate L380 from L22 on the “recent time” side of the great divide. If we can not, then some investigating from the “ancient time” side will need to be done by I1xL22 hobbyists. But the latter situation is more complex because just upstream of the three new I1xL22 “entry” snps Z58, Z63, and Z131 thee is a snp DF29 which may involve L22 in a non-straightforward way. DF29 is not yet in the catalog. My personal view is that checking out L380 from the I1xL22 side should wait until we really push back on the I1 L22+ side. So could a basic L22+ who belongs to no further subclade or subhaplogroup do a L380 test? The Bothnians in I1d3 might want to have one of their clan do L380 as well to cover that base. I’m not optimistic we can separate L380 from L22 on the L22+ side because P109+ seems so close in time to L22+; but we should try. Finding possible significance of L380 in both I1 and in M223+ part of haplogroup I is an example of a procedural loophole we hobbyists can fall into. L380 is an example of the growing number of snps showing up in multiple places in the y tree. This is a view of the future; we are now seeing it happen with the fastest mutating nucleotide sites. But this is a ubiquitous property of snps, and essentially it is just a matter of time before we find the multiple occurrences of just about every y snp. SNPs are not UEPs. WTY procedure is not to highlight in bright yellow when a new customer test result shows derived for a snp discovered previously in other earlier WTY test results. And they do not type out a message alerting us to this when it happens. It is up to us in each haplogroup to scan the entire alleles list results when new WTY tests are completed in the haplogroups of our interests. That’s how these potentially useful snps are found. Dr Krahn’s snp browser and Finch can also be used by the nimble to find these new occurrences of old snps. Ken

I have ordered the L380. I am L22+ and P109+ (see R2QD3). Hope that helps. John Ausman   --- On Mon, 11/14/11, Kenneth Nordtvedt <knordtvedt@bresnan.net> wrote: From: Kenneth Nordtvedt <knordtvedt@bresnan.net> Subject: [yDNAhgI] I1d, L380, and fixing a loophole To: y-dna-haplogroup-i@rootsweb.com, genealogy-dna@rootsweb.com Date: Monday, November 14, 2011, 4:09 PM A snp which has been around awhile and in the FTDNA catalog, L380, has been found ancestral in 7 of 7 I1xL22 folks.  It now has been found derived in 2 of 2 I1d L22+ people --- one being I1d1 P109+ and the other from uN2 clade. A garden variety, basic L22+ haplotype (dare I call it generic L22+?) not of those special clades should test for L380 to see if we can separate L380 from L22 on the “recent time” side of the great divide.  If we can not, then some investigating from the “ancient time” side will need to be done by I1xL22 hobbyists.  But the latter situation is more complex because just upstream of the three new I1xL22 “entry” snps Z58, Z63, and Z131 thee is a snp DF29 which may involve L22 in a non-straightforward way.  DF29 is not yet in the catalog.  My personal view is that checking out L380 from the I1xL22 side should wait until we really push back on the I1 L22+ side. So could a basic L22+ who belongs to no further subclade or subhaplogroup do a L380 test?  The Bothnians in I1d3 might want to have one of their clan do L380 as well to cover that base. I’m not optimistic we can separate L380 from L22 on the L22+ side because P109+ seems so close in time to L22+; but we should try. Finding possible significance of L380 in both I1 and in M223+ part of haplogroup I is an example of a procedural loophole we hobbyists can fall into.  L380 is an example of the growing number of snps showing up in multiple places in the y tree.  This is a view of the future; we are now seeing it happen with the fastest mutating nucleotide sites.  But this is a ubiquitous property of snps, and essentially it is just a matter of time before we find the multiple occurrences of just about every y snp.  SNPs are not UEPs. WTY procedure is not to highlight in bright yellow when a new customer test result shows derived for a snp discovered previously in other earlier WTY test results.  And they do not type out a message alerting us to this when it happens.  It is up to us in each haplogroup to scan the entire alleles list results when new WTY tests are completed in the haplogroups of our interests.  That’s how these potentially useful snps are found.  Dr Krahn’s snp browser and Finch can also be used by the nimble to find these new occurrences of old snps. 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