Diana, Yes all three were recently done, 2 in 1 batch, and the 3rd in the following batch. K9HKQ (Alan) sent me a screen shot of his results. They checked a total of 22 SNP's. FT had trouble with some of them and re-did them. L21 is not listed as one of the SNP's tested but the three following it are listed as negative. None of these three men can prove a relationship on paper, but were hoping to be able to prove it with DNA. Karen >1. If you walk down the Y-DNA haplotree, from the top, you will see that L23 >appears before L21. >http://dgmweb.net/DNA/SNPcharts/R1b_2010-02-12.shtml > >2. It would be extraordinary, even in subclades of haplogroup R, >for members of >the same family who are matching at levels of 65/67 and 66/67 to be >in different >subclades. Are you certain all three were tested recently? If >K9HKQ was tested >some time ago, it might have been before the L21 test was being offered. > >If you are in a position to check the member page of K9HKQ, I would >double-check >to see if L21 is really L21- or if it simply hasn't been tested >yet. If it has >been tested, and the result is negative, I would contact FTDNA and ask them to >retest K9HKQ for L21 and explain the reason he should be L21+. > >As for the differences at 464 and CDY, these would be typical for near family >members as those are probably the most volatile of all markers in the standard >67. > >Diana