Re: Y-DNA Warehouse Tree Tech Demo

开云体育

The Book of Invasions (written? in the 11^th century) says the Partholonians, the second group to settle in Ireland, died from a pestilence.? You can’t help but wonder if a plague/pandemic (a real one) occurred during that 40 BC to 250 AD period and was incorporated into the myths.?

?

Might our FGC11134… gents have survived?? Or might a second wave of that haplogroup arrived later?

?

John, does Stout indicate if this lull affected the whole island equally?? I know you shared with me privately last month that Stout believed that Ogham was developed in west Wales rather than southern Ireland.? I’m getting that book…

?

Elizabeth

?

Show quoted text

From: [email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of john brazil
Sent: 06 September 2021 19:22
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [R1b-CTS4466-Plus] Y-DNA Warehouse Tree Tech Demo

?

Neil,

?

A potential contributor to a SNP bottleneck might be the phenomenon known as the 'Late Iron Age Lull'?

?

Discussed briefly (since it antedates his main focus) by Dr Matthew Stout in his 2017 book entitled Early Medieval Ireland 431-1169, he points to a marked downturn in human agricultural activity in Ireland from around 40 BC to 250 AD as evidenced by pollen analysis. He suggests that this must have been associated with a marked decline in population, further supported by a 'gap' in building construction over the same period. This does not seem to have been associated with a deteriorating climate - indeed the corresponding period in Britain is known as the 'Roman Warm Period'.

?

It certainly could provide both a SNP bottleneck but also a marked incentive for some to 'investigate' opportunities on the eastern shore of the Irish Sea?

?

John.

?

On Mon, Sep 6, 2021 at 6:28 PM O'Brien, Neil <neil.obrien@...> wrote:

On final point, if the archaeological evidence doesn’t point to an Iron Age invasion, or if the linguistic evidence doesn’t point to any significant interruption or linguistic revolution in primitive insular Goidelic, then there is a problem – the sequence of events doesn’t fit. The only solution to this problem of such a large continuous snip block is a significant bottleneck in CTS4466, with the modern snip block perhaps representing the survivors. As such, if the modern Irish tree branch has been interrupted by a significant bottleneck, then that implies that the first CTS4466 man in Ireland was a lot older than 250AD. The MRCA of the modern group is just descended from a branch line that survived, the collateral lines perished and as such are absent on the modern phylogenetic tree. If so, it really isn’t possible to date when CTS4466 arrived in Ireland to any accurate degree. ???
?
I suspect I’m not delivering any earth shattering news – the conclusion is obvious.
?
?
?
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of O'Brien, Neil via
Sent: Monday 6 September 2021 17:36
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [R1b-CTS4466-Plus] Y-DNA Warehouse Tree Tech Demo
?
EXTERNAL EMAIL: This email originated from outside of NUI Galway. Do not open attachments or click on links in the message unless you recognise the sender's email address and believe the content is safe.
R?OMHPHOST SEACHTRACH: Tháinig an ríomhphost seo as áit éigin taobh amuigh de O? Gaillimh. Ná cliceáil ar naisc agus ná hoscail ceangaltáin mura n-aithníonn tú seoladh ríomhphoist an tseoltóra agus mura gcreideann tú go bhfuil an t-ábhar sábháilte.
?
On another point, if CTS4466, particularly R-A541, Irish Type II, is the dominant snip marker in the Southwest of Ireland, 250AD might seem a little recent to establish a founder effect. The other possible chink in the armour is language – Ogham stones might be identified with CTS4466, but we know they were written in primitive Irish and not in P-Celtic Brythonic, as might be expected if CTS4466 came from either Wales or Gaul.
?
I take your point though, yFull estimates the TMRCA of A541 to 1750 ybd.
?
Best,
?
Neil
?
From: O'Brien, Neil
Sent: Monday 6 September 2021 17:24
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: [R1b-CTS4466-Plus] Y-DNA Warehouse Tree Tech Demo
?
If we’re agreed that CTS4466 probably didn’t form on the island of Ireland, but in Wales – or perhaps further afield, 250AD would be a significant date. It would mean that the arrival of the clade into Ireland coincides with the Irish Iron Age, and most Irish archaeologists have long argued that there is no evidence for any significant population incursion into Ireland in the Iron Age. Mind you, they said the same about the Bronze Age too……… ??
?
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of James Kane via
Sent: Monday 6 September 2021 17:16
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [R1b-CTS4466-Plus] Y-DNA Warehouse Tree Tech Demo
?
EXTERNAL EMAIL: This email originated from outside of NUI Galway. Do not open attachments or click on links in the message unless you recognise the sender's email address and believe the content is safe.
R?OMHPHOST SEACHTRACH: Tháinig an ríomhphost seo as áit éigin taobh amuigh de O? Gaillimh. Ná cliceáil ar naisc agus ná hoscail ceangaltáin mura n-aithníonn tú seoladh ríomhphoist an tseoltóra agus mura gcreideann tú go bhfuil an t-ábhar sábháilte.
?
The thing about the age estimates is that you only count SNPs that fall inside the regions where there has been work to study the rates of mutations.? While there are 20 equivalent SNPs only 15 are used for dating the branch.
?
As far as the 1700 years that Elizabeth was asking about being different… that’s in the same ballpark I’m pretty sure I’ve always been. ?1950 - 1700 = 250AD.
?
James
?
On Sep 6, 2021, at 10:50 AM, Joe Carroll <jcarroll2@...> wrote:
?
To all:
This time/SNP thing intrigues me greatly (as I assume it does others). Let’s do a little kindergarden math:
?
Elizabeth notes that James has?CTS4466 formed 3,000 ybp and its’ TMRCA at 1,700 ybp.
?
There are 20 SNPs in the CYS4466 block making the time between forming and the TMRCA yield an average SNP rate of (3000-1700)/20 = 65 yrs/SNP.
?
There are two Lee’s near me who, with their 2 private variants, are some 37 SNPs below CTS4466’s TMRCA. If we assume that this takes us all the way to the ‘present’, then using James’s value of 1700 ybp for that time frame, we get another estimate: 1700/37 = 45.9 yrs/SNP. Of course, the two Lee’s likely do not lead us up to the present; there are more SNPs to be discovered, thus making the ’37’ larger and the yrs/SNP smaller.
?
Then if we do these together, we get 3000/57 = 52.6 yrs/SNP. And that’s a max number. So 50 yrs/SNP is perhaps a better guess.
?
Comments?????
— joe
?

Re: Y-DNA Warehouse Tree Tech Demo

#485

开云体育

Nigel, I believe you include STR mutations in those calculations?? Hence a smaller rate than for SNPs only.? E

?

Show quoted text

From: [email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Nigel McCarthy
Sent: 07 September 2021 07:15
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [R1b-CTS4466-Plus] Y-DNA Warehouse Tree Tech Demo

?

In answer to this specific question I am estimating the A212 Block comprising 3 SNPs and 3 STR mutations occurred between 100 and 325 A.D. after which two Robertson kits without the 18 to 19 mutation at DYS510 break away. If, however, they shared this mutation only to later have it back-mutating you can extend that span to 360 A.D., following which SNP A7699 occurs for many in this group.? THIS IS A ROUGH GUIDE BASED ON THE AVERAGE 35 – 40 ?YPM (Years per mutation) SUGGESTED IN MY ARTICLE. I HAVE YET TO WORK A THOROUGH COMPUTATION. THESE DATES ARE GIVEN FOR GUIDANCE AS TO THE APPROXIMATE CENTURIES IN WHICH MUTATIONS OCCURRED. IF YOU QUOTE THEM PLEASE QUALIFY THEM WITH THIS CONDITION.

?

I don’t count palindromic or DYZ19 suggested SNPs or most InDels ?(I doubt whether James does either). In a separate study, in a thorough exercise across all BY-700 testers among the progeny of the McCarthy kings of Cashel and Desmond through the second millennium, the average mutation rate calculated on the same basis was 32.6 ypm. ????

?

Kind regards = Nigel McCarthy

?

Sent from for Windows

?

From: CJ
Sent: 06 September 2021 19:22
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [R1b-CTS4466-Plus] Y-DNA Warehouse Tree Tech Demo

?

What does this new?TMRCA mean for?Nigel McCarthy's?PHYLOGENETIC ALIGNMENTS WITH GENEALOGIES OF DESCENT FROM AILILL?LOM?

Especially interested about A212.

?

Re: Y-DNA Warehouse Tree Tech Demo

#484

In answer to this specific question I am estimating the A212 Block comprising 3 SNPs and 3 STR mutations occurred between 100 and 325 A.D. after which two Robertson kits without the 18 to 19 mutation at DYS510 break away. If, however, they shared this mutation only to later have it back-mutating you can extend that span to 360 A.D., following which SNP A7699 occurs for many in this group.? THIS IS A ROUGH GUIDE BASED ON THE AVERAGE 35 – 40 ?YPM (Years per mutation) SUGGESTED IN MY ARTICLE. I HAVE YET TO WORK A THOROUGH COMPUTATION. THESE DATES ARE GIVEN FOR GUIDANCE AS TO THE APPROXIMATE CENTURIES IN WHICH MUTATIONS OCCURRED. IF YOU QUOTE THEM PLEASE QUALIFY THEM WITH THIS CONDITION.

?

I don’t count palindromic or DYZ19 suggested SNPs or most InDels ?(I doubt whether James does either). In a separate study, in a thorough exercise across all BY-700 testers among the progeny of the McCarthy kings of Cashel and Desmond through the second millennium, the average mutation rate calculated on the same basis was 32.6 ypm. ????

?

Kind regards = Nigel McCarthy

?

Sent from for Windows

?

Show quoted text

From: CJ
Sent: 06 September 2021 19:22
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [R1b-CTS4466-Plus] Y-DNA Warehouse Tree Tech Demo

?

What does this new?TMRCA mean for?Nigel McCarthy's?PHYLOGENETIC ALIGNMENTS WITH GENEALOGIES OF DESCENT FROM AILILL?LOM?

Especially interested about A212.

?

BEE4B9982AEC4838B001CED069F216E9.png

Re: Y-DNA Warehouse Tree Tech Demo

#483

开云体育

I think Iain’s methodologies are trying to incorporate local recalibration of mutation rates using known pedigrees and the radiocarbon dated samples. ?Unfortunately, I just haven’t had time to digest his documentation.

James

Show quoted text

On Sep 6, 2021, at 5:35 PM, Elizabeth <elizabeth@...> wrote:

?
Thanks, James.
?
John, did you have any luck clarifying point 1?
?
Re second point, have the genetic genealogy number crunchers considered trying to adjust their average SNP mutation rates to coincide with ancient DNA results?? There are plenty of other ancient DNA results in other haplogroups, so this affects all of us.? I realize that the older the sample, the harder it would be to obtain adequate results to check all the way down the tree.? I believe it was mentioned previously that there is a possible A151 sample from Meath dated 60-420 AD.
?
E
?
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of James Kane
Sent: 06 September 2021 21:44
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [R1b-CTS4466-Plus] Y-DNA Warehouse Tree Tech Demo
?
1) I don’t have the raw data for the ancient sample. ?I someone has the ENA identifier for the data, I can go retrieve it.
?
2) We can’t really draw conclusions at this time. ?Radio carbon dating is more accurate than rudimentary SNP counting.
?
James

On Sep 6, 2021, at 2:42 PM, Elizabeth <elizabeth@...> wrote:
?
I see two issues here –?
?
1. I don’t know that we know if the FGC11134 ancient DNA was tested far, if at all, beyond FGC11134 itself.? James, you were looking at what raw data you had access to – did you see if any SNPs downstream of FGC11134 were even checked?? As CJ points out, A212 would be a real possibility for that geography up north.
?
2. It is my opinion that the early dates identified for FGC11134 tells us that, provided we can trust the carbon dates, our dating calculations are off significantly.??
?
James has ‘MRCA: 1350BC [ 2750BC - 0AD 95% confidence using 174 NGS samples ]’ for FGC11134. ?
?
Alex has ‘…the median age of this block is 3751.26 YBP (1802 BC). The 95% confidence interval is 2396 BC to 1226 BC’ for FGC11134.? He shows:
?
Measure?????????? Age (YBP)
Mean?? ??????????? 3744.5
Median??????????? 3751.3
Mode?? ??????????? 3780.0
?
I’ve translated the ybp carbon dates below to dates BC in red.? ‘Our’ dates are a bit closer to low end of the Sligo remains, but generally estimated younger.? I wonder if anyone has seriously considered this as suggesting a re-evaluation may be in order?
?
Elizabeth?
?
?
From:?[email protected]?<[email protected]>?On Behalf Of?Gj3000
Sent:?06 September 2021 19:07
To:?[email protected]
Subject:?Re: [R1b-CTS4466-Plus] Y-DNA Warehouse Tree Tech Demo
?
If we’re agreed that CTS4466 probably didn’t form on the island of Ireland, but in Wales
If CTS4466 TMRCA is 250CE then IMO it?clearly?increases the likelyhood of it being of Irish rather than Welsh origin.??
?
I will point out (again) that FGC11134 (parent of CTS4466) remains were carbon dated in:
- Fermanagh (4370-4156 ybp)?????????????????????2349 – 2135 BC
- Sligo (4036-3779 ybp)??????????????????????????????????2015 – 1758 BC
?
As has been noted in this group there is zero known small scale elite migration to Ireland from the native Welsh (with the possible exception of the Roman conquest of Mon c. 80AD) in the first part of the first millennium CE.
?
There IS some “elite”/small scale return migration recorded of Irish settlers living in Wales BACK to Ireland plus PLENTY of recorded migration of Irish migration to Wales 100BCE-450CE, including starting royal dynasties there.
?

Re: Y-DNA Warehouse Tree Tech Demo

#482

开云体育

Thanks, James.

?

John, did you have any luck clarifying point 1?

?

Re second point, have the genetic genealogy number crunchers considered trying to adjust their average SNP mutation rates to coincide with ancient DNA results?? There are plenty of other ancient DNA results in other haplogroups, so this affects all of us.? I realize that the older the sample, the harder it would be to obtain adequate results to check all the way down the tree.? I believe it was mentioned previously that there is a possible A151 sample from Meath dated 60-420 AD.

?

E

?

Show quoted text

From: [email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of James Kane
Sent: 06 September 2021 21:44
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [R1b-CTS4466-Plus] Y-DNA Warehouse Tree Tech Demo

?

1) I don’t have the raw data for the ancient sample. ?I someone has the ENA identifier for the data, I can go retrieve it.

?

2) We can’t really draw conclusions at this time. ?Radio carbon dating is more accurate than rudimentary SNP counting.

?

James

On Sep 6, 2021, at 2:42 PM, Elizabeth <elizabeth@...> wrote:
?
I see two issues here –?
?
1. I don’t know that we know if the FGC11134 ancient DNA was tested far, if at all, beyond FGC11134 itself.? James, you were looking at what raw data you had access to – did you see if any SNPs downstream of FGC11134 were even checked?? As CJ points out, A212 would be a real possibility for that geography up north.
?
2. It is my opinion that the early dates identified for FGC11134 tells us that, provided we can trust the carbon dates, our dating calculations are off significantly.??
?
James has ‘MRCA: 1350BC [ 2750BC - 0AD 95% confidence using 174 NGS samples ]’ for FGC11134. ?
?
Alex has ‘…the median age of this block is 3751.26 YBP (1802 BC). The 95% confidence interval is 2396 BC to 1226 BC’ for FGC11134.? He shows:
?
Measure?????????? Age (YBP)
Mean?? ??????????? 3744.5
Median??????????? 3751.3
Mode?? ??????????? 3780.0
?
I’ve translated the ybp carbon dates below to dates BC in red.? ‘Our’ dates are a bit closer to low end of the Sligo remains, but generally estimated younger.? I wonder if anyone has seriously considered this as suggesting a re-evaluation may be in order?
?
Elizabeth?
?
?
From:?[email protected]?<[email protected]>?On Behalf Of?Gj3000
Sent:?06 September 2021 19:07
To:?[email protected]
Subject:?Re: [R1b-CTS4466-Plus] Y-DNA Warehouse Tree Tech Demo
?
If we’re agreed that CTS4466 probably didn’t form on the island of Ireland, but in Wales
If CTS4466 TMRCA is 250CE then IMO it?clearly?increases the likelyhood of it being of Irish rather than Welsh origin.??
?
I will point out (again) that FGC11134 (parent of CTS4466) remains were carbon dated in:
- Fermanagh (4370-4156 ybp)?????????????????????2349 – 2135 BC
- Sligo (4036-3779 ybp)??????????????????????????????????2015 – 1758 BC
?
As has been noted in this group there is zero known small scale elite migration to Ireland from the native Welsh (with the possible exception of the Roman conquest of Mon c. 80AD) in the first part of the first millennium CE.
?
There IS some “elite”/small scale return migration recorded of Irish settlers living in Wales BACK to Ireland plus PLENTY of recorded migration of Irish migration to Wales 100BCE-450CE, including starting royal dynasties there.

?

Re: Y-DNA Warehouse Tree Tech Demo

#481

开云体育

1) I don’t have the raw data for the ancient sample. ?I someone has the ENA identifier for the data, I can go retrieve it.

2) We can’t really draw conclusions at this time. ?Radio carbon dating is more accurate than rudimentary SNP counting.

James

Show quoted text

On Sep 6, 2021, at 2:42 PM, Elizabeth <elizabeth@...> wrote:

I see two issues here –?
?
1. I don’t know that we know if the FGC11134 ancient DNA was tested far, if at all, beyond FGC11134 itself.? James, you were looking at what raw data you had access to – did you see if any SNPs downstream of FGC11134 were even checked?? As CJ points out, A212 would be a real possibility for that geography up north.
?
2. It is my opinion that the early dates identified for FGC11134 tells us that, provided we can trust the carbon dates, our dating calculations are off significantly.??
?
James has ‘MRCA: 1350BC [ 2750BC - 0AD 95% confidence using 174 NGS samples ]’ for FGC11134. ?
?
Alex has ‘…the median age of this block is 3751.26 YBP (1802 BC). The 95% confidence interval is 2396 BC to 1226 BC’ for FGC11134.? He shows:
?
Measure?????????? Age (YBP)
Mean?? ??????????? 3744.5
Median??????????? 3751.3
Mode?? ??????????? 3780.0
?
I’ve translated the ybp carbon dates below to dates BC in red.? ‘Our’ dates are a bit closer to low end of the Sligo remains, but generally estimated younger.? I wonder if anyone has seriously considered this as suggesting a re-evaluation may be in order?
?
Elizabeth?
?
?
From:?[email protected]?<[email protected]>?On Behalf Of?Gj3000
Sent:?06 September 2021 19:07
To:?[email protected]
Subject:?Re: [R1b-CTS4466-Plus] Y-DNA Warehouse Tree Tech Demo
?
If we’re agreed that CTS4466 probably didn’t form on the island of Ireland, but in Wales
If CTS4466 TMRCA is 250CE then IMO it?clearly?increases the likelyhood of it being of Irish rather than Welsh origin.??
?
I will point out (again) that FGC11134 (parent of CTS4466) remains were carbon dated in:
- Fermanagh (4370-4156 ybp)?????????????????????2349 – 2135 BC
- Sligo (4036-3779 ybp)??????????????????????????????????2015 – 1758 BC
?
As has been noted in this group there is zero known small scale elite migration to Ireland from the native Welsh (with the possible exception of the Roman conquest of Mon c. 80AD) in the first part of the first millennium CE.
?
There IS some “elite”/small scale return migration recorded of Irish settlers living in Wales BACK to Ireland plus PLENTY of recorded migration of Irish migration to Wales 100BCE-450CE, including starting royal dynasties there.

Re: Y-DNA Warehouse Tree Tech Demo

#480

开云体育

I see two issues here –

?

1. I don’t know that we know if the FGC11134 ancient DNA was tested far, if at all, beyond FGC11134 itself.? James, you were looking at what raw data you had access to – did you see if any SNPs downstream of FGC11134 were even checked?? As CJ points out, A212 would be a real possibility for that geography up north.

?

2. It is my opinion that the early dates identified for FGC11134 tells us that, provided we can trust the carbon dates, our dating calculations are off significantly.?

?

James has ‘MRCA: 1350BC [ 2750BC - 0AD 95% confidence using 174 NGS samples ]’ for FGC11134. ?

?

Alex has ‘…the median age of this block is 3751.26 YBP (1802 BC). The 95% confidence interval is 2396 BC to 1226 BC’ for FGC11134.? He shows:

?

Measure?????????? Age (YBP)

Mean?? ??????????? 3744.5

Median??????????? 3751.3

Mode?? ??????????? 3780.0

?

I’ve translated the ybp carbon dates below to dates BC in red.? ‘Our’ dates are a bit closer to low end of the Sligo remains, but generally estimated younger.? I wonder if anyone has seriously considered this as suggesting a re-evaluation may be in order?

?

Elizabeth

?

Show quoted text

From: [email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Gj3000
Sent: 06 September 2021 19:07
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [R1b-CTS4466-Plus] Y-DNA Warehouse Tree Tech Demo

?

If we’re agreed that CTS4466 probably didn’t form on the island of Ireland, but in Wales

If CTS4466 TMRCA is 250CE then IMO it clearly increases the likelyhood of it being of Irish rather than Welsh origin.??

?

I will point out (again) that FGC11134 (parent of CTS4466) remains were carbon dated in:

- Fermanagh (4370-4156 ybp)???????????????????? 2349 – 2135 BC

- Sligo (4036-3779 ybp)????????????????????????????????? 2015 – 1758 BC

?

As has been noted in this group there is zero known small scale elite migration to Ireland from the native Welsh (with the possible exception of the Roman conquest of Mon c. 80AD) in the first part of the first millennium CE.

?

There IS some “elite”/small scale return migration recorded of Irish settlers living in Wales BACK to Ireland plus PLENTY of recorded migration of Irish migration to Wales 100BCE-450CE, including starting royal dynasties there.

Re: Y-DNA Warehouse Tree Tech Demo

#479

开云体育

Hi,

I didn't say I necessarily agreed with it at all, I'm agnostic on the point. Following the evidence, what you suggest is reasonable?

N

Show quoted text

From: [email protected] <[email protected]> on behalf of Gj3000 via groups.io <Griffjohns2012@...>
Sent: Monday 6 September 2021 19:06
To: [email protected] <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [R1b-CTS4466-Plus] Y-DNA Warehouse Tree Tech Demo

?

EXTERNAL EMAIL: This email originated from outside of NUI Galway. Do not open attachments or click on links in the message unless you recognise the sender's email address and believe the content is safe.
R?OMHPHOST SEACHTRACH: Tháinig an ríomhphost seo as áit éigin taobh amuigh de O? Gaillimh. Ná cliceáil ar naisc agus ná hoscail ceangaltáin mura n-aithníonn tú seoladh ríomhphoist an tseoltóra agus mura gcreideann tú go bhfuil an t-ábhar sábháilte.

If we’re agreed that CTS4466 probably didn’t form on the island of Ireland, but in Wales

If CTS4466 TMRCA is 250CE then IMO it clearly increases the likelyhood of it being of Irish rather than Welsh origin.??

?

I will point out (again) that FGC11134 (parent of CTS4466) remains were carbon dated in:

- Fermanagh (4370-4156 ybp)

- Sligo (4036-3779 ybp)

?

As has been noted in this group there is zero known small scale elite migration to Ireland from the native Welsh (with the possible exception of the Roman conquest of Mon c. 80AD) in the first part of the first millennium CE.

?

There IS some “elite”/small scale return migration recorded of Irish settlers living in Wales BACK to Ireland plus PLENTY of recorded migration of Irish migration to Wales 100BCE-450CE, including starting royal dynasties there.

Re: Y-DNA Warehouse Tree Tech Demo

#478

Neil,

A potential contributor to a SNP bottleneck might be the phenomenon known as the 'Late Iron Age Lull'?

Discussed briefly (since it antedates his main focus) by Dr Matthew Stout in his 2017 book entitled Early Medieval Ireland 431-1169, he points to a marked downturn in human agricultural activity in Ireland from around 40 BC to 250 AD as evidenced by pollen analysis. He suggests that this must have been associated with a marked decline in population, further supported by a 'gap' in building construction over the same period. This does not seem to have been associated with a deteriorating climate - indeed the corresponding period in Britain is known as the 'Roman Warm Period'.

It certainly could provide both a SNP bottleneck but also a marked incentive for some to 'investigate' opportunities on the eastern shore of the Irish Sea?

John.

Show quoted text

On Mon, Sep 6, 2021 at 6:28 PM O'Brien, Neil <neil.obrien@...> wrote:

On final point, if the archaeological evidence doesn’t point to an Iron Age invasion, or if the linguistic evidence doesn’t point to any significant interruption or linguistic revolution in primitive insular Goidelic, then there is a problem – the sequence of events doesn’t fit. The only solution to this problem of such a large continuous snip block is a significant bottleneck in CTS4466, with the modern snip block perhaps representing the survivors. As such, if the modern Irish tree branch has been interrupted by a significant bottleneck, then that implies that the first CTS4466 man in Ireland was a lot older than 250AD. The MRCA of the modern group is just descended from a branch line that survived, the collateral lines perished and as such are absent on the modern phylogenetic tree. If so, it really isn’t possible to date when CTS4466 arrived in Ireland to any accurate degree. ???

?

I suspect I’m not delivering any earth shattering news – the conclusion is obvious.

?

?

?

From: [email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of O'Brien, Neil via
Sent: Monday 6 September 2021 17:36
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [R1b-CTS4466-Plus] Y-DNA Warehouse Tree Tech Demo

?

EXTERNAL EMAIL: This email originated from outside of NUI Galway. Do not open attachments or click on links in the message unless you recognise the sender's email address and believe the content is safe.
R?OMHPHOST SEACHTRACH: Tháinig an ríomhphost seo as áit éigin taobh amuigh de O? Gaillimh. Ná cliceáil ar naisc agus ná hoscail ceangaltáin mura n-aithníonn tú seoladh ríomhphoist an tseoltóra agus mura gcreideann tú go bhfuil an t-ábhar sábháilte.

?

On another point, if CTS4466, particularly R-A541, Irish Type II, is the dominant snip marker in the Southwest of Ireland, 250AD might seem a little recent to establish a founder effect. The other possible chink in the armour is language – Ogham stones might be identified with CTS4466, but we know they were written in primitive Irish and not in P-Celtic Brythonic, as might be expected if CTS4466 came from either Wales or Gaul.

?

I take your point though, yFull estimates the TMRCA of A541 to 1750 ybd.

?

Best,

?

Neil

?

From: O'Brien, Neil
Sent: Monday 6 September 2021 17:24
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: [R1b-CTS4466-Plus] Y-DNA Warehouse Tree Tech Demo

?

If we’re agreed that CTS4466 probably didn’t form on the island of Ireland, but in Wales – or perhaps further afield, 250AD would be a significant date. It would mean that the arrival of the clade into Ireland coincides with the Irish Iron Age, and most Irish archaeologists have long argued that there is no evidence for any significant population incursion into Ireland in the Iron Age. Mind you, they said the same about the Bronze Age too……… ??

?

From: [email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of James Kane via
Sent: Monday 6 September 2021 17:16
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [R1b-CTS4466-Plus] Y-DNA Warehouse Tree Tech Demo

?

EXTERNAL EMAIL: This email originated from outside of NUI Galway. Do not open attachments or click on links in the message unless you recognise the sender's email address and believe the content is safe.
R?OMHPHOST SEACHTRACH: Tháinig an ríomhphost seo as áit éigin taobh amuigh de O? Gaillimh. Ná cliceáil ar naisc agus ná hoscail ceangaltáin mura n-aithníonn tú seoladh ríomhphoist an tseoltóra agus mura gcreideann tú go bhfuil an t-ábhar sábháilte.

?

The thing about the age estimates is that you only count SNPs that fall inside the regions where there has been work to study the rates of mutations.? While there are 20 equivalent SNPs only 15 are used for dating the branch.

?

As far as the 1700 years that Elizabeth was asking about being different… that’s in the same ballpark I’m pretty sure I’ve always been. ?1950 - 1700 = 250AD.

?

James

?

On Sep 6, 2021, at 10:50 AM, Joe Carroll <jcarroll2@...> wrote:

?

To all:

This time/SNP thing intrigues me greatly (as I assume it does others). Let’s do a little kindergarden math:

?

Elizabeth notes that James has?CTS4466 formed 3,000 ybp and its’ TMRCA at 1,700 ybp.

?

There are 20 SNPs in the CYS4466 block making the time between forming and the TMRCA yield an average SNP rate of (3000-1700)/20 = 65 yrs/SNP.

?

There are two Lee’s near me who, with their 2 private variants, are some 37 SNPs below CTS4466’s TMRCA. If we assume that this takes us all the way to the ‘present’, then using James’s value of 1700 ybp for that time frame, we get another estimate: 1700/37 = 45.9 yrs/SNP. Of course, the two Lee’s likely do not lead us up to the present; there are more SNPs to be discovered, thus making the ’37’ larger and the yrs/SNP smaller.

?

Then if we do these together, we get 3000/57 = 52.6 yrs/SNP. And that’s a max number. So 50 yrs/SNP is perhaps a better guess.

?

Comments?????

— joe

?

Re: Y-DNA Warehouse Tree Tech Demo

#477

What does this new?TMRCA mean for?Nigel McCarthy's?PHYLOGENETIC ALIGNMENTS WITH GENEALOGIES OF DESCENT FROM AILILL?LOM?

Especially interested about A212.

Re: Y-DNA Warehouse Tree Tech Demo

#476

If we’re agreed that CTS4466 probably didn’t form on the island of Ireland, but in Wales

If CTS4466 TMRCA is 250CE then IMO it clearly increases the likelyhood of it being of Irish rather than Welsh origin.??

?

I will point out (again) that FGC11134 (parent of CTS4466) remains were carbon dated in:

- Fermanagh (4370-4156 ybp)

- Sligo (4036-3779 ybp)

?

As has been noted in this group there is zero known small scale elite migration to Ireland from the native Welsh (with the possible exception of the Roman conquest of Mon c. 80AD) in the first part of the first millennium CE.

?

There IS some “elite”/small scale return migration recorded of Irish settlers living in Wales BACK to Ireland plus PLENTY of recorded migration of Irish migration to Wales 100BCE-450CE, including starting royal dynasties there.

Re: Y-DNA Warehouse Tree Tech Demo

#475

开云体育

On final point, if the archaeological evidence doesn’t point to an Iron Age invasion, or if the linguistic evidence doesn’t point to any significant interruption or linguistic revolution in primitive insular Goidelic, then there is a problem – the sequence of events doesn’t fit. The only solution to this problem of such a large continuous snip block is a significant bottleneck in CTS4466, with the modern snip block perhaps representing the survivors. As such, if the modern Irish tree branch has been interrupted by a significant bottleneck, then that implies that the first CTS4466 man in Ireland was a lot older than 250AD. The MRCA of the modern group is just descended from a branch line that survived, the collateral lines perished and as such are absent on the modern phylogenetic tree. If so, it really isn’t possible to date when CTS4466 arrived in Ireland to any accurate degree. ???

?

I suspect I’m not delivering any earth shattering news – the conclusion is obvious.

?

Show quoted text

From: [email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of O'Brien, Neil via groups.io
Sent: Monday 6 September 2021 17:36
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [R1b-CTS4466-Plus] Y-DNA Warehouse Tree Tech Demo

?

EXTERNAL EMAIL: This email originated from outside of NUI Galway. Do not open attachments or click on links in the message unless you recognise the sender's email address and believe the content is safe.
R?OMHPHOST SEACHTRACH: Tháinig an ríomhphost seo as áit éigin taobh amuigh de O? Gaillimh. Ná cliceáil ar naisc agus ná hoscail ceangaltáin mura n-aithníonn tú seoladh ríomhphoist an tseoltóra agus mura gcreideann tú go bhfuil an t-ábhar sábháilte.

?

On another point, if CTS4466, particularly R-A541, Irish Type II, is the dominant snip marker in the Southwest of Ireland, 250AD might seem a little recent to establish a founder effect. The other possible chink in the armour is language – Ogham stones might be identified with CTS4466, but we know they were written in primitive Irish and not in P-Celtic Brythonic, as might be expected if CTS4466 came from either Wales or Gaul.

?

I take your point though, yFull estimates the TMRCA of A541 to 1750 ybd.

?

Best,

?

Neil

?

From: O'Brien, Neil
Sent: Monday 6 September 2021 17:24
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: [R1b-CTS4466-Plus] Y-DNA Warehouse Tree Tech Demo

?

If we’re agreed that CTS4466 probably didn’t form on the island of Ireland, but in Wales – or perhaps further afield, 250AD would be a significant date. It would mean that the arrival of the clade into Ireland coincides with the Irish Iron Age, and most Irish archaeologists have long argued that there is no evidence for any significant population incursion into Ireland in the Iron Age. Mind you, they said the same about the Bronze Age too……… ??

?

From: [email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of James Kane via groups.io
Sent: Monday 6 September 2021 17:16
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [R1b-CTS4466-Plus] Y-DNA Warehouse Tree Tech Demo

?

EXTERNAL EMAIL: This email originated from outside of NUI Galway. Do not open attachments or click on links in the message unless you recognise the sender's email address and believe the content is safe.
R?OMHPHOST SEACHTRACH: Tháinig an ríomhphost seo as áit éigin taobh amuigh de O? Gaillimh. Ná cliceáil ar naisc agus ná hoscail ceangaltáin mura n-aithníonn tú seoladh ríomhphoist an tseoltóra agus mura gcreideann tú go bhfuil an t-ábhar sábháilte.

?

The thing about the age estimates is that you only count SNPs that fall inside the regions where there has been work to study the rates of mutations. ?While there are 20 equivalent SNPs only 15 are used for dating the branch.

?

As far as the 1700 years that Elizabeth was asking about being different… that’s in the same ballpark I’m pretty sure I’ve always been. ?1950 - 1700 = 250AD.

?

James

?

On Sep 6, 2021, at 10:50 AM, Joe Carroll <jcarroll2@...> wrote:

?

To all:

This time/SNP thing intrigues me greatly (as I assume it does others). Let’s do a little kindergarden math:

?

Elizabeth notes that James has?CTS4466 formed 3,000 ybp and its’ TMRCA at 1,700 ybp.

?

There are 20 SNPs in the CYS4466 block making the time between forming and the TMRCA yield an average SNP rate of (3000-1700)/20 = 65 yrs/SNP.

?

There are two Lee’s near me who, with their 2 private variants, are some 37 SNPs below CTS4466’s TMRCA. If we assume that this takes us all the way to the ‘present’, then using James’s value of 1700 ybp for that time frame, we get another estimate: 1700/37 = 45.9 yrs/SNP. Of course, the two Lee’s likely do not lead us up to the present; there are more SNPs to be discovered, thus making the ’37’ larger and the yrs/SNP smaller.

?

Then if we do these together, we get 3000/57 = 52.6 yrs/SNP. And that’s a max number. So 50 yrs/SNP is perhaps a better guess.

?

Comments?????

— joe

?

Re: Y-DNA Warehouse Tree Tech Demo

#474

开云体育

On another point, if CTS4466, particularly R-A541, Irish Type II, is the dominant snip marker in the Southwest of Ireland, 250AD might seem a little recent to establish a founder effect. The other possible chink in the armour is language – Ogham stones might be identified with CTS4466, but we know they were written in primitive Irish and not in P-Celtic Brythonic, as might be expected if CTS4466 came from either Wales or Gaul.

?

I take your point though, yFull estimates the TMRCA of A541 to 1750 ybd.

?

Best,

?

Neil

?

Show quoted text

From: O'Brien, Neil
Sent: Monday 6 September 2021 17:24
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: [R1b-CTS4466-Plus] Y-DNA Warehouse Tree Tech Demo

?

If we’re agreed that CTS4466 probably didn’t form on the island of Ireland, but in Wales – or perhaps further afield, 250AD would be a significant date. It would mean that the arrival of the clade into Ireland coincides with the Irish Iron Age, and most Irish archaeologists have long argued that there is no evidence for any significant population incursion into Ireland in the Iron Age. Mind you, they said the same about the Bronze Age too……… ??

?

From: [email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of James Kane via groups.io
Sent: Monday 6 September 2021 17:16
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [R1b-CTS4466-Plus] Y-DNA Warehouse Tree Tech Demo

?

EXTERNAL EMAIL: This email originated from outside of NUI Galway. Do not open attachments or click on links in the message unless you recognise the sender's email address and believe the content is safe.
R?OMHPHOST SEACHTRACH: Tháinig an ríomhphost seo as áit éigin taobh amuigh de O? Gaillimh. Ná cliceáil ar naisc agus ná hoscail ceangaltáin mura n-aithníonn tú seoladh ríomhphoist an tseoltóra agus mura gcreideann tú go bhfuil an t-ábhar sábháilte.

?

The thing about the age estimates is that you only count SNPs that fall inside the regions where there has been work to study the rates of mutations. ?While there are 20 equivalent SNPs only 15 are used for dating the branch.

?

As far as the 1700 years that Elizabeth was asking about being different… that’s in the same ballpark I’m pretty sure I’ve always been. ?1950 - 1700 = 250AD.

?

James

?

On Sep 6, 2021, at 10:50 AM, Joe Carroll <jcarroll2@...> wrote:

?

To all:

This time/SNP thing intrigues me greatly (as I assume it does others). Let’s do a little kindergarden math:

?

Elizabeth notes that James has?CTS4466 formed 3,000 ybp and its’ TMRCA at 1,700 ybp.

?

There are 20 SNPs in the CYS4466 block making the time between forming and the TMRCA yield an average SNP rate of (3000-1700)/20 = 65 yrs/SNP.

?

There are two Lee’s near me who, with their 2 private variants, are some 37 SNPs below CTS4466’s TMRCA. If we assume that this takes us all the way to the ‘present’, then using James’s value of 1700 ybp for that time frame, we get another estimate: 1700/37 = 45.9 yrs/SNP. Of course, the two Lee’s likely do not lead us up to the present; there are more SNPs to be discovered, thus making the ’37’ larger and the yrs/SNP smaller.

?

Then if we do these together, we get 3000/57 = 52.6 yrs/SNP. And that’s a max number. So 50 yrs/SNP is perhaps a better guess.

?

Comments?????

— joe

?

Re: Y-DNA Warehouse Tree Tech Demo

#473

开云体育

James, I took ‘TMRCA: 1050BC [ 2150BC - 0AD 95% confidence using 155 NGS samples ]’ from your .? E

?

Show quoted text

From: [email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of James Kane
Sent: 06 September 2021 17:16
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [R1b-CTS4466-Plus] Y-DNA Warehouse Tree Tech Demo

?

The thing about the age estimates is that you only count SNPs that fall inside the regions where there has been work to study the rates of mutations. ?While there are 20 equivalent SNPs only 15 are used for dating the branch.

?

As far as the 1700 years that Elizabeth was asking about being different… that’s in the same ballpark I’m pretty sure I’ve always been. ?1950 - 1700 = 250AD.

?

James

On Sep 6, 2021, at 10:50 AM, Joe Carroll <jcarroll2@...> wrote:
?
To all:
This time/SNP thing intrigues me greatly (as I assume it does others). Let’s do a little kindergarden math:
?
Elizabeth notes that James has?CTS4466 formed 3,000 ybp and its’ TMRCA at 1,700 ybp.
?
There are 20 SNPs in the CYS4466 block making the time between forming and the TMRCA yield an average SNP rate of (3000-1700)/20 = 65 yrs/SNP.
?
There are two Lee’s near me who, with their 2 private variants, are some 37 SNPs below CTS4466’s TMRCA. If we assume that this takes us all the way to the ‘present’, then using James’s value of 1700 ybp for that time frame, we get another estimate: 1700/37 = 45.9 yrs/SNP. Of course, the two Lee’s likely do not lead us up to the present; there are more SNPs to be discovered, thus making the ’37’ larger and the yrs/SNP smaller.
?
Then if we do these together, we get 3000/57 = 52.6 yrs/SNP. And that’s a max number. So 50 yrs/SNP is perhaps a better guess.
?
Comments?????
— joe

?

Re: Y-DNA Warehouse Tree Tech Demo

#472

开云体育

If we’re agreed that CTS4466 probably didn’t form on the island of Ireland, but in Wales – or perhaps further afield, 250AD would be a significant date. It would mean that the arrival of the clade into Ireland coincides with the Irish Iron Age, and most Irish archaeologists have long argued that there is no evidence for any significant population incursion into Ireland in the Iron Age. Mind you, they said the same about the Bronze Age too……… ??

?

Show quoted text

From: [email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of James Kane via groups.io
Sent: Monday 6 September 2021 17:16
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [R1b-CTS4466-Plus] Y-DNA Warehouse Tree Tech Demo

?

EXTERNAL EMAIL: This email originated from outside of NUI Galway. Do not open attachments or click on links in the message unless you recognise the sender's email address and believe the content is safe.
R?OMHPHOST SEACHTRACH: Tháinig an ríomhphost seo as áit éigin taobh amuigh de O? Gaillimh. Ná cliceáil ar naisc agus ná hoscail ceangaltáin mura n-aithníonn tú seoladh ríomhphoist an tseoltóra agus mura gcreideann tú go bhfuil an t-ábhar sábháilte.

?

The thing about the age estimates is that you only count SNPs that fall inside the regions where there has been work to study the rates of mutations. ?While there are 20 equivalent SNPs only 15 are used for dating the branch.

?

As far as the 1700 years that Elizabeth was asking about being different… that’s in the same ballpark I’m pretty sure I’ve always been. ?1950 - 1700 = 250AD.

?

James

On Sep 6, 2021, at 10:50 AM, Joe Carroll <jcarroll2@...> wrote:

?

To all:

This time/SNP thing intrigues me greatly (as I assume it does others). Let’s do a little kindergarden math:

?

Elizabeth notes that James has?CTS4466 formed 3,000 ybp and its’ TMRCA at 1,700 ybp.

?

There are 20 SNPs in the CYS4466 block making the time between forming and the TMRCA yield an average SNP rate of (3000-1700)/20 = 65 yrs/SNP.

?

There are two Lee’s near me who, with their 2 private variants, are some 37 SNPs below CTS4466’s TMRCA. If we assume that this takes us all the way to the ‘present’, then using James’s value of 1700 ybp for that time frame, we get another estimate: 1700/37 = 45.9 yrs/SNP. Of course, the two Lee’s likely do not lead us up to the present; there are more SNPs to be discovered, thus making the ’37’ larger and the yrs/SNP smaller.

?

Then if we do these together, we get 3000/57 = 52.6 yrs/SNP. And that’s a max number. So 50 yrs/SNP is perhaps a better guess.

?

Comments?????

— joe

?

Re: Y-DNA Warehouse Tree Tech Demo

#471

开云体育

I think it probably varies in every line how quickly snips form, or don’t. After a lot of persuasion I managed to arm twist my closest phylogenetic relative to test with me, to branch out our tree.

?

As you can see, our cousins, R-FT74196/BY21620 are producing snips at half the rate of my line R-FT74196/FT13219, and there are 5 private variants between me and the other tester in R-FT74196/FT13219.

?

At a rate of 52.6 years a would snip form once every 2 to 3 generations. If that were so across the board, we would be seeing a much larger tree, with more branches and leaves. Therefore trying to age snip formation, without lots of comparative data. The problem, I suppose, is that the number of testers, compared to the population at large (particularly from individuals born on the island of Ireland), is utterly insignificant. We’re only scratching at the surface.

?

Show quoted text

From: [email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Joe Carroll via groups.io
Sent: Monday 6 September 2021 16:50
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [R1b-CTS4466-Plus] Y-DNA Warehouse Tree Tech Demo

?

EXTERNAL EMAIL: This email originated from outside of NUI Galway. Do not open attachments or click on links in the message unless you recognise the sender's email address and believe the content is safe.
R?OMHPHOST SEACHTRACH: Tháinig an ríomhphost seo as áit éigin taobh amuigh de O? Gaillimh. Ná cliceáil ar naisc agus ná hoscail ceangaltáin mura n-aithníonn tú seoladh ríomhphoist an tseoltóra agus mura gcreideann tú go bhfuil an t-ábhar sábháilte.

?

To all:

This time/SNP thing intrigues me greatly (as I assume it does others). Let’s do a little kindergarden math:

?

Elizabeth notes that James has?CTS4466 formed 3,000 ybp and its’ TMRCA at 1,700 ybp.

?

There are 20 SNPs in the CYS4466 block making the time between forming and the TMRCA yield an average SNP rate of (3000-1700)/20 = 65 yrs/SNP.

?

There are two Lee’s near me who, with their 2 private variants, are some 37 SNPs below CTS4466’s TMRCA. If we assume that this takes us all the way to the ‘present’, then using James’s value of 1700 ybp for that time frame, we get another estimate: 1700/37 = 45.9 yrs/SNP. Of course, the two Lee’s likely do not lead us up to the present; there are more SNPs to be discovered, thus making the ’37’ larger and the yrs/SNP smaller.

?

Then if we do these together, we get 3000/57 = 52.6 yrs/SNP. And that’s a max number. So 50 yrs/SNP is perhaps a better guess.

?

Comments?????

— joe

Re: Y-DNA Warehouse Tree Tech Demo

#470

开云体育

The thing about the age estimates is that you only count SNPs that fall inside the regions where there has been work to study the rates of mutations. ?While there are 20 equivalent SNPs only 15 are used for dating the branch.

As far as the 1700 years that Elizabeth was asking about being different… that’s in the same ballpark I’m pretty sure I’ve always been. ?1950 - 1700 = 250AD.

James

Show quoted text

On Sep 6, 2021, at 10:50 AM, Joe Carroll <jcarroll2@...> wrote:

To all:

This time/SNP thing intrigues me greatly (as I assume it does others). Let’s do a little kindergarden math:

?

Elizabeth notes that James has?CTS4466 formed 3,000 ybp and its’ TMRCA at 1,700 ybp.

?

There are 20 SNPs in the CYS4466 block making the time between forming and the TMRCA yield an average SNP rate of (3000-1700)/20 = 65 yrs/SNP.

?

There are two Lee’s near me who, with their 2 private variants, are some 37 SNPs below CTS4466’s TMRCA. If we assume that this takes us all the way to the ‘present’, then using James’s value of 1700 ybp for that time frame, we get another estimate: 1700/37 = 45.9 yrs/SNP. Of course, the two Lee’s likely do not lead us up to the present; there are more SNPs to be discovered, thus making the ’37’ larger and the yrs/SNP smaller.

?

Then if we do these together, we get 3000/57 = 52.6 yrs/SNP. And that’s a max number. So 50 yrs/SNP is perhaps a better guess.

?

Comments?????

— joe

Re: Y-DNA Warehouse Tree Tech Demo

#469

开云体育

Which browser specifically are you using? ?I only test with Firefox and Webkit regularly.

Depending on when you were trying, there was a brief period where the server was running at 100%. ?It might have caused things to be slow.

James

Show quoted text

On Sep 6, 2021, at 10:07 AM, murramicha1 via <murramicha1@...> wrote:

Hello James, when I open the link the page it sometimes freezes and the browser stalls.
Windows 10 on a Dell Desktop.
My Samsung Android phone appears to work.
Can’t wait until you show branch A195 under A541 and its sub branches.? Me ending SNP is A1337/A1336.
?
Thanks and regards,
Michael J. Murray
?
From:?[email protected]?<[email protected]>?On Behalf Of?James Kane
Sent:?Sunday, September 5, 2021 10:21 AM
To:?[email protected]
Subject:?[R1b-CTS4466-Plus] Y-DNA Warehouse Tree Tech Demo
?
Hello folks,

There is a demo of the Y-DNA Warehouse's tree render available as I wrap up the new site's base functionality. ?At the moment it only displays the tree structure to people who are not logged in and the account registration is not turned on yet.

This link will land you on the current data loaded for R1b-CTS466 and subclades. ?The data is from a proof of concept run for the new tree builder earlier this year, so it's missing more branches than are included.

If you click the "More info..." button, you can see some information about the subclade and a pointer back to the project at FTDNA.

Feel free to play around and give feed back. ?Clicking the breadcrumbs above the tree will let you navigate up the tree. ?The primary goal is to render much faster than FTDNA or YFULL's tree offerings and I've a few more tricks to get things going faster as it grows.

For admins, if there are text blurbs you like to add to "More info..." on your branches of interest get in contact with me off-line.

Thanks,

James Kane?

Re: Y-DNA Warehouse Tree Tech Demo

#468

To all:

This time/SNP thing intrigues me greatly (as I assume it does others). Let’s do a little kindergarden math:

?

Elizabeth notes that James has?CTS4466 formed 3,000 ybp and its’ TMRCA at 1,700 ybp.

?

There are 20 SNPs in the CYS4466 block making the time between forming and the TMRCA yield an average SNP rate of (3000-1700)/20 = 65 yrs/SNP.

?

There are two Lee’s near me who, with their 2 private variants, are some 37 SNPs below CTS4466’s TMRCA. If we assume that this takes us all the way to the ‘present’, then using James’s value of 1700 ybp for that time frame, we get another estimate: 1700/37 = 45.9 yrs/SNP. Of course, the two Lee’s likely do not lead us up to the present; there are more SNPs to be discovered, thus making the ’37’ larger and the yrs/SNP smaller.

?

Then if we do these together, we get 3000/57 = 52.6 yrs/SNP. And that’s a max number. So 50 yrs/SNP is perhaps a better guess.

?

Comments?????

— joe

Re: Y-DNA Warehouse Tree Tech Demo

#467

开云体育

Hello James, when I open the link the page it sometimes freezes and the browser stalls.

Windows 10 on a Dell Desktop.

My Samsung Android phone appears to work.

Can’t wait until you show branch A195 under A541 and its sub branches.? Me ending SNP is A1337/A1336.

?

Thanks and regards,

Michael J. Murray

?

Show quoted text

From: [email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of James Kane
Sent: Sunday, September 5, 2021 10:21 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: [R1b-CTS4466-Plus] Y-DNA Warehouse Tree Tech Demo

?

Hello folks,

There is a demo of the Y-DNA Warehouse's tree render available as I wrap up the new site's base functionality. ?At the moment it only displays the tree structure to people who are not logged in and the account registration is not turned on yet.

This link will land you on the current data loaded for R1b-CTS466 and subclades. ?The data is from a proof of concept run for the new tree builder earlier this year, so it's missing more branches than are included.

If you click the "More info..." button, you can see some information about the subclade and a pointer back to the project at FTDNA.

Feel free to play around and give feed back. ?Clicking the breadcrumbs above the tree will let you navigate up the tree. ?The primary goal is to render much faster than FTDNA or YFULL's tree offerings and I've a few more tricks to get things going faster as it grows.

For admins, if there are text blurbs you like to add to "More info..." on your branches of interest get in contact with me off-line.

Thanks,

James Kane