开云体育

I'm adopted. I've discovered my birth mother, but she's passed and I can't narrow down my father. Thru Ancestry I can narrow down relatives, but i'm 99% sure most are from my father's mother. Through 23andMe I've found out my that haplogroup is CTS4466 and only two men that I'm related to share that with me and share 3rd great grandparents. Both are named Gilliam. My observations tell me that my "terminal" haplogroup might not actually be CTS4466. Does this sound correct? Thank you, Rick Smith

We now have a Mooney sharing the same branch as Moynihan. The hope for this to happen was discussed in our post from October. Nigel, or anyone else, does the addition of Mr. Mooney give any further insight into this area of the Big Y Tree? Sue Minnehan

Hi Nigel, regarding my previous question about Fran’s new Moynihan Y-700 match and your comments, is it ok if I screenshot your comments and share them with the wife of Mr. Moynihan who I’m communicating with? Also would it be ok if I shared page 24 of your tree which shows where these branches are located, as well as page 1 with your note #26. I’m also thinking of sending this information to Fran’s two Mooney Y-111 matches as maybe it would make them consider upgrading to Y-700. Would that be ok? I appreciate all your assistance. Best regards, Sue Minnehan

Hi Espen, Yes, I know of Dr Tyrone Bowes and his various Origenes websites (IrishOrigenes, ScottishOrigenes and EnglishOrigenes). I met Dr Bowes at the 2nd Genetic Genealogy Ireland Conference in Dublin in October 2014 where he described his methodology. I followed up with him during the following year about aspects of this. Whilst genetic genealogy has exploded over the past 10 years, Dr Bowes methodology was then (and to a large extent is still) based on the longstanding associations between surnames and geographical locations. Even back in 2015 I was arguing with him that this was not applicable in all instances - ' I have to disagree to a certain extent with you about surnames and locations. I agree that some names, and some branches of other names, can and do have long-term associations with a given location but others have clearly been subjected to dispersal pressures after surnames were adopted (the Great Famine being a recent example of a series of similar crises). And, no doubt, some people would have been subject to similar pressures before the adoption of surnames if they were unlucky enough to have been in the wrong place at the wrong time? And now traceable through SNP's?'. I now realise that many of these dispersal pressures also occurred before the adoption of hereditary surnames. In the case of the A151+ sub-branches of of CTS4466 / A541, I think that that Dr Bowes' methodology may lead to misleading results given that much of the further branching of this line occurred before the adoption of hereditary surnames in Ireland, Britain or Scandinavia and also given the wide geographical spread of this haplotype across Ireland, Britain and Scandinavia over a thousand years ago This is further compounded by the relatively small numbers of men identified thus far in these sub-branches. Dr Bowes certainly produces very visually striking case reports as illustrated in the case studies on his web sites but I would be doubtful that you would learn much more from him than from this group and your Big Y.. We would definitely learn more if we could identify and test more men who are A151+! All the best, John Brazil. On Tue, Aug 8, 2023 at 5:43 PM Espen Solheim <espheim@...> wrote: Hi Hope all is well! Have a question regarding Irish origenes (https://www.irishorigenes.com/content/re-writing-history). Anyone have any experience with the consultation and what can I as a Norwegian potentially learn that isn’t already known through this group and the DNA results from the big y itself? Espen Solheim/Johnsen

Hi Hope all is well! Have a question regarding Irish origenes (https://www.irishorigenes.com/content/re-writing-history). Anyone have any experience with the consultation and what can I as a Norwegian potentially learn that isn’t already known through this group and the DNA results from the big y itself? Espen Solheim/Johnsen

The first batch of Dante Lab's HiFi Reads 3rd Generation WGS tests are in from the $900 launch last November. Here's the good: 1) Average read length 12,968 bases. 2) The HiFi reads are nearly as clean from noise as the Illumina short reads. Here's the bad: 1) The test appears to be designed to deliver between 10 and 15gb. Which equates to 3.4x coverage and about 1.7x for the Y chromosome. 2) The price of this test is now $1,900 which makes it very difficult to recommend to anyone. Especially, when it should really be at least 30gb. The B2B version of that test runs $3,800. I have a report page hosted here that lists the overall coverage on all the chromosomes in chm13 v2.0 and some calling metrics for WGS and Y DNA from my sample here, if anyone is interested. https://warehouse-public-resources.s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/GFX0457637/cov-analysis.html Comparing these is a bit more tricky since all literature suggests using DeepVariant as the caller instead of GATK. I'm not finding any off-the-shelf tools that will do joint genotyping, which is how I produce call matrices for building out trees. Any way... something to keep an eye out as the years go on and the price comes down. Revio is supposed to bring this down when the sequencers start to pay themselves off. James

Hello, Michael and All. I’ve not commented on this thread yet, since I have a different point of view entirely. But I’ve decided to enter the conversation with another perspective, though it will mean a long-winded note to make my point. So… The question of where CTS4466 originated (or any other haplogroup, for that matter – M222, L226, etc.) will likely never be answered for certain, but the asking of it will certainly never cease. And James is correct that more – much more – aDNA is needed to have any realistic hope of narrowing down the possibilities with any certainty. Cassidy’s A Genomic Compendium of an Island contains the data for the two FGC11134 men that John referred to in a previous thread, along with a much later A151 sample on the east coast. There are advantages as well as disadvantages to her data, what we do have of it. Without the raw data, we can’t know if further downstream SNPs beneath FGC11134 were successfully tested negative or just no-calls. Getting results from ancient DNA is always much harder that modern samples. John and I have been trying with no success to obtain access to Cassidy’s raw data. A significant factor is that the dates she provided are not statistical estimates based on the DNA data but carbon dating from the associated artifacts found at the sites. No offense meant for the statisticians amongst us, but the old adage of there are ‘Lies, damned lies, and statistics’ is relevant here, since carbon dating, while not 100% accurate, is, I understand, much more reliable than statistical models of mutation rates. Of Cassidy’s two FGC11134 samples, she shows their ages as 2349-2135 BC and 2015-1758 BC . I’m not aware of Nigel dating FGC11134, but James’ tree shows 1967 BCE to 1776 BCE. Cassidy’s second date is slightly older, her first date is about 400 years older than James’ estimate. Now, looking at it as someone with no statistical training whatsoever but an inquiring mind, logically speaking, it seems difficult to feel any way comfortable that realistically, the ancient remains just happen to be anywhere near the time of the TMRCA of FGC11134. What this tells me, someone with no statistical training, is that however hard the statisticians have worked to get useful mutation rate models, the inevitable unknown factors in the mix make the mutation rates themselves at least somewhat unreliable, with the result that they underestimate the true ages of the SNPs. While CTS4466 – particularly S1121 – flourished in the south of Ireland, A7751, one of the earliest branches of CTS4466 on the tree, apparently split from CTS4466 itself within roughly around a few hundred years, much the same time as S1115 and subsequently ALL the rest of the downstream branches. And there is no question that the surnames in A7751 are mainly Welsh, with a few NI/Scots among them. Then just below S1115, brother to A212 (only in Northern Ireland, Scotland and England) is BY23591, also full of Welsh names. Now, while it’s quite possible that the Welsh names found in the A151 branch (with a much more recent TMRCA) are reverse migration, how likely is it that A7751 and S1115>BY23951 split from CTS4466 within a few hundred years/originated in the south of Ireland and migrated to establish themselves in Wales? A few A7751 have most recent ancestors in NI/Scotland. A212 is in NI/Scotland/England. Isn’t it far more likely that CTS4466 itself originated in Wales, and the early migrations of CTS4466 folk travelled north from Wales, across the Irish Sea from Scotland, where on a clear day you could see Ireland, some stopping in the North (A212), the rest travelling south, some more stopping in Leinster (A663), and some going the whole way to Munster and flourishing big time there? I too have tried to meld the annalistic/historical/mythical/folklore details from Irish origin myths with the DNA data we have, but accepting that at least some of it is pure fabrication – even from historical times (eg the Dál Cais claiming ancestry from Eoghan Mór’s brother to elevate themselves and justify their usurpation of the Eóganacht hegem

Hello! This group has a lot of members well versed in Irish history, so I was hoping someone may recognize the reference here about the Ciannachta that "The Ciannachta groups were absorbed over time." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ciannachta It is unfortunately not cited. I ask because the Ciannachta are not a bad candidate for A212s- Munster origin, supposed kin to the Eoghanachta, moving to Meath and into Ulster. The Ely O'Carroll have a claim to Ciannachta origins and are DF21, so it is not a perfect alignment. The native Irish surnames under A212 have a variety of tribal origins and could fit the "absorbed over time" well.

Z38201 for Sheehan Big Y match; 17th century SNP.

Looking at the type 2 tree i see the branch from FT43021 down to A1133 shows 576 18>19 385b 15>16 612u5 27>28 561 15>16 FTY191 11>10 would every person that is part of A1133 have these mutations?

Hi Nigel, I thought I was done pestering you but its seems I was premature, a cousin - Thomas H Miller - tested and his results have moved my son and I, on from R-FTB71099, on to a newly formed haplogroup R-FTB72303. Nigel, as James Millar (Kit no: SI14537) and me (Kit no: B654981) have reviously given you our permission to publish our info, you won't require a further permission? Nigel, I'll inform Thomas H, if he wants to add to your tree, he'll need to fire you off his details and his permission to publish. Nigel, have a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year - thank you for all the hard work, you do for us CTS4466ers. Nollaig Shona dhuit agus adh mor ort! Phil From: [email protected] <[email protected]> on behalf of Nigel McCarthy <ndmccarthy10@...> Sent: Monday, 24 October 2022 12:52 AM To: [email protected] <[email protected]> Subject: [R1b-CTS4466-Plus] Irish Type II tree: 23 October 22 update I have just published an update of my Irish Type II tree and its associated Mutation Block Age Table. As usual, these will be found on the McCarthy Surname Study Scrapbook site at https://mccarthydna.wordpress.com/. (Please do not attempt to join this study though, unless you are a male McCarthy). The number of Big Y-700 tests contributing to the age computation now stands at 474, i.e 44 added since the 30 Sep 22 issue. The following sheets ONLY have been updated in this 23 October issue: 1-3 5-8 12, 13 15-17 The next update (it is hoped by end of November) will focus on outstanding contributions on Sheets 4, 14, and 18-21. I am generally only adding / updating kits which have tested to Big Y-700. Kind regards = Nigel McCarthy

I have just published an update of my Irish Type II tree and its associated Mutation Block Age Table. As usual, these will be found on the McCarthy Surname Study Scrapbook site at https://mccarthydna.wordpress.com/. (Please do not attempt to join this study though, unless you are a male McCarthy). The number of Big Y-700 tests contributing to the age computation now stands at 474, i.e 44 added since the 30 Sep 22 issue. The following sheets ONLY have been updated in this 23 October issue: 1-3 5-8 12, 13 15-17 The next update (it is hoped by end of November) will focus on outstanding contributions on Sheets 4, 14, and 18-21. I am generally only adding / updating kits which have tested to Big Y-700. Kind regards = Nigel McCarthy

Something i'm noticing with the irish type II tree. Hoping someone can help it make sense If i look on FTDNA at someone that is tested as R-BY39363 It shows i am 5 Genetic steps away from them and 4 genetic steps away from R-FT95639 to me this seems to suggest i'm in the wrong location of the tree or R-FT95639 might not have branched from R-BY39363 or some sort of other mutation problem lol anyways, tell how wrong i am since i dont know thanks!! Me> R-FT43021 (delacy) 1185 A.D.? 5 steps away from R-BY39363 1330 A.D.? 4 steps away from R-FT95639 1355 A.D. ? Thanks Dave