There has been some talk on the U106 forum about an email that went out to some YDNA Warehouse () members telling them they needed to reset their password. This caused some confusion as some people thought it was a scam email. But it is real and came from James Kane (who manages that site). They are revamping the site to make it easier to use and people who have not logged on in a long time need to update their password. This site will serve as the main repository for all of the people who wanted to either be on Alex Williamson's Big Tree, wanted to have a way to compare results to people who have tested on other sites, wanted their data backed up somewhere else in case the place you tested goes out of business, or having your anonymous data able to be used by researchers for their papers and studies. Iain McDonald posted that he actually uses this data quite often to generate TMRCAs or to examine mutations to answer questions on the U106 forum or privately. Iain also notes on his website "The is collecting geographical, genealogical and genetic data from members. We can use this data to obtain statistical information about broader haplogroups, including computing TMRCAs, but also calibrating "molecular clocks" within that data, and reproducing migration patterns across the last 5000 years of human history." If you had wondered if the email was real, or have never uploaded your data to the warehouse and would like to please go ahead and either follow his password reset instructions or make a new account on the site if you never had one. If you have an old account once you reset your password you should be able to see all of the kits you have uploaded data for and what data they have for each one. I found for some of the kits I manage I hadn't uploaded all the different tests I had so I went ahead and did that. If you have any questions or need help, just let me know.
Chris
|
Re: Age estimates and another potential new member?
Thanks very much Chris and Jim - comments much appreciated. I was certainly totally mystified by the difference between the numbers for the two SNPs.
Yes Chris, I belong to the U106 group but there are a lot of posts on there and life is too short so I certainly don't catch everything. However I have dug out the post by Iain from last November with the reference to his look-up table at ?and put the numbers in there. For Robert and myself the range Iain's table gives for a most recent common ancestor is?1280AD to 1736AD at 95% confidence, with a mean of 1508AD.
So, since Parish records in England began in 1538 under Henry VIII after the reformation, it's not impossible that with a huge amount of luck there could be a recorded connection. But I wouldn't expect to be so lucky! I have been very surprised, though, at the number of parish records I have seen in Lancashire from the 1540s.
What I am pretty convinced by though is the Pennington connection. I was most surprised when 6 out of the 11 matches with 111 markers were either Penningtons or (in one case) had a Pennnington earliest paternal ancestor when my test was completed in July 2020. (It's now 7 out of 21.) So with my two closest Y matches in the block tree both Pennington / Pinnington, I suspect that the surname might just be right, especially since Lancashire (and the Wigan area in particular, where I come from) was such a hotbed of Penningtons. My studies of both the baptisms in the 1500s and the 1841 census make this particularly clear!
Chris, I will take your advice and look further at the other 111 matches - I can see now how that could well be very helpful.
Thanks again both, it's great to have help and advice from folks on here.
John
|
Re: Age estimates and another potential new member?
Hi, John, Yes, it is VERY likely that a "most recent common ancestor" lived before they started keeping parish registers in England (late-1500's).? Before that, only Noble and Royal families were recorded, to document inheritance and arms.? Our S6881 families were not "nobility," at least in the few centuries before that.? So there will be no "paper trail" from before then.
Jim
On Friday, May 27, 2022, 05:12:24 AM GMT-5, John <john@...> wrote:
Hi all
First, the potential member - last year I was contacted by Robert Pinnington about his tree. At that stage he had the 111 test and was a close match, but subsequently I have discovered (only recently) that he has the BigY results, and?R-FT356044 has been created for the two of us. Prior to that, my closest match was Max Pennington under?R-FT356010 which was created in 2020 when my BigY was added. I'm not sure if Robert is a member here, and I will email him to ask but this might be the quickest way to find out.
Robert has been tracing his Pennington line, but it's a bit sticky; however now I know he's a close match I am practically certain that my guess of being a Pennington through a non paternity event in 1818 is correct. With a few more clues on his tree and mine we might even be able to match the trees, which would be wonderful!
However - that brings me to the time estimates. It's possible that the most recent common ancestor was further back than we'll be able to trace; I would like to get a better feel for the likely time since the split., if such is possible. I guess the range may be big - but I don't know. Chris sent me a way to look at this in an email, but I am not quite sure how to apply it to myself and Robert from the results I see in the block tree.
Ideas anyone? (Especially Chris!)
Hope you are all well, it's been a while since there was anything on here.
Cheers
John
|
Re: Age estimates and another potential new member?
Hi John, ? Scaled Innovation, while a lovely graphic, suffers when there are too few people in a haplogroup and, I feel, gives a bad estimate the closer it gets to today. Do you belong to the R1b-U106 IO group? Iain has spoken a bit about age estimates and the shortcomings of Scaled Innovations' age estimates fairly recently in that group. Looking at the Block Tree it shows that you and your new match share an average of 6 private variants. The real way to do age estimates (which Iain goes into much detail on the U106 group) is complicated and not something I'm good at since my matches are quite distant. For a fast and less accurate method you could figure if you both average 6 private variants and each SNP on average occurs every 83 years (from the Y700 test) then you are looking at around 500 years just to get back to the block of SNPs that you share with your new match. So I'm doubtful this match will get you to the 1800s. Probably more like the 1400s and there is a lot of error built into that calculation. There have also been people on the U106 group commenting that they have found distant cousins who they have tested which appear to show in their particular lines that it has been hundreds of years since a new SNP. So the 83 years can be way off for a line (it is just an average of us all). On the other hand, you could have more than one SNP occur in those 83 years so it isn't a very exact calculation. I know this isn't a really helpful answer but I do feel your match could be further back in time than a usual genealogical tree reaches. You can continue to research a possible Pennington/Pinnington NPE or it might just be that your match is before surnames were adopted for your line. I'm glad you've been able to find a closer match. You might want to see if you have any other 111 SNP matches that might be good candidates for testing and maybe this part of your tree will become more clear.
Chris
On Fri, May 27, 2022 at 6:20 AM John < john@...> wrote: An update - the SNP tracker at??shows a big difference between R-FT356010 (about 750 years before present) and R-FT356044 (about 250 years before present).
Any ideas why?
John
?
|
Re: Age estimates and another potential new member?
An update - the SNP tracker at??shows a big difference between R-FT356010 (about 750 years before present) and R-FT356044 (about 250 years before present).
Any ideas why?
John
?
|
Age estimates and another potential new member?
Hi all
First, the potential member - last year I was contacted by Robert Pinnington about his tree. At that stage he had the 111 test and was a close match, but subsequently I have discovered (only recently) that he has the BigY results, and?R-FT356044 has been created for the two of us. Prior to that, my closest match was Max Pennington under?R-FT356010 which was created in 2020 when my BigY was added. I'm not sure if Robert is a member here, and I will email him to ask but this might be the quickest way to find out.
Robert has been tracing his Pennington line, but it's a bit sticky; however now I know he's a close match I am practically certain that my guess of being a Pennington through a non paternity event in 1818 is correct. With a few more clues on his tree and mine we might even be able to match the trees, which would be wonderful!
However - that brings me to the time estimates. It's possible that the most recent common ancestor was further back than we'll be able to trace; I would like to get a better feel for the likely time since the split., if such is possible. I guess the range may be big - but I don't know. Chris sent me a way to look at this in an email, but I am not quite sure how to apply it to myself and Robert from the results I see in the block tree.
Ideas anyone? (Especially Chris!)
Hope you are all well, it's been a while since there was anything on here.
Cheers
John
|
No, not unless you want to. It’s just that when we talk about the SNPs under S6881 yours won’t be there. The important group for you to belong to is the U106 group because all of us fall under that one.? Chris
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Jun 8, 2021, at 6:06 AM, Joel E. MacDonald via groups.io <corline1655@...> wrote:
?
Chris, Does this mean I need to vacate the group due to the fact it doesn't go down the correct path?
Joel
On Monday, June 7, 2021, 09:00:33 PM CDT, Chris Noble <avalea3@...> wrote:
It doesn't come down the path to S6881 but SNP tracker will show you your path.
On Mon, Jun 7, 2021 at 6:57 PM corline1655 via <corline1655= [email protected]> wrote: Got my Big-Y results R-BY98153. Can someone show me the path for this result.
Thanks!
Joel
<image.png>
|
Chris, Does this mean I need to vacate the group due to the fact it doesn't go down the correct path?
Joel
On Monday, June 7, 2021, 09:00:33 PM CDT, Chris Noble <avalea3@...> wrote:
It doesn't come down the path to S6881 but SNP tracker will show you your path.
On Mon, Jun 7, 2021 at 6:57 PM corline1655 via <corline1655= [email protected]> wrote: Got my Big-Y results R-BY98153. Can someone show me the path for this result.
Thanks!
Joel
|
It doesn't come down the path to S6881 but SNP tracker will show you your path.
On Mon, Jun 7, 2021 at 6:57 PM corline1655 via <corline1655= [email protected]> wrote: Got my Big-Y results R-BY98153. Can someone show me the path for this result.
Thanks!
Joel
|
Got my Big-Y results R-BY98153. Can someone show me the path for this result.
Thanks!
Joel
|
Re: Potential new member?
John, ?? I'll send you some stuff later today. It isn't really very hard. Actually, the block tree on FTDNA will show you where you land but I'll give you a bigger spreadsheet that I think is a little easier to read.
Chris
On Wed, Jul 29, 2020 at 7:55 AM John < john@...> wrote: Big Y results came in whilst I was away. Whew! What a lot of information! I guess I'm going to need some help in finding my way about this lot ...
John
|
Re: Potential new member?
Big Y results came in whilst I was away. Whew! What a lot of information! I guess I'm going to need some help in finding my way about this lot ...
John
|
Re: Potential new member?
Wonderful news! It can take a while to get the results back. Now is the part that teaches you patience :)
Chris
On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 11:27 AM John < john@...> wrote: My kit has arrived at FTDNA today. Happy to wait patiently for the Big Y results!
John
|
Re: Potential new member?
My kit has arrived at FTDNA today. Happy to wait patiently for the Big Y results!
John
|
I'm not sure everyone here follows the U106 discussion group so I wanted to post this here. Iain was speculating about the age and location of SNPs FGC11784 and FGC42045. Since almost everyone who has a kit in this group comes down through those SNPs I thought it might be of interest. You can always look at the file of the S6881 Group Tree that I have posted in the files section that shows the order of the SNPs if you want to see how close or far you are from these two SNPs. Here is what he said: " Please do understand that what is below is *very* speculative.
?
R-FGC11784 is quite a large clade for its age. Its downstream participants are strongly British, and specifically English: 52% of R-FGC11784 men list "England" or "UK" as a country of origin, compared to 16% of R-U106 overall. By comparison, only 3% list "Scotland", "Wales" or either Northern or Republic of Ireland, compared to 9% of R-U106 overall. This suggests migrations that only affected England, rather than the rest of the British Isles.
?
European R-FGC11784 records include Germany, the Netherlands, Denmark, France and Italy (8% of testers). This low percentage is partly due to our American testing bias, but the European percentage is also low compared to R-U106 overall (20%). While this could suggest a British origin for R-FGC11784, the majority of these European results appear in the upper (basal) clades of the R-FGC11784 phylogenic tree, and it's not until the major clade R-FGC42045 that the clade becomes very significantly British (2% of testers are European, 53% are English/UK). R-FGC42045 testers probably share a common British ancestor, dating back to the first millennium AD, but British testers from elsewhere in R-FGC11784 may have a different entry point in history.
?
The distribution of European testers has moderate significance. They are distributed around the same North Sea coasts as many Germanic tribes, but notably we have yet to find any Scandinavian results. We'd expect these to make up about a quarter of continental testers. This may be due to a lack of continental testers, but probably indicates a small Scandinavian R-FGC11784 population, and a continental European origin for R-FGC11784, somewhere in a Germanic population. The lone Italian family is common in clades which experienced a significant post-Roman migration.
?
Based on this information, if I had to make a guess, I would be thinking Anglo-Saxon invasions of England. At face value, the evidence here seems fairly clear-cut for that. However, there's always a danger in using averaged evidence across a whole haplogroup, based on scant and heavily biased data, to try and pick out evidence for a particular family. Not everyone follows the norm, so please don't take this as the only option, and be aware that future evidence may change these conclusions."
|
Re: Potential new member?
Oh yay! I’ll watch for results for you if you come up as a match to my kit. We’ll get you sorted to a spot in the tree when they come in. Great news! Chris
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Apr 24, 2020, at 6:58 AM, John < john@...> wrote: Thanks Chris - OK, I have succumbed! Since the sale is on I have put in a BigY-700 order. My wife has OK-d it on the grounds that we can't go on holiday anywhere this year :-)
It will give me something to look forward to whilst we are in this lockdown.
Cheers
John
|
Re: Potential new member?
Thanks Chris - OK, I have succumbed! Since the sale is on I have put in a BigY-700 order. My wife has OK-d it on the grounds that we can't go on holiday anywhere this year :-)
It will give me something to look forward to whilst we are in this lockdown.
Cheers
John
|
Re: Potential new member?
The Y-111 test will not give you a prediction of a haplogroup beyond M269. You have to test SNPs to get a further designation. You would find out who you still match at 111 STRs and who is now closest but from my kit I can say just because they are your closest match on STRs doesn’t necessarily mean they will turn out to be the branch of the tree you end up on. STRs move back and forth too much and can cause it to look like a closer match than it is. Only SNP testing will really tell you which branch of the tree you are on. You can do SNP packs or test individual SNPs instead of doing the Big Y-700 test but then you’ll only be matching to someone who has already tested and not finding your own personal SNPs for someone closer to match to. Usually the people who try to go the cheaper route (many of us have done this) will eventually break down and buy the Big Y test because we want those private SNPs but now we will have ultimately spent more money than just doing the test in the first place. Just save up for the test. The sales are good now and it is nowhere as expensive as it used to be. That will give you the answer you’re really looking for.? Chris
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Apr 24, 2020, at 2:49 AM, John < john@...> wrote: Thanks Chris - yes I have been following the discussion on U106. I had already seen that interesting article by Iain, and have read (and saved links to!) a lot of the stuff on his website. I have found Anthrogenica and am lurking in Eupedia :-)
I did upload my autosomal data to FTDNA and am finding it interesting to look at what is available there. One thing that jumped out was that one of my top three matches is R-Z343 which is not far above S6881. That was from a Y111 test. However most are simply M269, and I am guessing that I won't get much deeper information than I already have unless I take the BigY test.
It would be interesting to get below S6881. Is BigY the only way to do this? I am guessing that the Y111 test would not tell me anything I don't already know.
John
|
Re: Potential new member?
Thanks Chris - yes I have been following the discussion on U106. I had already seen that interesting article by Iain, and have read (and saved links to!) a lot of the stuff on his website. I have found Anthrogenica and am lurking in Eupedia :-)
I did upload my autosomal data to FTDNA and am finding it interesting to look at what is available there. One thing that jumped out was that one of my top three matches is R-Z343 which is not far above S6881. That was from a Y111 test. However most are simply M269, and I am guessing that I won't get much deeper information than I already have unless I take the BigY test.
It would be interesting to get below S6881. Is BigY the only way to do this? I am guessing that the Y111 test would not tell me anything I don't already know.
John
|
Re: Potential new member?
Hi John, ? If your interest is in deep ancestry then you probably will be happy with the discussions on the U106 group lately. If you follow the link that Iain posted recently to msg #637 about Frequency and Populations of R-U106 it will give you lots of information to ponder. If you need anything to follow along with the SNPs he mentions you can get the S6881 Group Tree in the files portion of our group and you can see what SNPs lead back up from S6881 to U106. I haven't updated it recently but since you've done no testing below the S6881 area it shouldn't matter to you (beyond that he doesn't go down that far). If you are able to find out the haplogroups of other ancestors in your family you can join similar groups (or check out the R1b group if they have haplogroups that fall under R1b) for other information. You can also check out Anthrogenica.com and Eupedia.com which have a lot of deep ancestry information. Let me know if you have any questions.
Chris
On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 2:20 AM John < john@...> wrote: Many thanks Chris and Jim - I'll go ahead with uploading to FTDNA. I saw the possibility of the extra features like the chromosome browser which looks interesting, so will go for that. It will also get me there with an account, so that if (more likely when!) I go for a FTDNA Y test I will already be on there.
One reason that I'm not in a rush is that I already have Y information from the old ScotlandsDNA / BritainsDNA people and more recently LivingDNA. My main interest in the DNA side is really in deep ancestry. The Y information is of course the best there is at present (along with mtDNA), but since it is only an increasingly smaller part of my ancestry the further back you go, it only provides a tiny hint of overall ancestry. One reason for trying Ancestry DNA was the thought of a possible strategy - to make contact with people interested in the DNA side, and hope to find people who have Y information for some of my other ancestors! One issue with the Y line is that I know (at least am 99% certain) that it's broken - my 3x great Cook grandfather is the furthest back Cook(e) male, his mother was born a Cooke, and even her mother was born a Cooke (about 1775). So actually it would be interesting to see what male line my Y DNA really belongs to!
At present I have my tree complete to all 32 of my 3x great grandparents (born around 1800), and am just over half way with progress on the next generation back. Obviously I have a few lines going much further back, but my main interest is in trying to get as much completion as possible. I was not especially interested in finding living relatives - though the idea of trying to find others who have appropriate Y DNA means this will probably change!
It is only recently that I have investigated Ancestry. I started helping my father with research methods back around 1980, though he did most of the work up to the time he died over 10 years ago. In those days of course we spent a lot of time sitting in record offices! My father pushed the research in directions he was interested in, and so I had some gaps to fill in. I have found Ancestry most useful for the value-for-money access to (in particular) census and church records from the comfort of home. There are a few trees (and more particularly, hints through the DNA side) that are helping to fill in details, but yes, there is an awful lot of stuff on there that can't be trusted! It has been good, I'm sure, in getting more people interested in family history, but few have the dedication (or research knowledge) to find all the evidence to produce satisfactory family connections. I suspect the DNA side is similar - people will take a test out of interest, but not have any real interest in the deep ancestry that can be obtained from Y and mtDNA information.
It would be great to have deep ancestry information for as many ancestors as possible. I find it fascinating that a huge amount of my ancestry back into the 1700s is firmly rooted in the area I grew up in (south Lancashire, mostly centred on the Wigan area), though I also have about an eighth Staffordshire, about an eighth north Welsh, and a sixteenth Yorkshire as well. I have nearly finished putting together records and maps on the origins of my 2x great grandparents, and the 3x great are next - it will take a while to put together the information for all 32.
Jim, when I saw your surname I immediately thought "Liptrot" which is a name more familiar to me from Lancashire - interesting to see more on your great web pages.
I will keep an eye on the FTDNA sales, and when I feel I have $99 burning a hole in my pocket at the appropriate moment I will take the plunge!
Many thanks, I will keep following this group (and U106) as the discussion can be interesting.
John Cooke
|
John