开云体育

ctrl + shift + ? for shortcuts
© 2025 开云体育

Mike Hartley BigY


 

I notice a new BigY match today with Mike Hartley. I'm not as good as Jared as figuring out what the matches mean. For example, there are 5 SNPs which Charles Thomas and I have that others don't have. I don't see any SNPs I share with Mike Hartley that I don't share with others.

Joel


 

Excellent!

Michael, if you could please e-mail me your raw data file from FTDNA,
that will be necessary for me to do a full analysis. Go to
and then click on the
Download Raw Data button at the top, then Download VCF at the bottom.
Then e-mail me the resulting file.

A quick check shows a few novel variants that each of you have, so
this will create a very distinct new Hartley branch that splits a few
hundred years ago into your distinct Hartley branches.

I'm just off to work, but will analyze the results much closer this evening.

Congrats to both of you on this new branch!

Jared

On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 6:28 AM, Joel Hartley <joel@...> wrote:
I notice a new BigY match today with Mike Hartley. I'm not as good as Jared
as figuring out what the matches mean. For example, there are 5 SNPs which
Charles Thomas and I have that others don't have. I don't see any SNPs I
share with Mike Hartley that I don't share with others.

Joel




 

开云体育

Hey Joel,

Mike Hartley is listed on my match list with 0 shared novel variants,

0 non-matching known SNPs, and 25,684 matching SNPs.

Is Mike 31/37 and 59/67 with you? My Thomas match with whom

I share the ancestor James Thomas b. abt 1760 is 66/67 with me.

So I'm thinking that your and Mike's shared Hartley ancestor could

be much farther back in time. Yet STRs can change at any time, and it's

just the average mutation rate per STR?that are known so maybe your

shared ancestor is more recent than I'm guessing. I'm sure Jared's

analysis of the SNPs will be helpful.

Best regards,

Charles




From: [email protected] <[email protected]> on behalf of Joel Hartley <joel@...>
Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2017 7:28 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: [Z16357] Mike Hartley BigY
?
I notice a new BigY match today with Mike Hartley. I'm not as good as
Jared as figuring out what the matches mean. For example, there are 5
SNPs which Charles Thomas and I have that others don't have. I don't see
any SNPs I share with Mike Hartley that I don't share with others.

Joel





 

I've started an initial analysis based on the limited information I
have from FTDNA thus far. I can provide more information after I
receive Michael's VCF files.

The following lists provide the SNP name (if available), then the DNA
position number and polymorphism/change value.

Thus far, I know Joel and Michael share the following known SNPs:

A11132 - 14092445-C-T
A11134 - 15656058-T-G
A11135 - 16770482-C-T
A11137 - 19090151-G-A
A11139 - 21637160-G-A
A11140 - 21757893-T-A

Michael has the following novel variants:
14806931-C-G
19110373-C-T (already named SNP - Y30173 - in another R1b branch)
22478928-G-C
21262641-C-A (already named SNP - K554 - in another C2e2 branch)

Joel has the following novel variants:
A11130 - 9132352-G-A
A11131 - 13691125-A-T
A11133 - 14819258-C-T
A11136 - 17550281-C-T
A11138 - 19477032-A-T

So I will preliminarily call the shared Hartley branch the A11132
branch. I'll continue to call Joel's Hartley sub-branch A11130.
Michael's Hartley branch will eventually be named once one of his
unique variants is assigned a name. It is interesting that two of
Michael's 'novel' variants align with known SNPs on other branches,
but this does happen occasionally.

Michael likely may have other good novel variants that FTDNA has not
identified. I'm not yet sure of the quality of the 4 they have
identified, but FTDNA is pretty conservative, so they're probably
good.

Using this we can start do some initial age estimates. With 6 shared
mutations and 4-5 unique mutations, this means that the split in your
lines was probably just this side of half way between when our Z17911
ancestor lived and present day. With our best guess estimate of Z17911
being 800-1000 years old, this puts your common ancestor living
probably 350-450 years ago, give or take.

It would be especially helpful if you could make a paper connection to
this ancestor, but that may not be possible. Regardless, this provides
a very nice Hartley branching for others to test to.

The A11130 SNP that Joel has is available for single SNP testing and
is part of the S5668 SNP Pack. I had hoped this would land on the
shared Hartley branch - it would have provided an easy test for people
to verify that they're on this Hartley line, but now testing for it
would only prove or disprove if someone is related to Joel more
recently than that SNP was formed - and it could have been at Joel's
father so only Joel and his brothers share it. So it's not of
particular value right now.

A new Hartley branch is discovered! Thank you Joel and Michael for
investing in Big-Y!

Jared Smith


On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 12:10 PM, Charles Thomas
<charles_002@...> wrote:
Hey Joel,

Mike Hartley is listed on my match list with 0 shared novel variants,

0 non-matching known SNPs, and 25,684 matching SNPs.

Is Mike 31/37 and 59/67 with you? My Thomas match with whom

I share the ancestor James Thomas b. abt 1760 is 66/67 with me.

So I'm thinking that your and Mike's shared Hartley ancestor could

be much farther back in time. Yet STRs can change at any time, and it's

just the average mutation rate per STR that are known so maybe your

shared ancestor is more recent than I'm guessing. I'm sure Jared's

analysis of the SNPs will be helpful.

Best regards,

Charles



________________________________
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> on behalf of Joel Hartley
<joel@...>
Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2017 7:28 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: [Z16357] Mike Hartley BigY

I notice a new BigY match today with Mike Hartley. I'm not as good as
Jared as figuring out what the matches mean. For example, there are 5
SNPs which Charles Thomas and I have that others don't have. I don't see
any SNPs I share with Mike Hartley that I don't share with others.

Joel





 

开云体育

Hi Charles,

You are right. Mike is actually off the chart on my matches. I think that he is a GD of 8 and the 67 STR cutoff is 7. I'm guessing that the connection is quite a ways back. Here is the last STR tree that I have worked on:




It shows some Hartleys with lesser GDs to me on the right as being more distantly related. This is due to the different mutation factors in the STRs. They vary by as much as 350 times from each other. The Quaker Hartley is Mike. He is on a subbranch on the left. The 455 STR is the very slow moving STR. I based the two main branches on that STR for the Hartleys.

Joel

On 3/15/2017 2:10 PM, Charles Thomas wrote:

Hey Joel,

Mike Hartley is listed on my match list with 0 shared novel variants,

0 non-matching known SNPs, and 25,684 matching SNPs.

Is Mike 31/37 and 59/67 with you? My Thomas match with whom

I share the ancestor James Thomas b. abt 1760 is 66/67 with me.

So I'm thinking that your and Mike's shared Hartley ancestor could

be much farther back in time. Yet STRs can change at any time, and it's

just the average mutation rate per STR?that are known so maybe your

shared ancestor is more recent than I'm guessing. I'm sure Jared's

analysis of the SNPs will be helpful.

Best regards,

Charles




From: [email protected] <[email protected]> on behalf of Joel Hartley <joel@...>
Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2017 7:28 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: [Z16357] Mike Hartley BigY
?
I notice a new BigY match today with Mike Hartley. I'm not as good as
Jared as figuring out what the matches mean. For example, there are 5
SNPs which Charles Thomas and I have that others don't have. I don't see
any SNPs I share with Mike Hartley that I don't share with others.

Joel






 

Thanks Jared,

That is such great news. This is a red letter day for Hartley Genetic Genealogy. This is the first SNP branching within the Hartley surname that I know of. That makes this a true Hartley SNP group which is one the goals of the BigY testing. Thanks also to Mike for doing this test.

I had a feeling that this branch of Hartleys was quite large. There is still room for other branches - both in the main Hartley group, in my group and in Michael's.

Joel

On 3/15/2017 8:32 PM, Jared Smith wrote:
I've started an initial analysis based on the limited information I
have from FTDNA thus far. I can provide more information after I
receive Michael's VCF files.

The following lists provide the SNP name (if available), then the DNA
position number and polymorphism/change value.

Thus far, I know Joel and Michael share the following known SNPs:

A11132 - 14092445-C-T
A11134 - 15656058-T-G
A11135 - 16770482-C-T
A11137 - 19090151-G-A
A11139 - 21637160-G-A
A11140 - 21757893-T-A

Michael has the following novel variants:
14806931-C-G
19110373-C-T (already named SNP - Y30173 - in another R1b branch)
22478928-G-C
21262641-C-A (already named SNP - K554 - in another C2e2 branch)

Joel has the following novel variants:
A11130 - 9132352-G-A
A11131 - 13691125-A-T
A11133 - 14819258-C-T
A11136 - 17550281-C-T
A11138 - 19477032-A-T

So I will preliminarily call the shared Hartley branch the A11132
branch. I'll continue to call Joel's Hartley sub-branch A11130.
Michael's Hartley branch will eventually be named once one of his
unique variants is assigned a name. It is interesting that two of
Michael's 'novel' variants align with known SNPs on other branches,
but this does happen occasionally.

Michael likely may have other good novel variants that FTDNA has not
identified. I'm not yet sure of the quality of the 4 they have
identified, but FTDNA is pretty conservative, so they're probably
good.

Using this we can start do some initial age estimates. With 6 shared
mutations and 4-5 unique mutations, this means that the split in your
lines was probably just this side of half way between when our Z17911
ancestor lived and present day. With our best guess estimate of Z17911
being 800-1000 years old, this puts your common ancestor living
probably 350-450 years ago, give or take.

It would be especially helpful if you could make a paper connection to
this ancestor, but that may not be possible. Regardless, this provides
a very nice Hartley branching for others to test to.

The A11130 SNP that Joel has is available for single SNP testing and
is part of the S5668 SNP Pack. I had hoped this would land on the
shared Hartley branch - it would have provided an easy test for people
to verify that they're on this Hartley line, but now testing for it
would only prove or disprove if someone is related to Joel more
recently than that SNP was formed - and it could have been at Joel's
father so only Joel and his brothers share it. So it's not of
particular value right now.

A new Hartley branch is discovered! Thank you Joel and Michael for
investing in Big-Y!

Jared Smith


On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 12:10 PM, Charles Thomas
<charles_002@...> wrote:
Hey Joel,

Mike Hartley is listed on my match list with 0 shared novel variants,

0 non-matching known SNPs, and 25,684 matching SNPs.

Is Mike 31/37 and 59/67 with you? My Thomas match with whom

I share the ancestor James Thomas b. abt 1760 is 66/67 with me.

So I'm thinking that your and Mike's shared Hartley ancestor could

be much farther back in time. Yet STRs can change at any time, and it's

just the average mutation rate per STR that are known so maybe your

shared ancestor is more recent than I'm guessing. I'm sure Jared's

analysis of the SNPs will be helpful.

Best regards,

Charles



________________________________
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> on behalf of Joel Hartley
<joel@...>
Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2017 7:28 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: [Z16357] Mike Hartley BigY

I notice a new BigY match today with Mike Hartley. I'm not as good as
Jared as figuring out what the matches mean. For example, there are 5
SNPs which Charles Thomas and I have that others don't have. I don't see
any SNPs I share with Mike Hartley that I don't share with others.

Joel





 

I count GD=8 between you. Seeing as your common ancestor was only a
few hundred years ago (I'd think 450 years ago at the furthest), this
is rather remarkable. This difference in STRs would otherwise suggest
a VERY distant common ancestor, but this SNP match proves this wrong.

The 391 STR (Joel = 10 and Michael = 11) and 447 STR (Joel = 26 and
Michael = 25) are moderately slow moving STRs and *might* be good ones
to estimate which side of these new Hartley branches other matches
might land on.

I'm going to request that FTDNA add one of your shared SNPs to the SNP
Pack and/or as a single SNP test. This would provide an easy way for
other Hartleys to verify if they are somewhere on this shared branch.

Yes, this is a great breakthrough. Anytime we can define very recent
splits in branches, it really helps us refine age estimates for
everyone else. In this case, it reinforces my previous estimates as
being accurate. And, as you note, we now have three Hartley branches
(one shared and then one each for the two of you) that allow other kin
to test to and define other new sub-branches. Getting to this level of
granularity is one of the primary goals of this project.

I've updated the charts at to reflect
these changes. There are still several questionable variants that I
need to sort to one side of the split or the other once I get
Michael's raw data files. Assuming FTDNA accepts my recommendation of
calling this block R-A11132, this will be your new terminal SNP.

Jared

On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 8:08 PM, Joel Hartley <joel@...> wrote:
Thanks Jared,

That is such great news. This is a red letter day for Hartley Genetic
Genealogy. This is the first SNP branching within the Hartley surname that I
know of. That makes this a true Hartley SNP group which is one the goals of
the BigY testing. Thanks also to Mike for doing this test.

I had a feeling that this branch of Hartleys was quite large. There is still
room for other branches - both in the main Hartley group, in my group and in
Michael's.

Joel


On 3/15/2017 8:32 PM, Jared Smith wrote:

I've started an initial analysis based on the limited information I
have from FTDNA thus far. I can provide more information after I
receive Michael's VCF files.

The following lists provide the SNP name (if available), then the DNA
position number and polymorphism/change value.

Thus far, I know Joel and Michael share the following known SNPs:

A11132 - 14092445-C-T
A11134 - 15656058-T-G
A11135 - 16770482-C-T
A11137 - 19090151-G-A
A11139 - 21637160-G-A
A11140 - 21757893-T-A

Michael has the following novel variants:
14806931-C-G
19110373-C-T (already named SNP - Y30173 - in another R1b branch)
22478928-G-C
21262641-C-A (already named SNP - K554 - in another C2e2 branch)

Joel has the following novel variants:
A11130 - 9132352-G-A
A11131 - 13691125-A-T
A11133 - 14819258-C-T
A11136 - 17550281-C-T
A11138 - 19477032-A-T

So I will preliminarily call the shared Hartley branch the A11132
branch. I'll continue to call Joel's Hartley sub-branch A11130.
Michael's Hartley branch will eventually be named once one of his
unique variants is assigned a name. It is interesting that two of
Michael's 'novel' variants align with known SNPs on other branches,
but this does happen occasionally.

Michael likely may have other good novel variants that FTDNA has not
identified. I'm not yet sure of the quality of the 4 they have
identified, but FTDNA is pretty conservative, so they're probably
good.

Using this we can start do some initial age estimates. With 6 shared
mutations and 4-5 unique mutations, this means that the split in your
lines was probably just this side of half way between when our Z17911
ancestor lived and present day. With our best guess estimate of Z17911
being 800-1000 years old, this puts your common ancestor living
probably 350-450 years ago, give or take.

It would be especially helpful if you could make a paper connection to
this ancestor, but that may not be possible. Regardless, this provides
a very nice Hartley branching for others to test to.

The A11130 SNP that Joel has is available for single SNP testing and
is part of the S5668 SNP Pack. I had hoped this would land on the
shared Hartley branch - it would have provided an easy test for people
to verify that they're on this Hartley line, but now testing for it
would only prove or disprove if someone is related to Joel more
recently than that SNP was formed - and it could have been at Joel's
father so only Joel and his brothers share it. So it's not of
particular value right now.

A new Hartley branch is discovered! Thank you Joel and Michael for
investing in Big-Y!

Jared Smith


On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 12:10 PM, Charles Thomas
<charles_002@...> wrote:

Hey Joel,

Mike Hartley is listed on my match list with 0 shared novel variants,

0 non-matching known SNPs, and 25,684 matching SNPs.

Is Mike 31/37 and 59/67 with you? My Thomas match with whom

I share the ancestor James Thomas b. abt 1760 is 66/67 with me.

So I'm thinking that your and Mike's shared Hartley ancestor could

be much farther back in time. Yet STRs can change at any time, and it's

just the average mutation rate per STR that are known so maybe your

shared ancestor is more recent than I'm guessing. I'm sure Jared's

analysis of the SNPs will be helpful.

Best regards,

Charles



________________________________
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> on behalf of Joel Hartley
<joel@...>
Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2017 7:28 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: [Z16357] Mike Hartley BigY

I notice a new BigY match today with Mike Hartley. I'm not as good as
Jared as figuring out what the matches mean. For example, there are 5
SNPs which Charles Thomas and I have that others don't have. I don't see
any SNPs I share with Mike Hartley that I don't share with others.

Joel







 

开云体育

Great work, Joel. Cool tree.

Charles


From: [email protected] <[email protected]> on behalf of Joel Hartley <joel@...>
Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2017 8:58 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Z16357] Mike Hartley BigY
?
Hi Charles,

You are right. Mike is actually off the chart on my matches. I think that he is a GD of 8 and the 67 STR cutoff is 7. I'm guessing that the connection is quite a ways back. Here is the last STR tree that I have worked on:




It shows some Hartleys with lesser GDs to me on the right as being more distantly related. This is due to the different mutation factors in the STRs. They vary by as much as 350 times from each other. The Quaker Hartley is Mike. He is on a subbranch on the left. The 455 STR is the very slow moving STR. I based the two main branches on that STR for the Hartleys.

Joel

On 3/15/2017 2:10 PM, Charles Thomas wrote:

Hey Joel,

Mike Hartley is listed on my match list with 0 shared novel variants,

0 non-matching known SNPs, and 25,684 matching SNPs.

Is Mike 31/37 and 59/67 with you? My Thomas match with whom

I share the ancestor James Thomas b. abt 1760 is 66/67 with me.

So I'm thinking that your and Mike's shared Hartley ancestor could

be much farther back in time. Yet STRs can change at any time, and it's

just the average mutation rate per STR?that are known so maybe your

shared ancestor is more recent than I'm guessing. I'm sure Jared's

analysis of the SNPs will be helpful.

Best regards,

Charles




From: [email protected] <[email protected]> on behalf of Joel Hartley <joel@...>
Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2017 7:28 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: [Z16357] Mike Hartley BigY
?
I notice a new BigY match today with Mike Hartley. I'm not as good as
Jared as figuring out what the matches mean. For example, there are 5
SNPs which Charles Thomas and I have that others don't have. I don't see
any SNPs I share with Mike Hartley that I don't share with others.

Joel






 

Thanks Jared,

I had missed 391 in my tree analysis. It helps to have an extra set of eyes looking at this. Still, these SNPs mutate over 10Xs as fast as the slow moving 455 that I based my tree on.

On a side note, I read that the L513 SNPs seem to mutate faster than the average SNP across all SNPs. I wonder if there is a correspondingly fast STR rate for L513's, or if these are more constant than the SNPs?

Joel

On 3/15/2017 10:55 PM, Jared Smith wrote:
I count GD=8 between you. Seeing as your common ancestor was only a
few hundred years ago (I'd think 450 years ago at the furthest), this
is rather remarkable. This difference in STRs would otherwise suggest
a VERY distant common ancestor, but this SNP match proves this wrong.

The 391 STR (Joel = 10 and Michael = 11) and 447 STR (Joel = 26 and
Michael = 25) are moderately slow moving STRs and *might* be good ones
to estimate which side of these new Hartley branches other matches
might land on.

I'm going to request that FTDNA add one of your shared SNPs to the SNP
Pack and/or as a single SNP test. This would provide an easy way for
other Hartleys to verify if they are somewhere on this shared branch.

Yes, this is a great breakthrough. Anytime we can define very recent
splits in branches, it really helps us refine age estimates for
everyone else. In this case, it reinforces my previous estimates as
being accurate. And, as you note, we now have three Hartley branches
(one shared and then one each for the two of you) that allow other kin
to test to and define other new sub-branches. Getting to this level of
granularity is one of the primary goals of this project.

I've updated the charts at to reflect
these changes. There are still several questionable variants that I
need to sort to one side of the split or the other once I get
Michael's raw data files. Assuming FTDNA accepts my recommendation of
calling this block R-A11132, this will be your new terminal SNP.

Jared


On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 8:08 PM, Joel Hartley <joel@...> wrote:
Thanks Jared,

That is such great news. This is a red letter day for Hartley Genetic
Genealogy. This is the first SNP branching within the Hartley surname that I
know of. That makes this a true Hartley SNP group which is one the goals of
the BigY testing. Thanks also to Mike for doing this test.

I had a feeling that this branch of Hartleys was quite large. There is still
room for other branches - both in the main Hartley group, in my group and in
Michael's.

Joel


On 3/15/2017 8:32 PM, Jared Smith wrote:
I've started an initial analysis based on the limited information I
have from FTDNA thus far. I can provide more information after I
receive Michael's VCF files.

The following lists provide the SNP name (if available), then the DNA
position number and polymorphism/change value.

Thus far, I know Joel and Michael share the following known SNPs:

A11132 - 14092445-C-T
A11134 - 15656058-T-G
A11135 - 16770482-C-T
A11137 - 19090151-G-A
A11139 - 21637160-G-A
A11140 - 21757893-T-A

Michael has the following novel variants:
14806931-C-G
19110373-C-T (already named SNP - Y30173 - in another R1b branch)
22478928-G-C
21262641-C-A (already named SNP - K554 - in another C2e2 branch)

Joel has the following novel variants:
A11130 - 9132352-G-A
A11131 - 13691125-A-T
A11133 - 14819258-C-T
A11136 - 17550281-C-T
A11138 - 19477032-A-T

So I will preliminarily call the shared Hartley branch the A11132
branch. I'll continue to call Joel's Hartley sub-branch A11130.
Michael's Hartley branch will eventually be named once one of his
unique variants is assigned a name. It is interesting that two of
Michael's 'novel' variants align with known SNPs on other branches,
but this does happen occasionally.

Michael likely may have other good novel variants that FTDNA has not
identified. I'm not yet sure of the quality of the 4 they have
identified, but FTDNA is pretty conservative, so they're probably
good.

Using this we can start do some initial age estimates. With 6 shared
mutations and 4-5 unique mutations, this means that the split in your
lines was probably just this side of half way between when our Z17911
ancestor lived and present day. With our best guess estimate of Z17911
being 800-1000 years old, this puts your common ancestor living
probably 350-450 years ago, give or take.

It would be especially helpful if you could make a paper connection to
this ancestor, but that may not be possible. Regardless, this provides
a very nice Hartley branching for others to test to.

The A11130 SNP that Joel has is available for single SNP testing and
is part of the S5668 SNP Pack. I had hoped this would land on the
shared Hartley branch - it would have provided an easy test for people
to verify that they're on this Hartley line, but now testing for it
would only prove or disprove if someone is related to Joel more
recently than that SNP was formed - and it could have been at Joel's
father so only Joel and his brothers share it. So it's not of
particular value right now.

A new Hartley branch is discovered! Thank you Joel and Michael for
investing in Big-Y!

Jared Smith


On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 12:10 PM, Charles Thomas
<charles_002@...> wrote:
Hey Joel,

Mike Hartley is listed on my match list with 0 shared novel variants,

0 non-matching known SNPs, and 25,684 matching SNPs.

Is Mike 31/37 and 59/67 with you? My Thomas match with whom

I share the ancestor James Thomas b. abt 1760 is 66/67 with me.

So I'm thinking that your and Mike's shared Hartley ancestor could

be much farther back in time. Yet STRs can change at any time, and it's

just the average mutation rate per STR that are known so maybe your

shared ancestor is more recent than I'm guessing. I'm sure Jared's

analysis of the SNPs will be helpful.

Best regards,

Charles



________________________________
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> on behalf of Joel Hartley
<joel@...>
Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2017 7:28 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: [Z16357] Mike Hartley BigY

I notice a new BigY match today with Mike Hartley. I'm not as good as
Jared as figuring out what the matches mean. For example, there are 5
SNPs which Charles Thomas and I have that others don't have. I don't see
any SNPs I share with Mike Hartley that I don't share with others.

Joel






 

Yes, there are no really slow moving/changing STR mutations that you
can differentiate the two Hartley lines on - but this would not really
be expected considering how closely related you are. But the fact you
have 8 differences on other STRs is still surprising.

You might identify better STRs if you both did Y-111 or used YFull
STRs, but this doesn't provide an easy/inexpensive testing path for
other Hartleys to see where they might fit in.

I've also wondered about and have tried to find some research on
genetic or physiological disposition for faster SNP/STR mutation
rates, but have been unable to find anything conclusive. Our L513
branch does seem to have more mutations over time than most other
branches that have had an in-depth analysis. YFull's research on
several lines gave them the 144 years per SNP they use, but this is
certainly not close to accurate for our haplogroup. They've
acknowledged that their methodology is flawed and will be revising it
soon. I believe this will move the age estimates for our ancestors
much more recent.

I'll post some more details later about my methodology for aging our
common ancestors.

Jared

On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 8:27 AM, Joel Hartley <joel@...> wrote:
Thanks Jared,

I had missed 391 in my tree analysis. It helps to have an extra set of eyes
looking at this. Still, these SNPs mutate over 10Xs as fast as the slow
moving 455 that I based my tree on.

On a side note, I read that the L513 SNPs seem to mutate faster than the
average SNP across all SNPs. I wonder if there is a correspondingly fast STR
rate for L513's, or if these are more constant than the SNPs?

Joel


On 3/15/2017 10:55 PM, Jared Smith wrote:

I count GD=8 between you. Seeing as your common ancestor was only a
few hundred years ago (I'd think 450 years ago at the furthest), this
is rather remarkable. This difference in STRs would otherwise suggest
a VERY distant common ancestor, but this SNP match proves this wrong.

The 391 STR (Joel = 10 and Michael = 11) and 447 STR (Joel = 26 and
Michael = 25) are moderately slow moving STRs and *might* be good ones
to estimate which side of these new Hartley branches other matches
might land on.

I'm going to request that FTDNA add one of your shared SNPs to the SNP
Pack and/or as a single SNP test. This would provide an easy way for
other Hartleys to verify if they are somewhere on this shared branch.

Yes, this is a great breakthrough. Anytime we can define very recent
splits in branches, it really helps us refine age estimates for
everyone else. In this case, it reinforces my previous estimates as
being accurate. And, as you note, we now have three Hartley branches
(one shared and then one each for the two of you) that allow other kin
to test to and define other new sub-branches. Getting to this level of
granularity is one of the primary goals of this project.

I've updated the charts at to reflect
these changes. There are still several questionable variants that I
need to sort to one side of the split or the other once I get
Michael's raw data files. Assuming FTDNA accepts my recommendation of
calling this block R-A11132, this will be your new terminal SNP.

Jared


On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 8:08 PM, Joel Hartley <joel@...> wrote:

Thanks Jared,

That is such great news. This is a red letter day for Hartley Genetic
Genealogy. This is the first SNP branching within the Hartley surname
that I
know of. That makes this a true Hartley SNP group which is one the goals
of
the BigY testing. Thanks also to Mike for doing this test.

I had a feeling that this branch of Hartleys was quite large. There is
still
room for other branches - both in the main Hartley group, in my group and
in
Michael's.

Joel


On 3/15/2017 8:32 PM, Jared Smith wrote:

I've started an initial analysis based on the limited information I
have from FTDNA thus far. I can provide more information after I
receive Michael's VCF files.

The following lists provide the SNP name (if available), then the DNA
position number and polymorphism/change value.

Thus far, I know Joel and Michael share the following known SNPs:

A11132 - 14092445-C-T
A11134 - 15656058-T-G
A11135 - 16770482-C-T
A11137 - 19090151-G-A
A11139 - 21637160-G-A
A11140 - 21757893-T-A

Michael has the following novel variants:
14806931-C-G
19110373-C-T (already named SNP - Y30173 - in another R1b branch)
22478928-G-C
21262641-C-A (already named SNP - K554 - in another C2e2 branch)

Joel has the following novel variants:
A11130 - 9132352-G-A
A11131 - 13691125-A-T
A11133 - 14819258-C-T
A11136 - 17550281-C-T
A11138 - 19477032-A-T

So I will preliminarily call the shared Hartley branch the A11132
branch. I'll continue to call Joel's Hartley sub-branch A11130.
Michael's Hartley branch will eventually be named once one of his
unique variants is assigned a name. It is interesting that two of
Michael's 'novel' variants align with known SNPs on other branches,
but this does happen occasionally.

Michael likely may have other good novel variants that FTDNA has not
identified. I'm not yet sure of the quality of the 4 they have
identified, but FTDNA is pretty conservative, so they're probably
good.

Using this we can start do some initial age estimates. With 6 shared
mutations and 4-5 unique mutations, this means that the split in your
lines was probably just this side of half way between when our Z17911
ancestor lived and present day. With our best guess estimate of Z17911
being 800-1000 years old, this puts your common ancestor living
probably 350-450 years ago, give or take.

It would be especially helpful if you could make a paper connection to
this ancestor, but that may not be possible. Regardless, this provides
a very nice Hartley branching for others to test to.

The A11130 SNP that Joel has is available for single SNP testing and
is part of the S5668 SNP Pack. I had hoped this would land on the
shared Hartley branch - it would have provided an easy test for people
to verify that they're on this Hartley line, but now testing for it
would only prove or disprove if someone is related to Joel more
recently than that SNP was formed - and it could have been at Joel's
father so only Joel and his brothers share it. So it's not of
particular value right now.

A new Hartley branch is discovered! Thank you Joel and Michael for
investing in Big-Y!

Jared Smith


On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 12:10 PM, Charles Thomas
<charles_002@...> wrote:

Hey Joel,

Mike Hartley is listed on my match list with 0 shared novel variants,

0 non-matching known SNPs, and 25,684 matching SNPs.

Is Mike 31/37 and 59/67 with you? My Thomas match with whom

I share the ancestor James Thomas b. abt 1760 is 66/67 with me.

So I'm thinking that your and Mike's shared Hartley ancestor could

be much farther back in time. Yet STRs can change at any time, and it's

just the average mutation rate per STR that are known so maybe your

shared ancestor is more recent than I'm guessing. I'm sure Jared's

analysis of the SNPs will be helpful.

Best regards,

Charles



________________________________
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> on behalf of Joel Hartley
<joel@...>
Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2017 7:28 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: [Z16357] Mike Hartley BigY

I notice a new BigY match today with Mike Hartley. I'm not as good as
Jared as figuring out what the matches mean. For example, there are 5
SNPs which Charles Thomas and I have that others don't have. I don't
see
any SNPs I share with Mike Hartley that I don't share with others.

Joel








Michael W. Hartley
 

I finally found this place.? My raw data is on it's way to Jared and Mike Walsh.? Let me know what else you need.


 

I did some additional analysis of Michael's results from his raw data.
There's not too much more to add, but I did find a couple other
variants that Joel and Michael share:
22425308 G A
25297201 T A
26310965 T C

As a brief explanation of this, 22425308 (for example) is the position
on the Y chromosome. The ancestral value (meaning the one that pretty
much everyone else has) for this position is G, but both of them have
an A here.

However, all three of these are in rather questionable areas on the
chromosome where poor reads can occur, so it's possible (though not
very likely) that these are both mis-reads that just happen to be the
same, or that some other relative could also have this variant, but
the test might not catch it due to its location.

I also found one solid INDEL that they both share:
18721623 A AA

Think of an INDEL (short for Insertion/Deletion) as a 'hiccup' on the
DNA - where the transfer of DNA from father to son results in one or
more extra segments of the DNA getting injected, or where a segment of
the DNA disappears. In this case, the ancestral marker is A, but you
two both have an extra A (thus AA) here.

We don't typically count INDELs as "SNPs", but this is certainly a
high quality mutation that you almost certainly got from a common
ancestor, so it can be used for comparing future matches.

I'm sure Mike W. and Alex will likely find some additional novel
variants for Michael when they do their analysis, but I think this is
probably everything that they share that is worth tracking.

I'll send the data to Michael Sager soon and ask him to update the
FTDNA tree and update your terminal SNPs to A11132.

Jared


On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 10:57 AM, Michael W. Hartley
<mwhlaw1@...> wrote:
I finally found this place. My raw data is on it's way to Jared and Mike
Walsh. Let me know what else you need.


 

开云体育

I see that Mike Hartley's results are at the Big Tree site awaiting analysis with several others in the lower right in pink:



Joel

On 3/17/2017 10:40 PM, Jared Smith wrote:

I did some additional analysis of Michael's results from his raw data.
There's not too much more to add, but I did find a couple other
variants that Joel and Michael share:
22425308 G A
25297201 T A
26310965 T C

As a brief explanation of this, 22425308 (for example) is the position
on the Y chromosome. The ancestral value (meaning the one that pretty
much everyone else has) for this position is G, but both of them have
an A here.

However, all three of these are in rather questionable areas on the
chromosome where poor reads can occur, so it's possible (though not
very likely) that these are both mis-reads that just happen to be the
same, or that some other relative could also have this variant, but
the test might not catch it due to its location.

I also found one solid INDEL that they both share:
18721623 A AA

Think of an INDEL (short for Insertion/Deletion) as a 'hiccup' on the
DNA - where the transfer of DNA from father to son results in one or
more extra segments of the DNA getting injected, or where a segment of
the DNA disappears. In this case, the ancestral marker is A, but you
two both have an extra A (thus AA) here.

We don't typically count INDELs as "SNPs", but this is certainly a
high quality mutation that you almost certainly got from a common
ancestor, so it can be used for comparing future matches.

I'm sure Mike W. and Alex will likely find some additional novel
variants for Michael when they do their analysis, but I think this is
probably everything that they share that is worth tracking.

I'll send the data to Michael Sager soon and ask him to update the
FTDNA tree and update your terminal SNPs to A11132.

Jared


On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 10:57 AM, Michael W. Hartley
<mwhlaw1@...> wrote:
I finally found this place.  My raw data is on it's way to Jared and Mike
Walsh.  Let me know what else you need.