开云体育

To start a new message thread or subject, click on "New Topic" just below the "Messages" item on the far left of the page. ?I'm not sure why they don't include this button on the Messages page. James

New messages to the discussion list can be sent to [email protected] Subscribe by e-mailing [email protected] or go to /g/Z16357 The Z16357 project web site is http://dna.smithplanet.com/ It has STR and SNP spreadsheets, known ancestries for members, and additional information and resources on our branch of the Y-DNA tree. Today I added a new tree overview graphic at http://dna.smithplanet.com/snp and on the homepage. It should provide a more basic overview of where folks are at - or may end up with testing. I also added Joel's STR relationship chart to the STR page. I've also further extended the STR and GD spreadsheets with likely Z16357+ people. I want to add as many as I can find, then I'll focus more on recruiting them to the project (I'll need help from others to get contact info from their Y-DNA and Big-Y matches). The tree is likely to change a bit in the coming month or so with the several tests that are underway - it makes sense to get a better sense of where some of the new people end up before recommending tests for others. Feedback and additional ideas are very welcome. Jared

Thomas Goff's SNP pack results are in and he has moved way down to the tips of the Z17911 branch. He is both BY11573+ (currently with Thomas, Bennett, and Merrick) and also BY11565+ which is only Merrick. With him and Merrick both having this SNP, this creates a new BY11565+ branch of our tree!!! I had this as a theoretical branch, but this confirms it. It also adds additional credibility to BY11573 as a very solid branch, and pushes the tips of this branch at least 100 years closer to present day. Thank you Mr. Goff for investing in this test! I need to process and analyze these results a bit more, but have updated the SNP tree at http://dna.smithplanet.com/snp. I catch a flight for NYC early in the morning, but will soon notify Mike W. to update his R-L513 tree. I also think that FTDNA should probably also push a terminal SNP name update for all 4 of you to reflect these findings. I'm not sure if Merrick has done a FamilyFinder test, but if so, it would be worth checking for an autosomal DNA match between you. It's probably a long shot, but a match would place your common ancestor within the last few hundred years. Unfortunately, this does cause some disruption to Joel's STR analysis in his wonderful blog post today. The STRs he suggests map to Z17911 and Z11573 work for everyone - except for Goff - who is just the opposite. I, like Joel, had presumed that Goff would stay at Z17911 based on his STR results. He's a very close STR match to me, but I don't have BY11573 or BY11565. I guess this shows that STRs (at least less than 111+ of them) are still just a rough predictor of haplogroup - especially for this last ~1000 years of our branch. This is all very exciting to me! Jared

I wrote a Blog on a Z17911 STR Tree. The Tree covers Smith, Goff, Gilroy, Hartley and Sanchez. I haven't tackled a STR Tree for BY11573 yet, but mention those in that Group also (Thomas, Merrick and Bennett and perhaps a few others). Joel Hartley

Does anyone know why I have a 0 SNP difference to Thomas and Bennett and a 2 SNP difference to Merrick on the Big Y?

I've just updated and uploaded new STR and GD spreadsheets - http://dna.smithplanet.com/str I tried to position people based on rough groupings. Sorting the GD spreadsheet by column provides the best insight into relationships. I added some of our Hartley and Thomas relatives. I also added newly found Watkins and Griffin people (all closely associated to Vaughn/Vaughan). Also some Martyn people closely associated to Thomas. Charles, do you know the connection here? I think I've mostly completed what I've considered Phase 1 of this project - identifying potential R-Z16357 people and future SNP testers from people who have taken Y-DNA tests. I've exhausted Mike W.'s spreadsheet, my STR matches, and several other sources. We're now at 75 very promising potential testers on our spreadsheet! But I know there are more out there. You can help with this by checking your FTDNA Y-STR matches (at Y25+) for people I could add, especially focusing on surname groups I may have missed. Some of you will have matches that I can't see. Unfortunately, it's difficult to find good potential matches to the Smith, etc. people who are or are likely Z16357. If we consider S5668 (the parent SNP to Z16357) as the trunk, and Z16357 as the base of our branch, then R-Z17911 is way out at the end of that long branch. So when you do STR comparisons, these Smiths are closer matches to hundreds of people on totally different branches than they are to us at the end of their own branch. This poses a distinct challenge, but we have many good prospects identified already. We'll now transition into recruiting these people to do Big-Y, or (as we better define the STR grouping positions on the SNP tree) SNP pack or single SNP tests. And also trying to connect genealogical lines and geographies. Jared Smith (FTDNA #307773)

I'd like to welcome Michael Hartley to the group. He has kit #617805 and has recently done the Y67 DNA test. He likely shows as a match to some of you (he is GD=7 to me at Y67). I've added him to the STR and GDs spreadsheets - http://dna.smithplanet.com/str I also added another Hartley from their surname project - there are now 5 Hartleys and Sanchez (who is a Hartley) in addition to Joel. These are all very good candidates for additional testing on the Hartley branch of Z17911. Michael's most distant known ancestor originates in England around 1660, then came to Pennsylvania in a Quaker emigration. Having such an old ancestor defined for our tree is very helpful. Hopefully we can establish Michael's location on our tree. Welcome aboard Michael! Jared

Joel noted on the R-L513 list that YFull has updated their tree based on Bennett's results - https://www.yfull.com/tree/R-S5668/ R-Z16351 is our branch (what I call Z16357). They have Joel alone at the base of this branch because there's not yet other results to differentiate him. They now have Thomas and Bennett on the Y29969 branch. I had identified this SNP as being distinctive to Thomas and Bennett at http://dna.smithplanet.com/snp They don't show BY11573 for them (like I, FTDNA, and Big Tree do), probably because it was a questionable read for both - and they don't have Merrick's results or SNP Pack results to add validity to it. Merrick had no or poor test coverage for Y29969, so for now we should consider Y29969 and BY11573 to be phylogenetically equivalent. I'll update my tree to reflect this. They also updated the Time to Most Recent Common Ancestor (TMRCA) estimates - moving Z16351/Z16357 (Hartley) a bit older to 1550 ybp and Y29969 (Thomas and Bennett) to 1200 ybp. Jared

Hi Jared, It's of no consequence to my Y-DNA lineage or to your research,?but in another line?I'm supposedy a descendant of?Nicholas Smith d.1719 Surry County, VA, and wife Elizabeth Flood. His Y-lineage seems to be I-M223-group 1 (#134470) at the Smith Project, but R-M269-group 32 is another possibility. Best, Charles

The Big-Y results for Brent Phillips are in. He is confirmed R-Y29969 with Bennett and Thomas. This is phylogenetically equivalent to BY11573. You'll notice FTDNA has changed the terminal SNP for Bennett and Thomas to Y29969 - it's a more reliable SNP to check. Beyond this, there's also a new tentative Bennett/Phillips branch. They both share the following markers (and perhaps some others that are yet to be discovered): 7488239-G-A 22486193-A-T 25311291-T-C These are in rather poor read areas for the Y-DNA test, but I believe at least the first one should hold up under further analysis to create this new branch. I had thought that Bennett and Phillips would share more good SNPs (i.e., they had a more recent common ancestor), but this proves that their lines split after Y29969. But both of them have around 10 good unique SNPs that would provide distinct Bennett and Phillips branches with additional cousin testers. Another good discover with the Phillips and my Smith Big-Y is validation of 5 or 6 other SNP markers that those of us on the Z17911 block share. This means that Z17911 is a bigger/longer block than we had previously thought, thus moving our more recent ancestor in that block closer to modern day. My own VERY rough estimate based on what we know now is that our most recent Z17911 lived probably around 1200 years ago, with the Bennett/Phillips/Thomas/Merrick/Goff Y29969/BY11573 ancestor living around 800 years ago. Brent's results add some very useful information to our project! Jared

I have uploaded a new spreadsheet to http://dna.smithplanet.com/media/Z16357-Variants.xlsx This likely has limited utility for anyone other than me, but I thought I'd share it. This file is used for analyzing Y-DNA mutation variants (SNPs, insertions/deletions, etc.) that us Z16357 people have. It's a very large spreadsheet with complex calculations - minor changes like sorting can take a long time to calculate. The Variants tab includes all 68,355 unique variants that we have. These were collected from Big-Y VCF files. You can use the Lookup tab to query specific DNA position numbers to see the values each of us have at that position. The Shared Variants tab shows all known variants ***AT OR BELOW Z16357*** that at least 2 of us have. This allows easy analysis of the consistency of SNPs and determination of their position on our branches. A "+" indicates a positive test for that variant. A "***" indicates the variant was identified, but the test quality is questionable. A blank box indicates EITHER a negative result OR no test coverage (be careful - you can't assume too much from a blank box without analyzing the BED file for read coverage). The Unique Variants tab lists most of the variants that are unique to only one of us. I'd be happy to add any new ones from YFull, if any of you who have tested there would like to e-mail them to me. Note that some Insertions/Deletions (these are kinda like hiccups in your DNA) show "Count" as 0 because Big Tree calculates the position info for INDELs a bit differently than the VCF file. These are retained for reference. The primary function of this spreadsheet is to easily add VCF data to Variants for new Big-Y testers, then immediately determine which existing SNPs from our branch they have, and which Unique Variants are then no longer unique and need to be moved to Shared Variants. Jared

I've again updated the charts at http://dna.smithplanet.com/snp These now include the proper positioning for everyone. I removed the speculative branches that do not have available SNP tests. All of us have our own speculative branches, so it didn't make sense to only show some of them. You'll notice a new BY15419 block above the Bennett/Phillips block and the Merrick/Goff block. Even though Merrick's results don't show this SNP, FTDNA has him below this block, so they must have analyzed his BAM file to find him positive for it. These small blocks provide a measurable "anchor SNP" for that common ancestor (within a few generations) and define the split in family lines. This portion of the tree is likely where many of the potential testers I've identified will land (particularly Vaughan, Watkins, Griffin, Lewis, Evans, etc.), if our STRs are a good indication (which they often aren't). With several good branches now defined, our project needs additional testers to verify and extend those branches. I have identified 80 or so good potential testers as found in the STR and GD spreadsheets - http://dna.smithplanet.com/str Please invite your Y37+ matches to participate with us! I can only contact people that are Y-DNA matches to me, so please send them e-mails and encourage them to check out the site and join this discussion list. I think most of them would be thrilled to know that your SNP testing has helped them know where they fit on the Y-DNA tree. Most have only tested L21 or M269, which are 4500 years old. Your tests prove a much more recent location for them on the tree. Feel free to send them my e-mail address if they have questions (copying me on the e-mail will be helpful). Or you can send me their names/emails to me and I'd be happy to contact them. Other items of note: - Michael Hartley has ordered Big-Y. This should define a long Hartley SNP branch. Though Michael and Joel have not identified a known common ancestor, this will at least bring this branch into surname times. - We have another Phillips tester that has or will soon be ordering Big-Y. This should create a well-defined Phillips branch below BY15420. - We're *still* awaiting the Z16357 SNP test results for Lenita. Once confirmed there, she may consider Big-Y to help redefine our oldest "Smith" line where Sylvia is currently located. - I will be compiling and requesting some of our recently discovered SNPs to (hopefully) be added to the S5668 SNP Pack. This will provide a less expensive way for some of our Y-DNA matches to discover their location on our branches. If desired, I can also request single SNP tests at YSEQ ($17.50 each) so people can easily test any of our known SNPs. Thanks, Jared Smith

This post should (hopefully) make a lot more sense... A few of us have been doing some analysis to try to figure out how long ago our common ancestors may have lived. We have come up with much more recent estimates than previously determined. SNP age calculations are always rough estimates. YFull uses 144.41 years per SNP to try to establish a formal baseline. The problem is that if you calculate the number of SNPs that some people have that are downstream of SNPs for which YFull has time estimates, and multiply that number by 144 years per SNP, this duration often does not align eve closely with YFull's time estimates. This simply proves that SNPs do not always occur at 144 years per SNP. This is certainly the case with the people on our branch of the tree - the 10 Big-Y testers on the Z16357 branch have A LOT more SNPs than is typical.?Based on generally accepted age estimates for older SNPs, we all average around 75 years per SNP. Our mutations occur nearly twice as fast on average as YFull's baseline - meaning that our common ancestors likely lived much more recently than YFull has estimated. Daryl?estimated that the time to our most recent common ancestor (TMRCA) that had the?Z16357 SNP?as being 2422 years ago. Below Z16357 is the large Z16343 block which he estimated ends at 900 years ago. Below it is Z17911 which he estimated at 706 years ago - much more recent than YFull's estimate of 1550 years ago.?My own analysis closely aligned with Daryl's - though mine are bit older?(I have Z17911 at around 800 years old). We use a methodology that is based on assumed dates for very old SNP mutations, but that also considers the number of SNPs both upstream and downstream from a known SNP?to establish a more reasonable estimation of time. This approach gets more difficult as we get to the ends of the branches because we have fewer people that share those newer SNPs to analyze and average. But if we accept Z17911 as being ~800 years old, we can rough estimate the Bennett/Phillips ancestor as living ~550 years ago, for example. I've updated the SNP chart at?http://dna.smithplanet.com/snp with these refined estimates. As we get additional testers, especially those with known shared ancestors with other testers, then we'll be able to refine these estimates. Jared Smith

Hi Jared and everyone, I have a new 34/37 match. Surname is Dean who may be related to my previous match of that name. I invited him to check out the L513 project. Charles Thomas

The S5668 SNP pack results are in for Chuck Martin and they confirm a new Thomas/Martin branch of the tree. First, I had indicated Chuck's kit # previously as 161394. That was incorrect. His actual kit # is 495859. One of Thomas' (previously) unique SNPs is FGC33966. FTDNA included this SNP in the S5668 SNP Pack. Chuck Martin is positive for FGC33966 (and also BY11573), thus verifying this new branch! I've updated my charts at http://dna.smithplanet.com/snp to reflect the new branching (you may need to hit Refresh). You'll notice that we currently don't have anyone left right at S59969/BY11573 - they've all moved to downstream blocks in just the last few weeks due to new test results. This places the common Thomas/Martin ancestor at probably 500-700 years ago. It's likely that Thomas and Martin also share some of Thomas' other 'unique' SNPs - such as FGC33968 and FGC33967 - see http://www.ytree.net/SNPinfoForPerson.php?personID=413 Each new SNP match would move your common ancestor 100+ years closer to present day. But you are GD=6 at Y67, so this does suggest that your common ancestor is still probably at least a few hundred years back, and that we got lucky and hit gold with your FGC33966 SNP match. In other news, I see that FTDNA has updated their tree with some of our recent changes (I'll request that FGC33966 be added). If I'm reading it correctly, the new terminal SNP for Bennett and Phillips (I currently have as ??? on my charts) is labelled BY15420. They also list BY15419 upstream of this and BY11565, but I'm not sure what this SNP is. I'll try to figure it out. Discovering new branches is what this project is about, and new ones always make my day! Thanks, Jared PS - Chuck, I don't see you in the Martin project. Maybe try re-joining - or maybe something odd is happening there.

Aging our ancestors using Y-DNA data is far from an exact science. I'd be happy to have you poke holes in any of this. An analysis of the 11 Z16357 people who have taken Big-Y results in the following number of 'good', unique/novel variants/mutations: C. Hays 4 R. Hays 3 Pillsbury 5 Merrick 11 Thomas 6 Phillips 7 Bennett 9 M. Hartley 5 J. Hartley 5 J. Smith 12 Smith 27 These are variants that each person has that are not shared with anyone else who has tested. The higher the number of novel variants, the further back one would expect to be related to someone else listed. I use the same metric for a 'good' variant as Alex does on his Big Tree. This is a bit more aggressive than what YFull uses. There are, however, some inconsistencies with this. Merrick, for example, has nearly twice as many novel variants as Thomas, even though Merrick connects lower/later on the tree than Thomas - one would thus expect Merrick to have fewer novel variants. This is primarily a factor of test coverage, but this is all we have to work with, so we partially account for this variability by averaging. This is why each new Big-Y test gives us increased accuracy. When I add the novel variants above to the number of 'good' SNPs in each block or haplogroup of our tree and average the results, I end up with the following average number of variants downstream from each listed SNP block: ZS349 - 3.5 Z16854 - 9.3 BY15420 - 8.0 BY15419 - 9.7 Y29969 - 9.5 A11132 - 5 Z17911 - 10.9 Z16343 - 13 Z16357 - 36.1 This means, for example, that there's an average of 3.5 variants that were formed after the most recent ZS349 ancestor that the two Hays men share. For Z17911, we average 10.9 variants downstream (more recent than) our most recent common Z17911 ancestor. Altogether, we average 36.1 SNPs downstream of Z16357. To use these variant numbers to help us in aging, we need to calculate a "years per SNP" value. YFull has our last Z16357 ancestor at around 3300 years ago (though they've acknowledged this is probably too high). Other recent estimates put it as young as 2300 years ago. Until someone digs up some Z16357 remains or we get enough DNA testers to give us better data, we have to use our best informed estimate. I'll assume our most recent Z16357 ancestor lived a minimum of 2500 and maximum of 3000 years ago. If we divide these age estimates by 36.1 SNPs (on average), this is a minimum of 69.3 years per SNP and a maximum of 83.1 years per SNP. We can then use these values to assign age estimates to notable branchings as follows: ZS349 - 327-376 years before present Z16854 - 732-861 BY15420 - 639-750 BY15419 - 755-889 Y29969 - 743-875 A11132 - 431-501 Z17911 - 837-987 Z16343 - 986-1166 Z16357 - 2585-3085 The values are years before present, and include an additional 35 years (one generation?) to account for the age of the last ancestor that had this SNP - and also adds 50 years as a guessed average of how old the 11 Z16357 people are. So this estimates that the common ZS349 ancestor for Hays was born 347-376 years ago. We know this ancestor was George Hays who was born in 1655 - 362 years ago, so these numbers align perfectly! This places our Z17911 ancestor being born between 837 and 987 years ago. It places the Hartley common ancestor between 431 and 501 years ago, the Bennett/Phillips ancestor 639-750 years ago, etc. Do keep in mind that accuracy is more variable near the end of the branches (closer to present day), especially with data from only 2 or 3 people. And SNPs are not always formed at a consistent rate. So this all a bit rough, but should give us fairly reasonable estimations. Jared

Hey Jared, I was looking for something online?in addtion to dna-explained.com to send to an autosomal DNA match of mine for explanation of the possibilities of the match and I found the following nice page of yours: http://smithplanet.com/stuff/gedmatch.htm I recommend it to others here looking?to understand?autosomal matches. Thanks, Charles Thomas