Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

DNA Latest Updates.....anyone clued up on Haplogroup ??

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • DNA Latest Updates.....anyone clued up on Haplogroup ??

    Good morning ...I have had a 5 year update of my 67 marker DNA test...OAKES -
    OAK Project
    I know that my Grandads , cousins Grandson is a match ....but don`t really understand the difference between...for example...I am
    Backbone SNP test M253+ Haplogroup lL

    another is
    Haplogroup R1b 1b2 .......can anyone , in simple Laymans terms explain the difference

    Am I allowed to put the Link / E-Mail up ?....it may be easier for someone to read it ..
    If I remember correctly someone on FTF has an understanding of DNA..I would appreciate any help whatsoever.....cheers....allan;)
    Allan ......... researching oakes/anyon/standish/collins/hartley/barker/collins-cheshire
    oakes/tipping/ellis/jones/schacht/...garston, liverpool
    adams-shropshire/roberts-welshpool
    merrick/lewis/stringham/nicolls-herefordshire
    coxon/williamson/kay/weaver-glossop/stockport/walker-gorton

  • #2
    Allan

    A haplogroup is a group of people who all have the same Y-DNA markers. Haplogroups are to do with "deep ancestry".

    Haplogroup IL means you all in that group have a common ancestor 4000-6000 years ago - in Scandinavia in the case of haplogroup IL. That's really handy for you to know, I'm sure, pmsl.

    Think of the haplogroup as an international dialling code, lol, which leads you to a group of people who all have the same international dialling code.

    OC

    Comment


    • #3
      Thanks OC would you mind having a look at this link for me please......I am OAK 11 and my relation in USA is OAK 10 ....would you have a look and see if there are any other possible matches....I am supposed to have the brains to do this but I am better at fitting Bars ...lol....allan
      With our premier suite of DNA tests and the world’s most comprehensive matching database...your DNA has met its match!


      LOL...Just realised ...it must be the HELIGOLAND connection....so Leif Ericsson was my ggggggggggggggggggggggggggggg grandfather....fame at last..lol
      Last edited by garstonite; 08-08-10, 10:18.
      Allan ......... researching oakes/anyon/standish/collins/hartley/barker/collins-cheshire
      oakes/tipping/ellis/jones/schacht/...garston, liverpool
      adams-shropshire/roberts-welshpool
      merrick/lewis/stringham/nicolls-herefordshire
      coxon/williamson/kay/weaver-glossop/stockport/walker-gorton

      Comment


      • #4
        Allan - I think if you have a 67 marker test (a very good one to have statistically) you will be looking for real matches with at least 63/67 (ish) markers matching yours. 67/67 means you are almost certainly related. On the other hand 37/67 is no good at all.

        In our one name study we have 37 marker tests. We have people with our surname with 35/37, 36/37, and 37/37 matches. Many of these are known by a 'paper trail' to be related with a 'most recent common ancestor' (mrca) up to 200 years ago. We assume others with similar matches are likley to be related, although they do not yet know how.

        Hope that helps
        Anne

        Edit to say - I would not consider trying to match with anyone with less than a 37 marker test. The 12 marker ones could be anyone!
        Last edited by Anne in Carlisle; 08-08-10, 11:54.

        Comment


        • #5
          Thanks Ann....to be honest , I don`t know why they send 12/12 25/25 37/37 matches....the closest I have is a 65/67 and that is within 200 yrs ?....I presume I need 67/67 to positively identify a DIRECT ancestor.....also Ann, do you know how they match FEMALEs?...there are 8 females on the OAK Project.....allan
          Allan ......... researching oakes/anyon/standish/collins/hartley/barker/collins-cheshire
          oakes/tipping/ellis/jones/schacht/...garston, liverpool
          adams-shropshire/roberts-welshpool
          merrick/lewis/stringham/nicolls-herefordshire
          coxon/williamson/kay/weaver-glossop/stockport/walker-gorton

          Comment


          • #6
            It looks as if you have some matches with OAK 6 haplogroup 1l, but no one else, because all the other haplogroups are remarkably different from OAK 6, 10 and 11.

            OC

            Comment


            • #7
              Thanks OC....Could you explain how please...is it because of the lL Haplogroup ?....allan
              Allan ......... researching oakes/anyon/standish/collins/hartley/barker/collins-cheshire
              oakes/tipping/ellis/jones/schacht/...garston, liverpool
              adams-shropshire/roberts-welshpool
              merrick/lewis/stringham/nicolls-herefordshire
              coxon/williamson/kay/weaver-glossop/stockport/walker-gorton

              Comment


              • #8
                Allan

                Yes, if you think of a haplogroup as the title of a book, say, then 1l is obviously a different "book" from Rlb.

                I'm not sure why these DNA companies give the results of the tests in such a complicated way, but I do think they try to blind you with science. Possibly because it is better than saying "the only two people who match in this study are you and your already-known relative, so we've taken money off you to tell you something you already knew"

                OC

                Comment


                • #9
                  A bit more...

                  Haplogroups for Y-DNA number 18, worldwide, so every man in the world falls into one of those 18 groups (so far - new groups are still being discovered).

                  The 18 groups are named alphabetically, A through to R.

                  Imagine the 18 groups are 18 brothers on a tree. It is so far not possible to identify the "parent" of the 18 brothers because he existed in prehistoric times. So the 18 brothers are related but each brother is an identifiable individual, who has descendants who all have Y-DNA identical to him.

                  So - you are in haplogroup I. Almost everyone else on that OAKS site is haplogroup R, so you are not related to any of them since prehistoric times. (You may share a common male relation before then).

                  The haplogroups also have subdivisions, which indicate how closely two individuals in one haplogroup are related, but I and R do not have a common male ancestor within the last 100,000 years or so and neither do any of the other A-R haplogroups.

                  OC

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by garstonite View Post
                    Thanks Ann....to be honest , I don`t know why they send 12/12 25/25 37/37 matches....the closest I have is a 65/67 and that is within 200 yrs ?....I presume I need 67/67 to positively identify a DIRECT ancestor.....also Ann, do you know how they match FEMALEs?...there are 8 females on the OAK Project.....allan
                    As I understand it the Y-DNA is only of use in males of the same surname. In our one name study the women go to considerable lengths to persuade male relatives with the surname to do the test! (usually they persuade a cousin but, of course, if there has been a 'non-paternity event' [!!!] it could all be up the creek anyway.)

                    In our study we do have people with a 35/37 and 36/37 match who are known to have a common ancestor. We would consider 65/67 markers matching a good match with a likely common ancestor somewhere. Our 'known' ones tend to be in the 1700s. The unknown (on paper) ones must be further back in time and it is not yet (and may never be) known who the mrca is!

                    Anne

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Anne/Allan

                      On the OAKS surname project there is a mtDNA test which can be taken by females and also by males....men inherit their mother's mtDNA but do not pass it on to their offspring.

                      I THINK the purpose of this test is to identify the earliest known common female ancestor, but the results baffle me.....

                      OC

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        it is rare, but there are known instances of men passing on mitochondrial dna.

                        Comment

                        Working...
                        X