G-L497 Y-DNA

  • 2116 members
Are you a member of the G-L497 Y-DNA project?
Philippe PERISSOL Philippe PERISSOL has a question!
September 10 @ 2:55am
Hello all, A few months ago, I saw a new exact match at the Y12 level: it was Monsieur Hocquigny, a Frenchman, who had performed a Y37 STR test. Hocquigny is the name of a small village in Normandy too, so I paid some attention to it, as I am in search for Anglo-Norman ancestors, but no more as the match was not at a higher level, and finally I completely forgot it until yesterday. Yesterday I uploaded the autosomal raw data of my father to GEDmatch, and surprisingly I found a match with a kit entitled “Hocquigny”: Chromosome 15: 8 cMs, 262 SNP’s, 33 triangulating references Chromosome 18: 9 cMs, 507 SNP’s, 1 triangulating reference Chromosome 20: 7 cMs, 312 SNP’s, 2 triangulating references Most of the triangulating references bear British patronymic names. Is it a common case to find a match which matches not only on your Y chromosome, but on your autosomal chromosomes too?
Robert Lewis
September 11 @ 3:15pm
12 marker matches are not trustworthy. I would disregard all matches below the 67 marker level, even close ones, unless close matches appear with the same or similar surnames at the 37 marker level and they have solely tested 37 markers. In the end, SNP testing will provide you with a better idea of when TMRCA lived, however regarding the dating of branches and TMRCA: the formed and TMRCA dates are just estimates and they are based on an average mutation of one SNP every 144.41 years and an assumed age of 60 years for living providers of YFull samples. SNPs will provide you with a far better idea of genetic distances than STRs, due to differences in marker mutation rates, however, solely focussing on Y-DNA matches isn't going to get you any further if you're looking for close direct paternal relatives within the genealogical time frame. The further the match is removed, the more the dating of your match is at risk of speculations and educated guess work based on averages and estimates, even with respect to STRs, which are infact more accurate in determining more historical relationships and used in determining branch formations . However, If you ever find yourself in the position of receiving a close Y-match with someone who also matches you autosomally, which, I must confess, is quite rare, unless a known relative has tested, it will be easier calculating TMRCA using autosomal tools in combination with the old fashioned "paper trail" than solely focussing on Y-SNPs in my opinion. SNPs are more useful for matches which prove be more distantly removed i.e. either more distant genealogical relationships or historic relationships outside of the genealogical time frame.
Gary Wells
September 12 @ 12:30pm
A Y 12 DNA is of little value. It simply established haplotype in truth you must have a 111 Y DNA done to establish any kind of relatio
September 13 @ 6:44am
Finally, I have invited Sylvain Hocquigny to join the L497 project: he has been tested by 23andme, he is G-CTS4803, with a terminal subclade that still need to be determined. Regarding the estimation of the TMRCA, even if it is an autosomal test, there is still a lot of uncertainty when the DNA segments are short: I have run the program “Archaic DNA Matches” of GEDmatch, and it has found a match between my father and the sample F999941, with a TMRCA estimated to 7.5 generations. But the sample F999941 corresponds to a man who lived 3000 or 4000 years ago in Sweden. (Beddinge, Swedish Battle Axe culture)
Rolf Carlsson
Yesterday at 3:48am
Joining our project is a first good step. Next could be testing specific SNPs along a supposed line, which is pretty cheap.
Kristian Lahdensuo Kristian Lahdensuo
September 1 @ 12:16pm
Hello! Has anyone used Nevgene to predict the haplogroup? https://www.nevgen.org I got G2a2 > L497>>Z725>> Z16775>Z2756
Walter Williamson
September 1 @ 3:17pm
Yes. I use it often. It is a prediction. It is not a confirmed SNP trail. Only testing can confirm, positive or negative for a given SNP. What it is good for is showing the possibilities of where a particular test would be beneficial.
Kristian Lahdensuo
September 1 @ 5:29pm
I think it said 100% possibility.
Rolf Carlsson
September 2 @ 9:37am
Kristian, as I have communicated earlier your YDNA is confirmed as Z39674 under Z27567/Z39670. There is no alternative. Whether you belong to one of the defined subbranches of Z39674 or not is not possible to determine without further testing. I do not think it is relevant to seek other less precise means for confirmation of your classification.
Duayne King Duayne King has a question!
June 26 @ 12:11pm
Hello all Please forgive my ignorance, I'm just starting to try and understand these deeper haplogroup DNA results. I took the 23 and me test several years ago and got the return that my Paternal lineage was G-L30. Now I've taken the Y-111 and am G-L497. So is this result a more refined G-L30? Also is there maybe something a bit more basic that the group could recommend? I enjoyed reading "The Rise of Haplogroup G2a-L497 in Central Europe". It's very interesting but a bit confusing to me for now. Wikipedia is not very clear. Thank for letting me join the group and for any help anyone is willing to give. Duayne King Kit # B391265
Mauricio Cattel
August 24 @ 8:16pm
It's possible Enos will form a new branch very soon with another member in this Project. We'll see in few months if it's true. :)
Rolf Carlsson
August 25 @ 9:22am
Just be careful not comparing male and female uncles. They will have different YDNA.
Eliazar Chapa
August 31 @ 3:51pm
Just purchased an upgrade to BigY 700 for Eliazar Chapa, kit MK50665. Looking forward to the results.
Rolf Carlsson
September 1 @ 8:05am
Very good indeed
David Litton David Litton
July 19 @ 2:03pm
A big new paper about ancient DNA from the Viking age has been published this week. In the extensive discussion of it on Anthrogenica I noticed that three males (among the 442 samples of both sexes) were from haplogroup G. One poorly preserved sample (VK140 from Denmark) only revealed the G2a level (P15/PF3112). The other two fall within this project. Sample VK39 from Skara-Varnhem, 10th to 12th century, was CTS11352/Z759. And sample VK479 from Gotland-Kopparsvik, 900-1050, was S2808>S23438. Here is a forum thread on which the paper is being discussed: https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?17812-Population-genomics-of-the-Viking-world-(bioxiv-2019-Copenhagen)&p=582993&viewfull=1#post582993
Kristian Lahdensuo
August 27 @ 3:26pm
When I got my results I had Z39674s in my matches, but now I have Z39673s. Some of the Z39674s have changed to Z39673. I would guess I am Z39673 as with 37 markers the majority are Z39673, closest with GD3. I ordered Y67 and should get the results soon.
Rolf Carlsson
August 28 @ 11:46am
Z39674 and z39673 are considerd as equivalents. Now we have changed in our project to Z39674 as leading SNP. Will be interesting looking at your upcoming result comparing with other Z39674/73.
Kristian Lahdensuo
September 1 @ 5:54am
My results are in! I was expecting having less matches than with 37 markers where I only had a few, but I have more at 67. I have now 13 matches but the closest from Y37 with GD3 has vanished from the 67 markers list. The two top results are from Finland and others seem to be Swedish, except one with GD7 who is also Finnish. I contacted him once and he seems to be convinced that he is descendant of Forbes clan from Scotland. His ethnicity was 16% British while I am: Finland 88% West and Central Europe 9% Scandinavia 3% Interestingly in MyHeritage where I transferred the raw data says I am 16% Scandinavian, the rest full Finnish.
Rolf Carlsson
September 1 @ 8:03am
I saw the result as well. Will contact you by mail. Shortly your male origin comes from the Z39674 group from the county of Västergötland (we are now over 40 persons tested/assumed positive for that group). Kirvisniemi and Linnamäki originate from this branch as well. If I remember right Linnamäki has a Swedish male ancient origin as well. You might betong to the subbranch of Bagge,but we are not sure exept some further specifik tests. To Bagge and Linnamäki you have more than 99 % probability having a common ancestor within 16 generations ( abt 500 years).
Steve Stevens Steve Stevens has a question!
August 11 @ 2:02pm
This is Kay Stevens Beasock, the administrator for my father’s DNA testing. Steve Stevens, kit#415014 – G-S2784. Brian and Rolf gave me some assistance several years ago and I’d like to ask for a bit more now. My earliest known ancestor is still a brickwall for me and I have been in contact with: Lewis Stevens, Roy Mitchell Stevens, Dick Eastman Stevens and all of the Clintons that match my father's Y-DNA at various levels. The Clintons also have a brickwall with their earliest known ancestor who was born around the same time mine was. The Clintons and I are now trying to team up to see if we can help each other. James Ernest Clinton who has tested for Y-DNA37 is willing to upgrade and take some SNP tests to see if this will assist the group of Clintons and Stevens who match. At this time, I know I can’t afford to upgrade to Y700 even though it is on sale, so a variety of options would be helpful. Would you please suggest some strategies and testing for Jim and perhaps the group of us working together? We would truly appreciate your guidance. Thank you!
Mauricio Cattel
August 22 @ 9:23am
Steve, G - L497v2 SNP Pack is appropriated for those who wanna confirm or figure out their branches. But you already know you're G-S2784. Additionally, the TMRCA (time to most distant common ancestor) of G-S2784 is ~2700 years before present, so no, G - L407v2 SNP Pack won't add further infos for you, also because it doesn't test SNPs downstream G-S2784. Yes, you guys must form a new branch below G-S2784, but this branch is unknown so far. As for the Y111 in this specific situation, you already know my opinion. Regards
Steve Stevens
August 23 @ 10:13am
Thanks Mauricio, forgive my ignorance, but does that mean all the Clintons who match on Y37 and Y67 would also be G-S2784?
Mauricio Cattel
August 24 @ 8:11pm
Steve, yes, G-S2784, as suggested in this very Project's Y Chart. Please check section DNA Results.
Steve Stevens
August 26 @ 5:03pm
Thanks Mauricio!
Walter Williamson Walter Williamson
July 26 @ 7:24am
Big Y 700 Upgrade Results for Batch 954 have arrived this morning. (7/26/2019) Yes it had been delayed many times and was currently delayed until after Aug 5. I expected the delays so didn't give it much concern after going thru the delay thing with Big Y 500. I have only taken a quick cursory look at my results, but basically what I am seeing is the only change is that my STR count is now 777 STR Markers. My SNP's have stayed the same. I still have 28 SNP's on the Unnamed Variants page and they are the same SNP's that Big Y 500 gave me. On my Block Tree I still have the 23 SNP Variants that I had with Big Y 500. On my Haplotree, I have many more SNP's in red. I still have some predicted SNP's on my Haplotree that I would have thought would have been tested and turned green because they are the major branch SNP's. Examples, L141 and L140 and CTS2230, which are branch SNP's. No Matches, but I didn't expect any since I didn't have any on Big Y 500. So other than increasing my STR Markers, I don't see any other changes from my Big Y 500 results.
Mauricio Cattel
July 29 @ 12:28pm
Hi, Walter. Besides the additional STR markers, BigY700 generally add SNPs. I thought it was abt. 20% more, but it seems in fact it'd add 10-15% as average. But it doesn't "necessarily" add them, and it's hard to know previously if it (un)likely will. In my case I guess it would be useful, probably, since I was not tested for an important SNP in my BigY500, for example, namely Y11076, for which I know I'm positive thanks to furthwr tests. Still, the result is that I'm not in the best position in some trees. :) An upgrade could help on this, so I must do it in the future.
Walter Williamson
July 29 @ 2:08pm
Mauricio: As the week continued more results came in. On my Block Tree, I had an increase of 3 Private Variants. from 23-26. My Unnamed Variants changed as well. From 28 to 32. I lost three unnamed variants from my BigY500 results and gained 7 unnamed variants on my BigY700 results. I have been told from other projects that I should expect more changes to filter in over the next few weeks. So I check my results each day.
Mauricio Cattel
July 31 @ 9:26am
Walter, great. So as expected. Let's see if some of these additional mutations also form new important branch(es) in the future.
July 5 @ 5:31pm
I believe my L497 results are available, but am not sure where to go from here. I read that I should click on G(15) in Projects, but only see G(16).
Mauricio Cattel
July 5 @ 8:41pm
Hi, Mr. Wheater. In my opinion, no need of further tests, since you have a close match with BigY700 pending. You probably belong to the same clade as him. Let's wait and see what it is. As for the other issue, not sure what you mean, but I guess you don't need to click anywhere. You're already a member of this Project. Regards!
July 19 @ 6:31pm
OK, I am all set. Was a little confused for a moment,
Terry  Bohme Terry Bohme
May 25 @ 2:09pm
So if we are tested as I did sometime ago and get the G-L42 does the admin see our actual add'l snp results or is that all we have. The L42 has many more subgroups now than 4 yrs ago. I'm #304210 Anyhow the SNP 'Store' has many to choose from however since I am stuck in the CTS 7357 I have already been negative at F1300 and at CTS3647. Yet that extension list of CTS7357 offers about 22 new SNPs and that's among many other blue choices outside and below. Waiting for anyone to carry below in that 22 to see how it works down- since no sub trees diagrams have been made
Rolf Carlsson
May 26 @ 6:37am
Hello Terry. You do pretty close match the Stickle group. Did you find any connections to them? Do you originate from same region? Did you test for CTS7537 or its equivavelents?
Kevin Stickle
July 18 @ 9:39am
How much of a change if I go from Y500 to Y700
Rolf Carlsson
July 18 @ 3:00pm
The upgrade is doubtful in this respect. What about questions I raised?
Guillaume Williams Guillaume Williams
July 13 @ 6:33pm
So, I've recently found out my grandmother had my dad by another man. This came to light because my dna over on my heritage had this fellow as a 1st cousin once removed to a 2nd cousin. Well having done some digging I found out from my dad's sister-in-law that his brother told her his name was Clendon C.. Well I've done a fair amount of genealogy on this C. family and there are two Clendon C's, Sr. and Jr.. One would have been 48 and the other 20 and my grandmother was 33 so it could be either one. Attached is some known shared dna with known persons and then the Clendon C. line. The first column is my grandmother and her sister. I know Collins is my second cousin and dna on Familytreedna bears that out. My brother has dna on 23and me and Leslie C.'s relationship to my brother via dna. Her great grandfather and Edward Joseph C. Jr.'s great grandfather are brothers. They would be 3rd cousins to one another. Edward Joseph C. Jr. 's grandfather and Clendon C. Sr. are brothers. Based on this would you say Clendon Sr. or Jr. is my grandfather. Thanks.
jeffrey andle
July 14 @ 9:43am
use the 'what are the odds" tool on dnapainter.com -- I'd say how but when I had a half first cousin explain 40 unknown 3rd-5th cousins I did it by hand... I hear the tool is easy and there is a facebook help group.
Guillaume Williams
July 14 @ 2:19pm
I'll have to try it out. Thanks.
James Griffis James Griffis
July 12 @ 10:07am
Forgive my ignorance and not doing more homework before posting. I see recently that my terminal SNP was refined (Kit 851614) Originally it was G-Y132505 and now it is G-BY211678 which is an offshoot of Y132505. Is this a recent update? At YFull.com it indicates that Y132505 formed 650 YBP and TMRCA is 60 YBP. How can I interpret this? When did the offshoot from Y132505 occur? If the most recent common ancestor was only 60 years ago, what does that imply or mean? If any of the administrators can lead me to explanations it would be greatly appreciated.
Mauricio Cattel
July 13 @ 12:28pm
Hi, Mr. Griffis. Yes, according to FTDNA, you and Mr. Williams would form a new branch below G-Y132505, supposedly not shared with the third G-Y132505 member, that's why you both, Williams and Griffis, were assigned as G-BY211678. Now, as for YFull, notice that Y132505 in there has several equivalents, while in ISOGG and FTDNA trees it has not. It means, in short, lack of data in YFull, i.e., this TMRCA could change as more men shared their data with YFull. Just for example, if a man positive for Y132505 but negative for BY211678 joined YFull, and there would be at least one, the Y132505 TMRCA would change. Y132505 has no equivalents according to FTDNA, and it has potentially one equivalent according to ISOGG, so particularly I'd expect a real TMRCA of "more or less" 600 ybp for G-Y131505. Finally, G-Y132505 structure, in theory, should be refined even more as we get more men with BigY700 results, either in new tests or in upgrades. Let's wait.
Walter Williamson
July 14 @ 10:11am
We love it when men with isolated SNP's get matched up and form new branches.
James Griffis
July 14 @ 10:43am
Thank you Mauricio for your explanation. You concisely explain the development of the various YDNA trees and that this is continuously evolving with new data. You also point to an interesting subject concerning the differences between the YFull, ISOGG and FTDNA trees. For me, it is exciting to see that I am able to be part of this development.