Haplogroup I-L38

  • 586 members
Administrators
  • Timothy Weakley
Co-Administrators
  • Hans De Beule
  • Stephen Prata
  • Stephen Ralls

$2.00

General Fund Total
Donate
Are you a member of the Haplogroup I-L38 project?
Charles Ala Charles Ala has a question!
September 21 @ 7:05pm
“ RJB for Chuck: quick question (undoubtedly asked before) Why is FTDNA so conservative in estimating the I-L38 haplogroup? NevGen gave this kit a 100% probability, yet the haplogroup assignment in FTDNA is just I-M170, which appears to be the case with most of the "red" kits. How did people ever find their way into this project initially (unless they used NevGen)? ”
Antonios Kollias
September 22 @ 6:30am
It is really sad, isn't it? When I got my result for M170, I first entered the I2a Haplogroup project. Bernie Cullen told me, that I am L38 and I was quite shocked, since I am from Greece and all I did read from L38 was, that it is a hg ftom north of alps. In between my subgroup raised, but I am still sad about the initial prediction.
Umar Butler
September 23 @ 5:10am
I found the Y-STR data for another Butler who came from the same area as me. Their terminal Y-SNP was within I-L38. After doing my own test, and seeing that same Butler come up as a match for me (which I had predicted), I knew I was in I-L38. I then tested the same terminal Y-SNP (its within L533) and tested positive :)
Stephen Templar
September 30 @ 4:01pm
Charles, as I understand, FTDNA were for a time more adventurous with their estimates, and got a few wrong. Now, their estimates are effectively certainties. Nevgen is not infallible. I have seen estimates in the high 90's turn out to be wrong.
Kenneth Kelly
October 8 @ 2:00pm
If FTDNA cannot predict haplogroup with 100% confidence they will perform a backbone test of 32 SNP's to determine haplogroup. L38 is not one of the SNP's tested. https://www.familytreedna.com/learn/project-administration/gap-interpretation/snp-assurance-program-2/
Evelyn (Mike) Cox Evelyn (Mike) Cox has a question!
June 14 @ 2:03pm
“ I am in awe of all of the sophisticated questions posted here. I am clueless about how to proceed, but I will start by saying that I just ordered the Big Y-700 test as an upgrade on my male cousin's 67-Marker test results. Question: what does it mean when I look at his kit results (515672) and see the following recommendation: "L38 Predicted BY14072+. Consider the 12-L38 SNP Pack for further resolution." ”
5 Comments
Antonios Kollias
July 4 @ 5:20am
Indeed S27697 Hans. I am looking forward to see the BY14072-group rising.
James Harmon
August 11 @ 1:42pm
This is my results in comparison to Cheddar Man. Does this mean Cheddar Man is definitely and distant relative and see most that did the comparison are getting the same chromosomes as matches. I also backed up a generation and did a comparison to my parents and my father had the chromosome 19 results and my mother had 15 and 22 chromosome matches. Chr B37 Start Pos'n B37 End Pos'n Centimorgans (cM) SNPs 15 26,420,412 27,268,034 3.1 182 19 49,925,667 51,073,532 3.2 191 22 24,184,850 26,284,669 4.8 344 Largest segment = 4.8 cM Total Half-Match segments (HIR) = 11.1 cM (0.310 Pct) 3 shared segments found for this comparison. 451826 SNPs used for this comparison. 56.609 Pct SNPs are full identical
Rob Judd
August 12 @ 6:26am
Any segment below 7 cM should be ignored.
Antonios Kollias
September 30 @ 5:40am
It seems the results for the BigY are in. I am looking forward to see the effect to the tree.
William Stonehouse William Stonehouse
September 11 @ 2:05pm
Received my results from YESQ...Positive on BY174585..chrY..14081183 G+! Back with the group it seems! Thanks Antonios Kollias!! Also positive on Y156944!
Antonios Kollias
September 11 @ 2:16pm
Great news William.
William Stonehouse
September 11 @ 2:25pm
All others neg..except Y156944? Thanks again!
Kenneth Kelly
September 12 @ 5:47pm
Is there any way to import SNP results from YSEQ into FTDNA to update terminal SNP?
Antonios Kollias
September 21 @ 4:04pm
No, it is not.
Merrill Garrison Merrill Garrison has a question!
September 20 @ 8:45pm
“ After submitting Y500 and Y700 recently, I notice that my two samples are marked with a beige i with a footnote in [beige id:AncientDNA]. Other than the obvious meaning ancient DNA, I can't find YFULL's definition or explanation for the footnote. Does anyone know where "ancient DNA" ends and "modern DNA" begins? (I don't know what the correct term might be.) For those with YFULL accounts, I have been assigned to I-BY172565. ”
Antonios Kollias
September 21 @ 6:24am
The yellow "i" has nothing to do with ancient DNA, but shows that it is a second test of one person and other information, also. As soon the analysis for your BigY700 is ready, your old BigY500 will be hidden on the tree. You can choose later, if you want to display both, or which of those. Just hoover over the i with your mouse. YF11651 is unshown and same person like YF64711.
Keith Carpenter Keith Carpenter has a question!
September 17 @ 5:49am
“ How meaningful in relatedness are the number of shared variants in the BigY report? I've done BigY 700. My 2nd cousin Gary (only BigY 500) and I closely match, of course, with the same terminal SNP and it says we have 450,054 shared variants. One of my two matches has fewer shared variants, but one has more, 455,230. Is that because that person has done BigY 700 and Gary has not? Also, that person only matches me in STRs at the 67 level, and at GD 7, which is way, way back. I don't get it... ”
Antonios Kollias
September 17 @ 8:37am
The "number of shared variants" is meaningless. It is like you assumed. BigY500 has a quite low coverage (many NoCalls) and therefore less SNPs tested, than with BigY700. Therefore the "number of shared variants" of two BigY700 is (usually) bigger, than the "number of shared variants" of two BigY500 kits, or a BigY500 with a BigY700.
Stephen Templar
September 21 @ 12:41am
I wish that FTDNA could differentiate the Block Tree, STR matches, Advanced Matches, and Colorized pages; between Big Y (if there are any), Big Y-500, and Big Y-700 results. Now we are forced to look at the SNP Results, and guess based on the size of the reported SNPs; and that is only possible if they are project members.
Hans De Beule Hans De Beule
Admin
February 27 @ 12:49pm
Dear I-L38 project members, Last week became clear that the Cheddar Man (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cheddar_Man ) is an early I-L38 sample. Actually he tested positive for 6 out of 32 that were tested on the I-L38 level. He did not test positive for SNP "L38" though, which makes him "ancestral to I-L38". Members who have taken a Family Finder test can compare their autosomal DNA to that of Cheddar Man by uploading their Raw Family Finder File to GedMatch (https://genesis.gedmatch.com ). To do so: 1 Download your Raw Family Finder Data ("Build 37 x Chromosome Raw Data") from your personal FTDNA page. 2 Register to GedMatch. 3 Upload your Raw Data and note your kit number code. 4 Click the "One-to-one Autosomal DNA comparision". 5 Fill in your kit number (in the kit number 1 field) 6 Fill in SC8491738 (in the kit number 2 field - this is Cheddar man's code) 7 Fill in "50" as SNP window size threshold. 8 Fill in "3" as Minimum segment cM size. 9 Click the Submit button and your result appears. Then, please share your result in this thread. Please report: * the largest segment (eg: 4.0 cM) * the total half-match segments (eg: 7.7 cM) * number of shared segments (eg: 2) Let's compare and find out who is Uncle Ched's closest genetic relative :-) Best wishes, Hans De Beule volunteer I-L38 project admin
60 Comments
Dean Armbrecht
September 7 @ 10:28am
Largest segment = 5.2 cM Total Half-Match segments (HIR) = 114.6 cM (3.197 Pct) 32 shared segments found for this comparison. 607562 SNPs used for this comparison. 55.695 Pct SNPs are full identical Comparison took 0.271 seconds. CPU time used: 0.061 cpu seconds.
Dean Armbrecht
September 7 @ 10:31am
My match to Chedder Man is small about 3.4 for both and 1 segment. However I was wondering how close am I related to Ernest Doane kit A082812 with the information I posted just above ???
Charles Ala
September 18 @ 2:59pm
T599194 and SC8491738 * largest segment 3.4 cM * total half-match segments 6.4 cM * number of shared segments 2
Galen Pinkham
September 18 @ 8:04pm
Largest segment = 3.4 cM Total half-match segments 6.4 cM (0.180 Pct) number of shared segments 2 Chr 16 3 cM 126 SNPs Chr 20 3.4 cM 257 SNPs
Paul Bowen Paul Bowen
September 8 @ 12:22pm
I have a question if no one minds? My dad is predicted L-38. His haplogroup is I-M170 on FTDN. He has a cousin that took a DNA test on 23 and me and his haplogroup is I-S2488. I have looked it up and it say both come from L-38. So my question is both should be the same but they are not, however the L-38 is the same?
1 Comment
Antonios Kollias
September 8 @ 1:36pm
L38 within M170 https://drive.google.com/file/d/1gmZsERH_n33l1QkyymLzYDaxYUjA0x8D/view?usp=drivesdk
Antonios Kollias
September 8 @ 1:37pm
Old version of L38 Fig tree. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1efHFC0uMEo0Z_T-K-uqrgVH9hMWnjPaX/view?usp=drivesdk
Hans De Beule
September 11 @ 3:43pm
If it concerns a paternal cousin (the son of your father's brother) your haplogroups will be identical (at least, if there is no Non Paternal Event at play - which it does not seem to be the case ;-). I-S2488 just is a subbranch of I-L38. This means that if you would test SNP S2488, you also will test S2488+ and be labeled I-S2488.
Paul Bowen
September 14 @ 8:46pm
Thank you all so much for helping me understand. I really appreciate it
Umar Butler Umar Butler
September 8 @ 3:26am
I have access to the full Y-STR data of 5 Butler/Rawlings of Wiltshire (that also appear as Y-STR matches). I thought I might publish some interesting findings I've made from comparing Y-STR data. Using paper records I confirmed that both B1 [code name] (Kit No. 59981) and B2 [code name] (Kit No. 260226) share a common ancestor: William Elijah Butler of Clorene, Wiltshire (b. 1819). I then compared their Y-STR data to those of the 3 other Butlers and noticed two distinct mutations shared by both B1 and B2. First, DYS390 = 25 (instead of 26) and second DYS464 = 14-14-16-16 (instead of 14-14-15-16). These two mutations could have arisen in William Elijah Butler but probably arose much earlier. There is at least 600 years of paper records distancing me from B1 and B2, as well as 600 of geographical separation (the Corsham (and later Colerene sub branch) and Devizes branches of Butlers/Rawlings split around 600 years ago) between myself and B1 and B2. It is thus possible for these two mutations have to arisen any time in the past 600 years. The other Butlers/Rawlings lack many paper records (because their ancestors immigrated to America), so unfortunately it is not yes possible to confirm whether these two mutations would be common amongst ALL Butler/Rawlings or Corsham, or whether they are a relatively recent mutation. More testing will be needed on the Butlers/Rawlings still living in the areas of Corsham and Devizes. - Umar
Hans De Beule
September 11 @ 3:54pm
What is your oldest known Butler /Rawlings location supported by paper records?
Umar Butler
September 14 @ 6:55am
Hey Hans, my oldest known Butler/Rawlings location supported by paper records is Devizes, Wiltshire (this is the [likely] father of my ancestor, John Rawlings/Butler) in the early 1500s. There also appear to be Butler/Rawlings in Corsham, Wiltshire at the same time. Past the 1500s, there are little to no records mentioning the names Butler/Rawlings in the area of Wiltshire. I did find mention of a Butler family in Wiltshire in the Visitation of Wiltshire 1565 by the English Govt. at the time which mentions a noble family descending from the Baron Butlers of Warrington. This record shows that Butlers were living in Wiltshire in the late 1400s (they moved from Warrington to Gloucester and then to Wiltshire). The issue is 1. there is no mention of our alias surname Rawlings (my line, for some reason which I still haven't discovered, used the surnames Butler and Rawlings interchangeably, calling both surnames aliases' (thus we don't know which one in the original) (since my family were Quakers for a few hundred years, we suspect it was to do with religious persecution)); 2. There is no later mention of the noble family in the Visitation of Wiltshire of 1623 (this could be explained by saying they didn't come to prove their right to bare arms, which many families were starting to do because it created certain unwanted responsibilities); 3. There are no living descendants of the original Butler of Warrington branch, and thus there is no way to prove a genetic link [yet] (there is a theory that the founder of the Butlers of Warrington came originally from the House of Albany/Albani/Abney/D'Aubigny, however, in comparing my Y-DNA to current descendants of the House, I can't find any connection). That family is the only known linage of Butlers I have found in the records. It is entirely possible I come from that family, especially because the locations, names and dates match up with my own records (there is a Richard Butler mentioned who would have been born at the same I would expect the father of my ancestor John Butler [who's birth record stated his father was called Richard] would have been born. Further, it in an area of Wiltshire close to Devizes.) However, there is not yet any definitive way to prove this.
Keith Carpenter Keith Carpenter
August 21 @ 8:35am
I reached out to David Reich, the Harvard geneticist who has been doing analyses of ancient DNA to build newer stories of population migrations. I asked him if there was one single compilation of DNA data that we in the L38 group could use for our work, and he pointed me to his website, and this link: https://reich.hms.harvard.edu/downloadable-genotypes-present-day-and-ancient-dna-data-compiled-published-papers. Now that I'm there, and have a choice of download formats, I don't know what to do with the data. Any ideas?
1 Comment
John Morrel
August 22 @ 5:20am
I agree with Robert that this appears to be a wonderful resource for this group. I look forward to the conversation and guidance from some of our more experienced hands about using and understanding Reich's data.
Hans De Beule
August 25 @ 10:14am
Check out https://med-k-rouissi.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=362af77c6ad145c8a4a5026a9177b945&extent=-2307057.137%2C549015.0046%2C16419403.2966%2C10802583.7269%2C102100 Basically the data come from the same sources.
Keith Carpenter
September 2 @ 5:29am
Thanks, Hans, this is very interesting. How are you the "responsible" person for the Esperstedt sample?
Hans De Beule
September 11 @ 3:59pm
I guess because I linked it to L39+ aka I-L38
Umar Butler Umar Butler
September 5 @ 1:24am
Hey Everyone. As I thought, I tested positive for I-S18432. Currently, everyone *known* to be in this subclade (myself, Mr Odom (272031) and Mr Butler (59981)) comes from the Wiltshire branch of the Butler/Rawlings family. The most interesting part is that, at least with me and Mr. Butler (59981), using paper records, I know that we have at least 600 years of genetic separation. Thus it is likely that most if not all Butler/Rawlings of Wiltshire share this subclade. It is also interesting to note that nobody without the surname Butler/Rawlings has been found to have this SNP. Hopefully more testing of others belonging to I-L38 will reveal more information on the SNP. - Umar
Robert Smith
September 5 @ 11:52am
The Price and Shellhorn samples could provide further insights. Neither has had an SNP test yet, although it's pretty obvious from the STR results they belong in this clade. The intriguing question is how deep is the split. Presumably, it occurred before surnames came into common use.
Robert Smith
September 7 @ 1:23pm
Something that continues to bug me is the lack of face validity between Y49785 and S18432. If S18432 is a subclade within Y49785 (per the SNP results), it should be a straightforward exercise to see how the STRs changed from Y49785 to S18432. Some of the changes seem plausible but not all of them. You can also reverse the process and test if Y49785 is a subclade within S18432. One direction should seem much more plausible than the other. If it is, I'm not seeing it. Something important is missing. It's as if two brothers (both Y49785) went their separate ways. The descendants of one brother's family eventually became the S18432 subclade, and the other brother's family (terminal SNP still unknown) are represented by Brion, Waugh, and the Fox cousins. Only more and better SNP results will explain the evolution of these two family lines.
Hans De Beule
September 11 @ 3:52pm
Clicking on "info" next to BY14072, L533 and Y49785, L533 in the YFull tree, you can see their typical STRs and deduce how they evolved going downstream.
view older posts