Save On Family FinderY-DNA, and mtDNA During Our Annual Summer Sale! Ends Aug 31

I-M223 Y-DNA Haplogroup

ISOGG Y-DNA Haplogroup I2a1b1 (was I2a2a & earlier I2b1)
  • 4539 members
Are you a member of the I-M223 Y-DNA Haplogroup project?
Justin Stewart Justin Stewart has a question!
19 hours ago
I received my Big Y-700 a few days ago. I want to send it to Yfull. I am confused on how to send it to Yfull. Will you please tell me how in terms that a novice can accomplish? Jacob L. Stewart, Sr,, FTDNA kit 5830, email Thank you!
Wade Ralph Kotter
18 hours ago
Justin, I strongly recommend that you remove you email from your post. You have just made it available to thousands of people, many of whom you don't know. To sent your results to YFull the first step is to generate your BAM file. If you previously did Big Y-500, then you already paid for the Bam file. If this is a new Big Y-700 test, you'll need to purchase your BAM file; the cost of your BAM file was included in the original Big Y-500 price. To do so, go to you Big Y results page and click on the blue button at the top right that says something like "Purchase BAM". When the purchase goes through the button will change to "Download RAW Data". Click on this and a window will open up with some green buttons at the bottom. I don't know if purchasing the BAM file will begin generating it, which can take a day or two. If you see a "Generate BAM" button, click on it and the process will begin. Go back in a day or two and you should see a green "Share BAM" button. When you get to that point, come back and ask instructions to send it to YFull. The BAM file is your best option, but it is possible to send YFull a VCF file; you should see a link at the top of your Big Y results pages that says "Download VCF." You can then go to the YFull order page at and submit your VCF file, but you should understand that the cost of $49 is the same for a VCF file analysis as for a BAM files analysis, although it you send a VCF file and later want to send your BAM file, there is no additional cost. The downside of the VCF file is that YFull can extract only 50 to 70% of the data from a VCF file then it can get from a BAM file. My advice is go for the BAM file; you already spent a lot of money for the FTDNA test; why not get the most our you results by sending your BAM file.
Hugh McCabe Hugh McCabe has a question!
Yesterday at 10:59am
Hello All, I have just received my Yfull results. How can I join the M223 project on Yfull? I and another Big Y tester with the same terminal SNPs have both subscribed to Yfull; what more can we learn from Yfull about what we share in common?
Wade Ralph Kotter
Yesterday at 1:08pm
Great news, Hugh! To join the I-M223 project at YFull: 1. Login to YFull 2. Click on "Groups | Y" in the menu on the left side of the page. 3. Scroll down the long list of groups and click on I-M223 4. Click on the "Join request" tab 5. Make sure your YFull sample ID shows in the "Sample ID" box 6. Type something (any thing will do, but you must type something) in the "Comment" box 7. Click on the box next to "I agree..." 8. Finally, click on "Send" Sooner or later (hopefully sooner), one of the administrators of the YFull group will approve your join request. Do you know if the other person you mention is a member of the I-M223 group? If not, he needs to join as well. YFull will identify your novel SNPs, including some that FTDNA may not have identified, and, after a few weeks, will give you an age estimation for your sample and for your branch as a whole, which FTDNA didn't do. By joining the I-M223, Wayne, Tom and the other administrators (including me) of that YFull group will be able to see your results and answer any questions you might have.
Hugh McCabe
24 hours ago
Done. I will make sure that Marshall Brown (the other match) also join the I-M223 group. Thank you!
Wade Ralph Kotter
24 hours ago
Hugh, I just added you to the group. I've got a virtual meeting in 2 minutes, but I may having something to say in an hour or two.
Wade Ralph Kotter
21 hours ago
Hugh, as you know, YFull has assigned you to I-Y6028* temporarily, I believe, until the next update to the YFull tree. You have 16 "New" SNPs listed on your "Hg and SNPs" page, which means that you match someone else currently assigned to I-Y6028* on these new SNPs, presumably Marshall Brown. It definitely looks like a new branch downstream of I-Y6028 will be formed, but I don't feel confident suggesting which of these new SNPs will be used by YFull to name the new branch. I see the FTDNA has named your new branch I-FT30350.
Matthew Kelley Matthew Kelley
August 10 @ 9:02am
It looks like Dr Ken Kelley's BigY700 upgrade is in the process of posting. His BigY strs have changed on my y str matches page, he has disappeared from my BigY matches page (though the y matches page no longer shows him as having taken BigY even though there are numbers in the BigY str differences column, and he has been moved temporarily to an upstream haplogroup from BY25870.
1 Comment
Matthew Kelley
August 11 @ 4:05pm
Tom, he apparently did not test positive for FT16184 based on it being a nonmatching variant with me. Can you tell his reading for FT16477? It is not nonmatching because I am a no call, but all 3 of my reads are positive. If he is positive (all A's read), he should form a new branch, splitting the FT16184 branch and descending from BY25870.
Tom Krzempek
August 11 @ 4:45pm
Matt, your Kelley/Kelly line will be devided. Kenneth is positive for: BY25870, BY201972, BY25871, FT144535, FT15717, FT17438, FT18553, FT19610 and FT20752. These SNPs below are under investigation, but they are presumed negative: BY165662, BY165663, BY201974, BY25866 and FT17492. During two weeks all should be clear, but now I can say that the Kelley nad O'Driscoll lines has one common ancestor. The Kelly line create own paternal line. I checked two SNPs which describe your paternal line: FT16184 and FT16477. Kenneth reading is negative for them.
Wade Ralph Kotter
August 11 @ 5:22pm
This is a great example of why an update from Big Y-500 to Big Y-700 can be of great benefit.
Wayne Rodney Roberts
22 hours ago
Matt as Tom said above, FTDNA are still determining Kenneth's SNP results even though they appear to have posted his Big Y700 results. When I checked those SNPs showing as not positive, Kenneth has low but positive reads for BY165662 BY165663, BY25866 and FT17438. He appears to be negative or no reads for BY201974. Admins have only received notification of his Big Y500. I expect when they finish we will see a notification for Big Y700. This has also occurred for some others that upgraded from Big Y500 to Big Y700 including Kurt Johnston.
Jimmy Jackson Jimmy Jackson has a question!
August 12 @ 5:38am
I have had a genealogist review the Jackson line. My Jackson line back to Robert Jackson is well documented (census reports, wills etc ) and Darrell’s (supposed to be kit # 7071 but I can't find it) line has no documentation besides family trees (it’s very sketchy). This is what I have been finding for years but was willing to consider another path. I have asked who the control person in the Jackson group is to determine Robert’s DNA as well as what is his relationship to Robert and I am waiting for the answer. Also for some reason I cannot find Darrell on FTDNA except him being listed in the Jackson group. What is his username or is there another name? I am going to submit an inquiry to FTDNA and Wikitree maybe. They should be able to help with this. This is from a genealogist ------- I have been going through your line, generation by generation and I cannot find anything wrong with it. For the earlier generations, leading up to the migration to Ohio from NJ, History of the Jackson family of Hempstead, Long Island, N.Y., Ohio and Indiana does a very good job of tracking each generations and has supporting evidence such as wills, for each step until Maj. Benjamin W. Jackson. Also, books such as Genealogical and Biographical Sketches of the New Jersey Branch of the Harris Family, in the United States expand a few more generations in Ohio, and we can support their connections with Benjamin Jackson's will, in which he names his son, Ziba. Ziba's biography in History of Knox County, Ohio, Biographical sketches (pg. 704) attests that he a child Shalon (Chalon), and from Chalon the line is well documented to your father. In short, as far as documentation is concerned, I see no issue with your line going back to Robert Jackson. I also looked at Darrell Jackson’s ancestry, and his line is much sketchier. His Jacksons were from Tennessee and the problem occurs in the jump between his ancestor, David Jackson of Campbell County, TN (see and William Jackson, who may have moved from Morris County, NJ to Carter Co. TN. This William Jackson of Morris Co, NJ is the son of Gen. Joseph Jackson, your ancestor. There seems to be a bunch of research here which you can find on Wikitree and The important section: “Darrell Jackson, a descendant of this William Jackson has participated in the Jackson DNA Project at FamilyTreeDNA. His DNA is a 99.9 percent match to a well documented, known descendant of Gen. Joseph Jackson. So this is further verification that William who died in Carter County is indeed Gen. Joseph Jackson's son.” A couple things stand out to me here. First of all, they say his DNA is a 99.9% match, but they do not really go into detail on what that means. Does it mean that a DNA service matched them as cousins, or do they share the same Y-DNA? It is not clear from this statement, and the difference is a very important one. What is clear, is that the documentation for this connection is simply not there. There are lots of references to Jacksons in NJ, NC and TN which they are trying to piece together. Unfortunately, Darrell Jackson is not longer with us, but if we want to pursue this further, I think that the next step would be to try and find which “known descendant of Gen. Joseph Jackson” did Darrell Jackson match with, and more specifically, exactly what was the nature of this match. Can someone help with this if possible? I am being told by one of the administrators Janie in the Jackson group that I am not a descendant of Robert Jackson of Hempstead because this Darrell Jackson is and our DNA does not match. I have asked several questions like "Who is the control person being used to confirm the DNA of Robert Jackson and what is the relationship?" No answer. Janie keeps talking Gedcoms when I asked about being able to compare the DNA for myself. How can you be an administrator of a group working with DNA when you don't know the difference between Gedcoms and DNA? Just really confused and feel like there is something weird is going on. Any help is appreciated. Thank you.
Jimmy Jackson
Yesterday at 1:09am
Sorry my kit # is 924790.
Tom Krzempek
Yesterday at 5:35am
Jimmy, our project is open, so who wants and is a descendant of I-M223 can join it. People choose different projects on a voluntary basis. If Darrell didn't join us, it was his choice. I looked at your links and now I can say that Darrell belongs to the Cont3 group and you belong to the Cont1 group, so they are two different groups. Robert Jackson could not have been the ancestor of both of your paternal lines. Your Y-DNA mutations are different. I checked also your Family Finder and mtDNA matches, but I couldn't find Darrell data, so maybe he didn't test FF and mtDNA or his autosomal and mtDNA data is either different or you didn't inherit enough DNA (autosomal) for these associations to be shown. Autosomal matches are associated with relatives from all relationships of your ancestors in the 5-6 generation range backwards, but without the guarantee of an exact match in the older generations (4-6). These data can be verified by the genealogical documentation. Jimmy, it cannot be ruled out that your family relationships were linked to Darrell's lineage at some point, but it's hard to tell at this time. I can definitely say that your paternal lines are different based on the Y-DNA data. Your common ancestor (I-CTS10057) lived about 10,000 years ago.
Wade Ralph Kotter
Yesterday at 10:32am
Thanks for sharing your kit number, Jimmy. Fortunately, Tom has already answered your question.
Wayne Rodney Roberts
23 hours ago
Thanks Tom and Wade, I also had a look and came to the same conclusion as Tom that these are two different Jackson lines. Jimmy is part of the Cont 1 I-Z79 branch while Darrell is part of the Cont 3 I-P78 branch. Darrell will never show up in Jimmy's matches and the administrator of the Jackson Project has done a good job in assigning groups to the various different I-M223 Jackson lines.
Kurt  Johnston Kurt Johnston
August 11 @ 10:26pm
Unfortunately my Big 700 from 500 did not change much in my case
Wade Ralph Kotter
August 11 @ 10:48pm
Kurt, your haplogroup may not have changed, but I'm quite sure Wayne and Tom will tell you that your count of Private Variants has changed, and if you were to send your BAM file to YFull, you would get a more refined age estimate for your sample. Also, just FYI, to make a new paragraph when typing a post, use shift-enter instead of enter. Also, it can take a while for the matching process to complete, verification of your place on the tree and manual review of you private variants. I suggest that you suspend judgement for a few weeks.
Tom Krzempek
August 12 @ 5:55am
Kurt, I understand your disappointment because it seems a few new mutations could be more, but we have to wait about two weeks to analyze your data. This time is needed to verify the obtained results. There will be no new variants in your panel as these are already verified. Some SNPs may have an unclear reading so we do not see them at the moment, but by comparing them with new results, they may appear at a later date. Currently, in the I-BY300 group, two members have tested the Big Y-500 and one has tested the Big Y-700. The data of these two members who tested the Big Y-500 are also checked for possible links to the Big Y-700 test data. Additionally, we are waiting for the result of sample # B430004 (predicted I-BY300), which is in labolatorim, and this results for his Big Y test have been delayed. Expected date is 08/24/2020 - 09/07/2020.
Matthew Kelley
August 12 @ 11:32am
Kurt, in our case, my upgrade initially only added snps to the existing haplogroup to which I was assigned. It took the other BigY500 matches to upgrade to cause new haplogroups because the matching snps that formed the new haplogroup were only found by BigY700. We are waiting now for the manual review of another upgrade that MAY cause yet another haplogroup to be added to the tree. There are indications this could happen in the data.
Kurt Johnston
August 12 @ 1:36pm
Thanks for the update
William McVay William McVay has a question!
August 11 @ 3:10pm
I just received my BigY700 results with the newest SNP listed as I-FT220080, which makes me completely different than any other man in this I-M223 Haplogroup. What would you recommend that I should do next?
1 Comment
Joshua Chisim
August 11 @ 4:08pm
FYI, this is the yfull tree: I-Y181758 is myself. The two below are McVay testers.
Wade Ralph Kotter
August 11 @ 4:11pm
William, it is not unusual for FTDNA to assign a person to a new branch based on his Big Y-700 results that at present he doesn't share with anyone else. You represent a new branch downstream of I-FT150755, which itself is downstream of I-Y36593. You are a pioneer. The only thing I would recommend is that you consider generating your BAM file and sending it to YFull. Otherwise, there is nothing more for you to do. Congratulations!
Tom Krzempek
August 12 @ 7:58am
William, you are positive for FT220080 but negative for FT151543, so the I-FT220078 * line looks like this: ... I-FT220078 * (Murphy) ... ... I-BY136377 (Watson - not our member) ... ... ... I-FT220080 (William McVay) ... ... ... ... I-FT151543 (Chisim) ... ... ... ... ... I-FT150755 (MacVay, McVey) You only have three private mutations so it's a bit too little. Joshua has eleven, so we would expect there to be about ten to twelve. I wonder if someone else in this line is testing the Big Y-700, so a few new SNPs may not be shown. Maybe YFull give us more information. Wade, William is negative for FT150755.
Wade Ralph Kotter
August 12 @ 9:00am
Thanks for the correction, Tom, and I'm sorry, William, for any confusion. I didn't (and still don't) see I-FT220080 on the public tree so I made an incorrect assumption. William, listen to what Tom says, not to me.
Kurt  Johnston Kurt Johnston
August 11 @ 10:27pm
That was my concern for not upgrading
Harold Gray Harold Gray
August 2 @ 12:40pm
I recently had my Uncle tested for the Big Y - Gray Family, North Carolina. It should be ready any day -- also I-M223
Harold Gray
August 9 @ 4:04pm
He tested with 23 and me. How can I help you with information from his testing?
Wade Ralph Kotter
August 9 @ 6:00pm
You already have done all you can. Unfortunately, he can't transfer his results to FTDNA or YFull. If he were to do Big Y-700 here at FTDNA, it would define Josh and his Harold's haplogroup as close as possible to the present. If, in addition, Josh were to tr go further and transfer his BAM file to YFull, their branch would be added to the YFull tree. This information does, however, confirm that administrator's prediction that Harold is on the I-L812 branch. 23andMe only tests selected branch-defining SNPs, so it will never discover a new branch. I took my test back in 2016 and they assigned me to I-M223; no help, whatsoever.
Harold Gray
August 11 @ 8:07pm
Big Y-700 Y700 1101 08/17/2020 - 08/31/2020 ....waiting......
Wade Ralph Kotter
August 11 @ 10:07pm
Remember, these are just projections. It could come in earlier or later. If it doesn't come in by Aug 17, the projection will bump two weeks to 8/31 - 9/14. Every Big Y-700 test is unique and there is no way to know for sure how long a specific test will take.
Bruce Green Bruce Green
August 10 @ 5:34pm
I am looking at the Parker branch , in looking for my Father. In the Parker group I am unmatched and differ from the Parkers on 4 Allele at the 111 level. me/them DYS 386 15-15 / 15-16 DYS447 24 / 25 DYS487 12 / 13 DYS712 22 / 23. Is this close to a match at level 111?
Wade Ralph Kotter
August 10 @ 11:28pm
You need to request that all the I-M223 Parkers in that group join this group who have not already done so. They are 4 GD matches at the Y-111 level, correct? If so, they are pretty close and support the possibility that you have Parker ancestors, although it doesn't prove that your father was a Parker.
Tom Krzempek
August 11 @ 2:28pm
Bruce, I looked at your data and the Parker Project data. As you earlier noticed your data are very close to the FG16 branch, but in this branch we can find two different lines. One of them should be negative for Y4752, but the second family line is positive for it. Your STR data are very close to the first family line, but I couldn't find your closer relationship. In the Isles group, we have to be very cautious about these results, so your decision to buy the Big Y-700 test is absolutely justified. You have listed four differences in the STR markers, but at this stage the value of the DYS712 marker can be omitted as this change is rather about a homogeneous group in the Parker line that can be isolated. Additionally, we see a few changes at different levels in the 37 STR markers in this line, so your changes also fit in with this pattern. Since STR markers in the initial period are used for initial matching, so you can have a look at the general understanding of the bindings at this link: Your Big Y-700 test result and an additional score from someone from that Parker line should answer your question.
Bruce Green
August 11 @ 4:59pm
Thanks. I also plan on getting the BAM file and uploading it to Y-Full. I also found someone (PARKER) who is an Autosomal match for me on another testing site and we both are listed as FGC20048 there. His ancestry connects to the Parkers above in the 1620s and with about 500 other people and me. Going to ask if he will take a 111 test on my dime. He has already shared his family tree with me; so chances are good.
Bruce Green
August 11 @ 5:28pm
big Y not 111
Ned Fleet Ned Fleet has a question!
August 10 @ 12:05pm
To Wayne: Did you ever get a chance to contact Yfull about FT15190?
1 Comment
Wayne Rodney Roberts
August 11 @ 8:07am
Sorry I don't think I got the email sent off to Kevin Rose what with all that has been happening here since then. I'll check to see if I have a draft email or if it was sent and report back. Things get lost when my laptop shuts down and has to be rebooted.
Ned Fleet
August 11 @ 12:48pm
Thanks a lot to Wade and Wayne.
Ned Fleet
August 11 @ 1:08pm
On my block chart I see a Steve Rose who is in Y7272, not in FT15190, and is BY68419. A second unnamed person is in Y7272, but not in FT15190, with no other haplogroup asssigned.
Wade Ralph Kotter
August 11 @ 2:23pm
Wayne can tell you for sure, but perhaps Ken is the administrator for the Rose account Wayne is referring to.