I-M223 Y-DNA Haplogroup

ISOGG Y-DNA Haplogroup I2a1b1 (was I2a2a & earlier I2b1)
  • 4147 members
Are you a member of the I-M223 Y-DNA Haplogroup project?
Benjamin Thompson Benjamin Thompson
Yesterday at 12:44pm
So I have 27 private variants among 4 Big Y people. Now what?
Wayne Rodney Roberts
23 hours ago
Benjamin, I'll have a look and see what options or suggestions I can offer.
Wayne Rodney Roberts
2 hours ago
Benjamin, I looked at your Big Y results and determined you share at least 16 variant SNP locations with Vaughn that will form a new sub-branch. You now show only Stephen Vaughn as your only Big Y match. You share other newly discovered SNPs with McHenry whom also has Big Y-700 results so these may for an intermediate sub-branch or may reveal they are upstream of your new branch somewhere. I would suggest you Generate your BAM file and then copy the Share BAM link and then submit it to YFull for an analysis. They will be able to determine just which SNPs match and form the new branch and the name of the branch they will show on their Y-Tree. FTDNA will eventually match up those of higher reads but not those of low reads for you and Vaughn.
Ned Fleet Ned Fleet
May 18 @ 3:58pm
I decided to make a study of my Y matches. (I believe my 12 markers are the modal for the I2a1b1 Pollocks, a line that goes back in the Glasgow area to about 1150AD)
20 Comments
Wayne Rodney Roberts
May 19 @ 7:30pm
Interesting Ned. At the present, you branch off from I-Y7272 node with Y39668, Y41107, Y41254, Y42157, Y43067, Y43356 but the order of these mutations and time is not known. Hopefully more can be revealed once you and others have their Big Y-700 results. We may find SNPs that link people together with branch nodes formed between I-Y7272 and your Novel SNPs.
Ned Fleet
11 hours ago
Of my 111 matches all 7, 4 at 103/111 and 3 at 102/111 are in Y7272
Ned Fleet
10 hours ago
At eupedia.com/europe/Haplogroup_I2_Y-DNA.shtml there are some great charts, allowing you to see the relationship between different haplogroups within M223.
Wade Kotter
8 hours ago
The problem is that this Eupedia page is outdated. It was last updated a year ago and a lot of new data has come to light since then. I should add that his tree charts are even more out of date.
David Boon David Boon
Yesterday at 6:12pm
Interesting developments for me with a with a recent triangulated autsomal match with Boon ancestry from Ramsey in Huntingdonshire on MyHeritage. The segment of DNA matches one I share with descendants of my gg grandfather's brother on the Boon line. Our line were from Somerset. The reason for my interest is that one of my YDNA matches at a genetic distance of 2 who has only tested to Y25 is from the same Ramsey in Huntigdonshire line. It is looking like he may be a closer match than I had anticipated. I am encouraging him to at least upgrade to Y111. Other thoughts and ideas welcomed.
9 Comments
Wade Kotter
19 hours ago
Matthew, there is only one SNP currently in the I-Y33688 block at both FTDNA and YFull.
Matthew Kelley
19 hours ago
I had a situation like this once. I think you are in a better position though. I met a lady who has been researching her and my Kelly line for 40+ years. We match on many places below the filter with autosomal. She supposedly descends from my 9 th ggf's brother with a solid paper trail (as solid as one can get back then). I asked if she had a male relative to y test and she said she did, her nephew (brother's son). She said he was in the ftdna Kelly project so I looked and he was R1b. Was my whole genealogy wrong or was hers, or neither? I eventually found out she descends from a Kelly daughter so anyone as close as her nephew is not going to have her Kelly ancestor's y dna.
Wade Kotter
17 hours ago
Matthew, David never says that his Y25 match from Ramsey is a close autsomal match. The Y25 match he mentions is not the same person as the autosomal match he mentions at the beginning of his post.
David Boon
14 hours ago
Thanks Wayne, Wade and Matthew. The feedback has probably confirmed my initial feeling that the Y111 might be the best first step. A number of my Boon/e matches are members of the Boon/e project so I have had a good look at their results and how some of them appear connected to one another. My feeling is that testing I-Y33688 is not really going to prove to be of much use as my matches without the Boon/e name are at that level and this is likely to be due to it forming prior to surnames rather than by NPEs. The autosomal match sharing a ggg grandfather with my Y25 match has led me to believe that line may be more closely connected to me than some of my other Boon/e Y matches. The only Boon match who has tested BigY500 is the one who forms I-B31465 with me. His line go back to Ardboe near Lough Neagh in Northern Ireland. One possibility is that his line moved there during the Plantation of Ulster. Boons are known to have gone there in that period from historical records. I am keen to see if I can establish whether my Boon matches with English links are more closely connected to me than my Boon matches in Northern Ireland and Ireland.
Brainard Watler Brainard Watler has a question!
Yesterday at 10:32am
Ok. Now I am confused. YFull has now updated their Y tree as of 18th May but my terminal haplogroup has still not changed from Y6647*. So far I have spent a lot of money on Big Y plus the YFull analysis but I do not really know anything more than I did before.
11 Comments
Brainard Watler
Yesterday at 7:14pm
Yes, the first assistant conveyed a different message as I posted above.
Wayne Rodney Roberts
Yesterday at 8:56pm
Brainard, FTDNA will look for SNP locations and the mutation when matching but not necessarily the SNP name. It seems to be taking weeks for them to update matching SNP locations and create new branches. You are not the only Project member waiting for them to catch up with matching SNP locations. They seem good at matching locations in two Big Y-700 results but not so good with Big Y-500 and Big Y-700 because of the large difference in reported SNPs.
Brainard Watler
22 hours ago
Thanks, Wayne.
Wayne Rodney Roberts
16 hours ago
YFull has updated their Y-Tree but I see no changes to our I-M223 tree. I'm not sure why. Perhaps the person responsible is on holidays :-(
Robert Hamlin Robert Hamlin
January 18 @ 10:35am
I have two matches at Y-111. Charles Bennett is I-M223 with a GD of 5. Peter Waid is i-Y22005 with a GD of 9. I'm I-Y30319, a subgroup of I-Y22005. Is this indicating Charles is closer related than Peter? I don't see how he can be and still be I-M223.
20 Comments
Robert Hamlin
May 15 @ 3:07pm
Thank you Wayne. None that I know has tested at YSEQ. I should have been upgraded from Hg19 to Hg 38. I paid the $15. Peter and Dennis are on YFull. Our I Y30319 should be good back to at least 1773 when the common ancestor was born for Dennis and me. It should reach back as far as 1650. Autosomal DNA matches support our paper trail back to the Hamlin ancestor born then.
william sample
May 15 @ 4:44pm
I submitted my BAM file to Full May 3rd. I am the "new" IDYF63199 on the YFull Tree under I-Y17376 waiting for completion of analysis
Wade Kotter
May 15 @ 6:02pm
Great news, William. Here's a link to the I-Y17376 at YFull as it currently stands with your sample included: https://yfull.com/tree/I-Y17376/
Wade Kotter
May 18 @ 5:05pm
William, I just added you to the I-M223 group at YFull. Wayne will now be able to see your results.
Michael Liggett Michael Liggett has a question!
April 28 @ 9:07am
Hi everyone, my Y700 results have arrived las weekend for kit number B41953 and I am curious to know what I need to do next. I can see that I have been moved into a different grouping but was wondering if my Y111 results are still relevant since they, for the most part, are no longer in the same group?
5 Comments
Wade Kotter
April 30 @ 4:58pm
That was quick. Click on the "Share BAM" button. A small area will open above the bottom green buttons with another green button says Copy next to a very small window with a very long URL in it. Clicking on the Copy will copy the link to your clipboard. Then go to the YFull order page: https://yfull.com/order/ Enter the information requested and paste (CTL-V) the BAM file link into the URL box. Then click on the box next to "I'm not a robot" and also the smaller box outlined in red just below. Then click on Order Now. You should receive an email from YFull indicating that your order was received. A while later you should get another email indicating that you BAM file had been downloaded and verified; it will also give you a user name (your email) and password for your account. After 2-4 weeks you should receive another email indicating that your basic results are done along with instructions for how to send the $49 to unlock your results. PayPal is one of the payment options.
Wade Kotter
April 30 @ 6:24pm
Based on what I see on the I-BY3819 section of the YFull tree, I believe you were successful in sending your BAM file to YFull: https://yfull.com/tree/I-BY3819/
Michael Liggett
May 18 @ 5:53am
Hi all I received confirmation this morning that my results have been completed at YFull and can be accessed upon payment. I have to say that the process was starightforward. I now need a walkthrough to explain what I am looking at.
Wade Kotter
May 18 @ 8:05am
Michael, your next step is to join the I-M223 group at YFull so Wayne, Tom and the other administrators of that group can see your results. To do so, go to your YFull home page and click on Groups | Y in the menu on the left. Scroll down until you see I-M223 and click on it. Then click on the "Join request", enter a comment if you like, click on the little box next to "I agree..." and finally click on Send. Sooner or later one of the admins of that group will approve your request.
Robert Henderson Robert Henderson
May 17 @ 9:07am
My Y-700 results are in. :)
3 Comments
Matthew Kelley
May 17 @ 3:15pm
Joseph, these are my guesses. If Mr. Muffett just got his BigY700 snps posted you may be beyond the 30 variant limit for matching with all the new snps being discovered. The average private variants on the block tree would have changed for the same reason (this assumes that ftdna upgraded these genetlemen's snps as well as the y700 strs) but in addition, many people over the last few day had changes to this number due to some programming ftdna was doing. An ftdna employee posted on facebook that the current values should be stable now, subject to new tests results.
Joseph Waters
May 17 @ 3:21pm
My private variants and unnamed variants have been stable for a couple weeks sitting at 11 and 14 respectively. What's changing, like 3 x per day is my shared variants on all of my Big Y matches. Several hundred to a few thousand per match per day. . . And I agree about the match that disappeared. He could even pop back up if his variants come back below the 30 minimum. Oh and the guy who show as a Q haplogroup but also a Big Y match to me has the most shared variants of all my matches... weird...
Matthew Kelley
May 17 @ 3:41pm
Sorry, I misread skimming through. Shared variants will continue changing. The variants being compared changes everytime ftdna adds any newly discovered snps to their catalog, so it will change each time they complete posting for a new test. FTDNA uses Shared on the Matches tab as Shared = same result, positive or negative ,as the match. If not shared, an snp in their catalog would be either nonmatching (one test is positive and the other is negative) or no call in one or both kits (ambiguous because some reads are positive and some are negative and there is not sufficient evidence or reason to make a call or the position was not read by the test). So the Total snps considered for matching is the total number of snps in ftdna's catalog including unnamed variants and is equal to shared + nonmatching + no calls.
Wayne Rodney Roberts
May 17 @ 5:38pm
Joseph, Mark Muffett had an unusually low number of Novel SNP locations from his Big Y-500 test and it was agreed that his test would be redone. On the old result, he would have matched you as the Hap. Q person did because they had virtually no results for what should have been matching SNPs such as CTS1977 and very few Novel SNPs. With the new results Muffett now has 19 Novel SNPs. The Hap Q person appears to have not been retested yet.
Matthew Kelley Matthew Kelley
May 15 @ 7:32pm
I did read a comment at the YFull facebook page from someone who was trying to submit their Y500 to Y700 upgrade BAM file. Assuming she was not talking about a BigY500 order that was upgraded for free (her specific question would make me think she was not), this would be the first mention I have seen of an BigY500 to BigY700 upgrade order completing. Progress, maybe.
Kenneth Whittemore
May 15 @ 8:06pm
Would 51 days be a record? The 500 to 700 upgrade went on sale during the conference in Houston on 24 Mar, more likely a 500 was ordered then converted to 700. Slow down, you'll see results by year end.
Matthew Kelley
May 15 @ 9:42pm
There were some from the March 26 batch 953 (new orders) that finished last week. There were a couple from the next batch as well. But I do realize most will take much longer. I was just letting people know. I was starting to think that they were holding the upgrade orders for some reason. I think 3 weeks is the record as far as tests I have seen complete. I don't remember if that was BigY500 or an early BigY700.
Matthew Kelley
May 15 @ 11:01pm
False Alarm. Remember that when we ordered the paid upgrade FTDNA pulled the chromosome browser detail for a few weeks? When they did, the BigY Completed Date on our accounts changed to the day we ordered the upgrade. This person had not looked at their account since they ordered the upgrade so when they saw a March Completion date, they thought it was finished. Their order status shows though the test is still pending.
Otto Hancock Otto Hancock has a question!
May 15 @ 7:47am
Why does the Y-DNA Chart show Y-GATA-H4 as 9 for kit B3466 - when my Y-DNA advanced results shows Y-GATA-H4 as 10 - Kit No. B3466 - Hancock
Wade Kotter
May 15 @ 10:13am
I can confirm that the results chart for this project shows you as 9 for Y-GATA-H4. What exactly do you mean by "Y-DNA advanced results"? Anyway, one thing I do notice is that the results chart shows readings for the first 30 markers but after that only a few "random "ones all the way into the Y68-Y111 range. This is the reason that FTDNA does not give you a haplogroup prediction. I'm assuming that you got your results several years ago, possibly transferred from another lab. In fact, the prefix B on your kit number indicates that your results originally came from a lab transfer program. I do know that at one time some labs offered tests that included 46 STRs and that the value reported for Y-GATA-H4 by the original lab dropped by a factor of 1 with the transfer to FTDNA. So if Ancestry, for example, reported you as 10 for the Y46 results they used to offer, FTDNA would report you as 9. This may well be the situation in your case.
Otto Hancock
May 15 @ 4:56pm
My results were transferred (original was Sorenson - SMGF 46) - Y-DNA - Advanced Y-STR Markers - shown after transfer. Y-GATA-H4 was 11 and was reduced to 10 on the transfer - MYFTDNA results after transfer shows as 10 - but on the DNA results - it shows a 9. When my results were transferred - DYS441 changed from 15 to 14, DYS442 changed from 17 to 12. Y-GATA-A10 changed from 15 to 13 and Y-GATA-H4 changed from 11 to 10. I don't know why the difference. Also what difference does it make - being 9 instead of 10. I will probably get a Y111 test when they come back on special. Y37 to Y111
Wade Kotter
May 15 @ 5:08pm
I don't see anything on my myFTDNA page in the Y-DNA section that says "Advanced Y-STR Markers" What I do see is "Y-STR Results." Did you test some individual STR markers at FTDNA after your transfer? Regardless, the data on the project results page should be identical to what you see on the myFTDNA page; they are both drawn from FTDNA's database. I think you definitely need to contact FTDNA support and call their attention to the discrepancy.
Otto Hancock
May 15 @ 5:42pm
Thanks Wade - I sent a request to support - hopefully they will solve the problem.
Matthew Kelley Matthew Kelley
May 14 @ 11:07pm
Several people tonight have noticed a drop in the number of average private variants on the block tree. I had checked mine last night and it was 6, and is now 2. Either FTDNA is in the process of doing some additional filtering, or some recent tests and perhaps some in process are clarifying the privates of our lone BigY700 tester that belong higher in the tree. These are all guesses. The average before our one BigY700 completed was 2.
1 Comment
Wade Kotter
May 15 @ 10:34am
The "average private variants" on the block tree for my terminal haplogroup has not changed. Since I'm the only person at FTDNA currently assigned to I-Y36144, the "average private variants" on the block tree is the same as the number of unnamed variants currently reported for me, which is 6. Unless someone else tests as I-Y36144 and has a different number of unnamed variants, this number in my case will not change until my Big Y-700 upgrade results come in, which I'm confident will result in some new unnamed variants for me. For situations where a terminal haplogroup includes two or more testers, any change in an individual tester's unnamed variants, like from new Big Y-700 results or ongoing manual checking of "existing" unnamed variants, can change the "average private variants" reported on the block tree. For Matthew and other people seeing such changes I think you should see such changes as positive refinements even though the reasons for the change may not always be clear.
Matthew Kelley
May 15 @ 11:19am
Several more people have reported this reduction in block tree private variants today.
Matthew Kelley
May 15 @ 2:08pm
Although my Block Tree variants dropped from 6 to 2 overnight Monday night, they have gone up to 5 now.
Wade Kotter
May 15 @ 5:11pm
Well, at least something is happening. Sounds like "progress" to me. :-)