I just joined this group after my Y37 test. This is a chart that David R. Moore posted back in 2015. It is a handwritten L1403 downstream. I also have A423 and the surname Moore, so can I assume that my Moore's were once O'Mordha and hence from County Laois and possibly earlier in Ulster. Our family oral history and an old Coat of Arms suggested that we were O'Mordha in Ireland originally. Strangely enough, the Moore Worldwide surname project grouped me with Moore's that came from Ireland through Scotland. Which makes sense. After eighty O'Moore chiefs alone were slaughtered by the English at the massacre at Mullaghmast. After the
The last one.
Look at this result with A5409 in my Geno2.0 helix none of my other files pull anything up.
@Rory: Also, I was intrigued by R-DF5 descendants having migrated to Brittany (or being found there) as early as during the Bronze Age (represented by an oversized blue circle on the North coast of Brittany). Have we now so much aDNA found in Brittany and/or so many modern R-DF5 samples with Breton EKAs available to be as conclusive? I thought this was just a credible hypothesis, not yet scientifically proven. A placement to be broadly interpreted all the whole Atlantic Coast, from Brittany to Galicia? As you refer to the barbarian invasions, you seem to have a preference for the prevalent historical hypothesis of Britons having migrated to Brittany in successive waves after the collapse of the Roman empire : from the end of the 4th century to the 9th or 10th century. Is it because genetic data analysis can now support this hypothesis to the detriment of all others?
Thanks, Rory for your comments, re: Y-DNA Path to R-DF5 by SNP Tracker. I was wondering if R-DF21 was indeed placed in the center of the British Isles! Ireland looks outside when you select the option "Zoom to Europe". Also, Rathlin1 is not displayed on the map. Overshadowed by an average of R-Z-246 samples placed in Scotland ? Not properly geolocated? Unfortunatley, all those blue circles are not pushpins with data or summary information available for a check … Your have (almost) killed my query with your new post as Admin, re : PhyloGeographer. ☺
As we started receiving the results from Big Y-700, the distribution of the new Private Variants was revealing a substantial expansion into the Sub-CEN region below 10072350, as we have discussed earlier this year. But it was not until a Subclade of R-Z16294, that had earlier had a Y Elite 2.1 tester, received their Big Y-700 test results that the pieces started to come together.
It had been amazing at first back then when this Y Elite 2.1 tester finally got his results because there were so many additional SNPs that had been called. But when the leader of this extended family research group took them to YSEQ for Wish a SNP review, it was quickly discovered that all seven in the Sub-CEN region were untestable by Sanger Sequencing. It caused us to reevaluate the presumed superiority of Y Elite 2.1 over Big Y if you wanted to use SNP testing in the genealogical period and did not have an unlimited budget to test every Cousin with NGS tests.
Now, with two Big Y-700 test results (a new one and a replacement), they have seen the same thing. All three Big Y-700 Private Variants in the Sub-CEN region have been rejected for testing by Sanger Sequencing.
This does not mean these are "bad" SNPs, only that no one can use single SNP testing to see if they carry them. It is an NGS test or nothing and even an NGS test fails to call some SNPs or more frequently calls them intermittently. In addition, we do not know just how much of this Sub-CEN region this condition applies to, only that out of ten requests for Review in this region, all ten have been rejected. The lowest rejection is at 3377929 and the highest is at 6720497, as I will try to show you in a map I created.
In the table, I have divided the New Kits from the Replacement Kits. There is not enough data so far with regard to the New Kits to presume the accuracy of these numbers, but there is reason to believe that the New Kits will always show a lower percentage of Sub-CEN Private Variants than the Replacement Kits because they will be examining the entire coverage area and not simply the expanded coverage area.
The bottom line is this. In the absence of knowing just how widespread the rejection area is in the Sub-CEN region, the new Private Variants from Big Y-700 replacement tests could be as much as two-thirds Secondary (NGS-only) SNPs. This could turn out to be a worst-case scenario, but it also excludes isolated SNP rejections in particular places in the Y-chromosome and there has always been some of those.
Although this is purely historical (for now), it is one of the fruits from our special Big Y-700 project in my private R-Z16294 Research Group this year and you can use it to compare to what happens in the future, including from the current Thanksgiving Sale. The Wait Times between batching and receipt of the data shown are averages for four Kits for Batch 953, five Kits for Batch 954, and two Kits for Batch 961. After that they represent only a single Kit in each case. That said, I believe the variance in Times also diminished as the calendar progressed. In fact, the two Kits in Batch 961 had Wait Times just one day apart, although that no doubt underrepresents the actual variability. I will present other, perhaps more interesting, summary results of this project in the future.
The S5488 tree is growing!
Im sorry Rory i should of just posted a pic.I was looking for a tree like this that has been updated.I wanted one with just our Df21 group.