Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

RE: [R1b-P312-Project] GD differences between close relations

Expand Messages
  • Belinda Dettmann
    Jeanette, those TiP estimates are strictly according to average rates of mutation, however on an individual basis people (and mutation rates) don’t always
    Message 1 of 12 , Sep 15, 2013
    • 0 Attachment

      Jeanette, those TiP estimates are strictly according to average rates of mutation, however on an individual basis people (and mutation rates) don’t always follow the average rate. Your uncle and your brother are well within the expected values fort such relationships.

       

      Belinda

       

      From: R1b-P312-Project@yahoogroups.com [mailto:R1b-P312-Project@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of trilby@...
      Sent: Monday, 16 September 2013 2:33 PM
      To: R1b-P312-Project@yahoogroups.com
      Subject: RE: [R1b-P312-Project] GD differences between close relations

      Something I only noticed after my first post 

       If I log on to my brother's account the TiP report says he and my uncle have a 30.35% chance of being related within 4 generations (at 37 markers).

       If I logon to my uncle's account the TiP report says he and my brother have an 83.49% chance of being related within 4 generations (at 37 markers).

       Jeanette Martin


      --- In R1b-P312-Project@yahoogroups.com, <r1b-p312-project@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

      Some markers mutate faster than others.

       

      They both should be DF27+, barring a non-paternal event.

       

      To: R1b-P312-Project@yahoogroups.com
      From: trilby@...
      Date: Sat, 14 Sep 2013 16:13:24 -0700
      Subject: [R1b-P312-Project] GD differences between close relations

       


      I know there have been posts on this before but how significant is it if an uncle and nephew have a GD of 2/37?
       
      My brother has 111 markers tested and he is DF27+. My uncle's results for 37 markers just came back and he is 2 GD different. At some stage I will upgrade my uncle's test to 67 markers.
       
      The TiP report says they have a 30.35% chance of being related within 4 generations. The most recent common ancestor is, of course, my grandfather.
       
      Can I assume my uncle would also test positive for DF27?
       
      Jeanette Martin




    • Arthur Fisher
      Greetings,   Nice work.   However, I would like to see a list of all 110 markers and information on how often each one mutates or a figure of how many years
      Message 2 of 12 , Sep 16, 2013
      • 0 Attachment
        Greetings,
         
        Nice work.
         
        However, I would like to see a list of all 110 markers and information on how often each one mutates or a figure of how many years or generations between each mutation.
         
        Has anyone done this?
         
        I suspect I am about to mutate.
         
         
        Arthur

        From: A. Sallaberry <sallaberry64@...>
        To: "R1b-P312-Project@yahoogroups.com" <r1b-p312-project@yahoogroups.com>
        Sent: Sunday, September 15, 2013 9:20 PM
        Subject: [R1b-P312-Project] GD differences between close relations
         
        Some markers mutate faster than others.

        They both should be DF27+, barring a non-paternal event.
        To: R1b-P312-Project@yahoogroups.com From: trilby@... Date: Sat, 14 Sep 2013 16:13:24 -0700 Subject: [R1b-P312-Project] GD differences between close relations 
        I know there have been posts on this before but how significant is it if an uncle and nephew have a GD of 2/37?   My brother has 111 markers tested and he is DF27+. My uncle's results for 37 markers just came back and he is 2 GD different. At some stage I will upgrade my uncle's test to 67 markers.   The TiP report says they have a 30.35% chance of being related within 4 generations. The most recent common ancestor is, of course, my grandfather.   Can I assume my uncle would also test positive for DF27?   Jeanette Martin
      • A. Sallaberry
        This might help: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Y-STR_markers On Sep 16, 2013, at 7:28 AM, Arthur Fisher wrote: Greetings, Nice
        Message 3 of 12 , Sep 16, 2013
        • 0 Attachment
          This might help:


          On Sep 16, 2013, at 7:28 AM, "Arthur Fisher" <apfisher@...> wrote:

           

          Greetings,
           
          Nice work.
           
          However, I would like to see a list of all 110 markers and information on how often each one mutates or a figure of how many years or generations between each mutation.
           
          Has anyone done this?
           
          I suspect I am about to mutate.
           
           
          Arthur

          From: A. Sallaberry <sallaberry64@...>
          To: "R1b-P312-Project@yahoogroups.com" <r1b-p312-project@yahoogroups.com>
          Sent: Sunday, September 15, 2013 9:20 PM
          Subject: [R1b-P312-Project] GD differences between close relations
           
          Some markers mutate faster than others.

          They both should be DF27+, barring a non-paternal event.
          To: R1b-P312-Project@yahoogroups.com From: trilby@... Date: Sat, 14 Sep 2013 16:13:24 -0700 Subject: [R1b-P312-Project] GD differences between close relations 
          I know there have been posts on this before but how significant is it if an uncle and nephew have a GD of 2/37?   My brother has 111 markers tested and he is DF27+. My uncle's results for 37 markers just came back and he is 2 GD different. At some stage I will upgrade my uncle's test to 67 markers.   The TiP report says they have a 30.35% chance of being related within 4 generations. The most recent common ancestor is, of course, my grandfather.   Can I assume my uncle would also test positive for DF27?   Jeanette Martin

        • mikewww7
          Jeanette, Since you have genealogical records and direct knowledge of the family so I would expect that a GD=2 at 37 means nothing. Even the slowest STR, can
          Message 4 of 12 , Sep 16, 2013
          • 0 Attachment

            Jeanette,


            Since you have genealogical records and direct knowledge of the family so I would expect that a GD=2 at 37 means nothing. Even the slowest STR, can mutate in the last generation. It's a matter of luck.


            However, there are GD=2 at 37 matches between R1b people that end up being of totally different haplogroups so there is no guararantee. If possible, I recommend testing out to 67 STRs. My guess you will find the GD is still 2 or maybe 3 and that is much a safer assumption.


            Regards,

            Mike W



            --- In r1b-p312-project@yahoogroups.com, <sallaberry64@...> wrote:

            This might help:


            On Sep 16, 2013, at 7:28 AM, "Arthur Fisher" <apfisher@...> wrote:

             
            Greetings,
             
            Nice work.
             
            However, I would like to see a list of all 110 markers and information on how often each one mutates or a figure of how many years or generations between each mutation.
             
            Has anyone done this?
             
            I suspect I am about to mutate.
             
             
            Arthur

            From: A. Sallaberry <sallaberry64@...>
            To: "R1b-P312-Project@yahoogroups.com" <r1b-p312-project@yahoogroups.com>
            Sent: Sunday, September 15, 2013 9:20 PM
            Subject: [R1b-P312-Project] GD differences between close relations
             
            Some markers mutate faster than others.

            They both should be DF27+, barring a non-paternal event.
            To: R1b-P312-Project@yahoogroups.com From: trilby@... Date: Sat, 14 Sep 2013 16:13:24 -0700 Subject: [R1b-P312-Project] GD differences between close relations 
            I know there have been posts on this before but how significant is it if an uncle and nephew have a GD of 2/37?   My brother has 111 markers tested and he is DF27+. My uncle's results for 37 markers just came back and he is 2 GD different. At some stage I will upgrade my uncle's test to 67 markers.   The TiP report says they have a 30.35% chance of being related within 4 generations. The most recent common ancestor is, of course, my grandfather.   Can I assume my uncle would also test positive for DF27?   Jeanette Martin
          • Joseph E Carroll
            I don t see how this can possibly be! The TIP comparison is just one set of STRs against another. It can t possibly have a different result depending on
            Message 5 of 12 , Sep 17, 2013
            • 0 Attachment
              I don't see how this can possibly be! The TIP comparison is just one set of STRs against another. It can't possibly have a different result depending on whether you start with one or the other of the pair being compared. It's like adding 3 and 5; you get the same answer whether it's 3+5 or 5+3.
              ---- Joe

              On Sep 15, 2013, at 11:33 PM, <trilby@...> <trilby@...> wrote:

               

              Something I only noticed after my first post 

               

              If I log on to my brother's account the TiP report says he and my uncle have a 30.35% chance of being related within 4 generations (at 37 markers).

               

              If I logon to my uncle's account the TiP report says he and my brother have an 83.49% chance of being related within 4 generations (at 37 markers).

               

              Jeanette Martin



              --- In R1b-P312-Project@yahoogroups.com, <r1b-p312-project@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

              Some markers mutate faster than others.

              They both should be DF27+, barring a non-paternal event.

            • A. Sallaberry
              The reason may be that the two subjects are not of the same generation. Four generations for the uncle would be five generations for the nephew. Conversely,
              Message 6 of 12 , Sep 17, 2013
              • 0 Attachment
                The reason may be that the two subjects are not of the same generation.  Four generations for the uncle would be five generations for the nephew.

                Conversely, four generations back for the nephew would be only three generations back for the uncle.






                On Sep 17, 2013, at 11:05 AM, "Joseph E Carroll" <jcarroll2@...> wrote:

                 

                I don't see how this can possibly be! The TIP comparison is just one set of STRs against another. It can't possibly have a different result depending on whether you start with one or the other of the pair being compared. It's like adding 3 and 5; you get the same answer whether it's 3+5 or 5+3.

                ---- Joe

                On Sep 15, 2013, at 11:33 PM, <trilby@...> <trilby@...> wrote:

                 

                Something I only noticed after my first post 

                 

                If I log on to my brother's account the TiP report says he and my uncle have a 30.35% chance of being related within 4 generations (at 37 markers).

                 

                If I logon to my uncle's account the TiP report says he and my brother have an 83.49% chance of being related within 4 generations (at 37 markers).

                 

                Jeanette Martin



                --- In R1b-P312-Project@yahoogroups.com, <r1b-p312-project@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

                Some markers mutate faster than others.

                They both should be DF27+, barring a non-paternal event.

              • Joseph E Carroll
                The result of the TIP is a probability curve that is so broad that you can only say something like the common ancestor lived 12-20 generations back.
                Message 7 of 12 , Sep 18, 2013
                • 0 Attachment
                  The result of the TIP is a probability curve that is so broad that you can only say something like the common ancestor lived 12-20 generations back. Independent of that, it aught not make any difference whether you start with one or the other.
                  ---- Joe

                  On Sep 17, 2013, at 11:47 AM, A. Sallaberry wrote:

                   
                  The reason may be that the two subjects are not of the same generation.  Four generations for the uncle would be five generations for the nephew.

                  Conversely, four generations back for the nephew would be only three generations back for the uncle.


                  On Sep 17, 2013, at 11:05 AM, "Joseph E Carroll" <jcarroll2@...> wrote:

                   I don't see how this can possibly be! The TIP comparison is just one set of STRs against another. It can't possibly have a different result depending on whether you start with one or the other of the pair being compared. It's like adding 3 and 5; you get the same answer whether it's 3+5 or 5+3.
                  ---- Joe

                  On Sep 15, 2013, at 11:33 PM, <trilby@...> <trilby@...> wrote:

                   Something I only noticed after my first post 
                   

                  If I log on to my brother's account the TiP report says he and my uncle have a 30.35% chance of being related within 4 generations (at 37 markers).
                   

                  If I logon to my uncle's account the TiP report says he and my brother have an 83.49% chance of being related within 4 generations (at 37 markers).

                   

                  Jeanette Martin


                • A. Sallaberry
                  Actually, I think my comments below are more reflective of autosomal DNA and not Y-STR marker analysis. I stand corrected. On Sep 18, 2013, at 8:36 AM, A.
                  Message 8 of 12 , Sep 18, 2013
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Actually, I think my comments below are more reflective of autosomal DNA and not Y-STR marker analysis.  I stand corrected.




                    On Sep 18, 2013, at 8:36 AM, "A. Sallaberry" <sallaberry64@...> wrote:

                     

                    The reason may be that the two subjects are not of the same generation.  Four generations for the uncle would be five generations for the nephew.

                    Conversely, four generations back for the nephew would be only three generations back for the uncle.






                    On Sep 17, 2013, at 11:05 AM, "Joseph E Carroll" <jcarroll2@...> wrote:

                     

                    I don't see how this can possibly be! The TIP comparison is just one set of STRs against another. It can't possibly have a different result depending on whether you start with one or the other of the pair being compared. It's like adding 3 and 5; you get the same answer whether it's 3+5 or 5+3.

                    ---- Joe

                    On Sep 15, 2013, at 11:33 PM, <trilby@...> <trilby@...> wrote:

                     

                    Something I only noticed after my first post 

                     

                    If I log on to my brother's account the TiP report says he and my uncle have a 30.35% chance of being related within 4 generations (at 37 markers).

                     

                    If I logon to my uncle's account the TiP report says he and my brother have an 83.49% chance of being related within 4 generations (at 37 markers).

                     

                    Jeanette Martin



                    --- In R1b-P312-Project@yahoogroups.com, <r1b-p312-project@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

                    Some markers mutate faster than others.

                    They both should be DF27+, barring a non-paternal event.

                  • robertbrookscasey
                    In my South Carolina Casey cluster, we have two first cousins with GD=2 at 67 markers. In the same cluster, there are two individuals that are at least 7.5
                    Message 9 of 12 , Sep 22, 2013
                    • 0 Attachment
                      In my South Carolina Casey cluster, we have two first cousins with GD=2 at 67 markers. In the same cluster, there are two individuals that are at least 7.5 generations apart with GD=0. The TiP tool is a statistically tool and statistics like large sample sizes that two submissions alone do not provide. There are three forms of sample size using the TiP tool - the number of markers involved, the number of generations involved and the number of submissions included. At 37 markers, only three or four generation involved and specially only two submissions, that is a very weak sample size - therefore, you should expect the possibility of much more variation. For my Casey cluster, the first fifteen submissions that were upgraded to 67 had all exact matches for markers 38 to 67 (that definitely beats the odds). At the first 37 markers, there are around 20 to 25 mutations between the same submissions. The handful of 111 marker upgrades are showing mutations that track the 37 submissions (quite a few mutations).

                      The more generations that you have, the more markers that you have and the more submissions that you compare, the better the accuracy. Do not worry too much about those that rolled the dice and got 12 (more mutations than normal). And, do not put too much relevance to those the rolled the dice and got 2 (many fewer mutations does not equate always to more relatedness). With only two submissions, you are only rolling the dice once - and expecting seven every time. If you build a cluster of ten to twenty related submissions, the mean value of the TiP would be much more reliable. If you upgrade both to 67 markers or even 111 markers, that would also increase the accuracy of the Tip tool. You should not really test close relatives for YDNA tests, as that buys very little. You should only test descendants of the sons and grandsons of your proven oldest ancestor. The TiP tool will be very problematic with only 37 markers, four generations and two submissions.

                       



                      --- In r1b-p312-project@yahoogroups.com, <sallaberry64@...> wrote:

                      Actually, I think my comments below are more reflective of autosomal DNA and not Y-STR marker analysis.  I stand corrected.




                      On Sep 18, 2013, at 8:36 AM, "A. Sallaberry" <sallaberry64@...> wrote:

                       
                      The reason may be that the two subjects are not of the same generation.  Four generations for the uncle would be five generations for the nephew.

                      Conversely, four generations back for the nephew would be only three generations back for the uncle.






                      On Sep 17, 2013, at 11:05 AM, "Joseph E Carroll" <jcarroll2@...> wrote:

                       

                      I don't see how this can possibly be! The TIP comparison is just one set of STRs against another. It can't possibly have a different result depending on whether you start with one or the other of the pair being compared. It's like adding 3 and 5; you get the same answer whether it's 3+5 or 5+3.

                      ---- Joe

                      On Sep 15, 2013, at 11:33 PM, <trilby@...> <trilby@...> wrote:

                       

                      Something I only noticed after my first post 

                       

                      If I log on to my brother's account the TiP report says he and my uncle have a 30.35% chance of being related within 4 generations (at 37 markers).

                       

                      If I logon to my uncle's account the TiP report says he and my brother have an 83.49% chance of being related within 4 generations (at 37 markers).

                       

                      Jeanette Martin



                      --- In R1b-P312-Project@yahoogroups.com, <r1b-p312-project@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

                      Some markers mutate faster than others.

                      They both should be DF27+, barring a non-paternal event.

                    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.