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

any new snps for L48-

Expand Messages
  • Ernest K Johnson
    Does anyone know if there are any new Z snps for U106* members since Z18/Z19? I was negative for those two snps as well as L257. Stuck at L127/L128. Thanks,
    Message 1 of 23 , Sep 1, 2011
    • 0 Attachment
      Does anyone know if there are any new Z snps for U106* members since Z18/Z19? I was negative for those two snps as well as L257. Stuck at L127/L128.
      Thanks,
      Ernest
    • Charles
      Not yet Ernest, but there will be, and hopefully soon. Charles
      Message 2 of 23 , Sep 1, 2011
      • 0 Attachment
        Not yet Ernest, but there will be, and hopefully soon.

        Charles

        --- In R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com, "Ernest K Johnson" <gaelstar@...> wrote:
        >
        > Does anyone know if there are any new Z snps for U106* members since Z18/Z19? I was negative for those two snps as well as L257. Stuck at L127/L128.
        > Thanks,
        > Ernest
        >
      • Ernest K Johnson
        Thanks Charles for the quick response. I will look forward to any new snps. Thanks, Ernest
        Message 3 of 23 , Sep 1, 2011
        • 0 Attachment
          Thanks Charles for the quick response. I will look forward to any new snps.
          Thanks,
          Ernest

          --- In R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com, "Charles" <cdmo29@...> wrote:
          >
          > Not yet Ernest, but there will be, and hopefully soon.
          >
          > Charles
          >
          > --- In R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com, "Ernest K Johnson" <gaelstar@> wrote:
          > >
          > > Does anyone know if there are any new Z snps for U106* members since Z18/Z19? I was negative for those two snps as well as L257. Stuck at L127/L128.
          > > Thanks,
          > > Ernest
          > >
          >
        • William Hancock
          Ernest Johnson inquired about Z SNPs to test for as he was feeling in limbo looking for a branch of U106 to land in.   Well, I don t have a Z SNP for you to
          Message 4 of 23 , Sep 1, 2011
          • 0 Attachment
            Ernest Johnson inquired about Z SNPs to test for as he was feeling in limbo looking for a branch of U106 to land in.
             
            Well, I don't have a Z SNP for you to test, but I do have a new SNP that might get you out of the U106* category.  I, too, have been stuck in a rut but recently have been found to have the new L653 SNP.  All those who would like to find a place in the sun are encouraged to test for this new SNP.  It needs people to test for it to make it out of the personal SNP category and into a full fledged branch of U106.  Please test for it - it may be where you belong!
             
            Thanks to all who consider it.
             
            Bill Hancock

            From: Ernest K Johnson <gaelstar@...>
            To: R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com
            Sent: Thursday, September 1, 2011 8:27 AM
            Subject: [R1b1c_U106-S21] Re: any new snps for L48-

             
            Thanks Charles for the quick response. I will look forward to any new snps.
            Thanks,
            Ernest

            --- In R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com, "Charles" <cdmo29@...> wrote:
            >
            > Not yet Ernest, but there will be, and hopefully soon.
            >
            > Charles
            >
            > --- In R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com, "Ernest K Johnson" <gaelstar@> wrote:
            > >
            > > Does anyone know if there are any new Z snps for U106* members since Z18/Z19? I was negative for those two snps as well as L257. Stuck at L127/L128.
            > > Thanks,
            > > Ernest
            > >
            >



          • Thomas Kameroski
            I tested for it and received the results today, which was negative. I am Z19+ Z18+ U106+ L147.3+ U198- P89.2- P107- L653- L6- L5- L48- L47- L46- L44- L325-
            Message 5 of 23 , Sep 1, 2011
            • 0 Attachment

              I tested for it and received the results today, which was negative.  I am Z19+ Z18+ U106+ L147.3+ U198- P89.2- P107- L653- L6- L5- L48- L47- L46- L44- L325- L259- L257- L217- L199- L127.2- L1-

               

              Tom Kameroski

               

              From: R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com [mailto:R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of William Hancock
              Sent: Thursday, September 01, 2011 7:15 PM
              To: R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com
              Subject: [R1b1c_U106-S21] Calling all R1b_U106* feeling stuck in a rut.

               

               

              Ernest Johnson inquired about Z SNPs to test for as he was feeling in limbo looking for a branch of U106 to land in.

               

              Well, I don't have a Z SNP for you to test, but I do have a new SNP that might get you out of the U106* category.  I, too, have been stuck in a rut but recently have been found to have the new L653 SNP.  All those who would like to find a place in the sun are encouraged to test for this new SNP.  It needs people to test for it to make it out of the personal SNP category and into a full fledged branch of U106.  Please test for it - it may be where you belong!

               

              Thanks to all who consider it.

               

              Bill Hancock

               

              From: Ernest K Johnson <gaelstar@...>
              To: R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com
              Sent: Thursday, September 1, 2011 8:27 AM
              Subject: [R1b1c_U106-S21] Re: any new snps for L48-

               

              Thanks Charles for the quick response. I will look forward to any new snps.
              Thanks,
              Ernest

              --- In R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com, "Charles" <cdmo29@...> wrote:
              >
              > Not yet Ernest, but there will be, and hopefully soon.
              >
              > Charles
              >
              > --- In R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com, "Ernest K Johnson" <gaelstar@> wrote:
              > >
              > > Does anyone know if there are any new Z snps for U106* members since Z18/Z19? I was negative for those two snps as well as L257. Stuck at L127/L128.
              > > Thanks,
              > > Ernest
              > >
              >

               

            • John German
              Have you tested for Z18 ? The discussions about the L653 SNP on DNA-Forums report that is is beneath Z18+ I ve tested Z18- so there would seem to be no reason
              Message 6 of 23 , Sep 1, 2011
              • 0 Attachment
                Have you tested for Z18 ?

                The discussions about the L653 SNP on DNA-Forums report that is is beneath Z18+

                I've tested Z18- so there would seem to be no reason for me to test
                L653 unless you are are Z18- and have upset the apple cart so to speak.



                William Hancock wrote:
                Ernest Johnson inquired about Z SNPs to test for as he was feeling in limbo looking for a branch of U106 to land in.
                 
                Well, I don't have a Z SNP for you to test, but I do have a new SNP that might get you out of the U106* category.  I, too, have been stuck in a rut but recently have been found to have the new L653 SNP.  All those who would like to find a place in the sun are encouraged to test for this new SNP.  It needs people to test for it to make it out of the personal SNP category and into a full fledged branch of U106.  Please test for it - it may be where you belong!
                 
                Thanks to all who consider it.
                 
                Bill Hancock

                From: Ernest K Johnson <gaelstar@...>
                To: R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com
                Sent: Thursday, September 1, 2011 8:27 AM
                Subject: [R1b1c_U106-S21] Re: any new snps for L48-

                 
                Thanks Charles for the quick response. I will look forward to any new snps.
                Thanks,
                Ernest

                --- In R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com, "Charles" <cdmo29@...> wrote:
                >
                > Not yet Ernest, but there will be, and hopefully soon.
                >
                > Charles
                >
                > --- In R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com, "Ernest K Johnson" <gaelstar@> wrote:
                > >
                > > Does anyone know if there are any new Z snps for U106* members since Z18/Z19? I was negative for those two snps as well as L257. Stuck at L127/L128.
                > > Thanks,
                > > Ernest
                > >
                >



              • William Hancock
                John,   There is only the one example of a person being Z18+ and also L653+.  One example does not a rule make.  We need more people to test before a hard
                Message 7 of 23 , Sep 1, 2011
                • 0 Attachment
                  John,
                   
                  There is only the one example of a person being Z18+ and also L653+.  One example does not a rule make.  We need more people to test before a hard and fast conclusion can be drawn that to be L653+ one must also be Z18+, or stated differently that L653 is definitely below Z18+.  On the other hand, we have a few examples already where being Z18+ happens when one is L653-.  Therefore, I encourage some testing by Z18- individuals to see just what is really what.  If you feel free to spend $29 to test yourself for the benefit of scientific knowledge, by all means please do it.  We need to know with a degree of certainty whether L653 is really a branch off the Z18+ branch and the only way we can obtain that knowledge in the early days is to have a few Z18- individuals test for L653.
                   
                  Thanks to you and others who consider testing for L653 for their personal interest and/or for the good of scientific knowledge.
                   
                  Bill Hancock
                  Silver Project Co-Administrator

                  From: John German <german@...>
                  To: R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com
                  Sent: Thursday, September 1, 2011 8:17 PM
                  Subject: Re: [R1b1c_U106-S21] Calling all R1b_U106* feeling stuck in a rut.

                   
                  Have you tested for Z18 ?

                  The discussions about the L653 SNP on DNA-Forums report that is is beneath Z18+

                  I've tested Z18- so there would seem to be no reason for me to test
                  L653 unless you are are Z18- and have upset the apple cart so to speak.



                  William Hancock wrote:
                  Ernest Johnson inquired about Z SNPs to test for as he was feeling in limbo looking for a branch of U106 to land in.
                   
                  Well, I don't have a Z SNP for you to test, but I do have a new SNP that might get you out of the U106* category.  I, too, have been stuck in a rut but recently have been found to have the new L653 SNP.  All those who would like to find a place in the sun are encouraged to test for this new SNP.  It needs people to test for it to make it out of the personal SNP category and into a full fledged branch of U106.  Please test for it - it may be where you belong!
                   
                  Thanks to all who consider it.
                   
                  Bill Hancock

                  From: Ernest K Johnson <gaelstar@...>
                  To: R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com
                  Sent: Thursday, September 1, 2011 8:27 AM
                  Subject: [R1b1c_U106-S21] Re: any new snps for L48-

                   
                  Thanks Charles for the quick response. I will look forward to any new snps.
                  Thanks,
                  Ernest

                  --- In R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com, "Charles" <cdmo29@...> wrote:
                  >
                  > Not yet Ernest, but there will be, and hopefully soon.
                  >
                  > Charles
                  >
                  > --- In R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com, "Ernest K Johnson" <gaelstar@> wrote:
                  > >
                  > > Does anyone know if there are any new Z snps for U106* members since Z18/Z19? I was negative for those two snps as well as L257. Stuck at L127/L128.
                  > > Thanks,
                  > > Ernest
                  > >
                  >





                • Ernest K Johnson
                  Thanks William and John for your input. I did test negative for Z19 and Z18. I will consider testing L653. If there is a slim chance of a positive result then
                  Message 8 of 23 , Sep 2, 2011
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Thanks William and John for your input. I did test negative for Z19 and Z18. I will consider testing L653. If there is a slim chance of a positive result then it may be worth testing. Money is not a problem. On the other hand I would like to find out why some in the Forums feel its below Z18. Even though L127/L128 is considered private, I'm curious how many U106* have tested it or considered testing those snps?
                    Thanks,
                    Ernest

                    --- In R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com, William Hancock <a12mayflower@...> wrote:
                    >
                    > John,
                    >  
                    > There is only the one example of a person being Z18+ and also L653+.  One example does not a rule make.  We need more people to test before a hard and fast conclusion can be drawn that to be L653+ one must also be Z18+, or stated differently that L653 is definitely below Z18+.  On the other hand, we have a few examples already where being Z18+ happens when one is L653-.  Therefore, I encourage some testing by Z18- individuals to see just what is really what.  If you feel free to spend $29 to test yourself for the benefit of scientific knowledge, by all means please do it.  We need to know with a degree of certainty whether L653 is really a branch off the Z18+ branch and the only way we can obtain that knowledge in the early days is to have a few Z18- individuals test for L653.
                    >  
                    > Thanks to you and others who consider testing for L653 for their personal interest and/or for the good of scientific knowledge.
                    >  
                    > Bill Hancock
                    > Silver Project Co-Administrator
                    >
                    > From: John German <german@...>
                    > To: R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com
                    > Sent: Thursday, September 1, 2011 8:17 PM
                    > Subject: Re: [R1b1c_U106-S21] Calling all R1b_U106* feeling stuck in a rut.
                    >
                    >
                    >  
                    >
                    > Have you tested for Z18 ?
                    >
                    > The discussions about the L653 SNP on DNA-Forums report that is
                    > is beneath Z18+
                    >
                    > I've tested Z18- so there would seem to be no reason for me to test L653
                    > unless you are are Z18- and have upset the apple cart so to speak.
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    > William Hancock wrote:
                    >
                    > Ernest Johnson inquired about Z SNPs to test for as he was
                    > feeling in limbo looking for a branch of U106 to land in.
                    > > 
                    > >Well, I don't have a Z SNP for you to test, but I do have
                    > a new SNP that might get you out of the U106* category.  I, too, have
                    > been stuck in a rut but recently have been found to have the new L653
                    > SNP.  All those who would like to find a place in the sun are
                    > encouraged to test for this new SNP.  It needs people to test for it to
                    > make it out of the personal SNP category and into a full fledged branch
                    > of U106.  Please test for it - it may be where you belong!
                    > > 
                    > >Thanks to all who consider it.
                    > > 
                    > >Bill Hancock
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >From: Ernest K Johnson <gaelstar@...>
                    > >To: R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com
                    > >Sent: Thursday,
                    > September 1, 2011 8:27 AM
                    > >Subject: [R1b1c_U106-S21] Re: any new snps for L48-
                    > >
                    > >
                    > > 
                    > >Thanks Charles for the quick response. I will look forward to
                    > any new snps.
                    > >Thanks,
                    > >Ernest
                    > >
                    > >--- In R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com,
                    > "Charles" <cdmo29@> wrote:
                    > >>
                    > >> Not yet Ernest, but there will be, and hopefully soon.
                    > >>
                    > >> Charles
                    > >>
                    > >> --- In R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com,
                    > "Ernest K Johnson" <gaelstar@> wrote:
                    > >> >
                    > >> > Does anyone know if there are any new Z snps for U106*
                    > members since Z18/Z19? I was negative for those two snps as well as
                    > L257. Stuck at L127/L128.
                    > >> > Thanks,
                    > >> > Ernest
                    > >> >
                    > >>
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    >
                  • Michael L. Hébert
                    If you take the lab results at face value and assume that there were no lab errors, then logic would dictate that L653 is downstream of Z18. The only person
                    Message 9 of 23 , Sep 2, 2011
                    • 0 Attachment
                      If you take the lab results at face value and assume that there were no lab errors, then logic would dictate that L653 is downstream of Z18.  The only person (Ysearch 962TS) found to be L653+ is also Z18+.  However, there are other Z18+ people who have been found to be L653-.  If L653 were upstream of Z18, then if one Z18+ person tested as L653+ then all Z18+ people should have tested as L653+.  But, since this has not been the case, it can be concluded that L653 must be downstream of Z18 ... if you trust the current lab results.  So, if L653 does somehow turn out to be upstream of Z18 then there had to have been some lab errors somewhere in those Z18+ people who have been tested so far.
                       
                      Mike
                       
                      Bell line "stuck" at U106-L1*
                       


                      From: Ernest K Johnson
                      Sent: Friday, September 02, 2011 5:24 AM
                      To: R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com
                      Subject: [R1b1c_U106-S21] Re: Calling all R1b_U106* feeling stuck in a rut.
                       

                      Thanks William and John for your input. I did test negative for Z19 and Z18. I will consider testing L653. If there is a slim chance of a positive result then it may be worth testing. Money is not a problem. On the other hand I would like to find out why some in the Forums feel its below Z18. Even though L127/L128 is considered private, I'm curious how many U106* have tested it or considered testing those snps?
                      Thanks,
                      Ernest

                    • Charles
                      Ernest, What is your kit number? I can t find you. Charles
                      Message 10 of 23 , Sep 2, 2011
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Ernest,

                        What is your kit number? I can't find you. Charles

                        --- In R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com, "Ernest K Johnson" <gaelstar@...> wrote:
                        >
                        > Thanks William and John for your input. I did test negative for Z19 and Z18. I will consider testing L653. If there is a slim chance of a positive result then it may be worth testing. Money is not a problem. On the other hand I would like to find out why some in the Forums feel its below Z18. Even though L127/L128 is considered private, I'm curious how many U106* have tested it or considered testing those snps?
                        > Thanks,
                        > Ernest
                        >
                        > --- In R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com, William Hancock <a12mayflower@> wrote:
                        > >
                        > > John,
                        > >  
                        > > There is only the one example of a person being Z18+ and also L653+.  One example does not a rule make.  We need more people to test before a hard and fast conclusion can be drawn that to be L653+ one must also be Z18+, or stated differently that L653 is definitely below Z18+.  On the other hand, we have a few examples already where being Z18+ happens when one is L653-.  Therefore, I encourage some testing by Z18- individuals to see just what is really what.  If you feel free to spend $29 to test yourself for the benefit of scientific knowledge, by all means please do it.  We need to know with a degree of certainty whether L653 is really a branch off the Z18+ branch and the only way we can obtain that knowledge in the early days is to have a few Z18- individuals test for L653.
                        > >  
                        > > Thanks to you and others who consider testing for L653 for their personal interest and/or for the good of scientific knowledge.
                        > >  
                        > > Bill Hancock
                        > > Silver Project Co-Administrator
                        > >
                        > > From: John German <german@>
                        > > To: R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com
                        > > Sent: Thursday, September 1, 2011 8:17 PM
                        > > Subject: Re: [R1b1c_U106-S21] Calling all R1b_U106* feeling stuck in a rut.
                        > >
                        > >
                        > >  
                        > >
                        > > Have you tested for Z18 ?
                        > >
                        > > The discussions about the L653 SNP on DNA-Forums report that is
                        > > is beneath Z18+
                        > >
                        > > I've tested Z18- so there would seem to be no reason for me to test L653
                        > > unless you are are Z18- and have upset the apple cart so to speak.
                        > >
                        > >
                        > >
                        > > William Hancock wrote:
                        > >
                        > > Ernest Johnson inquired about Z SNPs to test for as he was
                        > > feeling in limbo looking for a branch of U106 to land in.
                        > > > 
                        > > >Well, I don't have a Z SNP for you to test, but I do have
                        > > a new SNP that might get you out of the U106* category.  I, too, have
                        > > been stuck in a rut but recently have been found to have the new L653
                        > > SNP.  All those who would like to find a place in the sun are
                        > > encouraged to test for this new SNP.  It needs people to test for it to
                        > > make it out of the personal SNP category and into a full fledged branch
                        > > of U106.  Please test for it - it may be where you belong!
                        > > > 
                        > > >Thanks to all who consider it.
                        > > > 
                        > > >Bill Hancock
                        > > >
                        > > >
                        > > >From: Ernest K Johnson <gaelstar@>
                        > > >To: R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com
                        > > >Sent: Thursday,
                        > > September 1, 2011 8:27 AM
                        > > >Subject: [R1b1c_U106-S21] Re: any new snps for L48-
                        > > >
                        > > >
                        > > > 
                        > > >Thanks Charles for the quick response. I will look forward to
                        > > any new snps.
                        > > >Thanks,
                        > > >Ernest
                        > > >
                        > > >--- In R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com,
                        > > "Charles" <cdmo29@> wrote:
                        > > >>
                        > > >> Not yet Ernest, but there will be, and hopefully soon.
                        > > >>
                        > > >> Charles
                        > > >>
                        > > >> --- In R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com,
                        > > "Ernest K Johnson" <gaelstar@> wrote:
                        > > >> >
                        > > >> > Does anyone know if there are any new Z snps for U106*
                        > > members since Z18/Z19? I was negative for those two snps as well as
                        > > L257. Stuck at L127/L128.
                        > > >> > Thanks,
                        > > >> > Ernest
                        > > >> >
                        > > >>
                        > > >
                        > > >
                        > > >
                        > > >
                        > >
                        >
                      • Charles
                        Here is the situation surrounding the L653+ tester. It does not rely on the ridiculous idea that the other Z18+/Z19+ guys who have tested L653- might all be
                        Message 11 of 23 , Sep 2, 2011
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Here is the situation surrounding the L653+ tester. It does not rely on the ridiculous idea that the other Z18+/Z19+ guys who have tested L653- might all be back-mutated or might all have lab errors.

                          Instead it has to do with the L653+ tester himself, and as he says, the fact that he is the only one. It would otherwise be possible for him to have a convergence to the Z18+ result or a lab error to that result and not really be on the Z18/Z19 branch. But what slams the door behind him is the fact that he is both Z18+ and Z19+. For him to not be a legitimate member of the Z18/Z19 branch, he would have to have 2 convergences or lab errors. Unrealistic times ten.

                          For someone trying to match him, the remote possibility would exist that they could be back-mutated at one or the other of Z18 and Z19 or have a lab error. But if someone is both Z18- and Z19-, as Ernest is, there is no way that he is going to match someone is both Z18+ and Z19+, at L653.

                          You can't blame the L653+ guy for trying to get people to test his SNP, just as Ernest keeps trying to get guys to test L127.2 and L128. Guys with private SNPs are doomed to stay private if nobody tests their SNPs. But you guys are forgetting about the STRs!

                          OK, the STRs are heavily prone to convergence and back-mutation, which are very rare with SNPs. That is why SNPs rule, and the tree is built on SNPs. But the SNPs occur on branches that originate with STR changes. And the Z18/Z19 branch has STR characteristics that the L653 tester shares.

                          Presumably Ernest doesn't. I can't find him, so I can't make the comparison. As I said in response to Ernest yesterday, higher level SNPs within R-U106 such as Z381, Z301 and others should hopefully become testable soon. At least the L653+ tester can reliably place himself on the Z18/Z19 branch, and the other guys on that branch should test his SNP. Whereas Ernest and his 2 little private SNPs are wandering aimlessly around R-U106 trying to find what branch they are on.

                          There are a lot of guys in U106 or L48 who would like to have any other SNPs at all. So ya know, it's a relative problem.

                          Charles

                          --- In R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com, Michael L. Hébert <genlists@...> wrote:
                          >
                          > If you take the lab results at face value and assume that there were no lab
                          > errors, then logic would dictate that L653 is downstream of Z18. The only
                          > person (Ysearch 962TS) found to be L653+ is also Z18+. However, there are
                          > other Z18+ people who have been found to be L653-. If L653 were upstream of
                          > Z18, then if one Z18+ person tested as L653+ then all Z18+ people should have
                          > tested as L653+. But, since this has not been the case, it can be concluded
                          > that L653 must be downstream of Z18 ... if you trust the current lab results.
                          > So, if L653 does somehow turn out to be upstream of Z18 then there had to
                          > have been some lab errors somewhere in those Z18+ people who have been tested
                          > so far.
                          >
                          > Mike
                          >
                          > Bell line "stuck" at U106-L1*
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          > _____
                          >
                          > From: Ernest K Johnson
                          > Sent: Friday, September 02, 2011 5:24 AM
                          > To: R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com
                          > Subject: [R1b1c_U106-S21] Re: Calling all R1b_U106* feeling stuck in a rut.
                          >
                          >
                          > Thanks William and John for your input. I did test negative for Z19 and Z18.
                          > I will consider testing L653. If there is a slim chance of a positive result
                          > then it may be worth testing. Money is not a problem. On the other hand I
                          > would like to find out why some in the Forums feel its below Z18. Even though
                          > L127/L128 is considered private, I'm curious how many U106* have tested it or
                          > considered testing those snps?
                          > Thanks,
                          > Ernest
                          >
                        • Charles
                          Bill, I can t find you either. What is your kit number? Starting to wonder whether my brain is working this morning, or not. Charles
                          Message 12 of 23 , Sep 2, 2011
                          • 0 Attachment
                            Bill,

                            I can't find you either. What is your kit number? Starting to wonder whether my brain is working this morning, or not.

                            Charles

                            --- In R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com, William Hancock <a12mayflower@...> wrote:
                            >
                            > John,
                            >  
                            > There is only the one example of a person being Z18+ and also L653+.  One example does not a rule make.  We need more people to test before a hard and fast conclusion can be drawn that to be L653+ one must also be Z18+, or stated differently that L653 is definitely below Z18+.  On the other hand, we have a few examples already where being Z18+ happens when one is L653-.  Therefore, I encourage some testing by Z18- individuals to see just what is really what.  If you feel free to spend $29 to test yourself for the benefit of scientific knowledge, by all means please do it.  We need to know with a degree of certainty whether L653 is really a branch off the Z18+ branch and the only way we can obtain that knowledge in the early days is to have a few Z18- individuals test for L653.
                            >  
                            > Thanks to you and others who consider testing for L653 for their personal interest and/or for the good of scientific knowledge.
                            >  
                            > Bill Hancock
                            > Silver Project Co-Administrator
                            >
                            > From: John German <german@...>
                            > To: R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com
                            > Sent: Thursday, September 1, 2011 8:17 PM
                            > Subject: Re: [R1b1c_U106-S21] Calling all R1b_U106* feeling stuck in a rut.
                            >
                            >
                            >  
                            >
                            > Have you tested for Z18 ?
                            >
                            > The discussions about the L653 SNP on DNA-Forums report that is
                            > is beneath Z18+
                            >
                            > I've tested Z18- so there would seem to be no reason for me to test L653
                            > unless you are are Z18- and have upset the apple cart so to speak.
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            > William Hancock wrote:
                            >
                            > Ernest Johnson inquired about Z SNPs to test for as he was
                            > feeling in limbo looking for a branch of U106 to land in.
                            > > 
                            > >Well, I don't have a Z SNP for you to test, but I do have
                            > a new SNP that might get you out of the U106* category.  I, too, have
                            > been stuck in a rut but recently have been found to have the new L653
                            > SNP.  All those who would like to find a place in the sun are
                            > encouraged to test for this new SNP.  It needs people to test for it to
                            > make it out of the personal SNP category and into a full fledged branch
                            > of U106.  Please test for it - it may be where you belong!
                            > > 
                            > >Thanks to all who consider it.
                            > > 
                            > >Bill Hancock
                            > >
                            > >
                            > >From: Ernest K Johnson <gaelstar@...>
                            > >To: R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com
                            > >Sent: Thursday,
                            > September 1, 2011 8:27 AM
                            > >Subject: [R1b1c_U106-S21] Re: any new snps for L48-
                            > >
                            > >
                            > > 
                            > >Thanks Charles for the quick response. I will look forward to
                            > any new snps.
                            > >Thanks,
                            > >Ernest
                            > >
                            > >--- In R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com,
                            > "Charles" <cdmo29@> wrote:
                            > >>
                            > >> Not yet Ernest, but there will be, and hopefully soon.
                            > >>
                            > >> Charles
                            > >>
                            > >> --- In R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com,
                            > "Ernest K Johnson" <gaelstar@> wrote:
                            > >> >
                            > >> > Does anyone know if there are any new Z snps for U106*
                            > members since Z18/Z19? I was negative for those two snps as well as
                            > L257. Stuck at L127/L128.
                            > >> > Thanks,
                            > >> > Ernest
                            > >> >
                            > >>
                            > >
                            > >
                            > >
                            > >
                            >
                          • Ernest K Johnson
                            Charles, My kit # is 5962.
                            Message 13 of 23 , Sep 2, 2011
                            • 0 Attachment
                              Charles,
                              My kit # is 5962.

                              --- In R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com, "Charles" <cdmo29@...> wrote:
                              >
                              > Ernest,
                              >
                              > What is your kit number? I can't find you. Charles
                              >
                              > --- In R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com, "Ernest K Johnson" <gaelstar@> wrote:
                              > >
                              > > Thanks William and John for your input. I did test negative for Z19 and Z18. I will consider testing L653. If there is a slim chance of a positive result then it may be worth testing. Money is not a problem. On the other hand I would like to find out why some in the Forums feel its below Z18. Even though L127/L128 is considered private, I'm curious how many U106* have tested it or considered testing those snps?
                              > > Thanks,
                              > > Ernest
                              > >
                              > > --- In R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com, William Hancock <a12mayflower@> wrote:
                              > > >
                              > > > John,
                              > > >  
                              > > > There is only the one example of a person being Z18+ and also L653+.  One example does not a rule make.  We need more people to test before a hard and fast conclusion can be drawn that to be L653+ one must also be Z18+, or stated differently that L653 is definitely below Z18+.  On the other hand, we have a few examples already where being Z18+ happens when one is L653-.  Therefore, I encourage some testing by Z18- individuals to see just what is really what.  If you feel free to spend $29 to test yourself for the benefit of scientific knowledge, by all means please do it.  We need to know with a degree of certainty whether L653 is really a branch off the Z18+ branch and the only way we can obtain that knowledge in the early days is to have a few Z18- individuals test for L653.
                              > > >  
                              > > > Thanks to you and others who consider testing for L653 for their personal interest and/or for the good of scientific knowledge.
                              > > >  
                              > > > Bill Hancock
                              > > > Silver Project Co-Administrator
                              > > >
                              > > > From: John German <german@>
                              > > > To: R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com
                              > > > Sent: Thursday, September 1, 2011 8:17 PM
                              > > > Subject: Re: [R1b1c_U106-S21] Calling all R1b_U106* feeling stuck in a rut.
                              > > >
                              > > >
                              > > >  
                              > > >
                              > > > Have you tested for Z18 ?
                              > > >
                              > > > The discussions about the L653 SNP on DNA-Forums report that is
                              > > > is beneath Z18+
                              > > >
                              > > > I've tested Z18- so there would seem to be no reason for me to test L653
                              > > > unless you are are Z18- and have upset the apple cart so to speak.
                              > > >
                              > > >
                              > > >
                              > > > William Hancock wrote:
                              > > >
                              > > > Ernest Johnson inquired about Z SNPs to test for as he was
                              > > > feeling in limbo looking for a branch of U106 to land in.
                              > > > > 
                              > > > >Well, I don't have a Z SNP for you to test, but I do have
                              > > > a new SNP that might get you out of the U106* category.  I, too, have
                              > > > been stuck in a rut but recently have been found to have the new L653
                              > > > SNP.  All those who would like to find a place in the sun are
                              > > > encouraged to test for this new SNP.  It needs people to test for it to
                              > > > make it out of the personal SNP category and into a full fledged branch
                              > > > of U106.  Please test for it - it may be where you belong!
                              > > > > 
                              > > > >Thanks to all who consider it.
                              > > > > 
                              > > > >Bill Hancock
                              > > > >
                              > > > >
                              > > > >From: Ernest K Johnson <gaelstar@>
                              > > > >To: R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com
                              > > > >Sent: Thursday,
                              > > > September 1, 2011 8:27 AM
                              > > > >Subject: [R1b1c_U106-S21] Re: any new snps for L48-
                              > > > >
                              > > > >
                              > > > > 
                              > > > >Thanks Charles for the quick response. I will look forward to
                              > > > any new snps.
                              > > > >Thanks,
                              > > > >Ernest
                              > > > >
                              > > > >--- In R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com,
                              > > > "Charles" <cdmo29@> wrote:
                              > > > >>
                              > > > >> Not yet Ernest, but there will be, and hopefully soon.
                              > > > >>
                              > > > >> Charles
                              > > > >>
                              > > > >> --- In R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com,
                              > > > "Ernest K Johnson" <gaelstar@> wrote:
                              > > > >> >
                              > > > >> > Does anyone know if there are any new Z snps for U106*
                              > > > members since Z18/Z19? I was negative for those two snps as well as
                              > > > L257. Stuck at L127/L128.
                              > > > >> > Thanks,
                              > > > >> > Ernest
                              > > > >> >
                              > > > >>
                              > > > >
                              > > > >
                              > > > >
                              > > > >
                              > > >
                              > >
                              >
                            • Charles
                              Thanks! OK, well that is interesting, because you actually have the Z18 branch indicator 463=25. However, that result is not exclusive to the Z18 branch. It
                              Message 14 of 23 , Sep 2, 2011
                              • 0 Attachment
                                Thanks! OK, well that is interesting, because you actually have the Z18 branch indicator 463=25. However, that result is not exclusive to the Z18 branch. It works more the other way around. I shouldn't really be invading Peter's area of expertise here, but he identified 463=25 as an indicator of that branch. Peter updated his Z18 L257- and Z18 L257+ spreadsheets 3 days ago, and so far, everyone on both of them who has upgraded to 111, is 463=25, rather than the U106 modal 463=24. We rarely see universal indicators, and there will probably be exceptions at some point, but so far, so good.

                                We could speculate here that perhaps you and the Z18s are on the same higher branch of the tree, possibly indicated by 463=25. Otherwise, you just happen to have a change to that marker. Greg's diagram for the Z18 branch is based on just 5 preliminary testers who, in addition to Z18+ and Z19+, also share Z14+, Z16+, and Z17+. It is theoretically possible that you, or someone else who is 463=25, might be positive for Z14 or Z16 or Z17, without being positive for Z18 or Z19. That would vertically split that level on Greg's diagram, making Z18/Z19 a subclade of the other part. OK, it's just a possibility. I didn't actually do a full comparison of your STRs to the Z18 branch.

                                But for examples for you and others out there, if your STRs are more similar to those of U198 or L48, then Greg's diagram shows that you will be more likely to be positive for Z301 when it becomes testable. If your STRs are more similar to L1, then you would be more likely to be positive for Z156. If your STRs are more similar to Z18, but you came up negative anyway, then Z14 or Z16 or Z17 would be possibilities.

                                We are going to depend on some guys to "play the field" for us, so we can see what the characteristics of these new subclades will turn out to be, and how they differ from one another. And I realize that it isn't necessarily too easy to do the comparisons.

                                That's why my Cross-references include a few STR indicators for various subclades, to give you guys some guidance. But we can't know what the indicators for the new Z SNP clades will be until we get results from the guys who are "playing the field" for us.

                                Beyond all of that, STRs are only indicators. The only way that you can know if you are positive for a SNP, unless it is below one that you are negative for (in which case you are negative) or on another branch altogether (in which case you are negative) is to test it.

                                Charles

                                --- In R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com, "Ernest K Johnson" <gaelstar@...> wrote:
                                >
                                > Charles,
                                > My kit # is 5962.
                                >
                                > --- In R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com, "Charles" <cdmo29@> wrote:
                                > >
                                > > Ernest,
                                > >
                                > > What is your kit number? I can't find you. Charles
                                > >
                                > > --- In R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com, "Ernest K Johnson" <gaelstar@> wrote:
                                > > >
                                > > > Thanks William and John for your input. I did test negative for Z19 and Z18. I will consider testing L653. If there is a slim chance of a positive result then it may be worth testing. Money is not a problem. On the other hand I would like to find out why some in the Forums feel its below Z18. Even though L127/L128 is considered private, I'm curious how many U106* have tested it or considered testing those snps?
                                > > > Thanks,
                                > > > Ernest
                                > > >
                                > > > --- In R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com, William Hancock <a12mayflower@> wrote:
                                > > > >
                                > > > > John,
                                > > > >  
                                > > > > There is only the one example of a person being Z18+ and also L653+.  One example does not a rule make.  We need more people to test before a hard and fast conclusion can be drawn that to be L653+ one must also be Z18+, or stated differently that L653 is definitely below Z18+.  On the other hand, we have a few examples already where being Z18+ happens when one is L653-.  Therefore, I encourage some testing by Z18- individuals to see just what is really what.  If you feel free to spend $29 to test yourself for the benefit of scientific knowledge, by all means please do it.  We need to know with a degree of certainty whether L653 is really a branch off the Z18+ branch and the only way we can obtain that knowledge in the early days is to have a few Z18- individuals test for L653.
                                > > > >  
                                > > > > Thanks to you and others who consider testing for L653 for their personal interest and/or for the good of scientific knowledge.
                                > > > >  
                                > > > > Bill Hancock
                                > > > > Silver Project Co-Administrator
                                > > > >
                                > > > > From: John German <german@>
                                > > > > To: R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com
                                > > > > Sent: Thursday, September 1, 2011 8:17 PM
                                > > > > Subject: Re: [R1b1c_U106-S21] Calling all R1b_U106* feeling stuck in a rut.
                                > > > >
                                > > > >
                                > > > >  
                                > > > >
                                > > > > Have you tested for Z18 ?
                                > > > >
                                > > > > The discussions about the L653 SNP on DNA-Forums report that is
                                > > > > is beneath Z18+
                                > > > >
                                > > > > I've tested Z18- so there would seem to be no reason for me to test L653
                                > > > > unless you are are Z18- and have upset the apple cart so to speak.
                                > > > >
                                > > > >
                                > > > >
                                > > > > William Hancock wrote:
                                > > > >
                                > > > > Ernest Johnson inquired about Z SNPs to test for as he was
                                > > > > feeling in limbo looking for a branch of U106 to land in.
                                > > > > > 
                                > > > > >Well, I don't have a Z SNP for you to test, but I do have
                                > > > > a new SNP that might get you out of the U106* category.  I, too, have
                                > > > > been stuck in a rut but recently have been found to have the new L653
                                > > > > SNP.  All those who would like to find a place in the sun are
                                > > > > encouraged to test for this new SNP.  It needs people to test for it to
                                > > > > make it out of the personal SNP category and into a full fledged branch
                                > > > > of U106.  Please test for it - it may be where you belong!
                                > > > > > 
                                > > > > >Thanks to all who consider it.
                                > > > > > 
                                > > > > >Bill Hancock
                                > > > > >
                                > > > > >
                                > > > > >From: Ernest K Johnson <gaelstar@>
                                > > > > >To: R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com
                                > > > > >Sent: Thursday,
                                > > > > September 1, 2011 8:27 AM
                                > > > > >Subject: [R1b1c_U106-S21] Re: any new snps for L48-
                                > > > > >
                                > > > > >
                                > > > > > 
                                > > > > >Thanks Charles for the quick response. I will look forward to
                                > > > > any new snps.
                                > > > > >Thanks,
                                > > > > >Ernest
                                > > > > >
                                > > > > >--- In R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com,
                                > > > > "Charles" <cdmo29@> wrote:
                                > > > > >>
                                > > > > >> Not yet Ernest, but there will be, and hopefully soon.
                                > > > > >>
                                > > > > >> Charles
                                > > > > >>
                                > > > > >> --- In R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com,
                                > > > > "Ernest K Johnson" <gaelstar@> wrote:
                                > > > > >> >
                                > > > > >> > Does anyone know if there are any new Z snps for U106*
                                > > > > members since Z18/Z19? I was negative for those two snps as well as
                                > > > > L257. Stuck at L127/L128.
                                > > > > >> > Thanks,
                                > > > > >> > Ernest
                                > > > > >> >
                                > > > > >>
                                > > > > >
                                > > > > >
                                > > > > >
                                > > > > >
                                > > > >
                                > > >
                                > >
                                >
                              • Michael L. Hébert
                                I agree that things such as multiple lab errors and SNP convergences are highly unlikely. Ernest asked why the person at DNA Forums would place L653
                                Message 15 of 23 , Sep 2, 2011
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  I agree that things such as multiple lab errors and SNP convergences are highly unlikely.  Ernest asked why the person at DNA Forums would place L653 downstream of Z18/Z19.  I tried to explain the logic behind it (perhaps badly) and only mentioned the lab errors as being one remote possibility for L653 eventually being found to be upstream of Z18.  Convergence would certainly be another remote possibility for it being found outside Z18.  But, taking the results as they stand now, L653 seems to certainly be downstream of Z18 as Thomas Krahn has it in the Y draft tree and as the poster at DNA Forums (R-U106 L257 Project forum) placed it.  People like Ernest who are already Z18- can certainly test for L653 if they like, as encouraged by a previous poster, but it is highly unlikely to come back L653+.  If any of the Z18- did come back L653+, then it would be a rather unusual situation and the lab would have to try and square this with the previous L653 testing of the Z18+ people invoking those rarities such as lab errors or convergences.
                                   
                                  I don't blame the L653+ person, or any persons with currently private SNPs, to encourage more testing (I would be doing the same) and there has already been some testing for L653 within Z18.  Given those results, future L653 testing would seem to be most fruitful within Z18 and not outside it.  And, it may well turn out to be a private SNP, which is not necessarily a bad thing as these could be helpful in genealogical research.  Ernest with his L127/L128 does have the "honor" of currently having his own branch of U106 and perhaps being one of the first members of an as-of-yet undiscovered branch of U106, assuming that L127/L128 is relatively recent with more undiscovered SNPs upstream between it and U106.
                                   
                                  I keep checking once in a while for any action within U106-L1 which is my primary U106 interest, but things are pretty quiet there.  L48 seems to be where most of the action is right now.  But, things seem to be happening at a fairly rapid pace and I'm sure more and more of the big tree will get fleshed out with the discovery of new SNPs.
                                   
                                  Mike
                                   


                                  From: Charles
                                  Sent: Friday, September 02, 2011 9:28 AM
                                  To: R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com
                                  Subject: [R1b1c_U106-S21] Re: Calling all R1b_U106* feeling stuck in a rut.

                                   

                                  Here is the situation surrounding the L653+ tester. It does not rely on the ridiculous idea that the other Z18+/Z19+ guys who have tested L653- might all be back-mutated or might all have lab errors.

                                  Instead it has to do with the L653+ tester himself, and as he says, the fact that he is the only one. It would otherwise be possible for him to have a convergence to the Z18+ result or a lab error to that result and not really be on the Z18/Z19 branch. But what slams the door behind him is the fact that he is both Z18+ and Z19+. For him to not be a legitimate member of the Z18/Z19 branch, he would have to have 2 convergences or lab errors. Unrealistic times ten.

                                  For someone trying to match him, the remote possibility would exist that they could be back-mutated at one or the other of Z18 and Z19 or have a lab error. But if someone is both Z18- and Z19-, as Ernest is, there is no way that he is going to match someone is both Z18+ and Z19+, at L653.

                                  You can't blame the L653+ guy for trying to get people to test his SNP, just as Ernest keeps trying to get guys to test L127.2 and L128. Guys with private SNPs are doomed to stay private if nobody tests their SNPs. But you guys are forgetting about the STRs!

                                  OK, the STRs are heavily prone to convergence and back-mutation, which are very rare with SNPs. That is why SNPs rule, and the tree is built on SNPs. But the SNPs occur on branches that originate with STR changes. And the Z18/Z19 branch has STR characteristics that the L653 tester shares.

                                  Presumably Ernest doesn't. I can't find him, so I can't make the comparison. As I said in response to Ernest yesterday, higher level SNPs within R-U106 such as Z381, Z301 and others should hopefully become testable soon. At least the L653+ tester can reliably place himself on the Z18/Z19 branch, and the other guys on that branch should test his SNP. Whereas Ernest and his 2 little private SNPs are wandering aimlessly around R-U106 trying to find what branch they are on.

                                  There are a lot of guys in U106 or L48 who would like to have any other SNPs at all. So ya know, it's a relative problem.

                                  Charles

                                • Ernest K Johnson
                                  Charles, Your explanation does clarify the situation. I will research the STRS, look for some good possible candidates to test the L127/L128 snps and await the
                                  Message 16 of 23 , Sep 2, 2011
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    Charles,
                                    Your explanation does clarify the situation. I will research the STRS, look for some good possible candidates to test the L127/L128 snps and await the new snps released for test. Proud of my snps, but interested in if they are buds just a few hundred years old or a possible branch with other members outside myself. Thanks again for taking the time to add some light to the subject.
                                    Dry and hot in Austin.
                                    Ernest

                                    --- In R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com, "Charles" <cdmo29@...> wrote:
                                    >
                                    > Here is the situation surrounding the L653+ tester. It does not rely on the ridiculous idea that the other Z18+/Z19+ guys who have tested L653- might all be back-mutated or might all have lab errors.
                                    >
                                    > Instead it has to do with the L653+ tester himself, and as he says, the fact that he is the only one. It would otherwise be possible for him to have a convergence to the Z18+ result or a lab error to that result and not really be on the Z18/Z19 branch. But what slams the door behind him is the fact that he is both Z18+ and Z19+. For him to not be a legitimate member of the Z18/Z19 branch, he would have to have 2 convergences or lab errors. Unrealistic times ten.
                                    >
                                    > For someone trying to match him, the remote possibility would exist that they could be back-mutated at one or the other of Z18 and Z19 or have a lab error. But if someone is both Z18- and Z19-, as Ernest is, there is no way that he is going to match someone is both Z18+ and Z19+, at L653.
                                    >
                                    > You can't blame the L653+ guy for trying to get people to test his SNP, just as Ernest keeps trying to get guys to test L127.2 and L128. Guys with private SNPs are doomed to stay private if nobody tests their SNPs. But you guys are forgetting about the STRs!
                                    >
                                    > OK, the STRs are heavily prone to convergence and back-mutation, which are very rare with SNPs. That is why SNPs rule, and the tree is built on SNPs. But the SNPs occur on branches that originate with STR changes. And the Z18/Z19 branch has STR characteristics that the L653 tester shares.
                                    >
                                    > Presumably Ernest doesn't. I can't find him, so I can't make the comparison. As I said in response to Ernest yesterday, higher level SNPs within R-U106 such as Z381, Z301 and others should hopefully become testable soon. At least the L653+ tester can reliably place himself on the Z18/Z19 branch, and the other guys on that branch should test his SNP. Whereas Ernest and his 2 little private SNPs are wandering aimlessly around R-U106 trying to find what branch they are on.
                                    >
                                    > There are a lot of guys in U106 or L48 who would like to have any other SNPs at all. So ya know, it's a relative problem.
                                    >
                                    > Charles
                                    >
                                    > --- In R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com, Michael L. Hébert <genlists@> wrote:
                                    > >
                                    > > If you take the lab results at face value and assume that there were no lab
                                    > > errors, then logic would dictate that L653 is downstream of Z18. The only
                                    > > person (Ysearch 962TS) found to be L653+ is also Z18+. However, there are
                                    > > other Z18+ people who have been found to be L653-. If L653 were upstream of
                                    > > Z18, then if one Z18+ person tested as L653+ then all Z18+ people should have
                                    > > tested as L653+. But, since this has not been the case, it can be concluded
                                    > > that L653 must be downstream of Z18 ... if you trust the current lab results.
                                    > > So, if L653 does somehow turn out to be upstream of Z18 then there had to
                                    > > have been some lab errors somewhere in those Z18+ people who have been tested
                                    > > so far.
                                    > >
                                    > > Mike
                                    > >
                                    > > Bell line "stuck" at U106-L1*
                                    > >
                                    > >
                                    > >
                                    > > _____
                                    > >
                                    > > From: Ernest K Johnson
                                    > > Sent: Friday, September 02, 2011 5:24 AM
                                    > > To: R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com
                                    > > Subject: [R1b1c_U106-S21] Re: Calling all R1b_U106* feeling stuck in a rut.
                                    > >
                                    > >
                                    > > Thanks William and John for your input. I did test negative for Z19 and Z18.
                                    > > I will consider testing L653. If there is a slim chance of a positive result
                                    > > then it may be worth testing. Money is not a problem. On the other hand I
                                    > > would like to find out why some in the Forums feel its below Z18. Even though
                                    > > L127/L128 is considered private, I'm curious how many U106* have tested it or
                                    > > considered testing those snps?
                                    > > Thanks,
                                    > > Ernest
                                    > >
                                    >
                                  • Charles
                                    Right, I didn t really disagree with anything that anyone said. I was just trying to help provide some focus. Lab errors and back mutations do happen, but
                                    Message 17 of 23 , Sep 2, 2011
                                    • 0 Attachment
                                      Right, I didn't really disagree with anything that anyone said. I was just trying to help provide some focus. Lab errors and back mutations do happen, but very rarely.

                                      If I was U106* and 463=25, as far as choices available at the moment, I would try Z18, and work down to L257 or L653 from there. Testing a SNP descendant of a SNP that you are negative for, would be an astronomical long shot. But the world is full of choices if you've got the moolah. And that's all Bill really said.

                                      Charles

                                      --- In R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com, Michael L. Hébert <genlists@...> wrote:
                                      >
                                      > I agree that things such as multiple lab errors and SNP convergences are
                                      > highly unlikely. Ernest asked why the person at DNA Forums would place L653
                                      > downstream of Z18/Z19. I tried to explain the logic behind it (perhaps
                                      > badly) and only mentioned the lab errors as being one remote possibility for
                                      > L653 eventually being found to be upstream of Z18. Convergence would
                                      > certainly be another remote possibility for it being found outside Z18. But,
                                      > taking the results as they stand now, L653 seems to certainly be downstream
                                      > of Z18 as Thomas Krahn has it in the Y draft tree and as the poster at DNA
                                      > Forums (R-U106 L257 Project forum) placed it. People like Ernest who are
                                      > already Z18- can certainly test for L653 if they like, as encouraged by a
                                      > previous poster, but it is highly unlikely to come back L653+. If any of the
                                      > Z18- did come back L653+, then it would be a rather unusual situation and the
                                      > lab would have to try and square this with the previous L653 testing of the
                                      > Z18+ people invoking those rarities such as lab errors or convergences.
                                      >
                                      > I don't blame the L653+ person, or any persons with currently private SNPs,
                                      > to encourage more testing (I would be doing the same) and there has already
                                      > been some testing for L653 within Z18. Given those results, future L653
                                      > testing would seem to be most fruitful within Z18 and not outside it. And,
                                      > it may well turn out to be a private SNP, which is not necessarily a bad
                                      > thing as these could be helpful in genealogical research. Ernest with his
                                      > L127/L128 does have the "honor" of currently having his own branch of U106
                                      > and perhaps being one of the first members of an as-of-yet undiscovered
                                      > branch of U106, assuming that L127/L128 is relatively recent with more
                                      > undiscovered SNPs upstream between it and U106.
                                      >
                                      > I keep checking once in a while for any action within U106-L1 which is my
                                      > primary U106 interest, but things are pretty quiet there. L48 seems to be
                                      > where most of the action is right now. But, things seem to be happening at a
                                      > fairly rapid pace and I'm sure more and more of the big tree will get fleshed
                                      > out with the discovery of new SNPs.
                                      >
                                      > Mike
                                      >
                                      >
                                      >
                                      > _____
                                      >
                                      > From: Charles
                                      > Sent: Friday, September 02, 2011 9:28 AM
                                      > To: R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com
                                      > Subject: [R1b1c_U106-S21] Re: Calling all R1b_U106* feeling stuck in a rut.
                                      >
                                      >
                                      >
                                      >
                                      > Here is the situation surrounding the L653+ tester. It does not rely on the
                                      > ridiculous idea that the other Z18+/Z19+ guys who have tested L653- might all
                                      > be back-mutated or might all have lab errors.
                                      >
                                      > Instead it has to do with the L653+ tester himself, and as he says, the fact
                                      > that he is the only one. It would otherwise be possible for him to have a
                                      > convergence to the Z18+ result or a lab error to that result and not really
                                      > be on the Z18/Z19 branch. But what slams the door behind him is the fact that
                                      > he is both Z18+ and Z19+. For him to not be a legitimate member of the
                                      > Z18/Z19 branch, he would have to have 2 convergences or lab errors.
                                      > Unrealistic times ten.
                                      >
                                      > For someone trying to match him, the remote possibility would exist that they
                                      > could be back-mutated at one or the other of Z18 and Z19 or have a lab error.
                                      > But if someone is both Z18- and Z19-, as Ernest is, there is no way that he
                                      > is going to match someone is both Z18+ and Z19+, at L653.
                                      >
                                      > You can't blame the L653+ guy for trying to get people to test his SNP, just
                                      > as Ernest keeps trying to get guys to test L127.2 and L128. Guys with private
                                      > SNPs are doomed to stay private if nobody tests their SNPs. But you guys are
                                      > forgetting about the STRs!
                                      >
                                      > OK, the STRs are heavily prone to convergence and back-mutation, which are
                                      > very rare with SNPs. That is why SNPs rule, and the tree is built on SNPs.
                                      > But the SNPs occur on branches that originate with STR changes. And the
                                      > Z18/Z19 branch has STR characteristics that the L653 tester shares.
                                      >
                                      > Presumably Ernest doesn't. I can't find him, so I can't make the comparison.
                                      > As I said in response to Ernest yesterday, higher level SNPs within R-U106
                                      > such as Z381, Z301 and others should hopefully become testable soon. At least
                                      > the L653+ tester can reliably place himself on the Z18/Z19 branch, and the
                                      > other guys on that branch should test his SNP. Whereas Ernest and his 2
                                      > little private SNPs are wandering aimlessly around R-U106 trying to find what
                                      > branch they are on.
                                      >
                                      > There are a lot of guys in U106 or L48 who would like to have any other SNPs
                                      > at all. So ya know, it's a relative problem.
                                      >
                                      > Charles
                                      >
                                    • Charles
                                      The R-U106 project SNP list seems to indicate that nobody has tested L128, while 21 guys are negative for L127.2. However, WTY testers are separately tested
                                      Message 18 of 23 , Sep 2, 2011
                                      • 0 Attachment
                                        The R-U106 project SNP list seems to indicate that nobody has tested L128, while 21 guys are negative for L127.2. However, WTY testers are separately tested and not reported on the project SNP list, so there are probably 30 other guys who have been tested for these SNPs.

                                        Charles

                                        --- In R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com, "Ernest K Johnson" <gaelstar@...> wrote:
                                        >
                                        > Charles,
                                        > Your explanation does clarify the situation. I will research the STRS, look for some good possible candidates to test the L127/L128 snps and await the new snps released for test. Proud of my snps, but interested in if they are buds just a few hundred years old or a possible branch with other members outside myself. Thanks again for taking the time to add some light to the subject.
                                        > Dry and hot in Austin.
                                        > Ernest
                                        >
                                        > --- In R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com, "Charles" <cdmo29@> wrote:
                                        > >
                                        > > Here is the situation surrounding the L653+ tester. It does not rely on the ridiculous idea that the other Z18+/Z19+ guys who have tested L653- might all be back-mutated or might all have lab errors.
                                        > >
                                        > > Instead it has to do with the L653+ tester himself, and as he says, the fact that he is the only one. It would otherwise be possible for him to have a convergence to the Z18+ result or a lab error to that result and not really be on the Z18/Z19 branch. But what slams the door behind him is the fact that he is both Z18+ and Z19+. For him to not be a legitimate member of the Z18/Z19 branch, he would have to have 2 convergences or lab errors. Unrealistic times ten.
                                        > >
                                        > > For someone trying to match him, the remote possibility would exist that they could be back-mutated at one or the other of Z18 and Z19 or have a lab error. But if someone is both Z18- and Z19-, as Ernest is, there is no way that he is going to match someone is both Z18+ and Z19+, at L653.
                                        > >
                                        > > You can't blame the L653+ guy for trying to get people to test his SNP, just as Ernest keeps trying to get guys to test L127.2 and L128. Guys with private SNPs are doomed to stay private if nobody tests their SNPs. But you guys are forgetting about the STRs!
                                        > >
                                        > > OK, the STRs are heavily prone to convergence and back-mutation, which are very rare with SNPs. That is why SNPs rule, and the tree is built on SNPs. But the SNPs occur on branches that originate with STR changes. And the Z18/Z19 branch has STR characteristics that the L653 tester shares.
                                        > >
                                        > > Presumably Ernest doesn't. I can't find him, so I can't make the comparison. As I said in response to Ernest yesterday, higher level SNPs within R-U106 such as Z381, Z301 and others should hopefully become testable soon. At least the L653+ tester can reliably place himself on the Z18/Z19 branch, and the other guys on that branch should test his SNP. Whereas Ernest and his 2 little private SNPs are wandering aimlessly around R-U106 trying to find what branch they are on.
                                        > >
                                        > > There are a lot of guys in U106 or L48 who would like to have any other SNPs at all. So ya know, it's a relative problem.
                                        > >
                                        > > Charles
                                        > >
                                        > > --- In R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com, Michael L. Hébert <genlists@> wrote:
                                        > > >
                                        > > > If you take the lab results at face value and assume that there were no lab
                                        > > > errors, then logic would dictate that L653 is downstream of Z18. The only
                                        > > > person (Ysearch 962TS) found to be L653+ is also Z18+. However, there are
                                        > > > other Z18+ people who have been found to be L653-. If L653 were upstream of
                                        > > > Z18, then if one Z18+ person tested as L653+ then all Z18+ people should have
                                        > > > tested as L653+. But, since this has not been the case, it can be concluded
                                        > > > that L653 must be downstream of Z18 ... if you trust the current lab results.
                                        > > > So, if L653 does somehow turn out to be upstream of Z18 then there had to
                                        > > > have been some lab errors somewhere in those Z18+ people who have been tested
                                        > > > so far.
                                        > > >
                                        > > > Mike
                                        > > >
                                        > > > Bell line "stuck" at U106-L1*
                                        > > >
                                        > > >
                                        > > >
                                        > > > _____
                                        > > >
                                        > > > From: Ernest K Johnson
                                        > > > Sent: Friday, September 02, 2011 5:24 AM
                                        > > > To: R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com
                                        > > > Subject: [R1b1c_U106-S21] Re: Calling all R1b_U106* feeling stuck in a rut.
                                        > > >
                                        > > >
                                        > > > Thanks William and John for your input. I did test negative for Z19 and Z18.
                                        > > > I will consider testing L653. If there is a slim chance of a positive result
                                        > > > then it may be worth testing. Money is not a problem. On the other hand I
                                        > > > would like to find out why some in the Forums feel its below Z18. Even though
                                        > > > L127/L128 is considered private, I'm curious how many U106* have tested it or
                                        > > > considered testing those snps?
                                        > > > Thanks,
                                        > > > Ernest
                                        > > >
                                        > >
                                        >
                                      • Charles
                                        David Weston s analysis at the U106 Project last December, http://www.weston-genealogy.net/R_U106/analysis/Johnson_5962.html shows the guys listed from the top
                                        Message 19 of 23 , Sep 2, 2011
                                        • 0 Attachment
                                          David Weston's analysis at the U106 Project last December,

                                          http://www.weston-genealogy.net/R_U106/analysis/Johnson_5962.html

                                          shows the guys listed from the top as most closely related to you on GD basis. Those are the guys who should try your SNPs, unless they are in a different subclade such as L48 (his analyses cut across subclade boundaries, so you have to ignore the ones that make no sense).

                                          Charles

                                          --- In R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com, "Charles" <cdmo29@...> wrote:
                                          >
                                          > The R-U106 project SNP list seems to indicate that nobody has tested L128, while 21 guys are negative for L127.2. However, WTY testers are separately tested and not reported on the project SNP list, so there are probably 30 other guys who have been tested for these SNPs.
                                          >
                                          > Charles
                                          >
                                          > --- In R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com, "Ernest K Johnson" <gaelstar@> wrote:
                                          > >
                                          > > Charles,
                                          > > Your explanation does clarify the situation. I will research the STRS, look for some good possible candidates to test the L127/L128 snps and await the new snps released for test. Proud of my snps, but interested in if they are buds just a few hundred years old or a possible branch with other members outside myself. Thanks again for taking the time to add some light to the subject.
                                          > > Dry and hot in Austin.
                                          > > Ernest
                                          > >
                                          > > --- In R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com, "Charles" <cdmo29@> wrote:
                                          > > >
                                          > > > Here is the situation surrounding the L653+ tester. It does not rely on the ridiculous idea that the other Z18+/Z19+ guys who have tested L653- might all be back-mutated or might all have lab errors.
                                          > > >
                                          > > > Instead it has to do with the L653+ tester himself, and as he says, the fact that he is the only one. It would otherwise be possible for him to have a convergence to the Z18+ result or a lab error to that result and not really be on the Z18/Z19 branch. But what slams the door behind him is the fact that he is both Z18+ and Z19+. For him to not be a legitimate member of the Z18/Z19 branch, he would have to have 2 convergences or lab errors. Unrealistic times ten.
                                          > > >
                                          > > > For someone trying to match him, the remote possibility would exist that they could be back-mutated at one or the other of Z18 and Z19 or have a lab error. But if someone is both Z18- and Z19-, as Ernest is, there is no way that he is going to match someone is both Z18+ and Z19+, at L653.
                                          > > >
                                          > > > You can't blame the L653+ guy for trying to get people to test his SNP, just as Ernest keeps trying to get guys to test L127.2 and L128. Guys with private SNPs are doomed to stay private if nobody tests their SNPs. But you guys are forgetting about the STRs!
                                          > > >
                                          > > > OK, the STRs are heavily prone to convergence and back-mutation, which are very rare with SNPs. That is why SNPs rule, and the tree is built on SNPs. But the SNPs occur on branches that originate with STR changes. And the Z18/Z19 branch has STR characteristics that the L653 tester shares.
                                          > > >
                                          > > > Presumably Ernest doesn't. I can't find him, so I can't make the comparison. As I said in response to Ernest yesterday, higher level SNPs within R-U106 such as Z381, Z301 and others should hopefully become testable soon. At least the L653+ tester can reliably place himself on the Z18/Z19 branch, and the other guys on that branch should test his SNP. Whereas Ernest and his 2 little private SNPs are wandering aimlessly around R-U106 trying to find what branch they are on.
                                          > > >
                                          > > > There are a lot of guys in U106 or L48 who would like to have any other SNPs at all. So ya know, it's a relative problem.
                                          > > >
                                          > > > Charles
                                          > > >
                                          > > > --- In R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com, Michael L. Hébert <genlists@> wrote:
                                          > > > >
                                          > > > > If you take the lab results at face value and assume that there were no lab
                                          > > > > errors, then logic would dictate that L653 is downstream of Z18. The only
                                          > > > > person (Ysearch 962TS) found to be L653+ is also Z18+. However, there are
                                          > > > > other Z18+ people who have been found to be L653-. If L653 were upstream of
                                          > > > > Z18, then if one Z18+ person tested as L653+ then all Z18+ people should have
                                          > > > > tested as L653+. But, since this has not been the case, it can be concluded
                                          > > > > that L653 must be downstream of Z18 ... if you trust the current lab results.
                                          > > > > So, if L653 does somehow turn out to be upstream of Z18 then there had to
                                          > > > > have been some lab errors somewhere in those Z18+ people who have been tested
                                          > > > > so far.
                                          > > > >
                                          > > > > Mike
                                          > > > >
                                          > > > > Bell line "stuck" at U106-L1*
                                          > > > >
                                          > > > >
                                          > > > >
                                          > > > > _____
                                          > > > >
                                          > > > > From: Ernest K Johnson
                                          > > > > Sent: Friday, September 02, 2011 5:24 AM
                                          > > > > To: R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com
                                          > > > > Subject: [R1b1c_U106-S21] Re: Calling all R1b_U106* feeling stuck in a rut.
                                          > > > >
                                          > > > >
                                          > > > > Thanks William and John for your input. I did test negative for Z19 and Z18.
                                          > > > > I will consider testing L653. If there is a slim chance of a positive result
                                          > > > > then it may be worth testing. Money is not a problem. On the other hand I
                                          > > > > would like to find out why some in the Forums feel its below Z18. Even though
                                          > > > > L127/L128 is considered private, I'm curious how many U106* have tested it or
                                          > > > > considered testing those snps?
                                          > > > > Thanks,
                                          > > > > Ernest
                                          > > > >
                                          > > >
                                          > >
                                          >
                                        • Ernest K Johnson
                                          Thanks Mike and Charles for your inputs. I m game for any testing that will help the Cause (Project). I might need someone to point me in the right direction
                                          Message 20 of 23 , Sep 2, 2011
                                          • 0 Attachment
                                            Thanks Mike and Charles for your inputs. I'm game for any testing that will help the Cause (Project). I might need someone to point me in the right direction when the opportunity comes.

                                            --- In R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com, Michael L. Hébert <genlists@...> wrote:
                                            >
                                            > I agree that things such as multiple lab errors and SNP convergences are
                                            > highly unlikely. Ernest asked why the person at DNA Forums would place L653
                                            > downstream of Z18/Z19. I tried to explain the logic behind it (perhaps
                                            > badly) and only mentioned the lab errors as being one remote possibility for
                                            > L653 eventually being found to be upstream of Z18. Convergence would
                                            > certainly be another remote possibility for it being found outside Z18. But,
                                            > taking the results as they stand now, L653 seems to certainly be downstream
                                            > of Z18 as Thomas Krahn has it in the Y draft tree and as the poster at DNA
                                            > Forums (R-U106 L257 Project forum) placed it. People like Ernest who are
                                            > already Z18- can certainly test for L653 if they like, as encouraged by a
                                            > previous poster, but it is highly unlikely to come back L653+. If any of the
                                            > Z18- did come back L653+, then it would be a rather unusual situation and the
                                            > lab would have to try and square this with the previous L653 testing of the
                                            > Z18+ people invoking those rarities such as lab errors or convergences.
                                            >
                                            > I don't blame the L653+ person, or any persons with currently private SNPs,
                                            > to encourage more testing (I would be doing the same) and there has already
                                            > been some testing for L653 within Z18. Given those results, future L653
                                            > testing would seem to be most fruitful within Z18 and not outside it. And,
                                            > it may well turn out to be a private SNP, which is not necessarily a bad
                                            > thing as these could be helpful in genealogical research. Ernest with his
                                            > L127/L128 does have the "honor" of currently having his own branch of U106
                                            > and perhaps being one of the first members of an as-of-yet undiscovered
                                            > branch of U106, assuming that L127/L128 is relatively recent with more
                                            > undiscovered SNPs upstream between it and U106.
                                            >
                                            > I keep checking once in a while for any action within U106-L1 which is my
                                            > primary U106 interest, but things are pretty quiet there. L48 seems to be
                                            > where most of the action is right now. But, things seem to be happening at a
                                            > fairly rapid pace and I'm sure more and more of the big tree will get fleshed
                                            > out with the discovery of new SNPs.
                                            >
                                            > Mike
                                            >
                                            >
                                            >
                                            > _____
                                            >
                                            > From: Charles
                                            > Sent: Friday, September 02, 2011 9:28 AM
                                            > To: R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com
                                            > Subject: [R1b1c_U106-S21] Re: Calling all R1b_U106* feeling stuck in a rut.
                                            >
                                            >
                                            >
                                            >
                                            > Here is the situation surrounding the L653+ tester. It does not rely on the
                                            > ridiculous idea that the other Z18+/Z19+ guys who have tested L653- might all
                                            > be back-mutated or might all have lab errors.
                                            >
                                            > Instead it has to do with the L653+ tester himself, and as he says, the fact
                                            > that he is the only one. It would otherwise be possible for him to have a
                                            > convergence to the Z18+ result or a lab error to that result and not really
                                            > be on the Z18/Z19 branch. But what slams the door behind him is the fact that
                                            > he is both Z18+ and Z19+. For him to not be a legitimate member of the
                                            > Z18/Z19 branch, he would have to have 2 convergences or lab errors.
                                            > Unrealistic times ten.
                                            >
                                            > For someone trying to match him, the remote possibility would exist that they
                                            > could be back-mutated at one or the other of Z18 and Z19 or have a lab error.
                                            > But if someone is both Z18- and Z19-, as Ernest is, there is no way that he
                                            > is going to match someone is both Z18+ and Z19+, at L653.
                                            >
                                            > You can't blame the L653+ guy for trying to get people to test his SNP, just
                                            > as Ernest keeps trying to get guys to test L127.2 and L128. Guys with private
                                            > SNPs are doomed to stay private if nobody tests their SNPs. But you guys are
                                            > forgetting about the STRs!
                                            >
                                            > OK, the STRs are heavily prone to convergence and back-mutation, which are
                                            > very rare with SNPs. That is why SNPs rule, and the tree is built on SNPs.
                                            > But the SNPs occur on branches that originate with STR changes. And the
                                            > Z18/Z19 branch has STR characteristics that the L653 tester shares.
                                            >
                                            > Presumably Ernest doesn't. I can't find him, so I can't make the comparison.
                                            > As I said in response to Ernest yesterday, higher level SNPs within R-U106
                                            > such as Z381, Z301 and others should hopefully become testable soon. At least
                                            > the L653+ tester can reliably place himself on the Z18/Z19 branch, and the
                                            > other guys on that branch should test his SNP. Whereas Ernest and his 2
                                            > little private SNPs are wandering aimlessly around R-U106 trying to find what
                                            > branch they are on.
                                            >
                                            > There are a lot of guys in U106 or L48 who would like to have any other SNPs
                                            > at all. So ya know, it's a relative problem.
                                            >
                                            > Charles
                                            >
                                          • William Hancock
                                            OK, guys.  I wasn t trying to stir up controversy as such....just wanted a little attention given to testing L653 by anyone willing to do so.  Perhaps some
                                            Message 21 of 23 , Sep 2, 2011
                                            • 0 Attachment
                                              OK, guys.  I wasn't trying to stir up controversy as such....just wanted a little attention given to testing L653 by anyone willing to do so.  Perhaps some will remember that Peter posted last year how hard it was and how discouraging it was to beat the bushes for someone to test his then new SNP 257.  Few answer personal emails.  Most who do say what's in it for me? I suspect Peter asked me to chase down candidates to test L653 in order to "share the wealth".   Frankly, when a SNP is new it is very hard to know who will be a carrier for it.  STRs and all that are not certainties until sufficient people test to show that an STR combination really is valid.
                                               
                                              I hoped to stir up publicity for testing L653.  I hope your efforts have done that and I thank you for it.  As pointed out, a new SNP will remain a private SNP unless others test for it.
                                               
                                              There is one closely related member of the Silver family to the Silvers in whom L653 was found, who has committed to testing.  Another who is to be tested has
                                              what may be the right STR signature, but has a large Genetic Distance from that of the initial bearer of L653 as well as a different surname.  In both cases they do not have the 111 site test nor what is currently a full deep clade test.  This being perhaps typical of the  U106* people who are "stuck in a rut". 
                                               
                                              Despite your valid arguments to the contrary, I remain anxious for anyone that is at least R1b and doesn't know anything more about their haplogroup who is willing to test to do so.  No promises made for their willingness to spend their hard earned money on an uncertain result.
                                               
                                              Anything you feel comfortable doing to secure people to test for L653 would be appreciated.  A personal/family SNP is nice, but how much nicer to find a new branch that some of those in limbo at 106* might desire.  You can test for L653 now.  Some of the Z tests may be in the future and it might be interesting to some to take action now and more later.
                                               
                                              Thanks, Bill Hancock
                                              Co-Administrator of the Silver Surname Project
                                               

                                               
                                              From: Ernest K Johnson <gaelstar@...>
                                              To: R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com
                                              Sent: Friday, September 2, 2011 10:48 AM
                                              Subject: [R1b1c_U106-S21] Re: Calling all R1b_U106* feeling stuck in a rut.

                                               
                                              Thanks Mike and Charles for your inputs. I'm game for any testing that will help the Cause (Project). I might need someone to point me in the right direction when the opportunity comes.

                                              --- In R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com, Michael L. Hébert <genlists@...> wrote:
                                              >
                                              > I agree that things such as multiple lab errors and SNP convergences are
                                              > highly unlikely. Ernest asked why the person at DNA Forums would place L653
                                              > downstream of Z18/Z19.> already Z18- can certainly test for L653 if they like, as encouraged by a
                                              > previous poster, but it is highly unlikely to come back L653+. 
                                               
                                              > I don't blame the L653+ person, or any persons with currently private SNPs,
                                              > to encourage more testing (I would be doing the same) and there has already
                                              > been some testing for L653 within Z18. Given those results, future L653
                                              > testing would seem to be most fruitful within Z18 and not outside it. And,
                                              > it may well turn out to be a private SNP, which is not necessarily a bad
                                              > thing as these could be helpful in genealogical research.  >
                                              >
                                              > You can't blame the L653+ guy for trying to get people to test his SNP, just
                                              > as Ernest keeps trying to get guys to test L127.2 and L128. Guys with private
                                              > SNPs are doomed to stay private if nobody tests their SNPs.>
                                              > There are a lot of guys in U106 or L48 who would like to have any other SNPs
                                              > at all. So ya know, it's a relative problem.
                                              >
                                              > Charles
                                              >



                                            • Ernest K Johnson
                                              Charles where do I find Gregg,s diagram? I would like to consider testing for Z14,Z16 and Z17 to se if there is a possible vertically split. Ernest
                                              Message 22 of 23 , Sep 2, 2011
                                              • 0 Attachment
                                                Charles where do I find Gregg,s diagram? I would like to consider testing for Z14,Z16 and Z17 to se if there is a possible vertically split.
                                                Ernest

                                                --- In R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com, "Charles" <cdmo29@...> wrote:
                                                >
                                                > Thanks! OK, well that is interesting, because you actually have the Z18 branch indicator 463=25. However, that result is not exclusive to the Z18 branch. It works more the other way around. I shouldn't really be invading Peter's area of expertise here, but he identified 463=25 as an indicator of that branch. Peter updated his Z18 L257- and Z18 L257+ spreadsheets 3 days ago, and so far, everyone on both of them who has upgraded to 111, is 463=25, rather than the U106 modal 463=24. We rarely see universal indicators, and there will probably be exceptions at some point, but so far, so good.
                                                >
                                                > We could speculate here that perhaps you and the Z18s are on the same higher branch of the tree, possibly indicated by 463=25. Otherwise, you just happen to have a change to that marker. Greg's diagram for the Z18 branch is based on just 5 preliminary testers who, in addition to Z18+ and Z19+, also share Z14+, Z16+, and Z17+. It is theoretically possible that you, or someone else who is 463=25, might be positive for Z14 or Z16 or Z17, without being positive for Z18 or Z19. That would vertically split that level on Greg's diagram, making Z18/Z19 a subclade of the other part. OK, it's just a possibility. I didn't actually do a full comparison of your STRs to the Z18 branch.
                                                >
                                                > But for examples for you and others out there, if your STRs are more similar to those of U198 or L48, then Greg's diagram shows that you will be more likely to be positive for Z301 when it becomes testable. If your STRs are more similar to L1, then you would be more likely to be positive for Z156. If your STRs are more similar to Z18, but you came up negative anyway, then Z14 or Z16 or Z17 would be possibilities.
                                                >
                                                > We are going to depend on some guys to "play the field" for us, so we can see what the characteristics of these new subclades will turn out to be, and how they differ from one another. And I realize that it isn't necessarily too easy to do the comparisons.
                                                >
                                                > That's why my Cross-references include a few STR indicators for various subclades, to give you guys some guidance. But we can't know what the indicators for the new Z SNP clades will be until we get results from the guys who are "playing the field" for us.
                                                >
                                                > Beyond all of that, STRs are only indicators. The only way that you can know if you are positive for a SNP, unless it is below one that you are negative for (in which case you are negative) or on another branch altogether (in which case you are negative) is to test it.
                                                >
                                                > Charles
                                                >
                                                > --- In R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com, "Ernest K Johnson" <gaelstar@> wrote:
                                                > >
                                                > > Charles,
                                                > > My kit # is 5962.
                                                > >
                                                > > --- In R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com, "Charles" <cdmo29@> wrote:
                                                > > >
                                                > > > Ernest,
                                                > > >
                                                > > > What is your kit number? I can't find you. Charles
                                                > > >
                                                > > > --- In R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com, "Ernest K Johnson" <gaelstar@> wrote:
                                                > > > >
                                                > > > > Thanks William and John for your input. I did test negative for Z19 and Z18. I will consider testing L653. If there is a slim chance of a positive result then it may be worth testing. Money is not a problem. On the other hand I would like to find out why some in the Forums feel its below Z18. Even though L127/L128 is considered private, I'm curious how many U106* have tested it or considered testing those snps?
                                                > > > > Thanks,
                                                > > > > Ernest
                                                > > > >
                                                > > > > --- In R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com, William Hancock <a12mayflower@> wrote:
                                                > > > > >
                                                > > > > > John,
                                                > > > > >  
                                                > > > > > There is only the one example of a person being Z18+ and also L653+.  One example does not a rule make.  We need more people to test before a hard and fast conclusion can be drawn that to be L653+ one must also be Z18+, or stated differently that L653 is definitely below Z18+.  On the other hand, we have a few examples already where being Z18+ happens when one is L653-.  Therefore, I encourage some testing by Z18- individuals to see just what is really what.  If you feel free to spend $29 to test yourself for the benefit of scientific knowledge, by all means please do it.  We need to know with a degree of certainty whether L653 is really a branch off the Z18+ branch and the only way we can obtain that knowledge in the early days is to have a few Z18- individuals test for L653.
                                                > > > > >  
                                                > > > > > Thanks to you and others who consider testing for L653 for their personal interest and/or for the good of scientific knowledge.
                                                > > > > >  
                                                > > > > > Bill Hancock
                                                > > > > > Silver Project Co-Administrator
                                                > > > > >
                                                > > > > > From: John German <german@>
                                                > > > > > To: R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com
                                                > > > > > Sent: Thursday, September 1, 2011 8:17 PM
                                                > > > > > Subject: Re: [R1b1c_U106-S21] Calling all R1b_U106* feeling stuck in a rut.
                                                > > > > >
                                                > > > > >
                                                > > > > >  
                                                > > > > >
                                                > > > > > Have you tested for Z18 ?
                                                > > > > >
                                                > > > > > The discussions about the L653 SNP on DNA-Forums report that is
                                                > > > > > is beneath Z18+
                                                > > > > >
                                                > > > > > I've tested Z18- so there would seem to be no reason for me to test L653
                                                > > > > > unless you are are Z18- and have upset the apple cart so to speak.
                                                > > > > >
                                                > > > > >
                                                > > > > >
                                                > > > > > William Hancock wrote:
                                                > > > > >
                                                > > > > > Ernest Johnson inquired about Z SNPs to test for as he was
                                                > > > > > feeling in limbo looking for a branch of U106 to land in.
                                                > > > > > > 
                                                > > > > > >Well, I don't have a Z SNP for you to test, but I do have
                                                > > > > > a new SNP that might get you out of the U106* category.  I, too, have
                                                > > > > > been stuck in a rut but recently have been found to have the new L653
                                                > > > > > SNP.  All those who would like to find a place in the sun are
                                                > > > > > encouraged to test for this new SNP.  It needs people to test for it to
                                                > > > > > make it out of the personal SNP category and into a full fledged branch
                                                > > > > > of U106.  Please test for it - it may be where you belong!
                                                > > > > > > 
                                                > > > > > >Thanks to all who consider it.
                                                > > > > > > 
                                                > > > > > >Bill Hancock
                                                > > > > > >
                                                > > > > > >
                                                > > > > > >From: Ernest K Johnson <gaelstar@>
                                                > > > > > >To: R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com
                                                > > > > > >Sent: Thursday,
                                                > > > > > September 1, 2011 8:27 AM
                                                > > > > > >Subject: [R1b1c_U106-S21] Re: any new snps for L48-
                                                > > > > > >
                                                > > > > > >
                                                > > > > > > 
                                                > > > > > >Thanks Charles for the quick response. I will look forward to
                                                > > > > > any new snps.
                                                > > > > > >Thanks,
                                                > > > > > >Ernest
                                                > > > > > >
                                                > > > > > >--- In R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com,
                                                > > > > > "Charles" <cdmo29@> wrote:
                                                > > > > > >>
                                                > > > > > >> Not yet Ernest, but there will be, and hopefully soon.
                                                > > > > > >>
                                                > > > > > >> Charles
                                                > > > > > >>
                                                > > > > > >> --- In R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com,
                                                > > > > > "Ernest K Johnson" <gaelstar@> wrote:
                                                > > > > > >> >
                                                > > > > > >> > Does anyone know if there are any new Z snps for U106*
                                                > > > > > members since Z18/Z19? I was negative for those two snps as well as
                                                > > > > > L257. Stuck at L127/L128.
                                                > > > > > >> > Thanks,
                                                > > > > > >> > Ernest
                                                > > > > > >> >
                                                > > > > > >>
                                                > > > > > >
                                                > > > > > >
                                                > > > > > >
                                                > > > > > >
                                                > > > > >
                                                > > > >
                                                > > >
                                                > >
                                                >
                                              • Charles
                                                Right, except they are not available yet. To see Greg s diagram, go to this forum s Files section and look for Cross-reference. On my cross-reference charts,
                                                Message 23 of 23 , Sep 2, 2011
                                                • 0 Attachment
                                                  Right, except they are not available yet. To see Greg's diagram, go to this forum's Files section and look for Cross-reference. On my cross-reference charts, there is a link immediately below the chart that takes you to Greg's diagram. Ernest, it looks potentially promising that those SNPs could be your ticket. I will let you know when they become testable.

                                                  Charles

                                                  --- In R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com, "Ernest K Johnson" <gaelstar@...> wrote:
                                                  >
                                                  > Charles where do I find Gregg,s diagram? I would like to consider testing for Z14,Z16 and Z17 to se if there is a possible vertically split.
                                                  > Ernest
                                                  >
                                                  > --- In R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com, "Charles" <cdmo29@> wrote:
                                                  > >
                                                  > > Thanks! OK, well that is interesting, because you actually have the Z18 branch indicator 463=25. However, that result is not exclusive to the Z18 branch. It works more the other way around. I shouldn't really be invading Peter's area of expertise here, but he identified 463=25 as an indicator of that branch. Peter updated his Z18 L257- and Z18 L257+ spreadsheets 3 days ago, and so far, everyone on both of them who has upgraded to 111, is 463=25, rather than the U106 modal 463=24. We rarely see universal indicators, and there will probably be exceptions at some point, but so far, so good.
                                                  > >
                                                  > > We could speculate here that perhaps you and the Z18s are on the same higher branch of the tree, possibly indicated by 463=25. Otherwise, you just happen to have a change to that marker. Greg's diagram for the Z18 branch is based on just 5 preliminary testers who, in addition to Z18+ and Z19+, also share Z14+, Z16+, and Z17+. It is theoretically possible that you, or someone else who is 463=25, might be positive for Z14 or Z16 or Z17, without being positive for Z18 or Z19. That would vertically split that level on Greg's diagram, making Z18/Z19 a subclade of the other part. OK, it's just a possibility. I didn't actually do a full comparison of your STRs to the Z18 branch.
                                                  > >
                                                  > > But for examples for you and others out there, if your STRs are more similar to those of U198 or L48, then Greg's diagram shows that you will be more likely to be positive for Z301 when it becomes testable. If your STRs are more similar to L1, then you would be more likely to be positive for Z156. If your STRs are more similar to Z18, but you came up negative anyway, then Z14 or Z16 or Z17 would be possibilities.
                                                  > >
                                                  > > We are going to depend on some guys to "play the field" for us, so we can see what the characteristics of these new subclades will turn out to be, and how they differ from one another. And I realize that it isn't necessarily too easy to do the comparisons.
                                                  > >
                                                  > > That's why my Cross-references include a few STR indicators for various subclades, to give you guys some guidance. But we can't know what the indicators for the new Z SNP clades will be until we get results from the guys who are "playing the field" for us.
                                                  > >
                                                  > > Beyond all of that, STRs are only indicators. The only way that you can know if you are positive for a SNP, unless it is below one that you are negative for (in which case you are negative) or on another branch altogether (in which case you are negative) is to test it.
                                                  > >
                                                  > > Charles
                                                  > >
                                                  > > --- In R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com, "Ernest K Johnson" <gaelstar@> wrote:
                                                  > > >
                                                  > > > Charles,
                                                  > > > My kit # is 5962.
                                                  > > >
                                                  > > > --- In R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com, "Charles" <cdmo29@> wrote:
                                                  > > > >
                                                  > > > > Ernest,
                                                  > > > >
                                                  > > > > What is your kit number? I can't find you. Charles
                                                  > > > >
                                                  > > > > --- In R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com, "Ernest K Johnson" <gaelstar@> wrote:
                                                  > > > > >
                                                  > > > > > Thanks William and John for your input. I did test negative for Z19 and Z18. I will consider testing L653. If there is a slim chance of a positive result then it may be worth testing. Money is not a problem. On the other hand I would like to find out why some in the Forums feel its below Z18. Even though L127/L128 is considered private, I'm curious how many U106* have tested it or considered testing those snps?
                                                  > > > > > Thanks,
                                                  > > > > > Ernest
                                                  > > > > >
                                                  > > > > > --- In R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com, William Hancock <a12mayflower@> wrote:
                                                  > > > > > >
                                                  > > > > > > John,
                                                  > > > > > >  
                                                  > > > > > > There is only the one example of a person being Z18+ and also L653+.  One example does not a rule make.  We need more people to test before a hard and fast conclusion can be drawn that to be L653+ one must also be Z18+, or stated differently that L653 is definitely below Z18+.  On the other hand, we have a few examples already where being Z18+ happens when one is L653-.  Therefore, I encourage some testing by Z18- individuals to see just what is really what.  If you feel free to spend $29 to test yourself for the benefit of scientific knowledge, by all means please do it.  We need to know with a degree of certainty whether L653 is really a branch off the Z18+ branch and the only way we can obtain that knowledge in the early days is to have a few Z18- individuals test for L653.
                                                  > > > > > >  
                                                  > > > > > > Thanks to you and others who consider testing for L653 for their personal interest and/or for the good of scientific knowledge.
                                                  > > > > > >  
                                                  > > > > > > Bill Hancock
                                                  > > > > > > Silver Project Co-Administrator
                                                  > > > > > >
                                                  > > > > > > From: John German <german@>
                                                  > > > > > > To: R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com
                                                  > > > > > > Sent: Thursday, September 1, 2011 8:17 PM
                                                  > > > > > > Subject: Re: [R1b1c_U106-S21] Calling all R1b_U106* feeling stuck in a rut.
                                                  > > > > > >
                                                  > > > > > >
                                                  > > > > > >  
                                                  > > > > > >
                                                  > > > > > > Have you tested for Z18 ?
                                                  > > > > > >
                                                  > > > > > > The discussions about the L653 SNP on DNA-Forums report that is
                                                  > > > > > > is beneath Z18+
                                                  > > > > > >
                                                  > > > > > > I've tested Z18- so there would seem to be no reason for me to test L653
                                                  > > > > > > unless you are are Z18- and have upset the apple cart so to speak.
                                                  > > > > > >
                                                  > > > > > >
                                                  > > > > > >
                                                  > > > > > > William Hancock wrote:
                                                  > > > > > >
                                                  > > > > > > Ernest Johnson inquired about Z SNPs to test for as he was
                                                  > > > > > > feeling in limbo looking for a branch of U106 to land in.
                                                  > > > > > > > 
                                                  > > > > > > >Well, I don't have a Z SNP for you to test, but I do have
                                                  > > > > > > a new SNP that might get you out of the U106* category.  I, too, have
                                                  > > > > > > been stuck in a rut but recently have been found to have the new L653
                                                  > > > > > > SNP.  All those who would like to find a place in the sun are
                                                  > > > > > > encouraged to test for this new SNP.  It needs people to test for it to
                                                  > > > > > > make it out of the personal SNP category and into a full fledged branch
                                                  > > > > > > of U106.  Please test for it - it may be where you belong!
                                                  > > > > > > > 
                                                  > > > > > > >Thanks to all who consider it.
                                                  > > > > > > > 
                                                  > > > > > > >Bill Hancock
                                                  > > > > > > >
                                                  > > > > > > >
                                                  > > > > > > >From: Ernest K Johnson <gaelstar@>
                                                  > > > > > > >To: R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com
                                                  > > > > > > >Sent: Thursday,
                                                  > > > > > > September 1, 2011 8:27 AM
                                                  > > > > > > >Subject: [R1b1c_U106-S21] Re: any new snps for L48-
                                                  > > > > > > >
                                                  > > > > > > >
                                                  > > > > > > > 
                                                  > > > > > > >Thanks Charles for the quick response. I will look forward to
                                                  > > > > > > any new snps.
                                                  > > > > > > >Thanks,
                                                  > > > > > > >Ernest
                                                  > > > > > > >
                                                  > > > > > > >--- In R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com,
                                                  > > > > > > "Charles" <cdmo29@> wrote:
                                                  > > > > > > >>
                                                  > > > > > > >> Not yet Ernest, but there will be, and hopefully soon.
                                                  > > > > > > >>
                                                  > > > > > > >> Charles
                                                  > > > > > > >>
                                                  > > > > > > >> --- In R1b1c_U106-S21@yahoogroups.com,
                                                  > > > > > > "Ernest K Johnson" <gaelstar@> wrote:
                                                  > > > > > > >> >
                                                  > > > > > > >> > Does anyone know if there are any new Z snps for U106*
                                                  > > > > > > members since Z18/Z19? I was negative for those two snps as well as
                                                  > > > > > > L257. Stuck at L127/L128.
                                                  > > > > > > >> > Thanks,
                                                  > > > > > > >> > Ernest
                                                  > > > > > > >> >
                                                  > > > > > > >>
                                                  > > > > > > >
                                                  > > > > > > >
                                                  > > > > > > >
                                                  > > > > > > >
                                                  > > > > > >
                                                  > > > > >
                                                  > > > >
                                                  > > >
                                                  > >
                                                  >
                                                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.