K1a+195C: no deeper subclade resolution? [Archive]

Giver

04-09-13, 23:24

So, I'm one of the many participants in Bill Hurst's K project page at FTDNA. I'm designated K1a+195C, having taken the FTDNA "mtDNAPlus" test (ie, HVR1 and HVR2, but not the full coding sequence). Here's a question I can't find an answer to in any of his literature:

Are some of us K1a+195C participants designated as such because we can't be assigned to a deeper subclade, even with a full coding sequence test? Obviously there are mutations in the coding region that are used as markers for deeper subclade assignment, and I haven't taken that test. So no mystery there, that I'm not assigned any deeper.

But here's the thing: Some of my closest matches as given on FTDNA have taken their full sequence test, and are still assigned only as K1a+195C. So I'm wondering if some of us are just "stuck" there until some other mutations are identified and the phylo tree expanded.

Bill Hurst has described the K1a+195C folks as being either "pre-K1a10" or "pre-K1a9". Supposedly in the former case, these folks have the 16048A mutation that defines K1a10, but also 195C and occasionally the 523/524 CACA insertions. Likewise, with the former group ("pre-K1a9"), they have the K1a9-defining 16524G.

I do have the 523/524 insertions, but have neither 16048A nor 16524G, so I'm sorta left out in the cold here: neither pre-K1a10 nor pre-K1a9. And this shouldn't be a question of simply needing a deeper (full-sequence) test, because those 16K mutations are on the HVR regions.

I've taken a Geno 2.0 test, which should assign me to a terminal mtDNA subclade; still waiting on the results. But in the meantime I thought I'd pose the question.

Thanks!

Maciamo

06-09-13, 19:20

HVR1+2 tests are pretty much useless to determine deep mtDNA subclades. You could order a full mtDNA sequence from FTDNA, but it's cheaper and usually just as good to purchase a 23andMe test (99$). I know a lot of people who got exactly the same deep clade results with 23andMe and with FTDNA's full mtDNA sequence. K1a subclades are well covered by 23andMe.

Sile

06-09-13, 20:07

HVR1+2 tests are pretty much useless to determine deep mtDNA subclades. You could order a full mtDNA sequence from FTDNA, but it's cheaper and usually just as good to purchase a 23andMe test (99$). I know a lot of people who got exactly the same deep clade results with 23andMe and with FTDNA's full mtDNA sequence. K1a subclades are well covered by 23andMe.

I beg to differ, 23andme has not upgraded their subclades since 2009 times

Sile

06-09-13, 20:08

So, I'm one of the many participants in Bill Hurst's K project page at FTDNA. I'm designated K1a+195C, having taken the FTDNA "mtDNAPlus" test (ie, HVR1 and HVR2, but not the full coding sequence). Here's a question I can't find an answer to in any of his literature:

Are some of us K1a+195C participants designated as such because we can't be assigned to a deeper subclade, even with a full coding sequence test? Obviously there are mutations in the coding region that are used as markers for deeper subclade assignment, and I haven't taken that test. So no mystery there, that I'm not assigned any deeper.

But here's the thing: Some of my closest matches as given on FTDNA have taken their full sequence test, and are still assigned only as K1a+195C. So I'm wondering if some of us are just "stuck" there until some other mutations are identified and the phylo tree expanded.

Bill Hurst has described the K1a+195C folks as being either "pre-K1a10" or "pre-K1a9". Supposedly in the former case, these folks have the 16048A mutation that defines K1a10, but also 195C and occasionally the 523/524 CACA insertions. Likewise, with the former group ("pre-K1a9"), they have the K1a9-defining 16524G.

I do have the 523/524 insertions, but have neither 16048A nor 16524G, so I'm sorta left out in the cold here: neither pre-K1a10 nor pre-K1a9. And this shouldn't be a question of simply needing a deeper (full-sequence) test, because those 16K mutations are on the HVR regions.

I've taken a Geno 2.0 test, which should assign me to a terminal mtDNA subclade; still waiting on the results. But in the meantime I thought I'd pose the question.

Thanks!

clearly Bill Hurst must have advised you on what to test. He is not a lazy project person for K

brianco

07-09-13, 14:12

Hi Giver

Are you designated K1a+195C or just K?

I ask as T195C is a coding region and even though my cousin has a 195C it is in their HVR2.

My cousin's has 60 HVR2 matches. 28 of those have taken the FMS and have:

K1a4a1a-T195C (x13)
K1a-T195C (x8)
K1a4a1a1 (x4)
K1a4a1a3 (x2)
K1a15 (x1)
We have ordered the FMS upgrade and await the result due in 14th Oct :smile:

BTW their mtDNA roots are from Wigan, Lancs, England

So, I'm one of the many participants in Bill Hurst's K project page at FTDNA. I'm designated K1a+195C, having taken the FTDNA "mtDNAPlus" test (ie, HVR1 and HVR2, but not the full coding sequence). Here's a question I can't find an answer to in any of his literature:

Are some of us K1a+195C participants designated as such because we can't be assigned to a deeper subclade, even with a full coding sequence test? Obviously there are mutations in the coding region that are used as markers for deeper subclade assignment, and I haven't taken that test. So no mystery there, that I'm not assigned any deeper.

But here's the thing: Some of my closest matches as given on FTDNA have taken their full sequence test, and are still assigned only as K1a+195C. So I'm wondering if some of us are just "stuck" there until some other mutations are identified and the phylo tree expanded.

Bill Hurst has described the K1a+195C folks as being either "pre-K1a10" or "pre-K1a9". Supposedly in the former case, these folks have the 16048A mutation that defines K1a10, but also 195C and occasionally the 523/524 CACA insertions. Likewise, with the former group ("pre-K1a9"), they have the K1a9-defining 16524G.

I do have the 523/524 insertions, but have neither 16048A nor 16524G, so I'm sorta left out in the cold here: neither pre-K1a10 nor pre-K1a9. And this shouldn't be a question of simply needing a deeper (full-sequence) test, because those 16K mutations are on the HVR regions.

I've taken a Geno 2.0 test, which should assign me to a terminal mtDNA subclade; still waiting on the results. But in the meantime I thought I'd pose the question.

Thanks!

brianco

18-09-13, 19:56

Sorry Giver, I was misled on the T195C issue and it is indeed a HVR marker. :sad-2:

My cousin's FMS results came in and is now K1a - T195C.

From what I have heard it 'may' be dropped in future updates. Also our results showed 'new' markers that could define or be included in a later subclade :smile:

Hi Giver

Are you designated K1a+195C or just K?

I ask as T195C is a coding region and even though my cousin has a 195C it is in their HVR2.

My cousin's has 60 HVR2 matches. 28 of those have taken the FMS and have:

K1a4a1a-T195C (x13)
K1a-T195C (x8)
K1a4a1a1 (x4)
K1a4a1a3 (x2)
K1a15 (x1)
We have ordered the FMS upgrade and await the result due in 14th Oct :smile:

BTW their mtDNA roots are from Wigan, Lancs, England

Giver

24-09-13, 17:22

Hi Giver

Are you designated K1a+195C or just K?

K1a+195C. Pretty sure my mtDNA ancestors are from the British Isles, too.

Maciamo

24-09-13, 17:54

I beg to differ, 23andme has not upgraded their subclades since 2009 times

Doesn't matter, if it's on the chip you can find out yourself by looking at the mutations.