PDA

View Full Version : Question of "flow" in I1 chart.



C-in-fl-usa
07-09-13, 00:48
When I first looked at the I1 chart on Eupedia, it has M253 (an excellent marker) at the top and as one looks down, it splits to DF29 (I1a) and Z131 with Z131 assigned Western Germanic (I1b).

The next level down are: M227, L22, Z58, and Z63.

* Keep in mind that my destination is L338 at the bottom.

Following the chart downward, I hit Z59 then Z60 with Z382 branching right. Now, following it down, is this an exact formula or absolute route where one is Z60 and must then be Z140 or can an individual have say both Z60 and a bit of Z382? As I said in my intro, I'm new to genetics. Not other sciences but I've never had the chance before to involve myself.

Anyway, it's in flow chart form like a business flow chart... but can there be deviations? In that I am thinking can a person be L338 (I1a3a1a1) and partially L1301 (I1a3a1b1)?

sparkey
07-09-13, 02:05
You can only have one path through the tree. Think about it: If your grandfather had one mutation A, and passed it onto your dad and uncle, and then your dad got mutation B and passed it onto you, while your uncle got mutation C, it wouldn't be possible for you to be "a bit of B and a bit of C." You'd just have A and B.

There is one complication: Some SNPs are volatile and can appear in multiple unrelated lineages. However, even when that happens, the two lineages maintain different hierarchical names.

C-in-fl-usa
07-09-13, 19:23
You can only have one path through the tree. Think about it: If your grandfather had one mutation A, and passed it onto your dad and uncle, and then your dad got mutation B and passed it onto you, while your uncle got mutation C, it wouldn't be possible for you to be "a bit of B and a bit of C." You'd just have A and B.

There is one complication: Some SNPs are volatile and can appear in multiple unrelated lineages. However, even when that happens, the two lineages maintain different hierarchical names.
Thanks Sparkey. That's what I wanted to know. An absolute route without deviation.

Now, to you... is the fact that you belong to I2 more important... or that you are further defined by L596? Or is a further breakdown more important?

Also... your L596 seemingly ends in the Paleolithic but I've read where it split into A, B, and C and obviously carried on. How did you arrive at the PF designation? I looked at Vladimir Smargl's site and see that PF3881 is a further breakdown of L596.

Again... genetics is new to me and as foreign as Florida paleobiology was when I began that.

sparkey
09-09-13, 17:16
Now, to you... is the fact that you belong to I2 more important... or that you are further defined by L596? Or is a further breakdown more important?

I don't really understand the question. You're asking about importance to me, personally? Like, which marker do I feel most attached to? I suppose that if people ask my haplogroup, I would say "I2c," which is defined by L596.


Also... your L596 seemingly ends in the Paleolithic but I've read where it split into A, B, and C and obviously carried on. How did you arrive at the PF designation? I looked at Vladimir Smargl's site and see that PF3881 is a further breakdown of L596.

I actually haven't tested any SNPs, but there's so little convergence in I2c (unlike I1) that with only a small number of STRs, I can confidently say that I fit into the "A" branch, and the "A" and "C" branches together are PF3881+ per the I2* Project (http://www.familytreedna.com/public/I2nosubcladeM170P215/) and Ken Nordtvedt (http://knordtvedt.home.bresnan.net/). This trick often won't work with I1, though.


Again... genetics is new to me and as foreign as Florida paleobiology was when I began that.

Paleobiology is not a bad field to work your way into genetics from. In fact, the hobbyist community could probably use more paleobiologists... it often seems like it's mainly anthropologists and computer scientists around here.