toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
I had missed 391 in my tree analysis. It helps to have an extra set of eyes looking at this. Still, these SNPs mutate over 10Xs as fast as the slow moving 455 that I based my tree on.
On a side note, I read that the L513 SNPs seem to mutate faster than the average SNP across all SNPs. I wonder if there is a correspondingly fast STR rate for L513's, or if these are more constant than the SNPs?
On 3/15/2017 10:55 PM, Jared Smith wrote:
I count GD=8 between you. Seeing as your common ancestor was only a
few hundred years ago (I'd think 450 years ago at the furthest), this
is rather remarkable. This difference in STRs would otherwise suggest
a VERY distant common ancestor, but this SNP match proves this wrong.
The 391 STR (Joel = 10 and Michael = 11) and 447 STR (Joel = 26 and
Michael = 25) are moderately slow moving STRs and *might* be good ones
to estimate which side of these new Hartley branches other matches
might land on.
I'm going to request that FTDNA add one of your shared SNPs to the SNP
Pack and/or as a single SNP test. This would provide an easy way for
other Hartleys to verify if they are somewhere on this shared branch.
Yes, this is a great breakthrough. Anytime we can define very recent
splits in branches, it really helps us refine age estimates for
everyone else. In this case, it reinforces my previous estimates as
being accurate. And, as you note, we now have three Hartley branches
(one shared and then one each for the two of you) that allow other kin
to test to and define other new sub-branches. Getting to this level of
granularity is one of the primary goals of this project.
I've updated the charts at http://dna.smithplanet.com/snp to reflect
these changes. There are still several questionable variants that I
need to sort to one side of the split or the other once I get
Michael's raw data files. Assuming FTDNA accepts my recommendation of
calling this block R-A11132, this will be your new terminal SNP.
On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 8:08 PM, Joel Hartley <joel@...> wrote:
That is such great news. This is a red letter day for Hartley Genetic
Genealogy. This is the first SNP branching within the Hartley surname that I
know of. That makes this a true Hartley SNP group which is one the goals of
the BigY testing. Thanks also to Mike for doing this test.
I had a feeling that this branch of Hartleys was quite large. There is still
room for other branches - both in the main Hartley group, in my group and in
On 3/15/2017 8:32 PM, Jared Smith wrote:
I've started an initial analysis based on the limited information I
have from FTDNA thus far. I can provide more information after I
receive Michael's VCF files.
The following lists provide the SNP name (if available), then the DNA
position number and polymorphism/change value.
Thus far, I know Joel and Michael share the following known SNPs:
A11132 - 14092445-C-T
A11134 - 15656058-T-G
A11135 - 16770482-C-T
A11137 - 19090151-G-A
A11139 - 21637160-G-A
A11140 - 21757893-T-A
Michael has the following novel variants:
19110373-C-T (already named SNP - Y30173 - in another R1b branch)
21262641-C-A (already named SNP - K554 - in another C2e2 branch)
Joel has the following novel variants:
A11130 - 9132352-G-A
A11131 - 13691125-A-T
A11133 - 14819258-C-T
A11136 - 17550281-C-T
A11138 - 19477032-A-T
So I will preliminarily call the shared Hartley branch the A11132
branch. I'll continue to call Joel's Hartley sub-branch A11130.
Michael's Hartley branch will eventually be named once one of his
unique variants is assigned a name. It is interesting that two of
Michael's 'novel' variants align with known SNPs on other branches,
but this does happen occasionally.
Michael likely may have other good novel variants that FTDNA has not
identified. I'm not yet sure of the quality of the 4 they have
identified, but FTDNA is pretty conservative, so they're probably
Using this we can start do some initial age estimates. With 6 shared
mutations and 4-5 unique mutations, this means that the split in your
lines was probably just this side of half way between when our Z17911
ancestor lived and present day. With our best guess estimate of Z17911
being 800-1000 years old, this puts your common ancestor living
probably 350-450 years ago, give or take.
It would be especially helpful if you could make a paper connection to
this ancestor, but that may not be possible. Regardless, this provides
a very nice Hartley branching for others to test to.
The A11130 SNP that Joel has is available for single SNP testing and
is part of the S5668 SNP Pack. I had hoped this would land on the
shared Hartley branch - it would have provided an easy test for people
to verify that they're on this Hartley line, but now testing for it
would only prove or disprove if someone is related to Joel more
recently than that SNP was formed - and it could have been at Joel's
father so only Joel and his brothers share it. So it's not of
particular value right now.
A new Hartley branch is discovered! Thank you Joel and Michael for
investing in Big-Y!
On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 12:10 PM, Charles Thomas
Mike Hartley is listed on my match list with 0 shared novel variants,
0 non-matching known SNPs, and 25,684 matching SNPs.
Is Mike 31/37 and 59/67 with you? My Thomas match with whom
I share the ancestor James Thomas b. abt 1760 is 66/67 with me.
So I'm thinking that your and Mike's shared Hartley ancestor could
be much farther back in time. Yet STRs can change at any time, and it's
just the average mutation rate per STR that are known so maybe your
shared ancestor is more recent than I'm guessing. I'm sure Jared's
analysis of the SNPs will be helpful.
From: Z16357@groups.io <Z16357@groups.io> on behalf of Joel Hartley
Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2017 7:28 AM
Subject: [Z16357] Mike Hartley BigY
I notice a new BigY match today with Mike Hartley. I'm not as good as
Jared as figuring out what the matches mean. For example, there are 5
SNPs which Charles Thomas and I have that others don't have. I don't see
any SNPs I share with Mike Hartley that I don't share with others.