The “J2 Y-DNA Project ” was founded by Costa Tsirigakis and Angela Cone in 2006 and until 2013 has done considerable research in the J2 area, mainly STR-Cluster research to provide an answer to the question if sub-clades can be reliably predicted from extended haplotypes. See Site Map for full content of the original pages (Scientific process, Third phase results, etc.). To backup important news from this time period and make them available for search here, a copy and paste of the original J-Project News page is inserted here:
29 August 2013
• The final analysis of the J2 Y-DNA project has now been completed.
The results in the FTDNA J2 M172 group, are in the middle of being reorganised, and over the next few weeks additional new admins will be added to the new project management team. More information about this will be posted on Angela’s DNA research blog. The new goals etc. of the FTDNA J2 M172 group will be posted either on the FTDNA project page, Angela’s blog or later on the new J-M172.info site.
I have started to write up the results of the final analysis. I’ve decided that instead of writing up the results in full “behind the scenes” before making the results public (which could potentially take another few months to complete!), I shall present a results “skeleton/scaffold” on a “wiki”, – so that everyone can see “live” progress while the “body” of the results is constructed.
Over time I will also be revamping my dnainfo site, including new information that explains things like mutations, taxonomy, clusters, clades, phylogenetics, the difference between STR mutations and “SNP” mutations (and how that affects the kinds of information they give) using (hopefully!) easy to understand examples and analogies. It will help make the final results of the J2 project more understandable to the average genetic genealogist. This information will be relevant to all genetic genealogists, thus it isn’t a product of the J2 project specifically.
– 3 December 2012««
• The “hibernation” of the Y-DNA haplogroup J2 project has now ended.
Conditions are now such that I can now begin to initiate changes to move the project in a positive new direction….
Next year, the J2 haplogroup project will have a new structure and new member driven goals – there will be a team of co-admins. This “testing company independant” Haplogroup J2 Y-DNA project” on this website, will have its original research goals answered, and will be completed. Most members of this project tested with FTDNA and are also members of the FTDNA J2 DNA group. The FTDNA J2 DNA group itself will continue, – instead it will be transformed into effectively a new entity – the J-M172 project. This project will have a completely new website.
The J-M172 project will “begin with a clean slate” so to speak, operated by a team of admins. Some of these different co-admins will have their own speciality areas, that they are in charge of (eg. some people will be in charge of J2a-L24, some in charge of J2b etc…)…
Before this new J2 project incarnation can fully emerge, there will be a period of metamorphosis over the next few months. Behind the scenes, this process has already begun.
An expanded version of the update above can be seen on Angela’s DNA blog here
There are several tasks I need to complete for this transition process:
* I need to do the STR analysis,
* I need to reorganise the way that some of project haplotypes are categorised in the FTDNA results pages (This does not affect J2b or J2a-L24). The results of the STR analysis will determine how the haplotype groups are reorganised.
* I need to recruit new co-admins & figure out how to co-ordinate who does what etc.
* I need to write up/ present the analysis results
* I need to write a large amout of background information so EVERYONE can understand what the results me and how it is relevant to everyone.
Further updates during the project transition process can be seen here
– 4 April 2009««
• The “hypotheses” page has been updated.
• FTDNA is opening its “walk along the Y” program.
• A page for J2a-Beta cluster (J2a4h) has been created here
The content for this new page is still a work in progress. On this page I also mention the new L-24 project for J2a-Beta cluster/J2a4h (J L24+), Which is run by Al Aburto, David Dugas, and Kamel Gazzah.
– 19 March 2009««
• Newly discovered haplogroup J2 SNP’s now available for testing.
Four new SNP markers are now available for testing with FTDNA. These new SNP’s are now on the new March 2009 FTDNA tree.
Two of these SNP’s are phylogenetically equivalent to the DYS 413 deletion (ie. DYS 413 <18), and two of these SNP’s appear to be correlated with the projects J2a-Beta cluster (J2a-Lambda and J2a-Theta inclusive).
• The “hypotheses” page has been updated.
• A page for J2a-Beta cluster (J2a4h) has been created.
This page is still in draft form, and can be seen here
November 2008-February 2009 ««
• Angela went on a haplogroup J2 research hiatus due to the Birth of her son.
– 17 October 2008««
• Another potential new J2 SNP found via 23andme testing .
The details known to date are stated on the M172 blog
I am hopeful that this new SNP ( rs35248080) will turn out to be a defining marker for J2a-Beta cluster!! … a defining SNP for this group is item 1 on my wish list for new SNP discoveries.
Having said that its just as likely that this new SNP will not correlate exactly with the J2a-Beta cluster,.. it may be wider or narrower…. but in either case it still has the potential to be VERY useful indeed!!
I look forward to hearing more about this SNP marker in the future.
– 5 October 2008««
• Haplogroup J2b research update.
The project has now received 67 marker results for two J2b* haplotypes. These results have been quite mixed.
The one J2b* haplotype with DYS 385=14,17 received 67 marker results that do not seem to have any values that are significantly different to those seen in J2b2 haplotypes.
This might suggests that this J2b* haplotype is from either:
a) A lineage that is quite closely related to J M241+
b) Just reflects convergence
c) Is really J M241+, but got a M241- result due to lab error
d) Is from a J M241+ lineage that has experienced a back mutation
(at present I suspect a or b are more likely)
On the other hand, the one J2b* haplotype with DYS 385=13,16 received 67 marker results with several quite distinctive values. This member may be the first representative of a distinctive new cluster/clade of J2b. The combination of three distinctive haplotype values are: DYS450=7, DYS565=12, DYS511=10. It will be interesting to discover in future how widespread this grouping is, and also what the likely TMRCA for this grouping is. It will also be interesting to see what impact the existance of this grouping has on the J2b-Delta hypothesis. To get a better idea, more J2b people need to be tested for M241, and anyone who tests negative for both M241 and M205 should also test DYS 450, DYS565 and DYS511.
J2b1 (J M205+)
With the discovery of the J2b* haplotypes, some of the comments made in the cluster analysis updates page now need to be reviewed (regarding whether the relative frequency of J2b1 in Europe can be deduced from the literature). A page has now been created that is dedicated to J2b-Beta cluster (which appears to be synonomous with J2b1). This page can be seen here
• J2a8 (J M319) update:There is an upcoming J2a8 update (a page for this clade will be created). As has been already mentioned on Rootsweb and elsewhere (see here and here) recently a number of people have been found positive for M319, and this clade contains some very diverse haplotypes. In scientific studies, the highest percentage found has been on Crete and the most distinctive/diagnostic feature of this clade is a DYS413a value of 16. In the recent King et al. (2008) study, it was found that 8.8% of haplotypes in Crete were J M319. We can also infer that J M319 was found in earlier studies, based on its highly distinctive DYS413a value of 16. In 2001, Malaspina et al. reported finding 21 haplotypes with DYS413=16,18 and 18 of these 21 haplotypes were from Crete.
At present, a higher proportion of those who have tested positive for M319 have origins from either Spain or Mexico, – but before any conclusions are drawn from this, we should remember that the FTDNA database is heavily biased (and the apparent geographical correlation might merely be a reflection of the testing bias, rather than the actual distribution of J M319). A table showing the database bias can be seen here (the table was constructed for the J2b-Beta page, to illustrate the correlation between J2b-Beta and geographical origin in the Balkans)
I recommend SNP testing M319 to anyone who has a DYS 413a value of 16. Hopefully as more and more haplotypes are found that are J M319+ we will be able to acertain which other markers might be useful for predicting whether or not a haplotype is J M319+. I’m already beginning to see some patterns – but would like additional verification of these observations before stating them. In 67 marker cluster diagrams, most haplotypes with a DYS413a=16 cluster together with the haplotypes confirmed as M319+. However, there are two DYS413a=16 haplotypes that don’t cluster with the confirmed M319+ haplotypes – and it would be a high priority to have these haplotypes SNP tested to verify whether or not they are M319+.
• J2a-Beta update:There is an upcoming J2a-Beta update. I originally intended to have this ready for this current, – but decided to delay since there are a couple of J2a-Beta members with 67 marker results due soon (in case those results make significant changes to my conclusions). Two additional sub-clusters within J2a-Beta have now been identified: J2a-Beta_i and J2a-Beta_ii.
I intended to present a table showing the modal values of the various J2a-Beta subclusters, – but decided that some further analysis is required before I do this, so that only relevant/diagnostic modal values are shown. Presenting modal values, can give the impression that these values are generally diagnostic for the cluster. However for some markers, the repeat values might be highly variable, & the modal value might actually be of very low diagnostic value. Therefore, presenting the raw modals may potentially be misleading. I would prefer to do further analyses so that the relative diagnostic value of each modal value is better indicated.
Having said that, – preliminary examination of the data indicates that DYS444 seems to have relatively high diagnostic value for distinguishing between J2a-Beta sub-clusters.
Haplotypes within J2a-Lambda appear to usually have a value of 13 (one haplotype has a value of 12)
Haplotypes within J2a-Theta usually have a value of 14 ( some have values of 15 and 13 also)
Haplotypes within J2a-Beta_i usually have a value of 11 (one haplotype has a value of 12)
Haplotypes within J2a-Beta_ii usually have a value of 12
Not all J2a-Beta haplotypes fall into one of the above sub-clusters, and the DYS 444 values for these miscellaneous haplotypes range from 11-15.
Bear in mind that these values are not 100% diagnostic (and , – for instance if you know you are in Beta cluster and have DYS444=11 this does not, for instance, mean you are definitely in J2a-Beta_i cluster. It does however suggest that you are probably not in either J2a-Lambda, J2a-Theta or J2a-Beta_ii.
I should also point out, that of all the clusters within J2a-Beta, the most easily distinguished is of course J2a-Lambda cluster. This cluster has distinctive values for several different markers (the most important of course being DYS445=6).
Yet another thing that should be clarified is that there are exceptions to the general rule that DYS450=9 and DYS445=10 defines J2a-Beta cluster (therefore distinguishing J2a-Beta isn’t 100% clear cut).
These exceptions are:
* There are some J2a-Beta haplotypes with DYS450=9;
* There are some J2a-Beta haplotypes with DYS445=11
* There are some J2a haplotypes (that are not J2a-Beta haplotypes) with DYS445=11
(note: J2b haplotypes usually are DYS445=11, the above relates to J2a only)
We can usually conclude that a haplotype with DYS450=9, DYS445=12 is unlikely to be in J2a-Beta cluster, but a haplotype with DYS450=9, DYS445=11 will not be 100% clearcut. So far, one haplotype like this has been found – judging from its other haplotype values it does appear to be a J2a-Beta haplotype (but we cannot be “100% beyond a doubt” certain).
Testing both DYS450 and DYS 445 in combination will in most cases establish whether a haplotype is J2a-Beta cluster or not – but anyone who receives values of DYS450=9, DYS445=11 will not have a 100% clearcut answer. Bearing in mind that there are some haplotypes that are clearly not J2a-Beta (eg. some that are M67+ and some that are M319+), which tend to cluster with J2a-Beta at 37 markers and below – upgrading to 67 markers would be clearly advisable to anyone with results of DYS450=9, DYS445=11.
• 67 and 37 marker Network diagram update:There is an upcoming Network diagram update. I orginally prepared network diagrams to be ready for this update, – but due to a new crop of results upgrades these diagrams are already out of date. These diagrams will be prepared again when the bulk of the upgrades have been received. Hopefully this will be sometime in October.
• New SNP marker found in J2a : A new SNP has been found in J2a that (like S57) is equivalent to the DYS413 mutation.
In the last year, two new DNA companies (23andme and Decodeme) have started business, which measure thousands of SNP’s on different chromosomes. These include (for males) SNP’s on the Y-Chromosome. Many of the SNP’s that are tested on the Y-Chromosome are ones that are not placed yet in the Y-tree. These SNP’s have names like “rs34276300”.
As a result of comparing different results, people have found that some of these SNP’s do give useful new information for the Y-DNA tree. For instance, we now know that the SNP “rs34276300″ has an important place in the R1b portion of the Y-DNA tree (as do at least two other SNP’s). When the YCC Y-DNA tree is updated, this SNP will be included in the Y-DNA tree with the SNP name ” P312 ” (it’s also currently named “S116” by Ethnoancestry).
So far, one new SNP has been detected in J2a by 23andme. This new SNP is apparently found in most J2a’s, and is currently known by the number rs34126399. The location of this new SNP on the Y-Chromosome can be seen here.
According to tests done by Dr Peter Underhill, this new SNP is “equivalent” to the DYS413 deletion. Presumably this SNP will be given an official SNP name in the Y-DNA tree when the YCC tree is next updated. There is a short article about this new SNP in the 23andme blog which can be seen here.
According to Ethnoancestry (who have not yet released information on where S57 is located on the Y-Chromosome), this SNP is not the same as S57. It would be very interesting to know whether this new SNP is indeed different to S57.
A big thank you to the DNAforum members who posted the link to the 23andme blog article, and also the communication from Ethnoancestry. The forum thread can be seen here. Registration is needed to see most posts on the forum, – but the forum is a friendly place, and interesting topics are often posted there – so you might want to check it out from time to time.
• Nomenclature page update: The nomenclature page will be updated to encorporate S57 and rs34126399 into the tree (in a manner consistent with the official YCC Y-DNA nomenclature rules/guidelines). So far all testing by Ethnoancestry suggests that the DYS413 deletion and S57 are phylogenetically equivalent (ie. all J2a’s that have the DYS 413 deletion are also positive for S57, and all J2a’s that don’t have the DYS413 deletion are negative for S57). Likewise, all testing by Dr Peter Underhill has indicated that the DYS 413 deletion and rs34126399 are also phylogenetically equivalent. Ethnoancestry has also stated that S57 and rs34126399 are seperate mutations.
From now, the project will treat these three seperate mutations as if they are equivalent phylogetically (ie. as if they occurred at the same place in the J2 tree). The project does however acknowledge that it is theoretically possible that future research may find that the three are not precisely equivalent.
• What is Convergence? : I hope to prepare a page in the near future that explains what “convergence” is in laypersons terms (the page will also explain the difference between clusters and clades).
– 12 July 2008««
• The management of the J2 Y-DNA project has changed. The J2 Y-DNA project is now managed by myself Angela Cone (previously co-admin). I’d like to reassure everyone that this change in management will not affect the quality of the J2 Y-DNA projects Scientific research in any way.
You’ll see that the new project website has had a facelift, but overall retains much the same content as the old site. Over the next few months, the phase two and phase three analyses will be repeated and new content will be added to the site (eg. the taxonomy pages will be expanded).
A few months ago, Costa. and I agreed that we would make the publicly viewable project pages more accessible. This previously planned change has now been made – you’ll see that the project copyright has now been replaced with a creative commons licence. You can now copy/print the public project pages (just do so in accordance with the creative commons licence). We also discussed future changes like making .pdf downloads of project analysis results available – and these changes will be implemented once the phase two and three analyses have been repeated.
An addition I’m adding to the project is the establishment of a group fund for the J2 Y-DNA project, to be used to help pay for high priority testing. I’ve started the “ball rolling” by making a donation to the group fund. See here for more details.
Finally, I sincerely thank Costa. Tsirigakis for founding the J2-YDNA project, and providing such a solid scientific, ethical foundation for the project.
• J2b-Delta cluster research update.
[originally written July 1st 2008]
Now that FTDNA is testing for M241 (as well as other new SNPS), we are getting some new M241 results.
In February we concluded that most J2b M205- haplotypes are probably M241+ (with perhaps just J2b-Gamma cluster haplotypes the exception). Well,.. it appears that we were wrong…
I am currently aware of three haplotypes that have tested as J2b* (ie. M205-, M241-). The placement of these three haplotypes in the J2b haplotype clustering is indicated in the diagram below (along with the placement of M241 haplotypes, and the haplotypes which currently have M241 tests pending).
As can be seen, J2b* haplotypes have so far been found in both J2b-Delta and J2b-Alpha. We can also see that J2b2 haplotypes (J M241+) have been found in J2b-Alpha, J2b-Delta, J2b-Gamma and J2b-Zita clusters (but not J2b-Beta cluster). On the other hand J2b1 (M205+) haplotypes are confined to J2b-Beta cluster.
From this information we have (which is still a relatively low sample size) we might conclude that there is convergence in the clustering of J2b* and J2b2 haplotypes (yet both are easily distinguishable from J2b1), or testing error has occurred (ie. the J2b* haplotypes might really be M241+).
Over the last year, the J2 Y-DNA project has emphasized that haplotype clusters are not the same as haplogroup clades. In some cases haplotypes may cluster together due to a true biological relationship, but other times haplotypes may cluster together due to haplotype convergence. If I see a discrepancy between haplotype clustering and SNP results, my first tendancy is to assume that convergence has occurred (and that the SNP result is accurate).
The projects original hypotheses regarding J2a-Delta cluster can be seen here, and updates can be seen here (April 2007) and here (February 2008).
If these new results are genuine (ie. there really are two M241- haplotypes in J2b-Delta cluster) then what does this mean in terms of the projects hypotheses about J2b-Delta cluster? – well at this stage it’s too early to tell.
To find out whether these new results do falsify the J2b-Delta hypotheses, we need more J2b-Delta haplotypes tested for M241. Currently there are eight members waiting to receive M241 results. Three of these members are in J2a-Delta (two of which are likely related in a genealogical time frame). In addition, three of these nine members have previously tested positive for M241 at another lab (one of which is in J2b-Delta). Therefore, we’ll also have an extra level of result accuracy verification (ie. we’ll be able to exclude lab error as a cause for these J2b* results).
In about 6-8 weeks time (after those results have arrived), I will issue an update regarding the J2b-Delta hypotheses. At the moment I am inclined to think that these new results will “blow the J2a-Delta hypotheses out of the water” (ie. falsify them) – but who knows, we may be surprised! Future developments will be very very interesting to see…
[update – 7 July 08] M241 test results have arrived back for two of the members who had M241 tested previously. For both members, the results from the different DNA companies agreed (M241+). One of these members is in J2b-Delta cluster, and the other in J2b-Alpha cluster.
[update – 11 July 08] An additional M241+ result has arrived for a member in J2b-Alpha cluster.
• We now have three members in J2b-Zita with DYS413 tested. In February we reported that a J2b-Zita member with a GD of 18/37 (from the member who has DYS413 values of 18, 23) received results of 21 23. Since then we have had a member with a GD of 6/37, who has also received results of 21 23. At this stage it seems likely that the one example of a J2b haplotype with DYS413 values of 18 23 represents a private mutation.
I thank those of you in J2b-Zita who tested DYS413.
– 3 April 2008««
• The New YCC tree has now been published. It is contained in a research paper (Karafet et al. 2008) in the Scientific Journal “Genome research”. Details of this new tree can be seen on the projects nomenclature page found here. To assist all, we have included a diagram which shows the new nomenclature with the old nomenclature labels alongside.
We will be updating all the project websites pages (including results tables) over the next couple of days to incorporate the new nomenclature.
– 15 February 2008««
Part two of the “October 2007” update
|•||The new public results haplotype table has been added to the project website. This results table contains the haplotypes of members who have specifically given their informed consent. Of those members who responded, about 2/3 gave their full consent, and about 1/3 consented only to having their haplotype in the members area (not in the public area).
This results table will be manually updated with new results on a monthly basis (unfortunately it cannot be automatically updated). It will next be updated in the second week of March 2008.
|•||The member map on the public results page has been updated. This new version of the map shows members who have SNP test results in grey, blue and red. For the remainder of haplotypes (ie. those that do not have sub-clade results) we have predicted whether they are likely to be J2 M410+ or J2 M12+ (white or pale reddish).|
|•||Additional information about J2b, J2a-Beta (and J2b-Lambda & J2a-Theta) has been added to the phase three cluster analysis page. This includes distribution maps of the clusters mentioned. We also add some information about J (xM12) haplotypes that have DYS 413 >18.In this section we also update our investigation into J2b-Delta and its distribution (especially in relation to the British Isles). A year ago, we first examined the apparent association between J2b-Delta and the British Isles. We hypothesized that J2b-Delta might represent a genuine clade, and that we’d need to find a corresponding SNP marker to confirm this hypothesis.
Preliminary results indicate that If there is a SNP that defines J2b-Delta and/or J2b-Zita from J2b-Alpha (or vice versa) then it is not M241. So far, all non J2b-Beta haplotypes that have tested for M241 have received a result of “derived” (ie. positive). The project has yet to see a J2b haplotype confirmed to be negative for both M241 and M205. If there are any M241/M205 negative haplotypes in the project, then the most likely candidates are probably the haplotypes that are currently categorised in J2b-Gamma. However, – it is important to remember that this is only a hypothesis that can only be confirmed with additional testing.
|•||A new “hypotheses” page has been added, which outlines questions/hypotheses that have been generated by the J2 Y-DNA projects research. We are hoping that FTDNA’s new “walk on the Y” can help answer some of these questions (as well as the continued research by Ethnoancestry).|
|•||The new YCC tree has not yet been published. We were hoping to upload this update to the site just after the release of the YCC tree – but we have waited far too long now. We currently have our haplotype table results in the FTDNA 2005 nomenclature, and will update our pages to the new YCC nomenclature when the paper is published.Please note that the forthcoming new tree will be an update of the official YCC NRY phylogenetic tree, that scientists will subsequently use in scientifically legitimate publications.
This tree is being published in a scientific journal, so the delay is likely to be the result of normal delays (eg. peer review) that do occur when scientific research is published .
|•||The J2 Y-DNA project was very interested to hear about Ethnoancestry’s discovery of a new SNP marker, “S57” which may be more-or-less equivalent to the DYS 413 deletion.
Back in October 2007, The project presented a review that documented why STR’s (and DYS 413 especially) cannot be used in the YCC’s binomial NRY Phylogenetic tree. In that analysis, we concluded that STR markers like DYS 413 are definitely extremely useful, valuable and informative, but however useful, valuable and informative they are – they cannot be used as a taxonomic character in the binomial NRY phylogenetic tree (since the tree is binomial as defined by the YCC, and STR markers are not binomial characters). For more information see these pages:
(especially those marked by **)
• J2 Nomenclature page
• The DYS 413 review page **
• Menu for the taxonomy pages
• Taxonomy basics
• YCC Nomenclature
• Cladistics **
Therefore, it is very exciting that a new SNP has been found that may be equivalent to the primary DYS 413 deletion – and may therefore offer a far more reliable alternative to DYS 413 that can in time be included in the official scientific YCC NRY phylogenetic tree. Unfortunately though, this new SNP was not discovered in time for inclusion in the forthcoming 2008 YCC tree, so we will have to wait for it to be included in the official scientific NRY YCC tree.
At this time, Ethnoancestry is not sure whether S57 is directly equivalent to the primary DYS413 deletion – it may have occurred either earlier or later. This means that there is a chance that either:
1) Some DYS 413 >18 haplotypes are S57+, (with all DYS 413 <18 haplotypes being S57+) OR
2) Some DYS 413 <18 haplotypes are S57- . (with all DYS 413 >18 haplotypes being S57-)
(If the DYS 413 deletion and S57 are directly equivalent : All DYS 413 >18 haplotypes are S57- and all DYS 413 <18 haplotypes are S57+)If hypothesis 1) is correct, then most of you in J2a with DYS413 marker results greater than 20 will be negative for S57, but some will be positive (therefore you may like to test for this marker) .If hypothesis 2) is correct, then most of you in J2a with DYS 413 marker results lower than 19 will be positive for S57, but some will be negative. The project hypothesizes that those of you who fit into either J2a-Alpha or J2a-Beta (or any of the clusters nested within these), will be positive for S57+. The project also hypothesizes that some of you who do not fit in either J2a-Alpha or J2a-Beta cluster* may test negative for S57 (therefore you may like to test for this marker).Who should test for S57?Anyone who is confirmed or predicted as J2a (M410) might like to test for this marker, – especially those of you who either have DYS values of 20 or more, or those of you who do not fall into either J2a-Alpha cluster or J2a-Beta cluster*Those of you who are in J2a-Alpha or J2a-Beta cluster (or any of the clusters nested within these) are probably all positive for this marker (but some of you might like to test anyway to confirm this hypothesis)Those in J2b (tested or predicted as M12+) will all be negative for this new marker.[*Please note: For most members in J2a, The first 37 FTDNA markers (or more) are needed to place a haplotype in cluster. If you are not placed in either J2a-Alpha or J2a-Beta (nor any of the clusters nested within these), but do not have all of the first 37 FTDNA markers, then it is likely that having more markers tested will place you within either J2a-Alpha or J2a-Beta]
|•||In the October 2007 update we stated that one member in the J2b-Zita cluster received DYS 413 values of 18,23. It was these results which first prompted us to review the validity of DYS 413 as a taxonomic character for the NRY YCC tree. We now have a second member who has tested for DYS 413 who has received the more “normal” results of 21 23. The two members have a genetic distance of 18 at 37 markers (their common ancestor perhaps lived around 3000 years ago, depending on mutation rates).
We can now be confident that this secondary DYS 413 deletion is not characteristic of the whole of J2a-Zita, but it may still be characteristic of a sub-group of J2b-Zita. We still think it is possible that a result of 18 23 may be found in individuals whom are more closely related to the member who received a result of 18 23.
|•||We had planned to add some more educational pages to the site at this update, however this will now have to wait until after the next network diagram update. The next network diagram update will be done after the new YCC NRY phylogenetic tree is published.|
– 17 October 2007««
Part one of the October 2007 update
• A new network diagram analysis has been done, adding 38 additional haplotypes. The positions of some of the clusters have altered as a result of these new additions. Part way through the analysis we changed the program which we use to do analyses. Therefore you will see that some of the diagrams are “Network diagrams” created by the program “Network”, and some of them are “Phenograms” created with the program “Splits tree”. In future analyses we intend to use the program “Splits tree” exclusively, – as it is probably the more appropriate program to use.
• Angela Cone (one of the project admins) has prepared a series of educational pages that help explain about nomenclature and taxonomy. Angela wrote these educational pages because she has had professional expertise in Evolutionary Ecology (including Taxonomy of Plants and Insects).
She has also written a review on the validity of using DYS 413 as a taxonomic character in the YCC NRY phylogenetic tree. We have hinted on several occasions over the past few months that one of our members in the J2b-Zita cluster had “unusual results”. This member has DYS 413 values of 18 23. Before we made this public, we wanted to get a clearer idea on how this result might affect the validity of DYS 413 as a taxonomic character in the NRY Phylogenetic tree, and therefore whether this would impact on the validity of the Sengupta et al. 2006 nomenclature. While preparing this report, she discovered that this was definitely not an isolated occurrance. It appears that multirepeat deletions have occurred within the NRY tree on at least 6 different occasions. In four of these instances, a multi-repeat deletion has only been seen on one of the two DYS 413 copies. The full DYS 413 deletion is not unique to J2 M410 haplotypes, – DYS 413 values of 17 17 appear to be found in haplogroup O. In her judgement, it is not valid to use DYS 413 as a character in the YCC tree. Her reasons are fully explained in the pages she has prepared.
The project also notes on the J2 nomenclature page that there is a chance that it might be more valid to call M12+ J2a and M410+ J2b (rather the reverse).
The project will soon see whether the experts agree – there are rumours that a new Y-DNA tree will be presented by Dr Mike Hammer at the next FTDNA conference (20-21 October). We do not have any idea of what changes may have been made to the J portion of the tree (if any). Whatever these changes are, – the J2 Y-DNA project will use that new nomenclature (even if we have to swap J2a & J2b, or call J2 something like I2b or K2 instead).
Part Two of the October 2007 update:
• This will be ready in late October/early November.
• It will contain:
• Updates on: J2b-Zita cluster and J2b-Delta cluster; J2a-Beta cluster and J2a-Gamma cluster.
& ……… a few other interesting observations.
• Updates to the nomenclature used on project pages.
• The new public results page (with the haplotypes of all members that have given us their consent).
• The “members map” will be updated (!!)
– 29 April 2007««
• A new network diagram analysis has been done, adding 28 additional haplotypes . For the 37 marker analysis, seperate analyses for J2a and J2b haplotypes are now done.
• An update to our hypotheses on J2b-Delta -> link <- has been added.
• Our initial review of the Cruciani et al. 2007 paper -> link <- has been added.
• We have added some useful new pages to the site:
• A “frequently asked questions” page. -> link <-
• A page that outlines the scientific method -> link <-
• A page that outlines which clusters appear to be correlated with Jewish ancestry -> link <-
• You may notice that the project now refers to J2-M12+ as J2b (old J2e), and J2 M12-/M410+ as J2a (old J2(xJ2e)), but refers to all sub-clades within each of these clades by their SNP number rather than the sub-clade nomenclature used by Sengupta et al. 2006. For example, we refer to the YCC/FTDNA J2f as J2a-M67+, rather than J2a1b. At the time of the next project analysis update, we will explain indepth our rationale for using the nomenclature in this way.