Hi Michael, You asked about R-Y49873, which is part of R-Z159>S3251. I am busy looking at the upper echelons of R-U106 and its early migrations, though it is likely to be a while before I have a renewed idea of R-Z159 and its descendants as these are much later haplgroups. You can see previous analyses in message #5759. For R-Y49873 in particular, the few test results we have indicate that the haplogroup has probably been in modern Germany for the last 1000+ years. It's difficult to say much more than this without too much guesswork at this stage. Best wishes, Iain.

Dear all, I've begun to look again in earnest at the phylogeography of R-U106. To begin that, I've started some ground-work. A new PDF on my website details the current status of phylogeography and assesses the availability of information. Family matters will likely keep me from this for a while over Christmas, but I have almost completed an analysis of ancient DNA and how it charts the spread of R-U106 as well that I will append to it when I can. The take-home message from this document is to make sure your earliest-known ancestor information is up to date. To find this, log into your account, go to your name in the top right, and choose Account Settings. Click on the "Genealogy" tab, then the "Earliest known ancestors" tab below it. You should have a series of text boxes for your paternal ancestor with three pieces of information: a name and birth/death date, a country of origin, and a location. R-U106 has 70,626 modern descendants. Of those, 9126 (13%) are in our project (though many of the rest are recent Family Finder additions). Of these, 5805 have stated that their ancestry comes from a specific European country. Of these, 4696 have also given either a identified origin along with the name of their ancestor or a latitude/longitude. Of these, 41% do not match each other. In most cases, this is testers given an earliest-known ancestor in America and a country of origin in the British Isles. This means that we only have complete and fully correct data for 20% of our members. So: Please make sure your earliest-known ancestry is up to date and as accurate as possible (especially including specific locations). Please ensure all three boxes are complete and that the information matches between them. Please use modern country boundaries where possible (e.g. if your ancestor was from the Austro-Hungarian empire, don't put Austria or Hungary down unless your ancestor came from within their modern boundaries). Please don't quote a European country of origin unless you have good reason to believe it's true. Surnames alone aren't necessarily useful: as we've found out, just because you're a Johnson doesn't mean you weren't originally a Johannsson. Neither is the fact your ancestor was born in a British colony. If you do have good reason to believe your ancestry comes from Europe but can't prove it, briefly say why in the first textbox (e.g. emigrated from Bristol) and update the latitude/longitude to that location. The more complete you can make this information, the better. The situation is not dire - we can still make reasonable predictions from the 20% of correct data and reasonable assumptions about the 29% of mis-matching data. However, it would be really helpful to have more of this information believable, self-consistent and complete. By doing this, you will be able to improve our estimates of where our ancestors came from. If you speak to your matches, or if you run another project, please also encourage those testers to do the same. Best wishes, Iain.

For informational disclosure to those who have added there data, I have implemented a more advanced Study (Project) system than the one discussed here in the past. All men who are test with SNPS at or below have been added to a Private R-U106 study of which only Investigators (Admins) have been added to demo the functionality. If any of the other current R1b-U106 or Subclade admins who have accounts in the warehouse want to preview this, let me know and I will add you to the Investigator list. Anyone with an account can access this from the Studies tab from their Manage Subject screen. There are Prefs settings that you can turn on or off the details on the Member list. Currently only members of the Study can see anything, but if it's made public it will behave more like my R1b-CTS4466 public study. If anyone has questions or feedback, this is a still in active development MVP feature. Thanks, James Kane

https://omniletters.com/researchers-uncover-potential-new-ancient-human-species/ Dan D

Will an administrator of this group make available to a tester the Y DNA genetic distance report for the tester? This report that is accessible to the administrators of this group. It shows matches for much higher genetic distance, 25 for Y DNA 67 and 40 for Y DNA 111 -- Kevin Terry

I saw on another group that the DNA spreadsheets have changed, and strangely those with kit numbers beginning with "B" have dropped off. As one who has been affected by this, does anyone have an idea of when it will be fixed? My SNPs still appear in each group of which I am a member, but my STRs no longer appear in the spreadsheets. Thanks, Ed

Hi Shane, You might want to check YFull again. Currently the R-Y340824 group is empty, but it does show a sample YF131078, which I presume is yours, at R-FGC17465*. Since YFull only has a small number of testers compared to Family Tree DNA, not all the haplogroups are represented, and some are represented under different names. R-FGC17465 at YFull is equivalent to R-FGC17460 at YFull, since there are no FGC17465+ FGC17460- testers to form a new haplogroup. Consequently, both of you are placed in R-FGC17465=R-FGC17460, and given a TMRCA of ~2200 years. Cheers, Iain.

Hello all, I have recently added myself to the YDNA-Warehouse and I noticed that some of the TMRCA dates seem more recent than the estimates listed on FTDNA. For example: R-Z159 shows 344 BCE - 816 CE; FTDNA estimates 1900 BCE. I’m just trying to understand the reason for this discrepancy. Best regards, Herman

Hello all, I had a kit number registered in the project under >FGC50431>S6881>FT5123>FGC42045>“446=14”>A11376) > for some amount of years but it disappeared off the results page a couple months back. I do suspect the reasoning, but just wanted to see if I could sort it out. I have a kit on FTDNA though only tested at the Y-DNA67 level, but had originally a confirmation of S6881 under Britainsdna (long gone) and now Livingdna. I'm afraid to say I forget who I had communicated with to join the project back on Yahoo but with this information they had used my Y-DNA67 info and the proof of S6881 to give me a rough plot further down the chain. With this info would anyone be able to suggest a kit to purchase to get me back on the project and confirm where I am in the tree? I'm unsure what I am beyond S6881 and the additional placement further down was likely to do with STR marker results, though I honestly know very little about the topic. If anyone could help that would be grand. Kind regards Alister

Recently I have encountered a knowledge person claiming that R-L47 was not present in the Nordic Bronze Age cultures and only became part of the wider Germanic cultures in the Iron Age, possibly with the formation of the Jastorf culture. What are everyone’s thoughts on this? I have looked pretty extensively through all the samples I could find and the earliest confirmed R-L47 sample seems to be a Roman era Saxon.

Hi all, You'll have received an e-mail just now noting that Ewenn Gicquel has been added to the R1b-U106 project as a co-admin. Ewenn joins us primarily to help with automating a lot of the research work I'm trying to do (but don't have the time or skills to accomplish myself). I'm hoping that together we will be able to work on improved TMRCAs and more reliable origins than Globetrekker currently provides us with. This is one of several administrative changes that we are making. We are also retiring Zak Jones and Phil Chaddock from our admin pool - Zak and Phil have helped us with some of the manual data shovelling that our analysis work has required in the past. With the increased size of the project and volume of BigY testers, dealing with data manually is now not so much of an option, hence swapping Zak and Phil for Ewenn. Finally, Charles has also finally cajoled me into becoming a joint lead admin of the project with him, so I am now officially stepping up from co-admin to admin of the project. In practice, very little changes as a result: Charles will continue in the admin role he's had for 12 years, but I'll be giving him a bit of support with that. He's still grouping people, along with Connie and Kathy, and we still have gatekeeper Dan, Debbie, Vince and Ray helping out in various guises, and Robert who looks after R-FGC11674 are related groups in particular. We're hoping these changes will help this group approach the challenges in Y-DNA testing that will face us over the next few years. Here's to the future! Cheers, Iain.

Red Deer Cave People: Mysterious Humans With "Archaic" Features Lived Just 14,000 Years Ago Who were they? https://apple.news/A3Lmv3AxkSyahHnbMJKr1Mw Dan D.

Dear all, I've been in touch with Peter Op den Velde Boots, who runs the Family Tree DNA R-Z18 project. This project has been dormant for a couple of years, but he is now investing time in it. His aim is to work through the backlog of membership and grouping during October, with a normal service running from November. Our two projects have similar aims, but differ in some approaches and opinions. While R-Z18 is part of our R-U106 family, we therefore encourage R-Z18 members to join the R-Z18 project as well as our own, in order to benefit from both sets of approaches, which each have their advantages. Best wishes, Iain.

Does FGC 17467 have a Norse Viking heritage in England ?

Yesterday, FTDNA released quite a few Y haplotypes for AncestryDNA and 23andMe and perhaps MyHeritage. These are generally visible as "N/A" on Family Finder match lists, but they are fully named in the CSV download file. This is not in accordance with the FTDNA GAP email earlier this week, which stated "Please remember that these haplogroups will not be shown to either matches or administrators via GAP" So if you know of any 23andMe or Ancestry uploads at FF that might have an interesting Y haplogroup, then you should look now or download the CSV file. I downloaded yesterday and today, and there are more updated Y haplogroups today. Although listed as "N/A", the Y haplogroups do sort correctly and also are available via the Search box. ~~~ Today, however, I noticed a new R-L48 for an Autosomal Transfer. Yesterday, I know he was M269 based upon a Y37. Today he displays on the match list as "R-L48". Additionally, he is now shown as L48 in green on the project page, rather than the ubiquitous red R-M269. His personal page has two YDNA badges. One for his Y37 R-M269 and one for his L48 upload. So its useful to know that some Ancestry or 23andMe haplotypes are going to work their way into the Project pages. For better or worse..... (I am okay with this, although maybe in a Yellow or Orange color?)