Page 1 of 1

Subclade L250.2, L251.2 (includes L1064 and M68)

PostPosted: Wed Aug 22, 2012 9:12 am
by ChrisR
As everyone can follow in J-L26 J2a1/J2a3/J2a4 subclades SNP discoveries news info the subclade of the SNPs L250.2, L251.2 is almost defined by SNP testing in other clades and clusters. I decided to begin a new thread for this haplogroup, as the old thread J2a3/4* (J-L26*): new SNPs to test: L250.2, L251.2, L1064 is somehow outdated.

This thread is to discuss this new subclade. Some of the interesting topics:
  • What samples/kits are tested L26+ or L27+ and also positive for one or more of these SNPs: L250.2, L251.2, L1064, M68?
  • What samples/kits cluster by STR-haplotype to the previous ones?
  • How widespread are all these samples/kits (paternal ancestor locations)?
  • Why are L1064 and M68 modal haplotypes so diverse and nearer to L250.2/L251.2 upstream clades/clusters as between themselves?
  • Are L250.2/L251.2 reliable and stable SNPs?

Shortly a new FTDNA-Project will begin to work on this haplogroup and to collect evidence... ;-)

Re: Subclade L250.2, L251.2 (includes L1064 and M68)

PostPosted: Thu Aug 23, 2012 5:13 pm
by ChrisR
New FTDNA-Project J-L250 is online: -


Online Backups: v2

Re: Subclade L250.2, L251.2 (includes L1064 and M68)

PostPosted: Tue Aug 28, 2012 4:48 pm
by ChrisR
New evidence by Vince T. (thanks!) in the 1K Genome sample HG01781 (J-M319): L1064- L250-

Also a statement by Bonnie S. "the 1K Genome data sheets we use show only those SNPs that have varied among the samples included in it. If none of those samples had a mutation at that position, or if all of them are null, it won't be listed on the sheet. Such seems to be the case with L250 and L1064."
So we currently probably have no 1K Genome J-samples with L250+
Hope this is not a bad prediction for new SNPs under J-L250 in Geno 2.0 - the hope is on the Sardinian and maybe some Middle East sampleset used for the chip.

Re: Subclade L250.2, L251.2 (includes L1064 and M68)

PostPosted: Mon Oct 01, 2012 9:03 am
by ChrisR
Kit 110692 Amprayil-Cherian India (M68+, 67 markers) result comes back: L250.2-! By this new questions arise about the stability of L250.2/L251.2 and/or M68. Kit M6882 Al-Hashimi Iraq (M68+, 111 markers) is presumed to be positive for L250.2 and L251.2 and negative for L1064 (inofficial internal FTDNA lab result by primer readout of nearby SNP L229, M68+ was tested a bit later by final Deep Clade test results). There is one other Kit with M68+ tested by FTDNA: N12509 Rodrigues India (25 markers), a low marker kit with no SNP tests presumed to be related primarily to 110692: kit 94035 Abraham Karuvelil India (12 markers) and one interesting kit near by haplotype to 110692 and M6882 but tested M68- (L250.2/L251.2 and L1064 are untested): 123673 Demby Unknown Origin (67 markers). For comparison on currently three M68+ haplotypes (17 markers) all from Malaysia are published, the reference is Chang et al 2007. Bonnie in June 2012 published some very helpful information shared by Roy King from Peter Underhill on M68+ samples he knows: Tadjik sample collected by Spencer Wells in Central Asia (M68 was discovered in this one by Underhill); Hindu/Indian sample collected by Ornella Semino, Iraqi sample collected by Ornella Semino. The latter two are found in Semino et al. 2004 paper about E & J (see Table 2 Freq. J).
By my latest STR-comparisons I could observe a good differentiation of J2a-L250, but not of nearby J2a-M68 and J2a-L26*A. They both mixed up constantly. One J2a-M68 haplotype from Chang et al also seems to be very diverse, but more markers would be needed to get more clarity.
By writing to Thomas K., Bonnie S., Tim J. and JaG I hope to get all better informed about the situation and maybe Thomas K. can help to clarify this puzzle.
Current Y-SNP status - FTDNA kits positive/tested (ytree.ftdna J2a-L26, J2a-L250)
L26: 412/969, L27: 228/722, L927: 30/96
L250.2: 7/479, L251.2: 6/482
L1064: 7/541
M68: 3/681

Re: Subclade L250.2, L251.2 (includes L1064 and M68)

PostPosted: Mon Oct 01, 2012 12:53 pm
by JaG
Thank you for the update and especially for pointing out that samples from Chang et al (2007) were genotyped for M68 and M158. There is no mention for SNP testing in the paper.