Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

y-DNA question

Options
  • 22-02-2013 1:05pm
    #1
    ifconfig
    Registered Users Posts: 880 ✭✭✭


    I saw the second of the 2-part "Meet the Izzards" on BBC last night.
    Informative and entertaining.
    Geneticist Dr Jim Wilson (who featured in the Blood of the Travellers RTE series).

    One thing that confused me was that when they looked at Eddie's most recent y-DNA relatives based on those who had submitted y-DNA results to databases they found a match with an American chap whose paternal ancestor surnamed Friedrichs (or similar) had emigrated to US in the 18th century.
    It was postulated that Eddie Izzard's male line had moved to England much earlier (as part of the Anglo/Saxon invasion of England).

    What explains the discrepancy in surnames (given that y-DNA follows the surname unless there is a break in the chain of paternity)?
    Would this indicate, non parental events had to have happened in one,either or both distinct branches .. or alternatively that the degree of relationship between Eddie and the matching relative was so distant that their common ancestor predated the assignment of surnames ?


Comments

  • Options
    #2
    shanew
    Registered Users Posts: 2,777 ✭✭✭shanew


    I would say #1 reason for this is illegitimacy... often causes problems with Y dna traces. The date issues and start of surnames would also be a factor - think 1100s or so before this started, and probably later for widespread usage.

    I did a Y test a while ago and none of the 'recent' near-matches had the same surname.


  • Options
    #3
    spuncy
    Registered Users Posts: 44 ✭spuncy


    I got the impression that their common ancestor was 1,500 years ago or more, so that is before the advent of surnames.

    If a y-DNA test shows a common ancestor in the last few hundred years (using STRs and 67 or 111 markers), then it's more than likely a Non-Parental Event.


  • Options
    #4
    Ipso
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,995 ✭✭✭Ipso


    I didn't see the show but I heard they over simplified things. Did they just give his haplogroup as I2? Very strange if they did.


  • Options
    #5
    ifconfig
    Registered Users Posts: 880 ✭✭✭ifconfig


    I missed the first episode (but it is on YouTube and I plan to watch later).
    From reading a few UK forums it seems they gave him a haplogroup assignment of T2f1a1 based on mtDNA and I2 based on Y.
    They didn't specify whether I2a, I2b , etc - in fact, I think on the TV programme they just mentioned "I" without qualifying as I2.

    There was some criticism on the forums by viewers of them apparently having associated him with Viking blood on maternal side on the basis of the maternal/mitochondrial T2f1a1.


  • Options
    #6
    Ipso
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,995 ✭✭✭Ipso


    I'm also I2 so it would be interesting to see which group he is. I think they described it as Saxon, usually it's I1 that's more associated with Saxons.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    ifconfig
    Registered Users Posts: 880 ✭✭✭ifconfig


    Ipso wrote: »
    I'm also I2 so it would be interesting to see which group he is. I think they described it as Saxon, usually it's I1 that's more associated with Saxons.

    According to http://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplogroup_I2_Y-DNA.shtml

    I2a2a3 and I2a2a4 have mention of German/Saxon prevalence.
    Could be worth tweeting out to Eddie Izzard - he might reply with the exact grouping he was identified with for yDNA.... you never know ;)

    Interesting about your own I2 haplogroup assignment.
    I've yet to get my yDNA tested and I was figuring on going with familytreeDNA.
    How many markers did you get tested ?
    Did you get mtDNA done as well - out of curiosity ?

    I2 is probably even far rarer in Ireland than in England/UK.
    Was it a big surprise - i.e Does your surname (aside from DNA investigation) seem to be an Irish one or a name more commonly associated with England/Scotland/Wales ?


  • Options
    #8
    Ipso
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,995 ✭✭✭Ipso


    My I2 group is one that is associated with Scotland (L126), I think Izzards group is referred to as continental.
    My two closest matches going back about 20 to 25 generations have variations of a Scottish surname that is more or less the same as mine in Gaelic.
    It was a surprise as it turns what I know of my male lineage on its head. Basically my line arrived during or right before the plantation, I'm catholic but you can't rule out conversions.
    That test was with Family Tree DNA who are great at establishing direct male line connections.
    They have a sale on 12 markers right now but 37 markers are better for any neaningful analysis.
    23andme are good at testing your whole family tree except it's hard to be certain what line your matches come from.


  • Options
    #9
    ifconfig
    Registered Users Posts: 880 ✭✭✭ifconfig


    Ipso wrote: »
    My I2 group is one that is associated with Scotland (L126), I think Izzards group is referred to as continental.
    My two closest matches going back about 20 to 25 generations have variations of a Scottish surname that is more or less the same as mine in Gaelic.
    It was a surprise as it turns what I know of my male lineage on its head. Basically my line arrived during or right before the plantation, I'm catholic but you can't rule out conversions.
    That test was with Family Tree DNA who are great at establishing direct male line connections.
    They have a sale on 12 markers right now but 37 markers are better for any neaningful analysis.
    23andme are good at testing your whole family tree except it's hard to be certain what line your matches come from.

    Very interesting.
    Any advantage to the 67 marker test versus 37 ?
    Am I correct in thinking the 67 can give better info on deep ancestry but not at the expense of revealing recent ancestry (since 67 is based on an expanded set of markers) ?


  • Options
    #10
    Ipso
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,995 ✭✭✭Ipso


    Yes the more markers you test the better chance there is if getting a more accurate match with someone else. It's more useful for geneological purposes whereby the SNP's are more for big picture population genetics to show how you fit in overall.
    The field has really progressed in the last few years. Take Blood of the Irish tv show (which is best ignored now), they based their info of other research that had only tested 6 or 12 markers, now you can get 111 done at FTDNA. Even amateurs working on personal projects are ahead of what well respected historical authors are using for recently published books.
    The website below is good for getting info.
    http://eng.molgen.org/


  • Options
    #11
    Harlinger
    Registered Users Posts: 1 ✭Harlinger


    The American chap in the show was M223. His family had lived in East Frisia since at least the late 1600's.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #12
    CeannRua
    Closed Accounts Posts: 470 ✭✭CeannRua


    Just happened across this
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/blog/2013/feb/25/viking-ancestors-astrology

    The short version - author says genetic ancestry testing is comparable to astrology!


  • Options
    #13
    Ipso
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,995 ✭✭✭Ipso


    CeannRua wrote: »
    Just happened across this
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/blog/2013/feb/25/viking-ancestors-astrology

    The short version - author says genetic ancestry testing is comparable to astrology!

    Not really, he is saying shows or companies that tie haplogroups (which are a tiny part of your overall ancestry) to specific groups are really over simplifying things.
    Its a powerful tool but it's not some silver bullet that will solve your ancestry problems
    immediately.


  • Options
    #14
    CeannRua
    Closed Accounts Posts: 470 ✭✭CeannRua


    Ipso wrote: »
    Not really, he is saying shows or companies that tie haplogroups (which are a tiny part of your overall ancestry) to specific groups are really over simplifying things.
    Its a powerful tool but it's not some silver bullet that will solve your ancestry problems
    immediately.

    He does though. Quote: 'The truth is that there is usually little scientific substance to most of them [the tests] and they are better thought of as genetic astrology.'

    What do you mean it's not some silver bullet that will solve your ancestry problems immediately?


  • Options
    #15
    Ipso
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,995 ✭✭✭Ipso


    What I mean is that it's a very good tool to complement a paper search but on it's own it casts a very wide net. For example I have over 1,000 matches/relatives at 23and me (some people have their profiles as private so that's a hinderance on its own) but I only know my family history to around two generations and paper records in Ireland are hard to come by so I'm stuck. Plus in order to find a relative they need to have done a test.


  • Options
    #16
    CeannRua
    Closed Accounts Posts: 470 ✭✭CeannRua


    Ipso wrote: »
    What I mean is that it's a very good tool to complement a paper search but on it's own it casts a very wide net. For example I have over 1,000 matches/relatives at 23and me (some people have their profiles as private so that's a hinderance on its own) but I only know my family history to around two generations and paper records in Ireland are hard to come by so I'm stuck. Plus in order to find a relative they need to have done a test.

    I think this is partly what the article's author means when he uses the astrology analogy.


Advertisement