Search This Blog

Saturday, December 9, 2017

mtDNA Marker C16278T Found at the Pre-Columbian Norris Farms Archaeological Site

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1692451/pdf/10091255.pdf
This early study of ancient Mound Builders' DNA always appears in my disappointing searches for the raw data on the Windover Bog site in Florida (a lost cause, since it is being withheld from public view). So I've had to settle for what I'm given. But last night I suddenly noticed something that was there all along.
What became obvious this time, in Table 1 of the data, is the DNA marker indicated for the "Other" mtDNA haplogroup found in the pre-Columbian Norris Farms site: a specific marker, "16278T", which I happen to share, and which is considered an "extra" in my own DNA classification.
As an "extra", it means that most people in my classification (now tentatively W1-T119C; formerly, simply "X") -- do not share the marker with me.
The classification labelled "other" here, is just another designation for "X" -- the unwanted orphan clade of Native American mtDNA. The strictly North American clade. This paper was originally published in 1999, some years before mtDNA genetic research into Human origins began to make real progress (with the Genographic Project). It essentially blazed the trail for them.
Herein lies the key evidence:
It is the marker C16278T, listed beside the specimens designated "other" on the table. (The "Standard" for that marker is the chemically reversed T16278C).

Bear in mind that these "others" aren't just lab samples; they're the remains of real, pre-Columbian Human beings who once lived in this land. And I just happen to share that particular genetic variation with them -- along with significant identifiers in the rest of their genomes, presumably. I also share with all these individuals, markers 16189C and 16223T.

Oddly and mysteriously, a second marker for "other" was left unidentified and designated simply as "?". My question is: why?

It has absolutely nothing at all to do with one of the two so-called "contaminating sequences" mentioned in the footnote, also found in one of the haplogroup A samples. Because the contaminating sequences are not even listed there (they were in fact quite deliberately omitted from this published data table, presumably for good reason).

I also wonder how they determined those omitted (yet worthy of mention) sequences were "contaminating". And I wonder if it might have been a better idea to list those data results as well. But most of all, what's with the "?" ? What data was omitted there, that was not the so-called "contaminating sequences"?

Now for comparison, this is my own personal mtDNA report from James Lick's mtDNA calculator (an excellent analytic tool, by the way). I simply uploaded my raw data into his genius program, and it quickly generated a very conveniently detailed report for me:
I also have markers associated with haplogroup "X". In fact, my defining markers are split almost equally between haplogroups X and W. I got on board with Genographic Project mtDNA research, way back near the beginning of it, circa 2006. My haplogroup classification has since been revised several times over the years, thus:
  • Originally, officially, X (per the Genographic Project)
  • then, officially, W (per FTDNA)
  • tentatively estimated, W1 (per various administrators, genetic genealogists, i.e. unofficial 'authorities' on the subject)
  • tentatively estimated, W1e (again, per various unofficial 'authorities')
  • until presently, W1-T119C is the 'official', 'authorized' verdict. The last is again per FTDNA, following full sequence testing and analysis.
Yet I don't fit perfectly into that group, either; and the only reason there isn't a separate haplogroup classification for my mtDNA type, is because it is so rare.

And while it is true that I definitely have the 119C marker, I still do not fit very well into the European version of that particular clade / sub-clade. As shown both by James Lick and Family Tree DNA, my mtDNA has both, some extras and also some missing markers for that group:


Compared with the RSRS standard.


Compared with the rCRS standard.

Regardless of how you look at it, it all boils down to the same conclusion: I'm very closely related, if not an exact match, to the rare ancient mtDNA found in the Norris site (and probably also to the covered-up Windover Bog site), which has been referred to variously as "X" and "other".

...And which carries so many mysterious question marks, besides the starkly visible one that has tagged them in the c1999 published Norris Farms site data.

Are my ancestors the so-called "Giants" of North America? I know this: my American Indian family members are all unusually tall in height. My mother, uncles, great-aunts, and grandmother are all much taller than me (and I'm average, not short at all).

And that's just one prime example of physical characteristics I've inherited from my maternal lineage. Let us not forget that DNA is a physical characteristic too... Shall we discuss cheekbones? ;)

My DNA is the key that will open the shadowy, stuffy closet door to reveal, not skeletons, but the cowardly, greedy, selfish, bigoted -- real "frauds" -- in the whole "wannabe" controversy. "Wannabe" (like "Pocahontas" and "Princess") is a derogatory racist slur, which must be confronted and corrected.


My maternal grandmother's testimony, in her letter to me. (This is not the whole letter, only the relevant part.) I still have the letter.


My original certificate, issued to me by the Genographic Project. I still have it.


On Mitosearch, although they have me labeled "Not Tested" for HVR2 mutations -- I was indeed subsequently tested, so they just need to update that. My HVR2 markers are listed in the FTDNA data tables above.

This chart reports two 'exact' (i.e. zero genetic distance) 'matches' for me, who both share the same common ancestor (an adopted orphan). That erroneous 'match' was based on the available data at the time of the report. They're no longer listed as exact matches on FTDNA, based on subsequent testing. They're now shown to have a genetic distance of "3". So, probably distant cousins. In fact, I have no "exact" matches on either FTDNA or on Ancestry (where I received autosomal testing and analysis).

It shows a total of 25 of the closest matches to me (including myself), in their database. As you can see, some of my closest matches are haplogroups X. Variations of X shown here, are found in Europe, while I am related to the American line. Based on these facts, it is crystal clear to me that Mitosearch does not contain much data for Native American mtDNA.

This simply suggests that Native Americans of the mtDNA X haplogroups generally are reticent about publishing or going public with their personal data. I've met many people (including non-Natives), who are fearful of doing so, for whatever reasons. It is their right to choose, and I don't judge anyone for it, because it is perfectly understandable. (I, on the other hand, personally refuse to fear anything other than God Almighty. The truth means that much to me.)

The defining marker for my present haplogroup classification, T119C, is not found in any of the European X haplogroups listed there. Is it seen in any Native American groups? That question remains unanswered. The data in the Norris Farms site study is based only on HVR1 mutations.


While I do not fit exactly into the haplogroup, W1-T119C, it just happens to be the closest match for me based on the current, standard mtDNA classifications. On Family Tree DNA, which analyzed my mitochondrial samples, I currently have only 7 matches (including the two mentioned above who are also listed in Mitosearch), and those have shown up just fairly recently, after I completed further testing. For years I had none, zero matches of any kind. Then one or two popped up, which have since been removed or downgraded. And as seen above, currently none are exact matches.

The closest match on the list, "MB", with a genetic distance of "1", is from a very old, colonial Virginia family. Much like the paternal side of my own tree, which being Pilgrims from colonial 17th century Massachusetts, Long Island (when it was still a Dutch territory), later New Jersey (dating back prior to the Revolution), and the southern Appalachians (Tennessee, Alabama, the Carolinas, and Georgia) -- very reasonably may also carry some Indian blood (a completely separate issue, as I'm concentrating here on my mtDNA / maternal lineage, with the aim to prove that it is indeed genetically Native American).

I figure "MB" is probably a maternal second or third cousin of some sort. Likewise, my other reported matches are likely more distant, maternally related cousins.

Looking more closely at my maternal history alone, I find that it apparently originated solidly in Columbus county, North Carolina. All trails lead back to that region, and no further. Oh, the irony... And Cherokee was not the only tribe living there prior to modern European colonization. There were also the Waccamaws and Tuscaroras, among others. And many of those tribes also occasionally intermarried with one another. So the plot thickens.

What has brought me here, is the brick wall I keep running up against, while tracing my maternal lineage. I can't get beyond my gg-grandmother, Cely Bird. I know nothing about her parentage or siblings, or very much of her marital history, other than the facts of her marriage to Steven Hilburn (my gg-grandfather) and evidence of a possible previous marriage to a man named Powers.

The Powers, Hilburns, and Birds (also the Elkins and Nobles, among others) were all fairly well established North Carolina families, in those days (early- to mid-19th century, as far back as I'm able to document it). Hilburn is sometimes spelled Hilborn or Hillborn. He married a woman known only as Cely or Celia. My grandmother said she was "Cely Bird", and showed me a photograph of her.

Their daughter (my g-grandmother) Polly's name was misspelled "Dolly" in the marriage books. Polly Hilburn married George Washington Elkins. Remarriage was very common in those days, as now. However, then it was more often due to death rather than divorce. However their marriage to each other is the only one that I've seen documented.

Certain 'helpful' genealogists have dared suggest directly to me, that Cely Bird's real surname was Powers. But that is nothing more than false, speculative, conjecture. If you want to learn the facts about a family, ask the family -- don't go to self-appointed, profiteering "authorities".

If that were true, if Cely Bird's maiden name was really Powers -- where did "Bird" come from? My grandmother didn't just hatch that up from some wild daydream. And she didn't just decide one day to fantasize being American Indian, a persecuted minority. Get real. Anyone who knows my grandmother (and she was quite well-known in her community), would trust her word over that of any stranger to the family. Hell, anyone could LOOK at her, and see the woman (along with her closest family members of past generations) is Cherokee. But she's gone now, so I am left here to defend her and my family, alone.

There are photographs and other evidence, including family testimonials, but the best clue I have is my mtDNA. So, I would be very interested in studying the specific genetic markers for the various "Native American X" haplogroups. But where is that information? It's hidden, that is the problem. Apparently that is some sort of shady State Secret. And it's very unfair to people like me: people whose Native American ancestors "assimilated" into the general society. People whose Native American ancestors married "outsiders". People whose Native American ancestors refused to acknowledge treaties, refused to be 'removed' to 'reservations', far away from their own native homelands where they were born and raised...

There is a very rational explanation why I can't find sufficiently adequate (i.e. "official" or "authoritative") documentation for my gg-grandmother (Cely Bird), gg-grandfather (Steven Hilburn), and their parents and siblings -- other than in sketchy and often illegible censuses or marriage record books. It likely either never existed, or has since been destroyed, perhaps deliberately. Perhaps during the Civil War, or in some of the notorious courthouse fires.

But that doesn't mean they didn't exist. They existed, and still do -- in my genome.

There are never any good or innocent reasons for intentionally with-holding the truth and covering up facts, especially from your own family. There is never any justification for denying or stealing a person's rightful identity, their family history --- just because you decide to 'disown' them for some petty reason: greed, politics, power.

That's why I am so open and forthright. I have moral standards, learned from my elders. Fear NOTHING, other than God Almighty himself. I know the truth; but I can't stand all the deceit, all the unnecessary confusion, the outright lies.

I would like to begin with the Windover, Florida, Bog People raw data. Where is it? I need to know.

Here is another paper regarding the Norris Farms site:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0002929707615389

Awesome! The following paper, published in full, c2015, reports haplogroup X among the ancient mtDNA of particularly significant Mound Peoples (remember, Cherokees were originally Mound-builders, too). X was rare, even then. And while I am not an exact match, I do share the 16189C marker with those individuals. The finding of X is in itself, very encouraging, but also the fact that they're still looking at ancient lineages. Bravo, keep up the good work!

https://pqdtopen.proquest.com/doc/1752116929.html?FMT=ABS

https://pqdtopen.proquest.com/pubnum/3742824.html?FMT=AI

I'm still waiting for Windover Bog site information, nevertheless. I will never forget what happened there. It is unconscionable, what they did.

My most recent, revised certificate from FTDNA:


https://www.snpedia.com/index.php/Haplogroup_X_(mtDNA)

https://www.snpedia.com/index.php/Haplogroup_W_(mtDNA)

(Some updating is needed, in many areas.)


This may be helpful. And indeed, according to this, I have markers for W. But that doesn't mean W cannot be Native American. Obviously, I was initially classified X only because my specific clade or group is so rare that it was originally quite arbitrarily classified with X. Later, they managed to tease out the finer distinctions.


Polly Hilburn Elkins, my maternal g-grandmother. I know quite a lot about her, although we never met personally. And if I could show you the picture of her mother, Cely Bird Hilburn, it would instantly end the whole debate. Pictures are indeed worth thousands of words, yet are temporal; whereas memories (and genes) last forever. And any fool can see that this woman is at least mostly Native American. Chances are very good that she was even as much as full-blooded.

Monday, April 24, 2017

My Family Tree DNA Full Sequence Mitochondrial Analysis Report

 
 
Here is the data given me by Family Tree DNA, which I'm currently comparing with that from James Lick. Both sources have categorized my mtDNA as most closely resembling W1-T119C. However, mine has two missing markers and six extras, so I'm not quite sure but I think it means I'm in-between or belong in my own unique group or clade. However, unless the phylotree gets further updating, with my data included, I have to be content with the present conclusion.

 
 
"There are numerous other W1 lineages without enough results yet to receive a subgroup designation. As is the case with the non-Finnish, W1a's, W1b's, and W1e's, these all seem to be north European maritime lineages, perhaps descended from a basic W1 lineage in the eastern Baltic Sea around 4,000 years ago.

"One branch sharing the 119 mutation in HVR2 spread to territories on the Baltic and North Atlantic, and Bay of Biscay. Ancient DNA results show W+119 was present in Germany 7300 years ago, in burials of the LBK culture. Finds of the same type continue in the later Schöningen, Salzmünde, and Bernburg cultures through 5000 years ago.

"One sharing the 16295 mutation arose around 3,000 years ago and is found today in the Netherlands and the British Isles."
 
 
 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nuccore/FJ472633
This is the link directly tied to the T119C mutation.

http://www.phylotree.org/tree/X.htm

http://www.phylotree.org/tree/N.htm

http://www.phylotree.org/tree/index.htm

 
 
 
This explains my unusual mutations:
 
"MTDNA Mutations

"The most common mutations are a change in a letter at a location to its complementary letter - A to G, G to A, C to T, or T to C.

"Next most common are insertion of an extra letter. These are represented in your results by a dot, followed by the number of insertions. For example, 315.1C - meaning an extra C was inserted after 315C; or 315.2C - meaning two extra C's were inserted after 315C.

"Deletions can also occur, where a letter in the sequence is missing. These are indicated by a dash, for example 16183-.

"Occasionally the test results show 'heteroplasmy' - meaning the mtdna in your cells shows multiple results for the same position. This can happen because a single cell contains hundreds of thousands of mtdna copies, groups of which may have mutated and have different letters at the same location; and your results are based on the average for many millions of cells, some of which may all contain a certain mutation, while others are unchanged. These ambiguous results are indicated by the letters Y (C or T - example 16093Y); R (A or G - example 16034R); M (A or C - example 16183M); W (A or T - example 16189W); N (G or A or T or C - example 16192N). U, S, M, K, V, H, B, D, and X are also used to indicate other combinations of results for the same location."
 



 
 

James Lick's Full Report for My Full Sequence Mitochondria Results

My results are from Family Tree DNA; this report came from James Lick's website. I suppose I should have posted the entire report the first time, but I thought I could keep it brief instead. It seems it isn't that simple, after all.
 
mthap version 0.19b (2015-05-11); haplogroup data version PhyloTree Build 17 (2016-02-18)
raw data source XXXXXX-FASTA.fasta (16KB)
FASTA format was uploaded. Based on the markers found, assuming the following regions were completely sequenced: HVR1 (16001~16569) HVR2 (1~574) CR (575~16000).
Found 16569 markers at 16569 positions covering 100.0% of mtDNA.

 
Markers found (shown as differences to rCRS):

HVR2: 73G 118C 119C 189G 195C 198T 204C 207A 263G (315.1C)
CR: 709A 750G 1243C 1438G 2706G 3505G 4769G 5046A 5460A 7028T 7864T 8251A 8860G 8994A 11674T 11719A 11947G 12414C 12705T 14766T 15326G 15884C
HVR1: 16103R 16189C 16223T 16278T 16292T 16295T (16519C)

 
Best mtDNA Haplogroup Matches:
1) W1(T119C)
Defining Markers for haplogroup W1(T119C):
HVR2: 73G 119C 189G 195C 204C 207A 263G
CR: 709A 750G 1243C 1438G 2706G 3505G 4769G 5046A 5460A 7028T 7864T 8251A 8860G 8994A 11674T 11719A 11947G 12414C 12705T 14766T 15326G 15884C
HVR1: 16223T 16292T

Marker path from rCRS to haplogroup W1(T119C) (plus extra markers):
H2a2a1(rCRS) 263G ⇨ H2a2a 8860G 15326G ⇨ H2a2 750G ⇨ H2a 4769G ⇨ H2 1438G ⇨ H 2706G 7028T ⇨ HV 14766T ⇨ R0 73G 11719A ⇨ R 12705T 16223T ⇨ N 189G 709A 5046A 11674T 12414C ⇨ N2 195C 204C 207A 1243C 3505G 5460A 8251A 8994A 11947G 15884C 16292T ⇨ W 7864T ⇨ W1 119C ⇨ W1(T119C) 118C 198T (315.1C) 16103R 16189C 16278T 16295T (16519C)

Good Match! Your results also had extra markers for this haplogroup:
Matches(31): 73G 119C 189G 195C 204C 207A 263G 709A 750G 1243C 1438G 2706G 3505G 4769G 5046A 5460A 7028T 7864T 8251A 8860G 8994A 11674T 11719A 11947G 12414C 12705T 14766T 15326G 15884C 16223T 16292T
Extras(6): 118C 198T (315.1C) 16103R 16189C 16278T 16295T (16519C)

 
2) W1
Defining Markers for haplogroup W1:
HVR2: 73G 189G 195C 204C 207A 263G
CR: 709A 750G 1243C 1438G 2706G 3505G 4769G 5046A 5460A 7028T 7864T 8251A 8860G 8994A 11674T 11719A 11947G 12414C 12705T 14766T 15326G 15884C
HVR1: 16223T 16292T

Marker path from rCRS to haplogroup W1 (plus extra markers):
H2a2a1(rCRS) 263G ⇨ H2a2a 8860G 15326G ⇨ H2a2 750G ⇨ H2a 4769G ⇨ H2 1438G ⇨ H 2706G 7028T ⇨ HV 14766T ⇨ R0 73G 11719A ⇨ R 12705T 16223T ⇨ N 189G 709A 5046A 11674T 12414C ⇨ N2 195C 204C 207A 1243C 3505G 5460A 8251A 8994A 11947G 15884C 16292T ⇨ W 7864T ⇨ W1 118C 119C 198T (315.1C) 16103R 16189C 16278T 16295T (16519C)

Good Match! Your results also had extra markers for this haplogroup:
Matches(30): 73G 189G 195C 204C 207A 263G 709A 750G 1243C 1438G 2706G 3505G 4769G 5046A 5460A 7028T 7864T 8251A 8860G 8994A 11674T 11719A 11947G 12414C 12705T 14766T 15326G 15884C 16223T 16292T
Extras(7): 118C 119C 198T (315.1C) 16103R 16189C 16278T 16295T (16519C)

 
2) W1i
Defining Markers for haplogroup W1i:
HVR2: 73G 119C 189G 195C 204C 207A 263G
CR: 709A 750G 1243C 1438G 2706G 3505G 4769G 5046A 5460A 5580C 7028T 7864T 8251A 8860G 8994A 11674T 11719A 11947G 12414C 12705T 14766T 15326G 15884C
HVR1: 16223T 16292T

Marker path from rCRS to haplogroup W1i (plus extra markers):
H2a2a1(rCRS) 263G ⇨ H2a2a 8860G 15326G ⇨ H2a2 750G ⇨ H2a 4769G ⇨ H2 1438G ⇨ H 2706G 7028T ⇨ HV 14766T ⇨ R0 73G 11719A ⇨ R 12705T 16223T ⇨ N 189G 709A 5046A 11674T 12414C ⇨ N2 195C 204C 207A 1243C 3505G 5460A 8251A 8994A 11947G 15884C 16292T ⇨ W 7864T ⇨ W1 119C ⇨ W1(T119C) 5580C ⇨ W1i 118C 198T (315.1C) 16103R 16189C 16278T 16295T (16519C)

Imperfect Match. Your results contained differences with this haplogroup:
Matches(31): 73G 119C 189G 195C 204C 207A 263G 709A 750G 1243C 1438G 2706G 3505G 4769G 5046A 5460A 7028T 7864T 8251A 8860G 8994A 11674T 11719A 11947G 12414C 12705T 14766T 15326G 15884C 16223T 16292T
Mismatches(1): 5580T
Extras(6): 118C 198T (315.1C) 16103R 16189C 16278T 16295T (16519C)

 
2) W1c
Defining Markers for haplogroup W1c:
HVR2: 73G 119C 189G 195C 204C 207A 263G
CR: 709A 750G 1243C 1438G 2706G 3505G 4769G 5046A 5460A 7028T 7864T 8251A 8860G 8994A 11674T 11719A 11947G 12414C 12705T 14148G 14766T 15326G 15884C
HVR1: 16223T 16292T

Marker path from rCRS to haplogroup W1c (plus extra markers):
H2a2a1(rCRS) 263G ⇨ H2a2a 8860G 15326G ⇨ H2a2 750G ⇨ H2a 4769G ⇨ H2 1438G ⇨ H 2706G 7028T ⇨ HV 14766T ⇨ R0 73G 11719A ⇨ R 12705T 16223T ⇨ N 189G 709A 5046A 11674T 12414C ⇨ N2 195C 204C 207A 1243C 3505G 5460A 8251A 8994A 11947G 15884C 16292T ⇨ W 7864T ⇨ W1 119C ⇨ W1(T119C) 14148G ⇨ W1c 118C 198T (315.1C) 16103R 16189C 16278T 16295T (16519C)

Imperfect Match. Your results contained differences with this haplogroup:
Matches(31): 73G 119C 189G 195C 204C 207A 263G 709A 750G 1243C 1438G 2706G 3505G 4769G 5046A 5460A 7028T 7864T 8251A 8860G 8994A 11674T 11719A 11947G 12414C 12705T 14766T 15326G 15884C 16223T 16292T
Mismatches(1): 14148A
Extras(6): 118C 198T (315.1C) 16103R 16189C 16278T 16295T (16519C)

 
3) W
Defining Markers for haplogroup W:
HVR2: 73G 189G 195C 204C 207A 263G
CR: 709A 750G 1243C 1438G 2706G 3505G 4769G 5046A 5460A 7028T 8251A 8860G 8994A 11674T 11719A 11947G 12414C 12705T 14766T 15326G 15884C
HVR1: 16223T 16292T

Marker path from rCRS to haplogroup W (plus extra markers):
H2a2a1(rCRS) 263G ⇨ H2a2a 8860G 15326G ⇨ H2a2 750G ⇨ H2a 4769G ⇨ H2 1438G ⇨ H 2706G 7028T ⇨ HV 14766T ⇨ R0 73G 11719A ⇨ R 12705T 16223T ⇨ N 189G 709A 5046A 11674T 12414C ⇨ N2 195C 204C 207A 1243C 3505G 5460A 8251A 8994A 11947G 15884C 16292T ⇨ W 118C 119C 198T (315.1C) 7864T 16103R 16189C 16278T 16295T (16519C)

Good Match! Your results also had extra markers for this haplogroup:
Matches(29): 73G 189G 195C 204C 207A 263G 709A 750G 1243C 1438G 2706G 3505G 4769G 5046A 5460A 7028T 8251A 8860G 8994A 11674T 11719A 11947G 12414C 12705T 14766T 15326G 15884C 16223T 16292T
Extras(8): 118C 119C 198T (315.1C) 7864T 16103R 16189C 16278T 16295T (16519C)

 
3) W1h
Defining Markers for haplogroup W1h:
HVR2: 73G 189G 195C 204C 207A 263G
CR: 709A 750G 1243C 1438G 2706G 3505G 4769G 5046A 5460A 7028T 7864T 8251A 8860G 8994A 11674T 11719A 11947G 12414C 12705T 14766T 15326G 15884C
HVR1: 16145A 16223T 16292T

Marker path from rCRS to haplogroup W1h (plus extra markers):
H2a2a1(rCRS) 263G ⇨ H2a2a 8860G 15326G ⇨ H2a2 750G ⇨ H2a 4769G ⇨ H2 1438G ⇨ H 2706G 7028T ⇨ HV 14766T ⇨ R0 73G 11719A ⇨ R 12705T 16223T ⇨ N 189G 709A 5046A 11674T 12414C ⇨ N2 195C 204C 207A 1243C 3505G 5460A 8251A 8994A 11947G 15884C 16292T ⇨ W 7864T ⇨ W1 16145A ⇨ W1h 118C 119C 198T (315.1C) 16103R 16189C 16278T 16295T (16519C)

Imperfect Match. Your results contained differences with this haplogroup:
Matches(30): 73G 189G 195C 204C 207A 263G 709A 750G 1243C 1438G 2706G 3505G 4769G 5046A 5460A 7028T 7864T 8251A 8860G 8994A 11674T 11719A 11947G 12414C 12705T 14766T 15326G 15884C 16223T 16292T
Mismatches(1): 16145G
Extras(7): 118C 119C 198T (315.1C) 16103R 16189C 16278T 16295T (16519C)

 
3) W1f
Defining Markers for haplogroup W1f:
HVR2: 73G 189G 195C 204C 207A 263G
CR: 709A 750G 1243C 1438G 2706G 3505G 4769G 5046A 5460A 7028T 7864T 8251A 8860G 8994A 9950C 11674T 11719A 11947G 12414C 12705T 14766T 15326G 15884C
HVR1: 16223T 16292T

Marker path from rCRS to haplogroup W1f (plus extra markers):
H2a2a1(rCRS) 263G ⇨ H2a2a 8860G 15326G ⇨ H2a2 750G ⇨ H2a 4769G ⇨ H2 1438G ⇨ H 2706G 7028T ⇨ HV 14766T ⇨ R0 73G 11719A ⇨ R 12705T 16223T ⇨ N 189G 709A 5046A 11674T 12414C ⇨ N2 195C 204C 207A 1243C 3505G 5460A 8251A 8994A 11947G 15884C 16292T ⇨ W 7864T ⇨ W1 9950C ⇨ W1f 118C 119C 198T (315.1C) 16103R 16189C 16278T 16295T (16519C)

Imperfect Match. Your results contained differences with this haplogroup:
Matches(30): 73G 189G 195C 204C 207A 263G 709A 750G 1243C 1438G 2706G 3505G 4769G 5046A 5460A 7028T 7864T 8251A 8860G 8994A 11674T 11719A 11947G 12414C 12705T 14766T 15326G 15884C 16223T 16292T
Mismatches(1): 9950T
Extras(7): 118C 119C 198T (315.1C) 16103R 16189C 16278T 16295T (16519C)

 
3) W1g
Defining Markers for haplogroup W1g:
HVR2: 73G 189G 195C 204C 207A 263G
CR: 709A 750G 1243C 1438G 2706G 3505G 4769G 5046A 5460A 7028T 7864T 8251A 8860G 8994A 11674T 11719A 11947G 12414C 12705T 14766T 15326G 15884C
HVR1: 16223T 16292T 16320T

Marker path from rCRS to haplogroup W1g (plus extra markers):
H2a2a1(rCRS) 263G ⇨ H2a2a 8860G 15326G ⇨ H2a2 750G ⇨ H2a 4769G ⇨ H2 1438G ⇨ H 2706G 7028T ⇨ HV 14766T ⇨ R0 73G 11719A ⇨ R 12705T 16223T ⇨ N 189G 709A 5046A 11674T 12414C ⇨ N2 195C 204C 207A 1243C 3505G 5460A 8251A 8994A 11947G 15884C 16292T ⇨ W 7864T ⇨ W1 16320T ⇨ W1g 118C 119C 198T (315.1C) 16103R 16189C 16278T 16295T (16519C)

Imperfect Match. Your results contained differences with this haplogroup:
Matches(30): 73G 189G 195C 204C 207A 263G 709A 750G 1243C 1438G 2706G 3505G 4769G 5046A 5460A 7028T 7864T 8251A 8860G 8994A 11674T 11719A 11947G 12414C 12705T 14766T 15326G 15884C 16223T 16292T
Mismatches(1): 16320C
Extras(7): 118C 119C 198T (315.1C) 16103R 16189C 16278T 16295T (16519C)

 
3) W1e1
Defining Markers for haplogroup W1e1:
HVR2: 73G 189G 195C 204C 207A 263G
CR: 709A 750G 1243C 1438G 2706G 3505G 4769G 5046A 5460A 7028T 7864T 8251A 8659G 8860G 8887G 8994A 11674T 11719A 11947G 12414C 12705T 14766T 15326G 15884C
HVR1: 16223T 16292T 16295T

Marker path from rCRS to haplogroup W1e1 (plus extra markers):
H2a2a1(rCRS) 263G ⇨ H2a2a 8860G 15326G ⇨ H2a2 750G ⇨ H2a 4769G ⇨ H2 1438G ⇨ H 2706G 7028T ⇨ HV 14766T ⇨ R0 73G 11719A ⇨ R 12705T 16223T ⇨ N 189G 709A 5046A 11674T 12414C ⇨ N2 195C 204C 207A 1243C 3505G 5460A 8251A 8994A 11947G 15884C 16292T ⇨ W 7864T ⇨ W1 8659G 8887G ⇨ W1e 16295T ⇨ W1e1 118C 119C 198T (315.1C) 16103R 16189C 16278T (16519C)

Imperfect Match. Your results contained differences with this haplogroup:
Matches(31): 73G 189G 195C 204C 207A 263G 709A 750G 1243C 1438G 2706G 3505G 4769G 5046A 5460A 7028T 7864T 8251A 8860G 8994A 11674T 11719A 11947G 12414C 12705T 14766T 15326G 15884C 16223T 16292T 16295T
Mismatches(2): 8659A 8887A
Extras(6): 118C 119C 198T (315.1C) 16103R 16189C 16278T (16519C)

Wednesday, April 19, 2017

Mitochondria DNA Haplogroup W1-T119C Confirmed

It had been strongly suggested that my mtDNA haplogroup was W1e, and until I updated myself with more elaborate testing, I couldn't really argue with that assessment. However, I now have confirmation from both Family Tree DNA and James Lick's mtDNA Analysis Tool: I'm definitely W1-T119C. Of course, I suspected as much, because my two matches in the database prior to my upgrade are both the same haplogroup. With the upgrade, I now have five matches (one replacing one of the original two individuals, for some reason). None of them seem very familiar to me, except one has Cranfield (an unusual surname) listed in their family surnames. However, for me Cranfield / Crankfield is a surname exclusive to my paternal lineage. So that doesn't quite add up here.

El Cid's Wilma webpage (Ian Logan, I believe) states: "Ancient DNA results show W+119 was present in Germany 7300 years ago, in burials of the LBK culture. Finds of the same type continue in the later Schöningen, Salzmünde, and Bernburg cultures through 5000 years ago."

James Lick's report was interesting and very thorough as usual:

mthap version 0.19b (2015-05-11); haplogroup data version PhyloTree Build 17 (2016-02-18)
raw data source XXXXXX-FASTA.fasta (16KB)
FASTA format was uploaded. Based on the markers found, assuming the following regions were completely sequenced: HVR1 (16001~16569) HVR2 (1~574) CR (575~16000).
Found 16569 markers at 16569 positions covering 100.0% of mtDNA.


Markers found (shown as differences to rCRS):

HVR2: 73G 118C 119C 189G 195C 198T 204C 207A 263G (315.1C)
CR: 709A 750G 1243C 1438G 2706G 3505G 4769G 5046A 5460A 7028T 7864T 8251A 8860G 8994A 11674T 11719A 11947G 12414C 12705T 14766T 15326G 15884C
HVR1: 16103R 16189C 16223T 16278T 16292T 16295T (16519C)


Best mtDNA Haplogroup Matches:
1) W1(T119C)
Defining Markers for haplogroup W1(T119C):
HVR2: 73G 119C 189G 195C 204C 207A 263G
CR: 709A 750G 1243C 1438G 2706G 3505G 4769G 5046A 5460A 7028T 7864T 8251A 8860G 8994A 11674T 11719A 11947G 12414C 12705T 14766T 15326G 15884C
HVR1: 16223T 16292T

Marker path from rCRS to haplogroup W1(T119C) (plus extra markers):
H2a2a1(rCRS) 263G ⇨ H2a2a 8860G 15326G ⇨ H2a2 750G ⇨ H2a 4769G ⇨ H2 1438G ⇨ H 2706G 7028T ⇨ HV 14766T ⇨ R0 73G 11719A ⇨ R 12705T 16223T ⇨ N 189G 709A 5046A 11674T 12414C ⇨ N2 195C 204C 207A 1243C 3505G 5460A 8251A 8994A 11947G 15884C 16292T ⇨ W 7864T ⇨ W1 119C ⇨ W1(T119C) 118C 198T (315.1C) 16103R 16189C 16278T 16295T (16519C)

Good Match! Your results also had extra markers for this haplogroup:
Matches(31): 73G 119C 189G 195C 204C 207A 263G 709A 750G 1243C 1438G 2706G 3505G 4769G 5046A 5460A 7028T 7864T 8251A 8860G 8994A 11674T 11719A 11947G 12414C 12705T 14766T 15326G 15884C 16223T 16292T
Extras(6): 118C 198T (315.1C) 16103R 16189C 16278T 16295T (16519C)


2) W1
Defining Markers for haplogroup W1:
HVR2: 73G 189G 195C 204C 207A 263G
CR: 709A 750G 1243C 1438G 2706G 3505G 4769G 5046A 5460A 7028T 7864T 8251A 8860G 8994A 11674T 11719A 11947G 12414C 12705T 14766T 15326G 15884C
HVR1: 16223T 16292T

Marker path from rCRS to haplogroup W1 (plus extra markers):
H2a2a1(rCRS) 263G ⇨ H2a2a 8860G 15326G ⇨ H2a2 750G ⇨ H2a 4769G ⇨ H2 1438G ⇨ H 2706G 7028T ⇨ HV 14766T ⇨ R0 73G 11719A ⇨ R 12705T 16223T ⇨ N 189G 709A 5046A 11674T 12414C ⇨ N2 195C 204C 207A 1243C 3505G 5460A 8251A 8994A 11947G 15884C 16292T ⇨ W 7864T ⇨ W1 118C 119C 198T (315.1C) 16103R 16189C 16278T 16295T (16519C)

Good Match! Your results also had extra markers for this haplogroup:
Matches(30): 73G 189G 195C 204C 207A 263G 709A 750G 1243C 1438G 2706G 3505G 4769G 5046A 5460A 7028T 7864T 8251A 8860G 8994A 11674T 11719A 11947G 12414C 12705T 14766T 15326G 15884C 16223T 16292T
Extras(7): 118C 119C 198T (315.1C) 16103R 16189C 16278T 16295T (16519C)


3) W
Defining Markers for haplogroup W:
HVR2: 73G 189G 195C 204C 207A 263G
CR: 709A 750G 1243C 1438G 2706G 3505G 4769G 5046A 5460A 7028T 8251A 8860G 8994A 11674T 11719A 11947G 12414C 12705T 14766T 15326G 15884C
HVR1: 16223T 16292T

Marker path from rCRS to haplogroup W (plus extra markers):
H2a2a1(rCRS) 263G ⇨ H2a2a 8860G 15326G ⇨ H2a2 750G ⇨ H2a 4769G ⇨ H2 1438G ⇨ H 2706G 7028T ⇨ HV 14766T ⇨ R0 73G 11719A ⇨ R 12705T 16223T ⇨ N 189G 709A 5046A 11674T 12414C ⇨ N2 195C 204C 207A 1243C 3505G 5460A 8251A 8994A 11947G 15884C 16292T ⇨ W 118C 119C 198T (315.1C) 7864T 16103R 16189C 16278T 16295T (16519C)

Good Match! Your results also had extra markers for this haplogroup:
Matches(29): 73G 189G 195C 204C 207A 263G 709A 750G 1243C 1438G 2706G 3505G 4769G 5046A 5460A 7028T 8251A 8860G 8994A 11674T 11719A 11947G 12414C 12705T 14766T 15326G 15884C 16223T 16292T
Extras(8): 118C 119C 198T (315.1C) 7864T 16103R 16189C 16278T 16295T (16519C)

Clearly, it is the 119C mutation on my DNA which distinguishes it from both W and W1. My W1-T119C haplogroup has no more relationship to W1e than to most other W subclades, apparently. It is a direct offshoot from W ---> W1. The 7864T mutation differentiates both W1-T119C and W1 from W. My six extra mutations not ordinarily associated with W1-T119C include at least four markers for X, most likely because my mtDNA is supposed to be Cherokee (according to family history). The Genographic Project originally reported my mitochondria as "X", and I still have the certificate to prove it.