RootsChat.Com

Any company can issue a press release and make whatever claim they like but we cannot judge whether such claims stand up to scrutiny without the independent process of peer review.

FALSE. Over the last few years thousands of new SNP markers have been found by Geno 2 project, etc. Many have no known significance as they are found in too few individuals but there are also many, like S530, that are more widespread. Other Company's results support the Scottish-centricness of S530 as you would know if you were familiar with Y-DNA SNP testing.

As there are so many SNPs that are being researched it is perfectly understandable that detailed studies of each is not yet done (or proabably ever will be). To make a statement saying initial results point to X is fine if it is of interest to the public, and also help the DNA testing community to find new volunteers. Common sense says that more detailed studies are best left to when we have more results.

It also seems rather silly to claim that a marker is "Scottish" when samples have only been collected from the British Isles and we therefore do not know if it is prevalent in other populations.

FALSE. S530 has been tested for in a wide range of people who originate from all over the world. It is a subgroup of the Western European P312 Haplogroup, separate to other groups like U106, etc, which we already know make up the majority of the British and European population. We know that the overwhelming majority of Europeans or Britains or anyone else do not have the S530 SNP. Of those that do, they are predominantly Scottish.

Even if a marker is found today in one population that is not proof that the marker arose in that same region over one thousand years ago.

And that is not what is claimed in the Press Release. It only says that the SNP was likely found in the Picts i.e., between 0 and 900 A.D. The Press release states that the marker is much older (3000 yrs) but doesn't state where its first occurrence was. As the Picts were a confederation of tribes it could have originally been brought in from England, Wales, Belgium, France, etc, by a small number of people before flourishing in Scotland and multiplying many times.

It is nothing but a PR exercise for the company who wish to get people to buy their test.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with DNA testing companies making press releases informing the public of developments. There should be more if anything!

The articles just linked to are all inaccurate and I would not recommend anyone waste time reading them.

BritainsDNA never have offered a Pictish test, they just offer a Paternal line Y-DNA test comparable but more up to date than National Geographics Geno 2 test. They both determine a man's SNPs which can be used to learn more about their ancestry.

The Pictish tag only comes in because in order to  make the results more understandable to non-DNA experts they have categorized some of the SNP results into labled groups like Pictish etc just as FTDNA use the term "Jewish DNA" or "Niall of the 9 Hostages DNA" which are equally oversimplifed. Why is it you are not attacking FTDNA over this? If it really is accuracy you are interested in then please write some threads/articles on FTDNA's oversimplifications. If you do not then you are clearly biased.

Regarding the "Pictish" SNP, if you scroll down to the "Haplogroup Frequencies Graphic" graphic on the Chromo2 test example ( http://www.britainsdna.com/demos/chromo2 ) you will see the bubble with R1b-S530 Pictish 4.9% alongside many others.

My own take on it is that it is early days in testing but results from all testing companies do point to it being very "Scottish-centric" and looking like it has been in Scotland for a long time. Whether that makes it a "Pictish" marker is another issue as different people define the Picts as different things.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Picts

I am not Scottish but know that a lot of Scots do consider them to be of Pictish blood so perhaps that is all that is what the label is saying. The Pictish Kingdom merged with other Kingdoms in 900AD. As it was one of the largest parts of what went on to become Scotland you would expect a lot of modern day Scots to be descendants of them.

As I said, it is early days yet but I am sure we will learn more about these S530 men in the next few years.

If any man is interesting in testing there are 3 options I would recommend at this point in time

1) If you just want to test for this single SNP (only recommended for people who have already tested R1b+) the internationally respected Thomas Krahn's DNAFingerprint is the way to go (single SNP tests cost between £3 to £8). http://www.dna-fingerprint.com/

2) The entry level test most will be interested in at present is BritainsDNA Chromo2 Raw test @£129 http://www.britainsdna.com/demos/chromo2

3) The ultimate option is a Full Y Genome test which will be the only Y-DNA test you will ever take and tests STRs as well as SNPs such as FullGenomes £700 test https://www.fullgenomes.com/

Which 2 BCs did they send you?

If anyone going to the Norfolk RO has a few minutes to spare could they please check the following two baptisms that are listed on the IGI:-

John Colman bapt: 12 Nov 1759  St. Andrew, Thorpe-next-Norwich s. of John & Sarah   
Edmund Colman   bapt: 12 Nov 1759 St. Andrew, Thorpe-next-Norwich s. of John & Sarah

What I am interested in is whether the spelling of the surname is absolutely 100% certain or could they have been mistranscribed slightly, i.e., could they be Cotman?

Thanks