















Please note:
• This analysis is derived from the SNP tested haplotypes that were in the J2 YDNA project on 19 July 2006. The reliability, and applicability of these analyses is dependant on how globally representative these haplotypes are for their subclades.
It is possible, due to the demographics of people who DNA test, and the relatively low sample size, that these marker values are not globally representative. In future  after more results are added  allele frequency distributions for some subclades may change slightly (which, accordingly, may change some of the preliminary observations and/or conclusions). The reliability and representativeness of this data set should increase, as more haplotypes are added.
• J2*( in YCC 2003 nomenclature) is a paraphyletic clade (ie. probably contains many different "subclades"). The J2 project is aware that there are very distinct clusters in the J2* results, and that these clusters being lumped together may confound the statistical analysis.
However,  if we were to divide J2* using subjective criteria, this would invalidate the scientifically objective nature of the analysis.
When there are adequately scientifically verified UEP's ("unique event polymorphisms", ie. SNP markers, or equivalent) to define these clusters, and there are sufficient numbers of project members who have tested for these UEP's, then these additional scientifically/objectively defined clades will be included in the analyses. For instance, the project is currently beginning to receive results for DYS 413, so we will be able to separate J2a* from J2a1* (Both of these clades are paraphyletic (J2a1* nested within J2a*), however the increased resolution will still be informative). 












Last analysed:July 2006
Marker distributions in J2 subclades*
(The potential significance of each marker in distinguishing subclades is Statistically quantified)
First 12 markers
(in FTDNA order)

There are no statistically significant differences in the allele values for DYS 393 between the different subclades. 

TTest comparing J2a with J2b
T= 0.27 P= 0.7904 *NS*
ANOVA comparing J2*/J2f/J2e
F= 0.13 P= 0.8796 *NS*
ANOVA comparing J2*/J2f*/J2f1/J2e1/J2e2
F= 0.06 P= 0.9973 *NS* 




According to current data, DYS 393 is of no significant value in distinguishing J2 subclades. 


There are statistically significant differences in the allele values for DYS 390 between the different subclades. 

TTest comparing J2a with J2b
T= 6.07 P= 0.0000 *Significant*
ANOVA comparing J2*/J2f/J2e
F= 22.1 P= 0.0000 *Significant*
Tukey HSD AllPairwise Comparisons Test
J2e A
J2* B
J2f C
All clades are significantly different
ANOVA comparing J2*/J2f*/J2f1/J2e1/J2e2
F= 13.0 P= 0.0000 *Significant*
Tukey HSD AllPairwise Comparisons Test
J2e1 A
J2e2 AB
J2* B
J2f B
J2f1 C
There are 3 groups (A, B, etc.) in which the clades are not significantly different from one another 




According to current data, DYS 390 is of great significant value in distinguishing between J2a & J2b. There is also a statistically significant difference between J2f and J2*. When divided down by exact subclade, it can be seen that J2e1 is significantly different to J2*, J2f, and J2f1 (but not significantly different to J2e2); J2e2 is only significantly different to J2f1; J2*, J2 and J2e2 are not significantly different to each other.
In practical terms a value of 24 or 25 most likely means J2e; a value of 23 most likely means J2* or J2f; a value of 21 or 22 often means J2f1 (but 22 can also be found in both J2f* and J2*). None of the individual marker values can be considered 100% conclusively indicative for any particular clade,  the other marker values need to be taken into consideration. 


There are statistically significant differences in the allele values for DYS 19/394 between the different subclades. 

TTest comparing J2a with J2b
T= 5.47 P= 0.0000 *Significant*
ANOVA comparing J2*/J2f/J2e
F= 17.6 P= 0.0000 *Significant*
Tukey HSD AllPairwise Comparisons Test
J2e A
J2* B
J2f B
There are 2 groups (A, B, etc.) in which the clades are not significantly different from one another.
ANOVA comparing J2*/J2f*/J2f1/J2e1/J2e2
F= 7.43 P= 0.0000 *Significant*
Tukey HSD AllPairwise Comparisons Test
J2e1 is significantly different to J2* and J2f. J2f is also significantly different to J2e2. All other pairwise comparisons were not significant. 




According to current data, DYS 19/394 is of significant value in distinguishing between J2a and J2b. The difference between J2* and J2f is not significant. Lower values are associated with J2f, and higher values are associated with J2e, with values for J2* in between. According to the SNP tested data that is currently in the project, values of 16 or above appear to be conclusively indicative of J2e (bearing in mind that this pattern might change with new SNP tested data).
In practical terms a value of 16 or above most likely means J2e, and a value of 14 often means J2f (but sometimes J2*). A value of 15 appears to be prominent in one of the J2* haplotype clusters. 


There are (weak) statistically significant differences in the allele values for DYS 391 between the different subclades. 

TTest comparing J2a with J2b
T= 2.18 P= 0.0352 *Significant*
ANOVA comparing J2*/J2f/J2e
F= 4.02 P= 0.0227 *Significant*
Tukey HSD AllPairwise Comparisons Test
J2e A
J2f AB
J2* B
There are 2 groups (A, B, etc.) in which the clades are not significantly different from one another
ANOVA comparing J2*/J2f*/J2f1/J2e1/J2e2
F= 2.51 P= 0.0395 *Significant*
Tukey HSD AllPairwise Comparisons Test
There are no significant pairwise differences 




According to current data, DYS 391 is of weak (statistically significant) value in distinguishing J2 subclades. There is a mildly statistically significant difference between J2e and J2*. When divided down by exact subclade, while still mildly statistically significant, no significant differences were seen between individual clades.
In practical terms, a value of 9 is suggestive (but not conclusive for) J2*. A value of 9 seems to be predominant in one of the main putative J2* clusters. A value of 11 is suggestive of (but not conclusive for) J2e. Values of 11 can be found in both J2e1 and J2e2,  so at present there is no conclusive evidence to suggest this value is of significance in distinguishing clades within J2e. 


There are statistically significant differences in the allele values for DYS 385a between the different subclades. 

TTest comparing J2a with J2b
T= 4.52 P= 0.0000 *Significant*
ANOVA comparing J2*/J2f/J2e
F= 12.1 P= 0.0000 *Significant*
Tukey HSD AllPairwise Comparisons Test
J2e A
J2* B
J2f B
There are 2 groups (A, B, etc.) in which the clades are not significantly different from one another
ANOVA comparing J2*/J2f*/J2f1/J2e1/J2e2
F= 7.48 P= 0.0000 *Significant*
Tukey HSD AllPairwise Comparisons Test
J2e2 is significantly different to J2*, J2f, J2f1 and J2e1; J2e1 is significantly different to J2f. 




According to current data, DYS 385a is of significant value in distinguishing between J2a and J2b. It might also be of significant value in distinguishing between J2e1 and J2e2 (but owing to the small sample size of J2e2,  we should be cautious in making this conclusion until more J2e2 haplotypes are seen).
In practical terms, lower values are more suggestive of J2* and J2f, and higher values are more suggestive of J2e. Values of 16 might be suggestive of J2e2 (conclusiveness limited by the low J2e2 sample size). 


There are (weak) statistically significant differences in the allele values for DYS 385b between the different subclades. 

TTest comparing J2a with J2b
T= 3.18 P= 0.0022 *Significant*
ANOVA comparing J2*/J2f/J2e
F= 7.27 P= 0.0014 *Significant*
Tukey HSD AllPairwise Comparisons Test
J2e A
J2* AB
J2f B
There are 2 groups (A, B, etc.) in which the clades are not significantly different from one another
ANOVA comparing J2*/J2f*/J2f1/J2e1/J2e2
F= 3.45 P= 0.0083 *significant*
Tukey HSD AllPairwise Comparisons Test
J2f is significantly different to J2e1 and J2e2. 




According to current data, DYS 385b is of mild statistically significant value in distinguishing between J2a and J2b. There are statistically significant differences between J2e and J2f. J2* is not significantly different to either J2e or J2f.
In practical terms, a value of 18 and above is (according to current data) unlikely to be J2f, and a value of 15 or lower is unlikely to be J2e (bear in mind that this pattern might change with the addition of more haplotypes). 


There are no statistically significant differences in the allele values for DYS 426 between the different subclades. 

TTest comparing J2a with J2b
Data constant, Tstatistic cannot be computed *NS*
ANOVA comparing J2*/J2f/J2e
Data constant, cannot calculate *NS*
ANOVA comparing J2*/J2f*/J2f1/J2e1/J2e2
Data constant, cannot calculate *NS* 




According to current data, DYS 426 is of no significant value in distinguishing J2 subclades. 


There are no statistically significant differences in the allele values for DYS 388 between the different subclades. 

TTest comparing J2a with J2b
T= 1.46 P= 0.1492 *NS*
ANOVA comparing J2*/J2f/J2e
F= 2.38 P= 0.1008 *NS*
ANOVA comparing J2*/J2f*/J2f1/J2e1/J2e2
F= 1.39 P= 0.2410 *NS* 




According to current data, DYS 388 is of no significant value in distinguishing J2 subclades.
It is notable that most J2e repeat values for DYS 388 were 15. 


There are statistically significant differences in the allele values for DYS 439 between the different subclades. 

TTest comparing J2a with J2b
T= 4.32 P= 0.0001 *Significant*
ANOVA comparing J2*/J2f/J2e
F= 16.1 P= 0.0000 *Significant*
Tukey HSD AllPairwise Comparisons Test
J2e A
J2* B
J2f C
All clades are significantly different
ANOVA comparing J2*/J2f*/J2f1/J2e1/J2e2
F= 7.48 P= 0.0000 *Significant*
Tukey HSD AllPairwise Comparisons Test
J2e2 A
J2e1 A
J2* A
J2f1 AB
J2f B
There are 2 groups (A, B, etc.) in which the clades are not significantly different from one another 




According to current data, DYS 439 is of significant value in distinguishing J2 subclades. There is a statistically significant difference between J2a and J2b, and J2f is significantly different to J2e and J2*.
In practical terms, a value greater than 13 is generally more indicative of J2e, and a value of 11 or less is generally more indicative of J2f. Values of 10 at DYS 439 in combination with a DYS 390 value of 22 may possibly be indicative of a distinct cluster within J2f* (this is not yet conclusive,  more SNP tested haplotypes are needed to verify this). 


There are statistically significant differences in the allele values for DYS 389i between the different subclades. 

TTest comparing J2a with J2b
T= 8.04 P= 0.0000 *Significant*
ANOVA comparing J2*/J2f/J2e
F= 33.0 P= 0.0000 *Significant*
Tukey HSD AllPairwise Comparisons Test
J2e A
J2* B
J2f B
There are 2 groups (A, B, etc.) in which the clades are not significantly different from one another
ANOVA comparing J2*/J2f*/J2f1/J2e1/J2e2
F= 14.3 P= 0.0000 *Significant*
Tukey HSD AllPairwise Comparisons Test
J2e1 is significantly different to J2*, J2f and J2f1; J2e2 is significantly different to J2f, J2f1. J2*, J2f and J2f1 are not significantly different to each other





According to current data, DYS 389i is of particularly significant value in distinguishing between J2a and J2b. J2e is significantly different to J2* and J2f. J2* and J2f are not significantly different to each other.
In practical terms, a value of 12 usually is indicative of J2e (but is not conclusive, as there are confirmed J2* and J2f haplotypes with a DYS 389i value of 12). A value of 14 or above is unlikely to be J2e, and is somewhat more likely to occur in J2f (but does also occur in J2*). 


There are (weak) statistically significant differences in the allele values for DYS 392 between the different subclades. 

TTest comparing J2a with J2b
T= 0.72 P= 0.4739 *NS*
ANOVA comparing J2*/J2f/J2e
F= 0.84 P= 0.4382 *NS*
ANOVA comparing J2*/J2f*/J2f1/J2e1/J2e2
F= 2.41 P= 0.0463 *significant*
Tukey HSD AllPairwise Comparisons Test
J2e2 A
J2* AB
J2f AB
J2f1 AB
J2e1 B
There are 2 groups (A, B, etc.) in which the clades are not significantly different from one another. 




According to current data, DYS 392 is of weak (statistically significant) value in distinguishing J2 subclades. There is a weakly significant difference between J2e1 and J2e2. There is one J2e1 haplotype with a value of 10, and one J2e2 with a value of 12. It is unclear whether there is any true significance to these marker values or whether this is a spurious statistical result, which may be a result of the low J2e2 sample size. Additional J2e2 haplotypes may clarify this.
In practical terms,  it is currently unclear whether these DYS 392 results have any reliable practical use. 


There are (weak) statistically significant differences in the allele values for DYS 389ii(389i) between the different subclades. 

TTest comparing J2a with J2b
T= 2.46 P= 0.0166 *Significant*
ANOVA comparing J2*/J2f/J2e
F= 4.81 P= 0.0113 *Significant*
Tukey HSD AllPairwise Comparisons Test
J2e A
J2* AB
J2f B
There are 2 groups (A, B, etc.) in which the clades are not significantly different from one another
ANOVA comparing J2*/J2f*/J2f1/J2e1/J2e2
F= 2.23 P= 0.0630 *NS* 




According to current data, DYS 389ii(389i) is of weak (statistically significant) value in distinguishing J2 subclades. There is a mild statistical difference between J2e and J2f. There is no significant difference between J2* and J2f.
In practical terms, J2e is less likely to have values greater or less than 16. J2f is more likely to have values of 17 or greater 


TTest comparing
J2a with J2b
J2a N=44
J2b N=23

ANOVA comparing
J2*/J2f/J2e
J2* N=25
J2f N=19
J2e N=23 
ANOVA comparing
J2*/J2f*/J2f1/J2e1/J2e2
J2* N=25
J2f* N=16
J2f1 N= 3
J2e1 N=20
J2e2 N= 2
One M12 haplotype was omitted from this analysis, as it is still awaiting SNP test results for M102, and therefore cannot yet be classified as either J2e1 or J2e* 





