GENEALOGY-DNA-L ArchivesArchiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2004-06 > 1086099479
From: "gareth.henson" <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] Re: Differentiating I1c and I1a
Date: Tue, 1 Jun 2004 15:17:59 +0100
References: <001201c44735$6a9b06c0$d8e289d1@Ken1> <022601c4474b$b092da70$0c00a8c0@DD9D0N41>
The Y-str database suggests a potential I1c "hotspot" at Berne, Switzerland
where 6 out of 91 entries are 0-2 steps from the following haplotype:
DYS19 = 15, DYS389 = 14,31, DYS390 = 23, DYS391 = 10, DYS392 = 12, DYS393 =
14, DYS385 = 15,15.
In addition to the 3 markers in Ken's mail below, DYS389 and DYS385 are also
notably different from the modal for I1a.
(a) I1c represents a separate isolated pocket of I-M170 descendants
somewhere just north of the Alps, which re-merged with the other groups when
they all expanded post LGM
(b) I1c coexisted with I1a in north-central Europe, dominated but not
extinguished by the larger haplogroup.
Some further testing and number crunching may be able to support one or
other of these, but at present I1c looks as distinct from I1a as I1b,
despite the geography. What about I* (i.e. not a,b or c) - Cinnioglu's paper
has 6 of these.
I agree that on a small number of markers I1c is easily confused with G,
possibly some of the I-M170 haplotypes referred to as clustering with G-M201
in the Barac paper on Croatia (when SNPs were disregarded) were I1cs.
----- Original Message -----
From: "hamman" <>
Sent: Monday, May 31, 2004 9:13 PM
Subject: [DNA] Re: Differentiating I1c and I1a
> This I1c stuff is starting to get real interesting to me. Specifically,
> this Anglo-Saxon looking I1c is starting to look an awful lot like my
> putative HgG-like haplotype that originated in Germany (probably south
> Rhine/north Baden; been waiting for my SNP for many months now). Ken,
> you also please list the I1c data for the other 2 markers? At only 6
> markers, I won't jump to any conclusions, just find this correlation
> striking...alright, gotta go. Thanks, Brian
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Ken Nordtvedt" <>
> To: <>
> Sent: Monday, May 31, 2004 12:32 PM
> Subject: Differentiating I1c and I1a
> > Dr. Siiri Rootsi kindly sent me (and some others) a database of 6-loci
> > haplotypes which she and others used in their recent paper. One of the
> > elements introduced into the picture is the subclade I1c which seems to
> > a geographic distribution somewhat like I1a (NW Europe) and matches I1a
> > YCAIIa,b = 19,21.
> > I compiled statistics this morning on the frequencies of occurence of
> > numbers for the database's I1c haplotypes (defined from mutation M223)
> > the 6 loci. Three of the loci seem to show significant differences from
> > what typically occurs for I1a. I give you the I1c results below.
> > [DYS Z --- (X) Y means there were X number of haplotypes with Y repeats
> > marker Z]
> > DYS19 --- (1) 14, (25) 15, (8) 16, (1) 17
> > DYS392 --- (3) 11, (31) 12, (1) 13
> > DYS393 --- (2) 13, (19) 14, (14) 15
> > DYS388 --- (1) 11, (2) 12, (30) 13, (3) 14
> > Garvey's 5 most common I1a haplotypes from YSTR.org database all show
> > DYS19 = 14, DYS 392 = 11, DYS 393 = 13
> > His "most common repeat value" list for both FTDNA and Relative Genetics
> > shows DYS 388 = 14 for HG2 (which includes all "I")
> > So it seems in absence of personal SNP tests to tell us the final
> > of our haplotypes, we can TILT the probabilities that we are I1a versus
> > using these 4 markers. There's no certainty with this STR stuff, but
> > odds become somewhat stacked by comparing the numbers above. I
> > have checked my ancestral "I" haplotypes and find the probabilities
> > favor I1a.
> > There is another approach we could perhaps collectively take. It has
> > mentioned to me that these SNP tests which would define subclades can,
> > sufficient volume of business, be performed rather cheaply. If our well
> > known labs won't offer these SNP tests we may be able to go to labs
> > elsewhere in the world with bulk orders for SNP tests which we desire
> > can not now get. I'm not a surname administrator so have no leverage or
> > volume to offer, but I bring this to the attention of those who do.
> > Ken
|Re: [DNA] Re: Differentiating I1c and I1a by "gareth.henson" <>|