GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2005-04 > 1114732819


From: <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] Variance or Age of 'Northern' I1c
Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 20:00:20 -0400 (EDT)
References: <001001c54c1c$da0bd150$c6559045@Ken1> <003f01c54c40$3eb75f70$c6559045@Ken1>
In-Reply-To: <003f01c54c40$3eb75f70$c6559045@Ken1>


Ken:
So, if the Isles variety of I1c was founded in the British Isles, (maybe
Scotland), and you consider it indigenous there, where/what did it divert
from?

If it diverted from the "Northern variety" of I1c, (or any other hg I), in
Britain, then the other clade/subclade was there first.

I guess it is the word Indigenous, that I am having trouble with. It
seems that it should mean, "the first there and found there when the
second group arrived", since everyone had to come from somewhere. And
being developed there is just a mutated continuation of a pre-clade, maybe
the "original" indigenous inhabitants.

Anyway, I am curious, just which clade/subclade you might think it did
develop from? And why? I guess that goes for all the hg I clads as well.
Apparently I1c is older then I1a, so the second letter is just related to
the time of discovery and not to to the age of the clade?

And if I, (or we, which ever), knew all we should know about SNP's, there
would be no question, right?

Thanks,
Clyde

> The largest variety of I1c is the "Northern" variety which reaches its
> highest percent of population in NW Germany, Netherlands, and
> Scandinavia. It's main characteristic is 10 repeats at DYS459b instead
> of the 9 repeats of Southern and Isles I1c.
>
> I found the variance of this Northern variety using 25 markers to be 133
> percent of the variance of the root I1a variety. This would give its
> "age" as 13,300 years if I used my standard estimate of 10,000 years for
> root I1a. (By comparison, see original message below for the relative
> youth of Scot or Isles I1c.
>
> Rootsi et al in their 2004 paper on haplogroup "I" found a similar age
> ratio between I1c and I1a. They used an entirely different database
> which did not contain British haplotypes (and was light on
> German/Dutch). And they did not first separate out the varieties within
> I1a and I1c as I have done. Nevertheless, we're in decent agreement on
> the relative ages of these core haplogroups. This northern I1c is
> certainly continental. But lots of it is found in Britain, and this is
> to be expected since the Anglo-Saxons and Scandinavians who settled
> heavily in the Isles came from the areas of strongest continental
> concentration of this variety.
>
> I have two more modest sized varieties of I1c to examine for an age
> estimate. One is unusual with YCAIIa,b = 19,19 (maybe it's not even
> I1c?) and the other is the remnant of the DYS459b = 9 I1c left after
> isolating the "Isles" I1c. This remnant "Southern" I1c appears to be
> much closer to "Northern" than it was before pulling out the Isles I1c.
> This whole I1c (a.k.a. I2 by FTDNA) system is getting rich enough to try
> a total
> phylogenetic tree for the haplogroup.
>
> Ken

> From: "Ken Nordtvedt" <>
>
>
>> I have compared the repeat value variance of the "Scot" variety of I1c
> with that of the root variety of I1a. I find the variance of the "Scot"
> I1c to be 54 percent of that for the I1a, and determined from 21 STRs.
>>
>> If I use the 10,000 year estimate for the age of the root I1a, this
>> yields
> an estimate of 5400 years for the age of "Scot" I1c. This latter
> variety of I1c has so far been found only in Britain, and especially in
> Scotland and a lesser extent Ireland. If this geographical property for
> this I1c variety holds up, this indicates to me that this variety stands
> a good chance of having been founded in Britain in pre-historic times.
>>
>> Ken



This thread: