GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2005-05 > 1117214500


From: "Steven C. Perkins" <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] Middle Eastern ancestral markers on new Euro 1.0 test
Date: Fri, 27 May 2005 12:21:40 -0500
References: <20050527161222.77678.qmail@web52104.mail.yahoo.com><20050527161222.77678.qmail@web52104.mail.yahoo.com>
In-Reply-To: <42974E2E.4070308@kerchner.com>


The new papers on the southern route out of Africa may have a partial answer.

We all have markers for African ancestry which reflects the origin in
Africa. Moving from Africa to southern Arabia and the India, South East
Asia, Australasia area would show the Asia component as the next set of
markers to develop. Then the "european" markers and "Native American"
markers would be the next ones to develop.

So testing a European one would expect to find Asian markers as the next
highest set in that persons test results. Testing a Native American,
without European admixture, you would expect to find Asian as the next
highest result in that person's test. Some individual haplotypes and
haplogroups appear within the three divisions of Europeans, Africans, and
Asians, which just reinforces the connections within the human race. No
"pure" result should be expected in the short time period we have had for
the development of differences.

I think our time period for differentiation has to start from the Tuba
volcanic explosion and the population bottleneck it caused about 70 KYA.

Steven C. Perkins




At 12:43 PM 5/27/2005 -0400, you wrote:
>Ellen:
>
>Thank you for your analysis and suggestions. I really appreciate it.
>Hopefully a few more who have been DNAPrint 2.5 tested will do the Euro
>1.0 test add-on/upgrade to their 2.5 test and we can get more data on the
>break down of the Indo-European component of their results. There are a
>few other Euro 1.0 tests reported in my Log if anyone wants to read them:
>http://www.dnaprintlog.org/
>
>This is all very interesting.
>
>http://www.kerchner.com/dnaprint-euro1.0.htm
>
>Charles Kerchner
>http://www.kerchner.com/dna-info.htm
>
>ellen Levy wrote:
>>Charles:
>>The "Middle Eastern" markers (whatever those are
>>defined as) were probably spread through Europe, as
>>you postulate, by the Romans. However, I think you
>>can reach much further back in time as well. It
>>appears that significant amounts of Middle Eastern and
>>Mediterranean markers began their spread into northern
>>Europe as far back as the Neolithic. And I think we
>>can look further back than the Neolithic as well.
>>AncestrybyDNA supposedly finds "affiliation" between
>>Native Americans and Ashkenazi. This was discussed at
>>length on the list a few months back. In that debate,
>>Ann indicated that such "affiliation" was believed to
>>be very ancient indeed, stretching back tens of
>>thousands of years, before Native Americans even
>>migrated to the New World. There is no reason to
>>think that your "Middle Eastern" ancestry also not
>>tens of thousands of years old.
>>There doesn't seem to be Y chromosome or MtDNA
>>evidence of gene flow from Central Asia into the
>>Middle East, other than as I've mentioned, haplogroup
>>R1a1, though this doesn't mean that such gene flow
>>couldn't have occured 25,000 years ago (and now be
>>reflected in the autosomal results).
>>The MIddle East, however, is a much more difficult
>>area to reach than Europe. The Black and Caspian Seas
>>block the way. The Caucasus mountains serve as a
>>further barrier. To get there, you must cross the
>>Iranian plateau or come across the Arabian Sea. Again, not a lot of
>>genetic support for that kind of
>>gene flow.
>>Ellen Coffman
>
>
>
>==============================
>Search the US Census Collection. Over 140 million records added in the
>last 12 months. Largest online collection in the world. Learn more:
>http://www.ancestry.com/s13965/rd.ashx

This thread: