GENEALOGY-DNA-L ArchivesArchiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2005-06 > 1118072455
From: ellen Levy <>
Subject: RE: [DNA] It's official -- I'm weird
Date: Mon, 6 Jun 2005 08:40:55 -0700 (PDT)
I feel I must step in here and correct this
misstatement on your part.
The vast (and I mean VAST) majority of European J
results are of non-Semitic origin. Haplogroup J2 is
about as "Semitic" as haplogroup I, since they appear
to both originate in the areas around Turkey and the
Balkans. Only J1 can properly be considered "Semitic"
in origin and distribution. As such, it is extremely
rare in Europe. J2, on the other hand, is just as
prevelant among Europeans as Middle Eastern groups.
So let me state this again - most European J's (and
E's & G's, for that matter) are the result of
Neolithic movements out of Anatolia/Iraq into Europe.
These haplogroups have been a part of the European
genetic makeup for thousands of years. They are
fairly prevelant in the British Isles. Those who have
these results should not be searching for a "Semitic"
I assume we are talking about your direct Y lineage
here, which has nothing to do with your autosomal
DNAPrint results. They are essentially irrelevant in
--- Glen Todd <> wrote:
> > I hope you will let the list know the results of
> the SNP test
> > when it comes in.
> You'd better believe that I will. I ordered the
> test last week (they've
> already got my sample, of course). I don't know
> how long SNP tests take
> for I, but I'll post just as soon as I have
> > If you are in haplogroup I, I'm not sure I see a
> likely subclade.
> > Without 8 at DYS455, you are probably not I1a1.
> Some of the values are
> > consistent with I1b and I2 (formerly I1c), but
> others are unusual for
> Bonnie thinks that she's onto something with some
> work that she and Ken are
> doing (you've probably already seen her post), so
> that may produce some
> interesting results.
> > subclades. FTDNA is pretty cautious with its
> projections, so
> > they probably have reason not to propose
> haplogroup J. (I
> > don't follow I and J closely, but I recall that
> there is potential
> > confusion between subclades of each.)
> I don't know their particular reasoning, but in my
> case there's IMO
> substantial reason to believe that J is not a viable
> option. DNAPrint
> shows NO Semitic background, and family ancestry is
> northern England on that
> line (and many others).
> > FTDNA calls I1b when they can. If they didn't do
> it here,
> > they probably think this is not I1b. That kind of
> leaves I2 (or I1c
> > in the old terminology.)
> As I said, Bonnie thinks that she's onto something
> solid, and having taken a
> quick look at what she sent, I'm inclined to agree.
> Glen Todd
> Search the US Census Collection. Over 140 million
> records added in the
> last 12 months. Largest online collection in the
> world. Learn more:
|RE: [DNA] It's official -- I'm weird by ellen Levy <>|