GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2005-06 > 1118299389


From: (David Faux)
Subject: Re: [DNA] Participation in Genographic Project (Inconsistencies)
Date: Thu, 09 Jun 2005 06:43:09 +0000


Indeed Grant, and there are times when separating an I, J and G haplotype into its proper category is probematic. I would guess that at least for now they will just take a broad sweep approach, and later in the project may expand the SNP testing to give a more useful resolution. Frankly I am not clear on whether they are really interested in Europe anyway. I think, but don't know, that the focus will be on Central Asia, South Asia, East Asia etc. since Europe does not have many truly isolated populations. Thus due to the distribution of Hg I (Europe) my guess is that it is not a priority for the "real" research component of the work (although it is largely European / North American "participants" who are funding this work).

David F.



-------------- Original message --------------

> David,
>
> You make a good point regarding a M170 status.
>
> I believe the Genographic project associates M170 with Celtic migrations.
>
> To my thinking given the present locations of haplotypes, I2* has the
> stronger relationship to Hallstatt and La Tene Europe and the various
> historical Celtic migration points east.
>
> Although the movement of people out of the Balkans, is possibly associated
> with the second Kurgan development in eastern Europe.
> Data from other projects suggest that not all subclades of M170 will have
> taken the same route north and west to their present locations.
>
> 12 markers is a small number for groups like I1c/I2*.
>
> Grant South

This thread: