Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2005-06 > 1120057853

From: ellen Levy <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] Basques (was: Spencer Wells about Jefferson's Haplogroup
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2005 08:10:53 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <BAY103-F14436D66D025D0465805C5CEE00@phx.gbl>


I don't have the article in front of me, but I believe
they are using the R1* as R1*(xR1a). In other words,
in super-haplogroup R, but not R1a. Since we know R1
and R* are exceedingly rare, then almost all of what
they are referring to is R1b.

The report also implied that Basques may have
autosomal remmants of Paleolithic ancestry, but this
has been essentially depreciated in direct Y lineages
by recent male-mediated gene flow and pronounced
genetic drift. If you combine this with the ancient
Basque studies on MtDNA indicating significant genetic
change among the haplogroups present in Basque
populations, there is fairly persuasive argument there
that Basques are not accurate, unaltered reflections
of Europe's Paleolithic genetic ancestry (by the way,
no population is probably an accurate reflection of
this, but certainly the Basques have been put forward
as such an example).

Another point of the study is that examination of
Iberian genetics has been overshadowed by intense
focus on the Basques. Thus, it should be noted that
this is not a genetic Basque study, but does include a
lot of intriguing information about Iberian
populations in general, including the Basques.

Ellen Coffman

--- Russ _ <> wrote:

> That was an interesting article. One question I
> have about the article is
> its use of R1*. It seems it must be referring to
> R1b with it being so
> predominant amongst the Basque (62%). I thought R1
> was rare everywhere
> except in Central Asia. Also, how does that astrisk
> distingish this
> haplogroup from R1?

This thread: