GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2005-10 > 1128155696


From: David Faux <>
Subject: RE: [DNA] More S21 Results
Date: Sat, 1 Oct 2005 01:34:56 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <000001c5c656$bba70720$17d859db@BigMem2>


John:

Based on our latest findings that 30% figure is likely to be revised downward in certain parts of Britain such as Scotland (with possibly 20%), but perhaps hold steady in England. We will know a lot more in a few months.

David Faux.

John McEwan <> wrote:
Dear David

The table (I assume you refer to the one I posted today) was not
logically sorted by R1b clusters. They have been sorted solely on S21
status and then by cluster (alphabetically) within that division.

With more results I would hope that S21 status would cleanly separate
these R1b clusters with little overlap. This may be unrealistic. The STR
evidence I have is the R1b clusters all have a star-like phylogeny from
the ancestral R1b centre. There is only a small amount of tree like
substructure, for instance the "Irish" group seemed to have been an
early divergent. I have previously manually examined the R1b modal
haplotypes and it is apparent that for most markers homoplasy is
evident. Thus my lack of enthusiasm to sort based on some simple
criteria.

Like many others my only prediction would be that "Irish" and "Scots"
clusters will not be S21+

This moves on to the 30% frequency that David Faux states is observed
for S21+ within R1b. My guess is that if the STR clusters have any real
predictive value that the S21 mutation must have occurred very early in
the life of the R1b haplogroup. The best we can hope for is that some
minimal combination of STR alleles will turn out to be reasonably
predictive.

Cheers

John McEwan



This thread: