GENEALOGY-DNA-L ArchivesArchiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2005-11 > 1133143258
From: "George Haynes" <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] J1 or J2 were originally ALL CMH?
Date: Sun, 27 Nov 2005 21:00:58 -0500
References: <4387486E.email@example.com> <00d701c5f1f7$7461cdb0$408eb840@JamesRCarr> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <000201c5f379$be85cf80$79bf19ac@sasonb46c858c2> <email@example.com>
Wow! I guess I can change my entry in ysearch to J2a with my DYS413 being
17-17. Since I was negative to all the other SNPs downstream of M172, and
I assume I will be M410+, might my new subclade be now more precisely
called J2a*? It was getting tiresome typing DiGiacomo's
If anyone has a copy of the PDF I would appreciate it if they could forward
it. Cavalli-Sforza and Underhill are named among the authors.
> On 11/27/05, Sasson Margaliot <> wrote:
> > As for J2, it splits into two branches, based on a "quasi-SNP" mutation
> > DYS413 discovered already in 2000, shortly after discovery if the group
> > itself. In one of the branches Y-chromosomes have low value at DYS413,
> > another branch - high value (more than 18).This division of J2 into two
> > branches received much less attention, but it is very clearly explaned
> > Giakomo et al. (2004), page 4.
> J2 is actually split now into J2a and J2b. J2b is equivalent to the
> old J2e and J2a contains all other J2's, including the DYS413 ones
> with the short allele.
> Dienekes' Anthropology Blog
> View and search Historical Newspapers. Read about your ancestors, find
> marriage announcements and more. Learn more:
|Re: [DNA] J1 or J2 were originally ALL CMH? by "George Haynes" <>|