GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2006-12 > 1165057807-01


From: "John McEwan" <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] Age of S21+
Date: Sun, 3 Dec 2006 00:10:07 +1300
In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2962


Dear Alan

I have having a purge of my e-mails. Did this question ever get
answered?

I don't think I answered it because I have not updated the S21 page in a
while. In fact several got partly updated and not finished because more
data came in.

Basically S21+ is old and as more data comes in it is getting more
diverse and older.

Cheers

John McEwan

-----Original Message-----
From:
[mailto:] On Behalf Of afc700 .
Sent: Thursday, 19 October 2006 11:38 p.m.
To:
Subject: [DNA] Age of S21+

John McEwan/List
John,
Just a few weeks ago, on this list, I suggested that the S21+ SNP might
be
less than 10,000 old.

Since then, while trawling thro old papers, i see that you speculated in

December 2005, based on a sample size of about 20 haplotypes, that it
was
possibly ~ 9231 years since the S21+ variant came into existence.

Did this prediction have a 50% or 95% probability attached to it?

Also, it the light of many more S21+ being uncovered, is that 9231 ybp
speculation still your opinion ?

....and can you give an estimate as to how propable or improbable it is
for
S21+ to be less than 8,000 years old?

If S21+ was founded less than 8,000 yrs ago, then the creation of the
North
Sea at about that time, greatly reduces the likelihood that S21+ may
have
been founded in Doggerland or in any part of the British Isles.

Many thanks,
Alan Foster.
=========



-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
with the word 'unsubscribe' without
the quotes in the subject and the body of the message


This thread: