GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2007-05 > 1178039567


From: William L Harvey <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] Subclade of E-M34 (old E3b3a) with YCAII=18,22
Date: Tue, 01 May 2007 10:12:47 -0700
References: <BAY111-DAV1120ED038EF18EE186580B1430@phx.gbl>
In-Reply-To: <BAY111-DAV1120ED038EF18EE186580B1430@phx.gbl>


Larry,

For now at least you should remove 3JQRX from your tentative E-M34+ (old
E3b3a) subclade speculation. When/if his SNP test results are in we
will know the correct answer.

FTDNA has this to say about this fellow's haplogroup - "Haplogroup Test:
your matches suggest that you belong to Haplogroup E3b1"

Accordingly he has been placed in the E3b1 Suggested listing.

Bill Harvey
Co-administrator for E3b Haplogroup Project


Lawrence Mayka wrote:
> Ysearch 7PT4X just joined my project. He has 37 markers, is clearly E3b,
> and has ordered a deepSNP; but I still want to assign him a more specific
> category in the meantime.
>
> He appears to belong to a subclade of E-M34 (old E3b3a) with YCAII=18,22.
> Members are:
>
> N2K4X, 7DFW9, DXCDY, 7DMU4, 7PT4X, 3JQRX, YCCWP

STR-created subclades should be viewed with caution when working within E3b.
>
> N2K4X has undergone a deepSNP to confirm his membership in E-M34. N2K4X,
> 7DFW9, and 7DMU4 have 67 markers.
>
> Just from the 7 above, the subclade appears to be mixed Jewish and Gentile.
> This is not surprising since the genetic distances within the subclade are
> very large, indicating that the subclade itself is at least several thousand
> years old.

Perhaps you are working with excessively large genetic distances in
attempting to establish new "STR" subclades with such small population
samples?
>
> Interestingly, my 7PT4X of Ukraine is only a GD of 5, at 37 markers, from
> 3JQRX of Italy. Both appear to be of Gentile ancestry, at least recently.
>
> Note that this 3JQRX of Italy is listed in the E3b Project (as kit #N17409)
> under the 'M78 Suggested' category, albeit with a '-' from FTDNA. Perhaps
> he should be moved to the 'M34 Suggested' category--or better, encouraged to
> order a deepSNP to confirm.
Yes, this would be the best answer to the posed question.

This thread: