GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2008-04 > 1207109047


From: Thomas Krahn <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] About 10% of R1b1c* is ancestral for rs34276300
Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2008 06:04:07 +0200
References: <jyoa48.g9qwe3@webmail.variomedia.de><50EAFFD4-F0C3-43A0-855A-52A8FB6B8570@vizachero.com>
In-Reply-To: <50EAFFD4-F0C3-43A0-855A-52A8FB6B8570@vizachero.com>


Vincent Vizachero <> schrieb:

> In western Europe, only about 4% or 5% of R1b1c has DYS393=12. That
> 50% or so of the rs34276300- group that FTDNA tested so far should
> turn out to be DYS393=12 is remarkable, and suggests to me that the
> the MRCA representing the branch-point separating rs34276300+ from
> rs34276300- was temporally close to the MRCA representing the branch-
> point separating ht15 from ht35.
>
> Because ht35 is the ancestral TaqI 49a,f haplotype for R1b1c, and
> because ht15 appears to contain both rs34276300+ and rs34276300-
> individuals, I think it should be clear the the ht15/h35 division
> must be upstream of the rs34276300 event.
>
Not necessarily. Possibly the first occurrence of the ht15 is older than
rs34276300+ but at least a part of the ht35 may have received their Taq49a,f
haplotype from an ancestor who had lost his restriction site responsible for
the D2 band by a recLOH event or some others by a deletion. Also mutating 1 or
2 units back and forth isn't a big deal for a STR marker like DYS393.
Palindromic markers are usually too complicated for me, so I prefer to ignore
them for deep ancestry.

Thomas


This thread: