GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2008-05 > 1211226650


From: "Ken Nordtvedt" <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] S21/S28 Split+m223 stuff
Date: Mon, 19 May 2008 13:50:50 -0600
References: <BAY111-DAV7CD95482B3764952658E2B1C50@phx.gbl>


Your first paragraph is how I see it, and it is a predictive view. That's
what I meant by a sentence you erased that said an explosion of surviving
lines occured right about 3780 years ago...... There are some other
haplogroups downstream of S116 a.k.a. rs334276300 and parallel to S28
(S28-). MRCAs between S28 and any of them are predicted to be squeezed into
that narrow-in-time explosive period as well.

If the 130 "S21" haplotypes all happened to miss descending from one of the
sons of the S21 MRCA, then I guess a brand new bunch of S21 haplotypes who
did descend from that son could move the MRCA backward. But their effect on
the estimated date of the S21/S28 MRCA should be less --- statistical rather
than fundamental.

Ken

----- Original Message -----
From: "Lawrence Mayka" <>
To: <>
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2008 1:22 PM
Subject: Re: [DNA] S21/S28 Split+m223 stuff


> Because the S28+ population is rs34276300+ and the S21+ population is
> rs34276300- (which is ancestral), the common MRCA of S28 and S21 must also
> be rs34276300-. Thus, your comment that the S28 MRCA is only barely
> younger
> than the S21/S28 MRCA implies that rs34276300 and S28 occurred in rapid
> succession.
>
> Am I correct that the common MRCA you have calculated will _not_ change
> significantly with new data, whereas additional high-diversity S21
> haplotypes (e.g., from Ukraine) might force your S21 MRCA back almost as
> far
> as the common S21/S28 MRCA?
>
>> [mailto:] On Behalf Of Ken Nordtvedt
>> I get an age back to the common MRCA for S21 and S28 to be
>> 3780 years. The S28 MRCA is almost immediately after that
>> event, while the S21 MRCA does not occur until about 500
>> years later, 3270 years ago.
>
>
>
> -------------------------------
> 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: