GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2008-07 > 1216988299


From: "David Weston" <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] Dating of R-M269 and Subclades
Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2008 09:18:19 -0300
References: <ea3bd9560807241957o35bd94d5j7a4b367400ba3eda@mail.gmail.com><007001c8ee14$276ab3c0$6400a8c0@Ken1>
In-Reply-To: <007001c8ee14$276ab3c0$6400a8c0@Ken1>


Ken, Vince, Larry, et al.

Do your age estimates allow sufficient time to explain the current distribution of haplogroups in
Europe? That is, is the math supported by physically observeable data?

For example, I am finding U106 and its subclades as far as 64N latitude in Scandinavia (Nordmalling
and Robertsfor in Sweden, Oppland and Vikna in Norway) and Finland (Pietarssair) and as far as 24E
longitude (L'viv, Ukraine and Kobrin, Belarus). Excluding the UK&I, at present U106 is nearly as
concentrated in north eastern Europe as it is central and northwestern. The relative uniformity of
the distribution of U106 across northern Europe (north of about 47N), is something I didn't expect
when I started compiling this data. Assuming an ~3,000 yr old age estimate for U106, how then do
you explain the observed distribution? (See U106 group website for supporting data).

I should add that I am on the fence here in terms of the numbers that are being tossed about either
by the Population Geneticists or hobbyists. My only concern is that numbers are just that unless
they explain what we can see in the real world. I am not convinced that 3,000 yrs is enough to
explain this distribution. However, nor do I have much faith in older age estimates based on short
haplotypes and presumptive fudge factors.

Yes, Ken my schooling is in applied mathematics and physics, not theoretical :-)

David Weston.



-----Original Message-----
From: [mailto:] On Behalf Of
Ken Nordtvedt
Sent: July 25, 2008 2:06 AM
To:
Subject: Re: [DNA] Dating of R-M269 and Subclades


<snip>

[[[[ What the recent work boils down to is that if you take the most conservative,
generally-accepted dating methods of the field seriously, including the use of the measured STR
mutation rates for extended haplotypes, then some of the most populous haplogroups of Europe such as
those downstream of M269, I1, I2a1-Dinaric, I2b1-Continental all appear to have MRCAs younger than
4000 years ago (Haplogroup I as a whole, on the other hand, is estimated to have its MRCA before
the LGM !!!!! So there,
newcomer). Having verified the soundness of selected variance methods so
as to eliminate that as an issue for contention, I must conclude that mutation rates are the only
element in the process worth arguing about, but better yet worth doing better and better
measurements about. So it was about time to lay this all out, so we and the testing companies don't
indefinately continue to repeat unverifiable age estimates about phylogenetic ydna tree nodes which
originated back in the early days of the field. ]]]]]



-------------------------------
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: