GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives
Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2008-07 > 1217022047
From:
Subject: Re: [DNA] Dating of R-M269 and Subclades
Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2008 21:40:47 +0000
Dienekes Pontikos wrote:
I have recently decided to check the assumptions of the evolutionary
mutation rate of 0.00069/marker/generation. My conclusions are listed
here:
http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2008/07/how-y-str-variance-accumulates-comment.html
My response:
Dienekes, good job. I have also analyzed in detail the "Zhyvotovsky coefficient", and came to rather simple conclusions. First, his data on Bulgarian Gypsies and on Maori are described well in terms of normal "genealogical mutation rates" of about 0.0016 mut/gen/marker. In order to apply his 0.00069 "population mutation rate" Zhyvotovsky has manipulated with the haplotypes, removed some series and leave other (see below). Second, his "population mutation rate" is a diaster, as you have shown it well. It brought a real damage to DNA genealogy, and resulted in many absurd estimates.
Here are some excerpts from my studies (published in Proc. Russian Acad. DNA Genealogy, June 2008):
Bulgarian Gypsies (haplogroup H1)
Gypsies have arrived to Bulgaria according to old records in the Middle Ages. Haplotypes of Bulgarian Gypsies, or Roma, have been determined by testing 179 males from 12 local tribes (Zhivotovsky et al, 2004). All the haplotypes were pretty much similar and apparently originated from the same rather recent common ancestor. It seems that a very narrow circle of Gypsies, maybe a single tribe, had come to Bulgaria 500-700 years ago. The rest (if any) apparently did not pass through a genealogical bottleneck, and a single patriarch gave a survived offspring. (...).
The most numerous tribe Rudari had the following 6-marker base haplotype
15-12-22-10-11-12
which was represented by 62 identical haplotypes of the total amount of 67 haplotypes in the tribe. The same base haplotype was represented by 12 members of the tribe Kalderash of the total tested 13 individuals, 9 out of 26 members of the tribe Lom, all four tested members of the tribe Torgovzi (Traders), 20 out of 29 from the tribe Kalaidjii, 12 of 19 from the tribe Musicians. Other haplotypes also contained very few mutations. It is obvious that the ancestral haplotype was rather young, not older than several hundred years BP.
Overall, all 179 haplotypes of Bulgarian Gypsies contained 146 identical (base) 6-marker haplotypes and 34 mutations compared to the base haplotype.
Considering base haplotypes, this gives ln(179/146)/0.0096 = 21 generations, that is 525 years to the common ancestor for all 179 members of all the 12 Gypsy tribes.
Considering mutations, this gives 34/179/0.0096 = 20 generations, that is 500 years.
It is practically the same time. Thus, the Gypsies show a pretty straightforward, uncomplicated DNA genealogy family tree, in which there is a rather firm fit between diminishing (with time) base haplotypes, on the one hand, and accumulation of mutations in the resulting haplotypes, on the other. Incidentally, these haplotypes belong to haplogroup H1, which is very typical for India, and beyond that country it is met mainly among the Gypsies. The base 6-marker haplotype for H1 in India is exactly the same as that shown above, however, its age there is much older, several thousand years. (...)
The Polynesians (haplogroup C2)
The Polynesians, such as the Maoris, Cook Islanders, Samoans, often have haplogroup C2. In a published study (Zhivotovsky et al) 36 haplotypes were determined in these three populations, and the base haplotype for all of them was as follows:
16-15-20-10-12-14
There were 28 base haplotypes among 36 haplotypes total, and only 10 mutations in the whole set with respect to the base haplotype.
Considering base haplotypes, this gives ln(36/28)/0.0096 = 26 generations to the common ancestor for all 36 Polynesians.
Considering mutations, this gives 10/36/0.0096 = 29 generations.
It is not a poor fit, taking into account a relatively small set of haplotypes. Incidentally, the so-called Polynesian expansion is referred to 650-700 to 800 and even to 1200 years ago [cit. in (Zhivotovsky et al)]. One can see that the 650-700 years BP shows a good fit to our data of 26-29 generations, that is 650-725 years BP; the 1200 years BP is apparently on some extreme side for the haplotypes presented here.
***********************
Regards,
Anatole Klyosov
This thread: