GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2010-01 > 1263526462


From: Gary Felix <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] RES: Jewish DNA in the Genome of Mexican-Americans
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2010 19:34:22 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <B709CC37E5AD4664914EEE9F9538BCE1@Silva>


Hello Grandcross,
I thought I answered your question about having
some evidence that my ancestor straddled the Portuguese-Spanish border
(moving to where it is safest) by presenting genetic and historical
evidence. I provided the following about my ancestor:

1):See these YDNA 9 marker match(es) to Chihuahua Mexico, others in Latin America and Azkenazi Jew(s) in this - HRD database search.2) See this DNA match to haplotype 108 which matches a 3 Askenazi Jews
and 1 Muslim Kurd in this study
Y Chromosome Pool of Jews as Part of the Genetic Landscape of the Middle East.3) See this DNA match to haplotype 27 [listed as the Cohen Modal Haplotype (when it was
6
markers)] -
High-resolution Y chromosome haplotypes of Israeli and Palestinian Arabs reveal geographic substructure and substantial overlap with haplotypes of Jews.Showing his genetics matched Jews

4) See this 12 of 13 marker match to haplotype IP167 in Southern Portugal and this 8 marker Sephardic Jewish exact match to haplotype SJ62 in this study
Paternal Lineages of Christians, Jews, and Muslims in the Iberian Peninsula.

Then showing his genetics could still be found in the Sephardi of Iberia and
also in Southern Portugal.

Then I cited the Jews of New Spain saying that Jews were known to go back and forth
between Portugal and Spain especially after 1580 (this ancestor came and helped found
Saltillo Mexico in N. E. Mexico about 1620).

Then you asked if there were places where there is Jewish
founder effect in autosomal DNA.
I said this was likely. Then Ian provided a paper stating in its conclusion: The Portuguese NE Jews display a much closer
genetic relation to Jewish populations of Europe and the Middle East, especially other Sephardic groups, than to
the Portuguese population.
You said, regarding the non Jewish R1b in the sample: Shouldn't that raise a flag
with regard, at a minimum, to the non-J2 participants in the study you are
now defending?

No,
after at least 1800 years in Iberia it would raise a flag if R1b were
not there. Genetic studies on Jews supports minority admixture with the
host population. This study is no different.

You said, The researchers in the paper you support collected samples from "57
unrelated self-designated Jewish males from Tra´s-os-Montes." Now Tras os
Montes encompasses two political Districts in
Portugal (Braganza and Vila
Real) with a combined population of about 360,000. Without knowing from
where these test subjects were recruited, the reader is left with a very
small sample size to consider scattered over a geographic area of 11,000
square km and a "host" population whose local roots the authors concede
extend to the Paleolithic age.

My response: The question posed was if there were populations in Portugal that would exhibit founder effect
in Jews. This was never about how frequent Jews are in Portugal. Rather
for founder effect you have isolated populations like Jewish
communities of a particular area that have retained their genetics for
the most part through endogamy. The paper was about looking for founder
effect on the Y in some of the Jewish population of NE Portugal.

You said: In my opinion none of these goals were reached. The number of test subjects
was too small.

My
response: they compared their haplotypes to those in YHRD.org and found them to be consistent with Jewish ancestry. Haplogroups J and T were found to be much higher than in the population of Portugal. T is found in the Sephardic exiles in Israel at a similar frequency.

Your expectations of what they should have included were not the objectives of the paper.

You said referring to the Phoenicians
That's not what I said, Gary. That's a quote from what one of the
study's authors who was trying to distance himself from the 20% Sephardim conclusion. And I didn't even mention a conversation I had with another
contributor to that paper (who did not join in drafting the conclusions)
that cast serious doubt on what was published. But you continue.....

My response: I can't respond to you if I don't know what your referring to.

You said: I don't think much of Zalloua's Phoenician footprint analysis either so
using that to make points in this study is a non starter.

My response: your opinion is not
evidence. It needs basis.


You said: Some very knowledgeable population geneticists have doubts
about assigning ethnic and religious labels to haplogroups to the
extent we now see in some of these papers.

My response: the
sample was from self described Jews (no supposition was made) and the
conclusion was that for the most part they retain their Jewish Y DNA
genetics.

Gary
Mexico DNA Project Admin.




This thread: