GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2010-02 > 1266668394


From: "Anatole Klyosov" <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] TMRCA of R1b1b2s to King Tut?
Date: Sat, 20 Feb 2010 07:19:56 -0500
References: <mailman.5909.1266647674.2099.genealogy-dna@rootsweb.com>


>From: "Tom Gull" <>
>I'm asking a question, not providing an answer. The question is based on
>memories that the estimates I've seen for the TMRCAs for U152 and U106 to
their mutual parent a while back were only a few hundred years apart and the
confidence levels overlapped. (...) There any need for me to provide an
estimate because I'm not proposing an hypothesis, I'm wondering why other
people settled on one particular one when a number of similar hypotheses
seem equally probable.

My response:

I do not know who "settled" and on what "particular one", and where is
"wishful thinking" here.

What we have is a number of populations each one having a particular
(largely) irreversible mutation in their Y chromosome. Each one of those
populations has a certain pattern of other (slow reversible) mutations in
their Y chromosomal loci. Based on certain regularities which have a rather
solid scientific ground we can determine when the most recent common
ancestor of each one of those populations lived.

It turned out that a large population of people inhabiting Europe can be
subdivided into a number of subpopulation, which were migrating to Europe
around 4200-3700 years before present (and after it), apparently moving from
different directions into different regions of Europe, and each of those
groups of people had its own "mutation history". Indeed, many of their
"founding fathers" lived within those 500 years or so. Whether it reflects a
genetic drift (it certainly does), or because it was just a simple choice of
those particular irreversible mutations for classification (it certainly
was), or both plus some other factors, we can discuss, of course. But it
would not change that the "founding fathers" of those populations indeed
lived in times close to each other. Here are some figures for R1b1b2:
-- M269 - no less than 6,000 ybp
-- L23 - 5475+/-680
-- L51 - 5850+/-860
-- U106 - 4175+/-430
-- U106 (null-mutation in DYS425) - 3325+/-450
-- P312 - 3950+/-400
-- U152 - 4125+/-450
-- L2 - 4225+/-450
-- L20 - 4300+/-610
-- L21 - 3600+/-370
-- L21 (null mutation in DYS425) - 2600+/-420
-- M222 - 1450+/-150

Now, these data are as good as the haplotype datasets are. Of course these
figures are not carved in stone, and subject to change when more extended
haplotype datasets are available, and/or when the datasets are sorted out
taking into account their downstream subclades.

The first three subclades (M269, L23 and L51) has certainly appeared outside
of Europe. For instance, L23* is numerous in the Caucasus, their carriers
have a characteristic DYS39=12.

I hope it would help.

Anatole Klyosov



--------------------------------------------------
From: "Anatole Klyosov" <>
Friday, February 19, 2010 8:30 PM

>>From: Tom Gull <>
>>Isn't there some wishful thinking going on here <g>. Don't the various
>>SNPs for U152 and U106 and the like fall so much into the same timeframe
>>that we could sub any of the others in for U152 and be equally likely to
>>have a hit? And don't we also know that it's very hard to guess which of
>>these SNP someone has based on STRs alone? / Tom
>
>


This thread: