Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2010-02 > 1267030933

From: "grandcross" <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] mtDNA X1 in Eastern Europe
Date: Wed, 24 Feb 2010 11:02:18 -0600
References: <008801cab4f3$a484a710$ed8df530$@org>,<BAY133-W15543885BBA117930E6AF7F1410@phx.gbl>,<FBDF1B19D4E948748168C6CF417C010D@Silva><BAY133-W62943FC2DF9F9C3CCAAE9F1410@phx.gbl>
In-Reply-To: <BAY133-W62943FC2DF9F9C3CCAAE9F1410@phx.gbl>

>> Now that's intriguing. Can you be more specific about the combination of
>> mutations you have in mind Bill?
> So far, at least, everybody in the K Project with 16182C, 16183C and
> 16189C who lists a maternal ancestry, lists either Mexico, Spain, SW USA,
> or Portugal. I say Iberia because the DNA may precede country names.
> However, since none of these now lives in Iberia, there is some chance the
> mutation occurred in Mexico or the SW USA. There are 11 of these in the
> Project. The two who have FGS results have virtually identical K2a
> haplotypes. There are 12 others on GenBank, all tested in the SW USA.
> Bill Hurst

That's interesting but you may want to consider kit N23620 in the K Project
with 16224C, 16311C and 16519C. This person's maternal paper trail goes back
to 1691 in Portugal and the surname (carried forward along the female line)
has been documented in western Iberia since the eighth century. N23620
started out as K1c and now appears as simply "K". We've been waiting nearly
four months to get the results of an FGS (batch 330) which should help in
definition. Of course, I can't think of any reason why all K's in Iberia
must fit into one particular category, but the fact you saw a pattern as you
did is interesting nonetheless.

This thread: