GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2010-11 > 1290040731


From: "Lawrence Mayka <>" <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] Age of Zhong et al. (2010) R1b-related lineages
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2010 18:41:39 -0600
References: <273422554.555140.1290022251212.JavaMail.root@sz0002a.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net> <2140114066.556037.1290022955638.JavaMail.root@sz0002a.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net><SNT128-DS5E0EF3C5FBC896252C157B1380@phx.gbl>
In-Reply-To: <SNT128-DS5E0EF3C5FBC896252C157B1380@phx.gbl>


There is actually a second cluster in this discussion, the one called B1 in
the R1b1b1 Project. It is found in Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, and Turkey, with
the one Turkish case probably a descendant of the medieval Seljuk invasion
of Anatolia:

http://www.familytreedna.com/public/R1b1b1/default.aspx?section=yresults

According to Generations5, the interclade age between this cluster and the
other one (cluster B2 in that project) is 239 generations, or about 7200
years.

If I suspect that the DYS390=19 lineage has undergone a misleading
multi-step deletion, and therefore delete its column in the spreadsheet, the
interclade age drops to 166 generations, or about 5000 years. This suggests
that R1b1b1 has been present in Central Asia for at least 5000 years, but
not _necessarily_ longer than that.

> From: [mailto:genealogy-dna-
> ] On Behalf Of Lawrence Mayka <>
> I decided to apply my own usual procedure to the R1b cluster under
dispute.



This thread: