GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2010-12 > 1291908217


From: Mike W <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] NW European R1b from Iberia?
Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2010 09:23:37 -0600
References: <0A965AA0-40C8-44B3-9C79-A9EB11938E05@vizachero.com><201012090942.oB99gNdL003003@mail.rootsweb.com>
In-Reply-To: <201012090942.oB99gNdL003003@mail.rootsweb.com>


Dear Tim,

I appreciate your efforts in analyzing the data. Your analysis brings
up a sub-topic that I've never fully understood so I'll challenge
R-P312* variance numbers as being invalid to see what follow-on
discussion occurs that will hopefully lead to a better understanding
for myself and others who are interested.

The challenge I have is that I question the validity of comparing the
variance (and therefore also the TMRCA) of a paragroup versus a true
subclade.

The P312* designation indicates individuals that are P312+ while being
negative for all major known descendant SNP's such as L21, U152,
SRY2627, L165 and M153.... also possibly L176.2 fits as a significant
subclade as well.

Anyway, since P312* is a paragroup, there may be some P312*
individuals that are more closely related to L21's TMRCA or U152's
than to all other P312* tested individuals. This may or may not be
the case, but we just don't know. So my challenge is how can it make
sense to compare P312* as a group with L21, U152, etc. since P312* is
really not one group?

On the other hand, P312 "all" is a true clade so I can see how
comparing variance and TMRCA's for it are of value.

Regards, Mike

P.S. There is another caveat for P312* people from FTDNA projects.
Since L21 and L165 (and possibly L176.2) were not originally in
FTDNA's deep clade R package there may be people that are labeled as
P312 but we don't truly know if they are L21+ or L21-, for example.

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Tim Janzen <>
Date: Thu, Dec 9, 2010 at 3:42 AM
Subject: Re: [DNA] NW European R1b from Iberia?
To:


Dear Vince, Anatole, Robert, Andrew, and others,
       Thanks, Robert, for looking at the R-P312* variance data in your
message earlier today.  I decided to look at the data this evening as well
from the same project at
http://www.familytreedna.com/public/atlantic-r1b1c/default.aspx.  Depending
on the markers chosen for analysis, there is some variation for each region.
In general, it appears that the highest variance for R-P312* is in Eastern
Europe if you include all three estimates and average them.  However, if you
only include the results from the 50 markers estimate then you see that the
highest variance is in France and England, as Robert noted in his message
earlier today.  It still seems clear that R-P312* moved into Spain and Italy
(as well as all of Southern Europe) relatively recently.  The TMRCA
estimates are as follows using a 30 year generation interval:

15 67-marker samples from Eastern Europe:
50 markers:  3544
10 YHRD markers using YHRD mutation rates: 5718
24 slow markers: 7597

36 67-marker samples from Spain and Portugal:
50 markers: 2992
10 YHRD markers using YHRD mutation rates: 4168
24 slow markers: 4649

5 67-marker samples from Italy:
50 markers: 1812
10 YHRD markers using YHRD mutation rates: 3051
24 slow markers: 999

24 67-marker samples from France:
50 markers: 3843
10 YHRD markers using YHRD mutation rates: 5543
24 slow markers: 4704

14 67-marker samples from Germany:
50 markers: 2898
10 YHRD markers using YHRD mutation rates: 4995
24 slow markers: 4906

9 67-marker samples from Belgium and the Netherlands:
50 markers: 2319
10 YHRD markers using YHRD mutation rates: 2780
24 slow markers: 2389

17 67-marker samples from Scandinavia:
50 markers: 3120
10 YHRD markers using YHRD mutation rates: 3004
24 slow markers: 5725

54 67-marker samples from England:
50 markers: 3915
10 YHRD markers using YHRD mutation rates: 3610
24 slow markers: 3189

17 67-marker samples from Ireland:
50 markers: 3820
10 YHRD markers using YHRD mutation rates: 3117
24 slow markers: 2398

16 67-marker samples from Scotland:
50 markers: 3398
10 YHRD markers using YHRD mutation rates: 3860
24 slow markers: 5487

Averages of the TMRCA for each of the regions above:
Eastern Europe: 5620
Spain and Portugal: 3936
Italy: 1954
France: 4697
Germany: 4266
Scandinavia: 3950
England: 3571
Ireland: 3112
Scotland: 4248

       When I last looked at the variance for R-U106* in February (see
http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/read/GENEALOGY-DNA/2010-02/12667362
97), where I summarized the information as follows:  "We are seeing the
highest variance for R-U106* on continental Europe in NE Europe and NW
Europe with somewhat less variance in Central Europe."

       I also calculated TMRCA estimates for the L11* haplotypes from
Vince's project at
http://www.familytreedna.com/public/ht35new/default.aspx?section=yresults.
The results are as follows.

9 67-marker samples from Armenia, Germany, Poland, and Italy:
50 markers: 3113
10 YHRD markers using YHRD mutation rates: 4754
24 slow markers: 4008

8 67-marker samples from Denmark, England, France, Ireland, Netherlands, and
United Kingdom:
50 markers:     3422
10 YHRD markers using YHRD mutation rates: 5108
24 slow markers: 4536

       Although we don't have a lot of R-L11* haplotypes, there is a
definite trend suggesting that R-L11's variance is higher in NW Europe than
in Central and Eastern Europe.  Given that there is a higher frequency for
R-L11* in England than in other regions of Europe per the recent Myres
paper, it is certainly reasonable to postulate that R-L11, R-P312 and R-U106
could have first appeared in England or France and then spread elsewhere as
Robert suggested earlier today.  The Bell Beaker Culture may well have been
responsible for the initial dissemination of R-P312 and R-U106.

Sincerely,
Tim Janzen


-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
with the word 'unsubscribe' without
the quotes in the subject and the body of the message


This thread: