GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2005-12 > 1134991868


From: "John McEwan" <>
Subject: RE: [DNA] Dal Riata Modal Haplogroup
Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2005 00:31:08 +1300
In-Reply-To: <BKEPIIDHHKEPCMDIEBKBKECMCNAA.andrew.en.inge@skynet.be>


Dear Andrew and List

* The R1bSTR47Scots cluster, obviously came from Europe at some stage
after the LGM, when and by what route is the question. I really don't
have good information outside Britain and some extent Ireland (i.e.
extended haplotypes). I do know that with current information it is
difficult to sustain the argument that it came via Europe to England,
then to Ireland and then to Scotland and then diffused down into England
based on observed frequencies in the populations today and relative
"ages" of the haplotypes observed. At its simplest it "evolved" in
Britain.
* If you look at R1b the most divergent group from the R1b modal is the
R1bSTR19Irish with a GD of 12 Scots has a genetic distance of 7. Perhaps
more importantly if the 37 STR haplotypes are "grouped" by some method
it is generally accepted that R1bSTR19Irish and R1bSTR47Scots are
distinguishable from the background, and perhaps R1bSTR22Frisian is
getting close to it. For the rest there it is much less certainty. If
the Scots cluster was an illusion caused by convergence then by now it
is almost certain that we would have a S21+ amongst the Irish or Scots
clusters based on the numbers tested. Similarly, what is the likelihood
of a geographically localized convergence?
* I think using short haplotypes (for groups previously derived from
longer haplotypes) to search for geographical information is interesting
and useful, because of the larger amount of individuals available.
However, I would hesitate to accept it unquestionably. I think you need
enough long haplotypes from these other regions to also be able to
calculate likely misclassification rates.

So to names, this topic was very topical about May if I recall, and
provided much entertainment. Scots at the time seemed to be the most
accepted. Largely because Scotland (or a Scottish origin) is where there
is a highest frequency.

Dealing with them in turn
Colla Uais. I hesitate to describe a cluster that has a modal and age
obviously pre-Roman and maybe several thousand years prior to that and
is spread throughout England and Scotland after a person who lived in
~500AD. This is not to say there was not influential "sires" just that a
distinct and larger grouping should not be named after them.

Dal Riata. This was group living in Argyll circa 500-1400 AD which both
orally and as regards recorded history came from Ireland. That the
individuals with surnames associated with this group have a lower
frequency than those residing close by with a putatively Britonic origin
is not a good criteria on which to select a name!

Scots. Everyone knows that Scots stands for Scotti which in turn gets
back to the Dal Riadic Kingdom. However, in this case it does also stand
for a current region and today in common use means an inhabitant of
Scotland. Personally I like neutral names because their meaning can more
easily change as additional information is collected.

Cheers

John



-----Original Message-----
From: Andrew and Inge [mailto:]
Sent: Monday, 19 December 2005 4:48 a.m.
To:
Subject: [DNA] Dal Riata Modal Haplogroup

Hi John, Rob

Fascinating!

A couple of remarks:-

I am interested to see you 2 close watchers of the Colla/Scots/Dal-Riata
modal talking now about immigrations from Europe, and low percentages in
Ireland, while others with a lot of knowledge are still talking as
though it
is well known that this haplotype is found in Northern Ireland. I hope
the
data now starting to come into the public domain about Irish DNA will
clarify!

On the other hand, for the time being the cluster still seems to be most
well observed in Western Scotland around Argyll if I interpret things
correctly? In fact - to play devil's advocate - the second most likely
hypothesis seems to be that it is not a cluster at all, but an illusion
caused by convergence, as it is very close to WAMH. In other words, if
the
implications of a "short haplotype" search are extendable to more
markers,
meaning that there is no regional clustering to go with the DNA
clustering,
what would be left? I tend to think however that there is a cluster -
both
by region and by haplotype - even if some people who seem to be in it
might
theoretically be there by random convergence.

Here is an hypothesis: in areas where it is found in smaller
percentages,
random convergence from WAMH like haplotypes might be enough to explain
it.
But in Scotland?

The whole question is rather important to the genealogy of Pennsylvania
Livingstons, many of whom seem to descend from a Swiss-German family of
Liebensteins. They still believe that somewhere in the past these were
Livingstons, though it is claimed that they have been traced back to
Zurich
in the 1500s. What has kept us thinking it likely is that Scottish
Livingstons are amongst their best matches, and historically the fact
that
they lived in a parish where "Marian exiles" may well have come from
Scotland in that century.

Best Regards
Andrew




This thread: