GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2010-02 > 1266736297


From: "Tim Janzen" <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] : variance of S116*
Date: Sat, 20 Feb 2010 23:11:37 -0800
In-Reply-To: <800144.82408.qm@web86604.mail.ird.yahoo.com>


Dear Alan,
I agree with your comments below. I had been thinking about looking
at R-U106 in regards to the area of probable origin as well, but haven't had
time to analyze the data until today. I downloaded the latest data from the
R-U106 project at
http://www.familytreedna.com/public/U106/default.aspx?section=yresults. I
then used the 305 67-marker haplotypes that had been SNP tested as they are
currently categorized on the project's web site as follows:
1. Central Europe
2. NE Europe
3. NW Europe
4. Scandinavia
5. SW Europe
6. SE Europe
7. UK and Ireland

The following are intraclade TMRCA estimates for each of the above 7

regions:

21 67-marker samples from Central Europe:
50 markers:2795
10 YHRD markers using YHRD mutation rates: 2142
24 slow markers: 2973

24 67-marker samples from NE Europe:
50 markers:3113
10 YHRD markers using YHRD mutation rates: 3844
24 slow markers: 2845

91 67-marker samples from NW Europe:
50 markers:3315
10 YHRD markers using YHRD mutation rates: 3275
24 slow markers: 4348

23 67-marker samples from Scandinavia:
50 markers:2850
10 YHRD markers using YHRD mutation rates: 2905
24 slow markers: 4261

10 67-marker samples from SE Europe:
50 markers:3047
10 YHRD markers using YHRD mutation rates: 2906
24 slow markers: 4246

7 67-marker samples from SW Europe:
50 markers:2195
10 YHRD markers using YHRD mutation rates: 3262
24 slow markers: 1529

174 67-marker samples from UK and Ireland:
50 markers:3144
10 YHRD markers using YHRD mutation rates: 3584
24 slow markers: 3877

I next decided to remove all of the R-L48+ haplotypes from the
analysis. This left me with 180 67-marker R1b1b2a1a haplotypes. Presumably
these haplotypes are all R-U106* although I can't be certain of that. The
following are intraclade TMRCA estimates for each of the above 7
regions for these samples:

12 67-marker samples from Central Europe:
50 markers:2757
10 YHRD markers using YHRD mutation rates: 2396
24 slow markers: 1951

15 67-marker samples from NE Europe:
50 markers:3404
10 YHRD markers using YHRD mutation rates: 3600
24 slow markers: 3607

27 67-marker samples from NW Europe:
50 markers:3272
10 YHRD markers using YHRD mutation rates: 3488
24 slow markers: 5627

54 67-marker samples from NW, NE, and Central Europe (the above 3 groups
combined):
50 markers:3310
10 YHRD markers using YHRD mutation rates: 3510
24 slow markers: 4400

17 67-marker samples from Scandinavia:
50 markers:2862
10 YHRD markers using YHRD mutation rates: 2904
24 slow markers: 4429

6 67-marker samples from SE Europe:
50 markers: 2588
10 YHRD markers using YHRD mutation rates: 2270
24 slow markers: 3729

5 67-marker samples from SW Europe:
50 markers: 2162
10 YHRD markers using YHRD mutation rates: 2906
24 slow markers: 1998

11 67-marker samples from Southern Europe (the above two groups combined):
50 markers:2739
10 YHRD markers using YHRD mutation rates: 3032
24 slow markers:3302

98 67-marker samples from UK and Ireland:
50 markers:3172
10 YHRD markers using YHRD mutation rates: 3839
24 slow markers: 4454

43 67-marker samples from England from the UK/Ireland group:
50 markers:2897
10 YHRD markers using YHRD mutation rates: 3595
24 slow markers: 4062

14 67-marker samples from Scotland from the UK/Ireland group:
50 markers:3277
10 YHRD markers using YHRD mutation rates: 3447
24 slow markers: 4157

27 67-marker samples from Ireland from the UK/Ireland group:
50 markers:3202
10 YHRD markers using YHRD mutation rates: 3947
24 slow markers: 5293

All 180 R-U106* 67-marker samples
50 markers:3221
10 YHRD markers using YHRD mutation rates: 3672
24 slow markers: 4484

I then looked at all 121 of the R-L48 67-marker haplotypes for
analysis. The following are intraclade TMRCA estimates for each of the
above 7 regions for these samples:

9 67-marker samples from Central Europe:
50 markers:2561
10 YHRD markers using YHRD mutation rates: 1435
24 slow markers: 4008

9 67-marker samples from NE Europe:
50 markers:2205
10 YHRD markers using YHRD mutation rates: 2825
24 slow markers: 1387

19 67-marker samples from NW Europe:
50 markers:2846
10 YHRD markers using YHRD mutation rates: 2163
24 slow markers: 2162

37 67-marker samples from NW, NE, and Central Europe (the above 3 groups
combined):
50 markers:2860
10 YHRD markers using YHRD mutation rates: 2306
24 slow markers: 2668

6 67-marker samples from Scandinavia:
50 markers:2430
10 YHRD markers using YHRD mutation rates: 1766
24 slow markers: 3295

4 67-marker samples from SE Europe:
50 markers:2573
10 YHRD markers using YHRD mutation rates: 2384
24 slow markers: 2927

If we remove the one haplotype from Romania from the 4 67-marker samples
from SE Europe and then do an intraclade TMRCA estimate on the remaining 3
samples from Italy we get the following:
50 markers:2116
10 YHRD markers using YHRD mutation rates: 1614
24 slow markers: 1387

2 67-marker samples from SW Europe:
50 markers:1094
10 YHRD markers using YHRD mutation rates: 1362

72 67-marker samples from UK and Ireland:
50 markers:2921
10 YHRD markers using YHRD mutation rates: 2508
24 slow markers:3112

44 67-marker samples from England from the UK/Ireland group:
50 markers:2650
10 YHRD markers using YHRD mutation rates: 2314
24 slow markers: 2988

6 67-marker samples from Scotland from the UK/Ireland group:
50 markers:2695
10 YHRD markers using YHRD mutation rates: 1766
24 slow markers: 1301

13 67-marker samples from Ireland from the UK/Ireland group:
50 markers:2942
10 YHRD markers using YHRD mutation rates: 2536
24 slow markers: 3990

All 121 R-L48* 67-marker samples
50 markers:2950
10 YHRD markers using YHRD mutation rates: 2480
24 slow markers: 3059

I think that the 50 marker results are the ones that you should pay
the most attention to since they include many more markers than the other
results and thus have more statistical significance.
In summary, we are also seeing a north/south division in the R-U106*
data with relatively little variance in haplotypes from SW Europe and from
Italy. There are also relatively few R-U106* haplotypes in the R-U106
project that originate from SW Europe and SE Europe with a total of only 11
67-marker haplotypes from these areas. 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 find it of significant interest that
there is slightly more variance in Ireland than in any region on continental
Europe. There is also a relatively high variance in Scotland. This would
suggest that if R-U106 originated somewhere in northern Europe that it
reached Ireland and Scotland relatively quickly after R-U106 first appeared.
R-L48 has the most variance in NW Europe and in the UK/Ireland.
Interestingly, R-L48 has higher variance in Ireland than it does in England.
In fact, R-L48 has the highest variance in Ireland among all of the regions.
Overall, the data for R-U106*, R-P312/S116*, and R-U152* would
suggest that they came west through Europe via a route north of the Alps
rather than via a route south of the Alps.

Sincerely,
Tim Janzen

-----Original Message-----
From:
[mailto:] On Behalf Of Alan R
Sent: Friday, February 19, 2010 9:32 AM
To:
Subject: Re: [DNA] : variance of S116*

Tim

I think this discovery that there is a division between north and south in
age for S116 and U152 that is even stronger than the east-west one is
fascinating.  It is very surprising that this very strong trend has not
been discussed before.  It has major implications for R1b1b2 history.  That
leads to the simple question and request for some more number crunching -
does U106 also follow the pattern of a much earlier MRCA date in the north
than the south?  The trend regarding east-west would be of interest too but
I think the north-south aspect is what I really would like to know.  

This realisation that S116 and perhaps also all P310 is very young in the
south (especially Italy) really could have a big influence on R1b1b2
history,  It seems to warn against the pooling of all R1b1b2 in studies, as
this may be blurring results by mixing R1b1b2 from two entirely different
periods and directions. 

Alan




This thread: