TMRCA and Coalescence Age estimates for R-M269 and its subclades

[rms2]

Interesting. Not as startling as Myres' nine, but still a bit higher variance for the U106 with Slavic surnames.

[Mikewww]

Interesting. Not as startling as Myres' nine, but still a bit higher variance for the U106 with Slavic surnames.

I still think Ashkenazi people will be critical. Both in U106 and in U152, there are people with unusual haplotypes that are in Jewish R1b type projects.

Are they from Rhine? Khazaria? or the Levant? or who knows?

[Peter M]

Is this topic still alive ? Anybody in for a slightly different approach ??

Talking about early U106 and Eastern Europe, I've always wondered about the relatively high level of L47, a somewhat younger SNP, in Eastern Europe (and apparently in e.g. Scandinavia).

Anybody any idea/opinion on that ?

[Maliclavelli]

I still think Ashkenazi people will be critical. Both in U106 and in U152, there are people with unusual haplotypes that are in Jewish R1b type projects.

Are they from Rhine? Khazaria? or the Levant? or who knows?

You know I have always supported that many Jewish haplotypes are of European extraction, and I have paid for this, but I have always said too that we cannot exclude an ancient origin of these haplotypes from Middle East, specially R-L4, which has many characteristic mutations. Of course we should reconstruct the true ancientness of these haplotypes (and you know I’d multiply for 2.5 the usual dates). If it were true, we could think to an ancient migration (probably from Europe) to Middle East, or, if R1b were from Caucasus or Central Asia, a migration from there. But the problem is always the same: those places lack the path of the haplogroup that Europe, and specially Italy, has. The same R1b (if it will be so) of Tutankhamon may have the same origin, even though it seems that at the autosomal level he is above all African, but his Y, if ancient, would have had a little impact. I had done an explication of the Jewish R-L4 from an European origin, but I didn’t post it for not having polemics. Really those haplotypes get some mutations in the first 12 markers, but the rest is in the modal, and could be explained like the followers of European clusters otherwise extinct in Europe but multiplied in the Ashkenazic great expansion. Anyway the truth, whichever it will be, will have to be pursued in freedom and honesty of judgment.

[rms2]

Is this topic still alive ? Anybody in for a slightly different approach ??

Talking about early U106 and Eastern Europe, I've always wondered about the relatively high level of L47, a somewhat younger SNP, in Eastern Europe (and apparently in e.g. Scandinavia).

Anybody any idea/opinion on that ?

You know, I am not that familiar with L47. Since the R1b-U106 Research Project is not organized by terminal SNP, it makes easy investigation impossible. One has to go through and laboriously find and sort.

Of course, the presence of a downstream SNP in Eastern Europe doesn't alter the overall variance of U106 as a whole versus its variance as a whole elsewhere.

[Peter M]

You know, I am not that familiar with L47. Since the R1b-U106 Research Project is not organized by terminal SNP, it makes easy investigation impossible. One has to go through and laboriously find and sort.

As far as I'm concerned, the R1b-U106 Project is not organised AT ALL, at least not so as to support research. $:-)

Of course, the presence of a downstream SNP in Eastern Europe doesn't alter the overall variance of U106 as a whole versus its variance as a whole elsewhere.

Therefore I started by asking if anybody would be open for a different approach. I would like to have a look at the distribution of the SNPs. Primarily of Z18, as that's my main interest, but, I guess, younger SNPs like L47 or Nul425 might be useful as well. Btw, some guess L47 to be between 2,200 and 3,000 years old.

Would the presence of L47 in Eastern Europe indicate 1) U106 to have been relatively static for the first 1,000 - 2,000 years or 2) L47 in Eastern Europe to be the result of more recent eastern migration ? btw, e.g. in Hungary there is a significant population who migrated from Germany after 500AD; I know, Hungary is Central Europe, but still it indicates eastward migrations DID happen.

[rms2]

I think we're open to anything, but how do we find out about the distribution of these SNPs without putting in a lot of work?

Are there even enough men with positive results to give a real indication?

[Mikewww]

... Since the R1b-U106 Research Project is not organized by terminal SNP, it makes easy investigation impossible. One has to go through and laboriously find and sort.

As far as I'm concerned, the R1b-U106 Project is not organised AT ALL, at least not so as to support research. $:-)

I've got all the U106 confirmed haplotypes I could find from the U106, U198, null439, Z18 and several large geographic projects. They are stored in the Haplotype_Data-R-U106All spreadsheet.
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/R1b1c_U106-S21/files/

Terminal SNPs are listed, including the recent Z SNPs. You can filter or sort by them.  Variance is calculated at the bottom of the Allhts tab/worksheet.

I don't think L47 is that old, but as Maliclavelli has pointed out, U152's L4 and it's brothers are an interesting East European group.

[Peter M]

I think we're open to anything, but how do we find out about the distribution of these SNPs without putting in a lot of work?

Would Mike's spreadsheet provide a reasonable starting point ?

Are there even enough men with positive results to give a real indication?

That's a difficult issue when we are discussing just about any area of Continental Europe, I guess. My first observation was about the ratio between U106 and L47 and not so much about the absolute numbers.

[rms2]

Would Mike's spreadsheet provide a reasonable starting point ? . . .

No doubt, but I would have to join Yahoo's R1b-U106 group to even look at it, and I am not willing to do that.

I started Yahoo groups for both P312 and L21 but quit them because I found the Yahoo format aggravating. I don't want to join another one, sorry.

[GoldenHind]

While I think an examination of U106 subclades is long overdue, I am not willing to join the Yahoo U106 group either. I am still a member of the Yahoo P312 group, but I almost never look at it, except when I see Mike has a new file up. Unfortunately these long Excel files have a tendency to freeze my computer.

I agree with Rich that the way the U106 project at FTDNA makes it extremely difficult to examine its members by subclade. Sometimes I wonder if that is entirely coincidental.

Peter, I congratulate you on your effort to investigate U106 subclades. I just don't know where the best place is to initiate a discussion on the subject. I don't think there are enough people here who have sufficient interest in the subject to make the discussion productive.