World Families Forums - A germanic angle to the expansion of U152??

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
December 20, 2014, 12:51:26 PM
Home Help Search Login Register

+  World Families Forums
|-+  General Forums - Note: You must Be Logged In to post. Anyone can browse.
| |-+  R1b General (Moderator: rms2)
| | |-+  A germanic angle to the expansion of U152??
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2 3 Go Down Print
Author Topic: A germanic angle to the expansion of U152??  (Read 5290 times)
alan trowel hands.
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2012


« on: March 27, 2010, 09:11:06 AM »

I have for some time been thinking that the distribution of U152 which is often linked by David Faux and others with Gauls, La Tene, Hallstatt culture etc correlates rather well with the Suevic tribes, a west Germanic group of peoples close to the Roman Limes and who settled in the eastern fringes of the old Celtic world as Roman weakened.  We know U152 has peaks in Swtzerland, Alsace, south-west Germany, Italy etc.  The Suebi are especially linked with German Swabia/Bavaria, Alsace, Switzerland and the Langobardi who settled Italy were a section of them.  I find that a pretty remakable coincidence.  It doesnt even have to specifically be the Suebi but maybe a larger group of the westernmost Germanic tribes had a big role in the expansion of U152.

I have long thought that the distribution of U152 relative to L21 in western Europe is suggestive of U152 being a later overlay from the east over L21 (S116* being a paragroup is too hard to interpret).  A largely Germanic expansion would also potentially explain why U152 seems to be rare in the Celtic fringe of the isles.  

I am far from comitted to this idea but I want to put it out there for discussion because the idea keeps nagging away over the last few months. There is a good Wikipedia page on the Suebi.  
« Last Edit: March 27, 2010, 09:13:05 AM by alan trowel hands. » Logged
rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #1 on: March 27, 2010, 12:45:39 PM »

I broached that possibility a long time ago but was met with furious opposition from Dr. Faux, who seems committed to the "La Tene Celt" idea (except when it comes to U152 in the British Isles, which he thinks is of Viking provenance). I wasn't wedded to it either, so I didn't spend any time contending for it but dropped it when I saw the violent reaction it provoked.

Try posting your idea on Rootsweb and see what happens! ;-)

But, anyway, I think what you're saying makes good sense. U152 isn't all that well represented anywhere that Celtic language and culture survived.
« Last Edit: March 27, 2010, 12:46:16 PM by rms2 » Logged

alan trowel hands.
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2012


« Reply #2 on: March 27, 2010, 05:56:57 PM »

I think however, this theory would be dependent on there being no more than a very modest showing for U152 across much of the western half of France.  There were Germanic intrusions into Alsace, Lorrraine, Burgundy and adjacent areas and I think Flemish existed in Picardy and Franks spread to some degree into other parts of north-east France.  There was also a thinner spread Frankish elite spread across France (and indeed much of westerb Europe) and similar short-lived Visigothic and Suebic elites ruling kingdoms that included chunks of France but although I am no expert on this I would be surprised if they made a big genetic impact.

From the project maps etc, I think U106 must have been common and U152 pretty uncommon among the more northerly western Germans moving into lands near the North Sea coast such as the Franks, Frisians, Saxons etc.  Its more the southerly and westerly German confederacies like the Suebic and Allemanic ones that I wonder whether they connected to an expansion of U152.  Its a complex subject so I am more seeking opinions than stating a detailed case.  If only we could get the clade breakdowns found in the recent DNA study of France by the University of Santiago de Compostella discussed on this site.   They have regional totals for U152 and other clades across France and those figures probably would be enough to support or dismiss the U152-Germanic theory.  No reply to my emal request for the statistics as yet .
« Last Edit: March 27, 2010, 05:57:42 PM by alan trowel hands. » Logged
Nolan Admin - Glenn Allen Nolen
Project Coordinator
Old Hand
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 292


WWW
« Reply #3 on: March 27, 2010, 06:38:08 PM »

“Try posting your idea on Rootsweb and see what happens! ;-)”

No doubt about it, it will receive fierce opposition.

How anyone several years ago could label subclades of this subforum at WFN is beyond me. Plain, pure, and simply, it was a marketing strategy.
Logged
rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #4 on: March 27, 2010, 06:48:11 PM »

I think however, this theory would be dependent on there being no more than a very modest showing for U152 across much of the western half of France.  There were Germanic intrusions into Alsace, Lorrraine, Burgundy and adjacent areas and I think Flemish existed in Picardy and Franks spread to some degree into other parts of north-east France.  There was also a thinner spread Frankish elite spread across France (and indeed much of westerb Europe) and similar short-lived Visigothic and Suebic elites ruling kingdoms that included chunks of France but although I am no expert on this I would be surprised if they made a big genetic impact.

From the project maps etc, I think U106 must have been common and U152 pretty uncommon among the more northerly western Germans moving into lands near the North Sea coast such as the Franks, Frisians, Saxons etc.  Its more the southerly and westerly German confederacies like the Suebic and Allemanic ones that I wonder whether they connected to an expansion of U152.  Its a complex subject so I am more seeking opinions than stating a detailed case.  If only we could get the clade breakdowns found in the recent DNA study of France by the University of Santiago de Compostella discussed on this site.   They have regional totals for U152 and other clades across France and those figures probably would be enough to support or dismiss the U152-Germanic theory.  No reply to my emal request for the statistics as yet .

I haven't heard anything from my Spanish-speaking friend yet either. Hopefully he wrote them and one of us will hear something soon.
Logged

alan trowel hands.
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2012


« Reply #5 on: March 27, 2010, 07:10:43 PM »

Probably L21 is the only well defined R1b1b2 clade in western Europe whose distribution west of the Rhine simply demands it pre-dates the Germanic migrations westwards.  There is simply no way that L21 could be crammed into every last remote corner of Ireland, Scotland etc unless it was pre-Germanic and pre-Roman and therefore one has to suspect the same is true of L21 in France and other parts of the continent.  However, I do not think U152 or any other clade has a distribution that simply demands a pre-Germanic origin.  What I really would like to know is how sharp is the drop off in U152 when moving west from its peak in a band running through Alsace (eastern France?), southern Belgium??, Switzerland, SW Germany and Italy.  If it sharply drops off then the Germanic idea may have some support.  If the drop off westwards is slow and a good U152 showing remains throughout France then the Germanic theory would be on thin ice.   

Problem is I am not sure the project maps are up to the job when it comes to U152 and France.  For a start, the Santiago de Compostella University study of French DNA identified a U152 hotspot in Alsace but this is not apparent on the project map.
Logged
GoldenHind
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 731


« Reply #6 on: March 27, 2010, 07:35:36 PM »

Probably L21 is the only well defined R1b1b2 clade in western Europe whose distribution west of the Rhine simply demands it pre-dates the Germanic migrations westwards.  There is simply no way that L21 could be crammed into every last remote corner of Ireland, Scotland etc unless it was pre-Germanic and pre-Roman and therefore one has to suspect the same is true of L21 in France and other parts of the continent.  However, I do not think U152 or any other clade has a distribution that simply demands a pre-Germanic origin.  What I really would like to know is how sharp is the drop off in U152 when moving west from its peak in a band running through Alsace (eastern France?), southern Belgium??, Switzerland, SW Germany and Italy.  If it sharply drops off then the Germanic idea may have some support.  If the drop off westwards is slow and a good U152 showing remains throughout France then the Germanic theory would be on thin ice.   

Problem is I am not sure the project maps are up to the job when it comes to U152 and France.  For a start, the Santiago de Compostella University study of French DNA identified a U152 hotspot in Alsace but this is not apparent on the project map.
Personally I suspect both L21 and U152 (and most definitely P312*/S116*, and U106/S21 as well) pre-date the Celtic/Germanic division, and that they were present in both cultures. I believe Vince V. has estimated the age of all of them around 2000 BC. That being said, there is no reason why any of these subclades had to be distributed in equal proportions amongst the Celts and Germans. Thus I would not be surprised if, L21 (for example) was more far common amongst the Celts than in the Germanic tribes, but I don't think what we know of its distribution rules any presence amongst the Germanics.
Thus I think trying to fit any of these subclades into narrow boxes in the Iron Age is doomed to failure. I wouldn't be surprised if U152 was present in both the La Tene Celts as well as some later Germanic tribes such as the Alemanni. It is generally believed that most of these Iron Age Germanic tribes were confederations of numerous smaller tribes, so I think it is quite likely they contained a range of R1b subclades. 
Logged
rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #7 on: March 27, 2010, 07:55:35 PM »

I think we all know most of the major subclades of R1b1b2 are older than the ethnic distinctions between Celts, Germans, Slavs, etc. However, the R1b1b2 subclades are not so completely and thoroughly mixed that no associations between them and those ethnic groups are possible. There are clines in the distributions of the various clades that do tend to correspond, in an inexact but generally consistent way, with the historic distribution of the Celts and Germans.

Naturally, there is a great deal of overlapping, especially in border regions, and no doubt there were Celts who became Germans and Slavs who became Germans, and Germans who became Celts and Germans who became Slavs, and Celts who became Slavs and so on and on.

But I don't think any of that should stop us from being able to spot trends that enable us to make ethnic identifications that are generally correct.

For example, if someone were to say, "U106 seems to be mostly associated with Germanic people," I think he would be correct. That doesn't mean there never were any U106+ Celts or Slavs, but, generally speaking, U106 does have a distribution that makes it look basically Germanic.

In the same way, what Alan said about the distribution of L21 is correct, which is not to say some L21+ guys did not wind up as Germans or Slavs or Jews.
Logged

rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #8 on: March 28, 2010, 09:05:35 AM »

One thing that makes me think Dr. Faux might be right, i.e., that is there is a connection between U152 and the Celts (at least the southern and eastern Celts), is the apparently strong presence of U152 in old Cisalpine Gaul, that is, in Northern Italy.

Could the Lombard invasion of the 5th century account for that? Perhaps.

Of course, it looks like U152 is present all over Italy, and not just in Northern Italy, so maybe it goes further back there than the Gallic migrations.
Logged

GoldenHind
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 731


« Reply #9 on: March 28, 2010, 03:00:59 PM »

I think we all know most of the major subclades of R1b1b2 are older than the ethnic distinctions between Celts, Germans, Slavs, etc. However, the R1b1b2 subclades are not so completely and thoroughly mixed that no associations between them and those ethnic groups are possible. There are clines in the distributions of the various clades that do tend to correspond, in an inexact but generally consistent way, with the historic distribution of the Celts and Germans.

Naturally, there is a great deal of overlapping, especially in border regions, and no doubt there were Celts who became Germans and Slavs who became Germans, and Germans who became Celts and Germans who became Slavs, and Celts who became Slavs and so on and on.

But I don't think any of that should stop us from being able to spot trends that enable us to make ethnic identifications that are generally correct.

For example, if someone were to say, "U106 seems to be mostly associated with Germanic people," I think he would be correct. That doesn't mean there never were any U106+ Celts or Slavs, but, generally speaking, U106 does have a distribution that makes it look basically Germanic.

In the same way, what Alan said about the distribution of L21 is correct, which is not to say some L21+ guys did not wind up as Germans or Slavs or Jews.
It is just my opinion that the dividing line between Celts and Germanics is liable to fall farther down the R1b tree than U106/P312.
Logged
rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #10 on: March 28, 2010, 03:04:32 PM »

You may be right. I don't know.

Ancient y-dna would answer a lot of questions, as long as it is found in sufficient quantity.
Logged

GoldenHind
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 731


« Reply #11 on: March 28, 2010, 03:22:42 PM »

You may be right. I don't know.

Ancient y-dna would answer a lot of questions, as long as it is found in sufficient quantity.
I don't know if they will ever get to the point where they can do full SNP testing on ancient DNA. If so, it would certainly help. With only a handful of STRs, it's anyone's guess what R1b subclade might be involved, but that doesn't seem to stop people from predicting anyway. I have seen this tendency seen over and over, from the Germanic warrior graves to King Tut, who was recently confidently predicted to be U152 by someone.
I am hopeful that as we continue to breakdown U106 and P312 in to more subclades and look at their distribution, a much clearer picture will emerge than what we have a the moment. Take L21. There is good information to suggest it is common in much of France, but how about Scandinavia? We know it is there, but the picture remains cloudy. And what is the continental component of L159.2? We have no idea at the moment.
And what about the P107 subclade of U106. Pundits proclaim it is a sign of pre-Anglo-Saxon presence in England. Unless one accepts Oppenheimers phantom pre-Roman British Germanics, how does a major Germanic element end up being exclusively in Britain before the arrival of the Anglo-Saxons?
In sum, I see trying to force the P312/U106 divide into neat Iron Age boxes as premature at best, and a complete waste of time at worst.
Logged
rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #12 on: March 28, 2010, 04:07:34 PM »

I mildly and undogmatically disagree. I still think definite clines exist that allow for general statements about the correspondence of subclades with the distribution of various tribal/ethnic groups. That is not the same thing as trying to box everything up neatly and without exception or without blurring around the edges.

I have my doubts about L159 and its stability. In other words, I'm not sure being L159+ is a guarantee of descent from a common ancestor. Dr. Krahn himself said it is unstable, and we know it has occurred in at least two haplogroups thus far, I2a and R-L21. The same can be said in spades for L69.

As for P107, I don't see a problem with that at all. Aside from the allowance for what I referred to as "blurring around the edges", we know the Belgae settled in southern Britain long before the Anglo-Saxons. Caesar told us they were basically a blend of Germans and Celts, so perhaps they brought a number of y haplogroups and subclades with them. P107 may have been among them.

I don't think our alternatives are 1) "everything in neat Iron Age boxes" or 2) giving up in despair because European y-dna is about as organized as a soup sandwich.

Like I said, the clines that can be observed in the distribution of the various subclades allow for general, albeit inexact, statements concerning their correspondence with the distribution of ancient tribal/ethnic groups. Further refinements and the testing of ancient remains will only improve the accuracy of such statements.
« Last Edit: March 28, 2010, 05:02:11 PM by rms2 » Logged

alan trowel hands.
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2012


« Reply #13 on: March 28, 2010, 07:40:46 PM »

Goldenhind-can you summarise the arguements about P107 being pre-Germanic?  I have not been following that. 
Logged
NealtheRed
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 930


« Reply #14 on: March 29, 2010, 12:07:07 PM »

You may be right. I don't know.

Ancient y-dna would answer a lot of questions, as long as it is found in sufficient quantity.
I don't know if they will ever get to the point where they can do full SNP testing on ancient DNA. If so, it would certainly help. With only a handful of STRs, it's anyone's guess what R1b subclade might be involved, but that doesn't seem to stop people from predicting anyway. I have seen this tendency seen over and over, from the Germanic warrior graves to King Tut, who was recently confidently predicted to be U152 by someone.
I am hopeful that as we continue to breakdown U106 and P312 in to more subclades and look at their distribution, a much clearer picture will emerge than what we have a the moment. Take L21. There is good information to suggest it is common in much of France, but how about Scandinavia? We know it is there, but the picture remains cloudy. And what is the continental component of L159.2? We have no idea at the moment.
And what about the P107 subclade of U106. Pundits proclaim it is a sign of pre-Anglo-Saxon presence in England. Unless one accepts Oppenheimers phantom pre-Roman British Germanics, how does a major Germanic element end up being exclusively in Britain before the arrival of the Anglo-Saxons?
In sum, I see trying to force the P312/U106 divide into neat Iron Age boxes as premature at best, and a complete waste of time at worst.

Yeah, speaking of L21 in Scandinavia, there is no way all that is Celtic. It had to be there before the Celto-Germanic language/cultural split. This is also why I like that Brabant study that is posted on here. If we got a better sample from that area, we should be able to fill the gap between the Rhineland and Sweden.

As far as L159, The Schneider sample we have is L159+, but also CCGG. While I acknowledge that L159 is technically between a SNP and an STR, its modal haplotype is also CCGG. This coupled with L159 status is a strong indicator of shared ancestry. One continental is L159+, and I am sure others will follow.
« Last Edit: March 29, 2010, 12:07:27 PM by NealtheRed » Logged

Y-DNA: R-Z255 (L159.2+) - Downing (Irish Sea)


MTDNA: HV4a1 - Centrella (Avellino, Italy)


Ysearch: 4PSCK



GoldenHind
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 731


« Reply #15 on: March 29, 2010, 03:31:29 PM »

Goldenhind-can you summarise the arguements about P107 being pre-Germanic?  I have not been following that. 
I haven't really followed it either, but I am reasonably certain it is based on a distribution essentially limited to England. It seems to be the current view of the pundits. The same used to be said about U106 subclade S29(U198), but I'm not sure this view is still current, because though it is concentrated in England, a few have been found in the Low Countries and the Rhine Valley. (BTW, how is this all that different from L21?)
When Ethnoancestry announced some years ago that S21 was a marker of the Anglo-Saxons in England, they added this caveat, which was basically ignored by most as it spoiled the fun: "There may however be a smaller subgroup of indigenous British or Irish who test S21- this is unclear at this point."
 
Logged
GoldenHind
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 731


« Reply #16 on: March 29, 2010, 04:00:49 PM »

I mildly and undogmatically disagree. I still think definite clines exist that allow for general statements about the correspondence of subclades with the distribution of various tribal/ethnic groups. That is not the same thing as trying to box everything up neatly and without exception or without blurring around the edges.

I have my doubts about L159 and its stability. In other words, I'm not sure being L159+ is a guarantee of descent from a common ancestor. Dr. Krahn himself said it is unstable, and we know it has occurred in at least two haplogroups thus far, I2a and R-L21. The same can be said in spades for L69.

As for P107, I don't see a problem with that at all. Aside from the allowance for what I referred to as "blurring around the edges", we know the Belgae settled in southern Britain long before the Anglo-Saxons. Caesar told us they were basically a blend of Germans and Celts, so perhaps they brought a number of y haplogroups and subclades with them. P107 may have been among them.

I don't think our alternatives are 1) "everything in neat Iron Age boxes" or 2) giving up in despair because European y-dna is about as organized as a soup sandwich.

Like I said, the clines that can be observed in the distribution of the various subclades allow for general, albeit inexact, statements concerning their correspondence with the distribution of ancient tribal/ethnic groups. Further refinements and the testing of ancient remains will only improve the accuracy of such statements.
In fact I am urging a third alternative: 3) Wait and see.
I know you remember the days when the accepted wisdom was that R1b in Europe was divided into three categories: 1) U106=Germanic, 2) U152=Celtic, and 3) the rest of us, then labeled R1b1c*= Atlantic facade aboriginals. We have come a long way since then, but I think we have an equal if not greater distance yet to go before we can really understand the history of R1b in Europe.
Under the above scenario, if some evidence emerged that appeared to not match this classification, a way was found to interpret it so that it did.
It is just that process which remains my problem.
Take L21 for example. We look at what we know about its distribution in "Celtic" areas such as Britain and France, and there is the temptation (which I try to resist) to label it "Celtic." When it turns up in places which don't fit this scenario, such as Norway or Lithuania, people look for ways to explain these inconvenient facts in a way that remains consistent with the theory. Thus we get wandering medieval Irish monks, Celtic mercenaries, Scottish merchants and the Aberdeen steamship company shipping Ashkenazis to Lithuania. I know you have never been guilty of this, but there is no shortage of those that have.
I know it is fun to try to connect L21 with the Goidels (and let me state unquivocally I see no reason to doubt that L21 could have been a common subclade amongst that people), and I really don't want to spoil anyone's fun.
My problem arises when people try to equate these R1b subclades with various Iron Age cultures, when I firmly believe such an idea is not only premature but very likely just plain wrong, because it then unconsciously influences they way they interpret the evidence.
If the question on this topic is rephrased, "Could U152 have been an element in some Germanic tribes such as the Alemanni or Suevi?," I have no problem with it. But I don't why why an affirmnative answer to that question necessarily negates any possibilty of their presence amongst the La Tene culture.
I know this may seem like splitting hairs to some, but I am not speaking of the odd outlier or occasional exception to the general rule, but rather of significant portions of R1b subclades.
Logged
rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #17 on: March 30, 2010, 08:02:07 AM »

I'm fine with "wait and see" as long as that isn't taken to mean that there are no indicators or hints or clues along the way as to how things are playing out. There are definite clines in the distribution of the various haplogroups and subclades that do allow us to make generally true statements about their origins and their connections to various ancient peoples.

Any kind of dogmatism in this young science is a bad idea, however, and with that I agree.

What is Celtic in the British Isles may be something else some other place, but it is also well to remember that the Celts were certainly not limited to the British Isles.

Things are always developing and changing, and we learn as we go along. In that sense we need to keep our minds open and be willing to adapt to new information without trying to force it into a set of rigid assumptions arrived at when a clade was new and 999 out of every 1000 samples was from the British Isles.

But I still think it would be equally blind to ignore what is right in front of our faces simply because not every man on the planet has had his y-dna fully SNP tested yet.
« Last Edit: March 30, 2010, 08:06:45 AM by rms2 » Logged

OConnor
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 676


« Reply #18 on: May 08, 2010, 12:18:53 PM »


Mr Guerrero tested U152+

Is there a group(s) that he should join?


"hello Michael
I know that it has been awhile, but, this is just to give you an update on my Deep Clade test.  They are still testing for downline SNPs.  At this time, I've been tested positive for U152, so I guess L21 is out of the question.  Please let me know if you want to know the results of my final SNP."

Logged

R1b1a2a1a1b4


R-DF13**(L21>DF13)
M42+, M45+, M526+, M74+, M89+, M9+, M94+, P108+, P128+, P131+, P132+, P133+, P134+, P135+, P136+, P138+, P139+, P14+, P140+, P141+, P143+, P145+, P146+, P148+, P149+, P151+, P157+, P158+, P159+, P160+, P161+, P163+, P166+, P187+, P207+, P224+, P226+, P228+, P229+, P230+, P231+, P232+, P233+, P234+, P235+, P236+, P237+, P238+, P239+, P242+, P243+, P244+, P245+, P280+, P281+, P282+, P283+, P284+, P285+, P286+, P294+, P295+, P297+, P305+, P310+, P311+, P312+, P316+, M173+, M269+, M343+, P312+, L21+, DF13+, M207+, P25+, L11+, L138+, L141+, L15+, L150+, L16+, L23+, L51+, L52+, M168+, M173+, M207+, M213+, M269+, M294+, M299+, M306+, M343+, P69+, P9.1+, P97+, PK1+, SRY10831.1+, L21+, L226-, M37-, M222-, L96-, L193-, L144-, P66-, SRY2627-, M222-, DF49-, L371-, DF41-, L513-, L555-, L1335-, L1406-, Z251-, L526-, L130-, L144-, L159.2-, L192.1-, L193-, L195-, L96-, DF21-, Z255-, DF23-, DF1-, Z253-, M37-, M65-, M73-, M18-, M126-, M153-, M160-, P66-

12 24 14 10 11 14 12 12 12 13 13 29 18


rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #19 on: May 08, 2010, 02:19:59 PM »


Mr Guerrero tested U152+

Is there a group(s) that he should join?


"hello Michael
I know that it has been awhile, but, this is just to give you an update on my Deep Clade test.  They are still testing for downline SNPs.  At this time, I've been tested positive for U152, so I guess L21 is out of the question.  Please let me know if you want to know the results of my final SNP."



He should join the R1b-U152 Project:

http://www.familytreedna.com/public/R1b-U152/default.aspx
Logged

OConnor
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 676


« Reply #20 on: May 09, 2010, 08:56:37 AM »

Thanks Rich

I sent him the link.
Another lost sheep put on the right path. ;)

I was pretty sure he was L21. :(
Logged

R1b1a2a1a1b4


R-DF13**(L21>DF13)
M42+, M45+, M526+, M74+, M89+, M9+, M94+, P108+, P128+, P131+, P132+, P133+, P134+, P135+, P136+, P138+, P139+, P14+, P140+, P141+, P143+, P145+, P146+, P148+, P149+, P151+, P157+, P158+, P159+, P160+, P161+, P163+, P166+, P187+, P207+, P224+, P226+, P228+, P229+, P230+, P231+, P232+, P233+, P234+, P235+, P236+, P237+, P238+, P239+, P242+, P243+, P244+, P245+, P280+, P281+, P282+, P283+, P284+, P285+, P286+, P294+, P295+, P297+, P305+, P310+, P311+, P312+, P316+, M173+, M269+, M343+, P312+, L21+, DF13+, M207+, P25+, L11+, L138+, L141+, L15+, L150+, L16+, L23+, L51+, L52+, M168+, M173+, M207+, M213+, M269+, M294+, M299+, M306+, M343+, P69+, P9.1+, P97+, PK1+, SRY10831.1+, L21+, L226-, M37-, M222-, L96-, L193-, L144-, P66-, SRY2627-, M222-, DF49-, L371-, DF41-, L513-, L555-, L1335-, L1406-, Z251-, L526-, L130-, L144-, L159.2-, L192.1-, L193-, L195-, L96-, DF21-, Z255-, DF23-, DF1-, Z253-, M37-, M65-, M73-, M18-, M126-, M153-, M160-, P66-

12 24 14 10 11 14 12 12 12 13 13 29 18


rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #21 on: May 09, 2010, 05:10:59 PM »

Thanks Rich

I sent him the link.
Another lost sheep put on the right path. ;)

I was pretty sure he was L21. :(

Spanish guys who are U152+ are pretty rare, so I don't blame you for not foreseeing that.

Who knows, maybe his U152+ result is a lab or clerical error?
Logged

Nolan Admin - Glenn Allen Nolen
Project Coordinator
Old Hand
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 292


WWW
« Reply #22 on: May 10, 2010, 12:20:48 AM »

"Who knows, maybe his U152+ result is a lab or clerical error?"

Did this turn into an all R-L21 positive forum all the time? Of course, new R-U152 positive results will pop up in Spain and North Africa with continued testing of those populations.   
 

http://www.familytreedna.com/public/R1b-U152/default.aspx?section=yresults

Kerchner's R1b-U152 Project


100 171601 Mustapha Hanni 1923-1989, Algiers, Algeria  R1b1b2a1b4c

13 23 14 11 11 15 12 12 12 13 13 29


221 N47976 Francisco Corsi, Santander, España, 1750 (Spain)  R1b1b2a1b4

13 24 14 11 11 19 12 12 12 13 13 30 17 9 10 11 11 25 15 19 29 14 15 17 18       11 11 19 23 15 15 17 16 39 40 12 13 11 9 15 16 8 10 10 8 10 10 12 23 23 16 10 12 12 14 8 12 22 20 13 12 11 13 11 11 14 11
 
Logged
rms2
Board Moderator
Guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5023


« Reply #23 on: May 10, 2010, 04:21:39 AM »

"Who knows, maybe his U152+ result is a lab or clerical error?"

Did this turn into an all R-L21 positive forum all the time? Of course, new R-U152 positive results will pop up in Spain and North Africa with continued testing of those populations.   
 

http://www.familytreedna.com/public/R1b-U152/default.aspx?section=yresults

Kerchner's R1b-U152 Project


100 171601 Mustapha Hanni 1923-1989, Algiers, Algeria  R1b1b2a1b4c

13 23 14 11 11 15 12 12 12 13 13 29


221 N47976 Francisco Corsi, Santander, España, 1750 (Spain)  R1b1b2a1b4

13 24 14 11 11 19 12 12 12 13 13 30 17 9 10 11 11 25 15 19 29 14 15 17 18       11 11 19 23 15 15 17 16 39 40 12 13 11 9 15 16 8 10 10 8 10 10 12 23 23 16 10 12 12 14 8 12 22 20 13 12 11 13 11 11 14 11
 


Don't get defensive. U152 is rare in Spain, but that remark was made lightheartedly. It wasn't an attack on U152.

Just the same, clerical and lab errors do occur. I've seen them and have been behind the correction of a few of them.
Logged

OConnor
Old Hand
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 676


« Reply #24 on: May 10, 2010, 08:23:51 AM »

Here is his y-search sequence

Guerrero (Mexico)
14 24 15 11 11 14 12 12 12 13 13 31 17
9 10 11 11 25 15 17 29 15 15 17 17 11 11 17 23 15

http://www.ysearch.org/search_view.asp?uid=A4684&viewuid=A4684&p=1
« Last Edit: May 10, 2010, 08:27:29 AM by OConnor » Logged

R1b1a2a1a1b4


R-DF13**(L21>DF13)
M42+, M45+, M526+, M74+, M89+, M9+, M94+, P108+, P128+, P131+, P132+, P133+, P134+, P135+, P136+, P138+, P139+, P14+, P140+, P141+, P143+, P145+, P146+, P148+, P149+, P151+, P157+, P158+, P159+, P160+, P161+, P163+, P166+, P187+, P207+, P224+, P226+, P228+, P229+, P230+, P231+, P232+, P233+, P234+, P235+, P236+, P237+, P238+, P239+, P242+, P243+, P244+, P245+, P280+, P281+, P282+, P283+, P284+, P285+, P286+, P294+, P295+, P297+, P305+, P310+, P311+, P312+, P316+, M173+, M269+, M343+, P312+, L21+, DF13+, M207+, P25+, L11+, L138+, L141+, L15+, L150+, L16+, L23+, L51+, L52+, M168+, M173+, M207+, M213+, M269+, M294+, M299+, M306+, M343+, P69+, P9.1+, P97+, PK1+, SRY10831.1+, L21+, L226-, M37-, M222-, L96-, L193-, L144-, P66-, SRY2627-, M222-, DF49-, L371-, DF41-, L513-, L555-, L1335-, L1406-, Z251-, L526-, L130-, L144-, L159.2-, L192.1-, L193-, L195-, L96-, DF21-, Z255-, DF23-, DF1-, Z253-, M37-, M65-, M73-, M18-, M126-, M153-, M160-, P66-

12 24 14 10 11 14 12 12 12 13 13 29 18


Pages: [1] 2 3 Go Up Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


SEO light theme by © Mustang forums. Powered by SMF 1.1.13 | SMF © 2006-2011, Simple Machines LLC

Page created in 0.197 seconds with 18 queries.