GENEALOGY-DNA-L ArchivesArchiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2003-11 > 1069180523
From: "Lowe DNA" <>
Subject: RE: [DNA] Z.Rosser et al,2000, Hg2
Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 12:35:23 -0600
The discussion is not so much centered on the entire group HG2....it is
about lumping all of the HG2's (all sub-haplogroup I's) into one big bucket
with a claim to Viking or some other groups heritage..... It is clear that
these authors found what they termed a Hg2 clinal or geographic decrease in
frequency across Europe to the mid-east in their samples.....but which
sub-group of I was historically where, and why, and when ?
One of the original points yesterday was that there are at least 9 I
sub-haplogroups (see YCC Figure 1)...and that more care needs to be taken to
identify, differentiate these I sub-haplogroups and where their frequency is
greatest....which was not done in this paper...
Many of us have been lumped into Hg2 or I with NRY testing...but it would be
nice to also know if these 9 I sub-groups are also apparently clinal and if
they can be associated with specific historic population movements...
From: Alan Derriscott [mailto:]
Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2003 3:56 AM
Subject: [DNA] Z.Rosser et al,2000, Hg2
Dear David Faux
Your continued refusal to accept the Hg2 findings of Z.Rosser et al, 2000,
does not enhance your reputation.
You are aware that this major scientific paper was authored by 63 top
notch human geneticists, including Zoe Rosser, Bryan Sykes, Mark Jobling,
Chris Tyler-Smith and Lutz Roewer,
LIST members please see :-
The enlarged prints of Fig.3 and Fig.4, leave no doubt that you are
incorrect, and worse, you are not doing justice to our tyro LIST members by
denying the facts of Hg2 as set out in the scientific paper.
Best wishes, Alan.
Wallasey, Wirral, England,
To join Ancestry.com and access our 1.2 billion online genealogy records, go
|RE: [DNA] Z.Rosser et al,2000, Hg2 by "Lowe DNA" <>|