GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2011-11 > 1320219263


From: "Bernard SECHER" <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] G2a and E1b1b1a1b in Spain 7000 years ago
Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2011 08:34:23 +0100
References: <N1-CYKlA-GWm4@Safe-mail.net>


Didier,

0,3% is not the frequency of G2a, but the frequency of perfect matches for
G2a haplotypes of neolithic samples. It is quite different.

Bernard
----- Original Message -----
From: <>
To: <>
Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 2011 2:51 AM
Subject: Re: [DNA] G2a and E1b1b1a1b in Spain 7000 years ago


> OK, Let's talk DATA . The only available to me are from the supplementary
> materials. From Table S3 I can extract the total samples analyzed for Y
> DNA and the percentages for G2a and E1b1b1a1b. This is for comparison
> with what was found among the skeletons.
>
> total samples : 14166
> total G2a (over 14166) : 42 ---> % = 0.3
> total E1b1b1a1b (over 14166) : 346 ---> % = 2.44
>
> My comment : I don't know the discussion from the paper (not freely
> available) but these percentages look surprising making E1b1b1a1b more
> than 8 times more frequent than all G2a in Europe, with a very low 0.3 %
> frequency (for G2a). Something is wrong. In other instances G2 people
> were faster to react !
>
> About the findings of G2a among the skeletons (dated 5000 BC) I think this
> is still neolithic . The results thus confirm the Treilles result (France)
> : G2a was there from early neolithic times and still there at the onset of
> bronze age ; the change occurred later. E1b1b1a1b wasn't expected but the
> existence of waves of E-M78 much before the arabic conquest was known in
> Spain. Good to find it but I2a was probably also around as in the Treilles
> case.
> The main point, against all those criticizing the STR dating and willing
> stone ages R1b in Spain, is once again the absence of R1b among the
> skeletons.
>
> Didier
>
>
>> Very interesting!
>>
>> A few years back, E-V13 which was 7000 years old and looking like the STR
>> profiles found today in Europe would not have been such a big surprise.
>> At
>> the time, methods of using STR variance to measure clade ages led to R1b
>> being attributed to an ice age origin, and those methods would have no
>> problem with calling E-V13 pre-Bronze age, as indeed they did. Since then
>> such methods came to be doubted at least by us hobbyists.
>>
>> (In publications, even the low side estimates like those of the Rozzari,
>> Cruciani, Trombetta etc team have been cautious about moving too quickly
>> to
>> calling E-V13 POST Bronze age. So we can't say this new find clashes
>> terribly with the academics in print.)
>>
>> But the fact is, whatever you think about any of those methods, E-V13 is
>> quite homogeneous in Europe. It looks young, and us genealogists know
>> this
>> because we have a lot of European data. I have not read the article but
>> it
>> seems to have attempted to also do an STR haplotype comparison and
>> decided
>> that the haplotype was like the modern E-V13 found around Europe?
>>
>> If so then I would be interested to see what STR variance analysts on the
>> list think about this.
>
> Lawrence wrote :
>>
>> Has this paper been mentioned on our mailing list yet?
>>
>> http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2011/10/24/1113061108.abstract
>>
>> "... he Y-chromosomal analyses permitted confirmation of the existence in
>> Spain approximately 7,000 y ago of two haplogroups previously associated
>> with the Neolithic transition: G2a and E1b1b1a1b."
>
> -------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
> with the word 'unsubscribe' without the
> quotes in the subject and the body of the message
>



This thread: