PDA

View Full Version : The genetic variation in the R1a clade among the Ashkenazi Levites’ Y chromosome



Michał
11-02-2017, 01:51 PM
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-017-14761-7

The genetic variation in the R1a clade among the Ashkenazi Levites’ Y chromosome

Doron M. Behar, Lauri Saag, Monika Karmin, Meir G. Gover, Jeffrey D. Wexler, Luisa Fernanda Sanchez, Elliott Greenspan, Alena Kushniarevich, Oleg Davydenko, Hovhannes Sahakyan, Levon Yepiskoposyan, Alessio Boattini, Stefania Sarno, Luca Pagani, Shai Carmi, Shay Tzur, Ene Metspalu, Concetta Bormans, Karl Skorecki, Mait Metspalu, Siiri Rootsi & Richard Villems


Abstract

Approximately 300,000 men around the globe self-identify as Ashkenazi Levites, of whom two thirds were previously shown to descend from a single male. The paucity of whole Y-chromosome sequences precluded conclusive identification of this ancestor’s age, geographic origin and migration patterns. Here, we report the variation of 486 Y-chromosomes within the Ashkenazi and non-Ashkenazi Levite R1a clade, other Ashkenazi Jewish paternal lineages, as well as non-Levite Jewish and non-Jewish R1a samples. Cumulatively, the emerging profile is of a Middle Eastern ancestor, self-affiliating as Levite, and carrying the highly resolved R1a-Y2619 lineage, which was likely a minor haplogroup among the Hebrews. A star-like phylogeny, coalescing similarly to other Ashkenazi paternal lineages, ~1,743 ybp, suggests it to be one of the Ashkenazi paternal founders; to have expanded as part of the overall Ashkenazi demographic expansion, without special relation to the Levite affiliation; and to have subsequently spread to non-Ashkenazi Levites.

Pylsteen
11-02-2017, 02:08 PM
The sister clades of R1a-Y2619 within R1a-M582, coalescing ~3,143 (2,620–3,682) ybp, were sampled in Iranian Azeris, a Kerman, a Yazidi and one sample from Iberia

so the Levite subclade is most related to some Iranic samples coalescing ca. 1700BC - 700BC. Nice.
speculation: maybe someone from an Iranic clan entered the Jewish gene pool at the time of the Babylonian captivity or at the time of the Persian empire.

Michał
11-02-2017, 02:21 PM
so the Levite subclade is most related to some Iranic samples coalescing ca. 1700BC - 700BC. Nice.
speculation: maybe someone from an Iranic clan entered the Jewish gene pool at the time of the Babylonian captivity or at the time of the Persian empire.
See my Nethinim hypothesis:
https://sites.google.com/site/levitedna/origins-of-r1a1a-ashkenazi-levites/theory-re-nethinim-origins

ADW_1981
11-02-2017, 02:30 PM
Looks like there was an entrance of "Steppe" DNA to the Levant during the Iron Age since it exists in modern populations but is lacking in Bronze and earlier. That could have been accompanied by R1a, but also R1b-M269 as well.

Principe
11-02-2017, 04:29 PM
I think Ashkenazi R1a could have also been been a Mitanni lineage imo, and is fairly old in the Levant.

Michał
11-02-2017, 04:44 PM
I think Ashkenazi R1a could have also been been a Mitanni lineage imo, and is fairly old in the Levant.
There are actually many different subclades under R1a (including mostly those under Z93) that could have been potentially associated with the Mitanni Aryans, but I would personally favor those ones for which we know some closely related lineages/subclades in India, so this does not include neither M582 nor any other subclade under Z2122.

Principe
11-02-2017, 05:04 PM
There are actually many different subclades under R1a (including mostly those under Z93) that could have been potentially associated with the Mitanni Aryans, but I would personally favor those ones for which we know some closely related lineages/subclades in India, so this does not include neither M582 nor any other subclade under Z2122.

I looked at the Yfull tree for the older subclades, the R-F2935 lineage has a result from Turkey which has a TMRCA of 3700 ybp, which is a little earlier than when the Mitanni came to the area, I think it's possible that maybe M582 could have been a minor lineage of the Mitanni?

Humanist
11-03-2017, 12:15 AM
Would love to see a further analysis of the Assyrian J1-Z1828 sample, GRC15491782.

Rethel
11-19-2017, 04:40 PM
and carrying the highly resolved R1a-Y2619 lineage, which was likely a minor haplogroup among the Hebrews.

I didn;t know, that Hebrews emerged during Roman reign
of illyrian pharaos when Constantine the Great was born...
I stupidly thought it was 2500 years earlier... in the BA... :(

Rethel
11-19-2017, 04:52 PM
See my Nethinim hypothesis:
https://sites.google.com/site/levitedna/origins-of-r1a1a-ashkenazi-levites/theory-re-nethinim-origins

Possible, but too early for almost 800 years to bet on that.
Nethinim were mostly Canaanites, so probably where E1.

R1a can be from anywere: slaves, converts, Solomon servants, rape, or whatever.
In both two first centuries Jews were massivly converting almost everybody, and
earlier were massive buyers of slaves the same as later were massive sellers, so
it can be really form any source, and no theory is good enuogh. And if their very
forefather lived around 274, then there is no even slightest ties to Israelites what
so ever, so it really has no sense to look for him in deeper past.

Michał
11-19-2017, 09:55 PM
Possible, but too early for almost 800 years to bet on that.
Nethinim were mostly Canaanites, so probably where E1.
It seems you haven't used the link to the more detailed version of that hypothesis, so here are some relevant fragments:

"The Nethinim (or Nethenim) were foreign (non-Israelite) slaves/servants in the Second Temple serving there under the supervision of Levites. The key is that they gradually became a part of the Levitic society, as is acknowledged by many scholars. The name Nethinim is first attested in the post-Exilic texts (Books of Ezra and Nehemiah), though Nethinim were often regarded as descendants of Gibeonites (Josh 9:1-27) or as the continuators of the old tradition, that allowed giving some lower functions in the temple (like cleaning or carrying the water and wood) to the group of captured enemies or slaves.

There were two groups of Nethinim coming to Israel with the repatriants from Babylon. The first group (392 people) came to Jerusalem in 538 BC as a part of the first wave of Jews who returned to Jerusalem under the leadership of Zerubbabel/Sheshbazzar just after the Israelites were freed by the Persian king Cyrus the Great (Ezr 1). The names of the Nethinim leaders from this group (Ziha, Hesupha, Tabbaoth, etc., listed in Ezr 2:43-58 and Neh 7:46-56) are regarded as being non-Jewish. Many of these names sound Semitic or Hurrian/Urartic to me (though I’m not an expert in this field), which would partially support the view that at least some of these people could indeed originate from the Palestine region (Gibeonites, Ammonites, Kanaanites, etc.).

The case of the second group of Nethinim is a little bit different. They came to Israel much later (in 458 BC or even later) with the second wave of repatriants under the leadership of Ezra, a famous priest and writer. Before Ezra left Babylon he was troubled by the shortage of Levites and servants who were needed for maintaining the service in the temple (Ezr 8:15). Because of that shortage Ezra had to postpone (or interrupt) his journey to Israel. He then sent some respected compatriots to the place called Casiphia, where they asked the man named Iddo (a leader of the local Levite community?) to find some Levites who would be willing to go with Ezra to Israel (Ezr 8:16-17). They managed to collect 38 Levites, including Sherebiah, Hashebiah, Jeshaiah and their relatives (all with well documented Levitic ancestry, Ezr 8:17-18). They also brought with themselves 220 Nethinim (temple servants) from Casiphia - to my knowledge this is the only group of Babylonian repatriants for whom the names of their ancestors were not mentioned in the Bible (or nowhere else). They were described as servants whom David and his officials had set apart to attend the Levites (Ezr 8:20). It seems likely (if not certain) that they were non-Israelites. In my opinion, there is also a probability that there were some local people (slaves or servants) among them. The exact location of Casiphia is uncertain, though according to many biblical commentaries it shouldn’t be far from Babylon. It is, however, worth noting that according to some commentators Casiphia was located not in Mesopotamia (Babylonia) but in Persia, and some scholars/commentators place it specifically in the Caspian Mountains between Media and Hyrcania (near the Caspian Sea). It has also been suggested that the Nethinim from Casiphia were employed in local silver mines (keseph means silver in Hebrew). If Casiphia was indeed located in Media (conquered by Persians in 550 BC) or east of it, it seems possible that these Nethinim were slaves/servants of Iranian origin (Medes, Parthians or Scythians) who were given under the supervision of Israelites/Levites, likely being in charge of running the silver mines (in the name of the Persian rulers), though this of course is highly speculative.

After they came to Israel, the Nethinim were living in Jerusalem in a place/district called Ophel (Neh 11:21). They were initially forbidden to marry priests, Levites or other Israelites. This, however, changed with time. It seems generally accepted that the Nethinim, along with singers and porters, soon became regarded as specific subgroups within a broad Levite community. Finally, they all merged together into a single caste/class called the Levites."

"Let’s assume that the population of all Jews at the beginning of the first Millennium was 8 million people (according to Paul Johnson). Half of them would be males, which makes 4 million men. How many of them were Levites? Let’s assume that the percentage of the Levites was similar to that reported for the returnees from Babylon, which was about 1.7% (this includes both the Levites and their assistants: singers, porters and Nethinim). This would make a total number of 68,000 Levites in 1 AD. How many of them could have been the ancestors of Nethinim of Iranian origin? Let’s try to calculate it, assuming that there have been as many as 10 Iranian (L342+)* men among the 220 Nethinim (of various origin) coming from Casiphia between 458 and 369 BC. The total number of all Levites, singers, porters and Nethinim living in Jerusalem at that moment is difficult to evaluate, but it could be at least 2,000 men. The Jewish population doubled every 70-80 years, so about 400 BC the initial group of 773 Levites (L+S+P+N), who returned from Babylon in 558 BC, would expand to 1500-2000 men (and we should also include the 258 Levites and Nethinim coming from Casiphia). Ten L342 Nethinim out of 2000 Levites (L+S+P+N) makes 0.5%. Though this proportion could have been altered by the genetic drift, let’s assume that it was preserved until the end of the first Millennium BC. Continuing these calculations, 0.5% of 68,000 Levites makes 340 men of Iranian origin in 1 AD. During the next centuries the whole Jewish population was decreased by the factor of 8 according to Johnson).

So we are left with just 42 Levites carrying the L342 mutation. Is there a chance that these people were evenly distributed between the Sephardi, Ashkenazi and Mizrahi Jews? I doubt so. And what if there was only one L342+ man among the Nethinim who came from Casiphia? We would end up with just four L342+ men at the end of the first Millennium AD. It would be then very likely that they all were the members of just one family, living in a single location somewhere in Europe, so there would almost be no chance to evenly allocate these people to different Jewish subpopulations (Sephardi, Ashkenazi or Mizrahi).

(For the matter of simplicity, I did not count the Levites who did not return from Babylon, although including them would further decrease the number of L342 people in 1 AD)."

* - please note that this was written before mutations like Z93, Z94, Z2122, F1345, CTS6, M582 or Y2619 were identified, so this was the time when L342 was the only mutation known to define the large Asian branch of R1a. Today, L342 is known to be located in an unstable multicopy region. It is phylogenetically equivalent to Z94 but absent in many lineages under Z94.

Michał
11-19-2017, 10:02 PM
R1a can be from anywere: slaves, converts, Solomon servants, rape, or whatever.
In both two first centuries Jews were massivly convrting almost everybody, and
earlier were massive buyers of slaves the same as later were massive sellers, so
it can be rerally form any source, and no theory is good enuogh. And if their very
forefather lived around 274, then there is no even slightest ties to Israelites what
so ever, so it rreally has no sense to look for him in deeper past.
You are only partially right. There are indeed many scenarios possible, but some of them seem much more likely when knowing that the Ashkenazi Levite clade Y2619 has many close relatives in the Middle East (and nowhere else!) and it is strongly associated with the Levites. There are not many scenarios that explain these two facts equally well.

Michał
11-19-2017, 10:11 PM
I didn;t know, that Hebrews emerged during Roman reign
of illyrian pharaos when Constantine the Great was born...
I stupidly thought it was 2500 years earlier... in the BA... :(
I'm wondering who was the one who suggested that the Hebrews emerged in the Roman times, but I definitely agree with you that it was very stupid on your side to assume that they emerged 2500 years before that, or that they died out soon thereafter, so there were no Hebrews anymore in the more recent times.

nunomeco
01-08-2018, 10:44 AM
Hello

My name is Nuno, from Portugal. Born and raised, like my parents, greatparents, great greatparents. I tested my YDNA, only 12markers. My haplogroup is R-M198, with an exact match on Z93. Among the matches (and only remote possibilities) 11/12, there are 3 Levites. But, the awkward thing is my STR sequence:

DYS393 DYS390 DYS19 ** DYS391 DYS385 DYS426 DYS388 DYS439 DYS389I DYS392 DYS389II ***
Value 13 24 17 10 11-16 12 12 10 13 11 30

I´m not a DNA expert. But this is what it seems to me: Aparently looks like a regular R-M198 (z93) beggining, but the DYS385 is 2 steps from the mode. This 11-16 is typical of Z283. But the first 3 STR values are not usual on Z283. So, there is a mutation. The exact match of the Z93 has this sequence. Could it be something new? I´m going to test the YSEQ Y2619 soon. Thanks.

lgmayka
01-08-2018, 02:26 PM
DYS393 DYS390 DYS19 ** DYS391 DYS385 DYS426 DYS388 DYS439 DYS389I DYS392 DYS389II ***
Value 13 24 17 10 11-16 12 12 10 13 11 30

You have several exact 12-marker matches, all of them with Spanish surnames. One of them has tested Z93+. The R1a Project labels this cluster

9. M420>M459>M198>M417>Z645>Z93-P Iberian cluster (Z94 or Big Y needed)

The match who has tested Z93+ also has 67 markers. At 67 markers, his numerically nearest neighbor within the R1a Project is a Genetic Distance (GD) of 14 away. That's a lot!

You could order the R1a-Z93 SNP Pack. The R1a-Backbone SNP Pack covers all possibilities, but does not dive nearly so deeply into the Z93 branch. Or since you mentioned Yseq: You could order Yseq'a R1a Superclade Panel (https://www.yseq.net/product_info.php?cPath=27&products_id=56701), to cover all bases and dive as deeply as possible.

nunomeco
01-08-2018, 02:47 PM
Thank you for the explanation.

I already passed the two swabs of the Y2619. It will give something up or above, or nothing. LOL. Let´s see. But beeing the Iberian cluster, it has nothing to do with the levite mode, right?

nunomeco
01-10-2018, 10:01 AM
I changed the test to Z94.

nunomeco
01-17-2018, 02:21 AM
I got my results to Z94. I´m ancestral to Z94.

So, back to basics. Although my closest match is Z93, i would have to test it to get a definite answer. I also know that by my STR´s i don´t belong to a jewish Z93 branch. Values are 2 or 3 steps off.

This is rare and new.

Michał
01-17-2018, 10:47 AM
I got my results to Z94. I´m ancestral to Z94.

Is this is a result you got from YSEQ?

nunomeco
01-17-2018, 11:20 AM
Yes. Got it yesterday. There is a list with free tested snps all negative (-) ancestral and then the Z94 i bought: Z94: T-.

nunomeco
01-18-2018, 03:38 PM
I even doubt of being Z93. So i ordered yseq a test on that snp. At this point all i am sure is that i'm R-M198 😅

nunomeco
01-23-2018, 05:24 AM
Although my STR don´t fit exactly in any R1a branch at 12 markers (except the Z93 in FTdna), i found a few close and other quite close:

R1a-CTS3402+, Y33+, CTS8816+, Y3301+, S18681+, Y12463+
R1a-CTS3402+, YP237+, YP235+, YP234+, YP238+ Ungrouped
R1a-CTS3402+, YP237+, YP951+ (Malopolska Silesia)
R1a-Y2395+, YP694+
R1a-Z280+, S24902+, YP561 or YP469? (probably YP561)
R1a-Z280+, S24902+, YP561+, YP564+, YP658- (very close)
R1a-Z283+, Z282+, Z280+ Ungrouped (please, order R1a - Z280 SNP Pack)
R1a-Z92+ Ungrouped (please, order R1a - Z280 SNP Pack)
R1a-Z92+, Y4459+, YP617+ Ungrouped
R1a-Z92+, Y4459+, YP617+, YP1700+
R1a-Z92+, Y4459+, YP617+, YP573+ Ungrouped (also very similar)
R1a-Z92+, Y4459+, YP617+, YP573+, YP569+ "Veneds" (please, order Big Y or R1a - Z280 SNP Pack)
R1a-Z92+, Y4459+, YP617+, YP573+, YP569+, YP575+, YP682+, A8998+ (Veneds-FIN) (most close)

I´m almost sure that it´s Z92, or some variation.

nunomeco
01-23-2018, 05:59 PM
Well

Here i am again.

I probably have misread my YSEQ Z94 results. Probably. Why?

In the description of the test there are 2 values:

T - Ancestral
C- Derived

Then are (+) for positive and (-) for negative

The result was Z94 T -

By the logical interpretation it means i am negative for ancestral Z94?

Some help, please. Thanks. It´s hard to comprehend the nomenclature by YSEQ.

Michał
01-23-2018, 06:16 PM
Well

Here i am again.

I probably have misread my YSEQ Z94 results. Probably. Why?

In the description of the test there are 2 values:

T - Ancestral
C- Derived

Then are (+) for positive and (-) for negative

The result was Z94 T -

By the logical interpretation it means i am negative for ancestral Z94?

Some help, please. Thanks. It´s hard to comprehend the nomenclature by YSEQ.
"Z94 T -" means you are negative for Z94.

nunomeco
01-23-2018, 07:38 PM
Thank you.

nunomeco
01-28-2018, 03:27 AM
Last test on Yseq i did told me i am Z93 positive.

Doubt solved.