PDA

View Full Version : Haplogroup G1 founder effect among Palestinian Christians?



K33
03-07-2016, 03:32 AM
So my maternal side of the family is Palestinian Christian from Bethlehem, father's side is German/Irish American. I was just scanning through DNA relatives on 23andme, and a significantly large proportion of males from my maternal side (some estimated as 2nd cousins, most as 3rd/4th cousins) are haplogroup G1.

Here is an anecdotal breakdown of my first 18 maternal male DNA relatives as they appear in order of % DNA shared (filtering out the paternal male relations [admittedly unscientifically] by skipping relatives w/Euro surnames or "anonymous" males with R-M269 or other Eurocentric derived ydna). These are the results:

G1*: 9
J1e: 5
J2b2: 1 (this might be an Italian/Greek interloper - relative lives in S. America)
G2a: 1
E1b1c1: 1
E1b1c1a1: 1

Given the relatively anemic distribution of G1 outside of Persia and apparently a few isolated Iranic-derived groups in Central Asia, this is a fairly surprising result. A website called Holy Land DNA (http://www.holylanddna.com/p/paternal-haplogroups.html) apparently aggregates/tracks submitted genetic data from Pali Christians, and it seems like this y-dna is extremely stratified, even from village to village.


*Right now the paternal lines from Bethlehem, mostly appear to be G1*

Right now every direct line male tested from Beit Sahour is showing J1e.
Beit Sahour is <10 minutes drive from Bethlehem... It seems G1* dominates in particular among Bethlehem Christians, but is much less common even in other West Bank Christian towns.

Now, I would expect these communities to be fairly insular, but that site has at least 5 different surnames purportedly originating in Bethlehem, and [according to him], every single one is G1. Of the 9 G1* results I tabulated above, there were 4 distinct surnames among them -- only one of these overlaps with the Holy Land surname list. My other 5 G1* relatives had anonymous surnames.

Any thoughts as to where this apparent founder effect came from? Was G1 once much more common across the middle east, and was pushed to tertiary status when J1, J2, G2, and E1b1-bearing groups dominated the Neolithic?

K33
03-08-2016, 03:14 AM
Bump... no takers on this?

RCO
03-08-2016, 07:35 PM
What type of Palestinian G1's (full sequence of SNPs) and their closest G1 matches would give more elements to understand the origins in that region and the possible chronologies.

Viktor Reznov
03-08-2016, 07:42 PM
Any thoughts as to where this apparent founder effect came from? Was G1 once much more common across the middle east, and was pushed to tertiary status when J1, J2, G2, and E1b1-bearing groups dominated the Neolithic?

Probably, considering that most of the Neolithic farmers sampled had G Y-DNA and they supposedly came from the fertile crescent. Natufian samples are currently being studied and will shed light on this subject.

K33
03-08-2016, 08:05 PM
What type of Palestinian G1's (full sequence of SNPs) and their closest G1 matches would give more elements to understand the origins in that region and the possible chronologies.Every single one is either listed as G1 or G1* by 23andme. G1* = the most "upstream" version of the G1 tree and so unless I'm interpreting this incorrectly, that means G1* is also the most archaic.

As for the relatives marked as simply "G1" (without the asterisk) OTOH, I'm guessing 23andme just lacks deeper subclade resolution for those-- they could be G1a, G1a1, G1b, etc.

I would say that the aforementioned DNA relatives are almost evenly split between G1* and G1 as displayed by 23andme.

Agamemnon
06-20-2016, 03:52 PM
The J1 sample from Beit Sahour is FGC4745, a basal branch of YSC234, the Caprio cluster is under the same branch, prior to this branch's discovery it was assumed that the Palestinian Christians fit in the same cluster as the Jewish Kohanim (who ended up belonging to a different and equally basal branch of YSC234, ZS241).