Klyosov's Analysis of STRs of R1a-Y2619 Ashkenazi Levites

Professor Anatole Klyosov has prepared the following haplotype trees and provided the following analysis concerning the sets of 111-marker and 67-marker STRs for R1a-Y2619 Ashkenazi Levites collected at this site as of August 30, 2014. An index to the numbers appearing in the haplotype trees appears below Professor Klyosov’s analysis. (The men designated as nos. 1-88 have tested to 111 markers, while the men designated as nos. 89-214 have tested to 67 marker; men nos. 1-33 have DYS650<20, while men nos. 34-88 have DYS650=20.)

Professor Klyosov reports:

As I have expected, the haplotype tree happened to be pretty informative. Here is a 111-marker haplotype tree for the 89 individuals:

Article © 2014 by Anatole A. Klyosov.

Thanks to Meir G. Gover for his assistance in facilitating this article.

Click here to read the e-mails exchanged between Professor Klyosov and Jeff Wexler concerning, among other things, the use of a small number of STRs to predict SNPs among R1a-Y2619 Ashkenazi Levites.

As one can see, the tree is clearly split into two parts, one on the left and one on the right. The left part consists of 40 haplotypes, and it is younger, which is seen from its tighter and shorter “structure.” The right part contains 49 haplotypes; it is “looser” (“fluffier”), hence, an older one.

It turned out that the “younger” (left) part includes almost all haplotypes identified as SNP YP264/265 (Nos. 43, 44, 46, 55, 57, 60, 62, 67, 68, 69, 74, 78, and 84). Two haplotypes, Nos. 60 and 68, sitting on the base of the wheel, also belong to the left-hand part; they are in fact the base haplotypes, identical to each other and to the base haplotype of the left part. There are only two haplotypes of YP264/265 that sit on the right; they are Nos. 72 (kit 249519) and 77 (kit 296941), and the reason is simple: they randomly mutated in DYS459b from “11,” typical for YP264/265 (on the left side) to “10,” typical for the older, right side branch.

Let’s see, more specifically, what is “young” and “old” with respect to the two branches. All 40 haplotypes of the left branch contain 188 mutations from its base haplotype

13 25 16 10 11 14 12 12 10 13 11 30—14 9 11 11 11 24 14 20 30 12 12 15 15—11 11 19 23 14 16 19 20 35 38 14 11—11 8 17 17 8 12 10 8 11 10 12 22 22 15 10 12 12 14 8 14 23 21 12 12 11 13 10 11 12 13 – 32 15 9 17 12 27 27 19 12 12 12 12 10 9 12 11 10 11 11 30 12 12 25 13 9 10 20 15 20 11 23 15 12 15 25 12 23 19 10 15 17 9 11 11

which gives 188/40/0.198 = 24 conditional generations (of 25 years each), or 600 ± 75 years to their common ancestor. If we include to that set two “outliers” (Nos. 72 and 77), which we know belong to YP264/265, this adds 7 more mutations from the above base haplotype, and gives 195/42/0.198 = 23 conditional generations, that is, 575 ± 70 years to the common ancestor, which is within the margin of error.

The right-hand side, older branch, has the base haplotype as follows:

13 25 16 10 11 14 12 12 10 13 11 30—14 9 10 11 11 24 14 20 30 12 12 15 15—11 11 19 23 14 16 19 20 35 38 14 11—11 8 17 17 8 11 10 8 11 10 12 22 22 15 10 12 12 14 8 14 23 21 12 12 11 13 10 11 12 13 – 32 15 9 17 12 27 27 19 12 12 12 12 10 9 12 11 10 11 11 30 12 12 25 13 9 10 20 15 19 11 23 15 12 15 25 12 23 19 10 15 17 9 11 11

It has three different alleles in DYS459b, DYS537, and DYS650, compared with the “younger” branch. Those different alleles cannot be used as “diagnostic” ones, since they are not absolutely stable, and vary in some haplotypes of the branch. However, the common ancestor of the branch has them in his haplotype. That common ancestor lived 333/49/0.198 = 34 à 35 conditional generations, that is, 875 ± 100 years ago.

This figure would be applicable to the branch if haplotypes Nos. 72 and 77 indeed belonged to the branch (for example, if their typing as YP264/265 was incorrect). If we assume (not without a reason) that these two haplotypes should be subtracted from the older branch, we should subtract 8 mutations from the count, and obtain 325/47/0.198 = 35 à 36 conditional generations, that is 900 ± 100 years before present.

Three mutations between the two base haplotypes is equivalent to 3/0.198 = 15 generations, that is approximately 375 years between their common ancestors, and THEIR common ancestor lived (375+900+575)/2 = 925 years ago. This is the “age” of the older branch itself, within the margin of error.

Judging from the SNPs of the older branch, it belongs to Y2630 (kit 144477, No. 53) and Y2619 (such as kit 196865, No. 18, and kit 195398, No. 17), all in the “older” branch on the right-hand side of the tree. It seems that the upper sub-branch on the right belongs to Y2630, and the separate, larger sub-branch (from Nos. 16 through 17) belong to the upstream Y2619; however, we need more Y2630 and Y2619 typing to verify this hypothesis.

The 67-marker haplotype tree is less resolved compared with the 111-marker tree; however, it contains more haplotypes (214 haplotypes):

(A linear version of this haplotype tree is posted as a file at the bottom of this page; click on it to expand it.)

If one considers the whole Ashkenazi Levite dataset, without trying to resolve it to branches, then the Kilin-Klyosov Calculator gives the following TMRCA values:

All 379 haplotypes (111-, 67- and 37-marker): 893 ± 103 years, which should be rounded to 890 ± 100 years to the common ancestor.

214 haplotypes (67- and 37-marker): 917 ± 117 years, which should be rounded to 920 ± 120 years to the common ancestor.

All these figures are within the margin of error, along with the 900 ± 100 years calculated for the older branch of Ashkenazi Levites.

It seems that around 900 years ago an R1a Levite became the ancestor of a future, rather vast population of R1a Jewish people. He had SNP Y2619 and/or Y2630. Around 575 years ago (in about the 15th century), one of his descendants, who already had three mutations in his 111-marker haplotype (in DYS459b, DYS537, and DYS650), and had a new SNP YP264/265, became an ancestor of almost an equally large population of Ashkenazi, many (or most) of whom continued to be Levites.

It seems that the above is a good example of how DNA genealogy operates with data.

* * *

Index to Men Identified in Professor Klyosov's Haplotype Trees

A linear version of Professor Klyosov's 67-marker haplotype tree is attached as a file at the bottom of this page; click on it to expand it.