DNA-R1B1C7-L Archives

Archiver > DNA-R1B1C7 > 2011-03 > 1301285617


From: J David Grierson <>
Subject: Re: [R-M222] McHarg
Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2011 15:14:43 +1100
References: <18cf6.4cc5ae5f.3ac1209d@aol.com>
In-Reply-To: <18cf6.4cc5ae5f.3ac1209d@aol.com>


John,
Yesterday you said:
> If you ask Sandy though he will tell you (as he told me) that according to
> his simulation software these shared markers should have mutated away from
> anyone descending from a common ancestor ca. 1200 AD. So there might be
> some argument on how closely their DNA must match to establish a shared
> descent.

As I have pointed out before, there has been remarkably little mutation
away from (or even back toward M222) of the five defining Grierson/Greer
markers, which by my calculation are at least 650 years old. I would be
interested in Sandy's views on this aspect, see:

http://www.shade.id.au/Grierson/GriersonDNA.htm

go to Grier Chart 1c (Excel).

You (today) said:

>I spent most of
> the time on McLaughlins and Dohertys, said to descend from different sons
> of Nial c. 450 AD. or earlier. I can find nothing that tells me they are
> related except for the common M222 haplogroup. I see nothing that really
> distinguishes them reliably from the rest of M222. Both are modal at one
> marker (DYS 458 = 18) which is somewhat unusual in M222 but does appear in
> other Irish and Scottish surnames with no known connection.

458 is one of the above five markers. All of the related Grierson/Greers
are 458=18, probably at least since c1350. The same is true of many of
the "Amuliganes" (probably from much earlier), and this relationship
forms part of my "M222 Nith" cluster. I am yet to be convinced that this
has any relevance to Niall.
Regards
David Grierson in Melbourne

This thread: