Most heritable surnames, like Y chromosomes, are passed from father to son. in reproductive success is important in structuring haplotype diversity. Modern patterns therefore provide little reliable information about the original founders of surnames some 700 years ago. A comparative analysis of published data on Y diversity within Irish surnames demonstrates a relative lack of surname frequency dependence of coancestry, a difference probably mediated through distinct Irish and British demographic histories including even more marked genetic drift in Ireland. (Karafet et al. 2008) were largely typed in two multiplexes using the SNaPshot minisequencing procedure (Applied Biosystems, Foster City, CA) and an ABI3100 Genetic Analyzer (Applied Biosystems). The first multiplex contained the markers M9, M89, M145, M170, M173, P25, 12f2, and SRY10831, and the second, 96206-92-7 supplier carried out on a subset of chromosomes, contained M9 for confirmation, M172, M69, and M201. Additional SNaPshot assays were used for markers defining haplogroups E1a (M33) and Q1a (MEH2). In all cases, primer sequences were as 96206-92-7 supplier described (Hurles et al. 2005; Bosch et al. 2006). Markers defining haplogroups A1a (previously named A1) and T (previously named K2) were typed by DNA sequencing (King, Parkin, et al. 2007) and polymerase chain reaction-restriction fragment length polymorphism (PCR-RFLP) analysis (King, Bowden, et al. 2007), respectively. Note that all chromosomes classified here as belonging to hgR1*(xR1a,R1b1) have been previously shown (Adams et al. 2006) Rabbit polyclonal to ANKRD49 to be derived for the marker M269 (hgR1b1b2), and therefore to carry a reversion of the marker P25 through probable gene conversion. Haplogroup nomenclature is as described (Karafet et al. 2008), with the following shorthand names used in text and figures: J*(xJ2) is 96206-92-7 supplier referred 96206-92-7 supplier to as J*, Q*(xQ1a) as Q*, and R1*(xR1a,R1b1) as R1*. Seventeen Y-STRs (DYS19, DYS388, DYS389I, DYS389II, DYS390, DYS391, DYS392, DYS393, DYS434, DYS435, DYS436, DYS437, DYS438, DYS439, DYS460, DYS461, and DYS462) were typed in three multiplexes (Bosch et al. 2002). FIG. 1. Haplogroup frequencies and gene diversities in 40 surnames and controls. (< 0.05), and some surnames (Herrick, Hey, and Ketley) being significantly different from all other samples. Those surnames that do not differ from the controls include the four with the largest numbers of bearersSmith, King, Bray, and Stead, suggesting that common surnames may contain greater haplogroup diversity than rarer ones. This is confirmed by a significant correlation between surname frequency rank and gene diversity for haplogroups (Spearman's = 0.525; = 6.03 10?4). Some haplogroups that are rare (<10%) or absent in the controls exist at high frequencies within particular surnames: Examples are hgA1a in < 0.05) from controls. This 96206-92-7 supplier magnification of differences between surnames suggests that Y-STR haplotyping is acting to reveal distinct sublineages within haplogroups. Again, there is a significant relationship between surname frequency rank and gene diversity (Spearman's = 0.601; = 5.87 10?5). Networks (fig. 3; supplementary fig. 3, Supplementary Material online) provide a means of identifying such sublineages and displaying the relationships between haplotypes within surnames. The network of haplotypes among the 110 controls (fig. 3contain examples of descent clusters, many of which represent the majority of chromosomes within a surname: in the example of Attenborough, all of the hgE1b1b1 haplotypes, representing 87% of the sample, belong to a single descent cluster. In contrast, some surnames contain few or no descent clusters. How does the frequency of a surname influence the degree of clustering within networks? For the set of 40 surnames, the mean proportion of haplotypes within clusters is 62%, and this proportion is significantly correlated with surname frequency rank (Spearman's = 0.48; = 0.0187). The proportion of haplotypes lying within the largest descent cluster is even more strongly correlated (Spearman's = 0.62; = 1.20 10?6; fig. 4= 14; based on village or other local place names) and those that seem better candidates for multiple foundation (= 14; based on occupations, patronyms, nicknames, or topographical features). Considering the proportion.