PDA

View Full Version : King Richard III - G-P287



DejaVu
03-12-14, 20:56
Richard III the last king of the House of York and the last of the Plantagnet Dynasty - YDNA G-P287
http://www.nature.com/ncomms/2014/141202/ncomms6631/full/ncomms6631.html

In 2012, a skeleton was excavated at the presumed site of the Grey Friars friary in Leicester, the last-known resting place of King Richard III. Archaeological, osteological and radiocarbon dating data were consistent with these being his remains. Here we report DNA analyses of both the skeletal remains and living relatives of Richard III. We find a perfect mitochondrial DNA match between the sequence obtained from the remains and one living relative, and a single-base substitution when compared with a second relative. Y-chromosome haplotypes from male-line relatives and the remains do not match, which could be attributed to a false-paternity event occurring in any of the intervening generations. DNA-predicted hair and eye colour are consistent with Richard’s appearance in an early portrait. We calculate likelihood ratios for the non-genetic and genetic data separately, and combined, and conclude that the evidence for the remains being those of Richard III is overwhelming.

Male-line relatives are generally easier to trace than female ones historically, and ennobled and titled lineages are recorded in a number of published sources. We were able to identify, locate and contact five such relatives, descended from the 5th Duke of Beaufort (1744–1803), who agreed to take part in the study, providing an, albeit distant (between 24 and 26 generations), set of patrilinear relatives. It is worth noting that while easier to trace genealogically, the male line is far more susceptible to false-paternity than the female line is to false-maternity events.
Four of the modern relatives were found to belong to Y-haplogroup R1b-U152 (x L2, Z36, Z56, M160, M126 and Z192)with STR haplotypes being consistent with them comprising a single patrilinear group. One individual (Somerset 3) was found to belong to haplogroup I-M170 (x M253, M223) and therefore could not be a patrilinear relative of the other four within the time span considered, indicating that a false-paternity event had occurred within the last four generations.
Sequencing of Y-chromosome single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) on Skeleton 1 was carried out by on-array DNA hybridization capture of 24 amplified Illumina sequencing libraries, using probes generated to cover SNPs relevant to the major European Y lineages, followed by sequencing on a single 100 SE Illumina Hiseq 2000 sequencing lane. This approach provided insufficient coverage for some SNPs and further typing was performed using targeted PCRs with the amplification products sequenced on an Ion Torrent PGM. Finally, we also generated a STR haplotype using the Promega PowerPlex Y23 system.
In contrast to the Y-haplotypes of the putative modern relatives, Skeleton 1 belongs to haplogroup G-P287, with a corresponding Y-STR haplotype. Thus, the putative modern patrilinear relatives of Richard III are not genetically related to Skeleton 1 through the male line over the time period considered. However, this is not surprising, given an estimated average false-paternity rate of ~1–2%. The putative modern relatives and Richard III are related through a male relative (Edward III) four generations up from Richard III and a false-paternity event could have happened in any of the 19 generations separating Richard III and the 5th Duke of Beaufort, on either branch of the genealogy descending from Edward III. Indeed, even with a conservative false-paternity rate the chance of a false-paternity occuring in this number of generations is 16%.

DejaVu
03-12-14, 21:01
Missed there was a tread about this.
Link: http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/27813-Bones-of-Richard-III-found

Maciamo
04-12-14, 08:57
Great. Now we know that Richard III was G2(a), but also that there is probably another royal English lineage that is R1b-U152 (the three modern relatives). This only problem with this situation is that we can't extrapolate what haplogroup were any other king in Richard III's lineage since we don't know when the non-paternity event took place.

If I had to guess, I wouldn't be surprised if Richard III himself was not the son of Richard of York. His presumed father spent a lot of time in the Tower of London between 1450 and 1452. Richard III was born on 2 October 1452, and therefore must have been conceived around 2 January 1452. I don't have the exact details of his father's whereabouts, but if he was often incarcerated during that period, his wife could easily have had an affair. That would explain why Richard III could behave in such a cruel way toward his (half-)nephews, as they would be more genetically distant.

Another possibility is that Edmund of Langley, the founder of the House of York, was not genetically the son of Edward III. That would explain why he felt the need to create a rival royal lineage, not being a descendant of the Plantagenets. This kind of schism within a royal family lasting for several generations is unique in English history and not very common anywhere in European history.

MMaximus
04-12-14, 19:54
Great. Now we know that Richard III was G2(a), but also that there is probably another royal English lineage that is R1b-U152 (the three modern relatives). This only problem with this situation is that we can't extrapolate what haplogroup were any other king in Richard III's lineage since we don't know when the non-paternity event took place.

If I had to guess, I wouldn't be surprised if Richard III himself was not the son of Richard of York. His presumed father spent a lot of time in the Tower of London between 1450 and 1452. Richard III was born on 2 October 1452, and therefore must have been conceived around 2 January 1452. I don't have the exact details of his father's whereabouts, but if he was often incarcerated during that period, his wife could easily have had an affair. That would explain why Richard III could behave in such a cruel way toward his (half-)nephews, as they would be more genetically distant.

Another possibility is that Edmund of Langley, the founder of the House of York, was not genetically the son of Edward III. That would explain why he felt the need to create a rival royal lineage, not being a descendant of the Plantagenets. This kind of schism within a royal family lasting for several generations is unique in English history and not very common anywhere in European history.

Isn't this branch of the Royal family essentially a Frankish one and an offshoot of the French royalty? So the G2a result would somewhat make sense considering the two test conducted on french kings.

Comrade Petrov
02-06-18, 11:46
I have the same: G-P287