Skip to main content
Biology Direct logoLink to Biology Direct
. 2010 Oct 6;5:57. doi: 10.1186/1745-6150-5-57

The origin of Eastern European Jews revealed by autosomal, sex chromosomal and mtDNA polymorphisms

Avshalom Zoossmann-Diskin 1,2,3,
PMCID: PMC2964539  PMID: 20925954

Abstract

Background

This study aims to establish the likely origin of EEJ (Eastern European Jews) by genetic distance analysis of autosomal markers and haplogroups on the X and Y chromosomes and mtDNA.

Results

According to the autosomal polymorphisms the investigated Jewish populations do not share a common origin, and EEJ are closer to Italians in particular and to Europeans in general than to the other Jewish populations. The similarity of EEJ to Italians and Europeans is also supported by the X chromosomal haplogroups. In contrast according to the Y-chromosomal haplogroups EEJ are closest to the non-Jewish populations of the Eastern Mediterranean. MtDNA shows a mixed pattern, but overall EEJ are more distant from most populations and hold a marginal rather than a central position. The autosomal genetic distance matrix has a very high correlation (0.789) with geography, whereas the X-chromosomal, Y-chromosomal and mtDNA matrices have a lower correlation (0.540, 0.395 and 0.641 respectively).

Conclusions

The close genetic resemblance to Italians accords with the historical presumption that Ashkenazi Jews started their migrations across Europe in Italy and with historical evidence that conversion to Judaism was common in ancient Rome. The reasons for the discrepancy between the biparental markers and the uniparental markers are discussed.

Reviewers

This article was reviewed by Damian Labuda (nominated by Jerzy Jurka), Kateryna Makova and Qasim Ayub (nominated by Dan Graur).

Background

The genetic affinities of the Jewish populations have been studied since the early days of genetics, yet the origin of these populations is still obscure. Some of the studies, trying to establish the origins of the Jewish populations with autosomal markers, claimed that the Jewish populations have a common origin, but others concluded that the Jews are a very diverse group. This corpus of studies has already been critically reviewed [1].

The origin of Eastern European Jews, (EEJ) by far the largest and most important Ashkenazi population, and their affinities to other Jewish and European populations are still not resolved. Studies that compared them by genetic distance analysis of autosomal markers to European Mediterranean populations revealed that they are closer to Europeans than to other Jewish populations [1-3].

EEJ are the largest and most investigated Jewish community, yet their history as Franco-German Jewry is known to us only since their appearance in the 9th century, and their subsequent migration a few hundred years later to Eastern Europe [4,5]. Where did these Jews come from? It seems that they came to Germany and France from Italy [5-8]. It is also possible that some Jews migrated northward from the Italian colonies on the northern shore of the Black Sea [9]. All these Jews are likely the descendents of proselytes. Conversion to Judaism was common in Rome in the first centuries BC and AD. Judaism gained many followers among all ranks of Roman Society [10-13].

The aim of this study is to establish the likely origin of this major Jewish population by using a larger dataset of autosomal markers, and compare the results to analyses based on the available data for the X and Y chromosomes and for mtDNA.

Methods

Six Jewish populations: EEJ, Moroccan Jews, Iraqi Jews. Iranian Jews, Yemenite Jews and Ethiopian Jews, which have been studied for all the autosomal markers used in this study, are included in the analysis. EEJ are defined on the basis of history as those Jews originating from the areas of the Polish-Lithuanian Kingdom and their descendants in bordering regions, encompassing the territories of Russia, Poland, the Baltic States, Belarus, Moldavia, Moldova (the north-eastern part of Romania) and the Ukraine. The Data on the non-autosomal markers were also available for other Jewish populations: Bulgarian Jews (X, mtDNA), Turkish Jews (X, mtDNA), Tunisian Jews (mtDNA), Libyan Jews (Y, mtDNA) and Djerban Jews (Y).

The seventeen autosomal markers are: AK, ADA, PGM1, PGD, ACP, ESD, GPT, HP, GC, J311 MspI & MetH TaqI (both on chromosome 7 near the CF locus), FV G1691A, FII G20210A, MTHFR C677T, CBS 844ins68, ACE ID and PAH XmnI. All the markers are unique-event-polymorphisms, and apart from two insertions (CBS 844ins68, ACE ID) are all SNPs. The first nine markers are polymorphisms of red cell enzymes and serum proteins, and were typed mostly by protein electrophoresis, but the variation at the protein level is directly related in a 1:1 manner to the SNP variation at the DNA level. Indeed, some of the results for the Jewish populations were obtained by PCR methods [1,14]. The polymorphism of the remaining eight markers can only be detected at the DNA level. J311 MspI and MetH TaqI were typed in all the populations including the Israeli populations (unpublished results) by Southern blotting and hybridization [15,16]. The other 6 markers were typed in the Israeli populations by PCR methods. The data on FV G1691A, FII G20210A, MTHFR C677T and CBS 844ins68 have already been published [3,17]. The data on ACE ID and PAH XmnI are still unpublished. These polymorphisms were typed according to the methods of Rigat et al. [18] and Goltsov et al. [19] respectively. Allele frequencies for all the populations are given in Additional file 1: tables S1-4. Table S2 (Additional file 1) presents four markers on both sides of the CF locus. Because of the linkage between them, I chose to use only the two most distal markers, which are separated by a few centimorgans. Haplogroup frequencies of the non-recombining Y chromosome (NRY), the X chromosome (dystrophin locus, dys44, on Xp21.3) and mtDNA are given in Additional file 1: tables S5, S6 and S7 respectively.

Gower (cited in [20]) recommends, that for microevolutionary studies, when sample sizes are quite variable and gene frequencies do not differ greatly, Sanghvi's G2 [21] would be the most appropriate, and this is the measure I used. Distances were also calculated with Nei's [22] formula and the results were very similar (r = 0.990, genetic distance matrix not shown). The neighbor joining tree was computed by PHYLIP 3.66. Since it does not calculate Sanghvi's G2, I used Reynolds et al. distance [23], which is also based on the assumption that gene frequencies change by genetic drift alone, solely for the calculation of the tree (genetic distance matrix not shown). The significance of nodes in the tree and the standard errors of the genetic distances were computed by bootstrapping 10,000 times. Multidimensional scaling plots and Mantel tests for correlation between genetic distance matrices and between them and matrices of geographic distances were computed by NTSYS 1.70. Geographic distances were calculated as great circle distances between the capitals of the countries of origin of the populations (Warsaw was chosen for EEJ). Mantel test significance was assessed by 10,000 permutations.

Results

The autosomal genetic distances (table 1) do not show any particular resemblance between the Jewish populations. EEJ are closer to Italians in particular and to Europeans in general than to the other Jewish populations. All of the distances, apart from one, differ from zero by more than twice their standard error. A difference between two distances can be considered meaningful, if it is more than twice their largest standard error. The differences between the distance of EEJ from Italians and their distances from the other Jewish populations are meaningful according to this criterion, and the same is also true for all the Non-Jewish populations except for Greeks and Russians. In fact the distance between EEJ and Italians is the smallest distance in the matrix. A multidimensional scaling plot of the genetic distance matrix (figure 1) captures the proximity of EEJ to Italians and other European populations. The same is also true for the neighbor joining tree (figure 2). It should be noted that multidimensional scaling plots are a way to present graphically the intricate relationships of genetic distance matrices. As such they are necessarily less accurate than the matrices on which they are based. In order to understand the genetic affinities of a particular population, one must examine its distances in the matrix itself, not in the plot. The same also applies to the neighbor joining tree. The bootstrap values indicate the robustness of the clustering, but not the significance of individual genetic distances.

Table 1.

Autosomal genetic distance matrix (×1000) (standard errors above the diagonal)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
1) EEJ 103 94 52 180 348 76 57 38 11 35 73 42 94 58

2) Iraqi Jews 277 68 131 87 330 58 147 117 87 64 125 138 141 99

3) Iranian Jews 275 218 131 118 391 125 112 97 105 119 149 142 146 139

4) Moroccan Jews 243 330 325 148 263 105 115 89 36 66 71 55 80 78

5) Yemenite Jews 498 366 335 447 263 87 104 92 162 133 123 114 155 168

6) Ethiopian Jews 1240 1127 1004 809 696 233 322 333 349 396 373 341 381 463

7) Palestinians 277 223 425 298 323 972 43 44 60 65 131 63 87 122

8) Turks 170 243 305 314 400 1244 182 15 54 56 113 117 64 68

9) Greeks 105 270 316 311 356 1246 202 56 36 38 83 76 42 52

10) Italians 44 243 255 167 452 1083 231 157 101 25 48 34 81 40

11) Germans 131 268 294 237 511 1067 299 179 148 71 25 19 34 12

12) British 238 395 373 239 592 977 434 332 267 151 53 41 46 13

13) French 144 339 398 216 545 974 288 265 192 91 48 75 59 33

14) Russians 230 420 430 289 513 1144 375 175 139 193 102 112 134 25

15) Poles 195 405 365 264 600 1204 465 255 197 139 50 46 102 66

Figure 1.

Figure 1

A multidimensional scaling plot of the autosomal genetic distance matrix excluding Ethiopian Jews. Stress = 0.100. Populations names are: EEJ - Eastern European Jews, IqJ - Iraqi Jews, InJ - Iranian Jews, MJ - Moroccan Jews, YJ - Yemenite Jews, Pa - Palestinians, Tur - Turks, Gr - Greeks, It - Italians, Ge - Germans, Br - British, Fr - French, Ru - Russians, Po - Poles. Squares represent Jews and circles non-Jews. Colour indicates geographic region: red - Europe, green - Eastern Mediterranean, blue - Iran-Iraq, purpule - Arabian peninsula, yellow - North-Africa.

Figure 2.

Figure 2

A neighbor joining tree based on the autosomal polymorphisms. A number next to a node indicates the majority bootstrap support for that node out of 10,000 repetitions.

X-chromosomal haplogroups demonstrate the same relatedness of EEJ to Italians and other Europeans (table 2, figure 3). In contrast, according to the Y-chromosomal haplogroups EEJ are closest to the non-Jewish populations of the Eastern Mediterranean (table 3, figure 4). MtDNA shows a mixed pattern where EEJ are about equally close to Moroccan Jews, Palestinians, Italians and Bulgarian Jews, but overall are more distant from most populations and hold a marginal position in the MDS plot, rather than a central one like in the other plots (table 4, figure 5).

Table 2.

X chromosomal genetic distance matrix (×1000)

1) EE Jews 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
2) Iraqi Jews 402

3) Iranian Jews 497 351

4) Moroccan Jews 302 211 480

5) Yemenite Jews 555 406 512 439

6) Ethiopian Jews 533 617 683 676 709

7) Bulgarian Jews 409 276 440 299 611 672

8) Turkish Jews 288 519 474 452 403 599 625

9) Palestinians 573 506 512 464 666 754 350 712

10) Italians 223 374 488 184 493 741 337 395 478

11) Germans 263 483 497 358 715 701 318 518 502 282

12) Poles 233 482 531 336 570 741 406 476 484 235 266

13) Basques 311 597 548 513 827 702 378 479 503 369 349 359

14) Spaniards 252 385 457 313 609 554 297 406 487 334 315 365 337

15) French 313 332 454 284 649 706 206 401 483 285 308 347 249 244

16) Bretons 186 410 483 386 615 611 288 376 492 288 238 246 234 219 162

17) Ethiopians Oromo 771 918 892 906 977 1243 847 745 1002 753 816 797 840 840 717 727

18) Ethiopians Amhara 490 618 619 504 471 798 695 433 702 449 614 490 680 579 555 524 791

Figure 3.

Figure 3

A multidimensional scaling plot of the X-chromosomal genetic distance matrix. Stress = 0.125. Populations names are: EEJ - Eastern European Jews, IqJ - Iraqi Jews, InJ - Iranian Jews, MJ - Moroccan Jews, YJ - Yemenite Jews, EJ - Ethiopian Jews, BJ - Bulgarian Jews, TrJ - Turkish Jews, Pa - Palestinians, It - Italians, Ge - Germans, Po - Poles, Fr - French, Bre - Bretons, Sp - Spaniards, Ba - Basques, EO - Ethiopians Oromo, EA - Ethiopians Amhara. Squares represent Jews and circles non-Jews. Colour indicates geographic region: red - Europe, green - Eastern Mediterranean, blue - Iran-Iraq, purpule - Arabian peninsula, yellow - North-Africa, brown - Ethiopia.

Table 3.

Y chromosomal genetic distance matrix (×1000)*

1) EEJ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38
2) IqJ 341

3) InJ 574 236

4) MJ 245 335 764

5) LJ 242 626 863 465

6) DJ 582 813 1025 667 402

7) YJ 185 244 472 304 418 545

8) EJ 1296 1373 1444 1386 1308 1685 1278

9) Pa 192 469 728 362 351 411 215 1254

10) It 357 720 1022 332 538 928 669 1427 611

11) Ge 815 1209 1356 933 1194 1614 1179 1644 1196 424

12) Br 1233 1504 1801 1060 1494 1727 1475 1860 1474 499 398

13) Fr 754 1053 1177 749 1034 1299 971 1622 1043 307 399 346

14) Ru 1150 1303 1299 1384 1504 1811 1498 1737 1406 1159 595 1364 1255

15) Po 1030 1388 1430 1316 1359 1740 1388 1687 1337 971 388 1119 1058 185

16) SC 834 1212 1179 1216 1058 1516 1161 1466 1021 890 511 1166 910 676 615

17) Alb 349 838 844 677 514 1099 730 1316 622 366 441 993 613 749 618 341

18) Gr 380 904 1064 658 512 1104 782 1312 686 255 311 819 498 774 563 531 136

19) Ma 517 965 1135 792 713 1337 887 1323 783 440 266 841 592 667 500 222 144 138

20) Ro 570 1029 1221 833 745 1193 942 1476 819 502 409 828 620 889 715 198 274 341 180

21) Tur 159 447 700 265 413 696 460 1421 438 217 599 1008 622 899 891 845 352 303 490 535

22) Irn 494 424 717 369 727 805 601 1756 820 478 916 1134 813 1233 1285 1376 869 766 994 990 270

23) Irs 311 509 621 418 516 675 538 1528 587 566 860 1410 1042 874 896 991 529 592 781 773 217 370

24) Iq 245 516 628 374 406 444 320 1422 265 510 970 1397 915 1127 1113 1051 557 550 754 859 270 541 315

25) Cy 127 448 791 196 176 534 246 1241 240 395 1064 1239 799 1539 1359 1099 531 531 714 699 326 595 486 378

26) Sy 152 464 637 398 322 421 336 1304 177 508 947 1429 941 1043 1045 911 481 487 655 712 197 562 277 114 329

27) Lb 71 256 480 281 334 493 173 1330 191 426 925 1288 739 1213 1146 956 492 494 651 694 180 416 354 215 211 116

28) Jo 183 513 704 373 451 489 141 139 123 561 1026 1296 840 1365 1247 988 577 661 758 758 410 765 578 246 266 255 204

29) SA 448 580 605 606 724 565 372 1302 339 924 1286 1728 1256 1302 1357 1208 889 962 1115 1103 553 757 420 254 610 262 380 334

30) Qa 647 819 805 973 948 696 454 1483 518 1196 1405 1769 1360 1506 1450 1351 1132 1216 1327 1225 903 1081 690 499 800 546 623 392 153

31) UA 324 457 419 513 676 712 266 1304 367 818 1106 1575 1125 1233 1206 1050 671 825 956 954 488 694 365 290 500 305 315 295 130 249

32) Om 477 626 625 651 745 765 417 1144 366 955 1223 1754 1313 1146 1227 1097 804 880 1001 1086 586 900 524 289 653 303 474 381 99 279 157

33) Ye 769 913 1000 854 920 586 483 1438 383 1240 1664 1825 1407 1816 1734 1502 1252 1310 1412 1367 1088 1341 1066 542 768 645 710 369 365 238 475 410

34) Eg 185 365 655 289 355 742 205 988 183 598 1128 1481 1068 1305 1285 1036 593 647 728 839 384 724 502 350 197 260 242 283 430 677 364 358 672

35) Mo 764 999 1220 944 611 1264 801 933 715 1067 1543 1715 1365 1775 1652 1258 888 938 991 1125 1092 1492 1251 1098 559 970 911 903 1157 1282 1055 996 1105 454

36) Alg 437 641 1001 456 502 958 425 1101 350 812 1325 1458 1240 1632 1487 1208 801 874 907 999 793 1120 909 697 289 654 578 487 783 895 643 676 735 215 272

37) Tun 456 676 952 522 580 911 345 1153 316 893 1335 1485 1179 1653 1501 1250 853 919 968 1078 854 1193 969 604 332 626 554 356 643 664 528 551 497 251 379 71

38) EO 1089 1203 1319 1207 1056 1659 1090 452 1021 1332 1648 1851 1582 1701 1686 1387 1134 1186 1191 1418 1330 1726 1442 1319 967 1187 1186 1231 1197 1394 1190 998 1319 651 323 569 666

39) EA 826 932 1018 907 969 1107 622 555 569 1274 1653 1857 1497 1715 1692 1425 1170 1261 1290 1430 1154 1516 1172 819 790 803 844 676 617 693 677 500 581 449 638 473 397 346

*- For populations names see figure 4.

Figure 4.

Figure 4

A multidimensional scaling plot of the Y-chromosomal genetic distance matrix. Stress = 0.133. Populations names are: EEJ - Eastern European Jews, IqJ - Iraqi Jews, InJ - Iranian Jews, MJ - Moroccan Jews, LJ - Libyan Jews, DJ - Djerban Jews, YJ - Yemenite Jews, EJ - Ethiopian Jews, Pa - Palestinians, It - Italians, Fr - French, Br - British, Ge - Germans, Ru - Russians, Po - Poles, SC - Serbo-Croats, Alb - Albanians, Gr - Greeks, Ma - Macedonians, Ro - Romanians, Tur - Turks, Inn - Iranians-North, Ins - Iranians-South, Iq - Iraqis, Cy - Cypriots, Sy - Syrians, Lb - Lebanese, Jo - Jordanians, SA - Saudi-Arabians, Qa - Qataris, UA - United Arab Emirates, Om - Omanis, Ye - Yemenites, Eg - Egyptians, Mo - Moroccans, Alg - Algerians, Tun - Tunisians, EO - Ethiopians Oromo, EA - Ethiopians Amhara. Squares represent Jews and circles non-Jews. Colour indicates geographic region: red - Europe, green - Eastern Mediterranean, blue - Iran-Iraq, purpule - Arabian peninsula, yellow - North-Africa, brown - Ethiopia.

Table 4.

mtDNA genetic distance matrix (×1000)*

1) EEJ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
2) IqJ 916

3) IqJ 892 627

4) MJ 400 1020 814

5) LJ 1016 1303 770 741

6) TnJ 908 1336 973 438 487

7) BJ 453 817 676 381 727 605

8) TrJ 591 813 445 287 605 530 300

9) YJ 1020 1058 1257 1124 1349 1323 1287 1264

10) EJ 1685 1789 1794 1882 1701 1662 1844 1916 1251

11) Pa 417 976 941 674 1005 812 501 690 843 1382

12) Tur 531 478 419 499 767 795 406 379 985 1726 556

13) Gr 540 676 443 302 680 465 365 228 1138 1771 627 199

14) It 437 698 516 324 705 574 295 226 1247 1759 582 237 135

15) Ge 606 745 533 360 791 528 360 275 1299 1867 701 357 112 176

16) Fr 504 836 646 334 814 590 379 316 1374 1880 710 379 173 126 93

17) Br 610 761 562 341 822 602 454 295 1310 1927 806 410 166 220 70 84

18) Ru 650 785 510 411 716 534 432 300 1355 1854 697 303 124 148 105 96 142

19) Po 687 749 585 453 810 561 428 308 1414 1886 752 355 156 167 77 100 126 66

20) Sp 557 778 680 370 843 657 445 339 1294 1719 712 368 251 181 214 167 207 184 206

21) Cy 520 732 539 374 626 600 302 335 1141 1689 616 269 244 199 374 363 425 370 407 364

22) Lb 543 736 618 502 729 633 390 456 1095 1520 383 233 348 288 485 463 554 425 482 412 270

23) Sy 581 431 564 676 891 950 580 576 820 1465 463 283 427 444 613 659 659 609 659 609 412 339

24) In 583 553 464 681 879 995 561 571 888 1697 576 209 422 369 568 579 613 513 576 543 397 425 341

25) Jo 591 647 461 672 816 788 562 490 892 1329 419 387 449 370 613 616 711 563 614 532 355 328 285 405

26) SA 631 731 799 863 964 1018 745 801 745 1123 478 579 679 668 836 875 841 849 898 805 567 561 416 503 486

27) Ye 1064 1393 1351 1217 1310 1427 1206 1289 897 830 871 1078 1205 1154 1343 1315 1383 1314 1383 1254 1110 1125 949 943 898 770

28) Eg 634 721 853 751 967 895 692 763 791 985 374 556 656 620 835 868 926 801 869 714 574 449 365 572 270 398 782

29) MoA 736 1030 942 659 868 780 645 615 1196 1238 556 700 611 513 666 625 690 608 638 487 526 559 638 752 427 678 888 416

30) MoB 674 948 851 568 880 728 595 511 1208 1386 550 626 494 415 504 450 507 470 486 348 499 535 595 701 442 679 1015 495 89

31) Et 1394 1578 1679 1543 1492 1443 1541 1649 1008 300 1051 1470 1517 1470 1626 1612 1685 1604 1649 1461 1357 1279 1147 1406 1015 847 751 607 888 1032

*- For populations names see figure 5.

Figure 5.

Figure 5

A multidimensional scaling plot of the mtDNA genetic distance matrix. Stress = 0.110 for the outer plot and 0.161 for the inner one. Populations names are: EEJ - Eastern European Jews, IqJ - Iraqi Jews, InJ - Iranian Jews, MJ - Moroccan Jews, LJ - Libyan Jews, TnJ - Tunisian Jews, BJ - Bulgarian Jews, TrJ - Turkish Jews, YJ - Yemenite Jews, EJ - Ethiopian Jews, Pa - Palestinians, It - Italians, Fr - French, Br - British, Ge - Germans, Ru - Russians, Po - Poles, Sp - Spaniards, Gr - Greeks, Tur - Turks, In - Iranians, Cy - Cypriots, Sy - Syrians, Lb - Lebanese, Jo - Jordanians, SA - Saudi-Arabians, Ye - Yemenites, Eg - Egyptians, MoA - Moroccan Arabs, MoB - Moroccan Berbers, Et - Ethiopians. Squares represent Jews and circles non-Jews. Colour indicates geographic region: red - Europe, green - Eastern Mediterranean, blue - Iran-Iraq, purpule - Arabian peninsula, yellow - North-Africa, brown - Ethiopia.

Correlations between genetic distance and geography and between genetic distance matrices based on different markers (excluding the non-Caucasoid populations Ethiopians and Ethiopian Jews) are shown in table 5. The autosomal polymorphisms have a very high correlation (0.789) with geography in contrast to the more moderate correlations of the X-chromosomal, Y-chromosomal and mtDNA polymorphisms (0.540, 0.395 and 0.641 respectively). In order to compare two competing theories regarding the origin of EEJ, their geographic distances were computed as if they originated from Italy or Israel, i.e. the great circle distances for EEJ were calculated not between Warsaw and other capitals, but between Rome or Jerusalem and other capitals. The correlation between the autosomal genetic distance matrix and geography was slightly higher, 0.804, for Rome but dropped to 0.694 for Jerusalem. Autosomal distances are much better correlated with mtDNA distances (0.826) and with X-chromosomal distances (0.732) than with Y-chromosomal distances (0.437). The correlations between the mtDNA and X-chromosomal matrices and the Y-chromosomal matrix are rather poor (0.206 and 0.241 respectively) and insignificant. When the correlations with geography were only calculated for the genetic distances of EEJ and not for the entire matrix (table 6), the same trends emerge with the autosomal correlation from Rome reaching a high of 0.926. The correlations from Jerusalem are negative for the autosomes, the X chromosome and mtDNA. The reverse is true for the Y chromosome.

Table 5.

Correlation and significance level between genetic distance matrices and between genetic distance and geography

Autosomes Y mtDNA Geography
r p r p r p r p

Autosomes* 0.789 0.0001

Y* 0.437 0.0021 0.395 0.0038

mtDNA* 0.826 0.0001 0.206 0.1200 0.641 0.0003

X** 0.732 0.0005 0.241 0.1399 0.633 0.0058 0.540 0.0022

* - Based on the 14 populations (excluding Ethiopian Jews) in the autosomal matrix

** - Based on the 10 populations (excluding Ethiopian Jews) common to all 4 matrices

r = correlation; p = significance level

Table 6.

Correlation between the genetic distances of EEJ and geography*

Warsaw Rome Jerusalem
Autosomes** 0.778 0.926**** -0.149

X*** 0.781 0.835 -0.685

Y** -0.613 -0.213 0.556

mtDNA** 0.471 0.779 -0.190

* - Great circle distances calculated from the three alternatives for their origin

** - Based on the 14 populations (excluding Ethiopian Jews) in the autosomal matrix

*** - Based on the 10 populations (excluding Ethiopian Jews) common to all 4 matrices

**** - When the Italians are removed, the correlation still remains very high, 0.904.

Discussion

The autosomal genetic distance analysis presented here clearly demonstrates that the investigated Jewish populations do not share a common origin. The resemblance of EEJ to Italians and other European populations portrays them as an autochthonous European population. A study conducted in a New York college in the 1920s point to the same Ashkenazi - Italian similarity on basis of physical characteristics. Freshmen were asked before they knew one another to indicate the origin of their fellow students. Forty percent of the Italians were taken to be Ashkenazi Jews, and the same percentage of Ashkenazi Jews was adjudged Italians [24]. EEJ seem to be mainly Italian (Roman) in origin, which is easily understood, considering the historical evidence presented above.

The high correlation between the autosomal genetic distances and geography and the reduced correlation when EEJ are taken to originate from the Land of Israel reinforce the European origin of EEJ. In fact the correlation of the autosomal markers with geography is higher than previously described for 49 classical markers (0.503) or ~300,000 autosomal SNPs (0.661) in Europe [25]. If for comparison, only non-Jewish European populations are included, the correlation is lower, 0.689, but still higher than the above mentioned correlations. It is also interesting to note how using the three geographic alternatives for EEJ, changes the correlation, when only European populations are included. The correlation remains almost the same, 0.679, for Rome but drops to 0.490 and 0.571 for Warsaw and Jerusalem respectively; further emphasizing the correct geographic origin of EEJ within Europe.

Biparental versus uniparental markers

At first sight it seems that there is more than one explanation for the differing results produced by the analysis of the NRY haplogroups. It thus seems possible that EEJ founder population in Rome was composed of exiled Israelite males and local Roman females. In its simple form this clearly contradicts the facts, because both the autosomal and X-chromosomal polymorphisms demonstrate that EEJ do not occupy an intermediate position between European and Middle Eastern populations, but rather a strict European one. From table 1 it is clear that Italians are as close or closer to the other Jewish populations and Palestinians as EEJ. It is possible that once the founder population was established no other males but many females joined it, thus creating a population that is almost entirely European in all genetic aspects apart from its Y chromosomes. Such phenomenon was described for the population of Antioquia, Columbia, where the autosomes point to 79% of European ancestry and only 16% of Amerindian ancestry, whereas according to mtDNA the ancestry is 90% Amerindian and only 2% European (there is also a small African component). Historical records demonstrate that local Amerindian females joined the population only at its beginning, whereas European males joined it also in later periods [26]. The suggestion that the proselyte ancestors of EEJ were almost entirely females does not however accord with what we know about conversion to Judaism [10,12,27-29].

The inference that the NRY points to a Middle Eastern origin of EEJ is erroneous not only because the Y chromosomal analysis contradicts the analyses based on the other chromosomes, and because the NRY is a single uniparental marker that does not represent the whole history of the population, but also because its smaller effective population size makes it much more vulnerable to severe genetic drift caused by demographic bottlenecks. The demographic histories of three Jewish populations exemplify how different demographic patterns make the uniparental markers more reliable for Iraqi (Babylonian) Jews and Yemenite Jews and less reliable for EEJ. Both Yemenite Jews and Iraqi Jews resemble populations from their regions of origin according to autosomal markers [1,3,30-32]. Yemenite Jews, who are usually considered a small isolate, were numerous enough to have an independent kingdom in the first centuries AD [33]. They numbered a few hundred thousand in the 12th century AD, and gradually declined; reaching only about 30-40,000 in the beginning of the 20th century [34]. Babylonian Jews numbered more than a million in the first century AD [35], and constituted the majority of the population in the area between the Euphrates and the Tigris in the 2nd-3rd centuries AD [36]. Gilbert [37] estimates that by 600 AD there were 806,000 Jews in Mesopotamia, and according to Sassoon [38] it was inhabited by about a million Jews in the 7th century. In the 14th century the estimates for Baghdad alone range from 70,000 to hundreds thousands [38]. By 1939, 11 years before their emigration, there were 91,000 Jews in Iraq [35]. In contrast, the Jewish population of the Polish-Lithuanian Kingdom (EEJ) went through the opposite process. Their history is one of founder effects, migrations, demographic bottlenecks and finally a rapid expansion. We know nothing about their number in the first millennium, but after their emigration from Italy to Western Europe it is estimated that they numbered 4,000 in 1000 and 20,000 a hundred years later [8]. In 1500 already in Eastern Europe they numbered 10,000-30,000, in 1648 230,000-450,000 and in 1764 750,000 [39-41]. In the 19th century because of the partitions of the Polish-Lithuanian Kingdom and the immigrations of Jews to Central and Western Europe and America, the estimation of the number of EEJ becomes more difficult, but there is no doubt that the increase in numbers was impressive, as the number of EEJ under Russian rule alone was 5,200,000 in 1897 [41].

The existence of severe demographic bottlenecks in the history of EEJ has also been suggested by genetic studies of disease-causing-mutations and mtDNA [42-46]. The comparison based on this second uniparental marker, mtDNA, may help to resolve from within genetics itself the problem of the Y chromosome reliability for inferring the origin of the male ancestors of EEJ. If the European and Middle Eastern contributions to the gene pool of EEJ were female and male respectively, then comparisons based on mtDNA must place EEJ among other European populations, distant from Middle Eastern populations. The mtDNA analysis presented in this study does not place EEJ among other European populations rather their position is more intermediate and marginal, as can be seen in figure 5 and in figure 6, where autosomal distances are correlated with mtDNA distances. This lends further support to the notion that because of the unique demographic history of EEJ, their uniparental markers were subjected to stronger genetic drift than the biparental markers and thus should not be used to trace their origin.

Figure 6.

Figure 6

Correlation of autosomal (X axis) and mtDNA (Y axis) distances. Red circles denote EEJ. Most of the mtDNA distances of EEJ are too high relative to their autosomal distances, in contrast to most other distances (r = 0.826), attesting the greater genetic drift, to which the uniparental markers of EEJ were subjected.

The data on the Y chromosome itself also support the unreliability of the uniparental markers for discovering the origin of EEJ. Nebel et al. [47] studied haplogroup R-M17, whose frequency is ~12% in Ashkenazi Jews. By comparing the structure of the STRs network among the various Ashkenazi populations and among the various European non-Jewish populations they reached the conclusion that a single male founder introduced this haplogroup into Ashkenazi Jews in the first millennium. Behar et al. [48] write "It is striking that whereas Ashkenazi populations are genetically more diverse at both the SNP and STR level compared with their European non-Jewish counterparts, they have greatly reduced within-haplogroup STR variability ... This contrasting pattern of diversity in Ashkenazi populations is evidence for a reduction in male effective population size, possibly resulting from a series of founder events and high rates of endogamy within Europe. This reduced effective population size may explain the high incidence of founder disease mutations despite overall high levels of NRY diversity". It is unlikely that EEJ are the descendants of a single population. Admixture coupled with small effective population size and bottlenecks can create the puzzling situation we encounter in the uniparental markers. Thus smaller contributions from several populations, including possibly the original Middle Eastern Jewish population, and a major contribution from Italy combined with the unique demography of EEJ can create the current genetic picture without the need to invoke a major contribution from the Middle East, which contradicts the autosomal and X-chromosomal data.

Comments on previous studies

Some previous studies based on classical autosomal markers concluded that EEJ are a Middle Eastern population with genetic affinities to other Jewish populations. The problems with these studies have been previously discussed in detail [1]. These studies used fewer markers (mostly the less reliable antigenic markers) and failed to include European Mediterranean populations, apart from the discriminant analysis of Carmelli and Cavalli-Sforza [49], which used only four markers and contradicts the results of the later more elaborate discriminant analysis [1], and the genetic distance analysis of Livshits et al. [32], which includes a single European Mediterranean population, Spain. Despite this when a genetic distance analysis was performed, the greater similarity of EEJ to Russians and to a lesser extent to Germans more than to Non-European Jews was evident [32]. In fact Russians were more similar to EEJ than to any Non-Jewish European population in that analysis.

Recently, Cochran et al. [50] used 251 autosomal loci to calculate genetic distances and concluded that "from the perspective of a large collection of largely neutral genetic variation Ashkenazim are essentially European, not Middle Eastern". More recently, thousands of SNPs were used by Need et al. [51] to infer the relationships between Ashkenazi Jews and non-Jewish Europeans and Middle Easterners. They concluded that Ashkenazi Jews lie approximately midway between Europeans and the Middle Easterners, implying that Ashkenazi Jews may contain mixed ancestry from these two regions, and that they are close to the Adygei population from the Caucasus. However these conclusions are ill-founded, because, they used a highly selected set of SNPs, which were selected specifically for the purpose of distinguishing between Ashkenazi Jews and other populations and they inferred the origin of Ashkenazi Jews from principal components analysis (PCA), but as Tian et al. [52] show "PCA results are highly dependent on which population groups are included in the analysis. Thus, there should be some caution in interpreting these results and other results from similar analytic methods with respect to ascribing origins of particular ethnic groups'" Tian et al. [52] also published a table of paired Fst distances based on 10,500 random SNPs, which demonstrates that Ashkenazi Jews are not at all close to the Adygei population, and similarly to what is seen in table 1, their smallest distance is to Italians and then to Greeks. Unlike the assertion of Need et al. [51] on the midway position, and again similarly to what is seen in table 1, Italians and Greeks are closer to the Middle Eastern populations than Ashkenazi Jews.

The same phenomenon is seen in the table of Fst distances of Atzmon et al. [53]. North Italians (Bergamo and Tuscany) are a little closer to the Jewish and Middle Eastern populations than Ashkenazi Jews. The Italians from Tuscany (surprisingly the sample from Bergamo was not used) in Behar et al. [54] are also closer to the Jewish and Middle Eastern populations than Ashkenazi Jews. The Italians from Tuscany are in fact the closest population to Ashkenazi Jews in Behar et al. [54]. There is one sample that is apparently a little closer, what they call Sephardic Jews. Unfortunately this sample is composed of two populations, Turkish Jews and Bulgarian Jews, which should have been studied separately like all other Jewish populations. Bulgarian Jews have been shown in the past based on autosomal classical markers to be closer to EEJ than to populations with Sephardic ancestry and considering their history it was concluded that the Ashkenazi component in their gene pool is at least as large or even larger that the Sephardic component [1]. From both The current study and those of Atzmon et al. [53] and Behar et al. [54] it can be seen that the only Jewish populations that are as close to Ashkenazi Jews as non-Jewish Europeans are those with a significant Sephardic (The descendants of the Jews who were expelled from the Iberian peninsula at the end of the 15th century) component in their gene pool. It is not possible at this stage to say what is the source of this resemblance, since we don't know what is the origin of Sephardic Jews, but considering all the genetic affinities of both groups it likely stems from Sephardic Jews being the descendants of converts in the Mediterranean basin rather than from a common Jewish origin in the Land of Israel. When one compares the autosomal distances of EEJ (current study) or Ashkenazi Jews (in Atzmon et al. [53] and Behar et al. [54]) from the Jewish populations that were investigated in the current study, Iraqi, Iranian, Moroccan, Yemenite and Ethiopian Jews, one finds perfect agreement. EEJ or Ashkenazi Jews are much closer to non-Jewish Europeans than to these Jewish populations in all three studies.

The studies of Atzmon et al. [53] and Behar et al. [54] are based on 164,894 and 226,839 SNPs respectively. While this impressive number reduces the errors of the distances that stem from the number of markers, the errors that stem from sampling only a small number of individuals are much larger in these studies, where sample sizes can be as small as 2-4 individuals. The effect of these errors can be seen in table 7. Despite the small number of markers the current matrix has the highest correlation with geography. Moreover it has a higher correlation with each of the two other matrices than the two of them have with each other. The high correlations between the current matrix and the other two attest for the robustness of the autosomal genetic distances in this study. The lower correlation between the two matrices, which are based on more than 150,000 SNPs, is surprising and even more so, if we remember that the four non-Jewish populations are represented by exactly the same individuals taken from the Human Genome Diversity Panel (HGDP). It is likely then that sampling more individuals, which represent more of the variation of the investigated populations, is far more important than typing many markers. It is also possible that the typing error rates of genome-wide microarray studies are much higher, as demonstrated by the genotyping errors that were discovered in 7 out of 29 (24%) reexamined SNPs [55]. It seems therefore, that good characterization of the genetic relationships between populations can be achieved by a small number of good unique-event-polymorphisms.

Table 7.

Comparison of the correlations of the three autosomal genetic distance matrices*

Current Study Atzmon et al. Geography**
r p r p r p

Current Study 0.561 0.0015

Atzmon et al. 2010 0.872 0.0003 0.482*** 0.0192

Behar et al. 2010 0.852 0.0012 0.788 0.0029 0.437**** 0.0351

* - Based on the 7 populations common to all 3 studies

** - Great circle distances for EEJ or Ashkenazi Jews calculated from Rome (in all cases this was the highest correlation)

*** - Great circle distances for Italians calculated from Parma

**** - Great circle distances for Italians calculated from Florence

r = correlation; p = significance level

Conclusions

EEJ are Europeans probably of Roman descent who converted to Judaism at times, when Judaism was the first monotheistic religion that spread in the ancient world. Any other theory about their origin is not supported by the genetic data. Future studies will have to address their genetic affinities to various Italian populations and examine the possibility of other components both European and Non-European in their gene pool.

Competing interests

The author declares that he has no competing interests.

Reviewers' comments

Reviewer's report 1

Damian Labuda, Pediatrics Department, Montreal University Sainte-Justine Hospital Research Center, Montreal, PQ Canada (nominated by Jerzy Jurka, Genetic Information Research Institute, Mountain View, California USA).

The author compiled and reanalyzed the data on autosomal and sex chromosomes polymorphisms collected by different laboratories on different Jewish and West-Eurasiatic populations. His analysis indicates much greater European component of Eastern European Jews, EEJ (essentially Ashkenazim) than of other Jewish groups. Moreover the analysis points to Italians as the closest population to EEJ.

The question is how to interpret this evidence. Imperial Rome was a very cosmopolitan city culturally and genetically diverse. To what extent a sample of contemporary Italians preserves the genetic link to its population? It can simply reflect a mixture of historical influences from different centers around the Mediterranean Sea. We should thus keep in mind that the Italian connection may simply indicate Southern European and Mediterranean links with the latter including Middle Eastern roots.

Interestingly, this analysis that is based on a limited number of markers provided results that are very similar to a paper of Atzmon and colleagues, published five days ago in the American Journal of Human Genetics, and based on the microarray-based genotyping genome of wide distributed markers. I would like the author to comment on this paper in the context of his findings and his thoughts and reflections on the origin of Jewish Diasporas. Should we go back to the single locus analyses, as in the case of uniparentally transmitted markers, but targeting one by one different individual segments of the nuclear genome? Perhaps, in this way we could partition and identify genetic ancestries of different populations, which due to their history of relative isolation, are considered as genetically homogenous.

The author refers to Sangvi's G2 as the most appropriate distance metrics. Could you make it more clear when this metric was used and when that of Reynolds (only to produce a tree?).

Author's response

The historical sources listed above show that conversion to Judaism was common in ancient Rome among all ranks of the Roman society including the imperial families. It is thus unlikely that the original Roman population did not constitute a significant portion of the proselytes. What else can explain the resemblance of EEJ to a general sample of Italians in this study and to more local samples in the two array studies [53,54]? In all three studies the genetic affinities of the Ashkenazim are very similar to the affinities of the Italians, with the Ashkenazim usually being a bit more distant from the other populations, as can be expected from a population that underwent a stronger genetic drift. It is thus unlikely that the Ashkenazim are a mixture of people from different places in the Mediterranean basin, unless current-day Italians themselves not only have absorbed foreign genetic contributions, but actually constitute such a mixture, and this seems unlikely as well. The very high correlation (0.926) between the genetic distances of EEJ and geographic distances, when the latter are calculated from Rome, also supports the origin of EEJ from Italy or its vicinity and not merely from the Mediterranean basin. The similarity to Italians was also evident when several Italian populations from different provinces were included in a comparison based on classical autosomal markers. Most Italian populations were closer to EEJ than all other populations (data not shown).

My comments on the papers by Atzmon et al. [53] and Behar et al. [54] are in the discussion. Studying autosomal haplotypes will indeed contribute to revealing the ancestries of populations, but in order to gain meaningful insights one ought to study at least several loci and ensure that sample sizes are adequate, this may entail more effort than studying single SNPs, and I am not sure that the affinities between the populations are going to be depicted more accurately. I changed the phrasing in Methods to make it clearer that the formula of Reynolds et al. was only used for the calculation of the tree.

Reviewer's report 2

Kateryna Makova, Department of Biology, Penn State University, Pennsylvania USA.

This is an interesting manuscript that presents intriguing results. I have only a few comments:

1. The introduction is very short, while the discussion is lengthy. I suggest moving parts of the Discussion to the Introduction.

2. Some of the statements in the Discussion are too strong. I disagree with statements about "erroneous Y chromosomal genetic distances", "both uniparental markers should not be used to trace their origin", "uniparental markers being unreliable". The author should modify them.

Author's response

I moved the paragraph on the history of EEJ to the Introduction. The current revised version of the paper includes a new comparison based on mtDNA. I maintain that it adds more weight to my assertion that the uniparental markers should not be used to trace the origin of EEJ. In no way did I mean that the uniparental markers are always unreliable; to clarify it I modified the relevant sentence in the discussion. Indeed from the demographic examples that I give in the Discussion, it seems that the uniparental markers can be used to study the origins of Iraqi Jews and Yemenite Jews.

Reviewer's report 3

Qasim Ayub, The Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute, Wellcome Trust Genome Campus, Hinxton, UK (nominated by Dan Graur, Department of Biology and Biochemistry, University of Houston, Houston, USA).

The paper by Zoossmann-Diskin entitled 'The origin of Eastern European Jews revealed by autosomal and sex chromosomal polymorphisms' explores autosomal and sex chromosomal polymorphisms in six Jewish populations using previously published and additional unpublished data. The author concludes that the Jewish populations examined do not share a common origin and that Eastern European Jews are closer to the Italian population.

My major concern is the choice of markers and populations used in this study. The author has analyzed 17 autosomal loci, including 9 polymorphic protein electrophoretic variants in which the genotype was assumed. Although phenotypes often do correlate with genotypes assuming that they do can lead to erroneous results. Of the remaining 8 it is unclear whether the same samples were genotyped as the sample numbers for each locus vary widely (Supplementary Tables 2-4).

The author also uses Y hapologroup frequencies and shows a multidimensional scaling plot of Y chromosomal genetic distance matrix. However, the supplementary data (Supplementary Table 5) lists an outdated nomenclature for Y haplogroups as the M78 marker is no longer considered part of haplogroup E3b1. It would be more appropriate to list which markers are used to designate the haplogroups to ensure that they are comparable. In addition, the haplogroups that are selected for these analyses do not provide phylogenetic resolution to reliably detect male genetic sub-structure within the Middle East. The omission of recent mtDNA studies (Behar et al., 2008, PLoS One 3:e2062) is surprising as is the use of a single X chromosomal locus (DYS44) to make broad conclusions about genetic relatedness.

Current evidence, supported more recently by two major studies carried out on Jewish populations (Atzmon et al., Am J H Genetics 86:850-859; Behar et al., Nature doi:10.1038) using a much larger dataset clearly demonstrate a common genetic thread linking the diverse Mizrahi, Sephardic and Ashkenazi Jewish populations with the populations from the Levant and Middle East. The Ashkenazi show a European component but this is shared with many Eastern and Southern Europeans populations. These studies contradict the author's conclusion and demonstrate the power of using unbiased markers and host populations in corresponding geographic regions to address issues such as genetic relatedness among Jewish and non-Jewish populations

Author's response

I am not sure what Dr Ayub means by "assumed", but I suspect that he means something like the relationships between phenotype and genotype in certain blood groups, in which one (or more) allele is dominant over the other and the gene frequencies of the alleles have to be inferred from the phenotypes assuming Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium. In such cases there may indeed be errors in the gene frequencies. Protein electrophoretic markers are completely different. Nothing is inferred! As mentioned in Methods all the protein electrophoretic markers in this study represent a SNP at the DNA level. This SNP causes an amino acid change that can be detected at the protein level. Both alleles are directly viewed on the gel in the same way as both alleles of an RFLP are directly viewed on the gel. Gene frequencies are determined in both cases by simple gene counting and the error rate in protein electrophoresis is no greater than in DNA studies. There is no need to type the same samples for all the polymorphisms, because the unit of study is the population, not the individual. One can use polymorphisms typed by different researchers using different samples and combine them to create a genetic profile of each population. Typing all the polymorphisms on the same sample does not add more credibility to the study. Indeed the renowned works that employed classical autosomal markers to portray the genetic affinities of human populations were based on many different samples typed by many different researchers [56,57].

The nomenclature in the Y chromosome supplementary table has been updated. Following the publication of the study by Behar et al. [54] it was possible to add more Jewish populations to the Y chromosome analysis and increase the number of chromosomes for the Jewish populations. This increase has come however at the expense of resolution, because Behar et al. [54] used fewer haplogroups in their analysis. Consequently the number of haplogroups was reduced from 15 in the original version to 14 in this revised version. I would have been happier if the available data on the Jewish populations had enabled greater resolution to reliably detect male genetic sub-structure within the Middle East, but since this work deals with the genetic affinities of EEJ, the current level is sufficient. The work of Behar et al. from 2008 was instrumental in creating the mtDNA matrix as can be seen in table 7 in Additional file 1. There was no need to cite it previously, as it did not contain any genetic distance analysis that could further clarify the origin of EEJ. I am surprised at Dr Ayub's surprise at the use of a single X chromosomal locus. It would have been better to use many X chromosomal loci, but even the use of single loci is advantageous, as I am sure even Dr Ayub would agree regarding the two other single loci that I use, the non-recombining Y chromosome (NRY) and mtDNA.

As written in the Discussion the genetic distance matrices of Atzmon et al. [53] and Behar et al. [54] do not contradict my results, but reinforce them. I completely reject Dr Ayub's claim that the markers or populations I used are biased in anyway, and I let the reader judge, where exactly the bias lies.

Supplementary Material

Additional file 1

Allele frequencies tables, Tables S1-S7. The file contains seven tables that give the allele frequencies of the employed polymorphisms.

Click here for file (546.5KB, DOC)

References

  1. Zoossmann-Diskin A, Joel A, Liron M, Kerem B, Shohat M, Peleg L. Protein electrophoretic markers in Israel: compilation of data and genetic affinities. Ann Hum Biol. 2002;29:142–175. doi: 10.1080/03014460110058971. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Bonné-Tamir B, Zoossmann-Diskin A, Teicher A, Oppenheim A, Nevo S. In: Isolation migration and health. Roberts DF, Fujiki N, Torizuka K, editor. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1992. Genetic distance analyses in Israeli groups using classical markers and DNA polymorphisms in the β-globin gene; pp. 87–106. [Google Scholar]
  3. Zoossmann-Diskin A, Gazit E, Peleg L, Shohat M, Turner D. Thrombophilic polymorphisms in Israel. Blood Cells Mol Dis. 2008;41:230–233. doi: 10.1016/j.bcmd.2008.05.004. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Ankory Z. In: Genetic diseases among Ashkenazi Jews. Goodman RM, Motulsky AG, editor. New York: Raven Press; 1979. Origins and history of Ashkenazi Jewry (8th to 18th century) pp. 19–46. [Google Scholar]
  5. Hendelssmann Y. In: The History of the people of Israel. Shavit S, Shamir I, editor. Givataim, Israel: Massada; 1985. The Jewish centre in Ashkenaz in the 10-13th centuries; pp. 72–73. (in Hebrew) [Google Scholar]
  6. Renan E. Le judaÏsme comme race et comme religion. Paris: Ancienne Maison Michel Lévy Frères; 1883. [Google Scholar]
  7. Ashdy L. In: Encyclopedia of social sciences. Knaani D, editor. Vol. 1. Tel-Aviv: Sifriat-Poalim; 1970. Germany, Jews; pp. 849–862. (in Hebrew) [Google Scholar]
  8. Kriegel M. In: A historical atlas of the Jewish people. Barnavi E, editor. London: Hutchinson; 1992. The beginnings of European Jewry, 500-1096; pp. 78–79. [Google Scholar]
  9. Halpern I. In: The Jews, their history, culture and religion. Finkelstein L, editor. Vol. 1. New York: Harper & Brothers Publishers; 1960. The Jews in Eastern Europe (From Ancient Times until the Partitions of Poland, 1772-1795) pp. 287–319. [Google Scholar]
  10. Rapaport U. PhD thesis. The Hebrew University; 1965. Jewish religious propaganda and proselytism in the period of the second commonwealth. (in Hebrew with an English abstract) [Google Scholar]
  11. Eilat T. MA thesis. Tel-Aviv University; 1979. The Jewish community in pagan Rome from its beginning in times of the republic till Christianity became a recognized religion of the Roman Empire. (in Hebrew with an English abstract) [Google Scholar]
  12. Feldman LH. In: The Diaspora in the Hellenistic-Roman world. Stern M, editor. The Society For The Publication Of The History Of The Jewish People, Israel; 1983. Proselytism and syncretism; pp. 188–207. (in Hebrew) [Google Scholar]
  13. Meroz N. MA thesis. Tel-Aviv University; 1992. Proselytism in the Roman Empire in the first centuries AD. (in Hebrew with an English abstract) [Google Scholar]
  14. Zoossmann-Diskin A, Swinburne S, Shohat M, Peleg L, Gazit E, Turner D. Typing classical polymorphisms by real-time PCR: analysis of the GPT and ALAD protein polymorphisms in the Jewish populations. Am J Hum Biol. 2008;20:490–492. doi: 10.1002/ajhb.20766. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Wainwright BJ, Scambler PJ, Schmidtke J, Watson EA, Law HY, Farrall M, Cooke HJ, Eiberg H, Williamson R. Localization of cystic fibrosis locus to human chromosome 7cen-q22. Nature. 1985;318:384–385. doi: 10.1038/318384a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. White R, Woodward S, Leppert M, O'connell P, Hoff M, Herbst J, Lalouel JM, Dean M, Vande Woude G. A closely linked genetic marker for cystic fibrosis. Nature. 1985;318:382–384. doi: 10.1038/318382a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Zoossmann-Diskin A, Gazit E, Peleg L, Shohat M, Turner D. 844ins68 in the cystathionine beta-synthase gene in Israel and review of its distribution in the world. Anthropol Anz. 2004;62:147–155. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Rigat B, Hubert C, Corvol P, Soubrier F. PCR detection of the insertion/deletion polymorphism of the human angiotensin converting enzyme gene (DCP1) (dipeptidyl carboxypeptidase 1) Nucleic Acids Res. 1992;20:1433. doi: 10.1093/nar/20.6.1433-a. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Goltsov AA, Eisensmith RC, Woo SL. Detection of the XmnI RFLP at the human PAH locus by PCR. Nucleic Acids Res. 1992;20:927. doi: 10.1093/nar/20.4.927-a. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Jorde LB. In: Current developments in anthropological genetics. Mielke JH, Crawford MH, editor. Vol. 1. New York: Plenum Press; 1980. The genetic structure of subdivided human populations; pp. 135–208. [Google Scholar]
  21. Sanghvi LD. Comparison of genetical and morphological methods for a study of biological differences. Am J Phys Anthropol. 1953;11:385–404. doi: 10.1002/ajpa.1330110313. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Nei M. Genetic distance between populations. American Naturalist. 1972;106:283–292. doi: 10.1086/282771. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  23. Reynolds J, Weir BS, Cockerham CC. Estimation of the Coancestry Coefficient: Basis for a Short-Term Genetic Distance. Genetics. 1983;105:767–779. doi: 10.1093/genetics/105.3.767. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Herskovits MJ. In: The Jews, their history, culture and religion. Finkelstein L, editor. Vol. 2. New York: Harper & Brothers Publishers; 1960. Who are the Jews? pp. 1489–1507. [Google Scholar]
  25. Lao O, Lu TT, Nothnagel M, Junge O, Freitag-Wolf S, Caliebe A, Balascakova M, Bertranpetit J, Bindoff LA, Comas D, Holmlund G, Kouvatsi A, Macek M, Mollet I, Parson W, Palo J, Ploski R, Sajantila A, Tagliabracci A, Gether U, Werge T, Rivadeneira F, Hofman A, Uitterlinden AG, Gieger C, Wichmann HE, Ruther A, Schreiber S, Becker C, Nurnberg P, Nelson MR, Krawczak M, Kayser M. Correlation between genetic and geographic structure in Europe. Curr Biol. 2008;18:1241–1248. doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2008.07.049. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Bedoya G, Montoya P, Garcia J, Soto I, Bourgeois S, Carvajal L, Labuda D, Alvarez V, Ospina J, Hedrick PW, Ruiz-Linares A. Admixture dynamics in Hispanics: a shift in the nuclear genetic ancestry of a South American population isolate. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2006;103:7234–7239. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0508716103. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. Braude WG. Jewish proselyting in the first five centuries of the common era, the age of the Tannaim and Amoraim. Menasha, WI: The George Banta Publishing Company; 1940. [Google Scholar]
  28. Bamberger BJ. Proselytism in the Talmudic period. New York: Ktav Publishing House; 1968. [Google Scholar]
  29. Rosenbloom JR. Conversion to Judaism: from the biblical period to the present. Cincinnati: Hebrew Union College Press; 1978. [Google Scholar]
  30. Bonné-Tamir B. In: Genetic Microdifferentiation in Human and other Animal Populations: Occasional Papers in Anthropology No. 1. Ahuja YN, Neel JV, editor. Delhi: Indian Anthropological Association; 1985. Oriental Jewish communities and their genetic relationships with South-West Asian populations; pp. 153–170. [Google Scholar]
  31. Bonné-Tamir B, Zoossmann-Diskin A, Teicher A. In: Genetic diversity among Jews: Diseases and markers at the DNA level. Bonné-Tamir B, Adam A, editor. New York: Oxford University Press; 1992. Genetic diversity among Jews reexamined: preliminary analyses at the DNA level; pp. 80–94. [Google Scholar]
  32. Livshits G, Sokal RR, Kobyliansky E. Genetic affinities of Jewish populations. Am J Hum Genet. 1991;49:131–146. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  33. Ben-Zeev I. The Jews in Arabia. Jerusalem: Achiassaf; 1970. (in Hebrew) [Google Scholar]
  34. Ashdy L. In: Encyclopedia of social sciences. Knaani D, editor. Vol. 5. Tel-Aviv: Sifriat-Poalim; 1970. Yemen, Jews; pp. 853–854. (in Hebrew) [Google Scholar]
  35. Baron SW. In: Encyclopaedia Judaica. Roth C, Wigoder G, editor. Vol. 13. Jerusalem: Keter Publishing House; 1971. Population; pp. 866–903. [Google Scholar]
  36. Grets T. History of the Jews. Hebrew. Tel-Aviv: Izreel Publishing House; 1955. [Google Scholar]
  37. Gilbert M. Jewish history atlas. Hebrew. Jerusalem: Edanim Publishers (By arrangement with Weidenfeld and Nicolson, London); 1980. [Google Scholar]
  38. Sassoon DS. A history of the Jews in Baghdad. Letchworth, Great Britain; 1949. [Google Scholar]
  39. Baron SW. A social and religious history of the Jews. XVI. New York: Columbia University Press; 1976. Poland-Lithuania 1500-1650. [Google Scholar]
  40. Polonsky A. In: The Jews in old Poland, 1000-1795. Polonsky A, Basista J, Link-Lenczowski A, editor. London: IB Tauris & Co Publishers; 1993. Introduction; pp. 1–9. [Google Scholar]
  41. Stampfer S. In: The broken chain, Polish Jewry through the ages. Bartal I, Gutman I, editor. Jerusalem: The Zalman Shazar Center; 1997. Population growth and emmigration of the Polish-Lithuanian Jewry in the 16-19th centuries; pp. 263–285. (in Hebrew) [Google Scholar]
  42. Diaz GA, Gelb BD, Risch N, Nygaard TG, Frisch A, Cohen IJ, Miranda CS, Amaral O, Maire I, Poenaru L, Caillaud C, Weizberg M, Mistry P, Desnick RJ. Gaucher disease: the origins of the Ashkenazi Jewish N370S and 84GG acid beta-glucosidase mutations. Am J Hum Genet. 2000;66:1821–1832. doi: 10.1086/302946. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  43. Frisch A, Colombo R, Michaelovsky E, Karpati M, Goldman B, Peleg L. Origin and spread of the 1278insTATC mutation causing Tay-Sachs disease in Ashkenazi Jews: genetic drift as a robust and parsimonious hypothesis. Hum Genet. 2004;114:366–376. doi: 10.1007/s00439-003-1072-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  44. Risch N, Tang H, Katzenstein H, Ekstein J. Geographic distribution of disease mutations in the Ashkenazi Jewish population supports genetic drift over selection. Am J Hum Genet. 2003;72:812–822. doi: 10.1086/373882. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  45. Slatkin M. A population-genetic test of founder effects and implications for Ashkenazi Jewish diseases. Am J Hum Genet. 2004;75:282–293. doi: 10.1086/423146. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  46. Behar DM, Hammer MF, Garrigan D, Villems R, Bonné-Tamir B, Richards M, Gurwitz D, Rosengarten D, Kaplan M, Della Pergola S, Quintana-Murci L, Skorecki K. MtDNA evidence for a genetic bottleneck in the early history of the Ashkenazi Jewish population. Eur J Hum Genet. 2004;12:355–364. doi: 10.1038/sj.ejhg.5201156. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  47. Nebel A, Filon D, Faerman M, Soodyall H, Oppenheim A. Y chromosome evidence for a founder effect in Ashkenazi Jews. Eur J Hum Genet. 2005;13:388–391. doi: 10.1038/sj.ejhg.5201319. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  48. Behar DM, Garrigan D, Kaplan ME, Mobasher Z, Rosengarten D, Karafet TM, Quintana-Murci L, Ostrer H, Skorecki K, Hammer MF. Contrasting patterns of Y chromosome variation in Ashkenazi Jewish and host non-Jewish European populations. Hum Genet. 2004;114:354–365. doi: 10.1007/s00439-003-1073-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  49. Carmelli D, Cavalli-Sforza LL. The genetic origin of the Jews: a multivariate approach. Hum Biol. 1979;51:41–61. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  50. Cochran G, Hardy J, Harpending H. Natural history of ashkenazi intelligence. J Biosoc Sci. 2006;38:659–693. doi: 10.1017/S0021932005027069. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  51. Need AC, Kasperaviciute D, Cirulli ET, Goldstein DB. A genome-wide genetic signature of Jewish ancestry perfectly separates individuals with and without full Jewish ancestry in a large random sample of European Americans. Genome Biol. 2009;10:R7. doi: 10.1186/gb-2009-10-1-r7. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  52. Tian C, Kosoy R, Nassir R, Lee A, Villoslada P, Klareskog L, Hammarstrom L, Garchon HJ, Pulver AE, Ransom M, Gregersen PK, Seldin MF. European Population Genetic Substructure: Further Definition of Ancestry Informative Markers for Distinguishing Among Diverse European Ethnic Groups. Mol Med. 2009;15:371–383. doi: 10.2119/molmed.2009.00094. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  53. Atzmon G, Hao L, Pe'er I, Velez C, Pearlman A, Palamara PF, Morrow B, Friedman E, Oddoux C, Burns E, Ostrer H. Abraham's children in the genome era: major Jewish diaspora populations comprise distinct genetic clusters with shared Middle Eastern Ancestry. Am J Hum Genet. 2010;86:850–859. doi: 10.1016/j.ajhg.2010.04.015. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  54. Behar DM, Yunusbayev B, Metspalu M, Metspalu E, Rosset S, Parik J, Rootsi S, Chaubey G, Kutuev I, Yudkovsky G, Khusnutdinova EK, Balanovsky O, Semino O, Pereira L, Comas D, Gurwitz D, Bonne-Tamir B, Parfitt T, Hammer MF, Skorecki K, Villems R. The genome-wide structure of the Jewish people. Nature. 2010;466:238–242. doi: 10.1038/nature09103. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  55. Xue Y, Zhang X, Huang N, Daly A, Gillson CJ, Macarthur DG, Yngvadottir B, Nica AC, Woodwark C, Chen Y, Conrad DF, Ayub Q, Mehdi SQ, Li P, Tyler-Smith C. Population differentiation as an indicator of recent positive selection in humans: an empirical evaluation. Genetics. 2009;183:1065–1077. doi: 10.1534/genetics.109.107722. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  56. Cavalli-Sforza LL, Piazza A. Human genomic diversity in Europe: a summary of recent research and prospects for the future. Eur J Hum Genet. 1993;1:3–18. doi: 10.1159/000472383. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  57. Cavalli-Sforza LL, Menozzi P, Piazza A. The history and geography of human genes. Princeton: Princeton University Press; 1994. [Google Scholar]
  58. Weber W. Untersuchungen von in Deutschland lebenden Türken in 23 Blutgruppensystemen; Bedeutung für die Biostatistik. Das Ärztliche Laboratorium. 1983;29:171–178. [Google Scholar]
  59. Walter H, Gölge M, Aksoy M, Bermik E, Sivasli A. Genetic serum protein markers (HP, GC, TF, PI) in four Turkish population samples. Int J Anthropol. 1992;7:27–32. doi: 10.1007/BF02447867. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  60. Brega A, Scacchi R, Cuccia M, Kirdar B, Peloso G, Corbo RM. Study of 15 protein polymorphisms in a sample of the Turkish population. Hum Biol. 1998;70:715–728. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  61. Tsiakalos G, Walter H, Hilling M, Schaarschmidt L. Investigations on the distribution of genetic polymorphisms in Greece. 2. Serum protein polymorphisms. Anthropol Anz. 1981;39:1–9. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  62. Tsiakalos G, Walter H, Hilling M. Investigation on the distribution of genetic polymorphisms in Greece. 3. Red cell enzyme polymorphisms and genetic distances. Anthropol Anz. 1981;39:244–254. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  63. Kouvatsi A, Triantaphyllidis CD. Gc and Tf subtypes in Greece. Hum hered. 1987;37:62–64. doi: 10.1159/000153679. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  64. Hundrieser J, Bremer S, Peinemann F, Stuhrmann M, Hoffknecht N, Wulf B, Schmidtke J, Reiss J, Maass G, Tümmler B. Frequency of the F508 deletion in the CFTR gene in Turkish cystic fibrosis patients. Hum Genet. 1990;85:409–410. doi: 10.1007/BF02428283. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  65. Devoto M, De Benedetti L, Seia M, Piceni Sereni L, Ferrari M, Bonduelle ML, Malfroot A, Lissens W, Balassopoulou A, Adam G, Loukopoulos D, Cochaux p, Vassart G, Szibor R, Hein J, Grade K, Berger W, Wainwright B, Romeo G. Haplotypes in cystic fibrosis patients with or without pancreatic insufficiency from four European populations. Genomics. 1989;5:894–898. doi: 10.1016/0888-7543(89)90131-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  66. Weber J, Aulehla-Scholz C, Kaiser R, Eigel A, Neugebauer M, Horst J, Olek K. Cystic fibrosis: typing 89 German families with linked DNA probes. Hum Genet. 1988;81:54–56. doi: 10.1007/BF00283729. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  67. Tummler B, Aschendorff A, Darnedde T, Fryburg K, Maass G, Hundrieser J. Marker haplotype association with growth in German cystic fibrosis patients. Hum Genet. 1990;84:267–273. doi: 10.1007/BF00200573. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  68. Schmidtke J, Krawczak M, Schwartz M, Alkan M, Bonduelle M, Bühler E, Chemke M, Darnedde T, Domagk J, Engel W, Frey D, Fryborg K, Halley D, Hundrieser J, Ladanyi L, Libaers I, Lissens W, Mächler M, Malik NJ, Morreau J, Neubauer V, Oostra B, Pape B, Poncin JE, Schinzel A, Simon P, Trefz FK, Tümmler B, Vassart G, Voss R. Linkage relationships and allelic associations of the cystic fibrosis locus and four marker loci. Hum Genet. 1987;76:337–343. doi: 10.1007/BF00272441. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  69. Dean M, Amos JA, Lynch J, Romeo G, Devoto M, Ward K, Halley D, Oostra B, Ferrari M, Russo S, Weir BS, Finn PB, Collins FS, Iannuzzi MC. Prenatal diagnosis and linkage disequilibrium with cystic fibrosis for markers surrounding D7S8. Hum Genet. 1990;85:275–278. doi: 10.1007/BF00206745. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  70. Beaudet A, Bowcock A, Buchwald M, Cavalli-Sforza L, Farrall M, King MC, Klinger K, Lalouel JM, Lathrop G, Naylor S, Ott J, Tsui LC, Wainwright B, Watkins P, White R, Williamson R. Linkage of cystic fibrosis to two tightly linked DNA markers: joint report from a collaborative study. Am J Hum Genet. 1986;39:681–693. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  71. Ramsay M, Williamson R, Estivill X, Wainwright BJ, Ho MF, Halford S, Kere J, Savilahti E, de la Chapelle A, Schwartz M, Super M, Farndon P, Harding C, Meredith L, Al-Jader L, Ferec C, Claustres M, Casais T, Nunes V, Gasparini P, Savoia A, Pignatti PP, Novelli G, Bennarelli M, Dallapicola B, Kalaydjieva L, Scambler PJ:. Haplotype analysis to determine the position of a mutation among closely linked DNA markers. Hum Mol Genet. 1993;2:1007–1014. doi: 10.1093/hmg/2.7.1007. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  72. Harris A, Beards F, Mathew C. Mutation analysis at the cystic fibrosis locus in the British population. Hum Genet. 1990;85:408–409. doi: 10.1007/BF02428282. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  73. McIntosh I, Curtis A, Lorenzo ML, Keston M, Gilfillan AJ, Morris G, Brock DJ. The haplotype distribution of the delta F508 mutation in cystic fibrosis families in Scotland. Hum Genet. 1990;85:419–420. doi: 10.1007/BF02428290. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  74. Mornet E, Simon-Bouy B, Serre JL, Estivill X, Farrall M, Williamson R, Boue J, Boue A. Genetic differences between cystic fibrosis with and without meconium ileus. Lancet. 1988;1:376–378. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(88)91180-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  75. Vidaud M, Kitzis A, Ferec C, Bozon D, Dumur V, Giraud G, David F, Pascal O, Auvinet M, Morel Y, Andre J, Chomel JC, Saleun JP, Farriaux JP, Roussel P, Labbé A, Dastugue B, Lucotte G, Monnier N, Foucaud P, goossens M, Feingold J, Kaplan JC. Confirmation of linkage disequilibrium between haplotype B (XV-2c, allele 1;KM-19, allele 2) and cystic fibrosis allele in the French population. Hum Genet. 1989;81:183–184. doi: 10.1007/BF00293899. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  76. Serre JL, Simon-Bouy B, Mornet E, Jaume-Roig B, Balassopoulou A, Schwartz M, Taillandier A, Boué J, Boué A. Studies of RFLP closely linked to the cystic fibrosis locus throughout Europe lead to new considerations in populations genetics. Hum Genet. 1990;84:449–454. doi: 10.1007/BF00195818. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  77. Ferec C, Verlingue C, Parent P. Desequilibre de liaison et marqueurs de l'ADN associes au gene de la fibrose kystique. J Genet Hum. 1989;37:407–423. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  78. Baranov VS, Ivashchenko TE, Gorbunova VN, Voronina OV, Gaĭtskhoki VS, Gol'tsov AA, Kaboev OK, Shvarts EI, Berlin YuA, Livshits LA, Buzhievskaya TI, Venozhinskis MT, Sokolov BP, Kalinin VN, Orlov AV, Romanenko OP, Luk'yanenko AN, Kapranov NI, Rachinskii SV. Allele polymorphism of the DNA loci MET, D7S8, D7S23, linked to the cystic fibrosis gene in some populations of the USSR, in high risk families and in cystic fibrosis patients. Genetika. 1991;27:113–121. (in Russian) [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  79. Voronina OV, Baranov VS, Gaitskhoki VS, Gorbunova VN, Ivashchenko TE, Shvartsman AL. Polymorphism of nucleotide sequences of human genomic DNA linked to a mucoviscidosis locus. Mol Gen Mikrobiol Virusol. 1990. pp. 14–17. (in Russian) [PubMed]
  80. Bal J, Maciejko D, Buława E, Mazurczak T. Zastosowanie sond molekularnych DNA w diagnostyce mukowiscydozy--analiza polimorfizmu dlugosci fragmentow restrykcyjnych (RFLP) w 22 rodzinach wysokiego ryzyka. Pol Tyg Lek. 1992;47:215–218. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  81. Akar N, Akar E, Misirlioğlu M, Avcu F, Yalçin A, Cin S. Search for genetic factors favoring thrombosis in Turkish population. Thromb Res. 1998;92:79–82. doi: 10.1016/S0049-3848(98)00113-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  82. Akar N, Misirlioğlu M, Akar E, Avcu F, Yalçin A, Sözüöz A. Prothrombin gene 20210 G-A mutation in the Turkish population. Am J Hematol. 1998;58:249. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1096-8652(199807)58:3<249::AID-AJH20>3.0.CO;2-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  83. Balta G, Gürgey A. Methylenetetrahydrofolate reductase (MTHFR) C677T mutation in Turkish patients with thrombosis. Turk J Pediatr. 1999;41:197–199. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  84. Gürgey A, Mesci L. The prevalence of factor V Leiden (1691 G-- > A) mutation in Turkey. Turk J Pediatr. 1997;39:313–315. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  85. Ozbek U, Tangün Y. Frequency of factor V Leiden (Arg506Gln) in Turkey. Br J Haematol. 1997;97:504–505. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2141.1997.d01-3343.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  86. Sazci A, Ergul E, Kaya G, Kara I. Genotype and allele frequencies of the polymorphic methylenetetrahydrofolate reductase gene in Turkey. Cell Biochem Funct. 2005;23:51–54. doi: 10.1002/cbf.1132. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  87. Sehirali S, Inal MM, Yildirim Y, Balim Z, Kosova B, Karamizrak T, Sanci M, Topcuoglu N, Tinar S. Prothrombin G20210A mutation in cases with recurrent miscarriage: a study of the mediterranean population. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2005;273:170–173. doi: 10.1007/s00404-005-0061-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  88. Antoniadi T, Hatzis T, Kroupis C, Economou-Petersen E, Petersen MB. Prevalence of factor V Leiden, prothrombin G20210A, and MTHFR C677T mutations in a Greek population of blood donors. Am J Hematol. 1999;61:265–267. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1096-8652(199908)61:4<265::AID-AJH8>3.0.CO;2-#. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  89. Pallaud C, Stranieri C, Sass C, Siest G, Pignatti F, Visvikis S. Candidate gene polymorphisms in cardiovascular disease: a comparative study of frequencies between a French and an Italian population. Clin Chem Lab Med. 2001;39:146–154. doi: 10.1515/CCLM.2001.025. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  90. Margaglione M, D'Andrea G, Giuliani N, Brancaccio V, De Lucia D, Grandone E, De Stefano V, Tonali PA, Di Minno G. Inherited prothrombotic conditions and premature ischemic stroke: sex difference in the association with factor V Leiden. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol. 1999;19:1751–1756. doi: 10.1161/01.atv.19.7.1751. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  91. Rosendaal FR, Doggen CJ, Zivelin A, Arruda VR, Aiach M, Siscovick DS, Hillarp A, Watzke HH, Bernardi F, Cumming AM, Preston FE, Reitsma PH. Geographic distribution of the 20210 G to A prothrombin variant. Thromb Haemost. 1998;79:706–708. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  92. Schwender S, Großmann R, Keller F. High prevalence of factor V Leiden mutation is detected in a north to south axis through Germany. Journal of Laboratory Medicine. 1997;21:347–352. [Google Scholar]
  93. Reuner KH, Ruf A, Grau A, Rickmann H, Stolz E, Jüttler E, Druschky KF, Patscheke H. Prothrombin gene G20210-- > A transition is a risk factor for cerebral venous thrombosis. Stroke. 1998;29:1765–1769. doi: 10.1161/01.str.29.9.1765. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  94. Junker R, Koch HG, Auberger K, Munchow N, Ehrenforth S, Nowak-Gottl U. Prothrombin G20210A gene mutation and further prothrombotic risk factors in childhood thrombophilia. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol. 1999;19:2568–2572. doi: 10.1161/01.atv.19.10.2568. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  95. Reuner KH, Ruf A, Kaps M, Druschky KF, Patscheke H. The mutation C677-- > T in the methylene tetrahydrofolate reductase gene and stroke. Thromb Haemost. 1998;79:450–451. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  96. O'Shaughnessy KM, Fu B, Ferraro F, Lewis I, Downing S, Morris NH. Factor V Leiden and thermolabile methylenetetrahydrofolate reductase gene variants in an East Anglian preeclampsia cohort. Hypertension. 1999;33:1338–1341. doi: 10.1161/01.hyp.33.6.1338. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  97. Croft SA, Daly ME, Steeds RP, Channer KS, Samani NJ, Hampton KK. The prothrombin 20210A allele and its association with myocardial infarction. Thromb Haemost. 1999;81:861–864. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  98. Morrison ER, Miedzybrodzka ZH, Campbell DM, Haites NE, Wilson BJ, Watson MS, Greaves M, Vickers MA. Prothrombotic genotypes are not associated with pre-eclampsia and gestational hypertension: results from a large population-based study and systematic review. Thromb Haemost. 2002;87:779–785. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  99. Schneider JA, Rees DC, Liu YT, Clegg JB. Worldwide distribution of a common methylenetetrahydrofolate reductase mutation. Am J Hum Genet. 1998;62:1258–1260. doi: 10.1086/301836. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  100. Alhenc-Gelas M, Arnaud E, Nicaud V, Aubry ML, Fiessinger JN, Aiach M, Emmerich J. Venous thromboembolic disease and the prothrombin, methylene tetrahydrofolate reductase and factor V genes. Thromb Haemost. 1999;81:506–510. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  101. Harrington DJ, Malefora A, Schmeleva V, Kapustin S, Papayan L, Blinov M, Harrington P, Mitchell M, Savidge GF. Genetic variations observed in arterial and venous thromboembolism -- relevance for therapy, risk prevention and prognosis. Clin Chem Lab Med. 2003;41:496–500. doi: 10.1515/CCLM.2003.075. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  102. Sawuła W, Banecka-Majkutewicz Z, Kadziński L, Jakóbkiewicz-Banecka J, Wegrzyn G, Nyka W, Banecki B. Homocysteine level and metabolism in ischemic stroke in the population of Northern Poland. Clin Biochem. 2009;42:442–447. doi: 10.1016/j.clinbiochem.2008.12.019. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  103. Lopaciuk S, Bykowska K, Kwiecinski H, Mickielewicz A, Czlonkowska A, Mendel T, Kuczynska-Zardzewialy A, Szelagowska D, Windyga J, Schröder W, Herrmann FH, Jedrzejowska H. Factor V Leiden, prothrombin gene G20210A variant, and methylenetetrahydrofolate reductase C677T genotype in young adults with ischemic stroke. Clin Appl Thromb Hemost. 2001;7:346–350. doi: 10.1177/107602960100700418. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  104. Nizankowska-Mogilnicka E, Adamek L, Grzanka P, Domagala TB, Sanak M, Krzanowski M, Szczeklik A. Genetic polymorphisms associated with acute pulmonary embolism and deep venous thrombosis. Eur Respir J. 2003;21:25–30. doi: 10.1183/09031936.03.00034302. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  105. Szperl M, Dzielinska Z, Roszczynko M, Malek LA, Makowiecka-Ciesla M, Demkow M, Kadziela J, Prejbisz A, Florczak E, Zielinski T, Januszewicz A, Ruzyllo W. Genetic variants in hypertensive patients with coronary artery disease and coexisting atheromatous renal artery stenosis. Med Sci Monit. 2008;14:CR611–616. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  106. Akcali C, Ozkur M, Erbagci Z, Benlier N, Aynacioglu AS. Association of insertion/deletion polymorphism of the angiotensin-converting enzyme gene with angio-oedema accompanying chronic urticaria but not chronic urticaria without angio-oedema or the autologous serum skin test response. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2008;22:83–86. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-3083.2007.02353.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  107. Comas D, Schmid H, Braeuer S, Flaiz C, Busquets A, Calafell F, Bertranpetit J, Scheil HG, Huckenbeck W, Efremovska L, Schmidt H. Alu insertion polymorphisms in the Balkans and the origins of the Aromuns. Ann Hum Genet. 2004;68:120–127. doi: 10.1046/j.1529-8817.2003.00080.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  108. Lichter-Konecki U, Schlotter M, Yaylak C, Ozgüç M, Coskun T, Ozalp I, Wendel U, Batzler U, Trefz FK, Konecki D. DNA haplotype analysis at the phenylalanine hydroxylase locus in the Turkish population. Hum Genet. 1989;81:373–376. doi: 10.1007/BF00283695. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  109. Stuhrmann M, Riess O, Monch E, Kurdoglu G. Haplotype analysis of the phenylalanine hydroxylase gene in Turkish phenylketonuria families. Clin Genet. 1989;36:117–121. doi: 10.1111/j.1399-0004.1989.tb03173.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  110. Chen SH, Giblett ER, Anderson JE, Fossum BL. Genetics of glutamic-pyruvic transaminase: its inheritance, common and rare variants, population distribution, and differences in catalytic activity. Ann Hum Genet. 1972;35:401–409. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  111. Moran CN, Vassilopoulos C, Tsiokanos A, Jamurtas AZ, Bailey ME, Montgomery HE, Wilson RH, Pitsiladis YP. The associations of ACE polymorphisms with physical, physiological and skill parameters in adolescents. Eur J Hum Genet. 2006;14:332–339. doi: 10.1038/sj.ejhg.5201550. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  112. Biondi G, Calabro V, Colonna-Romano S, Giangregorio M, Malaspina P, Petrucci R, Santolamazza C, Santolamazza P, Tramontano E, Battistuzzi G. Common and rare genetic variants of human red blood cell enzymes in Italy. Anthropol Anz. 1989;47:155–174. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  113. Dianzani I, Devoto M, Camaschella C, Saglio G, Ferrero GB, Cerone R, Romano C, Romeo G, Giovannini M, Riva E, Angeneydt F, Trefz FK, Okano Y, Woo SLC. Haplotype distribution and molecular defects at the phenylalanine hydroxylase locus in Italy. Hum Genet. 1990;86:69–72. doi: 10.1007/BF00205176. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  114. Santovito A, Selvaggi A, Cervella P, Castellano S, Bigatti MP, Sella G, Delpero M. Polymorphic Alu insertions in five North-West Italian populations. Am J Hum Biol. 2007;19:589–592. doi: 10.1002/ajhb.20605. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  115. Aulehla-Scholz C, Vorgerd M, Sautter E, Leupold D, Mahlmann R, Ullrich K, Olek K, Horst J. Phenylketonuria: distribution of DNA diagnostic patterns in German families. Hum genet. 1988;78:353–355. doi: 10.1007/BF00291734. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  116. Herrmann FH, Wulff K, Wehnert M, Seidlitz G, Guttler F. Haplotype analysis of classical and mild phenotype of phenylketonuria in the German Democratic Republic. Clin Genet. 1988;34:176–180. doi: 10.1111/j.1399-0004.1988.tb02859.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  117. Kompf J, Ritter H. Polymorphism of alanine aminotransferase (E.C.2.7.6.1): common and rare alleles. Hum Genet. 1979;51:287–292. doi: 10.1007/BF00283396. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  118. Schmidt S, Schone N, Ritz E. Association of ACE gene polymorphism and diabetic nephropathy? The Diabetic Nephropathy Study Group. Kidney Int. 1995;47:1176–1181. doi: 10.1038/ki.1995.167. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  119. Schunkert H, Hense HW, Holmer SR, Stender M, Perz S, Keil U, Lorell BH, Riegger GA. Association between a deletion polymorphism of the angiotensin-converting-enzyme gene and left ventricular hypertrophy. N Engl J Med. 1994;330:1634–1638. doi: 10.1056/NEJM199406093302302. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  120. Welch SG, Mills PR, Gaensslen RE. Phenotypic distributions of red cell glutamate-pyruvate transaminase (E.C.2.6.1.2) isoenzymes in British and New York populations. Humangenetik. 1975;27:59–62. doi: 10.1007/BF00283506. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  121. Narain Y, Yip A, Murphy T, Brayne C, Easton D, Evans JG, Xuereb J, Cairns N, Esiri MM, Furlong RA, Rubinsztein DC. The ACE gene and Alzheimer's disease susceptibility. J Med Genet. 2000;37:695–697. doi: 10.1136/jmg.37.9.695. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  122. Sullivan SE, Moore SD, Connor JM, King M, Cockburn F, Steinmann B, Gitzelmann R, Daiger SP, Woo SL. Haplotype distribution of the human phenylalanine hydroxylase locus in Scotland and Switzerland. Am J Hum Genet. 1989;44:652–659. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  123. de Bosschere JP, Dinh Khoi T, Quennehen F, Le Treut A, Fauchet R, Le Gall JY. Etude du polymorphisme génétique de quelques enzymes érythrocytaires dans la région de Rennes. Nouv Rev Fr Hematol. 1979;21:9–15. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  124. Abadie V, Lyonnet S, Melle D, Berthelon M, Caillaud C, Labrune Ph, Rey F, Rey J, Munnich A. Molecular basis of phenylketonuria in France. Developmental Brain Dysfunction. 1993;6:120–126. [Google Scholar]
  125. Kidd JR, Pakstis AJ, Zhao H, Lu RB, Okonofua FE, Odunsi A, Grigorenko E, Bonné-Tamir B, Friedlaender J, Schulz LO, Parnas J, Kidd KK. Haplotypes and linkage disequilibrium at the phenylalanine hydroxylase locus, PAH, in a global representation of populations. Am J Hum Genet. 2000;66:1882–1899. doi: 10.1086/302952. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  126. Solovenchuk LL. Polymorphic biochemical systems in the population of immigrant inhabitants of the northeastern USSR. I. The genetic structure and its heterogeneity due to sexual dimorphism and to the duration of separate groups living under extreme environmental conditions. Genetika. 1983;19:1327–1334. (in Russian) [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  127. Altukhov Iu P, Khil'chevskaia RI, Shurkhal AV. Polymorphism and heterozygosity levels of the Russian population of Moscow: data for 22 gene loci coding blood proteins. Genetika. 1981;17:548–555. (in Russian) [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  128. Nazarov IB, Woods DR, Montgomery HE, Shneider OV, Kazakov VI, Tomilin NV, Rogozkin VA. The angiotensin converting enzyme I/D polymorphism in Russian athletes. Eur J Hum Genet. 2001;9:797–801. doi: 10.1038/sj.ejhg.5200711. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  129. Jaruzelska J, Henriksen KF, Guttler F, Riess O, Borski K, Blin N, Slomski R. The codon 408 mutation associated with haplotype 2 is predominant in Polish families with phenylketonuria. Hum Genet. 1991;86:247–250. doi: 10.1007/BF00202402. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  130. Zygulska M, Eigel A, Aulehla-Scholz C, Pietrzyk JJ, Horst J. Molecular analysis of PKU haplotypes in the population of southern Poland. Hum Genet. 1991;86:292–294. doi: 10.1007/BF00202412. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  131. Schlesinger D, Dobosz T. GPT polymorphism in the Polish population. Arch Immunol Ther Exp. 1976;24:423–428. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  132. Grzeszczak W, Misztalski T. Is insertion/deletion polymorphism angiotensin-converting enzyme gene responsible for long-life? Przegl Lek. 2002;59:79–83. (in Polish) [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  133. Shen P, Lavi T, Kivisild T, Chou V, Sengun D, Gefel D, Shpirer I, Woolf E, Hillel J, Feldman MW, Oefner PJ. Reconstruction of patrilineages and matrilineages of Samaritans and other Israeli populations from Y-chromosome and mitochondrial DNA sequence variation. Hum Mutat. 2004;24:248–260. doi: 10.1002/humu.20077. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  134. Capelli C, Redhead N, Romano, Calì F, Lefranc G, Delague V, Megarbane A, Felice AE, Pascali VL, Neophytou PI, Poulli Z, Novelletto A, Malaspina P, Terrenato L, Berebbi A, Fellous M, Thomas MG, Goldstein DB. Population structure in the Mediterranean basin: a Y chromosome perspective. Ann Hum Genet. 2006;70:207–225. doi: 10.1111/j.1529-8817.2005.00224.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  135. Zalloua PA, Platt DE, El Sibai M, Khalife J, Makhoul N, Haber M, Xue Y, Izaabel H, Bosch E, Adams SM, Arroyo E, López-Parra AM, Aler M, Picornell A, Ramon M, Jobling MA, Comas D, Bertranpetit J, Wells RS, Tyler-Smith C. Genographic Consortium. Identifying genetic traces of historical expansions: Phoenician footprints in the Mediterranean. Am J Hum Genet. 2008;83:633–642. doi: 10.1016/j.ajhg.2008.10.012. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  136. Capelli C, Brisighelli F, Scarnicci F, Arredi B, Caglia' A, Vetrugno G, Tofanelli S, Onofri V, Tagliabracci A, Paoli G, Pascali VL. Y chromosome genetic variation in the Italian peninsula is clinal and supports an admixture model for the Mesolithic-Neolithic encounter. Mol Phylogenet Evol. 2007;44:228–239. doi: 10.1016/j.ympev.2006.11.030. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  137. Onofri V, Alessandrini F, Turchi C, Fraternale B, Buscemi L, Pesaresi M, Tagliabracci A. Y-chromosome genetic structure in sub-Apennine populations of Central Italy by SNP and STR analysis. Int J Legal Med. 2007;121:234–237. doi: 10.1007/s00414-007-0153-y. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  138. Francalacci P, Morelli L, Underhill PA, Lillie AS, Passarino G, Useli A, Madeddu R, Paoli G, Tofanelli S, Calò CM, Ghiani ME, Varesi L, Memmi M, Vona G, Lin AA, Oefner P, Cavalli-Sforza LL. Peopling of three Mediterranean islands (Corsica, Sardinia, and Sicily) inferred by Y-chromosome biallelic variability. Am J Phys Anthropol. 2003;121:270–279. doi: 10.1002/ajpa.10265. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  139. Semino O, Passarino G, Oefner PJ, Lin AA, Arbuzova S, Beckman LE, De Benedictis G, Francalacci P, Kouvatsi A, Limborska S, Marcikiae M, Mika A, Mika B, Primorac D, Santachiara-Benerecetti AS, Cavalli-Sforza LL, Underhill PA. The genetic legacy of Paleolithic Homo sapiens sapiens in extant Europeans: a Y chromosome perspective. Science. 2000;290:1155–1159. doi: 10.1126/science.290.5494.1155. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  140. Wells RS, Yuldasheva N, Ruzibakiev R, Underhill PA, Evseeva I, Blue-Smith J, Jin L, Su B, Pitchappan R, Shanmugalakshmi S, Balakrishnan K, Read M, Pearson NM, Zerjal T, Webster MT, Zholoshvili I, Jamarjashvili E, Gambarov S, Nikbin B, Dostiev A, Aknazarov O, Zalloua P, Tsoy I, Kitaev M, Mirrakhimov M, Chariev A, Bodmer WF. The Eurasian heartland: a continental perspective on Y-chromosome diversity. Proc Nat Acad Sci USA. 2001;98:10244–10249. doi: 10.1073/pnas.171305098. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  141. Kayser M, Lao O, Anslinger K, Augustin C, Bargel G, Edelmann J, Elias S, Heinrich M, Henke J, Henke L, Hohoff C, Illing A, Jonkisz A, Kuzniar P, Lebioda A, Lessig R, Lewicki S, Maciejewska A, Monies DM, Pawłowski R, Poetsch M, Schmid D, Schmidt U, Schneider PM, Stradmann-Bellinghausen B, Szibor R, Wegener R, Wozniak M, Zoledziewska M, Roewer L, Dobosz T, Ploski R. Significant genetic differentiation between Poland and Germany follows present-day political borders, as revealed by Y-chromosome analysis. Hum Genet. 2005;117:428–443. doi: 10.1007/s00439-005-1333-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  142. Balanovsky O, Rootsi S, Pshenichnov A, Kivisild T, Churnosov M, Evseeva I, Pocheshkhova E, Boldyreva M, Yankovsky N, Balanovska E, Villems R. Two sources of the Russian patrilineal heritage in their Eurasian context. Am J Hum Genet. 2008;82:236–250. doi: 10.1016/j.ajhg.2007.09.019. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  143. Marjanovic D, Fornarino S, Montagna S, Primorac D, Hadziselimovic R, Vidovic S, Pojskic N, Battaglia V, Achilli A, Drobnic K, Andjelinovic S, Torroni A, Santachiara-Benerecetti AS, Semino O. The peopling of modern Bosnia-Herzegovina: Y-chromosome haplogroups in the three main ethnic groups. Ann Hum Genet. 2005;69:757–763. doi: 10.1111/j.1529-8817.2005.00190.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  144. Bosch E, Calafell F, González-Neira A, Flaiz C, Mateu E, Scheil HG, Huckenbeck W, Efremovska L, Mikerezi I, Xirotiris N, Grasa C, Schmidt H, Comas D. Paternal and maternal lineages in the Balkans show a homogeneous landscape over linguistic barriers, except for the isolated Aromuns. Ann Hum Genet. 2006;70:459–487. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-1809.2005.00251.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  145. Cinnioğlu C, King R, Kivisild T, Kalfoğlu E, Atasoy S, Cavalleri GL, Lillie AS, Roseman CC, Lin AA, Prince K, Oefner PJ, Shen P, Semino O, Cavalli-Sforza LL, Underhill PA. Excavating Y-chromosome haplotype strata in Anatolia. Hum Genet. 2004;114:127–148. doi: 10.1007/s00439-003-1031-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  146. Regueiro M, Cadenas AM, Gayden T, Underhill PA, Herrera RJ. Iran: tricontinental nexus for Y-chromosome driven migration. Hum Hered. 2006;61:132–143. doi: 10.1159/000093774. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  147. Abu-Amero KK, Hellani A, González AM, Larruga AM, Cabrera VM, Underhill PA. Saudi Arabian Y-Chromosome diversity and its relationship with nearby regions. BMC Genet. 2009;10:59. doi: 10.1186/1471-2156-10-59. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  148. Zalloua PA, Xue Y, Khalife J, Makhoul N, Debiane L, Platt DE, Royyuru AK, Herrera RJ, Hernanz DF, Blue-Smith J, Wells RS, Comas D, Bertranpetit J, Tyler-Smith C. Genographic Consortium. Y-chromosomal diversity in Lebanon is structured by recent historical events. Am J Hum Genet. 2008;82:873–882. doi: 10.1016/j.ajhg.2008.01.020. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  149. Flores C, Maca-Meyer N, Larruga JM, Cabrera VM, Karadsheh N, Gonzalez AM. Isolates in a corridor of migrations: a high-resolution analysis of Y-chromosome variation in Jordan. J Hum Genet. 2005;50:435–441. doi: 10.1007/s10038-005-0274-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  150. Cadenas AM, Zhivotovsky LA, Cavalli-Sforza LL, Underhill PA, Herrera RJ. Y-chromosome diversity characterizes the Gulf of Oman. Eur J Hum Genet. 2008;16:374–386. doi: 10.1038/sj.ejhg.5201934. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  151. Luis JR, Rowold DJ, Regueiro M, Caeiro B, Cinnioğlu C, Roseman C, Underhill PA, Cavalli-Sforza LL, Herrera RJ. The Levant versus the Horn of Africa: evidence for bidirectional corridors of human migrations. Am J Hum Genet. 2004;74:532–544. doi: 10.1086/382286. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  152. Cruciani F, Santolamazza P, Shen P, Macaulay V, Moral P, Olckers A, Modiano D, Holmes S, Destro-Bisol G, Coia V, Wallace DC, Oefner PJ, Torroni A, Cavalli-Sforza LL, Scozzari R, Underhill PA. A back migration from Asia to sub-Saharan Africa is supported by high-resolution analysis of human Y-chromosome haplotypes. Am J Hum Genet. 2002;70:1197–1214. doi: 10.1086/340257. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  153. Arredi B, Poloni ES, Paracchini S, Zerjal T, Fathallah DM, Makrelouf M, Pascali VL, Novelletto A, Tyler-Smith C. A predominantly neolithic origin for Y-chromosomal DNA variation in North Africa. Am J Hum Genet. 2004;75:338–345. doi: 10.1086/423147. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  154. Semino O, Santachiara-Benerecetti AS, Falaschi F, Cavalli-Sforza LL, Underhill PA. Ethiopians and Khoisan share the deepest clades of the human Y-chromosome phylogeny. Am J Hum Genet. 2002;70:265–268. doi: 10.1086/338306. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  155. Lovell A, Moreau C, Yotova V, Xiao F, Bourgeois S, Gehl D, Bertranpetit J, Schurr E, Labuda D. Ethiopia: between Sub-Saharan Africa and western Eurasia. Ann Hum Genet. 2005;69:275–287. doi: 10.1046/J.1469-1809.2005.00152.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  156. Zietkiewicz E, Yotova V, Gehl D, Wambach T, Arrieta I, Batzer M, Cole DE, Hechtman P, Kaplan F, Modiano D, Moisan JP, Michalski R, Labuda D. Haplotypes in the dystrophin DNA segment point to a mosaic origin of modern human diversity. Am J Hum Genet. 2003;73:994–1015. doi: 10.1086/378777. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  157. Bourgeois S, Yotova V, Wang S, Bourtoumieu S, Moreau C, Michalski R, Moisan JP, Hill K, Hurtado AM, Ruiz-Linares A, Labuda D. X-chromosome lineages and the settlement of the Americas. Am J Phys Anthropol. 2009;140:417–428. doi: 10.1002/ajpa.21084. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  158. Behar DM, Metspalu E, Kivisild T, Achilli A, Hadid Y, Tzur S, Pereira L, Amorim A, Quintana-Murci L, Majamaa K, Herrnstadt C, Howell N, Balanovsky O, Kutuev I, Pshenichnov A, Gurwitz D, Bonne-Tamir B, Torroni A, Villems R, Skorecki K. The matrilineal ancestry of Ashkenazi Jewry: portrait of a recent founder event. Am J Hum Genet. 2006;78:487–497. doi: 10.1086/500307. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  159. Behar DM, Metspalu E, Kivisild T, Rosset S, Tzur S, Hadid Y, Yudkovsky G, Rosengarten D, Pereira L, Amorim A, Kutuev I, Gurwitz D, Bonne-Tamir B, Villems R, Skorecki K. Counting the founders: the matrilineal genetic ancestry of the Jewish Diaspora. PLoS One. 2008;3:e2062. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0002062. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  160. Irwin J, Saunier J, Strouss K, Paintner C, Diegoli T, Sturk K, Kovatsi L, Brandstätter A, Cariolou MA, Parson W, Parsons TJ. Mitochondrial control region sequences from northern Greece and Greek Cypriots. Int J Legal Med. 2008;122:87–89. doi: 10.1007/s00414-007-0173-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  161. Babalini C, Martínez-Labarga C, Tolk HV, Kivisild T, Giampaolo R, Tarsi T, Contini I, Barać L, Janićijević B, Martinović Klarić I, Pericić M, Sujoldzić A, Villems R, Biondi G, Rudan P, Rickards O. The population history of the Croatian linguistic minority of Molise (southern Italy): a maternal view. Eur J Hum Genet. 2005;13:902–912. doi: 10.1038/sj.ejhg.5201439. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  162. Ottoni C, Martínez-Labarga C, vitelli L, Scano G, Fabrini E, Contini I, Biondi G, Rickards O. Human mitochondrial DNA variation in Southern Italy. Ann Hum Biol. 2009;36:785–811. doi: 10.3109/03014460903198509. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  163. Poetscha M, Wittigb H, Krause D, Lignitz E. Mitochondrial diversity of a northeast German population sample. Forensic Sci Int. 2003;137:125–132. doi: 10.1016/j.forsciint.2003.06.001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  164. Tetzlaff S, Brandstätter A, Wegener R, Parson W, Weirich V. Mitochondrial DNA population data of HVS-I and HVS-II sequences from a northeast German sample. Forensic Sci Int. 2007;172:218–224. doi: 10.1016/j.forsciint.2006.12.016. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  165. Helgason A, Hickey E, Goodacre S, Bosnes V, Stefánsson K, Ward R, Sykes B. mtDNA and the Islands of the North Atlantic: Estimating the Proportions of Norse and Gaelic Ancestry. Am J Hum Genet. 2001;68:723–737. doi: 10.1086/318785. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  166. Malyarchuk BA, Grzybowski T, Derenko MV, Czarny J, Woźniak M, Miścicka-Śliwka D. Mitochondrial DNA variability in Poles and Russians. Ann Hum Genet. 2002;66:261–283. doi: 10.1046/j.1469-1809.2002.00116.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Supplementary Materials

Additional file 1

Allele frequencies tables, Tables S1-S7. The file contains seven tables that give the allele frequencies of the employed polymorphisms.

Click here for file (546.5KB, DOC)

Articles from Biology Direct are provided here courtesy of BMC

RESOURCES