Approximately 300,000 men around the globe self-identify as Ashkenazi Levites, of whom two thirds were previously shown to descend from a single male. The paucity of whole Y-chromosome sequences precluded conclusive identification of this ancestor’s age, geographic origin and migration patterns. Here, we report the variation of 486 Y-chromosomes within the Ashkenazi and non-Ashkenazi Levite R1a clade, other Ashkenazi Jewish paternal lineages, as well as non-Levite Jewish and non-Jewish R1a samples. Cumulatively, the emerging profile is of a Middle Eastern ancestor, self-affiliating as Levite, and carrying the highly resolved R1a-Y2619 lineage, which was likely a minor haplogroup among the Hebrews. A star-like phylogeny, coalescing similarly to other Ashkenazi paternal lineages, ~1,743 ybp, suggests it to be one of the Ashkenazi paternal founders; to have expanded as part of the overall Ashkenazi demographic expansion, without special relation to the Levite affiliation; and to have subsequently spread to non-Ashkenazi Levites.

Southern Arabia and the Horn of Africa are important geographic centers for the study of human population history because a great deal of migration has characterized these regions since the first emergence of humans out of Africa. Analysis of Jewish groups provides a unique opportunity to investigate more recent population histories in this area. Mitochondrial DNA is used to investigate the maternal evolutionary history and can be combined with historical and linguistic data to test various population histories. In this study, we assay mitochondrial control region DNA sequence and diagnostic coding variants in Yemenite (n = 45) and Ethiopian (n = 41) Jewish populations, as well as in neighboring non-Jewish Yemeni (n = 50) and Ethiopian (previously published Semitic speakers) populations. We investigate their population histories through a comparison of haplogroup distributions and phylogenetic networks. A high frequency of sub-Saharan African L haplogroups was found in both Jewish populations, indicating a significant African maternal contribution unlike other Jewish Diaspora populations. However, no identical haplotypes were shared between the Yemenite and Ethiopian Jewish populations, suggesting very little gene flow between the populations and potentially distinct maternal population histories. These new data are also used to investigate alternate population histories in the context of historical and linguistic data. Specifically, Yemenite Jewish mitochondrial diversity reflects potential descent from ancient Israeli exiles and shared African and Middle Eastern ancestry with little evidence for large-scale conversion of local Yemeni. In contrast, the Ethiopian Jewish population appears to be a subset of the larger Ethiopian population suggesting descent primarily through conversion of local women.

No abstract

No abstract

Systematic performance comparing the results of exome-sequencing as a single test replacing Sanger-sequencing of targeted gene(s) is still lacking. In this study we compared Sanger-sequencing results of 258 genes to those obtained from next generation sequencing (NGS) using two exome-sequencing enrichment kits: Agilent-SureSelectQXT and Illumina-Nextera. Sequencing was performed on leukocytes and buccal-derived DNA from a single individual, and all 258 genes were sequenced a total of 11 times (using different sequencing methods and DNA sources). Sanger-sequencing was completed for all exons, including flanking ±8bp regions. For the 258 genes, NGS mean coverage was >20x for >98% and >91% of the regions targeted by SureSelect and Nextera, respectively. Overall, 449 variants were identified in at least one experiment, and 407/449 (90.6%) were detected by all. Of the 42 discordant variants, 23 were determined as true calls, summing-up to a truth set of 430 variants. Sensitivity of true-variant detection was 99% for Sanger-sequencing and 97%-100% for the NGS experiments. Mean false-positive rates were 3.7E-6 for Sanger-sequencing, 2.5E-6 for SureSelect-NGS and 5.2E-6 for Nextera-NGS. Our findings suggest a high overall concordance between Sanger-sequencing and NGS. Both methods demonstrated false positive and false negative calls and similar performances. Consequently, high clinical suspicion for a specific diagnosis should override negative results of either Sanger-sequencing or NGS.