PDA

View Full Version : R1b and Native Americans



ericrdpilot
15-07-14, 05:18
The more I learn about genetics's, the more confused I get. Many native tribes in the America's have a large percentage of the R1b haplogroup. This seems to be the only European haplogroup that made its way to the across the Atlantic. Any one have an opinion on this?

bicicleur
15-07-14, 08:44
is it haplogroup R1 or R1b ?

Aberdeen
15-07-14, 14:29
This has been discussed before. In some cases, it's reported as R, not further defined, but wherever there's sufficient information available, it's clearly R1b. For example, the Ojibwe appear to be nearly 80% R1B and only 4% other "European" Y haplotypes, but it's nevertheless been assumed by researchers so far that all the R1b is from post-contact sources. Interestingly enough, the non-Dene groups that seem to have high R1b are also the groups that have significant mtDNA X2. Among the Ojibwe, the amount of X2 is 22%, I believe.

My own opinion is that it doesn't make sense to assume that all the R1b is recent European, unless there's a problem with the sampling methods. Although I do think that a problem with the sampling methods is a definite possibility, given the small sampling sizes so far, and the fact that the more traditional Native people seem to shun DNA testing because of doubts about the motives of the testers.

From what I've seen, the position of any professional geneticists who've commented on the issue seems to be "All the R1b is recent, post-contact European DNA and the reason we know it must be is because any subclade information shows that it's the same subclades as European R1b, so shut the eff up about the whole subject."

FrankN
15-07-14, 18:37
If I understand correctly, the Ojibwe are geographically linked to the "Old Copper Complex", and the "Hopewell tradition". Do such linkages also exist for other Native American tribes with elevated percentages of hgs R/X2?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Copper_Complex
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hopewell_tradition

Aberdeen
15-07-14, 19:03
If I understand correctly, the Ojibwe are geographically linked to the "Old Copper Complex", and the "Hopewell tradition". Do such linkages also exist for other Native American tribes with elevated percentages of hgs R/X2?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Copper_Complex
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hopewell_tradition

Some of the other tribes that have elevated levels of R1b are in northwestern Canada and in some cases are Dene. Plus, there are apparently high rates of R1b among the Dene who migrated into the southern U.S. about 400 years ago (the Navaho and Apache). Of course, there are other tribes in eastern and central North America that have significant amounts of R1b but they also have significant amounts of other "European" Y haplotypes and a history of heavy intermarriage with whites, so I wouldn't make too much of the R1b in those tribes - examples are MicMac, Quebec Cree and Cherokee. But it is odd that at least one Dene tribe has about 40% R1b and apparently no other "European" haplotypes and that the Ojibwe, which historical records would suggest have less admixture than some tribes, have nearly 80% R1b and only about 3% other "European" R1b. So the distribution might suggest that some group of Siberian R1b types, perhaps distant descendants of Mal"ta Boy's relatives, migrated across the Bering Straits after the initial peopling of the Americas and that some of them eventually settled around the Great Lakes, where there was copper to be had. Except that in order for that theory to work, the R1b should consist of unique subclades, and I'm not aware of anyone finding any so far.

At this point, I'd still be inclined to consider the possibility of sampling issues. If you look up the original studies, the number of samples is fairly small, and I don't know what the selection criteria were.

oriental
15-07-14, 20:22
I think there are some R1b in Nepal.

Aberdeen
15-07-14, 20:29
I think there are some R1b in Nepal.

There's R1b in many parts of the world, but none to speak of in Siberia. In any case, the R1b among Native Americans doesn't seem to differ from European DNA. If the subclades were markedly different, I think someone would have noticed. The amount of R1b among some Native American groups can be explained by recent admixture, but the amount that seems to be there in some tribes (all out of proportion to evidence for admixture and all out of proportion to other "European" Y haplotypes) just doesn't seem to fit any reasonable explanation, IMO.

FrankN
15-07-14, 21:22
Some of the other tribes that have elevated levels of R1b are in northwestern Canada and in some cases are Dene. Plus, there are apparently high rates of R1b among the Dene who migrated into the southern U.S. about 400 years ago (the Navaho and Apache). Of course, there are other tribes in eastern and central North America that have significant amounts of R1b but they also have significant amounts of other "European" Y haplotypes and a history of heavy intermarriage with whites, so I wouldn't make too much of the R1b in those tribes - examples are MicMac, Quebec Cree and Cherokee. But it is odd that at least one Dene tribe has about 40% R1b and apparently no other "European" haplotypes and that the Ojibwe, which historical records would suggest have less admixture than some tribes, have nearly 80% R1b and only about 3% other "European" R1b. So the distribution might suggest that some group of Siberian R1b types, perhaps distant descendants of Mal"ta Boy's relatives, migrated across the Bering Straits after the initial peopling of the Americas and that some of them eventually settled around the Great Lakes, where there was copper to be had. Except that in order for that theory to work, the R1b should consist of unique subclades, and I'm not aware of anyone finding any so far.

At this point, I'd still be inclined to consider the possibility of sampling issues. If you look up the original studies, the number of samples is fairly small, and I don't know what the selection criteria were.
Thanks! That doesn't really look like a R1b spread along the Mississippi system promoted by the Hopewell tradition. Do we know about sub-clades? In a post-Columbian scenario, escaped Yoruba slaves might have played a role, especially a concerns tribes in the SE USA. The Ojibve could have shown a special kind of hospitality to early French trappers and traders, many of which might have originated in R1b-rich areas such as the Bay of Biscay.
There is the possible Nordic connection, and Vikings might not have been the first people making it from Scandinavia via Iceland and Greenland to North America (but such a scenario would of course imply substantial R1b presence on the Norwegian coast during earlier climate optimums, i.e. at least during the Roman age, which is questionable). Nevertheless, a spread along the east coast, as well as via the Hudson Bay and the river & lake systems of the North-West Territories could explain quite a lot of the geographical pattern. A hypothetical Phoenician link can probably be ruled out - it should have transported other hgs on top of R1b, and carried it further into the Caribbean and the Gulf of Mexico. In the Mal'ta boy scenario, I would expect R1b to be similarly highly concentrated in Eastern Siberia as it is in Alaska , which it isn't. Furthermore, as Ojibwe appear to have originally lived much closer to the East Coast, how did they get there from Alaska without leaving genetic footprints?
It's all quite mysterious. I guess, aside from a deeper breakdown of the genetic structure of Native Americans, we also need to know a lot more about their prehistory.

Aberdeen
16-07-14, 01:38
Thanks! That doesn't really look like a R1b spread along the Mississippi system promoted by the Hopewell tradition. Do we know about sub-clades? In a post-Columbian scenario, escaped Yoruba slaves might have played a role, especially a concerns tribes in the SE USA. The Ojibve could have shown a special kind of hospitality to early French trappers and traders, many of which might have originated in R1b-rich areas such as the Bay of Biscay.
There is the possible Nordic connection, and Vikings might not have been the first people making it from Scandinavia via Iceland and Greenland to North America (but such a scenario would of course imply substantial R1b presence on the Norwegian coast during earlier climate optimums, i.e. at least during the Roman age, which is questionable). Nevertheless, a spread along the east coast, as well as via the Hudson Bay and the river & lake systems of the North-West Territories could explain quite a lot of the geographical pattern. A hypothetical Phoenician link can probably be ruled out - it should have transported other hgs on top of R1b, and carried it further into the Caribbean and the Gulf of Mexico. In the Mal'ta boy scenario, I would expect R1b to be similarly highly concentrated in Eastern Siberia as it is in Alaska , which it isn't. Furthermore, as Ojibwe appear to have originally lived much closer to the East Coast, how did they get there from Alaska without leaving genetic footprints?
It's all quite mysterious. I guess, aside from a deeper breakdown of the genetic structure of Native Americans, we also need to know a lot more about their prehistory.

As far as I know, nobody has looked at the samples deeply enough to check the subclades. However, I would assume that by now some of the Ojibwe would have had their DNA tested for personal reasons, and I haven't read anything about unique subclades of R1b showing up among Native people who chose to get tested. As for the east coast thing, the levels of R1b are lower among the more eastern tribes than they are among the Ojibwe and some of the Dene, and they also show significant levels of other "European" haplotypes, such as R1A and I1, so the R1b in those tribes can be explained by significant recent European admixture. The oddly high levels of R1b show up among some of the Dene and also in some tribes that traditionally lived above and below the Great Lakes (Ojibwe and a few other groups), rather than on the east coast. Maybe the Hudson Bay Company only employed Irishmen. Except I know that wasn't the case. And it wouldn't explain why the Apache and Navaho, Dene speaking people who migrated from northern Canada to the southwestern part of the U.S. a few hundred years ago, appear to have surprisingly high levels of R1b.

I can't see a good explanation for the situation.

ericrdpilot
16-07-14, 05:08
Well, maybe we will figure it out someday. Thanks for your thoughts. I will contemplate on it some more.

bicicleur
17-07-14, 14:07
There's R1b in many parts of the world, but none to speak of in Siberia. In any case, the R1b among Native Americans doesn't seem to differ from European DNA. If the subclades were markedly different, I think someone would have noticed. The amount of R1b among some Native American groups can be explained by recent admixture, but the amount that seems to be there in some tribes (all out of proportion to evidence for admixture and all out of proportion to other "European" Y haplotypes) just doesn't seem to fit any reasonable explanation, IMO.

we all know now from ancient DNA, R was in Siberia 35000 years ago, before the last ice age
they seem to be swept away by the ice age, but these fugitives did quite well

there is some R1 left in the extreme far east of Siberia, next to Alaska, another indication that not all R1 among native Americans is due to European admixture

JS Bach
19-12-14, 06:48
There's R1b in many parts of the world, but none to speak of in Siberia. In any case, the R1b among Native Americans doesn't seem to differ from European DNA. If the subclades were markedly different, I think someone would have noticed. The amount of R1b among some Native American groups can be explained by recent admixture, but the amount that seems to be there in some tribes (all out of proportion to evidence for admixture and all out of proportion to other "European" Y haplotypes) just doesn't seem to fit any reasonable explanation, IMO.

There's a new paper out by Stanford, Bradley, and Oppenheimer on the genetic aspects of the Solutrean hypothesis here: http://www.academia.edu/9562579/Solu...th_in_the_room (http://www.academia.edu/9562579/Solutrean_hypothesis_genetics_the_mammoth_in_the_r oom) In the paper, this is what they say about Y-dna R1 in Native Americans:

“In geographic plots, R1 frequencies in native populations, of the Great Lakes/ Algonquian-speakers stand out as the great majority, having among the highest worldwide R1 rates (e.g., Malhi et al. 2008; and World frequency map as of 1 June 2014), even higher than non-western Europe and far higher than other Native Americans (c. 0 – 10 per cent). When further characterized in the USA (Hammer et al. 2005), 97 per cent of R1 had the M269 SNP (unambiguous Single Nucleotide Polymorphism), which defines R1b1b, the main West European Y-haplogroup, which possibly originated there before the LGM (Morelli et al. 2010). The less-reliable P25 was used in an earlier US study (Zegura et al. 2004).

The main problem with interpreting unusually high Y-R1 frequencies in Northeast Native Americans, is that the published SNP characterization is still too poorly resolved in all studies to differentiate ancient migration from post-Columbian introduced R1. STR (Short Tandem Repeats – more rapidly mutating, but less reliable than SNPs) characterization of R1, however, indicates a substantial proportion of derived, STR-haplotypes not shared with Europeans (Bolnick, Bolnick, and Smith 2006, Fig 6b; Zegura et al. 2004, Fig. 5). This would not be expected if those R1 STR types were all recent European introductions, and could be consistent with being derived from more ancient founders. While better phylogenetic resolution is needed, these results, far from refuting the SH, are more consistent with its predictions than solely with massive recent male replacement.”

So, some people have noticed STR differences, at least. I suspect there’s reluctance on the part of academic geneticists to consider the Solutrean hypothesis for fear of harming their careers or not getting the funding. There are many examples of this overlooking the ancient trans-Atlantic crossing scenario in other papers illustrated throughout the paper. That’s why the paper’s titled: “Solutrean hypothesis: genetics, the mammoth in the room”.

Also, in the Lazaridis et al 2014 paper they give an admixture graph on page 11 of the paper here: http://genetics.med.harvard.edu/reic...Ancestries.pdf (http://genetics.med.harvard.edu/reich/Reich_Lab/Welcome_files/2014_Nature_Lazaridis_EuropeThreeAncestries.pdf)

For the highest level, K=20, the Algonquin bar-graph appears to have some European-like admixture, although it seems to lack the West Asian component -- though maybe the sample size isn’t sufficient and it is recent European admixture.

Taranis
19-12-14, 13:35
When further characterized in the USA (Hammer et al. 2005), 97 per cent of R1 had the M269 SNP (unambiguous Single Nucleotide Polymorphism), which defines R1b1b, the main West European Y-haplogroup, which possibly originated there before the LGM (Morelli et al. 2010).

Honestly, I find it quite ridiculous that anybody would still adhere to the LGM Cantabrian refuge origin hypothesis for R1b, because its totally against all the evidence that we do have. The oldest sample of R1b in Europe is from the Kromsdorf site, from circa 2600 to 2500 BC, and there hasn't been a single evidence of R1b from the multitude of Neolithic sites. Indeed, we shouldn't expect one, because the "tree" of R1b suggests that its oldest subclades were located decisively outside of western Europe.

I think its fairly obvious that this Native American R1b must be of more recent European origin.

ElHorsto
19-12-14, 14:52
Also, in the Lazaridis et al 2014 paper they give an admixture graph on page 11 of the paper here: http://genetics.med.harvard.edu/reic...Ancestries.pdf (http://genetics.med.harvard.edu/reich/Reich_Lab/Welcome_files/2014_Nature_Lazaridis_EuropeThreeAncestries.pdf)

For the highest level, K=20, the Algonquin bar-graph appears to have some European-like admixture, although it seems to lack the West Asian component -- though maybe the sample size isn’t sufficient and it is recent European admixture.

It is possible that this admixture comes directly from Europe (Celts? Basques? I also read somewhere someone proposing that Basque language originated in America, odd thought.).
But the European-like admixture in Amerindians like Algonquin is always accompanied by East-Asian admixture (yellow) at K<12, which is otherwise lacking (not really lacking, but subsumed under the "new" Chipewyan component). For K>11 it gets almost subsumed under Chipewyan.
Second, the Aleuts and Tlingit appear even more "european"-like admixed than Algonquins, which is very unlikely. I think the European-like plus East-Asian admixture in Algonquin is just a lightly altered "Chipewyan" component where the calculator failed to identify it as such due to the minor alterations. A similar effect like for Chipewyan can be seen for the Kalash. Therefore I rather believe this European-like admixture comes from paleolithic siberian. Maybe even R1b came from paleolithic siberia.

Aberdeen
19-12-14, 16:40
It is possible that this admixture comes directly from Europe (Celts? Basques? I also read somewhere someone proposing that Basque language originated in America, odd thought.).
But the European-like admixture in Amerindians like Algonquin is always accompanied by East-Asian admixture (yellow) at K<12, which is otherwise lacking (not really lacking, but subsumed under the "new" Chipewyan component). For K>11 it gets almost subsumed under Chipewyan.
Second, the Aleuts and Tlingit appear even more "european"-like admixed than Algonquins, which is very unlikely. I think the European-like plus East-Asian admixture in Algonquin is just a lightly altered "Chipewyan" component where the calculator failed to identify it as such due to the minor alterations. A similar effect like for Chipewyan can be seen for the Kalash. Therefore I rather believe this European-like admixture comes from paleolithic siberian. Maybe even R1b came from paleolithic siberia.

One would expect to see more European admixture showing up in autosomal samples from eastern Algonquins simply because they've been in touch with Europeans longer than any group of Native Americans other than Mexicans and some South American groups and are in fact fairly admixed. That's why they have significant levels of other "European" Y DNA. I do find it puzzling that some other Native groups with less recorded European admixture have huge amounts of R1b and very little trace of other "European" haplotypes. I also find it odd that high levels of R1b don't show up among groups that have been in contact with the Spanish for centuries. However, given the small number of samples and the bias against DND testing among the more traditional Native types, I don't think we can rule out sample bias.

LeBrok
19-12-14, 18:29
Could have been from Vikings, that's 1,000 years ago. Long enough for R1b to spread around.

Angela
19-12-14, 19:20
Does anyone know off hand how the levels of R1b correlate with the levels of mtDna X2 in North American Indians? Are both high in the same tribes? What might that tell us?

Aberdeen
20-12-14, 03:03
Does anyone know off hand how the levels of R1b correlate with the levels of mtDna X2 in North American Indians? Are both high in the same tribes? What might that tell us?

There is some correlation between Y haplotype R1b and mtDNA X2. The most noticeable example is the Ojibwe tribe, a quite numerous group centred around the Great Lakes. Mostly R1b and over 20% X2 according to a couple of studies, although the sample sizes were small. And it can be confusing because the Algonquin, Ojibwe, Chippewa and Saulteaux tribes are closely related and different bands are given different labels by different researchers. Although the Chipewayan are a different group than the Chippewa. Confused yet?

Melancon
20-12-14, 03:28
Actually guys; I believe it is R-M173. I would say that Natives with R1b have a recent European paternal contribution. R1b and R-M173 are split separated by thousands upon thousands of years; and I don't believe they are the same clades, but both are derivative of R.


It is about as significant as finding E or E1b1b seen both in fair-skinned Europeans (E-V13) and Sub-Saharan Africans with dark skin.

sparkey
20-12-14, 08:22
Actually guys; I believe it is R-M173. I would say that Natives with R1b have a recent European paternal contribution. R1b and R-M173 are split separated by thousands upon thousands of years; and I don't believe they are the same clades, but both are derivative of R.

"R-M173" is another way of saying R1. R1b is a type of R1, of course. The reason you see "R-M173" in studies and maps of Native Americans in generally because they didn't test more specifically than R1. That, of course, is no evidence that the R1 present in Native Americans is from a pre-Columbian source. In fact, I've yet to see a single haplotype in a Native American R1 carrier that is best explained by a pre-Columbian source. If we're talking Solutrean, it would have to be a very ancient branch, about 17k years old at least, which is a good deal older than R1b in Europe anyway.

Melancon
20-12-14, 08:36
"R-M173" is another way of saying R1. R1b is a type of R1, of course. The reason you see "R-M173" in studies and maps of Native Americans in generally because they didn't test more specifically than R1. That, of course, is no evidence that the R1 present in Native Americans is from a pre-Columbian source. In fact, I've yet to see a single haplotype in a Native American R1 carrier that is best explained by a pre-Columbian source. If we're talking Solutrean, it would have to be a very ancient branch, about 17k years old at least, which is a good deal older than R1b in Europe anyway.The Solutreans were thought to be mostly a haplogroup I people. haha. Are you suggesting that the R1 in Native Americans is purely European in origin?

bicicleur
20-12-14, 11:16
When further characterized in the USA (Hammer et al. 2005), 97 per cent of R1 had the M269 SNP (unambiguous Single Nucleotide Polymorphism), which defines R1b1b, the main West European Y-haplogroup,

this is the abstract : http://www.fsijournal.org/article/S0379-0738(05)00615-8/abstract

has anybody acces to the full text?

bicicleur
20-12-14, 11:32
When further characterized in the USA (Hammer et al. 2005), 97 per cent of R1 had the M269 SNP (unambiguous Single Nucleotide Polymorphism), which defines R1b1b, the main West European Y-haplogroup,

this is the abstract : http://www.fsijournal.org/article/S0379-0738(05)00615-8/abstract

has anybody acces to the full text?

I found it here : https://www.familytreedna.com/pdf/HammerFSIinpress.pdf

table on page 5 : 398 native americans were tested
67 % are Q + C-P39
the other 33 % reflect pretty well the 927 European-Americans tested

Aberdeen
20-12-14, 20:57
The Solutreans were thought to be mostly a haplogroup I people. haha. Are you suggesting that the R1 in Native Americans is purely European in origin?

What's your source for Solutreans being "mostly a haplogroup I people"?

Aberdeen
20-12-14, 20:59
Could have been from Vikings, that's 1,000 years ago. Long enough for R1b to spread around.

I suppose that's possible but again I'm puzzled as to why that would only happened with R1b and not the other relevant "European" type haplotypes, which do appear in significant numbers in tribes known to have considerable European admixture, such as the Eastern Algonquin.

Sile
20-12-14, 21:01
When further characterized in the USA (Hammer et al. 2005), 97 per cent of R1 had the M269 SNP (unambiguous Single Nucleotide Polymorphism), which defines R1b1b, the main West European Y-haplogroup,

this is the abstract : http://www.fsijournal.org/article/S0379-0738(05)00615-8/abstract

has anybody acces to the full text?

really , you need a 1 hour session on how to search the net, it will be worth it for you.....no offense

he is a pdf file

https://www.familytreedna.com/pdf/HammerFSIinpress.pdf

sparkey
21-12-14, 08:29
What's your source for Solutreans being "mostly a haplogroup I people"?

I don't think it's a stretch to say that Solutreans are "thought to be" mostly haplogroup I, even if academic papers won't usually engage in that sort of speculation. No tests on so ancient a sample have been conducted, obviously, but Maciamo, for example, has placed proto-I as most likely in Europe by the Upper Paleolithic: http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/29080-Chronology-of-Cro-Magnon-Y-DNA
I've read similar sentiments from several other prominent hobbyists, but admittedly little from academics, who have tended to be either silent or wrong. So we still need ancient samples, as always, but in terms of speculation, placing the Solutreans as some sort of mix of Haplogroup I and Haplogroup C seems to be the most reasonable guess based on what we know at the moment, if we assign them to any extant haplogroup at all.

bicicleur
21-12-14, 10:16
I don't think it's a stretch to say that Solutreans are "thought to be" mostly haplogroup I, even if academic papers won't usually engage in that sort of speculation. No tests on so ancient a sample have been conducted, obviously, but Maciamo, for example, has placed proto-I as most likely in Europe by the Upper Paleolithic: http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/29080-Chronology-of-Cro-Magnon-Y-DNA
I've read similar sentiments from several other prominent hobbyists, but admittedly little from academics, who have tended to be either silent or wrong. So we still need ancient samples, as always, but in terms of speculation, placing the Solutreans as some sort of mix of Haplogroup I and Haplogroup C seems to be the most reasonable guess based on what we know at the moment, if we assign them to any extant haplogroup at all.

I would even speculate that Solutreans were C-V20, as the Solutrean is suposed to originate from the Aurignacian. It was the last Aurignacian industry.
All subsequent expanding industries in Europe are suposed to be based on Gravettian. That would explain the replacement of C-V20 by I.

Aberdeen
21-12-14, 17:33
I don't think it's a stretch to say that Solutreans are "thought to be" mostly haplogroup I, even if academic papers won't usually engage in that sort of speculation. No tests on so ancient a sample have been conducted, obviously, but Maciamo, for example, has placed proto-I as most likely in Europe by the Upper Paleolithic: http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/29080-Chronology-of-Cro-Magnon-Y-DNA
I've read similar sentiments from several other prominent hobbyists, but admittedly little from academics, who have tended to be either silent or wrong. So we still need ancient samples, as always, but in terms of speculation, placing the Solutreans as some sort of mix of Haplogroup I and Haplogroup C seems to be the most reasonable guess based on what we know at the moment, if we assign them to any extant haplogroup at all.

Well, yes, if we're talking about a Paleolithic Iberian population that's known to have actually existed, I and C would be reasonable guesses. I may have been mistaken in assuming the previous poster was using "Solutrean" to mean "they're the source of Clovis" but perhaps his reference to I was intended to convey the opposite meaning. I think the idea of Solutreans contributing to Amerindian populations should have been abandoned once it became clear that R1b didn't go back nearly that far in Europe, even without any information about subclades.

Aberdeen
22-12-14, 00:55
I've been thinking of the R1b situation among Amerindians and I have yet another improbable theory to explain it, although this one might fit the genetic evidence. There are many accounts of the Vikings finding Irish monks in Iceland when they arrived in 870 AD. I wonder if the Irish might have reached North America several centuries ago. If they did, the easiest way for them to move inland from the east coast of what is now Canada would be up the St. Lawrence River and into the Great Lakes, and many of the tribes that have a lot of R1b either still live or used to live near either the Atlantic Ocean or the Great Lakes. And I suppose that R1b might have been even more dominant in Ireland prior to English colonization than it is now. So it would be interesting to know what specific subclades of R1b are common among tribes such as the Ojibwe. Although there might not be any way to distinguish the descendants of hypothetical early Irish from the descendants of more recent Irish fur traders.

Angela
22-12-14, 02:08
I've been thinking of the R1b situation among Amerindians and I have yet another improbable theory to explain it, although this one might fit the genetic evidence. There are many accounts of the Vikings finding Irish monks in Iceland when they arrived in 870 AD. I wonder if the Irish might have reached North America several centuries ago. If they did, the easiest way for them to move inland from the east coast of what is now Canada would be up the St. Lawrence River and into the Great Lakes, and many of the tribes that have a lot of R1b either still live or used to live near either the Atlantic Ocean or the Great Lakes. And I suppose that R1b might have been even more dominant in Ireland prior to English colonization than it is now. So it would be interesting to know what specific subclades of R1b are common among tribes such as the Ojibwe. Although there might not be any way to distinguish the descendants of hypothetical early Irish from the descendants of more recent Irish fur traders.

That's coureurs de bois country too, isn't it? If all the "European" yDna in these tribes is laid out, I wonder how good a match it might be for northwestern France? I may be misremembering, but didn't a lot of the early French emigrants come from that area?

However, that still leaves the mtDna X2 unexplained, yes?

Aberdeen
22-12-14, 03:03
That's coureurs de bois country too, isn't it? If all the "European" yDna in these tribes is laid out, I wonder how good a match it might be for northwestern France? I may be misremembering, but didn't a lot of the early French emigrants come from that area?

However, that still leaves the mtDna X2 unexplained, yes?

Yes, the Great Lakes were used as a highway by both the Cour de Bois (unofficial traders) and the Voyageurs (official traders) since before 1700 and there was definitely some admixture but I've met enough Ojibwe to know that they're nowhere near 80% paternal European ancestry. And although most French settlers in Canada were from northwestern France, where R1b runs around 75-80% R1b, that doesn't explain why R1b would be 25 times as common as other "European" Y haplotypes among the Ojibwe, which is the result Mahli got in 2008, although that was only from 63 samples and I don't know the selection method. And, as you say, it doesn't explain why X2 is so common in that same population - I can't think of anything that would explain the high incidence of both R1b and X2 if we conclude that we have to forget about a Siberian source based on the idea that the R1b subclades are recent European. And I don't know why some Dene tribes are a mixture of R1b, C and Q but no "European" haplotypes at all other than R1b. If the 40% R1b among the Dogrib came from Hudson Bay traders, why is the rest either C (33%) or Q (27%) with zero other "European haplotypes? At this point I can't think of a good explanation.

sparkey
23-12-14, 00:41
I would even speculate that Solutreans were C-V20, as the Solutrean is suposed to originate from the Aurignacian. It was the last Aurignacian industry.
All subsequent expanding industries in Europe are suposed to be based on Gravettian. That would explain the replacement of C-V20 by I.

Who argues that the Solutrean is based on the Aurignacian and not the Gravettian? I thought that there was a 10,000 or so year gap between Aurignacian and Solutrean. Meanwhile, the Gravettian is found all across Europe during the time in-between. Also, the Magdalenian is a pretty clear successor to the Solutrean, why would it suddenly be based on a different culture from a few thousand years earlier?

That said, it's plausible that the Solutrean could have been Haplogroup C dominant. It's not possible to tell the relative ratio of C to I so far back yet. Unfortunately, it could range anywhere from 100:0 to 0:100 based on what we know at the moment.

sparkey
23-12-14, 00:51
And I don't know why some Dene tribes are a mixture of R1b, C and Q but no "European" haplotypes at all other than R1b. If the 40% R1b among the Dogrib came from Hudson Bay traders, why is the rest either C (33%) or Q (27%) with zero other "European haplotypes? At this point I can't think of a good explanation.

Sample sizes. I assume you're referencing Malhi 2008 for the Dogrib percentages? Their sample size was 15. Actually, you picked a perfect case for why sample sizes are the only real problem. Dulik 2012 (http://www.pnas.org/content/109/22/8471/T1.expansion.html) tested the Dogrib again, but this time at a sample size of 37. In terms of European-origin haplogroups, they got 3 R1b, 2 N1c, 1 I1, and 1 J2b. All consistent with what we may expect from a population that recently mixed with Europeans, given a small sample size.

Aberdeen
23-12-14, 03:36
Sample sizes. I assume you're referencing Malhi 2008 for the Dogrib percentages? Their sample size was 15. Actually, you picked a perfect case for why sample sizes are the only real problem. Dulik 2012 (http://www.pnas.org/content/109/22/8471/T1.expansion.html) tested the Dogrib again, but this time at a sample size of 37. In terms of European-origin haplogroups, they got 3 R1b, 2 N1c, 1 I1, and 1 J2b. All consistent with what we may expect from a population that recently mixed with Europeans, given a small sample size.

I guess I should have gone with Mahli's 243 samples from the Athabaskans, another Na-Dene group. He found 11.5% C, 70.4% Q, 18.1% R1 and 0% other. And in 2003, Bortolini sampled 48 Chipewyan, another Na-Dene group, and found 6% C, 31% Q, 62.5% R1 and 0% other. But the explanation of sampling bias still has appeal as a possible explanation simply because no other explanation seems to work.

Maciamo
23-12-14, 10:30
I guess I should have gone with Mahli's 243 samples from the Athabaskans, another Na-Dene group. He found 11.5% C, 70.4% Q, 18.1% R1 and 0% other. And in 2003, Bortolini sampled 48 Chipewyan, another Na-Dene group, and found 6% C, 31% Q, 62.5% R1 and 0% other. But the explanation of sampling bias still has appeal as a possible explanation simply because no other explanation seems to work.

R1* would make more sense among Native Americans than R1b. R1* is very close to the Mal'ta boy's R*, so it could have been found among the Siberian tribes that crossed over the Bering Strait alongside C3 and Q1a2a1. As far as we know R1a* and R1b* developed closer to southern Central Asia than to eastern Siberia.

bicicleur
23-12-14, 12:32
I guess I should have gone with Mahli's 243 samples from the Athabaskans, another Na-Dene group. He found 11.5% C, 70.4% Q, 18.1% R1 and 0% other. And in 2003, Bortolini sampled 48 Chipewyan, another Na-Dene group, and found 6% C, 31% Q, 62.5% R1 and 0% other. But the explanation of sampling bias still has appeal as a possible explanation simply because no other explanation seems to work.

have you read the whole study?

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2584155/pdf/nihms64490.pdf

at the bottom of page 3 :


Only samples that were
determined to belong to haplogroups Q (Q-M3 and Q-M242), C, or R were included in the
Haplogroup data set.

bicicleur
23-12-14, 12:36
Who argues that the Solutrean is based on the Aurignacian and not the Gravettian? I thought that there was a 10,000 or so year gap between Aurignacian and Solutrean. Meanwhile, the Gravettian is found all across Europe during the time in-between. Also, the Magdalenian is a pretty clear successor to the Solutrean, why would it suddenly be based on a different culture from a few thousand years earlier?



it was argued on the base of the special lithics of the Solutrean

but I checked and you're right

Aberdeen
23-12-14, 20:01
R1* would make more sense among Native Americans than R1b. R1* is very close to the Mal'ta boy's R*, so it could have been found among the Siberian tribes that crossed over the Bering Strait alongside C3 and Q1a2a1. As far as we know R1a* and R1b* developed closer to southern Central Asia than to eastern Siberia.

Although I haven't read any of the papers these figures come from, I have read comments on other forums that the results were listed as R because the results weren't examined in enough depth to determine subclades. Sparky has said he thinks all the R must be from recent European contact because a number of Amerindians have had their DNA tested by private firms and there are no reports of previously unknown subclades. That does seem conclusive, except for the fact that more traditional Native people don't like DNA testing and are less likely to pay to have their DNA results tested. However, I think that also means that the people willing to be tested by scientists are more likely to be those Amerindians who are less traditional and more likely to have recent European admixture, which could be screwing up the results of tests by people like Mahli.

Aberdeen
23-12-14, 20:11
have you read the whole study?

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2584155/pdf/nihms64490.pdf

at the bottom of page 3 :


Only samples that were
determined to belong to haplogroups Q (Q-M3 and Q-M242), C, or R were included in the
Haplogroup data set.

I hadn't found the study and was just quoting from a chart I found on the net. Is that the same study? The year and the name of the lead researcher are the same but the number of subjects is different. And it's not a study of members of the tribe in northern Canada and Alaska who are usually referred to as Athabaskans. The name used to be applied to all Na-Dene but I didn't think it was used as a global term anymore. The study you've provided a link to doesn't seem very meaningful to me when I look at it. It's a collection of test results from various Na-Dene groups all over North America plus some he lifted from other studies. And I don't know why he would list only those Y haplotypes that were C, Q and R if there were in fact other haplotypes. I think I'll stop worrying about the issue until I can look at a proper and thorough study that has hundreds of samples and a sound testing methodology. I thought we had a few studies suggesting that there was an interesting puzzle here but it's beginning to look as if it might just be sloppy science.

JS Bach
23-12-14, 22:14
...
But the European-like admixture in Amerindians like Algonquin is always accompanied by East-Asian admixture (yellow) at K<12, which is otherwise lacking (not really lacking, but subsumed under the "new" Chipewyan component). For K>11 it gets almost subsumed under Chipewyan.
...

Yes, but at lower levels of K below 12, the European component of the Algonquins look to me to remain fairly steady at about 25 percent; it’s the red Chipewyan component that looks to partly go to Siberian at K < 12. I wonder if they tested different algorithms with different parameter settings, and if they produced graphs that looked similar to this one? This proportion of 25 percent European-like ancestry in the autosomal makeup of Algonquin tribes aligns much better with the 25% of mtdna X2 found in them, rather than with the much higher proportions of R1b found in the Y-chromosomes – 79% in one study.


@Aberdeen: R1b has a very wide geographical distribution compared to most other haplogroups; it even went into sub-Saharan Africa. Perhaps that was influenced by genes for being individualistic, independent and prone to exploration.


@sparkey: In Stanford and Bradley’s book, Across Atlantic Ice, they do a cluster analysis of some characteristics of stone tools, and they conclude that the Gravettian and Magdalenian are more similar to each other than either are to the Solutrean. So possibly the Solutreans were of a different genotype, such as R1b.

LeBrok
24-12-14, 04:15
@Aberdeen: R1b has a very wide geographical distribution compared to most other haplogroups; it even went into sub-Saharan Africa. Perhaps that was influenced by genes for being individualistic, independent and prone to exploration.
.
I was thinking along same line. If R1b was very mobile and migrated to Central Africa and Western Europe, why couldn't it migrate to America too, through Siberia and Alaska?

Aberdeen
24-12-14, 06:41
I was thinking along same line. If R1b was very mobile and migrated to Central Africa and Western Europe, why couldn't it migrate to America too, through Siberia and Alaska?

IMO, R1b could easily have done that. IMO, R1b could have migrated to the Americas with the Na-Dene, who arrived there 8-10 thousand years ago, if I remember correctly. But there are African, European and Russian branches of R1b and if we look at the European branch, for example, it's divided into different subclades. So there should be a separate American branch, probably consisting of more than one subclade. The research papers apparently didn't look into the haplotypes in enough detail to tell us anything about that but, as sparkey has pointed out, Native people who've had their DNA tested and who have Y haplotype R1b seem to have European subclades.

JS Bach
25-12-14, 02:42
IMO, R1b could easily have done that.

Here’s a video of Dr. Dennis Stanford from a speech he gave a couple years ago following the publication of his book on the Solutrean hypothesis: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_tjoHMMPH90&list=PLFD20D41E19BC03A9

(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_tjoHMMPH90&list=PLFD20D41E19BC03A9)

He makes the crossing of the Bering land bridge out to be a difficult task. From about 12:24 to 13:00 he states:


“The Bering land bridge during the last Ice Age was probably the coldest place in the world. And it still is. It’s underwater though. And even if it was a land bridge, it was dark many months out of the year. It was wet in the summer. And the only time we could cross it without a boat, or without big high waders(?), would have been in the winter. But people did do it. But that began to worry me a little bit...”


Regardless, it sounds like it would have taken hardy people to do that - as the Solutreans seemingly also would have been.

LeBrok
25-12-14, 09:17
http://www.davidpratt.info/americas/amer6-2.gif
Channel Islands rout is most likely. Coastal fishing groups on small boats.

Aberdeen
26-12-14, 19:12
http://www.davidpratt.info/americas/amer6-2.gif
Channel Islands rout is most likely. Coastal fishing groups on small boats.

I agree that a route along the coast of Asia and the Americas is the most likely route for the first peopling of the Americas. And that's why we'll never find evidence of the first people to arrive in the Americas. Their physical remains and artifacts are likely under water, since sea levels are considerably higher than they were during the last glacial maximum. I do think other routes would have become possibilities later, as people improved their ability to travel by sea. Also, it would have become possible to live in the high arctic near the Bering Sea after the ice receded. I've never believed in the idea of some magic ice free corridor in "Beringa" during the last glacial maximum.

Angela
26-12-14, 19:54
IMO, R1b could easily have done that. IMO, R1b could have migrated to the Americas with the Na-Dene, who arrived there 8-10 thousand years ago, if I remember correctly. But there are African, European and Russian branches of R1b and if we look at the European branch, for example, it's divided into different subclades. So there should be a separate American branch, probably consisting of more than one subclade. The research papers apparently didn't look into the haplotypes in enough detail to tell us anything about that but, as sparkey has pointed out, Native people who've had their DNA tested and who have Y haplotype R1b seem to have European subclades.

I don't see, however, how the mtDna X2 levels can be explained as recent European admixture unless the samples were poorly selected, or there was one heck of a founder effect from a European woman.

Aberdeen
26-12-14, 23:35
I don't see, however, how the mtDna X2 levels can be explained as recent European admixture unless the samples were poorly selected, or there was one heck of a founder effect from a European woman.

It doesn't seem to be a recent thing, if we can judge by a paper published in the American Journal of Human Genetics on October 20, 2003 by Reidla et al entitled "Origin and Diffusion of mtDNA Haplogroup X. They concluded that the X2 found in North America is not closely related to the European X2 or to the mtDNA X found in the Altaic region and probably split of from the main group of mtDNA X when the haplogroup first started to spread about 20,000 years ago.

There seems to be more solid research on mtDNA than on Y DNA when it comes to Indigenous populations in the Americas.

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1180497/ (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1180497/)

If the X2 has been in the Americas that long, it's a bit strange that it's so common among people who speak or spoke an Algonquin type language such as Ojibwe but is rare among other tribes (except for some Na-Dene) and is completely absent in South America.

JS Bach
27-12-14, 08:06
In the recent 2014 paper by Stanford, Bradley and Oppenheimer: http://www.academia.edu/9562579/Solutrean_hypothesis_genetics_the_mammoth_in_the_r oom they give estimates of the ages of the Native American mtdna A, B, C and D branches as being about 14,000 years old:

The five deepest branches (specifically A2, B2, C1a&b & D1) date genetically in America around 14-kya (Soares et al. 2009, Fig. 6), consistent with the dates of the 14-kya coprolites from Oregon which, neatly, feature A2 andB2 aDNA haplotypes (Gilbert et al. 2008).

(I don’t know why they say C1a, and not C1b, C1c, and C1d. I thought C1a was exclusively East Asian)

They then give some estimates of the age of mtdna X2a: one as being 14,000 years old and another as being about 21,000 years old:

So much is common ground, but there is a fifth Palaeolithic American haplogroup: X2a, derived from West Eurasian ‘X’ (Brown et al. 1998; Reidla et al. 2003). This uniquely-American founder lineage ‘X2a’, is a sub-clade of X2-225 (Fernandes et al. 2012), and is of Pleistocene age: 14,080 yr; (10,321 – 17,914) by Maximum Likelihood (ML) and 21,289 yr (11,040 – 32,035) by Rho, on complete mtDNA sequences (Fernandes et al. 2012).

They then give the age results of another study in which they state:

ML estimates for five other American founding lineages with ultimate East Eurasian ancestors (A2: 14.6 ky; B2: 14.6ky; C1a: 13.0 ky; C1b: 14.5 ky; and D1: 13.5 ky). By contrast, the estimates Hooshiar Kashani et al. (2012) make for the age of American X2a (table 2) were older: 18.60 + / – 5.5ky (ML) and 18.4 + / – 5.2 ky (Rho)

My understanding is that these mtdna haplogroup ages are difficult to estimate, not least because there are so few markers in the complete mtdna sequence. Nonetheless, as shown above most of the results in the paper indicate an older age for X2a in America than the other Native American A, B, C and D clades.

That being said, I read Oppenheimer’s book The Origins of the British: A Genetic Detective Story some five years ago, and my impression was that some of it was good, and some of it wasn’t – meaning I’d be sceptical with some of the things he says. For instance, he seemed to be over-confident in some of his results, where just a small number of different STR markers (like, maybe six) were used.

Another thing that’s interesting in the paper is that some mtdna from a member of the extinct Beothuk tribe from Newfoundland (Eastern Canada) has been identified as X2a1. The Beothuks have been reported to be more European-looking than most Native American tribes. And in a sample of Algonquin-speaking Mi-kmaqs from around that general region, 3 out of 6 belonged to X2a (probably X2a1.) And some Mi-kmaqs can pass as looking European.

sparkey
27-12-14, 09:12
Oppenheimer's The Origin of the British is pretty much a case study in how some researchers drew wrong, overreaching conclusions from small amounts of data in the early days of population genetics. I was wondering when we would hear from him again. I suppose it's not surprising that he's releasing a paper on the Solutrean Hypothesis based on mtDNA.

Aberdeen
27-12-14, 09:13
Some Micmac can pass as looking European because they're mostly European. They live on the east coast and, from what I've seen, they're far more admixed than, for example, the Ojibwe, who some studies say have close to 25% X2. And the Beothuk are long since extinct.

After reading the Origins of the British, I wouldn't put too much stock in any conclusion reached by Oppenheimer, but maybe that's just me.

MOESAN
27-12-14, 20:35
It doesn't seem to be a recent thing, if we can judge by a paper published in the American Journal of Human Genetics on October 20, 2003 by Reidla et al entitled "Origin and Diffusion of mtDNA Haplogroup X. They concluded that the X2 found in North America is not closely related to the European X2 or to the mtDNA X found in the Altaic region and probably split of from the main group of mtDNA X when the haplogroup first started to spread about 20,000 years ago.

There seems to be more solid research on mtDNA than on Y DNA when it comes to Indigenous populations in the Americas.

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1180497/ (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1180497/)

If the X2 has been in the Americas that long, it's a bit strange that it's so common among people who speak or spoke an Algonquin type language such as Ojibwe but is rare among other tribes (except for some Na-Dene) and is completely absent in South America.


Don't take my remark too seriously but by hazard I have been looking to "forensic" (sic) reconstitutions of ancient steppic people of West Eurasia in the threads under Anthropology, and now it strikes me that some of them seem showing something not precisely europoid NOR typical east-asiatic (mongoloid), with strong broad cheekbones, ruggish face relief and hyperprominent (hypereuropoid) noses as we could see on the pictures old N-E Ameridians of the Plains -
just a flash - what worth?
good week-end

JS Bach
28-12-14, 08:23
Some Micmac can pass as looking European because they're mostly European. They live on the east coast and, from what I've seen, they're far more admixed than, for example, the Ojibwe, who some studies say have close to 25% X2. And the Beothuk are long since extinct.


I once had a co-worker who described himself as Micmac. When I first saw him I thought he was white. He had a French last name. I heard one of the Senior managers ask him: “Are you French?” And he said, no, he was Native Canadian Micmac. He had slightly darker skin than most white people. To me, it looked like he could have passed as either white or Native Canadian. A very nice fellow.


Regarding the admixture graph from the Lazaridis et al 2014 paper I posted earlier in this thread: http://genetics.med.harvard.edu/reich/Reich_Lab/Welcome_files/2014_Nature_Lazaridis_EuropeThreeAncestries.pdf it’s notable that the Algonquin, Cree and Ojibwe samples have a good deal of the light blue Mediterranean component as well as the dark blue North European component. It’s true that none of the Ancient European hunter-gatherer samples in the graph have any of the Mediterranean component, and that certainly carries weight, but seeing as how mtdna X is clearly distributed today in both the Middle East and Europe (as R1b-M269 is as well) maybe the population carried both components across the Atlantic, perhaps 18,000 years ago. Or maybe I’ve had too much whiskey.

Melancon
28-12-14, 08:32
I once had a co-worker who described himself as Micmac. When I first saw him I thought he was white. He had a French last name. I heard one of the Senior managers ask him: “Are you French?” And he said, no, he was Native Canadian Micmac. He had slightly darker skin than most white people. To me, it looked like he could have passed as either white or Native Canadian. A very nice fellow.


Regarding the admixture graph from the Lazaridis et al 2014 paper I posted earlier in this thread: http://genetics.med.harvard.edu/reich/Reich_Lab/Welcome_files/2014_Nature_Lazaridis_EuropeThreeAncestries.pdf it’s notable that the Algonquin, Cree and Ojibwe samples have a good deal of the light blue Mediterranean component as well as the dark blue North European component. It’s true that none of the Ancient European hunter-gatherer samples in the graph have any of the Mediterranean component, and that certainly carries weight, but seeing as how mtdna X is clearly distributed today in both the Middle East and Europe (as R1b-M269 is as well) maybe the population carried both components across the Atlantic, perhaps 18,000 years ago. Or maybe I’ve had too much whiskey.It could be that he is a Metis calling himself Micmac.

Tomenable
21-05-15, 22:45
The oldest sample of R1b in Europe is from the Kromsdorf site, from circa 2600 to 2500 BC, and there hasn't been a single evidence of R1b from the multitude of Neolithic sites.

There is now one Neolithic R1b1 from the Els Trocs site in Spain, from circa 5178 to 5066 BC.

But when it comes to the spread of European clades of R1b in post-Columbian times in America:

I think that immunity to diseases could play a significant role. Children from mixed native-European relationships had better immunity to European diseases, and they had a greater chance to recover from epidemics of smallpox, etc. Bottleneck effects certainly occured during outbreaks of those diseases, and European-admixed individuals were more likely to be among the survivors than not.

Tomenable
21-05-15, 22:58
Regarding the discussion about the Ojibwe (other names: Ojibwa; Chippewa) from page 1:


There is some correlation between Y haplotype R1b and mtDNA X2. The most noticeable example is the Ojibwe tribe, a quite numerous group centred around the Great Lakes. Mostly R1b and over 20% X2 according to a couple of studies, although the sample sizes were small. And it can be confusing because the Algonquin, Ojibwe, Chippewa and Saulteaux tribes are closely related and different bands are given different labels by different researchers. Although the Chipewayan are a different group than the Chippewa. Confused yet?

The post-Columbian demographic history of the Ojibwe - maybe some hints explaining their DNA can be found here?:

http://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=uc1.b4381154;view=1up;seq=523

http://s27.postimg.org/j9yjkyzrn/Ojibwa.png

Tomenable
22-05-15, 13:39
Here about the loss of native American haplogroup diversity after 1492:

http://patagoniamonsters.blogspot.com/2014/07/loss-of-amerindian-genetic-diversity.html

For example mtDNA haplogroup M apparently got extinct from America:

http://patagoniamonsters.blogspot.com.ar/2014/02/ancient-migrants-into-america-hg-m.html

Twilight
23-05-15, 03:41
There's R1b in many parts of the world, but none to speak of in Siberia. In any case, the R1b among Native Americans doesn't seem to differ from European DNA. If the subclades were markedly different, I think someone would have noticed. The amount of R1b among some Native American groups can be explained by recent admixture, but the amount that seems to be there in some tribes (all out of proportion to evidence for admixture and all out of proportion to other "European" Y haplotypes) just doesn't seem to fit any reasonable explanation, IMO.

You know, 23andme has been having trouble with Native Americans getting less NA DNA then they deserve, perhaps there was some intermingling somewhere is Pre-Columbian or early settlers

Tomenable
12-06-15, 00:38
An African slave who died at Saint Martin between 1660-1688 had haplogroup R1b-V88:

http://www.pnas.org/content/112/12/3669.full.pdf

It is known that escaped African slaves mixed with some Amerindian tribes, including Caribs.

I suppose that in North America some of R1b could also be introduced by the Vikings in the 1000s.

Maybe even by the Irish (there are rumours that the Irish people reached America before the Vikings).

Aaron1981
12-06-15, 02:14
There was no R1b in North or South America before the white man. The latest studies that have real YDNA and autosomal profiles from Anzick and possibly others (I don't recall all the details as it didn't interest me much) show the profile of the ancient people to be nearly identical to the modern ones when you strip away the European admixture.

It appears there was a bottleneck, likely in the difficult times crossing the strait and they all descend from Q1a3-L54 men. There may be a small bit of diversity here but the likelihood of being something other than Q or C is very low as these were prominent lineages in and around Chuchki peninsula. Bottom line - NO R.

LeBrok
12-06-15, 03:15
There was no R1b in North or South America before the white man. The latest studies that have real YDNA and autosomal profiles from Anzick and possibly others (I don't recall all the details as it didn't interest me much) show the profile of the ancient people to be nearly identical to the modern ones when you strip away the European admixture.

It appears there was a bottleneck, likely in the difficult times crossing the strait and they all descend from Q1a3-L54 men. There may be a small bit of diversity here but the likelihood of being something other than Q or C is very low as these were prominent lineages in and around Chuchki peninsula. Bottom line - NO R.
Agh, how come you strip European admixture to determine that there was no mixing with Viking and their R1b?! You know Vikings were Europeans...

Twilight
18-06-15, 06:42
[QUOTE=Tomenable;459448]An African slave who died at Saint Martin between 1660

In order for the Vikings to be present in Precolumbian American dna, haplogroup I and R1a have to be present as well as R1b but celtic irish sounds interesting :).

LeBrok
18-06-15, 07:06
An African slave who died at Saint Martin between 1660

In order for the Vikings to be present in Precolumbian American dna, haplogroup I and R1a have to be present as well as R1b but celtic irish sounds interesting :).

Yes, but what if it was only one or two guys who married native girls, and happened to be R1b?
If at the end the native R1 turns to be Viking R1b, it would mean that R1b is very virulent indeed. Not only in Western Europe but also in North America.

Twilight
18-06-15, 23:24
Yes, but what if it was only one or two guys who married native girls, and happened to be R1b?
If at the end the native R1 turns to be Viking R1b, it would mean that R1b is very virulent indeed. Not only in Western Europe but also in North America.

Possible, I suppose if the R1 is Viking than the dna would have conservatively come from Vinland; the Vikings who stayed behind not to mention Mr.Gnupson' s silence after the voyage to North America.
https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Vinland#Later_Norse_voyages

Perhaps a genetic pattern could be teased out by 23andme to see if the dna is from Scandinavia and/or his slaves.

The strange thing also is there is a uncanny resemblance to the Algic language families and the Canadian province of Nunavut.

Compare these map link

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/ff/Haplogroup_R_(Y-DNA).PNG/800px-Haplogroup_R_(Y-DNA).PNG
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Algonquian_languages#/media/File:Algonquian_langs.png
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/7a/Nunavut_in_Canada.svg/250px-Nunavut_in_Canada.svg.png
http://www.cogsci.indiana.edu/farg/rehling/nativeAm/continent.gif

According to Wikipedia; source below, Nunavut had quite a few Viking contacts prior to Leif Erickson's settlement in Vinland.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Nunavut

UPDATE:
According to ancestrydna, Native Americans; (I'm assuming those with documents stating that they are 100% Native American) tend to be at a genetic range of between 100%-85% NA Dna; at least those tested by Ancestrydna.

Twilight
19-06-15, 22:43
Could have been from Vikings, that's 1,000 years ago. Long enough for R1b to spread around.



I suppose that's possible but again I'm puzzled as to why that would only happened with R1b and not the other relevant "European" type haplotypes, which do appear in significant numbers in tribes known to have considerable European admixture, such as the Eastern Algonquin.



According to Ancestrydna, 8% of Native Americans were Iberian(Latin American?), 4% Great Britian (Brythoic/Celtiberian?) and 2% Italy/Greece(Greco-Roman/Latin American?)

that being said, I highly doubt that actual Scandinavian Vikings, Slavs or Germanic tribes ever intermingled with Precolumbian Americans; however, I still can not rule out the possibility of Vikings relinquishing their slaves;of Romanized British origin and the Romanized Britians intermingling with Native Americans.

I also doubt that European DNA crossed the Bering land ridge with the other Native Americans because the East Europeans (Slavs) are not mentioned in the "Region % of natives that have this region"

RobertColumbia
03-07-15, 18:05
I once had a co-worker who described himself as Micmac. When I first saw him I thought he was white. He had a French last name. I heard one of the Senior managers ask him: “Are you French?” And he said, no, he was Native Canadian Micmac. He had slightly darker skin than most white people. To me, it looked like he could have passed as either white or Native Canadian. A very nice fellow....

IME, many people of partial-Native ancestry (with the rest being white) could pass in many areas of the US (and, I suspect Canada as well) as Greek or Sicilian as long as they stayed away from areas with a large amount of actual Greek or Sicilian presence (e.g. New York City, most of New Jersey).

Salmon
03-07-15, 21:11
Ancient Eurasians crossed the Atlantic on canoes?

or

Modern researchers are not taking into account the possibility that many natives mixed with early European settlers in the NorthEast.

geoiii
29-08-16, 06:22
soultrean hypothesis does not explain presence of r1b. 20,000 BC r1b was still only in central asia, did not reach western europe until bronze age. it would have been theoretically possible that bronze age r1b humans made it to north america around 1000 BC, but they would have brought bronze age tech with them and when columbus discovered new world he would have found bronze age civ. the soultrean culture from france was supposedly haplogroup X and Clovis were supposedly Q like all native americans with no R not to mention any R1b.

kevingnet
10-03-17, 09:44
Some of the other tribes that have elevated levels of R1b are in northwestern Canada and in some cases are Dene. Plus, there are apparently high rates of R1b among the Dene who migrated into the southern U.S. about 400 years ago (the Navaho and Apache). Of course, there are other tribes in eastern and central North America that have significant amounts of R1b but they also have significant amounts of other "European" Y haplotypes and a history of heavy intermarriage with whites, so I wouldn't make too much of the R1b in those tribes - examples are MicMac, Quebec Cree and Cherokee. But it is odd that at least one Dene tribe has about 40% R1b and apparently no other "European" haplotypes and that the Ojibwe, which historical records would suggest have less admixture than some tribes, have nearly 80% R1b and only about 3% other "European" R1b. So the distribution might suggest that some group of Siberian R1b types, perhaps distant descendants of Mal"ta Boy's relatives, migrated across the Bering Straits after the initial peopling of the Americas and that some of them eventually settled around the Great Lakes, where there was copper to be had. Except that in order for that theory to work, the R1b should consist of unique subclades, and I'm not aware of anyone finding any so far.

At this point, I'd still be inclined to consider the possibility of sampling issues. If you look up the original studies, the number of samples is fairly small, and I don't know what the selection criteria were.

Yes...but...80%?!
Isn't that a bit high to explain simple intermarriage? Not saying it was or wasn't, just that the data is suspici0us.

kevingnet
10-03-17, 09:47
I think there are some R1b in Nepal.

I think that's my uncle. He likes to travel a lot, and he said the other day, he likes girls from Nepal.

bicicleur
10-03-17, 10:48
Yes...but...80%?!
Isn't that a bit high to explain simple intermarriage? Not saying it was or wasn't, just that the data is suspici0us.


the Ojibwe were traders and allies of the French colonisers near the rapids between Upper Lake and Lake Huron
they were the first to acquire firearms which explains their rapid expansion
appearantly before the expansion lot of their Y-DNA was switched into R1b

firetown
10-03-17, 18:02
Some Micmac can pass as looking European because they're mostly European. They live on the east coast and, from what I've seen, they're far more admixed than, for example, the Ojibwe, who some studies say have close to 25% X2. And the Beothuk are long since extinct. After reading the Origins of the British, I wouldn't put too much stock in any conclusion reached by Oppenheimer, but maybe that's just me. Show me some evidence please, because my network of rhesus negative people has a few "micmacs", many blood type A negative.

Rethel
01-04-17, 15:21
..................................................

airwalk12
17-07-17, 06:38
The only reason Native Americans have R1b is because of Admixture from colonization. Many people who say they are 100% Native American are not so genetically, especially in the US....most tribes are admixed. Have you not noticed a lot of people who say they are Native American look european?

I believe this is one reason NA tribes in the US do not want to take DNA tests because it will show a lot of admixture with European DNA

Angela
17-07-17, 19:18
The only reason Native Americans have R1b is because of Admixture from colonization. Many people who say they are 100% Native American are not so genetically, especially in the US....most tribes are admixed. Have you not noticed a lot of people who say they are Native American look european?

I believe this is one reason NA tribes in the US do not want to take DNA tests because it will show a lot of admixture with European DNA

That's very true, in my experience, especially for east coast and upper midwest tribes, like the ones around the Great Lakes. The Cherokee were very admixed even before they were forced out west. Some of the eastern tribes also have some SSA.

I've wondered if perhaps the admixture saved some people from the European diseases.

Promenade
17-07-17, 20:13
Why is it such a mystery where R1b originated in Native Americans? Couldn't you just look at the subclades of R1b they have? If it were more recent from the colonial, viking era, etc. you would think there would be other european haplogroups and not just R1b.

Megalophias
17-07-17, 21:03
They do have other European haplogroups. Most of the studies have not had high enough resolution, but such as have been tested are almost all R1b-M269.

For instance Hammer's 2005 pooled sample of US Native Americans (n=396) has 22% R1b-M269 and a single (0.3%) R1b-P25(xM269), as well as 5% I, 3% E, 2% R1a, 1% J, and singles of G and N, the rest being C and Q.

You can find unexpectedly high levels in some groups, some odd haplotypes in old studies, etc, but so far no distinct Amerindian subclades have actually been identified, if they exist.

LeBrok
17-07-17, 23:52
They do have other European haplogroups. Most of the studies have not had high enough resolution, but such as have been tested are almost all R1b-M269.

For instance Hammer's 2005 pooled sample of US Native Americans (n=396) has 22% R1b-M269 and a single (0.3%) R1b-P25(xM269), as well as 5% I, 3% E, 2% R1a, 1% J, and singles of G and N, the rest being C and Q.

You can find unexpectedly high levels in some groups, some odd haplotypes in old studies, etc, but so far no distinct Amerindian subclades have actually been identified, if they exist.
Pretty much says it all. Now I'm very interested if any of these were seeded by Vikings around 1,000 CE.

Ermotimos
14-10-17, 01:53
It could be from Greeks, and specifically from Heracleidians - Dorians. There is a passage from the 1st century Greek writer Plutarch, from his book "Concerning the Face Which Appears in the Orb of the Moon" in which he describes the presence of Greeks in Canada (St Lawrence bay area) and Greenland and other islands. They are described as having a presence there from way before the time of Heracles, who went there and revived the Greek spark for they are described as already having turned native. Why would they have had a presence there? Plutarch describes them as very spiritual and devoted particularly to Heracles and Saturn to whom they devoted a sacred journey. The whole way is an image of what the poets called the golden age, a time when Saturn reigned. Which would correspond to a way of life of the period before and including the neolithic, I think this is the answer to the mystery of the old copper complex. How else can one explain the appearance of copper technology in the old copper complex at the time it did, right after it was discovered in the old world. Keep in mind that, as far as we know and in Europe at least, the oldest copper is from the Balkans. That's where copper started. And the Aegean peoples had a probably advanced seamanship in the Mesolithic, obsidian from the island of Melos was traded all over the Aegean and beyond, which indicates an advanced trading network. So here's the passage from Plutarch. I calculated and measured all the distances he provides, on google map, they are all exact. The geography of north america he describes is correct. penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Plutarch/Moralia/The_Face_in_the_Moon*/D.html

Ermotimos
14-10-17, 03:45
Υou could reach Greenland from Britain in five days with a fast enough ship. Even with dugout canoes like the Polynesians. The distance of Ogygia (Greenland) from the mainland coast is 5000 stadia. That is 900 kilometers (one Athenian stadio is 180 meters), which is the distance of Greenland to the Canadian mainland and he says the sea is difficult to traverse because of what he considers alluvial deposits from the rivers, but it is specified that it was congealed, so he is probably talking about sea ice, which he or they believed was created by the muddynes of the continental rivers. The three other islands are some of the ones in Nunavut. This is indicated further by the arctic twilight conditions specified. The gulf which is the size of (not smaller than) the Maeotis lake (Azov sea) and on the same latitude as the mouth of the Caspian sea is the St Lawrence Bay (they haven't translated this part correctly in this link, the original text mentions latitude apart from size, it reads "whose mouth (the gulfs) is in line with the mouth of the Caspian". The estuaries of the Volga and the St Lawrence river are probably the "mouths" of the two).
Through the St Lawrence river they would have had naval access to the isle Royal copper mines, as the lakes were probably much bigger in the deep past after the ice age melt down and probably connected into one great lake.
But they could have also have used the rivers that connect the lakes. Today you can canoe this distance. They did use the rivers all over Europe. Rivers were the highways

Parafarne
14-10-17, 16:52
Native groups that have little European admixture(25%) in US looks closer to Europeans than Hispanics, despite Hispanics have more than 80% European Ydna?

Ermotimos
14-10-17, 18:01
what is interesting is how the use of copper for tools stopped, according to wikipedia, around 3000 years ago. Why was it that it was abandoned after 3000 years of use? Could it be that it was a particular culture that worked the copper and when they disappeared from the mine locality on isle Royale, the locals just didn't "pick it up"? Is it possible that the lowering lake levels cut off Greek naval access to the mines? It is curious that Plutarch doesn't mention copper, though he mentions gold. According to wikipedia in the article for the Old Copper Complex "By about 3,000 years ago the use of copper is increasingly restricted to jewelry and other status-related items, rather than for tools. This is thought to represent the development of more complex hierarchical cultures in the area" Maybe it was a political decision of the peoples of Cronos and Heracles, to move away from copper as a tool-weapon. Though it was still used by the copper Inuit in historical times. Or maybe it had something to do with the collapse of the copper trade with the introduction of iron in the old world and the bronze age collapse.

Ermotimos
17-10-17, 16:26
Are there distinct subclades of R1b in European populations? Like is it possible to distinguish R1b from Britain from that of the Balkans?

LeBrok
17-10-17, 16:44
Are there distinct subclades of R1b in European populations? Like is it possible to distinguish R1b from Britain from that of the Balkans?Start reading here:
https://www.eupedia.com/genetics/

Ermotimos
17-10-17, 17:01
Ok, thanks. So there are indeed many subclades of R1b. So what is the problem in determining the origin of R1b among the Anishinaabeg and other peoples?

LeBrok
17-10-17, 17:07
Ok, thanks. So there are indeed many subclades of R1b. So what is the problem in determining the origin of R1b among the Anishinaabeg and other peoples?Check post 77.

Ermotimos
17-10-17, 17:52
Aha, ok. So, according to the graph, R1b-M269 R1b1a1a2 also has an early bronze age Balkan-Anatolian subclade. R1b1a1a2b. If it's that it could be from the Greeks. If not, it's probably from early ice age Siberian Mammoth hunter admixtures. But no, wait. According to the graph M269 is from the chalcolithic, so it can't be from pre amerindian migration period. It must be latter admixture. Right? Anyways M269 doesn't say much on it's own. which subclade of M269?

Megalophias
17-10-17, 17:55
Ok, thanks. So there are indeed many subclades of R1b. So what is the problem in determining the origin of R1b among the Anishinaabeg and other peoples?

Testing costs money. Most people don't care enough to get tested themselves. An academic study could do it, but there's a ton of other interesting things that grant money could be spent on.

BTW if anyone wants to have a look at 10 STR haplotype data from three Chippewa groups for themselves, they can find them in the supplementary data (file 12) for "Asymmetric male and female genetic histories among Native Americans from Eastern North America": https://academic.oup.com/mbe/article-lookup/doi/10.1093/molbev/msl088#supplementary-data

Qamdalan
04-05-18, 07:59
Probably from ANE and Viking settlers if that is possible.

Gavin Charles Gist
09-05-18, 13:47
Honestly, I find it quite ridiculous that anybody would still adhere to the LGM Cantabrian refuge origin hypothesis for R1b, because its totally against all the evidence that we do have. The oldest sample of R1b in Europe is from the Kromsdorf site, from circa 2600 to 2500 BC, and there hasn't been a single evidence of R1b from the multitude of Neolithic sites. Indeed, we shouldn't expect one, because the "tree" of R1b suggests that its oldest subclades were located decisively outside of western Europe.

I think its fairly obvious that this Native American R1b must be of more recent European origin.

Sequoyah, noted for formulating the Cherokee alphabet, was the son of Nathaniel Gist and Wur-Teh. This would explain some of it. Nathaniel was an R1b kind of guy. It's more recent times, starting in the 1700's I would think.

I1a3_Young
09-05-18, 16:37
Until they find data otherwise, I steadfastly believe all R1b-M269 in Native Americans was from colonial European contact. Some tribes were very open to mixing blood.

In the book "Long Knife" by James Alexander Thom, the hero from Virginia, George Rogers Clark, went into the frontier to capture British forts during the American Revolution.

He won the respect of a large meeting of natives near St. Louis. They sent to him naked women which surprised and embarrassed him. The chiefs explained that he was a great and strong man, and they wanted to bring his blood into their tribe.

Additionally, early mixing with European men would give the offspring a better immune system for the devastating European diseases wracking the natives. They lost 80% or so from smallpox, cholera, influenza, common cold, etc. Euro genes would be a huge selective bonus for surviving lines.

rbaleki
28-05-18, 08:29
Couldn't this scenario be explained by Viking Age migrations? I suppose R1b/R1a/I1 is what would be expected for a viking colonization.

ToBeOrNotToBe
02-12-18, 20:52
Why is it such a mystery where R1b originated in Native Americans? Couldn't you just look at the subclades of R1b they have? If it were more recent from the colonial, viking era, etc. you would think there would be other european haplogroups and not just R1b.

Maybe, just maybe, it's sensitive info...

https://www.forosperu.net/proxy.php?image=http%3A%2F%2F1.bp.blogspot.com%2F-dYPB3mBpXzI%2FVD5zhYB9lTI%2FAAAAAAAAC7s%2FL7y-mBKqO4A%2Fs1600%2FRafael%252BVidela%252BEissmann.% 252BSobre%252Bel%252Borigen%252Bde%252Blas%252Bmom ias%252Brubias%252Bdel%252Bmundo%252Bandino%252B02 .jpg&hash=2f6f28ea1d18cefec92a50de60e3b1d1

You're correct though, that is literally all it would take to prove it (you wouldn't be able to disprove it unless you took a huge sample of all Native Americans, but that's only because of the nature of falsifiability). It would be so easy, yet nobody has gone into any detail. The truth is too big to cover up though, someone will do it eventually.

Johane Derite
02-12-18, 22:31
Maybe, just maybe, it's sensitive info...

https://www.forosperu.net/proxy.php?image=http%3A%2F%2F1.bp.blogspot.com%2F-dYPB3mBpXzI%2FVD5zhYB9lTI%2FAAAAAAAAC7s%2FL7y-mBKqO4A%2Fs1600%2FRafael%252BVidela%252BEissmann.% 252BSobre%252Bel%252Borigen%252Bde%252Blas%252Bmom ias%252Brubias%252Bdel%252Bmundo%252Bandino%252B02 .jpg&hash=2f6f28ea1d18cefec92a50de60e3b1d1

You're correct though, that is literally all it would take to prove it (you wouldn't be able to disprove it unless you took a huge sample of all Native Americans, but that's only because of the nature of falsifiability). It would be so easy, yet nobody has gone into any detail. The truth is too big to cover up though, someone will do it eventually.

There is a guy who is on the "Ancient Aliens" show that got a couple of Paracas Skulls dna tested in Canadian labs.

They only tested for mtdna and the results he claimed were U2e1, U2e, H1, H, K, H2a, J1b1 (european haplogroups) with the rest being either normal native american groups or no result.

Normal mtdna haplogroups for Native Americans are A,B,C,D, and X.

Now, I'm well aware that the probability that these results are legitimate is very very low.

Either he is a scam artist trying to cash in on money and sell his tours and books. Or he is an incompetent moron who has contaminated the samples. Or a mix of both.

I was curious when I heard about these tests and checked his videos, and its clear he has not even a basic understanding of genetics. He didn't even understand y-dna vs mtdna and things as basic as this (and of course he was trying to spin his results as being related to aliens somehow).

His lack of any understanding about even basic dna stuff made it clear that if it was a scam then somebody else must have prepared his DNA results for him, since their "curation" reflected an understanding of archeogenetics and historical context way beyond his own. If it was a contamination then it must have been quite coincidental to have it contaminated by mtdna groups specifically located around the black sea area.

Nonetheless, if there is even 1% chance that just one of his samples legitimately turned up european mtdna, shouldn't there be immediate interest to confirm one way or another? (Paracas culture preceded the Nazca culture and dates 1250BC - 150BC which means there would be deep pre-colombian trans oceanic contact confirmed)

At the worst the public deserves a severe debunking of his claims if they are false.

The guy promoting this thing is interested in the alien aspect and so doesn't quite understand the gravity of having found european mtdna in south america.

I know that Lazaridis was part of the debunking team that did the DNA analysis of the Atacama "Alien".

I would love to see something like that for these paracas skulls also.

Its too frustrating to think that the Paracas skulls could have european mtdna, and that the scientific community is ignoring it because they are the property of some moron who is promoting his ancient aliens theories.

Salento
03-12-18, 00:03
@Johane Derite
An ancient Scottish Native American?
Could it be?

:-)


https://youtu.be/qfOxC1GtV5A

Johane Derite
03-12-18, 00:17
@Johane Derite
A Scottish Native American?
Could it be?

:-)



Omg lol. I don't have any upvotes left but I laughed a lot :D

This is so shameful. First he says 100% match with scottish, then he says no Y-dna extracted. Obviously no autosomal was done either. Its just an mtdna result smh what does 100% scottish even mean

Why haven't any labs or universities DNA tested the paracas culture, jesus christ, why are they all in the possession of ancient aliens people :embarassed:

I actually saw the "claimed" results here (2:00-3:15):


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ugwVTqBfEKs

64logh
03-12-18, 13:06
Omg lol. I don't have any upvotes left but I laughed a lot :D

This is so shameful. First he says 100% match with scottish, then he says no Y-dna extracted. Obviously no autosomal was done either. Its just an mtdna result smh what does 100% scottish even mean

Why haven't any labs or universities DNA tested the paracas culture, jesus christ, why are they all in the possession of ancient aliens people :embarassed:

I actually saw the "claimed" results here (2:00-3:15):

Tourist guides tend to make shit up a lot. No wonder there are lots of alium stuff about precolumbian south america in youtube.

ToBeOrNotToBe
10-02-19, 00:10
If I understand correctly, the Ojibwe are geographically linked to the "Old Copper Complex", and the "Hopewell tradition". Do such linkages also exist for other Native American tribes with elevated percentages of hgs R/X2?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Copper_Complex
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hopewell_tradition

That's the connection I make too. Unfortunately, it looks like nobody is willing to analyse even the modern SNPs of Ojibwe R1b. I wonder what could be the reason for this.

matty74
10-02-19, 00:36
My daughter is part Ojibwe. Her grandmother is 100% Ojibwe and part of a tribe in northern MN. Many Ojibwe I know here in MN have French names. There has been a lot of intermarriage and mixing the past 250 years or more.

ToBeOrNotToBe
10-02-19, 01:13
My daughter is part Ojibwe. Her grandmother is 100% Ojibwe and part of a tribe in northern MN. Many Ojibwe I know here in MN have French names. There has been a lot of intermarriage and mixing the past 250 years or more.

STR results show otherwise for Ojibwe R1b (that is 97% M269 may I add), it seems distinct from European R1b. Then also, why only R1b? Someone should just analyse it and be done with it - but nobody has even bothered to. Do you know anybody with Ojibwe paternal ancestry? I could try and get in contact with a smaller lab to analyse his Y DNA, I'd pay for everything

And yes, in case people haven't figured out already, R1b is my "favourite" haplogroup - but I don't belong to it.

Megalophias
10-02-19, 01:31
Then also, why only R1b?
It's not. See post #77 of this thread.

ToBeOrNotToBe
10-02-19, 02:48
It's not. See post #77 of this thread.

Regarding Ojibwe specifically though it's around 3/4, with basically no signs of any other Eurasian Y DNA. Can't be Viking without I1, R1a etc. And Celtic is unlikely to me, but possible I suppose. Someone should just check their SNPs, as I said. It would be easy.

Megalophias
10-02-19, 03:02
Regarding Ojibwe specifically though it's around 3/4, with basically no signs of any other Eurasian Y DNA.
Source please?

ToBeOrNotToBe
10-02-19, 03:07
Source please?

Well it's on this map (all that R is R1b), and everyone refers to a 79% figure online, but I can't find the source (mainly because I don't have time) - it's probably true though, you can look it up I guess

https://haplomaps.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/HgR-Map.jpg

Compare to this:

https://slideplayer.com/slide/770573/2/images/17/Old+Copper+Culture+Copper+Culture+artifacts+were+m ined+in+limited+area%2C+Keweenaw+Peninsula+in+mode rn+Michigan..jpg

ToBeOrNotToBe
10-02-19, 03:16
Here's another interesting thing (though I doubt it's related to this R1b migration I'm proposing) - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calabash#Origin_and_dispersal

The mystery of the bottle gourd —– namely that this African or Eurasian species was being grown in the Americas over 8,000 years ago[12] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calabash#cite_note-MATRIX2005-12) —– comes from the difficulty in understanding how it arrived in the Americas. The bottle gourd was originally thought to have drifted across the Atlantic Ocean (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlantic_Ocean) from Africa to North (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_America) and South America (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_America) (laughable idea), but genetic research on archeological samples published by the National Academy of Sciences (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_National_Academy_of_Sciences) in December 2005 suggested that it may have been domesticated earlier than food crops and livestock and, like dogs, was brought into the New World (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_World) at the end of the ice age (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_age) by the native Paleo-Indians (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleo-Indians) (too early, probably later East Asians, or maybe even something related to Dene-Yeniseian). This study showed that gourds in American archaeological finds appeared to be closer to Asian variants than to African ones.[4] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calabash#cite_note-pmid16352716-4)

ToBeOrNotToBe
10-02-19, 03:43
As for Solutrean - I'm not sure. Despite the Anzick sample I'm inclined to believe in it: I REALLY hate the idea of independent inventions.


Clovis toolmaking technology appears in the archaeological record in much of North America between 12,800 and 13,500 years ago. Older blades with this attribute have yet to be discovered from sites in either Asia or Alaska.[4] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solutrean_hypothesis#cite_note-Mann2013-4)
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solutrean_hypothesis#cite_note-Mann2013-4)

Haplogroup X2 is by far the most frequent and widespread subclade. Its basal branches (including X2f) are largely restricted to the Near East, the Caucasus, and northern Africa, but the main subclade of X2, defined by a transition at position 225 in HVS-II, includes Near Eastern, north-African, and European-specific subclades, as well as the X2a subclade, famously restricted to Native Americans. The root of X2+225 is probably the major founder sequence for dispersals involving haplogroup X, and its age of ∼21 ka offers an upper bound for the time of these dispersals.45 (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3276663/#bib45) A curious feature of the tree is the possible connection of X2a to the north-African clade X2j through a mutation at position 12,397. However, this mutation might be a recurrence; X2j appears to be extremely recent. The rare X2g, also found only in Native Americans, indicates that the spread from the Near East toward the Americas could have begun as early as the emergence of the X2+225 clade, given that this could have been the only founder sequence.

Definitely not R1b even if true though

ToBeOrNotToBe
10-02-19, 22:59
Out of context reading is...

ToBeOrNotToBe
10-02-19, 23:05
Very stupid

Megalophias
11-02-19, 00:12
You realize that's a joke, right?

Angela
11-02-19, 02:22
I'm at a loss for words.

ToBeOrNotToBe
11-02-19, 03:22
I'm at a loss for words.

Lol my bad g i cant read

Salento
11-02-19, 06:01
Lol my bad g i cant read
Fuhgeddaboudit :)
(forget about it)
It’s about: Comprehension.
It doesn’t apply in this case, or to you (maybe):
If it makes you feel better, on average I Google 1 word out of 30 when I read academic intensive papers in English.

Nobody talks like that.

Sometimes I get the impression that they do it on purpose, they use technical words even when it's not necessary. Snobs.

So many unnecessary arguments are caused by the lack of understanding of these documents, Especially for those struggling in English. Goggle Translate Included.

imo I speak Italian (obviously) and English better than Google Translate. lol