About the Genographic Project results from Asturias (spain)

[JS Bach]

I have absolutely zero belief in the hypothesis that Solutreans crossed the Atlantic and contributed to the Clovis culture or their DNA. The Solutrean hypothesis is pure fantasy.

If you'd like to contribute some of your reasoned arguments to the points myself and others have made on the Solutrean Hypothesis thread here, by all means feel free to do so: http://www.eupedia.com/forum/thread...Culture-amp-NW-Europe-(ydna-Q-mtdna-X2)/page5

As I mentioned in some posts there, there's an admixture graph in the recently published Lazaridis et al paper that depicts Motala12 (the 7,000 ybp Swedish Hunter Gatherer) as being a mixture of WHG (about 98%) and Amerindian (about 2%) for most values of K.

In Eurogenes13, Motala12 breaks down as: North Atlantic (37.33%); Baltic (61.92%); and Amerindian (.75%) http://www.fc.id.au/2014/10/my-analysis-of-motala-12-ancient-dna.html

And in HarappaWorld Admixture, Motala12 breaks down as: NE-Euro (90.24%); Meditteranean (6.83%); American (1.58%); Beringian (.68%); Papuan (.57%); and Siberian (.07%).

 

[ArmandoR1b]

That doesn't prove anything about the Solutrean hypothesis. It's still a fantasy.

 

[MOESAN]

a repetition of mine - some ancient DNA common to a lot of human beings in very ancient time, and presenting today geographically very sharply separated distributions could have been kept at very low levels by someones,; selection and drift are not operating with computer technics - selection concerns very more certain genes and not other genes, maybe? - it's maybe not a hazard if ancient HGs kept some apparently "exotic" genes in their genome - all of these genes were not already eliminated???

 

[JS Bach]

a repetition of mine - some ancient DNA common to a lot of human beings in very ancient time, and presenting today geographically very sharply separated distributions could have been kept at very low levels by someones,; selection and drift are not operating with computer technics - selection concerns very more certain genes and not other genes, maybe? - it's maybe not a hazard if ancient HGs kept some apparently "exotic" genes in their genome - all of these genes were not already eliminated???

I suspect future genomic analysis will shed more light on that question, especially as more ancient dna becomes available. And looking for examples of those kind of oddities in modern populations around the world would probably also lend weight either for or against that. OTOH humans, as shown by dna results, mix a lot with people of different haplogroups, so perhaps over time it's likely that those exotic components would get diluted. However, my wife has a component very similar to Motala12's Amerindian component, and has no Amerindian ancestry she knows of, and that's 7,000 years later than Motala12.

 

[MOESAN]

not surprising if today Europeans have still some "amerindian" component elements in DNA: the eastern Eurasia in a bridge to Siberia and East Asia - we see Scandinavians and Alps-Lyonnais French people (Burgundians?) having not unsignificant %s of Y-Q (Asia) - did Scandinavians take that with later contacts with Eurasia steppic people? with I-Eans? before that?) exchanges existed at large scale between West and East for a long time even if a low demic levels -
AND even if possible WE NEED NO RECENT CONTACTS from far Asia: the ANE component contains surely a lot of "amerindian" (look ANE = 'lithuanien' + 'amerindian' + 'southasian' - the same reasoning concerning "subsaharian" even if less evident and surely even more ancient!
good drink for all of yours!

 

[Aberdeen]

I suspect future genomic analysis will shed more light on that question, especially as more ancient dna becomes available. And looking for examples of those kind of oddities in modern populations around the world would probably also lend weight either for or against that. OTOH humans, as shown by dna results, mix a lot with people of different haplogroups, so perhaps over time it's likely that those exotic components would get diluted. However, my wife has a component very similar to Motala12's Amerindian component, and has no Amerindian ancestry she knows of, and that's 7,000 years later than Motala12.

If your wife has ancestors who were in North America during the early settlement period, there's a good chance that some male ancestor married a Native woman because of the shortage of European women and later generations concealed the fact in order to avoid discrimination. DNA analysis shows that practice to have been most common in Quebec and Manitoba. On the other hand, it's also possible that a scrap of ANE is showing up as Amerindian, as Moesan has suggested. At this point, I think it's difficult to rule out either possibility.

 

[Melancon]

If your wife has ancestors who were in North America during the early settlement period, there's a good chance that some male ancestor married a Native woman because of the shortage of European women and later generations concealed the fact in order to avoid discrimination. DNA analysis shows that practice to have been most common in Quebec and Manitoba. On the other hand, it's also possible that a scrap of ANE is showing up as Amerindian, as Moesan has suggested. At this point, I think it's difficult to rule out either possibility.

http://www.acadian-home.org/origins-mtdna.html The chances of that are very rare; actually. ^^^This website proves that not all of the women were American indian, and most of the wives were actually European. The wives of Acadian colonists with Amerindian count is actually very low. Check the mtDna of most of them. Most are European women.

Why would a white male colonist marry American indian women in the New World, due to a lack of women? I can see it happening. And it has. But their isn't "a good chance" that's just silly. There is "a rare chance".

Erm, I don't believe most of the male French Acadians were virginal bachelors under 30 either, genius.

My advice for most here: the information presented at 23andMe and FTDNA aren't particularly accurate and are very generic. Use Dodecad or Eurogenes to browse Raw DATA/Genome.

@Aberdeen: I would school you in this area; because I am an Acadian myself and have already known the history. My ancestors are from .. NOVA SCOTIA! Go figure...I don't have to be Canadian to know Canada's history.

 

[JS Bach]

I shouldn't say my wife's Amerindian component is "very similar" to Motala12's, actually. Like Motala12, she has around 2% Amerindian on many calculators, but Motala12's Amerindian component goes away on other calculators more than my wife's does. For instance, unlike Motala12 she has a little over 1% Amerindian on Eurogenes36. Her dad's from Nova Scotia as well, and I could possibly see some Amerindian genes getting in there somewhere along the line.

 

[Melancon]

I suspect future genomic analysis will shed more light on that question, especially as more ancient dna becomes available. And looking for examples of those kind of oddities in modern populations around the world would probably also lend weight either for or against that. OTOH humans, as shown by dna results, mix a lot with people of different haplogroups, so perhaps over time it's likely that those exotic components would get diluted. However, my wife has a component very similar to Motala12's Amerindian component, and has no Amerindian ancestry she knows of, and that's 7,000 years later than Motala12.

Well then, she most likely doesn't have American indian ancestry pal; and the results came out erroneous; in all likelihood. This is not uncommon though. Congratulations man.


Aberdeen just because you and Angela scored on 23andme or FTDNA as having American indian ancestry or Black or whatever, doesn't mean the rest of us North American whites are. Not to call you idiotic, your analysis is just illogical.


Listen to Maciamo, he is all-knowing. He is a well-educated student and probably has a PhD.

 

[Melancon]

If your wife has ancestors who were in North America during the early settlement period, there's a good chance that some male ancestor married a Native woman because of the shortage of European women and later generations concealed the fact in order to avoid discrimination. DNA analysis shows that practice to have been most common in Quebec and Manitoba. On the other hand, it's also possible that a scrap of ANE is showing up as Amerindian, as Moesan has suggested. At this point, I think it's difficult to rule out either possibility.

Science isn't always right and has a tendency to contradict itself; with reoccuring studies. I don't readily believe everything I am told. Even sources I read. 100%

They are just scientific theory and perspectives, not facts.

And the UK will never leave the EU.

 

[Greying Wanderer]

a repetition of mine - some ancient DNA common to a lot of human beings in very ancient time, and presenting today geographically very sharply separated distributions could have been kept at very low levels by someones,; selection and drift are not operating with computer technics - selection concerns very more certain genes and not other genes, maybe? - it's maybe not a hazard if ancient HGs kept some apparently "exotic" genes in their genome - all of these genes were not already eliminated???

As long as those genes aren't being specifically selected *against* for some reason this seems quite likely to me especially if the containing population had a population explosion at one or more points in their history.

 

[JackBlack]

Or Maybe A2 came over with the Solutreans. On Family Tree DNA's haplogroup A project, there's an A2 fellow there who listed his most distant known maternal ancestor as being born in Seville, Spain in 1508. That's cutting it a little close to 1492. I wouldn't be too surprised if some A2 ancient dna turned up in Europe sometime.

On the 23andme forum, there's a person who's mother's grandmother on their mother's side immigrated from France in the 1800's yet had mt haplogroup A2. There is 2 other people in that thread with a similar maternal line, one leading back to France in the 1700's, the other being Basque, both with mt haplogroup A2.

[FONT=Georgia, Times, Times New Roman, serif][/FONT]These are just 3 antidotes. But I believe this is just the tip of the iceberg and that mt A2 ( at least some lines) did indeed descend from the Solutreans and not from Mongolia like most people would assume.

 

[JackBlack]

On the 23andme forum, there's a person who's mother's grandmother on their mother's side immigrated from France in the 1800's yet had mt haplogroup A2. There is 2 other people in that thread with a similar maternal line, one leading back to France in the 1700's, the other being Basque, both with mt haplogroup A2.

These are just 3 antidotes. But I believe this is just the tip of the iceberg and that mt A2 ( at least some lines) did indeed descend from the Solutreans and not from Mongolia like most people would assume.

Here's an interesting link on this topic.

http://simonsoutherton.blogspot.ca/2013_09_01_archive.html

If we compare the number of mutations that have occurred in X2a lineages with the number of new mutations that have occurred in other founding lineages of Native Americans we see similar numbers. The figure below compares the number of mutations in the X2a1a1 lineage with a typical lineage (A2i) in the major founding A2 haplogroup. Both share a similar number of mutations which are most likely to have arisen since their arrival in the New World.

You will also notice that the A and X lineage are very distantly related. They are different branches of the N super-haplogroup. The number of mutations that have occurred in the X2a subclade since it branched from other N lineages is 15. In other words, the amount of variation within New World X2a lineages is similar to the variation that distinguishes X2a from other lineages belonging to the N haplogroup, which includes the Native American A2 lineage.

This backs up what I was saying.