U.S. race groups and haplogroups

Tomenable said:
I have a better suggestion, though - Kosciuszko.
Click to expand...

I like that idea a lot. But good luck convincing people that they should replace the cavalry officer who died in battle with the engineer who was wounded in the buttocks.
 
Angela said:
The "American" option wasn't available.
Click to expand...

American wasn't a suggested option, and wasn't counted as one of ancestries, but it was present in the census of 1980.

Check this data:

http://www.census.gov/population/www/censusdata/pc80-s1-10.html

http://www.census.gov/population/www/censusdata/files/pc80-s1-10/tab01.pdf

1980_Ancestry.png


So in the census of 1980 they counted responses such as American as one of "non-ancestries" (ancestry not specified). ;)

As for the "Other" group of responses in 1980, footnote [1] says the following:

"[1] Includes responses indicating religious groups or unclassifiable responses."

So I think that they counted "Jewish" in this category. U.S. Census Bureau apparently don't know that "Jewish" is not just a religion but also an ethnicity. Ethnic groups are first of all cultural phenomenons - both religion and language are important parts of culture.

There are plenty of examples where religion correlates with ethnic identity - Jews are not an isolated case.
 
Fire Haired14 said:
There's no use in studying genetic in America. It's not an ethnic group.
Click to expand...

Not true in so many ways. American is an ethnic group in many ways due to the idea that has formed that Americans are their own, unique people.

It's also fallacious to say that since the US is a mix of ethnicities it must therefore not have its own genetic identity or even genetic trends. There has been mixing everywhere in Europe. Look at all the R1b-L21 in Germany today. Isn't that a Celtic haplogroup? What are these people doing speaking German? Maybe it's because there has been some mixing going on and that the German people today are also Celtic to some extent. Look at the British Isles. There is more I1 on the east coast of England than there is on the west coast due to a greater Anglo-Saxon and Viking presence in the east. Anglo-Saxons and Vikings, as Germanic peoples, were more mixed in terms of haplotypes than were the largely R1b Celts. Wales and Cornwall are more R1b due to the larger Celtic presence.

I'd be interested if anyone has mapped out US haplogroups or has at least found enough data that a map could be made of it. I would hypothesize that the New England region would be a sea of R1b due to large-scale French Canadian and Irish settlement while the Upper Midwest/Prairie area (e.g. Dakotas) would be more mixed with significant populations of German and Scandinavian-derived I1, I2, and R1a types as a result of 19th century migration.
 
There an artery road named Pulaski Avenue right in the middle of Chicago with lots of industrial companies. I found a job in the Skokie, NW Chicago suburb. It is a Jewish area. We were at a Christmas party and this workmate asked me: "How long have you been in Chicago?" " Six months." I answered. He retorted" And you don't know Polish!!!" He even loaded my plate with horse radish which I never tasted before. Of course, he is really a nice guy. I think he was acting out his inner comedian with me being a newbie and all. At the time I was flustered especially after tasting the horse radish!

In college it was regular trick where guys smile at me and ask if I wanted sugar in my coffee and pour in the white stuff. But it is salt as they substituted salt into the sugar container. That is how it is. American humour. Just have to get used to it.:mad::shocked::LOL:
 
Tomenable said:
The majority of Jews came to the USA from what was at that time the Russian Empire (after WW1 those territories became the Soviet Union, Poland, Lithuania and a few more sovereign states). "Russian ancestry" in American censuses definitely includes more ethnic Non-Russians than ethnic Russians. Also immigration from Russia consisted mostly of its persecuted minorities - Poles and Jews....
Click to expand...

This is a common situation underpinning a lot of the migration. Many ancestors of Americans left Europe because they didn't "fit in" where they lived. It was expensive to pack up and travel - one generally needed a very good reason to do so. This is one of the reasons why the USA has so many religious fundamentalists today - because "fundies" were driven out of European countries by Catholic, Anglican, and Lutheran politicians who had a more relaxed and/or pro-Establishment viewpoint on religion. Fundies were desperate for a place to go and figured that going all the way to North America was worth it. In some cases, entire churches were driven out. There are virtually no Amish remaining in Germany, or anywhere else in Europe for that matter. Most of them emigrated, and the remaining ones either converted to a more mainstream faith or were killed.
 
RobertColumbia said:
Not true in so many ways. American is an ethnic group in many ways due to the idea that has formed that Americans are their own, unique people.

It's also fallacious to say that since the US is a mix of ethnicities it must therefore not have its own genetic identity or even genetic trends. There has been mixing everywhere in Europe. Look at all the R1b-L21 in Germany today. Isn't that a Celtic haplogroup? What are these people doing speaking German? Maybe it's because there has been some mixing going on and that the German people today are also Celtic to some extent. Look at the British Isles. There is more I1 on the east coast of England than there is on the west coast due to a greater Anglo-Saxon and Viking presence in the east. Anglo-Saxons and Vikings, as Germanic peoples, were more mixed in terms of haplotypes than were the largely R1b Celts. Wales and Cornwall are more R1b due to the larger Celtic presence.

I'd be interested if anyone has mapped out US haplogroups or has at least found enough data that a map could be made of it. I would hypothesize that the New England region would be a sea of R1b due to large-scale French Canadian and Irish settlement while the Upper Midwest/Prairie area (e.g. Dakotas) would be more mixed with significant populations of German and Scandinavian-derived I1, I2, and R1a types as a result of 19th century migration.
Click to expand...

By Ethnic group, I mean a population that has been breeding with each other for many generations. America is not an ethnic group. America is very diverse and young. America is mostly the result of old World people who arrived in the last 400 years and unique developments that occurred in America afterwards. There isn't a single type of American in terms of genes and culture.

Most "Ethnic groups" in the Old World are actually populations who have been breeding for many generations, and are the result of events that occurred before mass modern travel and communication. There are exceptions of course. And culture and language changes so quickly, that you'll almost never find an ethnic group that's over 1,000 or 2,000 years. The general family that they're apart of, such as Celtic, might be much older though. Also, most ethnic groups are a mixture of people who have been lived in their region for thousands and thousands of years(doesn't mean their ethnic group is that old). That's not what Americans are at all.
 
Fire Haired14 said:
Most "Ethnic groups" in the Old World are actually populations who have been breeding for many generations
Click to expand...

I've found the following excerpt:

http://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article?id=10.1371/journal.pbio.1001555

Europe-Wide Patterns of Relatedness

Individuals usually share the highest number of IBD blocks with others from the same population, with some exceptions. For example, individuals in the United Kingdom share more IBD blocks on average, and hence more close genetic ancestors, with individuals from Ireland than with other individuals from the United Kingdom (1.26 versus 1.09 blocks at least 1 cM per pair, Mann-Whitney p<10−10), and Germans share similarly more with Polish than with other Germans (1.24 versus 1.05, p = 5.7×10−6), a pattern which could be due to recent asymmetric migration from a smaller population into a larger population.
Click to expand...

What does it actually tell us ??? Does it mean that various groups of Brits/Germans are less closely related to each other, than to respectively Irishers/Poles? This would mean that some ethnic groups - e.g. Germans - are only "loosely" related to each other, and have not been "close reproductive communities" for many generations, contrary to what you have just suggested above.

By Ethnic group, I mean a population that has been breeding with each other for many generations.
Click to expand...

See above.

Apparently some groups, e.g. Germans, do not fit your definition, because they aren't closely related to each other. This can perhaps be explained by fact that tons & tons of Non-Germans have been Germanized (assimilated) during several recent centuries.

Main populations subjected to Germanization processes were Slavic & Baltic populations to the east of Germany.

Similar processes took place in the west, where e.g. German Alsatians have been assimilated by the French nation:

http://historum.com/european-history/46813-alsace-lorraine-who-has-best-claim-15.html

Check also this map showing the westward political expansion of France in period from 985 to 1947:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/ae/Frontiere_francaise_985_1947_small.gif
 
Based on figures and calculations concerning natural growth in the U.S. in period 1790-1980 posted above:

Here a graph showing hypothetical U.S. population growth until 1980 had there been absolutely no immigration since 1790:

97,182,017 "old 1790 stock descendants" in 1980, include 78,456,469 Whites and 18,725,548 Black African-Americans:

http://s2.postimg.org/q2udff2q1/USA_Pop_Growth.png

USA_Pop_Growth.png


As for those Irish-Americans who came in the second half of the 1800s:

In year 1900 out of the total of 76 million inhabitants of the USA, 1.6 million were Irish-born, another 5 million were born to Irish-born parents (i.e. those were 2nd generation Irish immigrants) and only God knows how many were 3rd and 4th generation Irish immigrants. So I would rather trust the census when it says that 30 million people reported Irish ancestry in 1980 (when the USA had 226 million people), given the high rate of natural increase of American population between 1900 and 1980, as well as the rate of intermarriage of Irishers with others (i.e. the dillution, but also the faster spread, of Irish ancestry).

After year 1845 there was simply a long-lasting mass exodus of Irish population from Ireland to other places, mostly to the USA.
 
Here are details about Y-DNA haplogroups in the USA. Not much is written about them, most data is from Europe.
You can find them if you look for "Race, Ancestry and Genetic composition in the US Richard Morrill(sorry, not allowed to paste links yet)
Here we can see that Western European whites(Big majority Haplogroup R1b) are 192M. There are 330M inhabitants, even though he seems to count 300/315, so it must be around 10 years old.
The data of men belonging to Haplogroup R1b is divided between British Islanders, Continental Germanics, and French-Italian.

There's English/Irish predominance in almost every state (the greatest flaw of this post is that Irish and English R1b is not differentiated).
Only we see other most common people in the Midwest(German); Texas, New Mexico and California(Hispanics), and Louisiana and DC(Blacks). And English are always the 2nd.
Except for the DC. In the capital Blacks are almost half(other source) and Germans are the next most common group. That detail came as a great surprise to me.
Also Hawaii, that seems to have had large Chinese historical migration(haplogroup O)

But R1b is the most common Haplogroup by far. It's dominant in every place outside Hawaii and DC. In addition, in the States in the Northwestern quarter(West of the Lakes) as well as in New England, it's followed by I1 and R1a(both Nordic and German), I really doubt that this R1a is Slavic.
In the SW quarter, Florida and Texas. R1b is followed by Hispanic R1b, where they dominate the genetic landscape. With the exception of Asian presence in California, and Native Q in Desert States.
Black (Haplogroup E1b1a/E-V38) is only relevant in the Eastern half of the country. And is followed by German/Scandinavian and Slavic? R1a
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

This thread has been viewed 35846 times.

Back
Top