Eupedia Forums
Site NavigationEupedia Top > Eupedia Forum & Japan Forum
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 26 to 37 of 37

Thread: African admixture in ancient Germanic/Scandinavian people

  1. #26
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1000 Experience Points1 year registered

    Join Date
    12-12-16
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Posts
    288
    Points
    2,941
    Level
    15
    Points: 2,941, Level: 15
    Level completed: 64%, Points required for next Level: 109
    Overall activity: 15.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b U-152
    MtDNA haplogroup
    J1c8

    Ethnic group
    Italian, Jewish, British
    Country: USA - Massachusetts



    0 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    Might be the remnants of the first WHGs Out of Africa connection.

  2. #27
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1000 Experience PointsVeteran

    Join Date
    24-02-15
    Posts
    243
    Points
    2,727
    Level
    14
    Points: 2,727, Level: 14
    Level completed: 93%, Points required for next Level: 23
    Overall activity: 11.0%


    Country: United States



    0 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    I1 is quite obviously originally from north Africa. So we can expect to find pre-I1 in north Africa.

  3. #28
    Banned Achievements:
    100 Experience PointsTagger Second Class1 year registered

    Join Date
    06-11-16
    Posts
    184


    Ethnic group
    Neapolitan, Swiss, Slavic
    Country: Hungary



    Quote Originally Posted by Expredel View Post
    I1 is quite obviously originally from north Africa. So we can expect to find pre-I1 in north Africa.
    Source? I shares origins with J haplogroup and the proto ancestor was IJ which originated from the Near East - Mesopotamia region.

  4. #29
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1000 Experience PointsVeteran

    Join Date
    24-02-15
    Posts
    243
    Points
    2,727
    Level
    14
    Points: 2,727, Level: 14
    Level completed: 93%, Points required for next Level: 23
    Overall activity: 11.0%


    Country: United States



    0 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Seanp View Post
    Source? I shares origins with J haplogroup and the proto ancestor was IJ which originated from the Near East - Mesopotamia region.
    Scandinavian skulls resemble north African skulls, common knowledge for anyone familiar with anthropology. 1

  5. #30
    Banned Achievements:
    100 Experience PointsTagger Second Class1 year registered

    Join Date
    06-11-16
    Posts
    184


    Ethnic group
    Neapolitan, Swiss, Slavic
    Country: Hungary



    Quote Originally Posted by Expredel View Post
    Scandinavian skulls resemble north African skulls, common knowledge for anyone familiar with anthropology. 1
    Y-DNA is just one factor and it doesn't have effect on phenotype, there are other genetic markers responsible for physical appearance.

  6. #31
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1 year registered5000 Experience Points
    I1a3_Young's Avatar
    Join Date
    03-05-17
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    517
    Points
    7,957
    Level
    26
    Points: 7,957, Level: 26
    Level completed: 68%, Points required for next Level: 193
    Overall activity: 5.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    I1 Z63*
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H5b1

    Ethnic group
    Basically British
    Country: USA - Arkansas



    What about older Iberian samples? Do they show any African %?
    Administrator of the Young Family Project
    Genetic genealogy enthusiast

  7. #32
    Advisor Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteranTagger First Class50000 Experience PointsRecommendation First Class
    Awards:
    Discussion Ender
    LeBrok's Avatar
    Join Date
    18-11-09
    Location
    Calgary
    Posts
    10,329
    Points
    110,111
    Level
    100
    Points: 110,111, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b Z2109
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H1c

    Ethnic group
    Citizen of the world
    Country: Canada-Alberta



    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by I1a3_Young View Post
    What about older Iberian samples? Do they show any African %?
    It is hard to say at the moment if 1% African admixtures in older samples is the noise, old artifact, or some new flow.
    Be wary of people who tend to glorify the past, underestimate the present, and demonize the future.

  8. #33
    Elite member Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteran25000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    25-10-11
    Location
    Brittany
    Age
    70
    Posts
    4,350
    Points
    36,287
    Level
    58
    Points: 36,287, Level: 58
    Level completed: 70%, Points required for next Level: 363
    Overall activity: 17.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b - L21/S145*
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H3c

    Ethnic group
    more celtic
    Country: France



    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Expredel View Post
    Scandinavian skulls resemble north African skulls, common knowledge for anyone familiar with anthropology. 1
    too common knowledge?
    Scandinavian skulls are inherited from diverse stocks: you thinkin old anthropo 'nordic' dolicho type? they show only some common basis to a lot of europoid dolichocephalic subtypes, whose prototypes were surely bred around Northern Near East at some stage of History before differentiations; I should think the incomplete isolation of future 'nordic' types took place in Northern Steppes South Finland and around not without some input of 'brünnoids' partly evolved descendants; whatever the error I can do here (uneasy to be sure on this ground, it's rather personal guesses) this genesis don't need at all a direct route from Northwest Africa - concerning Y-haplos we know all of us how uneasy it is to link old haplo's with phenotypes, even in far past - concerning I, it seems it's still considered it comes from IJ whose place of development would be around Near-East/Anatolia rather than in North Africa -
    if we consider the allover auDNA of Scandinavian, it's "african" part was and is still very low, and I think that statistically phenotypes have still links with auDNA more than Y-haplo's so to try to compare well represented skulls to a marginal part of auDNA and to Y-haplo's so volatile is a bit weird, IMO.
    the between types could maybe be found already among some Paleo clans of Southeastern Europe ?

  9. #34
    Elite member Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteran25000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    25-10-11
    Location
    Brittany
    Age
    70
    Posts
    4,350
    Points
    36,287
    Level
    58
    Points: 36,287, Level: 58
    Level completed: 70%, Points required for next Level: 363
    Overall activity: 17.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b - L21/S145*
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H3c

    Ethnic group
    more celtic
    Country: France



    I thought in relatively recent Upper Paleo people (15000 BC? a bit older?) wandering at some stage between Southern and Central Europe and the Steppes, not in first Western Paleo people of the 40000/25000's BC before LGM and partly jammed by it)

  10. #35
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1 year registered1000 Experience Points
    Mark's Avatar
    Join Date
    26-11-16
    Posts
    115
    Points
    1,106
    Level
    8
    Points: 1,106, Level: 8
    Level completed: 78%, Points required for next Level: 44
    Overall activity: 78.0%


    Ethnic group
    United Kingdom and Baltic
    Country: United States



    1 out of 2 members found this post helpful.

    African admixture in ancient Germanic/Scandinavian people

    This is bad “science.” You cannot determine ancestry of an archaic sample relative to modern samples, especially if the archaic samples are over 5000 years old. Why? Africans today are not what they were > 5000 years ago and, if anything, should be analyzed the other way around. Descendant populations from a man in Siberia 20k years ago will not all be identical, obviously. Some populations (Finnish or Ural) descended of him will show some grouping of his genes whilst still other descended populations will not. This is to say that Eurasian groups introgressed into Africa (V88 being one bit of evidence of it) and it is obviously more likely that modern Africans are partly descended of ancient Europeans than it is that ancient Europeans are descended from modern Africans (the samples used for such admixture analyses).
    Last edited by Mark; 17-03-18 at 20:11.

  11. #36
    Satyavrata Achievements:
    Three FriendsRecommendation First ClassVeteran50000 Experience PointsTagger First Class
    Maciamo's Avatar
    Join Date
    17-07-02
    Location
    Lothier
    Posts
    8,692
    Points
    689,607
    Level
    100
    Points: 689,607, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 10.0%


    Ethnic group
    Italo-celto-germanic
    Country: Belgium - Brussels



    2 out of 2 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Mark View Post
    This is bad “science.” You cannot determine ancestry of an archaic sample relative to modern samples, especially if the archaic samples are over 5000 years old. Why? Africans today are not what they were > 5000 years ago and, if anything, should be analyzed the other way around. Descendant populations from a man in Siberia 20k years ago will not all be identical, obviously. Some populations (Finnish or Ural) descended of him will show some grouping of his genes whilst still other descended populations will not. This is to say that Eurasian groups introgressed into Africa (V88 being one bit of evidence of it) and it is obviously more likely that modern Africans are partly descended of ancient Europeans than it is that ancient Europeans are descended from modern Africans (the samples used for such admixture analyses).
    Do you understand how population admixture are used? Every scientific paper on ancient DNA compares prehistoric populations to modern ones (as well as to other ancient samples). That's how we know which ancient population contributed genetically to which modern one. Besides, the Dodecad admixture used here do not represent real present-day populations but phantom (or zombie as Dienekes said) populations that potentially existed in the past and were labelled with terms such as East European, Mediterranean or Northwest African. These are neither ancient nor modern, but theoretical model populations.
    My book selection---Follow me on Facebook and Twitter --- My profile on Academia.edu and on ResearchGate ----Check Wa-pedia's Japan Guide
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    "What is the use of living, if it be not to strive for noble causes and to make this muddled world a better place for those who will live in it after we are gone?", Winston Churchill.

  12. #37
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1 year registered1000 Experience Points
    Mark's Avatar
    Join Date
    26-11-16
    Posts
    115
    Points
    1,106
    Level
    8
    Points: 1,106, Level: 8
    Level completed: 78%, Points required for next Level: 44
    Overall activity: 78.0%


    Ethnic group
    United Kingdom and Baltic
    Country: United States



    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful.

    African admixture in ancient Germanic/Scandinavian people

    Quote Originally Posted by Maciamo View Post
    Do you understand how population admixture are used? Every scientific paper on ancient DNA compares prehistoric populations to modern ones (as well as to other ancient samples). That's how we know which ancient population contributed genetically to which modern one. Besides, the Dodecad admixture used here do not represent real present-day populations but phantom (or zombie as Dienekes said) populations that potentially existed in the past and were labelled with terms such as East European, Mediterranean or Northwest African. These are neither ancient nor modern, but theoretical model populations.
    Please refrain from trying to speak down to me. Thanks!

    That tells you about modern populations based on ancient. You learn significantly LESS about ancient populations based on modern.

    EDIT: what’s meant here is those “Zombie populations” are inferences of careful study in modern populations. They are constructs. By attempting to claim they are real rather than they are constructs extracted from inferences made about modern populations, you engage in simple reification. Those “zombie populations” are not complete pictures, by any stretch of the imagination, and they, more often than not, likely represent even more ancient admixture. I.e. those zombie populations are not real, they are reassembled from pieces supposed to fit. You cannot take those populations, assign them a real place in our ancestry and then extrapolate their introgression into a more ancient population based purely upon percentages retrieved from a tool meant for modern people to test their ancestry.

    Try running the Euro J-Test at Gedmatch on ancient Eurasian DNA samples, see how much “Ashkenazi” they have, you’d be surprised. Does that mean they were part Ashkenazim? No, Ashkenazim did not exist back then so it’s impossible. What is more likely is these types of tests are extremely inferential. That’s the first take away. The second takeaway is trying to determine the ancestry of somebody based on the DNA of their descendants is more valuable than trying to do so with an extrapolation of the DNA of other supposed ancestors based on those descendants. This becomes less true with more distant ancestry but on an overall declining arch of utility. It’s all the more the case if you try to take what you learn from that study and apply it to someone that isn’t related to any of them.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •