Do you believe that Y-DNA influences looks and behaviour?

Do you think that Y-chromosomal DNA has an influence on phenotype?

  • No, Y-DNA does not influence looks or behaviour at all

    Votes: 32 32.7%
  • Y-DNA might possibly have a minor influence on man's behaviour, but not on his physical appearance

    Votes: 7 7.1%
  • Y-DNA most probably influences a man's behaviour, but has no effect on physical appearance at all

    Votes: 1 1.0%
  • Y-DNA slightly influences a man's physical appearance, but not his behaviour

    Votes: 7 7.1%
  • Y-DNA considerably influences a man's physical appearance, but not his behaviour

    Votes: 1 1.0%
  • Y-DNA slightly influences a man's physical appearance and his behaviour

    Votes: 24 24.5%
  • Y-DNA considerably influences a man's physical appearance and his behaviour

    Votes: 11 11.2%
  • No idea !

    Votes: 15 15.3%

  • Total voters
    98
I think that its true to a degree. Alot of arabs are by nature, aggresive and tend to be of bad behaviour. Same goes with majority of northern africa and middleeast.
Let's cut out the pejorative stereotypes, shall we?
 
No genes? There are now over 200 known genes on the Y chromosome, a ten fold increase compared to what we knew 5 years ago. I wrote a lengthy article on how some mutations in Y-chromosomal genes were apparently favoured by natural selection. I mentioned some of the know Y-DNA gene functions (that includes non-fertility related things like bone growth and height), but of course we still don't know what most of those genes do. That doesn't mean they don't have important functions.

there is a link in your article to '200-chromosomal genes' but it doesn't work or it is a loop to the same article
I don't know how you can identify a gene if you don't know its function
I guess on genes with a function there is always some natural selection in play
 
I don't know how you can identify a gene if you don't know its function
A coding gene begins (usually) with a pointer sequence (TATA-Box), then we get the start codon, the code and the end codon. This identifies it as a gene, at least a protein coding one. So I don't need to know the function of the gene, just it's functional components.
I guess on genes with a function there is always some natural selection in play
Apparently. Functional genes are far better protected against mutations than non functional ones (aka Pseudogenes).

I don't know where the number 200 comes from, as far as I know the newest (2016) values are:
71 protein coding genes (that's what we are interested in)
109 non-coding genes (usually various types of RNA, single stranded molecules, which function by their own three-dimensional molecule structure)
388 pseudogenes (obviously defunct genes ready to be skipped out of the chromosome over time)

Whatever, as far as I know, the genes of the Y-Chromosome are for initialising defeminisation, maskulinisation and for sperma production. Otherwise, at least to my knowledge there is only one gene, Amely, which has to do with physical attributes (enamel production). I do not see any other genes that code for physical features or hormones which trigger 'male' behaviour. All those are coded in other chromosomes with the consequence that presumably no gene of the Y-Chromosome DIRECTLY has something to do with physical attributes or behaviour. Therefore it's pretty obvious that haplogroups can't be responsible for any of such claims, which by the way would be quite racist anyway...
 
The following graph from Haak et al is a handy one to keep in one's files. If I remember correctly, it's based on d-stats, not ADMIXTURE. According to their calculations, the Basque have a bit more steppe than Spaniards, but not much more. (I believe Basque here is French Basque, and Spanish North is Pais Vasco.)

The ancestral proportions shown in figure 3 are based on Haak's very own model of fixation statistics. In this case the authors attempt to measure the contribution to modern populations between the three hypothetical ancestral populations that contributed to modern Europeans, which in this case would be Loschbour-Yamnaya-Stuttgart as far as I remember. The ancestral components are calculated based on dissimilarity within this three population matrix. For those who'd like to understand this method I'd recommend Benjamin Peter's paper on the technical aspect of these models.

The higher contribution of Yamnaya to modern populations in f3 as opposed to more complex ADMIXTURE analyses may just be a result of the different population histories between the Upper Paleolithic, Neolithic & Chalcolithic. Haak's analysis might be skewed in favour of Chalcolithic Yamnaya because it has a very modern, diverse population history which lead to a reduction in heterozygosity, whereas the isolated Loschbour individuals are much less modern in this respect. In this context it might be worth pondering why for example in Alentoft's analysis the Basques of all populations show less of the West Asian component than even Sardinians at K = 19. It would be highly unusual if this was merely a result of the unreliablity of ADMIXTURE.
 
Interesting, found in an article linked by Northerner:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18942110

A comparison of the total and four subscale mean scores across the five common Y haplogroups that were present at a frequency > or =3% in this ethnic group revealed no overall significant differences. However, effect-size comparisons allowed us to detect an association of the haplogroups R2 (Cohen's d statistic=.448-.732) and R1a1 (d=.107-.448) with lower self-reported aggression mean scores in this population.
 
I think it hardly has any similarities. I know so many siblings who should have a lot of the same genetics who are quite radically different personality and looks wise. Clearly a lot of other factors probably have even more influence in characteristics of humans, especially when it comes to personality. How come you feel way more similar to your best friend than some of your closest genetic relatives?... Isn't that kinda weird. I know you can say well you've known your friend for a long time and blah blah blah...No still, I have known most of my relatives longer than my friend yet I simply feel like I have more common ground with him, and we simply get along and understand each other better.
To me these haplogroups probably don't matter much if at all, what they are probably useful for is trying to track population movements to some extent, and to figure out how much populations have mixed with each other.
 
No.
YDNA is just a very small part of our DNA. It matters only for tracing direct male line lineage and for tracing migration of large groups of peoples...
 
I voted ‘No’ as well. I am originally from Scotland and was born with red hair and blue eyes. My Ydna is under a very low tested clade, R1a-Y15121. Worldwide according to Yfull there are now 15 of us. They are from India, Iran, Syria, Yemen, Sri Lanka, Bulgaria, Poland, Ireland, England and Scotland. Recent BigY tests have provided matches in Ireland and England at a TMRCA of 600 years. Low tested but spread afar.

Geno2 test has me at 97% British and 2% Arabian. The analogy here is I may have started out as an Arabian Stallion, but through local breeding I am now an Old Scottish Dray Horse.
 
It actually says the exact opposite. They had ngative results all around.
The data shows a significant difference, however, the researchers claim this difference disappeared after adjusting for age and BMI. The BMI of haplogroup I would be lower if they are taller, as some people believe. The study raises more questions than it answers.
 
The data shows a significant difference, however, the researchers claim this difference disappeared after adjusting for age and BMI. The BMI of haplogroup I would be lower if they are taller, as some people believe. The study raises more questions than it answers.

The study mentions that the significance difference in testosterone levels (upwards of 4%) vanished after adjusting for BMI and age.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4476341/

According to that study age is not a relevant factor for testosterone levels, so this means that men belonging to Y haplogroup I had a significantly lower BMI, which suggests they are either taller, have a more slender build, are less prone to obesity, or all of the above.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-4854812/People-6ft-2in-higher-risk-heart-attacks.html

If haplogroup I increases height, this by itself would explain the reported higher risk of heart attacks for men belonging to hap I.

https://academic.oup.com/cid/article/37/Supplement_2/S69/337709

If haplogroup I has lower BMIs, this may explain the observed faster HIV progression.
 
Mitochondrial DNA and height? What are you talking about? Please provide some sources. Y-DNA contains genes affecting height, whereas mtDNA contains much less genes period.
Do you have the source for such study that says the Y chromosome has genes that directly determine height growth and physical build of a person(which the effect is not through testosterone level or the autosomal genes that people from that specific Y haplogroup usually carried)?
 
Last edited:
Appearance very slightly, behaviour no. Behaviour is tied to cultural and educational factors, usually from parents or people you spent most time with and what you watch on TV, internet etc.

Appearance is mostly decided by autosomal but ydna also has a very small impact, some sons look almost exactly like their dads or grandads (have found that grandad is more often the case). Ydna had a bigger impact when Europe was less mixed for instance WHGs, ANFs and Steppe would have looked more similar to their own groups when their neighbours ydna was similar or identical to theirs.

For example if you have ydna i2a and your mother's side also had parental ydna i2a that would have a bigger impact on your appearance. An even bigger impact is if both of your grandads had ydna i2a and their wives had fathers with ydna i2a. Maybe this is why some Scandinavians look a certain way with their frequent amount of ydna i1 and Croats/Bosnians look a certain way with their frequent amount of ydna i2. However Europe is mixed now with many different ydna (and mtdna) coming from 3 main groups (WHG, ANF, Steppe) so sons looking almost identical to their fathers is often not the case whereas thousands of years ago would have been a common occurrence
 
Last edited:
Some physical predispositions have apparently been tied to Mtdna haplogroups though I'm unsure how tight the correlations are.
I imagine there could be something similar with Y-dna.
In terms of behavior/psychology I'd imagine less so but possible.
And with looks... very slightly I think, but maybe not entirely unnoticable always either.
 

This thread has been viewed 44095 times.

Back
Top