Race and Haplogroups

[Neander]

Actually Cameroon has a pocket of R1b people...But obviously is not the same branch of R1b as the one found in Europe..

Cool...

I ask you what race were these R1b during their invasion in the Cameroon?

 

[Neander]

Secondly, the Dinaric Alps constitute a much broader area from Albania to Slovenia. The haplogroup with the highest frequency is I2a2. E1b1b is regulated to Albania.

I am not surprised that E1b1b is regulated to Albania. During slavic invasion the illyrians after unsuccsesful fighting were located to today Albania, where still are present memories of Jutbina and Klladusha in albanian songs. The majority of North albanians trace their origin in the North Dinaric Alps.

Please show evidence that the E1b1b has the cephalic index of 88 and I2a2 of 86.

From C.C The races of Europe:

The mean cephalic index of the Bosnians is over 85; this varies by religions, with the Catholics the most brachycephalic (86), and the Moslems the least (84).

And for Albania:

The only adequate anthropometric data extant which deals with the Toscs is a series from southwestern Albania, from the town of Gjinokastër and its neighborhood.
Their cephalic index mean, 90.8, is by far the highest recorded in Europe.

 

[Maciamo]

Cool...
I ask you what race were these R1b during their invasion in the Cameroon?

No ancient remains had been DNA tested this part of Africa yet, so no one knows what they looked like back then. The age of the African R1b-V88 is estimated between 15,000 and 10,000 years old based on Y-DNA mutation rate alone.

 

[Joro]

Hi Joro, look at this map.
http://pl.wikipedia.org/w/index.php...oples_9c_map.jpg&filetimestamp=20090604081328
North of Carpathian Mountains there are two tribes : W.Chrobatians and R.Chrobations (Ch=H). I checked few sources and it means Horvats. In English it translates as White Croats and Red Croats. Croats arrived in Dinaric Alps around 600 BC with Slavic Expansion. Where did they come from? If one can trust this map and some historians, it might show the remnants of Croatians tribes that didn't move south. I read in polish text that White Croats stopped North the Red Croats South in Dinaric Mountains. Now when you look at the map where Red Chrobatians are. They are located exactly between Moldova in south, and Belarus in north. Now the puzzle of heavy I2a in Moldova, South Croatia and Belarus makes sense.
White Chrobatians come from region also called Little Poland and heavy in R1a.
Not sure myself how much water it holds, but it makes some sense. What do you think? It would explain the colours on your flag though. :grin:

Recently I've read few research papers, in polish though futile to post here then. The thing is that more and more historians come to conclusion that first millennium (probably much before) Slavs in central Europe where already a mixture of R1a and I2a, and not pure R1a.

that's sympathic but i don't believe slavs brought I2a,maybe 1-2% but not more.the purest slavic areas in croatia have big R1a and their I2a is not more common than in north Italy.enough said.
25% for Belarus is too much,it simply makes no logic.there should be a new testing for thata rea definitively,and i'm sure it wouldn't show more than 15%.

 

[Joro]

I've found only this for Belarus: http://mbe.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/reprint/22/10/1964
And It shows 15% of I2a,while Bulgarians have no I2a according to that research.Although there are only 24 samples for Bulgarians,but to find none I2a at all is indicative.There should be new,enough-sampled,complete study,taking in account the changes in haplogroup I classification.For example,we first had the 'Eu7' and 'Eu8' containing the haplogroup I,and according to that Croats and Bosniaks carried the same dominant gene as Scandinavians,and the Sardinians were Eu8.While now Scandinavian and western-Balkan I are clearly divided,and western-Balkan I is more related to that of Sardinia and SW Europe than to Scandinavian I1.

 

[K_Sacana_Blomqvist]

Linking race to y-dna haplogroups is an almost impossible task, except perhaps in some sort of very broad and general terms. Autosomal dna is recombinant. It does not identify itself neatly; that is, it doesn't tell you where it came from. Some traits are dominant, and others are recessive. That plays out across the whole panoply of human physiological and phenotypical characteristics. It's just too complex a subject to enable us to say, simply, that this y haplogroup is "Nordic" or that one is "Alpine," etc.

The best one can do is say that certain y haplogroups are mostly European, while others are mostly African or Asian, etc. Even then there are exceptions and overlaps.

that's exactly what there's is to it. Nothing conclusive. Completly academic and theoretical discourse that has no bearing what so ever on any ethnic or "racial" characteristics of today.

I admit, it can be addictive to the enthusiasts. Still, despite the same gene markers the Scandinavians and Spanish r different physically from Persians or Hindus. Equally, the non IE Basques r similar to the surrounding IE Spanish as the IE Swedes are to the non IE Finnish

 

[Sprinkles]

Hi Joro, look at this map.
http://pl.wikipedia.org/w/index.php...oples_9c_map.jpg&filetimestamp=20090604081328
North of Carpathian Mountains there are two tribes : W.Chrobatians and R.Chrobations (Ch=H). I checked few sources and it means Horvats. In English it translates as White Croats and Red Croats. Croats arrived in Dinaric Alps around 600 BC with Slavic Expansion. Where did they come from? If one can trust this map and some historians, it might show the remnants of Croatians tribes that didn't move south. I read in polish text that White Croats stopped North the Red Croats South in Dinaric Mountains. Now when you look at the map where Red Chrobatians are. They are located exactly between Moldova in south, and Belarus in north. Now the puzzle of heavy I2a in Moldova, South Croatia and Belarus makes sense.
White Chrobatians come from region also called Little Poland and heavy in R1a.
Not sure myself how much water it holds, but it makes some sense. What do you think? It would explain the colours on your flag though. :grin:
Recently I've read few research papers, in polish though futile to post here then. The thing is that more and more historians come to conclusion that first millennium (probably much before) Slavs in central Europe where already a mixture of R1a and I2a, and not pure R1a.

The evidence points to an origin of I2a2 in the Balkans, specifically Hercegovina.

 

[Maciamo]

The evidence points to an origin of I2a2 in the Balkans, specifically Hercegovina.

I think that I2a2 was present all over the Balkans and Carpathians before the Neolithic. At that time people were (semi-)nomadic hunter-gatherers so it is pointless to try to define a fixed area of origin.

The first farmers from Greece pushed their way through the Balkans along the main rivers and the most fertile lands. They split the hunter-gatherers in two groups, one in Illyria and the other in the mountains of north-east Romania. The latter adopted agriculture quickly (probably with some population blending with the Near-Eastern farmers) and developed the Cucuteni-Tripolye culture, which later expanded into Moldova and western Ukraine. This late Cucuteni-Tripolye area matches very well the modern distribution of I2a2.

If I2a2 is more common and diverse around Bosnia-Herzegovina nowadays it is perhaps simply because this region was better sheltered from migrations for the last 10,000 years. The Cucuteni-Tripolye culture was overrun by waves of steppe immigrants for 5000 consecutive years. It's a wonder that so much I2a2 survived there at all.

 

[Vespasianus]

I would like to mark a few points:

1- Yes, Y-DNA can be tricky regarding race classification for sure( in the case of Europe I prefer to call it ethnicities or phenotypes), since autosomal DNA equates more precisely with someone's phenotype. However, Y-DNA is incredibly useful in determining ancestrality, the original bearers of a language/culture and also in demonstrating the links between the peoples, in this case indo-europeans. Althought current european populations have a variety of phenotypes, they also have a variety of Y-DNA haplogroups, and at least to an extent and in ancient times this can be associated with certain migrating peoples. Naturally that nowadays these groups have mixed and one's Y-DNA doesn't tell the whole picture, but it is still very valuable in showing the original genetic links. Additionally, also to an extent the overall prevalence of the Y-DNA as well as of the M-DNA correlates to the ethnically dominant group in an area.

2-Phenotype and genotype are different. As some have already pointed out, some genes are recessive and not completely expressed, but they are there. Heterozygotic europeans can express recessive traits in their offspring depending on the genetic combinations that would happen marrying between europeans, if it were with asians or africans it wouldn't happen(comparing for example a brown eyed european reproducing with another brown eyed european or light eyed european, in both cases the offspring could have light coloured eyes), just a stupid example. But not only because of recessive traits that might be hidden, but also due to environmental adaption. One reason we could say that R1b people in southern Europe tend to display less frequently red hair and freckles is because the freckled skin of red headed people(unable to tan) is a genetic disadvantage in places like southern Spain, Sardinia or southern Italy, where these individuals would get skin cancer or other skin or sun related problems. The same reason why afghan and persian R1as have much darker skin tone than russians and ukrainians. The British Islands is another example, in this dark, foggy and poor in sun light environment, with a lot of humidity and forests, pale skin and light eyes are more likely to be widespread. Other things like diet and environmental conditions etc also influence overall body size, muscle mass, fat retention etc. Coon gave examples of how even newcomers in Australia had already different anatomies compared to englishmen in England, imagine that in the thousands of years of indo-european migrations.


with some reservations we can at least correlate some haplogroups with some peoples, with phenotypes a little bit less, but not completely impossible, at least as the "core" of a phenotype. For example, the classical scandinavian Nordic phenotype, lanky, narrow headed etc is mostly associated with I1 haplogroup(although I1 came from Central Europe originally, replacing the I2a1 scandinavians from the mesolithic, these newly arrived I1 were 55% western hunter gatherer and 45% neolithic farmers already, bear that in mind, that's why they brought agriculture into Scandinavia and this could also explain why they were more dolichocephalic than their I2a2 cousins). I2a2 seems to be related to Dinarics, and R1a seems to be related to what Hans Günther called the "East Baltids". The alpines are a little bit more tricky, R1b is very common in alpine dominated regions, but not always it equates with the alpine phenotype, what we don't know is if the alpine phenotype emerged in a combination of invading R1b indo-europeans with the local genes or if it was already there originally, very hard to know, since many original Yamnaya people were dolicocephalic(although we do see a sizeable minority between 15-25% of brachycephalic people, one stocky and shorter and the other taller, resembling much the dinaric and alpine types.) The R1a slavs tend to be brachycephalic, but alpines are not R1a, perhaps they are a combination of R1b and local I2, western hunter-gatherers. Hard to precise. Original anatolian neolithic farmers had already a consirable influx of western hunter gatherer as well, the Balkanic WHG had partially driven a wedge into Anatolia, so these populations are related since ancient times.

 

[Neander]

Linking race to y-dna haplogroups is an almost impossible task, except perhaps in some sort of very broad and general terms. Autosomal dna is recombinant. It does not identify itself neatly; that is, it doesn't tell you where it came from. Some traits are dominant, and others are recessive. That plays out across the whole panoply of human physiological and phenotypical characteristics. It's just too complex a subject to enable us to say, simply, that this y haplogroup is "Nordic" or that one is "Alpine," etc.

The best one can do is say that certain y haplogroups are mostly European, while others are mostly African or Asian, etc. Even then there are exceptions and overlaps.

Everybody keeps saying this, like this would be the wisest word in the history of humanity.

But non of these people including you, dont remind that when a people invade some territory, if you are historian or at least some amateur of history, you must have clear ideas what this population brought here or there, in racial-genetic sense. No matter how they mixed in leter centuries, but in the time of arrivalë it has some genes, some racial features, some blood groups etc.

So, despite what everybody said here, I must repeat: Haplogroups is linked (historically) to race as well!

In this case you have obligations, not me. Or you are lazy to study to link race with haplogrups and it is simply to say "they have no links".

 

[Vespasianus]

Everybody keeps saying this, like this would be the wisest word in the history of humanity.

But non of these people including you, dont remind that when a people invade some territory, if you are historian or at least some amateur of history, you must have clear ideas what this population brought here or there, in racial-genetic sense. No matter how they mixed in leter centuries, but in the time of arrivalë it has some genes, some racial features, some blood groups etc.

So, despite what everybody said here, I must repeat: Haplogroups is linked (historically) to race as well!

In this case you have obligations, not me. Or you are lazy to study to link race with haplogrups and it is simply to say "they have no links".

I agree man. People are too narrow minded or sometimes lack the creativity and ingenuity to infer. Although I would make a few changes to the haplogroup european phenotypes associations you made, check my post above. I would relate I1 more closely to the Nordics than R1a, R1a would be baltic slavs mostly, R1b seems to be strongly correlated to alpines and I would say I2a is more dinaric than E1b1b, since if you look at Coon's and other anthropologists maps in Europe and Middle East, there are regions dominated by the E1b haplogroup that are not predominantly dinaric.

 

[Viramund]

I agree man. People are too narrow minded or sometimes lack the creativity and ingenuity to infer. Although I would make a few changes to the haplogroup european phenotypes associations you made, check my post above. I would relate I1 more closely to the Nordics than R1a, R1a would be baltic slavs mostly, R1b seems to be strongly correlated to alpines and I would say I2a is more dinaric than E1b1b, since if you look at Coon's and other anthropologists maps in Europe and Middle East, there are regions dominated by the E1b haplogroup that are not predominantly dinaric.

If by nordic we mean depigmented mediterraneans I2a and G2a are the nordic haplogroups (globular amphorae, scandinavian stone age), R1s were the swarthy hooked noosed Iranid-CM bunch that recognised how pretty the farmer women were and selected for what in their eyes were the most exotic/lighter ones. But there is no such a thing as "nordic race", nor dinaric race , its just a bunch of homo sapiens under the west eurasian phenotipical spectrum, its a shame how much time is wasted around with these labels as if they represented something solid but its just astrology level fantasy.

 

[Neander]

I agree man. People are too narrow minded or sometimes lack the creativity and ingenuity to infer. Although I would make a few changes to the haplogroup european phenotypes associations you made, check my post above. I would relate I1 more closely to the Nordics than R1a, R1a would be baltic slavs mostly, R1b seems to be strongly correlated to alpines and I would say I2a is more dinaric than E1b1b, since if you look at Coon's and other anthropologists maps in Europe and Middle East, there are regions dominated by the E1b haplogroup that are not predominantly dinaric.

Maybe we find some good answer from Madison Grants maps, where there are two kinds of nordics: continental and scandianvian, in my terms these are R1a and I1

for I2a it is known they as slavs took women as slaves, and from them inherited dinaric traits. As slavs they were neodanubian in origins.

 

[Vespasianus]

Maybe we find some good answer from Madison Grants maps, where there are two kinds of nordics: continental and scandianvian, in my terms these are R1a and I1

for I2a it is known they as slavs took women as slaves, and from them inherited dinaric traits. As slavs they were neodanubian in origins.

R1b U106 was the R1b subclade that spread Germanic languages, not R1a. R1a is more often than not associated with Slavs, negligible presence of R1a in West Germany and very few in Netherlands, common in Poland and somewhat in East Germany. Sweden(the blondiest country in the world) is the country with most I1 concentration. I2a were not the original bearers of slavic languages, but R1a, I2a were already in Europe long before the Indo-European invasions, they descend from the Western Hunter Gatherers, that's why they are found in Sardinia(not slavic) and Spain.

 

[Vespasianus]

If by nordic we mean depigmented mediterraneans I2a and G2a are the nordic haplogroups (globular amphorae, scandinavian stone age), R1s were the swarthy hooked noosed Iranid-CM bunch that recognised how pretty the farmer women were and selected for what in their eyes were the most exotic/lighter ones. But there is no such a thing as "nordic race", nor dinaric race , its just a bunch of homo sapiens under the west eurasian phenotipical spectrum, its a shame how much time is wasted around with these labels as if they represented something solid but its just astrology level fantasy.

I mean the classical nordic phenotype shown in old physical anthropology books. G2a is fore sure not nordic, this haplogroup was brought to Europe through the Neolithic farmers from Anatolia. I2a is related, but doesn't depict as often the fair traits, countries with high concentration of I2 usually don't have blonde hair. R1as were originally not hooked nosed, these would be Js and Ks, R1a is the stocky kind associated with Baltic Slavs, like Poles, ukrainians and west russians.I didn't use the term "nordic race" or "dinaric race", I said phenotype, and the phenotype does exist, althogh genetically is already mixed. We were just discussing which haplogroups were present or dominant in ancient populations and not that they exactly represent race or ethnicity, but they do have a geographical origin and path. About homo sapiens, they are many wholes in the african origins theory, the polygenic theory that used to be supported by Coon, Waldenreich and others has something to say. The current genetic diversity in human populations make it unlikely that one original ancestor group gave origin to all humans(besides neanderthal, denisovan and other ancient hominids DNA). Petralona skull in Greece, Java Man, Swanscombe fossils and many others attest to a much older origin of proto homo sapiens.

 

[Neander]

R1b U106 was the R1b subclade that spread Germanic languages, not R1a. R1a is more often than not associated with Slavs, negligible presence of R1a in West Germany and very few in Netherlands, common in Poland and somewhat in East Germany. Sweden(the blondiest country in the world) is the country with most I1 concentration. I2a were not the original bearers of slavic languages, but R1a, I2a were already in Europe long before the Indo-European invasions, they descend from the Western Hunter Gatherers, that's why they are found in Sardinia(not slavic) and Spain.

In sardiania is another clade. It must have been from bellbeakers.

The slavic clade is another. But they came in balkans with slavs.

 

[Touijer]

I would like to mark a few points:

1- Yes, Y-DNA can be tricky regarding race classification for sure( in the case of Europe I prefer to call it ethnicities or phenotypes), since autosomal DNA equates more precisely with someone's phenotype. However, Y-DNA is incredibly useful in determining ancestrality, the original bearers of a language/culture and also in demonstrating the links between the peoples, in this case indo-europeans. Althought current european populations have a variety of phenotypes, they also have a variety of Y-DNA haplogroups, and at least to an extent and in ancient times this can be associated with certain migrating peoples. Naturally that nowadays these groups have mixed and one's Y-DNA doesn't tell the whole picture, but it is still very valuable in showing the original genetic links. Additionally, also to an extent the overall prevalence of the Y-DNA as well as of the M-DNA correlates to the ethnically dominant group in an area.

2-Phenotype and genotype are different. As some have already pointed out, some genes are recessive and not completely expressed, but they are there. Heterozygotic europeans can express recessive traits in their offspring depending on the genetic combinations that would happen marrying between europeans, if it were with asians or africans it wouldn't happen(comparing for example a brown eyed european reproducing with another brown eyed european or light eyed european, in both cases the offspring could have light coloured eyes), just a stupid example. But not only because of recessive traits that might be hidden, but also due to environmental adaption. One reason we could say that R1b people in southern Europe tend to display less frequently red hair and freckles is because the freckled skin of red headed people(unable to tan) is a genetic disadvantage in places like southern Spain, Sardinia or southern Italy, where these individuals would get skin cancer or other skin or sun related problems. The same reason why afghan and persian R1as have much darker skin tone than russians and ukrainians. The British Islands is another example, in this dark, foggy and poor in sun light environment, with a lot of humidity and forests, pale skin and light eyes are more likely to be widespread. Other things like diet and environmental conditions etc also influence overall body size, muscle mass, fat retention etc. Coon gave examples of how even newcomers in Australia had already different anatomies compared to englishmen in England, imagine that in the thousands of years of indo-european migrations.


with some reservations we can at least correlate some haplogroups with some peoples, with phenotypes a little bit less, but not completely impossible, at least as the "core" of a phenotype. For example, the classical scandinavian Nordic phenotype, lanky, narrow headed etc is mostly associated with I1 haplogroup(although I1 came from Central Europe originally, replacing the I2a1 scandinavians from the mesolithic, these newly arrived I1 were 55% western hunter gatherer and 45% neolithic farmers already, bear that in mind, that's why they brought agriculture into Scandinavia and this could also explain why they were more dolichocephalic than their I2a2 cousins). I2a2 seems to be related to Dinarics, and R1a seems to be related to what Hans Günther called the "East Baltids". The alpines are a little bit more tricky, R1b is very common in alpine dominated regions, but not always it equates with the alpine phenotype, what we don't know is if the alpine phenotype emerged in a combination of invading R1b indo-europeans with the local genes or if it was already there originally, very hard to know, since many original Yamnaya people were dolicocephalic(although we do see a sizeable minority between 15-25% of brachycephalic people, one stocky and shorter and the other taller, resembling much the dinaric and alpine types.) The R1a slavs tend to be brachycephalic, but alpines are not R1a, perhaps they are a combination of R1b and local I2, western hunter-gatherers. Hard to precise. Original anatolian neolithic farmers had already a consirable influx of western hunter gatherer as well, the Balkanic WHG had partially driven a wedge into Anatolia, so these populations are related since ancient times.

Unrelated but I have never seen a blonde R1b despite looking very hard. An R1b man has dark hair or sometimes red hair. There might be a darkening agent on R1b. The haplogroups where I see blondes is I1 and R1a. I think it’s normal because it came from Central Asia but there’s this big misconception that R1b = blonde when I never saw one case of it

 

[Vespasianus]

In sardiania is another clade. It must have been from bellbeakers.

The slavic clade is another. But they came in balkans with slavs.

Well, check this link: https://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplogroup_I2_Y-DNA.shtml

I2 is an ancient haplogroup in Europe from Paleolithic times and abundant in the mesolithic. Independent of subclade it wasn't the slavs who brought I2, you are right when you say that I2 in slavic countries are a differente subclade, but as you can see the subclade there is closely related to the on in the British Isles. There were the ones who migrated east until Ukraine or so, but it doesn't mean that the I2 completely left the Balkans, that is highly unlikely, if this was the case its higher concentration wouldn't be in the southern Balkans, which have much less original slavic DNA. I2a1 was abundant in the Starčevo–Kőrös–Criş culture and Printed Cardium Culture, both pre-dating slavs, and the first in the Balkans.

 

[Vespasianus]

Unrelated but I have never seen a blonde R1b despite looking very hard. An R1b man has dark hair or sometimes red hair. There might be a darkening agent on R1b. The haplogroups where I see blondes is I1 and R1a. I think it’s normal because it came from Central Asia but there’s this big misconception that R1b = blonde when I never saw one case of it

I didn't say R1b was known for blondism. But there are many blonde R1b, or at least brown hair. Blondism is not related exclusively to haplogroup, it is an allele that came up some where in Eastern Europe and is associated with Baltic Populations. R1b is associated with red hair, that is a fact, red hair is fair hair and the genes related to red hair can also cause some kinds of blondism, although reddish or a darker tone. R1a in Asia has no blondism, it is more complicated than reducing it to haplogroups, blonde hair was selected through sexual selection in populations of mixed I1, I2, R1a and R1b. Netherlands has a lot of blondism and has a high percentage of R1b, like Western Germany and the British Islands. Many ancient Celts were strawberry blonde or even blonde and R1b is the one associated with Celts. About the R1b U-106 subclade it is widely recognized as Germanic, no doubts, its degree of blondism is another story. It could be the blondism appeared in I1 or I2 populations, but we don't know, the subclades here can change this scenario and so does the mixing between these groups, again R1a in Europe and Asia have completely different characterization for example(slavic R1a finds a smaller percentage of blondes than Germanic countries, Netherlands is blonder than Poland for example).About Centrala Asia stuff, that is not really precise, R1b and R1s were nomadic peoples wandering from eastern Europe to Siberia in times of the Ice Ages, these populations were highly adapted to the cold(you see that in body structure and incredibly fair skin of red heads), central asia in about 20k years ago was increadibly cold and different from today, the two were split by the melting of the Caspian sea, but otherwise there were close to the Pontic Steppe territory, R1b ended in the southern/western part, which was green back then, but it is tricky because there is abundance of R1b in Dnieper Donetsk culture.

 

[Gao1111]

Y-DNA has nothing to do with race. Race has a certain relationship with autosomal chromosomes and Mt-DNA. However, people with Y-DNA have autosomes and specific cultures, so it is difficult to become another race when mixed.