PDA

View Full Version : Another R1b distribution problem.



Curious
09-09-2013, 05:47 PM
Probably everyone here is aware of the R1b distribution problem in northern Europe. It generally gets higher as one approaches the Atlantic, and is highest in Ireland, Britain and the Basques country, so at one time it was assumed that R1b was the Y haplotype for the original Atlantic population. Recent strides in understanding dna changed that thinking, since it is now believed that R1b is only about 4500 years old and likely originated closer to the Black Sea than the Atlantic, so the distribution seems strange unless one assumes massive replacement of Y lineages in the Bronze Age. But there's another R1b distribution problem on the other side of the North Atlantic. Surveys of Amerindian Y dna do their best to screen out European dna from the post contact period (an admittedly difficult problem) but some tribes in the high north and in north eastern North America have very high levels of R1b. The reaction of the scientific community so far seems to be "It must be post contact European dna and the result of a founder affect, so let's not look at the problem too closely." But that doesn't really work, since the R1b levels are highest among the Dene in the high north and among the Algonquin speaking people in north eastern North America, declining as one moves south and west. And R1b is totally absent from the figures for South America, except for one part of Brazil. But South America has had a lot of racial mixing between indigenous people and people from Iberia, where R1b is common, so the attempts to screen out post contact European ancestry must have been successful in South America, except for the more remote parts of Brazil. And some of the North American tribes that have high rates of R1b have had later contact and less intermixing with people of European ancestry than other tribes with a lower rate of R1b. For example, the Ojibwe, who live north of the Great Lakes, have 79% R1b (and 25% mitrochondrial X2) and they didn't have much contact with white folks until about 1750. Whereas the Algonquin, who had much earlier contact with Europeans and who intermarried much more with Europeans than the Ojibwe have, show only 38% R1b. And in the far north, some of the Dene tribes who didn't have much contact with white folks until the 19th century show high rates of R1b, with the Chipewyan at 62%, for example. And there isn't much evidence of other "European" Y haplotypes, so one would have to assuming that attempts to screen out European ancestry were largely successful except in the case of R1b.

It should be fairly easy to find out whether R1b was here before the colonial age by testing old bones. Except that Native North Americans aren't going to let that happen. Another approach would be to look at what subclades are involved in order to see whether it does look like modern European R1b or whether R1b could have evolved independently in North America, from an old strain of R. That seems unlikely, but more likely than any other scenario I could come up with once I decided that the quick explanation of "post contact European ancestry and founder affect" doesn't really work. I'd like to see the issue examined, since the longer science ignores the issue, the longer the Storm Front types and the Edgar Cayce fans have to create their own explanation for why R1b is a common Y among Native North Americans in the high Arctic and in north eastern North America.

rms2
09-10-2013, 01:35 AM
Lucky Voyageurs? ;)

Curious
09-10-2013, 02:06 AM
Lucky Voyageurs? ;)

I don't think so. As I explained, the tribes with the highest R1B rates are not generally the ones that have had the most or earliest mixing with people of European descent, so they're not the best candidates for having unrecognized European ancestry, or for having time to experience a founder affect. Plus, a lot of North American tribes didn't grant high status to people of mixed ancestry, so such an explanation seems unlikely to me. Also, why only R1b? At one point, I looked at the geographic situation and had a notion of paleolithic Europeans crossing the Atlantic ice during the last glacial maximum and mixing with the folks who were already in North America at that time, and I find that theory has in fact been taken up by some (not on this forum). However, the current scientific view as to the actual age of R1b would seem to make that impossible. So it's a puzzle to me.

R.Rocca
09-10-2013, 02:07 AM
I don't think so. As I explained, the tribes with the highest R1B rates are not generally the ones that have had the most or earliest mixing with people of European descent, so they're not the best candidates for having unrecognized European ancestry, or for having time to experience a founder affect. Plus, a lot of North American tribes didn't grant high status to people of mixed ancestry, so such an explanation seems unlikely to me. Also, why only R1b? At one point, I looked at the geographic situation and had a notion of paleolithic Europeans crossing the Atlantic ice during the last glacial maximum and mixing with the folks who were already in North America at that time, and I find that theory has in fact been taken up by some (not on this forum). However, the current scientific view as to the actual age of R1b would seem to make that impossible. So it's a puzzle to me.

Can you point us to these studies?

rossa
09-10-2013, 02:47 AM
R1b in general or R1b-M269?

GoldenHind
09-10-2013, 06:28 AM
If this is correct, an analysis of the varieties of R1b would be crucial. If it were all of an early form, one would draw an entirely different conclusion than if it was a sprinkling of various European R1b subclades. The former would suggest an earlier input, while the latter would suggest that it in fact comes from European settlers in the modern era. Or, if it turned out to contain L238, a genetic legacy of the Vikings would be a likely explanation.

Jean M
09-10-2013, 12:07 PM
Can you point us to these studies?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_history_of_indigenous_peoples_of_the_Ameri cas#Haplogroup_R1

The relevant study: http://public.wsu.edu/~bmkemp/publications/pubs/Malhi_et_al_2008.pdf
Ripan Singh Malhi et al., Distribution of Y Chromosomes Among Native North Americans: A Study of Athapaskan Population History, American Journal of Physical Anthropology, Volume 137, Issue 4, pages 412–424, December 2008

This study in fact only tested to R-M173. Abstract:


In this study, 231 Y chromosomes from 12 populations were typed for four diagnostic single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) to determine haplogroup membership and 43 Y chromosomes from three of these populations were typed for eight short tandem repeats (STRs) to determine haplotypes. These data were combined with previously published data, amounting to 724 Y chromosomes from 26 populations in North America, and analyzed to investigate the geographic distribution of Y chromosomes among native North Americans and to test the Southern Athapaskan migration hypothesis. The results suggest that European admixture has significantly altered the distribution of Y chromosomes in North America and because of this caution should be taken when inferring prehistoric population events in North America using Y chromosome data alone. However, consistent with studies of other genetic systems, we are still able to identify close relationships among Y chromosomes in Athapaskans from the Subarctic and the Southwest, suggesting that a small number of proto-Apachean migrants from the Subarctic founded the Southwest Athapaskan populations.

Bear in mind that a single European trapper or logger mixing with a small native band in a thinly-populated area could have a comparatively large effect in percentage terms. By contrast Native Americans who were farmers and therefore more populous might need much more European introgression to have the same effect. Also bear in mind that the map on Wikipedia simply gives the results of existing studies when it was drawn up, not the results of some global study of even distribution.

Curious
09-10-2013, 12:51 PM
If this is correct, an analysis of the varieties of R1b would be crucial. If it were all of an early form, one would draw an entirely different conclusion than if it was a sprinkling of various European R1b subclades. The former would suggest an earlier input, while the latter would suggest that it in fact comes from European settlers in the modern era. Or, if it turned out to contain L238, a genetic legacy of the Vikings would be a likely explanation.

Results such as 79%, 62%, etc. is more than a sprinkling. And, as I said, some of the tribes with the highest percentage of reported R1b had later contact and less recorded intermarriage with Europeans. For example, I could accept the idea that European Y dna and a founder affect was responsible for the 38% R1b among the Algonquins of Quebec, who had considerable contact with Europeans from at least as early as 1600 and who subsequently intermixed considerably with Quebec settlers. Unrecorded European ancestry could account for the results in that case (if it is European R1b). However, there's much more difficult to explain a higher rate of R1b (79%) for the Ojibwe, who were contacted later and who have been traditionally less interested in intermixing and less likely to give high status to those of mixed race. And the information I found didn't indicate significant rates of other "European" Y haplotypes, with the remaining Y haplotypes being mainly C and Q and a high rate of "other" for only a couple of tribes. I wish I knew the details of "other".

Part of the problem is that I can't seem to find access to the actual studies, so don't know anything about the subclades, etc. And I can no longer find the page that I was initially looking at, which mentioned sample sizes, etc. Wikipedia seems to have slightly different data that may have come from different studies - for example, it doesn't mention the Ojibwe but refers to two groups of Chippewa in eastern North America, one of which records the 79% R1b rate - I assume that should actually be Ojibwe, but it's not clear. (The Algonquin, Chippewa and Ojibwe are all part of the larger Algonquin language group.)

Jean M
09-10-2013, 12:55 PM
This could be what you are looking for: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Y-DNA_haplogroups_in_indigenous_peoples_of_the_Ameri cas

A more recent study is http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2012/05/16/1118760109.full.pdf

Matthew Dulik et al., Y-chromosome analysis reveals genetic divergence and new founding native lineages in Athapaskan- and Eskimoan-speaking populations, PNAS (2012), which at least distinguished between R1a and R1b!

Curious
09-10-2013, 01:02 PM
This could be what you are looking for: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Y-DNA_haplogroups_in_indigenous_peoples_of_the_Ameri cas

It's what I can find currently that gives an outline of the issue. I was looking at more detailed information initially, I think from a University of Texas website, but it doesn't seem to be available anymore.

Mikewww
09-10-2013, 03:58 PM
.... the longer the Storm Front types and the Edgar Cayce fans have to create their own explanation ...
I've never followed the Storm Front or Edgard Cayce fans so I don't know what it is they are espousing, however, I've got a bad feeling bringing up groups like that is problematic for rational discussion.

As a moderator, please, let us leave any associations with those folks checked out at the door of our conversations. I'm okay if anyone wants to fight battles with other bloggers or forums but please do it on those other forums.

Curious
09-10-2013, 04:04 PM
I've never followed the Storm Front or Edgard Cayce fans so I don't know what it is they are espousing, however, I've got a bad feeling bringing up groups like that is problematic for rational discussion.

As a moderator, please, let us leave any associations with those folks checked out at the door of our conversations. I'm okay if anyone wants to fight battles with other bloggers or forums but please do it on those other forums.

My point was that when science fails to address a contentious issue, that leaves the field open to people whose approach many of us find questionable, without any scientific rebuttal being available. The particular names were chosen at random. However, I will leave names out of it from now on.

Mikewww
09-10-2013, 04:22 PM
Results such as 79%, 62%, etc. is more than a sprinkling. And, as I said, some of the tribes with the highest percentage of reported R1b had later contact and less recorded intermarriage with Europeans. For example, I could accept the idea that European Y dna and a founder affect was responsible for the 38% R1b among the Algonquins of Quebec, who had considerable contact with Europeans from at least as early as 1600 and who subsequently intermixed considerably with Quebec settlers. Unrecorded European ancestry could account for the results in that case (if it is European R1b). However, there's much more difficult to explain a higher rate of R1b (79%) for the Ojibwe, who were contacted later and who have been traditionally less interested in intermixing and less likely to give high status to those of mixed race.
...
What was the sample size and from what locations were these frequencies found in Ojibwe descendants? These people may be widely dispersed by now so it might be important to know who is from where.

How do you know what contacts Ojibwe had with Europeans? Perhaps I'm thinking of a different people, but weren't they from the area around Lake Superior? They must traveled the lake and we know French traders were there since the mid 1600s.

alan
09-10-2013, 04:46 PM
Well, it safe to start with an open mind even if some people have idealogical motives. The obvious first question is what clades of R1b?

It does seem extremely unlikely though given that R1b did not hit the Atlantic until P312 times and the sail only probably arrived in the Atlantic c. 1000BC as far as I know.

I presume R1b didnt reach the far east until M73 reached there. Its only 7000 years old apparently and in all likelihood wouldnt have reached the fringes of China until the Bronze Age.

So, its not looking good for any early sort of R1b presence in the Americas from either a very unlikely Atlantic route of from the east.

I suppose you could have some R1b* heading east just after it came into existence at the end of the LGM but I dont know of any evidence of that.

Discussion is pointless unless someone can look at native American R1b and suggest the clades.

alan
09-10-2013, 04:49 PM
If, as seems overwhelmingly likely, this is down to modern Europeans in the Americas, it is still interesting just how well R1b had done in a short time.

ADW_1981
09-10-2013, 04:55 PM
Results such as 79%, 62%, etc. is more than a sprinkling. And, as I said, some of the tribes with the highest percentage of reported R1b had later contact and less recorded intermarriage with Europeans. For example, I could accept the idea that European Y dna and a founder affect was responsible for the 38% R1b among the Algonquins of Quebec, who had considerable contact with Europeans from at least as early as 1600 and who subsequently intermixed considerably with Quebec settlers. Unrecorded European ancestry could account for the results in that case (if it is European R1b). However, there's much more difficult to explain a higher rate of R1b (79%) for the Ojibwe, who were contacted later and who have been traditionally less interested in intermixing and less likely to give high status to those of mixed race. And the information I found didn't indicate significant rates of other "European" Y haplotypes, with the remaining Y haplotypes being mainly C and Q and a high rate of "other" for only a couple of tribes. I wish I knew the details of "other".

Part of the problem is that I can't seem to find access to the actual studies, so don't know anything about the subclades, etc. And I can no longer find the page that I was initially looking at, which mentioned sample sizes, etc. Wikipedia seems to have slightly different data that may have come from different studies - for example, it doesn't mention the Ojibwe but refers to two groups of Chippewa in eastern North America, one of which records the 79% R1b rate - I assume that should actually be Ojibwe, but it's not clear. (The Algonquin, Chippewa and Ojibwe are all part of the larger Algonquin language group.)

It all depends on the sample, but as someone who has a sibling who has moved into NW Ontario with her husband, I am pretty certain there is significant European admixture in the Ojibwe. Many people in that area are part 'Native', or alternatively part 'European', depending how you look at it.

Silesian
09-10-2013, 05:04 PM
Probably everyone here is aware of the R1b distribution problem in northern Europe. ..

You have to remember that many of these posters are not from Canada.It is perhaps hard for them to grasp the possibility that not every R1b found among the groups you mention is from a wandering trader, although it is certainly possible. What is surprising is the amount of testing that has been done on native peoples of Canada including the groups you mention. You would think they would be of great interest around this region
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a0/Anishinaabe-Anishinini_Distribution_Map.svg

The recent report from http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0071390 however did not show any R1b.

Mikewww
09-10-2013, 05:09 PM
...
I suppose you could have some R1b* heading east just after it came into existence at the end of the LGM but I dont know of any evidence of that.

Discussion is pointless unless someone can look at native American R1b and suggest the clades.

Yes, and that should be easy enough to determine. If we just find L11+ types in Native American tribes, at least to the north, that would be hard to place as an ancient wandering. Any significant findings of M343*, L389*, M269*, M73 would be very telling and quite interesting.

Curious
09-10-2013, 06:20 PM
What was the sample size and from what locations were these frequencies found in Ojibwe descendants? These people may be widely dispersed by now so it might be important to know who is from where.

How do you know what contacts Ojibwe had with Europeans? Perhaps I'm thinking of a different people, but weren't they from the area around Lake Superior? They must traveled the lake and we know French traders were there since the mid 1600s.

I don't know the sample size, which is one of the problems with making any definite assumptions. However, I do know a fair bit about Canadian history. The Ojibwe were in the Lake Superior region, and did have some contact with passing fur traders from about 1650 on, but it appears unlikely that, until the 19th century, they would have had as much opportunity for racial mixing as the Algonquins of Quebec who were living among permanent white settlers from a very early date, so I just find it curious that the Ojibwe have a much higher rate of R1b than the Algonquins. I would have expected a much higher rate of no longer traceable European admixture among the Algonquins. However, without access to the data, I can't rule out the possibility that the apparent anomaly was created by the sampling methods.

Curious
09-10-2013, 06:22 PM
Yes, and that should be easy enough to determine. If we just find L11+ types in Native American tribes, at least to the north, that would be hard to place as an ancient wandering. Any significant findings of M343*, L389*, M269*, M73 would be very telling and quite interesting.

That's the problem - I don't know. If that information was available, someone like yourself could no doubt tell us very quickly whether there is or is not an interesting issue to look at further.

Curious
09-10-2013, 06:25 PM
You have to remember that many of these posters are not from Canada.It is perhaps hard for them to grasp the possibility that not every R1b found among the groups you mention is from a wandering trader, although it is certainly possible. What is surprising is the amount of testing that has been done on native peoples of Canada including the groups you mention. You would think they would be of great interest around this region
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a0/Anishinaabe-Anishinini_Distribution_Map.svg

The recent report from http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0071390 however did not show any R1b.

That recent report seems to only mention C and Q and focus on !, but I didn't really see a discussion about R1b - did I miss something? If an assumption was made that R1b wasn't really relevant because it "must be" a result of recent European admixture, that isn't actually proof, IMO.

Jean M
09-10-2013, 06:36 PM
This paper on ancient DNA may be of interest, though looking at mtDNA: http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0066948

Cui et al., Ancient DNA Analysis of Mid-Holocene Individuals from the Northwest Coast of North America Reveals Different Evolutionary Paths for Mitogenomes, PLOS ONE, 2013.


To gain a better understanding of North American population history, complete mitochondrial genomes (mitogenomes) were generated from four ancient and three living individuals of the northern Northwest Coast of North America, specifically the north coast of British Columbia, Canada, current home to the indigenous Tsimshian, Haida, and Nisga’a. The mitogenomes of all individuals were previously unknown and assigned to new sub-haplogroup designations D4h3a7, A2ag and A2ah. The analysis of mitogenomes allows for more detailed analyses of presumed ancestor–descendant relationships than sequencing only the HVSI region of the mitochondrial genome, a more traditional approach in local population studies. The results of this study provide contrasting examples of the evolution of Native American mitogenomes. Those belonging to sub-haplogroups A2ag and A2ah exhibit temporal continuity in this region for 5000 years up until the present day. Of possible associative significance is that archaeologically identified house structures in this region maintain similar characteristics for this same period of time, demonstrating cultural continuity in residence patterns. The individual dated to 6000 years before present (BP) exhibited a mitogenome belonging to sub-haplogroup D4h3a. This sub-haplogroup was earlier identified in the same general area at 10300 years BP on Prince of Wales Island, Alaska, and may have gone extinct, as it has not been observed in any living individuals of the Northwest Coast. The presented case studies demonstrate the different evolutionary paths of mitogenomes over time on the Northwest Coast.

The majority of studies investigating mitochondrial genomes (mitogenomes), high-resolution Y-chromosomes, and genome-wide autosomal data of Native Americas aim to reconstruct the evolutionary history and infer past demographic events of these populations (recently reviewed by Kemp BM, Schurr TG (2010) Ancient and Modern Genetic Variation in the Americas (http://public.wsu.edu/~bmkemp/publications/pubs/Kemp%20and%20Schurr%202010.pdf). In: Auerbach B, editor. Human Variation in the Americas: The Integration of Archaeology and Biological Anthropology. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University. 12–50.). The geographical distributions and frequencies of DNA variants exhibited by contemporary populations in the Americas are usually explained as the result of independent population migrations or significant regional demographic events (such as population bottlenecks, expansions, admixture, population structure) or a combination of these circumstances. However, a relatively high percentage of Y-chromosomes of Native Americans can be traced back to a European origin as a result of admixture following European contact. Moreover, genome-wide autosomal data of Native Americans usually exhibit significant amounts of European ancestry. In addition to non-indigenous admixture, European colonization complicates the genomic analyses of living populations because large-scale population loss, movements and amalgamations of indigenous peoples occurred after European contact, making it difficult to render an understanding of pre-European contact population dynamics.

ADW_1981
09-10-2013, 07:41 PM
Probably everyone here is aware of the R1b distribution problem in northern Europe. It generally gets higher as one approaches the Atlantic, and is highest in Ireland, Britain and the Basques country, so at one time it was assumed that R1b was the Y haplotype for the original Atlantic population. Recent strides in understanding dna changed that thinking, since it is now believed that R1b is only about 4500 years old and likely originated closer to the Black Sea than the Atlantic, so the distribution seems strange unless one assumes massive replacement of Y lineages in the Bronze Age. But there's another R1b distribution problem on the other side of the North Atlantic. Surveys of Amerindian Y dna do their best to screen out European dna from the post contact period (an admittedly difficult problem) but some tribes in the high north and in north eastern North America have very high levels of R1b. The reaction of the scientific community so far seems to be "It must be post contact European dna and the result of a founder affect, so let's not look at the problem too closely." But that doesn't really work, since the R1b levels are highest among the Dene in the high north and among the Algonquin speaking people in north eastern North America, declining as one moves south and west. And R1b is totally absent from the figures for South America, except for one part of Brazil. But South America has had a lot of racial mixing between indigenous people and people from Iberia, where R1b is common, so the attempts to screen out post contact European ancestry must have been successful in South America, except for the more remote parts of Brazil. And some of the North American tribes that have high rates of R1b have had later contact and less intermixing with people of European ancestry than other tribes with a lower rate of R1b. For example, the Ojibwe, who live north of the Great Lakes, have 79% R1b (and 25% mitrochondrial X2) and they didn't have much contact with white folks until about 1750. Whereas the Algonquin, who had much earlier contact with Europeans and who intermarried much more with Europeans than the Ojibwe have, show only 38% R1b. And in the far north, some of the Dene tribes who didn't have much contact with white folks until the 19th century show high rates of R1b, with the Chipewyan at 62%, for example. And there isn't much evidence of other "European" Y haplotypes, so one would have to assuming that attempts to screen out European ancestry were largely successful except in the case of R1b.

It should be fairly easy to find out whether R1b was here before the colonial age by testing old bones. Except that Native North Americans aren't going to let that happen. Another approach would be to look at what subclades are involved in order to see whether it does look like modern European R1b or whether R1b could have evolved independently in North America, from an old strain of R. That seems unlikely, but more likely than any other scenario I could come up with once I decided that the quick explanation of "post contact European ancestry and founder affect" doesn't really work. I'd like to see the issue examined, since the longer science ignores the issue, the longer the Storm Front types and the Edgar Cayce fans have to create their own explanation for why R1b is a common Y among Native North Americans in the high Arctic and in north eastern North America.

I see this suggested a lot and I'm a little tired of hearing about a "distribution problem" with R1b. It's no more of a "problem" than I1 peaking in Finns, or R1a1 peaking in some Turkic population in Russia someplace.

Curious
09-10-2013, 07:50 PM
This paper on ancient DNA may be of interest, though looking at mtDNA: http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0066948

Cui et al., Ancient DNA Analysis of Mid-Holocene Individuals from the Northwest Coast of North America Reveals Different Evolutionary Paths for Mitogenomes, PLOS ONE, 2013.

Interesting, but I'd need to know whether that statement about a relatively high percentage of Y-chromosomes of Native Americans being traceable back to admixture following European contact is based on anything other than the assumption that if it's R1b it must be from Europe. I'm not denying that Native North Americans have a high degree of European admixture. I'm just wondering why there are high levels of R1b, in some cases extremely high levels, and no other "European" haplotypes present in any significant quantity (with the possible exception of the results for a few tribal groups showing a high level of "other"). I'm making an assumption that anyone trying to figure out Y haplotypes for Native North Americans attempted to screen out the European admixture, so I would have expected a much smaller level of "European" Y haplotypes present, with R1b being dominant but not the only "European" Y haplotype.

There's also a problem with the distribution in the sense that the high levels of R1b aren't always where I'd have expected it if it was from post-Columbian Europeans. For example, the Sioux show a higher level of R1b than the Cherokee, even though the Cherokee are known to have absorbed a lot of European ancestry as compared to the Sioux, who tried to keep white folks out of their territory in order to protect their way of life (although they did admittedly do some trading with the French). The approach of (mainly) separatism only ended after the Sioux suffered several military defeats and were forced on to reservations in the 19th century. And since the Sioux were a very populous group, it would have taken a lot more Europeans to water down their bloodlines than would have been the case with some other groups.

kostop
09-11-2013, 12:44 PM
This reminded me of an article I read a while ago, claiming that a trade-link between the people around Lake Superior and the Minoans & Myceaneans existed around 1st-2nd millenium BC.
Personally I am not convinced , because if it had indeed existed "and continued until the Hellenistic times" as the author suggests, then I am sure it would have been mentioned more than once by the ancient writers and historians.

http://canada.greekreporter.com/2012/04/21/researcher-claims-ancient-greeks-made-it-to-america-before-columbus/

"Dr. Tsikritsis states that, “even before the time of Christopher Columbus, there was a communication which began during the Minoan era and continued until the Hellenistic times. The purpose of these travels during the Bronze Age was related to trade and the transportation of pure copper from Lake Superior of Canada.” - See more at: http://canada.greekreporter.com/2012/04/21/researcher-claims-ancient-greeks-made-it-to-america-before-columbus/#sthash.EjKKxxm7.dpuf"

I also remember another article claiming that the Phoenicians also made that journey before C.Columbus

http://news.softpedia.com/news/The-Most-Ancient-Navigators-51351.shtml

Jean M
09-11-2013, 01:21 PM
@ Kostop - We know that Vikings made the journey before Columbus. But Phoenicians and Myceneans? Just idle speculation about what could have happened, plus interpretations of the legend of Atlantis (of which there are a multitude).

Interesting idea here about the result of Viking interaction with the tragic Beothuk people of Newfoundland: Descendants of Newfoundland’s “extinct” Beothuk live on in Iceland: http://blogs.canoe.ca/parker/news/descendants-of-newfoundlands-extinct-beothuk-live-on-in-iceland/

Jean M
09-11-2013, 01:31 PM
so I would have expected a much smaller level of "European" Y haplotypes present, with R1b being dominant but not the only "European" Y haplotype.


R1b is not the only Eurasian haplogroup present in Native Americans.

You seem to have got that impression from a Wikipedia map which in fact shows R1 in Native Americans. As I mentioned above, the very limited study Ripan Singh Malhi et al. 2008 only tested to R-M173. In other words R*. Or to make matters absolutely clear, it did not distinguish between R1b and R1a.

Matthew Dulik et al 2012 found both R1a1a1 and R1b1a2, plus E1b1b1, I1, J1c3, J2a, J2b and N1c1.

Mikewww
09-11-2013, 06:29 PM
Another approach would be to look at what subclades are involved in order to see whether it does look like modern European R1b or whether R1b could have evolved independently in North America, from an old strain of R.
Yes, and that should be easy enough to determine. If we just find L11+ types in Native American tribes, at least to the north, that would be hard to place as an ancient wandering. Any significant findings of M343*, L389*, M269*, M73 would be very telling and quite interesting.
That's the problem - I don't know. If that information was available, someone like yourself could no doubt tell us very quickly whether there is or is not an interesting issue to look at further.

I don't have any long haplotype information from any Amerindian studies. As an alternative checkpoint (not a proof point), I looked for outlier R1b types in the two Amerindian projects I could find which were North American oriented. I pulled down all of the 67 STR R1b haplotypes so I could see how they matches with existing L11 files I have. I found 67 R1b predicted/tested haplotypes with 67 STRs.

67 total
28 L21 matching or tested
14 U106 matching or tested
13 P312xL21 matching or tested
12 unable to assign to an R1b-L11 cluster (closest GDs to known P312 people were in the 10-14 range at 67)

The remaining 12 all were predicted by FTDNA as R1b1a2 (M269) which is their normal depth of prediction for L11 or ht35 types. Of these 12,
10 of 12 were 393=13
10 of 12 were 393=24
9 of 12 were 19=14
10 of 12 were 385=11,14
This is all pretty WAMHish. I didn't see any that looked like ht35 possibilities let alone M73 or something in the very early branching of R1b.

If there was some R1b types in North America before the European exploration period I would have thought we'd see some outliers by now. I don't see any in these projects... none.
... an analysis of the varieties of R1b would be crucial. If it were all of an early form, one would draw an entirely different conclusion than if it was a sprinkling of various European R1b subclades. The former would suggest an earlier input, while the latter would suggest that it in fact comes from European settlers in the modern era...

Still, good news... I found two more good L513 suspects for my primary paternal haplogroup, including one from my cluster.

alan
09-11-2013, 06:57 PM
Well that certainly seems to settle it. If you had found R* it would have been a different story.


I don't have any long haplotype information from any Amerindian studies. As an alternative checkpoint (not a proof point), I looked for outlier R1b types in the two Amerindian projects I could find which were North American oriented. I pulled down all of the 67 STR R1b haplotypes so I could see how they matches with existing L11 files I have. I found 67 of the 67 STR R1b haplotypes.

67 total
28 L21 matching or tested
14 U106 matching or tested
13 P312xL21 matching or tested
12 couldn't assign to an R1b-L11 cluster (closest GDs were to known P312 people were generally in the 10-14 range at 67)

The remaining 12 all were predicted by FTDNA as R1b1a2 (M269) which is their normal depth of prediction for L11 or ht35 types. Of these 12,
10 of 12 were 393=13
10 of 12 were 3393=24
9 of 12 were 19=15
10 of 12 were 385=11,14
This is all pretty WAMHish. I didn't see any that looked like ht35 possibilities let alone M73 or something in the very early branching of R1b.

If there was some pre-European exploration period R1b in North America I would have thought we'd see some outliers by now. I don't see any in these projects... none.

Still, good news... I found two more good L513 suspects for my primary paternal haplogroup, including one from my cluster.

Curious
09-11-2013, 07:25 PM
I don't have any long haplotype information from any Amerindian studies. As an alternative checkpoint (not a proof point), I looked for outlier R1b types in the two Amerindian projects I could find which were North American oriented. I pulled down all of the 67 STR R1b haplotypes so I could see how they matches with existing L11 files I have. I found 67 of the 67 STR R1b haplotypes.

67 total
28 L21 matching or tested
14 U106 matching or tested
13 P312xL21 matching or tested
12 unable to assign to an R1b-L11 cluster (closest GDs to known P312 people were in the 10-14 range at 67)

The remaining 12 all were predicted by FTDNA as R1b1a2 (M269) which is their normal depth of prediction for L11 or ht35 types. Of these 12,
10 of 12 were 393=13
10 of 12 were 3393=24
9 of 12 were 19=15
10 of 12 were 385=11,14
This is all pretty WAMHish. I didn't see any that looked like ht35 possibilities let alone M73 or something in the very early branching of R1b.

If there was some pre-European exploration period R1b in North America I would have thought we'd see some outliers by now. I don't see any in these projects... none.

Still, good news... I found two more good L513 suspects for my primary paternal haplogroup, including one from my cluster.

Okay, that was the kind of information I was looking for but don't have the scientific background necessary to figure out. I still think some of the results are weird, but that could be down to sampling methods.

Mikewww
09-11-2013, 09:01 PM
Okay, that was the kind of information I was looking for but don't have the scientific background necessary to figure out. I still think some of the results are weird, but that could be down to sampling methods.

What are you proposing? Do you think that any significant amounts of R1b entered into North America before 1400 AD? or before 900 AD (as in Viking Era)?

I haven't seen anything that is really strange about about R1b in North America Native American claimed descendants that can be pinned down to anything other than by migrations and introgression in the historical timeframes.

I'm not saying there are no possibilities. Anything is possible. I don't see any exhaustive and deep analysis done by any scientific studies that that can pin down that there really is some kind of distribution problem. Is there a study that is claiming an early entry of R1b into North America?

Curious
09-11-2013, 09:17 PM
What are you proposing? Do you think that any significant amounts of R1b entered into North America before 1400 AD? or before 900 AD (as in Viking Era)?

I haven't seen anything that is really strange about about R1b in North America Native American claimed descendants that can be pinned down to anything other than by migrations and introgression in the historical timeframes.

I'm not saying there are no possibilities. Anything is possible. I don't see any exhaustive and deep analysis done by any scientific studies that that can pin down that there really is some kind of distribution problem. Is there a study that is claiming an early entry of R1b into North America?

I'm saying that the information you provided makes a convincing case that the high level of Y haplotype R in Native North Americans is from a recent European source, but I still think any figures over 50% are surprising, so I was wondering whether the really high figures for some tribal groups would be confirmed or would be found to be exaggerated if more sampling was done. I'm assuming that researchers would at least make some effort to try to screen out those who have obvious partial European ancestry when preparing figures on Native North American haplotypes. And yes, I know all about the founder effect, but given the time frame, I think there's a limit to how much that would have changed the dna structure of some of the more populous tribes.

Mikewww
09-11-2013, 09:30 PM
... I still think any figures over 50% are surprising, so I was wondering whether the really high figures for some tribal groups would be confirmed or would be found to be exaggerated if more sampling was done. I'm assuming that researchers would at least make some effort to try to screen out those who have obvious partial European ancestry when preparing figures on Native North American haplotypes....
Some of these studies aren't necessarily comprehensive and may have limited funding so I don't necessarily expect the kind of research we want. I guess I'm saying I would not assume they had screened or filtered out genealogically known European lineages.

I'd also be a bit leery of genealogical records for anyone going back too far, particularly in the latter settled/formally governed areas (as we think of it today). I was struck when visiting a beautiful canyon near Sedona, Arizona. It's truly a beautiful area, but I was amazed at an historical monument along side the road that noted the first European settler to the area in the 1890s. I remember thinking it could have been my grandfather's family if he we were from those parts, but it is also quite a contrast to the cathedral in Toledo (which I just visited) about 800 years old. I doubt if the recordkeeping in large parts of the American West amounted to much until very recently.

alan
09-11-2013, 10:11 PM
I am not a believer in much if any pre-Columbian European genes in the Americas. All I would concede is that the later the period the more it is theoretically more likely. Its not impossible that the Vikings lefts some genes although there is no clear evidence for this.

Its not impossible that Celtic monks could have reached the Americas as they may well have reached Iceland although again no real evidence for settlement beyond. The latter did have a strong tradition of heading off on peregranatio sea voyages into the unknown sometimes in boats with no oars or rudders leaving their fate to god and non-rational motives like that could have inspired some to head west.

There was a long belief that the otherworld lay to the west that seems to go back at least to the copper age in the west where it has been suggested that some sort of sunset belief related to this was the inspiration for the sudden appearance of south-westerly or westerly orientations on megalithic monuments like Wedge Tombs, clava cairns, recumbant stone circles, stone alignments etc in Atlantic parts of the isles from c. 2500BC. Its also common in the stone rows in Brittany although they are poorly dated. So it would almost surprising if some individuals were not inspired by the religious beliefs in pre-Christian times of a western otherworld. I dont need to mention the tales of the voyages or Bran and may other similar episodes mentioned in both Irish tales and actual historical sources in Christian times. Technologically by the late Bronze Age and Iron Age sails and improving boat techology would have made it more feasible for small relgious groups to attempt things like that. Generally speaking it seems just a little less suicidal in that sort of period to me. Its all pure speculation of course.

There are some rare cases of individual off course Eskimos/Inuit in Kayaks landing in Scotland in the extreme north and even at Aberdeen in the 1600-1900 sort of timeframe. The one that landed in Aberdeen is preserved.

rossa
09-11-2013, 10:53 PM
I read a good book a while back valled Cod which looked at the importance of Cod fishing in the North Atlantic, supposedly Basques and some English were fishing of the Eastern US just before Coumbus arrived. i wonder if they ever made it to the mainland.
http://www.nytimes.com/books/first/k/kurlansky-cod.html

Curious
09-12-2013, 01:03 AM
I read a good book a while back valled Cod which looked at the importance of Cod fishing in the North Atlantic, supposedly Basques and some English were fishing of the Eastern US just before Coumbus arrived. i wonder if they ever made it to the mainland.
http://www.nytimes.com/books/first/k/kurlansky-cod.html

There have certainly been claims that English and Basque fishermen were active in Newfoundland before Cabot "discovered" it in 1497, but I don't think there's much proof. The lack of evidence may be because at first it seems to have been simply a summer fishery - there's not much evidence of permanent settlements in Newfoundland prior to 1600. Even then, the settlers may have done more eliminating Native dna than altering it. The Beothuk of Newfoundland were declared extinct by 1829. Nevertheless, the east coast was settled much sooner than most other parts of Canada, and I'd expect to find more European admixture among the Micmac than among some other tribes.

SVR
06-13-2014, 11:32 AM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norse_colonization_of_the_Americas
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L%27Anse_aux_Meadows
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_Saguenay
Sorry, I'm from Russia and this is not my history but to my opinion early viking contact is a well-established concept. Taking into account some years of viking settlement in North America, it's enough to hypothesise that some tribes could receive enough Y-genetization.
Also, Ojibwe beliefs could help.

At a later time, one of these miigis appeared in a vision to relate a prophecy. It said that if the Anishinaabeg did not move further west, they would not be able to keep their traditional ways alive because of the many new settlements and pale-skinned peoples who would arrive soon in the east. Their migration path would be symbolized by a series of smaller Turtle Islands, which was confirmed with miigis shells (i.e., cowry shells). After receiving assurance from their "Allied Brothers" (i.e., Mi'kmaq) and "Father" (i.e., Abenaki) of their safety to move inland, the Anishinaabeg gradually migrated west along the Saint Lawrence River to the Ottawa River to Lake Nipissing, and then to the Great Lakes.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ojibwe#Pre-contact_and_spiritual_beliefs
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wendigo
There are many reasons to suggest European-American R1b contact circa 1000AD.
Also, it seems that these "voyagers" should be R1b if consider I-people as native Scandinavians and R1b as Scandinavian inviders. In this case, the further invaders should be also R1b as a Scandinavian military strata. Also, it could be hypothesized why these voyagers was not R1a. Erik the Red was banished from Norway by Harald Fairhair who was Yngling (presumably R1a). Erik and his companions were not Ynglings and were R1b. This could explain the absence of other European Y-clades (namely I and R1a) in North America.

R.Rocca
06-13-2014, 01:22 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norse_colonization_of_the_Americas
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L%27Anse_aux_Meadows
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_Saguenay
Sorry, I'm from Russia and this is not my history but to my opinion early viking contact is a well-established concept. Taking into account some years of viking settlement in North America, it's enough to hypothesise that some tribes could receive enough Y-genetization.
Also, Ojibwe beliefs could help.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ojibwe#Pre-contact_and_spiritual_beliefs
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wendigo
There are many reasons to suggest European-American R1b contact circa 1000AD.
Also, it seems that these "voyagers" should be R1b if consider I-people as native Scandinavians and R1b as Scandinavian inviders. In this case, the further invaders should be also R1b as a Scandinavian military strata. Also, it could be hypothesized why these voyagers was not R1a. Erik the Red was banished from Norway by Harald Fairhair who was Yngling (presumably R1a). Erik and his companions were not Ynglings and were R1b. This could explain the absence of other European Y-clades (namely I and R1a) in North America.

The probability that any single haplogroup had exclusivity in any part of Scandinavia circa 1000 AD is likely close to zero.

Táltos
06-13-2014, 01:50 PM
I read a good book a while back valled Cod which looked at the importance of Cod fishing in the North Atlantic, supposedly Basques and some English were fishing of the Eastern US just before Coumbus arrived. i wonder if they ever made it to the mainland.
http://www.nytimes.com/books/first/k/kurlansky-cod.html
I remember on another forum a guy who was Basque on his direct paternal line ended up Q-M3 on his Geno 2.0 test. His grandfather did not come to America until the early 1900s. Unfortunately he never wrote anything else back on the forum. I would have loved to seen if he uncovered anything else.

Also though this is about Y DNA R, what about mtdna X, various subclades of X2a's, and X2g? They are interestingly only found in North American Native populations, not South America. http://www.familytreedna.com/public/x I recently received an autosmal match who is X2g, they are from the Southern Untied States that they know of since the 1700s. They report their ancestry is British, Irish, and German, not Native. Yet according to the Haplogroup X project X2g is Ojibwa.

SVR
06-13-2014, 01:59 PM
The probability that any single haplogroup had exclusivity in any part of Scandinavia circa 1000 AD is likely close to zero.
Not in part of Scandinavia. I told about small selected group (may be and most likely been relatives) of R1b bearers from Norway military strata banished by new R1a nobility. These people, mainly men, when establish a settlement in Newfoundland, should take (or snitch) women from local tribes, leaving them on return home. Remnants of one Indian woman were found at Greenland Viking settlement. Somebody of the men could stay there (voluntarily or being captured) beginning Rb1-line. If XVI century Spaniards could, why X century Vikings couldn't? This is a typical bottleneck.
One more idea: there was a series of severe droughts in NA, namely in X-XIII centuries. The most severe one lasted since 1276 to 1299. Wikipedia says about diminishment of Ojibwe population for 98% due to drought of 1st century. May be, this refers to XIII century. In this case there is one more bottleneck.

Pappy
03-18-2018, 06:17 PM
The admix numbers only add up if the new males only produce male offspring.

Pappy
03-19-2018, 03:35 AM
I think the % of Nehanderthal DNA* in a given individual would be a great marker for post or pre contact R1.
The result being more NDNA* recent admixture as compared to low showing of NDNA* being Native American R1.
Has this already been considered ?

Pappy
03-20-2018, 04:05 PM
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.thesun.ie/living/433326/we-trace-our-roots-back-to-asia-and-america-using-%C2%ADirelands-national-dna-%C2%ADtesting-service/amp/

http://www.abroadintheyard.com/y-dna-test-reveals-irish-american-is-actually-native-american/


Just when and how did so much Native American DNA end up in the Irish population ?
Maybe that Columbus log book telling of Indians washing up on the shore was true.

Bas
03-20-2018, 04:42 PM
Interesting


It discovered her genetic make-up was 80 per cent European as she might have expected. But Fiona was surprised to find she is a sixth indigenous American.
This is interesting because the average Irish person is 96.4 per cent European and just 1.7 per cent indigenous American.

I think more in depth tests, even the tests offered by members on here, would tell us more about whether this in genuine Native American or just a shared component. I like to keep an open mind on that but the part I underlined above, I think should ring alarm bells about the whole thing because it is just not likely that an actual Native American component (however small the figure) is present so widespread among the Irish population as there isn't enough evidence of Native Americans being present in Ireland in large enough numbers to make even a 1.7% impact across the board, which requires some substantial geneflow. So what they are determining as 'Native American' is already shaky by the time we come to Fiona Ellis' being told she is 'a sixth indigenous American'.

So I tend to think it would have to be a very large (and noticeable/well documented) influx to make even that kind of impact and there's just not enough documented evidence for either Native Americans being brought to Ireland in large numbers or a small invasion/accidental landing and no evidence in uniparental markers or the non-commercial tests offered in places like this either. I think an individual case is more likely to throw up something like higher than average admixture from a very specific group. And a sixth of this component is quite a bit higher than the average. Or it could just be that she has some fairly recent ancestry from Baltic/Finland/Russia (Vikings?) and they have sloppily labelled what actually could be ANE as 'Native American'. Because the layman isn't going to understand 'ANE'. Nor does it sound exotic enough to be a selling point to the general public.

That's just my opinion though and maybe someone else can see things from an angle that I cannot see.

But, it's a good debate starter, and healthy debate I like!

Pappy
03-20-2018, 06:21 PM
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Paint_People

https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?8607-Trace-of-Native-American-in-British-Irish-people

http://indigenousboats.blogspot.com/2014/03/status-among-marine-hunter-gatherer.html?m=1

It's not a stretch to imagine little Native American fishing boats being caught in that current.
http://www.askaboutireland.ie/learning-zone/primary-students/3rd-+-4th-class/3rd-+-4th-class-environme/sea-time-story/ocean-currents/

https://anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?7276-R1-Native-American-dispersion-hypothesis-into-Western-Europe&styleid=5

Pappy
03-20-2018, 06:40 PM
http://historysmysteries.yolasite.com/red-paint-people.php

Noise indeed.