Page 142 of 142 FirstFirst ... 4292132140141142
Results 1,411 to 1,418 of 1418

Thread: Irish DNA Atlas, Preliminary Results

  1. #1411
    Registered Users
    Posts
    179
    Ethnicity
    Northern Ireland
    Nationality
    Northern Irish

    Northern Ireland Ireland
    Quote Originally Posted by Sikeliot View Post
    So how much British (especially English) ancestry does there seem to be in Leinster, Munster, Connacht, and non-Planter descended Ulster clusters? Does there seem to be any and if so, how do we know?

    Dublin, Leinster, Central Ireland, and some Connacht might show SOME evidence of it based on plotting to me. Especially Leinster.
    Not much to be honest.

  2. #1412
    Registered Users
    Posts
    179
    Ethnicity
    Northern Ireland
    Nationality
    Northern Irish

    Northern Ireland Ireland
    Quote Originally Posted by sktibo View Post
    That goes back to the N Ireland 1 not really being a Northern Irish cluster though as all of the NI1 markers were in England except for three, and only one of those three were in Northern Ireland.. I'm surprised there were any Gaelic surnames!
    It's quite rare for people in NI to have mostly English surnames, you will a mix of Irish, Scottish and English.

    My 8 great grandparents, 1 English, 3 Scottish and 4 Irish.

  3. The Following User Says Thank You to Nqp15hhu For This Useful Post:

     CannabisErectusHibernius (02-24-2018)

  4. #1413
    Registered Users
    Posts
    2,074
    Sex
    Location
    B.C.
    Ethnicity
    Métis
    Nationality
    Canadian
    Y-DNA
    R-Z198 (DF27)
    mtDNA
    T2B-T152C

    Canada England Scotland France
    Quote Originally Posted by Nqp15hhu View Post
    It's quite rare for people in NI to have mostly English surnames, you will a mix of Irish, Scottish and English.

    My 8 great grandparents, 1 English, 3 Scottish and 4 Irish.
    The comment you quoted was in regards to the cluster Northern Ireland 1, of which only one single marker was located in Northern Ireland, looking at the markers it is basically an English cluster with three outliers in Ireland - and not even in the same part of Ireland! the small amount of literature I have read on English influence on Northern Ireland indicated there wasn't much of it when compared to the Scottish influence
    Last edited by sktibo; 02-21-2018 at 07:45 AM.
    Paper trail ancestry to the best of my knowledge:
    English 28.12%, Unknown or mixed Eastern European (Polish speaking) 25%, Scottish 17.96%, Scotch-Irish 12.5%, French 8.2%, Welsh 3.125%, Native American 1.95%, and Colonial American, 3.125%, which cannot be determined with complete certainty: there is Dutch (at least 1.36%) and some English. The rest could include Spanish, Norwegian, German, and French, but these percentages would be minuscule.

  5. #1414
    Registered Users
    Posts
    2,074
    Sex
    Location
    B.C.
    Ethnicity
    Métis
    Nationality
    Canadian
    Y-DNA
    R-Z198 (DF27)
    mtDNA
    T2B-T152C

    Canada England Scotland France
    Hi folks,
    Over in the Global 25 thread (https://anthrogenica.com/showthread....712#post354712) some of us (myself included) have been playing with modeling the new Bell Beakers and have found that the British Beakers when modeled against modern populations appear as significantly Scandinavian. As a result there's been a lot of discussion which is probably more relevant to this thread than to that one. If anyone is interested in the Norway, Sweden, ect. percentages the IDA noted in the modern Irish populations, I encourage them to check out and join the discussion so we can possibly bring that over here.
    Thanks!
    Paper trail ancestry to the best of my knowledge:
    English 28.12%, Unknown or mixed Eastern European (Polish speaking) 25%, Scottish 17.96%, Scotch-Irish 12.5%, French 8.2%, Welsh 3.125%, Native American 1.95%, and Colonial American, 3.125%, which cannot be determined with complete certainty: there is Dutch (at least 1.36%) and some English. The rest could include Spanish, Norwegian, German, and French, but these percentages would be minuscule.

  6. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to sktibo For This Useful Post:

     avalon (Yesterday), Jessie (Yesterday), JohnHowellsTyrfro (Yesterday), Robert1 (Today), sgdavies@hotmail.com (Yesterday)

  7. #1415
    Registered Users
    Posts
    885
    Nationality
    British

    Quote Originally Posted by sktibo View Post
    Hi folks,
    Over in the Global 25 thread (https://anthrogenica.com/showthread....712#post354712) some of us (myself included) have been playing with modeling the new Bell Beakers and have found that the British Beakers when modeled against modern populations appear as significantly Scandinavian. As a result there's been a lot of discussion which is probably more relevant to this thread than to that one. If anyone is interested in the Norway, Sweden, ect. percentages the IDA noted in the modern Irish populations, I encourage them to check out and join the discussion so we can possibly bring that over here.
    Thanks!
    I've just caught up with the nMonte thread, interesting stuff!

    I think there is a good case for genetic affinity between Irish and Scandinavians based on shared steppe like ancestry- but my understanding was that the sources were slightly different, ie Bell Beaker v Corded ware, although I presume BB also had an impact on Scandinavia, don't know, BB not my strong point.

    The problem is, both these recent papers IDA and the Insular Celtic one do agree on the Viking Age admixture so there is clearly something to it. This modern Norse component fits the known history, being higher in Orkney, Western Isles, Ireland and lower in England and Wales as would be expected from known history. And it's the age old of problem of trying to unravel all this based on modern populations, which in Northern Europe are largely descended from the same Indo-European source population in any case.

  8. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to avalon For This Useful Post:

     Jessie (Yesterday), JohnHowellsTyrfro (Yesterday), Robert1 (Today), sgdavies@hotmail.com (Yesterday), sktibo (Yesterday)

  9. #1416
    Registered Users
    Posts
    885
    Nationality
    British

    Just regarding the topic of FRA1 which is the dominant component in all Irish and British clusters. I wonder if it is entirely related to the migration of Britons to Armorica in the 5th century AD?

    I think it's worth considering that prior to the Romans, Northern and NW France were already long standing Celtic speaking areas. Archaelogically there's quite a bit that links NW France to Southern Britain (and I think Maritime Bell Beaker with S Ireland too) during prehistory so there's a good chance that British and Irish populations were already genetically similar to NW France long before the migrations of 400AD, not withstanding potential impact of the Romans on Gaul and on Britain.

    The other thing I was going to say was that sample location for FRA1 was Rennes in Eastern Brittany. It may not make much difference, but obviously this is not the western part of Brittany where Britons had more impact and where the language still survives.

  10. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to avalon For This Useful Post:

     Jessie (Yesterday), Robert1 (Today), sktibo (Yesterday)

  11. #1417
    Registered Users
    Posts
    2,074
    Sex
    Location
    B.C.
    Ethnicity
    Métis
    Nationality
    Canadian
    Y-DNA
    R-Z198 (DF27)
    mtDNA
    T2B-T152C

    Canada England Scotland France
    Quote Originally Posted by avalon View Post
    The problem is, both these recent papers IDA and the Insular Celtic one do agree on the Viking Age admixture so there is clearly something to it. This modern Norse component fits the known history, being higher in Orkney, Western Isles, Ireland and lower in England and Wales as would be expected from known history. And it's the age old of problem of trying to unravel all this based on modern populations, which in Northern Europe are largely descended from the same Indo-European source population in any case.
    Hi Avalon, it is good to hear from you, and thank you for joining in this conversation.

    So you say clearly there is something to it. While there definitely might be, I disagree with the level of certainty placed on that statement. This is because if the older populations were analyzed by professionals against modern populations and found to have significant percentages of modern Scandinavians similar to or higher than the modern Irish then I don't think it would matter what method of analysis was used. Another reason that I don't think it is so clear is that while there were two studies done on it, both those studies used the same reference populations and both studies used the same Globetrotter method.. so it isn't as convincing as another study with a different method and different sample base. I don't know much about Globetrotter and how it works but I am pretty sure that the only way to tell if a type of admixture existed in a population at a given time beyond a doubt would be to analyze samples of that population from the period of time in question. Another point, although not as significant, is that "Surprising Scandinavian percentages in modern Irish" is a lot more exciting than "The Irish are... Irish.. yep." I'm not suggesting the findings were twisted by the people who did the study to get more media attention, but I'm just throwing out the idea here that one outcome is clearly more news worthy than the other and perhaps it could have had a small impact on the presentation or interpretation.

    While I'm not sure that Bell Beakers made it to Norway, it looks like there is definitely a connection to the Netherlands, Northern Germany, and possibly Denmark.

    Finn linked me this paper by D.L. Clarke called "A TENTATIVE RECLASSIFICATION OF BRITISH BEAKER POTTERY IN THE LIGHT OF RECENT RESEARCH" in the Global 25 thread.

    "The main centres of European Bell beaker settlement in Britain were Wessex, the East Anglian Coast, the Yorkshire Wolds and the Scottish Eastern Coast; subsequent expansion reaching the Bristol Channel and Southern Ireland, as well as to Western Scotland and Northern Ireland. The pottery and burial rite idiosyncrasies once again point mainly to the Rhine Delta and even Lower Saxony rather than to -any significant Breton influx. This holds true for the Irish material which can best be paralleled in Britain and the Rhineland." (186)

    This tells us (as we already know) that there's a North German connection with the British and Irish Beakers. I'm reviewing this to bring up a possible connection to Denmark, as from Northern Germany, Denmark isn't really that much of stretch. The Gundestrup cauldron from Northern Denmark hints at some kind of Celtic connection. Then we have the Norwegian analysis done which shows most of their DNA being closest to the Danish:

    Screenshot (161).png

    So, the type of Beaker which made it to Ireland was of the same type as the Dutch and North German types, and I have to make a leap over to Denmark which I don't think is that much of a leap from Northern Germany, in order to show how the modern Irish and modern Norwegians could share a common source of Bell Beaker ancestry.

    What really struck me was that Ulster, which when charted on the PCA appears to be the most distinct Irish cluster, or the "most Irish" as I like to say, also had the highest amount of Norwegian admixture. When I ran the Beakers using nMonte against modern populations, I noticed some of them had even higher amounts of Scandinavian affinity than the modern Irish did. This made me think that it could be possible that the Ulster cluster didn't have this percentage due to admixture with Vikings or Scots, but perhaps it was more untouched and thus retained more Steppe like ancestry than the other Ireland clusters.

    With all of this I am trying show that there is a different, and I think plausible, explanation for the Scandinavian percentages in the modern Irish to appear as they did on the IDA. If this is tested by professionals and turns out to be true, then I don't think it really matters what sort of analysis is used, Globetrotter or whatever, as that type of admixture would have been in the population to begin with. One important criticism, which you brought up, is that Orkney is correctly higher in Scandinavian admixture, and Scandinavian admixture is lower in England and Wales ect where appropriate. A counter argument to that is this: If the modern Irish are indeed the "Most Celtic" and by that I mean closest or least changed from the original Insular Bell Beakers, and we accept that the original Insular Beakers were higher in Steppe DNA than most modern Insular populations, then it would only make sense for the other populations to have less Scandinavian-like admixture (or more in the case of Orkney) as they are further away from the original source.
    Paper trail ancestry to the best of my knowledge:
    English 28.12%, Unknown or mixed Eastern European (Polish speaking) 25%, Scottish 17.96%, Scotch-Irish 12.5%, French 8.2%, Welsh 3.125%, Native American 1.95%, and Colonial American, 3.125%, which cannot be determined with complete certainty: there is Dutch (at least 1.36%) and some English. The rest could include Spanish, Norwegian, German, and French, but these percentages would be minuscule.

  12. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to sktibo For This Useful Post:

     avalon (Yesterday), Jessie (Today), Robert1 (Today)

  13. #1418
    Registered Users
    Posts
    885
    Nationality
    British

    Quote Originally Posted by sktibo View Post

    What really struck me was that Ulster, which when charted on the PCA appears to be the most distinct Irish cluster, or the "most Irish" as I like to say, also had the highest amount of Norwegian admixture. When I ran the Beakers using nMonte against modern populations, I noticed some of them had even higher amounts of Scandinavian affinity than the modern Irish did. This made me think that it could be possible that the Ulster cluster didn't have this percentage due to admixture with Vikings or Scots, but perhaps it was more untouched and thus retained more Steppe like ancestry than the other Ireland clusters.
    You make some good points sktibo, this is definitely something that warrants further investigation. Most likely in my opinion, is that the genetic affinity we see between modern Norwegians and modern Irish is partly due to the Viking Age and partly due to underlying Bronze Age Steppe ancestry.

    Interestingly, I have done some digging around in the supplementary info from "Insular Celtic Population structure" and I think I have found quite a major difference between that and IDA. Insular paper actually says this:
    Of all the European populations considered, ancestral influence in Irish
    genomes was best represented by modern Scandinavians and northern Europeans, with a
    significant single-date one-source admixture event overlapping the historical period of the
    Norse-Viking settlements in Ireland (p < 0.01; fit quality FQB > 0.985; Fig 6). This was
    recapitulated to varying degrees in specific genetically- and geographically-defined groups
    within Ireland, with the strongest signals in south and central Leinster (the largest recorded
    Viking settlement in Ireland was Dubh linn in present-day Dublin), followed by Connacht and
    north Leinster/Ulster
    European admixture date estimates in northwest Ulster did not overlap the Viking age but
    did include the Norman period and the Plantations
    And then if you look at supplementary 8 then you can see that they have an ancestry estimate for NOR-SG which is "Norway with significant minor representations from Sweden and Germany". This component is highest in Wexford and S Leinster/Munster (known areas of Viking settlement) and lowest in NW Ulster, N Leinster/Ulster and Connacht so this appears the complete opposite to IDA which showed Ulster with the highest Norwegian component.

    Tbh, I think the insular paper may have got the better of IDA on this as they appear to have detected the lack of Viking activity in Ulster but also detected high levels of NOR-SG component in the areas of known Viking settlement.
    Last edited by avalon; Yesterday at 10:02 PM.

  14. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to avalon For This Useful Post:

     Jessie (Today), Robert1 (Today)

Page 142 of 142 FirstFirst ... 4292132140141142

Similar Threads

  1. Irish and I1 ?
    By Kamo in forum I1-M253
    Replies: 64
    Last Post: 01-01-2018, 05:52 PM
  2. Irish Roots: The Irish DNA Atlas
    By Jean M in forum General
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 04-15-2017, 12:34 PM
  3. British & Irish 23andMe results
    By Anglo-Celtic DC in forum 23andMe
    Replies: 40
    Last Post: 02-07-2017, 11:51 AM
  4. Replies: 5
    Last Post: 02-17-2015, 05:41 PM
  5. who were the Irish?
    By MikeWhalen in forum General Sociology/Ethnology
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 05-16-2014, 12:48 AM

Posting Permissions

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