Actual Importance of Haplogroups

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alex Delarge

I'm just gonna assume that YDNA distributions isn't your strong point.. so how does R1b-L21 compare with other types of R1b in terms of "existing throughout Western Europe"? (M529 is another way of saying L21)

---

Obviously it peaks in Northern Ireland but it exists in France, northern Iberia, western Scandinavia and Iceland but my point was that nowadays it exists amongst mixed whites, African Americans, Aborigines, and any group that has mixed with Atlantic peoples. Please read my points in full. It means nothing on an individual level - only on a group level.

Anyway, here's a map to counter your map on R1b L21 http://adamsfamilydna.com/haplogroup...-subclade-l21/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Longbowman

Obviously it peaks in Northern Ireland but it exists in France, northern Iberia, western Scandinavia and Iceland but my point was that nowadays it exists amongst mixed whites, African Americans, Aborigines, and any group that has mixed with Atlantic peoples. Please read my points in full. It means nothing on an individual level - only on a group level.

---

This guessing only works for europeans, not new worlders.

Quote:

---

Anyway, here's a map to counter your map on R1b L21 http://adamsfamilydna.com/haplogroup...-subclade-l21/

---

They're similar but mine is from a study, yours is from Eupedia... a forum like this one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Longbowman

In the example given where X was exclusive to Finns, yes it does. As YDNA accounts for c. ~1% of your autosomal DNA, if your YDNA is Finnish, you're 1% Finn. With regards to MtDNA you're right, though.

---

You're all mixed up.

Quote:

---

With regard to the Y-chromosome, the most common haplogroups of the Finns are N1c (58%), I (29%), R1a (7.5%) and R1b (3.5%).[39] Haplogroup N1c, which is found only in a few countries in Europe (Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Finland and Russia), is a subgroup of the haplogroup N (Y-DNA) distributed across northern Eurasia and estimated in a recent study to be 10,000–20,000 years old and suggested to have entered Europe about 12,000–14,000 years ago from Asia.[40]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finns#cite_note-40

---

What exactly is exclusive to Finns?

N1c existed in those other areas before there was such a thing as Finns, Latvians, etc.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alex Delarge

This guessing only works for europeans, not new worlders.



They're similar but mine is from a study, yours is from Eupedia... a forum like this one.

---

I'm aware but I searched for a map and that one was the only one to come up on R1b L21. I couldn't even find yours. The point is it exists outside the UK.

And it only works for Europeans whose ancestry hasn't migrated at all for 500 years, or ever. Sure, a man with R1b is more likely to be a Brit than someone with Q, but the UK also has native R1a, E1b1b and even J clades.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Colonel Frank Grimes

You're all mixed up.


What exactly is exclusive to Finns?

N1c existed in those other nations before there was such a thing as Finns, Latvians, etc.

---

Argh, nothing's exclusive to Finns, it was an analogy. A hypothetical to explain the genetic payload of YDNA.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Longbowman

Argh, nothing's exclusive to Finns, it was an analogy. A hypothetical to explain the genetic payload of YDNA.

---

Instead of making an analogy why not actually use existing examples? Like the Berbers? Or subclade of Rb1 associated with French or the Irish? Instead you speak of haplogroups by themselves that can be found in many different places.

Your 1% reasoning is just absurd. Why not 0.1% or O.001%. You just randomly chose 1%.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Colonel Frank Grimes

Instead of making an analogy why not actually use existing examples? Like the Berbers? Or subclade of Rb1 associated with French or the Irish? Instead you speak of haplogroups by themselves that can be found in many different places.

Your 1% reasoning is just absurd. Why not 0.1% or O.001%. You just randomly chose 1%.

---

Because there's no haplogroup that's 100% unique, in the here and now, to just one group AND is the ONLY haplogroup found in that group.

No, it's 1%. 58 million base pairs. Look it up.

My indigenous DNA whatev result was saying i was Finnish... news to me, when was i Finnish?
Only if Viking colonialism had anything to do with it. Which makes your point completely make sense.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Longbowman

No, it's 1%. 58 million base pairs. Look it up.

---

It's 59 million. The human genome has 3 billion base pairs which computes to 1.97%.

I would say this 2% is hugely important, as I would be female without it. Another thing to consider is that the Y chromosome mutates 5 times faster than the other Chromosomes. So if we take a pure African and a pure Aboriginal 10% of their genetic difference will be on the Y chromosome. If we have an aboriginal male impregnate an african female, and an african male an aboriginal female, the level of genetic difference on the Y chromosome will increase because the DNA does not recombine.

Another issue is that historically for every 4 females that reproduced, only 1 male reproduced. This implies that the Y chromosome is under stronger evolutionary selection than the other chromosomes. If two races evolve under divergent evolutionary pressure this means that the Y chromosome will have more beneficial mutations than the other chromosomes. It's unclear to me how to calculate this, but from a functional perspective the genetic difference is likely to be between 15 and 30%?

One could go as far as to say that the Y haplogroup is one's race, that the other chromosomes are merely its support system, and that speciation occurs along paternal lines.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Void

It's 59 million. The human genome has 3 billion base pairs which computes to 1.97%.

I would say this 2% is hugely important, as I would be female without it. Another thing to consider is that the Y chromosome mutates 5 times faster than the other Chromosomes. So if we take a pure African and a pure Aboriginal 10% of their genetic difference will be on the Y chromosome. If we have an aboriginal male impregnate an african female, and an african male an aboriginal female, the level of genetic difference on the Y chromosome will increase because the DNA does not recombine.

Another issue is that historically for every 4 females that reproduced, only 1 male reproduced. This implies that the Y chromosome is under stronger evolutionary selection than the other chromosomes. If two races evolve under divergent evolutionary pressure this means that the Y chromosome will have more beneficial mutations than the other chromosomes. It's unclear to me how to calculate this, but from a functional perspective the genetic difference is likely to be between 15 and 30%?

One could go as far as to say that the Y haplogroup is one's race, that the other chromosomes are merely its support system, and that speciation occurs along paternal lines.

---

Importance with regards to race. Of course you need it for biological reasons. I'm sorry, I thought that was obvious by my post.

As for the rest of your post, it's not and more than 1-2% of your autosomal makeup, regardless of how few men (and indeed, fewer men have direct line descendants) have direct lines descendants. Here's a thought. Afrikaaners are 2% black on average. It stands to reason some of them will have black YDNA or mtDNA markers. Are these individuals black, when their cousins are white, and vice versa? The answer, of course, is no. Are African Americans actually white, and anglo-saxon, seeing as a very large percentage have Western European YDNA? Of course not.

Your facts are interesting, but ultimately do not change the autosomal relative irrelevance of YDNA.