Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It goes to show that all the rant and bulloney about the Portuguese being africans is ridiculous. I am cuban of spanish decent on my mother's side, and my father is from Portugal. My 23andme results were. .3 % Subsaharan and 97.6 % European. IRONICALLY, I had 5.2% Italian.
I didnt even have any middle eastern or North African Dna, which also dissolves the stupid statements about Spaniards and Portuguese also being very North African blooded. It is true, rather, that the moorish presence in the Iberian Peninsula did not equate the heavy crossbreeding. One scholar I read somewhere stated that it was more of a cohabitation of the different groups on the peninsula. I figured it is all a load a crap when I started noticing that I am much whiter than many so called "Anglo-Americans."
if you a male the y chrom will be the same or almost the same for thousands of years, so if your male grandfather couple hundred years ago was sweden then that what you are itt doesn't change. its basically the same with female or x chromo. now the problem is everything else, if you male and you trace your mama side then you could get anything, after about five generation, it is so small, it could be anything. like somebody said, just because your grandmother 4th generation back was 100 native american, that doesn't make you native because you might not inherited any of the genes. But if it was on the male side then you are..
what I'm saying if your grandmother a thousand years ago was rape by a viking, then you a viking, the male y doesn't change much in thousands of years.
by doing y dna, i found what town i was from in 1200, and my paperwork only goes back to 1650
Hm, I'm not sure I agree with what's in bold. Yes, if you have a Viking Y-chromosome then your paternal lineage is of Viking origin, but that doesn't necessarily mean the person is a Viking. That person may only have 1% actual Viking-related DNA, despite the Viking Y-chromosome.
How can someone that is 99% something else claim to be Viking simply because the Y-chromosome is of Viking origin?
If that's all that it takes, then many mixed African Americans with British Y-chromosomes will have to say they are British, even though their European component probably makes up 10% of their DNA. Doesn't makes sense to me. In this example, the African American can say he is of partial British origin, but he can't simply ignore all the other stuff that makes him him.
Hm, I'm not sure I agree with what's in bold. Yes, if you have a Viking Y-chromosome then your paternal lineage is of Viking origin, but that doesn't necessarily mean the person is a Viking. That person may only have 1% actual Viking-related DNA, despite the Viking Y-chromosome.
How can someone that is 99% something else claim to be Viking simply because the Y-chromosome is of Viking origin?
If that's all that it takes, then many mixed African Americans with British Y-chromosomes will have to say they are British, even though their European component probably makes up 10% of their DNA. Doesn't makes sense to me. In this example, the African American can say he is of partial British origin, but he can't simply ignore all the other stuff that makes him him.
This is where things get very subjective. For one no ones a Viking anymore (except maybe Techno Viking), even if you descend purely from Viking ancestry.
Also the last data point I saw was that African Americans are on average 25% European in DNA. Though identity is a complex thing. For example Henry Louis Gates Jr is about 50/50 African European in DNA. In fact I think he's something like 50.5% European and 49.5% African... Though he looks black, was raised black, and was raised in that culture. Interestingly I also think his Y DNA and mtDNA are European too (A very rare thing for African Americans to have their maternal line be white).
Pure percentages don't control identity. Some people drive it by surname, so that's actually pretty analogous to Y DNA. If they have a German surname then they consider themselves German. Even in Europe the DNA was mixed up but people still identified as certain things for a variety of reasons.
With all of our knowledge now I think genealogists have an amazing opportunity to know so much about our ancestry, including the DNA evidence, to choose to fold that into our identity however we want. But self identities can change, as we see with immigrant ancestors.
I didnt even have any middle eastern or North African Dna, which also dissolves the stupid statements about Spaniards and Portuguese also being very North African blooded. It is true, rather, that the moorish presence in the Iberian Peninsula did not equate the heavy crossbreeding. One scholar I read somewhere stated that it was more of a cohabitation of the different groups on the peninsula. I figured it is all a load a crap when I started noticing that I am much whiter than many so called "Anglo-Americans."
23 & Me consistently underestimates admixture percentages compared to Family Tree Dna Upload your file to Gedmatch.com I guarantee you you will see the North African. It's not a load of crap it has been heavily studied and is verifiable in academic studies that are peer reviewed by scientists and have been repeated many times. Having admixture isn't anything to be ashamed of. But you are correct the Portuguese and Spaniards don't have high percentages of Berber admixture and the sub-Saharan African admixture is entirely from maternal lineages they vast majority a result of the slave trade after the 15th Century.
These are the myorigins results from FTDNA for me and various family members of mine quite typical of what I have seen for Portuguese people we are all 100% Portuguese.
My Result
69% Southern Europe
15% Scandinavia
12% British Isles
05% North Africa
My fathers Results
80% Southern Europe
08% British Isles
06% Scandinavia
05% North Africa
My Mothers Results
67% Southern Europe
23% Western and Central Europe
03% Eastern Europe
05% North Africa
02% East Central Africa
My Daughters Results
55% Southern Europe
29% Western and Central Europe
09% British Isles
05% North Africa
02% Eastern Middle East
01% West Africa
I have seen at least 50 peoples results on Gedmatch.com of people of 100% Portuguese ancestry from Continental Portugal, the Azores Islands and Madeira island and they all have some North African their Myorigins results for the North African component typically range from 4%-7%. Some have also tested with 23 & Me and across the board that company underestimates non-European admixture what I have noticed is that they underestimate the sub-Saharan African and North African by as much as 90% compared to Family Tree Dna and much less than what the various Gedmatch calculators show. Btw My mother has the 2% East African but is significantly lighter complected than my father and my daughter with her 1% West African admixture is green eyed with straight dark blonde hair and is light complected you can't see small percentages of sub-Saharan African admixture or North African. Myorigins doesn't pick up sub-Saharan African for my father and I but after uploading our raw DNA files to Gedmatch I was able to see that it was indeed present however at smaller percentages. Also I was able to very that the 2% East African attributed to my mother wasn't all East African much of it was West African however more was East. Autosomal DNA test results vary from company to company due in part to there being overlap in shared DNA between populations and each company delineates the populations using a different process.
It goes to show that all the rant and bulloney about the Portuguese being africans is ridiculous. I am cuban of spanish decent on my mother's side, and my father is from Portugal. My 23andme results were. .3 % Subsaharan and 97.6 % European. IRONICALLY, I had 5.2% Italian.
Every 23 & Me result that I have seen of someone with Portuguese ancestry showed Italian. Most Cubans also have Canarian Spanish ancestry Canarians are partially descended from the Guanches who are related to the Berbers of North Africa.
Carlos, North African DNA is common in Europe. They were berberiscs, people of eastern origin and caucasian.
Most of them arrived during the neolithic. The "moors" in Spain were a minority, accounting for the fact that in the Spanish region I'm now has less "berberisc DNA" than Germany or Italy. They were caucasian, just as berberiscs you find in the Atlas mountains in Morocco, different from modern Moroccans from cities that are mixed by black slaves.
Berberiscs were very few compared to the general population, and later they were expelled along with other minorities.
For example, Hitler and Napoleon had "berberisc DNA".
Spain is a less heterogenous country that Italy or Germany, which was located in a crossway.
As to Canarians, Canarians are very caucasian.
What makes you think that most of the North African DNA arrived on the Iberian peninsula during the Neolithic? What are you basing your statement on? Maternal DNA U6a1 in the Iberian peninsula is attributed mostly to the Moors also is found most plentiful in Portugal where the Berbers had their strongest presence whereas U6a2 the Ethiopian cluster is much more frequent is Spain likely due to a much stronger Arab presence. There certainly had to have been some input of North African DNA during the Neolithic but I haven't seen anything to indicate that most of the input was from that period.
I got my 23andme results back, and it was SUCH a waste of $.
I had wanted to know about one ancestral line that might have been either African or Native American back in the early 1700s (Census shows this family as "Free Non-White" in 1790) 23andme results show .2% Sub Saharan African, .1% South Asian, and .6% Unassigned. Could the Native American (probably Choctaw) be the "Unassigned"? 23andme just doesn't have enough Native American genetic data, I think.
Since 23andme says their results are for the past 500 years only, the .3% African/Asian shouldn't represent the many thousands of years ago migration from Africa and East Asia to Western Europe.....
Science Behind Ancestry Composition which people should be reading states;
This is basically saying that it does not even meet the threshold to fit into the ancestral assignment model. Not even the Speculative. Speculative is 50% certainty as opposed to Conservative 90% and Standard 75%. Though the samples of Native American are small (108), Native American have more in common with one another and East Asians than to other populations. If you have Native American recently at least with 4 generation a strong (or few) segments should be able to be detected and pulling in East Asian is heard of. This seems to be a new tag line when Native American results are lackluster, "just doesn't have enough Native American." Though this may be true, no results may be simply telling for sure.
500 years is not to be taken literal. Point one, when 23andMe says (I've never seen "only" in their advertising) the ability to go back 500 years is due to the pattern of recombination. Every generation DNA segments are shuffled out and new segments are introduced. About 5/6 generations (4/5 great grandparent) is a cliff where DNA drops off. So theoretically, what is no longer existing cannot be detected.
Having said that, we have populations that have mixtures existing in an area for a long period of time, going way past 500 years. For example, we have Turkic peoples with East Asian ancestry, sometime as much as 2%-11% contribution. However, this does not always indicate "recent" ancestry with the timeline of a Great++ Grandparent. African Americans who on average can have as much as 15%-20% European admixture are often shocked to see such a result and many are unable to find a "recent" White ancestor. Again, we have populations of people recycling admixture in a gene pool of people. Unless they have a recent White ancestor or East Asian of course, this mixing could have happened before 500.
Africa/East Asian/South Asian/European are "old world" countries. When we start talking about .3 African/E Asian/So Asian being found in "new world" (people from colonial periods) it is hard do say if this was pre-existing or was recently introduced. Also factoring in statistical noise.
Last edited by AppalachianGumbo; 08-22-2015 at 08:31 AM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
