U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Covid-19 Information Page
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Genealogy
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 08-07-2017, 09:07 AM
 
Location: Colorado (PA at heart)
9,255 posts, read 14,295,728 times
Reputation: 12070

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by AntonioR View Post
If you did had 'their blood,' they would appear in your genetics even if they make up less than 1% of your genome, and not just on paper.
They are still your ancestors, because without them, you wouldn't be here today. Your other ancestors (their descendants) have their DNA, even if you don't. And it's my understanding that it's not necessarily that you don't have their DNA, it's just that it's been recombined so much that you wouldn't find any matching string of segments. You still have genes from them, just not in the same sequence.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-07-2017, 12:18 PM
Status: "Enjoying the moment" (set 8 days ago)
 
5,821 posts, read 8,584,131 times
Reputation: 4552
Quote:
Originally Posted by PA2UK View Post
They are still your ancestors, because without them, you wouldn't be here today. Your other ancestors (their descendants) have their DNA, even if you don't. And it's my understanding that it's not necessarily that you don't have their DNA, it's just that it's been recombined so much that you wouldn't find any matching string of segments. You still have genes from them, just not in the same sequence.
Those are paper ancestors, not blood ancestors.

You take one of those paper ancestors out of the question and yes, many of the people on the tree would not be the same. However, there is a possibility that even without that paper ancestor a person alive today would had been born, even if from different people. All that is needed is for the actual DNA that is inherited to be inherited and with ancestors from long time ago, we only inherit a little bit of their DNA. Given the small quantities, it's possible. I accept the possibilities are slim, but so were the possibilities for any one person alive today to had ever come into existence.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-07-2017, 01:04 PM
 
Location: NJ
12,581 posts, read 22,536,604 times
Reputation: 11496
Quote:
Originally Posted by naadarien View Post
Thanks, but I understand all of this, but still none of this addresses how the haplogroup gets assigned.
My suggestion would be to watch the documentary The Human Family Tree on National Geographic. Was very interesting
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-07-2017, 04:12 PM
 
Location: Colorado (PA at heart)
9,255 posts, read 14,295,728 times
Reputation: 12070
Quote:
Originally Posted by AntonioR View Post
Those are paper ancestors, not blood ancestors.

You take one of those paper ancestors out of the question and yes, many of the people on the tree would not be the same. However, there is a possibility that even without that paper ancestor a person alive today would had been born, even if from different people. All that is needed is for the actual DNA that is inherited to be inherited and with ancestors from long time ago, we only inherit a little bit of their DNA. Given the small quantities, it's possible. I accept the possibilities are slim, but so were the possibilities for any one person alive today to had ever come into existence.
No, I'm sorry but I disagree. In order for me to exist, with my exact DNA, my parents DNA had to be exactly as they are. And in order for their DNA to be exactly as it is, my grandparent's DNA had to be exactly as it was. And in order for their DNA to be exactly as it was.... you get the point. Each and ever generation had to be exactly as it was in order to me to exist, therefore I wouldn't be here today if not for each and every ancestor from each and every generation, no matter how far back.

And anyway, like I said, just because I don't inherit sequence of SNPs from a certain ancestor, doesn't mean I didn't get their individual genes, they've just been recombined into a difference sequence.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-08-2017, 01:25 AM
 
Location: Georgia, USA
25,216 posts, read 30,070,230 times
Reputation: 31342
Quote:
Originally Posted by PA2UK View Post
No, I'm sorry but I disagree. In order for me to exist, with my exact DNA, my parents DNA had to be exactly as they are. And in order for their DNA to be exactly as it is, my grandparent's DNA had to be exactly as it was. And in order for their DNA to be exactly as it was.... you get the point. Each and ever generation had to be exactly as it was in order to me to exist, therefore I wouldn't be here today if not for each and every ancestor from each and every generation, no matter how far back.

And anyway, like I said, just because I don't inherit sequence of SNPs from a certain ancestor, doesn't mean I didn't get their individual genes, they've just been recombined into a difference sequence.
I agree with what you said in the first paragraph but not what you said in the second. The further we get from an ancestor the more likely recombination has eliminated all the DNA from an individual person. We have no genes from him or her at all. He or she is still an ancestor, though. The DNA has to come from some ancestors, though, and that means what we do have came from people in our very distant past. That is why we now know we share DNA with Neanderthals.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-08-2017, 03:26 AM
 
877 posts, read 892,024 times
Reputation: 1227
Quote:
Originally Posted by naadarien View Post
Thanks, but I understand all of this, but still none of this addresses how the haplogroup gets assigned.
They test certain SNPS in the Y DNA and those markers match a pattern associated with a haplogroup.

Basically if you had 10 specific SNPS in a certain combination then that means you got them via a common ancestor say 4,000 years ago, that's the haplogroup designation. Haplogroups are just a designation behind a combination of SNPS. This creates a new entry in a big tree.

That's it. You can submit a Y DNA test to certain places and test for specific SNPS yourself that fit a haplogroup and identify it yourself. Or you can do a more comprehensive Y DNA test that tests a large amount of these SNPs and the person will only test positive for for a small amount, but it will place them in the tree.

For example you can look at the yfull tree for L21 here:
https://www.yfull.com/tree/R-L21/


If someone is given L21 that means they test positive for the SNPS listed for L21 and every marker above L21 in the tree. In reality they might not have tested every marker since a certain combination of markers down the tree is enough to confirm the place in the tree.

At a site where you can test further if you are given L21 you can then test specific sub-branch SNPs to confirm or eliminate them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-08-2017, 03:27 AM
 
877 posts, read 892,024 times
Reputation: 1227
Just to throw it in here that looking at our DNA and who we inherited from the perspectively of genealogically useful information is probably not applicable to looking at what DNA we have from ancestors or none at all from others.

We certainly inherit a lot of very small segments from a variety of ancestors, currently either our technology is too limited to confidently identify them or the data simple is just so small there's no way to identify IBS vs IBD. That doesn't mean we don't inherit DNA from a huge amount of our ancestors, maybe even most of them within a genealogical timeframe.

Additionally all these DNA segments either originated in a ways that could be reproduced by other ancestors or are so ancient that they just funneled down in their specific pattern to us via those ancestors. So it's not really that this DNA originated with them, just was delivered down through them. Without a doubt you still share a variety of ancient population DNA with them, much like all Humans share a massive amount of DNA.

Further we still don't fully understand why certain segments inherit and others don't. We still have a lot to learn. It's entirely possible that the DNA that isn't inherited might effect what DNA inherits, or how further down the line DNA from descendants might inherit.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-08-2017, 08:04 AM
 
Location: Colorado (PA at heart)
9,255 posts, read 14,295,728 times
Reputation: 12070
Quote:
Originally Posted by suzy_q2010 View Post
I agree with what you said in the first paragraph but not what you said in the second. The further we get from an ancestor the more likely recombination has eliminated all the DNA from an individual person. We have no genes from him or her at all. He or she is still an ancestor, though. The DNA has to come from some ancestors, though, and that means what we do have came from people in our very distant past. That is why we now know we share DNA with Neanderthals.
Yes, that's basically what I meant. All our genes come from somewhere, they don't just magically appear at the 5th or 6th generation back - some may be more recent mutations but not all.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-08-2017, 12:14 PM
 
16,207 posts, read 8,489,355 times
Reputation: 8336
Quote:
Originally Posted by naadarien View Post
Just blinders mostly. I'm a history major and long time amateur historian. It isn't like I don't know the reality. It isn't even that I'm fighting it from a personal perspective. It would be cool to have a unique story to tell about ancestry. I am all for it. I laugh at all these people who want to find out if they are descended from kings or related to celebrities when some of their best stories are personal.

Interestingly enough, through this DNA testing, I have found 3 people who look to be connected to me through both sides of my family (they appear in my 23 & Me relative lists on both my mom and my dad's side). The slowly dawning realization of that and proving it (distant cousin connections are so much work) has been changing my perspective. I have always seen my families as very separate and distinct entities and yet the more I dig into them individually, the closer they get to each other. My maternal grandfather would roll over in his grave. :-D

You bring up an interesting subject. I was trying to figure out what made my black family leave VA right after the Revolution, say 1800-1820 or so. They went to NC for a short time, but moved on to Sevier, TN and from then on to Arkansas (there by about 1850) leaving behind half the family in TN. I'm going to have to go back and look over the changing of laws in 1800's. I spent some time looking at natural disasters, fires, bankruptcies etc, but I hadn't looked at the broader landscape. If the laws changed such that it was harder to live, I can see why they headed out. I said to my dad just yesterday, that some people moved out into the frontier to get away from bad laws.

I'm off to wander down the rabbit hole... :-D

ETA: We have a Celtic last name. We argue over whether it is Scottish or Irish. I tend toward the latter, but none of us knows for sure. There was never any discussion about how we got the name. There are however 4 different spellings and we do argue over which is the original. My last name appears in the oldest records I can find so you'd think I'd win the argument, but...noooo LOL. Still no family lore on whites in the family. My father's male line is very dark skinned. I think even they assumed they had very little euro in them. Nothing above 10% most definitely. To find it hovers just under 20%, has a few of them rethinking some things.
Wanted to note on reasons free blacks left VA on the fact that many counties passed laws that required free negroes to register and pay a tax to the county to prove that they would not be indignant and a burden to the white population, many of them either could not afford, or didn't want to pay this tax and the passage of these laws, which occurred from the 1790s to the early 1800s, caused many free black/colored individuals to move west. Free black children in many counties were also denied the right to attend school in counties in both VA and NC and even other northern/western states (even in Ohio many areas sought to deny free black children an education). I also have free ancestors who were originally from VA then they moved to NC then they moved to IN then they moved to Canada! There has been quite a bit written about this particular family and most of the history of the family was taken from one of the oldest members of the family who died in the 1940s in Michigan and who was over 100 years old at the time of her death. She stated that the family moved around due to the threat of being kidnapped into slavery, this was more common than I ever thought (the occurrence and the idea that it could/would occur and the fear associated with it) prior to doing research on FPOC populations and interacting with people online who specialize in certain families of FPOC. Also that the communities they lived in taxed them unfairly and wouldn't let their children attend school. The move to IN was precipitated on the fact that the FPOC population in NC were routinely denied education opportunities and there was a school built in IN in a free town in SE IN called the Union Literary Institute that provided a high quality education that lured many free families in the 1840s, one of my maternal lines moved to the area around this time (here's a good summary of free blacks in IN, it mentions that most came from VA and NC). Those laws along with others that were common in specific states/territories, including the fact that free families could not bring charges against a white man or testify against a white man who harm him/his family. They also could not own guns/weapons without the permission/overseeing of a white citizen/neighbor/family member.

I recently finished reading a book about runaways and free blacks in Canada and one of the people interviewed in the 1840s and whose story was included in this book mentioned that he was not allowed to learn to read and write in NC and that he was free "in name only" and that being free and black in NC was almost the same as being a slave in NC and that they had no legal recourse for wrongdoings committed against them.

In regards to being dark skinned, my great grandmother mentioned earlier looked like a white woman. But her paternal cousins/ancestors ranged from very white like her to very dark skinned. I would post a pic of one of her first cousin's whose son did the yDNA testing and who also had a European haplogroup that corresponded with other cousins as he was VERY dark skinned and they were first cousins but his son is still alive and I don't want to post pics of his dad without his permission. He was very dark skinned though. My great grandmother's mother - my 2nd great grandmother was what was called a "quadroon" and she was 3/4 white - my 2nd great grandfather, her husband, was from the "tri-racial" family with the Scottish surname and he looked more like a mixed-race/bi-racial man. His brother married a dark skinned woman and all of the family on that side are dark skinned since then, so the skin color really has no bearing IMO on the haplogroup. Both sides - us brown/light skinned side and the darker skinned cousins, they all come from the same distant European ancestor, there is more than 4 spellings of the surname and it gave me a lot of headaches researching this line until I found some cousins on a Facebook page about 2 years ago.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Genealogy
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2020, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top