Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

mtDNA Haplogroups

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • mtDNA Haplogroups

    Hi,

    This forum if for talking about mtDNA Haplogroups in simple English. What do we know about each haplogroup? How do we know it?

    --
    Regards,
    Rebekah Canada - Consultant
    Web Presence and Customer Engagement
    Family Tree DNA

  • #2
    Originally posted by Rebekah Canada View Post
    Hi,

    This forum if for talking about mtDNA Haplogroups in simple English. What do we know about each haplogroup? How do we know it?

    --
    Regards,
    Rebekah Canada - Consultant
    Web Presence and Customer Engagement
    Family Tree DNA
    I"ve been trying to find out more about the X haplogroup online. There isn't much on this haplogroup written. I find it's very interesting that it's not confined to a specific area, that it's located in small percentages in different places. It isn't in large percentages in North America. Since this is my haplogroup I feel like it's like an Alien Haplogroup that nobody knows much about or why it's dispersed the way it is. Is there any new research published about it? My husband always said, I was dropped here by Alien's!

    Comment


    • #3
      It has been folklore in my family that one of my third great grandmothers was 100% Native American. My dna is not reflective of this. She would be through my mtDNA line. Since I am U3a1b (and she would be also since she is my mother's, mother's, etc.), does it help dispell the myth, since this halogroup is not an usual halogroup for NA? Sounds logical to me. Any thoughts?

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by marietta View Post
        It has been folklore in my family that one of my third great grandmothers was 100% Native American. My dna is not reflective of this. She would be through my mtDNA line. Since I am U3a1b (and she would be also since she is my mother's, mother's, etc.), does it help dispell the myth, since this halogroup is not an usual halogroup for NA? Sounds logical to me. Any thoughts?
        The only thing it proves is that the maternal line that passes through your third great grandmother was not Native American. She may have had Native American ancestry, but through a non-strict maternal line. For instance, if her father had some Native American ancestry, that wouldn't show up in her mtDNA haplogroup.

        If you were to test her descendants in any line with Family Finder, you may find some level of autosomal Native American ancestry in Population Finder. Or you might not, if that ancestry was a small amount and there wasn't enough Native American DNA left in her descendants to detect. You'd want to test the oldest living descendant of that third great grandmother in order to have the best chance to detect any Native American ancestry.

        Comment


        • #5
          Thanks for that clarity. It seems I was not so logical after all. LOL

          Comment


          • #6
            I have a couple of U5 HVR1 matches that claim NA ancestry. I suspect it was back in the French and Indian War era when there were kidnappings. Alternatively, whether or not romance was involved, I don't know.

            Comment


            • #7
              I have two matches at 23andMe that are C4a1 with no recent Asian ancestry that they know of. They have English ancestry!

              Any thoughts on C4a1 in England?

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Solothurn View Post
                I have two matches at 23andMe that are C4a1 with no recent Asian ancestry that they know of. They have English ancestry!

                Any thoughts on C4a1 in England?
                Many Loyalists returned to England after the Revolutionary War. They compensated by the Crown for their lost real estate properties. Anyway, I'm sure there must have been quite a few marriages with Native American girls previous to that. So some NA mtDNA went to the British Isles.
                Last edited by PDHOTLEN; 23 December 2013, 10:01 AM.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by PDHOTLEN View Post
                  I have a couple of U5 HVR1 matches that claim NA ancestry. I suspect it was back in the French and Indian War era when there were kidnappings. Alternatively, whether or not romance was involved, I don't know.
                  The 24,000 year old burial in Siberia, that was the subject of a recent article in Nature, was of a 4 year old boy. His DNA seems to be at the root of Native American stock but also matches Europeans. His mtDNA was an unusual type U, perhaps closest to U5 varieties. The article estimated that up to 30% of Native American DNA might match European types. This would change a lot of things if validated, but it is early days on this study. It would perhaps mean some DNA thought to be caused by admixture after the age of discovery could really be from the original migrations. A separate study in Science showed U5 as close to the mtDNA of bronze age Siberians.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by JohnG View Post
                    The 24,000 year old burial in Siberia, that was the subject of a recent article in Nature, was of a 4 year old boy. His DNA seems to be at the root of Native American stock but also matches Europeans. His mtDNA was an unusual type U, perhaps closest to U5 varieties. The article estimated that up to 30% of Native American DNA might match European types. This would change a lot of things if validated, but it is early days on this study. It would perhaps mean some DNA thought to be caused by admixture after the age of discovery could really be from the original migrations. A separate study in Science showed U5 as close to the mtDNA of bronze age Siberians.
                    The study does not say that Native American DNA is a 30% match to modern Europeans' DNA. It says that the 24,000 year old Siberian boy is a 30% match to modern Europeans' DNA. The boy is also a partial match to Native American DNA.

                    All this means is that the population of this 24,000 year old is a common ancestor of both modern Europeans and Native Americans. Think of it this way. If you and a 64/67 yDNA match share a 10x g-grandfather, it says that you are distant cousins, having a common ancestor. Now think how many generations there were in the last 24,000 years and that will give you an estimate of how distantly modern Europeans and Native Americans are related through the ancient population of this Siberian boy.
                    Last edited by MMaddi; 23 December 2013, 07:22 PM.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      It seems that I have H-G16129A!. However I cannot find its shortname. I don't know about the origins of this haplogroup. Does anybody know about this haplogroup?

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Looking at the H tree, I think you are probably in a subclade of H that they haven't given a 'name' yet!

                        http://www.phylotree.org/tree/subtree_R0.htm


                        Originally posted by Tolga View Post
                        It seems that I have H-G16129A!. However I cannot find its shortname. I don't know about the origins of this haplogroup. Does anybody know about this haplogroup?

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Thanks Solothurn, but there are 9 haplogroup which include G16129A!. So, I cannot decide..

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            You are in an unknown subclade of H with G16129A, not one of the 9 !

                            Your subclade could be 'named' the reserved: H88, H89 or H90 or even H101.

                            I think there has to be a known paper on it or/and so many GenBank submissions. I don't know the facts for naming a subclade



                            Originally posted by Tolga View Post
                            Thanks Solothurn, but there are 9 haplogroup which include G16129A!. So, I cannot decide..

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              I didn't realise your result was from Geno and not FMS

                              You would need an FMS to determine your 'true' H designation!


                              Originally posted by Tolga View Post
                              Thanks Solothurn, but there are 9 haplogroup which include G16129A!. So, I cannot decide..

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X