# Population Genetics > Y-DNA Haplogroups >  Does Y-DNA influence one's looks after all?

## Maciamo

The general consensus has been that Y-chromosomal DNA only contains a few of genes relating to male fertility and does not influence the carrier's appearance, except of course for the male characteristics influenced by testosterone. I have argued before that some Y-chromosomal mutations, in the coding region, certainly play a role in male behaviour and sexual selection, considering that such mutations typically define major haplogroups or subclades. The more I compare the looks of people whose Y-DNA haplogroup I know, the more I feel like people belonging to the same haplogroup do often (but it's not always that clear) share some common looks.

I just learned today that Ben Affleck belongs to J2a1-M319, a subclade found mainly Greece and Italy, but especially in Crete. It could have been spread by the Romans to western Europe. Ben Affleck has mixed  Scottish, English, Irish, German, and Swiss ancestry. Regardless of his ancestry, there is something that looks quite J2 about him.




Here are some other known J2 people. I would say that they all share a certain relatively gentle boyish look and have a face that is rather oval. These three are all Jewish, but they are very different in type from say Woody Allen or Albert Einstein.

Mike Nichols




Burt Bacharach




Matt Lauer







Another example is Swedish actor Max von Sydow, who I recently learned belongs to a Pomeranian subclade of R1a. There is only about 19% of R1a in Sweden, yet his looks screams R1a. He know a Polish guy who looks just like him.




Von Sydow has German ancestry, although that does not justify his Polish looks. Let's take two pure Swedish actors, Stellen Skarsgård and his son Gustaf. I do not know their haplogroups, but I would bet that they are R1a too. I can't explain it with words. It's just something in their expression.

Stellen Skarsgård



Gustaf Skarsgård

----------


## Aaron1981

> The general consensus has been that Y-chromosomal DNA only contains a few of genes relating to male fertility and does not influence the carrier's appearance, except of course for the male characteristics influenced by testosterone. I have argued before that some Y-chromosomal mutations, in the coding region, certainly play a role in male behaviour and sexual selection, considering that such mutations typically define major haplogroups or subclades. The more I compare the looks of people whose Y-DNA haplogroup I know, the more I feel like people belonging to the same haplogroup do often (but it's not always that clear) share some common looks.
> 
> I just learned today that Ben Affleck belongs to J2a1-M319, a subclade found mainly Greece and Italy, but especially in Crete. He, however, has mixed  Scottish, English, Irish, German, and Swiss ancestry. Not knowing his ancestry, would you rather say British-Irish or Italo-Greek? There is something that looks quite J2 about him.



Ben Affleck is extremely R1b looking to me. It looks like J2a1-M319 isn't one of the common J2 branches and may have been in western Europe an extremely long time. It's not like Affleck is a recent immigrant or anything. Most of the waspy Hollywood males look R1b to me. They all have a med-high forehead, squinty eyes, and an oval face. Typical R1b look... The Scandinavian look you don't see all the often in western Europe, is the broader face, high cheekbones, less of the oval/doughy face features that western Euro males often have. ie: Dolf Lundgren, Mads Mikkelsen..etc

----------


## Angela

Ben Affleck looks like a typical British Isles/German American mutt mix. I don't see anything at all Greek looking about him.

Oval faced, doughy features, squinty eyed R1b look? Really?

You mean like these Irish actors? Send um on over. :)







Or like Irish/Scottish mix Sean Connery?

----------


## Templar

Squinty eyes definitely do seem more common in the Northern half of Europe. Could be a borealized trait that developed as an adaptation to the cold. East Asians supposedly came to be somewhere around Siberia and they too have similar eyes. The extra fat on the upper eyelid could have provided protection from the cold or wind.

Either way, they are very kawaii on girls.

----------


## davef

Sorry, no offense but Ben affleck does not look "Mediterranean" (by that I mean greek or italian) at all. I would quickly guess him as Northern European in a heartbeat.

----------


## Angela

Do *not*, under any circumstances, send *this* guy over. :)



Or this one...the only way I'd ever cast him would be as a serial killer or the head of some nefarious international organization:


Seriously, before actors/actresses or models are cast, the people involved in the hiring do extensive testing in front of audiences. Certain looks appeal to a higher percentage of people. That's what they go with...if it's an action movie that they accept only men will go to see, they might go with a slightly different look, but generally, for male actors, they want a look women will really like and men will be ok with...

It's really as simple as that. Of course, in terms of Hollywood movies, which are the ones which make the really big not only U.S. stars but international stars, they're all tested on U.S. audiences, so that may account for any differences.




> Templar: Squinty eyes definitely do seem more common in the Northern half of Europe. Could be a borealized trait that developed as an adaptation to the cold. East Asians supposedly came to be somewhere around Siberia and they too have similar eyes. The extra fat on the upper eyelid could have provided protection from the cold or wind.
> 
> Either way, they are very kawaii on girls.


I don't think that for most people attractiveness is based on one feature, like whether someone has rather small versus big eyes. I don't think the "Siberian" look is high on the attractiveness scale in the U.S. It's about the whole package. Sean Connery has rather large eyes.

So do these "heart throbs", past as well as present.

Tyrone Power:


Gregory Peck:



Marlon Brando:


James Dean


Rock Hudson


George Clooney


Nowadays, because the only people actually going to the movies are teenagers and twenty somethings the leading men are starting to look different, but that's a different issue.

----------


## Aaron1981

> Ben Affleck looks like a typical British Isles/German American mutt mix. I don't see anything at all Greek looking about him.
> 
> Oval faced, doughy features, squinty eyed R1b look? Really?
> 
> You mean like these Irish actors? Send um on over. :)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Angela, I agree with you completely. Doughy faced wasn't really the best adjective for me to use, but it was in contrast to the high cheekboned face of the Scandinavians. West Euros do tend to have more oval faces, only doughy if they are overweight ;) Those are definitely the R1b faces I am referring to though.

Squinty eye not the best term either, but a long slight eye socket, rather than a wide open cavity, which is more common in Middle East/South Euro. It might be the heavy brow in north-west Euro which makes it seem this way.

----------


## Pax Augusta

> Sorry, no offense but Ben affleck does not look "Mediterranean" (by that I mean greek or italian) at all. I would quickly guess him as Northern European in a heartbeat.


Yes, but not all the Italians and Greeks look or are "Mediterranean".

----------


## Angela

> Angela, I agree with you completely. Doughy faced wasn't really the best adjective for me to use, but it was in contrast to the high cheekboned face of the Scandinavians. West Euros do tend to have more oval faces, only doughy if they are overweight ;) Those are definitely the R1b faces I am referring to though.
> 
> Squinty eye not the best term either, but a long slight eye socket, rather than a wide open cavity, which is more common in Middle East/South Euro. It might be the heavy brow in north-west Euro which makes it seem this way.


Yes, we're on the same wavelength. As I explained in the post above, when tested in front of Americans, this scores high on attractiveness. I'm no exception. :)

I know the anthrofora world is big on calling this Atlantid, but I think in Coon? terms, it's Atlanto Med. 

Those heavy facial bones that you see more of as you go east in Europe are what I think of as the "ANE" look. American Indians have it too. Or maybe it also has to do with proportionally more WHG/SHG survival?

I don't think the snps for these traits are on the yChromosome, however.

There's a definite cline in Italy in terms of eye shape and size as well, with larger eyes more frequent in the south. You can carry these things too far, though. Look at the northern European actors I posted above.




> Pax Augusta:Yes, but not all the Italians and Greeks look or are "Mediterranean".


What I'm sure he meant is that there's nothing *particularly* Italian or Greek looking about him. You're *much more likely* to find those particular kinds of looks in northern Europe than in Italy, even in the north.

----------


## Maciamo

> Ben Affleck is extremely R1b looking to me. It looks like J2a1-M319 isn't one of the common J2 branches and may have been in western Europe an extremely long time. It's not like Affleck is a recent immigrant or anything. Most of the waspy Hollywood males look R1b to me. They all have a med-high forehead, squinty eyes, and an oval face. Typical R1b look... The Scandinavian look you don't see all the often in western Europe, is the broader face, high cheekbones, less of the oval/doughy face features that western Euro males often have. ie: Dolf Lundgren, Mads Mikkelsen..etc


It's not so much the traits as the general 'feel' that is similar between those J2 people. It's things like the expression in the eyes. It's hard to explain. Usually, with a bit of international experience, it's possible to guess a person's mother tongue, or at least linguistic family of the mother tongue (e.g. Slavic, Germanic, Romance). It's not based on the person's ethnicity. It works even if a person is an immigrant to the country in question. For example, an East Asian who grew up in France (ideally adopted so as to be sure that French is their native language) will have a different facial expression from an East Asian who grew up in the UK, who will in turn be different from one who grew up in Korea. It's possible to perceive a sort of 'language aura' in one's facial expression. 

I think that there is also a particular 'aura' or 'feel' for haplogroups. R1a men look more earnest and forthright. J2a men look easy-going, amiable and diplomatic/commercial. I1 people seem levelheaded and sociable. E1b1b people appear to be more passionate and relentless. Those are just my personal impressions.

----------


## davef

> Yes, but not all the Italians and Greeks look or are "Mediterranean".


Certainly true! 

And Angela, that's exactly what I meant.

----------


## firetown

Interesting. My dad's dad was German. And I look nothing like him. When people see however a picture of my mom's dad, they usually assume it was me posing for a 1930's look picture.

----------


## firetown

For the life of me, I cannot understand why women like Dolph Lundgren, George Clooney or Ben Affleck. They look so boring to me. Their eyes spell emptiness. Sure I am not the right judge in regards to what women are looking for, but I would assume that when looking for a partner in life, you want someone who looks like they have more of a soul.

----------


## Pax Augusta

> I just learned today that Ben Affleck belongs to J2a1-M319, a subclade found mainly Greece and Italy, but especially in Crete. He, however, has mixed  Scottish, English, Irish, German, and Swiss ancestry. Not knowing his ancestry, would you rather say British-Irish or Italo-Greek? There is something that looks quite J2 about him.



Pics can be deceptive or misleading, there is a long tradition of cherrypicking in most anthroforums (many anthroforums without cherrypicking would be less popular).

I'm not saying that you've cherrypicked of course, what I'm saying is that the look of many people can vary a lot in pics (beard or no beard, tan, different lighting conditions... ).

To me Ben Affleck looks like a regular British who could pass in lot of places in Europe.

----------


## Angela

Now, if instead of Ben Affleck, who really does have a very "soft" face, you were to talk about someone like Colin O'Donohue, you'd find many more Italians who look like him, in my opinion...





Or Hugh Jackman:


Alessio Boni:



Ed. In this last set, first picture that came up for both, btw. :)

----------


## firetown

The pictures you have posted are different and make him look different. The eyes are "deeper", but there is still that sense of disconnect. There is a different "vibe" you get from Celtic and Jewish people IMO. You may not be able to put it all into words, but the overall look is very different from how someone engages in terms of connecting with others and from what I have seen, the eyes are the best way to detect certain tendencies in communication. People who are of Jewish and Celtic ancestry tend to connect better ... with both themselves and others. More natural.




> Pics can be deceptive or misleading, there is a long tradition of cherrypicking in most anthroforums (many anthroforums without cherrypicking would be less popular).
> 
> I'm not saying that you've cherrypicked of course, what I'm saying is that the look of many people can vary a lot in pics (beard or no beard, tan, different lighting conditions... ).

----------


## Maleth

Looks must be more related to an overall autosmal (including Mtdna) rather then simply Ydna. Sometimes even siblings vary to a considerable degree in both looks and character, so there cannot be just a straight forward trait in relation to Ydna.

----------


## Goga

> The general consensus has been that Y-chromosomal DNA only contains a few of genes relating to male fertility and does not influence the carrier's appearance, except of course for the male characteristics influenced by testosterone. I have argued before that some Y-chromosomal mutations, in the coding region, certainly play a role in male behaviour and sexual selection, considering that such mutations typically define major haplogroups or subclades. The more I compare the looks of people whose Y-DNA haplogroup I know, the more I feel like people belonging to the same haplogroup do often (but it's not always that clear) share some common looks.
> 
> 
> Another example is Swedish actor Max von Sydow, who I recently learned belongs to a Pomeranian subclade of R1a. There is only about 19% of R1a in Sweden, yet his looks screams R1a. He know a Polish guy who looks just like him.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Von Sydow has German ancestry, although that does not justify his Polish looks. Let's take two pure Swedish actors, Stellen Skarsgård and his son Gustaf. I do not know their haplogroups, but I would bet that they are R1a too. I can't explain it with words. It's just something in their expression.
> ...


They do look like Y-DNA hg. I1 !!!


And are you talking about Europe, right? Because *most R1a men*, and I mean *more than 1 billion*, look like him or something...




This is now an *AVERAGE* modern day R1a fella looks like!

----------


## vcovaci

I think it is quite probale that certain Y-DNA haplogroups would come with higher or smaller levels of male hormones, or androgens. We can also think of the 2D:4D ratio that reflects the levels of sex hormones, and seems to be also heritable on the paternal line. This ratio, like haplogroups, tends to show high geographical variability. The higher the levels of androgens (especially during intrauterine development, but also in adulthood), the more "manly" the facial traits of a person are (squarer jaw, smaller eyes, an overall wider face, etc.).

----------


## Maciamo

> Looks must be more related to an overall autosmal (including Mtdna) rather then simply Ydna. Sometimes even siblings vary to a considerable degree in both looks and character, so there cannot be just a straight forward trait in relation to Ydna.


I completely agree with that. Y-DNA may only have a minor influence on looks. Nevertheless, when we see what happens when a tiger mates with a lion, and how different the offspring look depending on which of the two is the father or the mother, it looks like the X and Y chromosomes play a considerable role in looks as well.

Here is a male and a female liger (cross between a male lion and a female tiger). 








Compare it with a male tigon (cross between a male tiger and a female lion).



And a female tigon



One thing that differs clearly is the body size. What's more, tigons resemble tigers more than lions. This is especially true of female tigons. But the facial features are also quite different. The male liger, which has a lion's Y-chromosome, does have a typical lion face. The male tigon's face is neither typically lion nor tiger.

----------


## Angela

Sorry, gentlemen, both looks and personality are probably dependent on hundreds if not thousands and tens of thousands of different snps, and those snps don't reside on the y chromosome.

The most that I would say as to correspondences is that certain looks and maybe personality traits may be more common in some areas than others, and those areas may have more of one y dna lineage than another, but that doesn't imply "causation" in the sense that something in the y is causing someone to have narrow versus round eyes, for example.




> Mike Damman: For the life of me, I cannot understand why women like Dolph Lundgren, George Clooney or Ben Affleck. They look so boring to me. Their eyes spell emptiness. Sure I am not the right judge in regards to what women are looking for, but I would assume that when looking for a partner in life, you want someone who looks like they have more of a soul.


You've got three totally different looking men there. I don't know what their souls are like. What I can say about their looks is that Ben Affleck is soft and, indeed, rather boring looking to me personally. He is very popular, though. I think George Clooney is very good looking, and seems to be, by all accounts, charming and funny, but no, I don't think he's very unique looking. Lundgren is just ugly to me, far too hard faced, and while tastes differ, I don't think he would appeal to most American women.

----------


## Goga

Indian population = 1,330,390,000

http://www.worldometers.info/world-p...ia-population/


Swedish population = 9,868,300

http://www.worldometers.info/world-p...en-population/


In India live just now 135 times more people than in Sweden !



16 % of Swedih males is R1a = ( 9,868,300 / 2 ) X .16 = 789,464 . Less than *1 million* Swedish men are R1a.

India

Let say in India are 40% of males are R1a. It is my LOWEST prediciton of R1a in India. There could be at least 50%. But let say it is 40%.

( 1,330,390,000 / 2 ) X .4 = 266,078,000 !

In India belong at least *266 million* to Y-DNA hg. R1a.


And now tell me again how a modern day *average* R1a fella looks like ??!! Exactly, he looks South Asian!

----------


## Goga

Maciamo, since when are you into PSEUDO science? This is one of the very few times that you disappoint me...

----------


## Milan

Uh,then i always wondered why i took physical traits much more of my mother side than my father in comparison,much more traits i carry are trough male lineage of my mother side,weird?then little less from father side,yet i cary Y-DNA from my father.

----------


## Maciamo

> They do look like Y-DNA hg. I1 !!!
> 
> And are you talking about Europe, right? Because *most R1a men*, and I mean *more than 1 billion*, look like him or something...
> 
> 
> 
> This is now an *AVERAGE* modern day R1a fella looks like!



That's because you think of autosomal looks linked to an ethnic group with a majority of one Y-haplogroup. I am talking about the cross-ethnic feel common among all members of a same haplogroup. When I say that R1a men look more earnest, that applies to Scandinavians, Slavs, Greeks, Jews, Kurds, Persians and Indians alike. You should do abstraction of the autosomal looks such as pigmentation and racial differences.

----------


## Goga

The *only* way to find out how a particular Y-DNA should look like is to find the very first and archaic Y-DNA haplogroup. Otherwise it is nothing but speculation and pseudo science ..


Nobody knows how the very first R1a or R1b fella looked like 20000 !!! years ago.


But all we know is that modern humans are much more evolved and refined than 20000 years ago. It has something to do with what we call time, environmental adaptation and attainable nutrition ( = evolution ) .

----------


## Goga

The very first born archaic R1b or R1a fella could look like a very, very dark African. 


But today what we do know for sure is that a *current* average looking R1b fella (I know there is R1b in native African & West/East Asian populations, but I'm talking about the general average global population), and that average looking R1b fella has 'Europoid' (native European) looks, most R1b fellas have European roots. While an average looking R1a fella is South Asian, most present day living R1a fellas have South Asian roots.


The rest is pseudo science...

----------


## Maciamo

> The *only* way to find out how a particular Y-DNA should look like is to find the very first and archaic Y-DNA haplogroup. Otherwise it is nothing but speculation and pseudo science ..
> 
> 
> Nobody knows how the very first R1a or R1b fella looked like 20000 !!! years ago.
> 
> 
> But all we know is that modern humans are much more evolved and refined than 20000 years ago. It has something to do with what we call time, environmental adaptation and attainable nutrition ( = evolution ) .


Once again you completely misunderstand the purpose of this thread. What you mean is to find out the autosomal genes for one particular phenotype (the ancient R1a ancestors) and match it with a Y-chromosomal DNA. But what I am trying to do is almost the opposite. I am trying to dissociate completely autosomal DNA from Y-DNA, and see what phenotypically relevant influence is left using _only_ the Y-DNA. The best way to test this would be to genetically engineer quasi-clones that differ only in their Y-DNA, and see how different they look. Chances are that they will be very similar, but will have a distinctively different 'feel'. Using language as an analogy, you could say that those clones who all speak English (the autosomal DNA) but with a different accent (the Y-DNA).

Now when I wrote that, based on my personal impression of people I know, R1a men were more earnest and straightforward (or even aggressive), you are a good example. :) But I also had other specific people in mind. It is now known that Benjamin Netanyahu belongs to R1a-Z93. Not only does he fit the description for his character, but his earnest character is also reflected on his face. That is no easy-going, boyish J2a man.




Many Jews had their DNA tested, and as Jews have so many different Y-haplogroups, they make a great 'test case' for the phenotypical expression of Y-DNA. Jews are fairly homogeneous genetically, being a single ethnic group that refrained (as much as possible) to intermarry with outsiders for over 3000 years. There are obvious differences between Ashkenazi, Sephardic and Mizrahi Jews, but they tend to be genetically close within each group (esp. Ashkenazi). So do J2 Jews look different from R1a Jews, J1 Jews, R1b Jews, Q1b Jews or G2 Jews? I believe it may be possible for an experienced observer (which would require a lot more practice, in my case) to guess the haplogroup based on the particular 'aura' or character associated with a specific haplogroup.

For example, most Levite Jews supposedly belong to Y-haplogroup R1a, while many Cohens are either J1 or J2. French philosopher Bernard Henri Levy (pictured below) is a Levite and therefore should fit my R1a image of the earnest man, which he very much is.





Benjamin Netanyahu and Bernard Henri Levy do not look similar at all in terms of autosomal DNA, but they have the same earnest 'atmosphere'. It may just be a coincidence, but that's what I found among the R1a people I know (celebrities + Facebook + friends). It also just happened to be that countries with high percentages of R1a tend to be more earnest and straightforward. That is as true for Scandinavians and Germans as for northern Slavs, Iranians or Pakistanis. Its harder to say for Indians as R1a is found mostly among the higher caste Hindus and vary a lot by region. But just compare outspoken and rather aggressive Pakistani with the much milder and more reserved Bangladeshi. They are a world apart despite sharing a similar culture. 



In contrast, I don't know what David Schwimmer's haplogroup is, but I would say J2a based on the type I described at the beginning of this thread. He clearly doesn't have that R1a look.




And it's not just because of the difference of age. Dustin Hoffman doesn't have the R1a look either. I'd say also J2a too.



The gentle, boyish charm of J2a men is more obvious when he was younger, but still shows with age.





Just to give an example of a non-Jewish actor who has the J2a looks (this is American actor John Larroquette, of French descent)

----------


## Fluffy

This has be the most ridiculous thing I've ever read on these forums. Y DNA Haplogroups making people act a certain way. What the hell? Am I missing something here? Are we still talking in reality? Where am I? If the OP wasn't who he is I would say more. But because of who he is Ill play nice.

----------


## A. Papadimitriou

Apophenia, Confirmation bias.

----------


## DuPidh

> Maciamo, since when are you into PSEUDO science? This is one of the very few times that you disappoint me...


Actually he half right. I have little knowledge in genetics but everyday life proves some of his assumptions. For instance if two painters get married its very likely their child will inherit some painting traits. If two non singers marry the likelihood their child becoming a singer is remote. The genetic law of inheritance gives his assumption scientific argument. But we know that major y haplogroups have evolved also so putting all R1a folks under the same umbrella in terms of their mental characteristics is exaggeration. But he is right in terms of physical appearance.

----------


## Goga

> Actually he half right.


He is not even 0.001% right. Look, if he talked about the 'genes' and the inheritability of those genes, then I would agree with him. I do believe that races can pass on and lose some genes. If your parents are smart, the chance is bigger that you're also smart. But he is not talking about the genes, but about the Y-DNA haplogroups. I mean, WHAT ??!!


What if I would recognize myself outside my own haplogroup and lean more toward that different haplogroup , would I be a some kind of *trans*-haplogrouper???


People can identify themselves as an ethnic group (race), by gender (man/female) and sexuality (homo/hetero), but it is really stupid to link Y-DNA haplogorups to facial characteristics or human nature/personality. Facial characteristics have to do with your race and human nature/personality has something to do with education, by whom you are raised and the human SOUL...

----------


## Fluffy

> He is not even 0.001% right. Look, if he talked about the 'genes' and the inheritability of those genes, then I would agree with him. I do believe that races can pass on and lose some genes. If your parents are smart, the chance is bigger that you' re also smart. But he is not talking about the genes, but about the Y-DNA haplogroups. I mean, WHAT ??!!
> 
> 
> What if I would recognize myself outside my own haplogroup and lean toward that different haplogroup , would I be a some kind of *trans*-haplogrouper???
> 
> 
> People can identify themselves as an ethnic group (race), gender (man/female) and sexuality (homo/hetero), but it is really stupid to link Y-DNA haplogorups to facial characteristics or human nature/personality. Facial characteristics has to do with your race and human nature/personality has something to do with education, by whom you are raised and the human SOUL...


Finally some sanity in this thread.

----------


## Maciamo

> He is not even 0.001% right. Look, if he talked about the 'genes' and the inheritability of those genes, then I would agree with him. I do believe that races can pass on and lose some genes. If your parents are smart, the chance is bigger that you're also smart. But he is not talking about the genes, but about the Y-DNA haplogroups. I mean, WHAT ??!!


FYI, there are over 200 genes on the Y chromosome (against 2000 for the X chromosome), i.e. about 1% of all our genes. Did you think it had no function at all? It's a chromosome like any other. The Y chromosome may be small, but it is larger than chromosomes 21 and 22 and the same size as chromosome 20. Anyway, I think that the difference between male lions, ligers, tigons and tigers convincingly shows that the Y-chromosome does influence looks. The male liger (lion Y-DNA, tiger X-DNA) has the lion's regal look and stern expression that the male tigon (tiger Y-DNA, lion X-DNA) or tiger do not have. Of course some traits like body size are very likely to be either on the X chromosomes or on imprinted autosomal genes, as they affect both genders equally. If you can't understand what I am talking about, perhaps you should refrain from posting in such discussions and read a bit more about genetics.

----------


## Maciamo

> This has be the most ridiculous thing I've ever read on these forums. Y DNA Haplogroups making people act a certain way. What the hell? Am I missing something here? Are we still talking in reality? Where am I? If the OP wasn't who he is I would say more. But because of who he is Ill play nice.


Why is it ridiculous to compare the looks of _known_ carriers of certain haplogroups across racial groups? Read again, I am not guessing the haplogroup of the four individuals tested in the OP. These were all tested and are all confirmed J2a members. I also posted two confirmed R1a members (von Sydow and Netanyahu) and a very likely R1a based on the surname (Levy). 

Do you also believe like Goga that the Y-chromsome has no function whatsoever. 59 million useless base pairs? It takes only a handful of mutations to get blue eyes (in the genes OCA2 and HERC, both on Chr. 15). Why would thousands of mutations selected by evolution over tens of thousands of years have no impact on behaviour or looks? Why do you think that the Y-chromosome does not affect males attractiveness, male dominance, or other male attributes? I suppose you don't believe in evolution and natural selection either?

----------


## João Soares

I’m guessing this another of those fantasy theories circulating.

It was suggested before that R1b men introduced social hierarchy to wherever they went, unitl FACTS disproved otherwise – the discovery of a cemetery in Varna containing individuals characterized with different materials, suggesting that there were already hierarchy societies in Europe before the coming of R1b males.

Secondly, this theory, if it is one, is entirely based on ones’s ‘feel’. This ‘feel’ or ‘aura’ is entirely subjective, and therefore different to each person’s perception. Since it’s lacking any objectivity, it’s impossible to be generaly applied.

I also expected more from the forum’s administrator, and until facts prove otherwise, I’m restricting haplogroups’ purposes merely to ancestry and migration.

(Not to say that the exemples provided for J2 men were all of the same nationality…)

----------


## Sloven-Vened

> They do look like Y-DNA hg. I1 !!!
> And are you talking about Europe, right? Because *most R1a men*, and I mean *more than 1 billion*, look like him or something...
> 
> This is now an *AVERAGE* modern day R1a fella looks like!


*I think that every man has more haplogrups in genetic informations, not only one. One haplogrup is in most % occurrence. It is reason for various appearance for people with the same haplogrup.*

----------


## Aaron1981

I always thought Netanyahu looked somewhere between Spaniard and Middle Eastern. I would have thought R1b or J2. The R1a-Z93 is a surprise...

You will notice though, the South Asian skull shape and features are similar to a European on many levels with the exception of the dark skin. That is probably why South Asians and Europeans were thought to be of the same racial type by those early anthropologists.


Were there any famous R1b men on the show this season?

The original J2 look.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recep_Tayyip_Erdo%C4%9Fan
http://arthistoryworlds.org/sculpture-from-sumer/

A very handsome variation of what ancient Celtic men probably looked like in modern form. Notice substantial EEF ancestry picked up in Central and SW Europe in traditional Celtic territory. (perhaps from mtDNA H women)
https://wallpaperscraft.com/tag/kit%20harington

----------


## Sloven-Vened

Occurrence of haplogrup R1a in India, is result of Aryans emigration to India. 
It support theory of Cyril Hromnik (Slovakian scientist historian and linguistic expert): conection between India and ancestors of Slavs in Europa.

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads...l=1#post489282

----------


## Sloven-Vened

> I always thought Netanyahu looked somewhere between Spaniard and Middle Eastern. I would have thought R1b or J2. The R1a-Z93 is a surprise...


Jews are not Semites. Semites have dark skin and black hair. Jews are Khazars. Khazars are Germanic nation. Language of Khazars is germanic Yiddish language.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yiddish
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashken...zar_hypothesis
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medical_genetics_of_Jews
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khazar...enazi_ancestry

----------


## DuPidh

> Jews are not Semites. Semites have dark skin and black hair. Jews are Khazars. Khazars are Germanic nation. Language of Khazars is germanic Yiddish language.
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yiddish
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashken...zar_hypothesis
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medical_genetics_of_Jews
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khazar...enazi_ancestry


 :Laughing:  :Delirious:

----------


## Dinarid

I see the opposite of what you described. Men with Haplogroup IJ seem to have longer, more prominent facial features. Have you seen the noses of the stereotypical inhabitant of any country with a high frequency of I or J? I would associate Haplogroup R with youthful features. In reality though I highly doubt this has anything to do with haplogroups. I do still see a connection with above-average height and Haplogroup I.

----------


## Degredado

It may not have any scientific basis, but I have also always visualized these silly physical and mental stereotypes for people of different haplogroups

R1b: smallish body frame, a bit hairy, usually dark haired, quick witted, creative, restless, shows emotions
R1a: blonde hair, pale skin, cold eyes, cold personality, never flinches from a fight
I1, I2: very tall, big boned, big nosed, vigorous, resilient, dutiful, unimaginative, a bit boring
J2, G2a: wavy hair, very dense beard, short or average height, easy going, enjoys life
E1b1b: squat, sly, hot temper

I probably just base these ideas off observations of nationalities/ethnicities where haplogroups X, Y or Z have a high incidence

----------


## Templar

The Tigon/Liger example is interesting. I wonder if a similar thing happens when races mixes.

----------


## Maciamo

> It may not have any scientific basis, but I have also always visualized these silly physical and mental stereotypes for people of different haplogroups
> 
> R1b: smallish body frame, a bit hairy, usually dark haired, quick witted, creative, restless, shows emotions
> R1a: blonde hair, pale skin, cold eyes, cold personality, never flinches from a fight
> I1, I2: very tall, big boned, big nosed, vigorous, resilient, dutiful, unimaginative, a bit boring
> J2, G2a: wavy hair, very dense beard, short or average height, easy going, enjoys life
> E1b1b: squat, sly, hot temper
> 
> I probably just base these ideas off observations of nationalities/ethnicities where haplogroups X, Y or Z have a high incidence


You are describing your image of people in countries with high percentage of a particular haplogroup. This is not at all what I had in mind. You should first consider what the Y-chromosome _can_ influence. It is linked to male sexual traits that develop at puberty. Therefore it is not going to affect skin colour, hair curliness, or the like. It could play a role in how quickly blond hair darkens, as it has been proven that women stay blond longer and that the testosterone surge at puberty quickly darkens the hair of blond children, but oddly enough not equally in all men. One hypothesis is that some haplogroups (like I1 or N1c) have a less darkening effect and these haplogroups were positively selected by natural selection in northern Europe to increase UV ray absorption and vitamin D production.

I also considered the possibility that Y-DNA could affect the way a man's jaw develop. I am not the only one who has observed that people belonging to some haplogroups, such as I1, J1 and J2, tend to have longer faces. But obviously autosomal genes are the prime determinant, as women can also have short or long faces. It just seems to be more pronounced in some men, so Y-DNA could just amplify the role of autosomal genes in that regard.

Body height is one of the most complex genetic traits, determined by dozens of autosomal genes. Some Y-DNA may also amplify it, but I doubt it is substantial.

----------


## João Soares

> But obviously autosomal genes are the prime determinant, as women can also have short or long faces.


I agree with this sentence. If Ydna Haplogroups determine certain behaviours/looks, what would determine them in women?

----------


## Maciamo

> I agree with this sentence. If Ydna Haplogroups determine certain behaviours/looks, what would determine them in women?


I think that Y-DNA can amplify some autosomal traits. Both men and women have hair and muscles, so it's obvious that these things are coded in autosomal DNA. Yet men are hairier and more muscular, especially from puberty when the Y chromosome becomes truly active. It's not just the effect of testosterone, as women who get testosterone injections, even if they become extreme body builders, will never have the same body shape as men, including wide shoulders, stronger jaws and nose and other different facial features. Likewise I have never heard or women getting body hair everywhere like men after using testosterone for years. Once again, not all men develop body hair at the same place. Some only have hair on the arms and legs, while others have hairy chests and even backs. The beard line varies a lot between individuals as well, but, like with receding hairlines, it probably has more to do with androgen receptors on the X chromosome. 

Ultimately, because the X and Y chromosomes evolved together and in competition with one another (with genes occasionally shifting from one to the other), I think that a lot of sexual features depend on the fine interactions between the gene set on both the X and Y chromosome. Consequently, changing genes on the X chromosome will alter masculine traits just as much (if not more) than substituting one Y chromosome for another. It's very complex. That's why the best way to confirm the exact phenotypic effect of the Y chromosome alone would be to create near clones that have only different Y chromosomes. We can't do that in humans for ethical reasons, but nothing prevent us to try on other animals. Dogs, who have facial features that humans are especially familiar with, would seem like good candidates. I wonder if canine Y-DNA varies with breeds, or if they all have mixed Y-DNA? What would happen if we replaced a dog's Y-DNA by a that of wolf or a fox or a jackal ? Would they look and behave differently? Probably since male liger and male tigon are very different despite being each half-lion and half-tiger. Only their X and Y chromosomes differ.

----------


## João Soares

> I think that Y-DNA can amplify some autosomal traits. Both men and women have hair and muscles, so it's obvious that these things are coded in autosomal DNA. Yet men are hairier and more muscular, especially from puberty when the Y chromosome becomes truly active. It's not just the effect of testosterone, as women who get testosterone injections, even if they become extreme body builders, will never have the same body shape as men, including wide shoulders, stronger jaws and nose and other different facial features. Likewise I have never heard or women getting body hair everywhere like men after using testosterone for years. Once again, not all men develop body hair at the same place. Some only have hair on the arms and legs, while others have hairy chests and even backs. The beard line varies a lot between individuals as well, but, like with receding hairlines, it probably has more to do with androgen receptors on the X chromosome. 
> 
> Ultimately, because the X and Y chromosomes evolved together and in competition with one another (with genes occasionally shifting from one to the other), I think that a lot of sexual features depend on the fine interactions between the gene set on both the X and Y chromosome. Consequently, changing genes on the X chromosome will alter masculine traits just as much (if not more) than substituting one Y chromosome for another. It's very complex. That's why the best way to confirm the exact phenotypic effect of the Y chromosome alone would be to create near clones that have only different Y chromosomes. We can't do that in humans for ethical reasons, but nothing prevent us to try on other animals. Dogs, who have facial features that humans are especially familiar with, would seem like good candidates. I wonder if canine Y-DNA varies with breeds, or if they all have mixed Y-DNA? What would happen if we replaced a dog's Y-DNA by a that of wolf or a fox or a jackal ? Would they look and behave differently? Probably since male liger and male tigon are very different despite being each half-lion and half-tiger. Only their X and Y chromosomes differ.


Here's a thought: Take 2 Haplogroups: F and E, 45 000 years BP. Since there were no subclades of these two, there were no E1b1b, I, J, R1a, R1b, etc. Would this mean that every men carying haplogroup F would have the same behaviour and looks, in comparison with men carying haplogroup E, and every men carying haplogroup E would have the same behaviour and looks in comparison with men carying haplogroup F? The diversification would have been close to none, both in behaviour and looks, because, according to this theory, there would be no trait amplifications provided by E1b1b, I, J, R1b, etc. and all the men would have been absolutely (or almost absolutely) the same.
But the Y chromosome did mutate in time, and I think the main question here is – why? Environment? The intrinsic nature of the self (?!) . Is there any men alive carying haplogroup F - without any subclades? Does that man have a personality? Or is he the most average person on the planet?(I must say, however, that I'm no expert on genetics)

----------


## arvistro

Well, R1a, I1, I2 whatever, those are all arbitrary things. 
Why split at level R1a/R1b? Perhaps we should look higher at R1 or go deeper into R1a subclades. 
Then we should also look at similarities of level NO, P, IJ, etc.

----------


## Maciamo

> Well, R1a, I1, I2 whatever, those are all arbitrary things. 
> Why split at level R1a/R1b? Perhaps we should look higher at R1 or go deeper into R1a subclades. 
> Then we should also look at similarities of level NO, P, IJ, etc.


Actually the defining mutations of major haplogroups are not all that arbitrary. Most top level haplogroups suffered major bottlenecks during the Last Glacial Maximum. If you look at the phylogenetic tree (either on Yfull.com or Isogg.org), you will see that haplogroups are defined by _a lot_ of mutations, often over 100, while subclades have just a few or even just one. For example (the mutation in brackets is just one of the defining mutations, usually the first identified or the most well known):

E1b1b (M125) : 148 defining mutations
- E1b1b1a (M78) :: 77 defining mutations
G : over 300 defining mutations
-G2a (P15) : 50 defining mutations
I1 : 301 defining mutations
I2 : 64 defining mutations
-I2a1 (M436) 55 defining mutations
-I2a2 (P37) : 28 defining mutations
J1 : 185 defining mutations
J2 : 30 defining mutations
-J2a (M410) : 117 defining mutations
R1a : 102 defining mutations
R1b (M343) : 28 defining mutations
-R1b-V88 : 75 defining mutations
-R1b-P297 : 33 defining mutations
--R1b-M269 : 100 defining mutations

These are of course cumulative and I skipped some intermediary subclades. 

Additionally, as I mentioned before, some haplogroups carry mutations in the coding section of important genes, and therefore are much more likely to cause visible changes in looks or behaviour. This is the case for haplogroups BT, DE, E*, J*, R*, R1a1, R1b-SRY2627, R1b-M222, and T*. I don't think it is a coincidence that these mutations happen to fall right in the node of major historical expansion and define top level haplogroups or very major subclades (R1a1, which means nearly 100% of all R1a people alive today). Even R1b-M222, which is a very young subclade (TMRCA 1900 years before present) now makes up a very considering part of paternal lineages in the British Isles and in the English-speaking world. What exactly is the evolutionary advantage of M222 men, I don't know, but there seems to be one, otherwise this subclade among dozens of L21 subclades would not have become so successful.

The number of mutations between R1b1b (P297) and R1b1b2 (M269) is absolutely stunning. Only about 3500 years elapsed between the two, but M269 acquired 100 new mutations, about 10 per generation ! I cannot think of any other haplogroup that developed such large number of mutations in such a short time. Now is it a coincidence that that very lineage suddenly expanded from a minor Caucasian or Steppe cow herder lineage to a world dominant lineage found on all continents in just a few thousands years? I don't think so. Some of these mutations must have had an effect on the behaviour of these R1b men. We are talking about 100 mutations here, three times more than Paleolithic I* got to become I2a2 over 20,000 years later ! That's not a minor change.

The Y chromosome is the fastest evolving chromosome. Despite the fact that we share 98% of our genome with chimpanzees, our Y chromosomes have already become 30% different. It has been suggested that this is because of the competitive nature of reproduction and that the most advantageous Y chromosomes get selected. However if reproductive fitness was the only role of Y-DNA, we should expect little change over time. If the machinery works properly, why change it? Mutations are actually more likely to damage a fertility tried and tested over millions of years. Surely Y-DNA has other evolutionary implications. One of the biggest differences between the chimpanzees, the gorillas and humans is their respective sexual behaviours. Chimps are extremely promiscuous and use sex as a entertainment and as a bargaining tool, while gorillas are very faithful but live in harems around a dominant male. Humans are somewhere in between, but human behaviour also varies considerably by region and by historical culture. Did Y-DNA influence male behaviour before religions, cultures and laws started regulating sexual behaviour? I think it's an idea worth exploring.

----------


## arvistro

> Only about 3500 years elapsed between the two, but M269 acquired 100 new mutations, about 10 per generation !


Are you sure math adds up? 
100 mutations per 3,500 years, that would be 1 mutation per 35 years. 10 per generation would make generation 350 years long?

And I still stick to it being arbitrary. 
R1b - M269 has 100 mutations as per you
R1b - only 28. Why are we looking for commonalities at R1b/R1a level, when in fact, R1b - M269 is 100 mutations different from R1b?

----------


## Maciamo

> Are you sure math adds up? 
> 100 mutations per 3,500 years, that would be 1 mutation per 35 years. 10 per generation would make generation 350 years long?


Sorry, of course it is 1 per generation.




> And I still stick to it being arbitrary. 
> R1b - M269 has 100 mutations as per you
> R1b - only 28. Why are we looking for commonalities at R1b/R1a level, when in fact, R1b - M269 is 100 mutations different from R1b?


When I am referring to haplogroup R1b, I always mean modern subclades of R1b unless otherwise specified. For Europeans that is almost always subclades downstream of R1b-M269. Anyway, if you understood anything about what I intended to say about cumulative mutations you wouldn't be asking such questions. You can spend your time counting all the mutations from R1b* to say R1b-M222, or a deep clade under R1b-U106 like L180, to get an idea of the hundreds of mutations that distinguish an R1b* man from 20,000 years ago to a modern R1b person. I don't have any time to waste on this. Anyway, not all mutations are equal, and a mutation in the coding section of a gene carries far more evolutionary weight than any other random mutation. Do you sincerely believe that it is a coincidence that such important mutations came to define the three most successful male lineages in human history: namely haplogroups E (covering most of Africa), J (from the Mediterranean to South Asia), and R (present at high frequencies in most of western Eurasia and South Asia)? Other haplogroups didn't get these super-mutations and they all waned as a result.

If we only considering super-mutations in the coding section of Y-chromosomal genes to define haplogroups, there would only be these haplogroups.

A
- BT (including haplogroups C, DxD2, F, G, H, I, K, L, M, N, OxO2b, P, Q, S)
-- DE
--- D2
--- E* (including E1a, E1b1a, E1b1b, etc.)
-- J* (including J1 and J2)
-- O2b
-- R*
--- R1a1
--- R1b-SRY2627
--- R1b-M222
-- T*

Note that these supermutations are extremely rare events. Out of the billions of men who were born in the course history, each with a few mutations on their Y chromosome, only these few were positive enough to be selected and spread. The mutations for D2 and J are identical (12f2.1), so they must be doing something right. Oddly, the R1a1 SRY mutation is a back mutation from haplogroup BT, so R1a1 men are like those of haplogroup A but with the supermutation of R*.

It's interesting that the two main Y-DNA lineages among the Japanese happen to be D2 (40%) and O2b (31%), although nine other top level Y-haplogroups are present in the country. Why is it exactly those carrying super-mutations that came to replace all others? It's not because the most recent invader replaced older lineages. Japan was only invaded once, by the Yayoi people from Korea/China from 500 BCE. Yet D2 is descended from the aboriginal Mesolithic inhabitants (alongside C1 and D1), while O2b came with the Yayoi (alongside C3, NO, N, O1, O2a, O3 and Q). Not a coincidence. Evolution at work.

Here is another one. Ireland and western Scotland have about 80% of R1b. With Norheast Spain (Basque country and Catalonia), this is the highest percentage of R1b in Europe. What are the most common deep clades in each region (under L21 and DF27 respectively) ? R1b-M222 in Ireland and western Scotland, and R1b-SRY2627 in Catalonia. Another coincidence? Even though L21 and DF27 have dozens of branches, M222 managed to seize up 28% of Irish lineages (35% of all R1b and 40% of R1b-L21) and SRY2627 25% of Catalan ones (38% of all R1b). I'd bet that their frequency has been gradually increasing over time.

----------


## arvistro

So, N and Q is not on the list.
Q spread over both Americas, N replaced half of supermutated R1a in Baltics...

Chinese are O3 right? Also doomed to vane?

Or belonging to BT or even A is enough? :)

----------


## Maciamo

> So, N and Q is not on the list.
> Q spread over both Americas, N replaced half of supermutated R1a in Baltics...
> 
> Chinese are O3 right? Also doomed to vane?
> 
> Or belonging to BT or even A is enough? :)



Haplogroup Q colonised an uninhabited continent. What's your point? No competition there. 

N1c is older than R1a. It started in the Manchurian Neolithic (see Yinqiu Cui et al. (2013)) and reached Northeast European with the Comb Ceramic culture from 4200 BCE, long before the Corded Ware culture. It's R1a1a that replaced N1c, not the other way round (although there were surely R1b* and R1a* in Northeast Europe, in addition to other lineages like I and Q1a, before the Comb Ceramic, as attested by the Karelian Mesolithic genomes).

O2b is found essentially in Japan and Korea, where it started replacing the other C3, N1 and O3 lineages that were predominant in North Chinese Neolithic cultures tested so far. O3 makes up nearly 60% of Han Chinese lineages and often much more (up to 100%) in other ethnic groups from China. Three deep clades of haplogroup O (O2a1c1a-F11, O2a2b1a2a1-F46, O3a2c1a-M117 in the ISOGG 2016 nomenclature) were recognised by Shi Yan et al. (2014) as being markers of the Chinese Neolithic expansion, and these three subclades account for 40% of modern Han lineages. If O2b had originated in China, the Chinese genetic landscape might be very different now. 

Then don't misunderstand me, the evolutionary advantage might simply be a higher fertility or slightly higher ratio of boys to girls. The Chinese have a long tradition of killing baby girls as boys are seen as more useful among the peasants (and less costly as they don't need a dowry). That kind of tradition of courses messes with the natural selection of Y chromosomes.

----------


## arvistro

I specifically mentioned Baltic N (M2783) which has tmrca of 600 bce, expanded to 40% in Balts way after Comb Ceramic or CW. 

Also I am ready to bet there were expansion of I1 or I2 subclades too. Anyway I would be surprised if say at 0 AD, there were Significant higher proportion of I1 or I2 vs R1s than today. would be curious to see stats.

----------


## Maciamo

> I specifically mentioned Baltic N (M2783) which has tmrca of 600 bce, expanded to 40% in Balts way after Comb Ceramic or CW. 
> 
> Also I am ready to bet there were expansion of I1 or I2 subclades too. Anyway I would be surprised if say at 0 AD, there were Significant higher proportion of I1 or I2 vs R1s than today. would be curious to see stats.


Obviously good genes or advantageous mutations are not the whole story. N1c1 could have been spread in the Baltic through royal or noble lineages, like the Gediminid dynasty and its offshoots. 

I wouldn't put too much emphasis on the Y-DNA replacements among the Iron Age or medieval Finns or Saami as they had tiny populations or only a few thousands members each. It is easy for a "politically" dominant male lineage (think local chieftain or owner of a herd of reindeer) to spread his Y-DNA quickly in such tiny populations. Then when populations quickly grow to reach a few millions thanks to the industrial revolution (as was the case in Finland), we end up with the last dominant tribal Y-DNA covering a big part of a country's population. That is a very special case that defies 'normal' historical developments in more populous regions.

----------


## arvistro

> Obviously good genes or advantageous mutations are not the whole story. N1c1 could have been spread in the Baltic through royal or noble lineages, like the Gediminid dynasty and its offshoots. 
> 
> I wouldn't put too much emphasis on the Y-DNA replacements among the Iron Age or medieval Finns or Saami as they had tiny populations or only a few thousands members each. It is easy for a "politically" dominant male lineage (think local chieftain or owner of a herd of reindeer) to spread his Y-DNA quickly in such tiny populations. Then when populations quickly grow to reach a few millions thanks to the industrial revolution (as was the case in Finland), we end up with the last dominant tribal Y-DNA covering a big part of a country's population. That is a very special case that defies 'normal' historical developments in more populous regions.


But were not R1a and R1b lines spread by politically dominant male lineages of bronze age (and later by politically dominant local grand...grand..sons of earlier politically dominant fathers)? Would R* descendants be so populous today, if not for Yamna?
I actually have nothing against idea of for example, some mutations having more boys than girls or some mutations being less or more fertile or perhaps aggressive. 
Just don't think there is enough data to support it, we would need to find an example of isolated, socialist community with 50/50 say R1a and I2a and give it time to see if R1a becomes dominant.

----------


## Maciamo

> But were not R1a and R1b lines spread by politically dominant male lineages of bronze age (and later by politically dominant local grand...grand..sons of earlier politically dominant fathers)? Would R* descendants be so populous today, if not for Yamna?
> I actually have nothing against idea of for example, some mutations having more boys than girls or some mutations being less or more fertile or perhaps aggressive. 
> Just don't think there is enough data to support it, we would need to find an example of isolated, socialist community with 50/50 say R1a and I2a and give it time to see if R1a becomes dominant.


To some extent yes. But R1b-V88 spread to many parts of Africa (Sahel region especially) long before the Indo-Europeans and without conquering armies. And it achieved it in competition with other haplogroups with supermutations, like E, J and T. Not bad. 

R1b subclades kept spreading around western Europe long after the Bronze Age. Just look at the Basques. The most recent common ancestor of the Basque R1b-M153 only lived 2500 years ago, and most Basques belong to newer subclades further down. Besides, the Basques retained their ancestral non-IE language. This means that R1b-M153 spread naturally and gradually, without conquest or political constraint. 

Only in regions where there was a lot of competition from other haplogroups with supermutations, like in the Balkans and the Middle East with all its E1b1b, J1, J2 and T1a, did R1a and R1b have a harder time to become dominant, despite the numerous military conquests and millennia or political dominance of Indo-European civilisations in the region (Hittites, Luwians, Lydians, Lycians, Armenians, Mitani, Medes, Persians, Achaemenids, Parthians).

----------


## arvistro

> R1b subclades kept spreading around western Europe long after the Bronze Age. Just look at the Basques. The most recent common ancestor of the Basque R1b-M153 only lived 2500 years ago, and most Basques belong to newer subclades further down. Besides, the Basques retained their ancestral non-IE language. This means that R1b-M153 spread naturally and gradually, without conquest or political constraint.


Not sure how is this different from Balts and N-M2783 vs supermutated R1a. Same age, same retain of ancestral (this time IE) language. Without conquest. Not even a single loanword from Finnish that would mean King, rule, chief, etc, etc. Without conquest or political constraint.
Although I suspect some smiths (transition to iron working perhaps?) doing their work in both Basques and Balts. At least in Balts.

Did not V88 spread with cattle? That would explain its popularity better than supermutation.

How I2 could spread so well in Balkans having a lot of competition from other haplogroups with supermutations? Is not I2 the main haplo of Balkans?

----------


## Hauteville

Yes like one R1b from Camerun and one from Ireland.

----------


## Maciamo

I have reflected over the comments posted in this thread. It is extremely important to understand that when I say that Y-DNA could influence one's physical appearance:

1) It is a very minor influence that has mostly to do with how a boy turns into a man at puberty. Autosomal DNA is still the most important for overall appearance.

2) Differences in looks between Y-DNA haplogroups should be greater between very different haplogroups (number of different SNPs), and especially if mutations occur in coding genes. Actually there may not be much difference between subclades of a same haplogroup, or even between haplogroups such as I1 and I2, if there is no change in the coding region.

3) If Y-DNA produces visible physical changes at puberty, these will be most obvious between members of a same ethnic group than between ethnic groups. For example, it may be possible to guess which Jewish man belongs to J2, as opposed to R1a, but it may not be possible to use these same clues for other ethnic groups because of the big differences in autosomal DNA that interfere with overall appearance. So there is no way that a Chinese N1c will look anywhere close to a Europe N1c ! I can't believe I have to explain that, but reading the comments I really feel like I have to explain every thing, even the obvious. A Chinese N1c might look a bit different from a Chinese C3 or O3. A Finnish N1c might be distinguishable from a Finnish I1 or R1a. But never will the Finnish N1c look like anything like a Chinese N1c ! And even within a certain ethnic group, the physical differences attributable to Y-DNA may not be discernible by people who aren't used to carefully analyse and compare facial features.

----------


## Alan

> The general consensus has been that Y-chromosomal DNA only contains a few of genes relating to male fertility and does not influence the carrier's appearance, except of course for the male characteristics influenced by testosterone. I have argued before that some Y-chromosomal mutations, in the coding region, certainly play a role in male behaviour and sexual selection, considering that such mutations typically define major haplogroups or subclades. The more I compare the looks of people whose Y-DNA haplogroup I know, the more I feel like people belonging to the same haplogroup do often (but it's not always that clear) share some common looks.
> 
> I just learned today that Ben Affleck belongs to J2a1-M319, a subclade found mainly Greece and Italy, but especially in Crete. It could have been spread by the Romans to western Europe. Ben Affleck has mixed  Scottish, English, Irish, German, and Swiss ancestry. Regardless of his ancestry, there is something that looks quite J2 about him.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here are some other known J2 people. I would say that they all share a certain relatively gentle boyish look and have a face that is rather oval. These three are all Jewish, but they are very different in type from say Woody Allen or Albert Einstein.
> 
> ...


 Indeed I have had this feeling for long and also mentioned it, I also know that you did argue with this for long. yDNA and mtDNA(for females) does influence the look and some characteristics of people. Also there is difference between the various subclades of a Haplogroup. For example East European R1a (mostly z280)
do have their own characteristic look in comparison to Indo_Iranic Z93 or even North European Z284. 

However there are still characteristics which are typically R1a no matter which subclade. If I compare my Polish friends behave to mine sometimes.

For example Jewish R1a people no matter how light they are scream more Indo_Iranian than Slavic to me. Funny thing is there was some time ago an article that scientist now can reproduce facial and cranial features based on some SNPs and interestingly the Scythian R1a z93 appeared like South Europeans based on cranial than modern East Europeans.

----------


## Alan

> Ben Affleck is extremely R1b looking to me. It looks like J2a1-M319 isn't one of the common J2 branches and may have been in western Europe an extremely long time. It's not like Affleck is a recent immigrant or anything. Most of the waspy Hollywood males look R1b to me. They all have a med-high forehead, squinty eyes, and an oval face. Typical R1b look... The Scandinavian look you don't see all the often in western Europe, is the broader face, high cheekbones, less of the oval/doughy face features that western Euro males often have. ie: Dolf Lundgren, Mads Mikkelsen..etc




There is a reason why y and mtDNA are highlighted in our DNA, if they had no use I doubt they would be highlighted.

People of the same ethnicity will often look more similar to people of completely different aDNA. But the point is the yDNA does give some charactersitics that is seen throughout different ethnicities.

----------


## Alan

> I always thought Netanyahu looked somewhere between Spaniard and Middle Eastern. I would have thought R1b or J2. The R1a-Z93 is a surprise...
> 
> You will notice though, the South Asian skull shape and features are similar to a European on many levels with the exception of the dark skin. That is probably why South Asians and Europeans were thought to be of the same racial type by those early anthropologists.
> 
> 
> Were there any famous R1b men on the show this season?
> 
> The original J2 look.
> 
> ...


I always was convinced he is z93 because he has even more the Iranic look than Middle Eastern. He doesn't look the slightest Spaniard or Levantine to me imo. 


Some typical Z93 facial features are this to me.

http://pbs.twimg.com/media/CGjh_hGUkAALD3T.jpg:small

https://c2.staticflickr.com/6/5292/5...c1f42f470a.jpg

https://ellengeerlings.files.wordpre...10/portret.jpg

http://www.hpg-sehit.com/wene/sehit_...lgani_ayar.jpg

http://tracara.com/wp-content/upload...k-bali-Beg.jpg

https://c1.staticflickr.com/7/6085/6...4dbd5b06_b.jpg

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-pgYnnBSRyQ...rdish-guys.jpg


A strong Characteristic I have noticed among R1a (especially z93 ) are elve like ears which lean towards outside at the top.

Erdogan looks absolutely nothing like a J2, more like a R1a(rather z280)

----------


## Alan

Maciamo here is another one with yDNA J2a 

Dr Oz

----------


## Maciamo

> Maciamo here is another one with yDNA J2a 
> 
> Dr Oz


Thanks, but he was already in the list of famous people on the Haplogroup J2 page. I didn't add the picture as he is a minor celebrity (practically unknown outside the US). I don't add minor celebrities to the Famous Y-DNA members page as it would be too long (millions of potential members over the years).

----------


## Azzurro

> I always was convinced he is z93 because he has even more the Iranic look than Middle Eastern. He doesn't look the slightest Spaniard or Levantine to me imo. 
> 
> 
> Some typical Z93 facial features are this to me.
> 
> http://pbs.twimg.com/media/CGjh_hGUkAALD3T.jpg:small
> 
> https://c2.staticflickr.com/6/5292/5...c1f42f470a.jpg
> 
> ...


Alan, thanks for posting the pics, I have to disagree with Erogdan, I find he looks J2a if anything, one thing I noticed from the pics you posted are that R-Z93 have similar features to J2a particularly the large forehead which for me was a trend I noticed for J2a individuals, also having an oval hairline/head shape for J2a, it seems that even R-Z93 men show a tendency to carry these features as well, this is all theory of course.

----------


## Alan

> Alan, thanks for posting the pics, I have to disagree with Erogdan, I find he looks J2a if anything, one thing I noticed from the pics you posted are that R-Z93 have similar features to J2a particularly the large forehead which for me was a trend I noticed for J2a individuals, also having an oval hairline/head shape for J2a, it seems that even R-Z93 men show a tendency to carry these features as well, this is all theory of course.


Well let's agree to disagree but look at Erdogan, he look much more similar to Netanyahu don't you think, his hairline, forhead and general facial features. 

The reason why J2a and R1a z93 look often very similar is imo, because these are the two Haplogroups which merged most often and earliest after z93 evolved. The very first thing that happened and which actually brought the Indo_Iranian tribes into existence is that R and J merged. Even R1b m343/L23 can look often similar.

Let's be clear almost every moden Indo_Iranian group has *at least* these two Haplogroups R1a z93 and J. From South_Central Asia to West Asia. Even the ancient Indo_Iranians from the Steppes did have these both most often (exception the Alans who were more R1a and G2a heavy). Sarmatians were J and R1a, Among Scythian remains we have R1a and J2a. Iron Age Iranians and Savavid era once had J2a and R1a z93.

No wonder J2 and R1a z93 look similar in features. The hairline is one of the least similarities imo. Otherwise there are many similarities.

----------


## Azzurro

> Well let's agree to disagree but look at Erdogan, he look much more similar to Netanyahu don't you think, his hairline, forhead and general facial features. 
> 
> The reason why J2a and R1a z93 look often very similar is imo, because these are the two Haplogroups which merged most often and earliest after z93 evolved. The very first thing that happened and which actually brought the Indo_Iranian tribes into existence is that R and J merged. Even R1b m343/L23 look very often similar to these two.
> 
> Let's be clear almost every moden Indo_Iranian group has *at least* these two Haplogroups R1a z93 and J. From South_Central Asia to West Asia. Even the ancient Indo_Iranians from the Steppes did have these both most often (exception the Alans who were more R1a and G2a heavy). Sarmatians were J and R1a, Among Scythian remains we have R1a and J2a. Iron Age Iranians and Savavid era once had J2a and R1a z93.
> 
> No wonder J2 and R1a z93 look similar in features. The hairline is one of the least similarities imo. Otherwise there are many similarities.


I agree with you on that one, I thought Netanyahu would have been J2a before this information, but yes Erogdan doesn't have the typical J2a facial features, I guess he would have to test who knows he might even get another clade.

I always suspected the same thing that J2 and R1a merged in the past, it makes sense and the information you persent seems very solid, thanks for the analogy, what other features would you say are consistent with the two and R-L23? You think that maybe even T-M70 might be in this merged group?

----------


## Northener

> It's not so much the traits as the general 'feel' that is similar between those J2 people. It's things like the expression in the eyes. It's hard to explain. Usually, with a bit of international experience, it's possible to guess a person's mother tongue, or at least linguistic family of the mother tongue (e.g. Slavic, Germanic, Romance). It's not based on the person's ethnicity. It works even if a person is an immigrant to the country in question. For example, an East Asian who grew up in France (ideally adopted so as to be sure that French is their native language) will have a different facial expression from an East Asian who grew up in the UK, who will in turn be different from one who grew up in Korea. It's possible to perceive a sort of 'language aura' in one's facial expression. 
> 
> I think that there is also a particular 'aura' or 'feel' for haplogroups. R1a men look more earnest and forthright. J2a men look easy-going, amiable and diplomatic/commercial. I1 people seem levelheaded and sociable. E1b1b people appear to be more passionate and relentless. Those are just my personal impressions.


@maciamo I doubt if y DNA has that kind of influence, you can take my family as an example, until now in Netherlands above the Rhine there are only two family cases of E-V22 (= original Egyptian YDNA), both most probably linked with the soldiers of the Spanish army during the Dutch liberation war. In my family case with the Battle of Boksum 1586. Afterwards this is always mingled with non Egyptian or Mediterranean Mt DNA, but I doubt it if this Y DNA until know has resulted in an Egyptian "look and feel" or aura as you called it.....or am I wrong.....?
















Spanis


Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum

----------


## Maciamo

> @maciamo I doubt if y DNA has that kind of influence, you can take my family as an example, until now in Netherlands above the Rhine there are only two family cases of E-V22 (= original Egyptian YDNA), both most probably linked with the soldiers of the Spanish army during the Dutch liberation war. In my family case with the Battle of Boksum 1586. Afterwards this is always mingled with non Egyptian or Mediterranean Mt DNA, but I doubt it if this Y DNA until know has resulted in an Egyptian "look and feel" or aura as you called it.....or am I wrong.....?


I see that you did not understand at all what I meant. I mean not even one bit. I don't know if it's because I failed to express myself correctly or because it's the kind of topic where people come with their preconceived ideas and just think A when I say B, no matter how many times I say it's B, just because there is no concept for B in their mind yet.


I wrote in several posts above (#50, #52) that Y-DNA's influence, be it on phenotype or fertility, varies because of special mutations (or insertions/deletions) that affect Y-chromosomal genes. I explained that 99% of Y-DNA SNP's are silent mutations that do not alter at all gene function, and that only a few polymorphisms seem to have had enough impact to have been selected by evolution. I wrote a full article on this, which I linked twice from this thread. Have you even read it? Because if you haven't it's like discussing a new paper and not even checking the paper in question. 


In short, as far as I have been able to establish from my research in the thread on Y-chromosomal polymorphisms, there is probably no phenotypical difference between any E1b1b subclade, be it V22, V13, M81 or M34, because the only gene-altering polymorphisms in E1b1b define haplogroups DE, E and E1b1b. Some gene-altering polymorphisms may only affect fertility. At present I have no way of knowing for sure which of these evolutionarily important polymorphisms affected fertility vs phenotype, or both.


Nevertheless, I have met enough people over the years whose Y-DNA is known to me, and seen many more pictures of famous haplogroup members, to realise that I could guess at least if someone belonged to haplogroup R, E, J or G-I (it's harder to tell G and I apart). I have guessed a few times right. I obviously can't tell the subclade, and I shouldn't be able since 99.9% of all subclades are defined by silent mutations with no phenotypic effect.


I am shocked to read that you would think that I believe that members of haplogroup E-V22 have an Egyptian feel, when haplogroup E has such a wide geographic distribution. I have tried to explain that Y-DNA could simply influence the way the body and mind masculinises at puberty. This may be through something visible like a stronger nose and jaw, or a behavioural phenotype that could increased one's chances of reproduction, like heightened charm/smooh-talking (a trait which I found more common among J2a men), heightened rationality, increased aggressivity/confrotation (E and R1a), increased sense of honour (surprisingly common in populations with lots of E1b1b), etc. It's very difficult to define common traits between haplogroup members because Y-DNA only has a minor effect on looks and behaviour compared to other chromosomes, and other genes as well as upbringing, culture and life experiences may also override any trait. So ideally we should look at trends within people from a same country, culure and ethnic group.

----------


## Northener

> I see that you did not understand at all what I meant. I mean not even one bit. I don't know if it's because I failed to express myself correctly or because it's the kind of topic where people come with their preconceived ideas and just think A when I say B, no matter how many times I say it's B, just because there is no concept for B in their mind yet.
> 
> 
> I wrote in several posts above (#50, #52) that Y-DNA's influence, be it on phenotype or fertility, varies because of special mutations (or insertions/deletions) that affect Y-chromosomal genes. I explained that 99% of Y-DNA SNP's are silent mutations that do not alter at all gene function, and that only a few polymorphisms seem to have had enough impact to have been selected by evolution. I wrote a full article on this, which I linked twice from this thread. Have you even read it? Because if you haven't it's like discussing a new paper and not even checking the paper in question. 
> 
> 
> In short, as far as I have been able to establish from my research in the thread on Y-chromosomal polymorphisms, there is probably no phenotypical difference between any E1b1b subclade, be it V22, V13, M81 or M34, because the only gene-altering polymorphisms in E1b1b define haplogroups DE, E and E1b1b. Some gene-altering polymorphisms may only affect fertility. At present I have no way of knowing for sure which of these evolutionarily important polymorphisms affected fertility vs phenotype, or both.
> 
> 
> ...


Thanks for the reply and explanations! The basic thing is that I think you overestimate the influence of Y-DNA. Especially when you speak about**: "I think that there is also a particular 'aura' or 'feel' for haplogroups." I think that's more nurture than nature. You make it almost supernatural. I doubt that....nothing more nothing less.

And speaking about character issues like " heightened rationality, increased aggressivity/confrotation... increased sense of honour" there are besides the environment al lot more genes at stake....

----------


## Maciamo

> Thanks for the reply and explanations! The basic thing is that I think you overestimate the influence of Y-DNA. Especially when you speak about**: "I think that there is also a particular 'aura' or 'feel' for haplogroups." I think that's more nurture than nature. You make it almost supernatural. I doubt that....nothing more nothing less.



Supernatural? I have no idea what you are talking about. I don't believe in supernatural.





> And speaking about character issues like " heightened rationality, increased aggressivity/confrotation... increased sense of honour" there are besides the environment al lot more genes at stake....



Of course there are much more gens at stake! I assumed that everybody knew that. Not only is there many non-Y-chromosomal genes involved, but the environment, upbringing and life experiences all play an influence. Additionally, the effects on Y-DNA would be strongest among young men (mid-teens to mid-twenties) when their testosterone and urge to reproduce is at its strongest. Prepubescents boys would not be affected at all. And elderly men with low testosterone and degenerating Y chromosomes (yes, Y-chromosomes in the body's cells tend to fray away more quickly than other chromosomes when telomeres shorten with age) would also see the effect on Y-DNA fade with age.


Character is difficult to measure, so let's take an example of physical trait. Let's imagine that Y-DNA had a effect on nose length (not completely absurd since men have bigger noses than women and the difference develops at puberty). The main genes involved in nose size, shape, etc. would obviously be autosomal. Y-DNA may just act as an amplificator, a bit like epigenetic changes that wrap histones more tightly, or conversely loosen their grip, to activate or inhibit genes. For example it is known that histone modification is implicated in the regulation spermatogenesis, so the role of Y-DNA in epigenetics is well established. 


So let's say individual A has inherited a set of autosomal genes associated with very short noses, and individual B has other gene variants linked to very prominent noses. If both have the same Y-DNA (or at least useful Y-DNA mutations, so haplogroup subclades don't really matter in most cases), only autosomal genes will account for the difference in nose length in adulthood. Let's say that individual A's nose is 4 cm longer than B's is 6 cm. Now if we take too other individuals (C and D) with the exact same autosomal genes for nose morphology as individuals A and B, but that they both carry another type of Y chromosome, known to amplify nose length (there isn't any Y-DNA know to do that at present - it's just hypothetical). The difference might be just a 10% increase on autosomal variations, so 4.4 cm for C and 6.6 cm for D. In other words, B's nose is still considerably longer than C's, even though C possess a Y-DNA haplogroup associated with longer noses. Yet, overall, in a population where the Y-DNA for long nose is very common, most people will have longer noses than in an autosomally similar population with different Y-DNA types. 

In this example, one way of knowing the additional impact of Y-DNA on top of autosomal genes, without knowing which autosomal genes are involved, would be to compare nose lengths between men and women of a same ethnic group, and calculate averages (out of thousands of samples, as individual autosomal variations can be huge) by Y-DNA haplogroup within that population. 

Now the nose was just an arbitrary example that I used because it is easy to visualise. The same would apply for other traits I described like rationality, dominance or aggressiveness. It all boils down essentially to autosomal genes, but Y-DNA could amplify some sexually relevant traits one way or another. Those amplifications are more visible at the scale of a whole population, especially if one haplogroup is strongly dominant, and influences all autosomal variations in the same direction.


I hope that clarifies what I intended to convey.

----------


## Northener

> Supernatural? I have no idea what you are talking about. I don't believe in supernatural.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Of course there are much more gens at stake! I assumed that everybody knew that. Not only is there many non-Y-chromosomal genes involved, but the environment, upbringing and life experiences all play an influence. Additionally, the effects on Y-DNA would be strongest among young men (mid-teens to mid-twenties) when their testosterone and urge to reproduce is at its strongest. Prepubescents boys would not be affected at all. And elderly men with low testosterone and degenerating Y chromosomes (yes, Y-chromosomes in the body's cells tend to fray away more quickly than other chromosomes when telomeres shorten with age) would also see the effect on Y-DNA fade with age.
> 
> 
> ...



Dear Macionmo af course I can understand your intentions.
A few remarks:
1. Your basic argumentation, with your nose example, in this posting is "as-if". The only thing we now certain for Y-DNA is the sober remark of LeBrok: "Y DNA makes a man out of a woman. If there was no Y chromosome there wouldn't be men, only women. As we know a man is somewhat different from a woman in behaviour and a look. So, yes to the main question." Nothing more nothing less. We simply don't know more than this, at least there is no clear evidence, for the fact that Y-DNA has an effect beyond that. But you approach the effect of Y-DNA as if it has broader "character" and even into "aura" consequenties. So at this moment you create an elephant out of it which may be in reality still is a little fly....
2. The differences in Y-DNA and the labeling is a human projection. A construct. The differences are "copy failures". We don't know which effect this "copy failures" have. Is it important for human behavior or is it junk DNA material n'importe quoi. We simply don't know.
3. What makes the influence of Y-DNA of one specific ancestor that big? Ok we come from a situation were the paternal line was important. But that's a social construct, opinion based, not an biological one. What makes his influence on my genotype, phenotype, behavior, "aura", "Feel" or whatsoever that big!? In my case the Y-DNA (a in Northwestern Europe very rare YDNA) came most probably in 1586 in my family. For me that's 12 generations ago. What makes the influence of this single person bigger than the other 4095 (double ancestors not counted)? In some way you can consider this as a kind of Dr. Vogel homeopathy ;)

----------


## Northener

[QUOTE=Maciamo;493621]Supernatural? I have no idea what you are talking about. I don't believe in supernatural.

Dear Maciamo,

Ever in doubt and out of curiosity I did further "deskresearch". This has changed my view. There is some research about the effect of Y-DNA and the differences within it, it's indeed about "typical male disorders" ;)

*- Brain function:
*Despite its small size, and limited gene content, we have argued here that the Y chromosome may exert a considerable influence on brain function. As a consequence of its inheritance pattern, genes upon it may help to define male-specific brain phenotypes, and hence male-typical behaviours. An alternative perspective is that, in some cases, Y-linked genes may act to attenuate sex differences (e.g. where the Y homologue of an X-linked escaping inactivation performs a functionally equivalent role). In this context, Dewing and colleagues suggested that, in rats, ‘Sry could compensate for a factor that is only present in females and maintains tyrosine hydroxylase expression in substantia nigra neurons’, positing high levels of estrogens in females as such a factor [53]. A major goal for future work will be to describe the brain functions of Y-linked genes in terms of their relevance to selective evolutionary forces acting on the chromosome, such as sexual antagonism. Further studies on the Y chromosome will provide insights into the biological basis of neural sexual differentiation (or lack thereof), and will clarify the molecular basis of sex biases in common neuropsychiatric disorders." 
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/art...2/#!po=50.0000

Result: unclear, need to further research

*- Aggressive behavior:
*Studies show that personality dimensions such as aggression are influenced by genetic factors and that allelic variants located on the Y chromosome influence such behavior. We investigated polymorphisms on the male-specific region of the human Y chromosome in 156 unrelated males from the same ethnic background, who were administered the Punjabi translation of the Buss and Perry Aggression Questionnaire that measures four aspects that constitute aggressive behavior, i.e. physical aggression, verbal aggression, anger, and hostility. A value of .85 for Cronbach's coefficient alpha indicates considerable internal consistency and suggests that the psychometric properties of the aggression questionnaire can be adapted for the Pakistani population. A mean score+/-SD of 69.70+/-19.95 was obtained for the questionnaire. Each individual was genotyped following a phylogenetic hierarchical approach to define evolutionary Y haplogroups. Five Y haplogroups that are commonly found in Eurasia and Pakistan comprised 87% (n=136) of the population sample, with one haplogroup, R1a1, constituting 55% of the sampled population. A comparison of the total and four subscale mean scores across the five common Y haplogroups that were present at a frequency > or =3% in this ethnic group revealed no overall significant differences. However, effect-size comparisons allowed us to detect an association of the haplogroups R2 (Cohen's d statistic=.448-.732) and R1a1 (d=.107-.448) with lower self-reported aggression mean scores in this population.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18942110

Result: positive effect of the influence of different Y-DNA

*- Alcoholism:
*Our results indicate that the risk of alcoholism in Finnish males is influenced by differences in Y chromosomes. Risk ratios suggest that males within clades _1_-_49_, _1_-_21_, and _1_-_57_ were 1.5 times more likely to be alcoholic than males with other Y haplotypes, and the risk for alcohol dependence with ASPD was increased 2-fold within clade _1_-_57_. However, the majority of the risk of alcoholism in these Finnish males is not Y chromosome-associated, and in fact, alcohol dependence is observed with Y haplotypes distributed throughout the cladogram. Twin studies suggest that alcoholism has a heritability of ≈50% (50, 51). Using this figure and data from our population sample, we estimate that Y chromosome variability may account for ≈7% of the total variance and 15% of the genetic variance of alcoholism in these Finnish males. These values are consistent with our present understanding of an etiology of alcoholism that encompasses contributions from many environmental factors and multiple genetic loci.https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC22445/

Result: positive effect of Y-DNA and the difference within it.

*- Autism:*
Taken together, these results indicate that there is no specific Y chromosome haplogroup in association with autism. However, a direct role of one or more Y chromosomal genes in the predisposition to the syndrome cannot be excluded. Indeed, the Y chromosome has a relatively high frequency of de novo point mutations or deletions compared to other chromosomes, so the appearance of neo-mutations leading to predisposition to autism would not be detected by a simple definition of haplogroups.
In conclusion, within the limits of association studies, this investigation supports the absence of a specific Y chromosome effect in autism but analysis of candidate genes may be necessary to exclude a direct role of the Y chromosome in autistic disorder.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1899172/

Result: negative effect, but partly still unclear.

Made my view more nuanced.....may be the effect is bigger than I supposed!

----------


## Alan

> Dear Macionmo af course I can understand your intentions.
> A few remarks:
> 1. Your basic argumentation, with your nose example, in this posting is "as-if". The only thing we now certain for Y-DNA is the sober remark of LeBrok: "Y DNA makes a man out of a woman. If there was no Y chromosome there wouldn't be men, only women. As we know a man is somewhat different from a woman in behaviour and a look. So, yes to the main question." Nothing more nothing less. We simply don't know more than this, at least there is no clear evidence, for the fact that Y-DNA has an effect beyond that. But you approach the effect of Y-DNA as if it has broader "character" and even into "aura" consequenties. So at this moment you create an elephant out of it which may be in reality still is a little fly....
> 2. The differences in Y-DNA and the labeling is a human projection. A construct. The differences are "copy failures". We don't know which effect this "copy failures" have. Is it important for human behavior or is it junk DNA material n'importe quoi. We simply don't know.
> 3. What makes the influence of Y-DNA of one specific ancestor that big? Ok we come from a situation were the paternal line was important. But that's a social construct, opinion based, not an biological one. What makes his influence on my genotype, phenotype, behavior, "aura", "Feel" or whatsoever that big!? In my case the Y-DNA (a in Northwestern Europe very rare YDNA) came most probably in 1586 in my family. For me that's 12 generations ago. What makes the influence of this single person bigger than the other 4095 (double ancestors not counted)? In some way you can consider this as a kind of Dr. Vogel homeopathy ;)


Actually to be fair, Maciamo gave a reasonable example with Lion/Tiger hybrids to assume that yDNA does indeed influence some physical and mental traits. 

It is no coincidence that male Lions and female tigers always become the larger typed Liger while female Lions and male Tigers become the physically little smaller and different looking Tigons.

There is a reason why y and mt chromosomes are highlited in our genome by being bigger in comparison to the other. 


But as Maciamo correctly noticed it is always a combination of both (in men) y chromosome on one hand and aDNA on the other with enviromental and ethno_cultural factors.

aDNA and yDNA are not fixated parameters. Every set of DNA has an interval of physical and mental end results.

Let me try to give an example.

You got two lookwise identical cars from the same manufacturer, withthe only difference that Car A: has max speed of 240 km/H , Car B: 300 km/H and difference in Horsepower. 

Now both have quite a huge interval of speed they can be driven at (A => 1-240 and B=> 1-280 km/h).

Now assuming both cars are driven by the same driver with the same driving skills( same set of aDNA), the way how the cars are driven wll be almost the same. Depending on where the Cars are driven (enviromental/ethno_cultural factor), one could be on average at 160 km/h while the other only at 60 km/h because the environment is different.

Now imagine both cars being driven on the same race track (same enviromental/cultural influence) by the same driver (same set of aDNA) with no speed limit (difference in maximum potential due to different maxspeed and horsepower ) one car will not only drive faster due to different max speed but also reach it's maximum speed a little faster due to difference in Horsepower. And this difference in my example would be the y and mtDNA effect, especially yDNA in males.

As you might have noticed I took for my example two cars with quite similar max speed with only a little difference of 40 km/H because I tried to make sure that this would rather be one of the smaller factors in my example since I believe it is a smaller factor in comparison to aDNA (the driver) but it is still an important factor! Yet every driver has an interval of possibilities of how he can drive (even the slowest driver has) and these possibilities next to his skills are dictated by his own skills in combination to enviromental factors. Enviromental differences would be the biggest unknown factor depending on where you live(drive) if it is the same aDNA but on the completely opposite part of the world (very hot vs very cold and very conservative vs very liberal) it can have huge effect on your physical/mental appearance.

----------


## Expredel

> Sorry, of course it is 1 per generation.


Is 100 mutations in 3500 years based on the full Y chromosome, or 20% of the Y chromosome?

I think yfull sequences only 20% of the Y chromosome, so this would imply 500 mutations in 3500 years. That is 3 mutations for every 21 years. If you look at the available data it comes out at 2.5 mutations per generation, but that doesn't take deletions/insertions into account.


The best way to test your theory is to post 40 pictures of men with similar autosomes who belong to 4 distinct Y haplogroups. Then ask people to pair males who they believe to look similar. Obviously this will not result in 20 pairs, but people should be able to find at least 4 pairs.

If Y haplogroup is of no influence they will be correct 25% of the time.

----------


## Expredel

Btw, some time ago I did a quick test, providing someone with 30 pictures of West European looking men with 10 pictures each of R1a, R1b, and I1. The test subject grouped 6 men together, 5 of which were I1. I'm not familiar with probability math, but it seems to defy the odds.

For R1a and R1b there wasn't an obvious pattern.

----------


## Angela

> Btw, some time ago I did a quick test, providing someone with 30 pictures of West European looking men with 10 pictures each of R1a, R1b, and I1. The test subject grouped 6 men together, 5 of which were I1. I'm not familiar with probability math, but it seems to defy the odds.
> 
> For R1a and R1b there wasn't an obvious pattern.


Can you post the pictures? It might be fun.

----------


## Expredel

> Can you post the pictures? It might be fun.


Alright, got 16 guys who should all belong to either one of two Y haplogroups. I don't know their nationality, but I picked men who I perceived as passable as NW European. Just refer to them as 01, 02, etc. Group them however you wish. I can only attach 4 pictures per post, so give me some time to add the rest.

Picture 01, 02, 03, 04.

01.jpg02.jpg03.jpg04.jpg

----------


## Expredel

Picture 05, 06, 07, 08.

05.jpg06.jpg7.jpg08.jpg

----------


## Expredel

Picture 09, 10, 11, 12.

09.jpg10.jpg11.jpg12.jpg

----------


## Expredel

Picture 13, 14, 15 and 16.

13.jpg14.jpg15.jpg16.jpg

----------


## Angela

These are just guesses, and my "yardstick" is just based on the best fit in terms of country, and which y lines are most prevalent in those countries.

R1b: 1, 2, 8, 12, 13, 15

I don't think 5 looks northwestern, but I'd say R1b just because there aren't many R1a or I1 southern Europeans.

I1 or R1a: 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 14, 16

----------


## Expredel

I'll give other people a chance to join in. I think most of these men are American. A better method might be to look for a striking resemblance between two faces, our brains are really good at recognizing faces after all. I don't think a rational approach works because we don't know what to look for.

----------


## Azzurro

Expredel, the two haplogroups are R1b and I1? Or is it R1b,I1 and R1a?

My Guess for R1b: 01, 02, 04, 05, 08, 13 and 15

My Guess for I1: 07, 09, 10, 11, 16

My Guess for R1a: 03, 06, 12, 14

If there is surprise haplogroups none of those 3, the best candidates are 03, 11, and 14

----------


## Groninger

Very difficult. 06, 07, 10 and 16 look like I1 to me. I have the feeling the features R1b men are more pronounced while they have a sort of dull rational look in the eyes. If they are handsome, they are so in a very masculine way. I1 men tend to have a higher forehead compared to the rest of the face with a sort of naughty look in the eyes. They look more 'cute'. If we compare Charlton Heston and David Beckham or instance, two Germanic looking men admired by women for their looks, I would say Heston is the R1b type while Beckham is the I1 type. Maybe it's nonsense, we'll see if it holds. As to character, looking at famous people, it seems the artisic type is overrepresented in haplogoup I.

----------


## Expredel

These are eight I1 men and eight R1b men. Looking for racial traits is pointless in my opinion, it's better to look for which men might be father and son. The setup is not very scientific, they should all be the same age, from the same nation, and photographed in the same manner.

----------


## Angela

> Very difficult. 06, 07, 10 and 16 look like I1 to me. I have the feeling the features R1b men are more pronounced while they have a sort of dull rational look in the eyes. If they are handsome, they are so in a very masculine way. I1 men tend to have a higher forehead compared to the rest of the face with a sort of naughty look in the eyes. They look more 'cute'. If we compare Charlton Heston and David Beckham or instance, two Germanic looking men admired by women for their looks, I would say Heston is the R1b type while Beckham is the I1 type. Maybe it's nonsense, we'll see if it holds. As to character, looking at famous people, it seems the artisic type is overrepresented in haplogoup I.


Good grief. That's about all I can say about this mishmash.

----------


## sparkey

My guesses:
I1: 01, 03, 06, 08, 09, 12, 14, 15
R1b: 02, 04, 05, 07, 10, 11, 13, 16

I don't have much rational justification, although I guess I tend to associate lighter pigmentation with I1 due to its modern distribution.

----------


## Groninger

> Good grief. That's about all I can say about this mishmash.


It seems my feminine instincts are better developed than yours.

----------


## Angela

> It seems my feminine instincts are better developed than yours.


We're dealing, as much as possible, with science here, not "instincts" of any kind. No crystal ball gazing or messages from aliens either.

----------


## Groninger

I mean look at Warren Buffet, what a wonderful, beautifulman… Then compare him to the singer Jimmy Buffet. I had never heard of him, butI looked up his picture and he has precisely the same cheerful boyish look inhis eyes. American i1-men are the friendly Yank-type, there is no doubt aboutthat; bonny and blithe and good and gay, with a touch of naughtiness. Take alook also at Bill Clinton and Bill Clinton’s father; even their real name saysit all.

----------


## ngc598

> We're dealing, as much as possible, with science here, not "instincts" of any kind. No crystal ball gazing or messages from aliens either.


Seriously? People try to determine the Y-haplogroup from the face looks in this thread, although there isn't a single gene in the Y-chromosome that has something to do with it, and you call that 'dealing with science'? The crystal ball, you mentioned so depreciatively, is definitely no less scientific than this, and let's not even talk about astrology, which has even* methods* which everybody can follow. Where are the methods for this physiognosticohaplodeterminology? You know, science is measuring and defining with methods, which have the capability for falsification (aka proof whether true or false). If this is not the case, it's just playing around. Oh yes, we have this: 'He has such thick eyebrows, he must be haplogroup G!' - Really - is that your perception of science?

Let's face it, this thread is just funny entertainment, no reason to belittle someones opinions. (Well, I guess, I did just the same right now! Bad me!  :Laughing:  )

----------


## Angela

"Here" as on this Board...not, obviously, on this thread. Perhaps you should hold your fire until you can discern the difference between people having fun, and people who may actually be serious.

----------


## Expredel

People are not getting anywhere close so far. To make it easier, this is not a random distribution, so there's a distinct pattern.

----------


## IronSide

Well does mtDNA influence looks as well ?

To me Y-dna and mtdna dont influence looks because that thing is in autosomal however they can be used as an indication to "racial classification" when used correctly.

We can start by defining "pure types" for example the early European hunter gatherers were of haplogroup I and U5 or U2, the populations with the highest frequency of these haplogroups are the saami, baltics, and fennoscandians, unsurprisingly that correlates with western european hunter gatherer admixture (WHG). these populations are tall, have fair hair and eyes, strong jaw,high nose bridge, and deep set eyes, sometimes prominent ears. They are classified as Cromagnoid.

An individual from a population is a mix of "pure types" that participate in the gene pool of that population, the dynamics of European migrations throughout history has produced the perceived types of alpine, dinarid, nordid, mediterranean, atlantic, armenoid ... etc.

Again its Autosomal that defines one's looks, these are just used as a possible indication and they can be wrong.

What do you think of my elegant methodology ? or is it as the british say "a bunch of bollocks"

as for the pictures my guess would be :
R1b : 1,2,7,8,9,13,14,16
I1 : 3,4,12,15
E1b1b: 5
N1c : 6
R1a : 10,11

----------


## Azzurro

> People are not getting anywhere close so far. To make it easier, this is not a random distribution, so there's a distinct pattern.


Is it all odds are I1 and all evens are R1b? I see that I1 has probably more square faces while R1b more round?

----------


## Groninger

> Is it all odds are I1 and all evens are R1b? I see that I1 has probably more square faces while R1b more round?


Perhaps, now that you say so… Guy 4 & 8 look a bit alikeI’d say. And 2 & 6 also, in the sense that they’re both nerdy guys withfunny teeth. But then, 9 & 14 look abit alike as well, 14 could be 9’s father or brother.

----------


## Expredel

> Well does mtDNA influence looks as well ?


mtDNA is several thousand times smaller than yDNA. The question is not whether yDNA influences looks (XY females prove it does) but whether we can tell the Y haplogroups apart.

I find it hard to tell whether 9 has a narrow or wide skull due to his haircut. I'm giving people a little more time to chip in because it's not easy to find pictures so it would be hard to repeat this experiment.

----------


## Northener

> We're dealing, as much as possible, with science here, not "instincts" of any kind. No crystal ball gazing or messages from aliens either.


This attempts to qualify the looks from some kind of Y-DNA are hocus pocus,nothing 'scientific.'

It's like how they have something NW European ok it will R1b or I, I bet you have a fair chance to make the right choice


Sent from my iPad using Eupedia Forum

----------


## Valerius

This thread reminds me of something written long time ago in the old books of Physical Anthropology. There were some observations on the so-called Dinaric phenotype in the Balkans noting that people with such phenotype tend to act like an alpha-males, being more aggressive, more war-like, more spontaneous. Their physical traits are robust, wide jaws, often with cleft chin, great height, athletic body build, long noses. The way they act with all their manliness and aggression seems connected to the Y-chromosome which has something to do with that and their physical traits are a product of higher tostosterone levels which is again connected to the Y-chromosome. The core area of this population is in the countries of ex-Yugoslavia (Western Balkans) and it falls almost in the middle of the I2a-Din YDNA hotspot. There could be some connection. Also, part of the I2a-Din is of local origin and it existed in the same geographical area as now, so it was something common among the ancient Illyrians and Thracians who were considered to be very warlike and aggressive, although that was also ascribed on the Celts and all other barbarians north of the Greeks and the Romans. Otherwise, the Dinaric phenotype is also found in Italy, Germany, France and Iberia where there seem to be no connection to I2a-Din.

----------


## Groninger

Assumingthedifference is wideskullsvsnarrowskulls (as Expredelseemstosuggest) andthere's a pattern in thenumbers as well, I'd say 1, 3, 5, 7, 10, 12, 14 & 16 are i1. Somefamous i-men have pretty big foreheads (Andrew Jackson, Bill Clinton, Peter R de Vries, AdmiralHorty)… Nowsome of youwill say it'sridiculousto say that men of a certainhaplogrouptendto have big foreheads, and as a totalamateur in the field I'm happy tobelievethat, but cansomeone more knowledgablethan me explainto me why? Why is itimpossiblethe Y-chromosomeinfluencestheshape of theforehead?

----------


## Northener

> Assumingthedifference is wideskullsvsnarrowskulls (as Expredelseemstosuggest) andthere's a pattern in thenumbers as well, I'd say 1, 3, 5, 7, 10, 12, 14 & 16 are i1. Somefamous i-men have pretty big foreheads (Andrew Jackson, Bill Clinton, Peter R de Vries, AdmiralHorty)… Nowsome of youwill say it'sridiculousto say that men of a certainhaplogrouptendto have big foreheads, and as a totalamateur in the field I'm happy tobelievethat, but cansomeone more knowledgablethan me explainto me why? Why is itimpossiblethe Y-chromosomeinfluencestheshape of theforehead?


Because the assumed relationship between Y-DNA and phenotype are guesses. No one has prove a correlation between a big forehead and Y-DNA. I guess I don't know any article/prove of it.
Of course there is a relationship between the genotype and phenotype. But your genotype is much more related to your aDNA than your Y-DNA. aDNA, your 22 chromosomes, is much broader more related to your parents and grand parents at both sides of your family. The Y-DNA is much smaller, only from father to son, although much more in depth.
Take my case. My aDNA is typically Northwest European, or you could say North Sea Germanic. My Y-DNA is seldom around the North Sea. Most probably due to a Spanish soldier who had a love affair with my Frisian great great etc grandmother (the romantic version) or was raped at the raid from the Spanish in 1586 (the games of thrones version). That's about 12 generations ago. Afterwards 4095 other man and women shaped my genotype......lots of them with haplotype R1b and I etc the typical NW European Y-DNa haplotypes. Would their influence on my look be subordinated to these Y-DNA!? the influence of 1 person vs. 4095 others? Still could be....but no one has a rational explanation c.q. prove for this!!
If the Y-DNA had such an impact I must 've had some "look and feel" of someone from Egypt/Somalia (E-V22 hotspots and homeland). But no one has ever recognized some features of a North East African in me.....
Not to mention the influence of the environment on your looks the Dutch man of the Golden Age (17th century) was 1.65 and in 2014 about 1.84. 20cm with no essential difference in the Y-DNA or aDNA...so circumstances matter also.

----------


## Angela

> This thread reminds me of something written long time ago in the old books of Physical Anthropology. Th*There were some observations on the so-called Dinaric phenotype in the Balkans noting that people with such phenotype tend to act like an alpha-males, being more aggressive, more war-like, more spontaneous. Their physical traits are robust, wide jaws, often with cleft chin, great height, athletic body build, long noses.* The way they act with all their manliness and aggression seems connected to the Y-chromosome which has something to do with that and their physical traits are a product of higher tostosterone levels which is again connected to the Y-chromosome. The core area of this population is in the countries of ex-Yugoslavia (Western Balkans) and it falls almost in the middle of the I2a-Din YDNA hotspot. There could be some connection. Also, part of the I2a-Din is of local origin and it existed in the same geographical area as now, so it was something common among the ancient Illyrians and Thracians who were considered to be very warlike and aggressive, although that was also ascribed on the Celts and all other barbarians north of the Greeks and the Romans. Otherwise, the Dinaric phenotype is also found in Italy, Germany, France and Iberia where there seem to be no connection to I2a-Din.


Valerius, that sounds like a very good description of the southern Italian man I married, and he's G2a. 

This is one of the reasons I'm skeptical of formulations like this. Traits might be brought into a region by a group bearing a certain yDna, but the coding for those physical traits is on the autosomes. The genetic material on the y would just "masculinize" them even more. That's why there's a girl in my husband's family who looks very like him but just "softer" and not as extreme. 

So, in our situation here, traits brought into a region by a population carrying a certain y signature might spread throughout the group, especially if those traits are dominant. So, you could wind up with men who have the traits but carry another y. 

The y chromosome is small and getting smaller. So far they haven't found anything that would tie to specific physical traits, although it's definitely what makes a man a man and not a woman, and there is probably a complex interplay between the coding there and those on the autosomes.

@Northener,
I like your analysis a lot...I just don't have any more points to allot.

----------


## Groninger

> Because the assumed relationship between Y-DNA and phenotype are guesses. No one has prove a correlation between a big forehead and Y-DNA. I guess I don't know any article/prove of it.
> Of course there is a relationship between the genotype and phenotype. But your genotype is much more related to your aDNA than your Y-DNA. aDNA, your 22 chromosomes, is much broader more related to your parents and grand parents at both sides of your family. The Y-DNA is much smaller, only from father to son, although much more in depth.
> Take my case. My aDNA is typically Northwest European, or you could say North Sea Germanic. My Y-DNA is seldom around the North Sea. Most probably due to a Spanish soldier who had a love affair with my Frisian great great etc grandmother (the romantic version) or was raped at the raid from the Spanish in 1586 (the games of thrones version). That's about 12 generations ago. Afterwards 4095 other man and women shaped my genotype......lots of them with haplotype R1b and I etc the typical NW European Y-DNa haplotypes. Would their influence on my look be subordinated to these Y-DNA!? the influence of 1 person vs. 4095 others? Still could be....but no one has a rational explanation c.q. prove for this!!
> If the Y-DNA had such an impact I must 've had some "look and feel" of someone from Egypt/Somalia (E-V22 hotspots and homeland). But no one has ever recognized some features of a North East African in me.....
> Not to mention the influence of the environment on your looks the Dutch man of the Golden Age (17th century) was 1.65 and in 2014 about 1.84. 20cm with no essential difference in the Y-DNA or aDNA...so circumstances matter also.


Thanks for the explanation, but, although I undertand the Y-chromosome haplogroup does not _determine_ the shape of the forehead, in my mind it is not impossible it _influences_ it. Men have different foreheads than women (bigger, more pronounced brow ridge) and I could imagine that two Y-chromosomes that carry slightly different information, have a slightly different influence on the shape of the forehead (and other parts of the body), that is perhaps difficult to see, but not non-existent. Interesting family history, by the way.

----------


## Groninger

And for the same reason I think it's possible the Y-haplogroup is one of the genetic factors that determine a man's character. We can all agree that men and women are completely different creatures, and even little boys and girls have a very different character. If having a Y-chromosome makes such a difference, why couldn't the Y-haplogroup make a difference as well? Why would it be impossible that men belonging to certain haplogroups are, for instance, more aggressive on average?

----------


## Expredel

> And for the same reason I think it's possible the Y-haplogroup is one of the genetic factors that determine a man's character.


One study among males in Finland showed Y-haplogroup determines 15% of a male's genetic predisposition for alcoholism. If you look at the size of the Y chromosome (it's quite big), its high mutation rate, and the higher level of selective pressure, it's no surprise.

----------


## Angela

I hate to rain on anyone's parade, but...



Still, men are ever vigilant to claim that size doesn't matter...:)

----------


## Groninger

Does the small size of the Y-chromosome prove anything at all? Does "size matter" in genetics? Again, this is all terra incognita for me but common sense tells me the influence of the Y-chromosome is extreme compared to its size because it makes the difference between male and female. Apparently a small amount of genetic information can make a huge difference. I therefore think it is a bit unreasonable to mock or even become angry about the suggestion that the Y-haplogroup is an _influence_ on a man's looks and personality as one factor among others.

----------


## ngc598

> Still, men are ever vigilant to claim that size doesn't matter...:)


Now I'm running into *your* parade...
Size really doesn't matter. Experiments with mice showed that. They copied just two essential genes, the SRY and another one into another chromosome and then killed the Y-chromosome. The resulting clone developed as a normal male. I guess they didn't try to procreate this product, but otherwise there was no difference to other male mice. So in the end it really needs not much to be a male. 

This is the reason why the Y-chromosome shrank so much and still has 80 percent or more junk. The essential gene(s) have to be on a separate chromosome, otherwise the sex determination can't work. But it can't shrink indefinitely, because then it would not be possible to join and separate the X and Y correctly during meiosis. And indeed the shrinkage of the Y-chromosome has diminished strongly, some researcher claim even that it has practically stopped. When we are told that the Y-chromosome develops so fast, we have to ask whether those people mean the whole genome or the essential genes, which to my knowledge don't show much difference to those on other chromosomes.

The result of the Y-evolution is that we have (very few) genes for sex determination, a bunch of genes for reproduction and various genes for cell house keeping, but the latter ones do have some important consequences on cancer related issues and neuronal function. This altering of neuronal functions may lead to behavioural expression, but primarily on dysfunction rather than normal variation of usual behaviour. So in that sense, alcoholism can be theoretically linked to the Y-chromosome, but keep in mind there are one or two women on Earth who are alcoholics as well, and they are not harmed by an altered Y-chromosome gene :)

----------


## Expredel

> Does the small size of the Y-chromosome prove anything at all? Does "size matter" in genetics?


It depends on the definition of small. The Y chromosome makes up 2% of the human genome, but ultimately it's the number of positive mutations that matters, with the evidence suggesting this has to be higher for the Y chromosome.

As for the fun test, the odd numbered men are highly likely to be I1, and the even numbered men are highly likely to be R1b.

So Azzura was correct.

There were several possible patterns, so this suggests R1b may have a more rounded skull than I1, but nothing substantial enough to accurately predict the Y haplogroup of individuals.

----------


## Azzurro

> It depends on the definition of small. The Y chromosome makes up 2% of the human genome, but ultimately it's the number of positive mutations that matters, with the evidence suggesting this has to be higher for the Y chromosome.
> 
> As for the fun test, the odd numbered men are highly likely to be I1, and the even numbered men are highly likely to be R1b.
> 
> So Azzura was correct.
> 
> There were several possible patterns, so this suggests R1b may have a more rounded skull than I1, but nothing substantial enough to accurately predict the Y haplogroup of individuals.


Very interesting, thanks for the shot out and the test.

----------


## Groninger

"Highly likely?" I was under the impression you knew for sure what group these men belonged to. But thanks anyway, it was interesting.

----------


## gidai

G2a is rare, but I found 15+Ötzi  :Smile:  G2a carriers, and I created a poll in G2a forum.
Do they have some common aura in their traits?
1.


2.


Ötzi  :Smile: 



3.


4.


5.


The ones below are from the same page. https://anthonyadolph.co.uk/adolph-a...p-g-genealogy/
6.


7. The first and the third are G2a.


8.


9.


10.


11.


12.


13.


14.


15.

----------


## Jack0123456

African-American comedians the Wayans Brothers are haplogroup O1a2. It was revealed on _Finding Your Roots_.They may be a prime examples...

----------


## Angela

Oh yeah? 

Are these men from the Cameroons prime examples of R1b V88? :)

----------


## Horncastle

Maciamo accused of pseudo science. I thought he was just making an observation. Of all the photos in the thread the one I look most like is Ben Affleck and I am English so perhaps that voids Maciamo's observation. However, like Ben Affleck I am J-M319 and my observations of other J-M319s is that we all look similar. My J-M319 colleagues from the Middle East make the same observations. perhaps the best thing for us to do is just keep quiet about it.

----------


## Wanderer

short answer,

----------


## TaktikatEMalet

Yes, i look like my dad and even more like my grandad

----------


## kingjohn

me too :Wink: 
much more like my dad don't look at all like 
my mother

----------


## Wanderer

I look more like my mother than my dad.

----------

