# Population Genetics > mtDNA Haplogroups >  "Icelanders descended from Native Americans"

## Canek

a very interesting article i want to share with the forum, taken from: http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gn...ive-americans/

"Icelanders descended from Native Americans"


That is the question, and tentatively answered in the affirmative according to a new paper in The American Journal of Physical Anthropology. A new subclade of mtDNA haplogroup C1 found in icelanders: Evidence of pre-columbian contact?:

Although most mtDNA lineages observed in contemporary Icelanders can be traced to neighboring populations in the British Isles and Scandinavia, one may have a more distant origin. This lineage belongs to haplogroup C1, one of a handful that was involved in the settlement of the Americas around 14,000 years ago. Contrary to an initial assumption that this lineage was a recent arrival, preliminary genealogical analyses revealed that the C1 lineage was present in the Icelandic mtDNA pool at least 300 years ago. This raised the intriguing possibility that the Icelandic C1 lineage could be traced to Viking voyages to the Americas that commenced in the 10th century. In an attempt to shed further light on the entry date of the C1 lineage into the Icelandic mtDNA pool and its geographical origin, we used the deCODE Genetics genealogical database to identify additional matrilineal ancestors that carry the C1 lineage and then sequenced the complete mtDNA genome of 11 contemporary C1 carriers from four different matrilines. Our results indicate a latest possible arrival date in Iceland of just prior to 1700 and a likely arrival date centuries earlier. Most surprisingly, we demonstrate that the Icelandic C1 lineage does not belong to any of the four known Native American (C1b, C1c, and C1d) or Asian (C1a) subclades of haplogroup C1. Rather, it is presently the only known member of a new subclade, C1e. While a Native American origin seems most likely for C1e, an Asian or European origin cannot be ruled out.

The core of the article treads the confusing gray zone between rock-hard precise science and the more vague and intuitive truths of history. One the rock-hard part, there is a huge literature on maternal genetic lineages, the mtDNA. Because this genetic material is copious it was some of the first to be analyzed using molecular clock models. A molecular clock is a feasible with mtDNA because it is haploid; it is only inherited through females and so is not subject to recombination which might break apart associations of distinctive genetic markers. Instead of being a reticulated mesh the genealogy of mtDNA is a clean and inverted elegant tree leading back to a common ancestress. You are finding the line of your mothers mothers mothers mothers.

But synthesizing this clarity with human history is more difficult, because we are dependent on the bias of text, and even more tendentious clues from oral history and archaeology. Because of Icelands Lutheran Christian heritage the maternal lineage here could be traced back to 1700. This does not mean that the first woman in the line that we know of was born like Athena from the head of her father; rather, the records were not kept well enough to continue unbroken back to the medieval era. We do know that the first permanent Norse settler in Iceland arrived in 874, and, that very few immigrants from Scandinavia added diversity to the gene pool after ~1000. Iceland is a small and poor island, so quickly reached its Malthusian maximum. How else to explain that Icelanders made a secondary migration to Greenland?

The most obvious explanation for the existence of the subclade of the C1 lineage is that it arrived recently. Without knowing anything else that is what youd have assumed. But as noted above the individuals who carry it have been traced back to a common ancestor in the early 18th century; these are native Icelanders, at least if native means anything substantive. An second point which rejects recent injection of this lineage into the gene pool: the Icelanders are their own special branch of C1, C1e. The phylogenetic tree of C1 below illustrates the relationship of the branches to each other. Since the font is so small, I added in clarifying labels (from top to bottom its C1a to C1e, with further clades such as C1d1):

As you can see, this is mostly an Amerindian clade, with some some Asians. But, by surveying the public data they did find two individuals who were European who carried possible C1e. Ill quote:

, using the criteria of one mutational difference from C1e when sequences were avail- able for only hypervariable segment 1 (HVS1) or 2 (HVS2) and two mutational differences when both HVS1 and HVS2 sequences were available. The result was a shortlist of 276 sequences that we suggest be checked first for C1e coding region mutations (Supp. Info. Table S3). We note that for the sequences for which geographical information is available, all but two were sampled from individuals with Native American ancestryi.e. from the Canary Islands and Germany.

The German sequencerepresents a perfect match to the Icelandic C1e for the short HVS1 fragment spanning sites 1602416365. This raises the intriguing, but perhaps unlikely, hypothesis that C1e is a European-specific subclade of C1, following the precedent of the European and Native American subclades of mtDNA haplogroup X2However, given the dense sampling of mtDNA variation in European populations, it is clear that C1e is exceedingly rare, a fact that weighs against a hypothesis of antiquity in Europe.

They believe that the Canary Islander is probably the result of admixture during the Spanish colonial era with someone who returned from the New World colonies. The German is the one to focus on. A plausible alternative model is that C1e is a very low frequency European lineage, which increased in frequency in Iceland simply through genetic drift because of that islands small population. Remember that though C1e is rare in Iceland, its frequency is much higher than in Northern Europe as a whole. Though here we must be cautious because the typing was preliminary in the Germany case, the authors note that This is because there are no other known human mtDNA sequences belong to C1e out of the 6747 complete sequences available in the literature. Also, the authors observe that there is variation among the Iceland C1e lineages, mutations which differentiate them. This further tilts the playing field toward an early entrance of the lineage into Iceland, probably before Columbus, because a late arrival would not have had time to build up mutational variation in the region of Iceland where C1e is found.

As this subclade is absent among Native Americans, you may wonder as to a relationship to Greelanders or Inuit. The larger C1 haplogroup as a whole is not evident in these populations. You can inspect the geographical distribution closer yourself. If this woman was a non-European, she was not maternally related to the peoples who replaced the Norse in Greenland. Though we should also be careful about assuming that the present genetic variation in the American Arctic is representative of pre-modern variation.
If the Greenland and ancient European hypotheses are rejected, what we have is a woman who entered the Icelandic society from an extinct lineage of Native Americans, probably from the northeast (or perhaps her Greenland Norse mother was of this line). What the Norse would have termed Markland. It is tempting to point to the Norse settlement at LAnse aux Meadows in Newfoundland. Perhaps the Europeans had enslaved a native woman, and taken her back to their homeland when they decamped? But more likely to me is the probability that the Norse brought back more than lumber from Markland, since their voyages spanned centuries.

Finally, does this explain Bjork? I doubt it. A minority of Scandinavians, especially ones of Sami background, exhibit an Asiatic cast to their features. The autosomal genomic content of the Icelanders is what youd expect, Scandinavian leavened with British, and twisted with their own particular history of population bottlenecks. Only the precision of mtDNA typing brought the reality of the woman who carried C1e into the light. In terms of total genome content she is one of tens of thousands of ancestors to any given descendant, and she may be one of the less common ones in the family trees because of her likely lower status. Though the flip side of the nature of mtDNA, and the inbred aspect of the Iceland pedigree, is that probably all native Icelanders can draw many lines of descent to this woman.

----------


## Twilight

:Thinking:  I wouldn't say that the Icelanders were totally descended from Native American, in the history of Iceland there were celtic monks living there but in 1,000 AD Leif Erickson went to the area and colonize the islands, according to the Y-dna haplogroups in Eupedia Iceland is R1b-R1a-I1 typical of Germanic tribes and Celts. Although there are some new discoveries saying that the Vikings captured female Native Americans and took them to Iceland, the more woman of the same culture who reproduce the more prevalent the signature would be. :Thinking: 

Source: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencete...years-ago.html

----------


## MOESAN

always this kind of titles, mistaking about reality spite of a good informative complete text! scoop scoop scoop!
interesting all the way - no surprise at all! but let's keep in mind the most of icelandic "mothers" were 1- scandinavian -
2- Ireland and Britain celt -
but the autosomals weight of this amerindian origin keep very light!

----------


## adamo

Total nonsense the name of this thread, they are like 99% European, not at all Native American. Maternally they're 50% H. They have about 16% U, another typically European group. 8% K and 5% I, the latter being passed to them by Viking Scandinavian immigrants as mtdna I used to have higher levels in Scandinavia anciently, about 10% J and 10% T, which is about normal European frequency , ( T runs highest in plains of western Russia, J infiltrated itself into Europe at 10-20% from Middle East), typical European mtdna in total. Patrilineally, they are about 40-45% R1b Celtic , pretty much all of it being M269 variety. They're 35% Scandinavian I1a as many of the Norwegian/Swedish Vikings that colonized the island where, and they are 20-25% 1a Slavic blood. Where is the Native American in that lollll, they cluster closest, in my opinion, to Danes, other Scandinavians ( Norwegians, swedes) and Germans!

----------


## nordicwarrior

I had additional questions after my father's surprising results from his "DNA Tribes" autosomal test (my impression of "DNA Tribes" is that it offers the most unvarnished readings of any test on the market)... and the very helpful representative mentioned in his answer via email that some European branches including the Irish have Native American and Siberian indicators (especially Northern Europeans). 

Apparently this situation isn't well understood at this time, but the genetic admixture is thought to come from the Mesolithic time period.

----------


## adamo

Certain SIBERIANS have y-DNA Q, found at highest frequencies in America, not to mention SIBERIANS/north-east Asians some C , also rare but found in western north-America. The Irish? No, they don't have Native American blood, at all, nor the Icelanders; SIBERIANS are a different story entirely from these 2 European groups. Both patrilineally and matrilineally.

----------


## ElHorsto

You are way too obsessed with haplogroups. There is a reason why there is autosomal DNA in the cells of eukaryotes, two strands and several chromosomes actually.

----------


## nordicwarrior

I agree with ElHorsto, Adamo you do seem a bit too obsessed with y-haplogroups... and this is coming from someone who pays close attention to paternal findings. Autosomal actually carries far more clues to overall make-up and will also probably unlock much historical data as our ability to decode findings improves.

----------


## adamo

Icelanders are common Europeans, not native Americans; they migrated from Denmark, Norway and Sweden into Iceland.

----------


## ElHorsto

Icelanders, Denmark, Swedes, Orcadians, Irish, Finns, Russians, whatever north-europeans, they all revealed an amerindian component (ca. 10%). There are also HG Q occurences left in north-europe (mostly sweden, check the eupedia map) as additional evidence, which I think is a paleolithic remnant too. Amerindian could actually stem from paleolithic Siberian hunter-gatherers who were in turn the ancestors of Amerindians.

----------


## adamo

Bravo for stating the obvious in the last segment of your paragraph. Again, I discredit that Irish, Danes, Icelanders or swedes have any Native American component; Finns and Russians do have Siberian components, Finns in particular.

----------


## adamo

There is maybe 2-5% Amerindian blood in Icelanders, due to original Icelanders going to the east north-American coast and mixing at very low levels with Amerindians and bringing this back to Iceland, but this is definitely NOT representative of the Icelandic population as a whole. We are talking like 5-7% of Orkney islands females have haplogroup X, its minimal. 5% X2 in Greece and Romania; this is not representative of these populations as a whole, they're not Amerindian "mix" they just acquired minor Amerindian blood at isolated low %.

----------


## ElHorsto

http://dienekes.blogspot.de/2012/10/...dian-like.html

Besides european HG Q, also STR data support this admixture to be real. Some believe it is from transatlantic connections, but I rather think it is eurasian paleolithic. Don't worry, 90% "european" is still pretty high.

----------


## adamo

The other 92-98% of these countries in not Amerindian and anyways

----------


## ElHorsto

I found a very interesting article which discusses Amerindian-European connections and surprisingly tends to favour a more direct Europe-America link. Additional evidence is Blood-Group 0 and an interesting Neanderthal theory:

*How Europeans Got to Be ~10% American Indian
*


“We do not of course think that there has been substantial gene flow back into Europe from Amazonia. The only plausible explanation we can see for our signal of admixture into the French is that an ancient northern Eurasian population contributed genetic material both to the ancestral population of the Americas, and also to the ancestral population of northern Europe.”

But Patterson et al. did not find any northern Eurasian population that would have a higher admixture potential related to French than Karitiana. They reported similar, but still lower values for Naukan Eskimos and Chukchi.

...

It remains to be seen if pre-Neolithic Europeans were more Neandertal than contemporary Europeans. If they were this correspondingly may make them even more American Indian.

http://anthropogenesis.kinshipstudie...rican-indians/

----------


## ebAmerican

The mtDNA C1e found exclusively in Iceland. C1a found in Asia. C1b,C1c, and C1d found in indigenous native Americans. Greenland has no C1e. C1e may be remnants of the Dorset Culture who were distinct from the Thule Culture (modern Inuit). The Vikings probably brought these woman over from their exploration of Northeast Canada, before the Inuit migration from Alaska. The 10% Amerindian component in North Europeans is probably paleolithic with the first American settlers 20K years ago. Back and forth migrations between Asia and North America probably diluted the original component, but the isolation of North Europeans and South Americans kept this original component visible in both populations.

This is what I got from Elhorsto's source, the C1e connection to the Dorset culture is only a guess.

----------


## adamo

Wow elhorsto, the answer of the Amerindian Icelanders is found in Neanderthals, more useless theories thanks. Wow 10% or less Amerindian blood, so this does not represent the majority does it? Original Icelanders had much less mtdna C, its as ebAmerican said from North America Viking explorations how it got to Iceland; nonetheless a minority.

----------


## nordicwarrior

> I found a very interesting article which discusses Amerindian-European connections and surprisingly tends to favour a more direct Europe-America link. Additional evidence is Blood-Group 0 and an interesting Neanderthal theory:
> 
> *How Europeans Got to Be ~10% American Indian
> *
> 
> 
> “We do not of course think that there has been substantial gene flow back into Europe from Amazonia. The only plausible explanation we can see for our signal of admixture into the French is that an ancient northern Eurasian population contributed genetic material both to the ancestral population of the Americas, and also to the ancestral population of northern Europe.”
> 
> But Patterson et al. did not find any northern Eurasian population that would have a higher admixture potential related to French than Karitiana. They reported similar, but still lower values for Naukan Eskimos and Chukchi.
> ...


Things keep pointing to Solutreans it seems.

So now we have not only the ancient native American meta-myths of red haired giants and mtdna haplogroup X centered around New York state and Southern Canada, but also these newly discovered autosomal echos (albeit distant echos) of possible Native American admixture in the European population.

----------


## Grubbe

A misleading heading, but very interesting news anyway.

Who knows - perhaps some day a modern Neanderthal shows up (with a Neanderthal Y- or mtDNA haplogroup). The truth is out there  :Wink:

----------


## Fire Haired

stop putting contversial titles that are not true _icelnders are european not native american sure like 10 out of 10's millions of them have a direct lineage that takes up like 0.000001% of their ancestry and is native american_ we already know vikings where in north america so big deal this should not be a suprise dont tell people lies with half true titles i think everyone knows icelanders are white and are manly in the nordic baltic race which settled scandnavia with y dna i1 about 10,000ybp i get sick of dumb media people like history channel, cnn, nbc, abc, wgn, the new yorker every freaking medi company telling people complte lies and strech the truth and are very unaccurate it gets extremly anyoing u know why gay marraige is getting more accepted because the media is compltly pro gay and they tell half truths about waht people who are gints gay marraige think and now the supreme court stuff they are starting to show their true opinon without being deceptive

no one is born gay anyways gaay people have the same sexual behvour as people in their gender they have reproductive behavour just they do it on the same gender they also use the same hormone sthey just confuse nd pervert what is naturaal but we are not allowed to showw the public the obvious scitfic facts that no on is born gay s==because of thast simple obious fact i complety diagree with gay marriage and the way it is in every tv show and these gay pride parades in my city people are half naked and doing un spechble things but of across the media wont mention that and the gay pride people re just getting sick i am totally done with even considering gay marraige it is a perverted unnatural thing and is just sick in my opion and should be banned for the better of society i want people to know that the media is trying to convince u and wont show others opions they are trying to brain wash america and the western world with half trues and lies ad they spread hate against people who care about morals and put lables and stertypes on us as if we are raciest or ignorant

----------

