Talk:Haplogroup G-M201

Original research

Wikipedia articles should not contain original research. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:No_original_research. The term "original research" refers to material—such as facts, allegations, ideas, and stories—not already published by reliable sources. It also refers to any analysis or synthesis of published material to advance a position not advanced by the sources. I have removed the entire speculative section on historical migrations by Ray Banks, which constitutes his own original work. I have also removed his own speculation that G2a3 today in Europe does not descend from the G2a3 found in a Neolithic skeleton of the LBK. Mr Banks may be right in all his thinking. He is notable within the genetic genealogy community for his research on haplogroup G. But Wikipedia does not publish original research. --Genie (talk) 15:16, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

R1a1, G and Iranian marker

Will someone clarify something for me: diagnosis of R1a as Iranian marker is based on Kurgan culture (mainly Scythian remainders). But why don't Ossetians (their only heir) have it??? It is obvious that G is Ossetian marker, so why was R diagnosed as Iranian marker? THIS IS DRIVING ME CRAZY.--Ddd0dd (talk) 01:55, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

I have added the explanation given by Nasidze et al. They concluded that, although the mtDNA of the Ossetians indicated an Iranian origin, their Y-DNA was the result of inter-mixture with their neighbours in the Causacus, where they settled in the medieval period. The Ossetians cannot be the only heirs of the Scythians genetically, though their language may qualify as a survivor of Scythian. --Genie (talk) 22:44, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

I came across this website [1]. I'm just gonna copy paste what is says. Apparantly it was an Alanic maker. I will make changes to the article later if there are no objections:

Alanic hypothesis

The only ethnic group that has a majority of haplogroup G nowadays are the Ossetians in the Caucasus, in the modern Russian Republic of North Ossetia-Alania. They are thought to descend directly from the Alans, a Central Asian tribe related to the ancient Samartians. The medieval Kingdom of Alania was located in the northern Caucasus, in present-day Georgia and Ossetia.

G2a has been observed at a slightly higher frequencies in Picardy and Flanders than in surrounding regions. It has been hypothetised that G2a was brought to northern France and Belgium by the Alans, who traversed all continental Europe during the barbarian invasions in the 5th century and founded a short-lived kingdom in northern France.

Nonetheless, if there is Alanic G in Europe it must certainly belong to other subclades than those from the Neolithic period (namely G2a3). G2a1 being the most common variety in the Caucasus nowadays, the fairly recent Alanic migration (from a genetic point of view) could have carried that particular subclade. In fact, G2a1 has been found all along the Alanic migration route (Hungary, France, Spain), as well as in Britain (Samartian element ?), but hardly anywhere else.

Scythian hypothesis

Romans were known to recruit Scythian or Sarmatian horsemen in their legions. According to C. Scott Littleton in his book From Scythia to Camelot, several Knights of the Round Table were of Scythian origin, and the the legend of Holy Grail itself originated in ancient Scythia. This hypothesis was also taken up in the 2004 movie King Arthur, which opens with the arrival of Scytho-Roman cavalry in Britain. However, Scythians were steppe people more likely to belong to haplogroup R1a. If any of them did belong to G, they presumably were G1, not G2a. This would explain the few cases of G1 in north-western Europe though.

The above speculation is unsupported by scholarly publications. Please do not add this kind of material to the Wikipedia page. --Genie (talk) 14:19, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

prehistoric presence "..... the Ötztal of the Italian Alps.." The Ötztal (Tal= Valley)belongs to Tyrol/Austria. "Ötzi" was found at the boarder between Austria and Italy (Südtirol). --Aschland (talk) 13:52, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

Origins of G

The statement about G being brought to Europe by Iranians is debatable; Indians, the descendants of ancient Aryans, show no presence of G and the high percentage of G in Ossetians is thus very probably only a result of the Caucasian influence and a genetic drift. 82.100.61.114 00:09, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Haplogroup G is found among Aryan-related peoples, including the Dardic and Iranic peoples in Pakistan and the Indic (as well as Dravidian) peoples in India and Sri Lanka, although at low frequency among most populations east of Pakistan. It is even found in China, Malaysia, and parts of Oceania, especially the Malay Archipelago. This article on Balinese paternal heritage tabulates some samples from India, Malaysia, and China that belong to Haplogroup G. In Central Asia, Haplogroup G is found as far east as among the Mongols. The range of its distribution should not be underestimated; Haplogroup G just doesn't receive much attention because of its very low frequency among most modern populations outside of the Caucasus. That study that I linked to is very comprehensive; the researchers examined 1,989 Y-chromosomes that had been sampled from 20 populations of Southwest Asia, South Asia, Southeast Asia, Oceania, and Southern China and found a total of only 18 Haplogroup G-M201 Y-chromosomes, including 2 out of 32 Malaysians (6.25% of the Malaysian sample), 1 out of 166 Han Chinese (0.6%), 6 out of 405 Indians (1.5%), 5 out of 91 Sri Lankans (5.5%), 1 out of 22 Saudi Arabians (4.5%), and 3 out of 87 Syrians (3.4%). When one considers the tremendous size of the Indian population, it is easy to see the possibility that the Iran-Afghanistan-Pakistan-India belt (precisely the region of the "Aryans") probably contains the greatest number of Haplogroup G persons in the world. Ebizur 03:31, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

The presence of G in Pakistan is easily explainable as a result of the Neolithic migration from the Near East to Baluchistan and subsequently with the Dravidian expansion to Pakistan. 82.100.61.114 13:27, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

It may not be an 'aryan' marker. However, G most certainly originated on the Iranian plateau, as G*, G1, G2 are all in relatively high frequencies there. G* and G1 are higher in the south and G2 shows a healthy presence in the North (and south). Add this to the fact that R1a* and R1a1 show a fair presence (not to mention very high diversity) in eastern Iran (again, R1a1 being higher in the south), and that Scythian remains have shown to be high in haplogroups R1a1 and G, it is clear that the Scythians were late founders of the neolithic emigrants of the Iranian plateau. Although, it is still safe to assume that the Iranians had some late influence from the steppes (Indeed, history tells us of the contact between Scythians and Persians).

The fact that G is not too common in Indo-Paki populations, certainly does not mean that it was not brought from the Iranian plateau (as well as taken to Europe), because G was never in high frequencies on the plateau, in the first place.

Haplogroup frequencies can be misleading. Population geneticists usually look at a combination of factors to determine HG origins: diversity, principal component analysis, and (least importantly) frequency. Just given the distribution pattern in Iran, I can tell you that G moved northwardly into the Caucauses (as well as south east into India and Pakistan), where it likely underwent genetic drift in certain populations.

 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zadeh79 (talk • contribs) 01:36, 5 April 2008 (UTC) 

I am not aware of Scythian remains being tested for Y-DNA haplogroups.--Genie (talk) 23:06, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

A study incorporating aDNA from Scythian remains has now been published, so I have added that information. Speculation that the Scythians were high in G is now inappropriate, being contradicted by the evidence so far.--Genie (talk) 14:15, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Date of Origin

Please do not change the date(s) of origin of G in the box, unless the new date(s) are supported in the origins section by reference to a scholarly source. --Genie (talk) 21:32, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Image of "Ossetian girl"

This is not meant to sound sexist, but could we also possibly have a picture of a Haplogroup G man? or a male from a Haplogroup G-rich population / area? At the very least, the picture of the woman should have a caption explaining who she was / where she was from. I'm assuming this is a Caucasian (((an excellent reason the term Caucasian should not be used to mean 'white skinned' in modern science. It should mean what it says: from the Caucasus))) woman, but the costume doesn't look Ossetian to me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.217.225.211 (talk) 16:49, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Really again, like in the "R" Y-DNA article, the image an ethnic member of a population which is associated with the Y-DNA haplotype, but with the sex that is not, somehow to me seems like it just doesn't belong. Nagelfar (talk) 14:32, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

I agree. If a picture is appropriate at all (which is debatable), why not use a picture of a known Ossetian man? Like that of Kosta Khetagurov or Vladimir Gaglojev? Hrothberht (talk) 00:11, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Y-DNA haplogroups by ethnic groups

The above article has been listed for deletion. The discussion is at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Y-DNA haplogroups by ethnic groups. Wapondaponda (talk) 04:31, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Ligures/Ligurians and Treilles ancient Y-DNA

I have deleted the link to the Ligures page. Unless someone can point to a link between the historic Ligurian people and ancient Y-DNA results at Treilles (mainly G2a Y-DNA haplogroup), it should remain that way. So far ancient DNA results are pointing to a population replacement in the late Neolithic where Cardium G2a population were replaced/displaced. Raetia and the Tyrol may be an exception to this or the destination for displaced populations because it is only there that Y-DNA Haplogroup G2a reaches significant proportions of the present population.Jembana (talk) 08:29, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

Low Importance?

The article relating to Y-DNA geno/haplotype G(2) has been categorized as of "LOW IMPORTANCE" I see - incorrectly.

I have no preexistent biases, only an interest in "archaeogenetics" and G is "not of low importance" for many reasons.

G is the first explorer beyond the climes of Africa and Arabia... I advise an editor to correct this ignorance as "G" is speculatively even conceivably the most important of all, in terms of historic human science and so much else, rivulet of the human river (in potentiality) - G appears the most mysterious and academically alluring, to both the uneducated and educated; moreover, G is a "fan favorite" to the average Joe, a genotype found quite interesting to the public (one of the reasons being its eerie predominating prominence in older aristocratic and regal families of Europe - sophisticated theories of Alan-Ossetic affinities have been constructed in this context - G exists, for whatever reasons, in numbers peculiarly uninterpretable except as strangely dominant in "OLD" feudatory, regal, and knightly European dynasties - Merovingian, Bourbon, Plantagenet, etc., etc. - King Richard was G, and in the news recently)... G is surely one of the top 2 or 3 male haplogroups from the scientific and public interest sides - only type in a search engine: "Neolithic + blue eyes + farmers" or "King Richard + Haplo G" and see how many media sources cover the subject... Beyond merely populist interest, G would seem to have empirically probable, quasi-crucial if not central importance civilizationally: the formation and history of "Homo Europeaus" or the constitution of the form of Sapiens we know as H.S.S. (Cro-Magnid gracile - the terminology matters not), right smack in the middle of Perso-Sumerian "Eden"-land...

Jewish genetic genealogists well know G possesses connections of undetermined meaning to early Jewish-Israelite history - its existence in high percentages in well-established, unmixed Jewish lineages poses many questions; G is hypothesized to be heavily involved in the not unimportant "proto-Indo-European question" and the morphogenesis or mutagenesis of "palaeo-Caucasian"; G is considered to have meaning in relation to the obviously significant old Sumerian civilization of primordiality, possible Ubaid [old, old Sumero-Iranian], even Kuro-Araxes culture identity; G is a candidate connecting link for the "Aryo-Semitic" issue; etc., etc.

G definitely is somehow deeply interwoven in the multi-factorial, poly-dimensional rise of advanced human civilization... It appears all but indisputable G is intertwined with the correlated innovation of agricultural industry, this is factually verified very substantively at this point now (Oetzi the Iceman of Switzerland is G and his "Sardinian Neolithic farmer" genome, scientists, to this day, are trying to figure out the trajectories of meaning of exactly, because G is *NOT unimportant* or *low important*)...

So G is hypothetically involved in definitional humanity itself in all probabilistic likelihood, that is, the transition from prehistoric oblivion to human history itself as we know it in the archaic Anatolian-Trans-Caucasian, Levantine matrix of "anthropogenesis", allegorized as "Eden"...G right in the Fertile Crescent, Persian Gulf region where humankind innovated farming etc., mutated in a special manner, due to enigmatic complex reasons, grew "dynamic" in different, new ways...

All haplo-groups, scientifically, are barely known, remain unexplored totally, yet G of all groups, is the opposite of "unimportant" if one must categorize in such a manner... The little we know of G, indicates it is right in the middle of so many significant phenomena... G, J(1)+J(2), and R1a+R1b tentatively seem the most scientifically rich and rewarding in studying thus far (not detracting at all from E, I, K and Q) - I speak admittedly from the vision of Western Eurasian human existence at least, all greater pan-"Aryo-Semitic" culture - G being probably the most opposite of "low-important" sub-lines of male haplogroups.. Forgive the prolixity — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:304:B34B:A940:F051:AB0F:3A76:DE48 (talk) 22:07, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

King Louis

Louis XIV had haplogroup R1b and his direct descendant Louis XVI had haplogroup G-M201. How is this possible?

http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/v22/n5/abs/ejhg2013211a.html https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3992573/ 68.231.141.199 (talk) 00:58, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

2605:A601:2014:E00:D4F5:E9A8:214C:6797 (talk) 01:08, 15 January 2018 (UTC) It isn't possible. The heart of Little Louis XVII matched his ancestor, King Louis XIV. Therefore King Louis XVI must have been in R1b1 as his great-great-great-grandfather and his son are match.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Haplogroup G-M201. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110205224742/https://genographic.nationalgeographic.com/genographic/lan/en/atlas.html to https://genographic.nationalgeographic.com/genographic/lan/en/atlas.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061116235645/https://www3.nationalgeographic.com/genographic/atlas.html?card=my034 to https://www3.nationalgeographic.com/genographic/atlas.html?card=my034
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090616065507/http://www.genebase.com/tutorial/item.php?tuId=15 to http://www.genebase.com/tutorial/item.php?tuId=15

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:02, 29 October 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Haplogroup G-M201. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110913002829/http://www.genebase.com/learning/article/15 to http://www.genebase.com/learning/article/15

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:06, 16 January 2018 (UTC)