GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2005-03 > 1110678233


From: "Bernard Burgey" <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] Conclusions in Strasbourg?
Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 21:47:02 -0400
References: <031320050012.17390.42338558000897FC000043EE2207002953050B989A0E00@comcast.net>


David, Ken et al,

Keeping in the back of our mind that the Netherland "Surnames" less then
200 years old, enforced to be implemented by Napoleon. The Dutch made a
joke out of it and invented a lot of "funny" names because they thought
after Napoleon this will be gone anyway. When they found out it did not go
away after Napoleon Hundred thousands changed there "Names" like : (in
Engl. Eqivalent of: Killer, Steamhammer, King and Badboy) again, making
this kind of "Study" for me worthless.
But I did post on March 1st 2005 a Message about Re-settlements of Germany
which got apparently ignored.

Regards
Bernard

----- Original Message -----
From: <>


> Here is the abstract that Bonnie posted. What do you make of it Ken? It
concerns me in relation to Weale et al., Capelli et al. and all who would
use the populations of a region today to simulate a population that lived
in the area 1600 years ago (act as a reference population). It seems to me
that this study could be very significant for those of us (myself included)
who look at todays haplotypes in an area (e.g., the Altai Mountains in the
case of my research) and project backwards in time making what might be
unwarranted assumptions.
>
> _________________________________________________________
>
> ABSTRACT: Several studies showed that surnames are good markers to
> infer patrilineal genetic structures of populations,both on regional and
> microregional scales. As a case study,the spatial patterns of the 9,929
> most common surnames of the Netherlands were analyzed by a clustering
> method called self-organizing maps (SOMs). The resulting clusters
> grouped surnames with a similar geographic distribution and origin. The
> analysis was shown to be in agreement with already known features of
> Dutch surnames, such as (1) the geographic distribution of some
> well-known locative suf fixes, (2) historical census data, (3) the
> distribution of foreign surnames,and (4) polyphyletic surnames. Thus,
> these results validate the SOM clustering of surnames, and allow for the
> generalization of the technique. This method can be applied as a new
> strategy for a better Y-chromosome sampling design in retrospective
> population genetics studies, since the identi- fication of surnames with
> a defined geographic origin enables the selection of the living
> descendants of those families settled, centuries ago, in a given area.
> In other words, it becomes possible to virtually sample the population
> as it was when surnames started to be in use. We show that, in a given
> location, the descendants of those individuals who inhabited the area at
> the time of origin of surnames can be as low as ~20%. This finding
> suggests (1) the major role played by recent migrations that are likely
> to have distorted or even defaced ancient genetic patterns, and (2)
> that standard-designed samplings can hardly portray a reliable picture
> of the ancient Y-chromosome variability of European populations.
>
> Am J Phys Anthropol 126:214 -228, 2005
>
> AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL ANTHROPOLOGY 126:214 -228 (2005)
>



This thread: