(revision of earlier post)
Sylvia received the results of her DNA tests recently. Those results are
very interesting. First, Sylvia is predominantly (94.1%) of northwestern
European descent, as we all suspected. The northwestern European ancestry is
mostly British and Irish (60.8%), but she is also apparently 7.7% Scandinavian,
probably from Viking incursions and occupations of the British Isles a little
more than a thousand years ago. To my disappointment, we apparently have no
American Indian ancestry. However, the results also revealed that Sylvia’s
ancestry is 1.5% Sub-Saharan African, which has sparked some discussion.
I am definitely not even close to an expert on DNA matters. I just
have some informed opinions. As I see it, there are at least four possibilities
regarding the 1.5% African ancestry in Sylvia’s DNA profile. For the record, I
am fine with African ancestry in our family lineage (heck, my children have
probably 40% African ancestry). I am, however, often a cautious skeptic.
First, as Joe mentioned in an earlier email, the 1.5% could be a
residual of African migrations and populations (anatomically modern humans)
colonizing the Middle East and then Europe and Asia. One theory says this
happened as early as 130,000 years ago, whereas another has it happening around
50,000 years ago. Fully modern humans did not appear until approximately
40,000-35,000 years ago with Cro-Magnon in western Europe. This scenario seems
somewhat plausible to me, but I doubt it.
Second, the 1.5% is marginal error of a complicated and comparatively
recent genetic program, in which all of the kinks have not been fully ironed
out (a definite possibility in my mind).
Third, the Sub-Saharan African 1.5%
is a product of slavery wherein one of our American ancestors mated with a female
(or male) of African descent, likely third-generation mixed. This scenario is
possible I suppose.
The fourth possibility appears to be most
plausible. I did not know this possibility until I did a little research online.
According to Wikipedia, North Africans moved to Britain during Roman rule,
but North Africa is not Sub-Saharan Africa as Sylvia’s profile suggests.
However, on the same link below, it states that some white British men
have a Y chromosome haplogroup originating from sub Saharan African males.
Apparently, Britons imported slaves from Africa beginning as early as the
middle of the 16th century. Thus, this may be our link to Sub-Sarahan African
genes.
