Children of Native American and European parents share their parents’ autosomal dna. Uniparental dna is however inherited without recombination. The situation is more complex if we imagine an isolated population which started to grow after ancient migrations from 100 Native American men and 100 European women. After several generations autosomal dna is more mixed. Autosomal dna is after generation also drifted, meaning they have lost something about the original information. I think that genetic drift is like entropy. The counterforce for entropy in this case is selection. Selection resists genetic drift but only in chromosome regions where the selective impact is efficient, in other regions genetic drift goes on. Uniparental dna doesn't transform similarly.
What I now portrayed can be tested in practice, we need only two populations showing some common uniparental dna, being on autosomal side far enough from each other to give clear difference and also better if they are enough homogeneous proving isolation. It is important that populations are not too much mixed. And I have them: on the other side Sardinians (group 1) and then Finns and Lithuanians (group 2). Then we need to know who they were in the beginning. Because we can’t have ancient samples corresponding exactly to history of any modern populations I have used EN results (European Early Neolithic samples), corresponding to the historical continuity of the group 1. This historical similarity between Sardinians and EN was shown in Haak et al. 2015, being 91-96%.
Here we go. I gathered YDNA and MTDNA distributions from Eupedia and autosomal figures from Haak et al. 2015. If my theory is right we should see something like:
- autosomal parity between ancient and modern populations in group 1 (Sardinians and EN) is high if both are mostly unmixed. This is a postulate.
- amounts between ancient autosomal dna (EN) and modern uniparental genes (group 2) roughly match because uniparental genes don’t drift.
- amounts between modern autosomal genes (group 1, Sardinians) and modern autosomal genes (group 2) don’t match similarly as in previous comparison because autosomal genes have drifted in both populations, in this case around 7000 years, less or more hard to say exactly because we know too little about ancient migrations.
But this is not a full story. Trying to make accurate comparison between modern populations usually fails less or more, because we have no fixed reference points. This happens espacially when using formal admixture softwares. It happens also in this case when comparing Sardinians and Finns/Lithuanians without using EN as a reference. Only ancient genomes can be reasonable references, so we actually don't know how much Sardinians and Finns/Lithuanians could match.
YDNA and MTDA statistics gathered from Eupedia, to download click here.
Comparison between Haak et al. 2015, statistics from page 122 onwards (download here) , and now gathered Eupedia numbers:
Finns: EN 31,5-42,5 % corresponding to the modern common
ydna uniparental with
Sardinians 34,5 % (Eupedia numbers)
Lithuanians: EN 33,4-44,2 % corresponding to the modern common
ydna uniparental with Sardinians 38,65 % (Eupedia numbers)
We know that uniparental and autosomal genes correlate and it happens also here.
For comparison three formal admixture analyses: