Interestingly, the researchers also carried out an analysis of the populations which included the HapMap populations:
When data from HapMap Han Chinese+Japanese and Yoruba individuals was included in the analysis, the MDS plot of IBS formed a triangle of the three continents in the first two dimensions, with the third dimension separating the European populations clinally from each other (Fig. S3). In the histograms of IBS between the five European populations and each HapMap population (Fig. 4a), the studied populations were most similar with the CEU and least similar with YRI. Interestingly, the similarity with the Asians varied between populations, being higher for Eastern Finns, Western Finns and Swedes than for the Germans and British (p less than 10−14 for all comparisons except for GER and BRI whose distributions did not differ). The same pattern was also observed when comparing the allele frequencies in the study populations and in CEU and CHB+JPT: the Eastern Finns had the largest proportion of SNPs deviating towards the Asian frequencies (Table S2; p less than 10−5), also when markers with smallest differences were excluded (data not shown).
They were able to differentiate between the effects of genetic drift and eastern influence by looking at the direction of the divergence:
To study the extent of eastern influence, we counted in each of the five European populations the number of markers where the population's allele frequency and the CHB+JPT allele frequency deviated from the CEU allele frequency to the same direction, and the number of markers where the allele frequencies deviated in opposite directions. We then compared the numbers to the null hypothesis that all the five populations stem from the same proto-European population (approximated by the CEU frequencies) from which they have subsequently diverged via genetic drift in the absence of admixture. In such a case, one would expect the number of markers drifting into a given direction (e.g. towards the Asian frequencies) to be similar across the populations, whereas a varying degree of eastern admixture in each population would result in disparate marker proportions. Using the number of deviating markers instead of the absolute size of the deviations should even out some of the effects of differing extent of drift in the populations.
This parallels my comment of an earlier study:
Under the theory of "drift due to isolation", the Finns might be distant from other Europeans, but not specifically at an East Eurasian direction.The paper also discusses genetic structure within Finland:
The information about the grandparental birthplaces of the Finnish samples enabled a more detailed analysis of population structure within Finland. In the multidimensional scaling plot of IBS within Finland (Fig. 2c,d, Fig. S1b), the first dimension showed the division to Eastern and Western Finland; the Häme samples settled between the clusters. The second dimension showed a north-south gradient within Eastern and the third dimension within Western Finland. Here the Swedish-speaking Ostrobothnians showed no separation from their Finnish-speaking neighbours, whereas in the MDS plot of the European populations, the Finnish samples closest to the Swedes were almost exclusively Swedish-speakers (data not shown), and in the Structure analysis the Swedish-speaking Finns showed twice as large an admixture with the Sweden-dominated cluster as the other Western Finnish samples did (48.9% versus 24.6%, data not shown).
PLoS ONE doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0003519
Genome-Wide Analysis of Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms Uncovers Population Structure in Northern Europe
Elina Salmela et al.
Abstract
Background
Genome-wide data provide a powerful tool for inferring patterns of genetic variation and structure of human populations.
Principal Findings
In this study, we analysed almost 250,000 SNPs from a total of 945 samples from Eastern and Western Finland, Sweden, Northern Germany and Great Britain complemented with HapMap data. Small but statistically significant differences were observed between the European populations (FST = 0.0040, p less than 10−4), also between Eastern and Western Finland (FST = 0.0032, p less than 10−3). The latter indicated the existence of a relatively strong autosomal substructure within the country, similar to that observed earlier with smaller numbers of markers. The Germans and British were less differentiated than the Swedes, Western Finns and especially the Eastern Finns who also showed other signs of genetic drift. This is likely caused by the later founding of the northern populations, together with subsequent founder and bottleneck effects, and a smaller population size. Furthermore, our data suggest a small eastern contribution among the Finns, consistent with the historical and linguistic background of the population.
Significance
Our results warn against a priori assumptions of homogeneity among Finns and other seemingly isolated populations. Thus, in association studies in such populations, additional caution for population structure may be necessary. Our results illustrate that population history is often important for patterns of genetic variation, and that the analysis of hundreds of thousands of SNPs provides high resolution also for population genetics.
Link
55 comments:
"Under the theory of "drift due to isolation", the Finns might be distant from other Europeans, but not specifically at an East Eurasian direction."
This is what I tried to tell you, but you would not listen.
You tried to tell me what I myself said?
LOL. You little predictable greek, I though you might be paying special attention the Asian affinity part of the study.
There´s no need to argue, we all know what you said and not said in the previous 500k study. It´s all printed. LOL.
Anyway, to the study. It was a bit unclear to me whether the Western Finns were more closer to Swedes then they were to Eastern Finns? Tuuli, how is it?
Interestingly in terms of Y-STR variation the Swedes in Finland´s Ostrobotnia formed own cluster which differed significantly from the Finnish-speaking values even compared to the immeadiate, adjacent Finnish-speaking neighbours, (Palo et. al, 2008). In fact the differences between the Swedes and Finns were like from another planet, in regards to Y-DNA that is. In contradiction to what Tuuli tried to enunciate yesterday, it wasn´t any East-West Finnish duality, it was Swedish vs. Finnish duality. It´s a pity Southern Finns and Swedes in Southern Finland were not tested.
"The MDS analysis of Finns showed a pattern resembling their geographic origins, although with some overlap of the provinces. A similar regional clustering of individuals has been seen in the Swiss, but not in Great Britain. The increased Swedish contribution among the Swedish-speaking Finns agrees with earlier findings,as well as with their medieval Swedish origin. Interestingly, in the MDS plots the Finnish-Swedes stood out from the rest of Western Finland only when Sweden was included in the analysis, which highlights the importance of relevant reference populations also when detecting patterns of variation within a country".
My personal stake is that the genetic border between West and East Finland is exarcebated due to proto-Uralic origins of Eastern Finns and on the other hand Central European origins of Western Finns.
Dienekes: the other study showed drift away from Europeans, but had nothing to do with East Eurasians.
The fact that now the Finns are moving closer to East Eurasians, is a seperate issue, and much less pronounced than you initially made it out.
Now I know that was the natural conclusion, that I would've made myself if not for some discussions with Finns, but come on, you were wrong.
Richard: the reason for the gap between the west and east Finns is a lack of samples in between.
The west to east gradient within Finland is clear, but there would be no gap in between if the sampling was more thorough. So yeah, it all depends on the sampling and breeding patterns.
Normally, the extremes of populations don't breed with each other often, but they do breed with the middle, hence the gradients.
There was actually one Finnish sub population sampled with values in between western and Eastern Finnish clusters.
Anyway,
Dienekes fairytales should deserve a blog of their own, my favourites Dienekes propositions are
1) People with thin faces in Scandinavia are de-pigmented mediterranians "types".
2) Scandinavian haplogroup I1a is indicator of Mediterranian connection.
3)Brunet´s are way more attractive than blondes which according Dienekes can be proved by science.
Phew...what else, I lost a track....ouh. Anyway, thanks for hosting the blog, we love you Dienekes, despite you are one complexed Greek.
One more question to Tuuli.
The study assessed that the sampled individuals had their grandparents within the given location. Does this mean that all the sampled individuals had their all 4 G`parent in the same area, and spoke the same language? Did this apply also to the sampled
group of 20 Finland-Swedes?
Moreover, the what was the status of Swedes and Britons; some of the UK dots were pretty off from the main cluster. Was ancestry check conducted or was this another non-deep ancestry study?
By the same reasoning, Southern Europeans are products of "African influence".
It is possible that Southwestern Europeans may have some Sub-Saharan affiliation, although in no large-scale genomic admixture study that I know of has this been established.
Genetic studies are really becoming to sophisticated for a mathematically challanged person like me, but since the link to this with commentary by one of the authors was featured on the netsite of the most read newspaper up here today, I did take a look. You too can, for free, here:
http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0003519
I must say, I was quite surpriced learning that the SNPs found in the Eeastern Finnish sample with a frequency deviation away from the Central European standard towards Asia would amount to 61 %, it would however be over 55 % in all controlgroups, including Brittish sample. Wouldn't this mean that deviations from the CE standard are much more common than previously thought in other North European populations too ?
BTW, there may be one ongoing discussion Finnish historians and geneologists have had for decades. Namely, while we know that most of the Norther Finland (beoynd the 1323 Treaty of Nöteborg boarder with Novgorodians) was settled from Southern Savo, there has been considerable dispute over where the original 12th or 13th century settlers of the Mikkeli area came from. There is some archeological evidence suggesting Häme Region, but also some suggesting Ladoga Carelia Region. Now, given Häme sample stands closer to the Western Finnish sample than the Eastern Finnish, I'd say the Ladoga Finns (later practically wiped out by the Slavic expansion and shifting boarderlines) were the main contributors to the 15th century Savo population which began the expansion North.
I must say, I was quite surpriced learning that the SNPs found in the Eeastern Finnish sample with a frequency deviation away from the Central European standard towards Asia would amount to 61 %, it would however be over 55 % in all controlgroups, including Brittish sample. Wouldn't this mean that deviations from the CE standard are much more common than previously thought in other North European populations too ?
It is expected, due to pure randomness that for any particular SNP, a population may deviate either towards Asians or away from them.
If, for example, an allele has a frequency in the Central European standard of 0.5 and in Asians of 0.7, then it's possible than in a separate European population the frequency may be 0.52 or 0.48. It's expected to be close to 0.5 but may deviate in either direction.
The interesting finding here is that Eastern Finns, to a lesser extent Western Finns, and to an even lesser extend Swedes deviate more towards Asians than Brits and Germans do.
If genetic drift alone was at play, then the deviations would be larger in absolute terms (say a frequency of 0.6 or 0.4 rather than 0.5) because of drift, but they would not be systematically in one direction, i.e., towards Asians.
Great.But will any of these studies be used to classify which one of these groups you most closely match? It could be kept on a Disc and used to identify you specifically,customize things to your needs,predict certain givens about you,and know what your tribal(medical) risk factors are.They'd need your DNA and then they could compare you to these studies and see which you match-but I'd like mine to be permanent so it wouldn't have to be done again.
"It was a bit unclear to me whether the Western Finns were more closer to Swedes then they were to Eastern Finns?"
Western Finns are pretty much in between Eastern Finns and Swedes. See Table 1 in the article - it has the FST values (i.e. genetic distances) for pairwise comparisons of all the populations.
I don't think there's a major difference in the origins of Eastern and Western Finns, although there seems to be a bit more eastern influence in Eastern Finland. And like polak said, and what we say in the article, if we had sampled regions in the middle of the country, the pattern would be likely to appear more clinal.
"Does this mean that all the sampled individuals had their all 4 G`parent in the same area, and spoke the same language? Did this apply also to the sampled
group of 20 Finland-Swedes? "
Actually now that you ask, I must admit I'm not sure about the language. I'll check that out next week (if I remember...).
"Moreover, the what was the status of Swedes and Britons; some of the UK dots were pretty off from the main cluster. Was ancestry check conducted or was this another non-deep ancestry study?"
The British in this study are from Wellcome Trust Case Control Consortium, and they are a part of a birth cohort from 1958, including a proportion of people born in Great Britain in that year. Outliers (= those with immigrant background) were excluded based on their genetic clustering in comparison to the HapMap samples - see WTCCC paper from 2007 for details.
tuulia, dienekes already answered the question about allele frequencies. And the "European standard", i.e. the CEPH samples are known to be just a sample of Europeans, not THE Europeans.
I wouldn't say that our analysis suggests that Häme is the origin of the South Savo settlers - it could be later admixture just as well.
"But will any of these studies be used to classify which one of these groups you most closely match? It could be kept on a Disc and used to identify you specifically,customize things to your needs,predict certain givens about you,and know what your tribal(medical) risk factors are.They'd need your DNA and then they could compare you to these studies and see which you match-but I'd like mine to be permanent so it wouldn't have to be done again."
Yeah that could be done, but there are a few drawbacks. Basically you'd get realible results only if you know that you don't have a mixed background - i.e. my ancestors come from all over Finland, so I'd probably be just in the middle, in "no-mans-land", or actually it might look like I'm from middle of Finland even though I'm really a mixture. And if you know that you're not admixed, that means you already know where your ancestors come from, in which case it's no use doing an expensive analysis to find out what you already know.
Also, in a purely practical sense, I don't think we or other reesarch groups would be willing or allowed to use our data for such individual testing purposes for the public, and getting a data set against which you could match your test samples would still cost tens of thousands of euros. If you don't have the reference data, you won't be able to say much - like 23andme and other companies at the moment.
In the Novembre et al. paper that was published about a month ago they tested this kind of ancestry inference, but first they excluded all the individuals with admixed background, so no wonder their analysis seemed to work pretty well...
"Does this mean that all the sampled individuals had their all 4 G`parent in the same area, and spoke the same language? Did this apply also to the sampled
group of 20 Finland-Swedes? "
"Actually now that you ask, I must admit I'm not sure about the language. I'll check that out next week (if I remember...)".
This would be a really nice detail to know. Assmuming you are more than busy commenting the study the next few weeks, I´d really appreciate if you deliver this info next week.
BTW Tuuli, I´ve tried to look for your Swedish Y-DNA study for a while but none of the biggest search engines, springerlink etc, seem to support it. Where can I access to it? PS, since my appetite is growing could mention something about your future project you previously referred to?
Tuuli,
Hope I'm not too late...
This might be a stupid question, but the red at K4 in the Swedes...what is that associated with? Is it closely related to the yellow??
Is that some sort of an early migration from Central Europe?
Cheers
polak,
The colours just denote different clusters inferred by the Structure software. We have no information of their meaning, only their distribution among individuals from different populations.
richard,
I checked the language thing. The Swedish-speaking Ostrobothnians are Swedish-speaking themselves and have at least three grandparents from the Swedish-speaking area (where there are actually very few Finnish-speakers). Vice versa for the Finnish-speaking Southern Ostrobothnians. The language border there is surprisingly strong with little admixture between the language groups.
"I checked the language thing. The Swedish-speaking Ostrobothnians are Swedish-speaking themselves and have at least three grandparents from the Swedish-speaking area (where there are actually very few Finnish-speakers). Vice versa for the Finnish-speaking Southern Ostrobothnians. The language border there is surprisingly strong with little admixture between the language groups".
There used to be very little Finns in the area, there´s no more very little Finns in the area. Finns find Swedish coastal cities attractive and have recently (post WW2) started a major population movements from rural finnish-speaking areas to formerly exclusively Swedish areas. Vasa, a city in middle of Swedish Ostrobotnia was formerly 99% Swedish is today 35% Swedish. This is not the most important issue of the study but something a Swede would pay attention to.
I am sorry if I am being stubborn, but Swedish-speaking is just a legal terminology, and Ostrobotnian a geographic terminoly, but the way I understand is that Finland-Swedes are an ethnic minority as well (Allardt & Starck, 1980, Bhopal, 1997)
So, since the article did not mention it and neither did you, I have to ask once again. Did all the 20 sampled Ostrobotnian had all 4 G´parent who were Finland-Swedes? or is this unknown, something that your study group did not see worth finding out? The 4 G´parent is usually a minimium requirement for fulfilling ancestral requirements and since this was a deep-ancestry study, atleast in regards to Finns, I wonder if if was a deep-ancestry study for Finland-Swedes as well.
This information would carry important info about Swedes in Finland. It would give us information whether the Finnish admixture in Ostrobotnian Swedes, or Swedish-speakers as you prefer to refer them, is recent (post Word War 2) or something way older.
Tuuli,
I am still waiting for your answer. Meanwhile here´s a master´s thesis I found from google scholar, it´s about bi-lingualism in Ostrobotnia. So I am afraid the 50 year old demographic statistics you must have about the language borders has slightly mislead you.
http://thesis.jyu.fi/v04/G0000701.pdf
richard,
I'm quite busy at the moment, I don't have time to read a bunch of blogs several times a day - this is not the only discussion I'm keeping an eye on...
This is as full a description of the Swedish-speaking samples as I can give:
The donors themselves are Swedish-speaking. At least three of their four grandparents have been born in the Swedish-speaking area (as marked on the map), but we don't know the language of the grandparents. They have been born in the beginning of 20th century, and at that time a person born in those counties is extremely unlikely to be Finnish-speaking.
Thus, post-WW2 events don't affect our data, since we use the grandparental birth places.
Your map in the study is based on regional borders of Finland, not based on the traditional linguistic borders (Ostrobtonia´s SvenskFinland).
Basically what you are saying is that your research group has not bothered to veryfy the ancestry of the 20 Ostrobotnian sampled. In other words, you are saying that this was a deep ancestry-study for Finns, but not deep-ancestral study for Swedes in Finland. That´s ok. What is not OK is that there´s not a single referral in your text of the differing standards you´ve applied to the different ethnic groups. There´s a slight mismatch, right?
This is not rocket science, Finland-Swedes are an ethnic minority, Finns majority. The ancestry of Finns was verified till 4 grandparents, the ancestry of Finland-Swedes was not verified till 4 grandparents. It was only verified that they were registered as Swedish speakers.(Finland´s legistlation does not recognize bi-lingualism). Nothing was mentioned about this dual practise.
I aknowledge that this was the main issue of the study but given the emphasis you paid for "Swedish-speaking Finns" and "Finland-Swedes" -the traditional term which was also used in the study-, I find the differing standards and lack of information of them slightly disturbing. Thanks to my current phase of university studies I´ve been more than enough exposed to extensive lectures about the ethics of science.
I am going to contact another author of the study and verify this. In case the information what you gave about the samples is correct, which I don´t doubt, I am going to personally contact PloS One and express my deep concern regarding the testing practises (and lack of info on them) of your research group.
The map in your study which shows the Swedish-speaking ostrobotnia is about three times bigger the 30km wide Ostrobotnian Swedish coastal strip has ever been. In fact the map the shows only the traditional regional border which has nothing to do with the actual linguistic border.
"Från Sideby i söder till Karleby i norr, en sträcka på omkring 300 kilometerm går en obruten kedja av svenska hemman, byar och samhällen och detta kustland sträcker sig som en circa 30 kilometer bred zon inåt landet".
Kari Tarkiainen, 2008 Sveriges Österland.
Richard:
"Basically what you are saying is that your research group has not bothered to veryfy the ancestry of the 20 Ostrobotnian sampled. In other words, you are saying that this was a deep ancestry-study for Finns, but not deep-ancestral study for Swedes in Finland. That´s ok. What is not OK is that there´s not a single referral in your text of the differing standards you´ve applied to the different ethnic groups. There´s a slight mismatch, right?"
To me it seems that there were no differing standards: as Tuuli wrote, at the grandparental timedepth there were quite a clear language boundary.
So there was probably no more reason to ask if their grandparents living in Swedish-speaking Ostrobothnia spoke Swedish, than there was reason to ask if their grandparents living in Savo spoke Finnish...
Interesting paper. I've been quite de-Internetized lately, so I had not noticed.
For me anyhow, the interest is that (besides the Finnish peculiarities and the apparent correlation with East Asia/Siberia of some of them) the Swedes make up a separate cluster and that North German-British cluster (CEU should be mostly Brit/Danish by ancestry) has two distinct components that are very apparent at K=4, one of them (yellow) more marked among Germans of Schlewig-Holstein and the other (blue) among Brits. The yellow component is then found most commonly (quite surprisingly) among Western Finns (being quite rare among Swedes and Eastern Finns). It suggests me a Central-East European origin (they always forget to sample the East!), while the blue component could well represent the Central European UP layer (hence, less diluted in Britain).
...
@Polak:
Dienekes fairytales should deserve a blog of their own, my favourites Dienekes propositions are
1) People with thin faces in Scandinavia are de-pigmented mediterranians "types".
2) Scandinavian haplogroup I1a is indicator of Mediterranian connection.
3)Brunet´s are way more attractive than blondes which according Dienekes can be proved by science.
Actually he is partly right re. points 1 and 2. (1) Though the actual ammount of Siberian/East Asian ancestry is surely very much arguable, it does exist. (2) While the antiquity of I in general and of I1 in particular is also arguable, it's clear that it has a SE European and ultimately West Asian (IJ haplogroup) source.
Swedes anyhow cluster separately very clearly in this study, what is significative in itself and does seem to relate, IMO, with the unusually high Y-DNA I that this ethnicity has, what could well be a Chalcolithic founder effect (earlier Sweden was only sparsely inhabited).
Point 3 is cerainly a matter of personal preferences and individual variability.
"To me it seems that there were no differing standards: as Tuuli wrote, at the grandparental timedepth there were quite a clear language boundary".
The problem is that the area of Swedish-Ostrobotnia in the map she is referring, where the sampled individuals allegedly came is not the map of Swedish Ostrobotnia but the regional border.
The study has not a single mention of the Swedish sample from Finland. I would understand if the sample size of Swedish Ostrobotnia was 2000 but since it ridiculously small, 20, I find it astonishing that the research group did bother the check their ancestry with the same principles the ancestry of Finnish samples was collected. Moreover, there was not a single mention about this mismatch in the study. This is not something I made up to give a hard time to Tuuli, but something I find sincerely disturbing.
Right, now the only option Tuuli has is to project her personal idea of the demographics of Ostrobotnia which she has obviously no clue of. Like I said I am preparing hand-written letter to PloS One, at the very moment. Just to make sure whether I am not the only one who thinks this is violation against ethics of science.
I´ve read international versions of this study along with Tuuli´s comments from several sources. It looks she has mislead the public by addressing that "Finnish speakers" have Central European roots and just on a side note the Eastern input is less than tenth. This statement is ofcourse intellectually phony. Given the rare set of allele frequencies of "Finnish-speaking" genepool along with prevailing linguistic theory the roots of "Finnish-speakers" along with other Chudes is in the proto-Uralic Ulmet. Tuuli Lappilainen knows this just as well as I do. The principal ancestral component upon finns is not Central European, that has only come through Chudes having assimilated foreign people, eg. Central Europeans.
Richard,
I’ll try to explain the sampling issue once more. The message is in two parts.
You’re right in the sense that our map is slightly inaccurate, and the middle part of the line separating Swedish-speaking Ostrobothnia and Southern Ostrobothnia should be about 1 mm to the left – in the map (but not in the sample classifications!) we have accidentally included the three Finnish-speaking counties of the administrative region of Ostrobothnia. However, this is an inaccuracy in the map and not in the sample classification: the samples with origins in those three counties have been calculated as being from Southern Ostrobothnia, not from Swedish-speaking Ostrobothnia.
The sample donors classified as Finnish-Swedes identified themselves to be Finnish-Swedes – thus, no registry information was used. In addition to the self-identification, they had at least three grandparents (born approximately in the time span 1875-1925) from the region conventionally called Svenska Österbotten, or Swedish-speaking Ostrobothnia. The linguistic history of the family was not asked. The following list gives the birth places of the grandparents of the samples classified as Finnish-Swedes. The number denotes the total number of grandparents from each location, and (SSO) denotes that the location is in Swedish-speaking Ostrobothnia. This is the actual location information given by the donors. We don’t have more detailed information.
Björkö 6 (SSO), Jeppo 4 (SSO), Karperö 1 (SSO), Kaskö 1 (SSO), Korsholm 2 (SSO), Kvevlax 3 (SSO), Malax 6 (SSO), Nykarleby 2 (SSO), Närpes 6 (SSO), Petalax 4 (SSO), Pörtom 5 (SSO), Replot 11 (SSO), Sarvijoki 1, Solf 4 (SSO), Sundom 4 (SSO), Vasa 3 (SSO), Vikby 1 (SSO), Voitby 2 (SSO), Vörå 12 (SSO), Övermark 2 (SSO)
to continue,
I don’t understand your claim that we would have more deep-ancestry information of the Finnish-speaking samples than of the Swedish-speakers. The Finnish-speakers identified themselves as such, and had at least three grandparents from the region they were assigned to. These criteria are identical to those of the Swedish-speakers. There is no mismatch.
Like you said yourself, detailed analysis of variation within Finland was not our main goal apart from the east/west difference, partly because we consider our sampling to be insufficient for that purpose, but we believe our ancestry information is well sufficient for the aims of our study. In the article, we discuss the variation between the Finnish counties very briefly, and we mention the Finnish-Swedes only in about two sentences.
Obviously, you have every right to e-mail my co-authors or PLoS ONE about this. E-mailing Elina Salmela wouldn’t give you any additional information, though, since she’s sitting at the same office with me and agrees with what’s written here. If you still want to ask for further details, the person in charge of the sample collection in Finland is Pertti Sistonen – the other authors would hardly know more than we do.
To answer the other accusations by Richard,
I congratulate you of knowing what the principal ancestral components of the Finns are. I don’t know, and that’s why I do research - I need real data and actual analysis results, not just a gut feeling.
Our data shows that even though there are genetic differences between the studied populations, especially in Northern Europe, the Western Finns are still genetically close to Central Europeans. Our results don’t suggest – and neither do earlier studies as a whole – that the majority of the genetic background of the Finns comes outside of Europe. The Eastern Finns are further away, but they show signs of such a strong genetic drift that they are most probably far from everything, including linguistic relatives in the east. To be fully able to assess the migration routes to Finland, additional reference data especially from the east is necessary, which we clearly point out in the article as well. I hope you are not basing your estimates on Y-chromosomal variation alone, since making especially quantitative estimates based on a single locus alone is very risky.
I’ve told the public what we, sincerely and after several months of analysis, think our data tells us about the history of North European populations. Time will tell if our estimates are correct or not, but I can assure you that I have not been misleading the public against my better knowledge, and I find the mere accusation quite insulting.
I find it insulting that your research group did not even bother to check the detailed ancestry of the 20 Ostrobotnian Swedes sampled. This conveys the information that you did treat them as an ethnic minority. Moreover, "ethnic identification" fits better in sociological studies; not in genetic studies where minium requirement is usually 4 grandparent identifying themselves in the same ethnic unit than the sampled individuals. Based on ethic self-identification you´d soon find sampling half-African, half-Finnish individuals in deep-ancestral studies.
Now that you revealed the exact locations and the exact birth time span of the sampled Swedes in Ostrobotnia, you have ungunned me to certain extent. Although, the odds are small in regards to misinformation, they still exist thanks to such a small sampling unit, 20 persons.
"I congratulate you of knowing what the principal ancestral components of the Finns are".
Don´t gratulate me, gradulate the biggest name of East-Asian languages at the university of Helsingfors. I am not drawing any conclusions about Y-DNA haplogroups, but from prevailing linguistic theory which address that Finns are relatively new comers to Northern Europe. I find it intellectually dishonoust to address that the roots of Finns are in Central Europe, although thanks to assimilation that´s biggest component in the genepool of Finns these days.
My "insults" would not have exist if the study would have been more transparent. For some odd reason I did not find any information that one sampling group was gathered based on "ethnic self-identification" and others due to 4grandparents.
I am not naive, my letter to PloS one would hardly have significance, however, they might remind it the next time you guys offer your studies. My sole intention is that such practises you´ve done and the lack of transparence will never happen again. And if it does you atleast know there will be consequences for that in terms of "insults" and questioning of research ethics.
-Best regards
"I congratulate you of knowing what the principal ancestral components of the Finns are. I don’t know, and that’s why I do research".
"..... which highlights the importance of relevant reference populations also when detecting patterns of variation within a country".
Salmela, Lappilainen et al.
-------------------
Howabout putting your money where your mouth is by adding a Siberian reference population??
Like I already said, there is no difference between the sampling criteria of the Finnish- and Swedish-speakers. Both are based on self-identification and grandparental birthplaces.
Regarding the lack of transparency: due to the need of conciseness in scientific papers, it is not possible to include all details, but the contact information of the corresponding author enables further enquiries.
Our data shows that the genetic background of the Finns is predominantly in Central Europe. We make no statement of the origins of the Finnish language.
Like I already said, we clearly acknowledge in the manuscript the need for better reference populations from the east to obtain a more complete picture of the roots of the Finnish population. However, I don’t think that makes it our duty to sample and genotype half of the continent.
Thus, I don’t see where we have breached research ethics, but do mail to PLoS if you wish.
Wait a minute I am not done yet,
"The linguistic history of the family was not asked".
Are you telling seriously that you´ve actually interviewed the donours and not aske the linguistic background?. If this is the case this can only mean that you have implicitly refused to view Finland-Swedes as an ethnic minority and not treated them with proper principles in genetic studies follwing by the recognition of ethnic status (Veryfication of all 4 G´parents). Considering the low smaple size of 20 this is somewhat astonishing. You attitude is nicely conveyed through this comment
"The Finnish-speakers identified themselves as such, and had at least three grandparents from the region they were assigned to. These criteria are identical to those of the Swedish-speakers. There is no mismatch".
-----------------------
Yes,
there is severe mismatch.
What you´ve done is seriously questionable mostly because of the lack transparency in the way you gathered your samples and applied different standards to different ethnic groups. You´ve treated "Swedish-speakers" only as geographic and linguistic minority. This is ofcourse a violation of contemporary academic traditions which view "Swedish-speakers" in Finland as an ethnic minorty (Allardt & Starch, 1980, Bhopal, 1997 + plenty of others).
"This is the actual location information given by the donors. We don’t have more detailed information".
"Sarvijoki 1". Hmmm.......This is seriously outrageous.
"Thus, I don’t see where we have breached research ethics, but do mail to PLoS if you wish".
Incase I wasn´t enough clear, I tell, you.
You have interviewed the donours without having asked their linguistic background. Why? Because you have implicitly assessed that they are not an ethnic minority, only linguistic and geographic minority and thus verification of their ancestry is unnecessary "because we apply the same standards as we apply to Finns". Had you addressed they are an ethic minority, which they are, you ought to have been forced to apply general principles to them (4grandparents or even 3 identifying to the same ethnic unit than the sampled donour).
Your assesment of consise scientific paper is ofcourse stupid. Palo et al. tested Finland-Swedes, nowhere did they mentioned they were testing Finland-Swedes because they did not want to spend the 1 hour screening church records for the donours. However, nowhere did they even mention they were sampling "Swedish-speakers", only a sample coming from "exclusively Swesdish-speaking community". You have sampled "Finland-Swedes" against the principles of what their ethnic status should have required. OK. Not ok, that you do not address this in your paper.
"Almost exclusively Swedish-speaking community" was what Palo said. I missed the crucial word.
Atleast in the english translations you addressed that the roots Finns are in Central Europe. The roots of Finns are in proto-Uralic Ulmet and at the top of these roots is mostly Central European genetic affinity builded upon. This would´ve been the intellectually more honoust phrasing.
Richard:
”Don´t gratulate me, gradulate the biggest name of East-Asian languages at the university of Helsingfors. I am not drawing any conclusions about Y-DNA haplogroups, but from prevailing linguistic theory which address that Finns are relatively new comers to Northern Europe. I find it intellectually dishonoust to address that the roots of Finns are in Central Europe, although thanks to assimilation that´s biggest component in the genepool of Finns these days.”
You are probably referring to the article by Juha Janhunen: ”När kom finnarna till Finland?” Janhunen himself keeps the language and the genes strictly separated, as can be seen in this article (and others, too): ”För att datera finnarnas ’ankomst’ till Finland måste man därför framför allt bestämma den tidpunkt då Finlands område för första gången nåddes av en direkt urform av det finska språket.” (Page 80.)
In English this means that if we are to speak about the coming of Finns to Finland, we must determine the time when the language predecessing Finnish was for the first time spoken in Finland.
Furthermore, Janhunen writes: ”Det begås emellertid ett metodiskt fel, om det genetiska eller arkeologiska materialet används för lingvistiska slutsatser.” (Page 88.) (It is a methodological error to draw conclusions concerning the language on the basis of genetic or archaeological material.)
The same is true also into the opposite direction: we cannot claim that Finns as a genetic population(s) come from the east, even though the language certainly comes from there.
Richard:
”Yes,there is severe mismatch.
What you´ve done is seriously questionable mostly because of the lack transparency in the way you gathered your samples and applied different standards to different ethnic groups. You´ve treated "Swedish-speakers" only as geographic and linguistic minority. This is ofcourse a violation of contemporary academic traditions which view "Swedish-speakers" in Finland as an ethnic minorty (Allardt & Starch, 1980, Bhopal, 1997 + plenty of others).”
Janhunen, to whom you just above referred, says that at the individual level it is only language that can determine the ethnicity. So what is the difference you are chasing here? What is the difference between linguistic and ethnic minority that you so eagerly stress?
"Janhunen, to whom you just above referred, says that at the individual level it is only language that can determine the ethnicity. So what is the difference you are chasing here? What is the difference between linguistic and ethnic minority that you so eagerly stress?".
Ethnicity is based on ancestry, culture, traditions and language. In Swedish Ostrobotnia, people with dual heritage (eg. Finnish mother and Swedish father) are reffered as "half Swedes". This was a deep ancestral study and Swedes are ethnic minority of Finland.
In genetic studies self-identification is confirmed by measuring atleast 3, usually all 4 grandparents belonging to the ethnic group than the donour is identifying her or himself. Self-Identification in genetic terms means nothing. I would not have been accepted as "British donour" despite I would have lived in the country for centuries and identified myself as British.
Tuuli Lappilainen has just informed me that she does not know whether the sampled Swedish Ostrobotnians 3 or 4 G´parent identified themselves in the same linguistic group than the donours did. Neither did her research bother to inform about this mismatch along with their understanding of the word "Finland-Swedes", which according to the authors refers only to geography and self-identification, not ancestry.
This is something I find rather insulting. It would never oocur to my mind to conduct a study for Tornedals Finnish minority in Sweden without veryfying their linguistic background to atlest 4 grandparents. Given that no information of my understanding of ethicicty and Finns was provided any other practise would ethically dishonoust and it would imply that I don´t perceive Finns as an ethnic group.
Richard:
”This is something I find rather insulting. It would never oocur to my mind to conduct a study for Tornedals Finnish minority in Sweden without veryfying their linguistic background to atlest 4 grandparents. Given that no information of my understanding of ethicicty and Finns was provided any other practise would ethically dishonoust and it would imply that I don´t perceive Finns as an ethnic group.”
Sorry, but I still can’t understand your point. Are you saying, that a person with only 3 grandparents speaking Swedish is not ”ethnically” Swedish, but a person with 4 grandparents speaking Swedish is ”ethnically” Swedish?
If you mean this, why the limit would lay just there? There are no ”pure” ethnic groups in reality. The latter ”ethnically pure”person may still have 3 of his 8 great-grandparents speaking some other language than Swedish. So why would your limit (4 grandparents) be any better than the limit applied in this study (between 3 and 4 grandparents*)?
*Tuuli wrote: ”The Finnish-speakers identified themselves as such, and had at least three grandparents from the region they were assigned to. These criteria are identical to those of the Swedish-speakers. There is no mismatch.”)
So, there probably is not – and even cannot be – any Swedish-speaking person with none non-Swedish-speaking ancestor. From the page 4:
”Here the Swedish-speaking Ostrobothnians showed no
separation from their Finnish-speaking neighbours, whereas in the
MDS plot of the European populations, the Finnish samples closest
to the Swedes were almost exclusively Swedish-speakers (data not
shown), and in the Structure analysis the Swedish-speaking Finns
showed twice as large an admixture with the Sweden-dominated
cluster as the other Western Finnish samples did (48.9% versus
24.6%, data not shown).”
So, the admixture is obvious. Why would your grandparental criteria be any better than the one applied in this study?
It´s really useless to discuss this about you. However, the key word is deep-ancestral study. I hope familiar with this term. The Swedes in Finland used to have a very endogamous phase, but in the past hundred years this has somewhat changed.
It might be that my concept of ethnicity is outdated, but concerning genetic studies the custom is that ethnicity of the donour equals 4 or atleast three grandparents identifying themselves in the same unit than the donour does. You have probably never read any genetic studies so these must be new issues for you.
The authors have implicitly assessed that Swedes in Ostrobotnia are not an ethnic minority because the linguistic background of the Swedish donours were not checked. The authors should have mentiond that their concept of ethnicity is based self-identification instead of the traditional 4 or 3 G´parents belonging to the same ethnic unit than the donour.
Did this made my cause more clear?
"The latter ”ethnically pure”person may still have 3 of his 8 great-grandparents speaking some other language than Swedish".
Yes, this might be the case but it would be out of the scope of deep-ancestral studies - which this study was, atleast regarding to finns -to track more than 4 G´parents of the donours. As said this ´4 or 3 G´parents is the norm of the industry.
"It might be that my concept of ethnicity is outdated, but concerning genetic studies the custom is that ethnicity of the donour equals 4 or atleast three grandparents identifying themselves in the same unit than the donour does. You have probably never read any genetic studies so these must be new issues for you."
Yes, I have read. But please feel free to confirm your claim by inserting quotations from a few studies which explicate this custom.
"The authors have implicitly assessed that Swedes in Ostrobotnia are not an ethnic minority because the linguistic background of the Swedish donours were not checked. The authors should have mentiond that their concept of ethnicity is based self-identification instead of the traditional 4 or 3 G´parents belonging to the same ethnic unit than the donour."
1. The authors do not implicate that they are denying the status of ethnic minority from Swedish-Speaking in Finland - this is your very own misinterpretation.
2. the authors mention that "The
geographical origin of the Finnish samples was assessed according
to grandparental birthplace, but no detailed ancestry information
was available for the Swedes." (Page 7.) You could have read there what they say.
Dude, c`om.
Tuuli and her crew has applied chauninistic, 1800´s nationalism and aissigned peeople based on artificial political state boundaries, not by culture, language and ancestry. The Swedes in Ostrobotnia were referred as "Swedish-speaking Finns". Which is as insane expression as Bantu-speaking Chud.
To get you started with "norms of industry" look for "Adenosine deaminase polymorphism in Finland (Swedes, Finns, and Lapps), the Mari republic (Cheremisses), and Greenland (Eskimos).
A W Eriksson, M Kirjarinta, J Fellman, M R Eskola, and W Lehmann"
or
"ABH secretion polymorphism in Icelanders, Aland Islanders, Finns, Finnish Lapps, Komi and Greenland Eskimos: a review and new data".
You find them from google scholar. I´ve neven seen a study which would sampled ethnic groups without veryfuing their ancestry. For Finn sthis will work because regions like Southern Ostrobotnia or North Carelia are 99,999% Finns. The Swedish area´s in Finland have been penetraded by Finns from inland parts of the country en masse for the last 100 years.
Jaska, could you give me a link to the study by Janhunen, the one in Swedish language. That man, Juha Janhunen is brilliant. His definitions of ethnicity is something which is typical for linguisticans. I disagree with it strongly as I would assume so does the 5 million Irish and 30 000 000 African Americans. Nevertheless I understand from where he is coming from. It should be noted that for linguisticans as Janhunen, language is not just a language but an ultimate conveyor of culture, identity and thus ethnicity.
Íncase the Finns would not have their roots on proto-Uralic Urmheit than would imply that there would have been full discontinuity with original speakers of finn and modern Finns. That would probably not be unique event in history but the odds for the full discontinuity are quite small.
Richard:
”The Swedes in Ostrobotnia were referred as "Swedish-speaking Finns". Which is as insane expression as Bantu-speaking Chud.”
Insane expression? These people really don’t seem to identify themselves as Swedes. Wikipedia tells us:
”Äidinkielenään suomenruotsia puhuvia suomalaisia kutsutaan suomenruotsalaisiksi.”
http://fi.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suomenruotsi
This is not easy to translate in English, I have to use some artificial terms: ”Those Finlandians who speak Finlands-Swedish are called Finlands-Swedish.” The point is that ethnically they don’t seem to be Swedes, even though they speak a language quite similar to Swedish in Sweden.
Your first referred study, page 568:
”It was a criterion for inclusion that at least 75% of the ancestors in the second to fourth generations were known to have been members of the populations in question.”
Definition is ”member of the population” – I can’t see any mention about language, so this must be your own interpretation, again. (I don’t have access to the other article from here.)
Richard:
”You find them from google scholar. I´ve neven seen a study which would sampled ethnic groups without veryfuing their ancestry. For Finn sthis will work because regions like Southern Ostrobotnia or North Carelia are 99,999% Finns. The Swedish area´s in Finland have been penetraded by Finns from inland parts of the country en masse for the last 100 years.”
As it has already been said here many times: grandparents were born mostly over a hundred years ago – that is, before the Swedish-speaking areas became penetrated by Finnish speakers. So, what is the problem?
Richard:
”Jaska, could you give me a link to the study by Janhunen, the one in Swedish language. That man, Juha Janhunen is brilliant. His definitions of ethnicity is something which is typical for linguisticans. I disagree with it strongly as I would assume so does the 5 million Irish and 30 000 000 African Americans. Nevertheless I understand from where he is coming from. It should be noted that for linguisticans as Janhunen, language is not just a language but an ultimate conveyor of culture, identity and thus ethnicity.
Íncase the Finns would not have their roots on proto-Uralic Urmheit than would imply that there would have been full discontinuity with original speakers of finn and modern Finns. That would probably not be unique event in history but the odds for the full discontinuity are quite small.”
There is no link, only reference:
Janhunen, Juha 2005: "När kom finnarna till Finland?"
SPHINX. Yearbook 2004–2005. The Finnish Society of Sciences and Letters.
And you didn’t get the point right. I wrote that according to Janhunen, in individual level it is only language by which we can determine the ethnic status of a person. Habits, clothes and genes may easily vary within ethnic group, so we usually can’t determine the ethnic status by these in individual level.
There is no need for full discontinuity. Have you ever heard about language shift? The Uralic language in Finland is only the last linguistical layer here. Before it Saamic was spoken here in Finland, and before it Palaeo-European languages. Language is not dependent on any cultural or genetic marker, is it?
Correction: It would be even more precise translation to say:
"Those Finns who speak Finlands-Swedish are called Finlands-Swedish."
Finns, not Swedes.
Please, give me sources. Not wikipedia, which is subjected to whackjobs of who knows what magnitude. Besides, I won´t take any sources about Finland-Swedes written in finnish and based on your arbitrary intrepretation seriously. You seem to confuse, one thing you speak "Finns" in nationalistic concept, not in ethnic. The Swedes if Finland are East-Swedes, nothing less nothing more. Your 1800´s nationalism which emphaiszed state borders is ridiculuous.
I start, here´s an academic sources.
"It is concluded that Finland-Swedes are over-represented in the total migrationprocess from Finland to Sweden. As such, the process is culturally embedded in the group´s ethnic identity, which causes migration both through the pratical minority situation in Finland and through ethnic affinity with Sweden".
Hedberg, C. 2004.The Finland-Swedish wheel of migration.Identity, networks and integration 1976-2000. Geographiska regionstudier 61.87pp.Uppsala. ISBN 91-506-1788-5
"Samhälsklimatet efter krigen inbegriper en fösterländsk ide´ om ett folk med två språk. Detta folk borde ju då ha ett folklynne. Och om ett folk uppfattas som likamed likamed en nationalitet så borde det finnas bara en `nationalkaraktär´. Detta åter strider mot historien och den tidigare uppfatningen och inte minst folks vardagserfarenheter."
Höckerstedt, Leif. Fuskfinnar eller östsvenskar? En debattbok om Finlandssvenskhet. Söderströms ISBN: 9789515218254 2000."
You and your fenno wikipedia. LOL.
"Your first referred study, page 568:
”It was a criterion for inclusion that at least 75% of the ancestors in the second to fourth generations were known to have been members of the populations in question.”
Finns are not members of "Swedish population in mainland Finland" as the study refers the "Swedish-speakers". Finns and Finland-Swedes are two different population.
This authors at the Helsingfors university is good as well.
Mr, Höckerstedt.
"Med finnarna har finlandssvenskarna åter en viktigt politisk gemenskap, men detta innebär inte en etnisk gemensam grupptillhörighet",
"Det är naturligt att betona Sverige-kontakten då man gör en analys av finlandssvenskarnas språk, kommunikation och historia. Ideologiskt kommer det att närma sig Axel OLof Freudenthals bygdessvenskhet och Sverige närheten kring sekelsskiftet. Finlandssvenskarna är ju helt enkelt svenskar, närmare bestämt östsvenskar"."
So howabout if we let Swedes to decide who Swedes are whereever they may reside instaed of Finns?
http://www.folktinget.fi/pdf/publikationer/Folktinget_low.pdf
”När det gäller finlandssvenskarnas relation till den finskspråkiga kulturen och till kulturen
i Sverige framgår det tydligt att man anser sig ha en egen kultur, men man betonar
samtidigt att den utgör en del av den finländska kulturen. Allardts tes att den svenskspråkiga
befolkningen i Finland har Finland som sitt fosterland får ett klart stöd i undersökningen.
Utbudet i Sverige, som förmedlas bland annat genom televisionen upplevs
som intressant, men känns ändå avlägset för majoriteten av finlandssvenskarna.”
”Kun tarkastellaan suomenruotsalaisten suhdetta suomenkieliseen kulttuuriin ja ruotsinmaalaiseen
kulttuuriin käy selvästi ilmi, että suomenruotsalaisilla on omasta mielestään
oma kulttuuri,mutta samalla korostetaan, että se on osa suomalaista kulttuuria. Allardtin
teesi että suomenruotsalaisten isänmaa on ensisijaisesti Suomi saa selkeän tuen tässä
tutkimuksessa. Ruotsalainen kulttuuritarjonta, jota muun muassa televisio välittää, nähdään
mielenkiintoisena, mutta enemmistö suomenruotsalaisista kokee sen kuitenkin
kaukaisena.”
So you can see, that:
1. Swedish-speaking minority in Finland think they have a culture on their own,
2. it is a part of culture in Finland (or Finnish culture),
3. Finland is their own country,
4. majority of them feel that Swedish culture is quite distant to them.
Richard:
”So howabout if we let Swedes to decide who Swedes are whereever they may reside instaed of Finns?”
No, let’s give Swedish-speaking in Finland decide who they are. And they are not Swedes.
Richard:
”Finns are not members of "Swedish population in mainland Finland" as the study refers the "Swedish-speakers". Finns and Finland-Swedes are two different population.”
Yes? Has anybody said anything else?
LOL.
Jaska, The Swedish culture in Finland has nothing to do with the North-Asian, rural culture of Finns. Finland and Finns are two completely different issues. The Swedish achievement in Finland are just Swedish culture, talking about as some seperate entity is ridiculous. Be awere of the politics,
" i dagens läge är finlandssvenskarnas förhållande till riksvenskarna problematisk och nånting som många finlandssvenskar tar starkt avstånd från eller vägrar att betona för hänsyn till finnar. Majoritetens värderingar påverkar den svensktalande minoriteten i Finland i ännu större grad numera. På grund av historia och särkilt den skandinaviska rörelsen i Finland och Sverige med sin rasistiska syn mot icke-germanska folket, anses en tanke om en distinkt svensk folkgrupp bland finnar lät chauvinistiskt och inte minst ofosterländskt".
Don´t be fooled by bunch of polite politicians who want to please the finns with low-self esteem.
Richard:
"Jaska, The Swedish culture in Finland has nothing to do with the North-Asian, rural culture of Finns."
OK, this really tells it all... Have a nice time there in your world at 1887! We shall continue the discussion if you ever visit here in the present day. :-)
Richard: it's just a criteria, not any absolute standard, much less a consolidated tradition. For example I recall from Alonso et al (year?) on R1b haplotypes that he made some self-criticism for having been so strict with his Basque samples (4 local grandparents, not just Basque but from the neighbourhood) when such criteria was not existent in the other sampes (from Europe and West Asia, and even in other Basque samples he took from other studies).
Obviously the criteria is up to the researches and mostly a matter of common sense and comparable samples. In this case both of these sensible requirements seem met, maybe not to your like but I have certainly seen much more strange things in genetic (and other type) papers gone without nearly any complain. I think you are overreacting probably because of some prejudice of you, not because the paper is essentially at fault on that.
All of these readings suggest how much DNA evidence is subject to interpretation and, above all, how difficult it is to ascribe differences in observable traits to genetic factors.
On the matter of Finns, historical evidence of their origin is quite easy to ascertain. The predominant element, as far as language, culture AND race are concerned is Uralic. Finland was part of the huge heartland of Comb Ceramic culture, the latter being the last common ancestor of Uralic, or at least Fino-Ugric, peoples. By 2800 BC, Aryans stationed in Sweden crossed into Aaland Archipelago and then into SW Finland, to establish a local Corded Ware cultural environment, who lasted until the ancestors of Baltic Finns migrated into their present country by first millennium BC. On a more general spectrum, this migration (affecting the whole of Eastern Europe) returned Aryan-Uralic ethnic boundary to its traditional setting (steppes - boreal forests limit), but also brought a new influx of Aryan words and Aryan race, as a natural result of assimilating existing groups into a new proto-Finnic framework. Although it will never be known what kind of Uralics existed in Finland before the settlement of Baltic Finns, historical evidence suggests that, at first, incomers concentrated in S Finland (historical Finland, that is, including Karelia), where the climate was bearable. Here they slowly absorbed local Aryan populace (whose distant legacy is witnessed in Finns' word for slaves, "orja") and pushed north or mixed with ancient Uralic groups long before established in this part of the world. The process of ethnogenesis appears complete by the eve of Christian era. During Middle Ages, as we all know, some Swedes moved on Baltic shores, but Swedish language in Finland is a product of acculturation as much as it is a product of ethnic movements. What was left behind is an Uralic people with a mostly Aryan vocabulary (very multilayered) and profoundly altered grammar/phonology, which makes it the most eccentric of all Finnic groups.
Racial evidence neatly confirms historical evidence. Modern Finns used to be a NE-SW gradient between classical Uralics ("East-Baltic") in Karelia and classical Aryans ("Corded Nordic") in SW Finland. Now, as so many people from interior have moved in SW, as a consequence of latter's economic development, the difference has been somewhat muted.
In the particular case of Uralics, genetic evidence seems to accord with racial evidence. Haplogroup N's distribution neatly accords with distribution of "East Baltics" (= Uralic race) and to historical evidence of distribution prior to Russian expansion. Most Finns have the haplogroup N mutation, whereas the Aryan element (probably carrying the R1a1 mutation) is equal to that of Swedes.
Post a Comment