tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-954616472560690638.post4092881781998553326..comments2023-12-09T16:01:46.365-08:00Comments on Metis Discussions: DNA Testing Tainted by Haplogroup HybridizationR J C Roland (Roly) Belangerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15785194537644345151noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-954616472560690638.post-38580026894284636672016-07-03T10:50:11.666-07:002016-07-03T10:50:11.666-07:00Hi everyone :) Henri Membertou, Sachem Chief of th...Hi everyone :) Henri Membertou, Sachem Chief of the Mi'kmaq First Nations (1580 - 1611)<br /> is your 12th great grandfather. Iam the grand daughter of Annetta May "Anita" Grenier. I have abundance of family history and was warming to see this blog :) Wela'lin Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-954616472560690638.post-52290094883446694902016-01-25T06:37:15.475-08:002016-01-25T06:37:15.475-08:00Your right. Since this article a new DNA test call...Your right. Since this article a new DNA test called "autosomal" (All grandparents) has increased yDNA and mtDNA accuracy. Unfortunately it's level of accuracy is limited to maybe 6 generations. Beyond that will take new markers that remain detectable for many more generations.R J C Roland (Roly) Belangerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15785194537644345151noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-954616472560690638.post-54193810658957254412016-01-24T01:32:11.094-08:002016-01-24T01:32:11.094-08:00I believe that genetic analyses have become much b...I believe that genetic analyses have become much better, gradually, but surely, with increasing numbers of markers, and also references (very important) to compare to.<br />I see no reason why finding the composition of someone in Canada with mixed ancestry would be more complicated than the mixed ancestry of Mexicans, for instance. Genetic tests are available and have been used in Mexican individuals to determine without much ambiguity, the proportions of Caucasian, Indian and Negro; so why this could not be possible in Canadian Mestizos?Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17258168407808437534noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-954616472560690638.post-43346234028427924692015-03-12T14:02:43.181-07:002015-03-12T14:02:43.181-07:00I feel like way too many genealogists today (parti...I feel like way too many genealogists today (particularly in North America) rely heavily on DNA when doing genealogy. Many will draw strong or final conclusions based on the DNA result that really doesn't tell much. It is like quoting a sentence in a book and pretending that tells you the entire story - it tells you one thing, but it doesn't tell you nearly enough. <br />I'm a firm believer in using every possible resource and drawing conclusions based on the facts. For example, in the case of Francoise Grenier:<br />-There is a long oral history that supports her to be a Native woman.<br />-There are records suggesting she is Native, and a lack of records showing her origins as French (just historian speculation, which is fine, but it's not a primary source I mean). <br />-The DNA result gives her mtDNA as "J", which is generally European, however, J is found in many regions in Europe (and some in the middle east in fact) and it also surfaces in people who are supposedly 100% Native on the east coast... Based solely on DNA, it is perfectly plausible that a Viking ship landed on the eastern coast and a woman stayed behind, intermarrying with the local population (probably Mi'kmaq) and then later descendants moving westwards due to intermarriage with a different nation or band. By the time the 17th century rolls around, the woman in question is an Algonquin woman with a distant viking ancestor from 600 years prior. I see no reason why this could be untrue, given that all J tells us is that at some point down the maternal line, there was a maternal ancestor with that haplogroup. Based purely on DNA however it is also equally possible that she could be of entirely European descent, or even have a Jewish or Arab maternal ancestor that arrived in Europe in the middle ages, and eventually became Christianized. That is perfectly plausible to me as well based entirely off the DNA.<br />However we cannot know, because we cannot go farther back than about 1600 in most cases. <br />And based off the oral history, the records, and the DNA results that do not disprove anything but rather give possible methods of this result, I personally conclude her to be an Algonquin woman whom was largely Frenchified and married a Frenchman (some of her descendants appear to have had a French-Canadian identity, others an Algonquin one, and some Metis. We're all related, but with different cultural identities in the end). <br />Some will reject my conclusions, but it is based on the available facts, and I will be willing to listen to those who disagree if they give their own theories based on the available facts as well. If however the only arguments they give me are racist and/or ahistorical and not based on fact, I will reject their analysis (example, one person said she couldn't be Algonquin because Noel wouldn't marry the first Native he saw. This appears to be based on that person's own prejudice, since they assumed that a Frenchman would not marry a Native, due to her being Native, when the historical record shows... actually this happened very often.)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-954616472560690638.post-4772641088927546952014-07-30T14:22:04.705-07:002014-07-30T14:22:04.705-07:00I have no idea what Henri Membertou's haplogro...I have no idea what Henri Membertou's haplogroup was! Only direct descendants might know this (maybe!). What is in contention is that the X haplogroup in question is separated by two migrations. One long ago and one more modern. Radegonde Lambert is far more modern---in the last 1000 years--- (I think X2b4). Unless one is prepared to accept the premise that the Vikings or the Basque could have introduced this DNA --there's little grounds to do further research! Edmee would also be in this category! FTDNA projects are still looking into where the modern X & U hapogroups might have been introduced into the indigenous population.<br /><br />RolyR J C Roland (Roly) Belangerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15785194537644345151noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-954616472560690638.post-41586936554983222712013-07-07T06:42:15.884-07:002013-07-07T06:42:15.884-07:00For those who would like to affirm their deep Abor...For those who would like to affirm their deep Aboriginal ancestry several companies are now evaluating an all ancestry autosomal test that will suggest an indigenous, Native percentage. National Geographic will report Native ancestry if it is above 2% @ $200. 23&Me will report any percentage found for $99. Do not expect great results. These tests are new (and unique to each company) and will improve as time passes. R J C Roland (Roly) Belangerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15785194537644345151noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-954616472560690638.post-35677756417680290052013-07-07T06:20:27.861-07:002013-07-07T06:20:27.861-07:00Direct lineage is not more legitimate than an indi...Direct lineage is not more legitimate than an indirect one. A Native grandfather or grandmother in one's early lineage is a Native grandfather or grandmother whether direct or indirect. Some people seem to think that they are MORE aboriginal because they have a direct Native marker in their DNA!R J C Roland (Roly) Belangerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15785194537644345151noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-954616472560690638.post-30531777385868175492013-07-01T12:26:16.123-07:002013-07-01T12:26:16.123-07:00Interesting and very well explained. Helpful for t...Interesting and very well explained. Helpful for those that have strong family oral histories but testing did not show expected results. I'd wondered at times if my Grandparents were telling lies, but could not accept that.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com