Brit-Am Anthropology and DNA Update (15 January, 2015, 24 Tevet, 5775)
Contents:
1. Solar activity at birth predicted infant survival and women's fertility in historical Norway
2. Question on Blue Eyes
3. White? Black? A Murky Distinction Grows Still Murkier by Carl Zimmer
===============================
===============================
1. Solar activity at birth predicted infant survival and women's fertility in historical Norway
Gine Roll Skjaervo, Frode Fossoy, Eivin Roskaft
DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2014.2032Published 7 January 2015
Gine Roll Skjaervo
Department of Biology, Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU), Trondheim, Norway
Frode Fossoy
Department of Biology, Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU), Trondheim, Norway
Eivin Roskaft
Department of Biology, Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU), Trondheim, Norway
http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/282/1801/20142032
Abstract
Ultraviolet radiation (UVR) can suppress essential molecular and cellular mechanisms during early development in living organisms and variations in solar activity during early development may thus influence their health and reproduction. Although the ultimate consequences of UVR on aquatic organisms in early life are well known, similar studies on terrestrial vertebrates, including humans, have remained limited. Using data on temporal variation in sunspot numbers and individual-based demographic data (N = 8662 births) from Norway between 1676 and 1878, while controlling for maternal effects, socioeconomic status, cohort and ecology, we show that solar activity (total solar irradiance) at birth decreased the probability of survival to adulthood for both men and women. On average, the lifespans of individuals born in a solar maximum period were 5.2 years shorter than those born in a solar minimum period. In addition, fertility and lifetime reproductive success (LRS) were reduced among low-status women born in years with high solar activity. The proximate explanation for the relationship between solar activity and infant mortality may be an effect of folate degradation during pregnancy caused by UVR. Our results suggest that solar activity at birth may have consequences for human lifetime performance both within and between generations.
===============================
===============================
2. Question on Blue Eyes
HAROLD BLALOCK wrote:
Do you know or have any materials regarding when the blue eye mutation happened in the Black Sea area? If so, what countries can it be traced through? It was reported on CBS new that this is where it started. Do Jews have blues? Thank you for what you are doing.
Harold
Big Sky Montana USA
===============================
Brit-Am Reply:
Contrary to what any popular journal scientist may claim blue eyes are universal.
Some animals have blue eyes just like they also have white fur coats in winter.
The coloring of Jews on the whole may be compared to that of central to northern Italy i.e. mainly brunette, majority of eyes brown but many blonds and blue eyes as well.
In addition a large minority of Jews have red hair.
Blue eyes are too common a phenomenon to make specific conclusions about.
My own opinions are very much AGAINST evolution BUT the human phenotype can change in accordance to environment very quickly under some circumstances.
This is an inbuilt adaptability mechanism.
There is a statistical correlation between the numbers of days of cloudy skies and blue eyes.
In Israel many children are born with blue eyes but the color changes within a few years.
God bless you
Yair
===============================
===============================
3. White? Black? A Murky Distinction Grows Still Murkier by Carl Zimmer
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/25/science/23andme-genetic-ethnicity-study.html?_r=0
DEC. 24, 2014
Extracts:
In 1924, the State of Virginia attempted to define what it means to be white.
The state's Racial Integrity Act, which barred marriages between whites and people of other races, defined whites as people 'whose blood is entirely white, having no known, demonstrable or ascertainable admixture of the blood of another race.'
There was just one problem. As originally written, the law would have classified many of Virginia's most prominent families as not white, because they claimed to be descended from Pocahontas.
So the Virginia legislature revised the act, establishing what came to be known as the 'Pocahontas exception.' Â Virginians could be up to one-sixteenth Native American and still be white in the eyes of the law.
People who were one-sixteenth black, on the other hand, were still black.
In the United States, there is a long tradition of trying to draw sharp lines between ethnic groups, but our ancestry is a fluid and complex matter. In recent years geneticists have been uncovering new evidence about our shared heritage, and last week a team of scientists published the biggest genetic profile of the United States to date, based on a study of 160,000 people.
On average, the scientists found, people who identified as African-American had genes that were only 73.2 percent African. European genes accounted for 24 percent of their DNA, while .8 percent came from Native Americans.
Latinos, on the other hand, had genes that were on average 65.1 percent European, 18 percent Native American, and 6.2 percent African. The researchers found that European-Americans had genomes that were on average 98.6 percent European, .19 percent African, and .18 Native American.
These broad estimates masked wide variation among individuals. Based on their sample, the resarchers estimated that over six million European-Americans have some African ancestry. As many as five million have genomes that are at least 1 percent Native American in origin. One in five African-Americans, too, has Native American roots.
Dr. Mountain and her colleagues also looked at how ancestry might influence ethnic identification.
Most Americans with less than 28 percent African-American ancestry say they are white, the researchers found. Above that threshold, people tended to describe themselves as African-American.
 African-Americans in Georgia and South Carolina have the highest average percentage of African ancestry among African-Americans in the United States.
 Latinos in the Southwest had high levels of Native American DNA, they found, while Latinos in the Southeast had high levels of African DNA.
The genes of African-Americans varied strikingly from state to state. In Oklahoma, the researchers estimated, 14 percent of African-Americans have genomes that are at least 2 percent Native American. This high percentage is probably due to the unique history of the state.
Some Native American tribes in the South, such as the Cherokee and Choctaw, kept African slaves. When they were expelled to Oklahoma in the 1830s, they brought the slaves with them. In some tribes, Native Americans and African slaves intermarried, and their descendants continue to live in Oklahoma today.