Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Biologists Create Genetic Map of Europe

Soulskill posted more than 6 years ago | from the unique-and-special-snowballs dept.

Earth 287

Death Metal Maniac brings us a story from the New York Times about a team of scientists who were able to relate genetic differences to geographical origins. Countries such as Germany, Austria, and France occupy the central area of the genetic map, with Italy, Finland, and the UK being relative outliers. Quoting: "All the populations are quite similar, but the differences are sufficient that it should be possible to devise a forensic test to tell which country in Europe an individual probably comes from, said Manfred Kayser, a geneticist at the Erasmus University Medical Center in the Netherlands. ... Genomic sites that carry the strongest signal of variation among populations may be those influenced by evolutionary change, Dr. Kayser said. Of the 100 strongest sites, 17 are found in the region of the genome that confers lactose tolerance, an adaptation that arose among a cattle herding culture in northern Europe some 5,000 years ago." Update: 08/16 15:11 GMT: Reader iminplaya points out the source article, which contains the technical details behind the study.

cancel ×

287 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

The Clash of Civilizations (4, Interesting)

burnitdown (1076427) | more than 6 years ago | (#24626135)

I recommend two books here:

The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order, by Samuel Huntington [amazon.com]
The Great Human Diasporas: The History of Diversity and Evolution, by Luigi Cavalli-Sforza et al [amazon.com]

Once humans evolved from apes, they went through several stages to create modern humans.

After that, modern humans underwent more aggressive development. This differentiated population groups.

Much like different programming languages are optimized for different tasks, but you can create just about anything in just about any language, human populations are different based on the optimizations that came about through their branch divergence.

This creates ethnicities, nationalities, and clines as mapped by Cavalli-Sforza.

Huntington points out that most of our modern wars have been caused by the nation-state, or an "imperial" grouping by politics that crosses these optimization lines, and suggests that as the superpower age winds down, people will identify with their optimization more than abstract and often illusory political concepts.

This is especially useful in understanding the difference between Georgia, Ossetia and Russia. For those who live in nation-states of an imperial nature, like the United States, Canada, Russia or UK, it's hard to grasp this, but not every country views itself as composed of generic people.

They view themselves as an organic nation, a notion which we may quaintly call "tribalism" yet seems to unite people with values more solidly than financial or political motivations.

The future will be determined by the struggle for these organic nations to define themselves.

All IMHO.

Re:The Clash of Civilizations (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24626327)

Historically, those "organic nations" tend to get shot down hard when they try to turn expansionist or purify their territory of what they consider to be different breeds.

I hope that kind of institutional racism belongs in the past, not the future.

Re:The Clash of Civilizations (1)

$RANDOMLUSER (804576) | more than 6 years ago | (#24626373)

I've recently been reading Will Durant's [wikipedia.org] Story of Civilization [wikipedia.org] , which I can tell you is no mean feat, but is a labor of love as they're so well written. In Volume IV, The Age of Faith [wikipedia.org] . Chapter 4, in particular, "The Dark Ages: AD 566-1095" has some fascinating comings and goings and goings and comings of various tribes all over Europe and the Near East. Magyars, Slavs, Croats, Turks, Mongols, Lombards, Serbs, Belarusians, Bulgarians and a hundred more warring, migrating, interbreeding - it's pretty damn fascinating.

The relevant sections are:
  1. The Byzantine World: 566-1095
  2. The Decline of the West: 566-1066
  3. The Rise of the North: 566-1066

Take a look here [wikipedia.org] for a similar map.

Re:The Clash of Civilizations (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24626379)

When humans evolve from apes, they shall go through several stages to create humans.

There I fixed that for you.

neo tribalism (2, Informative)

globaljustin (574257) | more than 6 years ago | (#24626833)

Huntington is certainly an excellent scientist, but his socio-political theories about why wars are fought are better left to experts in that field

Huntington points out that most of our modern wars have been caused by the nation-state, or an "imperial" grouping by politics that crosses these optimization lines

This argument is ridiculously reductive. First, what's the definition of 'war' in this context? I tried to imagine the different ways you can define 'war' and how they'd fit into this theory and none of them work.

This is good though:

as the superpower age winds down, people will identify with their optimization more than abstract and often illusory political concepts.

I don't agree that we're in a 'superpower age' that is 'winding down'...neither are accurate, HOWEVER, the idea that people (at least the younger Americans [felt right, geographically. It just fit. The climate affected everything about me in a positive way. When I moved back to Indiana, the humidity, allergens, etc. just wrecked me. I could feel my immune system changing, I swear. My friends would talk about similar feelings.

How this renewed understanding of geography and sub-species human differences will effect populations long term is a toss up. I feel that to say this genetic-based aspect of neo-tribalism (which itself has several components) will be THE guiding force in macro level human behavior is jumping the gun.

Re:The Clash of Civilizations (2, Insightful)

greg_barton (5551) | more than 6 years ago | (#24627027)

The future will be determined by the struggle for these organic nations to define themselves.

Nice try, but you should have just said RAHOWA [rahowa.com] and gotten it over with.

Burnitdown made it up (5, Interesting)

guanxi (216397) | more than 6 years ago | (#24627073)

I never thought the race-war bozos would make it onto /. It's the usual propoganda: Name check someone prominent (who didn't say anything in support of your argument), add some bogus theory with no support (but imply that it comes from the famous names), through in a little kernel of plausibility (hey, there's racism right? Maybe we are all genetically pre-disposed to hate each other), and stir.

Much like different programming languages are optimized for different tasks, but you can create just about anything in just about any language, human populations are different based on the optimizations that came about through their branch divergence.

See? Hmmm ... seems plausible. But think: Maybe I'm different based on the country I was born in, the way my parents fed me, raised me (the fact that I had loving parents), their wealth and social connections, the forces and choices that formed my personality. My education, the books I read, what I chose to study, my teachers and role models, how hard I worked at it, how well I networked, the career and jobs I chose, the person I married, the city I live in ... Where does this genetic optimization come in?

I recommend the same books as burnitdown, only you should read them and not just name-check them. I read Huntington's Clash of Civilizations [foreignaffairs.org] when it was first published in Foreign Affairs. It says nothing at all about genetics or "optimization", only super-national cultural groups called 'civilizations', which are genetically diverse (see list here [wikipedia.org] ). You can read more here [wikipedia.org] .

I haven't read Cavalli-Sforza, but The Economist seems to think [wikipedia.org] that his work challenges the assumption that there are significant genetic differences between human races, and indeed, the idea that 'race' has any useful biological meaning at all. Hmmm ... that seems opposite the ideas that burnitdown cited.

So Burnitdown is just talking out of his backside, start to finish. There is no outside support for it at all. I can't even imagine how it applies to Georgia, Russia, and North & South Ossetia. Does anyone know closely their populations correlate genetically? And why, on that basis, would South Ossetians want Russian more than Georgian citizenship? What the heck is 'Russian' genetically, anyway -- the country stretches from Europe to the Pacific; are they really genetically homogeneous?

Whenever I read something like this, I always try to remember: Think of the people who promolgate this theory of inevitable race-war hatred: From Milosovic to Bin Laden (who rails against Jewish people) to the Rwandan Hutu extremists to the KKK to, yes, Adolf Hitler. What have they accomplished? Then think of those who say that humans can integrate and live together regardless of supposed 'race', from Thomas Jefferson to Abraham Lincoln to Martin Luther King Jr., to Mahatma Gandhi and almost any current leader of prominence. Who has been more successful? Whose side would you rather be on?

Did you know that by the 3rd generation, most immigrants to the US marry across 'cultural' lines? Did you know that the rate of interracial marriage has increased ~700% in the US since 1970 [1] [wikipedia.org] ?

Re:Burnitdown made it up (0, Flamebait)

Das Modell (969371) | more than 6 years ago | (#24627213)

I never thought the race-war bozos would make it onto /.

And once again Slashdotters manage to create accusations of racism out of thin air. It's amazing.

See? Hmmm ... seems plausible. But think: Maybe I'm different based on the country I was born in, the way my parents fed me, raised me (the fact that I had loving parents), their wealth and social connections, the forces and choices that formed my personality. My education, the books I read, what I chose to study, my teachers and role models, how hard I worked at it, how well I networked, the career and jobs I chose, the person I married, the city I live in ... Where does this genetic optimization come in?

As we all know, humans are incorporeal entities that are entirely constructed from culture. Biology? What's that?

Re:The Clash of Civilizations (1)

ThousandStars (556222) | more than 6 years ago | (#24627267)

I'm not convinced that culture, rather than genetics, has more to do with the groupings you describe, but that's a very large subject and one that's caused much strife in the 20th Century. On a lighter note, I really wanted to respond to this: This is especially useful in understanding the difference between Georgia, Ossetia and Russia. For those who live in nation-states of an imperial nature, like the United States, Canada, Russia or UK, it's hard to grasp this, but not every country views itself as composed of generic people.

Quid Plura? [quidplura.com] has as an excellent post [quidplura.com] that deserves wider recognition on the subject of Georgia, Ossetia, Russia, and the Middle-ages. As often happens in events like this (see: Kosovo), the problems and issues go back much farther than is commonly reported.

Finland? (1)

wisty (1335733) | more than 6 years ago | (#24626163)

Hehe. Finland is special. TFA seems to suggest a certain level of genetic ... recycling

Re:Finland? (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24626181)

Well, when you have to choose between your cousin and a Swede, the choice is pretty clear, isn't it?

My wife is Finnish (5, Funny)

an.echte.trilingue (1063180) | more than 6 years ago | (#24626395)

My wife is Finnish, and this pretty much confirms my suspicion that she and all other Finns are in fact from outer space.

Re:My wife is Finnish (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24626529)

My wife is Finnish, and this pretty much confirms my suspicion that she and all other Finns are in fact from outer space.

Please don't let her know that you suspect this, as she might get drunk and kill herself.

HHOS [catb.org]

Re:My wife is Finnish (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24626577)

Heh, here is some space language for you:
Kahdennessakymmenennessätoisessakerroksessa.
And that reads: At the twenty second floor.
Our language is otherwise fine, but something definitely went wrong with our numerals. :)

Re:My wife is Finnish (1)

phaxkolumbo (572192) | more than 6 years ago | (#24626883)

...apart from the fact that that's slightly wrong. It's two words and not strictly a numeral anymore. "Kahdennessakymmenessätoisessa kerroksessa" would be the right expression. And that includes specifying the location, so it doesn't work out much more difficult or long than a similar expression in English. The Finnish numeral system is decimal-based instead of the 12-based ones in most european languages. Whether that makes it easier to learn or less space-y, I don't know.

Re:My wife is Finnish (1)

maxume (22995) | more than 6 years ago | (#24626983)

There are 7 syllables in the English statement. How many sounds is the Finnish statement using to convey the same information?

Re:My wife is Finnish (1)

phaxkolumbo (572192) | more than 6 years ago | (#24627095)

I'm counting 15, although a sentence fragment like this is not probably the best way to measure efficiency... it's probably said in the same time as the English one.

Re:My wife is Finnish (1)

maxume (22995) | more than 6 years ago | (#24627253)

Sure. I was thinking of the number of sounds as being a reasonable (though superficial) measure of complexity.

Re:My wife is Finnish (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24627001)

Whether that makes it easier to learn or less space-y, I don't know.

I believe I'm getting it now...

The "space language" version, as posted by the other AC a bit earlier:
"Kahdennessakymmenennessätoisessakerroksessa."

And here's the Finnish version:
"Kahdennessakymmenessätoisessa kerroksessa"

As you can see, the Finnish version has one space between the two words, while the space language version has none, thus making the Finnish version more space-y than the space language version, and... er...

Well, I think I'm Finnished here. Carry on!

Re:My wife is Finnish (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24627111)

Yhdyssanat tuottaa mullle aina ongelmia. :)
Run-in words have always been problematic to me, thanks for correct spelling. :)

Re:My wife is Finnish (1)

mfnickster (182520) | more than 6 years ago | (#24627299)

Did you know there's a language called 'aUI' whose author claims it really is from outer space?

"aUI: The Language of Space: Pentecostal Logos of Love & Peace"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AUI_(language) [wikipedia.org]

Turanian/Scandi/Baltic mix (3, Interesting)

burnitdown (1076427) | more than 6 years ago | (#24626201)

Finland is an interesting convergence of east and west. Their language is most closely related to Japanese and Hungarian; their population seems to be halfway between Swedes, Baltics and an Asian precursor.

Max Muller classified the Turanian language family into different sub-branches. The Northern or Ural-Altaic division branch compromised Tungusic, Mongolic, Turkic, Samoyedic, and Finnic. The Southern branch consisted of Dravidian languages like Tamil, Kannada, Telugu, Malayalam, and other Dravidian languages. The languages of the Caucasus were classified as the scattered languages of the Turanian family. Muller also began to muse whether Chinese belonged to the Northern branch or Southern branch.[31]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turan [wikipedia.org]

The language record does not mirror the genetic record, necessarily, but it provides a useful clue.

I'm not sure how this is related to their ability to create quality death metal bands like Amorphis, Demigod, Abhorrence, Demilich, Belial and Sentenced. However, all of Scandinavia is a death metal powerhouse, so it may be "cultural."

Re:Turanian/Scandi/Baltic mix (5, Informative)

CRCulver (715279) | more than 6 years ago | (#24626237)

Their language is most closely related to Japanese and Hungarian

Finnish is not related to Japanese. Finnish is a member of the Finno-Ugrian/Uralic language family, which does include Hungarian, Estonian and a number of minority languages spoken in Russia on either side of the Urals. Japanese is a language isolate, which some linguists have attempted to group under the Altaic umbrella (e.g. Turkic, Tungusic and Mongolian languages) but with little acceptance. No mainstream Uralicist believes in a genetic relationship between the Uralic and Altaic languages, though of course the Turkic languages influenced several Uralic languages somewhat in terms of lexicon and morphosyntax after Turkic expansion.

The language record does not mirror the genetic record, necessarily, but it provides a useful clue.

Linguists get rather sick of hearing language grouping identified with genes. The speakers of the Uralic languages are widely disparate in terms of "race", with the very Asian Samoyed peoples contrasting with the quite European Hungarians, and the Udmurts have both within the same nation.

Re:Turanian/Scandi/Baltic mix (1)

LizardKing (5245) | more than 6 years ago | (#24626275)

The speakers of the Uralic languages are widely disparate in terms of "race", with the very Asian Samoyed peoples contrasting with the quite European Hungarians, and the Udmurts have both within the same nation.

The difference in race is only really marked when you compare the Hungarians to other Finno-Ugrians. As I point out in another comment, the Hungarians are so mixed genetically because they've lived in a crossroads between the Western European, Slavic and Turkic regions for so long. Their language reflects this, having virtually no similarities to other Finno-Ugrian languages anymore. Many ethnic Finns from the more Northern and Eastern parts of the country still exhibit distinctly Uralic facial features, much like the Komi people and othes that still live around the Urals.

Re:Turanian/Scandi/Baltic mix (1)

CRCulver (715279) | more than 6 years ago | (#24626313)

Their language reflects this, having virtually no similarities to other Finno-Ugrian languages anymore.

Proto-Finno-Ugric is still mainly reconstructed based on Finnish on one hand and Proto-Samoyed on the other, and Finnish still preserves a huge number of lexemes in common with Mordvin and Mari. It hasn't diverged that much. Sure, one can point to signs of Germanic influence like some prepositions instead of only postpositions, but it's still squarely a Uralic language.

Re:Turanian/Scandi/Baltic mix (1)

CRCulver (715279) | more than 6 years ago | (#24626325)

Oops, sorry, I thought you said Finnish had diverged so much. Yes, Hungarian is now squarely in the typological orbit of its neighbouring Indo-European languages.

Altaic to Japanese (3, Informative)

burnitdown (1076427) | more than 6 years ago | (#24626415)

I think this one will be under debate for some time. Japanese inherits from multiple sources; whether it once had an Altaic root or contributing source is still under debate among some linguists, as far as I know.

A better explanation:

There is no such thing as a Finno-Ugro-Ural-Altaic language group.

There are Uralic and Altaic language families, and the Uralic family
divides up into two stocks, Finno-Ugric and Samoyed. The limits of Altaic
remain controversial, with Turkic, Mongolian, and Tungusic constituting
the core group, and Korean, and possibly Japanese being outliers.

The Uralic, and particularly the Finno-Ugric languages within them, are
closely related enough that the relationship can be demonstrated by
application of the traditional methods of comparative linguisics based on
systematic sound correspondences in basic inherited vocabulary. Within
Altaic the number of putative cognates is far smaller, and the distinction
between inherited words and *WanderwÃrter* is not always clear. The
relationship between them is based more on typological similarities than
on the presence of inherited morphemes exhibiting systematic phonological
correspondences. Japanese, and particularly Korean, although undoubtedly
demonstrating some Altaic-like structural features, are both strongly
mixed languages with elements of Sinetic (Chinese) and, particularly in
the case of Japanese, Malayo-Polynesian in their core structures.

http://newsgroups.derkeiler.com/Archive/Soc/soc.culture.nordic/2006-07/msg00007.html [derkeiler.com]

Apologies if I did not make that clear.

Re:Turanian/Scandi/Baltic mix (1)

RonTheHurler (933160) | more than 6 years ago | (#24627225)

Here's a unrelated question I've always wanted to ask a language expert.

Ever since I was a little kid (about 40 years ago) I was taught that "Oklahoma" is a native American word for "Red Man". Okla = red, Homa = man.

Now, isn't "Ochre Homo" Greek (or sort-of greek) for "red man"?

Whence the similarity from languages seemingly so far apart?

Re:Turanian/Scandi/Baltic mix (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24627345)

Firstly, ochre means 'yellow' in Greek, not 'red.'

Secondly, 'homo' is Latin - the Greek word would be 'anthropos'

Thirdly: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_cognate [wikipedia.org]

Re:Turanian/Scandi/Baltic mix (1)

bargainsale (1038112) | more than 6 years ago | (#24627483)

"Oklahoma" is from Choctaw.

In fact, it's the "okla" part that means "people", and the "homa" part that means "red".

"homo" is Latin, not Greek, for "person".

You can easily find lookalikes between the words of any two languages taken at random. The more leeway you allow in variations of vowels and consonants, and the more vagueness you permit in the meaning correspondence, the more purely coincidental lookalikes you can come up with.
Scientific comparative linguistics, in contrast, works by establishing sound-by-sound correspondences matching across lots of different words, eventually making it possible to deduce the earlier common form that has developed into the two different languages being compared.

For example, it's no coincidence that the words for "man" are similar in French, Spanish, Italian and Rumanian:

homme, hombre, uomo, om

because all the words are descended from Latin "homo", just as all the languages involved are modern descendants of Latin.

In the case of the Latin-derived languages, the original ancestor language is a known, written language, but you can compare other languages and reconstruct hypothetical ancestor languages, like "Primitive Germanic", the unwritten ancestor of English, German, Swedish etc.
The key to doing this scientifically and rigorously is to find systematic correspondences among lots of different words.

Unfortunately outside of linguistics, most people are unaware that there even is a scientific study of how languages have developed historically and how they are really related to one another. Many lay ideas about this are based on chance resemblances or general similarities of structure.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparative_linguistics [wikipedia.org]

Re:Turanian/Scandi/Baltic mix (1)

dylan_- (1661) | more than 6 years ago | (#24627489)

Ever since I was a little kid (about 40 years ago) I was taught that "Oklahoma" is a native American word for "Red Man". Okla = red, Homa = man.

Now, isn't "Ochre Homo" Greek (or sort-of greek) for "red man"?

Whence the similarity from languages seemingly so far apart?

I'm not a language expert (or language anything, actually), but I checked this out. According to the wikipedia entry for Oklahoma "The name Oklahoma comes from the Choctaw phrase okla humma, literally meaning red people."

By checking the entry for Choctaw, it seems that Okla = Men/People and therefore it's probable that Humma = Red. Which removes the coincidence, I'm afraid.

Re:Turanian/Scandi/Baltic mix (1)

Mortiss (812218) | more than 6 years ago | (#24626271)

I'm not sure how this is related to their ability to create quality death metal bands like Amorphis, Demigod, Abhorrence, Demilich, Belial and Sentenced. However, all of Scandinavia is a death metal powerhouse, so it may be "cultural."

I have heard that the large popularity of the death metal in a region is a symptom of a "depressive" culture (along the huge alcohol consumption) brought by the little exposure to the Sun during the year - Winter Blues?
Can anyone comment?

Re:Turanian/Scandi/Baltic mix (1)

xaxa (988988) | more than 6 years ago | (#24626359)

I'm not sure how this is related to their ability to create quality death metal bands like Amorphis, Demigod, Abhorrence, Demilich, Belial and Sentenced. However, all of Scandinavia is a death metal powerhouse, so it may be "cultural."

I have heard that the large popularity of the death metal in a region is a symptom of a "depressive" culture (along the huge alcohol consumption) brought by the little exposure to the Sun during the year - Winter Blues?

Can anyone comment?

I read in a music magazine that at some point the Swedish government financed youth clubs with musical instruments, to give non-sporty teens something to do. That explains why there's lots of good bands from Sweden.
I don't know if the number of bands in a genre is proportional to the number of fans of that genre (If you gave Japanese kids free instruments, would the ones who like metal be more likely to make a band?)

"Winter blues" is formally known as Seasonal Affective Disorder (looks like a backronym to me). I don't think there's less sun (over the whole year), but the short winter days in the UK really suck sometimes, they must be even worse in Sweden. Of course, there are long summer days too.

Swedish death metal (1)

burnitdown (1076427) | more than 6 years ago | (#24626527)

Sweden basically reinvented the genre after its first wave, pioneered by Americans (Deicide, Morbid Angel, Master) and Brazilians (Sarcofago, Sepultura), after the Germans, Swiss and Swedes invented a proto-death-metal as seen in Bathory, Hellhammer/Celtic Frost, Sodom and Merciless. Huge influences came from UK/Scottland hardcore punk (Discharge, The Exploited) and American speed metal (Slayer).

Swedish death metal of note: Dismember, Therion, Carnage, Unleashed, At the Gates/Grotesque, Entombed and Uncanny.

The Norwegians almost single-handedly renovated black metal in the early 1990s, with Emperor, Burzum, Mayhem, Gorgoroth, Immortal, Enslaved and Darkthrone.

A useful document is The History of Underground Heavy Metal [anus.com] .

Re:Swedish death metal (1)

Freultwah (739055) | more than 6 years ago | (#24627045)

Add Opeth and Meshuggah to that list. Cannot talk about Swedish metal without those two.

Re:Turanian/Scandi/Baltic mix (2, Funny)

Hal_Porter (817932) | more than 6 years ago | (#24626383)

I have heard that the large popularity of the death metal in a region is a symptom of a "depressive" culture (along the huge alcohol consumption) brought by the little exposure to the Sun during the year - Winter Blues?

Black clothes are also an evolutionary adaption to living in a snowy environment. In prehistoric times, humans who showed a preference for dark clothes were easier to find when they were lost in the snow. Evolution thus selected for this trait.

Moshing is also an efficient way for humans to stay warm in a confined environment like an igloo.

Humans who had the genes for moshing and wearing black clothes thus outbred those who did not.

Also, in most human societies with a harsh climate religion, in this case Satanism, acts as an agent to bind communities together.

Re:Turanian/Scandi/Baltic mix (1)

OriginalArlen (726444) | more than 6 years ago | (#24626421)

This explains why Fields of the Nephilim had a lot more fans in, say, Leeds than London. Oh yes.

Re:Turanian/Scandi/Baltic mix (2, Funny)

Hal_Porter (817932) | more than 6 years ago | (#24626811)

Damnit, I forgot this awesome link

"Stay still, ball sack!"
http://jwz.livejournal.com/913754.html [livejournal.com]

Re:Turanian/Scandi/Baltic mix (1)

tietokone-olmi (26595) | more than 6 years ago | (#24626413)

That doesn't really match. Canada is just as dark during the winter, yet they don't export piles of kill-your-dog-for-satan kind of music. It'd be offset by the bright summers too.

What I'd like to see explained is the amount of hip hop that comes from Sweden. Most of it's made by white people too.

Actually, Canada leads in metal music (1)

burnitdown (1076427) | more than 6 years ago | (#24626471)

Canada's produced quite a lot of influential metal music.

Probably the most common mentions would be Sacrifice, Voivod, Gorguts and Cryptopsy.

Gorguts helped define early technical death metal, along with Atheist, Pestilence, Obliveon, Demilich and others.

Interestingly, the French Canadian portion of Canada produces the best death metal, which is not mirrored in France itself, except through Massacra [anus.com] and Loudblast; however, the French band Supuration sounds similar to Voivod.

Shows what I know (1)

tietokone-olmi (26595) | more than 6 years ago | (#24626477)

Mea culpa.

Death metal is totally obscure (1)

burnitdown (1076427) | more than 6 years ago | (#24626597)

Good luck finding death metal information except in the underground. No one has heard of it.

The genre probably started 1983-1985, and other than a few standouts that sell over 100,000 albums -- Bathory, Morbid Angel, Deicide, Slayer -- it's mostly small bands that sell 1,000 CDs and conclude it's a smashing success.

Its heyday was probably 1985-1994, and at this point, it's mostly a tribute genre.

For more information, I would use period sources:

http://www.anus.com/metal [anus.com]
http://www.bnrmetal.com/ [bnrmetal.com]

Re:Death metal is totally obscure (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24627317)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watershed_(Opeth_album)

Please take note of the release date, the genre and the chart positions in Norway, Finland and Sweden.

Re:Shows what I know (1)

ColdWetDog (752185) | more than 6 years ago | (#24626945)

Mea culpa.

Not necessarily. You're probably thinking of that vast expanse of Canada that is populated large by mosquitoes and moose.

Neither appear to be much into heavy metal.

Re:Turanian/Scandi/Baltic mix (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24626591)

What I'd like to see explained is the amount of hip hop that comes from Sweden.

Is it really a larger amount of hip hop from Sweden than, say, the other Scandinavian countries? From what I know mostly LoopTroop (Rockers), Petter, Timbuktu and Ken Ring is the most known names atleast outside Sweden. Of course there is a bunch of groups not that well known, but I would think that's the situation in most countries.

Most of it's made by white people too.

Not all that strange since the majority of Sweden's population are white people.

Re:Turanian/Scandi/Baltic mix (1)

Teun (17872) | more than 6 years ago | (#24626909)

Have a look at a globe, in the West the US Canadian border runs on the 49th. parallel, Totonto is located at 43.5 degrees and Montreal at about 45.5.

Compare that with the southern tip of Sweden just above 55 and Stockholm and Oslo north of 59 degrees.

Most of the Canadians live on a latitude comparable to Italy with Rome at about 42 degrees...

Re:Turanian/Scandi/Baltic mix (1)

tietokone-olmi (26595) | more than 6 years ago | (#24626381)

The metal thing is definitely cultural. Notice how Finland, Sweden and Norway are evangelic lutheran?

Evangelical Lutherans in Europe (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24626575)

How do I find out which religious traditions are prominent in which countries?

Re:Finland? (1)

aliquis (678370) | more than 6 years ago | (#24626449)

To me it's pretty obvious that they are outside because they don't border to any of the countries except a very small part against Sweden, most of their borders is against russia and the baltics (estonia) so they probably have more in common with those.

From the looks of that genome map the borders of the genomes are quite similar to the borders of the countries, and why would Finland be any different?

Though one would expect them to be a little similar to us (swedes), but I guess it's only that we are even more similar to the norwegians and danish people which makes finland look like an isolate island.

Re:Finland? (1)

maxume (22995) | more than 6 years ago | (#24627203)

If I am understanding the map correctly, it is only for the 2 markers that vary most widely across Europe. The rest of the article downplays the overall variation throughout Europe. I would infer that the map does not demonstrate that Finland is wildly different than Europe, but that they have greater variation in those two markers (this goes along with the statement in the article that they would be able to infer origin locations from genetic material, I'm sure there are markers that are more or less unique to certain regions, and so forth).

Re:Finland? (1)

kestasjk (933987) | more than 6 years ago | (#24626503)

I wonder if it's because they're closer to Russia, and not just because of inbreeding.

I can't stand lactose... (1, Funny)

XanC (644172) | more than 6 years ago | (#24626213)

...and I won't tolerate it.

oh dear (2, Interesting)

thermian (1267986) | more than 6 years ago | (#24626215)

Good job Hitler never had this kind of info. I can't see that as having ended well.

Re:oh dear (1)

LizardKing (5245) | more than 6 years ago | (#24626241)

It's a shame the information *wasn't* available, as it disproves any notion of Germans being radically different in their genetic makeup from most other Europeans - including Slavic people like the Czechs and Poles.

Re:oh dear (5, Insightful)

M. Baranczak (726671) | more than 6 years ago | (#24626361)

It's nice to think so, but it wouldn't have made any difference. A "great ideology" never lets facts get in the way.

Re:oh dear (1)

maxume (22995) | more than 6 years ago | (#24626385)

It sort of depends on how you interpret it. He may have decided that most Germans were not pure enough.

Re:oh dear (1)

LizardKing (5245) | more than 6 years ago | (#24626493)

Which would have been pretty rich coming from someone with a surname that's strongly believed to a corruption of a Czech one, and who was also unable to trace his lineage back more than a couple of generations. If I remember rightly, his father Alois was born illegitimately and only had the name of his purported father added to his birth record much later, in order to make it easier for someone (Alois, his father or mother - can't remember) to get married.

Re:oh dear (1)

maxume (22995) | more than 6 years ago | (#24626921)

Yeah well, his whole ideology was "pretty rich" to begin with.

Re:oh dear (0, Offtopic)

Lead Butthead (321013) | more than 6 years ago | (#24626701)

It sort of depends on how you interpret it. He may have decided that most Germans were not pure enough.

Then he should "voluntarily enroll" himself in his "final solution" and save the rest of the planet a lot of trouble.

Actually, it was, but not as detailed (1)

burnitdown (1076427) | more than 6 years ago | (#24626649)

You can find a good summary of pre-WWII and thereabouts European ethnic knowledge summarized in Carleton Coon's The Origin of Races [amazon.com] (1962) which used previous knowledge and later archaelogy to derive conclusions. Included a number of photographic plates showing different European archetypes.

I can't see that as having ended well (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24627187)

Not for him if you traced back far enough to a common ancestor group that came out of Africa.

Interesting (3, Interesting)

LizardKing (5245) | more than 6 years ago | (#24626217)

Surprising how far "out there" the Finnish genetic makeup is, considering the long period of integration with Sweden. It's also interesting that this kind of research may give us the final pieces to jigsaw of migration that took place from the Urals to Central and Northern Europe. This great migration of the tribes is what lead to Finno-Ugrian people ending up around the Baltic and in Hungary, but it's still unclear where the tribes "split up", one lot heading north and the other west. The closeness of the Hungarian genetic makeup to other Central Europeans must reflect the massive amount of migration and conquest that occurred across that region (by various Slavic and Turkic peoples in particular), along with a fair bit of Germanic immigration through trading.

Re:Interesting (4, Interesting)

CRCulver (715279) | more than 6 years ago | (#24626259)

The history of Hungarian migration is pretty clear, actually. The Hungarians were living with their closest Uralic brethren, the Khanty and Mansi tribes, in the south Russian steppes around the beginning of the Common Era. The expansion of the Turkic peoples brought a tribe, evidentally speaking a Chuvash-type language, into contact with some Hungarians, who then learnt horsemanship and began to move west. A number of Hungarians remained behind, and when the Friar Julianus visited the area eight hundred years ago, he was able to communicate with them.

The Hungarian migration to the Carpathian Basin happened fairly recently compared to the spread of Uralic languages to northwestern Russia, Finland and Scandinavia, which must have been complete a thousand years before the beginning of the Common Era.

Re:Interesting (1)

LizardKing (5245) | more than 6 years ago | (#24626367)

It is, or at least was when I was at university, the migration up until the period when Finno-Ugrians were in the Southern Steppes that was unclear. In other words, the initial movements West from the Urals, and the split that saw some go North and others to the steppes - where as you describe, they settled for a considerable amount of time before moving on to the sparsely populated Carpathian basin. I'm going to try and get up to date by reading Cartledge's recent history of Hungary "A Will To Survive" soon, but it's sat unread on a bookshelf for several months now ...

Re:Interesting (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24626639)

It's also interesting to see that there is hardly any overlap between the Netherlands and France, with both populations living in Belgium as a federal state. It might explain the long history of conflicts between both communities resulting in a political crisis today.

Re:Interesting (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24626763)

That map actually confirms what was being said some time ago in a radio program I overheard about Finns.

It was stated that Finns are closer genetically with Swedes & Germans than Hungarians or even other people around Baltic sea and it's common mistake to think that it would be vice versa justifiying based on Fenno-Ugric language traces.

According to current undrestanding Finns changed their language for some reason in past, propably before arriving to their current location. Reasons to that switch is still unknown.

ac

ps. myself being 1/8 swede & rest finn.

Lack of overlap (4, Interesting)

Guppy06 (410832) | more than 6 years ago | (#24626277)

I'm now kind of curious about how such a map of North America would look in comparison, because to me there are some pretty big areas here where there is no overlap (Great Britain, southern Italy, Poland, Sweden...). They've been on the same continent for how many centuries, and they're still so distinct?

Re:Lack of overlap (1)

xaxa (988988) | more than 6 years ago | (#24626443)

Remember travelling was only for the rich until not so long ago. The first inter-city railway was only opened in 1830 (Liverpool to Manchester), before that most people couldn't afford the time or the money to travel further than to the nearest town.

Add to that the language barriers, probably cultural barriers and it's not so surprising.

Re:Lack of overlap (2, Informative)

Paul Jakma (2677) | more than 6 years ago | (#24626653)

That's not really true. E.g. notice the overlap between Ireland, Norway and Denmark, due to some degree to Viking tribes pillaging and then settling in Ireland, in the 600s to 800s (I think - going out on a limb by not checking wikipaedia first). You could go and on in similar fashion.

You can go back further in time and find evidence of trade stretching across Europe and even beyond. Even as far as back as *neo-lithic* (ie late stone age, circa 4k years ago) times, there is evidence of trade routes as stone axe heads known to have been quarried in Northern Ireland have been found in the UK and even the continent.

I'm picking a bit of a nit, cause you're right that travel was less common, but it wasn't confined to rich people and there was still plenty of it thanks to trade and war (e.g. we havn't even mentioned the Romans).

Re:Lack of overlap (2, Informative)

julian67 (1022593) | more than 6 years ago | (#24626635)

Great Britain might be part of Europe politically and in geological terms but there is the barrier of the English Channel which has kept us safe from French, Spanish and German invasion attempts for 900 years. The last 4 successful invasions of Britain were by the Normans in the 11th century, by the Angles, Saxons, Jutes et al in the 5th/6th century, by Vikings in the 9th/10th centuries and by the Romans in the 1st century. Probably not a lot changed in terms of the genetic profile of the population for many hundreds of years until the mass immigration in the 20th century of people from the West Indies, India, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Uganda (Ugandan Indians).

Re:Lack of overlap (1, Troll)

Eudial (590661) | more than 6 years ago | (#24626695)

Still, I expected to see more Italian<->British relation/overlap (because of the whole roman deal you mentioned). Looking at British people and Italian people, you can often see the resemblance in facial features hair/skin color, etc. in a way you can't between, say, Italian and German people (naturally, there are Italian looking Germans, but they are to my experience more rare than Britons).

Re:Lack of overlap (2, Informative)

julian67 (1022593) | more than 6 years ago | (#24626867)

The Roman legions weren't necessarily Italians, the soldiers would have been from all over Europe, North Africa and the Middle East. I don't know enough about the history to know if there was any great mixing of populations but the Roman occupation was only about 350 years in Britain, compared to many times more in Europe, and there were numerous rebellions and even the complete destruction of Roman armies and cities, so perhaps it was more like a military occupation than a settlement and integration. From what I've read of Roman history all citizens of the empire could attain high position in the military and civil governments regardless of national/ethnic origin but we don't see many Brits making big careers :-) The origin of the Britons in legend claims descent from those who fled Troy under the leadership of Brutus (no, not that one) after it was sacked by the Greeks. The Trojans arrived at Albion, which they conquered/colonised and renamed Britain. We all know that the legend of the founding of Rome is similar, fleeing Trojans in this case being led by Aeneas and arriving in Italy and Aeneas' descendents founding Rome. But I'm sure little of this survives real scrutiny.

Re:Lack of overlap (1)

fsmunoz (267297) | more than 6 years ago | (#24627075)

That resemblance you mention is more likely due to the shared origins of native Britons and Iberians than any Roman conquest. This is well known due to the R1b Y haplogorup distribution that reaches the highest percentages in Iberia and the British Isles (and especially in Ireland).

See this reference [findarticles.com] for some further info, although the information in there is rather speculative.

Re:Lack of overlap (1)

Das Modell (969371) | more than 6 years ago | (#24627227)

I'd love to know how you managed to get modded troll.

Re:Lack of overlap (3, Interesting)

Guppy06 (410832) | more than 6 years ago | (#24627315)

"Great Britain might be part of Europe politically and in geological terms but there is the barrier of the English Channel which has kept us safe from French, Spanish and German invasion attempts for 900 years."

And yet Ireland shows more overlap with with continent than Great Britain.

Re:Lack of overlap (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24626779)

The USA isn't old enough for this to be as interesting as is Europe's.

But there are definitely enclaves. Amish, Creole, American Indians, those weird fishing island people on the east coast, Germans in the midwest, hillbillies, Baltimore.

Accuracy of map? (3, Insightful)

SystematicPsycho (456042) | more than 6 years ago | (#24626289)

The map should have included Russia and other Eastern European areas. Also, one thing that makes me skeptical of the maps accuracy is there doesn't appear to be an overlap between EL and IT2.

Re:Accuracy of map? (1)

e-Flex (1219042) | more than 6 years ago | (#24626559)

Yeah, those lazy scientists!

Re:Accuracy of map? (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24626581)

Greece and Italy are near each other, but do not overlap.
Not terribly surprising as Greece was conquered by the Ottoman Empire and Italy was not, therefore having more of an East European and Arab influence.

Re:Accuracy of map? (1)

seyyah (986027) | more than 6 years ago | (#24626753)

The map should have included Russia and other Eastern European areas. Also, one thing that makes me skeptical of the maps accuracy is there doesn't appear to be an overlap between EL and IT2.

Agreed. What would have been really interesting would have been Turkey's presence on the map. I'd love to see the amount overlap with overlap with its neighbours - notably Greece.

Let's try to link to the source (2, Informative)

iminplaya (723125) | more than 6 years ago | (#24626307)

Shall we [current-biology.com] ?

Misleading title (2, Informative)

Stoutlimb (143245) | more than 6 years ago | (#24626311)

If this was the USA, it would be like making a map of the pacific states and some midwest states, and calling it a map of the USA. Where's the rest?

The country at the geographical centre of Europe (Ukraine) isn't even on there. Neither is Russia. Not to mention the dozens of smaller states. No wonder Finland is way out there... they're very similar to Russians who aren't on the map, like they weren't even part of Europe. This article is either very bad journalism or serious EU snobbery.

Europe versus Eurasia (1)

burnitdown (1076427) | more than 6 years ago | (#24626433)

Although people are always trying to redraw these boundaries for political reasons, many consider Russia, the Ukraine, et al, to be part of "Eurasia" and not "Europe." Your politics may differ and I doubt some God is going to descend and declare one right and not the other.

Re:Misleading title (1)

N3TW4LK3R (841526) | more than 6 years ago | (#24626437)

It looks like a map of Europe to me.
Although there has always been some discussion as to where the eastern border of 'Europe' is, the whole of Russia is most certainly not part of Europe. Take a look at some maps [google.com] . Perhaps you meant to say Eurasia [wikipedia.org] ?

Re:Misleading title (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24627359)

The Eastern border of Europe is defined by physical geography - the Ural mountains.

The Russian Federation as a whole, like the USSR before it, is certainly not entirely in Europe. But "Russia" is really in Europe. Was Britain not in Europe when it owned large chunks of India and America and Australia etc.? No, Britain was always in Europe, but the British Empire, like the Russian Federation, was much larger.

The Russians are currently maintaining it's all one state, of course, but once you get beyond the ural mountains (in fact a bit before), you run into a lot* of noticeably non-russian russian federation citizens, like the various Samoyed and Altaic peoples.

* Well, not that many, the whole stretch is incredibly sparsely populated. Russia kind of controls it by default more than anything else.

Re:Misleading title (2, Insightful)

tietokone-olmi (26595) | more than 6 years ago | (#24626457)

It also ignores the distinct ethnic groups (e.g. the different groupings of Sami) present in Norway, Sweden and Finland and apparently completely omits Iceland, Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia, Ukraine and other countries that're at least as far east as Finland.

As an amateur with no competence in this stuff whatsoever, I'd say that Finland's outlier status on this diagram follows the sample. The not so nice part is of course that now the papers are going to pronounce Finns as some kind of freaks in Europe, when (as you said) this study excluded a significant chunk of European peoples.

Re:Misleading title (1)

Paul Jakma (2677) | more than 6 years ago | (#24626671)

Stoutlimb meet scope and funding, and likewise..

Italian (5, Insightful)

seyyah (986027) | more than 6 years ago | (#24626357)

The article is quite light on details, but instead of the Alps, couldn't the reason for the Italian blob being outside the rest of Europe have more to do with it having absorbed a significant Arab/Berber population from North Africa?

The Iberian peninsula is also cut off by mountains but it sits in nicely with the rest of Europe. Of course Spain also had its Berbers and Arabs but kicked them - and the Jews - out rather successfully in 1492.

Re:Italian (3, Informative)

LizardKing (5245) | more than 6 years ago | (#24626423)

I wasn't aware of significant, if any, influx of North Africans or Arabs into Italy (the really recent immigration from North Africa hasn't had time to impact the genetic makeup of the population as a whole). The only part of Italy that I'm aware has had a North African or Arab influence is Sicily, where the Sicilian language at least has Arab influences (as well as Latin, Spanish, Norman French and some German influences). There's also a dialect in Sicily that is strongly Albanian influenced, and unintelligible to other Sicilian language speakers, the result of a significant migration of Albanians a long time ago who then remained pretty much in one small region.

Re:Italian (1)

seyyah (986027) | more than 6 years ago | (#24626673)

I meant especially Sicily (and Malta) in terms of direct immigration, but also other parts of southernmost Italy. The contact with North Africa has been a longstanding one, and perhaps long enough for the effects to have spread northwards (over hundreds or even thousand of years). The Alps hypothesis still seems a bit unlikely to me.

Just a thought though.

Geographical error (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24626553)

Figure 1 grossly misplaces FÃrde (the NO mark). It is in reality quite a bit further north.

What? No Belgians? (3, Funny)

houghi (78078) | more than 6 years ago | (#24626717)

Belgium does apparently have no people or are such a rare breed that it would falsify the map.

Re:What? No Belgians? (1)

Daimanta (1140543) | more than 6 years ago | (#24627197)

THat comes as no surprise.

Belgians are either "Dutch" or "French". The people in Flanders are Dutch and speak Dutch. The people Wallonia are French and speak French.

There are elements in both societies that want to reunify both nations(Flanders+ The Netherlands and Wallonia + France).

Re:What? No Belgians? (1)

owlnation (858981) | more than 6 years ago | (#24627239)

Almost... there are some Germans too.

The dairy board must be so happy! (2, Interesting)

voss (52565) | more than 6 years ago | (#24626719)

"...Most people switch off the lactose digesting gene after weaning, but the cattle herders evidently gained a great survival advantage by keeping the gene switched on through adulthood."

Behold the power of cheese!

Re:The dairy board must be so happy! (1)

maxume (22995) | more than 6 years ago | (#24627287)

There isn't much lactose in cheese.

That's not Europe (1)

asCii88 (1017788) | more than 6 years ago | (#24626731)

As you can see in the map, they are missing most eastern europe's countries... I wonder why.

Decades of research? (2, Informative)

GooDieZ (802156) | more than 6 years ago | (#24627021)

They don't even have a whole map of europe...

Oh... and Yugoslavia, actually there is no Yugoslavia for last 17 Years, it fell apart in 1991...

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?