Bjork
Posted on 02/07/2008 5:39:12 PM PST by blam
Third Cousins Have Greatest Number Of Offspring, Data From Iceland Shows
ScienceDaily (Feb. 8, 2008) — DeCODE scientists have established a substantial and consistent positive correlation between the kinship of couples and the number of children and grandchildren they have. The study, which analyzes more than 200 years of deCODE's comprehensive define genealogical data on the population of Iceland, shows that couples related at the level of third cousins have the greatest number of offspring.
For example, for women born between 1800 and 1824, those with a mate related at the level of a third cousin had an average of 4.04 children and 9.17 grandchildren, while those related to their mates as eighth cousins or more distantly had 3.34 children and 7.31 grandchildren. For women born in the period 1925-1949 with mates related at the degree of third cousins, the average number of children and grandchildren were 3.27 and 6.64, compared to 2.45 and 4.86 for those with mates who were eighth cousins or more distantly related.
The findings hold for every 25-year interval studied, beginning with those born in the year 1800 up to the present day. Because of the strength and consistency of the association, even between couples with very subtle differences in kinship, the authors conclude that the effect very likely has a biological basis, one which has yet to be elucidated.
This study provides the most comprehensive answer yet to the longstanding question of how kinship affects fertility in humans. Previous studies in other parts of the world have suggested that the two phenomena are positively correlated, though confounding variables, such as the impact of socioeconomic status on the size of families or age at marriage, have made the results difficult to interpret.
The analysis of such a long-term series of data from Iceland effectively eliminates these variables by encompassing an entire population which has historically been highly homogeneous both culturally and economically. Moreover, the results are strikingly consistent from eras in which Iceland was a predominantly poor and rural country, to the present-day era of a highly urbanized society with one of the highest standards of living in the world.
The authors note that the findings are somewhat counterintuitive from an evolutionary perspective because closely-related parents have a higher probability of having offspring homozygous for deleterious recessive mutations, although closer parental kinship can also decrease the likelihood of immunological incompatibility between mother and offspring, for example in rhesus factor blood type.
Perhaps most importantly, these new findings also suggest that the recent and dramatic demographic shift experienced in Iceland -- from a rural society to a highly urbanized one -- may serve to slow population growth, as individuals are exposed to a much broader range of distantly related potential mates. If so, this could be of relevance to slowing population growth in the many other -- and much more populous - societies around the world undergoing transition from closely-knit rural societies to more urbanized ones. Indeed, the UN estimates that in the 2007-2008 period the majority of the world's population will, for the first time in human history, live in town and cities.
The paper, 'An association between the kinship and fertility of human couples,' was published in the journal Science February 8, 2008.
Adapted from materials provided by deCODE genetics.
Gotta switch computers.
Twain wrote that????
OMG, I should have known.
|
|
|||
Gods |
Note: this topic is from February 7, 2008. |
||
|
· Discover · Nat Geographic · Texas AM Anthro News · Yahoo Anthro & Archaeo · Google · · The Archaeology Channel · Excerpt, or Link only? · cgk's list of ping lists · |
|||
Bjork
| (No more Photobucket bandwidth this month) |
Genetic Genealogy |
| Send FReepmail if you want on/off GGP list Marty = Paternal Haplogroup O(2?)(M175) Maternal Haplogroup H |
|
| GG LINKS: African Ancestry DNAPrint Genomics FamilyTree DNA GeneTree Int'l Society of Genetic Genealogy mitosearch Nat'l Geographic Genographic Project Oxford Ancestors RelativeGenetics Sorenson Molecular Genealogy Foundation Trace Genetics ybase ysearch |
|
| The List of Ping Lists | |
So much stupidity in this I don’t know where to start.
But I can say without a doubt: “science” gets it wrong wrong wrong about 50 percent or more of the time.
I can’t say I know any of my 2nd cousins, let alone 3rd or 4th. My family moved though, and are not centered in any small town.
Bjork has always had kind of a weird look, IMHO, but part of it is she looks slightly asian (see how her eyes slant up?). I suspect that in spite of the alleged "purity" of Icelandic ancestry, some time back there, their Viking ancestors intermarried with some Inuit (Eskimo) neighbors to the West and brought in the more flat, round faced, and actually Asian, features Inuit have. See the round flat face of the beauty in the hoodie above too.
This Euro-Asian mix I think is what makes Icelandic women so attractive, I think.
A first cousin is considered a distant relative..
NOT GUILTY!
No, I think you’re wrong. I’m related to my cousin’s child as his/her 1st cousin, one time removed. My cousin’s child is related to my child as second cousins. My mother in law has five great grandchildren who are all second cousins to each other (well, except the siblings but just to keep it simple). The children of my nephew in law if they have children will be third cousins of my granddaughter’s children. I took a course in law school on this so I’m pretty sure I have it right... course that was over 30 years ago and I don’t do probate. LOL
In my genealogy research I discovered that my 1st cousin 6 times removed married my husband’s first cousin 7 times removed in October 1800 joining two of the most important families in eastern Kentucky at the time. I wish I could find their descendants but haven’t been able to. Anyway, my sister in law claims that our marriage is incestuous.
My husband and I are half, third cousins. That is because we are from Utah and our Great-great grandfather had three polygamous wives - we are descended from different wives.
Heck I’m related to half the State because of polygamy!
First cousins and first cousin 6X removed and first cousin 7X removed are not the same thing at all.
The gap of 6X removed and 7X removed mean that's how many generations back to the common ancestor. Your and your wife's grandparents determine first cousins through their children; i.e., your grandparents had children that were siblings, and the siblings' children would be first cousins. I'm not even sure she's got the removed part right because it's complicated and I work it out in my genealogy program calculator.
My paternal great grandfather and great grandmother were first cousins. Technically that would be considered incestuous. Their common ancestor was their grandfather 2 generations B4. One of common grandfather's daughters was his mother, and one of their common grandfather's son was her father. That son and daughter were siblings but married non-relatives. You know what determines a first cousin if you have any. If not, I'll try to explain it better. And I hope I explained that one right.
You can work it out in your mind if any common grandparent had any children who were siblings with one marrying your father and one marrying your mother. It didn't happen, did it?
What? Turn people into Icelandic women?
Actually I’m the wife. It wouldn’t be uncommon for his family to have more removes than mine or less since for example, although my mother in law’s five great grandchildren are all going to remember her, my great grandparents and in fact both my grandfathers, died before I was born. My line married and bred late.
And I used my Family Tree Maker calculator for what that’s worth. His ancestor was the grandfather of Mary Todd Lincoln. My ancestor was Mary Polly Hawkins Craig, the Craigs being the other famous family besides the Todds because they came and settled right after the Boones and did Travelling Church (with two “l”s) and the Water Carriers of Bryant’s Station. Great stuff. When we went into the research room of the Lexington Cemetery in Lexington KY and told them we were looking the cemetery for Craigs and Todds, they didn’t believe us.
I've found a lot of interesting connections, and tried to think of a first cousin that far removed from me, didn't know who to run through my calculator for that, but can't. I think I found my 3rd cousin 6X removed Ethan Allen. Lots of little interesting factoids in my family tree but found no connection to any president.
I've kind of lost interest in it for now, but it's curious how you start with so little and add to it gradually. Meeting new distant cousins in more recent years and trading info has pretty much dried up now. I've got a few brick walls I'd like to crack through but doubt I'll be able to. Sometimes the finds I have had have I just stumbled across them.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
