3

The DNA indicated Asian origin and a rare haplogroup, X.

Windover Pond is one of a number of sites in Florida excavated since 1970 that have led to a major reassessment of the Archaic period in Florida. Jerald T. Milanich states that Windover has provided "unprecedented and dramatic" information about early Archaic people in Florida, and that the Windover site may be "one of the most significant archaeological sites ever excavated.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windover_Archeological_Site

I'm very interested in the genetic data from this site, with it being of such significance to archaeology.

And even more curious (to me, anyway), is the fact that around the time it was revealed that some of the specimens from Windover were found to be members of mtDNA haplogroup "X", I learned that my own mtDNA was also classified as simply "X".

This was no big surprise to me, as I am from Florida and have very good reason to believe that my maternal lineage is Native American (southeast North American, specifically), I would very much like to compare my mtDNA markers with those of the Bog mummies who were identified as mtDNA "X".

I have already made comparisons with several other ancient NA individuals of North America, specifically Mound-builders and the one in Montana, and found significant relationships. Had that not been the case, it might not seem so important for me to check the Windover data as well.

https://www.nature.com/articles/323803a0

"Anatomical, cellular and molecular analysis of 8,000-yr-old human brain tissue from the Windover archaeological site, by Doran, et al., c1986"

I believe the data I seek is in that original paper, but I'm not sure. And I don't understand why I can't find it in any DNA databases. I also wonder how Nature obtained ownership of it. I may go ahead and spring for the paywall fee, and hope for the best. In fact, I probably will do so very soon.

What are the specific mtDNA markers for the "X" individuals who were discovered at the Windover site?

google scholar search

  • The Nature article was published in 1986, it's DNA analysis would have been done before that: I wonder what impact subsequent testing (using more sophisticated methodologies) would have had on the article's conclusions. It might be worthwhile to see if the Doran article was cited by later publications. – bgwiehle Jan 1 '18 at 15:30
  • However, in response to your excellent advice, I googled scholar and found no citations for it, and nothing for it other than the Nature property. I'm going to purchase it, and see if anything useful is in there. Thanks again, I really appreciate the tip. I'm posting a screen shot of my google scholar search in my original question. – Bread Jan 1 '18 at 16:09
  • Your screenshot suggests 170 citations, and I think that is a clickable link for the citing works below the main abstract text. – AndyW Jan 1 '18 at 16:18
  • I googled, using search terms: windover paleo indian dna . Some of the search results lead to additional references to DNA studies for the Windover specimens. One result was "The First Americans: Race, Evolution and the Origin of Native Americans", by Joseph F. Powell, page 72, on GoogleBooks, which discusses nDNA markers specific to the Windover samples, citing Hauswirth et al. (1991). – bgwiehle Jan 1 '18 at 16:30
  • Thank you. When I expanded my search to "see all results" I only found one real citation of the Windover study, on a study focusing on cancer research. It was cited for its contributions to brain tissue analysis methodology, which is irrelevant for my question. The other 'citations' are very generic, including just one or few of the terms (iow, they completely miss the mark). However, I just found this book edited by Doran himself, which is providing more leads: Windover: Multidisciplinary Investigations of an Early Archaic Florida Cemetery (Florida Museum of Natural History: Ripley P. Bullen) – Bread Jan 1 '18 at 16:31
1

I bought the book and was a little dissapointed. I think there were like 20 individuals sampled. None belonged to A, C, or D. Several had markers of haplogroup B and couldn't be ruled out. Some had one marker for haplogroup X but not enough classify it confidently as Haplogroup X. There were 5 that the study described as having non native american haplogroups and that further study would be needed. Reply and let me know the thread isnt dead. Ill spend the time to get to you guys in more detail.

| improve this answer | |
  • 1
    The thread isn't dead, just waiting for an informed answer. – ColeValleyGirl Dec 17 '18 at 13:03
  • Hi, welcome to G&FH.SE! We are a Q/A site, not a discussion forum -- there are no 'threads', but questions and answers. To learn more about how this site works, we have a tour and lots of material in the help center. The answers do not stay in the same order as they were posted, so it isn't helpful to say "I bought the book" -- the earlier comments and answers could be deleted. Your answer could be improved by saying which book you are referring to. You can use the edit link under your answer to improve your answer at any time. – Jan Murphy Dec 17 '18 at 22:11
  • Thanks, @Cornelius Johnson , your answer is very helpful. I'm still hoping to hear more about the Windover people. – Bread Dec 17 '18 at 23:38
2

You won't find scientific DNA in any of the databases of the popular DNA companies where you can compare your DNA to others. If GEDmatch has any such data, it will be marked research only and you won't be able to find it or compare to it.

With regards to mtDNA, Family Tree DNA is the only company that now offers mtDNA testing that gives you more than just your haplogroup. You say you learned that your "mtDNA was also classified as simply "X".

If you did not test at Family Tree DNA, I'd highly recommend you do their mtFull sequencing which is normally $199 USD but goes on sale from time to time down to $139.

Once your test results become available, you will see all the people you match to and have many resources you can use:

enter image description here

Family Tree DNA also allows testers to join projects. They have a specific project for the mt Haplogroup X which would be well worth your while to join. The group lists test results for about 800 testers. You can only join the group if you've taken an mtDNA test at Family Tree DNA.

enter image description here

With regards to the Windover mtDNA data, maybe some of the people in the the Family Tree DNA group might know more about it.

Other than that, I did notice a 2012 book by Rachel K Wentz, a student of Glen Doran, titled "Life and Death at Windover: Excavations of a 7,000 Year-Old Pond Cemetery" that is available at Amazon. The Publisher's Preface says:

"Only one book has been written about Windover. In 2000, Doran edited a massive technical volume, a compilation of research highlighting the multidisciplinary nature of the site's analysis. But for the average reader, the book is a behemoth full of statistics, tables, and technical jargon. I initially thought I could reduce the contents of Doran's book into something more palatable to the general public. … I needed a fresh approach."

So you might find this book of interest to you.

enter image description here

| improve this answer | |
  • Thanks so much, @Ikessler , I'd be interested in reading the "massive technical volume" edited by Doran (just the hard data, not all of it of course). I had mine tested in 2006 with the Human Genome Project, who certified me "X" at the time. Later they transferred my data to FTdna, where it was later reclassified as "W". Then with further testing (the full sequence), they eventually certified mine as "W1-T119C". There I belong to the N / W group project. But I have very few matches. None are exact. My DNA has some X and some W identifying markers. – Bread Dec 18 '18 at 0:04
  • 1
    @Bread - Could this be Doran's publication? If so, it is available: amazon.com/… – lkessler Dec 18 '18 at 0:35
  • 1
    Yes, it is! I have it bookmarked now, and I suppose I'd better make plans to purchase before it becomes unavailable or more expensive. Thank you so very, very much! I was unaware that this textbook was published. All I knew about was the paper published in Nature. – Bread Dec 18 '18 at 0:56
  • 1
    @Ikessler I ordered it just now, and if I find anything of interest concerning the DNA specimens, I'll update here later. I still haven't purchased the Nature paper, and hopefully I won't have to now (seriously, I think it was over $200. for that one, last I checked). – Bread Dec 18 '18 at 1:09

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.