mtDNA variation in Inuit populations of Greenland and Canada: Migration history and population structure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We examined 395 mtDNA control-region sequences from Greenlandic Inuit and Canadian Kitikmeot Inuit with the aim of shedding light on the migration history that underlies the present geographic patterns of genetic variation at this locus in the Arctic. In line with previous studies, we found that Inuit populations carry only sequences belonging to haplotype clusters A2 and D3. However, a comparison of Arctic populations from Siberia, Canada, and Greenland revealed considerable differences in the frequencies of these haplotypes. Moreover, large sample sizes and regional information about birthplaces of maternal grandmothers permitted the detection of notable differences in the distribution of haplotypes among subpopulations within Greenland. Our results cast doubt on the prevailing hypothesis that contemporary Inuit trace their all of their ancestry to so-called Thule groups that expanded from Alaska about 800-1,000 years ago. In particular, discrepancies in mutational divergence between the Inuit populations and their putative source mtDNA pool in Siberia/Alaska for the two predominant haplotype clusters, A2a and A2b, are more consistent with the possibility that expanding Thule groups encountered and interbred with existing Dorset populations in Canada and Greenland.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".