Can swing partners or an ex lover transmit DNA to a child not fathered by him?

[kittyswinger 257]

A few years back, a study came out proposing that an ex lover or previous partners' DNA is retained by a woman and can be passed on to some of her children even though fathered by a different man. It caused a feminist uproar up to this time. I'm not sure if the research is shoddy or has already been discredited. Please don't interpret my question as politically, ideologically or morally motivated, but I'm just curious about the biological possibility.

I'm wondering because my daughter got some striking resemblance from my ex-boyfriend where for years we no longer had any sexual contact when I conceived my child. That is the reason I can't ditch out completely that study as garbage. Coincidence? Mind over matter? Or some other explanation I'm not aware of?

Any similar experience or none at all? Please answer the poll or discuss your thoughts in this thread. Either the mom or dad can participate in the poll or the discussion.

[Idahocouple6969 294]

If you had unprotected sex with 2 different people within a day or so? and your body released 2 eggs then you could give birth to faternal twins. DNA doesn't replicate on its own. So no there is no way that DNA can be passed on in that manner.  

[couplers 4,204]

From WebMD, sperm can live inside a woman's reproductive tract for up to five days, max.  We see, however, what we want (or fear) to see sometimes.

 

I would, however, be open to seeing the evidence from a credible source, such as a peer-reviewed journal.

[couplers 4,204]

A quick search:

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/ele.12373

[kittyswinger 257]

I'm just wondering because that ex-bf of mine was 5 years apart from the father of my child. They have different ethnicity that is the reason why the distinct features are easily identifiable. However, there are also other possibilities, like a dormant gene from my ancestors or from my partner's ancestors that we may not be aware of suddenly surfaced in my child.

[kittyswinger 257]

4 hours ago, couplers said:

A quick search:

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/ele.12373

Here are other articles about that study:

https://www.medicaldaily.com/dna-sperm-ex-partners-lingers-female-flies-and-influences-genetics-her-offspring-305934

https://time.com/3461485/how-previous-sexual-partners-affect-offspring/

On Microchimerism:

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16084184/

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microchimerism

[Fundamental Law 2,832]

This conversation about random DNA making it into the germ line has been speculative since the beginnings of genetics. While science is based on theory and falsifiable hypothesis--meaning it is impossible to prove a negative and say "impossible" and "never"--this is generally regarded as science fiction more than science fact. 

 

Yes it is possible to put additional DNA into a fertilized ovum--that can be done in the lab--but the idea of DNA sticking around for years and waiting for an opportunity in humans is farfetched. 

 

Your explanation of exposing some other characteristic that has been carried but not expressed is more likely. You mention that this is your daughter. She only got one of your X chromosomes; the other came from the father. It's worth reading about the fact that all  women are mosaics, meaning that the X chromosome that is operating in a particular cell reflects the fact that the other one is inactivated. Nor is this necessarily balanced. In fact it is rarely balanced. 

 

Genes are strong things!

 

 

[kittyswinger 257]

On 6/6/2020 at 9:27 PM, alexandsandra said:

This is why we have science, to drag us away from falsehoods. Analyze, hypothesize, experiment, peer review, confirm.

There was science that's why they conducted a study in 2014. Though the limitation was the subjects were not humans so no clear cut generalization can be made.

[couplers 4,204]

In our poly family, I didn't know which of the two men were the father of my first child. Clair had become unintentionally pregnant, so I decided to have a child as close in time to her as possible and went "pot luck" with our two men.  I wished it could have been both of them, and in some societies, the woman and her husband believe it can and hope for it to be so. 

 

The concept of shared paternity would be nice, if it were true: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2984172/

[Billygoat 427]

vaginal wall absorption capabilities, number of partners, ingestion of sexual fluids.......associative science........aarrrggghh.
 

Assuming the inquisitive nature of humans and our need to package, label, and make sense of the things we do.not understand....I get the question.  We are all mongrels.  A huge sea of genetics passed by our direct ancestors, birth parent lineage that dates back over 300,000 years past.  From primitive “pack” groups, latter tribal, clannish and eventually “village” populations, mating, couples etc the selection was very limited.  Shared mates, pairings....families....origins started with those in that tight pack of people.  First humans in packs (More animalistic) females were bred by most any male, your imagination can assume how that worked, much like any dog or cat.  
 

In time pairings became a norm.  Availability was scarce so often cousins paired, first cousins to distant cousins etc.  strangers/travelers were often used to enrich the tribes offspring including intratribal/village festivals to create and renew the gene pool.  Big societal change and acceptance came along with organized religious beliefs setting new couple/sexual accepted norms that started BC and haphazardly continued AC.  You can follow this back by our Judeo-christian based calendar, 2,020 years ago.  

 

so tracing your genetic family history is reliant on written records.....good luck

 

Enter genetic testing.  Knowing a little bit about history and the proven existence of at that time civilizations and the need to travel by humans.....a general genetic test to determine your genetic origin history will speak volumes of why family member appearances are what they are.  A step further to ID those in the genetic bank you might be related to is another useful tool.  
 

Dormant genes in one revealing itself out of nowhere has cause much strife, banishment, accusations, harm and worst over thousands of years.  Imagine that you gave birth to four blond or light brown haired children, then your fifth is a red haired child.  Or facial bone structure does not match to current or remembered family.  The Caucasian couple who’s child has darker skin.......or bark skin couple who have a lighter skin colored child.   You get my drift.

 

I did this for my aging Mother who is very into family research and our heritage.  I found the results very interesting.  We knew our Irish/Scottish/Welch history.  Turns out there isn’t much of early Europe we do not have genes from in various percentages.  Some I left out only because of the issues that would start around the table against much discussed family history.....the the results didn’t prove.  And a few that it would.

 

so breath deep my fellow mixed bred friends, we truly are brothers and sisters to and of each other.  Have a little fun and try on of those genetic tests.  Does not tell you who....but what you are made of.

[lcmim 1,043]

Billy goat, I realize we are having some topic drift here but the whole genetic testing thing is interesting. It often does require a bit of interpretation.

 

My sister came up with one of those tests and was all excited because we showed us as part Scottish. Now I wouldn't mind that, and it might explain my affinity for the pipes, but the claim was almost 100% sure to be false. We have written records on both sides going way back in Europe most of it central present day Germany with just a few Czech incursions.

 

Were the interpretation came in  is that the Scots are predominantly two strains of Celt. The the western end of the Celts ancient ancestral range in Europe is  overlaps the area that our documented ancestors came from. So while the report said Scottish ancestry it is far more likely that both the Scots and our family bloodline have shared  Euro-Celtic roots.

 

You are right though. Mongrels ever last one of us.

[Billygoat 427]

Oh yes I agree.  

 

But there is not much credible documentation or research for women to store DNA or anything else in their bodies from past lovers to commingle months, years later to produce a child.  But there is much proof of ancestral DNA resurfacing, generations later in a new born child, creating the thought that it could be the alternative.
 

The process does not list your relatives.  But traces DNA lines, where that originated.  So when ours came back listing Germanic it did not necessarily mean we were from Germany.  But does mean someone in our history mingled their DNA with theirs.  Could have been most anywhere in our past.   And we have documents and photo’s of Indian heritage, Abenaki Indian, MicMac.  But testing no measurable blood line.  So this woman, wife, mother, grandmother and later great grand mother must have been a second or third wife, a step mom.  That, and many Indian nations, councils refuse DNA.  So not much to base that there is or not something there.  It is purely a test Of DNA that has been establish over time to Mach country and region.   So although we are not from Germany.  At some point many years ago someone from Germany married in.