posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by xyyman:
Fully analysis with translation is on ESR. Search!!

Her early work covers Iberia since she graduated from Univ Barcelona.

Her recent works is more broad based. She is based in England now. The most notable recent owrk covers the early Neolithics in the Levant which also has SSA haplogroups.

All is on ESR..."your one stop shop".

---

Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

NE-1829 (Sample Name 5NE): Haplogroup L1b: 5.875±80 A.P.

---

quote:

---

NE-NM82.2 (Sample Name: 2NE): Haplogroup J*: 17000-20000

---

Posts: 2508 | From: . | Registered: Nov 2011  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova:

Go with the flow 3- more DNA and cranial studies show ancient African migration to, or African presence in ancient Europe


curvaceous connections.. si?

---

Posts: 42922 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by xyyman:
Polimorfismos de DNA mitocondrial en poblaciones antiguas de la cuenca mediterránea

biblioteca.universia.net/html_bura/ficha/params/title/polimorfismos-dna-mitocondrial-poblaciones-antiguas-cuenca-mediterranea/id/3136593.html


Description: SUMMARY OF DOCTORAL THESIS The origins of European populations have been addressed from different disciplines, highlighting the contribution of population genetics studies. Shuffle two moments in prehistory in which it has been possible to model the gene pool of populations in Europe: the spread of Neolithic and Palaeolithic period expansions. The ability to recover from bygone population genetics provides a unique opportunity to test the assumptions made in situ from other disciplines. We studied 197 samples from 115 dental and bone individuals 17 archaeological sites Sumerian Neolithic and Middle East, when Meroitic Nubia and Paleolithic era, post-Neolithic and Neolithic of the Iberian Peninsula. We obtained complete sequences of mitochondrial DNA of 244 bp of 35 different individuals, were compared with sequences from the same region of present individuals from 38 populations in Europe, Africa and Middle East. In phylogenetic reconstructions based on Reynolds distance groups of ancient samples are grouped together, separated from the rest of current populations. However, phylogenetic reconstructions made from the haplotypes of ancient and modern samples denote that although the majority of ancient mitochondrial variants are not present in current populations sampled, may relate more or less closely with them. The composition of haplotypes and haplogroups of ancient samples from the Near East and the Iberian Peninsula ****differs markedly*** from that found in the CURRENT populations of these geographical regions. In the ancient Middle East show highlights in particular the absence of mitochondrial haplogroup J, U3, W and X, associated with the Neolithic expansion into Europe. This may be due either to the sample obtained is not old chronologically or geographically-representative populations of the Middle East that spread during the Neolithic well that these variants were not introduced in Europe during the Neolithic. In the ancient sample of the Iberian Peninsula highlights the presence of 50% of sub-Saharan lines. These lines may have been introduced during the Solutrean, the Mesolithic or Neolithic. This work also delved into various technical aspects of obtaining authentic ancient DNA and the influence of several variables in the preservation of genetic material.

ABSTRACT The origins of the European Populations Studied extensively from Have Been Different disciplines. It is Thought That ancient demic expansions, like occurred After the Late Those Glacial Maximum or DURING the Middle East from neolithic diffussion to Europe. The Possibility to recover DNA from past Populations offers an unique Opportunity to test in situ These hypothesis. 197 It Were Analyzed teeth and bones from 115 individuos Archaeological Sites and 17 Different from Middle East and the Iberian Peninsula. It WAS possible to recover mitochondrial DNA sequences 244pb-35 from Different Individuals. They Were 38 Compared to sequences from European, African and Middle Eastern Populations present-day. Phylogenetic Reconstructions from Reynolds genetic distance Showed That ancient samples clustered together, extant from Clearly Separated Populations. Howeve, based phylogenetic Reconstructions on ancient and modern mitochondrial haplotypes Showed That ancient haplotypes are related to extant ones. Haplotype frequencies and haplogroup in samples from the ancient Middle East and the Iberian Peninsula are Different from Those Clearly present in the Same Geographical Nowadays regions. Haplogroups related to J neolithic expansion to Europe, U3, W and X-are absent in ancient middle eastern sample. There are two possible Explanations to this fact. First, It Could Be That the ancient samples possible Analyzed wont be representative of the Middle Eastern Populations That expanded the neolithic. Second, It Could Be That Those haplogroups Also possible wont Have Been made to them in Europe associated with expansions to neolithic demic. At This work It Were Also Examined technical Several Aspects related to the obtention of genuine ancient DNA and the Influence of Different variables in DNA preservation.

Read more: http://egyptsearchreloaded.proboards.com/thread/872#ixzz4BkVvg5Rl

---

Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by xyyman:
yes. Great job!!!! I haven't double checked your locale vs Hg but i assume you did your home work.

When i did my analysis and posted on ESR I got about 50% African haplogroups in ancient Iberia...not including hg-H. Which I later confirmed is also of recent African origin. ie Neolithic. Prior to that we thought it was Paleolithic ala Achilli Refugia Theory

What is odd is that current researchers are no longer finding hg-L in ancient Iberia and Italy. Makes me think they are now removing and falsifying data.

Although Eva(about 4ya) did find hg-L in the eNeolithic in the Levant. Aslso posted on ESR.

---

Posts: 2508 | From: . | Registered: Nov 2011  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Oshun:

Eva Fernández Domínguez:

Polimorfismos de DNA mitocondrial en poblaciones antiguas de la cuenca mediterránea

biblioteca.universia.net/html_bura/ficha/params/title/polimorfismos-dna-mitocondrial-poblaciones-antiguas-cuenca-mediterranea/id/3136593.html

---

Doctoral thesis 2011
tans: Mitochondrial DNA polymorphisms in ancient populations for the Mediterranean basin

_________________________________________________

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Eva_Fernandez_Dominguez

Eva Fernandez Dominguez
Durham University, Durham
Biological Anthropology, Genetics

PhD in Biology, MSc in Health Expertise (Forensics)


Conference Paper: ADN ancien d’échantillons néolithiques de la péninsule Ibérique.
Gamba C. · Fernandez E. · Tirado M. · Palomo S. · Deguilloux MF · Pemonge MH · Arroyo-Pardo E.

trans. "Old Neolithic DNA samples of the Iberian Peninsula." Dec 2013

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/260358812_ADN_ancien_d%27echantillons_neolithiques_de_la_peninsule_Iberique

______________________________________________

http://journals.plos.org/plosgenetics/article?id=10.1371/journal.pgen.1004401

Ancient DNA Analysis of 8000 B.C. Near Eastern Farmers Supports an Early Neolithic Pioneer Maritime Colonization of Mainland Europe through Cyprus and the Aegean Islands
May 2014
Eva Fernández et al


(excerpts)

Abstract
The genetic impact associated to the Neolithic spread in Europe has been widely debated over the last 20 years. Within this context, ancient DNA studies have provided a more reliable picture by directly analyzing the protagonist populations at different regions in Europe. However, the lack of available data from the original Near Eastern farmers has limited the achieved conclusions, preventing the formulation of continental models of Neolithic expansion. Here we address this issue by presenting mitochondrial DNA data of the original Near-Eastern Neolithic communities with the aim of providing the adequate background for the interpretation of Neolithic genetic data from European samples. Sixty-three skeletons from the Pre Pottery Neolithic B (PPNB) sites of Tell Halula, Tell Ramad and Dja'de El Mughara dating between 8,700-6,600 cal. B.C. were analyzed, and 15 validated mitochondrial DNA profiles were recovered. In order to estimate the demographic contribution of the first farmers to both Central European and Western Mediterranean Neolithic cultures, haplotype and haplogroup diversities in the PPNB sample were compared using phylogeographic and population genetic analyses to available ancient DNA data from human remains belonging to the Linearbandkeramik-Alföldi Vonaldiszes Kerámia and Cardial/Epicardial cultures. We also searched for possible signatures of the original Neolithic expansion over the modern Near Eastern and South European genetic pools, and tried to infer possible routes of expansion by comparing the obtained results to a database of 60 modern populations from both regions. Comparisons performed among the 3 ancient datasets allowed us to identify K and N-derived mitochondrial DNA haplogroups as potential markers of the Neolithic expansion, whose genetic signature would have reached both the Iberian coasts and the Central European plain. Moreover, the observed genetic affinities between the PPNB samples and the modern populations of Cyprus and Crete seem to suggest that the Neolithic was first introduced into Europe through pioneer seafaring colonization.


Author Summary

Since the original human expansions out of Africa 200,000 years ago, different prehistoric and historic migration events have taken place in Europe. Considering that the movement of the people implies a consequent movement of their genes, it is possible to estimate the impact of these migrations through the genetic analysis of human populations. Agricultural and husbandry practices originated 10,000 years ago in a region of the Near East known as the Fertile Crescent. According to the archaeological record this phenomenon, known as “Neolithic”, rapidly expanded from these territories into Europe. However, whether this diffusion was accompanied or not by human migrations is greatly debated. In the present work, mitochondrial DNA –a type of maternally inherited DNA located in the cell cytoplasm- from the first Near Eastern Neolithic populations was recovered and compared to available data from other Neolithic populations in Europe and also to modern populations from South Eastern Europe and the Near East. The obtained results show that substantial human migrations were involved in the Neolithic spread and suggest that the first Neolithic farmers entered Europe following a maritime route through Cyprus and the Aegean Islands.

Introduction

The term “Neolithic” refers to the profound cultural and technical changes that accompanied the transition from a hunter-gatherer subsistence economy to an agro-pastoral producing system [1]. The first Neolithic societies originated 12 to 10 thousand years ago in a region of the Near East traditionally known as the “Fertile Crescent” [2]. From this region the Neolithic technology rapidly expanded to Anatolia reaching the rest of Europe in less than 3,000 years by following two main routes linked to different archaeological cultural complexes. The Danubian route, associated to the Linearbandkeramic (LBK) cultural complex, brought the Neolithic to the central European plains and from there to the British Islands and Scandinavia (Funnel Beaker Cultural Complex) while the Mediterranean one, associated to the Cardial-Impressa cultural complex, spread it along the Mediterranean coast up to the Atlantic façade of Iberia [3].

The nature of the diffusion of the Neolithic and the possible demographic input associated to it have been widely debated. In this regard, two extreme hypotheses representing opposite views have been formulated: the demic diffusion model (DDM) and the cultural diffusion model (CDM) [1], [2], [4], [5]. The former stands up for a “wave of advance” of Neolithic immigrants with subsequent genetic replacement of the hunter-gatherer (Mesolithic) populations while the latter proposes a cultural adoption of Neolithic practices from local populations, implying a genetic continuity since the Palaeolithic. Moreover, integrationist models that involve a different extent of interaction between immigrants and local hunter-gatherers while considering the effect of geographic barriers and agricultural boundary zones, have been also used to explain the transition to the Neolithic process at a more local scale [6].




Genetic analyses from modern and ancient populations have contributed extensively to this debate providing discordant results. Principal component analysis and spatial autocorrelation of allele frequencies of “classic” genetic markers in modern European populations showed a South East to North West cline compatible with a Neolithic DDM. The Neolithic contribution to the modern genetic pool was estimated in this case to be around 27% [7]. The frequency distribution of Y chromosome polymorphisms displayed a similar pattern and haplogroups F*, E3b, G and J2, representing a 22% of extant lineages, were initially identified as the main contributors of the Neolithic spread [8], [9]. However, the analysis of the geographic distribution of the microsatellite diversity of the allegedly Paleolithic haplogroup R1b1b2, has been recently reinterpreted as a signal of substantial demic diffusion [10]. Phylogeographic analyses of another haploid marker, the mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA), in Europe and the Near East initially supported a limited Neolithic genetic contribution of around 9–12% in the Mediterranean and 15–22% in Central Europe [11]. Molecular dating and founder analyses identified then mtDNA haplogroups J, T1 and U3 as the main genetic markers of this expansion, with probable contributions of some other lineages from clusters H and W [12]. However, recent analysis of complete mtDNA sequences from the same region has pictured contradicting results depending on the analysis performed, from all mtDNA haplogroup expansions predating the Neolithic [13] to Neolithic expansions of mtDNA haplogroup H [14].

In the light of these results, the usefulness of modern genetic variability to reconstruct the Neolithic dynamics in Europe has been questioned [15], [16]. First of all, a certain level of genetic differentiation between hunter-gatherers and Near Eastern farmers has to be assumed in order to detect differences between both groups. Secondly, the existence of SE-NW clinal patterns in Europe may reflect the accumulation of small migrations entering the continent rather than a single migratory event [17]. Finally, original population substructure and subsequent processes of genetic drift and founder effects can introduce errors into the estimation of coalescence dates of mitochondrial and Y chromosome haplogroups [18]. In this regard, recent diachronic aDNA analyses of Central European populations have documented a fluctuation in haplogroup frequencies as a result of population bottlenecks and post-Neolithic migratory events [19], [20]. Besides, these estimated haplogroup dates do not necessarily correspond to the time of arrival of the lineages to the region [21]. As a result, the misidentification of genetic variants associated to the Neolithic spread and the effect of post-Neolithic expansions in the genetic make-up of Europe could have introduced important biases in the estimations of the Neolithic component of the European gene pool producing misleading conclusions [22].

During the last decade, ancient DNA analyses of Neolithic populations have provided a more reliable picture of the Neolithic transition process at a local scale. Studies have concentrated at the two edges of the two routes of the Neolithic wave of advance: Central/Northern Europe and the Iberian Peninsula/Southern France. In Central Europe and Scandinavia a DDM has been proposed to explain the observed genetic discontinuity between hunter-gatherers and the first farmer populations [19], [23]–[26]. However, recent analyses have suggested the coexistence of genetically distinct hunter-gatherer and farmer groups during several millennia at the same archaeological site, suggesting that the genetic replacement of hunter-gatherers populations was not complete [20]. In North Eastern Iberia and Southern France contradictory interpretations have been proposed to explain the nature of the Mesolithic-Neolithic transition process. On one hand, mtDNA studies of Cardial Neolithic remains seem to favor a pioneer Near Eastern colonization of North Eastern Spain [27], [28]. On the other hand, mtDNA results of Epicardial, Middle and Late Neolithic populations have been interpreted as a signal of pre-Neolithic legacy [29]–[31]. Dating and cultural differences between the studied groups, the effect of genetic drift at the beginning of the Neolithic and differences in the methods of analysis used (model-based statistical inference vs assignment of mtDNA haplogroup dating categories respectively) could be responsible of the observed differences [12], [27]. Moreover, the Y chromosome diversity of the Epicardial and Late Neolithic datasets has also shown a predominantly Near Eastern influence, suggesting that males and females might have played a differential role in the Neolithic dissemination process [16], [30], [31].

In this framework, the knowledge of the original Neolithic genetic pool in the Near East seems essential to correctly identify the variants associated to the Neolithic spread and also to provide a more global picture of the Neolithic dynamics in Europe.

In order to examine the genetic background existing in the first Neolithic communities and its impact over the European genetic pool, we have studied 3 archaeological sites in Syria located in two geographic areas in which agricultural practices were first documented: the middle Euphrates valley and the oasis of Damascus (Figure 1). These sites are dated back to the Pre-pottery Neolithic B period (PPNB). It is during this initial Neolithic phase that animal husbandry first appears, while full-scale agricultural practices are documented in the whole Levant. At the PPNB there is also an increase in the size of the settlements, probably as a response to the population growth derived from the consolidation of the new food-producing economic system [32].






Haplogroup composition

MtDNA haplogroups could be assigned to 14 out of the 15 skeletons according to the HVS1 sequences obtained and on the diagnostic Single Nucleotide Positions (SNPs) typed following Phylotree rCRS oriented version 15 (Tables 1 and S6).

Haplogroup K was the most prevalent, (N = 6, 42.8%) followed by R0 (N = 3, 21.42%) and H (N = 2, 14.28%). The observed haplogroup frequencies were compared to those of 59 modern populations from the Near East and South Eastern Europe and 2 Early Neolithic populations from Central Europe (LBK-AVK Neolithic, [24]) and North Eastern Iberia (Cardial/Epicardial Neolithic, [27]) (N = 11,610) (Table S7).

Haplogroup K was present in almost all populations compared, and its mean frequency in South Eastern Europe and the Near East was around 7%. It reached its highest frequencies in certain populations that have experienced recent population bottlenecks, such as the Askhenazi Jews and the Csángó in Transylvania, Romania [33], [34] and also among Greek Cypriots. Moreover, it was also highly represented in both Cardial/Epicardial (15.56%) and LBK-AVK (23.08%) Early Neolithic datasets. Haplogroup R0 is especially prevalent in the Near East and North Africa with a mean frequency in both regions around 6%. The maximum frequencies of R0 were detected in South Arabian populations such as Bedouin, Oman and Saudi Arabia (Table S7). The rare European haplogroups U* and N* were also detected in 2 individuals in our ancient sample. The mean frequency of haplogroup U* is 2% in the Near East, 0.9% in the Caucasus region and around 1% in Europe, whereas the N* mean frequency is less than 1% in all three datasets. However, both haplogroups reach peaks of frequency in certain populations, such as haplogroup U* in Crete. The case of N* is especially interesting, because apart from Bulgaria, Crete, Romania and Serbia it was only represented in Near Eastern populations (Iran, Jordan, Near Eastern Jews, Oman, Palestine, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Turkmenistan and United Arab Emirates). Moreover, this haplogroup was also detected in 4 Neolithic specimens from Catalonia, in North Eastern Spain, associated to the Cardial/Epicardial culture [27]. Carry- over contamination from these samples processed in the same laboratory can be ruled out, as results were validated in a second independent laboratory.

Finally, the skeleton H8 belonged to the African L3 lineage, this being the most prevalent African haplogroup found in present-day Near Eastern populations.

Modern mtDNA Near Eastern variability as a proxy of Near Eastern Neolithic variability

In recent years, the body of ancient DNA data of Neolithic populations has increased dramatically, providing a more accurate picture of local Neolithic dynamics. Some of these studies have also explored the Mesolithic genetic background, interpreting the results in terms of continuity or genetic break with the predecessor hunter-gatherer communities of the area [20], [23], [25], [28]. However, most of the attempts to estimate the Neolithic genetic input in those populations and/or to reconstruct the routes of dispersion of the first farmers into Europe have relied on extant data from modern Near Eastern populations [19], [24], [27], [29]–[31]. In the present research, ancient DNA results from the original human Near Eastern Neolithic communities are presented, to our knowledge, for the first time.

The present study shows that even though the mitochondrial variability of the PPNB population is within the limits of modern Near Eastern, Caucasian and South Eastern European populations (Table 3), both haplotype and haplogroup PPNB frequencies clearly deviate from their modern successors (Figures 2 and 3, Tables S5 and S7). This indicates that the mitochondrial DNA make-up of modern Near Eastern populations may not reflect accurately the genetic picture of the area at the emergence of the Neolithic.

All the detected haplotypes but one -the basal node of haplogroup K- have a null or limited distribution in the modern genetic pool, suggesting that a great bulk of ancient Neolithic lineages were not integrated into their succeeding populations or were erased by subsequent population movements in the region. This is in agreement with previous observations from other Early Neolithic populations [27], [46], and underlines the importance of genetic drift processes at the beginning of the Neolithic [16]. Nevertheless, the multi-population comparative analyses performed here also suggest that certain population isolates of Middle Eastern origin, like the Druze, could have retained an ancient Neolithic genetic legacy through cultural isolation and endogamous practices [47]. Another interesting case are the Ashkenazi Jews, who display a frequency of haplogroup K similar to the PPNB sample together with low non-significant pairwise Fst values, which taken together suggests an ancient Near Eastern origin. This observation clearly contradicts the results of a recent study, where a detailed phylogeographical analysis of mtDNA lineages has suggested a predominantly European origin for the Ashkenazi communities [48]. According to that work the majority of the Ashkenazi mtDNA lineages can be assigned to three major founders within haplogroup K (31% of their total lineages): K1a1b1a, K1a9 and K2a2. The absence of characteristic mutations within the control region in the PPNB K-haplotypes allow discarding them as members of either sub-clades K1a1b1a or K2a2, both representing a 79% of total Ashkenazi K lineages. However, without a high-resolution typing of the mtDNA coding region it cannot be excluded that the PPNB K lineages belong to the third sub-cluster K1a9 (20% of Askhenazi K lineages). Moreover, in the light of the evidence presented here of a loss of lineages in the Near East since Neolithic times, the absence of Ashkenazi mtDNA founder clades in the Near East should not be taken as a definitive argument for its absence in the past. The genotyping of the complete mtDNA in ancient Near Eastern populations would be required to fully answer this question and it will undoubtedly add resolution to the patterns detected in modern populations in this and other studies.

Our PPNB population includes a high percentage (80%) of lineages with a Palaeolithic coalescence age (K, R0 and U*) and differs from the current populations from the same area, which exhibit a high frequency of mitochondrial haplogroups J, T1 and U3 (Table S7). The latter have been traditionally linked with the Neolithic expansion due to their younger coalescence age, diversity and geographic distribution [11], [12], [49]. In addition to the PPNB population, haplogroup T1 is also absent in other Early Neolithic populations analyzed so far [17], [22], [26], [30]. Haplogroup U3 has been found only in one LBK individual and it has been suggested that it could have been already part of the pre-Neolithic Central European mitochondrial background [19].

Haplogroup J is present in moderate frequencies in Central European LBK-AVK populations (11.75%) and it has been proposed as part of the Central European “mitochondrial Neolithic package” [19]. However, it has also been described in one late hunter-gatherer specimen of Germany, raising the possibility of a pre-Neolithic origin [23]. Haplogroup J is present in low frequency (4%) in Cardial/Epicardial Neolithic samples of North Eastern Spain [27], [28], [31]. Absence of Mesolithic samples from the same region prevents making any inference about its emergence during the Mesolithic or the Neolithic. However, its absence in the PPNB genetic background reinforces the first hypothesis.

These findings suggest that (1) late Neolithic or post-Neolithic demographic processes rather than the original Neolithic expansion might have been responsible for the current distribution of mitochondrial haplogroups J, T1 and U3 in Europe and the Near East and (2) lineages with Late Paleolithic coalescent times might have played an important role in the Neolithic expansive process. The first suggestion alerts against the use of modern Near Eastern populations as representative of the genetic stock of the first Neolithic farmers while the second will be explored in depth in the following section.

Near Eastern Neolithic genetic contribution to the European gene pool

The sharing of mitochondrial haplotypes and haplogroups between pre-pottery farmers from the Fertile Crescent and European Neolithic populations, suggests a genetic contribution of the first Neolithic communities in the European mitochondrial genetic pool.

Haplogroup composition and PCA-HCA of the three ancient datasets compared here allow us to identify K and N*-derived haplogroups as potential Neolithic genetic contributors. Haplogroup K is present in all Early Neolithic datasets published so far with frequencies ranging from 7.7 to 43% (Table S7, [19], [28], [31]). Moreover, it is absent in Central European and Northern Iberian Paleolithic/Mesolithic mitochondrial backgrounds [20], [23], [28]. The presence of “rare” paragroup N* in both Cardial and Epicardial samples from North Eastern Iberia and PPNB populations confirms the connection between both edges of the Neolithic expansion previously suggested in [27].

Haplogroup N1a, representing 12.75% of LBK-AVK samples [19], [24], is not present in our PPNB sample, making it unlikely that this cluster was introduced from the earliest PPNB farmers of this region [23]. A more complex pattern for the LBK-AVK Neolithic expansion route, involving migration and admixture episodes with local hunter-gatherers in frontier zones (for example the predecessor populations of Starčevo-Criş-Körös cultures) should be considered in order to explain the available data for Neolithic populations of Central and Northern Europe. To solve this uncertainty, ancient DNA analysis from the Balkans region seems of vital importance.

The signal of both rare N-derived haplogroups over the Neolithic genetic pool must have been erased by subsequent genetic drift events after the consolidation of Neolithic practices, as it has been suggested in other works [15], [27], [50].

Routes of Neolithic expansion from the Near East into Europe

In the absence of ancient genetic data from populations in the primary and secondary Neolithization areas, a detailed comparison of the genetic composition of the PPNB population with modern adjacent populations can shed light on possible routes of Neolithic expansion.




As for modern Near Eastern populations, the frequency distribution of PPNB mitotypes in modern South Western European populations is limited (see Tables S5 and S7). However, strong genetic affinities at different levels of comparison could be detected with the islands of Cyprus and Crete (Figures 2, 3, 4 and S2, Tables S5, S7 and S9), pointing out at a survival of ancient Neolithic genetic stock in these populations probably through endogamy and geographic isolation.

The absence of an equivalent detectable genetic pattern in modern South-Western Anatolia suggests a primary role of pioneer seafaring colonization through Cyprus and the Aegean islands along the southern coast of Anatolia to the western coast of Greece.

This observation is supported by three facts:

The archaeological parallels found between the pre-pottery Neolithic of the Levant and those of Cyprus and the Aegean islands in terms of radiocarbon dating, settlement architecture, material culture, cereal and domestic animal species provide evidence for a sea-mediated arrival of Levantine people to Cyprus soon after the development of the agriculture, during the late PPNA or early PPNB, and a further expansion towards the Aegean [51]–[54].
The finding of PPNB lineages (U*) together with a high frequency of haplogroup K (16%) in a recent survey of Minoan mtDNA indicates a pre-Bronze arrival of these genetic traits of the island. Moreover, this result is in agreement with the archaeological information pointing at a Near Eastern Neolithic origin of the Bronze Age Cretan culture [55].
Spatial interpolation of radiocarbon dates has identified the Middle Euphrates-South Turkey region as the original centre of Neolithic expansion, and the maritime route through Cyprus, Crete and the Aegean islands as the primary route of Neolithic expansion from the Near East [56].
An alternative scenario of land-mediated expansion through Western Anatolia would assume a survival of the genetic traits observed in the PPNB sample until the end of the period, when Middle-PPNB descendant populations would have expanded to secondary, adjacent areas of Neolithization around 7,500–7,000 years B.C. [57], [58]. This framework is not supported by the obtained data, but cannot be completely discarded as genetic drift or post-Neolithic genetic remodeling of the area might have erased ancient genetic signatures, as already stated from modern Near Eastern populations. Considering that the Neolithic expansion process was not uniform [59], the development of appropriate, spatially-explicit, model-based, statistical inference tools could be of great assistance in fully exploring the probabilities of these and other, competing demographic scenarios.

In conclusion, the study of ancient DNA from the original geographic areas of Neolithic expansion performed here suggests a demic contribution of the first Near Eastern Neolithic in both main European routes of Neolithic expansion. Moreover, the population comparative analysis performed here points out at a leading role of seafaring colonization events in the first Neolithic expansions reaching the European continent. Further ancient DNA data from other primary and secondary areas of Neolithization and new data from frontier zones will be needed to add more resolution over the routes of expansion and the extent and nature of the genetic impact of the Neolithic over the European genetic pool.

Posts: 42922 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Oshun:

quote:

---

Originally posted by xyyman:
yes. Great job!!!! I haven't double checked your locale vs Hg but i assume you did your home work.

When i did my analysis and posted on ESR I got about 50% African haplogroups in ancient Iberia...not including hg-H. Which I later confirmed is also of recent African origin. ie Neolithic. Prior to that we thought it was Paleolithic ala Achilli Refugia Theory

What is odd is that current researchers are no longer finding hg-L in ancient Iberia and Italy. Makes me think they are now removing and falsifying data.

Although Eva(about 4ya) did find hg-L in the eNeolithic in the Levant. Aslso posted on ESR.

---

wiki-ing Haplogroup H emphasizes that about 40% of all maternal lineages in Europe belong to haplogroup H with it's origins 20k BC southwest asia. It wouldn't be the first time I notice wikipedia editors adding false info if that's the case but is there any material I should read that challenges the origin they provide for haplogroup H?

---

Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by xyyman:
[QB] Since you are genuinely interested. I will oblige there are two RECENT landmark papers. Disregard the Achilli nonsense written about 15years ago on the origin of hg-H.

mtDNA hg-H is also of African origin.

---

Posts: 42922 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                         

quote:

---

Originally posted by Oshun:
. . .
I put the assigned dates he placed and ran a search through all the PDFs and found them. ... I included the other haplogrouped samples he omitted and used the haplogroups in the original that he(?) changed:

http://www.tesisenxarxa.net/handle/10803/795;jsessionid=F3D8FEBA1B5D604CEC5EFAA0204F5275.tdx1

*To find the ages of each specimen: PDF 3 (Material): page 46 Table/Tabla MA6. Maps of the sites can also be found in these PDFs.

*To find find Haplogroups: PDF 5 (Results/Resultados): Page 223-224 Table/Tabla R81

*If you need to translate the individual name to find sample (Muestra) name (since some tables refer to samples interchangeably) use Tabla/Table R11 in PDF 5 (Results/Resultados) at page 29.


El Pirulejo, Córdoba (Spain)

2PI (Sample name: 2PI): Haplogroup H: 12500-13500 A.P.


Tell Ramad, Syria

R65-31 (Sample name: TR8): Haplogroup H: 8000-7750 A.P.

R65-14 (Sample name: TR12) Haplogroup K: 8000-7750 A.P.

R65-C8-SEB (Sample name: TR16): Haplogroup K: 8000-7750 A.P.

R65-1S (Sample name: TR18): Haplogroup K: 8000-7750 A.P.

R66-4-400 (Sample name: TR19): Haplogroup C: 8000-7750 A.P.


Nerja, Málaga (Spain)

NE-NM82.2 (Sample Name: 2NE): Haplogroup J*: 17000-20000

NE-NAP (Sample Name: 4NE): Haplogroup L1b: 2,260 BC

NE-1829 (Sample Name: 5NE): Haplogroup L1b: 5.875±80 A.P.


Tres Montes, Navarra (Spain)

TM-3 (sample name: 1TM2): Haplogroup L2: 4130 A.P

TM-6 (Sample name: 1TM4): Haplogroup L2: 4130 A.P

TM-6 (Sample name: 2TM4): Haplogroup H/K: 4130 A.P

TM-8 (Sample name: 1TM5) Haplogroup J* : 4130 A.P

TM-11 (Sample name: 1TM6) Haplogroup L2: 4130 A.P

TM-18 (Sample name: 1TM11) Haplogroup L2: 4130 A.P


Tell Halula, Syria

H-3 (Sample Name: TH2): Haplogroup H/K: 8800-8000 A.P.

H7 (Sample Name: TH5-TH6): Haplogroup H/HV/HV1/R/U: 8800-8000 A.P.

H-24 (Sample Name:1H24): Haplogroup H/T: 8800-8000 A.P.

H-37 (Sample Name: 2H20): Haplogroup L2: 8800-8000 A.P.

H-43 (Sample Name: 2H31): Haplogroup L2: 8800-8000 A.P.

H-45 (Sample Name: 1H17): Haplogroup H/K:7100-6500 A.P.

H-49 (Sample Name:1H15): Haplogroup L3a: 8800-8000 A.P.

H-68 (Sample Name: H12): Haplogroup H/T: 8800-8000 A.P.


Toledo, Portugal

K-13 (Sample Name: TO1): Haplogroup L3a: 9200-7800 A.P.


Dja’de, Syria

SK-A2 (Sample Name: DJ1): Haplogroup H/T: 9400-8700 A.P.


Mari, Syria

Mari [1] (Sample Name: 1MA1): Haplogroup H 2900-2700 A.P

Mari [2] (Sample Name: 2MA2): Haplogroup U4: 2900-2700 A.P

Mari [5] (Sample Name: 1MA5): Haplogroup U4: 2900-2700 A.P

Mari [10] (Sample Name: 2MA10): Haplogroup L3a: 2550 A.P

Mari [11] (Sample Name: 3MA11):Haplogroup J1a: 2550 A.P

Mari [12] (Sample Name: IMAI2): Haplogroup L2: 2550 A.P


Abauntz, Navarra (Spain)

ABb1.1 (Sample Name: AB5): Haplogroup H: 4240 A.P

AB17C (Sample Name: AB14): Haplogroup L2: 4240 A.P

AB23C (Sample Name: AB9): Haplogroup J*: 4240 A.P


... if I screwed up I will post it again with some edits >>> if anyone wants it<<<

I still have a few questions though:

quote:

---

NE-1829 (Sample Name 5NE): Haplogroup L1b: 5.875±80 A.P.

---

What doesthis mean? The chart says it's Neolithic but it says 5.875±80 A.P (which I'm guessing is BC).

quote:

---

NE-NM82.2 (Sample Name: 2NE): Haplogroup J*: 17000-20000

---

Is this A.P too? I'm sorry if this is a stupid question but what is A.P? I've heard of BCE and AD. This acronym I'm not as familiar with.

---

Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Oshun:
[QB] Thanks everyone for the help! it took me a lot of reading to get a better understanding. Seeing how the guy omitted information, I put the assigned dates he placed and ran a search through all the PDFs and found them. But since he didn't add a lot of the data I included the other haplogrouped samples he omitted and used the haplogroups in the original that he(?) changed:

---

Posts: 42922 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Oshun:
[QB] Thanks everyone for the help! it took me a lot of reading to get a better understanding. Seeing how the guy omitted information, I put the assigned dates he placed and ran a search through all the PDFs and found them. But since he didn't add a lot of the data I included the other haplogrouped samples he omitted and used the haplogroups in the original that he(?) changed:

---

why was something omitted?

---

All I know is that I confirmed what Swenet was saying about this site:


http://www.ancestraljourneys.org/copperbronzeagedna.shtml

They omitted a lot samples (most especially L haplogroups) from the study. Some samples the site did add but changed the haplogroups from what the study said or omitted info about it. The site still had some use though. It gave dates I needed and allowed me the ability to search all the pdfs for the date to double check their accuracy and to make the breakdown of ages, location and assigned Haplogroups above. That would've been impossible to do if the site hadn't given the me numbers to go searching for.

Posts: 2508 | From: . | Registered: Nov 2011  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by xyyman:
Since you are genuinely interested. I will oblige there are two RECENT landmark papers. Disregard the Achilli nonsense written about 15years ago on the origin of hg-H.

mtDNA hg-H is also of African origin. That is why I keep repeating there is no such thing as “race” and Europeans are a subset of Africans regardless of phenotype.

Two papers – 1) Enaffa(sp?) et al 2) Rym Kefi et al(2014).

---

[/QB][/QUOTE]

Thanks I will continue reading. I looked at ESR and I'm a little confused by something you posted. Namely this



Now, I'm still not entirely sure about how the origin of a given Haplogroup is found. But it sounds like sounds like refutations are pointing towards Tunisia. But then how come the Libyan Sahara (61.2) and Mali (52.4) have higher rates of Haplogroup H if there seems to be a growing argument it originate in Tunisia (31.3)? Even Greece (42.2), France (45.4) and Slovakia (47) by this graph has more than rates of Haplogroup H than Tunisia.

I notice the position on ESR a Tunisian origin is defended by H haplotype and nucleotide diversity, nucleotide differences and Tunisia having the second greatest number of Haplotypes. I don't kno very much about genetics so it's hard reading these things. But if Mali and Libya have higher values, wouldn't they make likelier candidates?

Posts: 2508 | From: . | Registered: Nov 2011  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0013378


Mitochondrial Haplogroup H1 in North Africa: An Early Holocene Arrival from Iberia


Claudio Ottoni , Giuseppina Primativo , Baharak Hooshiar Kashani, Alessandro Achilli, Cristina Martínez-Labarga, Gianfranco Biondi, Antonio Torroni, Olga Rickards
Published: October 21, 2010

The Tuareg of the Fezzan region (Libya) are characterized by an extremely high frequency (61%) of haplogroup H1, a mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) haplogroup that is common in all Western European populations. To define how and when H1 spread from Europe to North Africa up to the Central Sahara, in Fezzan, we investigated the complete mitochondrial genomes of eleven Libyan Tuareg belonging to H1. Coalescence time estimates suggest an arrival of the European H1 mtDNAs at about 8,000–9,000 years ago, while phylogenetic analyses reveal three novel H1 branches, termed H1v, H1w and H1x, which appear to be specific for North African populations, but whose frequencies can be extremely different even in relatively close Tuareg villages. Overall, these findings support the scenario of an arrival of haplogroup H1 in North Africa from Iberia at the beginning of the Holocene, as a consequence of the improvement in climate conditions after the Younger Dryas cold snap, followed by in situ formation of local H1 sub-haplogroups. This process of autochthonous differentiation continues in the Libyan Tuareg who, probably due to isolation and recent founder events, are characterized by village-specific maternal mtDNA lineages.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by xyyman

yes, many authors use frequency (ie the amount) as indicative of origin. But in reality OTHER authors use haplotype diversity. So, based on frequency, ONLY, yes hg-H will have an European origin(Achilli et al). But this is an archaic method that is becoming obsolete. Haplotype diversity is a better method

---

quote:

---

Mitochondrial Haplogroup H1 in North Africa: An Early Holocene Arrival from Iberia

The genetic diversity of the Libyan H1 mtDNAs appeared to be extremely low, with 91% of the H1 individuals sharing the same HVS-I/II haplotype (i.e. CRS-263).

The sharp homogeneity of H1 in the Libyan Tuareg, who show extremely low values of haplotype diversity (0.165), is straightforward. Moroccans, Tunisians and the Tuareg from Sahel were found to be much more diverse than the Libyan Tuareg, with haplotype diversities of 0.577, 0.633 and 0.595, respectively.

Indeed, Moroccans and Tunisians, the populations geographically closest to Europe, harbor the highest diversity values for all considered indices. Thus, the coastal areas of northwestern Africa, after the arrival of the Iberian founder H1 mtDNAs, probably acted as centers for the subsequent diffusion of H1 in the internal regions of North Africa. The rather high frequency of H1 in the Tuareg from Sahel (23.3%), in association with intermediate diversity values, is in agreement with the proposal that drift played a major role in shaping the genetic structure of inland populations after they were entrapped in the Sahel belt by the desertification of the Sahara [37]. As for the Libyan Tuareg, the extremely low values of the diversity indices confirm that the outstanding high frequency of H1 in this population is the result of even more recent founder events.

---

Posts: 42922 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged |