West asians vs Mediterranean neolithic farmers

Paleolithic or not, I2a and even I1 might have carried the Southern/Mediterranean admixture. Folks of the Megalithic, Cucuteni Tripolje and even the Scandinavian TRB cultures are all described as Mediterraneans, gracile Mediterraneans.
Mediterranean doesn't mean "foreign" or "Middle East" at all. It is a human type that appeared BEFORE the neolithic in some part of Europe.

Those who carried the haplogroup might have other relations to Mediterraneans, but the actual haplogroup is the earliest in Europe from Homo sapiens and the only Homo sapiens for 20,000 years (unless N came into NE Europe during the Ice Age). If we assume Mediterranean types emerged in the Middle East, then this type must have evolved well before 30,000 BC in order to associate it with I, as I migrated into Europe at around 30,000 BC.
 
Those who carried the haplogroup might have other relations to Mediterraneans, but the actual haplogroup is the earliest in Europe from Homo sapiens and the only Homo sapiens for 20,000 years (unless N came into NE Europe during the Ice Age). If we assume Mediterranean types emerged in the Middle East, then this type must have evolved well before 30,000 BC in order to associate it with I, as I migrated into Europe at around 30,000 BC.

Haplogroup I is indeed one of the earliest in Europe but maybe not the first. You can at least say that haplogroup I was in Europe at the end of the Gravettian culture (31 000 BP - 24 000 BP) but you can't say that it was already there during the Aurignacien (37 000 BP-30 000 BP) since haplogroup I is 25 000 years old.
The first modern humans in Europe might have been just IJ*.
 
SouthWestAsian is pulled toward Africa because they have some East-African alleles while most of it is Paleo-Med.Read well before you reply.Eitherway the Southern component is widespread and ancient in MENA to not have originated there.

Malsori, you are mixing apples with oranges. First, because Southwest Asian and Southern are not the same, and you assume that its huge presence in the Middle East makes both things equivalent. Wrong.

If you check the Fst distances, you'll see that the Southern component is a lot more removed from Black African clusters than the Southwest Asian is. Sardinians and Basques (as well as some Iberians), show very little West Asian and Southwest Asian, which are no way absent among Middle Eastern populations. If the resolution is very high, those populations show very high percents of Southwest Asian, and if the K's are lower, they get substantial West Asian despite being modal in Southern. So it's not clear at all that Southern must have come with Neolithic farmers, it could have been in Europe even long before considering its non despreciable presence in Southern Europe.

Another explanation is that Neolithic Farmers were not as Middle Eastern as some people thinks, exactly the same valid IMO. Simply because, as I said in other threads, what is identified nowadays as Middle Eastern, is a composite of West Asian and hints of African superposed to the Mediterranean substratum. Hence, quite different considering what Southern in its "pure" form is: very distant from inner African groups, and not specially close to the West Asian cluster according to K7b.

What I say it's more evident in the K10a run, check what Dienekes' said about Mediterranean (Modal in Sardinians, and quite high in both Basques and Iberians):

As for the African/Sub-Saharan components, they tend to be closer to the Southwest Asian/Red Sea components, not the Mediterranean/Atlantic_Med one.

The Mediterranean components appear to be the most remote ones overall (also evidenced by the fact that Basques and Sardinians nearly always form the peak in the West/East Eurasian/African triangle), which makes sense since the region where the Mediterranean/Atlantic_Med component is modal is most remote from both Africa and Asia along the land migration routes.
 
SouthWestAsian is pulled toward Africa because they have some East-African alleles while most of it is Paleo-Med.Read well before you reply.Eitherway the Southern component is widespread and ancient in MENA to not have originated there.
The Southern component is an admixed cluster even if possibly the most West Eurasian, as well as the Atlantic_Baltic is. The fact it's more widespread it could just mean it's older and had more time to move, we don't know it. Note that both Basques and Sardinians are almost fully Atlantic_Baltic + Med at k10a, and at K7b they are Atlantic_Baltic + Southern (worth to mention that Sardinians are very high in Med and Southern). And as Dienekes' points pretty well, both represent the peak in the West Eurasian cline when running genetic plots. Then, Southern could have originated in Southern Europe according to this results, although of course I am not saying it's 100% true.
 
i do not know how you can state that Iberia has none or nearly none of south-west asian, when Q, L, K and T are present there, especially in the north
¿What are you talking about? Haplogroups tell nothing, and by the way, what you say it's plain false. Q it's only 0.5% in the Basque country according to Eupedia, and T it's only 2.5% for the whole Spain, and specially low in the North LOL (Catalonia 0%, Basque country 0%, and even Galicia 0.5%...only Aragon shows 4%, which it's not incredibly high).

Also, I said SOME Iberians, I didn't say more, but I was refering to Northeast Iberians who sometimes deviate towards Basques and, hence, they show very low West Asian and Southwest Asian depending on the level of resolution. I think what you say it's valid for Northwest Iberians (Galicians and Northern Portuguese), since they don't have such evident lack of this components compared to people from the Northeast.
 
The Southern component is an admixed cluster even if possibly the most West Eurasian, as well as the Atlantic_Baltic is. The fact it's more widespread it could just mean it's older and had more time to move, we don't know it. Note that both Basques and Sardinians are almost fully Atlantic_Baltic + Med at k10a, and at K7b they are Atlantic_Baltic + Southern (worth to mention that Sardinians are very high in Med and Southern). And as Dienekes' points pretty well, both represent the peak in the West Eurasian cline when running genetic plots. Then, Southern could have originated in Southern Europe according to this results, although of course I am not saying it's 100% true.

Actually the Southern doesn't peak among Sardinians but Bedouins/Yemeni_Jews if i am not wrong.Also Moroccans have a lot of it.
 
It doesn't mean anything, Sardinians are close to 50% Southern, which is very high. The difference is not incredibly significant compared to Middle Easterns who, by the way, have other components which lack among Sardinians.

When increasing the resolution at K10a, Mediterranean peaks in Sardinians (largely), and they have almost no West Asian or other components.
 
Haplogroup I is indeed one of the earliest in Europe but maybe not the first. You can at least say that haplogroup I was in Europe at the end of the Gravettian culture (31 000 BP - 24 000 BP) but you can't say that it was already there during the Aurignacien (37 000 BP-30 000 BP) since haplogroup I is 25 000 years old.
The first modern humans in Europe might have been just IJ*.

Is there any indication that IJ spread to Europe previous to I? I thought IJ remained stationary in the ME.

Hmm, besides I, J, and IJ, what potential haplogroups might be associated with Aurignacian?
 
Is there any indication that IJ spread to Europe previous to I?
Not so far. That is just a guess.

I thought IJ remained stationary in the ME.

Maybe since the only IJ* people have been found in Iran.

Hmm, besides I, J, and IJ, what potential haplogroups might be associated with Aurignacian?

Very difficult to say. I hope it is posssible for researchers to test SNP on 30 000, 40 000 yo individuals. My guess is that U5 and U4 people came with IJ Y haplogroups. IJK seems a bit too old for the Aurignacian.
 
¿What are you talking about? Haplogroups tell nothing, and by the way, what you say it's plain false. Q it's only 0.5% in the Basque country according to Eupedia, and T it's only 2.5% for the whole Spain, and specially low in the North LOL (Catalonia 0%, Basque country 0%, and even Galicia 0.5%...only Aragon shows 4%, which it's not incredibly high).

Also, I said SOME Iberians, I didn't say more, but I was refering to Northeast Iberians who sometimes deviate towards Basques and, hence, they show very low West Asian and Southwest Asian depending on the level of resolution. I think what you say it's valid for Northwest Iberians (Galicians and Northern Portuguese), since they don't have such evident lack of this components compared to people from the Northeast.

oops I forgot to include J in southwest asian .............there is J in iberia , correct?

Haplogroup J is believed to have arisen roughly 30,000 years ago in Southwest Asia

BTW, G and I are also Southwest Asian

Lets state the truth, basically all europe is either from africa or Asia ....mostly through the middle East.

If the admixture reclassify many types which are southwest asian to something else, then we have a different scenario
 
Is there any indication that IJ spread to Europe previous to I?
Not so far. That is just a guess.

Maybe since the only IJ* people have been found in Iran.

Yeah, the almost total absence of that in Europe would be odd.

Very difficult to say. I hope it is posssible for researchers to test SNP on 30 000, 40 000 yo individuals. My guess is that U5 and U4 people came with IJ Y haplogroups. IJK seems a bit too old for the Aurignacian.

Hmm.

I am trying to look up cultural continuities of the Gravettian and Aurignacian. Depending on the date of I/J's earliest estimates, Aurignacian could still be I/J. The problem with J, though, is that it is centered in Arabia and East Africa.
 
when looking at metric anthropology of ancient times populations we find a pretty good mess of subtypes where someones appears as very new and others as ancient and "parent" one to another - so I am yet trying to see the importance of different or common traits -
but yet it appears that there have been movements in Western and South Europe during the Mesolithic that seams forgotten very often by the most of the people, all that before the Neolithic time - we see a modification from cromagnon typesin the direction of more "gracile" (a very imprecise and dangerous word) bodies and more "mediterranean" looks (in a very broad definition) and too one or more intrusions of a very different type that seams have evolved too on the "gracile" way (yet so imprecise), BUT keeping some definite features maintenning the differences with the more "cromagnon looking" previous people
not completely lost some cromagnon features by them -(I have not to explain you that appeared too crossings between these types after a moment) and as to complicate things for the pleasure, some of the newcomers (from central Europe fore sure concerning some of them, at least when speaking about their last knwn stage) show some physical links (phenotypical) with some Natufians of Palestine and eurafrican type: as some skeletal autosomals can remain a long time when Y-HGs and other autosomals (maybe pigmentation and genes responsible of environmental adaptation as stature) can change, and as some types could have been arrived by two or more ways we shall have some doors open about theories but without too much certitude for the moment, waiting knowing more) -
some modifications about the successors of cromagnons in S-W Europe (Iberia/France) concerning the faces (less broad) was found more on wives and children: someones saw immediatly a sex mediated evolution ("almost immediate evolution is in the wind", but we can imagine too a bigger mobility for wives and the mixtures that could have followed (the mtDNA of Mediterranea is or WAS supposed being more level and unified than the Y-DNA there - at the Bronze/Iron ages in Brittany the alpinlike phenotypes (apparently a kind of cromagnoid little brachycephal) had reached the Atlantic shores mostly by the wives at a first time, before becoming a very heavy element in Brittany among the two genres at the La Tène and Gallo-Roman period...
and the same studies show too movements (demic) during Neolithic and Bronze and Iron ages, spite the people fallen in love for the "no moving theory... 20 to 40% of new human beings in a region is an immigration or a colonization for me, not only acculturation... it was possible at ancient times in the span of a few generations: nowaday, so dense we are, it would no more be possible -

I think we 'll have to break down the so called N-W element or atlantic-mediterranean or atlanto-baltic element in the future to go further in details - what is sure is that the naming "mediterranean" even when speaking only of phenotypes is covering two different population, small enough, brunet for the most and dolichocephalic, but with very big differences in other body proportions and other autosomals conditionned traits, finally with different ancient far origin -
just my thought
 
I add I red somewhere sometimeS that the Megaliths expansion got along every Neolithic movements: it seams false to me: the first megalithic expansion semas beginning only about 4000 BC in W Europe, primarily on the coastal regions, well after first Cardial people imported agriculture (or better: breeding) in W-Mediterranea and well after the Danubian neolithic too... and the skeletons attached to these first Megalithics was different as a whole from the other ones associated to other newcomers with agriculture - in some way as for Bell Beakers, the human reliques found at the end of Megalithic culture (when it was generalized) where more mixed, more common or unanalysable - it seams to me (by my poor readings) that the stone constructions and a kind of cheftain system was very often attached to this first period of maritime megaliths, distinct from the timber constructions of other "neolithic" people - MORE THAN A WAVE IN MORE THAN A PLACE IN MORE THAN A WAY TO DO/ OPEN SI THE DOOR for autosomals and HGs!
 

http://dienekes.blogspot.fr/2012/07/a-physico-anthropological-study-of.html


Accorting to George Panagiaris 1993 study based on 767 cranial data, the Mediterranean/West Asian shift in Greece, signaled by the coming of Brachycephalic types, only occured during the Bronze age. He links it with the spread of metallurgy from west Asia.

the greater period of discontinuity in the material is observed during the Helladic period (=Bronze Age in Greek archaeology), where broad-headed incoming groups appear, side by side with the older Mediterranean population
 

http://dienekes.blogspot.fr/2012/07/a-physico-anthropological-study-of.html


Accorting to George Panagiaris 1993 study based on 767 cranial data, the Mediterranean/West Asian shift in Greece, signaled by the coming of Brachycephalic types, only occured during the Bronze age. He links it with the spread of metallurgy from west Asia.

Salute! yec'hed! Spongetaro: it is very funny, I just red this "advertising" of DIENEKE this morning!
I would be glad if I had the complete (traduced) texte of this survey, whatsoever the conclusions of the scholar (I fear his interpretations as very often for ohers ones!) -
I see not contradiction (for now) to my believings: he speaks about Greece and Steppes, not western Europe, not even of central and south-eastern Europe as a whole - I ever linked SOME brachycephalic types to metallurgy, close or indirect links) - the old survey by CHARLES I red spoke about a Balkan origin of Dorians and other people, and even at the chalcolithic of N-E Italy...
Thanks nevertheless and let us wait more details...
 
add: some 'dinaroid' bracycephalic people appears during the Helladic period in western Mediterranea too - I say period because the bulk of them did not seam linked too tightly to helladic people: maybe neighbors? other culture? uneasy to say for me...
 
Studies on my etnici tuscan say we cluster between northern italians and southern italians iter populations near are the iberians greeks albanians romenians and bulgarians.. I consider ourselves the true genetic centre of southern europe, in between al southern europeans.
 
Haplogroup I is indeed one of the earliest in Europe but maybe not the first. You can at least say that haplogroup I was in Europe at the end of the Gravettian culture (31 000 BP - 24 000 BP) but you can't say that it was already there during the Aurignacien (37 000 BP-30 000 BP) since haplogroup I is 25 000 years old.
The first modern humans in Europe might have been just IJ*.

Or maybe E1b*?

here is new Dienekes Calculator. Its the newest together with K12b

K10a
The 'K10a' calculator represents an intermediate stage between the K7 and K12 analyses released so far from the Project. The following components have been inferred:
Palaeoafrican
South_Asian
West_Asian
Southeast_Asian
Sub_Saharan
Atlantic_Baltic
Red_Sea
East_Asian
Mediterranean
Siberian
View attachment 5695


Atlantic_Baltic
Lithuanians 83.2%
Finnish_D 79%
Swedish_D 71.9%
Norwegian_D 71.1%
Irish_D 66.8%
French 55.8%




West Asian
Georgians 61.9%
Abhkasians_Y 60.1%
Brahui 59.1%
Baloch 58.3%
Kurds_Y 53.1%
North_Ossetians_Y 50.7%
Turks 42.5%
Cypriots 36.7%
Greek_D 24.2%
Romanians 18.6%
O_Italian_D 18.1%





Mediterranean
Sardinian 70%
Mozabite 53.3%
Samaritans 46.8%
Spanish_D 45.9%
Algerian_D 46%
Druze 42.4%
O_Italian_D 42%
Lebanese 38.7%
Saudis 37.5%
Bulgarians_Y 34%




Red Sea
Somali_D 52.9%
Ethiopians 47.7%
Saudis 34.6%
Egyptians 24%
Yemenese 22.8%
Mozabite 22.2%
Palestinians 17.7%
Syrians 15%



South Asian
Pulliyar_M 83.2%
Malayan 81.2%
North_Kannadi 79.5%
Uttar_Pradesh_Scheduled_Caste_M 68.6%
Balochi 24.4%
Brahui 24.1%

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0ArAJcY18g2GadC1kRjhxcHNfSGhPYlUxbEI0VVZPR0E#gid=0

the Mediterranean component is linking Europeans with West Asians, Southwest Asians and North Africans while West Asian is linking Europeans with West Asians, Southwest Asians and South- Central Asians.
 
I am new here so I cannot post a website. Go to s_c_o_t_e_s_e as it has a very good map of the Ice Age which stretched a very long period. It shows the inland seas the Black and Caspian Seas as non-existing. The ocean was 300 feet or so lower and the Caspian Sea is very shallow so it wouldn't exist during the Ice Age. The Black Sea could be non-existing or a small inland lake. This means the steppe highway joined Asia to Europe. Also, the Persian Gulf was lowland. Central Asia was surrounded by ice so in summer with the 24-hour sun over the Arctic the summer ice melt would have transformed the tundra to a wonderland for grazing animals. One must imagine this landscape to appreciate the Ice Age and the migration of humans. It was not altogether not like the Antartic.

Turkey was connected to Greece as the Mediterranean sea was also lower. The British Isles to the Netherlands and France. There is topic of doggerland
 
Last edited:

This thread has been viewed 41332 times.

Back
Top