IJ*-samples in large study Iran

[Alan]

point out the "insult" I have used against you.

[Alan]

No phobia my friend, and please, do not try to insult myself with such childish argument. I hope moderators take some notes about your behaviour when someone tells something you simply don't like to read...because it's not the first time.


What is of general knowledge, is that there's nothing as clear as you pretend to show regarding IJ, and we'll probably won't know more for the reasons I already explained (and seems you intentionally ignore). Like it or not, we need ancient DNA, it's the best clue, but probably not enough to know where IJ originated if it finally appears in many ancient burials as I suspect. In short: take it easy with your categorical statements and lack of respect, this is just the begining ;)

We havent found any ancient I* samples in Europe(the Balkans) yet you seem to be very ok with the idea its origin being assumed in the Balkans. We have high diversity of J* and the only confirmed IJ* samples are also from West Asia, yet you want some ancient Data do confirm the origin of IJ in Western Asia? If this is not childish and just an attempt to refuse the Western Asian origin than I have no idea.

So tell me where do you think Haplogroup IJ originated?

[Knovas]

"Knovas dont drag this into ridiculousness with your Middle Eastern phobia"

I said you TRIED to, not that you achieve the goal. So it seems you find ridiculous what I posted because it doesn't fit with your thoughts LOL. The fact is this is not the proper way to explain your arguments, that's the point I wanted to leave clear. Maybe you should take care of your phobia against people who don't think the same as you, and that's why you offer replies like the one above. I think it's enough, nothing left to say.

[Knovas]

I posted above West Eurasia, bacause I don't know. Perhaps I am not as clever as you, and I prefer to wait for more evidence.

[Alan]

"Knovas dont drag this into ridiculousness with your Middle Eastern phobia"

Wow what a sensible person you are. Though I couldnt see any personal attack.

[Alan]

Maybe you should take care of your phobia against people who don't think the same as you, and that's why you offer replies like the one above. I think it's enough, nothing left to say.

Well I accept my wrongs and also the opinions of other as far as they dont reach ridiculousness

[Knovas]

Wow what a sensible person you are. Though I couldnt see any personal attack.

"Knovas dont drag this into ridiculousness with your Middle Eastern phobia"

Yeah, that's not personal at all, no way...¬¬ XD

I'm afraid you should wear some glasses.

PD: You reached the top, congratulations.

[JFWR]

I dont get the but part, since it was neither found in modern nor in ancient populations anywhere else?

As it has been said: IJ hasn't been found in any ancient populations period. The remaining IJ might reflect a historical population growth to Iran, or else the only remaining IJ left in the world which was once formed elsewhere.

[Maciamo]

As it has been said: IJ hasn't been found in any ancient populations period. The remaining IJ might reflect a historical population growth to Iran, or else the only remaining IJ left in the world which was once formed elsewhere.

I agree. I explained two and a half years ago why it is wrong to assume that a haplogroup originated where it is most frequent now.

The Middle East is a seriously undersampled region for Y-DNA and we could still find plenty of other pockets of IJ. Once there are enough of them, these could be further tested for new SNP's, and who knows, one of several new branches parallel to haplogroups I and J could emerge. They would probably be called IJ1, IJ2... a rather clumsy nomenclature, until the whole Y-DNA tree of modern humanity becomes clear and all haplogroups are renamed in a better organised way.

[zanipolo]

basically I view all HG came through the middleeast except E ( which is african).

There are too many people with phobias about their DNA. the only true "aboriginal" europeans would be neaderthals.....are you one of them?

[Maciamo]

basically I view all HG came through the middleeast except E ( which is african).

That is not exactly true. A haplogroup is not just a (subjectively attributed) top-level haplogroup like E, I or R. I2a2a1 is as much a haplogroup as I2a or I or IJK. Even a vey deep subclade like R1b1a2a1a1a5b2b1a1b2a is ultimately as much a single haplogroup as R*. You shouldn't be misled by the (always-changing and arbitrary) nomenclature. If tomorrow the ISOGG decided that there just too many subclades under R1b1a2a1a1a (S21/U106) and that it would be more convenient to rename it haplogroup U, it would instantly become a "root haplogroup". This is just to show how arbitrarily haplogroup names are attributed. It is popular now to give letter names, then alternate with numbers for each subclade level, but what if later geneticists prefer to give individual names to each subclade ? (a bit like Brian Sykes gave names for mtDNA subclades)

So when you say that all haplogroups came from the Middle East, this is simply not true. Many of them developed in Europe or elsewhere.

[JFWR]

That is not exactly true. A haplogroup is not just a (subjectively attributed) top-level haplogroup like E, I or R. I2a2a1 is as much a haplogroup as I2a or I or IJK. Even a vey deep subclade like R1b1a2a1a1a5b2b1a1b2a is ultimately as much a single haplogroup as R*. You shouldn't be misled by the (always-changing and arbitrary) nomenclature. If tomorrow the ISOGG decided that there just too many subclades under R1b1a2a1a1a (S21/U106) and that it would be more convenient to rename it haplogroup U, it would instantly become a "root haplogroup". This is just to show how arbitrarily haplogroup names are attributed. It is popular now to give letter names, then alternate with numbers for each subclade level, but what if later geneticists prefer to give individual names to each subclade ? (a bit like Brian Sykes gave names for mtDNA subclades)

So when you say that all haplogroups came from the Middle East, this is simply not true. Many of them developed in Europe or elsewhere.

Good post.

Though to be fair to Zanipoli, I think he means that most haplogroups have an ancestor haplogroup that came from the ME.

[JFWR]

basically I view all HG came through the middleeast except E ( which is african).

There are too many people with phobias about their DNA. the only true "aboriginal" europeans would be neaderthals.....are you one of them?

It is meaningless to say that Europeans are not indigeneous to Europe due to the length of time which they have inhabitted the land.

Excluding historical invasions of Asiatic and Turkic people, the majority of European groups were here by the Neolithic at latest.

[zanipolo]

That is not exactly true. A haplogroup is not just a (subjectively attributed) top-level haplogroup like E, I or R. I2a2a1 is as much a haplogroup as I2a or I or IJK. Even a vey deep subclade like R1b1a2a1a1a5b2b1a1b2a is ultimately as much a single haplogroup as R*. You shouldn't be misled by the (always-changing and arbitrary) nomenclature. If tomorrow the ISOGG decided that there just too many subclades under R1b1a2a1a1a (S21/U106) and that it would be more convenient to rename it haplogroup U, it would instantly become a "root haplogroup". This is just to show how arbitrarily haplogroup names are attributed. It is popular now to give letter names, then alternate with numbers for each subclade level, but what if later geneticists prefer to give individual names to each subclade ? (a bit like Brian Sykes gave names for mtDNA subclades)

So when you say that all haplogroups came from the Middle East, this is simply not true. Many of them developed in Europe or elsewhere.

I do not know of any haplogroups that developed/formed/created in europe , only ones I know of developed in the middle-east, africa or western & central asia. The only things that developed in europe where subclades and branches of haplogroups.

I hope we are not saying that ...as an example, I1 and I2a are different haplogroups from a different "parental" haplogroup. To me they originated from I

I agree with you that they can rename it to haplogroup U , but they have not done this

[Knovas]

It's not even sure that E is native to Africa despite the fact it's very common and has a lot of diversity there. Dienekes' pointed the possibility that E it's a Paleo-Eurasian haplogroup likely originated in the Arabian Peninsula or carried by people different from modern Africans. The article was also discussed here in Eupedia.

Using autosomal experiments, Dienekes' found that some deep Sub-Saharan populations had a West Eurasian affinity, and those were specially groups having higher E frequencies. Deep Sub-Saharan populations did not include East Africans, since they have a more recent input via the middle East wich is actually well reported.

There you are the summary by Dorianfinder, he did it good:

Dienekes notes that HG A and B are purely African Y-haplogroups whereas HG D is East Asian. He states that according to the new software preliminary findings show that African populations with HG E have proportionally higher amounts of West Eurasian genetic input suggesting that HG E may not be 'entirely' African. This is interesting as it links HG E with Eurasia and not with Africa as first thought. No doubt this will be followed up with some interesting comments and articles.

[Wilhelm]

I agree. It is becoming more evident know that haplogroup E could have been an re-introsion of humans into Africa, from the middle-east, read the theories of Dienekes which are pretty good. He also explains why are West-Africans more shifted towards Eurasian on genetic plots, in respect to the more archaich africans like the Pygmies.

[JFWR]

I do not know of any haplogroups that developed/formed/created in europe , only ones I know of developed in the middle-east, africa or western & central asia. The only things that developed in europe where subclades and branches of haplogroups.

I hope we are not saying that ...as an example, I1 and I2a are different haplogroups from a different "parental" haplogroup. To me they originated from I

I* developed in Europe.

[Knovas]

I agree. It is becoming more evident know that haplogroup E could have been an re-introsion of humans into Africa, from the middle-east, read the theories of Dienekes which are pretty good. He also explains why are West-Africans more shifted towards Eurasian on genetic plots, in respect to the more archaich africans like the Pygmies.

Maybe the migration involved DE people, this is what Dienekes' said recently:

D has a relic distribution in the Asian periphery, and E is in Africa. So, it might make sense if DE was part of a southern population that got split up as the Arabia became more desert like, causing some remaining DE folk to migrate west and some east. These groups of escapees coalesced into E in Africa and D somewhere to the east.

So if that's the case, E could have originated in Africa, although seems it still wasn't representative of the original inhabitants of Africa (likely akin to modern Pygmies, some San, etc.). Well, let's follow the thread, moderators can move this to another discussion if they feel like.

[Knovas]

I* developed in Europe.

I prefer to remain cautious concerning this for the same I posted about IJ.

[sparkey]

I prefer to remain cautious concerning this for the same I posted about IJ.

I'm almost there with you, Knovas. I'm not willing to say "I originated in Europe" or "IJ originated in West Asia." But I am willing to say "Based on current samples, I probably originated in Europe, and IJ probably originated in West Asia." Future samples, of course, could change this idea dramatically. Who knows? We could find a tremendous diversity of IJ branches in an ancient DNA study in Djibouti, so even your assertion that IJ is "Western Eurasian" could be wrong. It's just very unlikely.

I'll also reiterate that the finding of IJ* in Iran is additional evidence that IJ originated in West Asia. It doesn't prove anything, no. Certainly not that IJ originated in Iran in particular. But it does show that the center of diversity of modern samples tested so far is probably in West Asia. Before this study, it had been split between Europe and West Asia, and we had to guess which migration direction was more likely based on the general direction of human migration. Now, we've got a little more evidence for the West Asia->Europe direction.

[Alan]

As it has been said: IJ hasn't been found in any ancient populations period. The remaining IJ might reflect a historical population growth to Iran, or else the only remaining IJ left in the world which was once formed elsewhere.

Well as I already said, the reason for my reaction was not because some people showed their uncertainty for the origin of IJ in Iran. I mentioned myself that it is possible that IJ originated somewhere else (maybe in Eastern Anatolia or North Mesopotamia since this areas are known for their diversity of J*). What I couldnt agree on was that he tried to stretch the possible place of origin for Haplogroup IJ* over whole West Eurasia! Since the highest frequency as well biggest diversity is found in the area between the Balkans and West/Southwest Asia, and also historically there has been much more movements from West Asia into the rest of the World. It just doesnt make much sense (in my opinion) to assume that an origin in North Africa, Europe or South- Central Asia is as much of a possibility as in Western Asia.

[Knovas]

Who knows? We could find a tremendous diversity of IJ branches in an ancient DNA study in Djibouti, so even your assertion that IJ is "Western Eurasian" could be wrong. It's just very unlikely.

Yes, it's unlikely, but I see your point. If I'm finally wrong it's ok, but I don't think so xd

Well Alan...

North Africa it's very unlikely to place the origin, but not unlikely at all to find ancient IJ, that's what I said. My point since the begining has been that IJ was probably very widespread in the deeper past, what would make pretty difficult to know the exact origin. Like it or not, West Eurasia will surely be the best guess for a very long time (if not for ever). Remove North Africa if you want, it doesn't matter.

If you have a problem with a possible origin out of West Asia, just take it easy, because it will take so long to get the final evidence. And yes, IT'S POSSIBLE.

By the way, did you see that?

I* developed in Europe.

Because it seems to me you only see what you want to see, so I diceded to help you.

You're welcome ;)

[JFWR]

Because it seems to me you only see what you want to see, so I diceded to help you.

You're welcome ;)

I is a haplogroup. You said that you knew of no haplogroup that developed in Europe. The preponderance of data highly suggests I developed in Europe, deriving from a potentially West Eurasian (as you advocate for) IJ, which itself comes from an IJK somewhere in the ME.

[zanipolo]

I is a haplogroup. You said that you knew of no haplogroup that developed in Europe. The preponderance of data highly suggests I developed in Europe, deriving from a potentially West Eurasian (as you advocate for) IJ, which itself comes from an IJK somewhere in the ME.

my scenario is that IJ where together in the middle-east and headed towards the levant, I went north and established in southern anatolia and J in the levant. I then went through the balkans into europe ............but there is a problem with this in that KN states the illyrian I came from the ukraine........so ......can we say say I went through the caucasus alone ( without J) ........but then that does not make sense for the IJ union in south west asia