Why are men of the Dinaric Highlands so tall?

The sub-branch referred to as "Balkan" of I2-M423 is only about 2200 years old and spread with an extremely recent founder. Yes, older branches exist in and around Poland/Belarus, but most Balkan men descend from a younger group under M423-L621. Perhaps prior to their arrival, the Balkans were populated by midgets. The most likely explanation here is a spread with South Slavic speakers during a period since 2200 ybp. This lines up with the fact that no branch of I2-M423 has been found on the steppes or the data from the ancient Balkans.
 
I think it is complicated and multifactorial as a matter, -that big "Why" I mean.
The absolute explanation does not fit into "a few lines".
The essential question is: "What makes us tall?" at a first level, but if we deepen to the core of such queries is: "- are the genes or the environment?".
This is a casual look and simplistic.


Of course, we realize that the offer (Dna / Enviroment) is common but different quotas and different in each case, as in the examples of the Netherlands and the Balkans mentioned earlier and more generally.
but
What about the case of the tall Dutch in relation to the shortest Irish(R1b) or the tallest inhabitants of the dinar alps and their Sardinian cousins ​​(I2)?
I mean in short terms that both could be tall but for different reasons.

As far what genetic science concerned, I do not have a deep understanding and therefore no valid position on the individual issues. I still understand the contribution (Y-dna) and that is why we are talking about:
Pattern <father, father, etc.
The question, however, is whether we should confuse, for example, (I2) with the populations that anthropologists refer to Dinaric as stock, I'm not in a position to answer. (for example: -every I2 carrier is Dinarid / es; or every I2 having dinaroid features;)
I suppose this is not, because I2 carriers are not at such a high density compared to the phenotypical characteristics of the Dinarides which are widely spread in Europe -in general.


To the question : -If Y-dna is responsible for the tallness?
-It is a major factor but not the exclusive one- I suppose. But I will expect mature conclusions from more "qualified" than me to confirm me.
To the question: -Is it the "Environment"? (Natural-Geographical / Economic-Social / Political-Cultural etc.etc)
Certainly, the environmental impact rates are relative and dominant in all previous possible examples.

The ultimately question rises, so: In what deegree the "Enviroment".is responsible for the mutation of our genes?
Who knows maybe it is, Just the phosphor...
-The last one is the "killing joke"... an irony to simple answers.

Anyway Genetics is not my field, it was just a naive approach.
 
for the Dinarics/Dinarides
I think the antropologists described as the people which were the core at Balkans, -mostly-, with a large expansion in general.
They dont look having all that mountaineer gualities of their Alpine and Armenoid cousins. Anyway both three are varieties of the Mediteranides, the greater -in expansion and variation- of the Europides.


How they related with upper Paleolithic populations I dont know, at least they are Mesolithic, or Neolithic or Chalkolithic stream.. ?
Maybe; the missconception happens because there are paleolithic settlements to the Western side of the penninsula, -Balkans/Greece-, which is the natural continuous of the dinaric alps, which Dinaric alps is continuous of the Alps.
I Have the feeling that climate reasons push that stock to the hills and the mountains maybe at the Wet period. My personal feel is that Dinarics have qualities, of a steppe inhabitant mostly (-european steppe).

Before the genetic studies, -decades ago, before internet-, I had the thought that the Dinarides is well related to prehistoric pre-greeks like Dryopes, Δρύοπες.


I also think that if is any paleolithic remnant stock to region is that one stock with the very small eyes,( when you see it you will remember me.) In simple words Dinarics is probably "newcomers". Bronze age maybe;
-Not the first choice for me.
 
No joke here...:ashamed2:


I really would like to know how much rich in phosphor is the Dinaric alps, Dalmatic coast and plains etc;
Since there is mostly limestones therefore possibly a lot of minerals...


I would appreciate the deep knowledge of geologist -also- at first hand.
 
The food they consume in that area also play role in my opinion.They eat a lot of proteins,meat,sour milk,cheese etc but could be genetic links too.
Historicaly i think they lived more on cattle breeding or hunt than on agriculture. The area is not very suitable for agriculture being mountainous,also there is the sharp and fresh air.
I am myself also South-Slav but we aren't tall on average as they are in my area.I am 187 cm (which is still tall but not as some man there) :LOL:,maybe is because we eat less meat and more veggies :))
 
Last edited:
Its a combination of genetics boosted by proper nutrition. When proper nutrition is lacking then you got a slightly above average height and nothing wow.

Im 188cm myself and taller than almost all my older cousins (the shortest in 181cm), while competing in height with a 17 and 19 year old cousins who are still growing.

So in my family's case nutrition can give that minimum 7cm boost.
 
South Slavs from Dinaric Alps are tall because of high percentage of I2a-Din haplogroup.

I haplogroup produce tall people, Scandinavians are tall because they have a lot of I1 haplogroup.

Gheg Albanians from northern Albania often have Dinarid features but they are quite shorter than south Slavs especially than south Slavs from Dinaric Alps and especially than Herzegovians (I2a-Din in Herzegovina reaches the hidgest percentage in the world).

Ghegs have very little I2a-Din (they are 70%+ E-V13, J2b2 and R1b-BY611) and because of that they are shorter than south Slavs.
 
^^Please read upthread. The genes for height are on the autosomes. The ychromosome doesn't code for these kinds of traits.
 
Angela said:
^^Please read upthread. The genes for height are on the autosomes. The ychromosome doesn't code for these kinds of traits.
Click to expand...
Incorrect, in fact, the Y chromosome probably is the most influential chromosome when it comes to height.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XYY_syndrome

The liger is a great example as well.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liger

The problem is that if the environment selects for increased height it will do so for both the Y chromosome and autosomal chromosomes.

In order to figure out the height contribution of the Y chromosome scientists need to first establish which autosomal mutations influence height, then correlate the remaining variance with Y haplogroups for men.

Maciamo mentioned a study into this subject, does anyone have a link?
 
^^

"The increased gene dosage of three X/Y chromosomepseudoautosomal region(PAR1) SHOX genes has been postulated as a cause of the increased stature seen in all three sex chromosome trisomies: 47,XXX, 47,XXY, and 47,XYY.[8]

If there are papers which show that yDna I2a men have a higher percentage of these chromosomal abnormalities that would be interesting.

Any paper showing that a random sample of yDna I2a men are appreciably taller than other men of the same ethnicity and inhabiting the same area and with similar autosomal genetics would also be very interesting.

Otherwise, I'm not convinced.
 
Angela said:
See: GIANT study finds rare, but influential, genetic changes related to height


https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/02/170201131513.htm

"International study of more than 750,000 people probes deeper into height than ever before
Click to expand...
Did they measure 750,000 people, or did they use self reported height? I hate to say it, but if they used self reported height they probably found mutations that play a role in dishonesty. :p

The way to go about this is to find very short people, and very tall people, measure them very accurately, next see what makes them different. The quality of academic research appears to be at an all time low however, there is no market economy, so corruption is inevitable. They probably get their 100,000$ grant, do 80 hours of work writing a report using fancy language that says whatever the sponsor wants to read, pay some Indian freelancer $200 to make some cool looking graphs, waste another $20,000 on miscellaneous wages, and pocket the rest.

The main problem is that nobody wants to spend money for real scientists to get real and verifiable results.

Edit:

Angela said:
"The increased gene dosage of three X/Y chromosomepseudoautosomal region(PAR1) SHOX genes has been postulated as a cause of the increased stature seen in all three sex chromosome trisomies: 47,XXX, 47,XXY, and 47,XYY.[8]
Click to expand...


No info on Wikipedia on the height of XXX, and while XXY's are taller, no info on how much the height increase is. So we're left guessing.
 
You think they asked 750,000 people to send in a questionaire? :) These kinds of really large studies are usually done using hospital data.

No, the problem is that some people can't be objective about scientific data. It always has to be massaged to somehow increase the "stature" of their own ethnic group.

Pun intended.

Change that to most people.
 
Angela said:
You think they asked 750,000 people to send in a questionaire? :) These kinds of really large studies are usually done using hospital data.
Click to expand...
Sounds more like they payed 23andme to get their hands on data people volunteered for scientific research.

Angela said:
No, the problem is that some people can't be objective about scientific data. It always has to be massaged to somehow increase the "stature" of their own ethnic group.
Click to expand...
Not to mention the genetic denialism by liberals and those afraid to lose funding if they draw unfavorable conclusions.

Maybe this deserves a different topic, but this is interesting.

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/a2cd/8b195e6d59b3cabedb6b38b1281ed0ffb5eb.pdf

It appears to claim there is a 1.8 Mb deletion in the N1 haplogroup. The human Y chromosome is about 59 Mb. Does this mean N1 is missing 1.8 million basepairs? That's 3% of the Y chromosome, it'd be rather shocking if that's the case.
 
What does 23andme have to do with it? GIANT is an effort organized by the Broad Institute to collect and sort data from hundreds of academic studies about anthropometric traits from around the world.

This is the organization.
https://portals.broadinstitute.org/collaboration/giant/index.php/Main_Page

This is the source of some of this data:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25282103?dopt=Citation

That's 389 contributors just from a prior paper. Maybe they've even hit 1000 by now. This kind of meta-analysis is only becoming possible now because of the super-computers. You can find the complete list at the link I provided. This is just some of them.

"Wood AR, Esko T, Yang J, Vedantam S, Pers TH, Gustafsson S, Chu AY, Estrada K, Luan J, Kutalik Z, Amin N, Buchkovich ML, Croteau-Chonka DC, Day FR, Duan Y, Fall T, Fehrmann R, Ferreira T, Jackson AU, Karjalainen J, Lo KS, Locke AE, Mägi R, Mihailov E, Porcu E, Randall JC, Scherag A, Vinkhuyzen AA, Westra HJ, Winkler TW, Workalemahu T, Zhao JH, Absher D, Albrecht E, Anderson D, Baron J, Beekman M, Demirkan A, Ehret GB, Feenstra B, Feitosa MF, Fischer K, Fraser RM, Goel A, Gong J, Justice AE, Kanoni S, Kleber ME, Kristiansson K, Lim U, Lotay V, Lui JC, Mangino M, Mateo Leach I, Medina-Gomez C, Nalls MA, Nyholt DR, Palmer CD, Pasko D, Pechlivanis S, Prokopenko I, Ried JS, Ripke S, Shungin D, Stancáková A, Strawbridge RJ, Sung YJ, Tanaka T, Teumer A, Trompet S, van der Laan SW, van Setten J, Van Vliet-Ostaptchouk JV, Wang Z, Yengo L, Zhang W, Afzal U, Arnlöv J, Arscott GM, Bandinelli S, Barrett A, Bellis C, Bennett AJ, Berne C, Blüher M, Bolton JL, Böttcher Y, Boyd HA, Bruinenberg M, Buckley BM, Buyske S, Caspersen IH, Chines PS, Clarke R, Claudi-Boehm S, Cooper M, Daw EW, De Jong PA, Deelen J, Delgado G, Denny JC, Dhonukshe-Rutten R, Dimitriou M, Doney AS, Dörr M, Eklund N, Eury E, Folkersen L, Garcia ME, Geller F, Giedraitis V, Go AS, Grallert H, Grammer TB, Gräßler J, Grönberg H, de Groot LC, Groves CJ, Haessler J, Hall P, Haller T, Hallmans G, Hannemann A, Hartman CA, Hassinen M, Hayward C, Heard-

You think people like this are interested in or even aware of the bizarre nationalistic worldviews of people who want to make "ethnic" based points about height, of all things?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

This thread has been viewed 64647 times.

Back
Top