PDA

View Full Version : African mtDNA and Y-DNA in Iberia



Maciamo
29-12-09, 13:08
I have started a new topic with posts originally from the thread Lie about mtDNA haplogroup frequencies in Spain (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/showthread.php?t=25304).

I think that this topic is interesting enough, though potentially controversial, to deserve its own thread. The main questions developed below are :

- How much African DNA is found in the Iberian population ?
- What is the origin of these African haplogroups (e.g. Maghreban, sub-Saharan) ?
- How does this compare to other parts of Europe ?
- What parts of Iberia have the highest frequencies of African haplogroups ?
- How can we explain their presence historically ?

----------------

African MtDNA haplogroups in Iberia

Luis posted below the regional percentages of hg L in Iberia. The overall continental average is 2.25%. With the islands, it is 2.90%. The highest frequency of L is found in Cordoba (8.30%), and the lowest in central Spain and the Basque country (0.66%).

Acording to Helgason et al. (2001), Iberia has 1.42% of North African haplogroup U6. I couldn't find any data for the other two typical Maghreban lineages, X1 and M1, but it cannot exceed the "other" category (1.99%).


Attention ! MtDNA does not equal autosomal DNA !

Before starting this discussion, I would like to explain why the percentage of haplogroups does not necessarily equal the percentage of admixture from the region of origin of that particular haplogroup. For example, 2% of mtDNA L in Iberia does not mean 2% of African admixture.

Imagine that an Black African woman was brought to Europe 2000 years ago. She has children with a European. All her children belong, like her, to hg L. However she is 100% African, but her children are only 50%. Her children all marry white Europeans. Her sons' children won't have any African mtDNA, but about 25% of African autosomal DNA. Her daughters' children will be mtDNA L, and have 25% of African DNA. After 10 generations (about 300 years), if any of her descendant still carries her mtDNA line, they might not have any African autosomal DNA left, but mtDNA will still be there. Those hg L people might be pure Europeans with an African mitochondrial haplogroup. At most they will have 1% of African DNA.

I am not aware of any direct settlement of Black Africans in Iberia. The amount of Black African Y-DNA is negligible like everywhere in Europe. Therefore, all the haplogroup L found in Iberia must be of Maghreban origin. This means that when L reached Iberia, its carriers already had an admixture of European, Berber and Black African DNA. Although 98% of Maghreban Y-DNA is North African (E-M81), up to 90% of their mtDNA lines (http://www.eupedia.com/europe/origins_haplogroups_europe.shtml#Berber) are European (minimum 50% in the most Africanised tribes in southern Morocco). In other words, when women carrying hg L entered Iberia, their autosomal DNA was mostly European and Berber (or native North African), with only a small amount of sub-Saharan DNA. If that amount was 10%, then it would be more correct to say that each % of hg L in Iberia only represents 0.1% of sub-Saharan African autosomal DNA. Even so, it is very theoretical and it could be less if L was already diluted when it reached the part of the Maghreb which provided the migrants to Iberia.


Y-DNA Haplogroup E in Iberia

For the sake of comparison, here is one of the most complete and up-to-date table of Y-haplogroup E in Iberia (http://dna-forums.com/index.php?app=core&module=attach&section=attach&attach_id=3006). It has 388 hg E samples out of 3553 samples in total (10.9% of E). Here is an explanation of the breakdown.

- 0.48% of sub-Saharan E (E*, E1a, E1b1a)

- 4.62% of Maghreban E (E-M81)

- 1.72% of E1b1b1a (E-M78) and its subclades (E-V12, E-V13, E-V22). E-M78 and E-V22 are the dominant variants, pointing at a Phoenician origin. V12 and V22 are typically Levantine. There is only 0.59% of the typically Balkanic E-V13.

- 0.74% of E1b1b1c (E-M123) + its subclade E-M34, which is most common from the Levant to the Arabian peninsula. It could be either of Phoenician or Arabic origin. Interestingly it peaks around Galicia and northern Portugal. I am not sure how to explain that. Could it be that the Phoenician had trading posts on the North-West coast, as a relay on their way to Britain ?

- 2.84% of E1b1b (E-M215) and E1b1b1 (E-M35), which are the parents of all North African, Middle Eastern and European subclades of E. It could be either North African or Levantine.


Conclusion

Based on the more detailed "mirror" provided by Y-DNA, it is most likely that mtDNA haplogroup L in Iberia is of mixed North African (Maghreban) and Middle-Eastern (Phoenician, Arabic) origin. Indeed, there is about five times more Y-DNA E than mtDNA L in Iberia, and mtDNA L represents about one third of haplogroups among Berbers. Even without knowing the origin of the Iberian E-M215 and E-M35, if combined to E-M81, the percentage for continental Spain would be 6.8%, roughly three times more than mtDNA L, the same proportion as in the Maghreb. Other Berber mitochondrial lineages being identical to European ones (except U6, M1 and X1), they would be undetectable in the Iberian population.

Furthermore, Women were less likely to travel so far away from home during the Arabic conquest, and even during the Phoenician colonisation, so the bulk of mtDNA L must have come almost exclusively from the nearby Maghreb.

Wilhelm
29-12-09, 16:59
Attention ! MtDNA does not equal autosomal DNA !

Before you go any further with this discussion, let me explain why 2% of mtDNA L does not mean 2% of African admixture.

Imagine that an Black African woman was brought to Europe 2000 years ago. She has children with a European. All her children belong, like her, to hg L. However she is 100% African, but her children are only 50%. Her children all marry white Europeans. Her sons' children won't have any African mtDNA, but about 25% of African autosomal DNA. Her daughters' children will be mtDNA L, and have 25% of African DNA. After 10 generations (about 300 years), if any of her descendant still carries her mtDNA line, they might not have any African autosomal DNA left, but mtDNA will still be there. Those hg L people might be pure Europeans with an African mitochondrial haplogroup. At most they will have 1% of African DNA.

I am not aware of any direct settlement of Black Africans in Iberia. The amount of Black African Y-DNA is negligible like everywhere in Europe. Therefore, all the haplogroup L found in Iberia must be of Maghreban origin. This means that when L reached Iberia, its carriers already had an admixture of European, Berber and Black African DNA. Although 98% of Maghreban Y-DNA is North African (E-M81), up to 90% of their mtDNA lines (http://www.eupedia.com/europe/origins_haplogroups_europe.shtml#Berber) are European (minimum 50% in the most Africanised tribes in southern Morocco). In other words, when women carrying hg L entered Iberia, their autosomal DNA was mostly European and Berber (or native North African), with only a small amount of sub-Saharan DNA. If that amount was 10%, then it would be more correct to say that each % of hg L in Iberia only represents 0.1% of sub-Saharan African autosomal DNA. Even so, it is very theoretical and it could be less if L was already diluted when it reached the part of the Maghreb which provided the migrants to Iberia.

Maghreban Y-DNA in Iberia

For the sake of comparison, here is one of the most complete and up-to-date table of Y-haplogroup E in Iberia (http://dna-forums.com/index.php?app=core&module=attach&section=attach&attach_id=3006). It has 388 hg E samples out of 3553 samples in total (10.9% of E). Here is an explanation of the breakdown.

- 0.48% of sub-Saharan E (E*, E1a, E1b1a)

- 4.62% of Maghreban E (E-M81)

- 1.72% of E1b1b1a (E-M78) and its subclades (E-V12, E-V13, E-V22). E-M78 and E-V22 are the dominant variants, pointing at a Phoenician origin. V12 and V22 are typically Levantine. There is only 0.59% of the typically Balkanic E-V13.

- 0.74% of E1b1b1c (E-M123) + its subclade E-M34, which is most common from the Levant to the Arabian peninsula. It could be either of Phoenician or Arabic origin. Interestingly it peaks around Galicia and northern Portugal. I am not sure how to explain that. Could it be that the Phoenician had trading posts on the North-West coast, as a relay on their way to Britain ?

- 2.84% of E1b1b (E-M215) and E1b1b1 (E-M35), which are the parents of all North African, Middle Eastern and European subclades of E. It could be either North African or Levantine.


Conclusion

Based on the more detailed "mirror" provided by Y-DNA, it is most likely that mtDNA haplogroup L in Iberia is of mixed North African (Maghreban) and Middle-Eastern (Phoenician, Arabic) origin. Women were less likely to travel so far away from home during the Arabic conquest, and even during the Phoenician colonisation, so the bulk of mtDNA L must have come from the nearby Maghreb.
Maciamo, but some of the E in Iberia is of greek origin, for example :

E31b1a was considered to be a signature of Greek
colonists in south Italy (Semino et al. 2004).
Its presence in the Portuguese territory might have the same
origin (see Table 5)
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/fulltext/118548798/PDFSTART

And Maciamo, is not Haplogroup A a sub-saharan Y-DNA ? If we look at sub-sharan y-DNA in EUROPE :

"Sub-Saharan African Y-chromosomes are much less common in Europe, for the reasons discussed above. However, Haplogroups E(xE3b) and Haplogroup A spread to Europe due to migrations from Northeast Africa, rather than the slave trade. The haplotypes have been detected in Portugal (3%), Spain (0.42%), Germany (2%), Austria (0.78%), France (2.5% in a very small sample), Italy (0.45%), Sardinia (1.6%) and Greece (0.27%). By contrast, North Africans have about 5% paternal black admixture.

Cambrius (The Red)
29-12-09, 17:46
Attention ! MtDNA does not equal autosomal DNA !

Before you go any further with this discussion, let me explain why 2% of mtDNA L does not mean 2% of African admixture.

Imagine that an Black African woman was brought to Europe 2000 years ago. She has children with a European. All her children belong, like her, to hg L. However she is 100% African, but her children are only 50%. Her children all marry white Europeans. Her sons' children won't have any African mtDNA, but about 25% of African autosomal DNA. Her daughters' children will be mtDNA L, and have 25% of African DNA. After 10 generations (about 300 years), if any of her descendant still carries her mtDNA line, they might not have any African autosomal DNA left, but mtDNA will still be there. Those hg L people might be pure Europeans with an African mitochondrial haplogroup. At most they will have 1% of African DNA.

I am not aware of any direct settlement of Black Africans in Iberia. The amount of Black African Y-DNA is negligible like everywhere in Europe. Therefore, all the haplogroup L found in Iberia must be of Maghreban origin. This means that when L reached Iberia, its carriers already had an admixture of European, Berber and Black African DNA. Although 98% of Maghreban Y-DNA is North African (E-M81), up to 90% of their mtDNA lines (http://www.eupedia.com/europe/origins_haplogroups_europe.shtml#Berber) are European (minimum 50% in the most Africanised tribes in southern Morocco). In other words, when women carrying hg L entered Iberia, their autosomal DNA was mostly European and Berber (or native North African), with only a small amount of sub-Saharan DNA. If that amount was 10%, then it would be more correct to say that each % of hg L in Iberia only represents 0.1% of sub-Saharan African autosomal DNA. Even so, it is very theoretical and it could be less if L was already diluted when it reached the part of the Maghreb which provided the migrants to Iberia.

Maghreban Y-DNA in Iberia

For the sake of comparison, here is one of the most complete and up-to-date table of Y-haplogroup E in Iberia (http://dna-forums.com/index.php?app=core&module=attach&section=attach&attach_id=3006). It has 388 hg E samples out of 3553 samples in total (10.9% of E). Here is an explanation of the breakdown.

- 0.48% of sub-Saharan E (E*, E1a, E1b1a)

- 4.62% of Maghreban E (E-M81)

- 1.72% of E1b1b1a (E-M78) and its subclades (E-V12, E-V13, E-V22). E-M78 and E-V22 are the dominant variants, pointing at a Phoenician origin. V12 and V22 are typically Levantine. There is only 0.59% of the typically Balkanic E-V13.

- 0.74% of E1b1b1c (E-M123) + its subclade E-M34, which is most common from the Levant to the Arabian peninsula. It could be either of Phoenician or Arabic origin. Interestingly it peaks around Galicia and northern Portugal. I am not sure how to explain that. Could it be that the Phoenician had trading posts on the North-West coast, as a relay on their way to Britain ?

- 2.84% of E1b1b (E-M215) and E1b1b1 (E-M35), which are the parents of all North African, Middle Eastern and European subclades of E. It could be either North African or Levantine.


Conclusion

Based on the more detailed "mirror" provided by Y-DNA, it is most likely that mtDNA haplogroup L in Iberia is of mixed North African (Maghreban) and Middle-Eastern (Phoenician, Arabic) origin. Women were less likely to travel so far away from home during the Arabic conquest, and even during the Phoenician colonisation, so the bulk of mtDNA L must have come from the nearby Maghreb.


Excellent information, Maciamo. Impressive.

Wilhelm
29-12-09, 18:34
I have seen the table, and obvisouly it is misleading becasue of the Canary Islands.
I don't know why they keep considering the Canaries as Iberian when they should not be considered as Iberians, because of the presence of the natives related to the berbers, who are E-M81(14.6%).
So, the precentage of E and E-M81 in 'real' Iberians is MUCH lower
And please , I just want to get facts straight, don't talk me again about the same story of being insecure and crap like that. La verdad siempre por delante !

Cambrius (The Red)
29-12-09, 18:42
I have seen the table, and obvisouly it is misleading becasue of the Canary Islands.
I don't know why they keep considering the Canaries as Iberian when they should not be considered as Iberians, because of the presence of the natives related to the berbers, who are E-M81(14.6%).
So, the precentage of E and E-M81 in 'real' Iberians is much lower than 10%.
And please , I just want to get facts straight, don't talk me again about the same story of being whites or europeans and crap like that.

The same can be said for Madeira. Again, why are genetic "researchers" including DNA samples that are not representative of the native origin population? These people are hardly stupid, but they are doing VERY stupid things in their work...

Maciamo
29-12-09, 23:20
Maciamo, but some of the E in Iberia is of greek origin, for example :

E31b1a was considered to be a signature of Greek
colonists in south Italy (Semino et al. 2004).
Its presence in the Portuguese territory might have the same
origin (see Table 5)
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/fulltext/118548798/PDFSTART


Greek E1b1b is mostly E-V13, which is rare in Iberia. It's only one of many haplogroups that represent the Greeks, along with J2b, some subclades of J2a, "Eastern" R1b, R1a, G2a... Anyway, it's not surprising not to find more Greek DNA in Spain as the Greeks only had a few minor settlements in Catalonia, like in Emporium, and around Valencia. The Phoenicians had 3x more colonies just in Andalusia.



And Maciamo, is not Haplogroup A a sub-saharan Y-DNA ? If we look at sub-sharan y-DNA in EUROPE :

"Sub-Saharan African Y-chromosomes are much less common in Europe, for the reasons discussed above. However, Haplogroups E(xE3b) and Haplogroup A spread to Europe due to migrations from Northeast Africa, rather than the slave trade. The haplotypes have been detected in Portugal (3%), Spain (0.42%), Germany (2%), Austria (0.78%), France (2.5% in a very small sample), Italy (0.45%), Sardinia (1.6%) and Greece (0.27%). By contrast, North Africans have about 5% paternal black admixture.


Where did you find those percentages about haplogroup A ? In all the major Y-DNA studies I know of, hg A has only been detected a few times here and there, nothing statistically relevant.

Maciamo
29-12-09, 23:27
I have seen the table, and obvisouly it is misleading becasue of the Canary Islands.
I don't know why they keep considering the Canaries as Iberian when they should not be considered as Iberians, because of the presence of the natives related to the berbers, who are E-M81(14.6%).
So, the precentage of E and E-M81 in 'real' Iberians is MUCH lower
And please , I just want to get facts straight, don't talk me again about the same story of being insecure and crap like that. La verdad siempre por delante !

In all fairness there are only 28 samples from the Canaries (all E-M81), out of 388 hg E. You can deduct the 0.8 % from the Canaries but E-M81 remains the main subclade of E in Iberia.

luis77
31-12-09, 13:32
To summarize, here are the sub-saharan African mtDNA L lineages frequencies found in Spain. This includes ALL the data ever published so far about Spain (1466 distinct individuals from continental Spain and 531 from Spanish Islands)

1) Continental Spain

Spain, northwestern : 8/216 =3.70%, Achilli 2007
Spain, central : 1/148 =0.68%, Achilli 2007
Spain, Andalusia: 2/114 =1.75%, Achilli 2007
Spain, northeastern : 3/179 =1.68%, Achilli 2007
Spain, Basque Country: 1/156 =0.64%, Achilli 2007
Spain, all regions : 9/312 =2.90%, Alvarez 2007
Spain, Pyreneans : 0/233 =0.00%, Lopez-Parra 2009
Spain, Cordoba : 9/108 =8.30%, Casas 2006 (highest frequency found in Spain)

2) Islands

Spain, Balearic : 5/231 =2.20%, Picornell 2005
Spain, Canaries : 20/300 =6.60%, Brehm 2003

3) Of course, because nations are political construct and because northern populations are overrepresented in the studies, it would not make sense at all to average regions with totally different histories like Basque Country (lowest frequency in Spain) or the province of Cordoba (highest frequency in Spain at 8.30%, almost similar to South Portugal) but if we want to do it we get :

Continental : 33/1466 = 2.25 %
All Spain (including Balearic and Canaries) : 58/1997 = 2.90%



=Sources=

a) Achilli 2007 (Mitochondrial DNA Variation of Modern Tuscans Supports the Near Eastern Origin of Etruscans) aggregated data from the following sources :

Salas 1998, mtDNA analysis of the Galician population: a genetic edge of European variation.
Richards 2000, Tracing European founder lineages in the Near Eastern mtDNA pool
Crespillo 2000, Mitochondrial DNA sequences for 118 individuals from northeastern Spain
Larruga 2001, Mitochondrial DNA characterisation of European isolates: the Maragatos from Spain
Plaza 2003, Joining the pillars of Hercules: mtDNA sequences show multidirectional gene flow in the western Mediterranean.
González 2003, Mitochondrial DNA affinities at the Atlantic fringe of Europe

b) Others studies not included by Achilli 2007

Brehm 2003, Mitochondrial portraits of the Madeira and Açores archipelagos witness different genetic pools of its settlers
Picornell 2005, Mitochondrial DNA HVRI Variation in Balearic Populations
Casas 2006, Human Mitochondrial DNA Diversity in an Archaeological Site in al-Andalus: Genetic Impact of Migrations from North Africa in Medieval Spain
Alvarez 2007, Characterization of human control region sequences for Spanish individuals in a forensic mtDNA data set
Lopez-Parra 2009, Preliminary results of mitochondrial DNA sequence variation in Spanish Pyrenean populations
Pereira 2005 (African Female Heritage in Iberia) only analysed samples from the studies above and did not include any new samples.

Maciamo
31-12-09, 14:21
To summarize, here are the sub-saharan African mtDNA L lineages frequencies found in Spain. This includes ALL the data ever published so far about Spain (1466 distinct individuals from continental Spain and 531 from Spanish Islands)
1) Continental Spain
Spain, northwestern : 8/216 =3.70%, Achilli 2007
Spain, central : 1/148 =0.68%, Achilli 2007
Spain, Andalusia: 2/114 =1.75%, Achilli 2007
Spain, northeastern : 3/179 =1.68%, Achilli 2007
Spain, Basque Country: 1/156 =0.64%, Achilli 2007
Spain, all regions : 9/312 =2.90%, Alvarez 2007
Spain, Pyreneans : 0/233 =0.00%, Lopez-Parra 2009
Spain, Cordoba : 9/108 =8.30%, Casas 2006 (highest frequency found in Spain)
2) Islands
Spain, Balearic : 5/231 =2.20%, Lopez-Parra 2009
Spain, Canaries : 20/300 =6.60%, Brehm 2003
3) Of course it does not make sense at all to average regions with totally different histories like Basque Country (lowest frequency in Spain) or the province of Cordoba (highest frequency in Spain at 8.30%, almost similar to South Portugal) but if we want to do it we get :
Continental : 33/1466 = 2.25 %
All Spain (including Balearic and Canaries) : 58/1997 = 2.90%

Thanks a lot for all the data.

There is no surprise in finding more mtDNA L in the Canaries and Andalusia than in the Basque country. North-West Spain (and northern Portugal, I presume) is the second region outside the isles, after Andalusia, for both mtDNA L and Y-DNA E1b1b. Galicia has nearly 15% of haplogroup E1b1b, and all of it looks North African (not Levantine or Arabic). North Portugal has 12%.

The record high in Iberia is the border of Extremadura (19%) and Portugal (28% in Portalegre, 13% in Guarda, 12% in Castelo Branco). I wonder if there is a connection with the Andalusian Neolithic culture of La Almagra Pottery. It is one of the oldest Neolithic cultures in Europe. It is almost 8,000 years old (older than the spread of agriculture through the Balkans !) and appears out of nowhere. It seems to have a connection with the Maghreb.

It could be imagined that these early Iberians would have been pushed north-westward from Andalusia to Extremadura, Portugal and Galicia by the successive waves of new settlers (Indo-Europeans, Phoenicians, Romans, Vandals...). A lot of mtDNA L might date from La Almagra culture as well.

Cambrius (The Red)
31-12-09, 17:57
Thanks a lot for all the data.

There is no surprise in finding more mtDNA L in the Canaries and Andalusia than in the Basque country. North-West Spain (and northern Portugal, I presume) is the second region outside the isles, after Andalusia, for both mtDNA L and Y-DNA E1b1b. Galicia has nearly 15% of haplogroup E1b1b, and all of it looks North African (not Levantine or Arabic). North Portugal has 12%.

The record high in Iberia is the border of Extremadura (19%) and Portugal (28% in Portalegre, 13% in Guarda, 12% in Castelo Branco). I wonder if there is a connection with the Andalusian Neolithic culture of La Almagra Pottery. It is one of the oldest Neolithic cultures in Europe. It is almost 8,000 years old (older than the spread of agriculture through the Balkans !) and appears out of nowhere. It seems to have a connection with the Maghreb.

It could be imagined that these early Iberians would have been pushed north-westward from Andalusia to Extremadura, Portugal and Galicia by the successive waves of new settlers (Indo-Europeans, Phoenicians, Romans, Vandals...). A lot of mtDNA L might date from La Almagra culture as well.

Excellent observations. Many do not to understand how old and "regional" some of this DNA is and that much of it originated in NW Africa.

Wilhelm
31-12-09, 18:17
I don't know why all of a sudden the discussion turned to the L mtDNA, There is already a thread about it.
Anyways, obviously the L level in Iberia is about 2%, pretty much the average in Europe. It is very old, maybe from pre-Neolithic..
Maciamo do you have the sources for this percentages you mention? Thanks

^ lynx ^
31-12-09, 21:16
I'm surprised that none still has mentioned the special case of Valle de Pasiegos (Pasiegos Valley).

Valle de Pasiegos is a very isolated region in Cantabria (North-Spain) and next to the Basque Country.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/39/Vega_de_Pas_%28Cantabria%29_Mapa.svg/300px-Vega_de_Pas_%28Cantabria%29_Mapa.svg.png

Its habitants have a very characteristic culture and traditions. Their language has some resemblances with asturianu and some words from euskera (basque) also.

http://www.corosydanzasdesantander.com/fotostrajes/pasiegos.jpg
http://www.ruralnaturaleza.com/files/files/1_3FOTO1_F_Sanchoyarto_FFRF_33.jpeg
http://www.cantabriatradicional.com/fotos_antiguas/portadas/pasiegos.jpg
http://viajepiroamerica.iespana.es/imagenes/villaspasiegas/pas726.jpg

The frequency of E3b in this isolated region is about 40% and is believed to come from the times of the Megalitic culture.

Wilhelm
31-12-09, 21:27
Yes, even some studies say the E-M81 started there, and then this people went to north-africa, and that would explain why some ancient bereber languages have a relationship with proto-Basque.

Alex D.
02-01-10, 20:31
Maciamo,
I have a question in regards to J and E oin the balkans. are these two haplogroups in the form of J2e and E-V13 or are they others? As i would guess greeks would have signiicant impact on the balkans due to geographc proximity etc.. or even being part of the balkans in some sense

Maciamo
02-01-10, 20:56
Maciamo,
I have a question in regards to J and E oin the balkans. are these two haplogroups in the form of J2e and E-V13 or are they others? As i would guess greeks would have signiicant impact on the balkans due to geographc proximity etc.. or even being part of the balkans in some sense

That's a different topic altogether, but farming spread from Anatolia to the Thessalian plain in northern Greece, and from there to the Balkans. The early farmers mostly belonged to hg E-V13, J2b, but with also some T, G2a, E-M78 and J2*.

Wilhelm
08-01-10, 21:03
Greek E1b1b is mostly E-V13, which is rare in Iberia. It's only one of many haplogroups that represent the Greeks, along with J2b, some subclades of J2a, "Eastern" R1b, R1a, G2a... Anyway, it's not surprising not to find more Greek DNA in Spain as the Greeks only had a few minor settlements in Catalonia, like in Emporium, and around Valencia. The Phoenicians had 3x more colonies just in Andalusia.
No.
Southern Portugal had greek settlements, which later repopulated the north , (POrto = Cale ,) ( Lisobon = Olissipona) there was also greek trade in Galleaecia

Drac
09-01-10, 17:08
To summarize, here are the sub-saharan African mtDNA L lineages frequencies found in Spain. This includes ALL the data ever published so far about Spain (1466 distinct individuals from continental Spain and 531 from Spanish Islands)

1) Continental Spain

Spain, northwestern : 8/216 =3.70%, Achilli 2007
Spain, central : 1/148 =0.68%, Achilli 2007
Spain, Andalusia: 2/114 =1.75%, Achilli 2007
Spain, northeastern : 3/179 =1.68%, Achilli 2007
Spain, Basque Country: 1/156 =0.64%, Achilli 2007
Spain, all regions : 9/312 =2.90%, Alvarez 2007
Spain, Pyreneans : 0/233 =0.00%, Lopez-Parra 2009
Spain, Cordoba : 9/108 =8.30%, Casas 2006 (highest frequency found in Spain)

2) Islands

Spain, Balearic : 5/231 =2.20%, Picornell 2005
Spain, Canaries : 20/300 =6.60%, Brehm 2003

3) Of course, because nations are political construct and because northern populations are overrepresented in the studies, it would not make sense at all to average regions with totally different histories like Basque Country (lowest frequency in Spain) or the province of Cordoba (highest frequency in Spain at 8.30%, almost similar to South Portugal) but if we want to do it we get :

Continental : 33/1466 = 2.25 %

All Spain (including Balearic and Canaries) : 58/1997 = 2.90%

Nope, as pointed out in another thread, you manipulated the data from at least one of the studies so you could try to inflate the frequencies in Spain to suit your obvious agenda. Casas et al. 2006 only considered L1-L2 sequences to be of sub-Saharan origin, so the actual data for that paper should be like this:

Spain, Priego de Cordoba : 1/108 =0.9%, Casas 2006

You also "mysteriously" left out the data for Pereira et al. 2005 in this latest "calculation" of yours:

Pereira et al. (2005) 8 L lineages out of 496 (1.61%)

Providing that the data for some of these other papers (Alvarez 2007, Picornell 2005, Brehm 2003) you refer to have not been manipulated as well, the actual frequencies are:

Spain, northwestern : 8/216 =3.70%, Achilli 2007
Spain, central : 1/148 =0.68%, Achilli 2007
Spain, Andalusia: 2/114 =1.75%, Achilli 2007
Spain, northeastern : 3/179 =1.68%, Achilli 2007
Spain, Basque Country: 1/156 =0.64%, Achilli 2007
Spain, all regions : 9/312 =2.90%, Alvarez 2007
Spain, Pyreneans : 0/233 =0.00%, Lopez-Parra 2009
Spain, Priego de Cordoba : 1/108 =0.9%, Casas 2006
Spain, all regions: 8/496 = 1.61%, Pereira 2005

Continental : 33/1962 = 1.68%

2) Islands

Spain, Balearic : 5/231 =2.20%, Picornell 2005
Spain, Canaries : 20/300 =6.60%, Brehm 2003

All Spain (including Balearic and Canaries) : 58/2493 = 2.32%

Drac
09-01-10, 17:32
There is no surprise in finding more mtDNA L in the Canaries and Andalusia than in the Basque country. North-West Spain (and northern Portugal, I presume) is the second region outside the isles, after Andalusia, for both mtDNA L and Y-DNA E1b1b. Galicia has nearly 15% of haplogroup E1b1b, and all of it looks North African (not Levantine or Arabic).

I'm not sure where are you getting this frequency for Galicia from, but Capelli et al. 2009 found E1b1b there at only 6.8%. Adams et al. 2008 (a rather fishy paper, I may add) I think claimed 9%. I'm not sure at this moment if "all of it looks North African", as it seems I can no longer find the specific data for these papers (it was available at some blogs and forums before.)

Wilhelm
09-01-10, 18:00
There is no surprise in finding more mtDNA L in the Canaries and Andalusia than in the Basque country. North-West Spain (and northern Portugal, I presume) is the second region outside the isles, after Andalusia, for both mtDNA L and Y-DNA E1b1b. Galicia has nearly 15% of haplogroup E1b1b, and all of it looks North African (not Levantine or Arabic).
Galicia has only 1.49% of E1b1b according to this :
http://iberianroots.com/statistics/iberian_peninsula.html

Maciamo
09-01-10, 20:05
I'm not sure where are you getting this frequency for Galicia from, but Capelli et al. 2009 found E1b1b there at only 6.8%. Adams et al. 2008 (a rather fishy paper, I may add) I think claimed 9%. I'm not sure at this moment if "all of it looks North African", as it seems I can no longer find the specific data for these papers (it was available at some blogs and forums before.)

It's an average of several studies. Adams (http://www.cell.com/AJHG/fulltext/S0002-9297%2808%2900592-2) found nearly 17% of E1b1b in Galicia (9% is only for E-M81). Flores (http://hpgl.stanford.edu/publications/EJHG_2004_v12_p855.pdf) found a stunning 31.6%, including 10% of E-M81 and 10% of E-M123. Gonçalves (http://www3.uma.pt/abrehm/v1.1/docs/downloads/pdfs/Goncalves_Y_Portugal_AnnHumGenet2005.pdf) found 21% of E1b1b in nearby North Portugal (higher than in Central or Southern Portugal), which does not seem to contradict Adams nor Flores.

Cambrius (The Red)
09-01-10, 20:15
It's an average of several studies. Adams (http://www.cell.com/AJHG/fulltext/S0002-9297%2808%2900592-2) found nearly 17% of E1b1b in Galicia (9% is only for E-M81). Flores (http://hpgl.stanford.edu/publications/EJHG_2004_v12_p855.pdf) found a stunning 31.6%, including 10% of E-M81 and 10% of E-M123.

The Adams paper has been heavily criticized and there are credibility issues surrounding it. I have no idea how Flores, et al. came up with such high figures. Perhaps someone here can provide perspective.

Wilhelm
09-01-10, 20:16
Maciamo, your numbers seem very exaggerated. According to this there is only 1.49% of E1b1b in Galicia :
http://iberianroots.com/statistics/i...peninsula.html

Maciamo
09-01-10, 20:21
Galicia has only 1.49% of E1b1b according to this :
http://iberianroots.com/statistics/iberian_peninsula.html

You obviously cannot read. The total for E1b1b subclades in Galicia is 1.49% + 5.22% + 0.75% + 7.46% = 14.92%.

I am getting fed up of Iberians trying to deny the remotest connection with anything that sounds African (even if it isn't), be it haplogroup E, trying to prove that they are pure Celts, etc. I am not sure if you realise, but you look pathetic and childish (and complexed, I should add) for people from other countries.

Haplogroup E1b1b is present in all Europeans. We would look very different without it. Based on mtDNA, it seems that the Italo-Celts intermarried heavily with Near-Eastern farmers (whose paternal lineages were mostly E1b1b) when they penetrated into the Danube valley and settled in central Europe. In fact, Indo-European R1b looked a bit Mongoloid, so modern Europeans probably own their facial traits and head shape more to their Neolithic maternal ancestors than to Indo-Europeans. We got other things from Indo-Europeans, like red hair or lactose tolerance, though.

Celtic language was Indo-European, but borrowed heavily (http://mathildasanthropologyblog.wordpress.com/2008/07/12/an-afro-asiatic-connection-to-celtic-languages/) from Afro-Asiatic languages spoken in central Europe during the Neolithic. Latin itself borrowed even more words and grammar from Near-Eastern languages through Etruscan. The languages that remained "purest" or closest to the Proto-Indo-European are Balto-Slavic languages, especially Polish and Russian.

It's ironic that the original Indo-European homeland (roughly from Moldova to Georgia/Chechenya), which would give Europe bronze working, horse riding, chariots, swords, wool clothes, apples, plums, lactose tolerance, etc. is now the poorest, and in many ways most backwards, part of Europe.

^ lynx ^
09-01-10, 20:25
Flores (http://hpgl.stanford.edu/publications/EJHG_2004_v12_p855.pdf) found a stunning 31.6%, including 10% of E-M81 and 10% of E-M123.

Pretty weird that study, they found 0% of haplogroups J and E in Catalonia??? :disappointed:

Besides the sample sizes are kinda lame (except for Seville and North Portugal).

Greetings.

Cambrius (The Red)
09-01-10, 20:35
You obviously cannot read. The total for E1b1b subclades in Galicia is 1.49% + 5.22% + 0.75% + 7.46% = 14.92%.
I am getting fed up of Iberians trying to deny the remotest connection with anything that sounds African (even if it isn't), be it haplogroup E, trying to prove that they are pure Celts, etc. I am not sure if you realise, but you look pathetic and childish (and complexed, I should add) for people from other countries.

Maciamo, I think some of us have gone over this with you. There are tremendous racial lies and exaggerations floating around about Iberians. I'm sure you can agree with that. And, who is trying to prove Iberians are "pure Celts"? I don't even believe there are definitive Celtic DNA markers, only people from Celtic cultures who may be somewhat related genetically. Moreover, I can't recall anyone claiming that Iberia is ALL Celtic or "pure" Celtic. I'm certainly not guilty of making such statements.

There are seriously pathological people in this world who seem to get great satisfaction by racially slandering certain ethnicities, and some are not just deranged racists. There is much correction to be done, I'm afraid...

Maciamo
09-01-10, 20:38
Pretty weird that study, they found 0% of haplogroups J and E in Catalonia??? :disappointed:

Besides the sample sizes are kinda lame (except for Seville and North Portugal).

Greetings.

I am not sure it is so weird. The Basque country also lacks E and J. Catalonia only had a minor Greek influence, no Phoenician, no Near-Eastern farmers from the Balkans or Andalusia... I am sure there is some E and J in Catalonia, but it must be among the lowest in Iberia.

^ lynx ^
09-01-10, 20:50
Catalonia had important settlement of sephardic communities, especially in Girona.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c0/Carrer_de_la_For%C3%A7a_Girona.jpg/450px-Carrer_de_la_For%C3%A7a_Girona.jpg
Carrer de la Fora, Girona, Catalonia.

Some well-known catalonian surnames have sephardic roots. For example: Ferrer.

And the results in the Basque Country are irrelevant for this matter IMO.

Wilhelm
09-01-10, 20:56
No, the Jews had always been a minority, not just in Catalonia, but all Iberia. The peak popoulation was about 3% , in the muslim era. Most of the J found in Iberia is of roman, phoenician or greek origin.
The west coast of Iberia also received greeks who brought original greek E, see my post #16

^ lynx ^
09-01-10, 21:00
They were a minority, but nobody can assume for sure how many they were.

Still 0% of J in Catalonia is laughable.

Wilhelm
09-01-10, 21:05
You obviously cannot read. The total for E1b1b subclades in Galicia is 1.49% + 5.22% + 0.75% + 7.46% = 14.92%.

I am getting fed up of Iberians trying to deny the remotest connection with anything that sounds African (even if it isn't), be it haplogroup E, trying to prove that they are pure Celts, etc. I am not sure if you realise, but you look pathetic and childish (and complexed, I should add) for people from other countries.

Haplogroup E1b1b is present in all Europeans. We would look very different without it. Based on mtDNA, it seems that the Italo-Celts intermarried heavily with Near-Eastern farmers (whose paternal lineages were mostly E1b1b) when they penetrated into the Danube valley and settled in central Europe. In fact, Indo-European R1b looked a bit Mongoloid, so modern Europeans probably own their facial traits and head shape more to their Neolithic maternal ancestors than to Indo-Europeans. We got other things from Indo-Europeans, like red hair or lactose tolerance, though.

Celtic language was Indo-European, but borrowed heavily (http://mathildasanthropologyblog.wordpress.com/2008/07/12/an-afro-asiatic-connection-to-celtic-languages/) from Afro-Asiatic languages spoken in central Europe during the Neolithic. Latin itself borrowed even more words and grammar from Near-Eastern languages through Etruscan. The languages that remained "purest" or closest to the Proto-Indo-European are Balto-Slavic languages, especially Polish and Russian.

It's ironic that the original Indo-European homeland (roughly from Moldova to Georgia/Chechenya), which would give Europe bronze working, horse riding, chariots, swords, wool clothes, apples, plums, lactose tolerance, etc. is now the poorest, and in many ways most backwards, part of Europe.

No one here has said that Iberians are pure Celt. No one.. We perfectly know we are Celtiberians, with heavy Iberian component, not just Celt.
Plus, anybody here denies the african haplogroups in Europe, there are other european countries with much more E than Spain, for example Austria or Serbia which has heavy amounts of E, so I don't understand why do you create an exlcusively thread of the AFRICAN admixture of Iberia, as If Spain was the only country with it, and not admixture of all Europe..

Maciamo
09-01-10, 21:14
Plus, anyone here denies the E haplogroups, there are other european countries with much more E than Spain, for example Serbia has heavy amounts of E, so I don't understand why do you create an exlcusively thread of the AFRICAN admixture of Spain, as If Spain was the only country with E., and not admixture of all Europe

Actually, I created this thread because there was so much interest/discussion about Iberia on the forum lately. It's also because Iberia has very diverse types of E1b1b, unlike most other European countries which have mostly E-V13 and E-M78 from the Balkans.

I was also wondering why a place like Galicia, with no recorded settlement from the Near East or North Africa, should have so much E1b1b. We could imagine a Paleolithic migration for E-M81, but how about the E-M123 from the Middle East ? Unknown Phoenician settlement ? I still do not have the answer.

Wilhelm
09-01-10, 22:46
You perfectly know Maciamo that we have to be very wary with this Iberian E studies. Because somes studies like this*, which attributes exclusively all the E to the North Africans of the Muslim era, and all the J to the Sephardic Jews. Ridiculous. And now, most people believe in that study. In Spain, in the TV news talked about this study, in the papers, the radio, go search in the internet in forums people around the world talk about this study, all mainstream people believes now that Spain is 20% Sephardic Jew or 10% Moor. This is the purpose, this is the agenda of some of this so-called scientists. There are probably political reasons behind this. Making people believe something they are not. Confuse them about their true ethnicity.

*http://download.cell.com/AJHG/pdf/PIIS0002929708005922.pdf

Cambrius (The Red)
09-01-10, 22:56
You perfectly know Maciamo that we have to be very wary with this Iberian E studies. Because somes studies like this*, which attributes exclusively all the E to the North Africans of the Muslim era, and all the J to the Sephardic Jews. Ridiculous. And now, most people believe in that study. In Spain, in the TV news talked about this study, in the papers, the radio, go search in the internet in forums people around the world talk about this study, all mainstream people believes now that Spain is 20% Sephardic Jew or 10% Moor. This is the purpose, this is the agenda of some of this so-called scientists. There are probably political reasons behind this. Making people believe something they are not. Confuse them about their true ethnicity.

*http://download.cell.com/AJHG/pdf/PIIS0002929708005922.pdf

This type of garbage research needs to be be aggressively challenged and debunked, once and for all. Why aren't Spanish government agencies combating this?

Wilhelm
09-01-10, 23:10
What I also find strange about that study is how the hell did they manage to create this 19.8% of sephardic, when their same study for haplogroup J is about 9% for al Spain !! And all the EXACT 10.3% of E, ALL attributed to the north african rule. I don't know what the hell is crossing their minds...

How is that posible that Southern Iberia has only 2.5% of North African contribution*, when we know the South was the most populated (thoug minoritary) area by moors of all Iberia ?
* http://mbe.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/full/21/7/1361/T03

Haganus
09-01-10, 23:11
Many thanks for those interesting messages. But I do not understand:
"R 1b looks a little mongoloid. ". I do not think that northwest Europeans
who has a lot of haplogroup R1b , have some mongoloid dna. Whole
West-Europa is lacking mongoloid ancestors.

Erik

Wilhelm
09-01-10, 23:29
They were a minority, but nobody can assume for sure how many they were.

Still 0% of J in Catalonia is laughable.
According to this :

"El judío Hasdai Ibn Shaprut (915-970), llegó a ser uno de los hombres de confianza del califa Abderraman III. En cuanto a su número, se calcula que a finales del siglo XV había unos 50.000 judíos en Granada y unos 100.000 en toda la Iberia islámica.[16] " Wasserstein, 1995, p. 101.
In the XV century , Iberian population was about 6.000.000, so that makes them about 1.7% of the total population of Iberia

^ lynx ^
09-01-10, 23:41
Thanks for the info Wilhelm.


This type of garbage research needs to be be aggressively challenged and debunked, once and for all. Why aren't Spanish government agencies combating this?

:laughing::laughing:

lol, I know that all this latin american anti-iberian trollism from panchos with no self-esteem like Sirious2b can be really irritating sometimes, and that there are a lot of ridiculous "projects" going around like DNA tribes. But I find a little bit exaggerated to make a criminal prosecution of it. :laughing:

Cambrius (The Red)
10-01-10, 04:28
What I also find strange about that study is how the hell did they manage to create this 19.8% of sephardic, when their same study for haplogroup J is about 9% for al Spain !! And all the EXACT 10.3% of E, ALL attributed to the north african rule. I don't know what the hell is crossing their minds...

How is that posible that Southern Iberia has only 2.5% of North African contribution*, when we know the South was the most populated (thoug minoritary) area by moors of all Iberia ?
* http://mbe.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/full/21/7/1361/T03

The earlier referenced study has been debunked by any number of population geneticists. It's flawed beyond belief.

LeBrok
10-01-10, 08:04
I am getting fed up of Iberians trying to deny the remotest connection with anything that sounds African (even if it isn't), be it haplogroup E, trying to prove that they are pure Celts, etc. I am not sure if you realise, but you look pathetic and childish (and complexed, I should add) for people from other countries.


As a citizen of other country I couldn't agree more with this statement.
Iberian guys, it's surely fine to believe what you believe, I understand your desire to like all research that supports your believes, and not agree with ones that don't. Human thing, I do that too.
The thing that bothers me is your total disrespect to anyone of different views. One thing is not to agree with point of view, other to bunch together, bully and throw epithets against an unfortunate sole that happens to express his/her opinion on Iberian forums. You basically prosecute people of different views, it's like Spanish Inquisition all over again.
Did someone give you the licence for the Truth?
Are you the chosen ones?
Genetics in archaeological and cultural context is quite new. For years it will be corrected, checked and corrected again. We are here to learn, discover, socialise and make friends. Let's talk about this, argue about this, have fun about this,...but with respect gentlemen, please, with respect.

PS. And no, I'm not Mexican.

LeBrok
10-01-10, 08:21
This type of garbage research needs to be be aggressively challenged and debunked, once and for all. Why aren't Spanish government agencies combating this?

I advise you to call 1-800-INQUISITOR












PS. Sorry, I know it was too easy, but I couldn't help myself. :lmao:

Maciamo
10-01-10, 15:05
What I also find strange about that study is how the hell did they manage to create this 19.8% of sephardic, when their same study for haplogroup J is about 9% for al Spain !! And all the EXACT 10.3% of E, ALL attributed to the north african rule. I don't know what the hell is crossing their minds...

I agree that Adams' study is completely off the mark in its "ethnic" attribution of haplogroups. It is a good example of geneticists with very little knowledge of history who jump to conclusions based on their own distorted and partial view of history.

One of the main reason I created a population genetics section on this website is to "set things straight" and denounce the historical aberrations I read in reports by geneticists. I was the first to say that R1b couldn't possibly have spread from the Franco-Cantabrian refuge 12,000 years ago, and the first to link the Maykop culture as the probable "R1b Proto-Indo-European-age/Bronze-age homeland". Many archaeologists, including the popular David Anthony, still think that Maykop was not Indo-European. Ironically Anthony's book
The Horse, The Wheel, and Language (http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/0691058873?ie=UTF8&tag=eupedia-21&link_code=as3&camp=2506&creative=9298&creativeASIN=0691058873) provided the archaeological evidence I needed to confirm my hypothesis, which was originally based only on linguistics and by comparing the age and geographic origin of older R1b subclades. The two converged around northern Anatolia and the North Caucasus. It is a shame that Anthony and other specialists of IE matters do not use genetics at all to confirm their own theories. Anthony explains that hardly any archaeologists have a background in linguistics, and vice-versa. He claims that Jim Mallory may be the only specialist of Indo-European studies trained in both fields. Apparently no renowned scientist is trained in archaeology/history, linguistics and population genetics. That is sad. As I was already a trained historian and linguist, I decided to study population genetics to fill that gap.

All this to say that I am not surprised that Susan Adams et al. could make such gross historical misassessments. But it doesn't mean it was intentional either. Almost any well-educated Spaniard would know better Spanish history than Adams, apparently. That doesn't mean that their Y-DNA results are wrong or were made up. I seriously doubt so. It would put her and her colleagues' career in jeopardy if it happened to be completely invalidated by other studies.

Cambrius (The Red)
10-01-10, 17:52
I agree that Adams' study is completely off the mark in its "ethnic" attribution of haplogroups. It is a good example of geneticists with very little knowledge of history who jump to conclusions based on their own distorted and partial view of history.

One of the main reason I created a population genetics section on this website is to "set things straight" and denounce the historical aberrations I read in reports by geneticists. I was the first to say that R1b couldn't possibly have spread from the Franco-Cantabrian refuge 12,000 years ago, and the first to link the Maykop culture as the probable "R1b Proto-Indo-European-age/Bronze-age homeland". Many archaeologists, including the popular David Anthony, still think that Maykop was not Indo-European. Ironically Anthony's book
The Horse, The Wheel, and Language (http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/0691058873?ie=UTF8&tag=eupedia-21&link_code=as3&camp=2506&creative=9298&creativeASIN=0691058873) provided the archaeological evidence I needed to confirm my hypothesis, which was originally based only on linguistics and by comparing the age and geographic origin of older R1b subclades. The two converged around northern Anatolia and the North Caucasus. It is a shame that Anthony and other specialists of IE matters do not use genetics at all to confirm their own theories. Anthony explains that hardly any archaeologists have a background in linguistics, and vice-versa. He claims that Jim Mallory may be the only specialist of Indo-European studies trained in both fields. Apparently no renowned scientist is trained in archaeology/history, linguistics and population genetics. That is sad. As I was already a trained historian and linguist, I decided to study population genetics to fill that gap.

All this to say that I am not surprised that Susan Adams et al. could make such gross historical misassessments. But it doesn't mean it was intentional either. Almost any well-educated Spaniard would know better Spanish history than Adams, apparently. That doesn't mean that their Y-DNA results are wrong or were made up. I seriously doubt so. It would put her and her colleagues' career in jeopardy if it happened to be completely invalidated by other studies.

So, shall we just codify Adams and some others as bad scientists? Faulty methodology?

How about the clowns that produced a genetic "study" concluding that Greeks clustered with Ethiopians?

Wilhelm
10-01-10, 17:57
As a citizen of other country I couldn't agree more with this statement.
Iberian guys, it's surely fine to believe what you believe, I understand your desire to like all research that supports your believes, and not agree with ones that don't. Human thing, I do that too.
It's not about 'what we believe' , it's about finding the truth.. And the truth is certainly not DNA-Tribes nor that study of the 20% Sephardic :laughing:



The thing that bothers me is your total disrespect to anyone of different views. One thing is not to agree with point of view, other to bunch together, bully and throw epithets against an unfortunate sole that happens to express his/her opinion on Iberian forums. You basically prosecute people of different views, it's like Spanish Inquisition all over again.
hmm...I don't know what are you talking about.:bored:.
We are here to discuss ..that's what we are doing..People give their different opinions, different point of views..Where is the problem ?


Did someone give you the licence for the Truth?
Are you the chosen ones?
Genetics in archaeological and cultural context is quite new. For years it will be corrected, checked and corrected again. We are here to learn, discover, socialise and make friends. Let's talk about this, argue about this, have fun about this,...but with respect gentlemen, please, with respect.
That's what we do , thank you PSYCHOLOGIST :good_job:

Cambrius (The Red)
10-01-10, 18:00
As a citizen of other country I couldn't agree more with this statement.
Iberian guys, it's surely fine to believe what you believe, I understand your desire to like all research that supports your believes, and not agree with ones that don't. Human thing, I do that too.
The thing that bothers me is your total disrespect to anyone of different views. One thing is not to agree with point of view, other to bunch together, bully and throw epithets against an unfortunate sole that happens to express his/her opinion on Iberian forums. You basically prosecute people of different views, it's like Spanish Inquisition all over again.
Did someone give you the licence for the Truth?
Are you the chosen ones?
Genetics in archaeological and cultural context is quite new. For years it will be corrected, checked and corrected again. We are here to learn, discover, socialise and make friends. Let's talk about this, argue about this, have fun about this,...but with respect gentlemen, please, with respect.

PS. And no, I'm not Mexican.

I understand what you are saying but the FACTS must be set straight. No one has the right to deny Iberians or any other people their TRUE ethnic heritage.

Drac
11-01-10, 17:34
It's an average of several studies. Adams found nearly 17% of E1b1b in Galicia (9% is only for E-M81). Flores found a stunning 31.6%, including 10% of E-M81 and 10% of E-M123. Gonçalves found 21% of E1b1b in nearby North Portugal (higher than in Central or Southern Portugal), which does not seem to contradict Adams nor Flores.

The result for Flores et al. (2004) is obviously a fluke. Their Galician sample size was only 19.

Drac
11-01-10, 18:28
Actually, I created this thread because there was so much interest/discussion about Iberia on the forum lately. It's also because Iberia has very diverse types of E1b1b, unlike most other European countries which have mostly E-V13 and E-M78 from the Balkans.

I was also wondering why a place like Galicia, with no recorded settlement from the Near East or North Africa, should have so much E1b1b. We could imagine a Paleolithic migration for E-M81, but how about the E-M123 from the Middle East ? Unknown Phoenician settlement ? I still do not have the answer.

E-M123 has been found among Greeks, Bulgarians, Macedonians, Romanians, Italians (2-7%; Cruciani et al. 2004), Albanians, and has even shown up among some descendants of British people in the New World. I am not so sure that a historical minority in Europe, like the Phoenicians were, have much to do with this marker.

luis77
23-01-10, 19:26
Nope, as pointed out in another thread, you manipulated the data from at least one of the studies so you could try to inflate the frequencies in Spain to suit your obvious agenda. Casas et al. 2006 only considered L1-L2 sequences to be of sub-Saharan origin, so the actual data for that paper should be like this:

Spain, Priego de Cordoba : 1/108 =0.9%, Casas 2006

You also "mysteriously" left out the data for Pereira et al. 2005 in this latest "calculation" of yours:

Pereira et al. (2005) 8 L lineages out of 496 (1.61%)

Providing that the data for some of these other papers (Alvarez 2007, Picornell 2005, Brehm 2003) you refer to have not been manipulated as well, the actual frequencies are:

Spain, northwestern : 8/216 =3.70%, Achilli 2007
Spain, central : 1/148 =0.68%, Achilli 2007
Spain, Andalusia: 2/114 =1.75%, Achilli 2007
Spain, northeastern : 3/179 =1.68%, Achilli 2007
Spain, Basque Country: 1/156 =0.64%, Achilli 2007
Spain, all regions : 9/312 =2.90%, Alvarez 2007
Spain, Pyreneans : 0/233 =0.00%, Lopez-Parra 2009
Spain, Priego de Cordoba : 1/108 =0.9%, Casas 2006
Spain, all regions: 8/496 = 1.61%, Pereira 2005

Continental : 33/1962 = 1.68%

2) Islands

Spain, Balearic : 5/231 =2.20%, Picornell 2005
Spain, Canaries : 20/300 =6.60%, Brehm 2003

All Spain (including Balearic and Canaries) : 58/2493 = 2.32%


1) Casas found L3 sequences in Cordoba which are or course sub-saharan like all L sequences

2) Regarding Pereira et al. 2005, as specified, the 496 individuals from were not "left out" but were already included in other studies and in the data posted
Quote from Peireira 2005 :
"The Iberian database was constructed with the following data (92 individuals from Galicia (Salas et al. 1998); 118 individuals from Catalonia (Crespillo et al. 2000); 122 Basques [45 from Bertranpetit et al. (1995) and 77 from Richards et al. (1996)]; 61 individuals from Leon (Larruga et al. 2001); 38 individuals from Castile (Larruga et al. 2001); and 65 individuals from Andalusia [50 from Larruga et al. (2001) and 15 from Corte-Real et al. (1996)"

So all my calculations are perfectly correct. You did manipulate the data not me...

Wilhelm
23-01-10, 22:30
Actually for Norway is 1.4% of Sub-Saharian admixture :

" In another recent study [3] on Norwegians, an L2 Sub-Saharan African sequence was found in the sample of 74 Norwegians (1.4% Sub-Saharan admixture).

3. Giuseppe Passarino et al., Different genetic components in the Norwegian population revealed by the analysis of mtDNA and Y chromosome polymorphisms, European Journal of Human Genetics10, 521 - 529 (23 Aug 2002)

^ lynx ^
23-01-10, 22:31
Casas based his study on Priego de Cordoba citizens for modern samples, which is not the same than Cordoba, Luis2b. ;-) Priego de Cordoba is a town in the province of Cordoba. The rest of his study is based on Medieval samples (which date from the Almohade epoch) from some ancient burial sites located in the same town.

Here's his study in PDF: http://backintyme.com/admixture/casas01.pdf


MATERIALS AND METHODS

Medieval samples

Bone and teeth samples belonging to 71 individuals
were collected from the burial sites of El Palenque (45),
La Cava (8), and El Castillo (18), of the Islamic medieval
town Madinat Baguh (today called Priego de Cordoba).
The chronology of the human remains was determined
by the archaeological records as well as by calibrated 14C
dating of human bones (cal. A.D. 1218, 2r: 1025–(1218)–
1291; and cal. A.D. 1214, 2r: 1022–(1214)–1289). Dates
were consistent with the Almohade epoch, and therefore
the samples were considered a sole population.

In two of the sites, La Cava and El Palenque, the skeletons
were perfectly individualized and in anatomical
connection. At the third site, El Castillo, samples from
individualized burials were collected (4), but also teeth
from isolated jaws from no individualized complete skeletons
(14).

Femur and tibia in good macroscopic preservation conditions,
i.e., without fractures and with, at most, moderately
porous cortices, were the preferential bones
selected for sampling. Pieces of 4 cm2 were cut from
the front of the shaft in minimum informative areas
from an anthropological perspective, i.e., without pathological
signs and not corresponding to muscular or ligament
insertion areas. The sampled teeth were taken
directly from their alveoli, and for those from incomplete
skeletons, only inferior teeth were collected from complete
jaws, to be sure they belonged to different individuals.
The selected teeth showed no cracks, fractures, or
caries lesions.

For some individuals, two bones or teeth of the same
skeleton were collected, so that independent extractions
could be prepared.

Modern samples

Saliva samples of 108 unrelated individuals who gave
their informed consent were collected in FTA cards
(FTA1, Whatman). All the donors and their maternal
ancestors at least for two previous generations came
from Priego de Cordoba or nearby villages within 30 km
of the town.

I took a capture from the PDF:

http://img503.imageshack.us/img503/2563/tablacasas.png (http://img503.imageshack.us/i/tablacasas.png/)

MP = Medieval Population (of Priego de Cordoba)
PP = Present Population (of Priego de Cordoba)
SIP = South Iberian Peninsula.
NWA = North West Africa.

Greetings.

Cambrius (The Red)
24-01-10, 03:59
Casas based his study on Priego de Cordoba citizens for modern samples, which is not the same than Cordoba, Luis2b. ;-) Priego de Cordoba is a town in the province of Cordoba. The rest of his study is based on Medieval samples (which date from the Almohade epoch) from some ancient burial sites located in the same town.

Here's his study in PDF: http://backintyme.com/admixture/casas01.pdf



I took a capture from the PDF:

http://img503.imageshack.us/img503/2563/tablacasas.png (http://img503.imageshack.us/i/tablacasas.png/)

MP = Medieval Population (of Priego de Cordoba)
PP = Present Population (of Priego de Cordoba)
SIP = South Iberian Peninsula.
NWA = North West Africa.

Greetings.

Another ridiculous study...:rolleyes2:

^ lynx ^
24-01-10, 05:05
http://img716.imageshack.us/img716/1002/dibujolr.png (http://img716.imageshack.us/i/dibujolr.png/)

MP: Medieval Population in Priego de Cordoba.
PP: Present " " " ".

Remember that L3 is the most dominant L haplogroup in non-african populations. It's believed to come from the initial migration by modern humans out of Africa 60.000 years ago. That's why Casas only considered L1-L2 sequences to be of sub-Saharan origin.

The right pies into the square try to show the impact caused by the expulsion of the muslims and "moriscos".

MP: Before the expulsion.
PP: Present days.

Greetings.

Wilhelm
27-01-10, 02:59
Very Recent Study :

González-Pérez et al. (2010) (http://www.scribd.com/doc/22956855/Population-relationships-mediterranean-gonz) have analyzed populations from the northern and southern shores of the Mediterranean, with Central Europeans and West Africans as external references. They estimate Sub-Saharan African admixture using two methods that yield vastly disparate results. In the Discussion section, they admit that the inflated "Alu/STR estimate might be artefactual" and favor the estimate based on the Alu loci set alone because it's consistent with previous mtDNA, Y-chromosome and 500,000-SNP structure data.

According to the more accurate latter method, Sub-Saharan African admixture is ~13% in North Africa and "imperceptible" (~0.01%) in Southern Europe:

http://img684.imageshack.us/img684/847/gonzalezperez2010admixt.png

Marianne
27-01-10, 13:08
Very interesting! Although it doesn't include Italy. Or is it included in "North Mediterraneans as a whole"?

^ lynx ^
27-01-10, 19:54
Thank you for this study Wilhelm, it seems more complete. Remember that Casas' study was mainly focused on Priego de Cordoba, a town.

^ lynx ^
27-01-10, 20:11
http://img651.imageshack.us/img651/3752/dibujoot.png (http://img651.imageshack.us/i/dibujoot.png/)

It's an autosomal-DNA study btw.

Cambrius (The Red)
27-01-10, 21:13
The levels are so trivial for Southern Europe it hardly makes sense to have follow-up studies.

Drac
28-01-10, 15:20
1) Casas found L3 sequences in Cordoba which are or course sub-saharan like all L sequences

Read the study in question and you'll see that the authors DO NOT consider it "sub-Saharan". They only consider L1-L2 as such:

"The significant higher number of sub-Saharan African lineages (L1 and L2, Table 2) in MP..." (see pp. 546-547, starting from the fourth paragraph, and also Figure 1, where L3 and sub-Saharan L1-L2 are clearly separated.)



2) Regarding Pereira et al. 2005, as specified, the 496 individuals from were not "left out" but were already included in other studies and in the data posted
Quote from Peireira 2005 :
"The Iberian database was constructed with the following data (92 individuals from Galicia (Salas et al. 1998); 118 individuals from Catalonia (Crespillo et al. 2000); 122 Basques [45 from Bertranpetit et al. (1995) and 77 from Richards et al. (1996)]; 61 individuals from Leon (Larruga et al. 2001); 38 individuals from Castile (Larruga et al. 2001); and 65 individuals from Andalusia [50 from Larruga et al. (2001) and 15 from Corte-Real et al. (1996)"

Nope, in your "calculations" you clearly left out that study's results, and counted the others. Go back and read your own posts.


So all my calculations are perfectly correct. You did manipulate the data not me...

Nope, you did manipulate the data, and therefore your "calculations" are hardly "correct".

Drac
28-01-10, 15:32
MP: Medieval Population in Priego de Cordoba.
PP: Present " " " ".

Remember that L3 is the most dominant L haplogroup in non-african populations. It's believed to come from the initial migration by modern humans out of Africa 60.000 years ago. That's why Casas only considered L1-L2 sequences to be of sub-Saharan origin.

The right pies into the square try to show the impact caused by the expulsion of the muslims and "moriscos".

MP: Before the expulsion.
PP: Present days.

Greetings.


Indeed. I would have posted links to the study myself since my first post, but there is some sort of silly link prohibition for members who have less than a certain minimum of posts.

Thanks for helping to expose this "Luis" fellow and his specious manipulations, clearly directed at trying to inflate sub-Saharan lineages in Spain. It is people like this who have taken over the Wikipedia article on "African admixture" and are posting such manipulations with seemingly all impunity (if you go to the discussion section you will see how they managed to successfully bar "Small Victory", one of the scarce users who was trying to fix that mess of an article.)

Wilhelm
28-01-10, 16:16
About L3 :

According to Maca-Meyer et al. (2001), "L3 is more related to Eurasian haplogroups than to the most divergent African clusters L1 and L2".L3 is the haplogroup from which all modern humans outside of Africa derive

One of these lineages, defined by loss of the DdeI site at np 10394, represents only a few percent of the African mtDNAs but appears to be the progenitor of roughly half of all European, Asian and Native American mtDNAs."


^ (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_L3_%28mtDNA%29#cite_ref-5) Maca-Meyer et al. (2001), Major genomic mitochondrial lineages delineate early human expansions (http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2156/2/13), BMC Genetics 2001, 2:13
^ (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_L3_%28mtDNA%29#cite_ref-6) https://www.cambridgedna.com/genealogy-dna-ancient-migrations-slideshow.php?view=step3

Cambrius (The Red)
28-01-10, 16:49
Indeed. I would have posted links to the study myself since my first post, but there is some sort of silly link prohibition for members who have less than a certain minimum of posts.

Thanks for helping to expose this "Luis" fellow and his specious manipulations, clearly directed at trying to inflate sub-Saharan lineages in Spain. It is people like this who have taken over the Wikipedia article on "African admixture" and are posting such manipulations with seemingly all impunity (if you go to the discussion section you will see how they managed to successfully bar "Small Victory", one of the scarce users who was trying to fix that mess of an article.)

So, the question is, what is WIKI doing about it?

Cambrius (The Red)
28-01-10, 16:56
Read the study in question and you'll see that the authors DO NOT consider it "sub-Saharan". They only consider L1-L2 as such:
"The significant higher number of sub-Saharan African lineages (L1 and L2, Table 2) in MP..." (see pp. 546-547, starting from the fourth paragraph, and also Figure 1, where L3 and sub-Saharan L1-L2 are clearly separated.)
Nope, in your "calculations" you clearly left out that study's results, and counted the others. Go back and read your own posts.
Nope, you did manipulate the data, and therefore your "calculations" are hardly "correct".

Something to keep in mind. Several of the referenced studies also have questions as regards validity of participant samples. It seems that a number of individuals from some regions of Iberia may not have been NATIVE ORIGIN, due to extra-European influences in family history. I would question many Iberian Sub-Saharan DNA results.

Drac
28-01-10, 18:21
So, the question is, what is WIKI doing about it?

Nothing. Go and see the article and discussion page:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African_admixture_in_Europe

For some reason the Afrocentrists/Nordicists/anti-Southern Europeans who took over there have gained some support from other users/administrators (the chief culprit there is "Wapondaponda/Muntuwandi", aided by folks like "Andrew Lancaster".) The user "Small Victory" was one of the few confronting them, but they managed to bar him from the article. At one point he nominated the article as biased, and that it should be erased and redone, but they voted against his proposal:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/African_admixture_in_Europe

Wikipedia seems to work in a "strength in numbers" way. As long as more people do not get involved to confront them, the article very likely will continue as is, spreading its manipulations and misinformation quite undisturbed. In fact, it's probably going to get worse, as these assorted charlatans will keep on digging more fishy stuff for their agendas (it's already plagued with obsolete things for population genetics, like HLA genes, immunoglobulin allotypes, sickle cell, etc.)

Wilhelm
28-01-10, 22:19
Thanks for the information Drac. The Wikipedia article on african admixture of Europe is all messesd up, all manipulated, with no sources, etc. and of course they only talk about Iberia, and not all Europe.

Cambrius (The Red)
29-01-10, 00:14
Looks like some genetics departments of world-class research universities have been informed about the terrible shortcomings of this particular WIKI article. Interesting...

^ lynx ^
29-01-10, 04:02
The most funny thing is that the guy who posted that cr*p on the wikipedia, took the data of the MEDIEVAL samples in the TOWN of Priego de Cordoba (8%) and posted it on wikipedia as TODAY'S sub-saharian admixture in the whole PROVINCE of Cordoba. :rolleyes2: :laughing:

What kind of moron could do that? I'm thiking about the same kind of guy who would talk about the Max-Planck Institute without knowing anything about it. :grin:

PS: Did you notice that they labelled "Iberia" as a "country", btw? :laughing: :laughing:

Cambrius (The Red)
29-01-10, 04:31
The most funny thing is that the guy who posted that cr*p on the wikipedia, took the data of the MEDIEVAL samples in the TOWN of Priego de Cordoba (8%) and posted it on wikipedia as TODAY'S sub-saharian admixture in the whole PROVINCE of Cordoba. :rolleyes2: :laughing:
What kind of moron could do that? I'm thiking about the same kind of guy who would talk about the Max-Planck Institute without knowing anything about it. :grin:
PS: Did you notice that they labelled "Iberia" as a "country", btw? :laughing: :laughing:
:laughing:Oh yeah, these sociopaths are real scholars... :innocent:

Wilhelm
29-01-10, 22:18
I was in wikipedia some years ago, but I was blocked by some nordicist, they are afraid of truth. Wikipedia sucks

Alejandro
31-01-10, 09:33
Actually, I created this thread because there was so much interest/discussion about Iberia on the forum lately. It's also because Iberia has very diverse types of E1b1b, unlike most other European countries which have mostly E-V13 and E-M78 from the Balkans.

I was also wondering why a place like Galicia, with no recorded settlement from the Near East or North Africa, should have so much E1b1b. We could imagine a Paleolithic migration for E-M81, but how about the E-M123 from the Middle East ? Unknown Phoenician settlement ? I still do not have the answer.

Im sorry for my bad english, but maybe thats E1b1b ect.. in Galicia and Nortwest of Spain is because in the XV century the population of Granada in the south os Spain, last muslim city in Iberian, was dispersed because they caused problem in violent revelations, Granada was almost entirely repopulated for people from other places.

Sorry again for my bad english.

Alejandro
31-01-10, 09:38
The muslims from Granada were moved to the northwest, Castilla and Galicia, away from the east Mediterraneanto not request assistance from the Turks and africans muslims.

Drac
31-01-10, 14:34
The muslims from Granada were moved to the northwest, Castilla and Galicia, away from the east Mediterraneanto not request assistance from the Turks and africans muslims.

That "theory" was proposed by Adams et al. to try to justify some of their fishy claims, but it doesn't wash. First of all, the majority of "Moriscos" were just former Iberian Muslims, not people of foreign descent (in other words, most of them weren't really "Moors" to begin with), and second, I don't know about you but I have never heard of any such large-scale movement of them to the North West of Spain. Most people have heard of the large-scale expulsion of them from Spanish soil in 1609 and 1611, though.

Wilhelm
31-01-10, 15:52
This theory doesn't stand up. Firstly, because moors in Iberia never reached such population. The moors never reached more than 7% of the population. Secondly, The E-M81 in Galicia or Pasiegos was most certainly introduced since paleolithic times.

The ancestral lineage of E-M81 in their hypothesis could have been linked with the spread of Neolithic food-producing technologies from the Fertile Crescent via the Nile, although pastoralism rather than agriculture. E-M81 and possibly proto-Afroasiatic language may have been carried either all the way from Asia, or they may represent a "local contribution to the North African Neolithic transition"

serinus
31-01-10, 16:35
Hi, I'm new on the forum.

I have a question: There is any study about autosomal sub-saharan DNA in Portugal? I know the mtDNA is high (and that provides plenty "arguments" for nordicists bashing my contry) but I haven't saw any studies about autosomal DNA.

Alejandro
31-01-10, 17:20
That "theory" was proposed by Adams et al. to try to justify some of their fishy claims, but it doesn't wash. First of all, the majority of "Moriscos" were just former Iberian Muslims, not people of foreign descent (in other words, most of them weren't really "Moors" to begin with), and second, I don't know about you but I have never heard of any such large-scale movement of them to the North West of Spain. Most people have heard of the large-scale expulsion of them from Spanish soil in 1609 and 1611, though.

The repopulation (new people of diferents places from Spain) of Granada is historically registered, the fear of the spaniard because these muslims could ask for help in North Africa and the Turks empire and starting a new conquest.

I know what only 6-7 % of population of the Iberian population was african and the rest were just religious converts but think what Granada is the last muslims reducts (city,land) in iberian and for 2 centuries, all a lot of muslim or african people, everyone fled (moved) to Granada.

These muslims where separated in relatively small groups throughout the country northwesternt, Galicia and Castilla and intragrated well abandoning their religion and escaped the expulsion od 1609 ect...

Im sorry, I can not explain me better in english :( I will try in Spanish the same text.

Entiendo que la gran mayoría de granadinos anteriores a 1492 no eran africanos pero no me cabe duda de que el porcentaje era superior al resto de provincias españolas pues los musulmanes fueron escapando poco a poco a esta ciudad confirme iban perdiendo terreno en España, recordemos que Granada además era más grande que en la actualidad.

Tras la conquista y las revueltas de las Alpujarras, las prosas y escritos secretos sobre el guerrero verde de islam que circulaban narrando que vendría a recuperar la península para esta religión y el poder turco en auge el miedo hizo que se movieran a todos los musulmanes de Granada al noroeste, alejados del levante español y del mediterraneo, fueron separados cada cierta distancia en poblaciones de Calicia y Castilla, y bueno no todo pero si una buena parte de esos genes debería encontrarse hoy en día fuera de Granada, en esas zonas.


Recordemos también que los musulmanes hicieron una criba de cristianos en el años 1125 expulsandolos al norte de Africa o exterminandolos debido a que se rebelaron en Granada, o sea menos cristianos viejos y más musulmanes en esa zona.

Im sorry for using my languaje, I say the same as above in english but without mistakes/errors.

Greetings.

^ lynx ^
31-01-10, 17:40
No hay constancia de lo que escribies Alejandro. De lo que s hay constancia es de la intensa presencia de los descendientes de los moriscos expulsados de la Peninsula en Marruecos, los enclaves ms conocidos de estos descendientes son: Chaun y Tetun.

http://www.rtve.es/television/20080411/cronicas-busca-rastro-los-moriscos-marruecos/23691.shtml

Lo del Noroeste de la Peninsula tiene ms que ver con el hecho de que la expulsin de musulmanes/judios de Portugal no fue tan intensa como a este otro lado de la frontera, y eso ha influenciado a las provincias espaolas colindantes y a Galicia. De todos modos como ya te han dicho, la presencia del haplogrupo E, ya se daba en la Peninsula mucho antes de la invasin musulmana, ah est el Valle de Pasiegos para atestiguarlo.


PD: Es increible la cantidad de gente nueva que entra a este hilo. :D

Cambrius (The Red)
31-01-10, 18:08
Hi, I'm new on the forum.
I have a question: There is any study about autosomal sub-saharan DNA in Portugal? I know the mtDNA is high (and that provides plenty "arguments" for nordicists bashing my contry) but I haven't saw any studies about autosomal DNA.

Autosomal studies show that the Portuguese cluster near perfectly with Spaniards (hardly a surprise), Northern and Central Italians, French and Swiss.

A good number of the mt-DNA studies on Sub-Saharan frequencies in Portugal, like in Spain, are distorted because of faulty methodology. They are NON-REPRESENTATIVE. Much of the L found in Portugal may not even be clades that are Sub-Saharan, rather, they could well be Asian and extremely old. Little of it has to do with the Atlantic Slave Trade. If you want to see the real miscegenation effects of the trade, go to Liverpool.

These idiot intra-race racists twist the facts to satisfy some sick agenda and are essentially flushing themselves down the toilet with their childish lies. Sound genetic research is wrecking the body of misinformation every day.

Cambrius (The Red)
31-01-10, 18:17
No hay constancia de lo que escribies Alejandro. De lo que s� hay constancia es de la intensa presencia de los descendientes de los moriscos expulsados de la Peninsula en Marruecos, los enclaves m�s conocidos de estos descendientes son: Chau�n y Tetu�n.

http://www.rtve.es/television/20080411/cronicas-busca-rastro-los-moriscos-marruecos/23691.shtml

Lo del Noroeste de la Peninsula tiene m�s que ver con el hecho de que la expulsi�n de musulmanes/judios de Portugal no fue tan intensa como a este otro lado de la frontera, y eso ha influenciado a las provincias espa�olas colindantes y a Galicia. De todos modos como ya te han dicho, la presencia del haplogrupo E, ya se daba en la Peninsula mucho antes de la invasi�n musulmana, ah� est� el Valle de Pasiegos para atestiguarlo.



PD: Es increible la cantidad de gente nueva que entra a este hilo. :D

Si, es MUY increible! :laughing:

Alejandro
31-01-10, 18:19
En octubre de 1 569, se produce una conspiración contra Aben Humeya en Cádiar. Se mezclaron varios motivos: la ambición de Aben Aboo, el enfrentamiento de Aben Humeya con las tropas turcas, el odio de la familia de su mujer (por haber matado el rey morisco a varios de sus miembros) e incluso el móvil de los celos. Aben Humeya descansaba en Laujar de Andarax (al este de Ugijar). Fue asesinado por su primo, quien le sucedió. Fue enterrado allí, pero D. Juan de Austria, al terminar el conflicto, trasladó sus restos a Guadix. El segundo rey morisco empieza bien su reinado al vencer a los cristianos en Orgiva pero, al entrar en combate el hermano de Felipe II, tiene que retirarse a las alturas de la sierra. En estos momentos, los moriscos de Granada y La Vega ya habían sido expulsados a otras provincias. En octubre de 1 570, tan sólo contaba el cabecilla morisco con 300 hombres. Al final es también asesinado y llevado a la capital granadina. Tras ser sofocada la rebelión se procede a la expulsión de los moriscos supervivientes, que han sido calculados en unos 80.000; el destino fue Andalucía occidental, La Mancha y Castilla. Unos pocos millares pudieron permanecer hasta la expulsión general de¡ país, en 1 610, bajo el reinado de Felipe II. Gran parte del territorio de Granada fue devastado. Hubo una repoblación de campesinos de Galicia, León, Asturias y Castilla, en total 12.542 familias que repoblaron 270 lugares, perdiéndose para siempre unos 130 lugares. A partir de estas fechas se va produciendo un retroceso general de la comarca y un fuerte olvido histórico; tan sólo se puede reseñar su participación durante la Guerra Civil española.


I have best texts in history books, but I can not scan this books sorry, you can look for more in google.

Tampoco digo que este sea el origen de ese ADN encontrado por esas zonas, pero supongo no está de más la posibilidad, aunque solo sea por que incrementó el aporte africano en el noroeste.

^ lynx ^
31-01-10, 18:30
Repito, el haplogrupo E3b (E1b1) ya ha estado presente en Iberia (y resto de Europa) mucho antes de la invasin musulmana de la Pennsula Ibrica.

http://www.jogg.info/32/bird_files/image039.jpg
http://www.jogg.info/32/bird_files/image028.jpg
http://www.jogg.info/32/bird_files/image022.jpg

http://img24.imageshack.us/img24/2851/dibujogxwl.jpg

Vase como en Gales hay una significativa concentracin de este haplogrupo, y que yo sepa los musulmanes no llegaron a Gales y tampoco creo que Felipe III de Espaa mandara moriscos hacia esas latitudes.:rolleyes2: Estoy seguro de que parte del E1b1 de Iberia procede de la poca de Al-Andalus... pero no todo, especialmente en el Norte (Cantabria, Galicia) donde probablemente la mayora date del Neoltico (especialmente en el caso cntabro).

La historia de la Pennsula Ibrica no empez con la llegada de los musulmanes, ya haba mucha gente viviendo aqu, antes de que llegaran ellos y despus de que se fueran.

^ lynx ^
31-01-10, 18:40
En este mapa, todava se puede ver mejor de lo que estoy hablando.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7a/HgE1b1b1a2.png

Wilhelm
31-01-10, 18:45
España tiene un nivel bajo-medio de E1b1b comparado con el resto de Europa. Aqui mismo en Eupedia lo puedes mirar.

Cambrius (The Red)
31-01-10, 18:57
I thought this debate had been resolved some time ago. Only the pathetic racist sociopaths keep pushing long disproved rubbish information. I hate to keep repeating obvious things but most E in both Spain and Portugal is M-81 subclade, very old and of Eurasian origin. Let's move on to better things.

Wilhelm
31-01-10, 19:05
yes, everytime we have to repeat the same things, but some people never learn or simply don't want to learn...
of the total 6% of E1b1b of Iberia about 4.6% is M-81 and it is of paleolithic origin.
Come on, This is not dna-forums !! Here we don't talk about that crap of dna-tribes and other crap studies. This is a serious minded forum

Alejandro
31-01-10, 19:12
yes, everytime we have to repeat the same things, but some people never learn or simply don't want to learn...
of the total 6% of E1b1b of Iberia about 4.6% is M-81 and it is of paleolithic origin.
Come on, This is not dna-forums !! Here we don't talk about that crap of dna-tribes and other crap studies. This is a serious minded forum

I'm not that people I want to learn but I have difficulty with English, maybe you (or someone else) can linker some studies of the Spanish population in Spanish language? by private message to not disturb the forum.

Drac
31-01-10, 19:32
I have best texts in history books, but I can not scan this books sorry, you can look for more in google.

Tampoco digo que este sea el origen de ese ADN encontrado por esas zonas, pero supongo no está de más la posibilidad, aunque solo sea por que incrementó el aporte africano en el noroeste.








Tu propia fuente no dice nada de que haya ocurrido un movimiento de grandes cantidades de "moriscos" hacia Galicia. Y ademas menciona la expulsion general:

"Tras ser sofocada la rebelión se procede a la expulsión de los moriscos supervivientes, que han sido calculados en unos 80.000; el destino fue Andalucía occidental, La Mancha y Castilla. Unos pocos millares pudieron permanecer hasta la expulsión general del país, en 1 610, bajo el reinado de Felipe II."

Alejandro
31-01-10, 19:49
Tu propia fuente no dice nada de que haya ocurrido un movimiento de grandes cantidades de "moriscos" hacia Galicia. Y ademas menciona la expulsion general:



"Tras ser sofocada la rebelión se procede a la expulsión de los moriscos supervivientes, que han sido calculados en unos 80.000; el destino fue Andalucía occidental, La Mancha y Castilla. Unos pocos millares pudieron permanecer hasta la expulsión general del país, en 1 610, bajo el reinado de Felipe II."








La expulsión



En 1570 Felipe II manda la expulsión. Se ordenó que los moriscos del Valle de Lecrín, Granada, Vega de granada, etc., salieran hacia Córdoba y desde allí fueron repartidos hacia Extremadura y Galicia. Para ello se reunieron el 1 de noviembre en las iglesias de cada lugar para comenzar la marcha.

(no me deja insertar links aún, necesito 10 mensajes)

Es información parcial solamente, tengamos en cuenta que en la población autóctona de granada, incluso la convertida al islam, había ya en el siglo I población semita, Elvira, sus barrios judíos, todos estos genes fueron borrados de la actual Granada con la repoblación y dispersados al noroeste, seguro que es posible que incrementen ese porcentaje de ADN, 80.000 personas no son pocas, esos moriscos además no fueron expulsados pues se integraron en pequeños grupos por todo el noroeste y se perdieron.

serinus
31-01-10, 20:32
A good number of the mt-DNA studies on Sub-Saharan frequencies in Portugal, like in Spain, are distorted because of faulty methodology. They are NON-REPRESENTATIVE.

Eu não sei se são representativos ou não. Mas se de facto as amostras foram recolhidos naquelas zonas onde alguns habitantes têm quase um aspecto de cabo-verdianos, tipo Alcácer, então não haveria diferença entre as terem recolhido aí ou ido a Chelas recolhê-las.
A ser verdade o que diz então a credibilidade desses estudos estão comprometidas.



Much of the L found in Portugal may not even be clades that are Sub-Saharan, rather, they could well be Asian and extremely old. Little of it has to do with the Atlantic Slave Trade. If you want to see the real miscegenation effects of the trade, go to Liverpool.


Pois, ainda há controvérsia sobre se o L é exclusivamente sub-sahariano ou de poderá também estar relacionado com povos Euroasiáticos. No entanto, mesmo que seja somente sub-sahariano, a sua presença em Portugal pode não dever-se apenas à escravatura colonial, e tenho essa suspeita porque vi algures um estudo (não me lembro qual) que mostrava que a Galiza possuia um valor de L ligeiramente superior ao do Norte de Portugal, ora, como isto pode ser possível se considerarmos que somente foi a escravatura a responsável pelas linhagens de L em existentes Portugal? A Galiza nunca fez parte de Portugal e o noroeste peninsular ( aliás, o norte todo)foi sempre uma região populosa que não precisaria de mão-de-obra escrava, ao contrário do sul, mais despovoado, em que os escravos poderiam ser valiosos para o trabalho. É isto que me leva crer que algum deste L é muito mais antigo, e portanto, já não terá relevância
a nível autossómico.
No entanto houve de facto mais recentemente alguma mestiçagem com escravos, como já pude ver no geneall.net numa discussão sobre escravos nascidos em Portugal filhos de escravas e seus senhores portugueses



These idiot intra-race racists twist the facts to satisfy some sick agenda and are essentially flushing themselves down the toilet with their childish lies. Sound genetic research is wrecking the body of misinformation every day.



Há um certo prazer mesquinho que os nordicistas, lusófobos brasileiros, etc, têm em pegar nestes números e fazer com eles uma dramatização exagerada, uma tragédia shakespeareana, de modo a rebaixarem o nosso país ao ponto de já ter visto escrito mais ou menos por estas palavras que "Portugal que era a maior potência europeia, tornou-se o país mais pobre da Europa devido à mestiçagem com milhares e milhares de negros", entre outas tretas do género.
Mas o que essas difamadores esquecem-se de mencionar é que, apesar do Sul do país ter um valor significativo de mtDNA sub-sahariano, essa região comporta apenas 10% da população portuguesa, o que faz com o número de pessoas do sul que possuem ancestralidade sub-sahariana sejam cerca cento e vinte mil; um número bastante modesto.

Sorry for those who don't speak portuguese. :ashamed2:

Cambrius (The Red)
31-01-10, 21:14
Eu não sei se são representativos ou não. Mas se de facto as amostras foram recolhidos naquelas zonas onde alguns habitantes têm quase um aspecto de cabo-verdianos, tipo Alcácer, então não haveria diferença entre as terem recolhido aí ou ido a Chelas recolhê-las.
A ser verdade o que diz então a credibilidade desses estudos estão comprometidas.
Pois, ainda há controvérsia sobre se o L é exclusivamente sub-sahariano ou de poderá também estar relacionado com povos Euroasiáticos. No entanto, mesmo que seja somente sub-sahariano, a sua presença em Portugal pode não dever-se apenas à escravatura colonial, e tenho essa suspeita porque vi algures um estudo (não me lembro qual) que mostrava que a Galiza possuia um valor de L ligeiramente superior ao do Norte de Portugal, ora, como isto pode ser possível se considerarmos que somente foi a escravatura a responsável pelas linhagens de L em existentes Portugal? A Galiza nunca fez parte de Portugal e o noroeste peninsular ( aliás, o norte todo)foi sempre uma região populosa que não precisaria de mão-de-obra escrava, ao contrário do sul, mais despovoado, em que os escravos poderiam ser valiosos para o trabalho. É isto que me leva crer que algum deste L é muito mais antigo, e portanto, já não terá relevância
a nível autossómico.
No entanto houve de facto mais recentemente alguma mestiçagem com escravos, como já pude ver no geneall.net numa discussão sobre escravos nascidos em Portugal filhos de escravas e seus senhores portugueses
Há um certo prazer mesquinho que os nordicistas, lusófobos brasileiros, etc, têm em pegar nestes números e fazer com eles uma dramatização exagerada, uma tragédia shakespeareana, de modo a rebaixarem o nosso país ao ponto de já ter visto escrito mais ou menos por estas palavras que "Portugal que era a maior potência europeia, tornou-se o país mais pobre da Europa devido à mestiçagem com milhares e milhares de negros", entre outas tretas do género.
Mas o que essas difamadores esquecem-se de mencionar é que, apesar do Sul do país ter um valor significativo de mtDNA sub-sahariano, essa região comporta apenas 10% da população portuguesa, o que faz com o número de pessoas do sul que possuem ancestralidade sub-sahariana sejam cerca cento e vinte mil; um número bastante modesto.
Sorry for those who don't speak portuguese. :ashamed2:

Algumas provas tiveram representantes de Alcacer... :laughing:

I suspect that in the next few years, after additional research has been completed, the true levels of "Sub-Saharan" mt-DNA will be about 2% for both Spain and Portugal. Like I said, go to Liverpool to se the REAL effects of the Atlantic Slave Trade on a European population.

Portugal is more than 2/3 Celtic in substratum and phenotypes are mainly Paleo-Atlantid and Nordid-Atlantid. Most Portuguese Mediterranean types are Western not Eastern Med or Mid-Eastern, such as what is commonly found in parts of italy and Greece.

A lot of these idiot racists look at the Brazilian mulattos in Portugal and claim they are native... :laughing: What a joke! Talk about moronic...

Wilhelm
31-01-10, 21:32
The mtDNA L in Spain (1.61%) is pretty much the same level found in Norway (1.40%) (Passarino et al. 2002). Also 2% among Finns (Pereira et al. 2005 ) and 1.4% in germans (Pliss et al. 2005)
In the wikipedia article obviously the nordicists have deleted this information.


Furthermore, the one found in Iberia is L3 (Eurasian)

About L3 :

According to Maca-Meyer et al. (2001), "L3 is more related to Eurasian haplogroups than to the most divergent African clusters L1 and L2".
L3 is the haplogroup from which all modern humans outside of Africa derive

One of these lineages, defined by loss of the DdeI site at np 10394, represents only a few percent of the African mtDNAs but appears to be the progenitor of roughly half of all European, Asian and Native American mtDNAs."

Source :
Maca-Meyer et al. (2001), Major genomic mitochondrial lineages delineate early human expansions, BMC Genetics 2001, 2:13

https://www.cambridgedna.com/genealo...php?view=step3

Cambrius (The Red)
01-02-10, 00:30
Eu não sei se são representativos ou não. Mas se de facto as amostras foram recolhidos naquelas zonas onde alguns habitantes têm quase um aspecto de cabo-verdianos, tipo Alcácer, então não haveria diferença entre as terem recolhido aí ou ido a Chelas recolhê-las.
A ser verdade o que diz então a credibilidade desses estudos estão comprometidas.
Pois, ainda há controvérsia sobre se o L é exclusivamente sub-sahariano ou de poderá também estar relacionado com povos Euroasiáticos. No entanto, mesmo que seja somente sub-sahariano, a sua presença em Portugal pode não dever-se apenas à escravatura colonial, e tenho essa suspeita porque vi algures um estudo (não me lembro qual) que mostrava que a Galiza possuia um valor de L ligeiramente superior ao do Norte de Portugal, ora, como isto pode ser possível se considerarmos que somente foi a escravatura a responsável pelas linhagens de L em existentes Portugal? A Galiza nunca fez parte de Portugal e o noroeste peninsular ( aliás, o norte todo)foi sempre uma região populosa que não precisaria de mão-de-obra escrava, ao contrário do sul, mais despovoado, em que os escravos poderiam ser valiosos para o trabalho. É isto que me leva crer que algum deste L é muito mais antigo, e portanto, já não terá relevância
a nível autossómico.
No entanto houve de facto mais recentemente alguma mestiçagem com escravos, como já pude ver no geneall.net numa discussão sobre escravos nascidos em Portugal filhos de escravas e seus senhores portugueses
Há um certo prazer mesquinho que os nordicistas, lusófobos brasileiros, etc, têm em pegar nestes números e fazer com eles uma dramatização exagerada, uma tragédia shakespeareana, de modo a rebaixarem o nosso país ao ponto de já ter visto escrito mais ou menos por estas palavras que "Portugal que era a maior potência europeia, tornou-se o país mais pobre da Europa devido à mestiçagem com milhares e milhares de negros", entre outas tretas do género.
Mas o que essas difamadores esquecem-se de mencionar é que, apesar do Sul do país ter um valor significativo de mtDNA sub-sahariano, essa região comporta apenas 10% da população portuguesa, o que faz com o número de pessoas do sul que possuem ancestralidade sub-sahariana sejam cerca cento e vinte mil; um número bastante modesto.
Sorry for those who don't speak portuguese. :ashamed2:

A populacao do sul, Algarve e Alentejo em total, e ~ 7-8% de Portugal enteiro.

What is incredible is that some of the samplings for "Sub-Saharan" mt-DNA studies in Portugal were taken from people who had a history of racial admixture in their family tree. Obviously, such samples cannot be used since they are not from native origin individuals. Similar things have happened in Spain. Pathetic, really.

It's very simple, a NATIVE ORIGIN Portuguese or Spaniard fundamentally means an individual with a genetic base of Iberian and Celtic and, to a lesser extent, Germanic, Roman, Nordic and Eurasian Berber - either as single component or in some combinatorial form. Pretty clear, given all the facts. However, some people just don't get it or DON'T WANT TO GET IT. :useless:

serinus
01-02-10, 01:06
A populacao do sul, Algarve e Alentejo em total, e ~ 7-8% de Portugal enteiro.

O Alentejo tem 820000 pessoas e o Algarve tem 426400, isso dá um total de 1246400 (~ 11% da população portuguesa). Se multiplicarmos esse valor por 0.10 ( que representa os 10% de pessoas com mistura sub-sahariana) isso dá cerca de 124640 pessoas, o que é um número baixo.
Acho que não me enganei.

Cambrius (The Red)
01-02-10, 02:56
O Alentejo tem 820000 pessoas e o Algarve tem 426400, isso dá um total de 1246400 (~ 11% da população portuguesa). Se multiplicarmos esse valor por 0.10 ( que representa os 10% de pessoas com mistura sub-sahariana) isso dá cerca de 124640 pessoas, o que é um número baixo.
Acho que não me enganei.

Sim, eu acho que tenho numeros velhos. Mas, em sima de tudo, os estudos geneticos nao sao completamente validos, por causa de metodologias fracas e defeituosas. Isso e certo.

Cambrius (The Red)
01-02-10, 19:47
yes, everytime we have to repeat the same things, but some people never learn or simply don't want to learn...
of the total 6% of E1b1b of Iberia about 4.6% is M-81 and it is of paleolithic origin.
Come on, This is not dna-forums !! Here we don't talk about that crap of dna-tribes and other crap studies. This is a serious minded forum

Actually, total E for Iberia averages out to ~ 9%. Portugal registers about 12.5% and Spain 6%. However, Portugal makes up only 1/5 of Iberia, in terms of geography and population. Of the Iberian average, approximately 7.2% is E (M-81), Eurasian / Paleolithic. Technically speaking, E (M-81) should not even be included in the Near-Eastern haplogroup category. With this in mind, TRUE Near-Eastern / Neolithic haplogroups (i.e., E minus M-81, J2, J1 and T) would total ~ 7.2% for Spain and ~ 15.5% for Portugal. It's possible a similar case can be made for France.

^ lynx ^
01-02-10, 20:46
I think Wilhelm was talking about Spain but he typed "Iberia" by mistake.

Cambrius (The Red)
01-02-10, 20:59
I think Wilhelm was talking about Spain but he typed "Iberia" by mistake.

I think so too.

kinggenesis
03-02-10, 20:25
To be realistic, since Spain is so close to the continent of Africa, it is inevitable that there is some African blood in the Spanish population which is however predominantly European. The contact made since the Roman times,Muslim invasions, later exploration and colonialism brought that. Perhaps even earlier the first inhabitants of Europe, Cro-Magnons,etc..

Cambrius (The Red)
03-02-10, 21:29
Actually, the Straights of Gibraltar acted as a much stronger genetic barrier than previously thought. Recent studies clearly indicate that Sub-Saharan and North African DNA frequencies are very low in Spain; lower than countries such as Italy, Austria and France. Also, much of the E in Spain is M-81. This subclade is not Near-Eastern compared to other E (Y-DNA), rather, it is Eurasian. Check the DNA tables on this forum...

Total Near-Eastern (includes North African) Y-DNA for Spain is 12% (if you take out M-81 it is closer to 7%). By comparison, Italy is at 35%, Portugal 25.5% (~15.5% if you do not include M-81), Austria 22% and France 15%.

Sub-Saharan DNA in Spain is trivial and no higher than other European countries. However, it should be stated that some of the Sub-Saharan genetic research for a number of European countries has been criticized as methodologically suspect, due to the inclusion of non-representative samplings, a variety of erroneous assumptions, historical misinterpretation and other issues.

Wilhelm
03-02-10, 21:51
To be realistic, since Spain is so close to the continent of Africa, it is inevitable that there is some African blood in the Spanish population which is however predominantly European. The contact made since the Roman times,Muslim invasions, later exploration and colonialism brought that. Perhaps even earlier the first inhabitants of Europe, Cro-Magnons,etc..
Heck, even Scaninavia has african admixture. The mtDNA L has been detected in Norway (1.4%) and Finland (2%). Same level as Spain (1.61%).

^ lynx ^
03-02-10, 23:08
To be realistic, since Spain is so close to the continent of Africa, it is inevitable that there is some African blood in the Spanish population which is however predominantly European. The contact made since the Roman times,Muslim invasions, later exploration and colonialism brought that. Perhaps even earlier the first inhabitants of Europe, Cro-Magnons,etc..

Nothing new added to the thread...

Cambrius (The Red)
03-02-10, 23:26
Newcomers just keep repeating embarrassingly erroneous information. Why?
:useless:

luis77
06-02-10, 14:35
There is a very interesting new study by Luis Alvarez 2010 about "Mitochondrial DNA patterns in the Iberian Northern plateau: Population dynamics and substructure of the Zamora province".

The authors found 10 L mtDna sub-saharan lineages out of 214 which gives 4.70% in the province of Zamora.

Quote from the authors :
"One of the distinctions between the mtDNA composition of the Iberian Peninsula with respect to other European populations is the presence of North African and sub-Saharan lineages [for revision, see Arroyo-Pardo et al. (2007)]. In Zamora, both North African and sub- Saharan mtDNA lineages were found"


L lineages mtDNA frequencies

So here are a new summary of the L lineages mtDNA frequencies found in Spain including this new study by Alvarez. This includes ALL the data ever published so far about Spain (1680 distinct individuals from continental Spain and 531 from Spanish Islands)

1) Continental Spain

Spain, northwestern : 8/216 =3.70%, Achilli 2007
Spain, central : 1/148 =0.68%, Achilli 2007
Spain, Andalusia: 2/114 =1.75%, Achilli 2007
Spain, northeastern : 3/179 =1.68%, Achilli 2007
Spain, Basque Country: 1/156 =0.64%, Achilli 2007
Spain, all regions : 9/312 =2.90%, Alvarez 2007
Spain, Pyreneans : 0/233 =0.00%, Lopez-Parra 2009
Spain, Cordoba : 9/108 =8.30%, Casas 2006 (highest frequency found in Spain)
Spain, Zamora: 10/214 =4.70%, Luis Alvarez 2010

Total continental Spain : 43/1680 = 2.55 %

2) Islands

Spain, Balearic : 5/231 =2.20%, Picornell 2005
Spain, Canaries : 20/300 =6.60%, Brehm 2003

3) All Spain

Of course it does not make sense at all to average regions with totally different histories like Basque Country (lowest frequency in Spain) or the province of Cordoba (highest frequency in Spain at 8.30%, almost similar to South Portugal) , and because northern populations are overrepresented in the studies, but if we want to do it we get :

All Spain (including Balearic and Canaries) : 68/2211= 3.07%

==Sources==

a) Achilli 2007 (Mitochondrial DNA Variation of Modern Tuscans Supports the Near Eastern Origin of Etruscans) aggregated data from the following sources :

Salas 1998, mtDNA analysis of the Galician population: a genetic edge of European variation.
Richards 2000, Tracing European founder lineages in the Near Eastern mtDNA pool
Crespillo 2000, Mitochondrial DNA sequences for 118 individuals from northeastern Spain
Larruga 2001, Mitochondrial DNA characterisation of European isolates: the Maragatos from Spain
Plaza 2003, Joining the pillars of Hercules: mtDNA sequences show multidirectional gene flow in the western Mediterranean.
González 2003, Mitochondrial DNA affinities at the Atlantic fringe of Europe

b) Others studies not included by Achilli 2007

Brehm 2003, Mitochondrial portraits of the Madeira and Açores archipelagos witness different genetic pools of its settlers
Picornell 2005, Mitochondrial DNA HVRI Variation in Balearic Populations
Casas 2006, Human Mitochondrial DNA Diversity in an Archaeological Site in al-Andalus: Genetic Impact of Migrations from North Africa in Medieval Spain
Alvarez 2007, Characterization of human control region sequences for Spanish individuals in a forensic mtDNA data set
Lopez-Parra 2009, Preliminary results of mitochondrial DNA sequence variation in Spanish Pyrenean populations
Luis Alvarez 2010, Mitochondrial DNA Patterns in the Iberian Northern Plateau: Population Dynamics and Substructure of the Zamora Province

Pereira 2005 (African Female Heritage in Iberia) analysed 496 samples from the studies above and did not include any new Spanish samples.


HLA Data

Hla data are also a good indicator of sub-saharan ancestry as they are transmitted by all lines

In Spain, the average figure for this African haplotype is 2.4%, whereas in other non-Mediterranean European populations that value is nearly eight times lower (0.3%)

1) Studies about HLA data found similar frequencies of HLA GM*1,17 23' 5* haplotype which is considered a genetic marker of sub-Saharan Africa. (HLA data are autosomal markers and can be inherited from any ancestors instead of only directly through the paternal or maternal line).

The 2 regions with highest frequencies are also Galicia and Andalusia as with mtDNA

Sub-saharan HLA haplotype GM*1,17 23' 5* in Spain (Reported by Calderon 2005) :

Spain, Galicia (357), 4.50%, Calderon et al. (2007)
Spain, Andalusia Huelva (252), 3.80%, Calderon et al. (2006)
Spain, Pyrenean Pallars Sobira (178), 3.70%, Giraldo et al. (2001)
Spain, Pas Mountains (98), 2.50%, Esteban et al. (1998)
Spain, Vizcaya Basques (86), 2.30%, Calderon et al. (1998)
Spain, Guipuzcoa Basques (97), 2.10%, Calderon et al. (1998)
Spain, Valencia (186), 1.90%, Schanfield et al. (1981)
Spain, Pyrenean Aran valley (210), 1.50%, Giraldo et al. (1998)
Spain, Navarre Basques (118), 1.30%, Calderon et al. (2000)
Spain, Alava Basques (122), 1.20%, Calderon et al. (1998)

According to Calderon 2005 about Galicia :

"The GM*1,17 23' 5* haplotype is considered a genetic marker of sub-Saharan Africa, where it shows frequencies of about 80% (Excoffier et al. 1991). A relatively moderate frequency (3.80%) of this haplotype, similar to that found in populations from Galicia (4.5%) and the Pyrenees (3.70%; Giraldo et al. 2001), was observed in Huelva.. this haplotype's frequency ranges between 1% and 3% in most Spanish populations".


According to Calderon 2007 about Andalusia :

"Galician population shows a genetic profile for GM haplotypes that is defined by the high presence of the European Mediterranean GM*3 23 5* haplotype, and the relatively high incidence of the African marker GM*1,17 23´ 5*... The GM*1,17 23´ 5* haplotype shows a peak in Galicia (4.5%), although values of around 4% have also been found in the Aran valley in the Pyrenees... In Spain, the average figure for this African haplotype is 2.4%, whereas in other non-Mediterranean European populations that value is nearly eight times lower (0.3%). Although some researchers have associated African traces in Iberia to Islamic invasions, the presence of GM*1,17 23´ 5* haplotype in the Galician population may in fact be due to more ancient processes"

==HLA data Sources==

Calderon et al. (2006), Genetic position of Andalusians from Huelva in relation to other European and North African populations: a study based on GM and KM allotypes.(genetic markers)
Calderon et al. (2007), GM and KM immunoglobulin allotypes in the Galician population: new insights into the peopling of the Iberian Peninsula


Autosomal DNA

In 2009 a study by Moorjani 2009, "Characterizing the history of sub-Saharan African gene flow into southern Europe" estimated the proportion of African admixture in southern Europe and found an autosomal sub-saharan proportion of 2.4% in whole Spain using hundred of thousands SNPs.

Characterizing the history of sub-Saharan African gene flow into southern Europe. P. Moorjani1, N. Patterson2, J. Hirschhorn1,3, D. Reich1,2 1) Department of Genetics, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA; 2) Broad Institute, Cambridge, MA; 3) Divisions of Endocrinology and Genetics and Program in Genomics, Children's Hospital, Boston, MA.

Recent analyses of whole-genome SNP data sets have suggested a history of sub-Saharan African ancestral contribution into southern Europe but not in northern Europe, consistent with previous analyses based on the Y-chromosome and mitochondrial DNA. However, there has been no characterization of the proportion of African admixture in southern Europe, or of its date. Here we analyze data from ~450,000 autosomal SNPs in the Population Reference Sample, ~650,000 SNPs from the Human Genome Diversity Panel, and ~1.5 million SNPs from the HapMap Phase 3 Project, and studied patterns of correlation in allele frequencies across populations to confirm the evidence of African ancestry in many southern European populations but not in northern Europeans. Using methods that can infer admixture proportions in the absence of accurate ancestral populations, we estimated that the proportion of sub-Saharan African ancestry in Spain is 2.4 +/- 0.3%, in Tuscany 1.5 +/- 0.3%, and in Greece 1.9 +/- 0.7% (1 standard error). We also studied the decay of admixture linkage disequilibrium with genetic distance, which provided a preliminary estimate of the date of African gene flow into Spain of roughly 60 generations ago, or about 1,700 years ago assuming 28 years per generation. This date is consistent with the historically known movement of individuals of North African ancestry into Spain, although it is possible that this estimate also reflects a wider range of mixture times.

So again it is an average with probably wide ranging variation from 0% to 5% but it is interesting to see that all data (mtDna, HLA and Autosomal) found a similar average sub-saharan ancestry estimation of about 2.5% in Spain most likely due to indirect North African contribution (neolithic or historical) rather than direct sub-saharan through slave. trade.

luis77
06-02-10, 15:51
Autosomal DNA

In a recent study in 2009, "Characterizing the history of sub-Saharan African gene flow into southern Europe", Moorjani et al. estimated the proportion of sub-Saharan African ancestry in southern Europe using hundred of thousands SNPs and found an autosomal sub-saharan proportion of 2.4% in whole Spain.

Characterizing the history of sub-Saharan African gene flow into southern Europe. P. Moorjani1, N. Patterson2, J. Hirschhorn1,3, D. Reich1,2 1) Department of Genetics, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA; 2) Broad Institute, Cambridge, MA; 3) Divisions of Endocrinology and Genetics and Program in Genomics, Children's Hospital, Boston, MA.

Recent analyses of whole-genome SNP data sets have suggested a history of sub-Saharan African ancestral contribution into southern Europe but not in northern Europe, consistent with previous analyses based on the Y-chromosome and mitochondrial DNA.
However, there has been no characterization of the proportion of African admixture in southern Europe, or of its date. Here we analyze data from ~450,000 autosomal SNPs in the Population Reference Sample, ~650,000 SNPs from the Human Genome Diversity Panel, and ~1.5 million SNPs from the HapMap Phase 3 Project, and studied patterns of correlation in allele frequencies across populations to confirm the evidence of African ancestry in many southern European populations but not in northern Europeans.
Using methods that can infer admixture proportions in the absence of accurate ancestral populations, we estimated that the proportion of sub-Saharan African ancestry in Spain is 2.4 +/- 0.3%, in Tuscany 1.5 +/- 0.3%, and in Greece 1.9 +/- 0.7% (1 standard error). We also studied the decay of admixture linkage disequilibrium with genetic distance, which provided a preliminary estimate of the date of African gene flow into Spain of roughly 60 generations ago, or about 1,700 years ago assuming 28 years per generation. This date is consistent with the historically known movement of individuals of North African ancestry into Spain, although it is possible that this estimate also reflects a wider range of mixture times.

So it is an average with probably wide ranging variation from 0% to 5% but it is interesting to see that all data (mtDna, HLA and Autosomal) found a similar average sub-saharan ancestry estimation of about 2.5% in Spain most likely due to indirect North African contribution (neolithic or historical) rather than direct sub-saharan through slave. trade.

Wilhelm
06-02-10, 16:38
Source ??
By the way there is already a thread of african admixture in Iberia. Stop with your trolling and obsession with Spain.
And Were you not from Brazil at first ? Why did you change the flag to Portugal ? :confused2:

^ lynx ^
06-02-10, 16:41
If you posted this article here already. Why did you open a new thread for it? Are you obsessed with this issue for any special reason?


Of course it does not make sense at all to average regions with totally different histories like Basque Country (lowest frequency in Spain) or the province of Cordoba (highest frequency in Spain at 8.30%, almost similar to South Portugal)

We already discussed this (we even posted a link to the original study from Casas et.al). L3 which is the most frequent L clade found in Spain is not of Sub-saharan origin (According to Maca-Meyer et al. (2001), "L3 is more related to Eurasian haplogroups than to the most divergent African clusters L1 and L2". L3 is the haplogroup from which all modern humans outside of Africa derive.) and that 8.30% is not from the present population Province of Cordoba, but the medieval population of Priego de Cordoba which is a TOWN.

How many times are you going to repeat the same cr*p??? :rolleyes2:

Wilhelm
06-02-10, 16:42
confirm the evidence of African ancestry in many southern European populations but not in northern Europeans.
Wrong.
Plaza et al. 2003;Romano et al. 2003, e.g., observed 1.2% African admixture in Germans.

^ lynx ^
06-02-10, 16:50
So I'll repeat my post again:

Casas based his study on Priego de Cordoba citizens for modern samples, which is not the same than Cordoba, Luisirious2b. ;-) Priego de Cordoba is a town in the province of Cordoba. The rest of his study is based on Medieval samples (which date from the Almohade epoch) from some ancient burial sites located in the same town.

Here's his study in PDF: http://backintyme.com/admixture/casas01.pdf

I took a capture from the PDF:

http://img503.imageshack.us/img503/2563/tablacasas.png (http://img503.imageshack.us/i/tablacasas.png/)

MP = Medieval Population (of Priego de Cordoba)
PP = Present Population (of Priego de Cordoba)
SIP = South Iberian Peninsula.
NWA = North West Africa.

http://img716.imageshack.us/img716/1002/dibujolr.png

Greetings.

PS: Have fun in the wikipedia. :rolleyes2:

^ lynx ^
06-02-10, 16:54
Since this article was posted by the same forummer in the "African admixture in Iberia" thread almost at the same time he openned this one, Maciamo should close this one.

Please trolls: At least don't spam the forum with the same issue. Thank you.


Plaza et al. 2003;Romano et al. 2003, e.g., observed 1.2% African admixture in Germans.

And Rosenberg et al. 2002 and Wilson et al. 2001 found 1% of autosomal in Norwegians.

^ lynx ^
06-02-10, 17:50
Now that we start talking about autosomal, let's learn more about it.

Neutral autosomal markers

Neutral autosomal markers are odd fragments of DNA that do not affect a person's physical traits. Because they are autosomal (within the nuclear DNA that is subject to meiosis), such markers reflect the recombination of paternal and maternal DNA with each generation. Hence, they are less useful than mtDNA or Y-DNA in tracking migrations and they are less precise as to time. This makes it hard to tell if any particular marker dates from the 1500-1800 trade, or from the post-glacial re-colonization of Europe, or from some time in between. On the other hand, neutral autosomal markers are useful for individual genealogies since they reflect just how much of an individual's genome came from which population group.

Two studies by Rosenberg et al. 2002 and Wilson et al. 2001 failed to detect any sub-Saharan admixture in Scots (from Orkney), Russians, Basques, Frenchmen or Italians (from Lombardy, Tuscany and Sardinia), while 1% was observed in Norwegians. More recently, Bauchet et al. 2007 tested several European groups for black admixture, and while cluster membership coefficients are not provided, the chart of Bayesian cluster results shows admixture levels to be equally low in Greeks, Spaniards (from Valencia), Basques, Frenchmen, Southern Italians, East English, West Irish, Poles, Germans (from Hanover) and Finns.

A similar study by Auton et al. 2009, which also contains an admixture analysis chart but no cluster membership coefficients, shows little to no sub-Saharan African influence in a wide array of European samples, i.e. Albanians, Austrians, Belgians, Bosnians, Bulgarians, Croatians, Cypriots, Czechs, Danes, Finns, Frenchmen, Germans, Greeks, Hungarians, Irish, Italians, Kosovars, Latvians, Macedonians, Netherlanders, Norwegians, Poles, Portuguese, Romanians, Russians, Scots, Serbians, Slovakians, Slovenians, Spaniards, Swedes, Swiss (German, French and Italian), Ukrainians, United Kingdom and Yugoslavians.

Results like these using the STRUCTURE program are considered to be highly accurate quantifications of admixture.

Adaptive autosomal markers

Adaptive autosomal markers are those that have evolved and spread because they enhance survivability. Several such markers of sub-Saharan African origin are present in Europeans, most notably HbS (sickle cell), Fy(a-b-) (Duffy-null), and GM and KM immunoglobulin allotypes, all of which confer immunity to malaria and are thus selected for in environments where this disease still poses a threat.

Traits such as these have two main advantages for population studies: First, they have been well-studied for centuries, so different strains are easily identified and tracked. Second, because their adaptive advantages are known, their dates of origin and spread are also known to reasonable precision. Their big disadvantage, however, is that they cannot tell what fraction of a population came from which ancestry. That HbS is found in, say, ten percent of some European populations does not mean that these populations have ten percent sub-Saharan ancestry; it may simply be that many individuals lacking the trait in the past died without progeny due to malaria.

Though widely used in the early days of population genetics, adaptive autosomal markers are today largely avoided because of their unreliability. Recently, the genetic testing company AncestryByDNA was criticized for providing information about ancestry based in part on loci that have undergone strong selection and may reflect similar environmental exposures rather than shared ancestry.

serinus
06-02-10, 21:42
Why this obsession with Spain, luis77? Are you mexican?

^ lynx ^
06-02-10, 21:56
When he logged in for first time in the forum he had the brazilian flag... for some misterious reason he changed it. :rolleyes2:

But please, let's continue with this discussion in the other thread. This one should be closed.

Drac
07-02-10, 07:35
If you posted this article here already. Why did you open a new thread for it? Are you obsessed with this issue for any special reason?



We already discussed this (we even posted a link to the original study from Casas et.al). L3 which is the most frequent L clade found in Spain is not of Sub-saharan origin (According to Maca-Meyer et al. (2001), "L3 is more related to Eurasian haplogroups than to the most divergent African clusters L1 and L2". L3 is the haplogroup from which all modern humans outside of Africa derive.) and that 8.30% is not from the present population Province of Cordoba, but the medieval population of Priego de Cordoba which is a TOWN.

How many times are you going to repeat the same cr*p??? :rolleyes2:

Apparently the troll wants to pretend he did not see how his manipulations already got exposed.

Drac
07-02-10, 08:02
Autosomal DNA

In a recent study in 2009, "Characterizing the history of sub-Saharan African gene flow into southern Europe", Moorjani et al. estimated the proportion of sub-Saharan African ancestry in southern Europe using hundred of thousands SNPs and found an autosomal sub-saharan proportion of 2.4% in whole Spain.

That paper does not appear to be published (at least not yet), so we will have to wait and see what their alleged "methods that can infer admixture proportions in the absence of accurate ancestral populations" are. Needless to say, their suspicious claims contradict STRUCTURE studies, which do not find any peculiarly higher admixture levels, sub-Saharan or otherwise, in Southern Europeans than among Northern Europeans. In fact, some of these studies have found LOWER admixture levels in some Southern Europeans, including Spaniards:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1852743/


http://i34.tinypic.com/ekm6h1.png






Recent analyses of whole-genome SNP data sets have suggested a history of sub-Saharan African ancestral contribution into southern Europe but not in northern Europe, consistent with previous analyses based on the Y-chromosome and mitochondrial DNA.


This is obviously a lie, since it is well known that sub-Saharan mtDNA and Y-Chromosomes have been found among Northern Europeans, in some cases at higher frequencies than among some Southern Europeans, including Spaniards.


However, there has been no characterization of the proportion of African admixture in southern Europe, or of its date. Here we analyze data from ~450,000 autosomal SNPs in the Population Reference Sample, ~650,000 SNPs from the Human Genome Diversity Panel, and ~1.5 million SNPs from the HapMap Phase 3 Project, and studied patterns of correlation in allele frequencies across populations to confirm the evidence of African ancestry in many southern European populations but not in northern Europeans.

Another lie.



Using methods that can infer admixture proportions in the absence of accurate ancestral populations, we estimated that the proportion of sub-Saharan African ancestry in Spain is 2.4 +/- 0.3%, in Tuscany 1.5 +/- 0.3%, and in Greece 1.9 +/- 0.7% (1 standard error). We also studied the decay of admixture linkage disequilibrium with genetic distance, which provided a preliminary estimate of the date of African gene flow into Spain of roughly 60 generations ago, or about 1,700 years ago assuming 28 years per generation. This date is consistent with the historically known movement of individuals of North African ancestry into Spain, although it is possible that this estimate also reflects a wider range of mixture times.


It seems pretty obvious that the hardly honest people who wrote this paper are thinking of the so-called Moorish invasion of the Iberian Peninsula. Apparently their knowledge of history and basic arithmetic is about as fishy as that of their claims in genetics. Islam didn't even exist around 300 AD ("1,700 years ago", as they say.)



So it is an average with probably wide ranging variation from 0% to 5% but it is interesting to see that all data (mtDna, HLA and Autosomal) found a similar average sub-saharan ancestry estimation of about 2.5% in Spain most likely due to indirect North African contribution (neolithic or historical) rather than direct sub-saharan through slave. trade.

This lie is all yours, though. "All data" does not show what you claim.

Drac
07-02-10, 08:15
I notice that our troll has not wasted time introducing a new entry about Zamora in the blatantly manipulated WikiPedia article about "African admixture":

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African_admixture_in_Europe

Like I "predicted" earlier, that article will not get fixed and it will just keep on getting worse, because these Afrocentrists, Nordicists and assorted anti-Southern Europeans (specially Spain-hating trolls) have gained a foothold in that article.

Drac
07-02-10, 10:38
There is a very interesting new study by Luis Alvarez 2010 about "Mitochondrial DNA patterns in the Iberian Northern plateau: Population dynamics and substructure of the Zamora province".

The authors found 10 L mtDna sub-saharan lineages out of 214 which gives 4.70% in the province of Zamora.

It remains to be seen how many of these L sequences they found are truly sub-Saharan



Quote from the authors :
"One of the distinctions between the mtDNA composition of the Iberian Peninsula with respect to other European populations is the presence of North African and sub-Saharan lineages [for revision, see Arroyo-Pardo et al. (2007)]. In Zamora, both North African and sub- Saharan mtDNA lineages were found"


This is obviously a lie, or honest ignorance from the part of the authors. Such mtDNA has been found elsewhere in Europe.



L lineages mtDNA frequencies

So here are a new summary of the L lineages mtDNA frequencies found in Spain including this new study by Alvarez. This includes ALL the data ever published so far about Spain (1680 distinct individuals from continental Spain and 531 from Spanish Islands)

[1) Continental Spain

Spain, northwestern : 8/216 =3.70%, Achilli 2007
Spain, central : 1/148 =0.68%, Achilli 2007
Spain, Andalusia: 2/114 =1.75%, Achilli 2007
Spain, northeastern : 3/179 =1.68%, Achilli 2007
Spain, Basque Country: 1/156 =0.64%, Achilli 2007
Spain, all regions : 9/312 =2.90%, Alvarez 2007
Spain, Pyreneans : 0/233 =0.00%, Lopez-Parra 2009
Spain, Cordoba : 9/108 =8.30%, Casas 2006 (highest frequency found in Spain)
Spain, Zamora: 10/214 =4.70%, Luis Alvarez 2010

Total continental Spain : 43/1680 = 2.55 %

2) Islands

Spain, Balearic : 5/231 =2.20%, Picornell 2005
Spain, Canaries : 20/300 =6.60%, Brehm 2003

3) All Spain

Of course it does not make sense at all to average regions with totally different histories like Basque Country (lowest frequency in Spain) or the province of Cordoba (highest frequency in Spain at 8.30%, almost similar to South Portugal) , and because northern populations are overrepresented in the studies, but if we want to do it we get :

All Spain (including Balearic and Canaries) : 68/2211= 3.07%



This manipulation has already been dealt with, but since you decided to repeat it, here goes a clarification again:


Providing that the data for some of these other papers (Alvarez 2007, Picornell 2005, Brehm 2003) you refer to have not been manipulated as well, the actual frequencies are:

Spain, northwestern : 8/216 =3.70%, Achilli 2007
Spain, central : 1/148 =0.68%, Achilli 2007
Spain, Andalusia: 2/114 =1.75%, Achilli 2007
Spain, northeastern : 3/179 =1.68%, Achilli 2007
Spain, Basque Country: 1/156 =0.64%, Achilli 2007
Spain, all regions : 9/312 =2.90%, Alvarez 2007
Spain, Pyreneans : 0/233 =0.00%, Lopez-Parra 2009

Spain, Priego de Cordoba : 1/108 =0.9%, Casas 2006 (only L1-L2 sequences were considered sub-Saharan in this study)

Spain, all regions: 8/496 = 1.61%, Pereira 2005 (which remains to be seen if its samples are all included in Achilli et al. 2007 or the other two studies)

Spain, Zamora: 10/214 =4.67%, Luis Alvarez 2010 (providing that all the L sequences they found are truly sub-Saharan)


Continental : 43/2176 = 1.9%

2) Islands

Spain, Balearic : 5/231 =2.20%, Picornell 2005
Spain, Canaries : 20/300 =6.60%, Brehm 2003

All Spain (including Balearic and Canaries) : 68/2707 = 2.5%




Pereira 2005 (African Female Heritage in Iberia) analysed 496 samples from the studies above and did not include any new Spanish samples


You only provided some information for Pereira et al. 2005 and Achilli et al. 2007. Until you clarify why these sample sources you provided do not wholly match (black means a "match", red "not a match" between your statements about both studies):



2) Regarding Pereira et al. 2005, as specified, the 496 individuals from were not "left out" but were already included in other studies and in the data posted
Quote from Peireira 2005 :
"The Iberian database was constructed with the following data (92 individuals from Galicia (Salas et al. 1998); 118 individuals from Catalonia (Crespillo et al. 2000); 122 Basques [45 from Bertranpetit et al. (1995) and 77 from Richards et al. (1996)]; 61 individuals from Leon (Larruga et al. 2001); 38 individuals from Castile (Larruga et al. 2001); and 65 individuals from Andalusia [50 from Larruga et al. (2001) and 15 from Corte-Real et al. (1996) "



a) Achilli 2007 (Mitochondrial DNA Variation of Modern Tuscans Supports the Near Eastern Origin of Etruscans) aggregated data from the following sources :

Salas 1998, mtDNA analysis of the Galician population: a genetic edge of European variation.
Richards 2000, Tracing European founder lineages in the Near Eastern mtDNA pool
Crespillo 2000, Mitochondrial DNA sequences for 118 individuals from northeastern Spain
Larruga 2001, Mitochondrial DNA characterisation of European isolates: the Maragatos from Spain
Plaza 2003, Joining the pillars of Hercules: mtDNA sequences show multidirectional gene flow in the western Mediterranean.
González 2003, Mitochondrial DNA affinities at the Atlantic fringe of Europe

b) Others studies not included by Achilli 2007

Brehm 2003, Mitochondrial portraits of the Madeira and Açores archipelagos witness different genetic pools of its settlers
Picornell 2005, Mitochondrial DNA HVRI Variation in Balearic Populations
Casas 2006, Human Mitochondrial DNA Diversity in an Archaeological Site in al-Andalus: Genetic Impact of Migrations from North Africa in Medieval Spain
Alvarez 2007, Characterization of human control region sequences for Spanish individuals in a forensic mtDNA data set
Lopez-Parra 2009, Preliminary results of mitochondrial DNA sequence variation in Spanish Pyrenean populations
Pereira 2005 (African Female Heritage in Iberia) only analysed samples from the studies above and did not include any new samples.

I will continue to consider the results & data of Pereira et al. 2005 as separate from Achilli et al. 2007.

If by "studies above" you actually also meant the other two (Alvarez 2007, Lopez-Parra 2009) that you took into account in your "calculations", provide info about their samples.



HLA Data

HLA genes and immunoglobulin allotypes are obsolete for population genetics, so don't waste our time.


So again it is an average with probably wide ranging variation from 0% to 5% but it is interesting to see that all data (mtDna, HLA and Autosomal) found a similar average sub-saharan ancestry estimation of about 2.5% in Spain most likely due to indirect North African contribution (neolithic or historical) rather than direct sub-saharan through slave. trade.

No matter how many times you repeat the same "all data found similar sub-Saharan ancestry" lie it will not magically become true, and rest assured that we will be here to remind you of it. This is not WikiPedia, where you and a couple of your buddies can gang up and bar the opposition so you can carefully select and manipulate data at your leisure.

^ lynx ^
07-02-10, 17:10
I notice that our troll has not wasted time introducing a new entry about Zamora in the blatantly manipulated WikiPedia article about "African admixture":

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African_admixture_in_Europe

Like I "predicted" earlier, that article will not get fixed and it will just keep on getting worse, because these Afrocentrists, Nordicists and assorted anti-Southern Europeans (specially Spain-hating trolls) have gained a foothold in that article.

I just told him to have fun in the wikipedia. Let the brazilian-afrocentrist freak have his own afro-festival of mislead/manipulated data. :laughing:

Cambrius (The Red)
07-02-10, 17:58
I frankly do not understand the mind set of insecure sociopaths who manipulate genetic research findings. Some of the older studies are methodologically deficient and have left the door open for exaggerated "interpretation", and the wack-jobs have taken advantage to lie and manipulate. What these cretins do not understand is that genetic science is advancing at a very rapid pace and results are becoming more refined and definitive month by month. The truth will clearly surface in the end, so why do these genetic mountebanks bother playing childish games? Because they have doubts about their own ethnicity? The dust-bin of history is wide open...

callaeca
23-03-10, 02:31
About E-M81 that, according to authors, can have frequencies of the 4.6% or 6.3% or 9.7%, depends the diferents geographic zones of Galicia:

http://callaecia.net/callaecia009001.jpg

It is possible to be verified that E-M81 is nonexistent in the North of Galicia. With similar frequencies in the West between 3%-4%. Elevated frequencies in the south (Baixo Miño, Ourense and North of Portugal). Decreases in the Southeast where G2a predominates and increases in Asturias.

In center and East of Galicia it does not reach 3%, (G2a = 10%). (Brion et al. 2002, 2004; Carracedo entrevista Voz de Galicia 11-11-2007)

Galicia is in a great percentage R1b3 ht35 if definitively they verify the result in values DYF385 10, 11 = ht 15 versus DYF385 10, 10 = ht 35; with contribution of "the Helgason indo-european mtDNA" (U2 + U3 + U4 + I + W) = Galicia 12,3%.

And remembering that the total sum of sequences mtdna H is of 77% (Eva-Liis Loogväli et al., 2004).

Cambrius (The Red)
23-03-10, 03:43
About E-M81 that, according to authors, can have frequencies of the 4.6% or 6.3% or 9.7%, depends the diferents geographic zones of Galicia:
http://callaecia.net/callaecia009001.jpg
It is possible to be verified that E-M81 is nonexistent in the North of Galicia. With similar frequencies in the West between 3%-4%. Elevated frequencies in the south (Baixo Miño, Ourense and North of Portugal). Decreases in the Southeast where G2a predominates and increases in Asturias.
In center and East of Galicia it does not reach 3%, (G2a = 10%). (Brion et al. 2002, 2004; Carracedo entrevista Voz de Galicia 11-11-2007)
Galicia is in a great percentage R1b3 ht35 if definitively they verify the result in values DYF385 10, 11 = ht 15 versus DYF385 10, 10 = ht 35; with contribution of "the Helgason indo-european mtDNA" (U2 + U3 + U4 + I + W) = Galicia 12,3%.
And remembering that the total sum of sequences mtdna H is of 77% (Eva-Liis Loogväli et al., 2004).

This is rather interesting information. I have always felt, from everything I have researched, that the large percentage of M-81 in Iberia is pre-Neolithic.

callaeca
23-03-10, 04:01
The mean frequency for the sequences belonging to superhaplogroup L, typical for sub-Saharan populations, reaches 3.83% ([+ or -]0.59%) in Iberia, representing 40 sequences in the total sample of 1,045 individuals. The frequency is clearly higher in Portugal (32 sequences in 549 individuals; 5.83%) than in Spain (8 out of 496; 1.61%) and without parallel in the rest of Europe. Furthermore, in western Iberia, increasing frequencies are observed for Galicia and northern Portugal (3.26% and 3.21%, respectively--a value similar to the one found in the rest of Spain) through the center (5.02%) and to the south (11.38%). The overall geographic Iberian heterogeneity is highly significant (p = 0.0003 in the chi-square for the 2 X 9 contingency table), as is the heterogeneity for the four western populations (p = 0.0110). This pattern is also consistent with historical reports referring to a predominant introduction of slaves in southern Portugal (Lahon 1999).(cf. African female heritage in Iberia: a reassessment of mtDNA lineage distribution in present times.2005)

Cambrius (The Red)
23-03-10, 04:31
The mean frequency for the sequences belonging to superhaplogroup L, typical for sub-Saharan populations, reaches 3.83% ([+ or -]0.59%) in Iberia, representing 40 sequences in the total sample of 1,045 individuals. The frequency is clearly higher in Portugal (32 sequences in 549 individuals; 5.83%) than in Spain (8 out of 496; 1.61%) and without parallel in the rest of Europe. Furthermore, in western Iberia, increasing frequencies are observed for Galicia and northern Portugal (3.26% and 3.21%, respectively--a value similar to the one found in the rest of Spain) through the center (5.02%) and to the south (11.38%). The overall geographic Iberian heterogeneity is highly significant (p = 0.0003 in the chi-square for the 2 X 9 contingency table), as is the heterogeneity for the four western populations (p = 0.0110). This pattern is also consistent with historical reports referring to a predominant introduction of slaves in southern Portugal (Lahon 1999).(cf. African female heritage in Iberia: a reassessment of mtDNA lineage distribution in present times.2005)

And then again you have more recent studies such as Beleza et al. (2005 / 2006) and Auton et al. 2009 where very insignificant levels of Sub-Saharan haplogroups / admixture were recorded in both Spain and Portugal. Scientists are now posing interesting questions as regards the methodologies of earlier research, and the substantial variance in figures from study to study suggests that at least some samplings, particularly in Portugal, were not representative. In other words, some of the participants may not have been of native origin ancestry, in the strict sense of the word. Why, for example, would you collect a portion of southern Portuguese samples from the Alcacer do Sal and Terras do Sado populations, given that these areas had a very long history of being socially isolated communities due to slavery and serious diseases? Makes one wonder...

Wilhelm
23-03-10, 18:14
The mean frequency for the sequences belonging to superhaplogroup L, typical for sub-Saharan populations, reaches 3.83% ([+ or -]0.59%) in Iberia, representing 40 sequences in the total sample of 1,045 individuals. The frequency is clearly higher in Portugal (32 sequences in 549 individuals; 5.83%) than in Spain (8 out of 496; 1.61%) and without parallel in the rest of Europe. Furthermore, in western Iberia, increasing frequencies are observed for Galicia and northern Portugal (3.26% and 3.21%, respectively--a value similar to the one found in the rest of Spain) through the center (5.02%) and to the south (11.38%). The overall geographic Iberian heterogeneity is highly significant (p = 0.0003 in the chi-square for the 2 X 9 contingency table), as is the heterogeneity for the four western populations (p = 0.0110). This pattern is also consistent with historical reports referring to a predominant introduction of slaves in southern Portugal (Lahon 1999).(cf. African female heritage in Iberia: a reassessment of mtDNA lineage distribution in present times.2005)
Callaeca, a new study in 2010 in a sample of 686 has not found any L in Spain, and only 1.9% in Andalusia :
http://biotech-events.ifrance.com/CONFERENCES2006/037%20LOPEZ_PEREZ.pdf

Cambrius (The Red)
23-03-10, 18:36
Callaeca, a new study in 2010 in a sample of 686 has not found any L in Spain, and only 1.9% in Andalusia :
http://biotech-events.ifrance.com/CONFERENCES2006/037%20LOPEZ_PEREZ.pdf

The link reads that the study came out in 2006.

Later this year, the University of Chicago apparently will be leading a large autosomal DNA research project covering all major European nations, including Spain and Portugal. They will be employing stat-of-the-art techniques. Stay tuned.

Wilhelm
23-03-10, 18:50
The link reads that the study came out in 2006.

Later this year, the University of Chicago apparently will be leading a large autosomal DNA research project covering all major European nations, including Spain and Portugal. They will be employing stat-of-the-art techniques. Stay tuned.
Yes, that's correct it is from 2006, I confused it with the González-Pérez et al. (2010) admixture study:

"They estimate Sub-Saharan African admixture using two methods that yield vastly disparate results. In the Discussion section, they admit that the inflated "Alu/STR estimate might be artefactual" and favor the estimate based on the Alu loci set alone because it's consistent with previous mtDNA, Y-chromosome and 500,000-SNP structure data.

According to the more accurate latter method, Sub-Saharan African admixture is ~13% in North Africa and "imperceptible" (~0.01%) in Southern Europe :
http://img684.imageshack.us/img684/847/gonzalezperez2010admixt.png

Cambrius (The Red)
23-03-10, 19:01
Yes, that's correct it is from 2006, I confused it with the González-Pérez et al. (2010) admixture study:

"They estimate Sub-Saharan African admixture using two methods that yield vastly disparate results. In the Discussion section, they admit that the inflated "Alu/STR estimate might be artefactual" and favor the estimate based on the Alu loci set alone because it's consistent with previous mtDNA, Y-chromosome and 500,000-SNP structure data.

According to the more accurate latter method, Sub-Saharan African admixture is ~13% in North Africa and "imperceptible" (~0.01%) in Southern Europe :
http://img684.imageshack.us/img684/847/gonzalezperez2010admixt.png

I like how they list Northern Spain and the Basque Country as Mediterranean...:laughing: I guess even scientists have issues with geographic logic.

Wilhelm
23-03-10, 20:21
yes, some geography and history lessons would do good to some so-called scientists:good_job:

Wilhelm
04-05-10, 15:08
In Brittany, (France), 4.5% of U6a1 has been observed (Dubut et al. 2004) :

http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/v12/n4/pdf/5201145a.pdf

http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/v12/n4/fig_tab/5201145t2.html#figure-title
http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/v12/n4/full/5201145a.html#tbl2

Eochaidh
04-05-10, 16:27
Now that we start talking about autosomal, let's learn more about it.

Neutral autosomal markers

.........

Adaptive autosomal markers

.........

Recently, the genetic testing company AncestryByDNA was criticized for providing information about ancestry based in part on loci that have undergone strong selection and may reflect similar environmental exposures rather than shared ancestry.
Thanks for this insight. This is not my field, but I am interested in it, so I depend upon the more knowledgeable for assistance such as this.

Cambrius (The Red)
04-05-10, 16:42
In Brittany, (France), 4.5% of U6a1 has been observed (Dubut et al. 2004) :

http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/v12/n4/pdf/5201145a.pdf

http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/v12/n4/fig_tab/5201145t2.html#figure-title
http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/v12/n4/full/5201145a.html#tbl2

First and third links do not work for me.

Wilhelm
04-05-10, 17:36
First and third links do not work for me.
yes, it's because you have to be suscribed to Nature to see the studies. I've uploaded the study in PDF:
Altough, you can see in the second link, the table of haplogroups, U6a1 is found at 4.5% in Brittany

^ lynx ^
04-05-10, 18:02
Thanks for the links Wilhelm. Maciamo may change the title of the topic to 'African mtDNA and Y-DNA in Europe'.

Cambrius (The Red)
04-05-10, 19:03
yes, it's because you have to be suscribed to Nature to see the studies. I've uploaded the study in PDF:
Altough, you can see in the second link, the table of haplogroups, U6a1 is found at 4.5% in Brittany

Many thanks.

Iacetanian
22-05-10, 22:38
I'm surprised that none still has mentioned the special case of Valle de Pasiegos (Pasiegos Valley).

Valle de Pasiegos is a very isolated region in Cantabria (North-Spain) and next to the Basque Country.
How is your country of residence "Spain", your nationality "Spaniard", and your mother tongue "Spanish", but you refer to Valle del Pas as "Valle de Pasiegos"?

Even in the unusual (not impossible) event that a Spaniard wanted to call the valley by the name of its residents, he would call it "valle de los pasiegos".

^ lynx ^
23-05-10, 21:26
I'm not from Cantabria. In some genetic studies (and other souces) I've found in my personal researchs the place is named as "Valle de Pasiegos". But I've checked out again about this place and looks like you're right.

Carlos
27-09-11, 02:56
Maciamo
I was also wondering why a place like Galicia, with no recorded settlement from the Near East or North Africa, should have so much E1b1b. We could imagine a Paleolithic migration for E-M81, but how about the E-M123 from the Middle East ? Unknown Phoenician settlement ? I still do not have the answer.


It seems since the dawn of the Bronze Age that the bond of unity of the nation was the traffic Ligurian tin, lead and gold from the UK, Galicia and central Portugal. These goods such as minerals (cassiterite) or pure metal (gold) should be the subject of an active trade, carried out first by land and from village to village along the lines of what happened with Baltic amber and the Hyperborean offerings to Delphic Apollo. Later this trade was by sea, to the lower Guadalquivir where it seems that the processing and trade would reach a special significance. At some point, when a reality Tartessos city and traffic took a qualitatively higher volume, low Andalusia centralize trade Ligures minerals, acting as a redistribution center [5]. This is clear for the tin trade is a basic ingredient of the famous bronze tartésico. Tin is not obtained pure, but it brings to the bronze alloy as its ore cassiterite directly in regard to lead this is also a necessary ingredient in the "primitive cupellation" in cases of low grade ores and different argentífera the Galena, just as is usually the case for minerals argentiferous immediate environment Tartessos.





Torre de Hercules in La Coruña, I remember the tin route to Albion Ostriminia and followed by Ligurian and Tartessos.



So far we have assumed that commercial traffic Tartessos minerals through the Ligurian was hidden from the Phoenician colonists settled in Cadiz, and build a closely guarded secret in the custody of charts Tartessian the monarchy itself, which is directly responsible train its pilots in a "Naval Academy" special. While this may be partly true, we are inclined rather by the possibility was that the Phoenicians arrived Tartessos Cadiz from one moment to a mutual non-interference pact of trade or commerce being beyond the columns Hercules forbidden Phoenicians and Tartessos Mediterranean trade. [6]. The expansion of Phoenician colonies along the coast protuguesas does not suggest that the Phoenicians arrived later to replace for a while Tartessian hegemony in the domain of the trade route, but we think that without making direct trips to Britain and Armorica not interested by the approach of metals from there to the Phoenician colonies themselves the Portuguese coast and Andalusia.

Tartessos that sailors had contact with the Ligurian settlements that traded with is a proven fact. So from a business point did Ligurian-flow-Phoenician Tartessian long-distance transactions with the Mediterranean end of the apex or intermediary was necessary Tartessos