PDA

View Full Version : new ancient DNA study in LBK



secherbernard
10-11-10, 13:23
A new study from Haak: "Ancient DNA from European Early Neolithic Farmers Reveals Their Near Eastern Affinities" see http://www.plosbiology.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pbio.1000536
The interesting point is the Y-DNA test on 3 LBK samples from Germany: one is G2a3, the 2 others are F*.
The paper emphasizes the absence of R1b and R1a among this LBK population.

Maciamo
10-11-10, 15:47
Very interesting. Finally some Neolithic Y-DNA from Europe. As I had expected no R1a or R1b.

Y-DNA analysis

The presence of F* is a bit befuddling considering that it has virtually disappeared from the modern population, except in specific parts of the Caucasus*. This could mean that the Neolithic farmers of the LBK originated in the (southern) Caucasus, the place where cattle, goats and pigs were first domesticated.

The rarity of F* and G2a3 in the geographic area corresponding to the LBK Culture also means that the R1a and R1b Indo-Europeans who invaded Europe in the 3rd millenium BCE most certainly killed most of the men from the Neolithic population. In fact, the G2a3 found in northern Europe nowadays belongs mostly to a more recent subclade (G2a3b1a) that also certainly originated in the Caucasus, but only came to Europe during the Bronze Age, accompanying R1b1b2a1.

mtDNA analysis

Out of 26 mtDNA haplotypes identified, there were :

- 3 N1a
- 3 HV
- 3 H
- 1 V
- 3 J
- 6 T (incl. 3 T2)
- 4 K
- 1 U5a1a
- 2 W

No big surprise here. It is pretty much a Middle Eastern composition, except the U5a1a, V and W samples (perhaps an assimilated hunter-gatherers). Note the near absence of haplogroup U, which is the dominant haplogroup after H in northern Europe nowadays. As I had predicted, hg U is of Paleolithic European origin (U5) or of Indo-European origin (U2, U3, U4), which is to say of Paleolithic Eastern and North-Eastern European origin (Russia, Ukraine).

Neolithic lineages had a high proportion of N1a and HV compared to the modern European population, which also supports the hypothesis of a major population shift since then. The authors mention that only 11 of these 26 haplotypes are found in high frequency in the present-day population. In other words, there would have been massive extinction of lineages on the maternal side too, although probably less important than for male lineages.


Predicting Y-DNA from mtDNA

The article comes with a map of genetic distances between the LBK samples and modern populations. It confirms a strong link with Anatolia and the Caucasus.

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_Ish7688voT0/TNm67W84rqI/AAAAAAAAC3c/rSRoTUje4pg/s1600/journal.pbio.1000536.g003.png

North-east Spain, south-west France, Cornwall and south Wales, which have the highest percentage of R1b1b2 in the world (along with Ireland), display one of the highest genetic distance from Near Eastern mtDNA (either LBK or modern Near East). If this needs explanations, it means that maternal lineages associated with high R1b populations simply do not correlate with the Neolithic diffusion of agriculture from the Near East. In other words, it is highly unlikely that Near Eastern farmers brought R1b to Western Europe.

The map also shows that the regions where Y-DNA haplogroup I is the strongest in comparison to Near-Eastern haplogroups E1b1b, T, J and G2a (i.e. northern Spain, Scandinavia, Bosnia-Herzegovina) are the regions where mtDNA lineages are the farthest from the LBK/Near-Eastern samples.

http://www.eupedia.com/images/content/Neolithic_Europe-blood.jpg

(more detailed above the above map in the thread Europe before the Indo-Europeans (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/showthread.php?t=26074))

Since I determined the percentage of Paleolithic vs Neolithic admixture by subtracting R1a and R1b percentages, this new study provides a confirmation that that R1a and R1b were indeed absent in Central and Western Europe during the Neolithic, since their modern incidence can be completely ignored to determine which region has the most Near-Eastern/Neolithic lineages.

The part of northern France around Picardy and Upper Normandy seems to be a hotspot for Near Eastern mtDNA. I had previously noticed the higher than average incidence of hg G2a and J2 in the region. I have personally observed that people in this region did look considerably more Caucasian (not Semitic) than elsewhere in northern Europe. A perfect example is French Defence Minister Hervé Morin (pictured below), who hails from this part of France.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/19/Hervemorin2008_recadre.PNG/225px-Hervemorin2008_recadre.PNG

I think that Neolithic LBK farmers from the Caucasus could have looked like that.


* I have since noticed that the authors of the study did not test for all the SNP's downstream of F, so that it is possible that the F* are actually pre-I or pre-J lineages.

iapodos
10-11-10, 16:15
Only three y-dna haplotypes...Though it is interesting results, what we can conclude on such small sample?

Haganus
10-11-10, 22:21
Very interesting messages! Do the results of this research do nothing the
research of the University of Kiel? Please let me pose three questions:

1) what has happened with the descendants of the southwest French
Cro-Magnons and Aurignacs? Did they go to Scandinavia? Coon wrote
in his book "Races of Europe" that so called "Upperpalaeolithic men" in
Norway, Denmark and Ireland are descendants of them. What has happened with the ancient men of the Mesolithicum? The so called Borreby and Bruenn types are descendants of the hunters who lived during the Ice Age in south France.
2) When did the men with haplogroup I enter Western Europe? And from which part of Europe? The haplogroup I is very important in the north of
Netherlands, the British Islands, Denmark and south Sweden.
3) I understand that the haplogroups R1 a and R1 b arrived at the end of
the Neolithic Age. There is a theory that the people from Ahrensburg Culture near Hambourg came from the Ukraine and had the haplogroup R1a.
See the wikipedia haplogroup R1a. Maybe men of the haplogroup R1a
in Scandinavia and Germany are descendants of the men of the Ahrens-
burg culture?

I was a little dispointed that the Germanic and Celtic tribes did not descend from the ancient Cro-Magnons from France. Tacitus wrote
that the fair haired Germanics have lived for thousands of years in
north of Europe and he could not imagine himself that people from
other countries would go to these unpleasant areas. According to him
they are autochtonous in their country.

willy
10-11-10, 22:39
I wonder from where R1b came to kill the neolithic peoples
so I don't share this opinion about murders ...

willy
10-11-10, 22:45
Very interesting. Finally some Neolithic Y-DNA from Europe. As I had expected no R1a and R1b.

The presence of F* is unexpected considering that it has virtually disappeared from the modern population, except in the Caucasus. This could mean that the Neolithic farmers of the LBK originated in the (southern) Caucasus, the place where cattle, goats and sheep were first domesticated.

The rarity of F* and G2a3 in the geographic area corresponding to the LBK Culture also means that the R1a and R1b Indo-Europeans who invaded Europe in the 3rd millenium BCE most certainly killed most of the men from the Neolithic population.

Out of 26 mtDNA haplotypes identified, there were :

- 3 N1a
- 3 HV
- 3 H
- 1 V
- 3 J
- 6 T (incl. 3 T2)
- 4 K
- 1 U5a1a
- 2 W

No big surprise here. It is pretty much a Middle Eastern composition, except the U5a1a, V and W samples (perhaps an assimilated hunter-gatherers). Note the near absence of haplogroup U, which is the dominant haplogroup after H in northern Europe nowadays. Neolithic lineages had a high proportion of N1a and HV compared to the modern European population, which also supports the hypothesis of a major population shift since then. The authors mention that only 11 of these 26 haplotypes are found in high frequency in the present-day population. In other words, there would have been massive extinction of lineages on the maternal side too, although probably less important than for male lineages.

The article comes with a map of genetic distances between the LBK samples and modern populations. It confirms a strong link with Anatolia and the Caucasus.

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_Ish7688voT0/TNm67W84rqI/AAAAAAAAC3c/rSRoTUje4pg/s1600/journal.pbio.1000536.g003.png

It also shows that the regions where Y-DNA haplogroup I is the strongest in comparison to Near-Eastern haplogroups E1b1b, T, J and G2a (i.e. northern Spain, Scandinavia, Bosnia-Herzegovina) are the regions where mtDNA lineages are the farthest from the LBK/Near-Eastern samples.

http://www.eupedia.com/images/content/Neolithic_Europe-blood.jpg

(more detailed above the above map in the thread Europe before the Indo-Europeans (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/showthread.php?t=26074))

Since I determined the percentage of Paleolithic vs Neolithic admixture by subtracting R1a and R1b percentages, this new study provides a confirmation that that R1a and R1b were indeed absent in Central and Western Europe during the Neolithic, since their modern incidence can be completely ignored to determine which region has the most Near-Eastern/Neolithic lineages.

The part of northern France around Picardy and Upper Normandy seems to be a hotspot for Near Eastern mtDNA. I had previously noticed the higher than average incidence of hg G2a and J2 in the region. I have personally observed that people in this region did look considerably more Caucasian (not Semitic) than elsewhere in northern Europe. A perfect example is French Defence Minister Hervé Morin (pictured below), who hails from this part of France.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/19/Hervemorin2008_recadre.PNG/225px-Hervemorin2008_recadre.PNG

I think that Neolithic LBK farmers from the Caucasus could have looked like that.

Yes he looks a Caucasian !

willy
10-11-10, 23:01
Very interesting. Finally some Neolithic Y-DNA from Europe. As I had expected no R1a and R1b.



yes correct and no J2 E1 I1 I2 !

how yes no 2
10-11-10, 23:40
yes correct and no J2 E1 I1 I2 !
good point
though, based on its variance I think J2 was spreading along sea coasts... so, I think it never was present in Germany...

but I would expect I1, I2 and perhaps E1 in Germany where samples come from.... but it is only 3 samples...

willy
10-11-10, 23:49
good point
though, based on its variance I think J2 was spreading along sea coasts... so, I think it never was present in Germany...

but I would expect I1, I2 and perhaps E1 in Germany where samples come from.... but it is only 3 samples...
Yes correct only 3 samples ... I will be curious about the others

Maciamo
11-11-10, 00:12
yes correct and no J2 E1 I1 I2 !

Why would you expect to find I1 or I2 among neolithic farmers ? They were the hunter-gatherers.

As for E1b1b and J2, I think there could be some among other samples, because the mtDNA is clearly Middle Eastern. It's also possible that E1b1b and J2 came from Anatolia to the Balkans and Danubian basin later, and the first wave was more Caucasian (F + G2a). Let's not forget that there were two Neolithic expansions : herding from the southern Caucasus, and farming from the Levant. Most people assume that the two would have merged in Anatolia before moving into Europe, but it's possible that the very first Neolithic Near Easterners to foot in Europe came from the Caucasus through northern Anatolia, with little or no Levantine admixture. Nevertheless, Caucasian would still probably carry a substantial percentage of J2, along with G2a and F.

If there is any R1b at all among Neolithic farmers, it would be Levantine R1b1a or old Anatolian subclades like R1b1b* or possibly R1b1b2*, but not R1b1b2a and deeper clades. In any case it would be a minority, not the overwhelming proportion seen today in Western Europe.

Haganus
11-11-10, 00:43
But the haplogroup R1 b came from Anatolia? And the haplogroup I is
an original West-European haplogroup of the ancient hunters?

willy
11-11-10, 01:08
But the haplogroup R1 b came from Anatolia? And the haplogroup I is
an original West-European haplogroup of the ancient hunters?
I think R1b was on the continent also with I so this is my opinion ..

MPA
11-11-10, 01:32
........... first wave was more Caucasian (F + G2a). ...........


this contradict your previous statment:

" Quote:Originally Posted by Maciamo http://www.eupedia.com/forum/images/buttonscolour/viewpost.gif (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/showthread.php?p=361054#post361054)


The high density of G2a3 in mountainous areas rather suggest that they were mine workers and metallurgists, so not the elite.."


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

The haplogroup G were quite likely the original inhabitants of Europe. As Indoeuropean tribes started migrating to Europe the original inhabitants lost their territories to escape to inaccessible high altitude terrain for safety. It was very common that people living in mountain areas were isolated and more protected from outside invaders. ususally people living in mountain areas also preserve their heritage more effectively than those living in lowland areas.

----------------------------------------------------
the Origin of Y-dna haplogroup G in Wapedia:
Haplogroup G (Y-DNA)

Origins

Various estimated dates and locations have been proposed for the origin of Haplogroup G. The National Geographic Society places haplogroup G origins in the Middle East 10-20,000 years ago and presumes that people carrying the haplogroup took part in the spread of the Neolithic Two scholarly papers have also suggested an origin in the Middle East, while differing on the date. Semino et al. suggested 17,000 years ago. Cinnioglu et al. suggested the mutation took place 9,500 years ago. [The oldest skeletons confirmed by ancient DNA testing as carrying haplogroup G date only from the 7th century C.E. and were found in present-day Bavaria, Germany

it was discussed in this link:
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/showthread.php?t=26019&page=2

Shetop
11-11-10, 01:46
The haplogroup G were quite likely the original inhabitants of Europe. As Indoeuropean tribes started migrating to Europe the original inhabitants lost their territories to escape to inaccessible high altitude terrain for safety. It was very common that people living in mountain areas were isolated and more protected from outside invaders. ususally people living in mountain areas also preserve their heritage more effectively than those living in lowland areas.

This scenario is indeed realistic.

willy
11-11-10, 02:32
this contradict your previous statment:


The haplogroup G were quite likely the original inhabitants of Europe. As Indoeuropean tribes started migrating to Europe the original inhabitants lost their territories to escape to inaccessible high altitude terrain for safety. It was very common that people living in mountain areas were isolated and more protected from outside invaders. ususally people living in mountain areas also preserve their heritage more effectively than those living in lowland areas.



thats strange to find them in Netherlands in Frisians there is no mountain there ? so about their heritage these G2a seems very Germanic people I have read this on that forum I don't remember where ?

Wilhelm
11-11-10, 05:18
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_Ish7688voT0/TNm67W84rqI/AAAAAAAAC3c/rSRoTUje4pg/s1600/journal.pbio.1000536.g003.png
Iberia seems to be the most Paleolithic area of western Europe. This was already confirmed in a previous study :

http://img178.imageshack.us/img178/1232/paleolithic.png

Maciamo
11-11-10, 09:38
But the haplogroup R1 b came from Anatolia?

Yes and no. It depends when, and where in Anatolia. Nowadays R1b is more common in northern and eastern Anatolia. However R1b is not dominant there, and probably came from somewhere else first (like the Pontic-Caspian steppe or even Central Asia). It's hard to say at present when R1b entered Anatolia, and if these early Anatolian R1b were indeed the ancestors of present-day Western Europeans.

I had imagined that the R1b homeland might actually be on the other side of the Caucasus, between the northern shore of the Black Sea and the Caspian Sea. Repeated westward and southward invasions would have brought R1b to Europe and Anatolia, but also depleted the original stock, until most of the R1b were pushed out of the Pontic steppes by their R1a neighbours. Of course this would have taken several millennia to achieve, starting approximately 5000 years ago, and ending not so long ago, with the last Central Asian invaders (Bulgars, Magyars, Khazars) that swept across the Pontic steppes to Europe (=> see my thread 5000 years of migrations from the Eurasian steppes to Europe (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/showthread.php?t=25619) ).

If modern Europeans descended in great part from Anatolia, Caucasian and Levantine immigrants, the incidence of fair hair and fair eyes would not be as high as it is today. Let's not forget red hair, which is almost unique to Western European R1b countries and parts of Central Asia. If red and blond hair came from Paleolithic Europeans (hg I), then the highest incidence would be in Bosnia-Herzegovina and Sardinia. But these places are among the darkest in Europe for hair colour (http://www.eupedia.com/europe/maps_of_europe.shtml#hair_colour) (Sardinia might well be the darkest, close to 100% black hair - Sardinian R1b appears to be mostly R-U152 from continental Italy, where the high percentage of Near-Eastern blood had lowered the incidence of fair hair before R1b reached Sardinia).

Maciamo
11-11-10, 09:51
Iberia seems to be the most Paleolithic area of western Europe. This was already confirmed in a previous study :

http://img178.imageshack.us/img178/1232/paleolithic.png

Where does this come from ?

Maciamo
11-11-10, 09:53
thats strange to find them in Netherlands in Frisians there is no mountain there ? so about their heritage these G2a seems very Germanic people I have read this on that forum I don't remember where ?

In flat regions, marshes provide a similar protection from outsiders as mountains. It could be why Picardy also has more Near-Eastern lineages.

Maciamo
11-11-10, 10:06
The haplogroup G were quite likely the original inhabitants of Europe. As Indoeuropean tribes started migrating to Europe the original inhabitants lost their territories to escape to inaccessible high altitude terrain for safety. It was very common that people living in mountain areas were isolated and more protected from outside invaders. ususally people living in mountain areas also preserve their heritage more effectively than those living in lowland areas.

First of all, the original inhabitants of Europe belonged to hg I, not G. I somehow agree, in principle, that people might want to seek refuge from invasions in mountainous areas. However, the Indo-Europeans were particularly metal-thirsty. It is evident from archaeological evidence in their tombs in the Eurasian plains that they had strong cravings for gold, copper and tin. If the Indo-Europeans had anything to do with the Maykop culture in the northern Caucasus, reputed for its early developments in metallurgy (e.g. the world's first bronze swords), it is probable that they would have invaded the Balkans for its wealth or copper, and push forward to the Alps, then to Brittany, Cornwall, Wales, Cantabria, Galicia, Italy and other metal-rich regions of Europe because they needed it.

The Indo-Europeans were warriors belonging to a highly hierarchical society with an acute sense of prestige, and prestige goods were mainly made of metal (gold or bronze). Just like Spaniards conquered the New World motivated by their thirst of gold, and California was built on the gold rush, I can very well conceive that Western Europe was colonised by the Indo-Europeans from the steppes for its natural resources and the feeble resistance of the locals due to less developed military technologies (namely stone weapons against bronze blades and axes).

The mere fact that the vast majority of northern and central Europeans belong to the same very recent subclade haplogroup G (G2a3b1a, about 4500 years old) not only disagrees with a Paleolithic European origin of G, but also coincides with the Indo-European migrations and the age of R1b1b2a1. It all fits.

willy
11-11-10, 12:27
Yes and no. It depends when, and where in Anatolia. Nowadays R1b is more common in northern and eastern Anatolia. However R1b is not dominant there, and probably came from somewhere else first (like the Pontic-Caspian steppe or even Central Asia). It's hard to say at present when R1b entered Anatolia, and if these early Anatolian R1b were indeed the ancestors of present-day Western Europeans.

I had imagined that the R1b homeland might actually be on the other side of the Caucasus, between the northern shore of the Black Sea and the Caspian Sea. Repeated westward and southward invasions would have brought R1b to Europe and Anatolia, but also depleted the original stock, until most of the R1b were pushed out of the Pontic steppes by their R1a neighbours. Of course this would have taken several millennia to achieve, starting approximately 5000 years ago, and ending not so long ago, with the last Central Asian invaders (Bulgars, Magyars, Khazars) that swept across the Pontic steppes to Europe (=> see my thread 5000 years of migrations from the Eurasian steppes to Europe (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/showthread.php?t=25619) ).

If modern Europeans descended in great part from Anatolia, Caucasian and Levantine immigrants, the incidence of fair hair and fair eyes would not be as high as it is today. Let's not forget red hair, which is almost unique to Western European R1b countries and parts of Central Asia. If red and blond hair came from Paleolithic Europeans (hg I), then the highest incidence would be in Bosnia-Herzegovina and Sardinia. But these places are among the darkest in Europe for hair colour (http://www.eupedia.com/europe/maps_of_europe.shtml#hair_colour) (Sardinia might well be the darkest, close to 100% black hair - Sardinian R1b appears to be mostly R-U152 from continental Italy, where the high percentage of Near-Eastern blood had lowered the incidence of fair hair before R1b reached Sardinia).

Yes but why there is fair hair and blue eyes and milk aptitude in the mixture R1a -11c or R1b - I1c among the Germanic peoples as Scandinavians cause if I1c was not fair hair and blue eyes the recessive genes of I1 supposed to be black brown eyes and black hair would appear

Maciamo
11-11-10, 12:47
Yes but why there is fair hair and blue eyes and milk aptitude in the mixture R1a -11c or R1b - I1c among the Germanic peoples as Scandinavians cause if I1c was not fair hair and blue eyes the recessive genes of I1 supposed to be black brown eyes and black hair would appear

Simply because R1a and R1b are the dominant haplogroups among Germanic peoples (about 60% in the Benelux and North Germany, 65% in Iceland, 67% in Denmark). European Russians, Poles and Ukrainians have a lot of blond hair and also have a high percentage of R1a + R1b (73% for Poles, about 54% for Russians and Ukrainians).

Add to this natural selection in northern Europe for fair pigmentation. Blond hair and blue eyes could have entered the I1 and I2b gene pool quite early on. I1 in particular seems to be a very recent haplogroup, which re-expanded from a common ancestor only 4000 years ago (i.e. after Scandinavia and Germany were swallowed up by R1a and probably also R1b). So the Paleolithic and neolithic pre-I1 could have been darked haired and eyed (like the Saami), but a small group of I1 might have been assimilated by the conquering R1a, married blond Indo-European girls, and after a few generations have male I1 children that were blond with blue eyes. It didn't happen with I2a because there was no such bottleneck.

You should also look at the percentage of maternal lineages corresponding to R1a and R1b. U2 and U4 lineages in particular correlate strongly with R1a, and are almost as strong in Scandinavia as in North-West Russia.

In Italy, southern France or Iberia, on the other hand, most of the mtDNA lineages are Paleolithic or Neolithic, and few are Indo-European. If genes are only passed on by the paternal side, and the R1b replacement did take place progressively due to a small oligarchy of Indo-European having lots of local wives for many centuries, then the Indo-European blood would have been heavily diluted. This is how a society can end up with a high percentage of one particular Y-DNA haplogroup but not so much autosomal DNA in line with it. This tends to be especially true if the Y-DNA lineages lack diversity, as is the case in northern Italy (mostly R1b-U152) and Spain (mostly R1b-P312 or R1b-M153 for the Basques).

willy
11-11-10, 14:47
In Italy, southern France or Iberia, on the other hand, most of the mtDNA lineages are Paleolithic or Neolithic, and few are Indo-European. If genes are only passed on by the paternal side, and the R1b replacement did take place progressively due to a small oligarchy of Indo-European having lots of local wives for many centuries, then the Indo-European blood would have been heavily diluted. This is how a society can end up with a high percentage of one particular Y-DNA haplogroup but not so much autosomal DNA in line with it. This tends to be especially true if the Y-DNA lineages lack diversity, as is the case in northern Italy (mostly R1b-U152) and Spain (mostly R1b-P312 or R1b-M153 for the Basques).

Yes this is the same thing about the R1b found at high % in Central Africa notice this Y-DNA lineage lake also diversity anyway they are not white cause their African mtDNA ! Same thing about the Y-DNA R1a in India .Other cases of mixture are the French - Spanish - Italians I do agree. I am often surprise to see some dark skin peoples in Brittany with North African features for a high level of Y-DNA R1b1b2 who seems also lake diversity ? anyway I always wondering if these North African features found in Brittany , I mean : black skin brown eyes etc .. were really correlated to these paleolithic mtDNA or from a more recent mixture but I do agree with you . Anyway the Indo european blood is more representative in Germanic and Nordic countries include Poland and Baltic eras no doubt .

Wilhelm
11-11-10, 17:42
Yes this is the same thing about the R1b found at high % in Central Africa notice this Y-DNA lineage lake also diversity anyway they are not white cause their African mtDNA ! Same thing about the Y-DNA R1a in India .Other cases of mixture are the French - Spanish - Italians I do agree. I am often surprise to see some dark skin peoples in Brittany with North African features for a high level of Y-DNA R1b1b2 who seems also lake diversity ? anyway I always wondering if these North African features found in Brittany , I mean : black skin brown eyes etc .. were really correlated to these paleolithic mtDNA or from a more recent mixture but I do agree with you . Anyway the Indo european blood is more representative in Germanic and Nordic countries include Poland and Baltic eras no doubt .
what ? north african features in Brittany ? Since when is dark hair a north-african feature ? And where do you get that Baltics and Polaks are the most representatives of Indo-europeans ?? The Celts were also indo-europeans, and they settled mostly in France, Iberia, Ireland, etc. they didn't settle in Poland nor the Baltic area. Plus the Balts have lots of Ugric N1c like the Finnish.

Wilhelm
11-11-10, 17:44
Simply because R1a and R1b are the dominant haplogroups among Germanic peoples (about 60% in the Benelux and North Germany, 65% in Iceland, 67% in Denmark). European Russians, Poles and Ukrainians have a lot of blond hair and also have a high percentage of R1a + R1b (73% for Poles, about 54% for Russians and Ukrainians).

Add to this natural selection in northern Europe for fair pigmentation. Blond hair and blue eyes could have entered the I1 and I2b gene pool quite early on. I1 in particular seems to be a very recent haplogroup, which re-expanded from a common ancestor only 4000 years ago (i.e. after Scandinavia and Germany were swallowed up by R1a and probably also R1b). So the Paleolithic and neolithic pre-I1 could have been darked haired and eyed (like the Saami), but a small group of I1 might have been assimilated by the conquering R1a, married blond Indo-European girls, and after a few generations have male I1 children that were blond with blue eyes. It didn't happen with I2a because there was no such bottleneck.

You should also look at the percentage of maternal lineages corresponding to R1a and R1b. U2 and U4 lineages in particular correlate strongly with R1a, and are almost as strong in Scandinavia as in North-West Russia.

In Italy, southern France or Iberia, on the other hand, most of the mtDNA lineages are Paleolithic or Neolithic, and few are Indo-European. If genes are only passed on by the paternal side, and the R1b replacement did take place progressively due to a small oligarchy of Indo-European having lots of local wives for many centuries, then the Indo-European blood would have been heavily diluted. This is how a society can end up with a high percentage of one particular Y-DNA haplogroup but not so much autosomal DNA in line with it. This tends to be especially true if the Y-DNA lineages lack diversity, as is the case in northern Italy (mostly R1b-U152) and Spain (mostly R1b-P312 or R1b-M153 for the Basques).
But how do you explain the Finnish case, with so much blondism and 60% of N1c ? Also, if the R1b hg is indo-european, how is that the Iberians (mainly in today Catalonia, 80% R1b) are considered pre-Indoeuropean ??


Where does this come from ?
The Chikhi et al. study.

Maciamo
11-11-10, 19:11
But how do you explain the Finnish case, with so much blondism and 60% of N1c ?

Blond Finns are south-west Finns, who are mostly I1a and R1a. They are most likely the descendants of Bronze Age Swedes (before R1b reached Sweden).



Also, if the R1b hg is indo-european, how is that the Iberians (mainly in today Catalonia, 80% R1b) are considered pre-Indoeuropean ??


MtDNA lineages in Spain are mostly Paleolithic. The high frequency of Spanish and Basque R1b are most likely due to a fast replacement of male lineages as explained here (http://www.eupedia.com/europe/origins_haplogroups_europe.shtml#R1b-conquest).

willy
11-11-10, 19:14
what ? north african features in Brittany ? Since when is dark hair a north-african feature ? And where do you get that Baltics and Polaks are the most representatives of Indo-europeans ?? The Celts were also indo-europeans, and they settled mostly in France, Iberia, Ireland, etc. they didn't settle in Poland nor the Baltic area. Plus the Balts have lots of Ugric N1c like the Finnish.

Excuse me about North African features who means nothing but these Britons have really sometimes brown skins , brown eyes and dark hair (not raid hair) and they are R1b1b2 of Brittany so from where they come from :thinking: Big lips brown skin black hair ? so they are Britons for a while .. This is not a recent migration the women line come from the paleolithic as in Spain or the Basque era : the ausomal DNA has turned to brown skin and black eyes in some and many of them so it is a nice mixture sometimes for cute girls :heart:

Wilhelm
11-11-10, 19:46
Excuse me about North African features who means nothing but these Britons have really sometimes brown skins , brown eyes and dark hair (not raid hair) and they are R1b1b2 of Brittany so from where they come from :thinking:
R1b1b2 is not even found in North Africa. Saying that dark-hair is of north-african origin in Europe is ridiculously ignorant.


Big lips brown skin black hair ? so they are Britons for a while .. This is not a recent migration the women line come from the paleolithic as in Spain or the Basque era : the ausomal DNA has turned to brown skin and black eyes in some and many of them so it is a nice mixture sometimes for cute girls :heart:Big lips as in africans ? sure. Dude you are troll or what ?

Wilhelm
11-11-10, 19:50
Blond Finns are south-west Finns, who are mostly I1a and R1a. They are most likely the descendants of Bronze Age Swedes (before R1b reached Sweden).
But Lithuanians, Lativians and Estonians have also a good amount of N1c, and they don't have as much swedish blood as Finns. And they have lots of blondism too.


MtDNA lineages in Spain are mostly Paleolithic. The high frequency of Spanish and Basque R1b are most likely due to a fast replacement of male lineages as explained here (http://www.eupedia.com/europe/origins_haplogroups_europe.shtml#R1b-conquest).
So, Iberians were haplogroups I2 ? It is rarely found in Catalonia, about 4%

Maciamo
11-11-10, 21:40
But Lithuanians, Lativians and Estonians have also a good amount of N1c, and they don't have as much swedish blood as Finns. And they have lots of blondism too.

They have a very high percentage of R1a.



So, Iberians were haplogroups I2 ? It is rarely found in Catalonia, about 4%

Yes, they were. North-eastern and central Iberians are still predominantly I2 if you remove all the R1b, R1a and G2a3b1a.

Haganus
11-11-10, 23:08
You wrote that a lot of Poles and Russians have fair hair and light eyes.
When I was in Poland and Russia, I saw especially in Russia and Ukrainia
many people with black eyes. Some times I believe that real Slave have
dark eyes and dark hair, maybe mongoloid or Tartarian admixture.

Wilhelm
12-11-10, 00:36
Yes, Poland and Russia are predominantly dark-haired. As an example, the Polish national team (all ethnic polaks) :

http://img521.imageshack.us/img521/6751/poland21024x768.jpg

Wilhelm
12-11-10, 00:43
Yes, they were. North-eastern and central Iberians are still predominantly I2 if you remove all the R1b, R1a and G2a3b1a.
So, in the case of Catalonia, this R1b replacemet when that would be ? During the Urnfield Culture wave of indo-europeans ? The Celts of the western Peninsula ? Because the Celtic remains of Catalonia are scarce, at least when compared with overwhelming remains of the western part of Iberia.

Cambrius (The Red)
12-11-10, 01:13
Poland has a fair percentage of light haired people but the large majority are dark.

willy
12-11-10, 01:19
R1b1b2 is not even found in North Africa. Saying that dark-hair is of north-african origin in Europe is ridiculously ignorant.

Big lips as in africans ? sure. Dude you are troll or what ?

Not big as Africans hahaha I never said that ;-) ! Anyway this is not a joke I know personally very well all Brittany country side and "Vende" a region in south of Brittany . If you have the opportunity to travel there you will see a mixture of people some are brown and some are white and blond as I said now I know the explanation according Maciamo .

willy
12-11-10, 01:22
Poland has a fair percentage of light haired people but the large majority are dark.

But they (the Polish people ) are Y-DNA R1a at very high level no ? are the women come from the paleolithic ?

willy
12-11-10, 02:25
Yes, Poland and Russia are predominantly dark-haired. As an example, the Polish national team (all ethnic polaks) :

http://img521.imageshack.us/img521/6751/poland21024x768.jpg

They really look the French : a mixture ..

Maciamo
12-11-10, 10:37
You wrote that a lot of Poles and Russians have fair hair and light eyes.
When I was in Poland and Russia, I saw especially in Russia and Ukrainia
many people with black eyes. Some times I believe that real Slave have
dark eyes and dark hair, maybe mongoloid or Tartarian admixture.

It really depends where you go. Around Belarus and St Petersburg, people have far more blond hair and blue eyes than in southern Russia. But Southern Russian nowadays are a completely different people than the Bronze Age steppe people.

Haganus
12-11-10, 14:37
I read several times that the Indo-Germanic tribes (haplogroups
R 1a and R1 b) have exterminated all most of the Neolithic men
(haplogroups E, I and J). It is a difficult thing to believe it.
Were mass graves found? It was a primitive society, they had not
extermination weapons at disposal. For example: Caesar wrote
that he exterminated the Eburones (a Belgium/Germanic tribe),
of course he murdered a lot of them, but others escaped to the
marshes between the Waal and Rhine (Netherlands).

Most areas were thinly populated, for example Norway and Sweden.
There were inaccessible mountains and woods. A lot of survivors
of the ancient Mesolithic and Neolithic ages must have taken their
refuge in Scandinavia and Finnland. For example the haplogroups
R1a and R1 b are rare in Finnland.

Maciamo
12-11-10, 17:48
I read several times that the Indo-Germanic tribes (haplogroups
R 1a and R1 b) have exterminated all most of the Neolithic men
(haplogroups E, I and J). It is a difficult thing to believe it.
Were mass graves found? It was a primitive society, they had not
extermination weapons at disposal. For example: Caesar wrote
that he exterminated the Eburones (a Belgium/Germanic tribe),
of course he murdered a lot of them, but others escaped to the
marshes between the Waal and Rhine (Netherlands).

Good that you mention Julius Caesar. He exterminate an estimated 1 million Gauls and enslaved one more million during his campaigns. This is out of a population of 5 million Gauls at the time.

Caesar is said to have killed more than half of the individuals in the Helvetii tribe. This alone is incredible given that Gauls had a roughly equivalent military technology to the Romans (although they were less organised and disciplined).

So imagine what it must have been when the Indo-Europeans arrived with bronze weapons almost as good as the Roman ones and fighting against Neolithic farmers who had nothing better than tiny stone hatchets or wood and stone spears. The inequality was so huge that Neolithic people would have been massacred on a battlefield. It's not sure this is what happened. They could indeed have fled to mountainous and marshy areas. But that would have had a similar consequence on their numbers in the long term. Deprived of all the good agricultural land, they would have suffered starvation at first, until their population decreased to a fraction of what they used to be. During that time, the Indo-European population would boom thanks to all the newly acquired land.


Most areas were thinly populated, for example Norway and Sweden.
There were inaccessible mountains and woods. A lot of survivors
of the ancient Mesolithic and Neolithic ages must have taken their
refuge in Scandinavia and Finnland. For example the haplogroups
R1a and R1 b are rare in Finnland.

That's right. I think that it is because Sweden and Finland were so forested, cold and inhospitable that the indigenous populations survived in greater number. But southern Scandinavia was undeniably taken over by the Indo-Europeans from the Corded Ware/Battle-Axe culture.

Haganus
13-11-10, 18:21
So a lot of Neolithic men have take their refugee in Scandinavia, British
Island and the Netherlands. Indeed there are many with haplogroup I,
but very few with E and J. Many fair/red haired men (Borreby and
Bruenn Aurignac men) can be found be. Are they descendants of the
ancient hunters of west and southwest Europe from Palaelithic and
Mesolithic Ages? The men who bear the haplogroups R1a and Rb1
must have arrived there much later on, for example 2500-2000 BC?
Is this correct?

Mzungu mchagga
13-11-10, 19:31
But couldn't it also be that the Indo-Europeans, after conquering the Neolithic farmers, took all their women and produced offspring with them, while the Neolithic males, if they haven't been killed slided into a much lower class which made it very hard for them to get married? So a lot of these Neolithic genes are still in us, but not the Y-DNA for obvious reason?

willy
13-11-10, 20:03
But couldn't it also be that the Indo-Europeans, after conquering the Neolithic farmers, took all their women and produced offspring with them, while the Neolithic males, if they haven't been killed slided into a much lower class which made it very hard for them to get married? So a lot of these Neolithic genes are still in us, but not the Y-DNA for obvious reason?

So it seems their women were very attractive with fair hair and blue eyes !

LeBrok
14-11-10, 02:27
I guess they were all blond, so guys got board and went after variety. lol
No sure if blond is naturally attractive to all. Tatars didn't take blond women home, right? But they easily could.

willy
14-11-10, 03:17
I guess they were all blond, so guys got board and went after variety. lol
No sure if blond is naturally attractive to all. Tatars didn't take blond women home, right? But they easily could.

Yes correct not many blonds in the steppe as our attractive blond paleolithic/neolithic Scandinavian girls lol

Aristander
19-11-10, 00:30
Yes, Poland and Russia are predominantly dark-haired. As an example, the Polish national team (all ethnic polaks) :

http://img521.imageshack.us/img521/6751/poland21024x768.jpg

Half of them look like they could be Mexican or some other Latin American group. :innocent: Are you sure they aren't illegal immigrants who snuck into Poland. :laughing:

bud
19-11-10, 13:57
Surely Y DNA cannot explain phenotypes among human populations.

willy
19-11-10, 14:50
Half of them look like they could be Mexican or some other Latin American group. :innocent: Are you sure they aren't illegal immigrants who snuck into Poland. :laughing:

may be some ?

Dagne
16-04-11, 22:02
I am still wondering about R1a, R1b, I1 and N1c1 in influencing fair hair and blue eyes.

To my observation Finnish and Scandinavians have much large share of very blond people (with almost white hair) while in Latvians and Lithuanian the blondism is different - the typical colour is somewhat in between dark and light. Thus the very light hair might come with I1 rather than R1a. Also, I am quite puzzled about N1c1. If it comes with dark hair, brown eyes, and prominent skulls as in Siberian FinnoUgric peoples, Lithuanians should look rather different, as we have a bit more of N1c1 than R1a. Having in mind that dark is dominant gene, there should be more brown eyes at least instead of the typical pale blue. Unless, of course, there is maternal DNA heavily at play...

This is the Lithuanian national basketball team of 2010 so that you could see that real hair colour:
4752

Bodin
03-10-11, 22:49
Yes and no. It depends when, and where in Anatolia. Nowadays R1b is more common in northern and eastern Anatolia. However R1b is not dominant there, and probably came from somewhere else first (like the Pontic-Caspian steppe or even Central Asia). It's hard to say at present when R1b entered Anatolia, and if these early Anatolian R1b were indeed the ancestors of present-day Western Europeans.

I had imagined that the R1b homeland might actually be on the other side of the Caucasus, between the northern shore of the Black Sea and the Caspian Sea. Repeated westward and southward invasions would have brought R1b to Europe and Anatolia, but also depleted the original stock, until most of the R1b were pushed out of the Pontic steppes by their R1a neighbours. Of course this would have taken several millennia to achieve, starting approximately 5000 years ago, and ending not so long ago, with the last Central Asian invaders (Bulgars, Magyars, Khazars) that swept across the Pontic steppes to Europe (=> see my thread 5000 years of migrations from the Eurasian steppes to Europe (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/showthread.php?t=25619) ).

If modern Europeans descended in great part from Anatolia, Caucasian and Levantine immigrants, the incidence of fair hair and fair eyes would not be as high as it is today. Let's not forget red hair, which is almost unique to Western European R1b countries and parts of Central Asia. If red and blond hair came from Paleolithic Europeans (hg I), then the highest incidence would be in Bosnia-Herzegovina and Sardinia. But these places are among the darkest in Europe for hair colour (http://www.eupedia.com/europe/maps_of_europe.shtml#hair_colour) (Sardinia might well be the darkest, close to 100% black hair - Sardinian R1b appears to be mostly R-U152 from continental Italy, where the high percentage of Near-Eastern blood had lowered the incidence of fair hair before R1b reached Sardinia).
But isnt Basques , south France and Iberia are also very dark haired - more than Bosnia , and they are 90%+ R1b ?

Selim
04-10-11, 00:42
We can't directly correlate haplogroups and phisical appearance,because evolution is faster than we thought.
Take a Pygme with hg B to Scandinavia,wait just 2-3 thousand years,he'll turn into a blond.
Just look at Albanians,they don't look like a North African,or Finns-as mentioned above-do not look like a Samoyet or Sibiryan.
Climate is the key of this matter.

LeBrok
04-10-11, 04:59
Sorry Selim, the human kind (and the world) is not 5,000 years old. Try 100 years from Pygmy to Scandinavia. On top of it, most likely, blond color was helped by Neanderthals.

Selim
04-10-11, 18:44
Sorry Selim, the human kind (and the world) is not 5,000 years old. Try 100 years from Pygmy to Scandinavia. On top of it, most likely, blond color was helped by Neanderthals.

I don't understand why you ''try'' to be sarcastic,but non-Africans including Europans are just % 4 Neanderthal,blondism seems as a result of evolution of Sapiens;not Neanderthals or something.

For the beginers,human variations are shaped by some factors such as climate,enviroment and naturel selection.

Knovas
05-10-11, 11:25
So, Iberians were haplogroups I2 ? It is rarely found in Catalonia, about 4%
I followed this discussion and it's interesting that perhaps Maciamo was quite right, in the sense that, at least, the last Dodecad Calculator gave me almost 60% Southwestern (very likely Paleolithic and dominant). However, it's just one case for the moment, and having around 35% Northwest + Northeast it is also significant (not far from the Spanish average, wich has more Southeastern instead of the huge Southwestern).

In next weeks/months, I think some things would become more clear.

LeBrok
06-10-11, 06:50
I don't understand why you ''try'' to be sarcastic,but non-Africans including Europans are just % 4 Neanderthal,blondism seems as a result of evolution of Sapiens;not Neanderthals or something.

For the beginers,human variations are shaped by some factors such as climate,enviroment and naturel selection.

Tell me one thing Selim. Why do you think Neanderthals were protected from evolutionary forces? As hominids living in Europe and Asia, it is quite logical that they developed light skin. Often forms of blondism come with it.
When black people from Africa mated with Neanderthals, it is very logical to assume that, they picked up lighter color of skin from Neanderthals. It's much faster way to adopt to environment than waiting maybe a million years for a right mutation to happen randomly.

For beginners, to your list of human variations add "mating with other hominids".

Selim
06-10-11, 22:50
Tell me one thing Selim. Why do you think Neanderthals were protected from evolutionary forces?

İs that really what you understood from my post?I wonder how you concluded my post with the phrase I bolded.Please read carefully.


It's much faster way to adopt to environment than waiting maybe a million years for a right mutation to happen randomly

''maybe a million years'',this is a common mistake that I'm trying to tell.One more time;evolution is much more faster than we used to assume.
Simple phisical mutations do not require millions of years;but thousands of years.Pigmentation,colour of hair or eyes,features of nose,face,etc.they all can change within 3-5 thousands of years,not millions.İt didn't took ''millions of years'' to have a white skin or all the different races didn't formed within ''millions of years''.

And bed news for you;Sapiens is not a million year old.

You can't explain everthing with non-Sapiens contrubitions;both Neanderthal and Denisova inputs are very limited.
Otherwise we can not explain hundreds of different phisical features of races of Sapiens,your magic wand,Neanderthal,is not enough to solve every problems.


When black people from Africa mated with Neanderthals,

They were probably not ''black'' anymore when they come to Europa,within a couple of thousands of years their pigmentation must have changed.
Just like Chadic speakers of Africa changed and become black in a few thousands of years.You can find hundreds of similar examples in human variations.

Just look at Russians,Kırgızs and Tadjiks;they all descend from the same paternal ansestors,but within thousands of years (not million) they completely changed as a result of different enviroment,climate etc.
You know how old R1a1 is,don't you?

LeBrok
07-10-11, 09:26
İs that really what you understood from my post?I wonder how you concluded my post with the phrase I bolded.Please read carefully.

This is why:


blondism seems as a result of evolution of Sapiens;not Neanderthals or something.







One more time;evolution is much more faster than we used to assume.

How do you know?




And bed news for you;Sapiens is not a million year old.

How old do you think Sapiens is?





You can't explain everything with non-Sapiens contrubitions;both Neanderthal and Denisova inputs are very limited.

How much of Neanderthal genome you need for a white skin? Is 4% enough?



Otherwise we can not explain hundreds of different phisical features of races of Sapiens,your magic wand,Neanderthal,is not enough to solve every problems.

What every problem???





They were probably not ''black'' anymore when they come to Europa,within a couple of thousands of years their pigmentation must have changed.
Just like Chadic speakers of Africa changed and become black in a few thousands of years.You can find hundreds of similar examples in human variations.

How do you know that Chadic didn't mate with black Africans to get black skin faster?
Why would you want to wait few thousand years for mutation to happen if the mutation for black skin is already in black Africans living in next village? Just have sex, it's so easy..., and your kids have this beneficial mutation right away.





Just look at Russians,Kırgızs and Tadjiks;they all descend from the same paternal ansestors,but within thousands of years (not million) they completely changed as a result of different enviroment,climate etc.
You know how old R1a1 is,don't you?

Why are you so afraid against people mating? What are you saying, groups of different people never mixed together?
Paternal HG and all chromosome Y doesn't have much to do with how people look. How people look is scattered all over the rest of DNA, it's called autosomal DNA. Obviously Kirghiz have lot's of Mongolian autosomal DNA. It doesn't mean they mutated this way. It means that R1a1 men mated with Mongolian women.


PS. Try not to exaggerate and keep it in lighter tone next time.

Ponto
19-10-11, 13:12
Doesn't that large frequency of R1b in Catalonia or Ireland or among the Basques rings bells? It is not normal for any people to have a near unity of one haplogroup. It either means a recent invasion, strange mating practices and severe founder effects. The Yemeni men are over 70% J1! It is not natural, like every having the surname Smith. Surnames are handed down from men to their male children in a hereditary fashion.

Only the today's Iberians think they are pre I.E or Paleolithic. Something to do with Rh negative? Everyone else just thinks them to be rather an strange and inbred group of isolates.

Knovas
19-10-11, 14:37
R1b is certantly significant in Iberia autosomally speaking, but the very high Southwestern as I said in other posts, makes me think Iberians, and specially ethnic Catalans (if my results weren't wrong or exclusive), have very strong Paleolithic element.

MOESAN
07-11-11, 23:20
Yes this is the same thing about the R1b found at high % in Central Africa notice this Y-DNA lineage lake also diversity anyway they are not white cause their African mtDNA ! Same thing about the Y-DNA R1a in India .Other cases of mixture are the French - Spanish - Italians I do agree. I am often surprise to see some dark skin peoples in Brittany with North African features for a high level of Y-DNA R1b1b2 who seems also lake diversity ? anyway I always wondering if these North African features found in Brittany , I mean : black skin brown eyes etc .. were really correlated to these paleolithic mtDNA or from a more recent mixture but I do agree with you . Anyway the Indo european blood is more representative in Germanic and Nordic countries include Poland and Baltic eras no doubt .


very funny
dark skinned Bretons? a lot even?
Genuine Bretons are known to have lighter eyes and lighter skin than lighter hair
freckling go to 30-40% in sommer for its inhabitants!!! (2,8-3,5% red and very reddish hairs!)
at a lower level, Bretons present the same 'derive' as the Irish and Welsh people (the famous dark skinned Welshes is a romantic vision of Londoners)
yes, there are some dark skinned people in Brittany, but rarer than black or near black haired people, and the most of them is to be found in Eastern romance speaking bretons - some very local districts have a little more 'dark' skins - in a whole, the Western Bretons have only 24% of dark haired dark eyed people (the categories brown hair-blue eyes and brown hair grey-green eyes are more numerous! - if you put the skin colour in the play, it is only something like 8%-10% of dark haired-dark eyed-dark skinned -
and the famous mediterranean 'olive coloured' skins is much rarest than the white-yellow hue

MOESAN
07-11-11, 23:21
keep in mind there are only 30% or genuine Bretons in Brittant towns - do study the old rural breton speaking people

MOESAN
11-11-11, 00:41
Yes, Poland and Russia are predominantly dark-haired. As an example, the Polish national team (all ethnic polaks) :

http://img521.imageshack.us/img521/6751/poland21024x768.jpg


sorry, but this photo is of little worth for pigmentation: (with photos you nead a lot of photos of the same guys to be sure) - a TV match is far better for the people moves and the lights effects too.
I have it in my drawers:
A-11 men is not a nation -
B- like a lot of them, this photo is darkning the hairs colours
C- I believe there was only 2 true very dark brown men on this one (I've no time to search my archives)
D- the others are brown hairs of different hues - the Polish people is one that presents the most every kinds of brown hair (very light/light/liddle/dark brown - the total is about 52-53% brown hairs, a maximum (in a mixing 50/50 "dark" genes" with "light "genes" the maximum in about 45% of middle hairs - we find often 50% but it could the effect of some genetic homozygotic brown hair' with less than 50-50 dark-light -
onlyin ireland, Wales, Brittany I found more than 50% of middle hues -addition of old mesolithics people with true brown hair?
I expect I'm not to hard in my writing.
good evening.

InukCanuck
04-08-13, 06:41
I believe I may be able to contribute to this conversation. My Geno 2.0 Results have me as 46% Northern European, 36% Mediterranean, 17% Southwest Asian. Likewise includes 1.5% Neanderthal and 2.9% Denisovan. I am U106- and P312- which according to my research makes me R1B-L11*. Are there many of us on here? I happen to be 1 of 7 children, 6 of whom were male. I love the great ideas floating around these forums by the way. It is a real breath of electronic fresh air!