PDA

View Full Version : Haplogroup G from the Levant (early farmer), R1b & J (herders) from East Anatolia



Maciamo
20-10-11, 09:24
Here is a new hypothesis. I, like most of the population genetics community, have assumed until now that haplogroup G originated in Anatolia or in the Caucasus, because this haplogroup is the most common there. A few elements make me think that haplogroup G could have expanded from the Levant instead.

1) Agriculture expanded from the Levant to Greece, then to the Balkans and the Mediterranean. Most of the early farmers tested so far being members of hg G2a, it would make sense that they originated where agriculture started, i.e. the Levant.

2) Haplogroup G has a fairly high frequency in Egypt (9%). There is so far no explanation as to how it got there. Either hg G was already in Egypt since the late Paleolithic, or it came with the spread of agriculture from the Levant. If Anatolian G people learned to farm from their Levantine neighbours (so far assumed to be E1b1b or J2 people) then expanded to Europe, there is no reason to find any G in Egypt. If G was absorbed by E1b1b an/or J2 farmers, then these two haplogroups should be found among early farmers in Europe, but so far it hasn't been the case.

3) What's more, hg G is found (at low frequencies) as far south as East Africa, Yemen and Oman, and as far east as India and Central Asia. So I think that the most reasonable assumption is that agriculture started with G people in the Levant, then expanded to Egypt, East Africa, all the Middle East, South Asia, Central Asia, and of course Europe. However they would probably have been outnumbered by local hunter-gatherers as G is a minority haplogroup almost everywhere.


If farming started with G in the Levant, then domestication started in East Anatolia/North Mesopotamia, and the prime candidates for spreading the new herder/stockbreeder lifestyle must have been haplogroups J and R1b1b, which both seem to have originated in that region in the Mesolithic. I see a stronger association of R1b1b with cattle and sheep, and J with goats.

As I have stated many times before, I believe that R1b1b crossed the Caucasus and settled in the Pontic Steppes, becoming one branch of the Proto-Indo-European speakers, a language that they probably spread to their R1a1a neighbours to the north and east.

As for haplogroup J, both J1 and J2 and found all over the Middle East, North Africa, Europe, and Central Asia. I really don't think that the medieval Arabic expansion is responsible for spreading all of it in North Africa and Central Asia. J2 being found among Hindus in India, was almost certainly in South Asia since the Neolithic. Dry, mountainous regions like the Maghreb, the Caucasus, most of Iran and Central Asia are also better adapted to herding than to agriculture, which may be why there is more haplogroup J than G in these regions. The same is true within Greece; Thessaly is better suited to agriculture and has a lot of hg G, while Crete is better suited to (goat) herding and has a lot of hg J2. In Iberia, hg G is more common in the wetter Northwest, while J1 and J2 are both more common in dryer Andalusia and Castilla-La Mancha.

Dorianfinder
20-10-11, 12:19
This is a step in the right direction, I can envisage haplogroup G as an early farming community with certain locations more suggestive of stock-breeding due to altitude and poor soil types. I like where you are heading with J and R1b, they fit better when we put the clock back a bit as opposed to the Pax Romana hypothesis. J and G are Caucasian elements in Egypt's genetic history, the Phoenicians et al. are evidence throughout the early Mediterranean civilization of a significant levantine R1b history. Crete remains an interesting case as E is relatively rare and in its place there is significantly more G. The Aegean islands may prove to have similar levels of G as on Crete, time will tell.

Knovas
20-10-11, 12:39
In Spain, Murcia appears to have a lot of G2a according to your map, wich is quite in the South but also very in the East. I supose you used the figures from Iberian roots, giving 14% G2a. Not sure if it's much reliable such figure, it seems there's lack of Murcian data to say something, but if it really is, it comes as the exception in Iberia. I'd like to see, if it's true, wich is the most common G2a subclade between Murcians, or if there's significant presence of an especific one. Nothing clear for the moment.

Dorianfinder
20-10-11, 13:51
In Spain, Murcia appears to have a lot of G2a according to your map, wich is quite in the South but also very in the East. I supose you used the figures from Iberian roots, giving 14% G2a. Not sure if it's much reliable such figure, it seems there's lack of Murcian data to say something, but if it really is, it comes as the exception in Iberia. I'd like to see, if it's true, wich is the most common G2a subclade between Murcians, or if there's significant presence of an especific one. Nothing clear for the moment.

The Southeastern/W-Asian/Caucasus components in Iberia may be reminiscent of this G2a marker found in some isolated locations on the peninsula. The evident relationship between S-Eastern and Caucasian within the Dodecad euro7 results for Iberia may reflect the prehistoric migratory route taken from the Caucasus to Iberia through the Levant, showing up as Southeastern instead of Caucasian/W-Asian.

Goga
20-10-11, 14:19
According to me there's very much hg. G in Egypt because of the Mamluks. Mamluks were slave children (sold to the Ottomans by their parents) from the Caucasus who became the greatest warriors in Egypt who defeated Saladin. The Mamluks were Caucasians (Georgians etc.) who were coverted into Islam and they fought also against the Crusaders.

Later the Mamluks were defeated by the Mongols, but that's another story...

Knovas
20-10-11, 14:23
Possibly. It's obvious West Asian autosomes in the Peninsula have been quite replaced, and the Southeastern could reflect different migratory ways. The problem is that the Southeastern needs to be focussed more in Europe, since includes a lot of Southwest Asian in the last run. Probably you Greeks have one of the highest amounts of real Southeastern, rather than Armenians as the spreadsheet shows.

And well, I'd really like to know more information about Murcians. Paternal grandfather was from there, but I reflect very low Southeastern, and no West Asian or Southwest Asian. Perhaps G2a is really not that huge there, or the answer is in the subclades. Who knows.

Hakan67
20-10-11, 14:31
According to me there's very much hg. G in Egypt because of the Mamluks. Mamluks were slave children (sold to the Ottomans by their parents) from the Caucasus who became the greatest warriors in Egypt who defeated Saladin. The Mamluks were Caucasians (Georgians etc.) who were coverted into Islam and they fought also against the Crusaders.

Later the Mamluks were defeated by the Mongols, but that's another story...

Thats Wrong.
Mamluks were slaves from Central Asia or Caucasus with turkish origin and later more Adyghe origin. They defeat the progeny of Saladin and became the Rulers of Agypt. They defeated the Mongols. Later they were defeated by the Ottomans.

Goga
20-10-11, 14:36
Thats Wrong.
Mamluks were slaves from Central Asia or Caucasus with turkish origin and later more Adyghe origin. They defeat the progeny of Saladin and became the Rulers of Agypt. They defeated the Mongols. Later they were defeated by the Ottomans.
Yes, you're RIGHT. Mamluks defeated the Mongols! but the Ottomans (formal leaders of the Mamluks) defeated the Mamluks later. I made a mistake.

But Mamluks were Caucasians of Circassian & GEORGIAN origin and not Turkish! They were sold by their parents and became high ranked officers in the Ottoman armies. And later rulers of Egypt.

Yetos
20-10-11, 14:47
hmmmm

So diversity shows G around Levant?

I was thinking around minor Asia

Hakan67
20-10-11, 14:49
Yes, you're RIGHT. Mamluks defeated the Mongols! but the Ottomans (formal leaders of the Mamluks) defeated the Mamluks later. I made a mistake.

But Mamluks were Caucasians of Circassian & GEORGIAN origin and not Turkish! They were sold by their parents and became high ranked officers in the Ottoman armies.

?? Where did you read that?
At first the Mamluks where from turkish origin, but later more and more Mamluks were from Adyghe origin (not georgian!).
Because of the rules of Islam, moslems cant be sold as slaves.
Later, almost all Turks were Muslims, so the Mamluks went on to train Adyghe slaves.

One of the most famous Mamluk ruler, Baibar, is from turkish origin.

Now stop talking offtopic

Goga
20-10-11, 14:54
?? Where did you read that?
At first the Mamluks where from turkish origin, but later more and more Mamluks were from Adyghe origin (not georgian!).
Because of the rules of Islam, moslems cant be sold as slaves.
Later, almost all Turks were Muslims, so the Mamluks went on to train Adyghe slaves.

One of the most famous Mamluk ruler, Baibar, is from turkish origin.

Now stop talking offtopic? Mamluks were 100% not Turkish!

Adyghe were Circassian; and Circassians & Georgians are the same, all Caucasians in origin!

These children were sold by their parents and later these children (Mamluks) got the Islamic schooling from the Ottomans.

This is not offtopic, because according to me the Mamluks carried hg. G into Egypt!

Hakan67
20-10-11, 15:09
? Mamluks were 100% not Turkish!

Adyghe were Circassian; and Circassians & Georgians are the same, all Caucasians in origin!

These children were sold by their parents and later these children (Mamluks) got the Islamic schooling from the Ottomans.

This is not offtopic, because according to me the Mamluks carried hg. G into Egypt!

I believe you mistake Mamluks for Janissary.
The Mamluks where from turkish and adyghe origin.
In the beginning they had nothing to do with the Ottomans.
Later they became enemies and the Ottoman vanquished the Mamluks.

Dorianfinder
20-10-11, 15:20
hmmmm

So diversity shows G around Levant?

I was thinking around minor Asia

Hi Yetos and welcome to the forum. It is not the Levant, it is to the north in the Caucasus and through a process of diffusion in eastern Anatolia. If an individual however shows more Southwestern or Southwest Asian on a Dodecad admixture run and they are known to be haplogroup G2a, it suggests their ancestors possibly traveled along the Levantine/Mediterranean route as opposed to the Central/Alpine corridor, into Europe. But for all intents and purposes haplogroup G is Caucasian (Caucasus).

razor
20-10-11, 17:35
Here is a new hypothesis. ...
If farming started with G in the Levant, then domestication started in East Anatolia/North Mesopotamia, and the prime candidates for spreading the new herder/stockbreeder lifestyle must have been haplogroups J and R1b1b, which both seem to have originated in that region in the Mesolithic. I see a stronger association of R1b1b with cattle and sheep, and J with goats.

As I have stated many times before, I believe that R1b1b crossed the Caucasus and settled in the Pontic Steppes, becoming one branch of the Proto-Indo-European speakers, a language that they probably spread to their R1a1a neighbours to the north and east.



We are still waiting for proof of the latter mantra (:=)). What contemporary archaeology has established is that (except for the earlier Bug-Dnister culture) the hunter-forager communities of the Pontic-Caspian steppes had no domesticated cattle or sheep prior to ca. 5.200/5.000 BCE [Cf. generally Anthony,2007, pp. 134-159], and that the breakthrough for innovation came from the farming communities of southeast Europe (esp. from the Crish and subsequently from the Cucuteni-Trypilia peoples). We have no evidence for "transCaucasian" arrivals in the steppes at that time. And even if we were to assume that many Crish and Trypolian people were R1b1b, there is even less evidence of their settlement in the steppes. If anything, this latest hypothesis would support the notion that R1b were assimilated fellow-travellers of the IE's (after Yamna) rather than originators of IE speech and culture.

sparkey
20-10-11, 18:01
I'll do a quick diversity analysis for dummies using the Haplogroup G FTDNA Project, to see what subclades are in the Levant. The fuller the G tree is there, the more likely this theory is correct:

G1: Yes, Lebanon and Palestine
G2*: No, but few have tested as such
G2a*: No, but few have tested as such
G2a1: No
G2a2: No, but appears quite young
G2a3: Yes, and quite diverse in Lebanon, also present in Palestine
G2a4: No, but does include members that surround the Levant, in North Africa and the Caucasus
G2a5: No, but appears quite young
G2a6: Yes, in Lebanon
G2a7: No, but appears quite young
G2a8: No, but appears quite young
G2a9: No, but appears quite young
G2c: Yes, in Lebanon and Syria
G2d: No, but appears quite young

So, my preliminary thought is that the diversity of G in the Levant holds well enough to suppose that levels of G in the Levant could have been higher then than they are today (which is already pretty high), especially since the common J2 subclade in the Levant that makes J2 particularly frequent in the region, J2a4h, seems to be a more recent expansion (although its presence outside of the Levant may indicate otherwise... I'm not that familiar with it). I'm less clear on J1 and E in the region.

So far so good, but it needs more analysis.

Yetos
21-10-11, 00:38
Hi Yetos and welcome to the forum. It is not the Levant, it is to the north in the Caucasus and through a process of diffusion in eastern Anatolia. If an individual however shows more Southwestern or Southwest Asian on a Dodecad admixture run and they are known to be haplogroup G2a, it suggests their ancestors possibly traveled along the Levantine/Mediterranean route as opposed to the Central/Alpine corridor, into Europe. But for all intents and purposes haplogroup G is Caucasian (Caucasus).

ty that is also my believe



I'll do a quick diversity analysis for dummies using the Haplogroup G FTDNA Project, to see what subclades are in the Levant. The fuller the G tree is there, the more likely this theory is correct:

G1: Yes, Lebanon and Palestine
G2*: No, but few have tested as such
G2a*: No, but few have tested as such
G2a1: No
G2a2: No, but appears quite young
G2a3: Yes, and quite diverse in Lebanon, also present in Palestine
G2a4: No, but does include members that surround the Levant, in North Africa and the Caucasus
G2a5: No, but appears quite young
G2a6: Yes, in Lebanon
G2a7: No, but appears quite young
G2a8: No, but appears quite young
G2a9: No, but appears quite young
G2c: Yes, in Lebanon and Syria
G2d: No, but appears quite young

So, my preliminary thought is that the diversity of G in the Levant holds well enough to suppose that levels of G in the Levant could have been higher then than they are today (which is already pretty high), especially since the common J2 subclade in the Levant that makes J2 particularly frequent in the region, J2a4h, seems to be a more recent expansion (although its presence outside of the Levant may indicate otherwise... I'm not that familiar with it). I'm less clear on J1 and E in the region.

So far so good, but it needs more analysis.

the G2a3 hmmmm
and also next to J2a

maybe do we find similar ratio in any other areas? G2a3/J2a = c (almost stable ratio)
that is interesting cause maybe, if it can be proved maybe explains a lot in pre Hettit minor asia

Hammonia III
21-10-11, 03:31
I'll do a quick diversity analysis for dummies using the Haplogroup G FTDNA Project, to see what subclades are in the Levant. The fuller the G tree is there, the more likely this theory is correct:

G1: Yes, Lebanon and Palestine
G2*: No, but few have tested as such
G2a*: No, but few have tested as such
G2a1: No
G2a2: No, but appears quite young
G2a3: Yes, and quite diverse in Lebanon, also present in Palestine
G2a4: No, but does include members that surround the Levant, in North Africa and the Caucasus
G2a5: No, but appears quite young
G2a6: Yes, in Lebanon
G2a7: No, but appears quite young
G2a8: No, but appears quite young
G2a9: No, but appears quite young
G2c: Yes, in Lebanon and Syria
G2d: No, but appears quite young

So, my preliminary thought is that the diversity of G in the Levant holds well enough to suppose that levels of G in the Levant could have been higher then than they are today (which is already pretty high), especially since the common J2 subclade in the Levant that makes J2 particularly frequent in the region, J2a4h, seems to be a more recent expansion (although its presence outside of the Levant may indicate otherwise... I'm not that familiar with it). I'm less clear on J1 and E in the region.

So far so good, but it needs more analysis.

As a confirmed "dummie" I guess my question would be: Can the diversity of the Levant be shown to be greater than that of the Caucasus?

sparkey
21-10-11, 17:14
As a confirmed "dummie" I guess my question would be: Can the diversity of the Levant be shown to be greater than that of the Caucasus?

No, the Caucasus seems equally diverse as the Levant, going by the same method. The only major subclade the Caucasus seems to be missing is G2a6, which probably proves a point about the G2a6 in Europe, but little about other subclades.

So I'd say that Maciamo's theory has proven to be plausible, but hasn't been proven.

Kardu
22-10-11, 01:52
I believe you mistake Mamluks for Janissary.
The Mamluks where from turkish and adyghe origin.
In the beginning they had nothing to do with the Ottomans.
Later they became enemies and the Ottoman vanquished the Mamluks.
After the fall of Constantinople and onwards many Georgians shared the fate with Circassians to be sold and become mameluks. Mameluks of Georgian origin were especially present in Iraq but also in Egypt. The most famus among them were Mohammed-Beg Katamish who was assassinated in 1736, Ali Bey Al-Kabir and Ibrahim Beg (my far ancestral relative btw) etc.
So we should compare Egyptian G to the Caucasian samples to determine if it's relatively recent or several milennia old.

Asturrulumbo
22-10-11, 05:19
The Levant is a quite likely candidate in my opinion, but I must say that agriculture did not come directly to Greece from the Levant, but rather arrived through migrations from southwest Anatolia (or so I have read).

Yetos
22-10-11, 09:32
The Levant is a quite likely candidate in my opinion, but I must say that agriculture did not come directly to Greece from the Levant, but rather arrived through migrations from southwest Anatolia (or so I have read).

that is an interesting, but following ancient Greek systems of agriculture, and plantation, it is rather another way,
Greeks follow that system from west minor asia and maybe came to them y messopotamia

the connection of Greece with Levant shares 2 branches,

1 is the Arcado-Cypriot Branch and the trade of Copper, remember Cyprus in Greek means copper,
2 is a colony system that creates trading posts in another area, remember that Greeks and phoenician had such colonies all over mediterrenean, changing goods, Levantines were famous for obsidian and perfums while greek for olive oil and wine, and in mid Cyprus with copper

according Greek historians Cadmus was from that areas, but we don't know if we classify Cypriot or Phoenician, or phillistine etc, most possible is a Crete-Akkadian who colonize central greece and went to ilyria,

rms2
23-10-11, 13:25
The fact that the Chadic-speaking Fulani of Mali possess both a high frequency of R1b-V88 and the European T-13910 lactase persistence allele (somewhat uniquely among Africans) can be seen as supporting Maciamo's idea that R1b has a pastoralist origin, or was pastoralist when it spread to Europe.

The Fulani are nomadic pastoralists.

http://www.malariajournal.com/content/10/1/9

Ivan
24-10-11, 03:48
I also considered north ME more suitable for primary distribution of G. There is also Iran and northern border of Afganistan. Why it ended up on mountains like Caucasus Olympus Alps... I thought a way of life played the role. They had to have their food on mountains. Not sure how farming fits, but this also has some intermediary logic involved.

Here is some data from Iran but for now there is still fewer than 50 people.
New Results (24/03/11)
by IranianDNAadmin on Thu Mar 24, 2011 04:39 AM PDT

Cluster-specific Y-DNA haplogroup breakdown

Assyrian

F3-P96
G1*-M342
G2a-P15
J1*-M267
T1-M320

Azeri

G*-M201
R2a-M124
R2a-M124

Arab

G-M201
G1*-M342
J1-M267
R1a1-M17

Judeo-Persian

R2a-M124

Luri

E1b1b1-M35
J2a4b-M67

Parsi/Tati (Transcaucasian Persian)

E1b1b1c1-M34

Persian

G-M201
G1a-P20
J2-M172 (x2)
J2a4a-M47
J2a4b-M67
J2a4d-M319
Q*-M242

Qajar

J1*-M267


Seyyed

J1c3d-L147

Tajik

R2*-M479

Talysh

G2a3b1-P303

Nation-wide Y-DNA haplogroup distribution (excluding Unassigned - Potential Iranian Ancestry group)

E1b1b1-M35 - 2.9% (1/35)
E1b1b1c1-M34 - 2.9% (1/35)
F3-P96 - 2.9% (1/35)
G*-M201 - 14.3% (5/35)
G1*-M342 - 5.7% (2/35)
G1a-P20 - 2.9% (1/35)
G2a-P15 - 2.9% (1/35)
G2a3b1-P303 - 2.9% (1/35)
H-M69 - 2.9% (1/35)
J1-M267 - 11.4% (4/35)
J1c3d-L147 - 2.9% (1/35)
J2-M172 - 8.6% (3/35)
J2a4a-M47 - 2.9% (1/35)
J2a4b-M67 - 5.7% (2/35)
J2a4d-M319 - 2.9% (1/35)
J2a4h2-M158 - 2.9% (1/35)
Q*-M242 - 2.9% (1/35)
R1a1-M17 - 2.9% (1/35)
R1b1b2a-L23 - 2.9% (1/35)
R2*-M479 - 2.9% (1/35)
R2a-M124 - 8.6% (3/35)
T1-M320 - 2.9% (1/35)

Note #1 - Results based on STR markers; FTDNA's predictions are entirely dependent on the number of DYS values tested
Note #2 - Further to the above, the corresponding SNP's follow ISOGG's 2010 index and are supplementary
Note #3 - Less than 50 users currently in the project, ruling out both qualitative and quantitative analysis

I am not sure what to think about this G* high value. It is from a small sample but still indicates a possible place of origin.

Ivan
27-10-11, 02:51
Dry, mountainous regions like the Maghreb, the Caucasus, most of Iran and Central Asia are also better adapted to herding than to agriculture, which may be why there is more haplogroup J than G in these regions. The same is true within Greece; Thessaly is better suited to agriculture and has a lot of hg G, while Crete is better suited to (goat) herding and has a lot of hg J2. In Iberia, hg G is more common in the wetter Northeast, while J1 and J2 are both more common in dryer Andalusia and Castilla-La Mancha. I am not sure HG G is relevant Hg in Maghreb history. There are just few G samples there which I believe migrated in relatively recent times. Circassians were probably mostly responsible for G in Egypt and neighboring countries. 30% of Moroccan samples are Jewish.

I have never heard G is outnumbered by any group in Caucasus overall, at least not enough for a claim above mentioned.
Also, I would consider a fact that today's Adygea is just a mere fraction of an earlier population and this didn't happen naturally. A reliable data say the amount of people that were deported to Turkey was 1.500.000 in 1864, while Russian data shows only 500.000. Out of these 1.500.000 just over 480.000 survived. Their descendants are today living as 4.000.000 strong diaspora. It is not a surprise that the Russian authorities keep the history of Circassians under a thick cover of censorship.

Comparatively, today's Serbia has some 7 million people and in 1864 had less than 500.000. I am not mentioning how many lives war with Russia claimed. After the final solution of the Circassian question not more than 10 per cent of the original Circassian population remained in Russia in isolated islets in today’s Kabardino-Balkaria, Karachay-Cherkessia, Adygea regions and in a few villages in Sochi area.

Circassia-Adiygea had 12 tribes with Shapsug tribe as the biggest.

There is less G in Armenia, Azerbaijan, and generally among tribes and states in south and east of Caucasus. In J maps I presume a route along the sea as a one of the routes of J and I suspect some of it arrived in Caucasus along the Caspian sea, therefore maintaining today's disposition.

Iran data is relatively unknown for now, but still I would not use 101 comparison of HG G to any other group as a relevant deductive material here. It is one of rarest groups (outside mountains), and for that reason I would not compare it to other groups in numbers, but rather consider its relative occurrence, and preferably, would have taken this into account as a possible sign of different times of arrival in this area, where in terms of time and genes i suspect, a dispersion and lowering in numbers of an older gene. There is much of G* then G1*...g2a3b and there is quite a time gap between them.

Central Asia is by my opinion a place where G was never a relevant or standalone HG, but rather a relatively recent companion type HG, and as such not creditable of any significant human achievement there, let alone as progenitor of farming who found no adequate soil.

As for Thessaly, they appear to me as if they came down from mountains (or somewhere else) in recent times, and thus maintained this rounded form we can see on the G map, rather then being so distinctively circular in appearance for ages.

In Spain they are mostly in Cantabria 10.5%, and again in a mountainous region.


This does not necessarily mean I oppose the division of groups as stated, but still, I am not sure I would use all of quoted as an explanation, especially when comparing G in numbers. In general, I might oppose one gene one vocation, but I believe this was vocational spreading and carriers in general.

Ivan
27-10-11, 23:25
##########

Alan
28-10-11, 00:58
interesting theory.

Ivan
30-10-11, 02:39
Actually I am probably wrong about Egypt.

I thought I knew the map of G, but I somehow overlooked an impact on Egypt territory.
It is actually quite an impact. This could not be done by Circassian Mamluks. It looks too old and widespread. Graphic rather naturally flows towards Egypt. This is probably the actuall route these people undertook on their way in a long periods of time and left their mark settling along the way.
I knew about Mamluks and inertly thought of it as their infuence. I never consulted the map nor the statistical data about Mamluk descendants.

Actually, it appears they probably were not able to make such an impact, and it seems warrior cultures never actually do unless they commit a genocide. Moreover this people were highly ranked officers and their numbers could have not left such a mark.


During the 13th century the Mamluks seized power in Cairo, and as a result the Mamluk kingdom became the most influential in the Muslim world. The majority of the leaders of the Mamluk kingdom were of Adyghe origin.Even after the Egypt was conquered by the Ottoman Turks, the Adyghes continued to rule in Egypt until the 18th century. With the rise of Muhammad Ali Pasha, almost all the senior Mamluks were killed and the remaining Mamluks fled to Sudan.

Also statistical data shows just about a 1000 of their descendants. I believe there are probably more of them, but nevertheless it still is not even near the impact on the map.


Today, several thousand Adyghes reside in Egypt and they are the descendants of these Mamluks. Until the rise of Gamal Abdel Nasser in Egypt the Adyghes were an elite group in Egypt.

Ivan
30-10-11, 02:46
Also, this seems to correspond to most of other data, concerning other genes that are not of African origin. Quotes from:
The Levant versus the Horn of Africa: Evidence for Bidirectional Corridors of Human Migrations,published by The American Society Of Human Genetics

This actually shows a strong correlation between G 9% and J 31% in Egypt in spreading neolithic agriculture, probably also seen in Greece as Yetos suggested.


The presence of the G and J lineages in Egypt (40%; fig. 1) probably represents a southern branch of the Neolithic agricultural diffusion, which may have returned some E3b-M35 chromosomes as well. The J-12f2 BATWING expansion estimates in Egypt and Oman (10.2 and 7.7 ky, respectively) fit well with this hypothesis. The BATWING expansion times of both the Turkish G and J lineages are substantially older than those of the Egyptian (20.3 and 13.9 ky in Turkey [Cinnioğlu et al. 2004] vs. 6.2 and 10.2 ky in Egypt, for G-M201 and J-12f2, respectively). This finding is compatible with an expected earlier introduction of Neolithic lineages into Turkey and an entry into Africa by way of the Levantine corridor. In addition, the low level of presumptive 12f2 chromosomes in East Africa (Ethiopia and Sudan [Underhill et al. 2000] and Tanzania and Kenya [present study]), except for a relatively low frequency in the more recently admixed Ethiopian Jews (5%) (Cruciani et al. 2002), argues against an introduction of this mutation into Africa via the Horn of Africa passage during the Neolithic migration.

Following quote proves Levantine corridor importance


Egypt is the only African population that is known to harbor all three M173 subtypes (R1b-M269, R1*-M173, and R1a1-M17). This unique status is most likely due to Egypt’s strategic location and its long history of interaction with Eurasia. Oman, like Egypt, also exhibits all three M173 haplogroups. The relatively high frequency of R1a1-M17 (9%) may result from the post-LGM expansion associated with this mutation. The expansion estimates of this haplogroup (11.4–3.4 ky; see table 3) support this hypothesis. The above data strongly suggest that the Levantine corridor was, by far, more important than the Horn of Africa passage in the original African dispersal of undifferentiated M173 chromosomes as well as the more recent introduction into Africa of its derivatives, since the M173 mutation is nearly absent in East, Central, and South African collections, except for a 1% frequency in both the Ethiopian (Underhill et al. 2000) and the Hutu assemblages.

Goga
30-10-11, 06:32
Of course Mamluks were not responsible for all G in Egypt, maybe between 3-4 %. There's in general 9% of G in Egypt. So if we reduce 4% from 9% we will got only 5% of very old G in Egypt. And that's not so much to conclude that G in Europe is from Egypt!

Ivan
30-10-11, 17:59
Of course Mamluks were not responsible for all G in Egypt, maybe between 3-4 %. There's in general 9% of G in Egypt. So if we reduce 4% from 9% we will got only 5% of very old G in Egypt. And that's not so much to conclude that G in Europe is from Egypt!

According to this theory:
Levantine corridor was just another way of spreading Levantine and other non African genes, into Africa. G, J as well as R1a, R1b, came through this corridor from Levant, and no one suggested these haplogroups populated Europe from Egypt. The basic idea is that this route introduced most of non native genes in Egypt.

G in Europe certainly did not came from Egypt, but from Levant via Anatolia and from Caucasus through the northern route. Levantine corridor is just a bidirectional route connecting Levant and N. Africa through Egypt, where some of G,J,R ended up going down south from Levant.You can consider it some sort of a dead end or an appendix if you like, and that's what it probably mostly was for these genes.

razyn
01-11-11, 00:21
Speaking of Haplogroup J, in this case J1* -- a couple of weeks ago the newly discovered SNP Z1834 became available for testing at FTDNA. "SNP Z1834 (http://ymap.ftdna.com/cgi-bin/gb2/gbrowse_details/hs_chrY?ref=ChrY;name=Z1834) is available for testing and is downstream M267 and upstream L136. Everyone who's J-M267*, in particular DYS388≤14, is highly recommended to test for this." That testing is already beginning to yield results that seem likely to subdivide the tree, for this side of J. Today fourteen new SNPs in the same area as Z1834, presumably defining some of its subclades, were made available (on the Advanced orders, SNP tests menu).

RayBanks
02-11-11, 05:15
Maciamo, you wrote:

"Most of the early farmers tested so far being members of hg G2a, it would make sense that they originated where agriculture started, i.e. the Levant."

I presume by this you mean the early farmers of Europe. And you are probably referring to the skeletons found in Derenburg, Germany, in Treilles, France, as well as the comment in an interview by the man who is charge of the Iceman's skeleton (Italian-Austrian border) that he belongs to haplogroup G2a4. Add to this is the information on the Avellaner Cave, Spain, skeletons published today. All are a little over 5000 yrs old except for the Spanish site which was dated to about 7000 yrs ago.

The G coverage is actually not numerous here because the Iceman was a single individual, and the French and Spanish G men belonged to the same family. So you are really dealing with 4 occurrences. This does raise some eyebrows, but they represent tiny samples for a large region. And importantly all the skeletons found were not solely G. The Spanish site also had haplo E. The German site also had either haplo F or H - undetermined. And the German site had an entirely different branch of G than the Iceman had. In believe an earlier study of Neolithic farming skeletions found haplogroup N. The authors of the Spanish article published today refer to "the probable high level of heterogeneity of the Neolithic dissemination in Europe," and indicate that their study was inadequate to evaluate the arrival of the men in the Neolithic transition. (Lacan et al., Ancient DNA Suggests the Leading Role Played by Men in the Neolithic Dissemination, PNAS Early Edition)

In addition, agriculture was already widespread over all southwest Asia, not just the Levant by at least several millennia before the non-Spanish men mentioned above which greater increases the possibilities for their origins. Because the G subgroups involved here may have been in existence for multiple millennia before before the movement to Europe, leaving many opportunities for intermixing with other haplogroups.


You also speculate on the origins of haplo G in Egypt. This is one country where G origins have been a black page due to the scarcity of detailed haplotype samples. There are only two Egyptian samples in the Haplogroup G Project. I found one in the YHRD database, and El-Sibai, 2009, Annals of H Genetics) had 8 G haplotypes. These samples seem to have bits and pieces of known G subgroups. There is only one DYS390=21, typically a sign of G2a3a so common in Greece and Turkey. There is no DYS392=10 found in all G2a1a men and ultra common in the mid-Caucasus Mtns. There are no men with DYS392=12, found in all G1 persons, most common in Iran & its western borders. There were no men with a double value for DYS19, found in half of G2a4 men (such as the Iceman) There were no men with the very low DYS385a values seen in European G2a3b1a1a men. There is one man with the DYS388=13 value seen in the large G2a3b1a2 men of Europe. The rest are miscellaneous patterns that could represent paleolithic arrivals, but one cannot ignore the isolated G2a3a & G2a3b1a2 samples which suggest a subsequent arrival. So one can argue anything one wants with regard to the Egyptian samples.

With regard to your comments that haplo G is more common in the northeast of Spain, this seems in conflict with your haplogroup G map which shows a relatively low percentage there. In the Adams Iberian study, they found an average amount of G in that area. In the samples in the YHRD database for Barcelona, by my rough estimate, these also have an average amount of G, but the samples from the Pyrenees have a below average amount.

Ray Banks, Administrator, Haplogroup G Project

RayBanks
02-11-11, 05:23
Goga,

Please refer to another of my postings today which referred in detail to the absence of certain G Caucasus marker values in the available Egyptian G samples. For example, there is a high percentage of G2a1a (all with DYS392=10) in the Ossetias and Georgia, but none in the Egyptian samples. The G2a3b1a1 marker values common in the western Caucasus are also absent in the available Egyptian samples. Half of the Turkish and Greek G samples have DYS390=21 which is typical of G2a3a, but only one such sample so far from Egypt.

Ray Banks, Administrator, Haplogroup G Project

RayBanks
02-11-11, 05:58
No, the Caucasus seems equally diverse as the Levant, going by the same method. The only major subclade the Caucasus seems to be missing is G2a6, which probably proves a point about the G2a6 in Europe, but little about other subclades.

So I'd say that Maciamo's theory has proven to be plausible, but hasn't been proven.

The question of diversity is a valid one. Most of the areas immediately abutting the Caucasus are not very diverse, with one type of G dominating the area. Armenia so far seems the most diverse containing a high percentage of the G subgroups.

If one is looking for the ultimate area of origin, then instead Iran would attract attention because it is about the only country where there is a good mixture of both G1 and G2. But G1 is uncommon among European G persons. If one is looking at diversity to explain origins, Iran does not seem to have been a major source of European G because of the lack of G1 in Europe.

The Iceman (Italian-Austrian border) over 5000 yrs old was recently revealed as belonging to the rare for anywhere G2a4 subgroup. We have one G2a4 man among the Bakthiari of Iran.

It would seem that one can argue quite a few scenarios about the signifance of diversity depending of which G groups are included in the mix.

Ray Banks, Administrator, Haplogroup G Project.

RayBanks
02-11-11, 07:13
Ivan,

In reply to your comments about haplo G and mountainous areas

There seems a fascination unique to this site linking haplogroup G to high mountain areas.

I think this may have originated with the early finding that the western half of the Caucasus has high percentages of haplogroup G, and apparently this finding would theoretically show some relationship between G persons and living in high mountains. The Balanovsky study earlier this year suggested that the types of G found along the Caucasus are relatively recent as to common ancestor. And the Yunusbaev study published in September using autosomal, Y and mitochondrial DNA concluded the Caucasus samples are “consistent with predominantly Near/Middle Eastern origin of the Caucasians.” Georgia (excluding S. Ossetia) to the south of the high mountains and mostly lowland, in contrast, also has one of the highest percentages of G in the world.

So I could argue as one option here that these Caucasian G persons sought refuge in the Caucasus, and their presence was not because they were inherently high altitude pastoralists. Other arguments can be made. My point is that the Caucasians do not necessarily explain G persons in Europe.

As another example, G is found in significant numbers among almost all the tested ethnic groups in Iran. It is 15% among the nomadic Bakhtiari who cross the high mountains traditionally, but it is found in about the same percentage among the Mazandarani farmers and fishermen on the lowland south end of the Caspian sea.

The Eupedia map for haplogroup G suggests that haplogroup G has some particular concentration throughout the Alpine region of central Europe. These maps are difficult to produce, and the data are ever changing and I am very appreciative of the work in creating them. Most of the map does reflect the data I have collected. Much of the data is posted to Haplogroup G (Y-DNA) Country by Country topic at Wikipedia and there are additional studies not yet posted but publicly listed through the Haplogroup G Project. However, there are some usual percentages of G not shown, such as on the islands of Ibiza and Cyprus. My data do not seem to support the dark shading given to Corsica. The aggregates of the Sardinian studies do not support such a high percentage in the center of the island, reaching a maximum 15% only in the northern end.. While data I gathered from YHRD suggest an unusual percentage of G in the western area of Austria (Tyrol) but only an average amount in Graz, Austria, which is still quite mountainous. In Switzerland I found only about 4% G in the general Swiss samples in YHRD, and only the western part of the country had an above average amount of G among three locales sampled in that country. The closest anyone has come to sampling the central south side of the Alps would be the Brescia, Italy samples in YHRD which seem to have a lower than average G percentage. A research study that sampled Val Badia in the South Tyrol to the east found only 3% G. In addition no particular concentration of G is noted in the Carpathians, and the Eupedia map shows a below average G percentage in the Pyrenees consistent with my data. In one of the Sardinian studies, the authors found the only area in which G was found in unexpected high percentage was in the flat north rather than the central highlands. Italy probably should look like a checkerboard. Each new community seems to have varying G percentages.

In summary, the only high mountain area in which G seems to be unusually common in Europe -- based on my data -- is in western Austria. And if the G persons in Europe have innate connection to the people who live in the other high mountain area (the Caucasus) why are the rather characteristic G subgroups found in the Caucasus in large numbers so uncommon among G persons in Europe, even in western Austria?

Ray Banks, Administrator, Haplogroup G Project

Yetos
02-11-11, 07:28
Ivan,

In reply to your comments about haplo G and mountainous areas

There seems a fascination unique to this site linking haplogroup G to high mountain areas.

I think this may have originated with the early finding that the western half of the Caucasus has high percentages of haplogroup G, and apparently this finding would theoretically show some relationship between G persons and living in high mountains. The Balanovsky study earlier this year suggested that the types of G found along the Caucasus are relatively recent as to common ancestor. And the Yunusbaev study published in September using autosomal, Y and mitochondrial DNA concluded the Caucasus samples are “consistent with predominantly Near/Middle Eastern origin of the Caucasians.” Georgia (excluding S. Ossetia) to the south of the high mountains and mostly lowland, in contrast, also has one of the highest percentages of G in the world.

So I could argue as one option here that these Caucasian G persons sought refuge in the Caucasus, and their presence was not because they were inherently high altitude pastoralists. Other arguments can be made. My point is that the Caucasians do not necessarily explain G persons in Europe.

As another example, G is found in significant numbers among almost all the tested ethnic groups in Iran. It is 15% among the nomadic Bakhtiari who cross the high mountains traditionally, but it is found in about the same percentage among the Mazandarani farmers and fishermen on the lowland south end of the Caspian sea.

The Eupedia map for haplogroup G suggests that haplogroup G has some particular concentration throughout the Alpine region of central Europe. These maps are difficult to produce, and the data are ever changing and I am very appreciative of the work in creating them. Most of the map does reflect the data I have collected. Much of the data is posted to Haplogroup G (Y-DNA) Country by Country topic at Wikipedia and there are additional studies not yet posted but publicly listed through the Haplogroup G Project. However, there are some usual percentages of G not shown, such as on the islands of Ibiza and Cyprus. My data do not seem to support the dark shading given to Corsica. The aggregates of the Sardinian studies do not support such a high percentage in the center of the island, reaching a maximum 15% only in the northern end.. While data I gathered from YHRD suggest an unusual percentage of G in the western area of Austria (Tyrol) but only an average amount in Graz, Austria, which is still quite mountainous. In Switzerland I found only about 4% G in the general Swiss samples in YHRD, and only the western part of the country had an above average amount of G among three locales sampled in that country. The closest anyone has come to sampling the central south side of the Alps would be the Brescia, Italy samples in YHRD which seem to have a lower than average G percentage. A research study that sampled Val Badia in the South Tyrol to the east found only 3% G. In addition no particular concentration of G is noted in the Carpathians, and the Eupedia map shows a below average G percentage in the Pyrenees consistent with my data. In one of the Sardinian studies, the authors found the only area in which G was found in unexpected high percentage was in the flat north rather than the central highlands. Italy probably should look like a checkerboard. Each new community seems to have varying G percentages.

In summary, the only high mountain area in which G seems to be unusually common in Europe -- based on my data -- is in western Austria. And if the G persons in Europe have innate connection to the people who live in the other high mountain area (the Caucasus) why are the rather characteristic G subgroups found in the Caucasus in large numbers so uncommon among G persons in Europe, even in western Austria?

Ray Banks, Administrator, Haplogroup G Project


so considering the tomb found G in Etruscans, can we say the Etruscans moved North to mountainous areas of W austria?

I mean the high concentration around Alps is New <3000 years old?
or older >5000

Sile
02-11-11, 08:02
so considering the tomb found G in Etruscans, can we say the Etruscans moved North to mountainous areas of W austria?

I mean the high concentration around Alps is New <3000 years old?
or older >5000

Well, all of north italy was gallic-ligurian and it is well known that the etruscans pushed into the modern lombardy area to neighbour the raeti and veneti ( at cologna veneta south of verona ) , the etruscan did get thrown out of lombardy and romagna later on by the celts.

Are you saying that the alpine people , the raeti where not G2 and the etrucans brought this to the alps?

RayBanks
02-11-11, 08:02
so considering the tomb found G in Etruscans, can we say the Etruscans moved North to mountainous areas of W austria?

I mean the high concentration around Alps is New <3000 years old?
or older >5000

Yetos,

There have been multiple studies of Etruscan genetics in indirect ways. My appraisal of these is that they did not come to really strong conclusion about the Etruscan genetic make-up. Including in the mix also studies of Etruscan animal genetics, most authors suggest that the Etruscans had a vague Near East origin but conclude little more than that. Those who favor a local Italian origin for the Etruscans are not happy with these conclusions, but their views did not make it into the more recent publications.

When one is speaking of western Austria and eastern Switzerland, one is rather speaking of the Raetians who some think also have Etruscan origins. One scholar thinks the Raetic language is Middle Mesopotamian and its presence in Europe is due to a specific expulsion from northern Babylonia abt 3000 yrs ago. But other Raetic scholars do not seem to have come forward to embrace this.

We, of course, are interested in whether haplogroup G was prominent among the Raetians. Raetians eventually became avid participants in the Roman military. One problem we have with this is that G is not so common in eastern Switzerland where the Raetians had known settlements, but is most common in western Switzerland where the Alans had settlements. This geographical juxtaposition might not be a barrier to linking G persons to being part of Raetians in the context of the rather small country and the extensive open area at the heart of Switzerland. But this is all very speculative. I do not think the Raetians alone could be responsible for spreading the more recent types of G subgroups in much of Europe. If G persons from more recent subgroups were part of the Etruscans also, that would help explain much more of the recent dispersal because the Etruscans were absorbed into the Roman citizenry and mobile army. But possible Raetian and Etruscan intermingling cannot explain all the G in Europe which seems to have arrived in different periods.

Ray Banks
Administrator, Haplogroup G Project

Sile
02-11-11, 08:22
so considering the tomb found G in Etruscans, can we say the Etruscans moved North to mountainous areas of W austria?

I mean the high concentration around Alps is New <3000 years old?
or older >5000

Yetos,

There have been multiple studies of Etruscan genetics in indirect ways. My appraisal of these is that they did not come to really strong conclusion about the Etruscan genetic make-up. Including in the mix also studies of Etruscan animal genetics, most authors suggest that the Etruscans had a vague Near East origin but conclude little more than that. Those who favor a local Italian origin for the Etruscans are not happy with these conclusions, but their views did not make it into the more recent publications.

When one is speaking of western Austria and eastern Switzerland, one is rather speaking of the Raetians who some think also have Etruscan origins. One scholar thinks the Raetic language is Middle Mesopotamian and its presence in Europe is due to a specific expulsion from northern Babylonia abt 3000 yrs ago. But other Raetic scholars do not seem to have come forward to embrace this.

We, of course, are interested in whether haplogroup G was prominent among the Raetians. Raetians eventually became avid participants in the Roman military. One problem we have with this is that G is not so common in eastern Switzerland where the Raetians had known settlements, but is most common in western Switzerland where the Alans had settlements. This geographical juxtaposition might not be a barrier to linking G persons to being part of Raetians in the context of the rather small country and the extensive open area at the heart of Switzerland. But this is all very speculative. I do not think the Raetians alone could be responsible for spreading the more recent types of G subgroups in much of Europe. If G persons from more recent subgroups were part of the Etruscans also, that would help explain much more of the recent dispersal because the Etruscans were absorbed into the Roman citizenry and mobile army. But possible Raetian and Etruscan intermingling cannot explain all the G in Europe which seems to have arrived in different periods.

Ray Banks
Administrator, Haplogroup G Project


IIRC the earliest etruscans in Italy was around 900BC.

Also , G2 in raeti lands might have been initially eastern alps to fit with otzi and was later pushed westward to collide with the ligurian tribes. Western alps as far as the rhone river was part of ancient liguria

Taranis
02-11-11, 08:47
Welcome to the forum, Ray Banks.

Regarding the Raetians, the problem is that the "Raetians" as described by the Romans and the "Raetians" who were actually speaking a language were probably not quite the same. The Raetians certainly were not a homogenous group, and a fraction of the tribes that are mentioned in ancient sources (Pliny, Ptolemy) are actually Celtic tribes, such as the Briganti (near Lake Constance, who are also sometimes considered part of the Vindelici) and the Leponti. This also correlates with where the "Raetian" inscriptions have been found, namely all in approximately the area of modern-day South Tyrol (http://adolfozavaroni.tripod.com/retiche.htm). The language in these inscriptions was indeed related with Etruscan. In addition there are the inscriptions of Val Camonica which show a distinct language that is usually considered Indo-European, however. In other words, most of the Raeti were probably not "Raetic" in the linguistic sense.

As for the Etruscans, from the linguistic perspective I think one can make a strong case that they were non-autochtonous, pointing, as genetics do, into the direction of the Near East, showing areal contact with the Anatolian languages, even though Etruscan itself is was obviouly a non-Indo-European language.

Maciamo
02-11-11, 09:56
The German site also had either haplo F or H - undetermined.

The F could also be IJ, which wasn't tested.


And the German site had an entirely different branch of G than the Iceman had.

This is to be expected considering the large diversity of G subclades found in the Levant.


In believe an earlier study of Neolithic farming skeletions found haplogroup N.

I am not aware of anything of the sort, except for mtDNA N. You may want to check my summary of all the ancient Y-DNA and mtDNA studies (http://www.eupedia.com/europe/ancient_european_dna.shtml) to date (I still have to add the sources for the Bronze and Iron ages).


The authors of the Spanish article published today refer to "the probable high level of heterogeneity of the Neolithic dissemination in Europe," and indicate that their study was inadequate to evaluate the arrival of the men in the Neolithic transition. (Lacan et al., Ancient DNA Suggests the Leading Role Played by Men in the Neolithic Dissemination, PNAS Early Edition)

Their opinion on the subject is not more informed than ours. In fact they may be more amateurish since they stated that the mtDNA lineages found were typically pre-Neolithic, when only 2 out 7 samples were (U5 and H3).


In addition, agriculture was already widespread over all southwest Asia, not just the Levant by at least several millennia before the non-Spanish men mentioned above which greater increases the possibilities for their origins. Because the G subgroups involved here may have been in existence for multiple millennia before before the movement to Europe, leaving many opportunities for intermixing with other haplogroups.

This is all the more surprising to find such homogeneity of G2a in Late Neolithic sites as well.



You also speculate on the origins of haplo G in Egypt. This is one country where G origins have been a black page due to the scarcity of detailed haplotype samples. There are only two Egyptian samples in the Haplogroup G Project. I found one in the YHRD database, and El-Sibai, 2009, Annals of H Genetics) had 8 G haplotypes. These samples seem to have bits and pieces of known G subgroups. There is only one DYS390=21, typically a sign of G2a3a so common in Greece and Turkey. There is no DYS392=10 found in all G2a1a men and ultra common in the mid-Caucasus Mtns. There are no men with DYS392=12, found in all G1 persons, most common in Iran & its western borders. There were no men with a double value for DYS19, found in half of G2a4 men (such as the Iceman) There were no men with the very low DYS385a values seen in European G2a3b1a1a men. There is one man with the DYS388=13 value seen in the large G2a3b1a2 men of Europe. The rest are miscellaneous patterns that could represent paleolithic arrivals, but one cannot ignore the isolated G2a3a & G2a3b1a2 samples which suggest a subsequent arrival. So one can argue anything one wants with regard to the Egyptian samples.

That's very interesting. Judging from this, these G2a3a and G2a3b1a2 could very well be of Greco-Roman or Anatolian (Hittite ?) origin, since Egypt was conquered and occupied by all of these.


With regard to your comments that haplo G is more common in the northeast of Spain, this seems in conflict with your haplogroup G map which shows a relatively low percentage there. In the Adams Iberian study, they found an average amount of G in that area. In the samples in the YHRD database for Barcelona, by my rough estimate, these also have an average amount of G, but the samples from the Pyrenees have a below average amount.

Sorry, typo error. I meant Northwest (Cantabria, Asturias, Northwest Castille, North Portugal).

Goga
02-11-11, 15:06
Goga,

Please refer to another of my postings today which referred in detail to the absence of certain G Caucasus marker values in the available Egyptian G samples. For example, there is a high percentage of G2a1a (all with DYS392=10) in the Ossetias and Georgia, but none in the Egyptian samples. The G2a3b1a1 marker values common in the western Caucasus are also absent in the available Egyptian samples. Half of the Turkish and Greek G samples have DYS390=21 which is typical of G2a3a, but only one such sample so far from Egypt.

Ray Banks, Administrator, Haplogroup G Project
Ok, you made your point. Hg. G is an ancient and very old haplogroup, so it seems that G could arrive in Egypt from West Asia in the prehistoric times!

Thank you for the correction!

Ivan
02-11-11, 18:33
Ivan,

In reply to your comments about haplo G and mountainous areas

There seems a fascination unique to this site linking haplogroup G to high mountain areas.


I see the same fascination in your theory linking G in Europe almost exclusively with Jewish communities.

I never said they were exclusively anything.
All I said is that there is a strange correlation between mountainous regions and today's substantial G numbers.

You are right, they probably went there to find shelter from invaders in the first place, and that is probably why there is lack of G in today's genetics, as they were probably not involved so much in spreading genes (they were absent in a way). Scattered cases of G in Europe, I believe were from merchants who were Jewish (probably Khazarian), and christian Armenian Jugaites who were known merchants all over the world. There was 30% of Jugaites among all merchants in some 200 years ago in Venice and there is a street with their name there. Armenian Hamsheni (lots of G1a),who live in mountains like Trabzon are probably closely connected to Assyrian Christians from Nakhchivan or perhaps the same one genetically. Also Jugaites are from this area.


It is 15% among the nomadic Bakhtiari who cross the high mountains traditionally, but it is found in about the same percentage among the Mazandarani farmers and fishermen on the lowland south end of the Caspian sea.
What you forgot to say is of no less importance. Mazandarani province is the highest region with 2nd highest peak in allready mountainous Iran. It is mostly consisted of high mountains, and a Caspian sea plane. The province would not include so much mountains if in history nobody lived there. If they are fisherman now, there is nothing strange there, and it is quite normal to use all the resources as possible. It does not change a fact it is the highest part of Iran. I believe much of them came down gradually to become fisherman etc. Also here they could just follow the traditions of the rest 85%. In Serbia and in my family, most of people were shepherds, but in last 300 years most of them settled in plains, or in my case on border of Austro-Hungarian empire.

But the best known postal stamp of Mazandarani is also suggestive. A typical Mazandarani man is holding an unusual fishing rod.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/7e/Stamp-Mazandaran.JPG

As you can see the highest mountains are where Bahktiari and Mazandarani live.
Name Elevation Latitude/Longitude
1 Kūh-e Kalū Farangī, Lorestān 5,642 m 33.576 / 48.822
2 Kūh-e Damāvand, Māzandarān 5,628 m 35.955 / 52.109
3 Kūh-e Zelzeleh Khīz, Razavi Khorasan 5,150 m 35.683 / 58.484
4 Kūh-e Alborz, Qazvīn 5,025 m 36.315 / 50.753
5 ‘Alam Kūh, Māzandarān 4,822 m 36.376 / 50.962
6 Kūh-e Khersān, Māzandarān 4,659 m 36.365 / 50.952
7 Kūh-e Sabalān, Ardabīl 4,597 m 38.256 / 47.817
8 Kūh-e Haft Khvān, Māzandarān 4,537 m 36.371 / 50.939
9 Kūh-e Hezār, Kermān 4,465 m 29.512 / 57.272
10 Kūh-e Langarī, Māzandarān 4,457 m 36.379 / 50.928


We have one G2a4 man among the Bakthiari of Iran.
I thought I read most of G among Bakhtiari were G1, but not sure about that, nevertheless there is also G2a4 as you said. This is quite indicative of the way of life Otzi showed, as they are shepherds crossing mountains twice a year.
I really liked watching the movie "Grass" done by authors of King Kong in 1925. It is quite interesting as they seek better pastures in valleys.

So following your logic one can call them valley men since they graze their stock there on better pasture lands, just like Circassians did in the steppe, and where Georgians collectively became men from valleys in your interpretation.


In Switzerland I found only about 4% G in the general Swiss samples in YHRD
You noticed lack of Jews among G in Mountain Jews society in the last Yunusbayev, Caucasus revisited study, compared to that of Nasidze. From 15% to 0%. Also G1 in Armenians rose from 1% up to 10%, and half of Georgia became G.


I must say I value your work and from time to time read statistical data and peoples thoughts about G, but, I am not that versed in modern statistical and scientific tools like you are. I am just an old fashioned guy. I consider your modern tools and knowledge far more advanced.

I read carefully everything on the web considering G, and just gave my humble opinion regarding an overall G character, using my perhaps outdated and somewhat amateurish tools, but with an artistic twist, maybe just like a police sketch artist would do. I expect from you and other more intelligent and qualified people to use this sketch or disregard it.

That is why I also, chose to capture the essence of G character much more in those communities that thrived in some place, and where are still in high numbers in comparison to other groups.

Thank you for the time and effort you put in this altruistic endeavor called G haplogroup project.

sparkey
02-11-11, 19:54
The question of diversity is a valid one. Most of the areas immediately abutting the Caucasus are not very diverse, with one type of G dominating the area. Armenia so far seems the most diverse containing a high percentage of the G subgroups.

I had assumed that the apparent lower diversity was due to lower samples sizes outside of Armenia (basically, the diversity is there, we just haven't taken samples to prove it yet). Am I wrong? If I am wrong, this is an intriguing pattern.


If one is looking for the ultimate area of origin, then instead Iran would attract attention because it is about the only country where there is a good mixture of both G1 and G2. But G1 is uncommon among European G persons. If one is looking at diversity to explain origins, Iran does not seem to have been a major source of European G because of the lack of G1 in Europe.

I agree. In the context of Europe, which is the focus here, we should look for a location where diversity is good enough to match the Neolithic expansion on Europe (doesn't need to be at the root of the G tree). I'm less concerned with frequency distributions of subclades, since those can expand and contract in both the region of origin and the region of expansion, so we shouldn't really expect them to match in both places.

Anthro-inclined
11-02-13, 04:02
so what is the general consensus on when G entered Europe. This this site references Ancient remains that date to 7000 ybp in Spain, so it would make sense to correlate G to early neolithic farmers, rather than bronze age invaders or late neolithic herders ,who entered West Europe at least 1000 years after these remains were dated to.

sparkey
11-02-13, 05:44
so what is the general consensus on when G entered Europe. This this site references Ancient remains that date to 7000 ybp in Spain, so it would make sense to correlate G to early neolithic farmers, rather than bronze age invaders or late neolithic herders ,who entered West Europe at least 1000 years after these remains were dated to.

The general consensus is that G entered Europe during the early Neolithic, yes. It's pretty incontestable, given the ancient samples. Of course, that doesn't mean that all European G descends from those who entered Europe during the Neolithic. Certain subclades could be later arrivals.

zanipolo
11-02-13, 07:30
The general consensus is that G entered Europe during the early Neolithic, yes. It's pretty incontestable, given the ancient samples. Of course, that doesn't mean that all European G descends from those who entered Europe during the Neolithic. Certain subclades could be later arrivals.

Agreed , but I also believe they brought every other haplogroup which was around "neighborly" with them. I, T, L, Q and anyone else

sparkey
11-02-13, 18:26
Agreed , but I also believe they brought every other haplogroup which was around "neighborly" with them. I, T, L, Q and anyone else

Other than T, those are odd choices to posit as being "neighborly" with G. J2 seems like a stronger correlation than those.

zanipolo
12-02-13, 08:10
Other than T, those are odd choices to posit as being "neighborly" with G. J2 seems like a stronger correlation than those.

There is L- (L595) solely in europe and no where else, of which the alpine areas have between 3 and 9% depending on which valleys, there is over 5%of L in Estonia, once thought to be T but its L2. The T is in Pskov instead ( 4.4%)
There are some ancient Q and N in the alps as well, but they do not exceed 3%

I agree with your J2

Basically G2a dominated early mainland european migration, but it took many other haplogroups with them