PDA

View Full Version : Possible new cro magnon haplogroup?



Anthro-inclined
11-02-13, 03:36
i have come across an interesting subclade of Haplogroup F. It is Haplogroup F-P96, it is defined by seven SNP's and the really interesting part is it is only found in western Europe ( Germany, Netherlands, Switzerland and France). Haplogroup F is thought to have originated in southwest or south Asia 50000 ybp. My hypothesis is that this particular subclade represents an extremely early branch off from F and a migration from the Middle East into Europe, possibly entering with the Aurignacian culture, and pre-dating Haplogroup I in Europe. Also, i would like to point out that F seemed to be more frequent in Europe in the Mesolithic, as 2 ancient DNA studies have yielded Haplogroup F. Please give me your thoughts on this and if you think it seems plausible.

nordicwarrior
11-02-13, 14:47
Haven't heard of this F subclade before. Nice work. I think you hypothesis sounds valid based on the findings.

Maciamo
11-02-13, 15:48
If there are indeed still people who belong to haplogroup F in N-W Europe, they would be descended from some of the earliest Homo Sapiens to reach Europe, perhaps between 40,000 and 30,000 years ago. But Cro-Magnons were not a single, homogeneous and continuous ethnicity. There were several migrations from the Middle East (and possibly North Africa) to Europe between 40,000 and 12,000 years ago. These probably included chronologically haplogroup F, IJ, I, and E1b1b. Hg I managed to replace most of the older F and IJ lineages. E1b1b remained mostly in the Mediterranean region, explaining the difference between the robust northern types (I) and the gracile Mediterranean types (E1b1b).

MOESAN
11-02-13, 16:14
let's be carefull when speaking about phenotypes: even in North Africa (Maghreb) very ancient skeletons were robust and tall, but, closer to us in time, mesolithic maghrebian types presented two types: a tall and partially gracilized ("eurafrican", not so far from 'capelloids', and after that a (or more than one?) small, well gracilized type, today the mix of all of these last ones, with regional variations

sparkey
11-02-13, 18:20
A damper on the idea that F3 is representative of a Paleolithic remnant is that it is also found in Asia, where it is more frequent. The F Project (http://www.familytreedna.com/public/f-ydna/default.aspx?section=yresults) has it in Turkey (among Armenians), Iran, Bahrain, and the UAE. Something that would be useful, and something that I don't know that anybody has done, would be to determine the TMRCA of F3 as a whole and European F3 to see if the Paleolithic hypothesis still fits. It is definitely an intriguing candidate.

Anthro-inclined
11-02-13, 23:37
Thank you for the feedback evereybody and When Saying "Cro Magnon", I Was Talking About Humans In Europe During The Paleolithic Period, and not a phenotype, Sorry If I Caused Any Misconception. Also i would like to adress the point by sparkey, it still seems plausible to me that F3 could represent a paleolithic european haplogroup, even if it is found in the middle east, my point being that it could have orginated in south arabia, along with Haplogroup F*, and split early and moved through the mid-east up to turkey and then dispersed into europe. You are right though, a MRCA would have to be determined to support my theory.

Anthro-inclined
12-02-13, 07:26
I would also like to bring another possible, Paleolithic European candidate to the table, haplogroup c7 or v20 is a deep subclade found in Europe, and I'm pretty sure no where else. It has been found in Britain and Southern Europe, I am still skeptical of this one because it could be a recent branch off of an Asian hg c, but the Clade seems to have a deep separation compared to other hg c's, feel free to add any input on this too.

Maciamo
12-02-13, 12:40
I would also like to bring another possible, Paleolithic European candidate to the table, haplogroup c7 or v20 is a deep subclade found in Europe, and I'm pretty sure no where else. It has been found in Britain and Southern Europe, I am still skeptical of this one because it could be a recent branch off of an Asian hg c, but the Clade seems to have a deep separation compared to other hg c's, feel free to add any input on this too.

C7 would also be a good Paleolithic candidate. As for the F, the chances are that it conceals a number of lineages as remote from each others as other European haplogroups descended from F. Comparing whole Y-chromosomes will certainly show that people now classified as F will have as about many mutations downstream of F as members of G, H, I, J, L, M, N, O, P, Q, R, S and T. Depending on how many isolated F lineages can be found across Europe and the Middle East, there are potentially dozens of new haplogroups that haven't been identified yet. I doubt that an F from the Netherlands is closer to a F from Arabia in the phylogenetic tree than from a G2a or I1 or N1c1 or R1b. They might have diverged from one another over 40,000 years ago, which is the minimum age of haplogroup F.

Fire Haired
24-06-13, 09:27
i have come across an interesting subclade of Haplogroup F. It is Haplogroup F-P96, it is defined by seven SNP's and the really interesting part is it is only found in western Europe ( Germany, Netherlands, Switzerland and France). Haplogroup F is thought to have originated in southwest or south Asia 50000 ybp. My hypothesis is that this particular subclade represents an extremely early branch off from F and a migration from the Middle East into Europe, possibly entering with the Aurignacian culture, and pre-dating Haplogroup I in Europe. Also, i would like to point out that F seemed to be more frequent in Europe in the Mesolithic, as 2 ancient DNA studies have yielded Haplogroup F. Please give me your thoughts on this and if you think it seems plausible.

one farmer in Germany was marked as for sure in teh Y DNA F family almost all non african Y DNA is F all it meant is this Y DNA was a decendant of F

there was another sample that they said was F and negative for any of F's descendants but i think that is incorrect plus Neloithci europeans where not any more ancient according to DNA haplogroups than modern europeans they where not cro magnon man and plus teh ones from LBk that supposedly one had F where probably more mid eastern than Europeans and i dont think if y DNA F was in cro magnon man 50,000ybp the Nelothci age 10,000-6,000ybp is not that ancient and is not evidence it was in cro magnon man

if this F is western europe is straight from the original F and not decended from any Asian and Australian F haplogroups then you are probably right and i would not be suprised of Cro magnon man also had F because there are remains of Human in britain from 44,000ybp in italy from 45,000ybp in germany from 42,000ybp in romania from 45,000ybp mtDNA U5 is almost only found in europe and defintley orignated in europe but it is almost 60,000 years old this mean caucasin humans where already in europe 50,000-60,000ybo

y DNA I is only 30,000 years old it decends from IJ which is about 45,000-50,000ybp so that means there had to be another y DNA haplogroup in Europe over 50,000ybp and it was not IJ so F is definaly the best candidate i wonder which early cro magnon group modern Europeans descend from

all modern Europeans are from the same family this family originally had Y DNA I and globe13 Austomnal DNA north european which is the only one to originate in Europe and all Europeans where founded by a group dominated by the white skin genes about 60-70% of European mtDNA haplogroups originated in Europe and probably arrived over 33,000ybp since Mesolithic genome from Spain was totally European and had mtDNA U5b and most Mesolithic European remains had U5b and that those Mesolithic people where definable European genetically and alot of othe reasons i think Europeans mainly decend from migration that came over 40,000ybp probably over 50,000ybp but not from teh F people from the IJ people

Knovas
24-06-13, 12:26
Both Mediterranean and North European from globe13 share lots of alleles, so your assertion regarding "the only one" cannot be true. By the way, the Iberian hunter gatherer was already 25% Mediterranean, which looks significant in my book.

It rather seems that those allele frequencies have been in Europe since more or less the same time, but the Med genes were probably restricted to some parts of Southern Europe (mostly Iberia and the Southern Alpine regions, we still need more data to confirm the later though).

Fire Haired
24-06-13, 12:45
no in globe13 north european and west asian are extremly relted here is a graph which shows http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Xal68HraeTs/UJBfD1d2CoI/AAAAAAAAAzU/yvTVW2WNvLQ/s640/1_2.png

and here is a link where they explain it http://dodecad.blogspot.com (http://dodecad.blogspot.com/) meditreaen is in teh caucasin family but not very related to north europeans it is most related to southwest asian

here is this link explians human globe13 austomnal groups http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/28822-Human-Family-Tree-discovered-through-globe13-austomnal-DNA

from what i have heard originally all europeans had north european and this mesloithci hunter gather in spain had more north european than most modern europeans and was most related to moder north europeans mainly sami and finnish who have almost only north european glob13 what this means is later groups liek meditreaen, west asian, and southwest asian came to europe and changed europeans autome gene'

but the fact that he did have a good amount of mdeitreaen is signifcant but he could have gotten it from farmers near him i noticed that all of europe has about the same amount of globe13 med about 35-40% south europe does not have more than places like britain but spain has extremely high amounts 50-60% and meditreaen is most popular in europe

but sami and finnish who have been isolated from Europeans since before the Neolithic age have almost no Mediterranean and hunter gathers in swedan from 5,000ybp had no Mediterranean so i still think it is probably from the Neolithic age but maybe not if u go my autsomnal DNA most Europeans are less than 50% European which we all know is not true and greeks are way more mid eastern than European which we also know is not true so austomnal DNA percentages dont tell exact ancestral percentages

Fire Haired
24-06-13, 13:03
by teh way 4,750 year old human remain in western france had your Y DNA haplogroup I2a1a and had mtDNA K1 liek u but had K1a not K1b1a

your Y DNA haplogroup is form Neloithci western europe here is a linkwhich explains the Y DNA of Neolithic europeans http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/28820-pre-Indo-European-Europe

also your Y DNA haplogroup was very popular in ancient Iberians and Neolithic Italians, French, and Iberians
Y DNA I2a1a1 is a pre Indo European Y DNA haplogroup it only exists in Iberia,France, Italy and Sardina when i was trying to find the Y DNA haplogroups of the Iberians i got a map from 2,300bp of Iberia i saw the non Celtic speaking areas it perfectly matches the highest areas of I2a1a in Iberiaand the Basque who still are not Indo European have the highest amount at 10-15%
http://www.theapricity.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=34777&d=1371550309http://www.eupedia.com/images/content/Haplogroup_I2a.gif

Italo Celts and Celts brough R1b to Iberia and these people where central europeans not liek modern Iberian so u know that modern Iberians are from the ancient non idno european iberians who come from neolithic iberians

so you have a Neolithic Iberian Y DNA haplogroup, mtDNA haplogroup and mainly Neolithic Iberian ancestry
and since 30-40% of IBerian mtDNA is H1,H3, And V and these orignated in Iberia 15,000ybp and that a total 60-70% of Iberian mtDNA is pre Neolithic and originated in Europe i think modern Iberians have mainly Mesolithic Iberian ancestry from 10,000-15,000ybp and some ancestry from Neloithci invaders who came probably from caucus mountains

60-70% of all Europeans mtDNA is pre Neolithic and originated in Europe and most Europeans are mainly from mesloithci people that lived in their area

nordicwarrior
24-06-13, 13:43
Spell check please. The errors distract from your message.

Knovas
24-06-13, 14:30
The fact that West Asian is closer to North European, it doesn't change on the other hand that Mediterranean and North European still share lots of alleles. Also, note that what the PCA plot shows, is that Mediterranean is the most remote component in West-Eurasia (as attested by the Fst distances and other similar experiments), so it's very likely to assume it was already present in some parts of Southern Europe while North European was dominant. This clearly points to higher isolation degree and fits my argument that it was probably restricted to some areas.

By the way, all I subclades go further back than the Mesolithic, so telling that I have a Neolithic Y-DNA isn't entirely correct either. Most present day subclades surely suffered mutations during the Neolithic or even after, and concretly I2a1a is much older than the average subgroups existing nowadays.

There's a thread dedicated to K if you're interested: http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/26612-mtDNA-K

ElHorsto
24-06-13, 14:49
no in globe13 north european and west asian are extremly relted here is a graph which shows http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Xal68HraeTs/UJBfD1d2CoI/AAAAAAAAAzU/yvTVW2WNvLQ/s640/1_2.png

and here is a link where they explain it http://dodecad.blogspot.com (http://dodecad.blogspot.com/) meditreaen is in teh caucasin family but not very related to north europeans it is most related to southwest asian


This paper might add a further explanation for the near-eastern-north-european proximity:

http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0049802



The result of our palaeogenetic study is important because it represents the first mtDNA data available for an early Holocene (Mesolithic) human from southern Europe or the Mediterranean. In addition, the fact that the mtDNA of Oriente B belongs to the HV-1 haplotype is noteworthy, because it has been suggested that most of the HV haplogroups in Europe expanded from the Near East and Caucasus region before the Last Glacial Maximum, having a coalescence age of 30,000±4,000 BP [54] (http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0049802#pone.0 049802-Macaulay1)–[56] (http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0049802#pone.0 049802-Tambets1). The HV-1 haplogroup, which belongs to the HV-family, is absent in most of Europe and India and it seems to have an epicentre of frequency and diversity in the Trans-Caucasus area. This suggests that the ancestors of the hunter-gatherers of Favignana might ultimately have originated from the Near East and Caucasus region.




here is this link explians human globe13 austomnal groups http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/28822-Human-Family-Tree-discovered-through-globe13-austomnal-DNA

from what i have heard originally all europeans had north european and this mesloithci hunter gather in spain had more north european than most modern europeans and was most related to moder north europeans mainly sami and finnish who have almost only north european glob13 what this means is later groups liek meditreaen, west asian, and southwest asian came to europe and changed europeans autome gene'

but the fact that he did have a good amount of mdeitreaen is signifcant but he could have gotten it from farmers near him i noticed that all of europe has about the same amount of globe13 med about 35-40% south europe does not have more than places like britain but spain has extremely high amounts 50-60% and meditreaen is most popular in europe

but sami and finnish who have been isolated from Europeans since before the Neolithic age have almost no Mediterranean and hunter gathers in swedan from 5,000ybp had no Mediterranean so i still think it is probably from the Neolithic age but maybe not if u go my autsomnal DNA most Europeans are less than 50% European which we all know is not true and greeks are way more mid eastern than European which we also know is not true so austomnal DNA percentages dont tell exact ancestral percentages

But I think it is also possible that some near-eastern mediterranean-like hunter-gatherers might have entered and mixed in Europe yet in the late mesolithic.

Fire Haired
24-06-13, 14:56
i know med shares alleles with north European but north european also shares alleles with south west asian too it is because they are all in the Caucasian family so i don't how what u are trying to say about med and north european

and what do u mean by med is the most remote component in west eurasia i know that is is not centered anywhere it is pretty much equally spread out in europe, mid east, and north Africa it is most popular in europe

and u say that there is a good chance it was in Mesolithic southern europe but Mesolithic south europeans came from the same source as Mesolithic north europeans so that means the common ancestor of Mesolithic south europeans and north europeans did not have med the only way the south Europeans could have gotten it was inter marriage with non
europeans

and if med was a austomnal group that came to europe in paloithci or even mesloithci time sthen why dont finnish and sami have any med their ancestors have probably lived in scandnvai fro about 10,000 years and since sami have 50% mtDNA V which orignatated in spain and 50% mtDNA U5b their subclade originated in Spain sami and finnish migrated to Scandinavia from spain in the Mesolithic age over 10,000ybp but they have no med austomnal DNA

also finnish and sami are the only Europeans who's ancestors where not really affected by the neolithic age farming spread in their area very late like 4,500-5,000ybp sami ancestors stayed as hunter gathers till about 4,000-3,000ybp and sami and Finnish are the closest modern relatives to Mesolithic 7,000 year old Spaniard and to hunter gathers in swedan

Sami and Finnish are like the last true Mesolithic Europeans it is true that originality all Europeans had just north European globe13 austomanl DNA Mesolithic south Europeans did have some med because we have a genome from one and he had some med but they got that from non European inter marraige

since med is over 30% in most of Europe it sounds crazy that originally it was 0% how did it spread all over Europe and become so popular and how come in Europe it is more popular than it is in the mid east or north Africa where did this med austomnal group originate austomnal DNA groups are not always reliable maybe the med is a mixture of different groups i don't know but it is extremely confusing

i think the best way to figure out where all modern DNA comes from is ancient bones and i think in the next 10 years most ancient DNA mysteroius will be figured out but of course we will never know all of the answers

Fire Haired
24-06-13, 14:59
By the way, all I subclades go further back than the Mesolithic, so telling that I have a Neolithic Y-DNA isn't entirely correct either. Most present day subclades surely suffered mutations during the Neolithic or even after, and concretly I2a1a is much older than the average subgroups existing nowadays.



o this website it says I2a1a is only 8,000 years old so that is neolithic but i think that date is too young yes it probably did originate in Mesolithic i just said Neolithic because that is when it was popular and we don't know that much about what Y DNA people had in Mesolithic

Fire Haired
24-06-13, 15:04
This paper might add a further explanation for the near-eastern-north-european proximity:

http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0049802





But I think it is also possible that some near-eastern mediterranean-like hunter-gatherers might have entered and mixed in Europe yet in the late mesolithic.

i think you are right La Brana who was a 7,000 year old very very late Mesolithic hunter gather in spain had some med but Mediterranean is not exactly near eastern it is most popular in europe which surprises me the most since originally europe had all north European then why is med most popular in Europe when Europeans got it from someone else it seems med is not centered in any area and it is hard to say where it originated i think it shows austomnal DNA is alot more complicated than we think and does not give perfect percentages of ancestry

Knovas
24-06-13, 15:16
By remote I mean the most distant from Asia and Africa overall, that's what the PCA plot shows and it can be seen in the Fst distances table.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0ArAJcY18g2GadF9CLUJnTUdSbkVJaDR2UkRtUE9ka UE#gid=3


and if med was a austomnal group that came to europe in paloithci or even mesloithci time sthen why dont finnish and sami have any med their ancestors
You can infer the answer: they don't have it simply because it was restricted to some areas (more isolated), and that would explain why the component is less admixed than North European.

ElHorsto
24-06-13, 15:18
i know med shares alleles with north European but north european also shares alleles with south west asian too it is because they are all in the Caucasian family so i don't how what u are trying to say about med and north european

and what do u mean by med is the most remote component in west eurasia i know that is is not centered anywhere it is pretty much equally spread out in europe, mid east, and north Africa it is most popular in europe

and u say that there is a good chance it was in Mesolithic southern europe but Mesolithic south europeans came from the same source as Mesolithic north europeans so that means the common ancestor of Mesolithic south europeans and north europeans did not have med the only way the south Europeans could have gotten it was inter marriage with non
europeans

and if med was a austomnal group that came to europe in paloithci or even mesloithci time sthen why dont finnish and sami have any med their ancestors have probably lived in scandnvai fro about 10,000 years and since sami have 50% mtDNA V which orignatated in spain and 50% mtDNA U5b their subclade originated in Spain sami and finnish migrated to Scandinavia from spain in the Mesolithic age over 10,000ybp but they have no med austomnal DNA

also finnish and sami are the only Europeans who's ancestors where not really affected by the neolithic age farming spread in their area very late like 4,500-5,000ybp sami ancestors stayed as hunter gathers till about 4,000-3,000ybp and sami and Finnish are the closest modern relatives to Mesolithic 7,000 year old Spaniard and to hunter gathers in swedan

Sami and Finnish are like the last true Mesolithic Europeans it is true that originality all Europeans had just north European globe13 austomanl DNA Mesolithic south Europeans did have some med because we have a genome from one and he had some med but they got that from non European inter marraige

since med is over 30% in most of Europe it sounds crazy that originally it was 0% how did it spread all over Europe and become so popular and how come in Europe it is more popular than it is in the mid east or north Africa where did this med austomnal group originate austomnal DNA groups are not always reliable maybe the med is a mixture of different groups i don't know but it is extremely confusing

i think the best way to figure out where all modern DNA comes from is ancient bones and i think in the next 10 years most ancient DNA mysteroius will be figured out but of course we will never know all of the answers

Depends on the analysis. The La Brana sample in K12b analysis:

http://dienekes.blogspot.de/2012/06/mesolithic-iberians-la-brana-arintero.html



UPDATE II: Using the K12b, the results are: 45% Atlantic_Med, 41.6% North_European, 10.3% East_African, 1% Sub_Saharan.


But in the hunter-gatherers AJV52 and AJV70 there is less K12b Atlantic_Med (from http://dienekes.blogspot.de/2012/04/first-look-at-dna-of-neolithic.html):

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-etz52hq0-tg/T5wc8JV8iaI/AAAAAAAAE0c/OJp92vZRSiY/s1600/proportions.jpg

ElHorsto
24-06-13, 15:24
i think you are right La Brana who was a 7,000 year old very very late Mesolithic hunter gather in spain had some med but Mediterranean is not exactly near eastern it is most popular in europe which surprises me the most since originally europe had all north European then why is med most popular in Europe when Europeans got it from someone else it seems med is not centered in any area and it is hard to say where it originated i think it shows austomnal DNA is alot more complicated than we think and does not give perfect percentages of ancestry

There were some artificial evidences calculated by Dienekes that Altantic_Med is the oldest from the european components (can be found in his blog). My current explanation model is that the earlier europeans were north-european-like but the later the migrations occured the more med-like they became (the bulk of course by neolithic farmers), and that's because in the paleolithic the near-east was possibly less West-Asian and more Med. than today, despite the West-Asian componend already existed, but it was probably more separated back then. The West-Asian component expanded in the near-east mostly during the neolithic, similar to the mongoloid expansion in asia. (pure speculation of mine)

Knovas
24-06-13, 15:41
There were some artificial evidences calculated by Dienekes that Altantic_Med is the oldest from the european components (can be found in his blog). My current explanation model is that the earlier europeans were north-european-like but the later the migrations occured the more med-like they became (the bulk of course by neolithic farmers), and that's because in the paleolithic the near-east was possibly less West-Asian and more Med. than today, despite the West-Asian componend already existed, but it was probably more separated back then. The West-Asian component expanded in the near-east mostly during the neolithic, similar to the mongoloid expansion in asia. (pure speculation of mine)
It's a possibility, but keep in mind that a huge isolation in the near east considering the lack of barriers makes it really difficult. But the Mediterranean acting as a genetic barrier could easily do the job considering that during the Paleo-Mesolithic significant migrations were a rare phenomenon.

So my bet is: somewhere in Southern Europe...maybe the Southern Alpine region, but that's pure guess though.

ElHorsto
24-06-13, 16:26
It's a possibility, but keep in mind that a huge isolation in the near east considering the lack of barriers makes it really difficult. But the Mediterranean acting as a genetic barrier could easily do the job considering that during the Paleo-Mesolithic significant migrations were a rare phenomenon.

So my bet is: somewhere in Southern Europe...maybe the Southern Alpine region, but that's pure guess though.

I don't know, but I think the neolithic revolution could have changed the near-east as much as southern europe and east asia, genetically.

ElHorsto
24-06-13, 16:51
Actually north-africa (and the once green Sahara) is more likely than the near-east to have been the refuge of the Atlantic_med component. This would explain why Atlantic_med but no North_european can be found today in Northwest-Africa and why Atlantic_med is stronger in west europe than in east europe and also the genetic proximity to the North-european component.

Later, also neolithic farmers could have fled from the desertification of the Sahara to the north, maybe even the Bell-Beakers.

Knovas
24-06-13, 17:32
But still in Africa there are little barriers to stop gene flow from Sub-Saharan Africa. If at some point a group of Caucasoids remained in the south, hence avoiding cold climate, it is very unlikely they never mated with Africans. Long time required...just see the Berbers as a Pre-Arab ethnic group: they are 20% African aprox.

The Med genes are surely very very old in North Africa though.

Fire Haired
24-06-13, 23:05
Actually north-africa (and the once green Sahara) is more likely than the near-east to have been the refuge of the Atlantic_med component. This would explain why Atlantic_med but no North_european can be found today in Northwest-Africa and why Atlantic_med is stronger in west europe than in east europe and also the genetic proximity to the North-european component.

Later, also neolithic farmers could have fled from the desertification of the Sahara to the north, maybe even the Bell-Beakers.

i think the first caucasin settlers of north africa had some globe13 austomnal DNA med because they have no west asian which means they never really nter married with mid eastern people but they have about 30-40% med and al;so people around Arabia and isreal that is where the rgoup soutwest asian orignated north africans also have alot of southwest Asian so the group that settled north Africa probably came from arabia and since southwest asian and med are brothers i bet the med group originated in arabia

i still dont think meditreaen was in europe till the Mesolithic age it had to come from non european inter marraieg all f europe was already settled by people with 100% north european then they inter married with people who had med

and actulley all the austomnal DNA tests i have looked at north africans usulley have a big amount of european blood in globe13 austomnal DNA they have about 6% north european in another test it said they had over 20% but in all the tests they had no west asian about 15,000 ybp people from spain migrated to north africa and about 25-35% of north africans have mtDNA H1,H3,V, and U5b all of these are europeans they estimate that they arrived in north Africa from spain over 10,000ybp

and 12,000 year old bones in north Africa two had specifically European mtDNA V this group actuality originate in Spain 15,000ybp and is associated with the Iberian refuge they also migrated acroos most of europe here is a link that explains ithttp://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/28819-Iberian-DNA-from-20-000-4-340-years-ago-exactly-like-modern-Europeans

most of the remains had mtDNA H and from 3 mtDNA samples in spain from 15,000ybp two of three had mtDNA H one had H6 and from 9 mtDNA samples in mesloithci portugal from 9,500ybp 5 had mtDNA H one 2 had H1b there is also a 20,000 year old bone in spain that had for sure mtDNA RO which is teh grandmother of H mtDNA RO is very old about 50,000 it is almost only found in arabia today and no mtDNA haplogroups ine urope ar edirect decendants so mtDNA Ro probably never migrated to Europe the possiblity is it had RO's daughter HV or its granddaughter H also a 28,000 year old bone in south tip of italy had H so mtDNA H did not arrive in europe during teh neloithic anothe reason is the mtDNA H subclades that take up aout 40% of European mtDNA are H1,H2,H3,H6,H8,H11 these all orignated in europe and are very veyr rare in the mid east this means they did not arriuve there from teh mid east and the mtDNA H is Europe is not all the same subclades if it came form teh same migration ukraine which has H6,H2,H8 would have the same subclades as spain who has H1 and H3 but they dont so mtDNA H was not spread in the Neolithic age

ElHorsto
24-06-13, 23:43
i think the first caucasin settlers of north africa had some globe13 austomnal DNA med because they have no west asian which means they never really nter married with mid eastern people but they have about 30-40% med and al;so people around Arabia and isreal that is where the rgoup soutwest asian orignated north africans also have alot of southwest Asian so the group that settled north Africa probably came from arabia and since southwest asian and med are brothers i bet the med group originated in arabia


This is also my reasoning more-or-less.



i still dont think meditreaen was in europe till the Mesolithic age it had to come from non european inter marraieg all f europe was already settled by people with 100% north european then they inter married with people who had med
and actulley all the austomnal DNA tests i have looked at north africans usulley have a big amount of european blood in globe13 austomnal DNA they have about 6% north european in another test it said they had over 20% but in all the tests they had no west asian about 15,000 ybp people from spain migrated to north africa and about 25-35% of north africans have mtDNA H1,H3,V, and U5b all of these are europeans they estimate that they arrived in north Africa from spain over 10,000ybp

and 12,000 year old bones in north Africa two had specifically European mtDNA V this group actuality originate in Spain 15,000ybp and is associated with the Iberian refuge they also migrated acroos most of europe here is a link that explains ithttp://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/28819-Iberian-DNA-from-20-000-4-340-years-ago-exactly-like-modern-Europeans

most of the remains had mtDNA H and from 3 mtDNA samples in spain from 15,000ybp two of three had mtDNA H one had H6 and from 9 mtDNA samples in mesloithci portugal from 9,500ybp 5 had mtDNA H one 2 had H1b there is also a 20,000 year old bone in spain that had for sure mtDNA RO which is teh grandmother of H mtDNA RO is very old about 50,000 it is almost only found in arabia today and no mtDNA haplogroups ine urope ar edirect decendants so mtDNA Ro probably never migrated to Europe the possiblity is it had RO's daughter HV or its granddaughter H also a 28,000 year old bone in south tip of italy had H so mtDNA H did not arrive in europe during teh neloithic anothe reason is the mtDNA H subclades that take up aout 40% of European mtDNA are H1,H2,H3,H6,H8,H11 these all orignated in europe and are very veyr rare in the mid east this means they did not arriuve there from teh mid east and the mtDNA H is Europe is not all the same subclades if it came form teh same migration ukraine which has H6,H2,H8 would have the same subclades as spain who has H1 and H3 but they dont so mtDNA H was not spread in the Neolithic age

Med component is mysterious. Globe13 seems to confirm K12b pretty well with a strong SW-european/NW-african to NE-european cline. It peaks in Europe (Sardinia), yet being distributed strongly along the Atlantic coast deep into the north and deep into the near-east (Druze). Samples from Neolithic farmers who are supposed to be of near-eastern origin are strikingly mediterranean. It could be that there was a second minor paleolithic population in Iberia or Italy which could not be isolated by any admixture analysis because it is either too mixed with pure North-Europeans (like Saami/Ajv52/Ajv70) and on the other end too mixed with neolithic farmers. In K12b a difference between La Brana sample and the Gotland hunter-gatherers becomes visible which could indicate such an additional unidentified element in the La Brana sample. The old iberian mtDNA HGs you mention could support his.

kamani
25-06-13, 01:41
The Mediteranean component was E1b1b and J2 neolithic farmer men from Levant/Anatolia who mixed with the local European population. There is nothing mysterious about it. Because of it today all Southern Europe has about 10-30%(depending on region) near-eastern genes. Today you're looked down in Western Europe if you're Near Eastern, but that's all propaganda, most human development has come from the Near East; things such as agriculture, writing, math etc.

Wilhelm
25-06-13, 04:51
and what do u mean by med is the most remote component in west eurasia i know that is is not centered anywhere it is pretty much equally spread out in europe, mid east, and north Africa it is most popular in europe
Med component is the most West-Eurasian one, since it forms a peak in the typical triangle-shape of world PCA plots, between East-Eurasia, West-Eurasia, and Sub-Sharan Africa.


and if med was a austomnal group that came to europe in paloithci or even mesloithci time sthen why dont finnish and sami have any med their ancestors have probably lived in scandnvai fro about 10,000 years and since sami have 50% mtDNA V which orignatated in spain and 50% mtDNA U5b their subclade originated in Spain sami and finnish migrated to Scandinavia from spain in the Mesolithic age over 10,000ybp but they have no med austomnal DNA
Yes, but remember there is also mtDNA H in mesolithic iberia, so it is definately related with autosomal mediterranean. Take in account that the autosomal components shared between Europe and north-africa is only the Med component, and it's not casuality that also north-africans have a lot of mtDNA H...so there is definately a connection between mtDNA H and the autosomal Med component, and it's at least from the Mesolithic.

Knovas
25-06-13, 18:50
There's substantial Med component even in Scandinavia taking globe13 as reference (more than 25%), where we also find a lot of MtDNA H. So the connection seems pretty clear to me as Wilhelm says.

And by the way, one must believe in miracles to think this component emerged in the Near East or North Africa where there are virtually no barriers. Very difficult, not to say impossible, to be that well preserved as the PCA experiment and the Fst distances show.

Knovas
25-06-13, 18:59
The Mediteranean component was E1b1b and J2 neolithic farmer men from Levant/Anatolia who mixed with the local European population. There is nothing mysterious about it.
Really? then you know a lot more than all the academic community. To start with, no J2 findings corresponding to the Neolithic period in Europe, nor even the Bronze Age. E1b1b is the joker: fits everywhere. We'll see what happens if some Mesolithic E1b1b shows up lol

ElHorsto
25-06-13, 19:36
And by the way, one must believe in miracles to think this component emerged in the Near East or North Africa where there are virtually no barriers. Very difficult, not to say impossible, to be that well preserved as the PCA experiment and the Fst distances show.

If even the North-European component came from the Near East (ultimately out-of-africa) then the Med. component could as well at least. It is the question when it happened. North-European is closer to the West-Asian component like the Atlantic_med is closer to the South-West-Asian, as also Fire Headed said.
I also find it actually amazing how low the Sub-Saharan influence in North Africa is still today.
For instance the Arabian penisula as possible med. source/refuge is enough isolated by the Red Sea and Persian Gulf and the shortest path from there to Iberia would be North Africa (besides euro-mediterranean).

kamani
25-06-13, 19:57
Really? then you know a lot more than all the academic community. To start with, no J2 findings corresponding to the Neolithic period in Europe, nor even the Bronze Age. E1b1b is the joker: fits everywhere. We'll see what happens if some Mesolithic E1b1b shows up lol

You speak in the name of the academic community about this, but you seem to be uninformed. Two significant studies were Semino 2000 and Rosser 2000, which identified haplogroups J2 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_J2_%28Y-DNA%29) and E1b1b (formerly E3b) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_E1b1b_%28Y-DNA%29) as the putative genetic signatures of migrating Neolithic farmers from Anatolia.

Knovas
25-06-13, 20:12
If even the North-European component came from the Near East (ultimately out-of-africa) then the Med. component could as well at least. It is the question when it happened. North-European is closer to the West-Asian component like the Atlantic_med is closer to the South-West-Asian, as also Fire Headed said.
I also find it actually amazing how low the Sub-Saharan influence in North Africa is still today.
For instance the Arabian penisula as possible med. source/refuge is enough isolated by the Red Sea and Persian Gulf and the shortest path from there to Iberia would be North Africa (besides euro-mediterranean).
It doesn't matter Mediterranean is closer to Southwest Asian. What basically show the Fst distances and the PCA plot, is that Southwest Asian is Mediterranean + something else added. Med still falls at the top of the West Eurasian peak, meaning that it's the less admixed cluster.

And I don't think the red sea was a problem, first because people could easily cross from Northeast Africa, and second because its water is extremly calm compared to the Mediterranean sea. While the Persian Gulf on the other hand it's useless in that sense, since it's not that far to go on foot from the Gedrosia Area to the Near East...nomadic lifestyle definetely achieves the goal generation after generation, and I highly doubt it took that long to reach the Peninsula.

Knovas
25-06-13, 20:19
You speak in the name of the academic community about this, but you seem to be uninformed. Two significant studies were Semino 2000 and Rosser 2000, which identified haplogroups J2 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_J2_%28Y-DNA%29) and E1b1b (formerly E3b) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_E1b1b_%28Y-DNA%29) as the putative genetic signatures of migrating Neolithic farmers from Anatolia.
I am enough informed to not trust Wikipedia and its year 2000 references, which are extremely outdated. The only fact is that no Neolithic J2 was found at present, and that E1b1b could still be older. What we know is that E1b1b was present, at least, since the Neolithic. It doesn't mean it couldn't have been in Europe before.

Concerning J2, we'll continue the discussion when something comes out.

Yetos
25-06-13, 21:06
Really? then you know a lot more than all the academic community. To start with, no J2 findings corresponding to the Neolithic period in Europe, nor even the Bronze Age. E1b1b is the joker: fits everywhere. We'll see what happens if some Mesolithic E1b1b shows up lol

and that is the problem in Balkans,

cause the most closer genetical and geographical ancient E found is 4000 years old in Konya, no neolithic J2 found, but we find R1a aged 5500 BC!!!!!

so Vinca culture was only G2 people? plus I1? or R1a coexisted?

BALKANS HAVE NO MESOLITHIC, ONLY EPIPALEOLITHIC.

meaning that Neolithic populations were autodeveloped mostly than migrated,

Fire Haired
27-06-13, 06:07
and that is the problem in Balkans,

cause the most closer genetical and geographical ancient E found is 4000 years old in Konya, no neolithic J2 found, but we find R1a aged 5500 BC!!!!!

so Vinca culture was only G2 people? plus I1? or R1a coexisted?

BALKANS HAVE NO MESOLITHIC, ONLY EPIPALEOLITHIC.

meaning that Neolithic populations were autodeveloped mostly than migrated,

are u saying they really have a 4,000 year old Y DNA sample i the balknes ad a Y DA R1a sample from 5,500bc i would love to see where u are finding these results

Tabaccus Maximus
10-08-13, 11:53
Spell check please. The errors distract from your message.

Strange that a guy who apparently reads so much can't construct a sentence?? I've commented on this guy before and it should be noted that the apparent typos are not typical keyboard errors. Either someone is disguising their identity or someone is ********. Sorry, that's the beer talking.

nordicwarrior
10-08-13, 17:18
In F.H.'s defense, he has shown great improvement in his more recent communications-- he now uses paragraph breaks which is incredibly helpful in figuring out his points. The guy obviously has some critical thinking skills that many of us lack, maybe he's wired differently. Definitely somewhat of a mystery though.

nordicwarrior
10-08-13, 17:39
I realize Tabaccus that there's a chance you might be referring to myself (I have mentioned some literary works here on Eupedia.) If that's the case, no worries because even if I'm lucky enough to construct and post an understandable sentence every now and again... there's no use in trying to deny that I'm am an absolute ********. :)

elghund
10-08-13, 18:11
I noticed a Rothlisberger in the F Y-DNA Project. I wonder if that's Ben Rothlisberger's line.

nordicwarrior
11-08-13, 00:11
I guess I'm not the only Eupedia contributor that plays the "I wonder what haplogroup that person belongs to?" game. It's an addicting endeavor...