PDA

View Full Version : Haplogroup I, is it European?



Anthro-inclined
22-02-13, 04:21
It seems that Across the world of genetics, everyone is in universal acceptance of HG I being native to the European continent, while i see little argument for the idea that it, like most other major HG in Europe, originated in West Asia. By now ( if you get your info from this site ), are probably thinking what i am saying is pretty odd, but id like to give some evidence to show what I'm talking about. The base Haplogroup for I is M170, or HG I*, when an individual tests for this, it means he carries the oldest mutation of HG I, so one would think that the highest frequency of the oldest form would be found around the origin point of the mutation. Well if HG I is native to Europe, this is not the case, the highest frequencies of M170 are found in the Caucasus(the Lak people display the highest frequency of any group at 14%) and Adygea and appears at low levels in the Middle East in Turkey and Iraq. I* does appear in Europe, but at similar small frequencies like in the Mid east and is absent from the Balkans, as it appears in the Spanish,French and Saami. With this distribution of the earliest I, i see little evidence to corroborate an origin in Europe. Also the parent group of HG IJ isn't found in Europe, but it has been found in Iran. I am not saying that it didn't enter Europe during the paleolithic, but rather that it did not originate there. Another point i should make is that I shows higher frequencies in Dagestan( also in the Caucasus) at 58%, than in Scandinavia. Also worthy of note, is that there is no paleolithic ancient DNA to prove that it was even in Europe before the Mesolithic. So with my points presented, please give me some feedback.

To clarify i am just presenting a new outlook on HG I, don't really like it when everyone agrees, makes me suspicious.:thinking:

Sources:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_I-M170_%28Y-DNA%29
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_IJ_%28Y-DNA%29

LeBrok
22-02-13, 05:29
I'm not HG expert, but I think what we say on this website is that I is the oldest European y-haplo. We don't really know where first I separated from IJ. Possible Middle East or around Caucasus, as you mentioned. Although part of Caucasus is in Europe, so it might make it European anyway. :)

Anthro-inclined
22-02-13, 05:55
This site does seem to think that the origin point for I is in the Balkans or in that general area, and to me it seems that the tangible evidence we have supports an origin point in the Mid-East or Caucasus, but my guess would be somewhere in modern Iran or Iraq, it seems odd that so many people are in agreement of this haplo representing the only native HG in the continent, my guess is that because of its variation and seclusion in Europe, that people jump to the conclusion that it came from there, and then there comes alot of story telling. The same thing happened with R1b, because of its distribution, Wells and everybody immediately deemed it THE native euro HG, then a couple years later it was discovered to be a bronze age migrant. So my question is to everybody on the forum, do you still think HG I originated in Europe, and if so, id like you to specify on what basis you believe it to be true.

Kardu
22-02-13, 11:21
Only I2a is found and only among Andis (Dagestani group). Older studies were mistaken.
This is from a recent work by Balanovskys. Lonely I1 must be coming from some viking raider.5823

sparkey
22-02-13, 18:36
Wikipedia cites studies as showing I*, when they did not test all known SNPs. For example, Bulayeva 2009 tested the SNPs for I1, I2a1, and I2a2a... simply testing for I2 would probably have recategorized these "I*" samples, which could have been I2c (most likely), I2b, or I2a2b. I suppose they could have been real I*, but it wouldn't be correct to say that we've seen any "true" or "proven" I* anywhere yet.

Although it is true that it isn't known for sure, there are good reasons to guess that Haplogroup I originated in Europe from an IJ lineage. The center of diversity of the whole of Haplogroup I is not only in Europe, but in Central Europe. I1 is an outlier with its greatest diversity in Central Europe; the second outlier is I2c+I2b, which also has its greatest diversity in Central Europe; then you reach the split between I2a1 (diversity is hard to pin down but it has a lot in Western and Central Europe) and I2a2, which has its greatest diversity in Central Europe. I dunno, it seems pretty clear cut to me. See my old map (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/26944-The-Paleolithic-Remnants-a-map) for pinpointing high diversity areas. It's a bit out of date, but the geography of it hasn't changed much to my knowledge. It is a map of Europe, and the only Haplogroup I point I know of that would fall off the map is an outlier I2a1b2 from Iraq.

In addition, downstream clades of I (most importantly I2a1a) have been found in ancient remains as early as the Neolithic. So it is at least that early.

Anthro-inclined
22-02-13, 19:11
Wikipedia cites studies as showing I*, when they did not test all known SNPs. For example, Bulayeva 2009 tested the SNPs for I1, I2a1, and I2a2a... simply testing for I2 would probably have recategorized these "I*" samples, which could have been I2c (most likely), I2b, or I2a2b. I suppose they could have been real I*, but it wouldn't be correct to say that we've seen any "true" or "proven" I* anywhere yet.

Although it is true that it isn't known for sure, there are good reasons to guess that Haplogroup I originated in Europe from an IJ lineage. The center of diversity of the whole of Haplogroup I is not only in Europe, but in Central Europe. I1 is an outlier with its greatest diversity in Central Europe; the second outlier is I2c+I2b, which also has its greatest diversity in Central Europe; then you reach the split between I2a1 (diversity is hard to pin down but it has a lot in Western and Central Europe) and I2a2, which has its greatest diversity in Central Europe. I dunno, it seems pretty clear cut to me. See my old map (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/26944-The-Paleolithic-Remnants-a-map) for pinpointing high diversity areas. It's a bit out of date, but the geography of it hasn't changed much to my knowledge. It is a map of Europe, and the only Haplogroup I point I know of that would fall off the map is an outlier I2a1b2 from Iraq.

In addition, downstream clades of I (most importantly I2a1a) have been found in ancient remains as early as the Neolithic. So it is at least that early.

I understand that Europe displays a high diversity of I, but all that says is that it has very ancient roots there, and not that it formed in this region necessarily. It could have just formed in the middle east and entered very early
So the main basis of argument for I's origin in Europe is its high diversity? To me in order to prove the origin, or have a tangible theory, one would need to find a case of IJ in Europe and I* also, and both of those have yet to be proven in Europe.

nordicwarrior
22-02-13, 19:44
Anthro-inclined, I agree with much of your thread starter. Not everything though-- I do have earliest I in Dagestan, but I have the I-J split in Turkey where I went North and J went South. And the point about not everyone agreeing is a good one, you have to break some eggs to make an omelett.

And by the way, Spencer Wells STILL has R1b as the first into Europe. This persistence in Cro-Magnon R + his miss in Neanderthal mixing has cost him credibility points.

The specific place to look for the I-J split in my humble opinion is Gobekli Tepe in Anatolia.

sparkey
22-02-13, 19:50
I understand that Europe displays a high diversity of I, but all that says is that it has very ancient roots there, and not that it formed in this region necessarily. It could have just formed in the middle east and entered very early
So the main basis of argument for I's origin in Europe is its high diversity? To me in order to prove the origin, or have a tangible theory, one would need to find a case of IJ in Europe and I* also, and both of those have yet to be proven in Europe.

Finding IJ in Europe wouldn't prove much; it would just be a third descendant that survived alongside I and J. Even if it was more closely related to I than J, that would just be additional evidence, not proof. Similarly, finding I* in Europe would say very little... we already have all the ancient branches represented in Europe, what value would a third branch add to our analysis other than a bit more evidence?

It's very difficult to prove where a haplogroup originated. Ancient samples can help point you there, but in general, diversity analyses have produced suspected points of origin for every haplogroup, not just I. As is, walking down the I tree gives you a bunch of apparently European clades. To suggest an origin outside of Europe, it would be useful to find some I*, proto-I1, or something like that that would force us to step outside of Europe during our analysis. Since we don't have that right now, why wouldn't a European origin be our best guess for now?

Ivan
22-02-13, 19:54
So the main basis of argument for I's origin in Europe is its high diversity?

All Hg s tend to diverge from the place of origin outwards as a part of a natural expansion in time (spreading). Subgroups are separated in thousands of years from each other by spreading and expanded quite a lot territoriality by migrations to unrelated territories. Some 10K years after only a highest diversity still holds value. Logically it is almost impossible for the subgroups created from the day one to simply converge towards the same point in any particular location.

The map I saw was map of high diversity. The highest diversity can be found by encircling all the different (not exactlly all derived ones by rather more diverse ones) I-s in one area. That would mean to exclude some I2a1 derived types which gravitate toward N-S France and surely to include most of different color dots.

Anthro-inclined
22-02-13, 20:07
Just wanted to give a thanks for all the input, made the thread just to clarify what peoples thoughts were on the origins for I, as i couldn't pin down an origin point myself, unfortunately i don't think i can put anymore input into this argument however, sparkey is correct that more ancient DNA, and demographic studies will need to be done before any certain origin is discovered, but none the less i still believe that origins of this HG are to hazy to automatically be put in Europe, and again thanks, and feel free to continue the debate, and if you are one of the few who supports a non euro origin please add your input.

To nordicfoyer, i still cant believe wells has R1b linked with the Aurignacian, its coming to the point where its absurd, its gotta be a pride thing.

oriental
23-02-13, 00:11
When Africans migrated out of Africa the sea level was 300 feet or so lower. There would have been a massive human settlement in the Persian "Gulf" which was lowland at the time. There wasn't a smooth 3 feet per year rise in the oceans. There occasional massive tsunamis and flood e.g. the Canadian Lakes area had a built up ice block as the glaciers were melting and only a thin ice dam. Every summer the water level got higher. The same thing was happening in the Urals and Black sea area and the Himalayas. Right now in the Bhutan or Sikkim the glaciers are melting and the natural dam of sand and mud will give way to massive flooding downstream.

The tsunamis might have wiped out the Persian Gulf settlement and those who escaped led to new settlements higher up. The oldest known civilizations are near the sea. Egypt, Greece, Sumer, India, etc. Hg IJ may have started in the Persian Gulf for all we know.

Kardu
23-02-13, 03:11
I do have earliest I in Dagestan

What earliest I in Dagestan??

nordicwarrior
23-02-13, 03:38
Sparkey I agree... proving where a haplogroup originated beyond a shadow of a doubt is uber difficult if not impossible. In a perfect world we could link ancient remains to diversity maps and life would be much easier. Hopefully we'll get there one day, but in the meantime I don't think Dagestan M170* tosses hg I out of Europe. That region is West of the Urals, so depending on the definition used, many would say that's still a European location (or European Russia anyway).

Oriental, great point about the sea-level change. Makes finding our ancestors that much harder. Same concept could be impacting sparse I1 discoveries in the Northern areas.

Kardu I was referring to I M-170*'s 58% spike in Dagestan.

Kardu
23-02-13, 13:42
Sparkey I agree... proving where a haplogroup originated beyond a shadow of a doubt is uber difficult if not impossible. In a perfect world we could link ancient remains to diversity maps and life would be much easier. Hopefully we'll get there one day, but in the meantime I don't think Dagestan M170* tosses hg I out of Europe. That region is West of the Urals, so depending on the definition used, many would say that's still a European location (or European Russia anyway).

Oriental, great point about the sea-level change. Makes finding our ancestors that much harder. Same concept could be impacting sparse I1 discoveries in the Northern areas.

Kardu I was referring to I M-170*'s 58% spike in Dagestan.

It's not true. The research was flawed, Current works don't confirm those results.

nordicwarrior
23-02-13, 14:05
It's not true. The research was flawed, Current works don't confirm those results.

I hadn't of findings disputing this... I'm not doubting you, I've been wrong before--but could you source it? M170* is what put Dagestan on the genetic map.

Anthro-inclined
23-02-13, 16:00
I hadn't of findings disputing this... I'm not doubting you, I've been wrong before--but could you source it? M170* is what put Dagestan on the genetic map.
Can't find much to specify the I* claim but here's a source that put I in Dagestan at around 50.http://dienekes.blogspot.ca/2009/12/y-chromosomes-of-dagestan-highlanders.html?m=1

Kardu
23-02-13, 17:15
I hadn't of findings disputing this... I'm not doubting you, I've been wrong before--but could you source it? M170* is what put Dagestan on the genetic map.

For example: The Caucasus as an asymmetric semipermeable barrier to ancient human migrations - 2011 paper by Yusunbayev et al.

Also Dagestan DNA Project on FTDNA. Sure, they have only few members so far, bust not a single HG I

http://www.familytreedna.com/public/dagestan/default.aspx?section=yresults

Kardu
23-02-13, 17:30
Can't find much to specify the I* claim but here's a source that put I in Dagestan at around 50.http://dienekes.blogspot.ca/2009/12/y-chromosomes-of-dagestan-highlanders.html?m=1

According to that study (Figure 3) HG I-M170 was found only among Laks - 3 out 9 tested and Tabasarans - 1 out of 23.
I don't think this statistics can support such far-reaching conclusions...

Anthro-inclined
23-02-13, 18:14
According to that study (Figure 3) HG I-M170 was found only among Laks - 3 out 9 tested and Tabasarans - 1 out of 23.
I don't think this statistics can support such far-reaching conclusions...
No Dispute, Used This Just To Support The High Percentage Of I In Dagestan Overall, Not Specifically I*.

Malsori
23-02-13, 20:31
No Dispute, Used This Just To Support The High Percentage Of I In Dagestan Overall, Not Specifically I*.

I have never seen any study which implies high frequency of Y-DNA I in Dagestan. Can you post it?

Anthro-inclined
23-02-13, 21:10
I have never seen any study which implies high frequency of Y-DNA I in Dagestan. Can you post it?
I Posted It Just Up The Page, But Since I Like Ya Here It Is Again: http://dienekes.blogspot.ca/2009/12/...nders.html?m=1
Links Dead So Here's a graph of the results. Its hard to see but DA are the dargingians and the largest chunk is I.http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_Ish7688voT0/Szj9Ix1Y8aI/AAAAAAAACFw/2HfE-Eqi8KA/s1600/caciagli.png

Malsori
23-02-13, 21:55
I Posted It Just Up The Page, But Since I Like Ya Here It Is Again: http://dienekes.blogspot.ca/2009/12/...nders.html?m=1
Links Dead So Here's a graph of the results. Its hard to see but DA are the dargingians and the largest chunk is I.http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_Ish7688voT0/Szj9Ix1Y8aI/AAAAAAAACFw/2HfE-Eqi8KA/s1600/caciagli.png


According to this study. The Darginians who compose 15% of the population of Dagestan have 56% Y-DNA I. Turks have 26% and Iranians from Teheran 36%.

http://www.familytreedna.com/pdf/caucasus.pdf

They seem unlikely percentages to me. I have heard before the about the Iranian/Tehran high percentage of Y-DNA I is due to some mistake.

Anthro-inclined
23-02-13, 22:06
According to this study. The Darginians who compose 15% of the population of Dagestan have 56% Y-DNA I. Turks have 26% and Iranians from Teheran 36%.

http://www.familytreedna.com/pdf/caucasus.pdf

They seem unlikely percentages to me. I have heard before the about the Iranian/Tehran high percentage of Y-DNA I is due to some mistake.
Cant Really Dispute With You On This Topic, If Its Your Opinion That The Study Is False, Then There Isnt Much Else I Have To Offer, But Thanks For The Info On The Caucasus, Ive Been Trying To Find A Good Paper On It For Awhile Now.

nordicwarrior
23-02-13, 23:51
It's not true. The research was flawed, Current works don't confirm those results.

You've got a good point Kardu... I'm going to back off my initial claims, but let me give some background info. that may be helpful. My dad got his DNA tested as soon as he heard about the process, which was at least seven years ago (maybe more). When he got his initial results back, I misunderstood the readings and had us being members of the Lak people. I researched the Lak tribe like crazy and found that they did have very interesting M170* readings which put them as some of the first hg I. I think the Lak diversity still stands, but not the higher population percentages that the later test indicated.

The high hg I readings in Iran have always thrown me for a loop. I have no answer (and yes I've heard those studies may have been flawed as well) other than to say the area needs to be studied further, with more accurate and modern methods.

zanipolo
24-02-13, 01:00
You've got a good point Kardu... I'm going to back off my initial claims, but let me give some background info. that may be helpful. My dad got his DNA tested as soon as he heard about the process, which was at least seven years ago (maybe more). When he got his initial results back, I misunderstood the readings and had us being members of the Lak people. I researched the Lak tribe like crazy and found that they did have very interesting M170* readings which put them as some of the first hg I. I think the Lak diversity still stands, but not the higher population percentages that the later test indicated.

The high hg I readings in Iran have always thrown me for a loop. I have no answer (and yes I've heard those studies may have been flawed as well) other than to say the area needs to be studied further, with more accurate and modern methods.

in regards to I-M170 some say Balkan and Crimea ( of the Gravettian (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravettian) culture )

but 2011 and 2012 studies of I have West Asia (Terreros 2011 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_I_%28mtDNA%29#CITEREFTerreros2011) and Fernandes 2012 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_I_%28mtDNA%29#CITEREFFernandes2012)).

so for I to be European, it must have started around the north and west parts of the black sea

Kardu
24-02-13, 01:30
You've got a good point Kardu... I'm going to back off my initial claims, but let me give some background info. that may be helpful. My dad got his DNA tested as soon as he heard about the process, which was at least seven years ago (maybe more). When he got his initial results back, I misunderstood the readings and had us being members of the Lak people. I researched the Lak tribe like crazy and found that they did have very interesting M170* readings which put them as some of the first hg I. I think the Lak diversity still stands, but not the higher population percentages that the later test indicated.

The high hg I readings in Iran have always thrown me for a loop. I have no answer (and yes I've heard those studies may have been flawed as well) other than to say the area needs to be studied further, with more accurate and modern methods.

All right, that's what I've heard personally from Kazima Bulayeva who is a population geneticist from Dagestan and adminsiters their DNA project:

Me: And btw, since we are talking about Daghestan genetic studies, is there any foundation in Nasidze's claim that there was incredible amount of haplogroup I among Dargins? Or it was some lab error?







Kazima Bulayeva (https://www.facebook.com/kazima.bulayeva)
Most likely -error...I have a lot of dargins data...I just did not want criticize him and did not accent on differences. I know how Ivan collected data among Dargins-it was not right collections...

Anthro-inclined
24-02-13, 02:45
in regards to I-M170 some say Balkan and Crimea ( of the Gravettian (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravettian) culture )

but 2011 and 2012 studies of I have West Asia (Terreros 2011 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_I_%28mtDNA%29#CITEREFTerreros2011) and Fernandes 2012 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_I_%28mtDNA%29#CITEREFFernandes2012)).

so for I to be European, it must have started around the north and west parts of the black sea
Good Input, Its Good Were Keeping The Views On I Varied, Also Lets Try To Shift Focus From Dagestan Back To The Initial Toic Of Where The Origin For I . Who Truly Knows The Validity Of The Study For Sure, But This Is Only One Point For A Non Euro Origin For I. Lets Remeber Things That We Should See Going Along With A Haplogroups Origin Point Like Diversity, Early Clades And Parent Haplogroups.

nordicwarrior
24-02-13, 03:35
Good Input, Its Good Were Keeping The Views On I Varied, Also Lets Try To Shift Focus From Dagestan Back To The Initial Toic Of Where The Origin For I . Who Truly Knows The Validity Of The Study For Sure, But This Is Only One Point For A Non Euro Origin For I. Lets Remeber Things That We Should See Going Along With A Haplogroups Origin Point Like Diversity, Early Clades And Parent Haplogroups.

I like that idea Anthro-inclined, but please let's not totally discard the Dagestan/Daghestan tribe, even at low numbers their diversity is remarkable, and they are considered to be an ancient sheltered population due to their mountainous surroundings. But we are still early in the hg I hunt so it's best to keep options on the table--like Balkans, Iran, etc.

Anthro-inclined
24-02-13, 03:45
I like that idea Anthro-inclined, but please let's not totally discard the Dagestan/Daghestan tribe, even at low numbers their diversity is remarkable, and they are considered to be an ancient sheltered population due to their mountainous surroundings. But we are still early in the hg I hunt so it's best to keep options on the table--like Balkans, Iran, etc.
I Agree Completeley, I Still Vest Importance In Dagestan For Finding I's Origin, And By All Means If You Feel You Can Defend It And Show Its Relavence To The Topic Of I For Sure Voice Your Opinion. I Was Just Concerned That The Oppistion Towards The Dagestan Subject Was Detracting From The Overall Goal Of The Thread.

MOESAN
24-02-13, 16:46
what is "Europe" definition? - what is an HG "origin place"?
Y-I is from Y-IJ (IJK?) cousin to Y-G, descended all of them (I believe) from Y-F
the remote origin is surely between N-E and Caucasus, or not too far from there, I suppose
but the european (geographically) Y-I SNPs (Y-I2a1, I2a2, I1, seam to me very ancient in Europe, and it's there they encreased very dramatically - I have some difficulty to imagine "our" SNPs come here a few centuries ago! so Y-I is "european" for the most, having in mind that nothing is perpetual...
some Y-I2b and I2c (am I wrong in naming, it si changing so fast?), not too rare in N-E an surroundings, are found too in WC-Europe (Germany etc...) and the Y-I2a1b of Eastern Europe-Steppes seam to me linked to I-E or pseudo-I-E movements (Bronze Age)
let's wait the ancient DNA discoveries (it's not going too quickly!)

Alan
26-03-13, 06:40
this is indeed a interesting topic and as you anthro inclined, I believe that this Haplogroup originated somewhere in the Near East and expanded during Neolithic period to Europe. And if you ask why today this Haplogroup is not that frequent anymore. Well probably because of the same reason why Haplogroup G2a which once almost dominated whole Neolithic Europe is in present Europe. Most probably replaced by J2 bearers.

zanipolo
26-03-13, 11:21
I like that idea Anthro-inclined, but please let's not totally discard the Dagestan/Daghestan tribe, even at low numbers their diversity is remarkable, and they are considered to be an ancient sheltered population due to their mountainous surroundings. But we are still early in the hg I hunt so it's best to keep options on the table--like Balkans, Iran, etc.

Check the history of the Varna culture from 4500BC ( east bulgaria ), they surely could have brought G, I, R and other ydna markers through the balkans, through North italy, into southern france and northern Iberia via trade......trade brings migration.......this is what the scholars state.

Nobody1
26-03-13, 16:27
at Zanipolo

No, the Varna culture has absolutely nothing to do with any Hg Y spread to North or West Europe, since the culture itself never spread West or North.
Varna was a distinct (Pre-Indo-European) culture of the East Balkans corresponding to Karanovo VI.
It was exclusively Black sea area, nowhere else.

And yes, Trade brings Migrations.

Varna was the first PRE-Indo-European culture that had extensive trade with the Indo-Europeans (Kurgan I) of the further east (Pontic-Caspian Steppe), and therefor prompted the Indo-European migration waves into Europe of Kurgan II and Kurgan III.

R1b is from the Neolithic (PRE-Indo-European) Linear Pottery Culture

http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/early/2011/08/18/rspb.2011.1044.full

from the study:
"that the R-M269 haplogroup may have spread with the Neolithic, and more specifically with the Linearbandkeramik, a Neolithic agricultural industry that spread throughout northern Europe, from Hungary to France, around 7500 years ago." [5.500 BC]

Thats 1000 years before Varna and 2000 years before the Indo-European expansion/migration (Kurgan III); and a further 2000 years before the (proper) Indo-European Bronze age cultures of Europe, resulting into the Indo-European Keltic, Italic, Nordic, Illyrian, Thracian etc. complex.

sparkey
26-03-13, 17:24
Hold your horses, this...


R1b is from the Neolithic (PRE-Indo-European) Linear Pottery Culture

http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/early/2011/08/18/rspb.2011.1044.full

from the study:
"that the R-M269 haplogroup may have spread with the Neolithic, and more specifically with the Linearbandkeramik, a Neolithic agricultural industry that spread throughout northern Europe, from Hungary to France, around 7500 years ago." [5.500 BC]

...is speculative and very likely incorrect. We have a couple of ancient samples from LBK, one of which was G2a, and the other was some sort of F, but not R1b (Haak 2010). Perhaps even more telling, later pre-Chalcolithic Western and Central European samples have not turned up R1b either, most notably Treilles and La Pierre Fritte, both circa 3000 BCE, which between them turned up a lot of G2a and I2a.

Furthermore, you're taking Busby 2011 out of context. That paper doesn't agree that LBK spread R1b, it's just mentioning there that that was the position supported my Myers et al. Seriously, Busby 2011 is the paper famous for destroying the early-Neolithic-farmer hypothesis with a diversity analysis. Read this from the abstract:


Our analysis reveals no geographical trends in diversity, in contradiction to expectation under the Neolithic hypothesis, and suggests an alternative explanation for the apparent cline in diversity recently described.

I have my issues with the Busby 2011 paper, notably how they suggest that STR dating values are too young without any supporting evidence to back that up. But I think they're spot on with the diversity analysis.

Nobody1
26-03-13, 18:50
at Sparkey

Thats exactly why i quoted Busby 2011, if i wanted to make it easy i would have just quoted Myres 2011 or Balaresque 2010.

Not only does Busby 2011 quote the conclusions of Myres 2011 and Belaresque 2010 (R1b being introduced via the Neolithic expansion), but it even Concludes himself:

"A recent analysis of radiocarbon dates of Neolithic sites across Europe [46] reveals that the spread of the Neolithic was by no means constant, and that several ‘centres of renewed expansion’ are visible across Europe, representing areas of colonization, three of which map intriguingly closely to the centres of the sub-haplogroups foci."

The only reason Busby 2011, is not all in favor (poss. even against) the Neolithic expansion theory of R-S269, is that it claims that there is no Correlation between S127 and xS127; something Balaresque 2010 has shown to be different.

As for Linear-Pottery, the studies of Myres and Balaresque do not claim that Linear Pottery spread R1b across Europe, the studies suggest that with Linear Pottery (earliest) began the spread across Europe. And neither Myres, Balaresque or even Busby claim that the Neolithic was a homogeneous expansion, ‘centres of renewed expansion’

nordicwarrior
26-03-13, 20:32
...Varna was the first PRE-Indo-European culture that had extensive trade with the Indo-Europeans (Kurgan I) of the further east (Pontic-Caspian Steppe), and therefor prompted the Indo-European migration waves into Europe of Kurgan II and Kurgan III....Thats 1000 years before Varna and 2000 years before the Indo-European expansion/migration (Kurgan III); and a further 2000 years before the (proper) Indo-European Bronze age cultures of Europe, resulting into the Indo-European Keltic, Italic, Nordic, Illyrian, Thracian etc. complex.

Nobody, what's your opinion of Gobekli Tepe in Turkey? It beginnings stretch back to 11,000 BCE. This is a big site, and large portions remain buried. At some point GT has to factor into genetic movements.

Nobody1
27-03-13, 19:02
at Nordicwarbler

I consider Gobekli Tepe to be just as interesting and mysterious as most other sites of the Fertile Crescent,
Interesting of course, because it was a Pre-Neolithic (hunter gatherer) religious site/settlement (transitioning to Neolithic agriculture) and mysterious in terms that it was, like Catal Huyuk or the Mureybet settlements simply abandoned.

Also the fact that Gobekli Tepe was Pre-Semitic as well as Pre-Indo-European, makes it interesting in connection with the the equally Non Semitic Sumerians and the Non Semitic (Pre-Indo-European) Hatti.
The entire History of the Fertile Crescent (Neolithic - Bronze age) is highly interesting, especially the vast trade links between Mesopotamia and the Harappan civ. of the Indus-valley. Both were later conquered and largely exploited by the Invading Indo-Europeans [Hittites and Aryans].