Haplogroup I, is it European?

Anthro-inclined

Regular Member
Messages
215
Reaction score
25
Points
0
Location
Toronto
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.:unsure:

Sources:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_I-M170_(Y-DNA)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_IJ_(Y-DNA)
 
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. :)
 
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.
 
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. Andi.jpg
 
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 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.
 
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 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.
 
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.
 
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?
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
Last edited:
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.
 
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.
 
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*.
 

This thread has been viewed 24703 times.

Back
Top