PDA

View Full Version : less homogeneous "populations" are Italians and French ?



zanipolo
23-06-13, 10:56
http://www.plosbiology.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pbio.1001555

seems like the italians and french within their respective borders are the least genetically united europeans.

very ancient gene lines

zanipolo
28-06-13, 09:18
what does this link say about albanians ?

Maciamo
28-06-13, 13:40
You can see in this table the degree of genetic diversity for each population.

http://www.plosbiology.org/article/fetchObject.action?uri=info:doi/10.1371/journal.pbio.1001555.t001&representation=PNG_I

The 'self' column shows the number of shared IBD ("identical by descent") blocks with other individuals of that country. The 'other' column compares IBD blocks with other countries. The higher the value the more recent the common shared ancestry. The Italians have the lowest self value (0.6), followed by the French (0.7) then the Belgians, Germans and Swiss (all 1.1). These are Europe's most genetically diverse populations according to this study. This coroborates my own research on surname diversity (http://www.eupedia.com/europe/european_family_names.shtml), which I found to be the highest in Italy, then France, then Belgium.

The most homogeneous by far are the Albanians (14.5) and the Kosovars (9.9), followed by the Slovenes (5.0), the Russians (4.3), the Poles (3.8), and other Slavic peoples. It means that the Albanian and the Kosovan populations expanded quite recently from a much smaller source population.

However the Albanians, Kosovars and Montenegrins have the highest percentage of shared IBD blocks with the rest of Europe. This is surprising considering the very different Y-DNA lineages found among these populations, notably the very high frequencies of E-V13 and J2b. Perhaps it is the result of the Balkans being the starting point of the Neolithic diffusion on the one side, and that the region was also invaded by all kinds of Europeans (Celts, Greeks, Goths, Slavs) who all left their genetic print in the Balkans. So it works both ways. All Europeans have a bit of Albanian, but all Albanians also have a bit of other Europeans in them.

The Spaniards, the Cypriots, and oddly enough also the Macedonians appear to be the most isolated populations from the rest of Europe. They are closely followed by the French, Swiss, Italians, Portuguese and Turks.

The study also supports a recent Slavic expansion, which not only includes the northern Slavs, but also the southern Slavs (Serbs, Croatians, Slovenes, Bulgars) who all share a lot of IBD blocks with other Slavic populations. That could mean that the Eastern European Y-haplogroup I2a1b-Din was spread around the Balkans during the Slavic migrations, and was not present in the region since the Mesolithic, Neolithic or even Bronze Age.

FBS
28-06-13, 14:42
Thank you for this wonderful explanation Maciamo, I could not make time to read the whole paper.

ElHorsto
28-06-13, 15:25
What if these data merely represent the east-to-west migration tendency in the past of europe?
A population closer to the root would have more diverse haplogroups than branching populations because the latter represent only samples of the root, more prone to genetic drift (source = haplogroup diversity).
For the IBD blocks: assume the simplistic example:
Given is a root population R and two branch populations R1, R2 (samples). The distance between R1 and R is much lower than between R1 and R2, because the path from R1 to R is only one step (R1-R), whereas the path from R1 to R2 is two steps (R1-R-R2).

Now assume there are many branches R1..R9 from root R. It would look like R shares the most blocks with most of the population set (R1..R9), but in fact it is the other way around: Each of R1..R9 shares blocks with its root R due to one-step distance, but shares less with each other due to two-step distances.

EDIT: In other words:
- The higher the 'other' value is, the more root-like the population is.
- And the higher the 'self' value is, the more likely a recent population growth happened in isolation

Or is the above reasoning erroneous?

Wilhelm
28-06-13, 15:29
I guess the spanish group includes Basques on it, otherwise it would show more homogeneus and less isolated

ElHorsto
28-06-13, 16:08
Although it is probably not completely different from what Maciamo wrote.

zanipolo
28-06-13, 21:10
@maciano

Doesn't this sentence below indicate that the Albanians came out of their "hibernation" and went from a very very small tribe to a greater one after the collapse of the Goths in the Balkans?

By far the highest rates of IBD within any populations is found between Albanian speakers—around 90 ancestors from 0–500 ya, and around 600 ancestors from 500–1,500 ya (so high that we left them out of Figure 5 (http://www.plosbiology.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pbio.1001555#pbio-1001555-g005); see Figure S12 (http://www.plosbiology.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pbio.1001555#pbio.1 001555.s012)). Beyond 1,500 ya, the rates of IBD drop to levels typical for other populations in the eastern grouping.

and

The highest levels of IBD sharing are found in the Albanian-speaking individuals (from Albania and Kosovo), an increase in common ancestry deriving from the last 1,500 years. This suggests that a reasonable proportion of the ancestors of modern-day Albanian speakers (at least those represented in POPRES) are drawn from a relatively small, cohesive population that has persisted for at least the last 1,500 years.


To me, this clearly indicates that the albanians where some very smallish tribe stuck between the the many illyrian tribes, many thracian tribes and many epirote tribes. The only 3 tribes in the Kosovo area which where different linguistically and culturally according to ancient historians where the Dardanians, Paeonians and Macedonians

LeBrok
29-06-13, 02:08
Thank you for this wonderful explanation Maciamo, I could not make time to read the whole paper.
Same here. Thanks.

kamani
29-06-13, 02:47
The most homogeneous by far are the Albanians (14.5) and the Kosovars (9.9), followed by the Slovenes (5.0), the Russians (4.3), the Poles (3.8), and other Slavic peoples. It means that the Albanian and the Kosovan populations expanded quite recently from a much smaller source population.

However the Albanians, Kosovars and Montenegrins have the highest percentage of shared IBD blocks with the rest of Europe. This is surprising considering the very different Y-DNA lineages found among these populations, notably the very high frequencies of E-V13 and J2b.

Thank You Maciamo. The above two statements are just another proof that the current Albanians are the remaining nucleus of a much larger collection of tribes who have now been assimilated and belong to other countries in terms of land and language. Did somebody say Illyrians and Thracians...

Maciamo
29-06-13, 09:14
@maciano

Doesn't this sentence below indicate that the Albanians came out of their "hibernation" and went from a very very small tribe to a greater one after the collapse of the Goths in the Balkans?

By far the highest rates of IBD within any populations is found between Albanian speakers—around 90 ancestors from 0–500 ya, and around 600 ancestors from 500–1,500 ya (so high that we left them out of Figure 5 (http://www.plosbiology.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pbio.1001555#pbio-1001555-g005); see Figure S12 (http://www.plosbiology.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pbio.1001555#pbio.1 001555.s012)). Beyond 1,500 ya, the rates of IBD drop to levels typical for other populations in the eastern grouping.

and

The highest levels of IBD sharing are found in the Albanian-speaking individuals (from Albania and Kosovo), an increase in common ancestry deriving from the last 1,500 years. This suggests that a reasonable proportion of the ancestors of modern-day Albanian speakers (at least those represented in POPRES) are drawn from a relatively small, cohesive population that has persisted for at least the last 1,500 years.


To me, this clearly indicates that the albanians where some very smallish tribe stuck between the the many illyrian tribes, many thracian tribes and many epirote tribes. The only 3 tribes in the Kosovo area which where different linguistically and culturally according to ancient historians where the Dardanians, Paeonians and Macedonians

Yes, that's also how I understood it.

Maciamo
29-06-13, 09:26
Thank You Maciamo. The above two statements are just another proof that the current Albanians are the remaining nucleus of a much larger collection of tribes who have now been assimilated and belong to other countries in terms of land and language. Did somebody say Illyrians and Thracians...

It would be a mistake to think that the Albanians remained "pure" since the Bronze Age. The Albanian Y-DNA pool undeniably incorporated Germanic (most likely Gothic) lineages as well, judging by the 2% of I1 and 1.5% of I2b. I don't have the breakdown of R1a and R1b subclades, but I would expect at least 5% of R1a+R1b to be of Germanic origin. So overall we are looking at approximately 8-9% of Germanic blood among Albanians. What seems to differentiate Albanians from their Balkanic neighbours is the lower incidence of Slavic lineages (R1a and I2a1b), although they are not absent from the admixture either. The Albanian expansion seems to have happened just after having assimilated Gothic and Slavic migrants.

kamani
29-06-13, 11:53
It would be a mistake to think that the Albanians remained "pure" since the Bronze Age.

They haven't remained pure. Most of them are now part of other countries in the Balkan, so they have mixed and acquired another identity. Illyria+Thracia were 50-60% of the Balkans, now Albania+Kosovo is maybe 10% of it. This 10% that still speaks Albanian is the part that "assimilation" has not reached yet.



The Albanian Y-DNA pool undeniably incorporated Germanic (most likely Gothic) lineages as well, judging by the 2% of I1 and 1.5% of I2b. I don't have the breakdown of R1a and R1b subclades, but I would expect at least 5% of R1a+R1b to be of Germanic origin. So overall we are looking at approximately 8-9% of Germanic blood among Albanians.


That's very good that you also found out that Albanians have some Germanic blood. I have noticed it is much more visible in the South. My data for South-Albania that I collect indicate, 9% I1, 3% I2b, 14% I2a2b, 10% R1b+R1a from West Europe. Total is about 36% Western/Nordic y-dna. If you factor in that the non-latin part of the Albanian language has mostly Nordic substrata, the full size of the "iceberg" starts to become visible. Basically, Illyrians+Thracians were "Germanic" Indo-Europeans who mixed with local Pelasgians in the Bronze Age/Early Iron. I don't have a published study, so anyone can choose to believe this or not, but in my mind I have no shade of doubt about this.

LeBrok
29-06-13, 17:32
Thank You Maciamo. The above two statements are just another proof that the current Albanians are the remaining nucleus of a much larger collection of tribes who have now been assimilated and belong to other countries in terms of land and language. Did somebody say Illyrians and Thracians...


It would be a mistake to think that the Albanians remained "pure" since the Bronze Age. The Albanian Y-DNA pool undeniably incorporated Germanic (most likely Gothic) lineages as well, judging by the 2% of I1 and 1.5% of I2b. I don't have the breakdown of R1a and R1b subclades, but I would expect at least 5% of R1a+R1b to be of Germanic origin. So overall we are looking at approximately 8-9% of Germanic blood among Albanians. What seems to differentiate Albanians from their Balkanic neighbours is the lower incidence of Slavic lineages (R1a and I2a1b), although they are not absent from the admixture either. The Albanian expansion seems to have happened just after having assimilated Gothic and Slavic migrants.

Interesting, two different conclusions.

For Albanian it is a proof of being old european stock from which all europeans come from.

For Outsider, Albania is like a woman who slept around and now has children related to all europeans.

kamani
29-06-13, 18:33
For Outsider, Albania is like a woman who slept around and now has children related to all europeans.

But it hasn't, in fact what is now called Albania has slept around way less that everybody else in Europe (since the Iron Age at least). The proof is that Albanians have by far the highest number of common ancestors with each-other. What makes it a source of genes is that also a lot of other Europeans have a good number of common ancestors with Albanians. It is like the source of a stream, water from the source reaches everybody, but water from everybody doesn't reach the source. The source is "ignorant" of what is out there. The Albanians that have mixed do not call themselves Albanian anymore, so this study would pick them up under other nationalities, now they're under ex-Jugoslavia, Greece, Italy etc.
Who "slept around" would be Italy or France with the lowest number of common ancestors within. Historically Italy has been a collection of Celts, Greeks, Illyrians, Etruscans, Germans etc.

nordicwarrior
29-06-13, 18:51
...Basically, Illyrians+Thracians were "Germanic" Indo-Europeans who mixed with local Pelasgians in the Bronze Age/Early Iron. I don't have a published study, so anyone can choose to believe this or not, but in my mind I have no shade of doubt about this.

I agree very much with your summary, except for part of the above quote. The mentioned I1 and some of the I2 strains would not really fit into the "Germanic Indo-European" mold that you speak of. I would think it more accurate to say that there was an input of Germanic Indo-European that had previously mixed with a Meso or even Paleo group of Norse.

I know that sounds nitpicking, but I wouldn't say these hg. I percentages would fit into I.E. classifications.

**EDIT**
I could also see the Pelasgians having a Nordic/hap. I1 component. I think hg. I used the rivers of Europe like we use highways today and that this has been going on for quite some time. These older native populations were much thinner but also very mobile.

Also, I'm assuming you include Dacians in your Illyrian umbrella?

DejaVu
29-06-13, 19:27
But it hasn't, in fact what is now called Albania has slept around way less that everybody else in Europe (since the Iron Age at least). The proof is that Albanians have by far the highest number of common ancestors with each-other. What makes it a source of genes is that also a lot of other Europeans have a good number of common ancestors with Albanians. It is like the source of a stream, water from the source reaches everybody, but water from everybody doesn't reach the source. The source is "ignorant" of what is out there. The Albanians that have mixed do not call themselves Albanian anymore, so this study would pick them up under other nationalities, now they're under ex-Jugoslavia, Greece, Italy etc.
Who "slept around" would be Italy or France with the lowest number of common ancestors within. Historically Italy has been a collection of Celts, Greeks, Illyrians, Etruscans, Germans etc.

This is a known fact that albanians (real identity - shqiptars) married or shall we say slept with their sisters, brothers or cousins, also known as incest. Thats why they have most common ancestors. But the truth about who are most pure country is they who match less with other countries population.

The 'self' column shows the number of shared IBD ("identical by descent") blocks with other individuals of that country. The 'other' column compares IBD blocks with other countries. The higher the value the more recent the common shared ancestry.
The most homogeneous by far are the Albanians (14.5) and the Kosovars (9.9), followed by the Slovenes (5.0), the Russians (4.3), the Poles (3.8), and other Slavic peoples. It means that the Albanian and the Kosovan populations expanded quite recently from a much smaller source population.
However the Albanians, Kosovars and Montenegrins have the highest percentage of shared IBD blocks with the rest of Europe.
The Spaniards, the Cypriots, and oddly enough also the Macedonians appear to be the most isolated populations from the rest of Europe. They are closely followed by the French, Swiss, Italians, Portuguese and Turks.

Conclusion:
Most isolated = Most original people of the country. (Spaniards, Cypriots, Macedonians)
Most homogeneous = Most incest people. (Albanians)

Luan
29-06-13, 20:18
This is a known fact that albanians (real identity - shqiptars) married or shall we say slept with their sisters, brothers or cousins, also known as incest. Thats why they have most common ancestors. But the truth about who are most pure country is they who match less with other countries population.
Why is this user is allowed to post such stupid anti Albanian on here, this is not the first time the user done it.

zanipolo
29-06-13, 20:20
I agree very much with your summary, except for part of the above quote. The mentioned I1 and some of the I2 strains would not really fit into the "Germanic Indo-European" mold that you speak of. I would think it more accurate to say that there was an input of Germanic Indo-European that had previously mixed with a Meso or even Paleo group of Norse.

I know that sounds nitpicking, but I wouldn't say these hg. I percentages would fit into I.E. classifications.

**EDIT**
I could also see the Pelasgians having a Nordic/hap. I1 component. I think hg. I used the rivers of Europe like we use highways today and that this has been going on for quite some time. These older native populations were much thinner but also very mobile.

Also, I'm assuming you include Dacians in your Illyrian umbrella?

As per the recent finds by KenN that I1 is no longer classed germanic or nordic but basically west-baltic from pomerania and prussia, then we can conclude that the goths took I1 to the balkans.
(seems like I was correct in that the goths where baltic people, but also seems that I was wrong when I thought they where in majority R1a.)
Brings us to the conclusion as per other thread that albanians coastal are J2 and inland E in majority

zanipolo
29-06-13, 20:23
This is a known fact that albanians (real identity - shqiptars) married or shall we say slept with their sisters, brothers or cousins, also known as incest. Thats why they have most common ancestors. But the truth about who are most pure country is they who match less with other countries population.

I say more like the tibetan people, they never came down from the mountains to mix with the locals.
your comments are a little bit harsh especially for a swede!

Luan
29-06-13, 20:32
I say more like the tibetan people, they never came down from the mountains to mix with the locals.
your comments are a little bit harsh especially for a swede!
My guess is he is fyrom. Not a swede.

kamani
29-06-13, 20:47
Also, I'm assuming you include Dacians in your Illyrian umbrella?

correct. They would have been mixed with each-other more so than with others.

Eldritch
29-06-13, 20:58
The Albanian Y-DNA pool undeniably incorporated Germanic (most likely Gothic) lineages as well, judging by the 2% of I1 and 1.5% of I2b.

Where are you getting this low numbers for Albanian speakers, in almost every study i've seen, Kosovar Albanians, Macedonian Albanians but also Albanian from Albania the I1 + I2b ratio have been around 6-7 %

Eldritch
29-06-13, 21:04
For example according to this paper I-M223 in Albanians is even higher than Swedes which is odd to say the least...

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1181996/table/TB1/

It's curious to see that Arbereshe community in Italy has the same percentages of I-M223

3.8% of I-M223 + 2.8% of I-M253 which is 6.6% and other studies show the same.

Athelti Albanoi
29-06-13, 21:17
It means that the Albanian and the Kosovan populations expanded quite recently from a much smaller source population.



just because they are homogeneous it does not mean that at all
that is just a hypothesis from you

zanipolo
29-06-13, 21:28
correct. They would have been mixed with each-other more so than with others.

nonsense

Dacians are under the thracian terminology same as getae, triballi, moesia, bessi etc

zanipolo
29-06-13, 21:29
just because they are homogeneous it does not mean that at all
that is just a hypothesis from you

it is fact not by maciano but by the genetic paper in post #1

Athelti Albanoi
29-06-13, 21:34
it is fact not by maciano but by the genetic paper in post #1

the author of the study just collected the numbers of different nationas
and than made possible hypothesis up of himslef this does not mean that it is a fact

the collected numbers are facts the rest are just hypothesis of the author
we can just guess how this all happend but not know

Eldritch
29-06-13, 21:35
Some countries on the list are seriously underepresented, Montenegro 1 person?

Athelti Albanoi
29-06-13, 21:48
https://fbcdn-sphotos-f-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/484012_483052468374912_1166571775_n.jpg
http://ids.lib.harvard.edu/ids/view/3303325?s=.5&rotation=0&width=1200&height=1200&x=-1&y=-1&xcap=mx+H1zMK5j7hx82zCIFrFnVueAoTe4xt4BAJZkh2JsSvC HXXlbDLFXHJfamXnEB%2FVpQ2Zq3hMqoQ0uId28WJ%2Fi0x%2F MXFhOo820NoHx0bMIVufOqRQcRzHzRkULS+WE%2F++M3kp851N ZQs8hX1p9KUhf1L4NcjgPdR602ve60%2FATPjo+wupbYiC+Yyh gy1smiFd5YNccjZoj9RrseHovlr2fy7VE4eGUfJnmi1W1wk%2F PKNVu6C1jT6g+TjT2Ow92rJGpMbBWrPc+pNpbg+qHZFaZFt5dm gsbdXuBdYxdHZtYo%3D

what is interesting is also that the albanian languge is the only one which was not romanised on the balkans
http://books.google.de/books?id=Phyvk2tPaYQC&pg=PA290&dq=albania+not+romanised&hl=de&sa=X&ei=1jjPUaWbE6Px4QTR8YGQDg&ved=0CDwQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=albania%20not%20romanised&f=false

we are the origjinali 5924 :grin:

5923

zanipolo
29-06-13, 21:49
the author of the study just collected the numbers of different nationas
and than made possible hypothesis up of himslef this does not mean that it is a fact

the collected numbers are facts the rest are just hypothesis of the author
we can just guess how this all happend but not know

This was the conclusion by the scholars/scientists/genetics that tested these people. It was not a guess.
The guess is what everyone writes here, you and me included.

maciano basically did a summary on what these genetic people documented.
Stop dribbling this bull-shit nationalistic crap taught to you by some story teller or friends at a card game or drinking session.

this is fact, every nation LIES about their own history, its a way to keep the nation intact. Lies on lies on lies. DNA cannot lie.

zanipolo
29-06-13, 21:51
https://fbcdn-sphotos-f-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/484012_483052468374912_1166571775_n.jpg
http://ids.lib.harvard.edu/ids/view/3303325?s=.5&rotation=0&width=1200&height=1200&x=-1&y=-1&xcap=mx+H1zMK5j7hx82zCIFrFnVueAoTe4xt4BAJZkh2JsSvC HXXlbDLFXHJfamXnEB%2FVpQ2Zq3hMqoQ0uId28WJ%2Fi0x%2F MXFhOo820NoHx0bMIVufOqRQcRzHzRkULS+WE%2F++M3kp851N ZQs8hX1p9KUhf1L4NcjgPdR602ve60%2FATPjo+wupbYiC+Yyh gy1smiFd5YNccjZoj9RrseHovlr2fy7VE4eGUfJnmi1W1wk%2F PKNVu6C1jT6g+TjT2Ow92rJGpMbBWrPc+pNpbg+qHZFaZFt5dm gsbdXuBdYxdHZtYo%3D

what is interesting is also that the albanian languge is the only one which was not romanised on the balkans
http://books.google.de/books?id=Phyvk2tPaYQC&pg=PA290&dq=albania+not+romanised&hl=de&sa=X&ei=1jjPUaWbE6Px4QTR8YGQDg&ved=0CDwQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=albania%20not%20romanised&f=false

we are the origjinali 5924 :grin:

5923

language is not genetics, language tells you nothing. You are writing in English...are you English ethnically!

zanipolo
29-06-13, 21:53
For example according to this paper I-M223 in Albanians is even higher than Swedes which is odd to say the least...

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1181996/table/TB1/

It's curious to see that Arbereshe community in Italy has the same percentages of I-M223

3.8% of I-M223 + 2.8% of I-M253 which is 6.6% and other studies show the same.

If the goths/vandals brought I into the balkans, then 80Years of goths in balkans and 200 yeras of goths in Italy can make an impact, especially since populations where so low. italy only got to 10M people around 1000AD

Athelti Albanoi
29-06-13, 21:55
language is not genetics, language tells you nothing. You are writing in English...are you English ethnically!

its and "indicator" like you would say

Athelti Albanoi
29-06-13, 22:02
This was the conclusion by the scholars/scientists/genetics that tested these people. It was not a guess.
The guess is what everyone writes here, you and me included.

maciano basically did a summary on what these genetic people documented.
Stop dribbling this bull-shit nationalistic crap taught to you by some story teller or friends at a card game or drinking session.

this is fact, every nation LIES about their own history, its a way to keep the nation intact. Lies on lies on lies. DNA cannot lie.

call it conclusion or guess its still the same: a hypothesis which can not be prooved so we can not know exactly what happend maciamo did a summery of the guesses or the hypothesis of the author

why do you think i am beeing nationalistc?
it is wondering me that you southslavs are so much interested about albanian genetics?
who is lyieng here i am beeing just a bit scaptical about that hypothesis what is your point of accusing me like that?

and what are you trying to say with this "quiete recently"

Eldritch
29-06-13, 22:13
If the goths/vandals brought I into the balkans, then 80Years of goths in balkans and 200 yeras of goths in Italy can make an impact, especially since populations where so low. italy only got to 10M people around 1000AD
Well rather the Germanic I clades, I P-37.2 was brought by Slavs for example.

zanipolo
29-06-13, 22:13
call it conclusion or guess its still the same: a hypothesis which can not be prooved so we can not know exactly what happend maciamo did a summery of the guesses or the hypothesis of the author

why do you think i am beeing nationalistc?
it is wondering me that you southslavs are so much interested about albanian genetics?
who is lyieng here i am beeing just a bit scaptical about that hypothesis what is your point of accusing me like that?

and what are you trying to say with this "quiete recently"

Pardon...............you are the southslav not me. You have 100% more slav, bulgarian, macedonian and greek than I . basically you are more balkan than me.

All are scared that genetics will eventually show the truth and all these myths created by nationalistic scholars will be just fantasy...as time passes this nationalistic bull-shit will disappear.

Athelti Albanoi
29-06-13, 22:24
Pardon...............you are the southslav not me. You have 100% more slav, bulgarian, macedonian and greek than I . basically you are more balkan than me.
slavs are mixed with everything there is no pure slavic haplogroup
lol what is this nonsense i am full albanian the others have our genes not we theirs :wary2:


All are scared that genetics will eventually show the truth and all these myths created by nationalistic scholars will be just fantasy...as time passes this nationalistic bull-shit will disappear.

hopfully so the southslavs can not try to relate theirself with the ancient balkan poeple anymore fyromianstyle

Yetos
29-06-13, 23:05
slavs are mixed with everything there is no pure slavic haplogroup
lol what is this nonsense i am full albanian the others have our genes not we theirs :wary2:



hopfully so the southslavs can not try to relate theirself with the ancient balkan poeple anymore fyromianstyle

when a joke is repeated many times is Boring,

Do you have something else to tell us except your personal believes?

Athelti Albanoi
30-06-13, 03:38
when a joke is repeated many times is Boring,

Do you have something else to tell us except your personal believes?

wtf what are you trying to say me

you stalk me in every thread and writte some random crap with makes not even sense
you are writting me not i you so how do i bore you lol hahahahah

Luan
30-06-13, 04:03
Pardon...............you are the southslav not me. You have 100% more slav, bulgarian, macedonian and greek than I . basically you are more balkan than me.

All are scared that genetics will eventually show the truth and all these myths created by nationalistic scholars will be just fantasy...as time passes this nationalistic bull-shit will disappear.
100%slav? Not possible. So you must be pure venet, don't know how you found that, stop with your nationalist bullshit.

zanipolo
30-06-13, 04:48
@Maciano

regarding the slovenes and based on the knowledge that they state they are from modern Poland/czech lands and that M458 ( slavic marker ) is no longer a "polish" marker, do you think that the slovenes might have always been there ( in slovenia ) but became slavic via language after 700AD.
I found no slovene migration unless the Avars where these slovenes OR where the slovenes the "east germanic" tribe and later became slavic via language?



focus on the possibility that it was rather the Przeworsk culture expanding south-east that managed to include those "Carpathian" M458 people.

We know that Przeworsk has also influenced some territories further east (in Western Ukraine just north of the Carpathian region) and this is quite commonly interpreted as invading the territory of the local Dacian tribe named Costoboci (commonly identified with the so-called Lipiţa culture located on the upper Dniester). Intriguingly, such a potential "clash" has been reported in ancient sources as a conflict between the Costoboci and the Vandalic tribe of Asdingi (which happened around 170-180 AD), hence some people consider this to be just another proof that Przeworsk was in fact a Germanic culture represented by Vandals (who were supposed to be reported earlier as Lugii because of their hypothetical initial association with the assimilated Celtic population of Southern and Central Poland).

Since it is quite obvious that M458 and especially CTS11962, including of course L1029, are all very strongly associated with the entire Slavic population, let's assume for the sake of this discussion that Przeworsk was not a Germanic but rather a Pra-Slavic culture while its relatively small South-Eastern part that could have shown a significant proportion of M458 became a center of the subsequent Slavic expansion. One problem with this scenario is that this relatively small region (encompassing SE Poland and some neighboring territories) has actually never become a significant and independent cultural center that would be responsible for spreading not only the Slavic culture but also the Slavic genes in all directions. Importantly, just like all remaining parts of the Przeworsk culture, this region has undergone a significant collapse in the late 4th and early 5t century, and this is a period when we would expect the Slavic population (and especially M458) to significantly increase in size rather than shrink down. Finally, it is well documented that the Korchak-Prague culture (evidently Early Slavic!) that has been occupying the SE Poland since the late 5th and early 6th century AD, has come to this region from the East (before expanding further west and north-west), so this would rather speak against SE Poland as a potential initial center of the Slavic expansion.

Despite the above counter-arguments, there is, however, a small chance that M458 was born in SE Poland. We can, for example, imagine that once the local population has been included into the expanding Przeworsk culture, the two major sub-branches of M458 have been separated, with the larger CTS11962 "clan" having moved further east, while its much younger (and less numerous) brother lineage L260 having been left somewhere in SE Poland. Assuming that the CTS11962 clade contributed to the formation of the Zarubintsy culture and all Post-Zarubintsy Early Slavic (or Proto-Slavic) formations, this would explain its presence in nearly all modern Slavic cultures. Additionally, when some of those Early Slavs in Western Ukraine (Korchak-Prague) have started to expand west they met (and "assimilated") a local population representing the young L260 clade. This would explain not only the presence of CTS11962 (including L1029) in all Slavic populations, but also the characteristic distribution pattern of L260 (showing the highest frequency in some sub-populations of Western Slavs).

zanipolo
30-06-13, 04:53
Well rather the Germanic I clades, I P-37.2 was brought by Slavs for example.

maybe scythian from when the goths settled north of the black sea for so many years

nordicwarrior
30-06-13, 06:19
As per the recent finds by KenN that I1 is no longer classed germanic or nordic but basically west-baltic from pomerania and prussia, then we can conclude that the goths took I1 to the balkans.
(seems like I was correct in that the goths where baltic people, but also seems that I was wrong when I thought they where in majority R1a.)
Brings us to the conclusion as per other thread that albanians coastal are J2 and inland E in majority

Wow! This is huge news. Can you site a link or source?

I have been saying for quite some time that I1 looks like it should be pushed more towards Prussia or even Finland. The term Norse would apply probably even more so though because of the Northern orientation of this haplogroup.

It not always easy being a genius...

Maciamo
30-06-13, 07:23
Interesting, two different conclusions.

For Albanian it is a proof of being old european stock from which all europeans come from.

For Outsider, Albania is like a woman who slept around and now has children related to all europeans.

Actually I never said that Albanian women slept around. I was rather imagining that some Goths (both men and women) became assimilated to the population of the Eastern Roman Empire in the Balkans in the 4th and 5th centuries and their DNA pervaded the whole gene pool in the region.

What you are saying is that male Gothic lineages reached the Albanian gene pool because either:

a) Albanian women slept around (cheated on their Albanian husbands) with Gothic men
b) Gothic men raped Albanian women (unlikely on a big scale since the Goths were poor immigrants wishing to become Roman citizens, not mighty conquerors)

I think that neither can explain the 9% of Gothic lineages among the Albanians. The only way to know if that is true is to look at mtDNA lineages and try to identify the exact percentage of Gothic mtDNA among the Albanians. If there is less than 1%, then you may be right. But I expect it to be of a similar percentage as the Y-DNA. Unfortunately we don't know what Gothic mtDNA lineages were at present, and anyway we don't have a study on Albanian mtDNA that includes deep subclades.

MOESAN
30-06-13, 17:11
This is a known fact that albanians (real identity - shqiptars) married or shall we say slept with their sisters, brothers or cousins, also known as incest. Thats why they have most common ancestors. But the truth about who are most pure country is they who match less with other countries population.

The 'self' column shows the number of shared IBD ("identical by descent") blocks with other individuals of that country. The 'other' column compares IBD blocks with other countries. The higher the value the more recent the common shared ancestry.
The most homogeneous by far are the Albanians (14.5) and the Kosovars (9.9), followed by the Slovenes (5.0), the Russians (4.3), the Poles (3.8), and other Slavic peoples. It means that the Albanian and the Kosovan populations expanded quite recently from a much smaller source population.
However the Albanians, Kosovars and Montenegrins have the highest percentage of shared IBD blocks with the rest of Europe.
The Spaniards, the Cypriots, and oddly enough also the Macedonians appear to be the most isolated populations from the rest of Europe. They are closely followed by the French, Swiss, Italians, Portuguese and Turks.

Conclusion:
Most isolated = Most original people of the country. (Spaniards, Cypriots, Macedonians)
Most homogeneous = Most incest people. (Albanians)



In find a bit insulting your "incest" vocabulary! (maybe it was not your purpose)
and do not confuse wide intermarriages basis (contrary to narrow, short endogamy) with populations crossings in them very diverse sources of "exogenes" -
but I think it is sometimes difficult to tell a self within differentiation (by time and/or by number) from an outside come differentiation (far foreign populations introgression) - continuity on place or discontinuity perhaps can be differentiated if some parts of the genome use to vary faster than others (I need some more knowledge about their methods on this point) -i it is the same problem we see about HT "variance",

MOESAN
30-06-13, 17:36
As per the recent finds by KenN that I1 is no longer classed germanic or nordic but basically west-baltic from pomerania and prussia, then we can conclude that the goths took I1 to the balkans.
(seems like I was correct in that the goths where baltic people, but also seems that I was wrong when I thought they where in majority R1a.)
Brings us to the conclusion as per other thread that albanians coastal are J2 and inland E in majority

on what basis? 6% only of -Y1 in baltic lands...
surely they were denser previously but before I-Eans, and they were overflowed - they have been for a long time all over the baltic shores until Finnland and in Denmark
today they are more a germanic marker or finnic marker than whatever else and without any other proof I consider Y-I1 as a reasonably sure germanic marker in southern lands of Europe - maybe sometime I 'll know I'm wrong?

LeBrok
30-06-13, 20:33
Actually I never said that Albanian women slept around. I.
Neither did I. It was a figure of speech.
She/Albania slept around/mixed with others.

Yetos
30-06-13, 20:52
wtf what are you trying to say me

you stalk me in every thread and writte some random crap with makes not even sense
you are writting me not i you so how do i bore you lol hahahahah

you name neolithic settlements as illyrian,
I ask you, Illyrians spoke IE and you did not answer.

Simply I got bored of Albanian extra Nationalistic imagination,

TELL US NOW,
PULE/POLA WAS AN ILLYRIAN SETTLEMENT?
ILLYRIAN WAS OR NOT IE?

EVEN SCIENCE FICTION WRITERS WOULD ENVY YOUR IMAGINATION.

nordicwarrior
01-07-13, 00:20
I'm not at all convinced the I1 was brought southward by the Gothic tribal movements. I'm thinking it happened much later.

Eldritch
01-07-13, 00:38
I'm not at all convinced the I1 was brought southward by the Gothic tribal movements. I'm thinking it happened much later.
Later ?

Maybe you mean earlier.

nordicwarrior
01-07-13, 03:27
Nope. Later.

ElHorsto
05-07-13, 12:47
The Albanian Y-DNA pool undeniably incorporated Germanic (most likely Gothic) lineages as well, judging by the 2% of I1 and 1.5% of I2b. I don't have the breakdown of R1a and R1b subclades, but I would expect at least 5% of R1a+R1b to be of Germanic origin. So overall we are looking at approximately 8-9% of Germanic blood among Albanians.


I don't understand. According to Eupedia y HG table Albanian I1,I2b figures are not high. Every neighbour country has more I1 and I2b, even Greece and Bulgaria.
I tend to agree with nordicwarbler that it came later than Goths.

zanipolo
05-07-13, 13:10
I don't understand. According to Eupedia y HG table Albanian I1,I2b figures are not high. Every neighbour country has more I1 and I2b, even Greece and Bulgaria.
I tend to agree with nordicwarbler that it came later than Goths.

Ken N stated in 2012 that I2b was Eastern balkans and went to anatolia
he stated recently that I1 was south baltic marker
he also stated that I2a was ukraine and moldovian ( its moldovia's highest marker )

So, maciano I1 comment seemed to have meant that it could not come before the "germanic" invasions of the balkans . The goths could have taken I2a with it as they settled in ukraine and moldovian areas for a long time before they began their invasion. and I2b was ancient bulgarian and romanian lands.

The albanian I markers could be dregs of goths who remained after their balkan kingdom declined. Its Albanian by default.

I2b was already in Italy in the early iron-age

albanopolis
05-07-13, 15:59
Some countries on the list are seriously underepresented, Montenegro 1 person?I's not that they are underrepresented. It's their size. Montenegrins are around 200 000 people. The rest of the people in Montenegro are Servs (around 40%), Albanians (around 8%) and Boshniacs, Croats the rest. So, that's why is a single person.

albanopolis
05-07-13, 16:07
Some countries on the list are seriously underepresented, Montenegro 1 person?

So according to their population Montenegrins should have less than one person. Since its not practical to halve a person, they have given them a full person. So in this study they appear overrepresented.:laughing:

kamani
05-07-13, 16:26
I don't understand. According to Eupedia y HG table Albanian I1,I2b figures are not high. Every neighbour country has more I1 and I2b, even Greece and Bulgaria.
I tend to agree with nordicwarbler that it came later than Goths.

That table is not that accurate about Albania. It's an average of Albanian and Kosovar y-dna, which are a bit different. Pericic found more I1 in Kosovars than in all other ex-Jugoslavs thou; and they're supposed to be the least germanic of Albanians because they descend from Pelasgian refuge-mountain areas. There is no published study about South/Middle Albania, where you would expect to find the most traces of the "germanic" tribes.

MOESAN
06-07-13, 11:02
For example according to this paper I-M223 in Albanians is even higher than Swedes which is odd to say the least...

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1181996/table/TB1/

It's curious to see that Arbereshe community in Italy has the same percentages of I-M223

3.8% of I-M223 + 2.8% of I-M253 which is 6.6% and other studies show the same.

the survey you mention is of 2004, new surveys came after and these %s ought to be changed, for Albanese as for french regions (and evidently mayby for others too) -
I red very contradictory things concerning Y-I2a2 ex I2B ex I1c as for Provence where it was supposed to be high and now is low - I saw old maps where at first it was centered around Provence and other where it was centered around Rouergue (south to Auvergne, just north to the central mediterranean coasts of Languedoc. So...

Eldritch
06-07-13, 11:27
the survey you mention is of 2004, new surveys came after and these %s ought to be changed, for Albanese as for french regions (and evidently mayby for others too) -
I red very contradictory things concerning Y-I2a2 ex I2B ex I1c as for Provence where it was supposed to be high and now is low - I saw old maps where at first it was centered around Provence and other where it was centered around Rouergue (south to Auvergne, just north to the central mediterranean coasts of Languedoc. So...
Well yes i can post other studies but anyway it's still reliable, just the terminology has changed.

For example in Pericic paper Kosovar Albanians (No Albanians from Albania) show 5.31% of I-M253 no I-M223 found.

Seems the later haplogroup haves a little hotspot between South Albania, North Greece and Macedonia so it makes sense.

MOESAN
06-07-13, 11:54
[QUOTE=Maciamo;411082]You can see in this table the degree of genetic diversity for each population.



The 'self' column shows the number of shared IBD ("identical by descent") blocks with other individuals of that country. The 'other' column compares IBD blocks with other countries. The higher the value the more recent the common shared ancestry. The Italians have the lowest self value (0.6), followed by the French (0.7) then the Belgians, Germans and Swiss (all 1.1). These are Europe's most genetically diverse populations according to this study. This coroborates my own research on surname diversity (http://www.eupedia.com/europe/european_family_names.shtml), which I found to be the highest in Italy, then France, then Belgium.

I'm sorry because it is on the merge of this topic -
but concernng frequence of patronymic surnames, even if your remark keeps a lot of sense, I precise that the density of different surnames in a population depends on more than 1 fact: the date of first patronymic fixed transmission and the research of originality or differenciation for names:
we could wait a less variated panel or surnames if they were fixed in ancient time in a small population - but
Wales chosen patronymic system only about the XIX° century which doesn' t explain the paucity if it explainsthe anglo-norman look of the more born welsh surnames; by the way: the same late (around 1800) date for Jews in France (Napoleon the 1st) - Scandinavia too - we could wait more variated surnames in these cases: not at all: the welsh and scandinavian system was a true patronymic UNfixed one, changing at every generation: son of ... was the rule ('mab' >> '(a)b/p'-+ christian name' in Wales, dropped very often after, and christian name'-sson'-'sen' among Scandinavians: poor enough result too in North Europe -
Spain and Portugal, highly variable region according to this survey, is poor enough concerning surnames too-
other detail: France is vaste: if you study the surnames by regions, you find less variability in ancient times - and when making this kind of statistic, it is difficult to manage the regional forms of same meaning surnames...

concerning the present topic, even if things seem evident enough, I wait having understood the all method before saying my point of view - because I try to tell the impact of population dimension on ancient mixtures from the impact of new mixtures -
sun is came back in Brittany and perhaps elsewhere: surely it will help us to see more clearly?