MOESAN
Elite member
- Messages
- 5,893
- Reaction score
- 1,295
- Points
- 113
- Location
- Brittany
- Ethnic group
- more celtic
- Y-DNA haplogroup
- R1b - L21/S145*
- mtDNA haplogroup
- H3c
In a work I saw there was a PCA of principal cranial metrics measures; no mention of shapes or indexes, and I regreat it;
some statements after seeing it:
-the Körös they have is almost sticked to Natufians (an heterogenous population, it's true: here ti's a mean) -
-they are well separated from the cluster Catal Höyük and Neo Nikomedia, LBK-C and LBK-Hungary are very close to Catal Höyük too in this PCA
-Alföld AVK-ALP is almost in the middle of a ligne joigning Natufians-Körös to Catal-N-Nikomedia-LBK
-the Lengyel sample they have is very outside, at the opposite of Natufian-Körös in comparison to Catal Höyük-NN-LBK AND OPPOSITE TOO globally speaking to --the vastely spred Mesolithic and North and East Eurasian Neolithic people
-an outsider on the Mesolithic side are the Russian Neolithic group and Oleni Ostrov, at the opposite to Lengyel sample
-Neolithic and mesolithic Latvians and Neolithic Baltic are less far from the "centrum" of the graph, and cluster between them
-French Mesolithic and Lepinski Vir are close enough to this "centrum" the closer being the Portugal Mesolithic, the closer to the megagroup Neolithic samples: -from what I had red about some of these Mesolithic people (Mugem) and their internal variation, it seems to me they already had received an Eastern Mediterranean imput - this imput, if I base myself upon the evolution of "old cromagnoid mediterrean" types (means) of Eneolithic Mediterranea, could have been mediated by females, the diminution of face breadth seeming beginning among wives and children, spite it is not a sexual tendancy - a survey about chromosome X in Mediterranea (West and East), and not only about mt-DNA, concluded at X being more homogenous than Y in Mediterranean.
this PCA is not sufficient to do settle absolute conclusions but we can say
-at first sight, Neolithic people were not metrically speaking a completely homogenous mean
+ some flow of Southeatsern genes had become to reach Soutwestern Mesolithic people before Neolithic revolution was archeologically constated there -
it could explain some differences in mtDNA among Mesolithic regions in Europe; at the opposite, the considered "neolithical" mtDNA of East-central Europe could have been LESS SOUTHEASTERN than we believe today or to better say: their bearers could have been separated enough time from sources to evolve another way and acquire new mutations and traits? some quasi oppositions in distribution exist between some Neolithic groups of Central and East Europe.
the discouraging thing is that we are searching steep changes in anthropology and genetics to illustrate clear historical changes and that we find always some exceptions or some mergins moves of populations without too precise link with huge cutural changes; always this relativity making pictures fuzzy.
the autosomals tool is surely the better at high resolution scale, but very often is just roughly valuable to separate very well separated populations; it would improve with time (and money?);
some statements after seeing it:
-the Körös they have is almost sticked to Natufians (an heterogenous population, it's true: here ti's a mean) -
-they are well separated from the cluster Catal Höyük and Neo Nikomedia, LBK-C and LBK-Hungary are very close to Catal Höyük too in this PCA
-Alföld AVK-ALP is almost in the middle of a ligne joigning Natufians-Körös to Catal-N-Nikomedia-LBK
-the Lengyel sample they have is very outside, at the opposite of Natufian-Körös in comparison to Catal Höyük-NN-LBK AND OPPOSITE TOO globally speaking to --the vastely spred Mesolithic and North and East Eurasian Neolithic people
-an outsider on the Mesolithic side are the Russian Neolithic group and Oleni Ostrov, at the opposite to Lengyel sample
-Neolithic and mesolithic Latvians and Neolithic Baltic are less far from the "centrum" of the graph, and cluster between them
-French Mesolithic and Lepinski Vir are close enough to this "centrum" the closer being the Portugal Mesolithic, the closer to the megagroup Neolithic samples: -from what I had red about some of these Mesolithic people (Mugem) and their internal variation, it seems to me they already had received an Eastern Mediterranean imput - this imput, if I base myself upon the evolution of "old cromagnoid mediterrean" types (means) of Eneolithic Mediterranea, could have been mediated by females, the diminution of face breadth seeming beginning among wives and children, spite it is not a sexual tendancy - a survey about chromosome X in Mediterranea (West and East), and not only about mt-DNA, concluded at X being more homogenous than Y in Mediterranean.
this PCA is not sufficient to do settle absolute conclusions but we can say
-at first sight, Neolithic people were not metrically speaking a completely homogenous mean
+ some flow of Southeatsern genes had become to reach Soutwestern Mesolithic people before Neolithic revolution was archeologically constated there -
it could explain some differences in mtDNA among Mesolithic regions in Europe; at the opposite, the considered "neolithical" mtDNA of East-central Europe could have been LESS SOUTHEASTERN than we believe today or to better say: their bearers could have been separated enough time from sources to evolve another way and acquire new mutations and traits? some quasi oppositions in distribution exist between some Neolithic groups of Central and East Europe.
the discouraging thing is that we are searching steep changes in anthropology and genetics to illustrate clear historical changes and that we find always some exceptions or some mergins moves of populations without too precise link with huge cutural changes; always this relativity making pictures fuzzy.
the autosomals tool is surely the better at high resolution scale, but very often is just roughly valuable to separate very well separated populations; it would improve with time (and money?);