PDA

View Full Version : Possible Post-Neolithic Immigration Flow From the Fertile Crescent



Tomenable
10-01-16, 12:55
After Anatolian farmers, there could be yet another migration flow from the Middle East, which affected Southern Europe:

It seems that the majority of Maltese ancestry is from those immigrants:

LINK:

http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?6197-Possible-fertile-crescent-admixture-in-South-Europe

Chart (interesting is this breakdown for Yamna West and East - I guess it's Yamna_Samara and Yamna_Kalmykia ???):

http://gen3553.pagesperso-orange.fr/images/Country.png

http://gen3553.pagesperso-orange.fr/images/Ancient.png

MAP:

http://gen3553.pagesperso-orange.fr/images/CroissantFertile.png

Who was that and what haplogroups could they bring with them ???

Tomenable
10-01-16, 13:06
​See these differences:

Bell Beaker:

Yamna_West = 18,6%; Yamna_East = 14,1%; Kotias (Teal / CHG ???) = 9%

Corded Ware:

Yamna_West = 9,7%; Yamna_East = 24,2%; Kotias (Teal / CHG ???) = 25,8%

Does this show, that R1a is from "Teal people" (from Iran?), or perhaps R1a was present in Eastern Yamna?

Maybe this explains where did R1a Xiaohe mummies buried in the Tarim Basin come from ???

Sile
11-01-16, 06:36
After Anatolian farmers, there could be yet another migration flow from the Middle East, which affected Southern Europe:

It seems that the majority of Maltese ancestry is from those immigrants:

LINK:

http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?6197-Possible-fertile-crescent-admixture-in-South-Europe

Chart (interesting is this breakdown for Yamna West and East - I guess it's Yamna_Samara and Yamna_Kalmykia ???):

http://gen3553.pagesperso-orange.fr/images/Country.png

http://gen3553.pagesperso-orange.fr/images/Ancient.png

MAP:

http://gen3553.pagesperso-orange.fr/images/CroissantFertile.png

Who was that and what haplogroups could they bring with them ???


Why does every amateur EXCLUDE the early Neolithic from 4000BC or older from these calculations ?

LeBrok
11-01-16, 07:31
Do we have West Yamnaya DNA finally?

Fire Haired14
11-01-16, 08:42
There is. According to Eurogene's CHG_K8, there's post-Neolithic West Asian ancestry in all of Europe. It must have brought most of the J and E1b in Europe. The EEF+WHG+Steppe doesn't perfectly explain European genetics. The fourth ancestor is "Mysterious West Asians".

http://gen3553.pagesperso-orange.fr/images/CroissantFertile.png
http://cdn.eupedia.com/images/content/Haplogroup-E1b1b.jpg
http://cdn.eupedia.com/images/content/Haplogroup-J2.jpg

Promenade
11-01-16, 11:12
Which J2 subclades would the "Fertile crescent" admixture be associated with in your opinion? I wonder how it would compare to the J2 of the CHG in Europe since it seems so absent in Europe despite R1 being so common. The spread of J2 in Europe does seem to point to more of a southeast entry rather than one through the steppe.

I remember reading that there were two separate waves of farmers into Europe. Perhaps this "Fertile crescent" admixture is the other wave? Is there archaeological evidence of another type of farming culture in neolithic Europe other than the one associated with the EEF?

Maciamo
11-01-16, 11:30
The West Asian admixture in South Italy and the Balkans is linked to haplogroup J2, E-M123 and T (and probably also R1b-L23). It probably came through a late Bronze Age or Early Iron Age migration from Anatolia, around the time of the great upheavals c. 1200 BCE and the Sea Peoples. The development of the Iron Age would have allowed a mass of commoners to literally take up arms and start armies of their own, rising against the ruling elite of the Bronze Age (essentially Indo-Europeans). It's not impossible that this new wave of Iron Age warriors originated in Mesopotamia and spread across Anatolia until southern and central Italy.

Around the same period the Phoenicians also started colonising Malta, parts of Sicily and Sardinia, the Maghreb and southern Iberia, bring also lots of J2 and E-M123, but also some R1a-Z93, Q1b and J1-P58.

bicicleur
11-01-16, 13:27
could this 'fertile crescent' component simply be the consequence of Arabic-Islamic rule during the middle ages in Malta and southern Italy ?

Fire Haired14
11-01-16, 13:40
could this 'fertile crescent' component simply be the consequence of Arabic-Islamic rule during the middle ages in Malta and southern Italy ?

The impact is way to large to be Arabic. Plus only West Iberians and South Italians have any African ancestry, and it comes from North Africa not Arabia.

bicicleur
11-01-16, 14:53
The impact is way to large to be Arabic. Plus only West Iberians and South Italians have any African ancestry, and it comes from North Africa not Arabia.

Malta has been Arabic too, the language is even Arabic

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maltese_language

and northern Africans are Berbers and Arabs who arrived with Islamic conquerors

Auld Reekie
11-01-16, 18:19
could this 'fertile crescent' component simply be the consequence of Arabic-Islamic rule during the middle ages in Malta and southern Italy ?
Only Sicily had long lasting Islamic rule with the mainland receiving raids by the Saracens. Sardinia also received raids but their numbers are low. It could be the Sea Peoples but I've read, though this is not proven, that Sardinia and Sicily might be Sherden and Shekelesh that the Egyptians refer to. Then again that could have been multi-ethnic. Maybe it was brought by Greek colonizers to southern Italy and later moved around by Romans? There was a lot of movement between the Levant and Greece in the time of the Greek dark ages. Then the Phoenicians could have spread it farther. I dunno...

Sile
11-01-16, 18:50
Malta has been Arabic too, the language is even Arabic

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maltese_language

and northern Africans are Berbers and Arabs who arrived with Islamic conquerors

between the sea peoples in malta and islam there is nearly 2000 years difference.

the first known inhabitants that i recall are the phoenicians.............and phoenicians are not arabs

LeBrok
11-01-16, 19:12
Which J2 subclades would the "Fertile crescent" admixture be associated with in your opinion? I wonder how it would compare to the J2 of the CHG in Europe since it seems so absent in Europe despite R1 being so common. The spread of J2 in Europe does seem to point to more of a southeast entry rather than one through the steppe.

I remember reading that there were two separate waves of farmers into Europe. Perhaps this "Fertile crescent" admixture is the other wave? Is there archaeological evidence of another type of farming culture in neolithic Europe other than the one associated with the EEF? Judging by distribution of haplogroups of first farmers who reached Europe, the EEF guys, the first farmers of the Fertile Crescent were most likely G2a.

Alan
11-01-16, 20:17
could this 'fertile crescent' component simply be the consequence of Arabic-Islamic rule during the middle ages in Malta and southern Italy ?

If they have used modern Iraqis, Syrian and Lebanese as proxy for this "Fertile Crescent" component obviously a good portion of it will be due to Arabic admixture but not all.

Angela
11-01-16, 20:45
The question is a valid one; however, I am getting very tired of these increasingly bizarre and badly created amateur "maps" and "calculators". "Kurd" over at anthrogenica seems to know what he is doing, and his methodology is absolutely transparent. He also is clearly aware of the problems involved and how easy it is either wittingly or unwittingly to create "biased" or just incorrect results. However, even in his case, I question whether an analysis of IBS with ancient samples can really be reliable, especially given the quality of these ancient samples. IBD analysis is even more problematical. I took a look at the results by country at the analysis over at eurogenes. In many cases, out of a sample set of, say, twelve, often 10 can show no sharing whatsoever, but an "average" is computed using the remaining two. I'm not at all convinced by this kind of methodology. If anyone wants to look at the mathematics and the algorithms necessary to come to any meaningful conclusions about IBD, even using high quality modern genomes, I would suggest going to the methodology section of the Ralph and Coop paper:
http://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article?id=10.1371/journal.pbio.1001555

I highly doubt this has much to do with North African domination, as anyone who has paid any attention to y Dna and IBD analysis of Europe in general or of Italy in comparison to countries like Spain or Portugal would know.

The yDna analyses have been discussed endlessly on this site, particularly in reference to North African specific subclades of both yDna and mtDna, and people should be aware of them.

As to IBD analyses there is the much criticized, by some, Botigue et al. Still, with the usual caveats as to direction and timing of gene flow, and the small percentages involved, it still indicates the general trends, in my opinion, and the fact that it is doubtful this has any major part to play.
http://www.pnas.org/content/110/29/11791.abstract

As discussed on the Dienekes site:
http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2013/06/ibd-sharing-between-iberians-and-north.html

In terms of autosomal analyses there are also the results at 23andme to consider for both Iberians and southern Italians. I've never seen anything greater than 2-3% for any southern Italians. Neither do North African populations show up on oracle results in calculators, at least not for Italians, in any meaningful way.

Speaking of calculators, someone ran some of the ancient Anatolian farmers through Gedmatch.

"Gedmatch results of an Early Farmer from Anatolia

M897077 I0707 Anatolian EF

EUtest Oracle results:
Kit M897077

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 WEST_MED 46.98
2 EAST_MED 32.62
3 MIDDLE_EASTERN 10.57
4 ATLANTIC 9.59
5 NORTH-CENTRAL_EURO 0.21
6 EAST_AFRICAN 0.03

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 Sardinian 19.83
2 South_Italian_&_Sicilian 30.51
3 Tuscan 31.43
4 GR 31.65
5 North_Italian 33.52
6 Moroccan 33.96
7 AJ 34.13
8 PT 36.5
9 ES 36.7
10 Algerian 38.39
11 Samaritan 39.07
12 Mozabite_Berber 40.98
13 RO 41.39
14 FR 43.19
15 Druze 43.37
16 Serbian 44.14
17 TR 44.62
18 French_Basque 45.13
19 Armenian 45.38
20 Assyrian 45.63"

The FST values are high, of course.

Here are the much better (lower FST) values from Dodecad K=12b:
Dodecad K12b Oracle results:
"Kit M897077

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 Atlantic_Med 48.5
2 Caucasus 37.07
3 Southwest_Asian 12.16
4 Northwest_African 2.24
5 Southeast_Asian 0.03

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 Sicilian (Dodecad) 20.91
2 S_Italian_Sicilian (Dodecad) 21.09
3 C_Italian (Dodecad) 21.4
4 Tuscan (HGDP) 21.73
5 TSI30 (Metspalu) 22.27
6 Morocco_Jews (Behar) 22.5
7 Sephardic_Jews (Behar) 22.58
8 Ashkenazi (Dodecad) 24.51
9 North_Italian (HGDP) 25.24
10 Ashkenazy_Jews (Behar) 25.26
11 Sardinian (HGDP) 25.79
12 O_Italian (Dodecad) 26.53
13 Greek (Dodecad) 26.91
14 N_Italian (Dodecad) 27.31
15 Andalucia (1000Genomes) 29.51
16 Cypriots (Behar) 29.54
17 Baleares (1000Genomes) 30.29
18 Murcia (1000Genomes) 30.41
19 Canarias (1000Genomes) 31
20 Galicia (1000Genomes) 32.55"

Still not really low FST values, but a lot of water has passed under the bridge since then. So, how much of this is just because Italy harbors the most ancient Anatolian farmer ancestry, much more than do Middle Easterners or North Africans? I don't know, but I think it does have a role to play, as even some IBD analyses have shown which use the ancient samples from the Neolithic in both Anatolia and Europe and compare them to European populations. Either Tuscany or northern Italy show the highest percentages in those studies, although so far as I know southern Italian samples weren't used in the ones I saw. Indeed, as I've pointed out a number of times, when the first analysis of the Gok sample came out, the similarity to Sicilians was pointed out (after Sardinians, of course)

That's not to say that other, later migrations might not have a part to play as well. There are the Bronze Age migrations, some of which may have come from Anatolia (let's see if Drews was correct), early Iron Age migrations, as has been mentioned, and late first millennium BC colonizations from Greek city states from mainland Greece, the islands, and the western coast of Anatolia. The Phoenicians may have had some small role to play. Perhaps Byzantine era migrations also had a minor impact.

Certainly, there were no "Arabic" migrations into Tuscany and northern Italy; indeed, the vast majority of any settlements in the two hundred year occupation of Sicily was by Berbers, not Arabs, who only constituted the elite. Southern Italy was occupied only for a few decades.

In this regard I'd point out that while southern Italians and Sicilians at 23andme get some percentage of "Middle East", Middle East there is defined as Anatolia, Iran, Armenia, the Caucasus etc., not the Levant and certainly not Saudi Arabia. Saudi Arabia and other Arabian peninsula populations form part of the North Africa cluster, which has already been discussed.

I honestly don't know the explanation, and I don't think anyone else does either. Most particularly I don't think the "map" posted is either reliable or informative, in my opinion. The answer is only going to come from ancient dna.

Maciamo
12-01-16, 09:01
could this 'fertile crescent' component simply be the consequence of Arabic-Islamic rule during the middle ages in Malta and southern Italy ?

No. We are talking about mostly West Asian admixture rather than Southwest Asian. Then, it encompasses all southern Italy, whereas the Arabs only settled in Sicily. Additionally, the Y-DNA haplogroups in southern Italy only have a tiny minority of J1-P58, and most of it outside Sicily could be of Jewish origin.

Malta has more Southwest Asian ancestry, but since it was a Phoenician colony it's hard to tell the Phoenician from the later Arabic DNA apart.

Compare the West Asian vs Southwest Asian admixtures. Aegean/Mediterranean Anatolia has essentially the same proportions as Greece and southern/central Italy, and the haplogroup mix is very similar as well. The Greek (+ Etruscan) colonisation is still the best explanation for the West Asian admixture in Italy. The real question is when did those West Asian genes and Y-haplogroup J2 get into Greece, when we now know that Neolithic Greeks were just like other European Neolithic farmers ? I have always said that the first J2 wave came in the Late Bronze Age with the Minoans. But a second wave would have been around 1200 BCE as I have explained above.

http://cdn.eupedia.com/images/content/West-Asian-admixture.gif

http://cdn.eupedia.com/images/content/Southwest-Asian-admixture.gif

Vukodav
12-01-16, 12:34
The plot looks totally amateurish and is not supported by any peer reviewed paper. Moreover we don't have any ancient sample from the fertile crescent yet, so the calculator is totally wrong.In Europe Greeks have the most post Neolitich West Asian ancestry (40%), followed by Albanians, Italians and South Slavs, in this order, according to the last Eurogenes calculator which used the recent published CHG samples from Georgia.
The impact is way to large to be Arabic. Plus only West Iberians and South Italians have any African ancestry, and it comes from North Africa not Arabia.All Iberians (not just western ones) and only Sicilians have some SSA in Europe, my Puerto Rican friend.

Vukodav
12-01-16, 12:45
The West Asian admixture in South Italy and the Balkans is linked to haplogroup J2, E-M123 and T (and probably also R1b-L23). It probably came through a late Bronze Age or Early Iron Age migration from Anatolia, around the time of the great upheavals c. 1200 BCE and the Sea Peoples. The development of the Iron Age would have allowed a mass of commoners to literally take up arms and start armies of their own, rising against the ruling elite of the Bronze Age (essentially Indo-Europeans). It's not impossible that this new wave of Iron Age warriors originated in Mesopotamia and spread across Anatolia until southern and central Italy.

Around the same period the Phoenicians also started colonising Malta, parts of Sicily and Sardinia, the Maghreb and southern Iberia, bring also lots of J2 and E-M123, but also some R1a-Z93, Q1b and J1-P58.

You have no idea about what you are talking about. South Italians and Sardinians have 2-3 times more Anatolian Neolitich farmer admixture than modern Turks.

Milan
12-01-16, 12:50
Maciamo,you make good point that J2 could have come in Southern Europe 1200 B.C around the time of the sea peoples,if we assume that during this time was really a migration or as you explained the subjected could have took arms against their overlords,it seems that there were two migrations in what is today Greece or Southern Europe and probably spread more north?if we even take the Greek mythology and myth,their claim of ancestry on Danaus(Daanans or Achaeans) that were part of the Mycenaean Greece they trace their ancestry in Egypt with some myths further to Hyksos people,which were expelled around 1580 to 1550 BC reign of Ahmose in Egypt,Mycenaean civilization lasted from 1600–1100 BCE the years match,Hyksos origin is difficult to explain but they were prevalent Semitic ancestry with maybe some Hurrian but Indo-European component is difficult to explain,however this go against Indo-European language hypothesis in Greece and the previous inhabitants,Semitic component in Minoans is easier to explain their language is not Indo-European,but can they spread this haplogroup from one island? the question however remain open for this as well the language hypothesis,origin of the Greeks and previous inhabitants there.

Drac II
12-01-16, 14:13
All Iberians (not just western ones) and only Sicilians have some SSA in Europe, my Puerto Rican friend.

That's not what many studies show, continental Italians have it too (not "just Sicilians"), "Joey".

Drac II
12-01-16, 14:24
could this 'fertile crescent' component simply be the consequence of Arabic-Islamic rule during the middle ages in Malta and southern Italy ?

Not likely, except if you go by the results suggested by studies like Fiorito et al. for southern Italy, which imply that the admixture there is from medieval times, while for the rest of Italy is closer to Etruscan as well as during Roman times.

Sile
12-01-16, 19:44
Maciamo,you make good point that J2 could have come in Southern Europe 1200 B.C around the time of the sea peoples,if we asume that during this time was really a migration or as you explained the subjected could have took arms against their overlords,it seems that there were two migrations in what is today Greece or Southern Europe and probably spread more north?if we even take the Greek mythology and myth,their claim of ancestry on Danaus(Daanans or Achaeans) that were part of the Mycenaean Greece they trace their ancestry in Egypt with some myths further to Hyksos people,which were expelled around 1580 to 1550 BC reign of Ahmose in Egypt,Mycenaean civilization is asumed to have lasted from 1600–1100 BCE the years match,Hyksos origin is difficult to explain but they were prevalent Semitic ancestry with maybe some Hurrian but Indo-European component is difficult to explain,however this go against Indo-European language hypothesis in Greece and the previous inhabitants,Semitic component in Minoans is easier to explain their language is not Indo-European either,but can they spread this haplogroup from one island? the question however remain open for this as well the language hypothesis,origin of the Greeks and previous inhabitants there.

there was no semetic language in anatolia..............the languages of the Hittites, Hatti and Hurrians and their thousands upon thousands of clay text tablets have been studied by countless numbers of linguists and no semetic has been found in these anatolian writings

If as you say, minoans where semetic , then their origin as per recent historical studies would via Iraq ( elamite/sumer?) and originally south-asia ( india-pakistan ) and not from anatolia.

Milan
12-01-16, 21:07
there was no semetic language in anatolia..............the languages of the Hittites, Hatti and Hurrians and their thousands upon thousands of clay text tablets have been studied by countless numbers of linguists and no semetic has been found in these anatolian writings

If as you say, minoans where semetic , then their origin as per recent historical studies would via Iraq ( elamite/sumer?) and originally south-asia ( india-pakistan ) and not from anatolia.
Minoan is unclassified language,Minoans were on Crete haven't said is Semitic only guessing of the prevalent haplogroups and their flow in the period discussed above,it is neither Semitic or Indo-European,they were traders mostly with East Mediterranean cultures they must have had some "lingua franca" for communication among them,later came new people this culture start from 3650 to 1400 BCE,they were overthrown by Mycenaean Greeks.

Sile
12-01-16, 22:11
Minoan is unclassified language,Minoans were on Crete haven't said is Semitic only guessing of the prevalent haplogroups and their flow in the period discussed above,it is neither Semitic or Indo-European,they were traders mostly with East Mediterranean cultures they must have had some "lingua franca" for communication among them,later came new people this culture start from 3650 to 1400 BCE,they were overthrown by Mycenaean Greeks.

The 2014 israeli digs at Tell es-Safi and Megiddo on the philistine people shows they have minoan pottery and spoke a cypro-minoan language called Ashkelon . they also stated these philistines are originally eastern minoan people who settled in the southern levant after the collapse of minoa/crete. Clearly this is also non-semetic language .
They also assume that because they found no evidence of cremations or graves, that the philistines buried their dead at sea, like the minoans

Taranis
13-01-16, 12:30
Minoan is unclassified language,Minoans were on Crete haven't said is Semitic only guessing of the prevalent haplogroups and their flow in the period discussed above,it is neither Semitic or Indo-European,they were traders mostly with East Mediterranean cultures they must have had some "lingua franca" for communication among them,later came new people this culture start from 3650 to 1400 BCE,they were overthrown by Mycenaean Greeks.

Minoan itself was for sure not a Semitic language. Semitic languages have the distinct feature of having consonantal roots (which is why you can write the consonants alone and the meaning of a word isn't lost - which is a feature of the original Phoenician alphabet). I'm not ruling out that one of the other "pre-Greek" languages spoken elsewhere in "Greece" at the time were in fact Semitic, as Greek has a good number of early Semitic loans to it. As an example, the words for 'wine' ((ϝ)οινος) and 'gold' (χρυσος) are likely borrowed from a Semitic source. Alternatively, these are borrowings from (Bronze Age) contact with Semitic-speaking peoples (which is also plausible).

Hauteville
16-01-16, 12:06
There is. According to Eurogene's CHG_K8, there's post-Neolithic West Asian ancestry in all of Europe. It must have brought most of the J and E1b in Europe. The EEF+WHG+Steppe doesn't perfectly explain European genetics. The fourth ancestor is "Mysterious West Asians".

http://gen3553.pagesperso-orange.fr/images/CroissantFertile.png


That map is questionable and it was made by Tolan on Anthrogenica used Eurasia K10CHG of the Kurd guy, actually it does not match with what the most recent studies say.
http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?6197-Possible-fertile-crescent-admixture-in-South-Europe