PDA

View Full Version : African admixture in ancient Germanic/Scandinavian people



Maciamo
11-11-16, 16:53
I have analysed dozens of ancient genomes using Dodecad dv3 and K12b and Eurogenes K36, and I noticed that almost every time ancient Scandinavians or Germanic tribes possessed non-negligible percentages of African admixture. These were sometimes reported as Central African or Northwest African by Eurogenes K36. Ancient Germanic sample have between 1% and 3% of African admixture using the two Dodecad calculators. Yet modern Scandinavians don't have any trace of it (0%, not even 0.1%) using the exact same calculators. This is extremely odd. It cannot be due to the poor quality of the genomes, since it happened even with nearly full genomic sequences 50x bigger than 23andMe's raw data, and therefore covering all the SNP's used in the calculators.

The African admixture was not found in Mesolithic Scandinavia, but shows up at high frequency (6 to 10%) in the Late Neolithic Funnelbeaker culture (http://www.eupedia.com/genetics/funnelbeaker_culture.shtml), just before the Proto-Indo-European invasions with the Corded Ware culture (from 2800 BCE in Scandinavia). The Funnelbeaker culture marks the arrival of Megalithic structures in Scandinavia from western Europe. Megaliths seem to have originated in the Near East. The oldest ones in Europe were found in Sicily and southern Portugal and date from c. 7000 BCE. The Atlantic Megalithic culture really started with the advent of farming and would have spread from Iberia to France, the British Isles and the Low Countries before reaching Scandinavia. Considering the high Northwest African admixture in Funnelbeaker, there is a good chance that Iberian Megalithic people inherited genes from Northwest Africans, probably from the North African Neolithic route that brought R1b-V88, E-M78, J1 and T1a to Iberia.

Here are two Funnelbeaker samples (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/33081-Comparing-Mesolithic-and-Neolithic-genomes-using-the-Eurogenes-K36-calculator?p=494430&viewfull=1#post494430) from Sweden. They also had about 3% of Southwest Asian, which is perfectly consistent with a Neolithic dispersal from the southern Levant across North Africa until Iberia.

Gökhem7

Dodecad dv3

8.38% of Northwest_African
2.14% of Palaeo_African
------------------------------
TOTAL: 10.52% African

Dodecad K12b:

6.75% of Northwest_African
4.77% of Sub_Saharan
------------------------------
TOTAL: 11.52% African


Gökhem3

Dodecad dv3

4.26% of Northwest_African
1.19% of Palaeo_African
0.85% of Palaeo_African
------------------------------
TOTAL: 6.3% African

Dodecad K12b:

3.94% of Northwest_African
1.73% of Sub_Saharan
------------------------------
TOTAL: 5.67% African


This African admixture remained in Scandinavia at least until the Late Iron Age and was present in every single sample I tested.


Battle-Axe culture (RISE71, H3b, c. 2100 BCE Denmark)

Dodecad Dv3:

0.73% Neo_African
0.34% Palaeo_African
------------------------------
TOTAL: 1.07% African

Dodecad K12b:

0.17% Northwest_African

Nordic Bronze Age (RISE077, I1, J1c8, c. 1350 BCE Denmark)

Dodecad Dv3:

2.79% Neo_African

Dodecad K12b:

2.69% Sub_Saharan

Iron-age Sweden (RISE174, W1, c. 500 CE)

Dodecad Dv3:

0.42% Neo_African
2.03% Northwest_African
0.12% Palaeo_African
------------------------------
TOTAL: 2.57% African

Dodecad K12b:

0.97% Northwest_African
0.36% Sub_Saharan
------------------------------
TOTAL: 1.33% African

Anglo-Saxon (Hinxton2, H2a2b, c. 700 CE)

Dodecad Dv3:

0.53% Neo_African
0.81% East_African 0.22% Palaeo_African
------------------------------
TOTAL: 1.55% African


Dodecad K12b:

0.70% Sub_Saharan
0.49% East_African
------------------------------
TOTAL: 1.19% African

Twilight
11-11-16, 18:19
I have analysed dozens of ancient genomes using Dodecad dv3 and K12b and Eurogenes K36, and I noticed that almost every time ancient Scandinavians or Germanic tribes possessed non-negligible percentages of African admixture. These were sometimes reported as Central African or Northwest African by Eurogenes K36. Ancient Germanic sample have between 1% and 3% of African admixture using the two Dodecad calculators. Yet modern Scandinavians don't have any trace of it (0%, not even 0.1%) using the exact same calculators. This is extremely odd. It cannot be due to the poor quality of the genomes, since it happened even with nearly full genomic sequences 50x bigger than 23andMe's raw data, and therefore covering all the SNP's used in the calculators. I have no explanation for it. This is a mystery. Could it be linked to the low percentage of Y-haplogroup A1a in Scandinavia and Finland?

Here are the percentages tested.

Battle-Axe culture (RISE71, H3b, c. 2100 BCE Denmark)

Dodecad Dv3:

0.73% Neo_African
0.34% Palaeo_African
------------------------------
TOTAL: 1.07% African

Dodecad K12b:

0.17% Northwest_African

Nordic Bronze Age (RISE077, I1, J1c8, c. 1350 BCE Denmark)

Dodecad Dv3:

2.79% Neo_African

Dodecad K12b:

2.69% Sub_Saharan

Iron-age Sweden (RISE174, W1, c. 500 CE)

Dodecad Dv3:

0.42% Neo_African
2.03% Northwest_African
0.12% Palaeo_African
------------------------------
TOTAL: 2.57% African

Dodecad K12b:

0.97% Northwest_African
0.36% Sub_Saharan
------------------------------
TOTAL: 1.33% African

Anglo-Saxon (Hinxton2, H2a2b, c. 700 CE)

Dodecad Dv3:

0.53% Neo_African
0.81% East_African 0.22% Palaeo_African
------------------------------
TOTAL: 1.55% African


Dodecad K12b:

0.70% Sub_Saharan
0.49% East_African
------------------------------
TOTAL: 1.19% African

Keep in mind that midevil British Islesmen were subject to pillaging and the Vikings took them as slaves. Even today, we can see the genetic effects of the Viking raids by seeing a noticeable R1b-L21 presence in Scandinavia and Iceland Even AncestryDna has reported that a whooping 41% of Norwegian, Swedes and Danes combined population has partial ancestry that came from the Isles. As far as African genes in Scandinavia is concerned, I'd be interested to see where the origins of Scandinavian E-M78 and A1 subclades are.

http://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplogroup_R1b_Y-DNA.shtml#L21



http://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplogroup_E1b1b_Y-DNA.shtml#M78

berun
11-11-16, 18:24
My guess is that such African signal is nowadays so diluted and recombined into the actual Scandinavian gene pool that programs take all it as native Scandinavian. If that would be the case the real African signal might be higher than that found.

Maciamo
11-11-16, 18:33
Keep in mind that midevil British Islesmen were subject to pillaging and the Vikings took them as slaves. Even today, we can see the genetic effects of the Viking raids by seeing a noticeable R1b-L21 presence in Scandinavia and Iceland Even AncestryDna has reported that a whooping 41% of Norwegian, Swedes and Danes combined population has partial ancestry that came from the Isles. As far as African genes in Scandinavia is concerned, I'd be interested to see where the origins of Scandinavian E-M78 and A1 subclades are.

It has nothing to do with slaves. The African admixture was absent in Mesolithic Sweden, but appeared since the Chalcolithic/EBA with Corded Ware and lasts for 3700 years until the Anglo-Saxon migrations in every sample I ran. I also noticed a bit (but less) African admixture in some Yamna samples. I wonder if this could not be some Palaeolithic remnant that has been pruned from the gene pool but some kind of natural selection. The question is how did it happen and why did it take some 4000 years to disappear?

FYI E-M78 in Scandinavia is almost all E-V13 and has a very recent TMRCA (LBA or Iron Age). The African admixture was probably there before. And anyway V13 is European and countries with high levels of V13 like Albania and Kosovo have nowhere near as much African admixture as these ancient Scandinavian samples.

Twilight
11-11-16, 19:09
It has nothing to do with slaves. The African admixture was absent in Mesolithic Sweden, but appeared since the Chalcolithic/EBA with Corded Ware and lasts for 3700 years until the Anglo-Saxon migrations in every sample I ran. I also noticed a bit (but less) African admixture in some Yamna samples. I wonder if this could not be some Palaeolithic remnant that has been pruned from the gene pool but some kind of natural selection. The question is how did it happen and why did it take some 4000 years to disappear?

FYI E-M78 in Scandinavia is almost all E-V13 and has a very recent TMRCA (LBA or Iron Age). The African admixture was probably there before. And anyway V13 is European and countries with high levels of V13 like Albania and Kosovo have nowhere near as much African admixture as these ancient Scandinavian samples.

Interesting, Soundslike a serious case of natural selection, I can't even figure out what other Ancient civilizations could have come into contact with the Norse; besides other Germanic tribes and Uralic tribes. Was there any disaster going on in Scandinavia's archeological record that required them to not only move out but shead their African genes; becides competing tribes and overpopulation?

Sile
11-11-16, 19:17
@ maciano

maybe you should run something like this program

Eurasia K14 Neolithic Admixture Proportions
This calculator's focus is calculation of admixture proportions and modeling of an individual based on a collection of ancient Neolithic and Bronze Age genomes from across Eurasia.

For information about population abreviations and descriptions: Wolfgang Haak, et al (http://biorxiv.org/content/early/2015/02/10/013433), Haak population map (https://www.gedmatch.com/images/Haak_Map1.gif) and Morten Allentoft, et al (http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v522/n7555/full/nature14507.html) or Allentoft population map (https://www.gedmatch.com/images/Allentoft1.gif). Additional information about this calculator HERE. (https://www.gedmatch.com/Eurasia_14_ReadMe.htm)

For further questions, please contact the calculator creator at [email protected] ([email protected]?subject=Eurasia%20K14%20Neol ithic%20Calculator%20on%20GEDmatch).


which uses the ancient samples

example of mine below with ancient samples I match

Admix Results (sorted):



#
Population
Percent


1
Early_European_Farmers
43.72


2
Neolithic_Balkan_Farmers
13.57


3
SW_Asian
12.74


4
Afansievo_Yamnaya
11.63


5
SHG_WHG
10.74


6
Kalash
3.87


7
SE_Asian
1.22


8
S_Amerindian
0.94


9
Papuan
0.79


10
Siberian
0.4


11
Sub_Saharan
0.39



Single Population Sharing:



#
Population (source)
Distance


1
HungaryGamba_BA1
14.45


2
HungaryGamba_IA
14.64


3
Hungarian_BA3
17.45


4
Bell_Beaker_LN3
17.89


5
Bell_Beaker_LN4
18.13


6
Hungarian_BA7
18.87


7
Bell_Beaker_LN2
19.98


8
Hungarian_BA8
20.89


9
Nordic_BA1
21.31


10
Bell_Beaker_BA1
23.04


11
Sintashta_BA
24.1


12
Nordic_IA
24.25


13
Hungarian_BA4
24.85


14
RISE_baSca
26.81


15
Unetice_BA1
26.82


16
RISE_baSca
27.36


17
Bell_Beaker_BA2
28.66


18
Bell_Beaker_BA4
29.83


19
Hungarian_BA5
30.23


20
Corded_Ware_BA3
31.85



Mixed Mode Population Sharing:



#

Primary Population (source)
Secondary Population (source)
Distance


1

50.7%
Hungarian_BA3
+
49.3%
Bell_Beaker_LN3
@
5.71


2

59.1%
Hungarian_BA3
+
40.9%
Nordic_IA
@
6.7


3

54%
Hungarian_BA3
+
46%
Bell_Beaker_LN2
@
7.28


4

62%
Hungarian_BA3
+
38%
Unetice_BA1
@
7.42


5

55.3%
Hungarian_BA3
+
44.7%
Hungarian_BA8
@
7.57


6

59.8%
Corded_Ware_BA6
+
40.2%
Armenian_BA3
@
7.57


7

56.2%
HungaryGamba_BA1
+
43.8%
Hungarian_BA3
@
7.89


8

62.3%
Hungarian_BA3
+
37.7%
RISE_baSca
@
8.02


9

58.3%
Hungarian_BA3
+
41.7%
Bell_Beaker_BA1
@
8.09


10

67.1%
Hungarian_BA3
+
32.9%
Nordic_LN
@
8.41


11

56.1%
HungaryGamba_IA
+
43.9%
Hungarian_BA3
@
8.48


12

75.7%
HungaryGamba_BA1
+
24.3%
Hungarian_BA1
@
8.66


13

59.8%
Hungarian_BA3
+
40.2%
Sintashta_BA
@
8.75


14

88.5%
HungaryGamba_BA1
+
11.5%
BedouinB
@
9.28


15

73.7%
HungaryGamba_IA
+
26.3%
Stuttgart
@
9.35


16

56.4%
Sintashta_BA
+
43.6%
Hungarian_BA5
@
9.39


17

67.8%
Hungarian_BA3
+
32.2%
Benzigerode_LN3
@
9.6


18

53.4%
Unetice_BA1
+
46.6%
Hungarian_BA5
@
9.73


19

51.4%
Hungarian_BA3
+
48.6%
Bell_Beaker_LN4
@
9.78


20

65.1%
Hungarian_BA3
+
34.9%
Bell_Beaker_BA2
@
9.79

Northener
12-11-16, 00:07
It has nothing to do with slaves. The African admixture was absent in Mesolithic Sweden, but appeared since the Chalcolithic/EBA with Corded Ware and lasts for 3700 years until the Anglo-Saxon migrations in every sample I ran. I also noticed a bit (but less) African admixture in some Yamna samples. I wonder if this could not be some Palaeolithic remnant that has been pruned from the gene pool but some kind of natural selection. The question is how did it happen and why did it take some 4000 years to disappear?

FYI E-M78 in Scandinavia is almost all E-V13 and has a very recent TMRCA (LBA or Iron Age). The African admixture was probably there before. And anyway V13 is European and countries with high levels of V13 like Albania and Kosovo have nowhere near as much African admixture as these ancient Scandinavian samples.


Keep in mind that midevil British Islesmen were subject to pillaging and the Vikings took them as slaves. Even today, we can see the genetic effects of the Viking raids by seeing a noticeable R1b-L21 presence in Scandinavia and Iceland Even AncestryDna has reported that a whooping 41% of Norwegian, Swedes and Danes combined population has partial ancestry that came from the Isles. As far as African genes in Scandinavia is concerned, I'd be interested to see where the origins of Scandinavian E-M78 and A1 subclades are.

http://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplogroup_R1b_Y-DNA.shtml#L21



http://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplogroup_E1b1b_Y-DNA.shtml#M78

Is there still a small change that my Y-DNA (E-V22) has old roots? My educated guess up to know: it's derived from a Spanish soldier (during a raid in Frisia in 1586). The Spanish tercios where recruited from places with relative high E-V22 (about 5 %) like Asturias, Andalusia, Sicily, Napels area.

But if has older roots how could it survive for so long?

MOESAN
12-11-16, 01:32
I try to guess:
- archaic segments can without too much doubt show some today labelled "African SSA DNA", among Europeans or Asians; I have not all in mind but I believe I saw high enough "African" admixture in almost all very old (Paleol.) samples in Asia or Eurasia; to be checked.
- it seems some very light "african" admixture was found too in Afanasyevo and even Andronovo, depending on admixtures calculators.
- for Battle Axe I don't know but the Scandinavian BA I saw in PCAs or in admixtures were spred around Central-South Europe of today, even more "southerners" than BBs as a mean and had a serious amount of 'mediter' or EEF or this kind.
- I don't forget a supposed FLBK man of Sweden Gokhem was very 'basque-mediter' oriented, basically EEF + more WHG than the Neolithic of the period in Central Europe. this aspect of FLBK seems strongly associated with megalithic cultures of more western origin, surely with a remote origin in the Atlantic Façade; if Atlantic Iberia people have been involved at some stage it's possible they could explain an higher % of "African" ancestry even if this % is relatively low? Some Atapuerco men showed amazing results in some admixture runs.
- I suppose selection but also DRIFT and later mutations can explain the quasi disparition of this African small components
- finally I wonder if we rely not too much on admixtures calculators so different one from another, when speaking of so small %s? Only a doubt.
That said, I'm going to bed. Good week-end all of you.

Northener
12-11-16, 14:11
It has nothing to do with slaves. The African admixture was absent in Mesolithic Sweden, but appeared since the Chalcolithic/EBA with Corded Ware and lasts for 3700 years until the Anglo-Saxon migrations in every sample I ran. I also noticed a bit (but less) African admixture in some Yamna samples. I wonder if this could not be some Palaeolithic remnant that has been pruned from the gene pool but some kind of natural selection. The question is how did it happen and why did it take some 4000 years to disappear?

FYI E-M78 in Scandinavia is almost all E-V13 and has a very recent TMRCA (LBA or Iron Age). The African admixture was probably there before. And anyway V13 is European and countries with high levels of V13 like Albania and Kosovo have nowhere near as much African admixture as these ancient Scandinavian samples.

I try to guess:
- archaic segments can without too much doubt show some today labelled "African SSA DNA", among Europeans or Asians; I have not all in mind but I believe I saw high enough "African" admixture in almost all very old (Paleol.) samples in Asia or Eurasia; to be checked.
- it seems some very light "african" admixture was found too in Afanasyevo and even Andronovo, depending on admixtures calculators.
- for Battle Axe I don't know but the Scandinavian BA I saw in PCAs or in admixtures were spred around Central-South Europe of today, even more "southerners" than BBs as a mean and had a serious amount of 'mediter' or EEF or this kind.
- I don't forget a supposed FLBK man of Sweden Gokhem was very 'basque-mediter' oriented, basically EEF + more WHG than the Neolithic of the period in Central Europe. this aspect of FLBK seems strongly associated with megalithic cultures of more western origin, surely with a remote origin in the Atlantic Façade; if Atlantic Iberia people have been involved at some stage it's possible they could explain an higher % of "African" ancestry even if this % is relatively low? Some Atapuerco men showed amazing results in some admixture runs.
- I suppose selection but also DRIFT and later mutations can explain the quasi disparition of this African small components
- finally I wonder if we rely not too much on admixtures calculators so different one from another, when speaking of so small %s? Only a doubt.
That said, I'm going to bed. Good week-end all of you.

Gentleman Marciamo and Moesan. Please your view, the view of an expert, on African lineage in Germans.

My family line, confirmed by test with very distant cousins, that E-V22 is the case. I figured out that E-V22 is a typical Northeast African lineages. See: http://e-v22.net/origin/ and http://e-v22.net/descendants/

In the Netherlands above the Rhine, typical "germanic area' , there are only two families tested with (very very distant related) E-V22. In both cases we suspect that there is a linkage with the Spanish army.

But Maciamo's posting opens another possibility! May be it's an old, prehistoric, African lineage in Germanic Europe? Within E-V22 we belong to the E-PH2818 subclade. Y-full figured out that the TMRCA is 8000 years ago.

See:
https://www.yfull.com/tree/E-V22/
(I'am the PH 2818 the non Pur)

So time enough to travel to Northern Europe within the time range Maciamo has given (the TMRCA of 'cousin' E-V13 is much later).

But the only thing I think it's not possible to relate this to old roots is because of what Maciamo stated: North African lineage like E-V22 are statistically non-existent in modern Northwest European people. So I guess it's almost statistically impossible (would almost be a miracle) to link my North African Y-DNA with Battle-Axe, Nordic Bronze or Anglo-Saxon. Or?

Maciamo
12-11-16, 17:58
Gentleman Marciamo and Moesan. Please your view, the view of an expert, on African lineage in Germans.

My family line, confirmed by test with very distant cousins, that E-V22 is the case. I figured out that E-V22 is a typical Northeast African lineages. See: http://e-v22.net/origin/ and http://e-v22.net/descendants/

In the Netherlands above the Rhine, typical "germanic area' , there are only two families tested with (very very distant related) E-V22. In both cases we suspect that there is a linkage with the Spanish army.

But Maciamo's posting opens another possibility! May be it's an old, prehistoric, African lineage in Germanic Europe? Within E-V22 we belong to the E-PH2818 subclade. Y-full figured out that the TMRCA is 8000 years ago.

See:
https://www.yfull.com/tree/E-V22/
(I'am the PH 2818 the non Pur)

So time enough to travel to Northern Europe within the time range Maciamo has given (the TMRCA of 'cousin' E-V13 is much later).

But the only thing I think it's not possible to relate this to old roots is because of what Maciamo stated: North African lineage like E-V22 are statistically non-existent in modern Northwest European people. So I guess it's almost statistically impossible (would almost be a miracle) to link my North African Y-DNA with Battle-Axe, Nordic Bronze or Anglo-Saxon. Or?

Since you insist for an answer on a personal question in a thread about a very general topic, here is your answer. E-V22 formed about 12,000 years ago, and all current carriers descend from a common ancestors who lived only 8500 years ago, during the Neolithic period. Since E-V22 originated in Northeast Africa, its presence in northern Europe cannot be very ancient. It might have spread from Egypt to the Maghreb, then crossed to Iberia and spread over western Europe during the Megalithic and/or Bell Beaker period, about 5000 years ago, just before the R1b Indo-Europeans invaded western Europe.

Northener
12-11-16, 20:01
Since you insist for an answer on a personal question in a thread about a very general topic, here is your answer. E-V22 formed about 12,000 years ago, and all current carriers descend from a common ancestors who lived only 8500 years ago, during the Neolithic period. Since E-V22 originated in Northeast Africa, its presence in northern Europe cannot be very ancient. It might have spread from Egypt to the Maghreb, then crossed to Iberia and spread over western Europe during the Megalithic and/or Bell Beaker period, about 5000 years ago, just before the R1b Indo-Europeans invaded western Europe.

Thank you Maciamo! It's indeed a personal question, but a personal question related to the big question how came North-African in the gene pool of the ancients Germans. And what's the story afterwards. So a nice coincidence of a more private, personal matter and a more general one.

The big question for me, and it's also a general question, it's an almost mathematical, statistic question. Mathematics I must admit was not my favorite lesson at school, too much alpha, historian ;)

But let's assume in Megalithic and or Bell Beaker period there was little amount of North-African genes in Northwestern Europe. That was 5000 years ago. About 170 generations ago. Every generation there is a change that this Y-DNA died out. What's the chance that after 170 generations this Y-DNA is still alive?

I guess this is a nice general genetic (what's the chance every generation a Y-DNA lineage died) and a mathematical question! Who's the smart whiz kid here :)

MOESAN
13-11-16, 20:52
@Northerner: I am not an expert - by the way Maciamo did you an answer which would have taken time from me to do.
That said, if a component is present in a region, even at low frequency, it doesn't systematically disappear; yes a pure "alien" arriving in a new land has his genes diluted - rapidly - but if they were more th

MOESAN
13-11-16, 20:55
... more than an "alien", at some stage, the % of their genes stabilizes itself at a low rate, but doesn't fade out so quickly, even if their rarety put them in statistical danger. an haplo can disappear more quickly than autosomes.

Northener
14-11-16, 22:24
... more than an "alien", at some stage, the % of their genes stabilizes itself at a low rate, but doesn't fade out so quickly, even if their rarety put them in statistical danger. an haplo can disappear more quickly than autosomes.

Thank you Moesan, although not an self-declared expert stil a wise man![emoji2]

With another person who belongs to a family with E-V22 in the Northeastern part in the Netherlands we are researching how this North African genes came in two tiny villages one in the center of Friesland and one in Twente exactly on the border with Germany.

Independent form each other we suspect a linkage with Spanish raids during the Dutch revolt, or the Dutch liberation war 1568-1648. For both areas this is proven. Other possibilities like a Jewish heritage is unknown but because of different reasons (like Jewish people came after 1650 in Frisia and had already last names etc).

But we still haven't closed the case, because it would only be solved when we discover in Southern Europe the same lineage, so its more likely that we are descendant of a Spanish soldier. Until then there is still the possibility of Dodo genes from an older contingent.....but with these two Isolated cases, on the total know amount of the northern Netherlands tests not even a pro mille, it looks to me more like "alien" than a low rate but stabile old Y DNA.

But I stays triggering that on the Benelux level there are 8 families with E-V22 all in relatively small towns....but the Spanish fury was devastating.





Sent from my iPad using Eupedia Forum (http://r.tapatalk.com/byo?rid=89698)

Tomenable
24-11-16, 15:06
AFAIK in some cases African admixture shows up due to damages in ancient DNA, low coverage (small number SNPs), or/and a lot of "no calls".BTW, the following ancient Scandinavians have been uploaded:Gedmatch / Sample / Dating / Country / Coverage (number of SNPs)F999956 / RISE94 / 2621-2472 BC / Sweden / 619,914M130094 / RISE61 / 2650-2300 BC / Denmark / 293,152M671253 / RISE71 / 2196-2023 BC / Denmark / 203,604F999945 / RISE97 / 2025-1885 BC / Sweden / 580,367F999941 / RISE98 / 2275-2032 BC / Sweden / 1,125,643F999943 / RISE174 / 427-611 AD / Sweden / ???Are there any other ancient Scandinavians worth uploading ???

ahlner78
24-06-17, 01:08
Interesting, Soundslike a serious case of natural selection, I can't even figure out what other Ancient civilizations could have come into contact with the Norse; besides other Germanic tribes and Uralic tribes. Was there any disaster going on in Scandinavia's archeological record that required them to not only move out but shead their African genes; becides competing tribes and overpopulation?

I am new here but have with interest noticed this thread of ancient African admixture into Scandinavians autosomal genome as I am a Scandinavian myself (Swede).

I have one theory about this and why this admixture is not seen in Scandinavians of today. I have read that this admixture cam be seen in the Funnelbeaker culture and with a less percentage even all the way into the late Iron Age.

In Scandinavia there was a great social crisis following the Extreme Weather Events of 535-536 AD which persisted to at least 550 AD and is regarded as the worst climatic anomaly the last 2000 years, problably longer. Perhaps the crisis in Scandinavia simply extirpated these farmer people with african genes. The climatic anolmaly was worldwide but Scandinavia suffered the most severe impact, due to geography and climate. Those who would have suffered most would have been farmers who could not have coped with prolonged climatic cooling. There is evidence of many abondened villages at this time in Scandinavia and a shift in the farming practices.

Probably this climatic and social crisis in Scandinavia around 550 AD extirpated many lineages.

olov
13-07-17, 07:55
New here. Im from the northern parts of sweden.
On the Dodecad v3 i get
Northwest_African 0,46
On the K12b
Northwest_African 0,49
And on eurogens
North_African 1,36
My wife have aboute the same numbers so it still exists in some of us. This part of the country have always been much more isolated than the southern parts so perhaps it was better preserved here.

I1a3_Young
13-07-17, 14:04
AFAIK in some cases African admixture shows up due to damages in ancient DNA, low coverage (small number SNPs), or/and a lot of "no calls".BTW, the following ancient Scandinavians have been uploaded:Gedmatch / Sample / Dating / Country / Coverage (number of SNPs)F999956 / RISE94 / 2621-2472 BC / Sweden / 619,914M130094 / RISE61 / 2650-2300 BC / Denmark / 293,152M671253 / RISE71 / 2196-2023 BC / Denmark / 203,604F999945 / RISE97 / 2025-1885 BC / Sweden / 580,367F999941 / RISE98 / 2275-2032 BC / Sweden / 1,125,643F999943 / RISE174 / 427-611 AD / Sweden / ???Are there any other ancient Scandinavians worth uploading ???

Do you know about RISE175, 179, and 207?

Tomenable
13-07-17, 14:43
According to Davidski:


The Sub-Saharan noise is more linked to post-mortem damage than to the lack of markers or even to low depth coverage, so samples that have not been UDG treated, for example, will show a lot of noise.

Lukas
13-07-17, 17:11
Do you know about RISE175, 179, and 207?

Z681012 rise175

Z236325 rise207

Z570822 rise179

LeBrok
13-07-17, 17:19
According to Davidski:Perhaps, but here is another view:
When I look at admixture samples there always was SS African in them from way back, Oasis and Kostenki, or SE Asian. It was noticeably diminishing through ages till completely disappeared today in Northern Europe. Well, except Papuan (in Harappa). It is still there. Looks like slow changes due to mutations. Slowly getting away from African base to modern varieties.

MOESAN
14-07-17, 00:43
Perhaps, but here is another view:
When I look at admixture samples there always was SS African in them from way back, Oasis and Kostenki, or SE Asian. It was noticeably diminishing through ages till completely disappeared today in Northern Europe. Well, except Papuan (in Harappa). It is still there. Looks like slow changes due to mutations. Slowly getting away from African base to modern varieties.

I agree - Surely one of the most evident causes -
the longer lasting old forms could be due to selective advantage in some conditions -

LeBrok
14-07-17, 05:36
I agree - Surely one of the most evident causes -
the longer lasting old forms could be due to selective advantage in some conditions - Yes, I imagine some genes can persist much longer, because are "perfect" for existing conditions. It is almost impossible to improve them.

Lukas
16-07-17, 15:50
I uploased all Motala, Ajvide and Gokhem smaples (some of them were before on Gedmatch).

For me all "SSA: among them is due to contamination and low coverage. Results in K36 Eurogenes.





F999917
Z455526
Z116076
Z974364
Z151696
Z937642
Z466794




Motala012
Motala01, Sweden
Motala02, Sweden
Motala04, Sweden
Motala06, Sweden
Motala09, Sweden
Stora Forvar 11


Amerindian
0
0
0
0
0
0
0


Arabian
0
0
0
0
0
0
0


Armenian
0
0
0
0
0
0
0


Basque
0
0
0
0
0
0
1,15


Central_African
0
0
0
0
0
7,8
0


Central_Euro
0
0
0
0
4,18
0
7,3


East_African
0
0
0
0
0
0
0


East_Asian
0
0
0
0
0
0
0


East_Balkan
0
0
0
0
0
0
0


East_Central_Asian
0
0
0
0
0
0
0


East_Central_Euro
20,39
23
8,61
9,03
41,76
8,43
14,79


East_Med
0
0
0
0
0
0
0


Eastern_Euro
19,45
8,25
4,78
5,31
6,15
10,02
30,05


Fennoscandian
33,3
35,5
42,31
49,66
19,06
52,19
18,48


French
0
0
3,9
0
0
15,92
0


Iberian
0
0
0
0
0
0
0


Indo0Chinese
0
0
0
0
0
0
0


Italian
0
0
0
0
0
0
0


Malayan
0
0
0
0
0
0
0


Near_Eastern
0
0
0
0
0
0
0


North_African
0
0
0
0
0
0
0


North_Atlantic
9,79
0
9,11
11,83
4,86
0
16,27


North_Caucasian
0
0
0
0
0
0
0


North_Sea
17,08
31,72
31,29
19,08
24
5,64
10,13


Northeast_African
0
0
0
0
0
0
0


Oceanian
0
0
0
0
0
0
0


Omotic
0
0
0
0
0
0
0


Pygmy
0
1,53
0
0
0
0
0


Siberian
0
0
0
0
0
0
0


South_Asian
0
0
0
0
0
0
0


South_Central_Asian
0
0
0
0
0
0
0


South_Chinese
0
0
0
0
0
0
0


Volga0Ural
0
0
0
0
0
0
0


West_African
0
0
0
5,07
0
0
1,84


West_Caucasian
0
0
0
0
0
0
0


West_Med
0
0
0
0
0
0
0





Pitted Ware, Gotland





F999924
Z191490
Z977196
T109642
T577284
T529074




Ajvide58 (http://www.y-str.org/2014/10/ajvide58-dna.html)
Ajvide53
Ajvide59
Ajvide70
Ajvide52
Ire8


Amerindian
0,72
2,77
0
0
0
0


Arabian
0
0
0
0
0
0


Armenian
0
0
0
0
0
0


Basque
4,32
12,44
0
0
3,24
9,59


Central_African
0
1,55
0
0
0
0


Central_Euro
3,67
0,55
0
0
2,37
0


East_African
0
0
0,73
0
0
0


East_Asian
0
0
0
0
0
0


East_Balkan
0
0
0
0
9,84
0


East_Central_Asian
0
0
0
0
0
0


East_Central_Euro
17,81
0
7,26
32,73
26,77
10,38


East_Med
0
0
0
0
0
0


Eastern_Euro
14,4
21,11
57,99
6,25
2,85
8,89


Fennoscandian
26,19
31,55
14,01
23,6
19,22
29,46


French
5,51
0
0
6,07
0
5,4


Iberian
0
0
0
0
0
0


Indo0Chinese
0
0
0
0
0
0


Italian
0
0
0
0
0
0


Malayan
0
0
0
0
0
0


Near_Eastern
0
0
0
0
0
0


North_African
0
0
0
0
0
0


North_Atlantic
7,89
0
0
20,11
13
16,94


North_Caucasian
0
0
0
0
0
0


North_Sea
19,49
25,89
13,29
10,52
20,7
14,87


Northeast_African
0
0
0
0
0
0


Oceanian
0
0,59
0
0
0
0


Omotic
0
0
5,47
0
0
4,47


Pygmy
0
0
1,24
0
2,01
0


Siberian
0
0
0
0
0
0


South_Asian
0
0
0
0
0
0


South_Central_Asian
0
0
0
0
0
0


South_Chinese
0
0
0
0
0
0


Volga0Ural
0
3,54
0
0
0
0


West_African
0
0
0
0,72
0
0


West_Caucasian
0
0
0
0
0
0


West_Med
0
0
0
0
0
0

Lukas
16-07-17, 15:57
Gokhem, Sweden




Z070134
Z867326
F999934
T742920



Gokhem4
Gökhem7
Gökhem2 (http://www.y-str.org/2014/11/gokhem2-ancient-dna.html)
Gokhem5


Amerindian
4,34
0
0
0


Arabian
0
0
0
0


Armenian
1,97
0
0
0


Basque
2,49
27,03
1,78
9,45


Central_African
4,5
0
0
1,15


Central_Euro
0
0
0,55
7,85


East_African
0
0
0
0


East_Asian
2,14
0
0
0


East_Balkan
0
13,07
3,77
11,36


East_Central_Asian
0
0
0
1,16


East_Central_Euro
0
0
0
0


East_Med
0
0
0
0


Eastern_Euro
0
0
0
0


Fennoscandian
0
0
0
0


French
0
0
6,83
0


Iberian
15,83
26,71
39,35
7,37


Indo0Chinese
0
0
0
0


Italian
32,27
0
14,78
37,94


Malayan
0
0
0
0


Near_Eastern
0
0
0
0


North_African
1,11
0,18
1,34
5,34


North_Atlantic
9,12
0
0,13
0


North_Caucasian
0
0
0
0


North_Sea
0
0
6,86
0


Northeast_African
0
0
0
0


Oceanian
0
0
0,19
0,11


Omotic
0
4,25
0
0


Pygmy
0
0
0
0


Siberian
0,77
0
0
0


South_Asian
0
0
0
0


South_Central_Asian
0
0
0
0


South_Chinese
0
0
0
0


Volga0Ural
0
0
0
0,32


West_African
0
0,83
0
0


West_Caucasian
0
0
0
0


West_Med
25,46
27,93
24,4
17,96

New Englander
16-07-17, 16:58
Might be the remnants of the first WHGs Out of Africa connection.

Expredel
20-07-17, 21:06
I1 is quite obviously originally from north Africa. So we can expect to find pre-I1 in north Africa.

Seanp
20-07-17, 21:33
I1 is quite obviously originally from north Africa. So we can expect to find pre-I1 in north Africa.

Source? I shares origins with J haplogroup and the proto ancestor was IJ which originated from the Near East - Mesopotamia region.

Expredel
20-07-17, 23:53
Source? I shares origins with J haplogroup and the proto ancestor was IJ which originated from the Near East - Mesopotamia region.
Scandinavian skulls resemble north African skulls, common knowledge for anyone familiar with anthropology. 1

Seanp
21-07-17, 10:01
Scandinavian skulls resemble north African skulls, common knowledge for anyone familiar with anthropology. 1

Y-DNA is just one factor and it doesn't have effect on phenotype, there are other genetic markers responsible for physical appearance.

I1a3_Young
21-07-17, 14:06
What about older Iberian samples? Do they show any African %?

LeBrok
21-07-17, 16:41
What about older Iberian samples? Do they show any African %? It is hard to say at the moment if 1% African admixtures in older samples is the noise, old artifact, or some new flow.

MOESAN
21-07-17, 22:55
Scandinavian skulls resemble north African skulls, common knowledge for anyone familiar with anthropology. 1

too common knowledge?
Scandinavian skulls are inherited from diverse stocks: you thinkin old anthropo 'nordic' dolicho type? they show only some common basis to a lot of europoid dolichocephalic subtypes, whose prototypes were surely bred around Northern Near East at some stage of History before differentiations; I should think the incomplete isolation of future 'nordic' types took place in Northern Steppes South Finland and around not without some input of 'brünnoids' partly evolved descendants; whatever the error I can do here (uneasy to be sure on this ground, it's rather personal guesses) this genesis don't need at all a direct route from Northwest Africa - concerning Y-haplos we know all of us how uneasy it is to link old haplo's with phenotypes, even in far past - concerning I, it seems it's still considered it comes from IJ whose place of development would be around Near-East/Anatolia rather than in North Africa -
if we consider the allover auDNA of Scandinavian, it's "african" part was and is still very low, and I think that statistically phenotypes have still links with auDNA more than Y-haplo's so to try to compare well represented skulls to a marginal part of auDNA and to Y-haplo's so volatile is a bit weird, IMO.
the between types could maybe be found already among some Paleo clans of Southeastern Europe ?

MOESAN
22-07-17, 16:08
I thought in relatively recent Upper Paleo people (15000 BC? a bit older?) wandering at some stage between Southern and Central Europe and the Steppes, not in first Western Paleo people of the 40000/25000's BC before LGM and partly jammed by it)

Mark
17-03-18, 18:57
This is bad “science.” You cannot determine ancestry of an archaic sample relative to modern samples, especially if the archaic samples are over 5000 years old. Why? Africans today are not what they were > 5000 years ago and, if anything, should be analyzed the other way around. Descendant populations from a man in Siberia 20k years ago will not all be identical, obviously. Some populations (Finnish or Ural) descended of him will show some grouping of his genes whilst still other descended populations will not. This is to say that Eurasian groups introgressed into Africa (V88 being one bit of evidence of it) and it is obviously more likely that modern Africans are partly descended of ancient Europeans than it is that ancient Europeans are descended from modern Africans (the samples used for such admixture analyses).

Maciamo
22-03-18, 09:44
This is bad “science.” You cannot determine ancestry of an archaic sample relative to modern samples, especially if the archaic samples are over 5000 years old. Why? Africans today are not what they were > 5000 years ago and, if anything, should be analyzed the other way around. Descendant populations from a man in Siberia 20k years ago will not all be identical, obviously. Some populations (Finnish or Ural) descended of him will show some grouping of his genes whilst still other descended populations will not. This is to say that Eurasian groups introgressed into Africa (V88 being one bit of evidence of it) and it is obviously more likely that modern Africans are partly descended of ancient Europeans than it is that ancient Europeans are descended from modern Africans (the samples used for such admixture analyses).

Do you understand how population admixture are used? Every scientific paper on ancient DNA compares prehistoric populations to modern ones (as well as to other ancient samples). That's how we know which ancient population contributed genetically to which modern one. Besides, the Dodecad admixture used here do not represent real present-day populations but phantom (or zombie as Dienekes said) populations that potentially existed in the past and were labelled with terms such as East European, Mediterranean or Northwest African. These are neither ancient nor modern, but theoretical model populations.

Mark
24-03-18, 18:53
Do you understand how population admixture are used? Every scientific paper on ancient DNA compares prehistoric populations to modern ones (as well as to other ancient samples). That's how we know which ancient population contributed genetically to which modern one. Besides, the Dodecad admixture used here do not represent real present-day populations but phantom (or zombie as Dienekes said) populations that potentially existed in the past and were labelled with terms such as East European, Mediterranean or Northwest African. These are neither ancient nor modern, but theoretical model populations.

Please refrain from trying to speak down to me. Thanks!

That tells you about modern populations based on ancient. You learn significantly LESS about ancient populations based on modern.

EDIT: what’s meant here is those “Zombie populations” are inferences of careful study in modern populations. They are constructs. By attempting to claim they are real rather than they are constructs extracted from inferences made about modern populations, you engage in simple reification. Those “zombie populations” are not complete pictures, by any stretch of the imagination, and they, more often than not, likely represent even more ancient admixture. I.e. those zombie populations are not real, they are reassembled from pieces supposed to fit. You cannot take those populations, assign them a real place in our ancestry and then extrapolate their introgression into a more ancient population based purely upon percentages retrieved from a tool meant for modern people to test their ancestry.

Try running the Euro J-Test at Gedmatch on ancient Eurasian DNA samples, see how much “Ashkenazi” they have, you’d be surprised. Does that mean they were part Ashkenazim? No, Ashkenazim did not exist back then so it’s impossible. What is more likely is these types of tests are extremely inferential. That’s the first take away. The second takeaway is trying to determine the ancestry of somebody based on the DNA of their descendants is more valuable than trying to do so with an extrapolation of the DNA of other supposed ancestors based on those descendants. This becomes less true with more distant ancestry but on an overall declining arch of utility. It’s all the more the case if you try to take what you learn from that study and apply it to someone that isn’t related to any of them.