PDA

View Full Version : Iberian mtDna from Neolithic to early Bronze Age



Angela
11-02-17, 15:39
See:

Nagy Szecsenyi-Nagy et al:

http://biorxiv.org/content/early/2017/02/10/106963

"Agriculture first reached the Iberian Peninsula around 5700 BCE. However, little is known about the genetic structure and changes of prehistoric populations in different geographic areas of Iberia. In our study, we focused on the maternal genetic make-up of the Neolithic (~ 5500-3000 BCE), Chalcolithic (~ 3000-2200 BCE) and Early Bronze Age (~ 2200-1500 BCE). We report ancient mitochondrial DNA results of 213 individuals (151 HVS-I sequences) from the northeast, middle Ebro Valley, central, southeast and southwest regions and thus on the largest archaeogenetic dataset from the Peninsula to date. Similar to other parts of Europe, we observe a discontinuity between hunter-gatherers and the first farmers of the Neolithic, however the genetic contribution of hunter-gatherers is generally higher and varies regionally, being most pronounced in the inland middle Ebro Valley and in southwest Iberia. During the subsequent periods, we detect regional continuity of Early Neolithic lineages across Iberia, parallel to an increase of hunter-gatherer genetic ancestry. In contrast to ancient DNA findings from Central Europe, we do not observe a major turnover in the mtDNA record of the Iberian Late Chalcolithic and Early Bronze Age, suggesting that the population history of the Iberian Peninsula is distinct in character."

Haak, Krause, and Brandt are listed as authors. I would think they know the general results that are in the pipeline about Bell-Beakers, so I wonder if this is a hint that the original Bell-Beakers were a local, non-steppe associated development? That wouldn't at all surprise me.

The mesolithic results in the paper are from old papers and are, imo, questionable given they didn't know as much about contamination and couldn't take the proper precautions.

bicicleur
11-02-17, 17:18
there is something weird with the oldest known Iberian chalcolithic genome ATP3



Spain
El Portalón, Sierra de Atapuerca [ATP 3]
M
5466-5312 cal BP
Genetiker : R1b-M269 xZ2110


K1a2b
Günther 2015 (http://www.ancestraljourneys.org/bibliography.shtml#Gunter2015)

ATP3 Pre-Beaker Copper Age 3516–3362 BC R1b1a1a2-M269 calls (https://genetiker.wordpress.com/y-snp-calls-for-atp3/)


he is the only one in Iberian chalcolithic with some CHG
he could be modelled as 1/3 Yamna and 2/3 EEF
the others in El Portalon don't have CHG, but they still have some EHG apart from EEF admixed with WHG
the nearby El Mirador don't have EHG, just EEF admixed with WHG as one could expect from neolithic Europeans

ATP3 could be R1b-M269 acording to Genetiker calls, but there is much controversy about that
still, if it is not R1b-M269, it is very likely R1b-P297

it is as if ATP3 would be a newcomer who teached local the farmer people metallurgy

we need more data to solve this puzzle

MarkoZ
11-02-17, 18:25
The Hunter Gatherer resurgence in the Iberian peninsula was already demonstrated by Günther, though most of his samples were drawn from North-Central Spain where the signal seems to be weaker than in the south. But even those Northern Spaniards had more 'HG' ancestry than the Swedish Gökhem farmers.

These f3-Statistics for the Irish Bell Beakers might also be of interest in this context:

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-TUMkimoUu3A/VojmPTmmHWI/AAAAAAAADTs/9-TElYUc1mM/s1600/F3.png

http://www.pnas.org/content/113/2/368.abstract

Note the strong affinity to the Mesolithic Hungarian KO1 individual in all three samples. It looks like there was quite some internal structure in the European Mesolithic.

Angela
11-02-17, 20:07
there is something weird with the oldest known Iberian chalcolithic genome ATP3



Spain
El Portalón, Sierra de Atapuerca [ATP 3]
M
5466-5312 cal BP
Genetiker : R1b-M269 xZ2110


K1a2b
Günther 2015 (http://www.ancestraljourneys.org/bibliography.shtml#Gunter2015)

ATP3 Pre-Beaker Copper Age 3516–3362 BC R1b1a1a2-M269 calls (https://genetiker.wordpress.com/y-snp-calls-for-atp3/)


he is the only one in Iberian chalcolithic with some CHG
he could be modelled as 1/3 Yamna and 2/3 EEF
the others in El Portalon don't have CHG, but they still have some EHG apart from EEF admixed with WHG
the nearby El Mirador don't have EHG, just EEF admixed with WHG as one could expect from neolithic Europeans

ATP3 could be R1b-M269 acording to Genetiker calls, but there is much controversy about that
still, if it is not R1b-M269, it is very likely R1b-P297

it is as if ATP3 would be a newcomer who teached local the farmer people metallurgy

we need more data to solve this puzzle

Well, imo it's pretty clear that copper metallurgy was not a local development, although I used to think that like farming it came along the northern littoral of the Mediterranean, perhaps from Remedello type people (in which case we'd find some I2a), and if not, then directly from the Balkans or somewhere else in the east.

Bell-Beakers have never been a focus of my interest, so unfortunately I didn't save the document, but to the best of my recollection the first Bell-Beaker finds in Central Europe were described as rudimentary and crude in comparison to those in Spain. So, some movement of the pottery tradition may have made its way to Central Europe, to be adopted there? We know that copper working already existed there.

I think some of the confusion might be because there was this broad brush sort of simplified notion of the "Indo-European invasions" where they came charging into Europe as mounted master metal smiths. We now know that isn't quite true. Steppe peoples had to learn their copper technology from Balkan farming cultures, and Bronze making seems to have come from over the Caucasus. Early Corded Ware had no bronze metallurgy and barely any copper, certainly not like the metal working traditions that had existed in "Old Europe", and places like Remedello and the Alpine regions. I don't see why early Bell Beaker in Central Europe was necessarily much different.

@Marko,
Also lots of structure in terms of admixture right within the Iberian peninsula. It also seems there was more admixture there than, as they say, in the far north.

That Cassidy paper was indeed well done.

Fire Haired14
11-02-17, 23:16
mHG frequencies of ancient Europeans (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1sUEn8VzWv-48bCXQHaOSrFqLmdaewuc4jiiBipNtjls/edit#gid=0)

About 500 samples from Neolithic Hungary, about 160 from Saxony-Anhalt Germany, about 200 from Iberia, 71 from NorthEast France, 38 from Romania.

Note how all Neolithic European have similar frequencies except Romania. 14%+ K in all of Neo Europe, 10%+ T2 and J in all of Neo Europe, 2%+ X2 in all of Neo Europe, less than 30% H in all of Neo Europe. But in Romania 5% K, 0% T2, 0% X2, 63% H. We desperately need more Neolithic Eastern European DNA. They could have been different from other Neolithic Europeans and important EEF ancestors of modern Europeans.

bicicleur
11-02-17, 23:59
mHG frequencies of ancient Europeans (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1sUEn8VzWv-48bCXQHaOSrFqLmdaewuc4jiiBipNtjls/edit#gid=0)

About 500 samples from Neolithic Hungary, about 160 from Saxony-Anhalt Germany, about 200 from Iberia, 71 from NorthEast France, 38 from Romania.

Note how all Neolithic European have similar frequencies except Romania. 14%+ K in all of Neo Europe, 10%+ T2 and J in all of Neo Europe, 2%+ X2 in all of Neo Europe, less than 30% H in all of Neo Europe. But in Romania 5% K, 0% T2, 0% X2, 63% H. We desperately need more Neolithic Eastern European DNA. They could have been different from other Neolithic Europeans and important EEF ancestors of modern Europeans.

there is serious doubt about the paleolithic and mesolithic mtDNA N and H, both in Italy and Iberia, they seem to have been contaminated

http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?9255-Once-Upon-a-Time-in-the-West-quot-DNA-(Roth-2016)&p=213613&viewfull=1#post213613



Gravettian
Wales, UK
Paviland [Red Lady (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Lady_of_Paviland)]
M
26,000 BP



Unreliable (http://www.ancestraljourneys.org/adnaintro.shtml#Warning)
CRS (http://www.ancestraljourneys.org/adnaintro.shtml#CRS); Cloning not used; contamination highly likely.
Sykes 2000 (http://www.ancestraljourneys.org/bibliography.shtml#Sykes2000)


Gravettian
Italy
Grotta Paglicci (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paglicci_Cave) [12]

24,000 BP



Unreliable (http://www.ancestraljourneys.org/adnaintro.shtml#Warning)
Contaminated.
Caramelli 2003 (http://www.ancestraljourneys.org/bibliography.shtml#Caramelli2003); Bandelt 2005 (http://www.ancestraljourneys.org/bibliography.shtml#Bandelt2005); Fu 2013, supplementary table S6.


Gravettian
Italy
Grotta Paglicci (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paglicci_Cave) [25]

24,000 BP



Unreliable (http://www.ancestraljourneys.org/adnaintro.shtml#Warning)
Contaminated.
Caramelli 2003; Fu 2013, supplementary table S6.





Solutrian
Spain
Nerja, Málaga [NE-NM 82.2]

18,000-15,000 BC



Unreliable
16126C, 16311Y
Fernández 2005 (http://www.ancestraljourneys.org/bibliography.shtml#Fernandez2005)








Magdalenian
Spain
El Pirulejo [2P1]

11,500-10,500 BC



Unreliable (http://www.ancestraljourneys.org/adnaintro.shtml#Warning)
CRS (http://www.ancestraljourneys.org/adnaintro.shtml#CRS)
Fernández 2005






Portugal






Unreliable
Various claimed haplogroups. Museum bones, contamination likely.
Chandler 2005 (http://www.ancestraljourneys.org/bibliography.shtml#Chandler2005)







2013 (http://www.ancestraljourneys.org/bibliography.shtml#DerSarkissian2013)



Spain
La Chora (Cantabria) [CH-1]

5346 ± 90 BCDate from Strauss 2002




?
73G, 16093, 16362, reported as H6
Hervella 2012 (http://www.ancestraljourneys.org/bibliography.shtml#Hervella2012)




Portugal






Unreliable
Various claimed haplogroups. Museum bones, contamination likely.
Chandler 2005 (http://www.ancestraljourneys.org/bibliography.shtml#Chandler2005)

Olympus Mons
12-02-17, 16:53
there is serious doubt about the paleolithic and mesolithic mtDNA N and H, both in Italy and Iberia, they seem to have been contaminated

http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?9255-Once-Upon-a-Time-in-the-West-quot-DNA-(Roth-2016)&p=213613&viewfull=1#post213613



This is just dishonest. - When something does not agree with our view just say something like: seemed, might, suspicion of contamination... a shame. Sykes, Chandler, etc all incompetent.

Now, those guys at Anthrogenica, on the other hand... jesus, beacons of impartiality and knowledge.

Angela
12-02-17, 16:59
This is just dishonest. - When something does not agree with our view just say something like: seemed, might, suspicion of contamination... a shame. Sykes, Chandler, etc all incompetent.

Now, those guys at Anthrogenica, on the other hand... jesus, beacons of impartiality and knowledge.

So anyone who doesn't agree with you is dishonest? Have you even bothered to read the Methods section of the papers in question? Do it, and then compare it to the procedures that are in place today; it will be an eye-opener.

Keep the insults for other sites. They're not appreciated here. Civil discourse, if you please.

bicicleur
12-02-17, 17:07
Well, imo it's pretty clear that copper metallurgy was not a local development, although I used to think that like farming it came along the northern littoral of the Mediterranean, perhaps from Remedello type people (in which case we'd find some I2a), and if not, then directly from the Balkans or somewhere else in the east.

Bell-Beakers have never been a focus of my interest, so unfortunately I didn't save the document, but to the best of my recollection the first Bell-Beaker finds in Central Europe were described as rudimentary and crude in comparison to those in Spain. So, some movement of the pottery tradition may have made its way to Central Europe, to be adopted there? We know that copper working already existed there.

I think some of the confusion might be because there was this broad brush sort of simplified notion of the "Indo-European invasions" where they came charging into Europe as mounted master metal smiths. We now know that isn't quite true. Steppe peoples had to learn their copper technology from Balkan farming cultures, and Bronze making seems to have come from over the Caucasus. Early Corded Ware had no bronze metallurgy and barely any copper, certainly not like the metal working traditions that had existed in "Old Europe", and places like Remedello and the Alpine regions. I don't see why early Bell Beaker in Central Europe was necessarily much different.

@Marko,
Also lots of structure in terms of admixture right within the Iberian peninsula. It also seems there was more admixture there than, as they say, in the far north.

That Cassidy paper was indeed well done.

the DNA doesn't give any clear hints as to where the copper metallurgy came from in Iberia

the BB have always been a very confusing story

hopefully the new study will bring a new understanding and not even more confusion

berun
12-02-17, 21:01
This is just dishonest. - When something does not agree with our view just say something like: seemed, might, suspicion of contamination... a shame. Sykes, Chandler, etc all incompetent.

Now, those guys at Anthrogenica, on the other hand... jesus, beacons of impartiality and knowledge.

I agree with that. The pattern is always the same. It reminds me little sects with gurus saying in what or who the people must rely. No insulting here, it's just what appears.

Fire Haired14
13-02-17, 01:32
This is just dishonest. - When something does not agree with our view just say something like: seemed, might, suspicion of contamination... a shame. Sykes, Chandler, etc all incompetent.

Now, those guys at Anthrogenica, on the other hand... jesus, beacons of impartiality and knowledge.

A study from 2000 got mtDNA from a late Paleolithic "Villabruna" individual and the result was mHG H. A 2016 study got mtDNA from the same location and time period, maybe same individual, and the result was mHG U5b. The same occurred on a Paleolithic site in Spain, the first study said the individual had H and the second study said U5b.

I personally will keep results from older ancient mtDNA studies in the back of my mind but I believe I have reasonable doubt about their legitimacy.

Olympus Mons
13-02-17, 02:05
So anyone who doesn't agree with you is dishonest? Have you even bothered to read the Methods section of the papers in question? Do it, and then compare it to the procedures that are in place today; it will be an eye-opener.

Keep the insults for other sites. They're not appreciated here. Civil discourse, if you please.

Where did you got the idea that I consider dishonest when someone disagrees with me? - Both Chandler, Zilhao and sykes are renown scientist and never retracted their work - . What is dishonest is to say "seemed", "might" and then put a link to Anthrogenica.

do you think is any less harsh your comment to me? Do you think is civil to infer (baseless) my intentions towards anyone who disagrees with me? who gave you the right to insult me in such a manner? do you have special privileges here?

bicicleur
13-02-17, 09:33
calm down Olympus,
nothing to get excited about

Olympus Mons
13-02-17, 16:45
calm down Olympus,
nothing to get excited about

Hi Bicicleur. Sorry if I was very harsh to you on saying that it was "dishonest". I truly meant what you "did" and not you as a person.

bicicleur
13-02-17, 17:49
it is true there are some on Anthrogenica with curious theories which prevent them from thinking straight and unbiassed
but some people over there make sense too
I hope I'm able to discern them

Olympus Mons
13-02-17, 18:25
yes. that is true.
Again, sorry. :)

Fire Haired14
13-02-17, 21:14
@Olympus,

I've looked at the mtDNA results from that study with Neolithic U5a1 from Portugal and they're not as crazy as some other older studies. It could be legite but doesn't change the 100s of other Neolithic Iberian mtDNA samples. But of course different mtDNA mHG frequencies could have existed in different parts of Neolithic Iberia. But check cout these mtDNA results from Iron age Spain(300-400 BC).

http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0155342

Lots of H1, H3, and U5b like in Neolithic Spain. But...One sample had U5a1b1 like one of the Spanish Bell Beaker samples. The same is true for modern Spain; lots of U5b but a little U5a. About 2% of Spanish have U5a which is a lot more than the 0-0.5% in the 200+ Neolithic samples.

bicicleur
13-02-17, 21:30
it's ok Olympus

Carlos
07-03-17, 01:37
The Genetics of the Pre-Roman Iberian Peninsula: A mtDNA Study of Ancient Iberians M. L. Sampietro, D. Caramelli, O. Lao, F. Calafell, D. Comas, M. Lari, B. Agustí, J. Bertranpetit and C. Lalueza-Fox. Summary The Iberians developed a surprisingly sophisticated culture in the Mediterranean coast of the Iberian Peninsula from the 6th century BC until their conquest by the Romans in the 2nd century BC. They spoke and wrote a non-Indo-European language that still cannot be understood; their origins and relationships with other non-Indo-European peoples, like the Etruscans, are unclear, since their funerary practices were based on the cremation of bodies, and therefore anthropology has been unable to approach the study of this people. We have retrieved mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) from a few of the scarce skeletal remains that have been preserved, some of them belonging to ritualistically executed individuals. The most stringent authentication criteria proposed for ancient DNA, such as independent replication, amino-acid analysis, quantitation of template molecules, multiple extractions and cloning of PCR products, have been followed to obtain reliable sequences from the mtDNA hypervariable region 1 (HVR1), as well as some haplogroup diagnostic SNPs. Phylogeographic analyses show that the haplogroup composition of the ancient Iberians was very similar to that found in modern Iberian Peninsula populations, suggesting a long-term genetic continuity since pre-Roman times. Nonetheless, there is less genetic diversity in the ancient Iberians than is found among modern populations, a fact that could reflect the small population size at the origin of the population sampled, and the heterogenic tribal structure of the Iberian society. Moreover, the Iberians were not especially closely related to the Etruscans, which points to considerable genetic heterogeneity in Pre-Roman Western Europe. http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1529-8817.2005.00194.x?journalCode=ahg -- The most frequent haplogroup is H (52.9%), followed by U (17.6%), J (11.8%), and pre-HV, K and T at the same frequency (5.9%). No samples were found to correspond to other haplogroups that are widely present in the Iberian peninsula populations (Table 7), such as V, X, I or W. The North African U6 subhaplogroup and Sub-Saharan African L lineages are also absent from the ancient Iberians analyzed so far; therefore, the possible entry of U6 lineages prior to the Muslim conquest in the 8th century A.D., as suggested by some authors, remains unproven. However, it is recognized that the sample size is at present too small to exclude any competing hypothesis about a possible North African genetic contribution to the genesis of the Iberian peninsula populations.