PDA

View Full Version : New study concentrating on E-M2 and E-M78



eastara
13-02-18, 02:15
A new study has just come out "The peopling of the last Green Sahara revealed by high-coverage resequencing of trans-Saharan patrilineages"
https://genomebiology.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13059-018-1393-5
It concentrates on several Y haplogroups common in Africa, from the Es on the M2 and M78 branches. I would not comment on the overall results relevant to African population, but just found interesting data in the Supplementary files. It seems new samples from Europe and the Balkan were sequenced, so we will have extra scientific data regarding those branches.

Regarding the African M2 branch, it is found only among Portuguese and not elsewhere in Europe.
Now for the M78, the most numerous is, of course V13. It is found with highest percent among Albanians with 33.82%, however the number of samples is small, 68 only. Second are Romanians with 26.67%, but again the number of samples is 30 only.
Bulgarians are 20.93%/129 samples, Macedonians 17.15%/99, Greek 11.32%/433, Hungarians 9.43%/106, etc.
Other branches under M78 on the Balkans are found mainly among Greeks - V12 and V65, One Bulgarian is V12 and one Macedonian V22. In other parts of Europe different branches under M78(xV13) are common only among South Italians and Spaniards.

Angela
13-02-18, 04:44
Some interesting conclusions about R1b-V88. I think it's as was suspected.


" The presence of two nested R-V88 basal European clades can be related to the high frequencies of R-V88 internal lineages in the central Sahel assuming a movement from Europe toward the central Sahel across northern Africa. In turn, considering the trans-Saharan distribution and the “star-like” topology of the sub-clade R-V1589 (branch 233), it is likely that this lineage rapidly expanded in the lake Chad area between 5.73 and 5.25 kya and moved backward to northeastern Africa across the Saharan region "

"Outside Africa, both A3-M13 and R-V88 harbour sub-lineages geographically restricted to the island of Sardinia and both seem to indicate ancient trans-Mediterranean contacts. The phylogeography of A3-M13 suggests that the direction of the movement was from Africa to Sardinia, while R-V88 topology indicates a Europe-to-Africa migration. Indeed, our data suggest a European origin of R-V88 about 12.3 kya, considering both the presence of two Sardinian R-V88 basal clades (R-M18 and R-V35) and that the V88 marker arose in the R-M343 background, which in turn includes Near-Eastern/European lineages [52 (https://genomebiology.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13059-018-1393-5#CR52)]. It is worth noting that the arrival of R-V88 in the Sahara seems to have occurred between 8.67 and 7.85 kya (considering as an upper limit the time estimates of the last node including a European-specific lineage, while the lower limit is the coalescence age of all the African-specific lineages), refining the time frame of the trans-Saharan migration proposed in previous studies [37 (https://genomebiology.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13059-018-1393-5#CR37), 56 (https://genomebiology.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13059-018-1393-5#CR56)]. The route of R-V88 toward the lake Chad basin probably passed through northeastern Africa rather than Arabia, considering the absence of R-V88 in the Horn of Africa. Interestingly, both A3-M13 and R-V88 European sub-clades coalesced in ancient times (> 7.62 kya for A3-M13/V2742 and between 12.34 and 8.67 kya for R-V88/M18 and R-V88/V35) (Additional file 2 (https://genomebiology.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13059-018-1393-5#MOESM2): Figures S2 and S5). So it is possible that both clades were widespread in southern Europe, where they have been replaced by the Y haplogroups brought by the following recurrent migration waves from Asia [57 (https://genomebiology.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13059-018-1393-5#CR57)]."

Angela
13-02-18, 04:55
These data suggest that the presence in northern Africa of sub-Saharan patrilineages was not due to recent contacts but probably occurred in more ancient times, possibly during the Green Sahara period considering the coalescence ages of the clades. Our findings seem to be at odds with genome-wide studies [42 (https://genomebiology.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13059-018-1393-5#CR42), 43 (https://genomebiology.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13059-018-1393-5#CR43), 59 (https://genomebiology.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13059-018-1393-5#CR59), 60 (https://genomebiology.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13059-018-1393-5#CR60)] reporting a recent relevant sub-Saharan genetic component in modern northern African populations, mainly attributed to the Arab slave trade. This apparent discrepancy between inferences based on Y chromosomal and autosomal data could be the consequence of a sex-biased sub-Saharan contribution to the northern African gene pool that occurred in historical times. Indeed, it is known that the trans-Saharan Arab slave trade involved twice as many servile women as men (almost the reverse of the Atlantic slave trade ratio). Moreover, few male slaves left descendants, whereas female slaves were imported in northern Africa as household servants and as concubines and their offspring were born free, thus contributing to the local gene pool [54 (https://genomebiology.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13059-018-1393-5#CR54), 61 (https://genomebiology.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13059-018-1393-5#CR61)]. Thus, we suggest that the Arab slave trade mainly contributed to the mtDNA and autosomal gene pool of present-day northern Africans, whereas the paternal gene pool was mainly shaped by more ancient events. This hypothesis is in line with genome-wide data obtained from three ancient Egyptian mummies (dated between ~ 2.5 and 2 kya) showing a not negligible ancient sub-Saharan component (~ 6–10 %) [44 (https://genomebiology.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13059-018-1393-5#CR44)]."

"The multifurcated structure of the E-M2 is suggestive of a first demographic expansion, which occurred about 10.5 kya, at the beginning of the last Green Sahara (Fig. 2 (https://genomebiology.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13059-018-1393-5#Fig2); Additional file 2 (https://genomebiology.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13059-018-1393-5#MOESM2): Figure S4). After this initial expansion, we found that most of the trans-Saharan lineages within A3-M13, E-M2 and R-V88 radiated in a narrow time interval at 8–7 kya, suggestive of population expansions that may have occurred in the same time (Fig. 2 (https://genomebiology.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13059-018-1393-5#Fig2); Additional file 2 (https://genomebiology.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13059-018-1393-5#MOESM2): Figures S3, S4 and S6). Interestingly, during roughly the same period, the Saharan populations adopted pastoralism, probably as an adaptive strategy against a short arid period [1 (https://genomebiology.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13059-018-1393-5#CR1), 62 (https://genomebiology.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13059-018-1393-5#CR62), 63 (https://genomebiology.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13059-018-1393-5#CR63)]. So, the exploitation of pastoralism resources and the reestablishment of wetter conditions could have triggered the simultaneous population expansions observed here."

Ygorcs
13-02-18, 08:51
These results are fascinating! This suggests that we should (or maybe will) be finding more genetic connections between the northern and the southern coasts of the Mediterranean in ancient, pre-Neolithic times, and that R1b (V88 or otherwise) and even, at least regionally, A were a lot more common in Mesolithic Europe than we thought.

bicicleur
13-02-18, 09:43
Some interesting conclusions about R1b-V88. I think it's as was suspected.


" The presence of two nested R-V88 basal European clades can be related to the high frequencies of R-V88 internal lineages in the central Sahel assuming a movement from Europe toward the central Sahel across northern Africa. In turn, considering the trans-Saharan distribution and the “star-like” topology of the sub-clade R-V1589 (branch 233), it is likely that this lineage rapidly expanded in the lake Chad area between 5.73 and 5.25 kya and moved backward to northeastern Africa across the Saharan region "

"Outside Africa, both A3-M13 and R-V88 harbour sub-lineages geographically restricted to the island of Sardinia and both seem to indicate ancient trans-Mediterranean contacts. The phylogeography of A3-M13 suggests that the direction of the movement was from Africa to Sardinia, while R-V88 topology indicates a Europe-to-Africa migration. Indeed, our data suggest a European origin of R-V88 about 12.3 kya, considering both the presence of two Sardinian R-V88 basal clades (R-M18 and R-V35) and that the V88 marker arose in the R-M343 background, which in turn includes Near-Eastern/European lineages [52 (https://genomebiology.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13059-018-1393-5#CR52)]. It is worth noting that the arrival of R-V88 in the Sahara seems to have occurred between 8.67 and 7.85 kya (considering as an upper limit the time estimates of the last node including a European-specific lineage, while the lower limit is the coalescence age of all the African-specific lineages), refining the time frame of the trans-Saharan migration proposed in previous studies [37 (https://genomebiology.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13059-018-1393-5#CR37), 56 (https://genomebiology.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13059-018-1393-5#CR56)]. The route of R-V88 toward the lake Chad basin probably passed through northeastern Africa rather than Arabia, considering the absence of R-V88 in the Horn of Africa. Interestingly, both A3-M13 and R-V88 European sub-clades coalesced in ancient times (> 7.62 kya for A3-M13/V2742 and between 12.34 and 8.67 kya for R-V88/M18 and R-V88/V35) (Additional file 2 (https://genomebiology.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13059-018-1393-5#MOESM2): Figures S2 and S5). So it is possible that both clades were widespread in southern Europe, where they have been replaced by the Y haplogroups brought by the following recurrent migration waves from Asia [57 (https://genomebiology.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13059-018-1393-5#CR57)]."



R1b-V88 indeed probably has a European origin, in the Iron Gate.
But I don't understand how they link the 12.3 ka origin with movements from Sardegna.
Mesolithic Sardegna was virtually uninhabited.
An arrival of R1b-V88 subclades in Sardegna with Cardium Ware 8 ka is possible.
But in the mean time R1b-V88 folks must have been roaming around elsewhere too.
Many Sardegnian genomes are known, that makes it easy, but that doesn't mean we always have to conclude for Sardegnian origins.

Ownstyler
13-02-18, 13:31
A new study has just come out "It is found with highest percent among Albanians with 33.82%, however the number of samples is small, 68 only. Second are Romanians with 26.67%, but again the number of samples is 30 only.
Bulgarians are 20.93%/129 samples, Macedonians 17.15%/99, Greek 11.32%/433, Hungarians 9.43%/106, etc.
Other branches under M78 on the Balkans are found mainly among Greeks - V12 and V65, One Bulgarian is V12 and one Macedonian V22.

Where are you getting these numbers? The Eupedia haplogroup by countries page has different percentages.

Also, how can we get the new data from for each population?

Angela
13-02-18, 16:38
R1b-V88 indeed probably has a European origin, in the Iron Gate.
But I don't understand how they link the 12.3 ka origin with movements from Sardegna.
Mesolithic Sardegna was virtually uninhabited.
An arrival of R1b-V88 subclades in Sardegna with Cardium Ware 8 ka is possible.
But in the mean time R1b-V88 folks must have been roaming around elsewhere too.
Many Sardegnian genomes are known, that makes it easy, but that doesn't mean we always have to conclude for Sardegnian origins.

I didn't interpret the paper as saying that R1b-V88 originated or even was in Sardegna in the Mesolithic. It could have been picked up along the Cardial route, but isn't it also possible it arrived in the Chalcolithic with people from the Balkans?

I'm not so sure about this supposed movement of A3-M13 from North Africa to Sardegna either. It could have also come with the Neolithic.

It's just that because they've been so isolated, y lines that almost disappeared elsewhere survived in Sardegna.

eastara
14-02-18, 00:11
Where are you getting these numbers? The Eupedia haplogroup by countries page has different percentages.

Also, how can we get the new data from for each population?

First, have in mind that Eupedia reports everything under E1b1b1, which is E-M35. This includes other branches under M78, not just V13, plus under M123, which are predominantly non European.

The data I was mentioning could be found in Additional file 1, Table S5.
It seems they had the full genomes by NGS in China of 104 Y chromosomes from their lab collection (77 of them belonging to the four trans-Saharan haplogroups), After identifying the SNPs of interest they further analysed samples from 7955 males from 145 worldwide populations (128 from our lab collection and 17 from the literature).
If somebody is interested to analyse the .bam files of the full Y genomes, they are available also on https://www.ebi.ac.uk/ena

kingjohn
14-02-18, 00:29
Some interesting conclusions about R1b-V88. I think it's as was suspected.


" The presence of two nested R-V88 basal European clades can be related to the high frequencies of R-V88 internal lineages in the central Sahel assuming a movement from Europe toward the central Sahel across northern Africa. In turn, considering the trans-Saharan distribution and the “star-like” topology of the sub-clade R-V1589 (branch 233), it is likely that this lineage rapidly expanded in the lake Chad area between 5.73 and 5.25 kya and moved backward to northeastern Africa across the Saharan region "

"Outside Africa, both A3-M13 and R-V88 harbour sub-lineages geographically restricted to the island of Sardinia and both seem to indicate ancient trans-Mediterranean contacts. The phylogeography of A3-M13 suggests that the direction of the movement was from Africa to Sardinia, while R-V88 topology indicates a Europe-to-Africa migration. Indeed, our data suggest a European origin of R-V88 about 12.3 kya, considering both the presence of two Sardinian R-V88 basal clades (R-M18 and R-V35) and that the V88 marker arose in the R-M343 background, which in turn includes Near-Eastern/European lineages [52 (https://genomebiology.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13059-018-1393-5#CR52)]. It is worth noting that the arrival of R-V88 in the Sahara seems to have occurred between 8.67 and 7.85 kya (considering as an upper limit the time estimates of the last node including a European-specific lineage, while the lower limit is the coalescence age of all the African-specific lineages), refining the time frame of the trans-Saharan migration proposed in previous studies [37 (https://genomebiology.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13059-018-1393-5#CR37), 56 (https://genomebiology.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13059-018-1393-5#CR56)]. The route of R-V88 toward the lake Chad basin probably passed through northeastern Africa rather than Arabia, considering the absence of R-V88 in the Horn of Africa. Interestingly, both A3-M13 and R-V88 European sub-clades coalesced in ancient times (> 7.62 kya for A3-M13/V2742 and between 12.34 and 8.67 kya for R-V88/M18 and R-V88/V35) (Additional file 2 (https://genomebiology.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13059-018-1393-5#MOESM2): Figures S2 and S5). So it is possible that both clades were widespread in southern Europe, where they have been replaced by the Y haplogroups brought by the following recurrent migration waves from Asia [57 (https://genomebiology.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13059-018-1393-5#CR57)]."



fascinating :)
angela do you think haplogroup A is that old in sardinia ?
regards
Adam

Angela
14-02-18, 01:45
fascinating :)
angela do you think haplogroup A is that old in sardinia ?
regards
Adam
[/B]

The short answer is that I don't know. The long answer is that I'm not sure how you could determine when and how it arrived. I didn't comb through the supplement, but from this paragraph, the coalescence age is  >7.62 kya for A3-M13/V2742 .

So, could we be talking about 6,000 BC or around the time of the Neolithic? Could it have been very early in the Neolithic Near East and swept up in the migrations, and then straight to Sardegna, or even to the Balkans and then later to Sardegna in the Chalcolithic? I think that places like Sardegna can very easily shelter rare haplogroups that have drifted out of the gene pool in areas where there have been large scale migrations, as in the Middle East, for example, which was inundated with men with "J" lines.

I also didn't pore over the sources of the data. If the authors used the originally selected Sardinian samples from the isolated plateau, then I think it's probably no later than the Neolithic, or Chalcolithic at the most, because they're really a genetic isolate. Even the Romans couldn't absorb and assimilate them.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/7a/Sardegna_Barbaria.png/220px-Sardegna_Barbaria.png

If the samples were taken, and particularly this sample, from the southern coastal regions, then there are other possibilities. Sardegna was one of the few places in Italy, northwestern Sicily being the other, where the Carthaginians did have trading outposts and probably married or mated with some local women. Could it have come that late?

Although the studies indicate that the autosomal differences between the highlanders and the rest of the Sardinians are not significant, there are some, including ones indicating input from Yamnaya type people, and also some trace North African and even SSA. Y lines, of course, could very easily survive without any autosomal inpact at this point.

What I think is less plausible is that it has been there since the Mesolithic, having arrived directly from Africa. The signs of the Mesolithic there are not very robust. Even if it were, I think the populating of the island was predominantly from the Iberian and Italian peninsulas. That's been the consensus, I think. It's not impossible, as the currents from perhaps around Morocco might just allow it if the people were lucky, so I'd be willing to be persuaded.

kingjohn
14-02-18, 12:24
i wonder what made the auther of this paper to decide that a3-m13 is
that old in sardinia
and not from Carthaginian for example ?
regards
adam

p.s
by the way e-m81 in sardinia could be linked to the punic Carthaginian rule of sardinia

Angela
14-02-18, 16:25
]i wonder what made the auther of this paper to decide that a3-m13 is
that old in sardinia
and not from Carthaginian for example [/B]?
regards
adam

p.s
by the way e-m81 in sardinia could be linked to the punic Carthaginian rule of sardinia

Not to be pedantic, but there was no Punic/Carthaginian rule of the whole of Sardinia.

See:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Sardinia#Early_and_Classical_Antiquity

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Sardinia#Early_and_Classical_Antiquityh ttps://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/0/05/Carthaginian_Sardinia.JPG

As I mentioned above, no one, including the Romans, ever subjugated the Barbagia area from which most of the samples collected by Cavalli-Sforza come.

As to the bolded comment, I don't think they did. I interpreted their text to mean that the general direction of flow was from Africa to Europe, not specifically Africa to Sardinia in the Mesolithic.

Could you point me to the part of the text which leads you to believe that? Maybe I missed it.

However, I also don't know why you would single out the Carthaginian period, particularly if this sample came from the Barbagia. The Carthaginians had nothing to do with that area. Of course, as I said, I didn't check the geographical source of all the Sardinian samples. Knowing that would narrow the probabilities.

Angela
14-02-18, 17:26
Here is Razib Khan's post on the paper. He focuses on the Chadic R1b...

https://www.gnxp.com/WordPress/2018/02/13/when-western-near-eastern-farmers-carried-north-eurasian-y-chromosomes-into-central-africa/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

"There’s a lot of other Y lineages that are surveyed in this work, but in the supplements, the figure makes it clear that Sardinian R-V88 is basal to star-like African topologies. The implication here is that the African lineages derive from European ones."

The autosomal paper found Chad populations (though the one in question was not Chadic speaking) seem to share drift from Sardinians in particular. Looking at ancient genomes Early European Farmers seem to have been the primary donor population. Additionally, the coalescence of the African lineages seems to date to 5 to 6 thousand years before the present.


"Though not definitive, the association of Afro-Asiatic populations with R-V88 is strongly suggestive to me of the possibility that some western Near Eastern Farmers spoke Afro-Asiatic languages."

I'm not so sure of the latter.

Are they saying coalescence in the Neolithic, but it didn't expand to central Africa until the Bronze?

bicicleur
14-02-18, 17:30
I didn't interpret the paper as saying that R1b-V88 originated or even was in Sardegna in the Mesolithic. It could have been picked up along the Cardial route, but isn't it also possible it arrived in the Chalcolithic with people from the Balkans?
I'm not so sure about this supposed movement of A3-M13 from North Africa to Sardegna either. It could have also come with the Neolithic.
It's just that because they've been so isolated, y lines that almost disappeared elsewhere survived in Sardegna.
there is always this possibility too

https://www.eupedia.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=9737
9737

that is the problem with studying modern population DNA - to many possibilities

Angela
14-02-18, 19:03
there is always this possibility too

https://www.eupedia.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=9737
9737

that is the problem with studying modern population DNA - to many possibilities

Sorry, Bicicleur, it says invalid attachment.

As to your general point, I couldn't agree more. There are indeed a lot of possibilities if you're using yDna lines to try to figure out ancient migrations. That's why I'm leery of a lot of people's conclusions, and especially if they have an obvious agenda.

That's why it's become a sort of mantra with me that the real answers will only come with lots of ancient dna.

Perhaps that's why the authors of this paper kept it so general.

kingjohn
14-02-18, 19:41
Not to be pedantic, but there was no Punic/Carthaginian rule of the whole of Sardinia.

See:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Sardinia#Early_and_Classical_Antiquity

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Sardinia#Early_and_Classical_Antiquityh ttps://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/0/05/Carthaginian_Sardinia.JPG

As I mentioned above, no one, including the Romans, ever subjugated the Barbagia area from which most of the samples collected by Cavalli-Sforza come.

As to the bolded comment, I don't think they did. I interpreted their text to mean that the general direction of flow was from Africa to Europe, not specifically Africa to Sardinia in the Mesolithic.

Could you point me to the part of the text which leads you to believe that? Maybe I missed it.

However, I also don't know why you would single out the Carthaginian period, particularly if this sample came from the Barbagia. The Carthaginians had nothing to do with that area. Of course, as I said, I didn't check the geographical source of all the Sardinian samples. Knowing that would narrow the probabilities.

angela when they speak on 7.6ky that means that this certin branch of a3-m13 was in sardinia from 5600 bc this is neoliotic period
i never spoke about it as mesolithic one nor do they in the paper ......

i know there was punic carethegenian settlelmnts in the south and western part of the island

i thought the samples were taken from cagliary in south sardinia not barbagia {which as you mention is isolated area}

bicicleur
14-02-18, 19:50
Sorry, Bicicleur, it says invalid attachment.

As to your general point, I couldn't agree more. There are indeed a lot of possibilities if you're using yDna lines to try to figure out ancient migrations. That's why I'm leery of a lot of people's conclusions, and especially if they have an obvious agenda.

That's why it's become a sort of mantra with me that the real answers will only come with lots of ancient dna.

Perhaps that's why the authors of this paper kept it so general.

the map is about the obsidian trade, somewhere in the early neolithic

the authors didn't draw any solid conclusions, and yes, probably right so
I must admit though I did find it an interesting overview
but conclusions indeed can only be made with anciant DNA

Angela
14-02-18, 20:28
angela when they speak on 7.6ky that means that this certin branch of a3-m13 was in sardinia from 5600 bc this is neoliotic period
i never spoke about it as mesolithic one nor do they in the paper ......

i know there was punic carethegenian settlelmnts in the south and western part of the island

i thought the samples were taken from cagliary in south sardinia not barbagia {which as you mention is isolated area}

Well, regardless of where the sample was taken, then, the Carthaginians are irrelevant if it's dated to the Neolithic in Sardinia itself, yes?

The date of the earliest Neolithic in Sardinia, Cardial, is just around this time, so I suppose there could have been an overlap with any Mesolithic people who remained, but I think it's probably more likely this y line came with the Neolithic settlers, as I said initially.

If the E-M81 was from samples taken from Cagliari, then, yes, that line could be from Carthaginians, or maybe it was Saracen raiders from later in history. There are lots of possibilities. This is the problem with trying to use modern dna to assign "ethnicity" or a certain migration to the presence of certain y lines. Sometimes it's proven true, and sometimes it isn't.

Goodness, King John, you seem to have become infected with Azzurro's fascination with the Carthaginians. Well, I suppose if an Italian can so identify with the arch-enemy of Rome, it's possible. You'd have to identify with Titus to match that! :)

I certainly wouldn't take these minor y lines as necessarily having a direct correspondence with autosomal results. In the Dienekes K12 run, the Sardinians came out as 2.6% Northwest African. Yet, all he had were the samples generally from the Barbagia, so it's unlikely that had anything to do with any Carthaginians. At the same time, Otzi came out part NorthWest African too.

It just points out the limitations of Admixture runs based on modern clusters.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1GWhNZcfTQ2hMSK9Ni1IqG7aXHB00SRE5L6ED2osPs9M/edit?hl=en_US&hl=en_US#gid=0

https://i.imgur.com/YtIUk8b.png



Btw, I wasn't able to find info on where "particular samples" were taken. Could you point me to where you got that info?

kingjohn
14-02-18, 20:37
Well, regardless of where the sample was taken, then, the Carthaginians are irrelevant if it's dated to the Neolithic in Sardinia itself, yes?

The date of the earliest Neolithic in Sardinia, Cardial, is just around this time, so I suppose there could have been an overlap with any Mesolithic people who remained, but I think it's probably more likely this y line came with the Neolithic settlers, as I said initially.

If the E-M81 was from samples taken from Cagliari, then, yes, that line could be from Carthaginians, or maybe it was Saracen raiders from later in history. There are lots of possibilities. This is the problem with trying to use modern dna to assign "ethnicity" or a certain migration to the presence of certain y lines. Sometimes it's proven true, and sometimes it isn't.

Goodness, King John, you seem to have become infected with Azzurro's fascination with the Carthaginians. Well, I suppose if an Italian can so identify with the arch-enemy of Rome, it's possible. You'd have to identify with Titus to match that! :)

I certainly wouldn't take these minor y lines as necessarily having a direct correspondence with autosomal results. In the Dienekes K12 run, the Sardinians came out as 2.6% Northwest African. Yet, all he had were the samples generally from the Barbagia, so it's unlikely that had anything to do with any Carthaginians. At the same time, Otzi came out part NorthWest African too.

It just points out the limitations of Admixture runs based on modern clusters.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1GWhNZcfTQ2hMSK9Ni1IqG7aXHB00SRE5L6ED2osPs9M/edit?hl=en_US&hl=en_US#gid=0

https://i.imgur.com/YtIUk8b.png



Btw, I wasn't able to find info on where "particular samples" were taken. Could you point me to where you got that info?


azurro is a good man
he uploaded me and my family ftdna rqaw data to my heritage
and he didn't have to
i remmber is kind hourt :)
now to the subject i score 14% north central italian in gencove { yes i know this site is joke and use imoputation but still so maybe i do have some titus in me}

there was a research in sardinia who found 5.6% e-m81 thats not small % it was higher than e-m34 and e-m78-v13 in that specific study
unfortuntley i don't know from where trombolta took those samples .....

Angela
14-02-18, 20:56
azurro is a good man
he uploaded me and my family ftdna rqaw data to my heritage
and he didn't have to
i remmber is kind hourt :)
now to the subject i score 14% north central italian in gencove { yes i know this site is joke and use imoputation but still so maybe i do have some titus in me}

there was a research in sardinia who found 5.6% e-m81 thats not small % it was higher than e-m34 and e-m78-v13 in that specific study
unfortuntley i don't know from where trombolta took those samples .....

Gosh, KingJohn, no need to rush to man the ramparts; it just tickled my funny bone, that's all! It's a bit unusual, you'd have to admit. As I said, to equal it, you'd have to choose Titus as your avatar. :)

No, that isn't a small percentage, but that's one study, you say? I would think a lot of it is male mediated, so perhaps at the most half that in terms of autosomal inheritance?

This paper has a lot more samples, yes? What is the frequency they have for E-M81 island wide? I mean, they've got about 1500 samples, yes, so their number should be more accurate, I would think.

kingjohn
14-02-18, 21:36
the research i am talking about is this http://science.sciencemag.org/content/341/6145/565
they found 5.8% e-m81 out of 1204 sardinians{thats pretty big sample and not shy number }
file:///C:/Users/guardsb/Downloads/Low-PassDNASequencingof1200SardiniansReconstructsEurop eanY-ChromosomePhylogeny.pdf

Angela
14-02-18, 21:49
the research i am talking about is this http://science.sciencemag.org/content/341/6145/565
they found 5.8% e-m81 out of 1204 sardinians{thats pretty big sample and not shy number }
file:///C:/Users/guardsb/Downloads/Low-PassDNASequencingof1200SardiniansReconstructsEurop eanY-ChromosomePhylogeny.pdf

Did I say it was a small number? I think, if you check, I said it isn't a small number, although it is undoubtedly a minority of the y lineages in Sardinia.

Plus, you said it was the Trombetta study, not the Francalacci study. I'm not obsessed with the Carthaginians. I don't have the percentages of E-M81 by paper by area memorized. I didn't know you were talking about the Francalacci paper. Obviously, the Francalacci sample of 1200 is very good.

So? Have I or any one else here ever denied that there was some impact in southern Sardinia from various migrations? Well, northern Sardinia too, but of a different type. Didn't I specifically say that E-M81 in southern Sardinia makes sense from that perspective, even if the A lineage does not?

kingjohn
14-02-18, 22:10
Did I say it was a small number? I think, if you check, I said it isn't a small number, although it is undoubtedly a minority of the y lineages in Sardinia.

Plus, you said it was the Trombetta study, not the Francalacci study. I'm not obsessed with the Carthaginians. I don't have the percentages of E-M81 by paper by area memorized. I didn't know you were talking about the Francalacci paper. Obviously, the Francalacci sample of 1200 is very good.

So? Have I or any one else here ever denied that there was some impact in southern Sardinia from various migrations? Well, northern Sardinia too, but of a different type. Didn't I specifically say that E-M81 in southern Sardinia makes sense from that perspective, even if the A lineage does not?

my mistake

but you can also admitt you were wrong when you thought that in the paper they speak
about a3-m13 as mesolitic
7.6 ky
doesn't mean 7600 bc late mesolitic it means 5600 bc neolithic period .....

i don't agree with you 1204 samples is more than enough to reflect this small island ....

Azzurro
14-02-18, 22:29
azurro is a good man
he uploaded me and my family ftdna rqaw data to my heritage
and he didn't have to
i remmber is kind hourt :)
now to the subject i score 14% north central italian in gencove { yes i know this site is joke and use imoputation but still so maybe i do have some titus in me}

there was a research in sardinia who found 5.6% e-m81 thats not small % it was higher than e-m34 and e-m78-v13 in that specific study
unfortuntley i don't know from where trombolta took those samples .....

Thanks for the reponse brother! As you know its always my pleasure :)

Azzurro
14-02-18, 22:42
Well, regardless of where the sample was taken, then, the Carthaginians are irrelevant if it's dated to the Neolithic in Sardinia itself, yes?

The date of the earliest Neolithic in Sardinia, Cardial, is just around this time, so I suppose there could have been an overlap with any Mesolithic people who remained, but I think it's probably more likely this y line came with the Neolithic settlers, as I said initially.

If the E-M81 was from samples taken from Cagliari, then, yes, that line could be from Carthaginians, or maybe it was Saracen raiders from later in history. There are lots of possibilities. This is the problem with trying to use modern dna to assign "ethnicity" or a certain migration to the presence of certain y lines. Sometimes it's proven true, and sometimes it isn't.

Goodness, King John, you seem to have become infected with Azzurro's fascination with the Carthaginians. Well, I suppose if an Italian can so identify with the arch-enemy of Rome, it's possible. You'd have to identify with Titus to match that! :)

I certainly wouldn't take these minor y lines as necessarily having a direct correspondence with autosomal results. In the Dienekes K12 run, the Sardinians came out as 2.6% Northwest African. Yet, all he had were the samples generally from the Barbagia, so it's unlikely that had anything to do with any Carthaginians. At the same time, Otzi came out part NorthWest African too.

It just points out the limitations of Admixture runs based on modern clusters.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1GWhNZcfTQ2hMSK9Ni1IqG7aXHB00SRE5L6ED2osPs9M/edit?hl=en_US&hl=en_US#gid=0

https://i.imgur.com/YtIUk8b.png



Btw, I wasn't able to find info on where "particular samples" were taken. Could you point me to where you got that info?

Your obessed with me ah? You have to mention me on every post.

First off Southern Italians largely joined Hannibal and were anti-Roman

“After Cannae, several south Italian cities allied themselves to Hannibal: the Apulian (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apulia) towns of Salapia (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salapia), Arpi (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arpi) and Herdonia (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ordona) and many of the Lucanians (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucania). Mago marched south with a Carthaginian army detachment and, some weeks later, the Bruttians (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bruttian) joined him. Simultaneously, Hannibal marched north with part of his forces and was joined by the Hirpini (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hirpini)and the Caudini (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caudini), two of the three Samnite (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samnium)cantons. The greatest gain was the second largest city of Italy, Capua (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capua), when Hannibal's army marched into Campania (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Campania) in 216 BC. The inhabitants of Capua held limited Roman citizenship and the aristocracy was linked to the Romans via marriage and friendship, but the possibility of becoming the supreme city of Italy after the evident Roman disasters proved too strong a temptation. The treaty between them and Hannibal can be described as an agreement of friendship, since the Capuans had no obligations, but provided the harbour through which Hannibal was reinforced.[26] (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Punic_War#cite_note-26)By 215 BC, Hannibal's alliance system covered the bulk of southern Italy, save for the Greek cities (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magna_Graecia) along the coast (except Croton (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crotone), which was conquered by his allies), Rhegium (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhegium), and the Latin colonies of Beneventum (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benevento), Luceria (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucera) in Samnium (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samnium), Venusia (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venusia) in Apulia, Brundisium (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brundisium) and Paestum (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paestum).[27] (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Punic_War#cite_note-FOOTNOTEHoyos2011313-27)”

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Punic_War#Establishing_a_Carthaginian_allia nce_in_Italy

Same is true for Northern Italy as well, most of the Cisalpine Gauls joined Hannibal eagerly, if anything Hannibal is a hero to Italians.

Second, are you seriously trying to compare Hannibal to the genocidal monster that was Titus? It is no where near the same.

Angela
14-02-18, 23:09
^^You don't have a clue how Italians feel about anything. How could you?

Now stop making everything about you and get back on topic. Must you ruin every thread about ancient dna in Italy? We were having a perfectly civil discussion until you decided to insert yourself and your private feelings and sensitivities.

Azzurro
14-02-18, 23:10
Its funny how you delete my post mentioning you abuse your power, lol reality check much?

Azzurro
14-02-18, 23:11
^^You don't have a clue how Italians feel about anything.

Now stop making everything about you and get back on topic. Must you ruin every thread about ancient dna in Italy? We were having a perfectly civil discussion until you decided to insert yourself and your private feelings.



shut your mouth you menopausal B****

Angela
14-02-18, 23:22
I wanted originally to remove a post which was only a personal attack so as to maintain the dignity of this site.

However, I'm getting tired of whining, childish, perhaps mentally disturbed members ranting, insulting, and otherwise degrading me, and just silently moderating such posts. If anyone wants to know why infractions are issued, why they accumulate, and why some people are then automatically banned, this is a great example. No infractions were issued until after the first insult. In fact the banned member wasn't even part of the conversation.

This is what I deal with on a constant basis from certain young men on this site. I don't think I need to point out that this kind of vitriol is not dealt out when male moderators give infractions. The blatant sexism and vulgarity is unbelievable. This is the recourse of people who can't compete in debate, and can't even, in this case, take a mild joke.

One thing that someone in his twenties or older should have learned is how to control him or herself in debate or disagreement. In this context the consequences for behaving this way are mild; try this in a professional setting, and you're toast.

Salento
14-02-18, 23:32
Well, hoops.........
The Messapi of South Puglia and the population of Gargano didn’t join Hannibal, they actually helped the defeated left over Roman Army after Cannae.
From Wikipedia:
“During Hannibal's invasion of Italy in the Second Punic War (218-201 BC) the Messapii remained loyal to the Romans. The Battle of Cannae, where Hannibal routed the forces of the Romans and their Italic allies, was fought in the heart of the neighbouring Peucetii territory. The Roman survivors were welcomed into nearby Canusium. Part of the final stages of the war were fought out at Monte Gargano, in the northernmost part of Apulia, in the territory of the Dauni.”

Angela
14-02-18, 23:42
my mistake

but you can also admitt you were wrong when you thought that in the paper they speak
about a3-m13 as mesolitic
7.6 ky
doesn't mean 7600 bc late mesolitic it means 5600 bc neolithic period .....

i don't agree with you 1204 samples is more than enough to reflect this small island ....

I think we're having a communication problem.

This is what I said:
" Obviously, the Francalacci sample of 1200 is very good. "

How do you get from that that I think 1200 samples isn't good enough? You initially didn't say that the figure came from Francalacci. You said Trombetta. I didn't even know how many samples were in the Trombetta paper for Sardinia.

As to a3-m13, I don't know how many times I have to say that it probably isn't Mesolithic in Sardinia. Since the date given was so close to the very earliest Neolithic in Sardinia I thought there was a possibility of an overlap and it having been absorbed by Neolithic people from prior hunter-gatherers on the island, but I didn't think it was likely. Otherwise, why would I say this to you when you first brought it up. Clearly, I know what dates are being discussed.

" I didn't comb through the supplement, but from this paragraph, the coalescence age is  >7.62 kya for A3-M13/V2742 .

So, could we be talking about 6,000 BC or around the time of the Neolithic? Could it have been very early in the Neolithic Near East and swept up in the migrations, and then straight to Sardegna, or even to the Balkans and then later to Sardegna in the Chalcolithic? I think that places like Sardegna can very easily shelter rare haplogroups that have drifted out of the gene pool in areas where there have been large scale migrations, as in the Middle East, for example, which was inundated with men with "J" lines. "

Jovialis
15-02-18, 01:07
I wanted originally to remove a post which was only a personal attack so as to maintain the dignity of this site.

However, I'm getting tired of whining, childish, perhaps mentally disturbed members ranting, insulting, and otherwise degrading me, and just silently moderating such posts. If anyone wants to know why infractions are issued, why they accumulate, and why some people are then automatically banned, this is a great example. No infractions were issued until after the first insult. In fact the banned member wasn't even part of the conversation.

This is what I deal with on a constant basis from certain young men on this site. I don't think I need to point out that this kind of vitriol is not dealt out when male moderators give infractions. The blatant sexism and vulgarity is unbelievable. This is the recourse of people who can't compete in debate, and can't even, in this case, take a mild joke.

One thing that someone in his twenties or older should have learned is how to control him or herself in debate or disagreement. In this context the consequences for behaving this way are mild; try this in a professional setting, and you're toast.

I wholeheartedly agree, Angela. It's completely unacceptable that this kind of disrespect be tolerated. I share your sentiments that you've been the target of disgusting provocations. The comments on this page highlight the kind of disrespect that must be dealt with swiftly.

To the rest of the forum users, this isn't the street, or some low-brow setting; this is an academic forum, and you're expected to behave properly. Any language that unfairly targets individuals on their race, ethnicity, religion, or gender, will be punished.

kingjohn
15-02-18, 01:14
dont ban azurro is a good man

Jovialis
15-02-18, 01:26
dont ban azurro is a good man

Don't ban him?! On what planet do you think his comments would be acceptable? Are you blind?

It's an accumulation of infractions which he deserved for each of the posts that merited it.

AdeoF
15-02-18, 02:34
I wanted originally to remove a post which was only a personal attack so as to maintain the dignity of this site.

However, I'm getting tired of whining, childish, perhaps mentally disturbed members ranting, insulting, and otherwise degrading me, and just silently moderating such posts. If anyone wants to know why infractions are issued, why they accumulate, and why some people are then automatically banned, this is a great example. No infractions were issued until after the first insult. In fact the banned member wasn't even part of the conversation.

This is what I deal with on a constant basis from certain young men on this site. I don't think I need to point out that this kind of vitriol is not dealt out when male moderators give infractions. The blatant sexism and vulgarity is unbelievable. This is the recourse of people who can't compete in debate, and can't even, in this case, take a mild joke.

One thing that someone in his twenties or older should have learned is how to control him or herself in debate or disagreement. In this context the consequences for behaving this way are mild; try this in a professional setting, and you're toast.

I know this is off-topic but a lot of people around my age don't really know how to do that very well. It's good that you banned him, talking like that will just create a wild fire. It's not even like your mad and your not thinking about what happens next, it's post when you think about what to type lol.

Salento
15-02-18, 02:42
dont ban azurro is a good man

Azzurro knew that he might get banned. There’s a history of confrontation by the 2.
To Angela: You are Ok.
To Azzurro: Not Cool.

Ygorcs
15-02-18, 07:21
"Though not definitive, the association of Afro-Asiatic populations with R-V88 is strongly suggestive to me of the possibility that some western Near Eastern Farmers spoke Afro-Asiatic languages." > I think this hypothesis of Razib Khan, unlike most of what he writes about genetics, looks a bit far-fetched, especially because he says it is "strongly suggestive", which I don't think it is. Suggestive, yes, but not strongly so. I can't see any reason why Chadic couldn't already have been spoken in North Africa (maybe to the west of Berber before its further expansion) and have been picked up by the R1b-V88 settlers as it was already the main language family of the region (and, importantly, of the women they married/procreated with). Not always the conqueror immigrants manage to impose their language instead of absorbing the local language and most of the local culture. If Proto-Semitic (or Pre-Proto-Semitic more specifically) was already spoken in the Near East, we'd expect Chadic to be much more closely related to Semitic, but no, it's actually the most divergent of all Afro-Asiatic branches. So, I think it is more likely that Chadic was the descendant of one among the 1st AA languages to have been spoken in North Africa.

bicicleur
15-02-18, 08:52
I'm not an expert in linguistics but,
to me, the most likely source of Afro-Asiatic seems to be the Natufians,
or maybe the common ancestor of the Natufians, the Ibero-Maurisians and the Halfan people,
in short, the E1b1b1-M35 clade

bicicleur
15-02-18, 09:14
there was an interludium in the Green Sahara : the 8.2 ka climate event, which lasted a few centuries and during which the Sahara was empty
the dispersal of these main Y-haplogroups must have happened between 8.2 ka and 5.9 ka, which is the end of the Green Sahara

IronSide
15-02-18, 09:48
Another male lineage suggestive of the West Eurasian origin of AA languages is haplogroup T, its distribution in Africa is concentrated in the Cushitic (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cushitic_languages) branch of AA, R1b-V88 is strong in Chadic speakers but also Berbers and Copts, while J in Semitic speakers.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_T-M184#Africa

All Afro-Asiatic groups in Africa have major Levantine Neolithic autosomal admixture, thats another evidence.

Linguistic evidence for dispersal of AA languages with farming in Africa http://www.jolr.ru/files/(9)jlr2009-1(95-106).pdf

IronSide
15-02-18, 10:35
This is very hypothetical, but if we were to assume that Levant PPN people spoke proto-AA, then the migrations of that population detected through ancient dna might give us a picture of AA migrations.

Cushitic: a result of a migration from the PPN Levant to Arabia first, and then to Eastern Africa.

Berber: colonization of North Africa by Levantine Neolithic people.

Chadic: a movement south from the same North African wave.

Semitic: Levant Neolithic people migrated north and east to some parts of the Caucasus and Iran, this wave has evidence in the admixture of Iran Chalcolithic, where 20% of the ancestry is from the Levant. and linguistically in the Elamite language which show influence from afro asiatic. a major back migration from Iran/Caucasus to the Levant formed the Levant BA population, and the first appearance of Haplogroup J in the Levant. further BA movements east and south of the Levant spread Semitic languages.

see : Proto Semitic; dating and locating it. (https://mathildasanthropologyblog.wordpress.com/2009/02/08/proto-semitic-dating-and-locating-it/)

Egyptian: because of the presence of Caucasus/Iran ancestry in Ancient Egyptian samples, albeit lower than that of the Levant, I think proto-Egyptians were either a related tribe to proto-Semites (Egypto-Semitic is a clade within Afro-Asiatic), or that they received admixture from them in the Levant, and then migrated to Egypt in early Bronze Age, I wonder if there is archaeological evidence of this ?

These are not necessarily all of the AA tribes, lost pre-historic branches of AA that stayed in the Levant, or followed the coastal path north to the Aegean or Cyprus are possible. I don't think Anatolian Neolithic people spoke an AA language, difference in admixture, Y-dna, and pre-IE languages of Europe are suggestive of another lost language family, probably related to some languages in the Caucasus. I think Etruscan and the Tyrsenian family (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyrsenian_languages) were the only remnants from that large group.

bicicleur
15-02-18, 11:34
in short, the E1b1b1-M35 clade

the L539 and Z830 branch are Natufian
the L19 branch is not sure, maybe Natufian, or Ibero-Maurisian or Capsian

so, maybe Berber is not Levantine in origin?

I guess, this doesn't make sense, as the Berber branch is to young?

Salento
15-02-18, 21:46
in short, the E1b1b1-M35 clade

the L539 and Z830 branch are Natufian
the L19 branch is not sure, maybe Natufian, or Ibero-Maurisian or Capsian

so, maybe Berber is not Levantine in origin?

I guess, this doesn't make sense, as the Berber branch is to young?
NatGeo say about the Berbers:
“Followed a migration path from the region of the Fertile Crescent in Northeast Africa. They moved across the shorelines of North Africa. They are now part of populations such as the Berber peoples of the Atlas Mountains. The Berbers are traditionally livestock herders. Some who initially took this path appear to have later headed east to India. There their lineages are found in populations such as the Chenchu, the Mahali, and the Bauris.”

kingjohn
16-02-18, 05:26
in short, the E1b1b1-M35 clade

the L539 and Z830 branch are Natufian
the L19 branch is not sure, maybe Natufian, or Ibero-Maurisian or Capsian

so, maybe Berber is not Levantine in origin?

I guess, this doesn't make sense, as the Berber branch is to young?

you got a point e-m81 is indeed young but his ancestor e-L19 was found in north morocco remains in 5000 bc ....
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ifri_n%27Amr_or_Moussa

http://secher.bernard.free.fr/blog/index.php?post/2017/09/23/G%C3%A9nomes-anciens-au-Maghreb

we can see the location of the site in north morocco the black dot

Fregel; et al. (2017). "Neolithization of North Africa involved the migration of people from both the Levant and Europe". bioRxiv (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BioRxiv)191569 (https://doi.org/10.1101/191569)