More Y Dna results from Italy

Maciano thinks that H and L ( ydna ) could also be in Volterra

Based on F-M89* and K-M9 (xM173,M70).

Anyway F-M89* according to Boattini 2013 is 3,9% and 3,3% in north Italy, respectively in Liguria (Savona/Genoa) and Piedmont (Cuneo), higher than Volterra (0,9%).

And according to this study, K-M9 is 1,3% in north Italy, in Lombardy, in both Bergamo plain and valleys, higher than Volterra (0,9%).

Is F-M89* H? And K-M9 (xM173,M70) is L?

Volterra is also special for having 1% of haplogroup F* (possibly H) and 1% of K* (possibly L), both of which are exceedingly rare.

Well, according to this study K-M9 is 1,3% in north Italy, in Lombardy, in both Bergamo plain and valleys. And according to Boattini 2013 F-M89* is 3,9% and 3,3% in north Italy, in Liguria (Savona/Genoa) and Piedmont (Cuneo), higher than Volterra (0,9%). I mean, Volterra isn't that special in this either.
 
I really don't understand why they are saying that Volterra displays a unique Y-chromosomal genetic structure. It's not really true.

Volterra is 49,6%
R1b-M269 (U152, S116, U106), 13,3% G-M201, 13,3% J2-M172, 7,1% E1b-M78 (E-V13), 4,4% I-M170 (xM26), 4,4% T-M70, 2,7% I2-M26... There are differences with the rest of Tuscany, but this could be due to internal sub-regional differences or to just random variation. Also the size of the sample could play a role.




i52sMWq.png








It could be indeed an old Etruscan-Rhaetian link, dating back to a Neolithic/Late Neolithic/Early Chalcolithic.





Volterra has also 7,1% of R1b-U106, 2,7% of I-M233, 1,8% of I-M253... a Germanic influence seems to really exist there. Even some of G and T could have arrived with a Germanic movement. The Longobards?





I think the majority of the inhabitants of the Borbera Valley still speak today a dialect of the Ligurian and not Piedmontese type.

That's what I was wondering too about all of those haplogroups up in the area of the Piemonte, Liguria, Lombardia, Emilia border, the "Quattro Province" area.

The authors of the paper mention the Langobards up there in the Val Borbera, but their castles are in the whole area, and also all over the Lunigiana and down into Toscana too. Some of the old calculators consistently give Tuscans about a third "Germanic" type ancestry. These "Germanic" y lines, which would have been minority lines, just might not have totally drifted out of the pool of y haplogroups in these more remote areas.

Did you see where the area of greatest variation is for G2a-L497? It's not in the Alps, it's just below Denmark. Although originally a Neolithic line, it might have gotten picked up by Indo-European groups and then spread into both Celtic speaking and Germanic speaking peoples.

Yes, they speak Ligurian dialects up there, largely because the villages were feudatories of families from Genova.

"in provincia di Alessandria, l'Oltregiogo storico a sud di Ovada e Novi Ligure include i centri di Gavi, Arquata Scrivia e Serravalle Scrivia, la val Lemme e la val Borbera, che fecero parte della Repubblica di Genova o furono amministrati come feudi da famiglie genovesi"
https://www.visitriviera.info/tradizioni-cultura/lingua-ligure/

"The Val Borbera (val Borbëa or Borbéia" in Ligurian, val Borbaja in Piedmontese) is a valley formed by the River Borbera, a tributary of the Scrivia, located in the province of Alessandria. It was historically linked to the Republic of Genoa, the Ligurian Republic and is still strongly tied to Liguria.[1]:

"
It is surrounded by high mountains, making it a place isolated from the surrounding valleys, little touched by industrialization and with a well-preserved environment. Up until the beginning of the 20th century, there was no road connecting the upper with the lower valley, the main passageway being the gravel riverbed in the dry season. It is the only valley of Piedmont bordering on the Emilia-Romagna region.""Its population has been considered a genetic isolate.[3]"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Val_Borbera

Actually, the paper that is the subject of the OP says the road wasn't paved until a couple of decades ago.

The sample that is used in some modern population genetics studies (and labelled Piemonte, which is a bit inaccurate, although the political borders are a bit irrelevant), comes from a study done there precisely because it is a genetic isolate.

"In this paper we report a demographic and epidemiological analysis of a genetically isolated population, settled in Val Borbera, a large valley in the North West Apennines, in Italy. Around 60% of the modern descendants, still living in the 7 main villages of the valley or in the nearby areas, have been recruited based on their ancestry. Analysis of the large genealogy constructed starting from city and parish archives showed not only that endogamy was high in the past, but also that >90% of the participants to the study had 4 grandparents born in the valley and that 87% were connected in a unique large genealogical tree that included up to 16 generations tracing back to the 16th century."
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2761731/

I think the best way to think of them is probably as a very drifted segment of the population of the "Quattro Province".

Interesting article in Italian:
https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quattro_Province

This is the English version:
https://translate.google.it/translate?hl=en&sl=it&u=https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quattro_Province&prev=search

"From a linguistic point of view it is difficult to give an exact classification of the Gallo-Italic linguistic varieties still spoken today, together with Italian , in the area of ​​the Four Provinces [6] . In the territory in question, dialects of the Ligurian language and transitional dialects between Ligurian, Emilian and Piedmontese intersect.On the other hand, among the provinces in question, it is only Genoa that is at the center of the linguistic system of its administrative region of belonging. Theprovince of Piacenza is characterized by Emilian varieties in contact with Lombardy , which, however, going back up the Apennine valleys are gradually affected by Ligurian characters. The Emilian dialect then extends to the Oltrepò Pavese , where the continuity with the Piacenza area gives way to Piedmontese influences as one approaches the border with the province of Alessandria , whose easternmost portion - the Tortonese - is still interested from the dialectal continuum of Emilia [7] [8] to the river Scrivia [9] . In the Alessandria area, going westwards there are gradual changes that gradually lead to a rapprochement with the Piedmontese, while to the south we approach the Ligurian [9] , similarly to what happens in the province of Pavia and in the Piacenza area."

"There are many evidences of the presence of the Ligurians since the Stone Age ( Neolithic village in Travo , val Trebbia piacentina ) and in the Iron Age (castelliere , fortified village, of Guardamonte in the Alessandrino ). [ citation needed ] [3]Also well documented the presence of the Romans : many toponyms, archaeological finds (remains of the city of Libarna in Val Scrivia ) and historical documentation ( Tabula alimentaria Traiana of the municipality of Velleia of the second century AD ). According to the historian Polybius , in December 218 BC ,Hannibal inflicted a heavy defeat on the Roman consul Tito Sempronio Longo in the battle of Trebbia . Some toponyms of Val Trebbia and Val Boreca , as Zerbaseems to trace traces from the passage of Hannibal's troops.
From the fourth century , under the increasing pressure of the barbaric peoples, there was a migration from the Ligurian coast and from the plain towards the mountainous areas. Thus new settlements were formed based on an agro-pastoral subsistence economy.
The history of the territory is strongly linked to the presence of the monastery of Bobbio (PC), historical and cultural center of primary importance and richmonastic fief with possessions throughout northern Italy, founded in the seventh century by the Irish monk San Colombano , also in function of point of control of traffic to and from the Ligurian Sea , especially for the control of salt traffic towards the salt route .
After the fall of the Lombards by Charlemagne , the Holy Roman Empire later reassigned the territory constituting first the Marca Obertenga and then the imperial feuds , with the aim of maintaining a safe passage to the sea, in addition to the bishopric of Bobbio, assigned these territories starting from 1164 , to families (first descendants of the ancient Obertenghi ) such as: the Malaspina , the Fieschi , the Doria , the Pallavicino , the Landi and the Farnese ) who dominated these feuds for centuries."


I've posted a lot of their music and dancing.


This is specifically from one of the villages tested. If one thing stands out to me about their appearance, it's their height and the fact they're very lean. Height was, according to the genetics paper, one of the extremely heritable traits they possessed.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g1miA5VJztI
 
Based on F-M89* and K-M9 (xM173,M70).
Anyway F-M89* according to Boattini 2013 is 3,9% and 3,3% in north Italy, respectively in Liguria (Savona/Genoa) and Piedmont (Cuneo), higher than Volterra (0,9%).
And according to this study, K-M9 is 1,3% in north Italy, in Lombardy, in both Bergamo plain and valleys, higher than Volterra (0,9%).
Is F-M89* H? And K-M9 (xM173,M70) is L?
Well, according to this study K-M9 is 1,3% in north Italy, in Lombardy, in both Bergamo plain and valleys. And according to Boattini 2013 F-M89* is 3,9% and 3,3% in north Italy, in Liguria (Savona/Genoa) and Piedmont (Cuneo), higher than Volterra (0,9%). I mean, Volterra isn't that special in this either.
K-M9 is only valid if it retained its "purity", ie not mutated into another haplogroup ................I am positive for K-M9
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_K-M9
.
All the haplogroups in the spreadsheet from K-M9 to T inclusive............all have positive K-M9
.
tyrol/austria/south Germany has a higher % of K-M9
.
I am sticking with its origins........... being south of the caspian sea
 
Angela said:
^^Yes, I was about to say that most of the G in Volterra is G-L497. The total G there is 13.3%, and G-L497 is 7.1%. Total "G" is higher in the Val Borbera where the total G is 15.3%, and G-L497 is 12.9%.

Central Italy is pretty high, with a total of 13.3%.

The "G" in the south is actually a bit lower, and is largely of a different type:

Tyrhennian Calabria: 12.3%
Apulia 11.8
Sicily 10.9
S.Italy 8.5
Ionian Calabria 5.3%

So, I think to look at total "G" numbers is a little misleading; you have to look at the sub-clades. Plus, as I said, much of southern Italy actually has lower numbers than Central Italy, probably because the G-L497 wave didn't have as much impact there. You had some coming up the peninsula, some down, and where they met in Central Italy, you have some of the highest numbers.

Makes you wonder who brought that G-L497.

G-L497 definitely looks like it's coming from the north, but with whom?

As to J2, there doesn't seem to be one particular clade that is prominent in Toscana does there according to this graphic? It looks like it has a bit of a few of them, including J2b.

I didn't notice in the frequency table that the G2a in Volterra was mostly L497. That actually solves the problem. I have maintained at least since 2013 in my Genetic History of the Italians (specifically here) that G2a-L497 was the second main Hallstatt lineage after R1b-U152, and by extension also that of the Italic tribes and La Tène (Gaulish/Belgic) tribes. The correlation between G2a-L497 and R1b-U152 is very strong.

Haplogroup-G2a-L497.png


Haplogroup-R1b-S28.gif



I have explained in detail in the G2a page that it is particularly the G2a-Z1816 branch of L497 that seems to have spread with R1b from Yamna until the Alps. The oldest Z1816 was found in a Trypillian outlier just before the Yamna expansion.

I explained in the Genetic History of the Italians that the four main haplogroups of the ancient Italic tribes, including the Romans, were R1b-U152 (esp. the Z56 and Z192 branches), G2a-L497 (Z1816, although specific deep clades remain to be identified) and J2a-L70.

J2b is more likely of Greek or Balkanic origin. I have associated J2b2-L283 with the Illyrians and Mycenaean Greeks, while J2b1 is more widely West Asian, Greek and West Balkanic.
 
yes but it was found in 6% in sicily in this study
wish i knew from where in sicily the samples were taken :)
kind regards
adam

p.s
you have a point on the val borbera though....
although i do believe that some e-m35* could have been present among the ligurians
Because of small number of samples. In Heraklides et al. there were 765 samples from Sicily and E-M81 was only 1.6%.

 
All you have to do is google Heraklides et al:
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0179474

All of the tables are in the Supplement. That particular one is Table 7. All of them are pretty interesting.
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0179474#sec018


It really should be more well known. They've collected a lot of data in one place. Should I add it to the list of papers for newbies? I think I thought it was too specific.

Anyway, I think what perhaps isn't sufficiently appreciated is that in a country like Italy, which is so mountainous, and where so many communities were isolated and were endogamous for so many years, certain y lines can drift to prominence in a small community. If that community happens to be one that is sampled for yDna, there's the danger that the results can be extrapolated to apply to a wider region than is justified.
 
Interesting.
Do you have a link to the Heraklides study?

thanks for this table that 13% e-m123 in greek cypriotes
more common than in the levnat 5% in modern times ... :)
i think maybe e-m123 was more common in ancient time :)
i still would like to know from where in sicily the samples were taken in this study .....
maybe from place there was more carthegenian influence in sicly ?
or more moors print ?
 
thanks for this table that 13% e-m123 in greek cypriotes
more common than in the levnat 5% in modern times ... :)
i think maybe e-m123 was more common in ancient time :)
i still would like to know from where in sicily the samples were taken in this study .....
maybe from place there was more carthegenian influence in sicly ?
or more moors print ?

I believe this is from Ahmed Reguig et al 2014

9FasTgB.png


However, some of the data comes from DiGaetano et al
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2985948/

It would seem to be Caccamo and Piazza Amerina, but you're talking about sample sizes of 16 and 28. This is actually a perfect example of what I was pointing out above.

Caccamo is now part of the metropolitan area of Palermo. So far as I know Caccamo's recorded history starts with the Normans. However, this was the area of the Carthaginian settlement.

On the other hand, other areas in the northwest have almost none of it. It looks to me as if somebody in Caccamo carrying E-M81 got lucky in terms of sons.

You can see what I mean in this chart from DiGaetano:
ahaJ4do.png
[/IMG]

walk-map-sicily.jpg



Piazza Armerina is actually one of the Lombard communes of Sicily, so called because northern Italians were brought in to colonize the area. Of course, there were probably people in the vicinity before that time, but I'm not aware of any particular tie to Carthaginians or the Moors.

I think I vaguely remember it has a lot of "I" or U-152 as well. Does anyone have a better recall of that?

Maciamo's map, because he uses so many sources, also shows very low levels of E-M81 in Sicily.
 
i still would like to know from where in sicily the samples were taken in this study .....
maybe from place there was more carthegenian influence in sicly ?
or more moors print ?

Not clear the exact location of the Sicilian sample from this study. Of course the results from Heraclides et al. 2017 are closer to a more accurate Sicilian average.



From Grugni et al 2017

FnF8tTe.jpg



Piazza Armerina is actually one of the Lombard communes of Sicily, so called because northern Italians were brought in to colonize the area. Of course, there were probably people in the vicinity before that time, but I'm not aware of any particular tie to Carthaginians or the Moors.

Yes, but I don't think that all the people from Piazza Armerina descend from these northern Italian settlers.
 
agree
on Volterra it says
VOLTERRA
Geography
Volterra is a town of Tuscany - Central Italy - in the province of Pisa. It is located on a rocky hill, between the Bra and Cecina rivers. Along with the districts of Castelnuovo Val di Cecina, Montecatini Val di Cecina and Pomarance, it is part of the Upper Cecina Valley. This region is surrounded by other neighbouring valleys: on the West there are the Lower Cecina and the Cornia Valleys; on the North the Era Valley, and on the East the Upper Elsa Valley. On the South it confines with the Colline Metallifere, a mountain-hill group in the Tuscan Anti-Apennine.
In the surroundings of Volterra, the forests of Berignone-Tatti and Monterufoli are some of the wooded areas that form the landscape, often characterized by the Mediterranean shrub land, the dramatic landslides of the Balze area and rolling hills.
Historical background
The hill on which Volterra is located was already settled from the Iron Age onwards, as the Villanovan necropolis shows. During the Neolithic, Volterra was an important settlement of the Etruscans; part of the principal twelve cities of the Etruscans confederation. Volterra was more isolated than the other Etruscan cities, due to its geographical position, and it was one of the last cities to join the Roman Republic, in the III century B.C..
The origin of Etruscans is still controversial and different hypotheses have been made: one sustains they came from Anatolia, another claims an autochthonous process of formation from the preceding Villanovan society. Lastly, influence from Northern Europe has also been hypothesized.

I was interested in Vicenza with its 5% of T .............only because of a paternal line of mine, Matteo married Teresa Greslin in Schio ~1670 ..............Vicenza had a mix of trevisani and trentini merging there

Only the T-M70 from this paper
Picene , if ancient are Histri/Liburnian Illyrians
L`Aquila with its 20% ( some found to be haplogroup LT ) would mostly likey be Samnites , speaking Sabellic , if so, can be also some South-Picene language which is also Sabellic
.
La Spezia to Massa in just north of ancient Volterra
l`Aquila
This was the land of Samnium inhabited by the Caraceni
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caraceni_(tribe)
.
Their northern neighbours
The Frentani[1] were an Italic tribe occupying the tract on the east coast of the peninsula from the Apennines to the Adriatic, and from the frontiers of Apulia to those of the Marrucini. They were bounded on the west by the Samnites, with whom they were closely connected, and from whom they were originally descended. Hence Scylax assigns the whole of this line of coast, from the frontiers of Apulia to those of Picenum, to the Samnites.[2] Their exact limits are less clearly defined, and there is considerable discrepancy in the statements of ancient geographers: Larinum, with its territory (extending from the Tifernus (modern Biferno) to the Frento), being by some writers termed a city of the Frentani,[3] while the more general opinion included it in Apulia, and thus made the river Tifernus (Biferno) the limit of the two countries.[4] The northern boundary of the Frentani is equally uncertain; both Strabo[5] and Ptolemy[6] concur in fixing it at the river Sagrus (modern Sangro), while Pliny extends their limits as far as the Aternus,
.
both spoke a Sabellic language
 
Not clear the exact location of the Sicilian sample from this study. Of course the results from Heraclides et al. 2017 are closer to a more accurate Sicilian average.



From Grugni et al 2017

FnF8tTe.jpg





Yes, but I don't think that all the people from Piazza Armerina descend from these northern Italian settlers.

Clearly not. They didn't settle in empty territory.

In table S3 in the Supplement to this Grugni et al 2018 paper, it says their Sicily samples come from Boattini et al, 2013, which were taken from Agrigento, Catania, and Ragusa/Siracusa.

See: Boattini et al 2013
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0065441

I think that was wise sampling: they hit the major areas of Sicily, and particularly the areas in the south where the Berbers mostly settled, and the total for E-M81 was 2.8%.

230px-Map_of_region_of_Sicily%2C_Italy%2C_with_provinces-en.svg.png


The more samples the better, so the best estimate is probably the one from Heraklides et al, because they compiled lots of studies. Maciamo, who does the same thing also came up with something similar.
 
That's what I was wondering too about all of those haplogroups up in the area of the Piemonte, Liguria, Lombardia, Emilia border, the "Quattro Province" area.

The authors of the paper mention the Langobards up there in the Val Borbera, but their castles are in the whole area, and also all over the Lunigiana and down into Toscana too. Some of the old calculators consistently give Tuscans about a third "Germanic" type ancestry. These "Germanic" y lines, which would have been minority lines, just might not have totally drifted out of the pool of y haplogroups in these more remote areas.

Did you see where the area of greatest variation is for G2a-L497? It's not in the Alps, it's just below Denmark. Although originally a Neolithic line, it might have gotten picked up by Indo-European groups and then spread into both Celtic speaking and Germanic speaking peoples.

You're right, I also didn't notice that the G2a in Volterra was mostly L497. Also Grugni in her paper concludes that G2a-L497 is a Central European lineage.

A couple of PCAs based on Y-DNA frequencies. The first scatterplot includes, beyond the samples from this study, also the ones from Capelli 2007, Ferri 2008, Di Gaetano 2009, Boattini 2013...

4gZWp5M.jpg


6VZe1tC.jpg
 
Clearly not. They didn't settle in empty territory.

In table S3 in the Supplement to this Grugni et al 2018 paper, it says their Sicily samples come from Boattini et al, 2013, which were taken from Agrigento, Catania, and Ragusa/Siracusa.

See: Boattini et al 2013
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0065441

I think that was wise sampling: they hit the major areas of Sicily, and particularly the areas in the south where the Berbers mostly settled, and the total for E-M81 was 2.8%.

230px-Map_of_region_of_Sicily%2C_Italy%2C_with_provinces-en.svg.png


The more samples the better, so the best estimate is probably the one from Heraklides et al, because they compiled lots of studies. Maciamo, who does the same thing also came up with something similar.

Sorry, I need to correct that. The Sicilian samples used by this Grugni et al 2018 paper come not only from Boattini et al 2013, but also from Di Gaetano et al 2009. Grugni says they also used Capelli et al 2007, but I don't see any Sicilian samples listed there. The DiGaetano et al numbers are upthread.

The two outliers are Caccamo and Piazza Armerina, which bring up the average. Caccamo was the site of a Carthaginian emporia, but as I said upthread, other similar areas near by have zero or very low levels, so it may be a bit of an anomaly, founder effect of some sort. Piazza Armerina may have been a refuge area for the Saracens, which may explain the numbers there. Lombards were deliberately settled in areas which had had a Saracen presence.

You can see what Boattini et al 2013 showed for Sicily: Roman Numeral 7 is Sicily.

haplogroups_italy.png



It didn't make sense to me that using only Boattini and DiGaetano data the number in Grugni was 6.3, while Boattini was 2.8, so I re-ran the numbers myself for Boattini. I think there's a typo in Boattini. I think the average for Sicily in Boattini is 3.8%, not 2.8%. That comes from Ragusa/Siracusa, which had 3 E-M81 compared to 1 each for Catania and Agrigento. Still a stretch to get to 6.3% using just DiGaetano numbers in addition to Boattini. Does anyone know if maybe there is another paper they might have used in place of Capelli et al or if they added samples of their own, perhaps from central Sicily?

This is Capelli et al 2007: I don't see Sicily in the chart.
https://s3.amazonaws.com/academia.e...=Y_chromosome_genetic_variation_in_the_It.pdf


Feel free to check all of the above. It was a quick and dirty overview, and I want it to be correct.

Now, as to Heraklides et al, they used Brisighelli, but also studies I've never looked at, and some medical papers. I didn't check the number of samples for each paper or where they came from, but 767 samples seems like a really big number. Maybe someone who has the time can see if they're all brand new samples or some are duplicates or what.

Tofanelli S, Brisighelli F, Anagnostou P, Busby GB, Ferri G, Thomas MG, et al. (2016) The Greeks in the West: genetic signatures of the Hellenic colonisation in southern Italy and Sicily. Eur J Hm Genet 24: 429–436. pmid:26173964

Herrera KJ, Lowery RK, Hadden L, Calderon S, Chiou C, Yepiskoposyan L, et al. (2012) Neolithic patrilineal signals indicate that the Armenian plateau was repopulated by agriculturalists. Eur J Hum Genet 20: 313–320. pmid:2208590

Bekada A, Fregel R, Cabrera VM, Larruga JM, Pestano J, Benhamamouch S, et al. (2013) Introducing the Algerian mitochondrial DNA and Y-chromosome profiles into the North African landscape. PLoS One 8: e56775. pmid:23431392

Brisighelli F, Alvarez-Iglesias V, Fondevila M, Blanco-Verea A, Carracedo A, Pascali VL, et al. (2012) Uniparental markers of contemporary Italian population reveals details on its pre-Roman heritage. PLoS One 7: e50794. pmid:23251386
 
honestly i think the e-m81 in sicily here
are new samples it is written inthe right this study
if it was based on older refernces it would have been written on the right the name of the refernces
you can see in sile post above of the table S.4 what i mean ..... :)
 
honestly i think the e-m81 in sicily here
are new samples it is written inthe right this study
if it was based on older refernces it would have been written on the right the name of the refernces
you can see in sile post above of the table S.4 what i mean ..... :)

Yes, you're right, King John, that's the 64 on the map which Pax provided. From the placement, which looks accurate for the others, it looks like it's perhaps Caltanissetta. Given its history it makes sense there would be higher levels there, as there are in Piazza Armerina.

That's in addition to the ones from Boattini, which were from Agrigento, Catania, and Ragusa/Siracusa, and the ones from Di Gaetano listed above. As I said, I couldn't find any Sicilian samples in Capelli et al, so maybe it's another paper.

So, we're looking at over 400 samples, compared to the 767 from Heraklides. Perhaps Heraklides used all of these plus others in the additional papers I saw?

Grugni may have deliberately picked the refuge area in Central Italy (Caltanissetta) to see if there are remaining traces, as Boattini deliberately picked areas in the south where there is more evidence of Berber settlement. DiGaetano just did broad sampling across Sicily.

Bottom line, it seems that 6.3% figure is not for Sicily as a whole. It is for that central area which is perhaps Caltanissetta. That correlates with the figure for Piazza Armerina. Looking at all the Sicily samples from Table 4, E-M81 ranges from 1.6% in western Sicily to that high of 6.3%. It's higher in the areas that you would expect, perhaps close to 4% in some southern areas, and around 6% in that refuge area in central Sicily.
 
Last edited:
Yes, you're right, King John, that's the 64 on the map which Pax provided. From the placement, which looks accurate for the others, it looks like it's perhaps Caltanissetta. Given its history it makes sense there would be higher levels there, as there are in Piazza Armerina.

That's in addition to the ones from Boattini, which were from Agrigento, Catania, and Ragusa/Siracusa, and the ones from Di Gaetano listed above. As I said, I couldn't find any Sicilian samples in Capelli et al, so maybe it's another paper.

So, we're looking at over 400 samples, compared to the 767 from Heraklides. Perhaps Heraklides used all of these plus others in the additional papers I saw?

Grugni may have deliberately picked the refuge area of Central Italy (Caltanissetta) to see if there are remaining traces, as Boattini deliberately picked areas in the south where there is more evidence of Berber settlement. DiGaetano just did broad sampling across Sicily.


if thats the case than the real picture of e-m81 in sicily is probably from
his data :)
 
[/B]if thats the case than the real picture of e-m81 in sicily is probably from
his data :)

That's exactly what I was thinking: in fact I was going to post that. :) However, there's Heraklides to consider. With more samples from more widely diffused areas, it seems to go way down in terms of an island wide average.

I think Italian researchers, knowing the history of their country pretty well, have a tendency to sample in areas where they know there might be traces of certain migrations. (That's with the exception of DiGaetano.) That's great for historical or pre-historical purposes, but it might give a false impression of average distributions in an area.

It's even worse, I think, when they pick areas that are so isolated and inbred that they do disease studies there, because you have so much founder effect and drift.

Her data, btw: Cornelia Di Gaetano. Lots of Italian pop gen researchers are women.
 
There is an interesting peak of J2b-M241 (L283) in NW Italy and Apulia. This is the second study I have seen to have J2b-L283 in Apulia at 5-6% range. I wonder if this could be tied to the ancient Illyrian migrations. It would be interesting to have these samples NGS tested, but I have a hunch (as suggested by an STR study) some might be under Z1296>Y20899, Z1296>>Y23094, etc, which are pretty commonly found on the other side of the Adriatic. E-V13 is pretty common in Apulia as well...
2314254.jpg
 

This thread has been viewed 60820 times.

Back
Top