New Study Shows MASSIVE Ancient BA Immigration Into Ireland

Greying Wanderer said:

Yes exactly. It makes me wonder how many genetic diseases have some unknown positive effect - or had a positive effect in the past in a particular region due to local climate. diet or whatever.

Click to expand...

Exactly! Many genetically inherited "conditions" used to have a positive effect in the past.

One example of something which is now considered a "genetic disease" but was useful in the past, is this:

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

Today Factor V Leiden may cause a person die younger, but in the past it could help you survive a battle.

Another example might be acromegaly. Perhaps you have heard about a Russian boxer Nikolai Valuev?

Nikolai Valuev resembles a Neanderthal a bit, but that's because he has a condition called acromegaly.

However, what if acromegaly is caused by a recessive mutation inherited from interbreeding with Neanderthals?

Acromegaly is associated, among other health problems, with hypertension (high blood pressure).

But here is what I found about high blood pressure in animals:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25140012

http://hyper.ahajournals.org/content/49/2/260.full

'high blood-pressure animals' have better capillarization of the peripheral tissues allowing high endurance performance.

Click to expand...

So acromegaly apparently increases endurance performance, something which could be useful in prehistory (or today in BOXING - surprise!).

Many things which are considered "diseases" today were probably useful, prehistoric adaptations.

Today high blood pressure may cause a person die relatively younger.

But in prehistoric times a mammoth was more likely to kill you much sooner than hypertension!

While today high blood pressure is considered a "disease" because one might die at age 65 instead of at age 95 because of it, in prehistoric times it could be beneficial because it could save you from being killed by a mammoth at age 35, for example.

Is acromegaly present in populations with close to ~0% Neanderthal ancestry (Sub-Saharans) ???

For reference:

Neanderthal man (left), boxer Nikolai Valuev who has been diagnosed with a condition of acromegaly (right):

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-0hSMHzEKK...og/s1600/neanderthal-side-tobiasjacobsen1.jpg

http://www.koanicsoul.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/Nikolai_Valuev.jpg

Tomenable said:

I guess that lactase persistence rose to high frequencies via selection only in those cultures which were drinking raw milk.

And also it rose to high frequencies in areas where drinking milk was a major factor when it comes to chances of survival.

Click to expand...

Let's remember that, kids of all cultures, farmers and herders, drunk milk. The difference is that lactose intolerant people need to stop drinking milk around puberty, but lactose persistent folks can keep drinking.

Some claim that acromegaly is maladaptive - causes diabetes, cardiac failure, hypertension, accelerated arthritis.

However, even if it really is (and always was ???) maladaptive, it might still be of Neanderthal origin.

After all, Neanderthals accumulated many maladaptive mutations due to excessive inbreeding - according to:

Kelley Harris, Rasmus Nielsen, "The Genetic Cost of Neanderthal Introgression":

http://biorxiv.org/content/early/2015/10/31/030387

using previously published estimates of inbreeding in Neanderthals, and of the distribution of fitness effects from human protein coding genes, we show that the average Neanderthal would have had at least 40% lower fitness than the average human due to higher levels of inbreeding and an increased mutational load

Click to expand...

Anyway - in case of Valuev, his acromegaly does NOT seem to be a major obstacle in his boxing career.

@Greying Wanderer and Tomenable,

I agree modern disorders could have been selected for in the past because of climate and created strangely tall or big populations. It's possible there were ancient people who were 5'10-6'0 tall or more, because of excess hormones or whatever other disorders. But I've read modern averages and averages from ancient Europe, and the average genetic height for males is consistently 5'6-5'8 all around the world. I doubt any of the Pre-Historic Admixture events recorded in Europe included a group who towered over the other.

Some people wrongly assume differences between modern humans in phenotype is caused solely by climate. It was assumed Pale skin is because of latitude, and that's been for the most part debunked in the case of Europe. Some of these theories are PC mumbo jumbo. It's an easy and quick explanation for racial(phenotype) differences, that allows all humans to be a "single human race". Plus, I see geneticists make exaggerated claims about the effect of SNPs on traits so their papers get published and praise by others.

We have to admit: 1: It's very difficult to find what in DNA produce certain traits. 2: It's very difficult to discover what caused differnt phenotypes evolve.

What is the average genetic height for Mbuti / Biaka Pygmies ???

Are they so extremely short partially because of poor nutrition ???

Polish wrestler Leon Pinecki, height: 203 cm, arm span: 245 cm, weight: 128 kg (but his head doesn't look as if he had acromegaly):

Tomenable said:

Surely there were "Giants" (just like "Ebu Gogo" myth turned out to be true after discovery of Homo Floresiensis :wink:

Meganthropus was an extinct hominid on average ca. 8 feet (2.44 m) tall and ca. 400 to 600 lbs (181 – 272 kg):

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

I think that many hominids got extinct much later than we have been assuming. Recent evidence seems to confirm this.

First Homo Floresiensis, now this (another hominid who survived until at least 14,000 years ago, perhaps longer):

http://www.theguardian.com/science/...e-thigh-bone-survival-ancient-human-ancestors

Click to expand...

Surely, not.

[h=2]Extreme claims[edit][/h]Meganthropus has been the target of numerous extreme claims, none of which is supported by peer-reviewed authors since the late 20th century. Perhaps the most common claim is that Meganthropus was a giant; one unsourced claim estimated they were 9 feet (2.75 m) tall and 750 to 1000 pounds (340 to 450 kilograms).
O.D. von Engeln [and] Kenneth E. Caster. mentioned that " Another astounding discovery is that of human teeth in China and Java of such size as to suggest a period of gigantism in human evolution. If the teeth can be accepted as indicative, these giant men stood 9 to 10 feet tall and weighed perhaps 600 to 700 pounds!" Von Engeln, O. D.; Caster, Kenneth E. (1952). Geology. : McGraw-Hill Book Co.Inc.(pages 411-412) No exact height has been published in a peer-reviewed journal since the late 20th century, and none gives an indication of Meganthropus being substantially larger than H. erectus. However, earlier estimates from the 1940s and 1950s, based primarily on the very large Sangiran No. 6 jaw fragment, led Prof. Franz Weidenreich, and several other anthropologists to conclude Meganthropus was a giant, and substantially larger than any H. erectus, perhaps on the order of 2 to 4 times the body mass. Perhaps as expression of this theory, Von Koenigswald and Weidenreich named the taxon in 1942, "Meganthropus palaeojavanicus", which in Neo-Latin translates to "great or large man of ancient Java".
There have been some rumors of post-cranial material, but those have either yet to be published or belong to H. erectus. Reports, most if not all apparently from Australian researcher Rex Gilroy, place Meganthropus in Australia. He associates it with giant tools and even modern day reports. But, almost all paleoanthropologists maintain that Meganthropus is known only from central Java. In similar non-peer-reviewed claims, some Bigfoot researchers claim that Bigfoot is a modern Meganthropus.

Click to expand...

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

Seems very iffy to say the least.

LeBrok, Robert Pershing Wadlow when last measured on 27 June 1940, was found to be 2.72 m (8 ft 11.1 in) tall.

Of course - it was some kind of medical condition - but at least it shows the upper range of human height.

Currently the tallest living man is Sultan Kösen who measured 251 cm (8 ft 3 in) - also not a healthy man.

I wonder what's the tallest "healthy" male ever. But how to determine where does "healthy" end and "sick" start?

LeBrok said:

Seems very iffy to say the least.

Click to expand...

The problem with Meganthropus is that nobody has found a complete skeleton so far.

But his height was estimated based on the size of several bones, including skull.

Tomenable said:

How can you possibly know this ??? Those cultures practiced breastfeeding of babies, but so did hunter-gatherers.

But we don't know if they drunk raw animal milk, or if they just used milk to produce cheese, kefir, kumis, etc.

Click to expand...

You mean they really missed extremely nutritional food for their always hungry kids? Actually it were the kids who milked cows, goats and sheep daily. They had the first access to milk. Fresh, delicious milk just inches from their hungry mouths! Try to stop them...

Tomenable said:

The problem with Meganthropus is that nobody has found a complete skeleton so far.

But his height was estimated based on the size of several bones, including skull.

Click to expand...

It is easier to believe that such case of one individual, if true, was related to hyper supply of growth hormone, than gigantic people on islands.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gigantism

Usually, animal and people get smaller, not bigger, when secluded on islands for long time.

Tomenable said:

Alan,



OK two-wheeled wagons but what kind of such wagons? A "two-wheeled wagon" can be anything from this...

... to things much more sophisticated.

As for two-wheleed chariots used in battles (not as "civilian" carts), they appear for the first time in Sintashta.

And in Egypt they appear after the Hyksos invasion (during the 15th Dynasty).

The Hyksos were suspected of having an Indo-Iranian ruling class because of that:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origins_of_the_Hyksos#Hurrians_or_Indo-Europeans



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



But in reality they could obtain chariots from Indo-Iranians as a cultural exchange.

Europe did not need a Muslim or Mongol ruling class to obtain gunpowder from them.

Click to expand...

I am just telling you that two or four wheeled wagons already existed prior to Sintashta, also Horses. I never even argued about the form or usage of these wagons. It is possibly true that Sintashta folks improved the two wheeled wagons for warfare. I am not denying this. Why should I? They were a group of Indo-Iranians at the end of the day, more the linguistic ancestors of the Indo_Aryans though (Sintashta -> BMAC -> Indo-Aryans). But that doesn' mean these were not used elsewhere already as chariots too because we have ~3000 year old evidences of Sumeria where four wheeled "chariots" are used and we have evidences that two wheeled wagons did also existed prior to Sintashta. Srubna culture, Yaz and Kura Araxes look more like being ancestral to the Iranic speakers. Interestingly Kura Araxes and Srubna had very similar cultures based on farming and live stock breeding.

I also know about the Hyksos being probably of Indo_Iranian origin. And interestingly this is roughly at the time of the Mitanni people and we have evidences that the Mitanni had contact to the ancient Egyptians. One of the Princesses of Egypt is even said to be of Mitanni origin. Therefore it is likely that the Hyksos were of Mitanni origin. There are hypothesis that the Mitanni derive from the Kura-Araxes culture.

It seems that the Indo_Iranians can be seperated into even four! major cultural branches.

Kura-Araxes, Srubna, Sintashta-Andronovo-BMAC, Yaz

Google for them and you will realize the similarities these cultures have.

Alan said:

I also know about the Hyksos being probably of Indo_Iranian origin.

Click to expand...

The Hyksos are considered either Semitic or a mix of Semites and Hurrians.

There is no evidence of Indo-Iranian (or any other IE) names among them.

On the other hand, rulers of the Mitanni realm had Indo-European names.

But most of the population of it were Non-Indo-European ethnic Hurrians.

Yes - I wrote that they were suspected of having a ruling class of Indo-Iranian origin because of having chariots.

And now I write that there is no confirmation of this idea in any other aspects (apart from knowledge of chariots):

See the wiki article on Hyksos origins: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyksos#Origins_of_the_Hyksos

BTW - "they had an elite of Indo-Iranian origin" =/= "they spoke Indo-Iranian language and were Indo-Iranians".

In the Mitanni kingdom, even though it was ruled by Aryans, the main language was Hurrian - not Indo-Iranian.

By 1500 BC "Hurrians" as a state didn't exist, it was Mitanni already and mixed of Indo_Iranians and Hurrians

Click to expand...

But the Hyksos migrated towards Egypt earlier than 1500 BC, long before the rest of Hurrians were attacked by Indo-Iranians.

And just in case you don't know it is still not known what kind of language the Hurrians really spoke.

Click to expand...

Aren't there some inscriptions or single words in Hurrian language (and it was probably most closely related to Urartian) ??? :

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hurro-Urartian_languages

Tomenable said:

Angela,
.

By the way, coming back to post #140 for a moment (and your claim about WHG ancestry):

North-Eastern Europeans score a lot of "WHG" only in calculators which do not take into account EHG and SHG.

Most of HG here is EHG and SHG (Poles for example have some connection with SHG - see the link below), not WHG:

http://polishgenes.blogspot.com/2012/04/prehistoric-scandinavians-genetically.html

I suppose that "SHG-type" hunters inhabited also areas to the south of the Baltic Sea, not just Sweden.

Click to expand...

What a very predictable response. In fact, I personally already predicted that this would be the response.

Your link is not very persuasive.

As for the rest, from the "calculators" I've seen, they show WHG and EHG, but no break out for SHG. I have no doubt that considerable effort will be expended in creating one that does so, however, and making sure that the SHG numbers are higher in certain countries.

Then those so inclined can congratulate themselves on their SHG percentages, if the EHG aren't sufficiently "light".

Such a waste of effort when the first Anatolian farmers were already fixed for SLC24A5 and 40% derived for SLC 42A5 and thus perhaps even slightly lighter than Yamnaya, not to mention that by the Middle Neolithic many central European farmers were derived for both and had the blue eye genes as well, but it seems that old stereotypes and attitudes die hard.

Ed. In fact, you'd better check Fire-Haired's sheets on pigmentation for EHG and SHG. Even SHGs weren't 100% derived for the three major snps you know. Sorry to disappoint, but there were some "darker ones" still among them.

Greying Wanderer said:

...
Well it might well be - that's the thing. Sickle cell is very bad for you but if it protects you against something worse (malaria) then it can still be selected for.

This is why I think it's possible for something like acromegaly to have been wide spread at one point in time - perhaps because of Bergman's rule - and then gradually reduced in frequency after it got warmer. As long as it helped you to reproduce and only became negative in your 40s it might have been net benign in a particular environment....

Click to expand...

True. There are many different genetic conditions that are like this - they can have good or bad effects depending on the situation. I am a heterozygous carrier (single copy) for HFE Hereditary Hemochromatosis/Haemochromatosis (the so-called "Celtic Curse"), which helps the body store enough dietary iron under famine conditions (which have been depressingly common in Ireland over the centuries), but which (especially when one has two HH genes) can cause self-poisoning of internal organs.