new ancient DNA study in LBK

So a lot of Neolithic men have take their refugee in Scandinavia, British
Island and the Netherlands. Indeed there are many with haplogroup I,
but very few with E and J. Many fair/red haired men (Borreby and
Bruenn Aurignac men) can be found be. Are they descendants of the
ancient hunters of west and southwest Europe from Palaelithic and
Mesolithic Ages? The men who bear the haplogroups R1a and Rb1
must have arrived there much later on, for example 2500-2000 BC?
Is this correct?
 
But couldn't it also be that the Indo-Europeans, after conquering the Neolithic farmers, took all their women and produced offspring with them, while the Neolithic males, if they haven't been killed slided into a much lower class which made it very hard for them to get married? So a lot of these Neolithic genes are still in us, but not the Y-DNA for obvious reason?
 
But couldn't it also be that the Indo-Europeans, after conquering the Neolithic farmers, took all their women and produced offspring with them, while the Neolithic males, if they haven't been killed slided into a much lower class which made it very hard for them to get married? So a lot of these Neolithic genes are still in us, but not the Y-DNA for obvious reason?

So it seems their women were very attractive with fair hair and blue eyes !
 
I guess they were all blond, so guys got board and went after variety. lol
No sure if blond is naturally attractive to all. Tatars didn't take blond women home, right? But they easily could.
 
I guess they were all blond, so guys got board and went after variety. lol
No sure if blond is naturally attractive to all. Tatars didn't take blond women home, right? But they easily could.

Yes correct not many blonds in the steppe as our attractive blond paleolithic/neolithic Scandinavian girls lol
 
Yes, Poland and Russia are predominantly dark-haired. As an example, the Polish national team (all ethnic polaks) :

poland21024x768.jpg

Half of them look like they could be Mexican or some other Latin American group. :innocent: Are you sure they aren't illegal immigrants who snuck into Poland. :LOL:
 
Surely Y DNA cannot explain phenotypes among human populations.
 
I am still wondering about R1a, R1b, I1 and N1c1 in influencing fair hair and blue eyes.

To my observation Finnish and Scandinavians have much large share of very blond people (with almost white hair) while in Latvians and Lithuanian the blondism is different - the typical colour is somewhat in between dark and light. Thus the very light hair might come with I1 rather than R1a. Also, I am quite puzzled about N1c1. If it comes with dark hair, brown eyes, and prominent skulls as in Siberian FinnoUgric peoples, Lithuanians should look rather different, as we have a bit more of N1c1 than R1a. Having in mind that dark is dominant gene, there should be more brown eyes at least instead of the typical pale blue. Unless, of course, there is maternal DNA heavily at play...

This is the Lithuanian national basketball team of 2010 so that you could see that real hair colour:
View attachment 4752
 
Yes and no. It depends when, and where in Anatolia. Nowadays R1b is more common in northern and eastern Anatolia. However R1b is not dominant there, and probably came from somewhere else first (like the Pontic-Caspian steppe or even Central Asia). It's hard to say at present when R1b entered Anatolia, and if these early Anatolian R1b were indeed the ancestors of present-day Western Europeans.

I had imagined that the R1b homeland might actually be on the other side of the Caucasus, between the northern shore of the Black Sea and the Caspian Sea. Repeated westward and southward invasions would have brought R1b to Europe and Anatolia, but also depleted the original stock, until most of the R1b were pushed out of the Pontic steppes by their R1a neighbours. Of course this would have taken several millennia to achieve, starting approximately 5000 years ago, and ending not so long ago, with the last Central Asian invaders (Bulgars, Magyars, Khazars) that swept across the Pontic steppes to Europe (=> see my thread 5000 years of migrations from the Eurasian steppes to Europe ).

If modern Europeans descended in great part from Anatolia, Caucasian and Levantine immigrants, the incidence of fair hair and fair eyes would not be as high as it is today. Let's not forget red hair, which is almost unique to Western European R1b countries and parts of Central Asia. If red and blond hair came from Paleolithic Europeans (hg I), then the highest incidence would be in Bosnia-Herzegovina and Sardinia. But these places are among the darkest in Europe for hair colour (Sardinia might well be the darkest, close to 100% black hair - Sardinian R1b appears to be mostly R-U152 from continental Italy, where the high percentage of Near-Eastern blood had lowered the incidence of fair hair before R1b reached Sardinia).
But isnt Basques , south France and Iberia are also very dark haired - more than Bosnia , and they are 90%+ R1b ?
 
We can't directly correlate haplogroups and phisical appearance,because evolution is faster than we thought.
Take a Pygme with hg B to Scandinavia,wait just 2-3 thousand years,he'll turn into a blond.
Just look at Albanians,they don't look like a North African,or Finns-as mentioned above-do not look like a Samoyet or Sibiryan.
Climate is the key of this matter.
 
Sorry Selim, the human kind (and the world) is not 5,000 years old. Try 100 years from Pygmy to Scandinavia. On top of it, most likely, blond color was helped by Neanderthals.
 
Sorry Selim, the human kind (and the world) is not 5,000 years old. Try 100 years from Pygmy to Scandinavia. On top of it, most likely, blond color was helped by Neanderthals.

I don't understand why you ''try'' to be sarcastic,but non-Africans including Europans are just % 4 Neanderthal,blondism seems as a result of evolution of Sapiens;not Neanderthals or something.

For the beginers,human variations are shaped by some factors such as climate,enviroment and naturel selection.
 
So, Iberians were haplogroups I2 ? It is rarely found in Catalonia, about 4%
I followed this discussion and it's interesting that perhaps Maciamo was quite right, in the sense that, at least, the last Dodecad Calculator gave me almost 60% Southwestern (very likely Paleolithic and dominant). However, it's just one case for the moment, and having around 35% Northwest + Northeast it is also significant (not far from the Spanish average, wich has more Southeastern instead of the huge Southwestern).

In next weeks/months, I think some things would become more clear.
 
I don't understand why you ''try'' to be sarcastic,but non-Africans including Europans are just % 4 Neanderthal,blondism seems as a result of evolution of Sapiens;not Neanderthals or something.

For the beginers,human variations are shaped by some factors such as climate,enviroment and naturel selection.

Tell me one thing Selim. Why do you think Neanderthals were protected from evolutionary forces? As hominids living in Europe and Asia, it is quite logical that they developed light skin. Often forms of blondism come with it.
When black people from Africa mated with Neanderthals, it is very logical to assume that, they picked up lighter color of skin from Neanderthals. It's much faster way to adopt to environment than waiting maybe a million years for a right mutation to happen randomly.

For beginners, to your list of human variations add "mating with other hominids".
 
Tell me one thing Selim. Why do you think Neanderthals were protected from evolutionary forces?

İs that really what you understood from my post?I wonder how you concluded my post with the phrase I bolded.Please read carefully.

It's much faster way to adopt to environment than waiting maybe a million years for a right mutation to happen randomly

''maybe a million years'',this is a common mistake that I'm trying to tell.One more time;evolution is much more faster than we used to assume.
Simple phisical mutations do not require millions of years;but thousands of years.Pigmentation,colour of hair or eyes,features of nose,face,etc.they all can change within 3-5 thousands of years,not millions.İt didn't took ''millions of years'' to have a white skin or all the different races didn't formed within ''millions of years''.

And bed news for you;Sapiens is not a million year old.

You can't explain everthing with non-Sapiens contrubitions;both Neanderthal and Denisova inputs are very limited.
Otherwise we can not explain hundreds of different phisical features of races of Sapiens,your magic wand,Neanderthal,is not enough to solve every problems.

When black people from Africa mated with Neanderthals,

They were probably not ''black'' anymore when they come to Europa,within a couple of thousands of years their pigmentation must have changed.
Just like Chadic speakers of Africa changed and become black in a few thousands of years.You can find hundreds of similar examples in human variations.

Just look at Russians,Kırgızs and Tadjiks;they all descend from the same paternal ansestors,but within thousands of years (not million) they completely changed as a result of different enviroment,climate etc.
You know how old R1a1 is,don't you?
 
İs that really what you understood from my post?I wonder how you concluded my post with the phrase I bolded.Please read carefully.
This is why:
blondism seems as a result of evolution of Sapiens;not Neanderthals or something.




One more time;evolution is much more faster than we used to assume.
How do you know?


And bed news for you;Sapiens is not a million year old.
How old do you think Sapiens is?



You can't explain everything with non-Sapiens contrubitions;both Neanderthal and Denisova inputs are very limited.
How much of Neanderthal genome you need for a white skin? Is 4% enough?

Otherwise we can not explain hundreds of different phisical features of races of Sapiens,your magic wand,Neanderthal,is not enough to solve every problems.
What every problem???



They were probably not ''black'' anymore when they come to Europa,within a couple of thousands of years their pigmentation must have changed.
Just like Chadic speakers of Africa changed and become black in a few thousands of years.You can find hundreds of similar examples in human variations.
How do you know that Chadic didn't mate with black Africans to get black skin faster?
Why would you want to wait few thousand years for mutation to happen if the mutation for black skin is already in black Africans living in next village? Just have sex, it's so easy..., and your kids have this beneficial mutation right away.



Just look at Russians,Kırgızs and Tadjiks;they all descend from the same paternal ansestors,but within thousands of years (not million) they completely changed as a result of different enviroment,climate etc.
You know how old R1a1 is,don't you?
Why are you so afraid against people mating? What are you saying, groups of different people never mixed together?
Paternal HG and all chromosome Y doesn't have much to do with how people look. How people look is scattered all over the rest of DNA, it's called autosomal DNA. Obviously Kirghiz have lot's of Mongolian autosomal DNA. It doesn't mean they mutated this way. It means that R1a1 men mated with Mongolian women.


PS. Try not to exaggerate and keep it in lighter tone next time.
 
Doesn't that large frequency of R1b in Catalonia or Ireland or among the Basques rings bells? It is not normal for any people to have a near unity of one haplogroup. It either means a recent invasion, strange mating practices and severe founder effects. The Yemeni men are over 70% J1! It is not natural, like every having the surname Smith. Surnames are handed down from men to their male children in a hereditary fashion.

Only the today's Iberians think they are pre I.E or Paleolithic. Something to do with Rh negative? Everyone else just thinks them to be rather an strange and inbred group of isolates.
 
R1b is certantly significant in Iberia autosomally speaking, but the very high Southwestern as I said in other posts, makes me think Iberians, and specially ethnic Catalans (if my results weren't wrong or exclusive), have very strong Paleolithic element.
 
Yes this is the same thing about the R1b found at high % in Central Africa notice this Y-DNA lineage lake also diversity anyway they are not white cause their African mtDNA ! Same thing about the Y-DNA R1a in India .Other cases of mixture are the French - Spanish - Italians I do agree. I am often surprise to see some dark skin peoples in Brittany with North African features for a high level of Y-DNA R1b1b2 who seems also lake diversity ? anyway I always wondering if these North African features found in Brittany , I mean : black skin brown eyes etc .. were really correlated to these paleolithic mtDNA or from a more recent mixture but I do agree with you . Anyway the Indo european blood is more representative in Germanic and Nordic countries include Poland and Baltic eras no doubt .


very funny
dark skinned Bretons? a lot even?
Genuine Bretons are known to have lighter eyes and lighter skin than lighter hair
freckling go to 30-40% in sommer for its inhabitants!!! (2,8-3,5% red and very reddish hairs!)
at a lower level, Bretons present the same 'derive' as the Irish and Welsh people (the famous dark skinned Welshes is a romantic vision of Londoners)
yes, there are some dark skinned people in Brittany, but rarer than black or near black haired people, and the most of them is to be found in Eastern romance speaking bretons - some very local districts have a little more 'dark' skins - in a whole, the Western Bretons have only 24% of dark haired dark eyed people (the categories brown hair-blue eyes and brown hair grey-green eyes are more numerous! - if you put the skin colour in the play, it is only something like 8%-10% of dark haired-dark eyed-dark skinned -
and the famous mediterranean 'olive coloured' skins is much rarest than the white-yellow hue
 

This thread has been viewed 69029 times.

Back
Top