Major new paper on haplogroup G : new peaks in NW Caucaus, Palestine & Corsica

[Maciamo]

A new paper on haplogroup G by Rootsi et al. was published two days ago. They compiled a new database of some 1500 members of hg G spread over nearly 100 regions and listed frequencies in all these regions for 17 subclades of G. This is by far the most comprehensive study of hg G so far.

I am happy to see that the Adyghei of the Northwest Caucasus, living in the area corresponding to the Bronze Age Maykop culture, have 45% of hg G, and that most of it falls under G2a3b1a1 (G-U1), which has been associated with the spread of R1b1b2 (M269) in Central, Western and Northern Europe. The worldwide peak for G2a3b1a is actually the southern Pontic Steppes, between the North Caucasus and the River Don, almost exactly the extend of the Maykop Culture.

The paper also re-confirms that G2a3b1a is the main subclade of G in parts of Europe where R1b is dominant. Most of it falls under G2a3b1a2 (L497), with a peak around southern Romania and Bulgaria, and another around the Alps from central Germany to northwest Italy, which correspond to the two regions where Steppe people (and R1b) stopped for a while before continuing their invasion of Europe.

This goes a long way to confirm the place of origins from which haplogroup R1b-M269 expanded to Europe. It would seem that most of the R1b people migrated away from the region, leaving mostly G2a3b1a1 behind.

Also interesting is that the highest genetic diversity is found in the north of the Fertile Crescent, namely in Eastern Anatolia, Armenia and Northeast Iran, roughly the same area as the one with the highest diversity of haplogroup R1b. It is also the region where cattle, goats, sheep and pigs were first domesticated.

The peak frequencies of G in Southwest Asia are found in Palestine (22%) and Israel (14% for non-Ashkenazi Jews and 12% for the Druzes), the cradle of agriculture.

The highest frequency of G in Europe is no longer Sardinia (15% in the Eupedia data and 13% in Rootsi et al.) but Corsica (21.5% with a reasonable sample size of 330) for which data was scarce so far. Obviously, most of the subclades present in Corsica and Sardinia are Neolithic, not the Bronze Age G2a3b1a1 from the Southern Pontic Steppes. Corsica even has 11.2% of G2a2b, Ötzi's hapogroup. There are nevertheless 5.8% of G2a3b1a1 (and subclades) in Corsica and 2.4% in Sardinia, which probably dates from the Italic and Roman periods (like the R1b on both islands). They come in about the same proportion to R1b as in the rest of Europe.

[Maciamo]

I have to say that I am rather surprised (again) at the poor judgement Rootsi's team (who includes such famous population geneticists as Myres, King, Balanovsky, Behar, Battaglia, Semino and Underhill) when it comes to linking subclades with historical events. For example:

1) They only associate haplogroup G with the spread of agriculture, with no mention at all of the Indo-European migrations.
2) They associate the G2a3b1a1a1 (G-M527) lineage with the Greek colonization, when it is found in places that have nothing to do with the Greeks, such as Estonia, Belarus, Tatarstan, Iran or Germany.
3) They associate G2a3b1a2 (G-L497) with the LBK culture, which is really startling since there is close to no geographic correspondance between the two.

[Eldritch]

Do you have excel file Maciamo with frequency in Europe?

[sparkey]

The paper also re-confirms that G2a3b1a is the main subclade of G in parts of Europe where R1b is dominant. Most of it falls under G2a3b1a2 (L497), with a peak around southern Romania and Bulgaria, and another around the Alps from central Germany to northwest Italy, which correspond to the two regions where Steppe people (and R1b) stopped for a while before continuing their invasion of Europe.

Very interesting correlation. But do we know which precise subclades of R1b are dominant in those regions? Presence of a younger SNP along the European R1b line (like L150) would establish this tremendously well. Something much farther back, and we'll need to consider whether that means that the apparent correspondence of R1b and G2a-L497 is coincidental, or if they really have been associated for that long.

1) They only associate haplogroup G with the spread of agriculture, with no mention at all of the Indo-European migrations.

Not surprising, considering that academia has often been slow to recognize how much has happened since the Neolithic, and we have Neolithic samples that appear to help the Neolithic narrative.

2) They associate the G2a3b1a1a1 (G-M527) lineage with the Greek colonization, when it is found in places that have nothing to do with the Greeks, such as Estonia, Belarus, Tatarstan, Iran or Germany.
3) They associate G2a3b1a2 (G-L497) with the LBK culture, which is really startling since there is close to no geographic correspondance between the two.

These are more surprising... do they give any rationale?

[razyn]

I have to say that I am rather surprised (again) at the poor judgement Rootsi's team (who includes such famous population geneticists as Myres, King, Balanovsky, Behar, Battaglia, Semino and Underhill) when it comes to linking subclades with historical events.

Thomas Krahn has expressed different, but equally negative, views in a new thread about this paper here:

http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.co...-05/1337209662

[zanipolo]

[QUOTE=sparkey;395362]Very interesting correlation. But do we know which precise subclades of R1b are dominant in those regions? Presence of a younger SNP along the European R1b line (like L150) would establish this tremendously well. Something much farther back, and we'll need to consider whether that means that the apparent correspondence of R1b and G2a-L497 is coincidental, or if they really have been associated for that long.


/QUOTE]

maciano is correct in that the dominant R1b in the area was R1b1b2 with U5b3 ( data from worldfamilies 2010) , but this also is the same for the cimmerians. The tyrolese numbers of R1b with its G2a neighbours reflects L-23 , while the veneti is R1b M137 while its northern Ladin neighbours are G2a-L497

It seems there was more than 1 type of R1b in the alps and neighbouring regions

[Yetos]

I have seen a post in science mag. about the Neolithic farmers,

I think it can be usefull to those that can have access

http://www.sciencemag.org/content/33...b-4fce49d24ff2


the abstract say

The farming way of life originated in the Near East some 11,000 years ago and had reached most of the European continent 5000 years later. However, the impact of the agricultural revolution on demography and patterns of genomic variation in Europe remains unknown. We obtained 249 million base pairs of genomic DNA from ~5000-year-old remains of three hunter-gatherers and one farmer excavated in Scandinavia and find that the farmer is genetically most similar to extant southern Europeans, contrasting sharply to the hunter-gatherers, whose distinct genetic signature is most similar to that of extant northern Europeans. Our results suggest that migration from southern Europe catalyzed the spread of agriculture and that admixture in the wake of this expansion eventually shaped the genomic landscape of modern-day Europe.


I hope it can be useful

[Christiaan]

I have to say that I am rather surprised (again) at the poor judgement Rootsi's team (who includes such famous population geneticists as Myres, King, Balanovsky, Behar, Battaglia, Semino and Underhill) when it comes to linking subclades with historical events. For example:

1) They only associate haplogroup G with the spread of agriculture, with no mention at all of the Indo-European migrations.
2) They associate the G2a3b1a1a1 (G-M527) lineage with the Greek colonization, when it is found in places that have nothing to do with the Greeks, such as Estonia, Belarus, Tatarstan, Iran or Germany.
3) They associate G2a3b1a2 (G-L497) with the LBK culture, which is really startling since there is close to no geographic correspondance between the two.

1) And why should they? What do we know about unwritten language in the past and what do we know about agriculture in the past. The problem is you will find agricultural artefacts but not the language.
2) about this one you could be right, I don't see any connection either
3) ?....why is there no correspondance, please enlighten me. There are at least some... For instance Derenburg Meerenstieg II(SNP tested upstream of G-L497...or do you think there is a better G2a3 candidate), and what about Löss soils and western linear pottery . LBK settlements correlates with Löss soils every prehistorian will tell you this...

[Maciamo]

1) And why should they? What do we know about unwritten language in the past and what do we know about agriculture in the past. The problem is you will find agricultural artefacts but not the language.
2) about this one you could be right, I don't see any connection either
3) ?....why is there no correspondance, please enlighten me. There are at least some... For instance Derenburg Meerenstieg II(SNP tested upstream of G-L497...or do you think there is a better G2a3 candidate), and what about Löss soils and western linear pottery . LBK settlements correlates with Löss soils every prehistorian will tell you this...

Sorry for the very belated reply.

1) The linguistic evidence about the spread of Indo-European languages is just as compelling as agricultural artefacts. The correlation between regions that speak IE languages and haplogroups R1a and R1b is so strong that it speaks for itself. If you look at the map of languages in Europe and the Middle East in the Antiquity the correlation is even more evident. For example, Sardinians spoke Nuragic, a non-IE language until the Roman conquest, and they have close to no R1a and comparatively little R1b (most of which is probably Roman and post-Roman). The Turks speak a non-IE language today, but there were many important pockets of IE languages in the Antiquity. And so on...

3) the LBK culture extended roughly from modern Hungary to the Benelux, via the Czech Rep., Slovakia, southern Poland, most of Germany and northern France. It did not include Switzerland, the Rhone Valley or North Italy. The only overlap with their map of G-L497 is southern Germany. Nothing else matches. On the other hand, the map of G-L497 matches much better the later Alpine Bronze Age cultures (such as Hallstatt).

[Christiaan]

Sorry for the very belated reply.

1) The linguistic evidence about the spread of Indo-European languages is just as compelling as agricultural artefacts. The correlation between regions that speak IE languages and haplogroups R1a and R1b is so strong that it speaks for itself. If you look at the map of languages in Europe and the Middle East in the Antiquity the correlation is even more evident. For example, Sardinians spoke Nuragic, a non-IE language until the Roman conquest, and they have close to no R1a and comparatively little R1b (most of which is probably Roman and post-Roman). The Turks speak a non-IE language today, but there were many important pockets of IE languages in the Antiquity. And so on...

3) the LBK culture extended roughly from modern Hungary to the Benelux, via the Czech Rep., Slovakia, southern Poland, most of Germany and northern France. It did not include Switzerland, the Rhone Valley or North Italy. The only overlap with their map of G-L497 is southern Germany. Nothing else matches. On the other hand, the map of G-L497 matches much better the later Alpine Bronze Age cultures (such as Hallstatt).

I don't mind,

anyway

1) Not quiet, because it is not fysical it can only be deduced by later oberservations. We simply don't know when Indo-European languages entered Europe. We can only guess by statistical means how old the languages are, but that is not the same. Archaeological artefacts are usually captured in time... in situ.

And if it came with R1b and R1a and not G2a, what sense would it make to speculate about it, if you have something else that is more tangable. I'm not saying it is not plausible, I only prefer hard evidence.

3)Well of those subclades tested it is clearly the best match to the LBK distribution, but who knows maybe L497 represents several subclades, which are not detected yet.

[zanipolo]

[QUOTE=zanipolo;395370][QUOTE=sparkey;395362]Very interesting correlation. But do we know which precise subclades of R1b are dominant in those regions? Presence of a younger SNP along the European R1b line (like L150) would establish this tremendously well. Something much farther back, and we'll need to consider whether that means that the apparent correspondence of R1b and G2a-L497 is coincidental, or if they really have been associated for that long.


/QUOTE]

maciano is correct in that the dominant R1b in the area was R1b1b2 with U5b3 ( data from worldfamilies 2010) , but this also is the same for the cimmerians. The tyrolese numbers of R1b with its G2a neighbours reflects L-23 , while the veneti is R1b M173 while its northern Ladin neighbours are G2a-L497

It seems there was more than 1 type of R1b in the alps and neighbouring regions

[Silesian]

[QUOTE=razyn;395365]Thomas Krahn has expressed different, but equally negative, views in a new thread about this paper here:

Haplogroup IJ does not exist or has not been found. Snp r-m429 does exist, with the highest frequency in Arabia Felix.
This does not stop people from using extrapolated mutation rates to conjecture ydna I as Indigenous to Europe.

[Taranis]

I don't mind,

anyway

1) Not quiet, because it is not fysical it can only be deduced by later oberservations. We simply don't know when Indo-European languages entered Europe. We can only guess by statistical means how old the languages are, but that is not the same. Archaeological artefacts are usually captured in time... in situ.

And if it came with R1b and R1a and not G2a, what sense would it make to speculate about it, if you have something else that is more tangable. I'm not saying it is not plausible, I only prefer hard evidence.

3)Well of those subclades tested it is clearly the best match to the LBK distribution, but who knows maybe L497 represents several subclades, which are not detected yet.

It's possible to make conjectures about the "age" of a language family by analyzing the vocabulary of a reconstructed proto-language. Key items such as words for farming, domesticated animals, the wheel, words for metals/metal-working etc. This of course, doesn't prevent people from having diverging opinions (the Anatolian Hypothesis is a textbook example of that).

Regardless, I do think the argument remains that although Haplogroup G appears to be clearly connected with the spread of agriculture in Europe, there are some solid arguments that it is not the only source of it.

[Semitic Duwa]

This study basically supports the inference that the Caucasus was a genetic sink rather than a source.
It also destroys your assertion that Caucasian markers do not correlate with linguistic division, since the diversity speaks for itself.

And this certainly has very little to do with the spread of IE.

G's distribution pattern reminds me that of M67...
High in the Caucasus and in Italy.
Though it's subset, M92, might be more closely associated to the spread of agriculture within Europe and even Greek colonisation.

[MMaximus]

Is R1b-U152 the R1b linked with G2a-L497?

[MarTyro]

I have to say that I am rather surprised (again) at the poor judgement Rootsi's team (who includes such famous population geneticists as Myres, King, Balanovsky, Behar, Battaglia, Semino and Underhill) when it comes to linking subclades with historical events. For example:

1) They only associate haplogroup G with the spread of agriculture, with no mention at all of the Indo-European migrations.
2) They associate the G2a3b1a1a1 (G-M527) lineage with the Greek colonization, when it is found in places that have nothing to do with the Greeks, such as Estonia, Belarus, Tatarstan, Iran or Germany.
3) They associate G2a3b1a2 (G-L497) with the LBK culture, which is really startling since there is close to no geographic correspondance between the two.

Thomas Krahn has expressed different, but equally negative, views in a new thread about this paper here:
http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.co...-05/1337209662

...

Very good discussion here and also in the Dienekes Blog. Much better then every "Mass Media flattened Science" publication. I'm interested if and how this paper changes distribution in the Y-DNA G Map.

[pinovski]

Hola, soy de Asturias, España y, de hecho, mi haplogrupo es el G, al parecer somos pocos en Europa.