Strong Evidence mtDNA H did not spread in Neolithic and was already popular in Europe

[Fire Haired]

I have noticed people in this website assume that mtDNA H was not popular in Europe till the Neolithic age and it was spread by mid eastern farmers and Bell Beaker culture I have read news articles that don't even consider H was in Europe before the Neolithic age to many people assume mtDNA H spread in Europe during the Neolithic and did not exist before that


So, these are arguments I have created that argue against the so strongly believed theory that mtDNA H spread in Europe during the Neolithic age




I want to know what peoples think about this so please vote on the poll and post your opinion




There is not Enough Investigation pre Neolithic European mtDNA samples and people only mention the ones that don't have alot of H


mtDNA H was 41.52% from from 236 mtDNA samples in Iberia from 7,000- 4,340ybp http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads...indo-europeans
and in the same article i showed that mtDNA H was 46.6% from 14 mtDNA sample from pre Neolithic Iberian s 20,000-7,500ybp from 3 mtDNA 15,000 year old mtDNA samples in northern spain 2 had mtDNA H one had H6 from 9 mtDNA 9,500-7,500 year old samples in Portugal 5 out of 9 had mtDNA H two had H1b which orignated in Iberia

also the oldest mtDNA samples in Iberia from 20,000-18,000years ago one had for sure U and for the other all they know is it was in the RO family mtDNA RO is the grandmother of H today it is almost only found in Arabia and it is over 50,000 years old and probably never migrated to Europe but its daughter mtDNA HV did and so did H so this sample most likely had either mtDNA HV or H also this sample had the R* CRS muation which is usulley reported as mtDNA H but they just did not have enough DNA information to say it was for sure but it probably was H


also a 26,000 year old mtDNA sample from Wales also had the R* CRS muation which means it almost definitely had mtDNA H and now that the technology for receiving DNA from ancient remains is getting much better maybe they can do another test on this remains from Wales the one from Spain this will confirm that we have


two 25,000 year old mtDNA samples from central Russia most likely brother and sister had the CRS and mutation 161219A which means they where for sure mtDNA H17


and 28,000 year old mtDNA sample on the south tip of Italy was for sure mtDNA H and it was not contamination because all of the people that where near it or had contact mtDNA did not match.


so that means we have 4 mtDNA samples in Europe from over 25,000ybp with mtDNA H in Italy, Wales, and Russia and one even had a subclade and we also have 3 mtDNA mtDNA H samples in Europe from 20,000-15,000ybp all in Spain this means mtDNA H has been in Europe for about 35,000 years


i took a National Genographic DNA test and i have mtDNA H64 they tried to explain my DNA story and said mtDNA H orignated in the middle east just 20,000-25,000ybp why would they say that if we have four over 25,000 year mtDNA H samples from all over europe one even had H17 this means mtDNA H probably originated in the middle east over 40,000 years ago it is nearly twice as old as DNA experts predicted i think this also means age predictions on DNA haplogroups are not always accurate usulley they ave a dat at least 5,000 years to young because they also saud mtDNA V is only 9,000 years ago in Spain and migrated acroos Europe and north Africa just 7,000ybp then we find four 12,000 year old mtDNA V samples in north Africa.


here is all the mtDNA samples from Paloithci Europe 37,985-12,300ybp there are 20
U=12 60%(U5=6(U5b=3(U5b1=2, U5b2b1=1), U2/3/4/7/8/9=1, U2=1), H=7 35%(almost defintley H=2, H*unknown subclade=2, H17=2, H6=1), HV=1 5%


and mtDNA H1 and H3 are the most popular H subclades in Europe and northwest Africa they all come from a huge migration that started in north Spain about 15,000ybp also mtDNA V and some U5b subclades also migrated with that group from northern Spain.


from 22 mtDNA samples that are dated as 12,000 years old in Morocco which is far northwest North Africa
H/V/U=12, H=4, H/V=3, V=2
mtDNA V is only 15,000 years old and originated in northern Spain it is apart of that group that migrated across Europe and north west Africa 10,000-15,000ybp so these are remains of the ones that went to north Africa so really we have mtDNA samples from Mesolithic Spaniards who immigrated to north Africa only one had the possibility of being mtDNA U which is strange compared to other Mesolithic mtDNA samples all of them had the possibility of being H or V four where for sure H and two where for sure V i am guessing the rest where H but who knows i think this and the other Mesolithic and Paleolithic Iberian remains are good evidence that mtDNA H was dominant in Iberia at least 15,000ybp and the fact that about 30-50% of Iberian mtDNA are H1 and H3 which originated in Iberia about 15,000ybp


I also made a thread http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads...NA-from-German
which shows that from 86 mtDNA samples all came from Germany except two came from Denmark from 6,625- 4,025 ybp 40.7% had mtDNA H just like modern Europeans and H1 and H3 where th main subclades even though most where not well enough preserved to show subclades this means even back then most of central European mtDNA H was H1 and H3 like today and originated in Spain 15,000ybp


also the pre Bell Beaker Germany remains also had mainly mtDNA H and the same subclades so that mean Bell Beaker probably did not spread mtDNA H in central Europe and there is no way they spread it to Scandinavia, Britain, or any where east of Germany because Bell Beaker culture never expanded there so i think Bell Beaker is not the reason mtDNA H is so popular in Europe


only about 24% of the small sample size of 29 5,000 year old mtDNA samples from Trellis southwestern France had mtDNA H but all had European H1 and H3 which take up 20-30% of mtDNA in that area today.




The main mtDNA H subclades in Europe are rarly found in the middle east
mtDNA H1 and H3 takes up about 30-75% of the H subclades in central, western, and northern Europe and are also the most popular H subclades in all of Europe they take up about 10-30% of their total mtDNA in central, western, and northern Europe in the Middle east mtDNA H1 and H3 only take up about 5-10% of their H subclades and take up usulley less than 1-5% of their total mtDNA and almost all experts believe both mtDNA H1 and H3 originated in northern Spain about 15,000ybp and spread across Europe 10,000-15,000ybp they call it the Iberian refuge http://genome.cshlp.org/content/15/1/19.full
so that means mtDNA H1 and H3 where already 10-30% or more in central and western Europe before the Neolithic age and there is no way they came from middle eastern farmers and they expanded during the Mesolithic age 10,000-15,000ybp not the Neolithic 6,000-10,000ybp


also mtDNA H6 which takes up 5-40% of mtDNA in volga Russia and far eastern Europe it also is believed to have originated in Europe about 15,000-20,000ybp and a 15,000 year old remain in northern Spain had H6 and mtDNA H6 is actually very spread out in all of Europe and also found in the middle east it is probably one of the oldest H subclades


mtDNA H5 and H13 are about 10% of H subclades in the middle east but they are very very very rarely ever found in central, western, northern Europe at the most they reach 3% of the mtDNA H subclades they are commonly found though in north Italy and eastern Europe they usulley hit about 5-15% of H subclades in eastern Europe sometimes more popular than in the middle east but in some areas they are less than 1% of the H subclades.


there are many H subclades found in Europe and the middle east but i could not find any information of where they originated or how old they are so right now i cant say which mtDNA H subclades in Europe are from the middle east but in general most Europeans have mtDNA H subclades did not come from middle eastern farmers.


and if there is any one with information out there on where H13, H5, H7, H9, H15, H16, H18, H11, H10, H20, H21, H4 originated that would be extremely helpful






It is impossible for Bell Beaker to Have spread mtDNA H
I have heard many people say Bell Beaker spread mtDNA H in Europe but to me that sound impossible sure Bell Beaker probably started in Iberia where mtDNA H has been popular for 15,000 years and their culture spread across all of western Europe between just 4,800-3,800ybp there are no real signs Bell Beaker spread their culture from Spain by conquering western Europe all they did was spread a culture and bell beaker culture is identified only by a type of pottery style that is all it may have not even been a culture just a type of pottery that spread but lets say it was a culture that started in Spain and conquered most of western Europe when people conquer the native women are not killed off the native men are mainly because they are the ones that fight in the war the invading army replaces the old Y DNA not mtDNA so the Bell Beaker would have done something from what we know no people group has done in history and Internationally only kill off the women and also Bell Beaker never expanded to Scandinavia or east of Germany but in those areas mtDNA H is still 40% so Bell Beaker is not a good explination and H1 and H3 are still the most popular mtDNA H subclades in areas bell Beaker never spread so to me the Bell Beaker argument does not have good evidence just assumptions
and Bell Beaker was actulley conquered by proto Germanic speakers and proto Italoi Celtic it is explained in this link https://www.google.com/url? sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0 CC8QFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.eupedia.com%2Feurope %2FHaplogroup_R1b_Y-DNA.shtml&ei=We3IUYTMFeGqyAHts4GAAQ&usg=AFQjCNHXsH j4Btu0ZPVHyQKiyCoKbeHnKw


Europeans have Different mtDNA H subclades from each other


eastern Europe has very diffenrt mtDNA H subclades than western Europe in eastern Europe H13 and H5 are very popular but they are almost never found in western Europe in western Europe H1 and H3 are very popular but not nearly as popular as in eastern Europe it is true most of Europe has 40% mtDNA H but different regions have different subclades which means it did not spread in the same event and that it is just luck most of Europe turned out to have 40% mtDNA H eastern Europe has many similar subclades as the middle east which could mean its spread in the Neolithic age but western, central, and northern Europe do not so obviously mtDNA H was spread in western, central, and northern Europe from the same event probably Iberian refuge 10,000-15,000ybp but mtDNA H is eastern Europe had to of been spread by a different even they do have some H1 and H3 which means they got some b fro Iberian refuge but since they has many similar subclades to mid easterns it probably spread from the middle east. but mtDNA H1 and H3 are still the most popular mtDNA H subclades in all of Europe which probably means the Iberian refuge made a huge impact on European mtDNA

Conclusion

so basically what i am trying to say is people do not investigate the origin of mtDNA H in europe enough they just assume it came from the Neolithic age based in the few mtDNA samples we have of pre Neolithic Europe but for some reason they dont realize that 35% of Paloithic EUropean mtDNa samples had H and people do not look at subclades i think the origin of mtDNA H in Europe mostly comes from the Iberian refuge and Mesolithic Europe 10,000-15,000ybp some does come from the Neolithic age but most does not and people only mention the few Neolithic cultures like LBK that did not have 40% mtDNA H but most did which people don't mention


also another big thing is a 28,000 year old mtDNA sample from south tip Italy, two 25,000 year old mtDNA samples in central russia have H17, one 26,000 year old sample in wales most likley had mtDNA H it defintley did not have U, 20,000-18,000 year old mtDNa sample in south tip Spain also almost defintley had mtDNA H, and two mtDNA samples from norther Spain had mtDNA H one had H6 had H so it probably first arrived in Europe over 35,000ybp





what i want people to know is mtDNA H is alot more popular in Paleolithic and Mesloithci European remains than advertised and mtDNA U is not 100% like the impression they give mtDNA H also shows up in Mesolithic European remains all of this proves mtDNA H was deifntley present in pre Neolithic Europe and was actulley very popular and most mtDNA H subclades in Europe originated in Europe most mtDNA mid eastern farmers brought was T, X, K, J orignalley i think Europe was just U, H, and HV but i may be wrong they might find a T or K in pre Neolithic European remains




so lets say most mtDNA and Y DNA haplogroups in europe arrived in the Neolithic age but still Europeans ancestry is from Paleolithic Europeans modern Europeans have a unique austomnal DNA type some tests call it north European other Atlantic Baltic because it is mainly in those areas but since Europeans are dominated by a austomnal DNA type that originated in Europe almost definitely in the Paleolithic age that means most of Europeans ancestry are the so called Cro Magnon or people that arrived over 30,000ybp


and when people say well none of the 31 Neolithic European Y DNA samples had R1a or R1b and 50% of modern Europeans have them this does not mean Europeans did not arrive in Europe till 5,000ybp because Y DNA and mtDNA are just direct lineages there are black people with European Y DNA but they are only about 5% European this is because their great great great great grandfather was European so it does not tell your full ancestry the Indo Europeans brought R1a and R1b to Europe 6,000-4,000ybp in June 2013 they released some DNA information from 6,000 and 5,000 year old remains from some of the very first Indo European cultures in the Pontic Steppes they said there is no doubt they where a European population they had all of the some light skin genes that dominate Europeans today and they also said they had mainly brown eyes and 4,000 and 3,8000 year old DNA from Indo Iranian Indo Europeans in south Siberia and west china they spread the Indo European language in asia they also had the same white skin genes as modern Europeans and had mainly light eyes and hair and some even had red hair. what i am trying to say is the Indo Europeans that spread the language in Europe and Asia where ethnically European just like the European people they conquered so even before R1a and R1b where popular in Europe the people where already Europeans and the main ancestors of modern ones


Also austomnal DNA from 7,000 year old late Mesolithic hunter gather in Spain with mtDNA U5b had more north European than most modern Europeans and the only true Mesolithic Europeans left are Finnish and Sami people in Scandinavia they have almost only north European globe13 austomnal DNA and the speak a uralic language which according to Maciamo migration map arrived in Scandinavia from north east Asia about 7,000-8,000ybp and since Sami have about 50% mtDNA V and 50% mtDNA U5b and they have unique subclades which are about 8,000 years old this means Sami, Finnish, and all Scandinavians come from Mesolithic hunter gathers who came there at least 10,000ybp since they where already spread out 8,000ybp and Sami and Finnish people's ancestors where not affected by the Neolithic age like other Europeans that is why they have almost no none European austomnal DNA so they are really the last living Mesolithic Europeans and they are the closet modern relatives to Genomes of the Mesolithic hunter gather in Spain and two 5,000 year old hunter gathers from Sweden and they don't look any different from the rest of Europe they actually are paler and have light hair and eyes than any other people in Europe so the European ethnicity is not defined by mtDNA H and did not arrive in the Neolithic age the part of Europeans blood that makes them European arrived in Europe at least 35,000ybp-50,000ybp most of Europeans mtDNA any ways traces back to ancestors that arrived over 35,000ybp


the latest mtDNA haplogroup to arrive in Europe was H and it came 33,000-36,000ybp but mtDNA U5 arrived 50,000-60,000ybp


Here are some resources i used
http://www.genebase.com/doc/mtdnaHap...bution_Map.pdf


http://www.eupedia.com/europe/europe...requency.shtml


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beaker_...cientdna.shtml


http://www.plosone.org/article/info:...l.pone.0002700


http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0715204741.htm


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_DNA-tested_mummies


https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=...pOKphS2kkGf_vA


http://forwhattheywereweare.blogspot...of-europe.html

[Fire Haired]

I my own opinion i think almost all mtDNA H in western Europe was already there 10,000-15,000ybp but i dont know about eastern Europe i also think that it is impossible for Bell Beaker to have spread mtDNA and there is no good evidence for it

i also defintley think people come to quick conclusions and to many are taking it as a fact that mtDNA H in Europe was spread in the Neolithic age and their only argument is the few pre Neolithic mtDNA samples we have and most come from central and northern europe

and if you are reading this Maciamo since u are the leader of this website i think u need to really investigate where mtDNA H in Europe comes from and not go for quick conclusions that all of it spread in the Neolithic age because obviously alot did not

[zanipolo]

I have noticed people in this website assume that mtDNA H was not popular in Europe till the Neolithic age and it was spread by mid eastern farmers and Bell Beaker culture I have read news articles that don't even consider H was in Europe before the Neolithic age to many people assume mtDNA H spread in Europe during the Neolithic and did not exist before that

So, these are arguments I have created that argue against the so strongly believed theory that mtDNA H spread in Europe during the Neolithic age


I want to know what peoples think about this so please vote on the poll and post your opinion

The main mtDNA H subclades in Europe are rarly found in the middle east
mtDNA H1 and H3 takes up about 30-75% of the H subclades in central, western, and northern Europe and are also the most popular H subclades in all of Europe they take up about 10-30% of their total mtDNA in central, western, and northern Europe in the Middle east mtDNA H1 and H3 only take up about 5-10% of their H subclades and take up usulley less than 1-5% of their total mtDNA subclades and almost all experts believe both mtDNA H1 and H3 originated in northern Spain about 15,000ybp and spread across Europe 10,000-15,000ybp they call it the Iberian refuge http://genome.cshlp.org/content/15/1/19.full
so that means mtDNA H1 and H3 where already 10-30% or more in central and western Europe before the Neolithic age and there is no way they came from middle eastern farmers and they expanded during the Mesolithic age 10,000-15,000ybp not the Neolithic 6,000-10,000ybp

also mtDNA H6 which takes up 5-40% of mtDNA in volga Russia and far eastern Europe it also is believed to have originated in Europe about 15,000-20,000ybp and a 15,000 year old remain in northern Spain had H6 and mtDNA H6 is actually very spread out in all of Europe and also found in the middle east it is probably one of the oldest H subclades

mtDNA H5 and H13 are about 10% of H subclades in the middle east but they are very very very rarely ever found in central, western, northern Europe at the most they reach 3% of the mtDNA H subclades they are commonly found though in north Italy and eastern Europe they usulley hit about 5-15% of H subclades in eastern Europe sometimes more popular than in the middle east but in some areas they are less than 1% of the H subclades.

there are many H subclades found in Europe and the middle east but i could not find any information of where they originated or how old they are so right now i cant say which mtDNA H subclades in Europe are from the middle east but in general most Europeans have mtDNA H subclades did not come from middle eastern farmers.

and if there is any one with information out there on where H13, H5, H7, H9, H15, H16, H18, H11, H10, H20, H21, H4 originated that would be extremely helpful

There is not enough investigation on Pre Historic European mtDNA samples and people only mention the ones that did not have alot of H

I have already made a article which explains that mtDNA H was 41.52% from from 236 mtDNA samples in Iberia from 7,000- 4,340ybp http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads...indo-europeans
and in the same article i showed that mtDNA H was 46.6% from 14 mtDNA sample from pre Neolithic Iberian s 20,000-7,500ybp from 3 mtDNA 15,000 year old mtDNA samples in northern spain 2 had mtDNA H one had H6 from 9 mtDNA 9,500-7,500 year old samples in Portugal 5 out of 9 had mtDNA H two had H1b which i said before originated in Iberia

also the oldest mtDNA samples in Iberia from 20,000-18,000years ago one had for sure U and for the other all they know is it was in the RO family mtDNA RO is the grandmother of H today it is almost only found in Arabia and it is about 50,000 years old and probably never migrated to Europe but its daughter mtDNA HV did and so did H so this sample most likely had either mtDNA HV or H

and mtDNA H1 and H3 are the most popular H subclades in Europe and northwest Africa they all come from a huge migration that started in north Spain about 15,000ybp also mtDNA V and some U5b subclades also migrated with that group from northern Spain. from 22 mtDNA samples that are dated as 12,000 years old in Morocco which is far northwest North Africa H/V/U=12, H=4, H/V=3, V=2
mtDNA V is only 15,000 years old and originated in northern Spain it is apart of that group that migrated across Europe and north west Africa 10,000-15,000ybp so these are remains of the ones that went to north Africa so really we have mtDNA samples from Mesolithic Spaniards who immigrated to north Africa only one had the possibility of being mtDNA U which is strange compared to other Mesolithic mtDNA samples all of them had the possibility of being H or V four where for sure H and two where for sure V i am guessing the rest where H but who knows i think this and the other Mesolithic and Paleolithic Iberian remains are good evidence that mtDNA H was dominant in Iberia at least 15,000ybp and the fact that about 30-50% of Iberian mtDNA are H1 and H3 which originated in Iberia about 15,000ybp

I also made a thread http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads...NA-from-German
which shows that from 86 mtDNA samples all came from Germany except two came from Denmark from 6,625- 4,025 ybp 40.7% had mtDNA H just like modern Europeans and H1 and H3 where th main subclades even though most where not well enough preserved to show subclades this means even back then most of central European mtDNA H was H1 and H3 like today and originated in Spain 15,000ybp

also the pre Bell Beaker Germany remains also had mainly mtDNA H and the same subclades so that mean Bell Beaker probably did not spread mtDNA H in central Europe and there is no way they spread it to Scandinavia, Britain, or any where east of Germany because Bell Beaker culture never expanded there so i think Bell Beaker is not the reason mtDNA H is so popular in Europe

Also only about 24% of the small sample size of 29 5,000 year old mtDNA samples from Trellis southwestern France had mtDNA H but all had European H1 and H3 which take up 20-30% of mtDNA in that area today.

It is impossible for Bell Beaker to Have spread mtDNA H
I have heard many people say Bell Beaker spread mtDNA H in Europe but to me that sound impossible sure Bell Beaker probably started in Iberia where mtDNA H has been popular for 15,000 years and their culture spread across all of western Europe between just 4,800-3,800ybp there are no real signs Bell Beaker spread their culture from Spain by conquering western Europe all they did was spread a culture and bell beaker culture is identified only by a type of pottery style that is all it may have not even been a culture just a type of pottery that spread but lets say it was a culture that started in Spain and conquered most of western Europe when people conquer the native women are not killed off the native men are mainly because they are the ones that fight in the war the invading army replaces the old Y DNA not mtDNA so the Bell Beaker would have done something from what we know no people group has done in history and Internationally only kill off the women and also Bell Beaker never expanded to Scandinavia or east of Germany but in those areas mtDNA H is still 40% so Bell Beaker is not a good explination and H1 and H3 are still the most popular mtDNA H subclades in areas bell Beaker never spread so to me the Bell Beaker argument does not have good evidence just assumptions
and Bell Beaker was actulley conquered by proto Germanic speakers and proto Italoi Celtic it is explained in this link https://www.google.com/url? sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0 CC8QFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.eupedia.com%2Feurope %2FHaplogroup_R1b_Y-DNA.shtml&ei=We3IUYTMFeGqyAHts4GAAQ&usg=AFQjCNHXsH j4Btu0ZPVHyQKiyCoKbeHnKw

Europeans have Different mtDNA H subclades from each other

eastern Europe has very diffenrt mtDNA H subclades than western Europe in eastern Europe H13 and H5 are very popular but they are almost never found in western Europe in western Europe H1 and H3 are very popular but not nearly as popular as in eastern Europe it is true most of Europe has 40% mtDNA H but different regions have different subclades which means it did not spread in the same event and that it is just luck most of Europe turned out to have 40% mtDNA H eastern Europe has many similar subclades as the middle east which could mean its spread in the Neolithic age but western, central, and northern Europe do not so obviously mtDNA H was spread in western, central, and northern Europe from the same event probably Iberian refuge 10,000-15,000ybp but mtDNA H is eastern Europe had to of been spread by a different even they do have some H1 and H3 which means they got some b fro Iberian refuge but since they has many similar subclades to mid easterns it probably spread from the middle east. but mtDNA H1 and H3 are still the most popular mtDNA H subclades in all of Europe which probably means the Iberian refuge made a huge impact on European mtDNA

so basically what i am trying to say is people do not investigate the origin of mtDNA H in europe enough they just assume it came from the Neolithic age based in the few mtDNA samples we have of pre Neolithic Europe and people do not look at subclades i think the origin of mtDNA H in Europe mostly comes from the Iberian refuge and Mesolithic Europe 10,000-15,000ybp some does come from the Neolithic age but most does not and people only mention the few Neolithic cultures like LBK that did not have 40% mtDNA H but most did which people don't mention

also another big thing is a 28,000 year old mtDNA sample from south tip Italy had H so it probably first arrived in Europe 33,000-36,000ybp since that is probably how long it would take cavemen to unintentionally migrated to south tip of Italy from Iraq


so maybe most mtDNA and Y DNA haplogroups in europe arrived in the Neolithic age but still Europeans ancestry is from Paleolithic Europeans have a unique austomnal DNA type some tests call it north European other Atlantic Baltic because it is mainly in those areas but since Europeans are dominated by a austomnal DNA type that originated in Europe almost definally in the Paleolithic age that means most of Europeans ancestry are the so called Cro Magnon or people that arrived over 30,000ybp

Also austomnal DNA from 7,000 year old late Mesolithic hunter gather in Spain with mtDNA U5b had more north European than most modern Europeans and the only true Mesolithic Europeans left are Finnish and Sami people in Scandinavia they have almost only north European globe13 austomnal DNA and the speak a uralic language which according to Maciamo migration map arrived in Scandinavia from north east Asia about 7,000-8,000ybp and since Sami have about 50% mtDNA V and 50% mtDNA U5b and they have unique subclades which are about 8,000 years old this means Sami, Finnish, and all Scandinavians come from Mesolithic hunter gathers who came there at least 10,000ybp since they where already spread out 8,000ybp and Sami and Finnish people's ancestors where not affected by the Neolithic age like other Europeans that is why they have almost no none European austomnal DNA so they are really the last living Mesolithic Europeans and they are the closet modern relatives to Genomes of the Mesolithic hunter gather in Spain and two 5,000 year old hunter gathers from Sweden and they don't look any different from the rest of Europe they actually are paler and have light hair and eyes than any other people in Europe so the European ethnicity is not defined by mtDNA H and did not arrive in the Neolithic age the part of Europeans blood that makes them European arrived in Europe at least 35,000ybp-50,000ybp most of Europeans mtDNA any ways traces back to ancestors that arrived over 35,000ybp

the latest mtDNA haplogroup to arrive in Europe was H and it came 33,000-36,000ybp but mtDNA U5 arrived 50,000-60,000ybp

Here are some resources i used
http://www.genebase.com/doc/mtdnaHap...bution_Map.pdf

http://www.eupedia.com/europe/europe...requency.shtml

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beaker_culturehttp://www.buildinghistory.org/dista...cientdna.shtml

http://www.plosone.org/article/info:...l.pone.0002700

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0715204741.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_DNA-tested_mummies

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=...pOKphS2kkGf_vA

what about these ancient mtdna actual finds

http://forwhattheywereweare.blogspot...of-europe.html

[Fire Haired]

what about these ancient mtdna actual finds

http://forwhattheywereweare.blogspot...of-europe.html

thank u for the information i had no idea that the 18,000-20,000 year old mtDNA sample in southern Spain had the R* CRS muation which is uslley reported as H so in my opinon that means it had H and also a 26,000 year old mtDNA sample from wales all they could find is it had the R*CRS muation which means it also probably had H

these are huge finds and if they do more tests and confirm they are H that would really mean mtDNA H was in Europe in teh Paloithic age well we already have that 28,000 year old mtDNA sample from south tip Italy that had H but this would mean we have 3 H samples in europe from over 20,000 years ago and at every corner of western europe even wales this probably means it arrive dine urope well over 33,000ybp i would guess over 36,000ybp and mtDNA H is actulley probably over 40,000 years old.

i hope they get alot more mtDNA, Y DNA, and austomnal DNA from Mesolithic and paleolithic people from all over the world it would solve so many mysterious and lets say they get over 10o or over 200 mtDNA samples from Europe that are 10,000-15,000 years old i bet they will have 25-45% mtDNA H mainly H1 and H3

[Maciamo]

In my opinion, mt-haplogroup H was present in Europe and in the Middle East during the late Palaeolithic. Some subclades developed in Europe (probably H1 and H3, for example), while others came from the Middle East during the Neolithic, Chalcolithic and Bronze Age (through the Pontic Steppes for the latter).

[polako]

Both mtDNA H and R1b are of post-Ice Age (ie. Neolithic) origin in Western Europe.

They have to be, because Western Europeans are more Middle Eastern in terms of genome-wide genetic ancestry than the populations of the East European Plain, by a wide margin.

Plenty of studies show this clearly, and you can work it out yourself by running a very simple MDS test of Middle Eastern and European samples using something like PLINK. This will produce a cline running from Arabia to the East Baltic, and Western Europeans will be closer to Arabia than Eastern Europeans.

[kamani]

They have to be, because Western Europeans are more Middle Eastern in terms of genome-wide genetic ancestry than the populations of the East European Plain, by a wide margin.

That is mainly due to the Mediteranean component, present everywhere in Western Europe. Eastern Europe on the other hand has more East-Asian component, due to mixing with mongoloid genes. This is more visible in Russia and Finland however.

[Fire Haired]

In my opinion, mt-haplogroup H was present in Europe and in the Middle East during the late Palaeolithic. Some subclades developed in Europe (probably H1 and H3, for example), while others came from the Middle East during the Neolithic, Chalcolithic and Bronze Age (through the Pontic Steppes for the latter).

mtDNA H is alot older than what they age it for it was already in Russia and southern Italy over 25,000ybp and it originated in the mid east i was shocked that out of a total of 19 mtDNA that had a for sure haplogroup from Paleolithic Europe four where for sure had H and the 25,000 year old one from Russia had a subclade same with the 15,000 year old one in Spain the one in Spain had H6 which is usulley in far eastern europe in my opinon mtDNA H is 40,000-45,000 years old and probably came to Europe around 35,000 years ago

I think there needs to be more study on mtDNA H in Europeans, middle easterns, and north africans i know that mtDNA H1 is the most popular subcalde in Europe and it was born in spain in the paloithci 15,000-20,000ybp so it did no come with mid eastern farmers i know H6 originated in Europe and i have heard H13 originated in the middle east i wish i could find a way to figure out what percentages of European H originated in Europe then get the percentages i am sure it will be over 20% most of H in Europe was probably there before the Neolithic age in north africa i think most H also is H1 which means it came from the iberian refuge 15,000-20,000ybp i don't know about the middle east i think they have subclades from the mid east

if we can find all the mtDNA that originated in Europe it can give an idea of how europe was settled before the neolithic age U later U5 and other U subclades probably came first 50,000-60,000ybp then HV and H probably came next 35,000-40,000ybp i don't know if there are any other haplogroups europe would have had

and also everyone in europe is related they all come from one big family in austomnal DNA they call it north european or atlantic baltic but either way Europeans have a unique group that originated in europe the pale skin genes they know of originated in the mid east probably 60,000ybp because mid easterns have the same genes at almost the same rate but Europeans became dominated by the genes the genes for blue eyes also originated in the mid east but it became very popular in Europe blonde hair red hair originated in europe and unlike other people like Indians and Iraqis who are a mix of different families that lived in that area europe was founded by one family

when was this family founded when did it split from middle eastern DNA families i think it was the first migration that made this family with the European austomnal groups then later they inter married with mtDNA H maybe they can give age estimates for austomnal groups

[Fire Haired]

Both mtDNA H and R1b are of post-Ice Age (ie. Neolithic) origin in Western Europe.

They have to be, because Western Europeans are more Middle Eastern in terms of genome-wide genetic ancestry than the populations of the East European Plain, by a wide margin.

Plenty of studies show this clearly, and you can work it out yourself by running a very simple MDS test of Middle Eastern and European samples using something like PLINK. This will produce a cline running from Arabia to the East Baltic, and Western Europeans will be closer to Arabia than Eastern Europeans.

H is not Neloithci becaue we have a two 25,000 year old H17/H27 in European Russia one H sample in southern Italy from 28,000ybp two H samples from northern Sapin from 15,000ybp one even had the H6 subclade and one probably H in Wales from 26,000-33,000ybp and H1 and H3 orignated in SPain 15,000-20,000ybp and their teh most popular subclades of H in Europe probably most of H was already in Europe before teh neloithci age and it decended from H that arrived in Europe about 35,000ybp

y DNA R1b in western Europe did come in Neolithic age but it is not from mid eastern farmers it is from Indo Europeans who came from around Russia and Ukraine that is the reason why R1b in europe breaks down into languages R1b S116 is Italo Celtic R1b U106 is Germanic and Spain has the celtic gaulic version because celts wet to spain also red hair in western europe was spread by R1b Indo Europeans

just saying people exagrete teh absence of mtDNA H in pre neloithci europeans it ws there 33% of paloithci european mtDNA was H it was in russia and southern italy over 25,000ybp and it already had a subclade and most of H in europe is native to Europe all the evidence says the Neolithic is not why H is so popular in europe but people with that opinon are to stubborn to admit it and ignore the DNA we have and they spread false new on the media like bbc does that soemhow there was a genetic turnover in Europe and modern Europeans ar from Neolithic mid estern how does that make any sense and we have austomnal DNA from a Mesolithic European and he had more European blood than almost any modern Europeans and a haplogroup does not define a family group like europeans

when they say pre Neolithic Europeans where almost only U i actuality checked myself it was hunter gathers in Europe 6,000-5,000ybp they where dominated by U and most of the remains came from teh same area of northern europe so that is not reliable to represent all Europeans before farming and like i said we have 2 H samples in europe from over 25,000ybp

[ElHorsto]

Both mtDNA H and R1b are of post-Ice Age (ie. Neolithic) origin in Western Europe.

They have to be, because Western Europeans are more Middle Eastern in terms of genome-wide genetic ancestry than the populations of the East European Plain, by a wide margin.

Plenty of studies show this clearly, and you can work it out yourself by running a very simple MDS test of Middle Eastern and European samples using something like PLINK. This will produce a cline running from Arabia to the East Baltic, and Western Europeans will be closer to Arabia than Eastern Europeans.

I agree about Arabia (SW-Asian) and West Europe but I'm confused: Don't you consider West-Asian to be "Middle Eastern" as well? I'm asking because Eastern Europe is more West-Asian instead SW-Asian, but that's still Middle Eastern imho (Caucasus, Anatolia, Levant,...).

(welcome to the forum polako, I personally look forward to your contributions.)

[ElHorsto]

That is mainly due to the Mediteranean component, present everywhere in Western Europe. Eastern Europe on the other hand has more East-Asian component, due to mixing with mongoloid genes. This is more visible in Russia and Finland however.

This little bit is not really comparable to the med. admixture in NW-Europe.

[Wilhelm]

The mtDNA H theory being neolithic is outdated, when we have already mtDNA H samples from Paleolithic Iberia. And this time there is no confusion, they are clearly H6 and H

[Fire Haired]

i know and like i said in this thread a for sure H sample in southern Italy from 28,000ybp and it was not contamination because they checked all the people that had any type of history or contact with it and none of them matched and two for sure H17 or H27 samples in European Russia from 25,000ybp and likley H samples in Wales from 26,000-33,000ybp and southern Spain from 18,000-20,000ybp

and the most popular H subclades in Europe are H1 and H3 and they both orignated in Europe H1b was found in 9,500-7,5000ybp in Portugal so H has probably been in europe for 35,000 years but how do we know if the H europe has today is from Paloithci H i know alot is but maybe most of H in europe is Neolithic that is why i wanted to know where all of those subclades came from i think most H in europe is decended from H that came there 35,000ybp

and i have only been looking at ancient DNA for a few months i dont know how long u have but i though the theory H in europe is neloithci was a new theory because i have seen articles on the news that say it is a fact modern european H came in Neloithci and modern europeans ancestors where mid eastern farmers who 6,000ybp but teh natives toe xtinction that souded crazy to me because europeans are white mid easterns are brown and I already know there was H in Paloithci and MEsloithci europe and because europe has its own unque austomnal DNA and Y DNa haplogroups that are not found in teh mid east and europe has so many features no one else has liek red hair that would take thousends of years to devlope and not everyon in Europe became a farmer liek northern scandviens so i think that theory is honestly RACIEST and a attack against European people

some with theories that teh genes that create white skin in europens are less than 20,000 years old because many mid easterns and north Africans have teh exact same genes some even have white skin and when a European person have a kid with a chinese or africa the SLC4a2 rs14554 alleles switch from European pale skin A,A to A,G but mid eastern and north Africans have about 60% European A,A that means it is not from inter marraige and for some reason all the European white skin genes are just about as popular in the mid east and northa frica this means they are not european they originated in the mid east probably 60,000ybp so the first Europeans would have already had white skin genes

and they say blue eyes are only 6,000-10,000 years old and like with white skin genes blue eye gens are also found in mid eastern and north Africans Europeans have the younger version of blue eye genes mid easterns and north Africans have the ancestral genes blue eyes are extremely rare in north Africans and mid eastern but they do have some and it is not from European inter marriage except kalsh people have the younger versions like Europeans and this study i saw had no idea kalsh are partially descended of European Indo Europeans who migrated to asia about 5,000ybp the tarium mummies are apart of that migration and the sythiens so these results sound legit to me so the first Europeans also would have had some blue eyes so just saying don't trust the people who say that stuff

[Knovas]

That is mainly due to the Mediteranean component, present everywhere in Western Europe. Eastern Europe on the other hand has more East-Asian component, due to mixing with mongoloid genes. This is more visible in Russia and Finland however.

I see the main idea. It rather seems the other way around: the Middle East is more Mediterranean-like, and that's what produces the effect. If there's a difference between Med and SW Asian, is simply because SW Asian represents Mediterranean alleles + something else.

On the other hand, Siberian admixture is not that significant in most parts of Eastern Europe. The Finns cannot be considered part of it, since they are an isolated population. Russians...yeah right, the closer to the Urals, the more Siberian genes we find (not to mention Russian territories in Asia), but certainly depends on the region ¿How about near Latvia or Estonia?. Concerning the rest of Eastern Europe, if there's 1-2% Siberian, doesn't worth much to comment.

The mtDNA H theory being neolithic is outdated, when we have already mtDNA H samples from Paleolithic Iberia. And this time there is no confusion, they are clearly H6 and H

The authors confirm the results for both samples, so until there's evidence showing the opposite, the info is correct.

[Fire Haired]

in globe13 austomnal DNA europe has the most meditreaen a average of about 30-40% and southern europe only has about 6% more than most of europe and only spain has about 50-60% basque have 59% and otzie the iceman a farmer in alps italy from 5,300ybp in globde13 had 59.5% med and a farmer from swedan from 5,000ybp had 64.5% med but mesloithci hunter gather in spain from 7,000ybp had 71.9% north european and 24.8% med and hunter gathers in swedan from 5,000ybp had 79.1% north european and 85.8% north european and 10.3 and 5.8% med so the Mediterranean in Europe probably came from Neolithic farmers but and north european is from the Mesolithic and paloithci hunter gathers but they may have orignalley had some medutreaen but the thing is that med is centered in iberia and is more popular in europe than the mid east and north africa but these farmers had Y DNA G2a which orignated in iran or northern Anatolian and those areas have less than 40% med then where the heck did Europe get the Mediterranean from also otzi had 15.9% southwest asian while most of europe has less than 2% and the farmer in swedan had 7.6% southwest asian otzi also had alittle west asian but the hunter gathers had no southwest asian or west Asian this means the farmers are connected to the middle east they had more southwest asian which is surprising because that group is mainly round arabia and isreal not where G2a is found

[Wilhelm]

Like I said in the other thread...Mediterranean, or part of it, in Europe is at least Mesolithic, not neolithic farmers...as La Braña shows this Med levels depending on the Calculator :

globe13 : 24.8%
harrappaWorld : 27.42%
MLDP5 : 44.14%
K12b (Atlanto-Med) : 45%


In my opinion, the Neolithic farmers are responsible for the Southwest-Asian and West-Asian components, but not mediterranean, which is much older in Europe.

[Knovas]

Minor components, especially those below 10%, aren't informative at all considering the low number of markers available. 25% Mediterranean it's at least a generous figure, and goes quite according to the argument that the component could be restricted to some parts of Southern Europe long before the Neolithic. Not necessarily arose in Iberia, maybe it was originally from the Southern Alpine region and reached Iberia after some time. Curious that Sardinia (half way more or less) has the highest known Med percent, and that the isolated samples from the Friulli region seem to posses even more.

We already talked about this in the other thread, and there are many problems to explain its supposed Middle Eastern/Neolithic origin. Well, at some point, all Europeans have ancestors who lived in the Middle East, but my point is that this Med people left the area long before than what some people think.

PD: By the way, correct me if I'm wrong, but you Fire Haired seem to link MtDNA H with North European, when it's obviously linked to Mediterranean. That is important, because it completely destroys your theory considering you admit H is Paleolithic.

[Fire Haired]

Knovas and Wilhelm there is not enough austomnal DNA to make any conclusions if we had 40 austomnal DNA from every region of Europe in the Mesolithic age then we can make conclusions but right now we cant

i think there is a possibility med was in Europe in paleolithic but iut seems originality europe was all north european or Atlantic baltic and in K12b austomnal DNA most of northern Europe has 40% Atlantic med like La brana different austomanl tests have different percentages of med in some tests med will be 40% in British but 15% in another test so u cant use the same tests the same way u have to see what modern people have La Brana defintley had some meditreaen but that is probably because there where already many farmer culture in europe and spain 7,000ybp tha lived right next to him it was probably inter marraige and even if it was ine urope in mesloithci it was from non european inter marraige and the reason modern iberians and Europeans have it is they are a result of farmer and hunter gather inter marraige and La brana was the begging of that

also Knovas we dont have enough DNA to say what haplogroups group with what autsomnal DNA i don't think there is evidence H is connected with Mediterranean because we have for a fact 3 mtDNA H samples in Europe that are over two 25,000 years old H17/27 in russia from 25,000ybp and H in southern italy from 28,000ybp this is before med would have ever been in Europe or maybe even before med and north european austomnal DNA was born

and maybe med got to europe 10,000ybp but mtDNA H1 and H3 the most popular subclades in europe are 15,000-20,000ybp and came from spain and i dont think there is a pattern with people in europe who have alot of H and also have alot of med so i dont think there is any evidence and we cant make any conclusions on when med got to europe because we don't have austomnal DNA from any one in europe from before 7,000ybp and since the farmers where over overwhelmingly med that means they definally brought most of it to europe and i bet if they made globe13 med maps in europe areas that got farming late will have very little med that is why finnish have less than 2%

Iberia at 50-60% has teh higest which means they probably have the highest amount of neloithic blood the rest of southern europe has second highest at about 40% but they prpbably oirgnalley had as mouch or more than spain but latter in greco roman times they inter married with mid easterns that is why they have 20-25% west asian and 15-20% southwest asian while ibera has 5% west asian 5% southwest asian

the reason why central and western Europe might have only 30-40% med is indo European R1b migrations they have 6,000 year old early indo european dna in steppes with some austomanl DNA but they have not published yet these are just guess i am probably wrong

[Knovas]

also Knovas we dont have enough DNA to say what haplogroups group with what autsomnal DNA i don't think there is evidence H is connected with Mediterranean

There's, indeed, a suitable piece of evidence when one checks the Mediterranean percents starting from Scandinavia (not less than 25%), then going down to Germany (30%), France (40%), Iberia (50%), and ending in North Africa (40%), where there's very little North European and virtually absent among Berbers (Pre-Arab ethnic group).

If those populations have something in common, that is definetely MtDNA H. So I'm afraid the answer seems pretty clear.

[Wilhelm]

i dont think there is any evidence and we cant make any conclusions on when med got to europe because we don't have austomnal DNA from any one in europe from before 7,000ybp and and i bet if they made globe13 med maps in europe areas that got farming late will have very little med that is why finnish have less than 2%

Yes there is evidence. Since North-African share with Europeans the mtDNA H1 and H3, and the only autosomal component that North-Africa share with rest of Europe, in a high degree, is Mediterranean component. They don't have Northern-European component.

since the farmers where over overwhelmingly med that means they definally brought most of it to europe

The farmer Gok4 didn't come directly from Middle-East to Sweden, we don't know, so his ancestors probably came from other parts of Europe, specially from Iberia, since he seems to plot in Southwestern-Europe on PCA.

Iberia at 50-60% has teh higest which means they probably have the highest amount of neloithic blood the rest of southern europe has second highest at about 40% but they prpbably oirgnalley had as mouch or more than spain but latter in greco roman times they inter married with mid easterns that is why they have 20-25% west asian and 15-20% southwest asian while ibera has 5% west asian 5% southwest asian

Wrong. Iberia has actually the least Neolithic of all Southern-Europe..how do I know that, because on PCA plots, when running a linear axis PCA from Middle-East to Baltic, the Iberians are between NW Europeans and North-Italians.

[Fire Haired]

There's, indeed, a suitable piece of evidence when one checks the Mediterranean percents starting from Scandinavia (not less than 25%), then going down to Germany (30%), France (40%), Iberia (50%), and ending in North Africa (40%), where there's very little North European and virtually absent among Berbers (Pre-Arab ethnic group).

If those populations have something in common, that is definetely MtDNA H. So I'm afraid the answer seems pretty clear.

scandnaviens have just about as much mtDNA H1 and H3 as spainhttp://www.eupedia.com/europe/europe...requency.shtml

they have the second highest amount in Europe but they have only about 25% globe13 med and north Africans have alot of H1 and H3 because of the Iberian refuge which spread H1,H3, V, and U5b1 across europe and north africahttp://www.plosone.org/article/info:...l.pone.0013378 http://genome.cshlp.org/content/15/1/19.full and it is northwest africans not people like egyptiens and northwest africans actulley do have a signifcant amopunt of north european in globe13 https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/...tUE9kaUE#gid=0

they have about 6% that is more than anywhere outside of Europe and groups where there is recorded contact with european people in every type of austomnal dna test they show Atlantic Baltic or north europeanhttps://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/...QblVRR2c#gid=0 which they probably got from the Iberian refuge it would have been LA Brana's people who migrated to north Africa and they also got some from recent inter marriage with Spanish and Portuguese

so your argument about them not having north european is wrong they have high amounts compared to other non europeans and since the only austomnal type to originate in europe they call it north European or Atlantic baltic so over 10,000ybp pretty much everyone in europe had north european and mtDNA H1 and H3 which take up 30-50% in Iberia and the most popular subclades in europe where born in iberia 15,000-20,000ybp before med ever got to europe and we have three H samples in europe from over 25,000 years ago in russia and italy so H probably arrived in europe well over 30,000ybp and most H in europe today almost defintley descends from the first H in europe so i still dont think there is strong evidence connecting mtDNA H to med but i might be wrong i want to hear more of ur arguments

since there was some med in hunter gathers in swedan from 5,000ybp and they did have some contact with farmers the 5,000 year old farmer in the same area of swedan had 64% med in globe13 but maybe that is evidence med has been in europe for at least since like 15,000 and LA brana had 24% which is lower than most of europe and alot less than modern iberian and he did have contact with farmers but guess that is evdence top

[Fire Haired]

Wrong. Iberia has actually the least Neolithic of all Southern-Europe..how do I know that, because on PCA plots, when running a linear axis PCA from Middle-East to Baltic, the Iberians are between NW Europeans and North-Italians.

yes iberia has very little west asian and southwest asian and mid eastern blood period they have about as much as most of europe but they still have the most med which was the dominate group in all types of austomnal DNA tests of neloithci farmers in europe so i still think iberians have alot of blood from those farmers we dont know exactley where those farmers came from there defintley was some west asian and southwest asian in th,e otzi in globe13 had 15% southwest asian only italy,greec,yugoslvai, and soith east europe has that much today so there was something mid eastern about them but what is wierd is they had so much med when today there is no place where med is completly dominte we know these farmers did not come from europe because their Y DNA was G2a which is from north antolia, caucus, and northenr iran but those areas have less med than europe it is a mystery i think austomnal DNA percentages are not exact according to them most people in europe are less than 50% european these austomnal tests are alot more complicated i think the best thing is look at a bunch of difernt types of tests those farmers like otzie who had over 50% med almost defintley did not orignate from europe r

[ElHorsto]

yes iberia has very little west asian and southwest asian and mid eastern blood period they have about as much as most of europe but they still have the most med which was the dominate group in all types of austomnal DNA tests of neloithci farmers in europe so i still think iberians have alot of blood from those farmers we dont know exactley where those farmers came from there defintley was some west asian and southwest asian in th,e otzi in globe13 had 15% southwest asian only italy,greec,yugoslvai, and soith east europe has that much today so there was something mid eastern about them but what is wierd is they had so much med when today there is no place where med is completly dominte we know these farmers did not come from europe because their Y DNA was G2a which is from north antolia, caucus, and northenr iran but those areas have less med than europe it is a mystery i think austomnal DNA percentages are not exact according to them most people in europe are less than 50% european these austomnal tests are alot more complicated i think the best thing is look at a bunch of difernt types of tests those farmers like otzie who had over 50% med almost defintley did not orignate from europe r

You certainly know this already, then please don't mind, but I think in general a reminder is necessary from time-to-time (hoping I do not sound too teacher-like):

Haplogroups represent selected deep ancestry whereas autosomals represent the complete ancestry. It means that HG G from Ötzi could well represent a much much older "root" ancestry in Caucasus or wherever, whereas his autosomals surely represents all later migrations and admixtures from Ötzi's other ancestors until his birth. So HG G could be trace of the early but watered-down West-Asian component in Ötzi. Sardinians also have some G today and some West-Asian remnant, similar to Ötzi. It should be clear that a HG shows only one of several thousands of ancestry lines. Basically the more time passes the more become HGs and autosomals uncorrelated, they eventually become completely unrelated. A correlation can exist only within a limited time window.

[Wilhelm]

scandnaviens have just about as much mtDNA H1 and H3 as spainhttp://www.eupedia.com/europe/europe...requency.shtml

Those figures seem to be wrong.. here is from an actual study :

still have the most med which was the dominate group in all types of austomnal DNA tests of neloithci farmers in europe so i still think iberians have alot of blood from those farmers we dont know exactley where those farmers came from there defintley was some west asian and southwest asian in th,e otzi in globe13 had 15%

What are you talking about...Otzi was not a Neolithic farmer, he was from the Calcholitic era. And he was Sardinian-like genetically. Gok4 is the one neolithic famer, and she is mostly Atlanto-Med which means she already has a lot of Northern-Euro in her, meaning her ancestors were already living in Europe before the Neolithic.

[Knovas]

Fire Haired, you only see what you want to see, and you only read what you want to read:

- First of all, you say Scandinavians have "only" 25% Med, when the incredibly North Euro-like Moroccans you checked are ONLY 6.5% North European. ¿How do both things match? LOL.

- Second, North Africans don't have more North European than any other population outside of Europe: Selkup (35%), Ket (27.7%) Jatt (18.4%), Uzbeks (16.3%), Dolgan (13.1%)...and so on.

- I specially mentioned Berbers, since they are Pre-Arab, and they also did not mate with Vandals and other similar people who probably brought minor North European component. Check the Mozabite samples and you'll see they are 0% North European in globe13.

- Take the North African samples as whole, and you'll see how low is the average North European: Mozabite (0%), Behar Moroccans (2.3%), Algerian (5.8%) and Dodecad Moroccans (6.5%) = 3.65% average.

- Of course, I am not taking into account Morocco Jews (8.9%), since Jews are always outliers compared to their host populations. However, they also probably spread some North Euro as well among the main North African population, but not in more isolated regions where Berber tribes lived.


So H was definetely responsible of the Mediterranean admixture in North Africa, since North European is rather the product of the overlap between some allele frequencies, or the result of minor migrations as I said. Completely irrelevant.


Edited:

At lower K's when the Atlantic-Baltic component is present, the program simply searches the most likely fit taking the available clusters as reference (No Med available at K=7). But Dienekes' already made another experiment proving that the West Eurasian ancestry in North Africa is overwhelmingly Sardinian-like, hence Mediterranean.

http://dodecad.blogspot.com.es/2012/...alculator.html

The Mozabite samples as expected show noisy Atlantic-Baltic figures.