More DNA from stone age European(Swedish) farmers and hunter gatherers

[Angela]

So, the idea would be that another semi-population replacement afterwards would bring back the WHG part into current day European genome, originating from the east? But I fail to see that if HG's population growth lost so badly from the farmers here, it somehow did not in those parts from which those population movements originated. Shouldn't these areas have experienced a far larger survival rate in order to enhance the WHG rate in Western Europa to present day levels?

I'm sorry if I'm being dense, but I'm not following you here. The Neolithic seems very clearly to have originated in the northern Middle East. From the last papers I've read on the issue, it probably started in the foothills near the Zagros mountains and spread from there. At some point, people carried that technology and their genes, which may, or may not, in my opinion, have been very different from those which existed in the Aegean and the southern Balkans, into Europe, sometimes over land and sometimes by sea. In the Balkans and Italy, for example, and if the EEF levels mean anything, in Spain, the hunter-gatherers were rather quickly absorbed. Since they were not very numerous, their impact on the genome was relatively minimal.

In Central Europe things were somewhat different. From what I recall, there was a pause while the "Neolithic package" was slightly altered for the new conditions. However, as time passed, more and more of the land was cultivated, and, as I said, the population numbers for the farmers soared. While some scattered HG settlements survived, I don't see how their numbers could have been very large. It just takes way too much land to sustain life by a hunter-gatherer lifestyle, and it seems they were basically reduced to fishing and gathering. There things lay for a while.

Then, at some point, there was a population collapse of unknown extent, caused by climate change and/or environmental degradation. It's at this juncture that the Indo-Europeans enter the picture, a group, according to the most popular theory, from the Pontic Caspian steppe, but whose EEF, WHG, and ANE proportions are unknown. I would be surprised, however, to learn that they were highly EEF. At any rate, as they moved into northern and eastern Europe, they could very well have picked up more WHG and SHG even if they did start out with more substantial levels of EEF. This group did, it seems pretty clear, as they entered these areas during the Bronze Age, affect the genetics of France, Spain, Italy and the Balkans.

Then, during the Classical Age, climate change which dried up their grasslands, and the panic caused by the arrival of the Huns pushed many peoples of a whole area from northern Europe to the steppes west into central Europe and eventually northwestern Europe. These would be, broadly speaking, the Baltic and Germanic and Slavic speaking peoples. They greatly impacted the genetics of central and Northwest Europe, and the Slavs impacted the Balkans, but from the evidence so far the genetic impact on Italy and Spain, and on France other than in the northeast and perhaps around the Alps with the Burgundians, was relatively minor.

I know that's all very broad stroke stuff, and I'm ready to adjust my view of it as soon as new evidence becomes available, but as things stand now, that seems pretty coherent to me, and in accordance with both the archaeology and the genetics.

If you think I'm getting things wrong, please point it out. I'm just trying to make sense of it all, just like everybody else.

 

[motzart]

There are none I2a1-P37.2 subclaees besides M26 and M423. I2a1a-CTS95, I2a1c-L1294, and I2a1b-M423 are the known subclades of I2a1-P37.2, M26 is one of three known I2a1-CTS95 subclades, the two less popular ones according to Eupedia are most popular in north-western Europe. I2a1c-L1294 is the most popular form of I2a1-P37.2 in the British isles, so i bet that's what you have. Pre-I2a1b has been found in Mesolithic north-west Europe, they had 7 of 9 defining mutations of I2a1b. Ajv58 a Neolithic Gotland hunter gatherer who is I2a1-P37.2, probably belonged to a brother lineage of modern I2a1b, or some rare I2a1 lineage that may or may not have been found in modern Europeans.

Since your M423- that means you don't belong to the same lineage as did the pre-I2a1b Mesolithic European samples since they were postive they had derived alleles in SNO M423 but were missing two other I2a1b defining mutations.

Your paternal lineage though is for sure descended of stone age north-west European hunter gatherers, like my maternal lineage(U5b2a2).

The I2a1 from the Skoglund study didn't show up as +M423, I am probably L233 as this is the most popular in the British Isles. Unfortunately 23andme doesn't test for these subclades :/, one day I'll get a proper ftdna deep subclade test and know for sure.

I am very curious as to how the H (specifically H1 & H3) became the dominant mtDNA haplogroup among primarily Haplogroup I populations. Personally I would attribute it to "hybrid vigor", the WHGs that initially moved in to Europe up the Danube from Anatolia would have been a very small group possibly in the hundreds 45,000 years ago. This population expanded in isolation and then contracted with the coming LGM, not encountering other humans until the arrival of (likely) G2a bearers. It seems unavoidable that they would have been very inbred. This can be attested to by their accumulation of recessive genetic traits: blue eyes, (likely) blonde hair, and height. As can be seen with animals inbreeding leads to vastly reduced birth rates, the introduction of new genetic material would have lead to a population explosion from the hybrids and a decline of mtDNA U.

Either that or they snatched up mtDNA H from the farmers and refused to continue mating with their mtDNA U partners...

Or possibly mtDNA H originated with the WHGs and these women were so super sexy that they were snatched up from the WHGs and spread all the way to siberia and iran by the farmers and indo europeans...

Only deep subclade tests and more neolithic dna will tell us

 

[epoch]

I'm sorry if I'm being dense, but I'm not following you here.

Sorry, I misread you: You stated farmers replaced HG is the south, rather than everywhere.

 

[sparkey]

Genetiker has a detailed analysis of the Y-DNA findings, along with some guesses:

The calls for Ajvide 59 don’t tell us which haplogroup he belonged to, but they do tell us that he didn’t belong to P, Q, or R.


The calls for Gökhem 4 tell us that he belonged to I2, but not to I2a1a or I2a2a.


The calls for Ire 8 tell us that he belonged to F, but not to P, Q, or R. He was probably I or I2.

The calls for Stora Förvar 11 imply that he was O3a1a, but I think that’s extremely unlikely, considering the fact that O3a1a is only found in the Mongoloids of East and Southeast Asia. The analyses of the Stora Förvar 11 genome didn’t show any significant amounts of Mongoloid admixture. The calls imply that Stora Förvar 11 wasn’t P, Q, or R. He was probably I or I2.

The calls for Ajvide 52 tell us that he was I2a2a1.

The calls for Ajvide 70 imply that he was F2, but I think that is also extremely unlikely. F2 is found in the Mongoloid Lahu people of China, and Ajvide 70 didn’t show any significant amounts of Mongoloid admixture. But the calls do show that he wasn’t I, P, Q, or R, so it’s not clear what he was. He might have been F*.

The calls for Ajvide 58 confirm the published finding that he was I2a1, and they also show that he was not I2a1a, I2a1b, I2a1d, or I2a1e.

In a follow-up post, Genetiker shows that the weird O3a1a call for Stora Förvar 11 is indeed probably a glitch, but is unable to show the same for the F2 call for Ajvide 70.

To me, Ajvide 59, Gökhem 4, Ire 8, and Stora Förvar 11 don't tell us a lot, although I agree that I2 of some sort is a good default guess for all of them. The interesting ones are the other three.

I think it's a bit hasty to declare Ajvide 52 as I2a2a1 with 100% certainty, because there aren't enough supporting SNPs to confirm that it's not a false positive. There's no confirmation that it is I2a2a, nor I2a2, nor I2a, nor I2, nor I, nor IJ. But I2a2a1 does make sense for the region and time period. I2a2a1 represents most of I2-M223, including the Cont, Roots, and Isles sectors. Interestingly, Ajvide 52 tested negative for the SNP defining the Roots sector (L1229), showing that if Ajvide 52 is indeed I2a2a1 as it seems to be, then it is in the Cont or Isles sector, or some outlier.

Ajvide 70 is genuinely interesting. Of all of the samples, it's the only one that we can confirm was NOT Haplogroup I. However, it definitely tested positive for P146 (defining Haplogroup F), meaning that it is downstream of F. Particularly interesting is the fact that it tested positive for F2's defining SNP, M427. And since it also tested negative for G, H, J1, J2a, J2b, LT, O, P, Q, and R, there aren't many candidates left for what it could have been other than some kind of direct F subclade. Really, other than F2, only F*, F-P96, and N seem like plausible alternatives to me.

Ajvide 58 is the one that was already confirmed as being I2a1-P37.2, and I had speculated earlier that it was probably I2a1b, or possibly I2a1a. But I was WRONG! Turns out that it is negative for all known modern branches of I2a1, except for I2a1c, the branch with the groups nicknamed I2a-Western and I2a-Alpine. So either Ajvide 58 is on the I2a-Western/Alpine branch, or it's some outlier in I2a1 that is unknown in modern samples.

 

[Fire Haired14]

Genetiker has a detailed analysis of the Y-DNA findings, along with some guesses:



In a follow-up post, Genetiker shows that the weird O3a1a call for Stora Förvar 11 is indeed probably a glitch, but is unable to show the same for the F2 call for Ajvide 70.

To me, Ajvide 59, Gökhem 4, Ire 8, and Stora Förvar 11 don't tell us a lot, although I agree that I2 of some sort is a good default guess for all of them. The interesting ones are the other three.

I think it's a bit hasty to declare Ajvide 52 as I2a2a1 with 100% certainty, because there aren't enough supporting SNPs to confirm that it's not a false positive. There's no confirmation that it is I2a2a, nor I2a2, nor I2a, nor I2, nor I, nor IJ. But I2a2a1 does make sense for the region and time period. I2a2a1 represents most of I2-M223, including the Cont, Roots, and Isles sectors. Interestingly, Ajvide 52 tested negative for the SNP defining the Roots sector (L1229), showing that if Ajvide 52 is indeed I2a2a1 as it seems to be, then it is in the Cont or Isles sector, or some outlier.

Ajvide 70 is genuinely interesting. Of all of the samples, it's the only one that we can confirm was NOT Haplogroup I. However, it definitely tested positive for P146 (defining Haplogroup F), meaning that it is downstream of F. Particularly interesting is the fact that it tested positive for F2's defining SNP, M427. And since it also tested negative for G, H, J1, J2a, J2b, LT, O, P, Q, and R, there aren't many candidates left for what it could have been other than some kind of direct F subclade. Really, other than F2, only F*, F-P96, and N seem like plausible alternatives to me.

Ajvide 58 is the one that was already confirmed as being I2a1-P37.2, and I had speculated earlier that it was probably I2a1b, or possibly I2a1a. But I was WRONG! Turns out that it is negative for all known modern branches of I2a1, except for I2a1c, the branch with the groups nicknamed I2a-Western and I2a-Alpine. So either Ajvide 58 is on the I2a-Western/Alpine branch, or it's some outlier in I2a1 that is unknown in modern samples.

Thanks for updating everyone, this is great news. I hope Davidski at Eurogenes is testing the Stone age Swedes from Skoglund 2014.

This is my interpretation.

Ajv59 had Y-SNP calls for very few SNPs compared to the other Stone age Swedes, and all we know is he did not have many haplogroups no one would expect him to have, except it's important to know that he certainly did not have G. It does seem likely that Gok4 belonged to I2(he defintley did not belong to G), but he wasn't tested for anything in between BT and I2, and not to subclades I2a1a-L159.1/S169.1, I2a2a-L622, and I2a2a1c1-L701. Ire8 certianly was a member of major non-African haplogroup F, and not to G. He probably had Y DNA I, but we know he did not belong to these subclades: I1-CTS11042/S66, I1a-DF29/S438, I1a2b1-Z2541, I1a3a2-S15301, I2a2a-L622, I2a2a1b-L1229, I2a2a1c2a2a1a-Z190.

Sf11 is defintley a member of major non-African Y DNA haplogroup F-P313. He was not tested for anything between F-P313 and O3a1a-DYS257_2/P27.2_2, and he wasn't tested for enough F-P313 subclades to figure out what subclade he belonged to. It is important to note that he was tested and was negative for many hg I subclades: I1-L121/S62, I1a2-S244/Z58, I1a2b-PF2805.2/Z2540.2, I2a1b-L178/S328, I2a1b-M423, I2a2-L37/PF6900/S153, I2a2a-P223/PF3860/S117, I2a2a1c2-Z161, I2a2b-L38/S154, I2a2b-L39/S155.

Ajv52's Y SNP calls are constant with him belong to I2a2a1-CTS616. This is very exciting, because I thought I2a1-P37.2 took up nearly all the hg I of Mesolithic west Europeans, and that I2a2-M423 spread with later Germanic and Celtic people in the bronze and Iron ages. I2a2 and I1 are probably native central-west-north European lineages that were adopted by Indo Europeans from eastern Europe during the metals ages, and may be connected with much higher amounts of WHG and ANE in modern northwest European farmers than in Neolithic ones.

AJv70's Y SNP calls are very surprising. It is safe to say he was a member of BT. He is positive for 1/2 hg C mutations he was tested for and positive for the one F mutation he was tested for and he is positive for F2-M427. H defintley did not belong to hg I, and It would be interesting if he belonged to C-V20 like La Brana-1 or exclusively European F-96. The one C call he did not have, La Brana-1 was not successfully tested for.

Ajv58 certainly did have I2a1-P37.2, and since he was negative for all the I2a1a, I2a1b, I2a1d, and I2a1e mutations he was tested for I think it is likely he had had I2a1c-L1286(defintley a remnant of northwest European hunter gatherers), or was apart of a lineage not found yet in modern people.

 

[Sile]

Thanks for updating everyone, this is great news. I hope Davidski at Eurogenes is testing the Stone age Swedes from Skoglund 2014.

This is my interpretation.

Ajv59 had Y-SNP calls for very few SNPs compared to the other Stone age Swedes, and all we know is he did not have many haplogroups no one would expect him to have, except it's important to know that he certainly did not have G. It does seem likely that Gok4 belonged to I2(he defintley did not belong to G), but he wasn't tested for anything in between BT and I2, and not to subclades I2a1a-L159.1/S169.1, I2a2a-L622, and I2a2a1c1-L701. Ire8 certianly was a member of major non-African haplogroup F, and not to G. He probably had Y DNA I, but we know he did not belong to these subclades: I1-CTS11042/S66, I1a-DF29/S438, I1a2b1-Z2541, I1a3a2-S15301, I2a2a-L622, I2a2a1b-L1229, I2a2a1c2a2a1a-Z190.

Sf11 is defintley a member of major non-African Y DNA haplogroup F-P313. He was not tested for anything between F-P313 and O3a1a-DYS257_2/P27.2_2, and he wasn't tested for enough F-P313 subclades to figure out what subclade he belonged to. It is important to note that he was tested and was negative for many hg I subclades: I1-L121/S62, I1a2-S244/Z58, I1a2b-PF2805.2/Z2540.2, I2a1b-L178/S328, I2a1b-M423, I2a2-L37/PF6900/S153, I2a2a-P223/PF3860/S117, I2a2a1c2-Z161, I2a2b-L38/S154, I2a2b-L39/S155.

Ajv52's Y SNP calls are constant with him belong to I2a2a1-CTS616. This is very exciting, because I thought I2a1-P37.2 took up nearly all the hg I of Mesolithic west Europeans, and that I2a2-M423 spread with later Germanic and Celtic people in the bronze and Iron ages. I2a2 and I1 are probably native central-west-north European lineages that were adopted by Indo Europeans from eastern Europe during the metals ages, and may be connected with much higher amounts of WHG and ANE in modern northwest European farmers than in Neolithic ones.

AJv70's Y SNP calls are very surprising. It is safe to say he was a member of BT. He is positive for 1/2 hg C mutations he was tested for and positive for the one F mutation he was tested for and he is positive for F2-M427. H defintley did not belong to hg I, and It would be interesting if he belonged to C-V20 like La Brana-1 or exclusively European F-96. The one C call he did not have, La Brana-1 was not successfully tested for.

Ajv58 certainly did have I2a1-P37.2, and since he was negative for all the I2a1a, I2a1b, I2a1d, and I2a1e mutations he was tested for I think it is likely he had had I2a1c-L1286(defintley a remnant of northwest European hunter gatherers), or was apart of a lineage not found yet in modern people.

so you did not like my post

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/thread...eans-(R1a-R1b)?p=432338&viewfull=1#post432338

and decide to avoid it

is there any difference with this one on this thread?

 

[Fire Haired14]

Ajv59, hunter gatherer PWC culture 4,900-4,600 cal B.P, Ajvide, Eksta, Gotland Sweden: ?(E-, G-)


Gok4, farmer TRB culture, 5,050-4,750YBP Frälsegården Sweden: I2 (I2a1a L159.1/S169.1-, I2a2a L622-, and I2a2a1c1 L701-)


Ire8, hunter gatherer PWC culture 5,100-4,150 cal. B.P, Ire, Hangvar, Gotland Sweden: F(G-, I1 CTS11042/S66-, I1a-DF29/S438-, I1a2b1 Z2541-, I1a3a2 S15301-, I2a2a L622-, I2a2a1b-L1229-, I2a2a1c2a2a1a Z190-)


Sf11, hunter gatherer, 7,500-7,250YBP, Stora Karlso Sweden: F(G-, I1 L121/S62-, I1a2 S244/Z58-, I1a2b PF2805.2/Z2540.2-, I2a1b L178/S328-, I2a1b M423-, I2a2 L37/PF6900/S153-, I2a2a P223/PF3860/S117-, I2a2a1c2 Z161-, I2a2b L38/S154-, I2a2b L39/S155-.


Ajv52, hunter gatherer PWC culture, 4,900-4,600 cal B.P Ajvide, Eksta, Gotland Sweden: I2a2a1-CTS616!!!!!!!!


Ajv70, hunter gatherer PWC, 4,900-4,600 cal B.P, Ajvide, Eksta, Gotland Sweden: Probably F, but maybe C(I-, G-, C-V183+, C-P184-,F-P146/PF2623+)


Ajv58, hunter gatherer PWC, 4,900-4,600 cal B.P, Ajvide, Eksta, Gotland Sweden: I2a1*(I2a1a-, I2a1b-, I2a1d-, I2a1e-).


Loschbour, 6,000BC Loschbour Luxembourg: Y DNA=pre-I2a1b or brother lineage to I2a1b(I L41+, I PF3742+, I M258+, I M170+, I P389+, I2 L68+, I2 M438+, I2a L460+, I2a1 P37.2+, I2a1b M423+, I2a1b CTS8239+, I2a1b CTS7218+, I2a1b CTS54985+, I2a1b L178+, I2a1b CTS1293+, I2a1b CTS176+, I2a1b CTS5375-, I2a1b CTS8486-, I2a1b1 M359.2-, I2a1b2 L161.1, I2a1b3 L621-)


Motala2, 6,000BC Motala Sweden: Y DNA=I* (I P38+, I PF3742+, I L41+, I1 S108-, I1 L845-, I1 M253-, I2a1b CT1293-, I2a2 L37-)


Motala3 6,000BC Motala Sweden: Y DNA=I2a1b*(I M258+, I PF3742+, I2 L68+, I2a1 P37.2+, I2a1b CTS7218+, I2a1b CTS1293+, I2a1b CTS176+, I2a1b1 M359.2-, I2a1b3 L621-)


Motala6 6,000BC Motala Sweden: Y DNA=? (Q1 L232- Q1a2a L55+)


Motala9 6,000BC Motala Sweden: Y DNA=I* (I P38+, I1 P40-)


Motala12 6,000BC Motala Sweden: Y DNA=pre-I2a1b or brother lineage to I2a1b(I PF3742+, I M258+, I M170+, I2 L68+, I2a L460+, I2a1 P37.2+, I2a1b CTS7218+, I2a1b CTS5985+. I2a1b L178+, I2a1b CTS1293+, I2a1b CTS176+, I2a1b CTS5375-, I2a1b CTS8486-, I2a1b1 M359.2-, I2a1b3 L621-)


La Brana-1,~7940-7690YBP, La Braña-Arintero, Leon Spain: C1a2-V20(no reason to list results for haplogroup defining SNPs he was tested for).

I know my list is kind of sloopy, but it does show that there was some noticeable Y DNA diversity in stone age European hunter gatherers. 11/11 have BT, 9/10 have F, 7/9 have hg I, 1/8 have C1a2-V20, 5/7 have I2a, 4/7 have I2a1, 1/9 have I2a2, 1/10 have I2a2a1, 3/9 have I2a1b(most likely pre-I2a1b). 10 have been tested and are negative for at least one I1 defining mutations(there are 25) or were found to have another haplogroup.

 

[Fire Haired14]

so you did not like my post

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/thread...eans-(R1a-R1b)?p=432338&viewfull=1#post432338

and decide to avoid it

is there any difference with this one on this thread?

You are the first to show it to me, just i could not find the time to read it till now.

 

[sparkey]

Great summary, Fire Haired. Two things I think are worth adding: (1) The F2-M427 result for Ajvide 70 and (2) The negative results for La Brana 1 for SNPs that are phyloequivalent to V20 in modern carriers.

Looking again at Stora Förvar 11, I wonder if he could be on the same branch as Ajvide 58. If we assume that he was I2, then I2a1c or I2a1* seem like realistic possibilities considering that he was neither I2a1b nor I2a2a. I wish we could say more about him, considering the age of the sample. Interestingly, the main modern I2a1c branch cluster, the one nicknamed "Western," is less than 3000 years old per Nordtvedt. So if these "maybe I2a1c" samples do indeed prove to be on that branch, they're not likely to fit squarely into a modern cluster.

 

[FrankN]

I wouldn't be surprised to see small HGs communities lingering in secluded places deep to the end of Bronze Age. I forgot the name of the site in Germany where of HG/herding village, of 1 millenium BC, with all males composed of I2a and R1a type.

You mean the Lichtenstein cave? Located between the Harz mountains, a centre of bronze-age copper mining, and the valley of the Leine, a major pathway in the network of amber routes? Inside a hill that is crowned by the ruins of a 10th century castle which, with a bit of luck, you may spot from the A7 motorway that connects Hannover with Munich and Frankfurt?
View attachment 6440
The cave where, next to some 40 skeletons, more than 100 bronze artefacts, amber and glass pearls, polished bones (possibly earrings) etc. were found? Plus the remains of several burial feasts, including whole beef legs that were obviously grilled in situ, and various kinds of grains and other field crops?
That wasn't HGs, that was the local elite controlling a major amber and metal trade route! At least four different I2b lineages, plus one R1a.
http://www.genebaze.cz/res/LC/LC.pdf (in German)

 

[motzart]

You mean the Lichtenstein cave? Located between the Harz mountains, a centre of bronze-age copper mining, and the valley of the Leine, a major pathway in the network of amber routes? Inside a hill that is crowned by the ruins of a 10th century castle which, with a bit of luck, you may spot from the A7 motorway that connects Hannover with Munich and Frankfurt?
View attachment 6440
The cave where, next to some 40 skeletons, more than 100 bronze artefacts, amber and glass pearls, polished bones (possibly earrings) etc. were found? Plus the remains of several burial feasts, including whole beef legs that were obviously grilled in situ, and various kinds of grains and other field crops?
That wasn't HGs, that was the local elite controlling a major amber and metal trade route! At least four different I2b lineages, plus one R1a.
http://www.genebaze.cz/res/LC/LC.pdf (in German)

Urnfield	Germany	Lichtenstein Cave, near Dorste, Lower Saxony [M1, M2, M7]	M	1000 BC	I2a2b	Ii in table 2; Z5REF in Ysearch	H	3 samples	Schilz 2006
Urnfield	Germany	Lichtenstein Cave [M3, M6]	M	1000 BC	I2a2b	Iii in table 2	H	2 samples	Schilz 2006
Urnfield	Germany	Lichtenstein Cave [M14]	M	1000 BC	I2a2b?	Iii? in table 2	H		Schilz 2006
Urnfield	Germany	Lichtenstein Cave [M4, M5, M19]	M	1000 BC	I2a2b	Iiii in table 2	H	3 samples	Schilz 2006
Urnfield	Germany	Lichtenstein Cave [M8, M16]	M	1000 BC	I2a2b	Ii in table 2; Z5REF in Ysearch	U5b	2 samples	Schilz 2006
Urnfield	Germany	Lichtenstein Cave [M10]	M	1000 BC	R1a1?	Ri in table 2	T2?		Schilz 2006
Urnfield	Germany	Lichtenstein Cave [M11]	M	1000 BC	R1a1?	Ri? in table 2	U		Schilz 2006
Urnfield	Germany	Lichtenstein Cave [M9]	M	1000 BC	R1b	Rbi in table 2	H		Schilz 2006
Urnfield	Germany	Lichtenstein Cave [F1, F12, F13, F19, F20, F21]	F	1000 BC			H	6 samples	Schilz 2006
Urnfield	Germany	Lichtenstein Cave [F2, F3, M12, M15]	F	1000 BC			J*	4 samples	Schilz 2006
Urnfield	Germany	Lichtenstein Cave [F14]	F	1000 BC			J1b1		Schilz 2006
Urnfield	Germany	Lichtenstein Cave [F5, F6, F10, F16]	F	1000 BC			T2	4 samples	Schilz 2006
Urnfield	Germany	Lichtenstein Cave [F9, F18]	F	1000 BC			U	2 samples	Schilz 2006
Urnfield	Germany	Lichtenstein Cave [F15]	F	1000 BC			U (2?)		Schilz 2006
Urnfield	Germany	Lichtenstein Cave [F4, F7, F8]	F	1000 BC			U5b	3 samples	Schilz 2006

 

[FrankN]

Urnfield	Germany	Lichtenstein Cave, near Dorste, Lower Saxony [M1, M2, M7]	M	1000 BC	I2a2b	Ii in table 2; Z5REF in Ysearch	H	3 samples	Schilz 2006
Urnfield	Germany	Lichtenstein Cave [M3, M6]	M	1000 BC	I2a2b	Iii in table 2	H	2 samples	Schilz 2006
Urnfield	Germany	Lichtenstein Cave [M14]	M	1000 BC	I2a2b?	Iii? in table 2	H		Schilz 2006
Urnfield	Germany	Lichtenstein Cave [M4, M5, M19]	M	1000 BC	I2a2b	Iiii in table 2	H	3 samples	Schilz 2006
Urnfield	Germany	Lichtenstein Cave [M8, M16]	M	1000 BC	I2a2b	Ii in table 2; Z5REF in Ysearch	U5b	2 samples	Schilz 2006
Urnfield	Germany	Lichtenstein Cave [M10]	M	1000 BC	R1a1?	Ri in table 2	T2?		Schilz 2006
Urnfield	Germany	Lichtenstein Cave [M11]	M	1000 BC	R1a1?	Ri? in table 2	U		Schilz 2006
Urnfield	Germany	Lichtenstein Cave [M9]	M	1000 BC	R1b	Rbi in table 2	H		Schilz 2006
Urnfield	Germany	Lichtenstein Cave [F1, F12, F13, F19, F20, F21]	F	1000 BC			H	6 samples	Schilz 2006
Urnfield	Germany	Lichtenstein Cave [F2, F3, M12, M15]	F	1000 BC			J*	4 samples	Schilz 2006
Urnfield	Germany	Lichtenstein Cave [F14]	F	1000 BC			J1b1		Schilz 2006
Urnfield	Germany	Lichtenstein Cave [F5, F6, F10, F16]	F	1000 BC			T2	4 samples	Schilz 2006
Urnfield	Germany	Lichtenstein Cave [F9, F18]	F	1000 BC			U	2 samples	Schilz 2006
Urnfield	Germany	Lichtenstein Cave [F15]	F	1000 BC			U (2?)		Schilz 2006
Urnfield	Germany	Lichtenstein Cave [F4, F7, F8]	F	1000 BC			U5b	3 samples	Schilz 2006

Thanks for the update. The original study only classifies the Y-DNA as Y1 to Y7, and I must have picked up a "translation" that used an earlier version of the nomenclature, and did not dare to classify two of the R1 individuals (those two that you have as "R1a1?").

Anyway, the interesting point is that we have a bronze-age local elite burial that in majority contains presumed HG male DNA. I think that at latest with the diffusion of metallurgy, HGs were at an advantage when it came to identifying and exploring metal sources - they knew the rocky terrain, and also how to stay alive in such terrain. The advantage may already have started during the diffusion of agriculture, when it came to identifying and exploiting flint and obsidian sources. It became even larger, especially in Northern Europe, when amber and furs developed into major trade commodities
As fishermen, they were furthermore better positioned to engage in early medium- and long-distance trade, which mainly developed along the coasts and large river systems. Last but not least, experienced hunters should have been more experienced and better equipped to withstand violent incursions than early farming-herding communities.

Explorers & resource providers & tool-makers & traders & warriors = local elite.

 

[polako]

That R1a from the Lichtenstein caves is most likely an extinct or currently extremely rare form of R1a-Z280.

 

[MOESAN]

Sorry, I missed this initially.

As far as Bollongino et al is concerned, it's a study whose data doesn't logically lead to its conclusions, in my opinion, or at least doesn't support the claims that have been made based on the study. The period in question, when the two groups were simultaneously in the same area, amounted to only a few hundred years if I remember correctly. It's just as likely that this group moved down from the Baltic shores.

Regardless, neolithic peoples are always going to out breed hunter-gatherers, a point made in the Skoglund study itself. It was only with the Neolithic that some distance was put between humanity and extinction.

I'm still leaning toward the idea that in the southern areas where the original Neolithic package was a good "fit", the hunter-gatherers were indeed "wiped out" very early as a distinct group, not, from what we can see in the Balkans through any kind of genocide, (death through disease we don't know, but I doubt it) but from being outbred and incorporated.

In central Europe that probably happened as well, if the population figures I've seen in prior papers are accurate, with only scattered communities of hunter-gatherers remaining, as was alluded to by LeBrok. In the far northern regions, the " Neolithic package" just wasn't optimum for a long time, and so they were left relatively undisturbed for a long time. I think it has to be remembered that even now Scandinavia, Finland, the eastern Baltics etc. are very low in population compared to the densities we see in central and southern Europe.

Then, there seems to have been a climate collapse in central Europe, or an environmental collapse, which caused a population collapse as well. We don't know how many people of which groups survived.

At some point, you have a new group of people entering central Europe, in unknown numbers, containing an unknown amount of EEF, WHG and ANE, to refer to the discussion on another thread. Later still, you have the migrations after the fall of Rome affecting central Europe and northwestern Europe, and even the Balkans later on, which could have brought more WHG and ANE for that matter.

That's how I think we have gotten to the current genetic landscape in Europe.

All speculation I know, but I think there's solid evidence for some of it. We may get more soon.

Ed. I don't remember the specifics of those two papers. It's been eight years, and my memory isn't what it was.... I'm going to glance through them when I have a chance.

I don't know if this can help, but on the classical anthropologic side we have the Michelsberger culture, classified "néolithic", from 4300 to 3700 BC, for the most comprised between Elsass/Alsace, Wallonia, S-Netherlands and south-central Germany West the Rhine, where a big imput of 'mesolithical archaic' features were found among the skeletons spite the neolithical statute - surely a mix of 'cromagnoids' and 'brünnoids-capelloids' for the aspect, but where the more brutal asepct of the second ones was dominant - a remnant of this inlfuence remained yet among bearers of the Seine-Oise-Marne culture (néolithic too!) of N-E France between 3000 and 2000 BC... so a non neglictible autosomals heritage of HGs among agricultors could make sense for these ages - maybe the HGs gave more through the female mediation? after that, the I-E (Celts, Germans) erased in part this heritage but it is not absent today in these places - I say in part because I think Celts and Germans had had time ti mix a bit in N-Central Europe with diverse already mixed populations where HG's more than agricultors descendants were involved -

 

[kamani]

Current Scandinavian dna is heavily influence by Funnel Beaker Culture. That's why I1 replaced I2a in Scandinavia. A hint is the story of Lactose Tolerance http://abcnews.go.com/Health/WellnessNews/story?id=8450036:

Somewhat less than 40% of people in the world retain the ability to digest lactose after childhood. The numbers are often given as close to 0% of Native Americans, 5% of Asians, 25% of African and Caribbean peoples, 50% of Mediterranean peoples and 90% of northern Europeans. Sweden has one of the world's highest percentages of lactase tolerant people.
........
A long-held theory was that the mutation showed up first in Northern Europe, where people got less vitamin D from the sun and therefore did better if they could also get the crucial hormone (it's not really a vitamin at all) from milk.
But now a group at University College London has shown that the mutation actually appeared about 7,500 years ago in dairy farmers who lived in a region between the central Balkans and central Europe, in what was known as the Funnel Beaker culture.

Being able to digest milk was a big evolutionary advantage for children over 5 years old; especially in countries that freeze 1/2 the year where farming was hard.

 

[FrankN]

This paper puts the Swedish Mesolithic and Neolithic into European and Near East context, especially as concerns the expansion of agriculture and the associated stone tool industry:
http://arheologija.ff.uni-lj.si/documenta/pdf28/28knutsson.pdf

A settlement-based production of blades occurs at Gravetian and Magdalenian sites. A whole chain of production is detectable in the assemblages of these sites involving local materials. But there is also a tendency to bring ready-made products from different sources, for example flint mines from the Cracow region and chert from Bavaria.

In other words - already Paleolithic European hunter-gatherers had a certain division of labour and some longer-distance trade.

During the early Neolithic, a systematic exploitation of products from several flint, obsidian and other raw material mines in Europe seems to have started. (..) Production sites for daggers, axes and adzes appeared in several parts of Europe, and whole flint nodules were brought to central Europe from north-eastern flint sources in the Volhynian mountains. (..) Specialists such as flint prospectors and "middleman" or "agencies" were responsible for the production and distribution of goods. (..)Intensively used sites for the production of specialsed tools usually surround the known mines - we could call them factories. The use of these sources seems to run parallel with the use of gold and copper ores, which were extracted in other types of mines already in the Early Neolithic. We may speak of two different industries, in which the extractors were well aware of the possibilities of finding raw material deposits in Europe as early as Neolithic times. Specialists were surely needed in such types of enterprises. (..) In summary, a change of blade production and consumption is detected even in central Europe which relates to the spread of agriculture from the South-East. (..)

The situation in the Northern European contexts is different. Excellent, regular blade production is indicated in the Villingebaek phase of the Kongemose culture in Scandinavia (ca. 6.000-5.000 BC). The establishment of the Linear Pottery culture in Poland happened in the period corresponding (..). The excessive production of blades indicated in the newly excavated settlement of Tâgerup may be interpreted as production corresponding to new contacts and new needs expressed by these southern (continental) groups. (..) It is necessary, however, to mention that the production methods of the Kongemose blades are defined as endemic in Southern Scandinavia. They were produced by locals, although responding to needs expressed by groups living further south, who looked for new, exploitable resource.

In other words: The expansion of agriculture did not necessarily crowd-out hunter-gatherers. For early Neolithic Scandinavia (and that is most likely not he only place where this applied), it provided the opportunity to set traditional skills - flint prospection, collection and tool-making - in value, and receive other necessities or amenities (e.g. leather, linen clothing, pottery) in exchange. I would, btw, also guess that the contact across the Baltic Sea between Pomeranian LBK and Swedish Kongemose groups was rather initiated by the latter, as fishermen..

As concerns the "specialists" mentioned in the article, I am quite sure that outside the Mediterranean, most of them were from hunter-gatherer communities, i.e. typically Y-DNA I2* This is possibly the reason you find that haplogroup, often in rather homeopathic doses, almost everywhere where Neolithic mining occurred, with closely-related subclades spread as far apart fro each other as from Ireland to the Ural mountains.

 

[Fire Haired14]

Current Scandinavian dna is heavily influence by Funnel Beaker Culture. That's why I1 replaced I2a in Scandinavia. A hint is the story of Lactose Tolerance http://abcnews.go.com/Health/WellnessNews/story?id=8450036:

Somewhat less than 40% of people in the world retain the ability to digest lactose after childhood. The numbers are often given as close to 0% of Native Americans, 5% of Asians, 25% of African and Caribbean peoples, 50% of Mediterranean peoples and 90% of northern Europeans. Sweden has one of the world's highest percentages of lactase tolerant people.
........
A long-held theory was that the mutation showed up first in Northern Europe, where people got less vitamin D from the sun and therefore did better if they could also get the crucial hormone (it's not really a vitamin at all) from milk.
But now a group at University College London has shown that the mutation actually appeared about 7,500 years ago in dairy farmers who lived in a region between the central Balkans and central Europe, in what was known as the Funnel Beaker culture.

Being able to digest milk was a big evolutionary advantage for children over 5 years old; especially in countries that freeze 1/2 the year where farming was hard.

Funnel Beaker farmer Gok4 had Y DNA I2, not I1. If modern Swedes are as largely descended of Funnel beaker farmers as you suggest they should be very closely related to Sardinians and Iberians. Their ancestry is certainly much more complex than Swedish farmer+hunter gatherer, and I think their mainly descended of Indo Europeans who arrived in the copper and bronze ages. Swedes and Norwegians have around 20-30% Y DNA R1a, almost all of it in the Z284 subclade which is Scandinavian-specific, and descends of Indo European Corded ware R1a Z282 which arrived in the copper age. They also have around 20-25% R1b, almost all being under L11 which arrived in west Europe around 5,000 years ago(probably with Indo Europeans), the U106 is definitely depended of from bronze age proto-Germans. Plus, many Y DNA I2a2-M223 and I1-M253 clades were largely spread by Germanic people. I1 probably initially spread in the copper age with non-Germanic people, but still it arrived after the Funnel beaker and PWC cultures. It appears that Ajv52 a PWC hunter gatherer had I2a2a1-CTS616, but still much of it in modern Scandinavians is probably from bronze age proto-Germans.

 

[Nobody1]

Current Scandinavian dna is heavily influence by Funnel Beaker Culture. That's why I1 replaced I2a in Scandinavia. A hint is the story of Lactose Tolerance http://abcnews.go.com/Health/WellnessNews/story?id=8450036:

Somewhat less than 40% of people in the world retain the ability to digest lactose after childhood. The numbers are often given as close to 0% of Native Americans, 5% of Asians, 25% of African and Caribbean peoples, 50% of Mediterranean peoples and 90% of northern Europeans. Sweden has one of the world's highest percentages of lactase tolerant people.
........
A long-held theory was that the mutation showed up first in Northern Europe, where people got less vitamin D from the sun and therefore did better if they could also get the crucial hormone (it's not really a vitamin at all) from milk.
But now a group at University College London has shown that the mutation actually appeared about 7,500 years ago in dairy farmers who lived in a region between the central Balkans and central Europe, in what was known as the Funnel Beaker culture.

Being able to digest milk was a big evolutionary advantage for children over 5 years old; especially in countries that freeze 1/2 the year where farming was hard.

So far all ancient corpses (whether Farmers or Hunter-Gs.) were tested to be lactose intolerant; And that includes the Gök2 farmer from (TRB/Funnel-beaker) Sweden; Also this ancient corpse of late-Neolithic (Globular-Amphora/Kowal, Poland) was tested to be lactose intolerant;
http://polishgenes.blogspot.de/2013/12/the-globular-amphora-man-from-late.html

I will check but if anyone already knows is there anything known on the Eulau (Corded-ware) corpses in that regard? My guess is Corded-ware and not Funnel-beaker/TRB;

 

[Fire Haired14]

More pigmentation from stone age Europe

Pigmentation of stone age Swedish farmers and hunter gatherers.

Spreadsheet of stone age European hunter gatherer's and farmer's genotypes in pigmentation SNPs of the 8-plex and Hirisplex system, and SNPs of blue eye haplotypes.

Hunter gatherers: Loschbour(6000BC, Loschbour Luxembourg), La Brana-1(5960-5750BC, Leon Spain), Motala12(6000BC, Motala Sweden) Sf11(5500-5250BC, Stora Karlsö Island Sweden), Ajv58(2,600-2,900BC, Gotland Sweden), Ajv52(2,600-2,900BC, Gotland Sweden), Ajv70(2,600-2,900BC, Gotland Sweden), Ire8(2150-3100BC, Gotland Sweden).

Farmers: Stuttgart(5100-4800 BC, Stuttgart Germany), Gok2(2,750-3,050BC, Gokhem Sweden), Gok4(2,750-3,050BC, Gokhem Sweden), Gok7(2,750-3,050BC, Gokhem Sweden).

Map of Mesolithic-Neolithic European hunter gatherer DNA

4/4 stone age European hunter gatherers(La Brana-1, Loschbour, Motala12, Ajv58) tested so far have G/G in rs12913832 which means they had light eyes, 3/3(La Brana-1, Loschbour, Motala12) have blue eye alleles in 7 SNPs associated with eye color(labeled BEH), and 2/3(Loschbour, LA Brana-1, not Motala12) have the h1 haplotype which has been observed in 97% of modern blue eyed people. According to the 8-plex system Gok2 and Ajv58 had blue eyes, because they had G/G in rs12913832 and T/T in rs12896399, Loschbour though had G/G alleles in SNP rs12896399. Most stone age European hunter gatherers probably had light eyes, because 4/4 tested so far are light eyed, the samples come from all over western Europe(Spain, Luxembourg, south Sweden, Gotland Sweden), and they are all from differnt archaeological sites(not family members).

Stuttgart like Otzi(~5300BP copper age farmer, born in northern Italy) had A/A alleles in SNP rs12913832 which means they most likely had brown eyes, according to the 8-plex system since Stuttgart had C/C alleles in SNP rs16891982 she had brown eyes. Gok2 who was also a farmer had light eyes which is probably because he had an estimated 21% more hunter gatherer ancestry than Otzi, and probably around 40% overall hunter gatherer ancestry(around as much as modern Basque and central Europeans). It is safe to assume the Levante farmer ancestor's of early European farmers were mainly dark eyed, because their blood in Europe today correlates with dark eyes.

All of the stone age European farmer and hunter gatherer samples are constant with having dark hair, and it is very unlikely any had a blonde or red tone. The hunter gatherers were probably uniformly dark haired, because 3/4 have C/C alleles in SNP rs16891982, and C/C or A/C alleles is supposed to give modern Europeans a 7x better chance of having black hair. Today in Europe and the middle east the distribution of C/C or A/C alleles correlate with dark hair. Motala12 probably had rs16891982 G/G and Ajv52 probably had rs16891982 C/C, because Motala12 had rs2877 A/A and Ajv52 had rs2877 C/C. If we assume that is true 4/6 European hunter gatherers so far have rs16891982 C/C.

Farmers Gok2 and Otzi had rs16891982 G/G, and Stuttgart had rs16891982 C/C. Probably around 70-85% of early European farmers had rs16891982 G/G, because that is around what modern Sardinians have, who are almost no differnt genetically to Otzi and Stuttgart. This means there is a better chance stone European farmers had light hair than hunter gatherers. The farmers were probably also almost entirely dark haired, because Sardinians are the darkest haired people in modern Europe.

1/4(Motala12 had it, Loschbour, La Brana-1, and Ajv58 did not) European hunter gatherers have rs1426654 A/A and 3/3 European farmers have rs1426654 A/A, which lightens skin and is fixated in modern west Asians and Europeans. 1/4 European hunter gatherers have rs16891982 G/G(rest have C/C) and 2/3 European farmers have rs16891982 G/G, which lightens skin(the ancestral form darkens hair), is fixated in northern Europeans, anywhere from 70-90% in southern Europe(It really depends where you go), and 40-50% in the middle east.

1/5 European hunter gatherers have rs28777(directly connected with rs16891982) A/A and 1/2 European farmers have rs28777 A/A(the other C/C), which is probably distributed similarly to rs16891982 G/G, and nearly fixated in CEU. 0/4 European hunter gatherers have rs1042602 A/C or A/A and 1/2 European farmers have rs1042602 C/A(The other had C/C), which are 40-50% in Europeans and middle easterns. 0/1(La Brana-1) European hunter gatherers have rs1126809 A/A or A/G, which are around 40% in CEU. 0/5 European hunter gatherers have rs1393350 A/G or A/A and 2/2 European farmers have rs1393350 G/G, which are around 30-40% in CEU. 0/4 European hunter gatherers have rs12821256 C/C or C/T and 2/2 European farmers have rs12821256 T/T, which are around 30% in CEU. 0/1(La Brana-1) of rs35395 C/C or C/T, which are fixated in CEU. 1/3 European hunter gatherers have rs2470102 A/A and 1/1(Stuttgart) European farmers have rs2470102 A/A, which is nearly fixated in CEU.

The info above tells us that European farmers had a much higher percentages of mutations associated with light skin in modern Europeans(for most or all also middle easterns and south Asians), than European hunter gatherers. My best guess is that European hunter gatherers had sometype of dark skin tone, because it can't be random that they are missing multiple light skin mutations which are fixated or popular in modern Europeans. These light skin mutations were probably selected for multiple times in Europe during and after the Neolithic.

 

[Fire Haired14]

I almost forgot, Ajv58 had rs12203592 C/T, like Loschbour(T/T), Motala12(T/T), and La Brana-1(T/C), this had to do something to hunter gatherer's pigmentation since it seems they were fixed for it. Unlike light eyes it did not survive well in modern Europeans, Gok2 had hunter gatherer light eyes but rs12203592 C/C so maybe it is more recessive or something than mutations for light eyes.

Motala12 is interestingly constant with having light skin. Unlike Loschbour, La Brana-1, and Ajv58 he has rs2470102 A/A(fixated in modern Europeans), rs28777 A/A(fixated in modern Europeans), and rs1426654 A/A(fixated in modern Europeans). The fact he has so many light skin mutations Loschbour, La Brana-1, and Ajv58 did not, may mean he really did have a lighter skin tone than most of his fellow hunter gatherers.

Known light skin mutations were selected for in European's ancestors, and those mutations were more popular in their farmer ancestors than hunter gatherer. So it doesn't make sense to say modern European light skin is descended of their hunter gatherer ancestors. A good question is why don't middle easterns have skin as light as Europeans if they mainly have the same mutations, and early Europeans primarily descended from the same source as do modern middle easterns. I still think the answer is unknown European light skin mutations, which probably descend from the farmers.