Eupedia Forums
Site NavigationEupedia Top > Eupedia Forum & Japan Forum
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 74

Thread: European mtDNA Signature Established in the Mid Neolithic

  1. #1
    Regular Member Aberdeen's Avatar
    Join Date
    12-11-13
    Posts
    1,838

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    I1
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H4

    Ethnic group
    Scottish, English and German
    Country: Canada-Ontario



    1 members found this post helpful.

    European mtDNA Signature Established in the Mid Neolithic

    Here's an article published by Nature Communications about a study that suggests Europe's modern mtDNA signature was largely established about 6000 years ago, in the mid Neolithic, by people of an unknown origin who largely replaced the early Neolithic farmers, for reasons that aren't yet clear. Although it does also indicate that Bell Beaker folk expanding out of Iberia did have a significant impact during the late Neolithic.

    www.nature.com/ncomms/journal/v4/n4/full/ncomms2656.html

    Here's the abstract.

    Haplogroup H dominates present-day Western European mitochondrial DNA variability (>40%), yet was less common (~19%) among Early Neolithic farmers (~5450 BC) and virtually absent in Mesolithic hunter-gatherers. Here we investigate this major component of the maternal population history of modern Europeans and sequence 39 complete haplogroup H mitochondrial genomes from ancient human remains. We then compare this ‘real-time’ genetic data with cultural changes taking place between the Early Neolithic (~5450 BC) and Bronze Age (~2200 BC) in Central Europe. Our results reveal that the current diversity and distribution of haplogroup H were largely established by the Mid Neolithic (~4000 BC), but with substantial genetic contributions from subsequent pan-European cultures such as the Bell Beakers expanding out of Iberia in the Late Neolithic (~2800 BC). Dated haplogroup H genomes allow us to reconstruct the recent evolutionary history of haplogroup H and reveal a mutation rate 45% higher than current estimates for human mitochondria.

  2. #2
    Elite member Fire Haired14's Avatar
    Join Date
    20-04-14
    Posts
    2,194

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b DF27*
    MtDNA haplogroup
    U5b2a2b1

    Country: USA - Illinois



    This is old news,

  3. #3
    Advisor bicicleur's Avatar
    Join Date
    27-01-13
    Location
    Zwevegem, Belgium
    Posts
    5,731


    Country: Belgium - Flanders



    maybe a consequence of the milk revolution, with origins in Anatolia

    http://www.nature.com/news/archaeolo...lution-1.13471

    in Europe : Hamangia culture, Lyengel, Rösen, TRB and British neolithic
    Y-DNA , I guess : J1 and T
    there was also an expansion into Africa, Y-DNA R1-V88 and T

  4. #4
    Satyavrata Maciamo's Avatar
    Join Date
    17-07-02
    Location
    Lothier
    Posts
    9,369


    Ethnic group
    Italo-celto-germanic
    Country: Belgium - Brussels



    Another paper that completely ignores the Indo-European migrations. Many mtDNA lineages did not spread around Europe until the Bronze Age, as explained here.
    My book selection---Follow me on Facebook and Twitter --- My profile on Academia.edu and on ResearchGate ----Check Wa-pedia's Japan Guide
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    "What is the use of living, if it be not to strive for noble causes and to make this muddled world a better place for those who will live in it after we are gone?", Winston Churchill.

  5. #5
    Elite member Fire Haired14's Avatar
    Join Date
    20-04-14
    Posts
    2,194

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b DF27*
    MtDNA haplogroup
    U5b2a2b1

    Country: USA - Illinois



    Quote Originally Posted by Maciamo View Post
    Another paper that completely ignores the Indo-European migrations. Many mtDNA lineages did not spread around Europe until the Bronze Age, as explained here.
    People tend to go with the simple and comforting answer. Nations are constantly moving, mixing, trading, interacting, and so I am sure there were other groups besides eastern Indo Europeans who caused genetic changes in Europe after the initial spread of farming.

  6. #6
    Regular Member Aberdeen's Avatar
    Join Date
    12-11-13
    Posts
    1,838

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    I1
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H4

    Ethnic group
    Scottish, English and German
    Country: Canada-Ontario



    Quote Originally Posted by Maciamo View Post
    Another paper that completely ignores the Indo-European migrations. Many mtDNA lineages did not spread around Europe until the Bronze Age, as explained here.
    I'm merely trying to generate some discussion about this theory. I haven't seen the background data, so can't argue about how accurate it is. However, when I look at the information available so far from various sources that were collected by Ancestral Journeys, I would have to say that I'm not sure there's enough data available to definitely prove or disprove the idea. Certainly there's more mtDNA H among the 5000 year old Portugese samples and among the Bell Beaker samples than among earlier samples, but I think more detailed data is necessary before one draws definite conclusions about the date when certain subclades of mtDNA H became more dominant in Europe. There does seem to have been some DNA change between the early and later Neolithic, but I don't know if there's enough data to say it all happened at once, as this study seems to be arguing. I suspect it would actually have been ongoing change.

  7. #7
    Regular Member Aberdeen's Avatar
    Join Date
    12-11-13
    Posts
    1,838

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    I1
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H4

    Ethnic group
    Scottish, English and German
    Country: Canada-Ontario



    Accidently double posted while editing. See next post.
    Last edited by Aberdeen; 02-07-14 at 22:08.

  8. #8
    Regular Member Aberdeen's Avatar
    Join Date
    12-11-13
    Posts
    1,838

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    I1
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H4

    Ethnic group
    Scottish, English and German
    Country: Canada-Ontario



    I was hoping that someone had paid to read the article so they could tell me what it said. When I look at the charts on Ancestral Journeys, I don't see a stable mtDNA structure in Europe between the early Neolithic and the Bronze Age - I think the authors are right to say that there was a significant change between the start of the Neolithic and the start of the Copper Age. But it seems to me that the uptick in mtDNA H really started in Portugal about 3000 B.C. and is also found among Bell Beaker samples after about 2400 B.C. (although H doesn't seem to be as dominant in the earliest Bell Beaker samples). And of course the Bronze Age did make a difference, but more in terms of Y DNA. It looks as if mtDNA remained fairly mixed even in the Bronze Age, with H not being as dominant as it later became. As for this paper and its conclusions about a major mtDNA turnover supposedly taking place about 4000 B.C., I'm having trouble finding out what that conclusion is based on, so if someone has read the whole paper, perhaps they could tell us what it's about.

  9. #9
    Regular Member ebAmerican's Avatar
    Join Date
    11-07-12
    Posts
    226

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b- P312
    MtDNA haplogroup
    T2E2

    Ethnic group
    German and Swedish
    Country: USA - Colorado



    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3978205/ I believe it is all or most of the paper. What I got out of it was that mtDNA H was brought to Iberia from the near east, and after a natural decline in population of the LBK, and with the spread of the Bell Beaker cultural package mtDNA H merged with the newly developed Corded ware Culture and Central Europe. I believe the author is suggesting that mtDNA H is not Mesolithic/Paleolithic, but was brought to southern Europe during the Neolithic transition. The earlier lines became extinct, and the Iberian lines populated the rest of Europe after the mid Neolithic.

  10. #10
    Regular Member Aberdeen's Avatar
    Join Date
    12-11-13
    Posts
    1,838

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    I1
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H4

    Ethnic group
    Scottish, English and German
    Country: Canada-Ontario



    Quote Originally Posted by ebAmerican View Post
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3978205/ I believe it is all or most of the paper. What I got out of it was that mtDNA H was brought to Iberia from the near east, and after a natural decline in population of the LBK, and with the spread of the Bell Beaker cultural package mtDNA H merged with the newly developed Corded ware Culture and Central Europe. I believe the author is suggesting that mtDNA H is not Mesolithic/Paleolithic, but was brought to southern Europe during the Neolithic transition. The earlier lines became extinct, and the Iberian lines populated the rest of Europe after the mid Neolithic.
    Thanks. The time frame is a bit different than indicated in the abstract and fits the actual data better, but the conclusion still seems to me to be a bit of an exaggeration.

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    26-06-13
    Posts
    44


    Country: Poland



    2 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Aberdeen View Post
    Here's an article published by Nature Communications about a study that suggests Europe's modern mtDNA signature was largely established about 6000 years ago, in the mid Neolithic, by people of an unknown origin who largely replaced the early Neolithic farmers, for reasons that aren't yet clear.
    No, the study doesn't say that. It says that Europe's modern mtDNA signature was largely established about 6000 years ago as a result of migrations into Europe during the early Neolithic.

    However, it also says that from the late Neolithic onwards there were new migration waves into the heart of Europe from eastern and western Europe that added new components to this already established gene pool.

    Obviously, they're talking about the movements of pan-European cultures like the Bell Beaker and Corded Ware, which makes sense. However, one thing that looks a bit funny in this study is the claim that Indo-European languages spread into Europe during the Neolithic, and then Celtic languages expanded from Iberia with the Bell Beakers.

    Of course, any claim that Proto-Indo-European existed during the early Neolithic and sat around in different parts of Europe waiting to expand and differentiate during the Bronze Age can't be taken seriously. It's also at odds with recent ancient DNA evidence which indicates a significant population turnover across Europe during the Copper Age, which is the generally accepted Proto-Indo-European time frame, and a shift from Mediterranean-like to more Northern European-like genetic structure.

  12. #12
    Regular Member Aberdeen's Avatar
    Join Date
    12-11-13
    Posts
    1,838

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    I1
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H4

    Ethnic group
    Scottish, English and German
    Country: Canada-Ontario



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by polako View Post
    No, the study doesn't say that. It says that Europe's modern mtDNA signature was largely established about 6000 years ago as a result of migrations into Europe during the early Neolithic.

    However, it also says that from the late Neolithic onwards there were new migration waves into the heart of Europe from eastern and western Europe that added new components to this already established gene pool.

    Obviously, they're talking about the movements of pan-European cultures like the Bell Beaker and Corded Ware, which makes sense. However, one thing that looks a bit funny in this study is the claim that Indo-European languages spread into Europe during the Neolithic, and then Celtic languages expanded from Iberia with the Bell Beakers.

    Of course, any claim that Proto-Indo-European existed during the early Neolithic and sat around in different parts of Europe waiting to expand and differentiate during the Bronze Age can't be taken seriously. It's also at odds with recent ancient DNA evidence which indicates a significant population turnover across Europe during the Copper Age, which is the generally accepted Proto-Indo-European time frame, and a shift from Mediterranean-like to more Northern European-like genetic structure.
    Were you drunk when you wrote that? You "correct" what I said by saying the exact same thing, i.e., that the abstract indicates that Europe's modern mtDNA signature was largely established about 6000 years ago.

    Of course, that isn't what the body of the paper is saying. First of all, the paper is partly focussed on one locale but partly addresses the situation throughout Europe, so some of the comments about Europe as a whole are based on the results for that one region, while others are based on the results of Europe as a whole - that was not well thought through. And the paper does conclude that most of the change happened during the Copper and Bronze Ages, although the paper doesn't actually mention the Copper Age. I agree that comment about conflating the Celtic language with Bell Beaker is obvious nonsense. But, no, the Indo-Europeans don't appear to have arrived during the Copper Age, they appear to have arrived during the Bronze Age. It's an interesting question as to why there seems to have been a partial population turnover in Europe during the Copper Age - were those people from an early kind of proto-proto-IE horizon or were they a different but somewhat genetically related group? I think we need more data from Copper Age and Bronze Age Eastern Europe in order to answer that question.

    The biggest flaw in the paper, IMO, is that it doesn't really address the mystery of mtDNA H haplotype - while H was present in a small way from early on and it does appear to have increased in frequency all during the period from the mid Neolithic right up to and into the Bronze Age, it still wasn't nearly as dominant as it later became. To me, the real mystery is why H became so much more dominant after the population turnover of the Bronze Age.

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    26-06-13
    Posts
    44


    Country: Poland



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Aberdeen View Post
    Were you drunk when you wrote that? You "correct" what I said by saying the exact same thing, i.e., that the abstract indicates that Europe's modern mtDNA signature was largely established about 6000 years ago.
    Let me try and explain again.

    Your understanding of the study:

    Europe's modern mtDNA signature was largely established about 6000 years ago, in the mid Neolithic, by people of an unknown origin who largely replaced the early Neolithic farmers, for reasons that aren't yet clear.

    What the study actually argues:

    The descendants of early Neolithic farmers weren't replaced about 6000 years ago but were the ones who largely established Europe's modern mtDNA gene pool at this time.

    They were then partly replaced by invaders from western and eastern Europe after the final Neolithic (ie. during the Copper Age).


    See the difference now?

    To me, the real mystery is why H became so much more dominant after the population turnover of the Bronze Age.
    Bell Beaker invasion from the west, as mentioned above.

  14. #14
    Regular Member Aberdeen's Avatar
    Join Date
    12-11-13
    Posts
    1,838

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    I1
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H4

    Ethnic group
    Scottish, English and German
    Country: Canada-Ontario



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by polako View Post
    Let me try and explain again.

    Your understanding of the study:

    Europe's modern mtDNA signature was largely established about 6000 years ago, in the mid Neolithic, by people of an unknown origin who largely replaced the early Neolithic farmers, for reasons that aren't yet clear.

    What the study actually argues:

    The descendants of early Neolithic farmers weren't replaced about 6000 years ago but were the ones who largely established Europe's modern mtDNA gene pool at this time.

    They were then partly replaced by invaders from western and eastern Europe after the final Neolithic (ie. during the Copper Age).


    See the difference now?



    Bell Beaker invasion from the west, as mentioned above.
    Your current comment is somewhat similar to what the paper says, but is not what the abstract says. One of the points I was making is that the abstract doesn't actually reflect what's in the paper. See the difference now? And no, the Bell Beaker "invasion from the west", if it was that, would not explain why the level of dominance by mtDNA H appears to have continued to increase into the Iron Age. As I said, the Copper Age and Bronze Age both seem to have increased the percentage of mtDNA that is H in western Europe, but even at the end of the Bronze Age, H still wasn't yet as dominant as it later became. See my point now?

  15. #15
    Elite member Fire Haired14's Avatar
    Join Date
    20-04-14
    Posts
    2,194

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b DF27*
    MtDNA haplogroup
    U5b2a2b1

    Country: USA - Illinois



    Why do you guys group all mtDNA H together? It has over 100 basal clades all with differnt histories.

  16. #16
    Elite member
    Join Date
    21-01-14
    Posts
    533


    Country: UK - Wales



    @Aberdeen

    "It's an interesting question as to why there seems to have been a partial population turnover in Europe during the Copper Age - were those people from an early kind of proto-proto-IE horizon or were they a different but somewhat genetically related group?"

    I think an early IE expansion may have displaced some of the Cucuteni type cultures west of the Black Sea and pushed them west.

    "I think we need more data from Copper Age and Bronze Age Eastern Europe in order to answer that question."

    yes


    "To me, the real mystery is why H became so much more dominant after the population turnover of the Bronze Age."

    Yes, my guess it was an adaptation that was only directly advantageous in females e.g. something to do with children.

    @Fire-haired

    "
    Why do you guys group all mtDNA H together? It has over 100 basal clades all with differnt histories."

    Important point but we'd be having the same argument except referencing specific clades.


  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    26-06-13
    Posts
    44


    Country: Poland



    Quote Originally Posted by Aberdeen View Post
    Your current comment is somewhat similar to what the paper says, but is not what the abstract says. One of the points I was making is that the abstract doesn't actually reflect what's in the paper. See the difference now? And no, the Bell Beaker "invasion from the west", if it was that, would not explain why the level of dominance by mtDNA H appears to have continued to increase into the Iron Age. As I said, the Copper Age and Bronze Age both seem to have increased the percentage of mtDNA that is H in western Europe, but even at the end of the Bronze Age, H still wasn't yet as dominant as it later became. See my point now?

    Holy shit. Is English your first language or not?


    The paper says exactly what the abstract says. This is the part from the abstract that you're not getting.


    Our results reveal that the current diversity and distribution of haplogroup H were largely established by the Mid Neolithic (~4000 BC), but with substantial genetic contributions from subsequent pan-European cultures such as the Bell Beakers expanding out of Iberia in the Late Neolithic (~2800 BC).

    So let's break this down:


    By 4,000 BC (or 6,000 years ago) the current diversity and distribution of mtDNA H was largely established, and this was among the descendants of early Neolithic farmers, rather than some mysterious population that swept into Europe 6,000 years ago, as you claimed.


    However, there were also substantial genetic contributions from around 2800 BC, or the late Neolithic (aka. Copper Age or Chalcolithic), into Central Europe from Western and Eastern Europe that had a significant impact on the modern European mtDNA structure.


    The Bell Beakers were one of the most important groups in this respect, because it seems that their Copper Age and early Bronze Age exploits eventually led to later expansions, during the Iron Age, that increased the levels of mtDNA H to around 40% across much of Europe and also upped the frequencies of Atlantic-specific subclades of mtDNA H. So if not for the Bell Beakers, it's likely that Europe today would show lower frequencies of mtDNA H and higher frequencies of Eastern European and Near Eastern derived subclades.

  18. #18
    Regular Member Aberdeen's Avatar
    Join Date
    12-11-13
    Posts
    1,838

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    I1
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H4

    Ethnic group
    Scottish, English and German
    Country: Canada-Ontario



    Quote Originally Posted by Greying Wanderer View Post
    @Aberdeen

    "It's an interesting question as to why there seems to have been a partial population turnover in Europe during the Copper Age - were those people from an early kind of proto-proto-IE horizon or were they a different but somewhat genetically related group?"

    I think an early IE expansion may have displaced some of the Cucuteni type cultures west of the Black Sea and pushed them west.

    "I think we need more data from Copper Age and Bronze Age Eastern Europe in order to answer that question."

    yes


    "To me, the real mystery is why H became so much more dominant after the population turnover of the Bronze Age."

    Yes, my guess it was an adaptation that was only directly advantageous in females e.g. something to do with children.

    @Fire-haired

    "
    Why do you guys group all mtDNA H together? It has over 100 basal clades all with differnt histories."

    Important point but we'd be having the same argument except referencing specific clades.

    You're right. The reason I didn't bother to get into specific subclades is because if we were to discuss specific subclades, we'd have much the same issue to discuss, without getting any better answers. It's not clear why the subclades of H that appear early on in Europe seem to have vanished or become rare, depending on the specific subclade, while other subclades that don't seem to be there earlier later become dominant. I know that strange things happen in genetic history, but I'm sure there are explanations for the changes. I'm just not sure we'll ever have all the answers, although we may get a bit better understanding of the issue once we have more data from the relevant time periods and geographic areas. It still looks as if there was some kind of expansion out of Iberia but we don't yet know how those people got there. And some of the change in H and specific subclades probably came from the east. I don't think the answer is simple.

  19. #19
    Regular Member Aberdeen's Avatar
    Join Date
    12-11-13
    Posts
    1,838

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    I1
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H4

    Ethnic group
    Scottish, English and German
    Country: Canada-Ontario



    Quote Originally Posted by polako View Post
    Holy shit. Is English your first language or not?


    The paper says exactly what the abstract says. This is the part from the abstract that you're not getting.





    So let's break this down:


    By 4,000 BC (or 6,000 years ago) the current diversity and distribution of mtDNA H was largely established, and this was among the descendants of early Neolithic farmers, rather than some mysterious population that swept into Europe 6,000 years ago, as you claimed.


    However, there were also substantial genetic contributions from around 2800 BC, or the late Neolithic (aka. Copper Age or Chalcolithic), into Central Europe from Western and Eastern Europe that had a significant impact on the modern European mtDNA structure.


    The Bell Beakers were one of the most important groups in this respect, because it seems that their Copper Age and early Bronze Age exploits eventually led to later expansions, during the Iron Age, that increased the levels of mtDNA H to around 40% across much of Europe and also upped the frequencies of Atlantic-specific subclades of mtDNA H. So if not for the Bell Beakers, it's likely that Europe today would show lower frequencies of mtDNA H and higher frequencies of Eastern European and Near Eastern derived subclades.
    You don't seem to be very bright, but please try re-reading the paper. Nowhere in it is there any evidence given of a major turnover of mtDNA 6000 years ago, mostly because that didn't happen. Regardless of what the authors of the paper said in terms of generalities, when they do get around to discussing specifics, they admit that H was present in small part fairly early on but the first major uptick of mtDNA H seems to have happened with Bell Beaker and another wave of increased H happened during the Bronze Age, as I previously discussed. In order for you to get a better grasp of the facts, you might also want to look at the charts at Ancestral Journeys. Do you see any evidence there that mtDNA H became dominant 6000 years ago? I don't.

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    20-11-12
    Posts
    562


    Country: Canada



    Just a hypothesis from the paper: there was E-v13 found in Iberia at 5000 BC and now it is mainly in the Balkans. H also is at 50% in Balkans. So they must have come together from Iberia at 5000 BC.
    Then the Turkish farmers came and made everybody R1b, except some well developed areas that kept their ydna makeup.
    Then the Indo-Europeans came with R1a and J.

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    26-06-13
    Posts
    44


    Country: Poland



    Quote Originally Posted by Aberdeen View Post
    You don't seem to be very bright, but please try re-reading the paper. Nowhere in it is there any evidence given of a major turnover of mtDNA 6000 years ago, mostly because that didn't happen.
    I never claimed there was a major turnover of mtDNA 6,000 years ago. You did and the evidence is in the posts above.

    Regardless of what the authors of the paper said in terms of generalities, when they do get around to discussing specifics, they admit that H was present in small part fairly early on but the first major uptick of mtDNA H seems to have happened with Bell Beaker and another wave of increased H happened during the Bronze Age, as I previously discussed.
    No, the authors very obviously state that the major portion of European mtDNA H diversity and distribution was established by the middle Neolithic, around 6,000 years ago. This is stated several times in the posts above, including your own.

    And no, there was no "other wave" of mtDNA H into Central Europe during the Bronze Age. The phylogeography of the full mtDNA sequences studied in the paper show that Neolithic farmers and Bell Beakers from the Atlantic facade can explain almost all of the mtDNA H in Europe (the rest can be explained by Corded Ware and other expansions from the east which carried Eastern European-specific mtDNA H subclades).

    So what most likely happened was that the Neolithic and Bell Beaker-derived populations, sitting in Western and Central Europe, where population densities were relatively high and could get much higher than in Eastern Europe, experienced large population growth during the metal ages, thereby pushing up the frequencies of mtDNA H and the Atlantic-derived subclades of mtDNA H even further.

    Do you see any evidence there that mtDNA H became dominant 6000 years ago?
    Yes, it's stated in the paper including in the abstract. Here's that quote again.

    Our results reveal that the current diversity and distribution of haplogroup H were largely established by the Mid Neolithic (~4000 BC), but with substantial genetic contributions from subsequent pan-European cultures such as the Bell Beakers expanding out of Iberia in the Late Neolithic (~2800 BC).

  22. #22
    Satyavrata Maciamo's Avatar
    Join Date
    17-07-02
    Location
    Lothier
    Posts
    9,369


    Ethnic group
    Italo-celto-germanic
    Country: Belgium - Brussels



    Quote Originally Posted by polako View Post
    No, the authors very obviously state that the major portion of European mtDNA H diversity and distribution was established by the middle Neolithic, around 6,000 years ago. This is stated several times in the posts above, including your own.

    And no, there was no "other wave" of mtDNA H into Central Europe during the Bronze Age. The phylogeography of the full mtDNA sequences studied in the paper show that Neolithic farmers and Bell Beakers from the Atlantic facade can explain almost all of the mtDNA H in Europe (the rest can be explained by Corded Ware and other expansions from the east which carried Eastern European-specific mtDNA H subclades).

    So what most likely happened was that the Neolithic and Bell Beaker-derived populations, sitting in Western and Central Europe, where population densities were relatively high and could get much higher than in Eastern Europe, experienced large population growth during the metal ages, thereby pushing up the frequencies of mtDNA H and the Atlantic-derived subclades of mtDNA H even further.
    Although I agree that most major mtDNA H subclades were already present in Europe during the mid Neolithic, I can't agree with this paper that the modern distribution of H subclades was already established back then. As you said, the Corded Ware (+ the Unetice and all subsequent IE cultures) redistributed eastern H subclades across most of Europe, and by doing so changing substantially the mtDNA landscape and the frequencies of H subclades.

    I also disagree with the authors' view that mtDNA H was virtually absent from Mesolithic Europeans. Most of the Mesolithic samples are from the northern half of Europe, where indeed hg H was rare (though not completely absent). But southern samples (e.g. Iberia) show a considerable present of hg H at least since the Mesolithic. I wouldn't be surprised if Mesolithic Italians and Southeast Europeans were the true source of most Neolithic H subclades. Only a few subclades appear to be truly Near Eastern in origins, like H2, H5, H7, H13 and H20.

    So, in my opinion, in the late Palaeolithic and Mesolithic haplogroup H was already distributed around most of the Mediterranean basin. Early Neolithic farmers only redistributed Near Eastern and Balkanic lineages across Europe. Late Neolithic Bell Beakers redistributed Iberian lineages to central and north-west Europe. Then the Indo-Europeans redistributed eastern European and Caucasian lineages to most of Europe.

  23. #23
    Elite member Fire Haired14's Avatar
    Join Date
    20-04-14
    Posts
    2,194

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b DF27*
    MtDNA haplogroup
    U5b2a2b1

    Country: USA - Illinois



    Quote Originally Posted by Maciamo View Post
    Although I agree that most major mtDNA H subclades were already present in Europe during the mid Neolithic, I can't agree with this paper that the modern distribution of H subclades was already established back then. As you said, the Corded Ware (+ the Unetice and all subsequent IE cultures) redistributed eastern H subclades across most of Europe, and by doing so changing substantially the mtDNA landscape and the frequencies of H subclades.

    I also disagree with the authors' view that mtDNA H was virtually absent from Mesolithic Europeans. Most of the Mesolithic samples are from the northern half of Europe, where indeed hg H was rare (though not completely absent). But southern samples (e.g. Iberia) show a considerable present of hg H at least since the Mesolithic. I wouldn't be surprised if Mesolithic Italians and Southeast Europeans were the true source of most Neolithic H subclades. Only a few subclades appear to be truly Near Eastern in origins, like H2, H5, H7, H13 and H20.

    So, in my opinion, in the late Palaeolithic and Mesolithic haplogroup H was already distributed around most of the Mediterranean basin. Early Neolithic farmers only redistributed Near Eastern and Balkanic lineages across Europe. Late Neolithic Bell Beakers redistributed Iberian lineages to central and north-west Europe. Then the Indo-Europeans redistributed eastern European and Caucasian lineages to most of Europe.
    All we can say about the "H" from Mesolithic Portugal and Magdalenian Spain is that they without almost any doubt had R0 because all of them except the reported H6 had G73A. The testing was so primitive there is no way to know for sure what type of R0 they had(there are many possibilities). There is also for sure 24,000 year old R0 from Gravettian Italy because it had both R0's mutations.

    I don't understand how La brana-1 could be 100% the same thing as northwest European hunter gatherers if hunter gatherers from his area had ancestry(maternal lineage R0) the northwest European hunter gatherers lacked. If south European hunter gatherers during the LGM had a high amount of R0 and their descendants resettled northern Europe, then why did northern hunter gatherers completely lack R0? R0 in Italy 24,000 years ago is explainable but R0 in Portugal during the end of the Mesolithic is not. It is an interesting idea and possible but unlikely.

    The European hunter gatherer R0 samples could somehow be false, maybe the dates(Neolithic not Mesolithic) are off, who knows. They don't make any sense(especially in Mesolithic Portugal) and at the time of their discovery the mainstream theory was that the first Europeans were full of mtDNA H, and prove that they were not would have been crushing for many people.

    Quote Originally Posted by Maciamo View Post
    But southern samples (e.g. Iberia) show a considerable present of hg H at least since the Mesolithic. I wouldn't be surprised if Mesolithic Italians and Southeast Europeans were the true source of most Neolithic H subclades. Only a few subclades appear to be truly Near Eastern in origins, like H2, H5, H7, H13 and H20.
    Would you say the same is true for J1c, T2b, J2b1a, J2a1a, and J1b1a1? To me it seems like mtDNA that the evidence"European" subclades of west Asian haplogroups originated around west Asia were somehow erased after they arrived in Europe, and the only way we know they came from west Asia is ancient DNA.

  24. #24
    Satyavrata Maciamo's Avatar
    Join Date
    17-07-02
    Location
    Lothier
    Posts
    9,369


    Ethnic group
    Italo-celto-germanic
    Country: Belgium - Brussels



    Quote Originally Posted by Fire Haired14 View Post
    I don't understand how La brana-1 could be 100% the same thing as northwest European hunter gatherers if hunter gatherers from his area had ancestry(maternal lineage R0) the northwest European hunter gatherers lacked.
    La Brana is the north of Spain, close to Cantabria and the Basque country, a region that is climatically closer to France and the British Isles, and probably shared more with north-west European hunter-gatherers than with Mediterranean hunter-gatherers.

  25. #25
    Regular Member Wilhelm's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-10-09
    Location
    Spain
    Posts
    1,661

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b-S26
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H1

    Ethnic group
    Celtiberians
    Country: Spain - Catalonia



    Quote Originally Posted by Fire Haired14 View Post
    All we can say about the "H" from Mesolithic Portugal and Magdalenian Spain is that they without almost any doubt had R0 because all of them except the reported H6 had G73A. The testing was so primitive there is no way to know for sure what type of R0 they had(there are many possibilities). There is also for sure 24,000 year old R0 from Gravettian Italy because it had both R0's mutations.

    I don't understand how La brana-1 could be 100% the same thing as northwest European hunter gatherers if hunter gatherers from his area had ancestry(maternal lineage R0) the northwest European hunter gatherers lacked. If south European hunter gatherers during the LGM had a high amount of R0 and their descendants resettled northern Europe, then why did northern hunter gatherers completely lack R0? R0 in Italy 24,000 years ago is explainable but R0 in Portugal during the end of the Mesolithic is not. It is an interesting idea and possible but unlikely.

    The European hunter gatherer R0 samples could somehow be false, maybe the dates(Neolithic not Mesolithic) are off, who knows. They don't make any sense(especially in Mesolithic Portugal) and at the time of their discovery the mainstream theory was that the first Europeans were full of mtDNA H, and prove that they were not would have been crushing for many people..
    There is also a Mesolithic Russian with mtDNA H.

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •