Eupedia Forums
Site NavigationEupedia Top > Eupedia Forum & Japan Forum
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 51 to 75 of 81

Thread: Tracing the genetic origin of Europe's first farmers

  1. #51
    Regular Member Achievements:
    3 months registered1000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    13-07-14
    Posts
    309
    Points
    2,363
    Level
    13
    Points: 2,363, Level: 13
    Level completed: 72%, Points required for next Level: 87
    Overall activity: 0%


    Country: Russian Federation



    Quote Originally Posted by bicicleur View Post
    you mean G2a1a P16 1/P16 2 ?
    Yes G2a1aP16_1, P16_2, FGC645/Z6616
    But P16_1, P16_2 are unstable and unreliable
    Better if we say G2a1a FGC645

  2. #52
    Advisor Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteranTagger First Class50000 Experience PointsRecommendation First Class
    Awards:
    Discussion Ender
    LeBrok's Avatar
    Join Date
    18-11-09
    Location
    Calgary
    Posts
    10,329
    Points
    110,111
    Level
    100
    Points: 110,111, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b Z2109
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H1c

    Ethnic group
    Citizen of the world
    Country: Canada-Alberta



    Quote Originally Posted by sparkey View Post
    I don't think that I1-DF29 is old enough to be around since the Mesolithic. DF29 represents the primary modern expansion of I1 but it seems to have happened to the north somewhere, since it includes the main subclades of West, East, and North Germanic peoples (Z58, Z63, and L22). I'm guessing that if this ancient sample had been tested for these SNPs, it would have been negative for all of them. If we're supposing that the ancient sample is closer to the true origin of I1, then that means that the I1 of today is mostly from a young displaced branch, while the old I1 branches went extinct (as far as we can tell from samples we have so far). Actually, that scenario would tie up some loose ends, like why modern I1 appears so young, and why Eastern Europe has no native haplogroup that appears to date to the Mesolithic like I2 does in Western and Central Europe. I'm not ready to commit to the hypothesis with only one sample, though.
    Thanks for this elegant explanation. Always admire your ability to word your ideas in so easy to comprehend style.



    Could it be that hunters and hunters-turned-farmers were more likely to be pushed to the north than migrant farmers, and northerners would later experience population expansion at the expense of southerners? Probably too simplistic an explanation, but that could be one of the many effects to contribute to the pattern we see.
    I don't think it was that easy for HGs to break into farmers society. When we look at LBK culture and samples that's around 2,000 years after first farmers took first step in Europe around Bulgaria and Greece. At the time of LBK we should be able to start seeing first HGs among farmers. More precisely HGs paternal haplogroups in farmers population. When this I1 individual is tested autosomally, sample should show predominantly EEF admixture. If it shows mainly WHG that I would swear he was most likely a slave. ;)

    Do you have any hypothesis what happened to E1b folks? Are they still deep in South Balkans at this time?
    Be wary of people who tend to glorify the past, underestimate the present, and demonize the future.

  3. #53
    Advisor Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteranTagger First Class50000 Experience PointsRecommendation First Class
    Awards:
    Discussion Ender
    LeBrok's Avatar
    Join Date
    18-11-09
    Location
    Calgary
    Posts
    10,329
    Points
    110,111
    Level
    100
    Points: 110,111, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b Z2109
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H1c

    Ethnic group
    Citizen of the world
    Country: Canada-Alberta



    Quote Originally Posted by Angela View Post

    Given this model, how then are we to make sense of the mtdna findings from the site in Hungary which is the subject of this thread? In Hungary, at least, the U5 lineages which the scholars have been associating with the Mesolithic fisher/foragers form only 10% of the total. Does that mean the wife exchanges were asymmetrical? I don't know. Perhaps forager women, totally foreign to the Neolithic lifestyle, would not have been the first choice for a Neolithic village, while a farmer mate could provide a source of technological expertise in the forager communities? Or, perhaps it was simply a case where the Neolithic farmers just outbred them.

    Also, I think we have to keep in mind that the I1 and even the I2a forager lineages are decidedly in the minority. So perhaps we have to think in terms of some absorption of the foragers, but it might be that the majority of them were pushed further to the northeast. There is an analogy in what happened to the North American Indians.
    .
    Well, 10% might be just right. Roughly speaking, population density between farmers and HGs is 10 to 1. If farmers settled and mixed right away with HGs that is the proportion of haplogroups or admixtures one might expect coming from density factor. I don't think it was the case, but surprisingly the numbers added up, lol.

    To bad they didn't use Lazarides autosomal admixture "standards", we would know right away much EEF mixed with HGs.

  4. #54
    Satyavrata Achievements:
    Three FriendsRecommendation First ClassVeteran50000 Experience PointsTagger First Class
    Maciamo's Avatar
    Join Date
    17-07-02
    Location
    Lothier
    Posts
    8,689
    Points
    682,168
    Level
    100
    Points: 682,168, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 4.0%


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



    Quote Originally Posted by LeBrok View Post
    To bad they didn't use Lazarides autosomal admixture "standards", we would know right away much EEF mixed with HGs.
    They didn't here, but the Lazaridis paper tested the autosomal DNA of one LBK individual from Germany (Stuttgart) and the proportion was also 90% East Mediterranean (EEF) and 10% Mesolithic European (WHG).

    That makes it even more difficult to understand how I1 became so overwhelmingly dominant compared to G2a (3:1) in Germany and especially in Scandinavia (15:1 in Denmark, 30:1 in Sweden/Norway). I suppose it has to do with a founder effect in the northward expansion of farmers from Germany to Scandinavia. After all, even if the Neolithic farmers that colonised Scandinavia were 90% EEF and 10% WHG, if it was just one extended family and all the men were I1 (by chance), then I1 ended up introducing Mediterranean genes into Scandinavia. That would explain why Mesolithic Scandinavians had 0% EEF, but modern Scandinavians have 40% EEF. That would also explain why a mere 15% of mtDNA lineages in Sweden and Norway are Mesolithic U4 and U5, and only 8% in Denmark. In fact we cannot even be sure that these are direct descendants from the Mesolithic inhabitants of Scandinavia since the Indo-Europeans definitely had U4 and U5 among their lineages too.

    Ironically most of the 45% WHG admixture in modern Scandinavians may have come from R1a invaders from the Corded Ware (and some from the subsequent R1b invaders in the Late Bronze Age).
    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. #55
    Elite member Achievements:
    Veteran10000 Experience Points
    epoch's Avatar
    Join Date
    13-09-13
    Posts
    779
    Points
    10,483
    Level
    30
    Points: 10,483, Level: 30
    Level completed: 89%, Points required for next Level: 67
    Overall activity: 2.0%


    Country: Netherlands



    Quote Originally Posted by LeBrok View Post
    To bad they didn't use Lazarides autosomal admixture "standards", we would know right away much EEF mixed with HGs.
    The idea is to find results independently. If they then match you can be relatively sure it is right.

  6. #56
    Advisor Achievements:
    VeteranThree Friends50000 Experience PointsRecommendation Second Class
    Awards:
    Posting Award
    Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    14,828
    Points
    249,903
    Level
    100
    Points: 249,903, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 96.0%


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: USA - New York



    I think we have to keep in mind here that there isn't a perfect correlation between the percentages for uniparental markers and autosomal results. While the "hunter/fisher/forager" mtdna might only account for 10% of the lineages, their autosomal contribution might be greater. There is then the y lineage contribution. So, you could easily reach the 20% 'hunter-fisher-gatherer" component hypothesized for the EEF signature. I don't know if that's coincidence or not, but the numbers fit.

    The authors also come down in favor of a scenario were most of the prior inhabitants evacuated the area, presumably for the northeast regions. From the paper:
    Residual Neolithic hunter-gatherer isolates, as reported from Central Europe by Bollongino et al. [30], have not yet been observed in our study region. According to the low proportion of hunter-gatherer mtDNA lineages in the LBK gene pool, we assume that admixture between hunter-gatherers and colonizing LBK farmers was negligible in Central Europe.
    Considering the relative size and speed of the LBK expansion, we have to assume a substantial population growth during the earliest LBKT, which might have resulted in a population pressure and led to emigration from Transdanubia [55]. While such a radical
    population increase was not palpable from the Early Neolithic archaeological records [7], but recent extensive archaeological excavations have provided new insights into large-scale early LBKT settlements in western Hungary [9,56,57], which suggest larger source communities for a possible colonization than previously assumed.


    In other words, previous scenarios underestimated the numbers of farmers moving into Central Europe, and the Bollongino results seem to be anomalous. Indeed, I never thought the interpretation of that find ever made much sense. A strange use of a burial cave by two different cultures for a couple of hundred years should not have been, in my opinion, extrapolated to mean that there were two, co-equal in numbers, cultures inhabiting Central Europe at the same time. (Fisher/forager and Farmer)

    An obvious take away from the results is the extreme diversity of the mtDNA package in comparison to the y dna results. The authors explain it in terms of patrilocality, which makes sense. What I find more interesting is the question of where that mtDNA package was formed, especially in light of the so far unpublished results from an analysis of mesolithic Greek mtdna, which found no U5 or U4, but did find what are usually called "Neolithic" or "Near Eastern" lineages. There are also the recently published mtDNA samples from the Near Eastern Neolithic, Fernandez et al 2014, which can be found here: http://www.plosgenetics.org/article/...l.pgen.1004401

    This is a table of the Fernandez results:
    http://www.ephotobay.com/image/picture-32-55.png

    As to this last find, this is what the authors of the current paper have to say:

    Recent aDNA study from 8000 BC Near Eastern farmers raises the question whether modern Near Eastern mtDNA can be used as a proxy for the Near Eastern Neolithic variability [44]. In our opinion, these newly described seven different incomplete HVS-I haplotypes (np 16095-16369) only provide a limited basis for comparative aDNA analyses, and we thus still consider modern-day Near Eastern genetic data sufficient proxies, when tracing the origin of the first European farmers.

    The fact that prior papers found an affinity between the mtDna of Crete and the Near East on the one hand, with that of Europe on the other, also has to be factored into the equation.

    So, I don't know where we stand. Maybe the supposedly Mesolithic dna found in Greece which is not U5 or U4 is misdated. Or, the movement of mtDNA from the Near East into Europe began during the Mesolithic. There's something to be said for the fact that population increases in the Near East which coincided with improving climatic conditions actually propelled the development of this new technology. It could also have propelled migration into similar climatic regions in the Greek Islands and mainland proper.

    We know that the Neolithic transition occurred in the Near East. However, when these farmers moved into Europe, they might have encountered people already related to them at least through some mtDNA lines.

    Btw, speaking of the Fernandez paper, I think their map is a great way to visualize the spread of the Neolithic:

    Attachment 6605


    Non si fa il proprio dovere perchè qualcuno ci dica grazie, lo si fa per principio, per se stessi, per la propria dignità. Oriana Fallaci

  7. #57
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1 year registered50000 Experience Points
    Aberdeen's Avatar
    Join Date
    12-11-13
    Posts
    1,839
    Points
    52,092
    Level
    70
    Points: 52,092, Level: 70
    Level completed: 68%, Points required for next Level: 458
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    I1
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H4

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



    When trying to make sense of the population movements, I think it's important to remember that we're talking about the Carpathian Basin, a relatively flat area of grassland with a river running through it. During the Early Neolithic, farmers with stone axes would congregate in an area like that and avoid the more forested area, so they could graze their livestock and till the soil without first having to clear the land of trees, so the population of Hungary during the Early Neolithic could have been much higher than elsewhere in Central Europe. Of course, once people acquired copper and perhaps bronze axes, clearing the forest would have been a little easier, but I doubt the population would have shifted off the plains that quickly. And the Carpathian Basin would have also seemed highly appealing to the Bronze Age IE pastoralists, so I suspect the population replacement rate as a result of the later Indo-European invasions would have been much higher in this area than in some other parts of Central Europe, specifically those heavily forested areas to the north. If the G2 folk remained primarily on the Hungarian Plain, they would have felt the full impact of the IE invasions. However, if I1 folk did learn farming for G2 people, then decided to move north or were pushed north into more forested areas, they would have initially been much less vulnerable to Indo-European pastoralists with bronze weapons, simply because forest lands with farms carved out of them are much less appealing to pastoralists than open plains.

  8. #58
    Advisor Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteran25000 Experience Points
    Awards:
    Most Popular
    bicicleur's Avatar
    Join Date
    27-01-13
    Location
    Zwevegem, Belgium
    Posts
    5,254
    Points
    41,853
    Level
    63
    Points: 41,853, Level: 63
    Level completed: 16%, Points required for next Level: 1,097
    Overall activity: 9.0%


    Country: Belgium - Flanders



    Quote Originally Posted by Angela View Post
    I'm not quite sure I understand, but I'll take a stab at it. :) Are you thinking that the "I" lineage males were slaves? I have to read the paper more carefully. Is there any indication from the archaeology that the "I" males were of a lower social status?

    I also don't know that we have any indication that very early farmers had slaves. I would think that slavery would involve a level of stratification in society that would be more typical of the very late Neolithic if not the Metal Ages, although that's just my best guess. Perhaps an analogy might be the difference between the more advanced Aztecs and Incas, who indeed had slavery (and ritual sacrifices using slaves) and the Plains Indians, who often, particularly with young people, adopted them into the tribe.

    This is the study to which I was referring about assimilation of hunter-gatherers in the north-central Balkans around Lepinski Mir:
    http://www.pnas.org/content/110/9/3298
    "Strontium Isotopes document greater human mobility at the start of the Balkan Neolithic"


    This is the abstract:
    Questions about how farming and the Neolithic way of life spread across Europe have been hotly debated topics in archaeology for decades. For a very long time, two models have dominated the discussion: migrations of farming groups from southwestern Asia versus diffusion of domesticates and new ideas through the existing networks of local forager populations. New strontium isotope data from the Danube Gorges in the north-central Balkans, an area characterized by a rich burial record spanning the Mesolithic–Neolithic transition, show a significant increase in nonlocal individuals from ∼6200 calibrated B.C., with several waves of migrants into this region. These results are further enhanced by dietary evidence based on carbon and nitrogen isotopes and an increasingly high chronological resolution obtained on a large sample of directly dated individuals. This dataset provides robust evidence for a brief period of coexistence between indigenous groups and early farmers before farming communities absorbed the foragers completely in the first half of the sixth millennium B.C.

    Following is a link to the supplementary information. It's well worth a read.
    http://www.pnas.org/content/suppl/20...DCSupplemental

    Ed. Perhaps this is the source of the "hunter-gatherer" component of EEF.
    it makes sense, at first there was place for 2 complimentary economies at Lepenski Vir : the fisher/hunter/gatherer and the new neolithic one
    both economies could benefit from mutual trade, as their products (and resources) were complimentary
    but when the neolithic population kept growing, it must have created problems
    a tough choice for the original fisher/hunter/gatherers

  9. #59
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    17-03-13
    Posts
    760
    Points
    5,707
    Level
    22
    Points: 5,707, Level: 22
    Level completed: 32%, Points required for next Level: 343
    Overall activity: 1.0%


    Country: Sweden



    Quote Originally Posted by Maciamo View Post
    Finally an interesting study this summer ! There hadn't been much happening for several months.

    These new samples come from the Early Neolithic Starčevo and LBK cultures. The most valuable results here are the ancient Y-DNA. Haak 2010 and Brandt 2013 had already tested three Y-DNA samples from the LBK culture in Germany and yielded haplogroups F* and G2a2b. Identically the same haplogroups were found in these Hungarian samples, with the addition of haplogroups I2a1 and I1. I2a1 was also found among Neolithic farmers in France and probably represents the Mesolithic European population assimilated by Near Eastern farmers in the Balkans before their expansion across Europe. I1 is by far the most interesting for two reasons:

    1) It is the oldest attested existence of I1 and it suggests that I1 may have been far more widespread in the Mesolithic than the Baltic region.

    2) Since I1 hasn't been found yet among Mesolithic Scandinavians (who so far were found to belong to I*, I2* and I2a1), it could mean that I1 was also among the first lineages of Mesolithic Europeans assimilated by Neolithic farmers, and that I1 actually entered Scandinavia during the Neolithic/Chalcolithic. In other wors, I1 could have been living in the Balkans in the Mesolithic, then spread to Germany with the LBK culture, then to Scandinavia afterwards.
    "We sampled one Mesolithic, 47 Starčevo and 61 LBKT skeletons, excavated in Croatia and western Hungary.

    I1 was found in western Hungary not in the Balkans.
    The STA expanded from present-day Serbia to the western part of the Carpathian Basin, encompassing the regions of today’s northern Croatia and south-western Hungary (ca. 6,000- 5,400 BC) [7,8] (Figure 1), and resulting in the formation of the Linearbandkeramik culture (LBK) [9]."


  10. #60
    Regular Member Achievements:
    3 months registered1000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    13-07-14
    Posts
    309
    Points
    2,363
    Level
    13
    Points: 2,363, Level: 13
    Level completed: 72%, Points required for next Level: 87
    Overall activity: 0%


    Country: Russian Federation



    Journal of Language Relationship • 9 (2013) • Pp. 69–92 • © Dybo A., 2013
    Anna Dybo
    Russian State University for the Humanities (Moscow)
    Language and archeology: some methodological problems.1. Indo-European and Altaic landscapes
    The article is the first part of a larger work that represents an attempt to systematize ourideas on the natural environment and material culture of the Proto-Indo-Europeans. It is based on a more or less complete selection of reconstructed words from the appropriate semantic areas and on their comparison with a similar selection performed for a proto-language of similar time depth, whose speakers evidently inhabited a territory that was notin contact with the Proto-Indo-European one — Proto-Altaic. In this part, only the words that belong to the semantic field of landscape terms are analyzed. The main conclusion is that thehypothesis of a steppe environment is more applicable for the Proto-Altaic population,whereas for Proto-Indo-Europeans a mountainous region seems more appropriate. As forthe water bodies, for Proto-Indo-Europeans we should suppose the existence of a sea (or of avery big lake), and for speakers of Proto-Altaic, the existence of very big rivers with seasonfloods.
    http://jolr.ru/files/(108)jlr2013-9(69-92).pdf

  11. #61
    Regular Member Achievements:
    VeteranThree Friends25000 Experience Points
    Sile's Avatar
    Join Date
    04-09-11
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    5,120
    Points
    29,699
    Level
    52
    Points: 29,699, Level: 52
    Level completed: 96%, Points required for next Level: 51
    Overall activity: 37.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    T1a2 -Z19945..Jura
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H95a1 ..Pannoni

    Ethnic group
    North Alpine Italian
    Country: Australia



    New study

    http://vaedhya.blogspot.com.au/2014/...llated-xu.html

    has excel spreadsheets also

    Interesting for me is the T-L162 in ancient Peru ..............although I do not belong to this T branch.
    T-L162 ( with or without P77 ) .........is clearly the oldest of the T branches as it appears in many spots world wide ...........The T-L131 ( seems much younger) must be, as stated by others to be an "azeri"( lezkins) branch moving in a NW and W pattern and finally much later going S
    có che un pòpoło no 'l defende pi ła só łéngua el xe prónto par èser s'ciavo

    when a people no longer dares to defend its language it is ripe for slavery.

  12. #62
    Great Adventurer Achievements:
    Three FriendsTagger Second ClassOverdriveVeteran50000 Experience Points
    Awards:
    Arm of Law
    sparkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    17-02-11
    Location
    California
    Posts
    2,270
    Points
    68,877
    Level
    81
    Points: 68,877, Level: 81
    Level completed: 49%, Points required for next Level: 873
    Overall activity: 16.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    I2c1 PF3892+ (Swiss)
    MtDNA haplogroup
    U4a (Cornish)

    Ethnic group
    3/4 Colonial American, 1/8 Cornish, 1/8 Welsh
    Country: USA - California



    Quote Originally Posted by Sile View Post
    Interesting for me is the T-L162 in ancient Peru
    Ancient Peru? Looks like the tested modern Quechua. They also found an instance of haplogroup I in the Quechua. Probably European lines.

  13. #63
    Junior Member Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    07-01-11
    Posts
    2
    Points
    5,295
    Level
    21
    Points: 5,295, Level: 21
    Level completed: 49%, Points required for next Level: 255
    Overall activity: 0%


    Country: USA - Texas



    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful.

    Information about the I1 skeleton

    • I just spent most of the afternoon and evening researching this find of haplogroup I1 in Hungary from the LBK (Neolithic).
      This is a highly edited version (critical information is different), that I posted in the I1 forum, not knowing that this I1 sample is discussed yet a THIRD time here.


      The article by a Hungarian archeologist, presents results of DNA testing on collections of bones from around Hungary and surrounding areas, from the Neolithic and earlier.

      In the supplementary data are tables that contain a bare minimum of information on each skeleton examined. The lone haplogroup I1 male skeleton is one of six skeletons from some place on planet Mars, or maybe Jupiter, called Balatonszemes-Bagodomb. Google can't even find the place. It turns out to be on the southern shore of Lake Balaton in Hungary, just west of the Carpathian basin, in a region where there are many Starcevo, LBK and transitional sites - but Balatonszemes and Bagodomb are two places near each other, and google maps can't find the second one. Along Lake Balaton they are found in a belt along the northern and western coasts of the lake and the south and east are notably missing them. There are, however, finds from every other cultural epoch in European archeology in the region as well. This was a main route from the lower Danube into Europe.


      There is a vague reference to Zoffmann (2011). Zoffmann isn't in the references (the bibliography), and is mentioned only in the acknowledgements for having provided contextual information about the skeletons that the author never thought to pass on to the reader.


      There is absolutely nothing about how we know the remains are LBK or what PART of the LBK, which is a long and culturally complex period.


      The LBK encompasses the time from 5600 BCE to 4250 BCE, give or take a few hundred years.


      Haplogroup I1 is expected to have a date of origin about 2500 BCE. Specifically, haplogroup I1 has a very long chain of mutations, that separate it from haplogroup I, quite unlike haplogroup I2, which has only a few mutations separating its main subclades that can't be more than just pre-Neolithic in age, from haplogroup I.


      Even though I posted a link to the article yesterday with no problem, today it will not let me post a link, and it also mysteriously tells me I haven't posted recently. ???? Gremlins.


      The article is "Tracing the genetic origin of Europe's first farmers reveals insights into their social organization",
      Anna Szécsényi-Nagy, Guido Brandt, Victoria Keerl, János Jakucs, Wolfgang Haak, Sabine Möller-Rieker, Kitti Köhler, Balázs Mende, Marc Fecher, Krisztián Oross, Tibor Paluch, Anett Osztás, Viktória Kiss, György Pálfi, Erika Molnár, Katalin Sebők, András Czene, Tibor Paluch, Mario Šlaus, Mario Novak, Nives Pećina-Šlaus, Brigitta Ősz, Vanda Voicsek, Krisztina Somogyi, Gábor Tóth, Bernd Kromer, Eszter Bánffy, Kurt Alt.


      But the journal title does not appear since one is SUPPOSED to use the url! The url appears twice in the citation and the journal title does not. So I guess you all will have to google it. It is at biorxiv dot org.

      The authors of the study determined haplogroup by testing for 30 or so specific SNPs. For haplogroup I1, that was M253. M253 is an early found SNP in the chain of mutations that defines I1 that is still in use but may not necessarily be the chronologically last mutation to appear, so it is not necessarily impossible that it did exist in 6000 BCE.


      I have incorrect information about the history of the sample in an earlier post in another Eupedia discussion. I posted that the information is wrong, but moved the discussion over here.


      Data about the specific I1 skeleton is presented in several places in the supplemental data. The haplogroup I1 male is BAB5, from Balatonszemes-Bagodomb, in the Carpathian basin, in Hungary. He was 34 to 40 years old. It is on the southern shore of Lake Balaton. It is mitochondrial haplogroup H. It is the only male from the six people in that set of graves, whose Y DNA was tested. Table S2 makes it look like the data came from Zoffmann 2011, which is who my post yesterday identifies as the excavator, but as the author pointed out to me in an email, Table 1 gives more information. There were a total of 6 skeletons, excavated by the Directorate of Somogy County Museums/ Institute of (location of Lake Balaton), archeological features LBK settlement and graves, fine archeological chronology, Bicske-Bina, Keszthely, grave characteristics, crouched skeletons, 4 on the left side, 2 with grave goods. Archeological references, Bondar-Honti-Kiss 2000, Kiss 2002, Kiss V. - Sebok 2007. Anthropological references K. Zoffmann 2007, 2011.

      In her email, Anna Szecseny-Nagi, the author of the study, told me she agrees with my reservations about the actual age of the skeleton. Viki Kiss is who did the excavation, and says the grave is LBKT. Evidently this grave was not one of the graves that had grave goods. "We did have some problems with this grave, which we are currently analysing for full genome as well. We date BAB5 in two radiocarbon labs, and I can tell you more about it in March-April (2017, this discussion is old), when I have the results. Genomically it seems to be younger then LBKT, even if the archaelogical context was clearly Neolithic...".


      I have seen, and followed up on, speculation that the roots of haplogroup I1 could lie with a thriving Mesolithic people who were in contact with the Neolithic but had no particular reason to join them; such a group could have carried a haplogroup for thousands of years without developing any genetic variation, which is clearly the story of haplogroup I1. it must be said that quite a few Y DNA haplogroups and subclades that were once common in Europe are now rare or extinct, so it is possible I1 once had genetic variation it now lacks. I pursued an observation I found online that the lower/ middle Danube, specifically the Iron Gates, were an ideal situation for such a thing, for instance, the people of Lepenski Vir. It appears from the archeology that the region around Lake Balaton was an even better situation; for LBK was actually born of the assimilation of Mesolithic people by the migrating Neolithic people. The Lepenski Vir theory is missing a clear explanation of how the group moved on to Scandinavia, though similarities in pottery suggest some kind of hop by travelers to the Rhine Delta or Denmark. The Carpathian basin theory is very logical, because the Neolithic people of this area were migrating. They continued to migrate, all the way to Germany. The LBK reached nearly to the Baltic coast and Denmark, and gave rise to a culture immediately to the north that encompassed Denmark and southern Scandinavia, and the western Baltic coast.
      However, intriguing though this is, I would really wait for more information or else another find of ancient haplogroup I1 in the area before fully committing to it.


      Since clearly the author of the study does have an interest in pursuing it, I will mention the suggestion I got on my earlier post to the wrong board, that what is needed is a full Y sequence.




  14. #64
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    17-03-13
    Posts
    760
    Points
    5,707
    Level
    22
    Points: 5,707, Level: 22
    Level completed: 32%, Points required for next Level: 343
    Overall activity: 1.0%


    Country: Sweden



    The lone haplogroup I1 male skeleton is one of six skeletons from some place on planet Mars, or maybe Jupiter, called Balatonszemes-Bagodomb. Google can't even find the place. It turns out to be on the southern shore of Lake Balaton in Hungary, just west of the Carpathian basin, in a region where there are many Starcevo, LBK and transitional sites - but Balatonszemes and Bagodomb are two places near each other, and google maps can't find the second one.

    Hungarians are martians:Jump to: navigation, search "The Martians" were a group of prominent Jewish-Hungarian scientists (mostly, but not exclusively, physicists and mathematicians) who immigrated to the United States in the early half of the 20th century.[1] They included, among others, Theodore von Kármán, John von Neumann, Paul Halmos, Eugene Wigner, Edward Teller, George Pólya, and Paul Erdős. They received the name from a fellow Martian Leó Szilárd, who jokingly suggested that Hungary was a front for aliens from Mars. In an answer to the question of why there is no evidence of intelligent life beyond Earth despite the probability of it existing Szilárd responded "They are already here among us: they just call themselves Hungarians."

    It's NOT Bagodomb,it's Bagódomb!

    https://www.google.se/maps/place/Bal....7878262?hl=sv

    You should learn Martian!

  15. #65
    Advisor Achievements:
    VeteranThree Friends50000 Experience PointsRecommendation Second Class
    Awards:
    Posting Award
    Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    14,828
    Points
    249,903
    Level
    100
    Points: 249,903, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 96.0%


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: USA - New York



    Wasn't an autosomal analysis done of the sample who carried yDna I1, and wasn't he a typical Neolithic farmer? If that's the case then what's all the fuss here?

  16. #66
    Advisor Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteranTagger First Class50000 Experience PointsRecommendation First Class
    Awards:
    Discussion Ender
    LeBrok's Avatar
    Join Date
    18-11-09
    Location
    Calgary
    Posts
    10,329
    Points
    110,111
    Level
    100
    Points: 110,111, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b Z2109
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H1c

    Ethnic group
    Citizen of the world
    Country: Canada-Alberta



    Quote Originally Posted by villandra View Post
    • I just spent most of the afternoon and evening researching this find of haplogroup I1 in Hungary from the LBK (Neolithic).
      This is a highly edited version (critical information is different), that I posted in the I1 forum, not knowing that this I1 sample is discussed yet a THIRD time here.


      The article by a Hungarian archeologist, presents results of DNA testing on collections of bones from around Hungary and surrounding areas, from the Neolithic and earlier.

      In the supplementary data are tables that contain a bare minimum of information on each skeleton examined. The lone haplogroup I1 male skeleton is one of six skeletons from some place on planet Mars, or maybe Jupiter, called Balatonszemes-Bagodomb. Google can't even find the place. It turns out to be on the southern shore of Lake Balaton in Hungary, just west of the Carpathian basin, in a region where there are many Starcevo, LBK and transitional sites - but Balatonszemes and Bagodomb are two places near each other, and google maps can't find the second one. Along Lake Balaton they are found in a belt along the northern and western coasts of the lake and the south and east are notably missing them. There are, however, finds from every other cultural epoch in European archeology in the region as well. This was a main route from the lower Danube into Europe.


      There is a vague reference to Zoffmann (2011). Zoffmann isn't in the references (the bibliography), and is mentioned only in the acknowledgements for having provided contextual information about the skeletons that the author never thought to pass on to the reader.


      There is absolutely nothing about how we know the remains are LBK or what PART of the LBK, which is a long and culturally complex period.


      The LBK encompasses the time from 5600 BCE to 4250 BCE, give or take a few hundred years.


      Haplogroup I1 is expected to have a date of origin about 2500 BCE. Specifically, haplogroup I1 has a very long chain of mutations, that separate it from haplogroup I, quite unlike haplogroup I2, which has only a few mutations separating its main subclades that can't be more than just pre-Neolithic in age, from haplogroup I.


      Even though I posted a link to the article yesterday with no problem, today it will not let me post a link, and it also mysteriously tells me I haven't posted recently. ???? Gremlins.


      The article is "Tracing the genetic origin of Europe's first farmers reveals insights into their social organization",
      Anna Szécsényi-Nagy, Guido Brandt, Victoria Keerl, János Jakucs, Wolfgang Haak, Sabine Möller-Rieker, Kitti Köhler, Balázs Mende, Marc Fecher, Krisztián Oross, Tibor Paluch, Anett Osztás, Viktória Kiss, György Pálfi, Erika Molnár, Katalin Sebők, András Czene, Tibor Paluch, Mario Šlaus, Mario Novak, Nives Pećina-Šlaus, Brigitta Ősz, Vanda Voicsek, Krisztina Somogyi, Gábor Tóth, Bernd Kromer, Eszter Bánffy, Kurt Alt.


      But the journal title does not appear since one is SUPPOSED to use the url! The url appears twice in the citation and the journal title does not. So I guess you all will have to google it. It is at biorxiv dot org.

      The authors of the study determined haplogroup by testing for 30 or so specific SNPs. For haplogroup I1, that was M253. M253 is an early found SNP in the chain of mutations that defines I1 that is still in use but may not necessarily be the chronologically last mutation to appear, so it is not necessarily impossible that it did exist in 6000 BCE.


      I have incorrect information about the history of the sample in an earlier post in another Eupedia discussion. I posted that the information is wrong, but moved the discussion over here.


      Data about the specific I1 skeleton is presented in several places in the supplemental data. The haplogroup I1 male is BAB5, from Balatonszemes-Bagodomb, in the Carpathian basin, in Hungary. He was 34 to 40 years old. It is on the southern shore of Lake Balaton. It is mitochondrial haplogroup H. It is the only male from the six people in that set of graves, whose Y DNA was tested. Table S2 makes it look like the data came from Zoffmann 2011, which is who my post yesterday identifies as the excavator, but as the author pointed out to me in an email, Table 1 gives more information. There were a total of 6 skeletons, excavated by the Directorate of Somogy County Museums/ Institute of (location of Lake Balaton), archeological features LBK settlement and graves, fine archeological chronology, Bicske-Bina, Keszthely, grave characteristics, crouched skeletons, 4 on the left side, 2 with grave goods. Archeological references, Bondar-Honti-Kiss 2000, Kiss 2002, Kiss V. - Sebok 2007. Anthropological references K. Zoffmann 2007, 2011.

      In her email, Anna Szecseny-Nagi, the author of the study, told me she agrees with my reservations about the actual age of the skeleton. Viki Kiss is who did the excavation, and says the grave is LBKT. Evidently this grave was not one of the graves that had grave goods. "We did have some problems with this grave, which we are currently analysing for full genome as well. We date BAB5 in two radiocarbon labs, and I can tell you more about it in March-April (2017, this discussion is old), when I have the results. Genomically it seems to be younger then LBKT, even if the archaelogical context was clearly Neolithic...".


      I have seen, and followed up on, speculation that the roots of haplogroup I1 could lie with a thriving Mesolithic people who were in contact with the Neolithic but had no particular reason to join them; such a group could have carried a haplogroup for thousands of years without developing any genetic variation, which is clearly the story of haplogroup I1. it must be said that quite a few Y DNA haplogroups and subclades that were once common in Europe are now rare or extinct, so it is possible I1 once had genetic variation it now lacks. I pursued an observation I found online that the lower/ middle Danube, specifically the Iron Gates, were an ideal situation for such a thing, for instance, the people of Lepenski Vir. It appears from the archeology that the region around Lake Balaton was an even better situation; for LBK was actually born of the assimilation of Mesolithic people by the migrating Neolithic people. The Lepenski Vir theory is missing a clear explanation of how the group moved on to Scandinavia, though similarities in pottery suggest some kind of hop by travelers to the Rhine Delta or Denmark. The Carpathian basin theory is very logical, because the Neolithic people of this area were migrating. They continued to migrate, all the way to Germany. The LBK reached nearly to the Baltic coast and Denmark, and gave rise to a culture immediately to the north that encompassed Denmark and southern Scandinavia, and the western Baltic coast.
      However, intriguing though this is, I would really wait for more information or else another find of ancient haplogroup I1 in the area before fully committing to it.


      Since clearly the author of the study does have an interest in pursuing it, I will mention the suggestion I got on my earlier post to the wrong board, that what is needed is a full Y sequence.
    Interesting. There is always a chance that a younger body is buried inside ancient historical place, messing up the site for archeologists. I just hope finds like this could be recognized as "fishy", and bones dated just to make sure.
    Having said this, as Angela mentioned his autosomal DNA fits exactly as farmer of LBK. So why the suspicion?

  17. #67
    Elite member Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points
    holderlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    01-12-14
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    763
    Points
    7,483
    Level
    25
    Points: 7,483, Level: 25
    Level completed: 87%, Points required for next Level: 67
    Overall activity: 0%


    Country: USA - Washington



    Quote Originally Posted by Angela View Post
    Wasn't an autosomal analysis done of the sample who carried yDna I1, and wasn't he a typical Neolithic farmer? If that's the case then what's all the fuss here?
    I was wondering this.

  18. #68
    Elite member Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points
    holderlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    01-12-14
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    763
    Points
    7,483
    Level
    25
    Points: 7,483, Level: 25
    Level completed: 87%, Points required for next Level: 67
    Overall activity: 0%


    Country: USA - Washington



    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    Is there something wrong with the TRB culture as the carrier of the I1 founder effect in Scandinavia?

  19. #69
    Advisor Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteran25000 Experience Points
    Awards:
    Most Popular
    bicicleur's Avatar
    Join Date
    27-01-13
    Location
    Zwevegem, Belgium
    Posts
    5,254
    Points
    41,853
    Level
    63
    Points: 41,853, Level: 63
    Level completed: 16%, Points required for next Level: 1,097
    Overall activity: 9.0%


    Country: Belgium - Flanders



    Quote Originally Posted by holderlin View Post
    Is there something wrong with the TRB culture as the carrier of the I1 founder effect in Scandinavia?
    these are the oldest I know

    Nordic LN Sweden Abekas I [RISE179] M 2010-1776 BC I CTS674, CTS1301, FI3, CTS10941 K1a3 Allentoft 2015; Mathieson 2015 RISE179 Sweden Nordic LN I1-Z2765/CTS3506

    Nordic Bronze Age Sweden Angmollan [RISE207] M 1493-1302 BC I1
    J1c8a1 Allentoft 2015 ; Y-DNA personal communication from author RISE207 Sweden Nordic BA I1-M450/S109


    note that this was also pre-I1, but very unlikely ancestral to I1 as it is also negativ for some of the SNPs :


    Sweden Stora Förvar cave, Stora Karlsö Island [SfF11] M 7500-7250 cal. BP Pre-I1 (7 op 16) Genetiker U5a1 Skoglund 2014 Mesolithic 5500 BC Stora Förvar 11 I1-M253 calls


    the LBK I1 in Hungary is also pré-I1

  20. #70
    Elite member Achievements:
    Tagger Second ClassThree FriendsVeteran25000 Experience Points
    Fire Haired14's Avatar
    Join Date
    20-04-14
    Posts
    2,194
    Points
    28,146
    Level
    51
    Points: 28,146, Level: 51
    Level completed: 55%, Points required for next Level: 504
    Overall activity: 31.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b DF27*
    MtDNA haplogroup
    U5b2a2b1

    Country: USA - Illinois



    Thanks for emailing an author of the paper. It's nice to know they're sequencing the genome of the I1 individual because it'll tell us if he had pre-I1 or not. We have a lot of pre historic Scandinavian genomes. pre-I1 existed in one Mesolithic individual and I1 existed in several late Neolithic/Bronze age individuals. Neolithic and Mesolithic Y DNA is all I2.

    Corded Ware Swedes were the same as Corded Ware in Eastern Europe and so far 2/2 have R1a. One had Scandinavian specific R1a-Z284, which takes up about 1/4 of modern Scandinavian Y DNA. Modern Norse can be fitted as about 60-70% Swedish Corded Ware and 30-40% Swedish Funnel Beaker. So, it's possible that I1 is a Funnel Beaker lineage. Modern Scandinavians don't appear to have any Mesolithic Scandinavian ancestry or at least not a significant amount. Because of that I doubt Mesolithic Scandinavians are the source of I1.

  21. #71
    Advisor Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteran25000 Experience Points
    Awards:
    Most Popular
    bicicleur's Avatar
    Join Date
    27-01-13
    Location
    Zwevegem, Belgium
    Posts
    5,254
    Points
    41,853
    Level
    63
    Points: 41,853, Level: 63
    Level completed: 16%, Points required for next Level: 1,097
    Overall activity: 9.0%


    Country: Belgium - Flanders



    Quote Originally Posted by Fire Haired14 View Post
    Thanks for emailing an author of the paper. It's nice to know they're sequencing the genome of the I1 individual because it'll tell us if he had pre-I1 or not. We have a lot of pre historic Scandinavian genomes. pre-I1 existed in one Mesolithic individual and I1 existed in several late Neolithic/Bronze age individuals. Neolithic and Mesolithic Y DNA is all I2.

    Corded Ware Swedes were the same as Corded Ware in Eastern Europe and so far 2/2 have R1a. One had Scandinavian specific R1a-Z284, which takes up about 1/4 of modern Scandinavian Y DNA. Modern Norse can be fitted as about 60-70% Swedish Corded Ware and 30-40% Swedish Funnel Beaker. So, it's possible that I1 is a Funnel Beaker lineage. Modern Scandinavians don't appear to have any Mesolithic Scandinavian ancestry or at least not a significant amount. Because of that I doubt Mesolithic Scandinavians are the source of I1.
    these are the calls for Stora Forvar

    https://genetiker.wordpress.com/y-sn...ora-forvar-11/

    mind you there is always the possibility of a few false positives/negatives
    but as you can see many I1 SNP were tested

    afaik there is not data about the calls for the LBK I1

  22. #72
    Elite member Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points
    holderlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    01-12-14
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    763
    Points
    7,483
    Level
    25
    Points: 7,483, Level: 25
    Level completed: 87%, Points required for next Level: 67
    Overall activity: 0%


    Country: USA - Washington



    Quote Originally Posted by bicicleur View Post
    these are the oldest I know

    Nordic LN Sweden Abekas I [RISE179] M 2010-1776 BC I CTS674, CTS1301, FI3, CTS10941 K1a3 Allentoft 2015; Mathieson 2015 RISE179 Sweden Nordic LN I1-Z2765/CTS3506

    Nordic Bronze Age Sweden Angmollan [RISE207] M 1493-1302 BC I1
    J1c8a1 Allentoft 2015 ; Y-DNA personal communication from author RISE207 Sweden Nordic BA I1-M450/S109


    note that this was also pre-I1, but very unlikely ancestral to I1 as it is also negativ for some of the SNPs :


    Sweden Stora Förvar cave, Stora Karlsö Island [SfF11] M 7500-7250 cal. BP Pre-I1 (7 op 16) Genetiker U5a1 Skoglund 2014 Mesolithic 5500 BC Stora Förvar 11 I1-M253 calls


    the LBK I1 in Hungary is also pré-I1
    Thanks, OK so not ruled out, and it seems to be there by the BA. I think was can all agree on that.

    This is all speculation, but I've always held the notion that I1 people were the speakers of the Non-IE germanic substratum language that shaped much of the seafaring lexicon. I1 people must have been formidable. The rest of North (West) Europe was virtually replaced, but I1 held strong. Considering the evidence in the substratum this must have been because of their seafaring knowledge.

  23. #73
    Advisor Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteran25000 Experience Points
    Awards:
    Most Popular
    bicicleur's Avatar
    Join Date
    27-01-13
    Location
    Zwevegem, Belgium
    Posts
    5,254
    Points
    41,853
    Level
    63
    Points: 41,853, Level: 63
    Level completed: 16%, Points required for next Level: 1,097
    Overall activity: 9.0%


    Country: Belgium - Flanders



    Quote Originally Posted by holderlin View Post
    Thanks, OK so not ruled out, and it seems to be there by the BA. I think was can all agree on that.

    This is all speculation, but I've always held the notion that I1 people were the speakers of the Non-IE germanic substratum language that shaped much of the seafaring lexicon. I1 people must have been formidable. The rest of North (West) Europe was virtually replaced, but I1 held strong. Considering the evidence in the substratum this must have been because of their seafaring knowledge.
    Bell Beaker people arrived in Northern Denmark, they must have been the R1b-U106
    Battle Axe/ Nordic LN Sweden Lilla Beddinge 56 [RISE98] M 2275-2032 BC R1b1a2a1a1 M405/S21/U106 K1b1a1 Allentoft 2015; Mathieson 2015
    there was no copper, so they made flint daggers instead of copper daggers
    the flint was very high quality and found on that area in Northern Denmark
    then they started trading with the farmers in the Baltic area, this is where the seafaring came in
    goods from the Baltic were traded with western Europe and the Carpathian basin for metals
    it was the Nordic bronze age

    we have only one Scandinavian TRB DNA
    he was not I1

    Gökhem Västergötland [regional TRB] Sweden Gok4 M 4-5 ka I2a1b1 L161.1 xS2639 Genetiker 1+ 0 – op 35 onzeker
    Funnelbeaker 3000 BC Gökhem 4 I2a1b1-L161.1 calls

    could I1 have had contacts with the CW people on the Baltic shores prior to their arrival in southern Scandinavia?

  24. #74
    Elite member Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteran25000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    25-10-11
    Location
    Brittany
    Age
    70
    Posts
    4,321
    Points
    35,088
    Level
    57
    Points: 35,088, Level: 57
    Level completed: 70%, Points required for next Level: 362
    Overall activity: 8.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b - L21/S145*
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H3c

    Ethnic group
    more celtic
    Country: France



    Quote Originally Posted by holderlin View Post
    Is there something wrong with the TRB culture as the carrier of the I1 founder effect in Scandinavia?
    Funny, I was just weighting this possibility before to read your post! I was thinking in an hypothesis for "Germanic" Y U106 staying south the Baltic and giving a lift to I1 peoeple (not too evident for these patriarcal clannic tribes) and the, seeing that in fact the excess of I1 ratio to R-U106 are West and East on the Continent, and not central, I thought in the FBK and its western ramifications, kind of melting pot uniting lands of East with Coast of N-W Europe - a more agricultural (spite maritime too) culture without too clannic system could have helped I1 development before future Proto-Germanics (R-U106) was obliged to take in account and old Y-R1a and "younger" I1 (in demic development).

  25. #75
    Elite member Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteran25000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    25-10-11
    Location
    Brittany
    Age
    70
    Posts
    4,321
    Points
    35,088
    Level
    57
    Points: 35,088, Level: 57
    Level completed: 70%, Points required for next Level: 362
    Overall activity: 8.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b - L21/S145*
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H3c

    Ethnic group
    more celtic
    Country: France



    Not speaking here about the S-Central Europe Y-I1 (speculation about one case if I don't mistake) it remember me the excess Y-I1/Y R1bU106 (helas, no I1 subclade by me) in Brittany, some parts of Wales, french North/Picardie, East Germany, when compared to Austrians, Flemings and Dutch people. The partly maritime long-barrows culture which took part I think into FBK concretion had surely a role in this?

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 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
  •