Southern Neolithic route brought Megaliths from the Levant to Western Europe

Seems like an apology to LeBrok is in order. I was genuinely ignorant and stuck in the 'Jordan valley paradigm'.

the paper makes a difference between cultivation (e.g. Natufian and PPNA) and domestication (which occured not earlier than PPNB)
this does not contradict the fact that cultiviation of cereals happened in Jordan Valley and Middle/Upper Euphrates during PPNA, they even had granaries :

Sedentism of this time allowed for the cultivation of local grains, such as barley and wild oats, and for storage in granaries. Sites such as Dhra′ and Jericho retained a hunting lifestyle until the PPNB period, but granaries allowed for year-round occupation.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pre-Pottery_Neolithic_A#Crop_cultivation_and_granaries

afaik no or little cereals or grains were cultivated east of the Euphrates, there the emphasis before PPNB was on pulses and ovicaprids

IMO PPNB is a gradual merger of the Levant & Upper Euphrate (Natufian) people with the people from the Eastern Taurus Mts & the Zagros Mts
 
Why a fourth brother lineage? What I was trying to explain was that 50 to 90% of Early Neolithic male lineages are now extinct. That's why there are lots of *. If all the know modern SNPs are tested, the * shows that there are no other mutations shared with modern people and therefore that this lineage is extinct. In living people the * only means that they didn't test all Y-chromosomal SNPs (e.g. through BigY or a full genomic test) and that that individual's deep clade hasn't been identified yet. Of course we could also find new branches among ancient samples, but if they didn't survive to the present they are meaningless. There would be thousands of extinct subclades.

Actually, this will remain as a speculation and we don't know with certainity how much of these ancient samples belong or not to extinct lineages. Also we should remember that a lot of these "modern SNPs" did not exist in ancient times. Anyway there are a lot of ancient samples, like those belonging to T1a1*/T1a* in Karsdorf, that are not tested properly for most of the known SNPs up to date. So there is no way with the available information to know if these ancient samples belong to a extinct branch or not.
 
I guess there are more ways leading to Rome. Maciamo is sketching the neolithic route from the Levant through the Mediterranean via the Atlantic coast upwards. There is also the possibility of an inland route through the Balkan, by the grand rivers, to central Europe and further. When I zoom out you can see in the different spread of E-V13 and E-V22. E-V13 more, Balkan, inland and his far nephew E-V22 the sea route (sublclade E-PH2818 Iberia and than to Wales and Frisia)!?

No one doubts that there were two major routes of dispersal of the Neolithic into Europe. One went by sea, hopping from place to place to the Western Mediterranean and then up the Atlantic coast. The other landed first in Greece and then the Balkans. In both cases there was movement inland from the coastal areas.
Neolithic2reduced.jpg


http://d10k7sivr61qqr.cloudfront.net/content/royinterface/12/106/20150166/F1.large.jpg
F1.large.jpg


At a certain point the two streams met in the Paris Basin.

I think one of the questions raised here is whether there were significant differences genetically between the people who participated in those two migration streams. From every paper I've seen, and even some of the experimental modeling, they seem to have been remarkably similar, with any differences put down to differential amounts of mixing with local h-gs in Europe.

Y dna is a different issue, although Impressed Ware/Cardial was still heavily G2.

Torsten Gunther et al:
http://biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/early/2016/09/01/072926.full.pdf
Gunther et al Genes Mirror Migration-Admixture.PNG
Click on above to enlarge.
It can also be found on page nine of the paper.


Olade et al:
PCA-Olalde-annotated.png



http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-VgWw-1Pyk...HU/XK2XmIO_J0Q/s1600/PCA-Olalde-annotated.png

You can find Gok 2 above. CO1 is Baden.

Perhaps of interest with respect to the Gok group of Northern farmers:
allele_sharing.png

The following is based on older calculators so shouldn't be taken as gospel, but I think it's still generally accurate.
proportions.png


Calculators designed for modern populations are unreliable in terms of SSA admixture in ancient samples, as the below shows. According to this, the most SSA is in Mesolithic European hunter-gatherers. Otzi would have more than Gok, and Otzi is pretty clearly a southeastern European Neolithic farmer genetically even if he is Copper Age, and the ancestry as well as the technology probably owes a great deal to the Balkans.
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-ZwmxlhXO8-k/T_B9lrlnFJI/AAAAAAAAE7w/My33JaMKr_E/s1600/ancientdna12.png
ancientdna12.png
 
No one doubts that there were two major routes of dispersal of the Neolithic into Europe. One went by sea, hopping from place to place to the Western Mediterranean and then up the Atlantic coast. The other landed first in Greece and then the Balkans. In both cases there was movement inland from the coastal areas.
Neolithic2reduced.jpg


http://d10k7sivr61qqr.cloudfront.net/content/royinterface/12/106/20150166/F1.large.jpg
F1.large.jpg


At a certain point the two streams met in the Paris Basin.

I think one of the questions raised here is whether there were significant differences genetically between the people who participated in those two migration streams. From every paper I've seen, and even some of the experimental modeling, they seem to have been remarkably similar, with any differences put down to differential amounts of mixing with local h-gs in Europe.

Y dna is a different issue, although Impressed Ware/Cardial was still heavily G2.

Torsten Gunther et al:
http://biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/early/2016/09/01/072926.full.pdf
View attachment 8400
Click on above to enlarge.
It can also be found on page nine of the paper.


Olade et al:
PCA-Olalde-annotated.png



http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-VgWw-1Pyk...HU/XK2XmIO_J0Q/s1600/PCA-Olalde-annotated.png

You can find Gok 2 above. CO1 is Baden.

Perhaps of interest with respect to the Gok group of Northern farmers:





allele_sharing.png

The following is based on older calculators so shouldn't be taken as gospel, but I think it's still generally accurate.
proportions.png


Calculators designed for modern populations are unreliable in terms of SSA admixture in ancient samples, as the below shows. According to this, the most SSA is in Mesolithic European hunter-gatherers. Otzi would have more than Gok, and Otzi is pretty clearly a southeastern European Neolithic farmer genetically even if he is Copper Age, and the ancestry as well as the technology probably owes a great deal to the Balkans.
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-ZwmxlhXO8-k/T_B9lrlnFJI/AAAAAAAAE7w/My33JaMKr_E/s1600/ancientdna12.png
ancientdna12.png

Inland route and sea route not differentiated?
In the last picture I see a major difference between the Swedish and Northern Italian Farmer, the Swedish one has far more Atlantic Med and far less Caucasus.
And you didn't pay attention to the two subclades of E1b namely E-V22 (sea route) and E-V13 (inland route).
It would be nice if some research could go in debt on this matter.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/2/2d/Neolithic_Expansion.gif
 
LBK and Cardial Ware were the 1st wave of farmers into Europe
and alltough they represent 2 different cultures, the people were genetically quite similar
that is quite clear
but what subsequent waves followed is less clear
also is puzzling where the rising WHG admixture came from, is it local admixture after the 1st wave, or did this additional WHG come from elsewhere?
 
This is just the latest research of which I'm aware, Marko. There may be something more recent that changes the picture. Archaeology isn't a static discipline after all.

If someone knows of any such studies which contradict the above, please correct the record.

One of the most important take aways for me about the early Neolithic is, as I said above, the difference between cultivation and domestication. The people of the southern Levant, for example, were living in settled villages, transplanting plants and tending fields of cereals, harvesting and storing hundreds and thousands of seeds, making bread etc. for hundreds and thousands of years before the first actual domestication took place. Grain stores have been found at Ohala that date to 23,000 years ago.

So, they did have a certain amount of social organization and cooperation. Their took kit was still pretty primitive however. The housing in the Natufian was built of brush in a lot of cases. It was only in the next period that clay was used.

Gobekli Tepe is still a puzzle to me.
Right on Angela. To become a fully fledged farmer from h-g is a long transition. In known cases it took thousands of years.
 
LBK and Cardial Ware were the 1st wave of farmers into Europe
and alltough they represent 2 different cultures, the people were genetically quite similar
that is quite clear
but what subsequent waves followed is less clear
also is puzzling where the rising WHG admixture came from, is it local admixture after the 1st wave, or did this additional WHG come from elsewhere?

Bicicleur, may be when you stand closer to the painting, you can see more differences. Because I did some small study of E-V22 I 've seen that the migration is very differentiated from E-V13 (his far nephew). E-V22 is very cardial and E-V13 very LBK!
 
LBK and Cardial Ware were the 1st wave of farmers into Europe
and alltough they represent 2 different cultures, the people were genetically quite similar
That's right. So if their was other wave of farmers sailing to Spain, they must have come from the same Anatolian Farmer stock, as the ones who got to Balkans.
but what subsequent waves followed is less clear
also is puzzling where the rising WHG admixture came from, is it local admixture after the 1st wave, or did this additional WHG come from elsewhere?
It took time till mid Neolithic to mix in all the WHG groups roaming in South and Central Europe. WHG or EHG admixtures stabilized in mid Neolithic and were pretty much the same in Late/Copper Age.
 
That's right. So if their was other wave of farmers sailing to Spain, they must have come from the same Anatolian Farmer stock, as the ones who got to Balkans.
It took time till mid Neolithic to mix in all the WHG groups roaming in South and Central Europe. WHG or EHG admixtures stabilized in mid Neolithic and were pretty much the same in Late/Copper Age.

As stated an example is E-V13 (LBK) vs E-V22 (Cardial). E-V22 is found on the cardial hotspots, med. island and coast, not related to Anatolian stock!
 
LBK and Cardial Ware were the 1st wave of farmers into Europe
and alltough they represent 2 different cultures, the people were genetically quite similar
that is quite clear
but what subsequent waves followed is less clear
also is puzzling where the rising WHG admixture came from, is it local admixture after the 1st wave, or did this additional WHG come from elsewhere?
That's right. So if their was other wave of farmers sailing to Spain, they must have come from the same Anatolian Farmer stock, as the ones who got to Balkans.
It took time till mid Neolithic to mix in all the WHG groups roaming in South and Central Europe. WHG or EHG admixtures stabilized in mid Neolithic and were pretty much the same in Late/Copper Age.

See also, Voskarides (2016): “E-V22 and E-M34 are common in the Southern Levant, Sicily, Algeria, and in Egypt and rare in Europe. These lineages, like J2b-M205, could mirror a Pottery Neolithic movement to Cyprus from the Southern Levant (Pearson R 2 coefficient of correlation of E- M34 to longitude: 0.164, p = 0.003)” On of the earliest spread to the Mediterranean is the the so called Impressed (or Cordial) Ware (7000-5500 ybp). The spread to the Mediterranean could be in several waves up until the so called Phoenicians (3500-2500 ybp)."
 
Ed. I see LeBrok and Bicicleur have beat me to it.:)

Inland route and sea route not differentiated?
In the last picture I see a major difference between the Swedish and Northern Italian Farmer, the Swedish one has far more Atlantic Med and far less Caucasus.
And you pay attention to the two subclades of E1b namely E-V22 (sea route) and E-V13 (inland route).
It would be nice if some research could go in debt on this matter.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/2/2d/Neolithic_Expansion.gif

My point in posting that Dodecad analysis was to show how misleading it can be to use Admixture calculators created for modern populations to analyze ancient genomes unless you understand subsequent findings. According to that calculator, Otzi, who is definitely a product of the Balkan stream of the Neolithic, has more SSA than Gok, and the most is in European hunter-gatherers, which is the opposite of the assertions made here. I don't know how often it has to be said and demonstrated, but Admixture calculators based on modern modal clusters have to be interpreted very carefully, and with a knowledge of what more recent methods have shown, or they can be very misleading.

You also have to be careful when discussing these Neolithic samples to know whether you are talking about the Early Neolithic of Impressed Ware/Cardial-Balkan Neolithic or you are talking about the Middle Neolithic. They are different, and the differences are the result of differing amounts of local h-g ancestry, not because there were differences among the farmers who came to Europe.

If you go back and carefully re-read what I wrote and carefully re-look at all the graphics, you will see that I was discussing the initial streams of the Neolithic. Those early EEF people, whether in the Balkans, Central Europe, or Iberia, were remarkably similar to the Anatolian Neolithic people, and the Anatolian Neolithic people, who were the ones who went to Europe (actually many of them migrated from the juncture of Anatolia and northern Syria) were almost indistinguishable from one another. There was no Levant Neolithic which went to Europe versus an Anatolian Neolithic. Natufians didn't go to Europe. The major division in terms of early Near Eastern farmers was between the Anatolian Neolithic (which indeed had a chunk of Levant Neolithic in it), and the Iranian Neolithic.

If you look at the Gunther et al graphic above, in particular, you'll see what I mean.

You also might want to take a look at the latest Reich paper on the Neolithic people of the Near East.
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v536/n7617/abs/nature19310.html

I don't know if E-V22 was specifically Cardial versus E-V13 being specifically Balkan. I would say not, as the precursor of E-V13 is found in a Cardial setting in Spain, and Cardial moved from there all the way to the Paris Basin and elsewhere. Even if E-V22 was limited to Cardial, I don't see how it matters. Some differences in y Dna are to be expected. They don't translate into autosomal differences. Autosomally, these people were all very similar. We have many, many papers, and many autosomal analyses of these people to prove it. That's why I2a farmers and I1 farmers are identical to G2a farmers.

E-V22 could also definitely have reached certain areas of Europe with later migrations, some historical. Some could have come with Phoenicians, maybe some with North Africans during the Roman Era and later. I don't see any difficulty with North African troops under the Romans spreading it to northern Europe. They were stationed in Britain and along the borders with Germania.
 
Ed. I see LeBrok and Bicicleur have beat me to it.:)



My point in posting that Dodecad analysis was to show how misleading it can be to use Admixture calculators created for modern populations to analyze ancient genomes unless you understand subsequent findings. According to that calculator, Otzi, who is definitely a product of the Balkan stream of the Neolithic, has more SSA than Gok, and the most is in European hunter-gatherers, which is the opposite of the assertions made here. I don't know how often it has to be said and demonstrated, but Admixture calculators based on modern modal clusters have to be interpreted very carefully, and with a knowledge of what more recent methods have shown, or they can be very misleading.

You also have to be careful when discussing these Neolithic samples to know whether you are talking about the Early Neolithic of Impressed Ware/Cardial-Balkan Neolithic or you are talking about the Middle Neolithic. They are different, and the differences are the result of differing amounts of local h-g ancestry, not because there were differences among the farmers who came to Europe.

If you go back and carefully re-read what I wrote and carefully re-look at all the graphics, you will see that I was discussing the initial streams of the Neolithic. Those early EEF people, whether in the Balkans, Central Europe, or Iberia, were remarkably similar to the Anatolian Neolithic people, and the Anatolian Neolithic people, who were the ones who went to Europe (actually many of them migrated from the juncture of Anatolia and northern Syria) were almost indistinguishable from one another. There was no Levant Neolithic which went to Europe versus an Anatolian Neolithic. Natufians didn't go to Europe. The major division in terms of early Near Eastern farmers was between the Anatolian Neolithic (which indeed had a chunk of Levant Neolithic in it), and the Iranian Neolithic.

If you look at the Gunther et al graphic above, in particular, you'll see what I mean.

You also might want to take a look at the latest Reich paper on the Neolithic people of the Near East.
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v536/n7617/abs/nature19310.html

I don't know if E-V22 was specifically Cardial versus E-V13 being specifically Balkan. I would say not, as the precursor of E-V13 is found in a Cardial setting in Spain, and Cardial moved from there all the way to the Paris Basin and elsewhere. Even if that were the case I don't see how it matters, however. Some differences in y Dna are to be expected. They don't translate into autosomal differences. That's why I2a farmers and I1 farmers are identical to G2a farmers.

I'am pretty sure:
See also, Voskarides (2016): “E-V22 and E-M34 are common in the Southern Levant, Sicily, Algeria, and in Egypt and rare in Europe. These lineages, like J2b-M205, could mirror a Pottery Neolithic movement to Cyprus from the Southern Levant (Pearson R 2 coefficient of correlation of E- M34 to longitude: 0.164, p = 0.003)” On of the earliest spread to the Mediterranean is the the so called Impressed (or Cordial) Ware (7000-5500 ybp). The spread to the Mediterranean could be in several waves up until the so called Phoenicians (3500-2500 ybp)."

I'am not so sure if E-V13 was found in Cardial Spain. if I'am well it
could be related to E1b but are there not enough marker to classify him as E-V13. So probably an hoax. i will do research.
 
As stated an example is E-V13 (LBK) vs E-V22 (Cardial). E-V22 is found on the cardial hotspots, med. island and coast, not related to Anatolian stock!
All Neolithic in south and central europe is the same source, not much autosomal variations. Explosions of some haplogroups has happened once they settled in certain places, causing local variations. Also it might mean different route to the destination, gathering various h-g dna on their way. However EEF had one source.
 
Ed. I see LeBrok and Bicicleur have beat me to it.:)



My point in posting that Dodecad analysis was to show how misleading it can be to use Admixture calculators created for modern populations to analyze ancient genomes unless you understand subsequent findings. According to that calculator, Otzi, who is definitely a product of the Balkan stream of the Neolithic, has more SSA than Gok, and the most is in European hunter-gatherers, which is the opposite of the assertions made here. I don't know how often it has to be said and demonstrated, but Admixture calculators based on modern modal clusters have to be interpreted very carefully, and with a knowledge of what more recent methods have shown, or they can be very misleading.

You also have to be careful when discussing these Neolithic samples to know whether you are talking about the Early Neolithic of Impressed Ware/Cardial-Balkan Neolithic or you are talking about the Middle Neolithic. They are different, and the differences are the result of differing amounts of local h-g ancestry, not because there were differences among the farmers who came to Europe.

If you go back and carefully re-read what I wrote and carefully re-look at all the graphics, you will see that I was discussing the initial streams of the Neolithic. Those early EEF people, whether in the Balkans, Central Europe, or Iberia, were remarkably similar to the Anatolian Neolithic people, and the Anatolian Neolithic people, who were the ones who went to Europe (actually many of them migrated from the juncture of Anatolia and northern Syria) were almost indistinguishable from one another. There was no Levant Neolithic which went to Europe versus an Anatolian Neolithic. Natufians didn't go to Europe. The major division in terms of early Near Eastern farmers was between the Anatolian Neolithic (which indeed had a chunk of Levant Neolithic in it), and the Iranian Neolithic.

If you look at the Gunther et al graphic above, in particular, you'll see what I mean.

You also might want to take a look at the latest Reich paper on the Neolithic people of the Near East.
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v536/n7617/abs/nature19310.html

I don't know if E-V22 was specifically Cardial versus E-V13 being specifically Balkan. I would say not, as the precursor of E-V13 is found in a Cardial setting in Spain, and Cardial moved from there all the way to the Paris Basin and elsewhere. Even if E-V22 was limited to Cardial, I don't see how it matters. Some differences in y Dna are to be expected. They don't translate into autosomal differences. Autosomally, these people were all very similar. We have many, many papers, and many autosomal analyses of these people to prove it. That's why I2a farmers and I1 farmers are identical to G2a farmers.

E-V22 could also definitely have reached certain areas of Europe with later migrations, some historical. Some could have come with Phoenicians, maybe some with North Africans during the Roman Era and later. I don't see any difficulty with North African troops under the Romans spreading it to northern Europe. They were stationed in Britain and along the borders with Germania.

Are 4 DYS enough for an haplotype? The E1b found in Spain is number 6 in the appendix of Lacan (2011). Is this certainly E-V13??????

http://www.pnas.org/content/108/45/18255/T3.expansion.html


When you look at the Y-Full tree
https://www.yfull.com/tree/E-Z1919/
you get another picture, Spain 7000 ybp is for E-V13 indeed to "young". E-v13 is an offspring from E-L616 in the Y-full tree only found in Latvia, definitely no relation with cardial I guess ;) On branche earlier we get E-Z1919 but at these fase we already have no differentiation with E-V22 so hmmmmm!
The Western Desert (Libya/Egypt) is most probably the source of E-M78 is not unthinkable that a person with an E-M78 variant went from North-Africa to Spain, but not exclusive related to E-V13 I guess....so hoax?
 
LBK and Cardial Ware were the 1st wave of farmers into Europe
and alltough they represent 2 different cultures, the people were genetically quite similar
that is quite clear
but what subsequent waves followed is less clear
also is puzzling where the rising WHG admixture came from, is it local admixture after the 1st wave, or did this additional WHG come from elsewhere?

There's been some work indicating that Loschbour type people were absorbed in the west, and KO1 type people in Central Europe, which makes sense.

What I don't think is yet clear, if it will ever be clear, is whether the local h-g sort of stayed in place, the way that some Indians were to be found on the outskirts of forts in the American west, and were slowly absorbed over hundreds of years, or whether the local h-gs initially fled to refugia in the far northeast and the Atlantic, to slowly filter back in.

I think there may have been an initial admixture in the area of the Danube Gates. However, remember that enigmatic abstract about an upcoming paper that said some of the initial admixed? Balkan groups had no genetic impact on modern Europeans? I still want to know what that meant.

The rest may have taken place later, because most parts of LBK are almost identical to the Anatolian farmers. In Iberia there also may have been some initial admixture.

What is still surprising to me is how long it took to absorb them, and the small amount of that admixture. It's about 20%, right?
 
Seems like an apology to LeBrok is in order. I was genuinely ignorant and stuck in the 'Jordan valley paradigm'.
Not needed. I like exchange of ideas and good argument. ;)
 

This thread has been viewed 92587 times.

Back
Top