Population Genetic Analysis of Neolithic to BA Human Remains from Trentino-Alto Adige

Well, it's like reading a paper from ten years ago, isn't it? No autosomal analysis at all? Not even a lowly admixture run?

It's really all about the uniparental markers, and they don't resolve them very deeply. The mtDna, as always, is a mixture. From the list I only saw one mtDna "U", so all "farmer" mtDna. I think they're claiming with the Bronze Age you get mtDna more similar to Beaker mtDna, which would make sense.

All I could see for the yDna is G2a for Copper Age. Did I miss the yDna for the Bronze Age?

That's the important bit, of course.

This is the problem with uniparental markers. With autosomal dna a handful of samples can give you a good idea of the admixture. With mtDna and yDna you need lots and lots of samples and fine grain resolution.

Still, if this is right, Polada culture might be Bell Beaker descended.

In terms of comparisons to other groups, as expected, these people are closest to some groups in Switzerland, but in a rather haphazard way, which imo is always going to be the case unless you have lots and lots of, in this case, mtDna samples.

Interestingly, not very similar to Etruscans.

Anyway, I only skimmed the paper. A more turgid piece of writing I can scarcely remember. Did they have to make this poor person regurgitate the entire history of the population genetics of Europe? :)

Am I getting the gist of it? What do you think of their conclusions?
 
Well, it's like reading a paper from ten years ago, isn't it? No autosomal analysis at all? Not even a lowly admixture run?
It's really all about the uniparental markers, and they don't resolve them very deeply. The mtDna, as always, is a mixture. From the list I only saw one mtDna "U", so all "farmer" mtDna. I think they're claiming with the Bronze Age you get mtDna more similar to Beaker mtDna, which would make sense.
All I could see for the yDna is G2a for Copper Age. Did I miss the yDna for the Bronze Age?
That's the important bit, of course.
This is the problem with uniparental markers. With autosomal dna a handful of samples can give you a good idea of the admixture. With mtDna and yDna you need lots and lots of samples and fine grain resolution.
Still, if this is right, Polada culture might be Bell Beaker descended.
In terms of comparisons to other groups, as expected, these people are closest to some groups in Switzerland, but in a rather haphazard way, which imo is always going to be the case unless you have lots and lots of, in this case, mtDna samples.
Interestingly, not very similar to Etruscans.
Anyway, I only skimmed the paper. A more turgid piece of writing I can scarcely remember. Did they have to make this poor person regurgitate the entire history of the population genetics of Europe? :)
Am I getting the gist of it? What do you think of their conclusions?
Thanks for the comments, and sorry: I barely find the time to read these papers the way I'd like, more "fluidly", and fully (this forum many times facilitate my job of knowing their content).
So, I also just skimmed this one. I must have read one or two paragraphs actually (just to be sure about its content), and I didn't see the conclusions yet. I've put it here just as a new paper that popped up. I did notice it looks like an "oldie". :) Btw, when I shared that stuff in another recent thread, I thought it was a technical and serious paper about the subject. Then I realized it was just a biased "pamphlet", je je. It happens, but now I'm a bit more tunned. :)
All that said, I confess I'm curious about this paper, especially as someone with ancestry close to that area. I'll try to see it deeper later today or in weekend.
I did check the few mtDNAs and Ys briefly, and it seems the latter were very poorly tested. Only two SNPs; one evidencing they must have been G2, and the other evidencing they must not have been G-L91 (Ötzi's). Unfortunately, no deeper categorization (which could have been useful).
Again, thanks for the comments. They always help!
 


great paper....and lot of links to newer papers which I never saw ..................

like this one https://www.researchgate.net/public...the_dynamic_life_story_of_a_Bronze_Age_Female for one............there are at least half a dozen I never saw , even as late as 2019

and
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-019-43183-w

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0174886

and many more

all linking to your paper analysis
 
The links are all to old papers we have discussed on this Board if not other Boards.

You must have missed them.

I'm aware you have a personal interest in your and their mtDna, and that's fine, but as a general matter this is dated analysis which only gives information on mtDna and minimally on yDna, and even that is not fully resolved. I'm surprised given that the Max Planck Institute is at the University of Leipzig.

If this were the group from Bolzano which has charge of Otzi I wouldn't be surprised. They're living in a time warp. They're also holding on to that data and milking it for all its worth. They don't want anyone else to "get the glory" perhaps. What they don't understand is that by the time they get around to releasing all their papers, probably in 2050 or something, no one will care because we'll have gotten the information in other ways.
 
First of all it is not a paper. It is a a poor Ph.D. student's dissertation.
 
The links are all to old papers we have discussed on this Board if not other Boards.

You must have missed them.

I'm aware you have a personal interest in your and their mtDna, and that's fine, but as a general matter this is dated analysis which only gives information on mtDna and minimally on yDna, and even that is not fully resolved. I'm surprised given that the Max Planck Institute is at the University of Leipzig.

If this were the group from Bolzano which has charge of Otzi I wouldn't be surprised. They're living in a time warp. They're also holding on to that data and milking it for all its worth. They don't want anyone else to "get the glory" perhaps. What they don't understand is that by the time they get around to releasing all their papers, probably in 2050 or something, no one will care because we'll have gotten the information in other ways.
Reminds me of the time that I was working on my Ph. D. I probably had enough material for 5 papers. My advisor wanted me to milk this subject for what it was worth with tiny little changes generating yet another paper. I was not willing to play that game. I still have the material for it.
 
First of all it is not a paper. It is a a poor Ph.D. student's dissertation.

I skimmed through the paper and it does have a Literature Review consistent with what a Phd Committee Chair would want.
 
The links are all to old papers we have discussed on this Board if not other Boards.

You must have missed them.

I'm aware you have a personal interest in your and their mtDna, and that's fine, but as a general matter this is dated analysis which only gives information on mtDna and minimally on yDna, and even that is not fully resolved. I'm surprised given that the Max Planck Institute is at the University of Leipzig.

If this were the group from Bolzano which has charge of Otzi I wouldn't be surprised. They're living in a time warp. They're also holding on to that data and milking it for all its worth. They don't want anyone else to "get the glory" perhaps. What they don't understand is that by the time they get around to releasing all their papers, probably in 2050 or something, no one will care because we'll have gotten the information in other ways.


I don't understand what it has to do with sites like this https://www.eva.mpg.de/genetics/advanced-dna-sequencing-techniques/overview.html and the other sites under Max Planck

https://www.shh.mpg.de/118825/dag_research_groups

https://www.mpg.de/11247830/dna-cave-sediments

It is like when I check wiki sites.......the below links of the wiki site are more valuable and not actually the main site which are always written by amateurs , sometimes with their own agendas
 
^^Sorry, I'm not following you.

If you write a dissertation you're going to have to list the papers on which you relied. Research papers likewise. It's standard operating procedure; there's no special merit attached to doing it. It's required.

If I'm reading a piece and something doesn't sound right I always go back to the paper in the footnote to check if that is indeed what I would take from the cited paper.

What this has to do with Max Planck I have no idea. It's one of the two or three leading population genetics labs in the world. I have great respect for all of them.
 
^^Sorry, I'm not following you.

If you write a dissertation you're going to have to list the papers on which you relied. Research papers likewise. It's standard operating procedure; there's no special merit attached to doing it. It's required.

If I'm reading a piece and something doesn't sound right I always go back to the paper in the footnote to check if that is indeed what I would take from the cited paper.

What this has to do with Max Planck I have no idea. It's one of the two or three leading population genetics labs in the world. I have great respect for all of them.


I was referring to the woman who did the paper , born in 1975 and part

https://uni-mainz.academia.edu/AngelaGraefen

it is a new paper based on the summary of all the past studies and with Max Planck team from Mainz
 
I've read some parts, and particularly I could identify one issue here and there, but I don't intend to list them. Too time consuming.
Anyway, it's decent as a dissertation, and it brought informations regarding G2a I didn't know about.

For example, it called my atention the Coia et al. 2013. I had never "heard" about it.

"A study by Coia et al. (2013) including two South Tyrolean and nine Tridentine valleys found that, although variants of R1b were the most common haplotype in most sampled regions, the levels of haplogroup G-M201 were higher than the European mean, averaging 0.092 across Trentino and South Tyrol, with values ranging from 0 in some smaller populations and as much as 0.488 in Val Primiero (Trentino)."

"A similar pattern can be observed in the modern-day Trentino region, with frequencies reaching 49% in Val Primiero (Coia et al., 2013)."

So we'd have for haplo G-M201 a frequency of 9.2% in Trentino-Alto Adige and 49% in Val Primiero. They're new for me.

@torzio
I've checked the STRs from Val Primiero. Only 15 markers; anyway, almost all samples (19 out of 20) seem to point to G-L497 (I used Nevgen), which would not be that surprising if true. This hypothetical absolute G-L497 frequency would be even higher than that one confirmed by Berger for G-L497 in Paznaun Valley in Austria (40%).
Val Primiero have a population close to 10k (twice as big as Paznaun), and I wonder if this interesting (supposed) G-L497 spot would "continue" in Belluno province along Gosaldo etc.

Beautiful place, btw. :)
primiero1.jpg



@bigsnake49
You're right. It's not a "paper" in the sense we generally use here in the forum.
 
I've read some parts, and particularly I could identify one issue here and there, but I don't intend to list them. Too time consuming.
Anyway, it's decent as a dissertation, and it brought informations regarding G2a I didn't know about.

For example, it called my atention the Coia et al. 2013. I had never "heard" about it.

"A study by Coia et al. (2013) including two South Tyrolean and nine Tridentine valleys found that, although variants of R1b were the most common haplotype in most sampled regions, the levels of haplogroup G-M201 were higher than the European mean, averaging 0.092 across Trentino and South Tyrol, with values ranging from 0 in some smaller populations and as much as 0.488 in Val Primiero (Trentino)."

"A similar pattern can be observed in the modern-day Trentino region, with frequencies reaching 49% in Val Primiero (Coia et al., 2013)."

So we'd have for haplo G-M201 a frequency of 9.2% in Trentino-Alto Adige and 49% in Val Primiero. They're new for me.

@torzio
I've checked the STRs from Val Primiero. Only 15 markers; anyway, almost all samples (19 out of 20) seem to point to G-L497 (I used Nevgen), which would not be that surprising if true. This hypothetical absolute G-L497 frequency would be even higher than that one confirmed by Berger for G-L497 in Paznaun Valley in Austria (40%).
Val Primiero have a population close to 10k (twice as big as Paznaun), and I wonder if this interesting (supposed) G-L497 spot would "continue" in Belluno province along Gosaldo etc.

Beautiful place, btw. :)
primiero1.jpg



@bigsnake49
You're right. It's not a "paper" in the sense we generally use here in the forum.


the Coia paper
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0081704


the austrian tyrol paper has about 80% plus of G-L497 .................I have placed this paper here many times

[url]https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23948323/

[/URL]
 
the austrian tyrol paper has about 80% plus of G-L497 .................I have placed this paper here many times
Notice that actually 80% of the G-M201 men in those Austrian valleys belong to G-L497. The G-L497 absolute frequencý would reach the max. of 40%, possibly lower than Val Primiero's (if these samples are indeed G-L497 mostly, as I think they could be).
 

This thread has been viewed 5109 times.

Back
Top