Do you know how much E-V13 there is in Pontians? I believe it is close to 10%.
There's 17 E1b (2.2%) and 46 R1b (6.1%) in the FTDNA project, make of it what you will.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Do you know how much E-V13 there is in Pontians? I believe it is close to 10%.
I used to believe that Southern Italians were Mycenaean-like before the Greek colonization even started, but the leaked samples does not show it so I changed my mind. Sure they had regional differences but still it turned out to be wrong. I am not sure how did this 33% EBA Anatolian and native population in Southern Italy remained unmolested till 300BC, but you are entitled to your opinion.
Even if for example Ancient Greeks replaced the entire population of Southern Italy (they were probably below 50% when you count all provinces together but still) you still need a more eastern source to model Southern Italians. And I find hard to believe that Native Italians were more eastern than Ancient Greeks genetically.
Of course the percentages are arguable, ~50% East Med input and later 20% Germanic input in Tuscany is beyond point too high.
^^Again, Daunians are not "Native" to Puglia, they only arrive in the LBA. Furthermore, the "recent admixture" with CHG-richer people among the Daunians is possibly them mixing with the population at large.
There are some new hints I have recognized about Y-Dna in Balkans and Italy. (In many regions.)
But until more papers come up I wont vocalize myself because it seems that it bothers many people here.
What is the current consensus on this CHG component? Seems for some samples it predates IE peoples, and might have come as a package with EEF? or at some point after EEF.
Have not looked into it. Anything to be taken from the last few papers regarding this particular CHG input?
[FONT="]Steppe-pastoralist-related ancestry reached Central Europe by at least 2500 bc, whereas Iranian farmer-related ancestry was present in Aegean Europe by at least 1900 bc. However, the spread of these ancestries into the western Mediterranean, where they have contributed to many populations that live today, remains poorly understood. Here, we generated genome-wide ancient-DNA data from the Balearic Islands, Sicily and Sardinia, increasing the number of individuals with reported data from 5 to 66. The oldest individual from the Balearic Islands (~2400 bc) carried ancestry from steppe pastoralists that probably derived from west-to-east migration from Iberia, although two later Balearic individuals had less ancestry from steppe pastoralists. In Sicily, steppe pastoralist ancestry arrived by ~2200 bc, in part from Iberia; Iranian-related ancestry arrived by the mid-second millennium bc, contemporary to its previously documented spread to the Aegean; and there was large-scale population replacement after the Bronze Age. In Sardinia, nearly all ancestry derived from the island’s early farmers until the first millennium bc, with the exception of an outlier from the third millennium bc, who had primarily North African ancestry and who—along with an approximately contemporary Iberian—documents widespread Africa-to-Europe gene flow in the Chalcolithic. Major immigration into Sardinia began in the first millennium bc and, at present, no more than 56–62% of Sardinian ancestry is from its first farmers. This value is lower than previous estimates, highlighting that Sardinia, similar to every other region in Europe, has been a stage for major movement and mixtures of people.
[/FONT]
Fernandes et al. 2020
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41559-020-1102-0
To explore the genetic turnover and the contribution of the local groups to the newly formed BA genetic profile in Iberia, we systematically tested a series of qpAdm models. We started by using the distal ancestry sources Anatolia_N, WHG, GoyetQ2, Yamnaya_Samara, and Iran_N to model the genetic ancestry components of Iberian BA groups (table S2.10 and fig. S6). We found that the local traces of GoyetQ2, a characteristic but variable component of southern Iberia CA individuals, were no longer detectable, suggesting a dissolution of geographic substructure in BA Iberia with respect to HG ancestry. We explain this by the spread of steppe-related ancestry from North to South (7) that also contributed northern and central Iberian ancestry to the South, diluting the subtle GoyetQ2 signal to a level beyond the limits of detection (text S8). By using the same qpAdm model, we also observed that Almoloya_Argar_Early, Almoloya_Argar_Late, SE_CabezoRedondo_BA, and Bastida_Argar cannot be modeled with Yamnaya_Samara as a single source but find better support with a combination of Iran_N and Yamnaya_Samara, however, without reaching P values ≥0.05 in Almoloya_Argar_Early and Late and SE_CabezoRedondo_BA (table S2.10 and fig. S6). These El Argar groups (Almoloya and Bastida) are also slightly shifted to the right on the PC1 axis, in the direction of Mediterranean BA groups with excess Iran_N-like ancestry, such as “Minoans,” who only carry Iran_N-like ancestry but not steppe-related ancestry, or “Mycenaeans,” who carry a mix of both (71), and that has also been shown for some BA individuals from Sicily_MBA (51) and for Sardinians here (Fig. 3A).
Villalba-Mouco et al. 2021
https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.abi7038
Raveane et al. 2019
Although the details of the origins of this signature are still uncharacterized, it may have been present as early as the Bronze Age in Southern Italy (data file S4). The very low presence of CHG signatures in Sardinia and in older Italian samples (Remedello and Iceman), but its occurrence in modern-day Southern Italians, might be explained by different scenarios not mutually exclusive: (i) population structure among early foraging groups across Italy, reflecting different affinities to CHG; (ii) the presence in Italy of different Neolithic contributions, characterized by a different proportion of CHG-related ancestry; (iii) the combination of a post-Neolithic, prehistoric CHG-enriched contribution with a previous AN-related Neolithic layer; and (iv) a substantial historical contribution from Southeastern Europe across the whole of Southern Italy...
No major structure has been highlighted so far in pre-Neolithic Italian samples (6). An arrival of the CHG-related component in Southern Italy from the Southern part of the Balkan Peninsula, including the Peloponnese, is compatible with the identification of genetic corridors linking the two regions (Fig. 1E) (9) and the presence of Southern European ancient signatures in Italy (Fig. 2). The temporal appearance of CHG signatures in Anatolia and Southern East Europe in the Late Neolithic/Bronze Age suggests its relevance for post-Neolithic contributions (33). Our results suggest contributions from ancestries additional to the three “canonical” ones considered so far in the literature (WHG, AN, and SBA). The differential distribution of these ancestries contributed to the differentiation observed between Northern and Southern Italian clusters. Additional analyses of aDNA samples from around this time in Italy are expected to clarify what ancient scenario might best support the structure related to ancient ancestry composition presented here.
https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.aaw3492
The origins of the Bronze Age Minoan and Mycenaean cultures have puzzled archaeologists for more than a century. We assembled genome-wide data from nineteen ancient individuals, including Minoans from Crete, Mycenaeans from mainland Greece, and their eastern neighbours from southwestern Anatolia. We show that Minoans and Mycenaeans were genetically similar, having at least three quarters of their ancestry from the first Neolithic farmers of western Anatolia and the Aegean1,2 , and most of the remainder from ancient populations like those of the Caucasus3
and Iran4,5 . However, the Mycenaeans differed from Minoans in deriving additional ancestry from an ultimate source related to the hunter-gatherers of eastern Europe and Siberia6–8 , introduced via a proximal source related to either the inhabitants of either the Eurasian steppe1,6,9 or Armenia4,9. Modern Greeks resemble the Mycenaeans, but with some additional dilution of the early Neolithic ancestry. Our results support the idea of continuity but not isolation in the history of populations of the Aegean, before and after the time of its earliest civilizations.
Lazaridis et al. 2017
https://www.nature.com/articles/nature23310
[FONT="]Similar to early farmers from other parts of Europe, Neolithic individuals from central Italy project near Anatolian farmers in PCA (13, 14, 17–19) (Fig. 2A). However, ADMIXTURE reveals that, in addition to ancestry from northwestern Anatolia farmers, all of the Neolithic individuals that we studied carry a small amount of another component that is found at high levels in Neolithic Iranian farmers and Caucasus hunter-gatherers (CHG) (Fig. 2B and fig. S9). This contrasts with contemporaneous central European and Iberian populations who carry farmer ancestry predominantly from northwestern Anatolia (fig. S12). Furthermore, qpAdm modeling suggests that Neolithic Italian farmers can be modeled as a two-way mixture of ~5% local hunter-gatherer ancestry and ~95% ancestry of Neolithic farmers from central Anatolia or northern Greece (table S7), who also carry additional CHG (or Neolithic Iranian) ancestry (fig. S12) (14). These findings point to different or additional source populations involved in the Neolithic transition in Italy compared to central and western Europe.Antonio et al. 2019[/FONT]
https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.aay6826
Aneli et al. 2021
[FONT="]Amhara_NAF can be used as a proxy for the Non-African component in modern Ethiopian individuals that was tentatively linked to the Sea People, a Bronze Age nomadic seafaring population[/FONT][FONT="]22, 24[/FONT][FONT="]. Together with Minoans and Roman Republicans, this component can be broadly modelled as a Pan-Mediterranean population (constituted by AN and IN/CHG components) with the addition of WHG and Steppe-related ancestry in Roman Republicans. When modelled also with Minoans and Amhara_NAF, which roughly proxies the same ancestral signature, the majority of the samples required an additional CHG/IN contribution (two-way admixtures in [/FONT]Figure S5B,C[FONT="]) as well as Steppe-related and WHG.
[/FONT]
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.07.30.454498v1.full
Previous surveys on the ancient genetic legacy of Southern Italy pointed to genetic contributions linking Southern Italy and Mediterranean Greek islands with Anatolia and the Caucasus tracing back to migratory events occurred during the Neolithic and the Bronze Age, in which the Mediterranean served as a preferential crossroad3,13,27. In particular, while the expansion of Anatolian Neolithic farmers significantly impacted all the Peninsula, differential Bronze-Age contributions were observed for Southern Italy with respect to Northern Italian populations. Bronze Age influences in the gene pool of Southern Italians have been in fact associated to a non-steppe Caucasian-related ancestry carried along the Mediterranean shores at the same time, but independently from the Pontic-Caspian Steppe migrations that occurred through Continental Europe. Consistently with this viewpoint, genetic analyses performed by comparing our modern populations with the main ancient ancestral sources have displayed the clustering of analysed Southern Italian groups with Neolithic and Bronze Age samples from Anatolian, Aegean Minoan and Mycenaean populations, as opposed to the affinity of Northern Italy with Late-Neolithic and Bronze-Age samples from continental Europe (Suppl. Figure S8). Accordingly, both f3-outgroup, qpGraph and qpAdmixture analyses (Fig. 4, Suppl. Figure S9, Suppl. Figure S10) revealed influences related to a Steppe ancestry in the Northern Italian groups, instead paralleled in Southern Italy by an analogous Caucasian-related contribution from a non-Steppe CHG/Iran_N source. Importantly, the same ancestral sources are equally shared both by the present-day “open” (i.e. not-isolated) Southern Italian populations of Benevento, Castrovillari and Catanzaro, as well as by the geographically and linguistically-isolated communities of the Aspromonte mountain area (Fig. 4, Suppl. Table S8), thus signaling a common genetic background that possibly predates the linguistic hypotheses originally suggested about the times of formation of the Greco language in Southern Italy. Accordingly, we hypothesize that the genetic continuity between Southern Italian populations and the other Mediterranean groups may date back to these Neolithic and post-Neolithic events and may have been subsequently maintained and in some cases reinforced by continuous and overlapping gene flows following similar paths of diffusion and interaction between populations, among which the migrations of Greek-speaking people during the classical era (Magna Graecia) and/or in Byzantine and subsequent times. Therefore, the observed patterns could be linked to a tendency to mobility that has always characterized these populations, resulting in continuous cultural and genetic exchanges over time.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-021-82591-9
There are some new hints I have recognized about Y-Dna in Balkans and Italy. (In many regions.)
But until more papers come up I wont vocalize myself because it seems that it bothers many people here.
Thanks for the info Pax. Surprised Calabria is overlooked, I feel the Oenotrians and/or the populous Greek colonies would solve the puzzle
Well, I think enough papers have come out for me to make my point legitimate.
The only thing that bothers me, is that you have preference for modeling, because it makes you look more historically native to Albania (who knows, you could even be in the ball park of being right about that, idk). Yet you want to criticize others for what you perceive as the very thing you are doing yourself.
Given all of the examples I have shown above in my post to Archetype0ne, from very recent papers, why is my modeling here less legitimate than yours?
I don't think it is accurate to say that there was no subsequent historical event that impacted Southern Italian genetics, since the Bronze age. But as Sarno et al. 2021 hypothesizes, there seem to indeed be genetic continuity since then, which was re-enforced by subsequent migrations.
Do we have any Y-DNA breakdown of modern Apuglians?
What I find highly interesting is the significant percentages of R1a-M17 in Apulia, Calabria Ionica, and especially Grecia Salentina, and the paucity of J1 even in the south.
For those who may have forgotten, the Valle Borbera is listed as Piemonte, but that's an accident of recent map drawing politics; the villages all speak a Ligurian dialect and even the names of the villages contain the word "Ligure". So, those are isolated Ligurians, who, as you can see, are very high in R1b, especially U-152, but also have 12.9% of G2a-497, and barely any E-V13. That, to me, and contrary to some of the speculation introduced to this board, speaks to a maritime spread of E-V13 in the Ligurians.
As for Tortona/Vorghera, they're in a no man's land between Lombardia, Piemonte and Emilia.
As I've expounded upon before, these mountain communities of the Appennines are pretty similar in genetic make-up, I think, as they are in culture. Cavalli Sforza speculated these were the refugial areas of the Celt-Ligurians. I wish they could be tested against ancient samples from there, if we ever get some, before all the older people with all four grandparents from the area are dead.
Valle Borbera: lots of burly, rather portly men with big, broad, round skulls for the most part, as there are in the Appennines of Emilia.
STEFANO VALLA e MATTEO BURRONE "" Monferrina "" - YouTube
CORO SPONTANEO "" Bella Angiolina "" - YouTube
p.s
about the r1a in significant % in south italy it is truly suprising
it is interesting that they also carry 3.5% e-m35* 3/85 ( i know its not high but still)
since the markers: m81, m78 and m123 were tested and been found negetive for these samples
they might belong e-pf2431 under e-L19
that wasn't tested here ....
https://www.yfull.com/tree/E-PF2431/
they are interesting population indeed
p.s
about the r1a in significant % in south italy it is truly suprising
This thread has been viewed 147699 times.