New map of mtDNA haplogroup L

Maciamo

Veteran member
Admin
Messages
10,070
Reaction score
3,474
Points
113
Location
Lothier
Ethnic group
Italo-celto-germanic
MtDNA haplogroup L is the oldest maternal branch of humanity comprises almost all the lineages in sub-Saharan Africa. All Eurasian haplogroups descend from L3, the subclade that is the most common in the Arabian peninsula and North-East Africa. All four top branches of L (L0, L1, L2 and L3) are nevertheless found in North Africa, the Middle East and Europe.



The correlation between mtDNA L and Y-DNA E1b1b (the main African paternal lineage) is striking, although expected. But what is more interesting is the lack of correlation between E-V13, the main European branch of E1b1b, and mtDNA L. While the distribution of Franco-Iberian E-M81 and the Near Eastern E-M123 match fairly well that of mtDNA L, one could wonder why the southern Balkans, where E-V13 makes up between 10 and 50% of the paternal lineages, have only 0.4% of mtDNA L. Haplogroup L is actually present at trace frequency (0.2 to 0.5%) in most of Eastern and Central Europe, and is only totally absent in Finland, Baltic countries, Croatia, Slovenia, Austria, and North-East Italy, and the Caucasus (except among the Ossetians and Nogays). This actually correlates well with the distribution of E-V13, which means that when the E-V13 population reached Europe, only about 1% of the women who accompanied them belonged to mtDNA L. In contrast, in Iberia and France, the percentage of mtDNA L women accompanying E-M81 men would have been between 20 and 40% (U6 would have been another major lineage).

In Egypt, Jordan, Palestine and Syria, mtDNA L makes up almost exactly half the percentage of E1b1b lineages. In Lebanon, Turkey and Kurdistan, the proportion falls to 10-15%, which means that E1b1b men advanced (presumably during the Neolithic) north marrying more often local women than women from their tribe. By the time they reached the Balkans and southern Italy, most maternal lineages had become local or picked up on the way. The same phenomenon could have happened for both E-M123 and E-V13, with the difference that E-V13 would have boomed in the Balkans due to a founder effect in the Early Neolithic population. An alternative possibility is that E-V13 mixed with non-African women (probably haplogroup H) in North Africa during the Late Palaeolithic or Mesolithic before crossing over to southern Europe. This hybrid population could have been living in North Africa for millennia before crossing the Mediterranean, perhaps during one of the periods when the Sahara was green and teeming with large animals.

In Western Europe, E-M81 and mtDNA L were almost certainly in Europe before the Neolithic. They were one of the many groups of hunter-gatherers roaming across Europe, alongside Y-DNA I and R1a and mtDNA H1, H3, U2, U4, U5, U6, V and W. Considering that H1, U5, U6 and V are all present among the Berbers of Northwest Africa, it is likely that E-M81 men belonged to these lineages as well. It is interesting how Cantabria and Auvergne both have unusually elevated percentages of both E-M81 and R1a-SRY1532 (the Mesolithic variant) and both have a higher percentage of mtDNA L, U4, U5 and V than their neighbours.

The L lineages in Central Italy were surely brought by the Etruscans from Anatolia. Additional lineages may have come to Rome during the imperial period.

The slightly higher percentage (0.5%) of L in Serbia and Bosnia corresponds to a known hotspot of Y-haplogroup T (a lineage closely linked to E1b1b).


EDIT : It's also interesting to see the correlation between mtDNA L and the African autosomal admixture from the Dodecad K=12.

African-admixture.gif
 
Last edited:
MtDNA haplogroup L is the oldest maternal branch of humanity comprises almost all the lineages in sub-Saharan Africa. All Eurasian haplogroups descend from L3, the subclade that is the most common in the Arabian peninsula and North-East Africa. All four top branches of L (L0, L1, L2 and L3) are nevertheless found in North Africa, the Middle East and Europe.



Haplogroup L is actually present at trace frequency (0.2 to 0.5%) in most of Eastern and Central Europe, and is only totally absent in Finland, Baltic countries, Croatia, Slovenia, Austria, and North-East Italy, and the Caucasus (except among the Ossetians and Nogays). This actually correlates well with the distribution of E-V13, which means that when the E-V13 population reached Europe, only about 1% of the women who accompanied them belonged to mtDNA L. In contrast, in Iberia and France, the percentage of mtDNA L women accompanying E-M81 men would have been between 20 and 40% (U6 would have been another major lineage).

It is interesting how Cantabria and Auvergne both have unusually elevated percentages of both E-M81 and R1a-SRY1532 (the Mesolithic variant) and both have a higher percentage of mtDNA L, U4, U5 and V than their neighbours.

The L lineages in Central Italy were surely brought by the Etruscans from Anatolia. Additional lineages may have come to Rome during the imperial period.

The slightly higher percentage (0.5%) of L in Serbia and Bosnia corresponds to a known hotspot of Y-haplogroup T (a lineage closely linked to E1b1b).

- It is more likely that L in the middle-east part did not go to the west and was not part of the Etruscans. This years paper from Ghiotto clearly states the etruscans left Anatolia no later than 7600 years ago and settled in Italy 2800 years ago. Where did they go, ?..............
The very old old story that etruscans came from Tunisia and Libya might have some merit.

- the western Europe 2.5% part and above ( except central France and beyond) , look typical Carthaginian/Phoenician marker , maybe a large number of women as cooks and whores accompanying Hannibal

- I do not know of any hotspot of T in serbia/bosnia, that patch represent the hotspot for N1 ( ydna) . I can only imagine that L marker there coming from Italy, maybe as a filler of population after the Romans butchered the illyrians in the illyrian revolt of 9BC onwards.

E over time





for curiosity, my mtdna ancient line

L1'2'3'4'5'6
L2'3'4'5'6
L2'3'4'6
L3'4'6
L3'4
L3
N
R
R0
HV
H etc etc
 
E over time
9qq.PNG

Eh, that's my old map of E1b1b migration from 5 years ago. I had removed it from Eupedia because I had doubts about the migration paths.
 
So high in Iberia ? I've done my own research and by no means it arrives at the 7.5-10% as you put in South Spain...here are some samples that I have :

Spain n = 15/813 1.84% Achilli et al 2007
Spain, n = 0/686 0.00% Rhouda 2006
Spain n = 0/233 0.00%, Lopez-Parra 2009
Spain n = 1/251 0.40% Plaza et al. 2003
Spain n = 9/312 2.90% Álvarez et al. 2007
Spain n = 1/108 0.90% Casas et al. 2006 *
Spain n = 2/226 0.88% Maca-Meyer et al. 2003
Spain n = 15/742 2.02% García et al. 2011
Spain (Basques) n = 0/462 0.00% García et al. 2011
Spain, Zamora Province n =10/214 4.67% Álvarez et al. 2010
Spain, n = 8/496 1.61% Pereira et al. 2005

Spain Total n = 51 / 4.329 1.18%


Also other countries you don't have marked such as :

Finnish n = 1/50 2.00% Sajantila et al. 1995
Finland n = 1/121 0.83% Achilli et al 2007
Finns n = 3/580 0.52% Pliss et al. 2005

-----

Poland n = 1/542 0.20% Achilli et al 2007
Poland n = 1/436 0.22% Malyarchuk et al., 2002
Poles n = 1/849 0.12% Malyarchuk et al., 2008

-----

Slovaks n = 2/207 0.97% Malyarchuk et al.2006
Czechs n = 1/279 0.36% Malyarchuk et al., 2008

-----

Norway n = 1/74 1.40% Passarino et al 2002
Norwegians n = 2/397 0.50% Pliss et al. 2005
 
So high in Iberia ? I've done my own research and by no means it arrives at the 7.5-10% as you put in South Spain...here are some samples that I have :

Spain n = 15/813 1.84% Achilli et al 2007
Spain, n = 0/686 0.00% Rhouda 2006
Spain n = 0/233 0.00%, Lopez-Parra 2009
Spain n = 1/251 0.40% Plaza et al. 2003
Spain n = 9/312 2.90% Álvarez et al. 2007
Spain n = 1/108 0.90% Casas et al. 2006 *
Spain n = 2/226 0.88% Maca-Meyer et al. 2003
Spain n = 15/742 2.02% García et al. 2011
Spain (Basques) n = 0/462 0.00% García et al. 2011
Spain, Zamora Province n =10/214 4.67% Álvarez et al. 2010
Spain, n = 8/496 1.61% Pereira et al. 2005

Spain Total n = 51 / 4.329 1.18%


For Spain I used the data from : Alvarez et al. 2007 (n=265), Álvarez-Iglesias et al. 2009 (n=515), Casas et al. 2006 (n=418), Cordoso et al. 2010 (n=60), Corte-Real et al. 1996 (n=41), Corte-Real et al. 1996 & Richards et al. 1996 (n=30), Crespillo et al. 2000 (n=118), Falachi et al. 2006 (n=133), Garcia et al. 2011 (n=131), Gonzalez et al. 2003 (n=43), Larruga et al. 2001 (n=149), Maca-Meyer et al. 2003 (n=160), Picornell et al. 2005 (n=183), Pinto et al. 1996 (n=18), Plaza et al. 2003 (n=95), Prieto et al. 2011 (n=365), Salas et al. 1998 (n=92).

Casas et al. 2006 found 7.4% of L in southern Iberia (n=310).

Your average has been significantly lowered by taking into account the data from Rhouda et al. 2006, which is a actually study about Morocco, and apparently a pretty controversial or disreputable paper since it was not published by any scientific journal and has virtually disappeared from the Web. This study also fails to mention where the Spanish samples came from. If the 0% of L is correct, then it might be based on purely Basque samples.

Then you didn't notice that the data of Achilli et al. 2007 was mostly taken from older studies, including Plaza et al.

Also other countries you don't have marked such as :

Finnish n = 1/50 2.00% Sajantila et al. 1995
Finland n = 1/121 0.83% Achilli et al 2007
Finns n = 3/580 0.52% Pliss et al. 2005

For Finland I also have Finnilä et al. 2001 (n=189), Hedmann et al. 2007 (n=196), Kittles et al. 1999 (n=74), Lahermo et al. 1996 (n=32), Meinilä et al. 2001 (401), and Richards et al. 1996 (29). Average 0.38%.

Poland n = 1/542 0.20% Achilli et al 2007
Poland n = 1/436 0.22% Malyarchuk et al., 2002
Poles n = 1/849 0.12% Malyarchuk et al., 2008

That's also what I have. As I explained above, most countries in Central and Eastern Europe have between 0.2 and 0.5% of mtDNA L. But the map starts at 0.5% and only Serbia and Bosnia have that level in Eastern Europe.

Slovaks n = 2/207 0.97% Malyarchuk et al.2006
Czechs n = 1/279 0.36% Malyarchuk et al., 2008

For Slovakia I also have the data for Lehocký et al. 2008 (n=374), which gives an average of 0.34% with Malyarchuk et al.

Norway n = 1/74 1.40% Passarino et al 2002
Norwegians n = 2/397 0.50% Pliss et al. 2005

For Norway I also have Opdal et al. 1998 (215) and Helgasson et al. 2001 (n=323). Average 0.32%.
 
Your average has been significantly lowered by taking into account the data from Rhouda et al. 2006, which is a actually study about Morocco, and apparently a pretty controversial or disreputable paper since it was not published by any scientific journal and has virtually disappeared from the Web. This study also fails to mention where the Spanish samples came from. If the 0% of L is correct, then it might be based on purely Basque samples..
Nope, the study can be found here. It's from the University of Zaragoza in collaboration with a moroccan university. As for the Spanish sample, it's not from Basques but actually from Madrid and Zaragoza and taken from another study (Dahmany et al.)
 
Hello,
I'm very curious about the Etruscan origin of mtdna L3 in Italy. Could anyone tell me more about it? I know L3 is really rare in Europe but it's typically African. I'm from Italy (Liguria), and my ancestors (as far as I know) are European..but according to 23 and me my maternal haplogroup is L3f1b. So, could I have very remote Etruscan origins?

Thank you :)
 
Hello,
I'm very curious about the Etruscan origin of mtdna L3 in Italy. Could anyone tell me more about it? I know L3 is really rare in Europe but it's typically African. I'm from Italy (Liguria), and my ancestors (as far as I know) are European..but according to 23 and me my maternal haplogroup is L3f1b. So, could I have very remote Etruscan origins?

Thank you :)

Why would you assume that the source is in the Etruscans?
 
Why would you assume that the source is in the Etruscans?

Because Maciamo said:

"In Western Europe, E-M81 and mtDNA L were almost certainly in Europe before the Neolithic. They were one of the many groups of hunter-gatherers roaming across Europe, alongside Y-DNA I and R1a and mtDNA H1, H3, U2, U4, U5, U6, V and W. Considering that H1, U5, U6 and V are all present among the Berbers of Northwest Africa, it is likely that E-M81 men belonged to these lineages as well. It is interesting how Cantabria and Auvergne both have unusually elevated percentages of both E-M81 and R1a-SRY1532 (the Mesolithic variant) and both have a higher percentage of mtDNA L, U4, U5 and V than their neighbours.

The L lineages in Central Italy were surely brought by the Etruscans from Anatolia. Additional lineages may have come to Rome during the imperial period."

I would have thought that L would have come from either the Roman period or the period when moslems from North Africa occupied southern Italy and Sicily. However, that wouldn't explain why L is found at low levels in Germany, Denmark and southern Sweden, or why it's absent from southern Italy other than Sicily, if that is in fact correct. So there must have been some early L in Europe. Since it's common in Anatolia, and since the Etruscans apparently came from Anatolia, I can see why it's assumed that the Etruscans brought L from Anatolia when you look at its distribution in Italy (except in Sicily, where I still think it could be partly recent North African).
 
Thank you for your answers :)
That's precisely what I thought. Looking at the map it's just curious how L3 mtDNA is spread. No sign , for instance, in Puglia and Calabria, but higher percentage in Toscana and Liguria.
Another curious thing is that my 23andMe results show no African admixture. They show, on the other hand, < 0.1 % of East Asian and Native American.

That really made me think "Who on earth was my ancestral MOM?"
 
Ghirotto et al 2013 tested 30 Etruscan corpses (6th-1st century BC) from 6 diff. sites;
http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0055519#pone.0055519.s009

The result was that the Etruscan maternal-lineage is identical to Neolithic-Europeans and closest to modern day South Germans; An amateur on the internet determined that most Etruscan mtDNA Hg's were U5, JT and H1b (no mtDNA L);
http://forwhattheywereweare.blogspot.com.es/2013/02/guest-article-by-gail-tonnesen-comments.html

mtDNA L was also not found in any of the older European sites tested so far - whether from the Neolithic, Chalcolithic, Bronze-age or even Paleolithic Cro-Magnons (R0/HV/N*); The complete absence of mtDNA L in ancient Europe - makes mtDNA L a rather new input into Europe with L2 and L1 being West-African and L3 East African;

Cerezo et al 2012
http://genome.cshlp.org/content/22/5/821.full
F1.medium.gif


It is mostly present in modern-day Europe in Iberia (Spain/Portugal) and maybe your ancestral MOM stems from there; Modern-day Tuscany (322 samples / Achilli et al 2008) has 1.8% mtDNA L;
 
@fla88: I wrote this a couple of hours ago and forgot to post it, so this may be a bit redundant.

It's true that certain specific mtDNA "L" clades have been found in Toscana. However, I don't see any reason to assume they were necessarily brought by the Etruscans, if indeed it's ever proven that the Etruscans, even the "elite" Etruscans, are not "native" to Italy in the first place. As Nobody1 pointed out, there is no evidence from ancient DNA that the Etruscans themselves carried it.

Certain mtDNA "L" lineages appear in Syria in the Neolithic. The presence of mtDNA "L" in Toscana could very well also date to the Neolithic. Then, there are all the subsequent movements into the area, including by North Africans in the Roman era, and by southern Italians in more modern times, some of whose ancestors may have picked up this marker from the Saracens who invaded Sicily and some areas of the south in the early Medieval era.

In terms of Liguria, it was settled in the Neolithic by Cardial peoples who could very well have carried a few mtDNA "L" lineages with them. Then, it was a great sea power for many centuries during which a stray mtDNA lineage or two could have been brought home. Finally, although the Saracens never established dominions in the north in any way comparable to what happened in the south, there is a well attested incursion into Provence in which Saracens by way of Spain established a base from there all the way into the Alpine passes in Switzerland, which they controlled for quite some time. In addition to setting themselves up as brigands who could extort money from travelers using the Alpine passes, there is also evidence for some settlement in some parts of Provence. I'm not suggesting that this was a particularly large group or that the incursion lasted very long, but certainly long enough, I would think, to leave a few markers behind. These markers could, with time, have migrated along the coast to Liguria and eventually even into Toscana.
http://www.academia.edu/3537846/Fraxinetum_An_Islamic_Frontier_State_in_Tenth_Century_Provence

Jean Manco's online catalog of ancient DNA is a good resource. I recommend it. From examining it:

No sample of mesolithic DNA has, as of yet, come back mtDNA "L".

This is a catalog of ancient DNA from the Near Eastern Neolithic. You can see the presence of L2a1 in Neolithic Syria.
http://www.ancestraljourneys.org/wasianneolithicdna.shtml

This is the list for ancient DNA from North Africa and the Canary Islands. You can see the presence of both L2 and L3 there.
http://www.ancestraljourneys.org/nafricaadna.shtml

It shows up in Bronze Age Sumerian DNA (L2a1) from 2550 B.C.
http://www.ancestraljourneys.org/ancientdna.shtml

It only shows up in ancient DNA in Europe in Spain:
Tres Montes, Spain, Bell Beaker in 2130 B.C. (Again, it's L2)
http://www.ancestraljourneys.org/ancientdna.shtml
Al Andalus, 1100-1300 AD: L3d, L1b, L2, L2a1.
http://www.ancestraljourneys.org/medievaldna.shtml

This doesn't mean it didn't exist elsewhere; it's just that no evidence has so far shown up.

If anyone is aware of any other ancient mtDNA L samples in western Eurasia, it would be great if we could include it.

As for modern samples, some studies have indeed picked it up in Italy, including in southern Italy, and not just in Sicily, and it has been picked up through individual commercial testing.

In this regard, see this discussion of Ottoni et al on Dienekes' site. Unfortunately, the study is still behind a pay wall, so the following quote, by a poster who claimed to have access, is the only info I have available.
http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2009/10/mtdna-in-southern-italy.html

"Haplogroups L1/L3e, which are typical of South-Saharan Africa (Salas et al. 2002) were found in Calabria (1%), Sicily (2%) and Basilicata (2%)". The poster also states that the math appears to be incorrect, if you can believe it, and the percentages are actually lower.

Maybe someone with institutional access could check the figures.

Btw, the academic data for modern Tuscany is also very inconclusive in my opinion. I often see a 2% mtDNA "L" level posted for Tuscany. However, the study which is often cited as support, the Achilli et al 2007 one, only sampled the small towns of Murlo, Volterra, and the Casentino valley. It was not a representative sample in any way. Indeed, if you take a look at table 1 of that study, you'll see that the percentage is basically due to the finding of 3 mtDNA L3d samples in the town of Volterra. Given the inter-relatedness of small Italian cities, that undoubtedly is a result of founder effect.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1852723/table/TB1/

Even when considering this data only with regard to the Etruscans, while the Etruscans certainly had a presence in those areas, there's no way to validate that they are the ones who brought the lineages to those particular towns. Indeed, the last study on Etruscan mtDNA of which I'm aware, flawed as it is, shows that the mtDNA of actual ancient Etruscans from these areas, which was claimed to have a particular affinity to Anatolia and thus to provide proof for a Bronze Age Anatolian source for the Etruscans has now been shown to be so ancient that it could very well be Neolithic in origin.

That's why I take absolutely no position on the origin of the Etruscans, and won't do so until someone competent does a complete genomic study of attested ancient remains.

The problem is that the testing of ancient samples, particularly in the early years, was often subject to contamination. Also, the typing was and too often still is very cursory, only looking at HVRI sequences, for example, as has been a perennial problem with the testing of Etruscan samples. In order to track the migration history of one's own sequence, it would be necessary to compare one's own FGS mtDNA to the FGS of ancient samples, very few of which have been done for any clade. When they have been done, they are almost never done for real "minority" clades in Europe.
 
Nope, the study can be found here. It's from the University of Zaragoza in collaboration with a moroccan university. As for the Spanish sample, it's not from Basques but actually from Madrid and Zaragoza and taken from another study (Dahmany et al.)

Indeed, it is a perfectly legitimate paper, published at a biochemical conference (Congres International de Biochimie, 2006.) It is in fact the study dealing with the subject of mtDNA L in Spain with the largest sample size of any that have been published. The only people who ever found this study "objectionable" were those with obvious agendas who certainly were not happy with the results, like that "Luis" character, remember his specious manipulations and lies about what it and its related earlier study by the same authors plainly said?:

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/26756-Lies-about-Rhouda-et-al-2006-study-and-MtDna-in-Spain
 
Ghirotto et al 2013 tested 30 Etruscan corpses (6th-1st century BC) from 6 diff. sites;
http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0055519#pone.0055519.s009

The result was that the Etruscan maternal-lineage is identical to Neolithic-Europeans and closest to modern day South Germans;

I found this an interesting passage:

"DNAs from modern humans and cattle in Tuscany show affinities with Near Eastern DNAs, which was interpreted as supporting Herodotus’ narrative [2], [6], but in these studies modern Tuscans were assumed to be descended from Etruscan ancestors, in contrast with ancient DNA evidence [5]."

Do you realize that the implication here is that the modern Tuscan population is more like Near Easterners than the Etruscans were? Apparently some "change" in the population of the area must have happened after the decline of the Etruscans and the subsequent rise of the Romans and their empire. This was all during historical times, not Neolithic or earlier. But apparently it does not bother you as long as it doesn't involve those pesky "Africans".

mtDNA L was also not found in any of the older European sites tested so far - whether from the Neolithic, Chalcolithic, Bronze-age or even Paleolithic Cro-Magnons (R0/HV/N*); The complete absence of mtDNA L in ancient Europe - makes mtDNA L a rather new input into Europe with L2 and L1 being West-African and L3 East African;

Not quite. As Angela pointed out, at least in Iberia this mtDNA was indeed present at least since prehistoric times. It might be of more recent arrival in other places in Europe, though.

It is mostly present in modern-day Europe in Iberia (Spain/Portugal) and maybe your ancestral MOM stems from there; Modern-day Tuscany (322 samples / Achilli et al 2008) has 1.8% mtDNA L;

No need to desperately go seeking to attribute mtDNA L among Italians to somewhere else in Europe, since Italy has plenty of it all by itself, no need for "outside help".
 
Indeed, it is a perfectly legitimate paper, published at a biochemical conference (Congres International de Biochimie, 2006.) It is in fact the study dealing with the subject of mtDNA L in Spain with the largest sample size of any that have been published. The only people who ever found this study "objectionable" were those with obvious agendas who certainly were not happy with the results, like that "Luis" character, remember his specious manipulations and lies about what it and its related earlier study by the same authors plainly said?:

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/26756-Lies-about-Rhouda-et-al-2006-study-and-MtDna-in-Spain

But Luis was Portuguese and IIRC he was combating the castilian rubbish that all Portuguese where of African descent
 
I would like to thank you all for your answers :)

Trying to summerize.. my mtDNA may come from these areas:

- Subsaharan Africa
- North Africa
- East Africa
- Middle East
- Canary Islands
- Iberian Peninsula

Am I correct?
 
I would like to thank you all for your answers :)

Trying to summerize.. my mtDNA may come from these areas:

- Subsaharan Africa
- North Africa
- East Africa
- Middle East
- Canary Islands
- Iberian Peninsula

Am I correct?

add the Levant and Anatolia to that list

Join Gedmatch and this might help you
 
add the Levant and Anatolia to that list

Join Gedmatch and this might help you

thank you :)

I tried many calculators on gedmatch but could you tell me which calculator is more accurate?
 
mtDNA L is actually quite low in Sicily much like the Mediterranean (Italian/Crete/Cypriot) range/average of 1%-3%;
In contrast to the higher Atlantic Spain and Portugal;

Sicily -
Sicily [106 samples / Cali et al 2003] = 0.9%
Sicily [105 samples / Achilli et al 2007] = 1.9%
Sicily [169 samples / Plaza et al 2003] = 0.6%

Italy -
Tuscany [322 samples / Achilli et al 2007] = 1.9%
Marche [813 samples / Achilli et al 2007] = 0.9%
Central Italy [83 samples / Plaza et al 2003] = 1.2%
Lombardy [177samples / Achilli et al 2007] = 0.0%
Piedmont [169 samples / Achilli et al 2007] = 0.0%
Basilicata [92 samples / Ottoni et al 2009] = 2.2%
Apulia/Calabria [226 samples / Achilli et al 2007] = 0.0%

Spain -
Iberia (Spain/Portugal) [310 samples / Casas et al 2006] = 7.4%
Central Spain [50 samples / Plaza et al 2003] = 4.0%
NW Spain [216 samples / Achilli et al 2007] = 3.7%
Galicia [92 samples / Pereira et al 2005] = 3.3%
Spain (Prov. Zamora) [214 samples / Alvarez et al 2010] = 4.7%
Spain (Com. Sayago) [33 samples / Alvarez et al 2010] = 18.1%
Cordoba [108 samples / Casas et al 2006] = 8.3%
Catalonia [101 samples / Alvarez-Iglesias et al 2009] = 2.9%

Portugal -
Portugal [549 samples / Pereira et al 2005] = 5.8%
North Portugal [100 samples / Plaza et al 2003] = 5.0%
Central Portugal [82 samples / Pereira et al 2010] = 9.7%
South Portugal [195 samples / Brehm et al 2003] = 11.3%

@ Angela
The tripple town tests are quite common praxis for mtDNA L;

Tuscany [Achilli et al 2007]: Murlo 1.2% / Volterra 2.6% / Casentino 1.6%
Sicily [Romano et al 2003]: Sciacca 2.3% / Castelamare 0.8% / Ragusa 0.0% / Troina 0.0%
Portugal [Pereira et al 2010]: Coruche 8.7% / Pias 3.9% / Alcacer do Sal 22.0%

The high number for Portugal were given as with the Atlantic-slave trade and slaves from West Africa;
Pereira et al 2010 -
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20737604
 
thank you :)

I tried many calculators on gedmatch but could you tell me which calculator is more accurate?

for me..only the dodecad ones of 3 , 7 and 12b
 

This thread has been viewed 221710 times.

Back
Top