New map of mtDNA haplogroup U4

Maciamo

Veteran member
Admin
Messages
10,065
Reaction score
3,459
Points
113
Location
Lothier
Ethnic group
Italo-celto-germanic
Here is another mtDNA map. Haplogroup U4 in particularly common in Balto-Slavic and to a lower extent also in other Y-DNA R1a populations (including Turkic and Altaic). The highest percentages of U4 are observed among the Chuvash (16.4%) and Bashkirs (14.8%) of the Volga-Ural region, who have respectively 31% and 26% of R1a. In the Caucasus U4 peaks among the Georgians (8.4%), Dargins (6.4%) and Kumyks (6.3%), the three ethnic groups who also happen to have the highest levels of R1a in the region (9%, 13% and 8.5% respectively). U4 is only completely absent from the North Ossetians, who also lack R1a.

Likewise the Cantabrians in northern Spain mark a hotspot of U4 in southwest Europe and also have unusually high levels of R1a. It's harder to explain the higher frequencies in Catalonia, Béarn and in western Loire Valley, except that all of them have exceptionally high levels of R1b-DF27 (especially SRY2627). There may have been a founder effect on the maternal side in the Indo-Europeans who brought this subclade of R1b. The Basques did not inherit it because they preserved most of their pre-Indo-European mtDNA.

U4 is expectedly absent from Sardinia and Corsica, who both lack any R1a on the paternal side.

Oddly enough the Kurds, who have the highest levels of R1a in the Middle East, don't seem to have any U4 lineages.

It's hard to explain how the Benelux got such high percentages of U4, but that may be due to the small sample size (although the results are comparable for Belgium and the Netherlands, both around 6 to 6.5%).

mtDNA-U4-map.png


UPDATE 1:

Another explanation for the elevated U4 frequency in the Benelux, western France and Catalonia is that these lineages have survived in those regions since the Mesolithic. U4 has been found in Mesolithic Portugal, Germany and Sweden. No Mesolithic DNA from the Benelux or France has been tested to date, and there is only one sample from Mesolithic Spain (U5b1 from Navarre). It has been proven that Mesolithic hunter-gatherers from Iberia and Scandinavia were very close autosomally and that their mtDNA both included U4 and U5. Their Y-DNA is unknown yet, but besides the obvious haplogroup I it is not impossible that they possessed R1a lineages as well. Those would be the oldest branches of R1a like M420, SRY1532 and perhaps M17. The Mesolithic hunter-gatherers might have eventually been surrounded by Neolithic farmers and let their women marry into rich farmers' families. The paternal R1a lineages of hunter-gatherers would have remained low while the maternal U4 lineages who had integrated the Neolithic population would have grown much faster. Sampietro et al. provides the first evidence that U4 lineages did integrate farming communities in Catalonia during the Neolithic.

The lower incidence of U4 in countries with relatively high percentages of R1a like Hungary, Romania and Bulgaria can be explained by the fact that a lot of this R1a is of non-Slavic origin, and was brought mostly by Central Asian invaders like the Huns, the Alans, the Eurasian Avars, the Magyars, the Khazars and the Bulgars. In the Balkans and Carpathians, only the Serbs have an elevated frequency of U4, which is concordant with the fact that they are more Slavic than all of their neighbours (the Croats, Bosnians and Bulgarians being Slavicised people rather than true ethnic Slavs).

UPDATE 2: a detailed page about the origins, history, distribution and subclades of haplogroup U4 is now available here.
 
Last edited:
Oddly enough the Kurds, who have the highest levels of R1a in the Middle East, don't seem to have any U4 lineages.

true, but than we seem to have allot of combined U lineages in general. Could it be that some of the U* was just not tested for deeper clades or is it confirmed to be just U*?
Though I appreciate Palistos work and his blog in general, I have my doubts that the mtDNA frequencies are really representative because I do not agree on Palistos methodology in this specific case.

I am totally against taking all samples of studies together and than determining the frequency in percentage. Simply out of one reason. The study likely were taken in different territories. One study, though testing a much more densely populated city might has much less samples than a study taken from one single village. Than this one village would be more representative for the whole ethnicity than the sample taken from a much larger city. Simply taking all samples together could falsify the results.

And when I look at the studies and where they took their samples and than compare the sample size to the total number of people around the area. I feel confirmed about my thoughts.

I am not saying the results are incorrect or wrong. But I assume that this methodology might have caused a slight "shift" in the frequency of some specific Haplogroups.

Also I do assume that beside U4 other Haplogroups like T, HV and J have also connection to R1a, since they were found in archaeological sides of R1a bearers.
 
true, but than we seem to have allot of combined U lineages in general. Could it be that some of the U* was just not tested for deeper clades or is it confirmed to be just U*?

I mistook, there is actually 0.6% of U4 in Kurdistan. That doesn't change anything for the map though. There isn't any U* among the Kurds. The U lineages include exclusively U1 (4.5%), U2 (1.1%), U3 (2.8%), U4 (0.6%), U5 (1.7%), U7 (8.5%), U8b (2.8%). The Mesopotamian U7 and Anatolian U1 are clearly dominant.
 
Thanks Maciamo

U4a3 roots here. Only 2 U4a3 matches on 23andMe from 1,738 matches. My cousin also only has 2 matches from 1,856 !!
 
What is it with the Benelux; more K, more V, more U4 (if enough data)? Can it be the Benelux lay outside the "main flux" of people after neolithic, and therefore these groups were quite well preserved? Or is it just a founder effect (at least, for I know the Netherlands did not have many inhabitants in ancient times).
 
Very good map. I've also observed the apparent local maximum of U4 in Cornwall, and come from that matrilineal extraction myself. However, it doesn't seem like a purely genetic expansion within the population, as the U4 in Cornwall seems to consist of many otherwise unrelated U4 subclades. So it's probably due to an actual population expansion of some sort.

In case anyone is interested: My subclade is predicted as U4a2.
 
only the Serbs have an elevated frequency of U4, which is concordant with the fact that they are more Slavic than all of their neighbours (the Croats, Bosnians and Bulgarians being Slavicised people rather than true ethnic Slavs).
How are Serbs more slavic than Croats, in all the maps and results i've seen Croats are more northern shifted.
 
My father as me is Albanian and his mtdna is U4c1.. what’s its origin in the Balkans!?


Sent from my iPad using Eupedia Forum
 
I’m Albanian with U4a1 maternal haplogroup from my aromanian/ vlach grandmother
 
I have a huge % of Balkan DNA and no verbal paper history of it
 

This thread has been viewed 40464 times.

Back
Top