New map of mtDNA haplogroups H1+H3

Maciamo

Veteran member
Admin
Messages
10,070
Reaction score
3,474
Points
113
Location
Lothier
Ethnic group
Italo-celto-germanic
There are now about 100 identified subclades of mt-haplogroup H. Most mitochondrial studies just test H, without mentioning subclades. Fortunately there was one major study on H subclades focusing especially on the two major western and northern European subclades H1 and H3. As these two occur roughly in the same region and probably share the same Palaeolithic origin in the Franco-Iberian LGM refugia, I have decided to put them together for this map. Overall H1 is the most common of the two subclades and apparently the only one found in the Near/Middle East.

I see a particularly strong correlation between H1+H3 and the extend of the Megalithic cultures, including the Bell Beaker culture in Western Europe and the Funnelbeaker culture in Scandinavia. The oldest known H1 dates from Mesolithic Portugal (circa 6500 BCE). H1 and H3 have both been found on several sites from Neolithic Iberia and France, including Megalithic cultures.



The lower incidence of H1 and H3 in the Benelux is due to the higher percentage of other Mesolithic haplogroups in the region, especially U4 and V, but also U2 and W in the Netherlands.

UPDATE: a detailed page about the origins, history, distribution and subclades of haplogroup H is now available here.
 
Last edited:
And I would pretty much agree
 
Thanks for the map. Wow, that's less H1+H3 than I thought for western Europe, but still much. Again, why would the Benelux be different than the surrounding lands?
 
Indeed it pops up in Iberia out of nowhere just like the Bell-Beakers did.
The almost lack in lappland is contrasting with the high incidence in southern scandinavia. Even if H1+H3 originates in paleolithic iberia, it looks like it spread by completely different means and at different times than U5 did. If H1+H3 is really paleolithic then there must have been very isolated hunter-gatherer clans in franco-cantabria, which would be unusual for nomads. Maybe the pyrenees were a genetic barrier between H and U5? Or maybe the mediterranean was the barrier and H1+H3 then came from north africa (Afalou, Mechta, Capsian)? Maybe it originated in north-africa, where it got replaced by subsequent near-easteners but remained conserved in europe? I don't know.
 
Okay so linked to bell-beaker culture, megalithic structures, it seems to have spree from the Cantabrian refuge is the pattern I'm seeing; it's lack of presence in Lappland is due to the missing N1c people at that time so these women mixed with I1 and R1b lineages across north and west Europe.
 
Indeed it pops up in Iberia out of nowhere just like the Bell-Beakers did.
The almost lack in lappland is contrasting with the high incidence in southern scandinavia. Even if H1+H3 originates in paleolithic iberia, it looks like it spread by completely different means and at different times than U5 did. If H1+H3 is really paleolithic then there must have been very isolated hunter-gatherer clans in franco-cantabria, which would be unusual for nomads. Maybe the pyrenees were a genetic barrier between H and U5? Or maybe the mediterranean was the barrier and H1+H3 then came from north africa (Afalou, Mechta, Capsian)? Maybe it originated in north-africa, where it got replaced by subsequent near-easteners but remained conserved in europe? I don't know.

Reinvigorating my old theory about paleolithic mediterraneans, namely those who would be central in various european mediterraneans components from admixtures and who are possibly related to H1/H3 and perhaps HV:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franchthi_Cave
The H1/H3 bearers might have lived in the east-mediterranean during the Epipaleolithic before they have been pushed west to Iberia by near-eastern farmers.
This could explain the lack of H1+H3 in Lappland while the iberian La-Brana sample was autosomally very close to the Saami people. H1 and H3 was just not yet in Iberia at that time.
According to the Wikipedia source the Franchthi inhabitants were good fishermen, making them good candidates for the coastal distribution of the Atlantic_Med component from various calculators and being so strong on the island of Sardinia. The majority of it was certainly distributed by farming, but it still was possibly in europe already during the paleolithic.
 
Okay so linked to bell-beaker culture, megalithic structures, it seems to have spree from the Cantabrian refuge is the pattern I'm seeing; it's lack of presence in Lappland is due to the missing N1c people at that time so these women mixed with I1 and R1b lineages across north and west Europe.

Some 15,000 years elapsed from the end of the Last Glacial Maximum (start of the re-expansion from the LGM refugia) and the beginning of the Bell Beaker culture. A lot could have happened in between. It's hard to know what period was the most important for the spread of H1 and H3. However since no Mesolithic samples to date in northern Europe belonged to hg H, it is better to assume that the expansion of H1 and H3 from Iberia and southern France took place only during the Neolithic and Chalcolithic with the Beaker culture.
 
Reinvigorating my old theory about paleolithic mediterraneans, namely those who would be central in various european mediterraneans components from admixtures and who are possibly related to H1/H3 and perhaps HV:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franchthi_Cave
The H1/H3 bearers might have lived in the east-mediterranean during the Epipaleolithic before they have been pushed west to Iberia by near-eastern farmers.
This could explain the lack of H1+H3 in Lappland while the iberian La-Brana sample was autosomally very close to the Saami people. H1 and H3 was just not yet in Iberia at that time.
According to the Wikipedia source the Franchthi inhabitants were good fishermen, making them good candidates for the coastal distribution of the Atlantic_Med component from various calculators and being so strong on the island of Sardinia. The majority of it was certainly distributed by farming, but it still was possibly in europe already during the paleolithic.

I should have been reading this site more frequently...I thought I was the only one who thought this might be possible. :)

Particularly in regard to mtDNA H, it has a definite starburst pattern emanating from the Middle East...

And look at the Paglicci Cave 25 Gravettian sample. It is listed as HV or RO.
http://www.ancestraljourneys.org/ancientdna.shtml

As you say, it may have spread with the Neolithic as well, in fact most of it probably did, since it's biggest expansion seems to correlate with the Neolithic, but that doesn't mean H wasn't already present, as was HV.

In terms of its spread, I have also wondered if it spread across North Africa and from there into Iberia, but U6 was, I think, already dominant there...I have to check the dates.

If the early Paleolithic culture members were indeed fisherman, then a coastal spread might make more sense, and given the tides and wind currents in the Mediterranean, it would have had to spread, I think, along the northern Mediterranean. (It's counter clockwise from the Middle East from what I understand...and maritime travelers of that time would have bound by those currents and winds.)
 
Interesting to see that Basque and Welsh people have more than 50% of their mtdna haplogroup (H1+h3+J) in common besides having both more than 80% of R1b P312.
 
I should have been reading this site more frequently...I thought I was the only one who thought this might be possible. :)

Particularly in regard to mtDNA H, it has a definite starburst pattern emanating from the Middle East...

And look at the Paglicci Cave 25 Gravettian sample. It is listed as HV or RO.
http://www.ancestraljourneys.org/ancientdna.shtml

As you say, it may have spread with the Neolithic as well, in fact most of it probably did, since it's biggest expansion seems to correlate with the Neolithic, but that doesn't mean H wasn't already present, as was HV.

In terms of its spread, I have also wondered if it spread across North Africa and from there into Iberia, but U6 was, I think, already dominant there...I have to check the dates.

If the early Paleolithic culture members were indeed fisherman, then a coastal spread might make more sense, and given the tides and wind currents in the Mediterranean, it would have had to spread, I think, along the northern Mediterranean. (It's counter clockwise from the Middle East from what I understand...and maritime travelers of that time would have bound by those currents and winds.)

Particularly in regard to mtDNA H, it has a definite starburst pattern emanating from the Middle East...

And look at the Paglicci Cave 25 Gravettian sample. It is listed as HV or RO.
http://www.ancestraljourneys.org/ancientdna.shtml

As you say, it may have spread with the Neolithic as well, in fact most of it probably did, since it's biggest expansion seems to correlate with the Neolithic, but that doesn't mean H wasn't already present, as was HV.

In terms of its spread, I have also wondered if it spread across North Africa and from there into Iberia, but U6 was, I think, already dominant there...I have to check the dates.

If the early Paleolithic culture members were indeed fisherman, then a coastal spread might make more sense, and given the tides and wind currents in the Mediterranean, it would have had to spread, I think, along the northern Mediterranean. (It's counter clockwise from the Middle East from what I understand...and maritime travelers of that time would have bound by those currents and winds.)[/QUOTE]

I checked the dates of the major clades in Behar et al, http://www.cell.com/AJHG/abstract/S0002-9297(12)00146-2

If his dating is correct, these are the oldest dates (BP) for the following:

HV: 19,000

H: 12,846

H13: 12,475

H2: 11, 905.3

H4: 10,000

H1: 9,888.6

H5: 9877.6

H2a2 (CRS): 9126.3

H3: 8919

Looking at this, it doesn't seem likely to me that "H" is Paleolithic, and even Mesolithic is doubtful. If it's about 11,000 years old, and it spread in a starburst pattern from the Middle East, then it developed after the Neolithic transition there.

H1 and H3 are very young, and therefore it seems equally unlikely, if these dates are correct, that they were in any Franco-Cantabrian Refugium.

It's certainly possible that HV had arrived in Europe in the Mesolithic, but it seems to be too young for Paglicci 25, which then perhaps is R0, which is plenty old enough.

As for U6, which is ubiquitous in North Africa, it's much older than "H".

So, until we get a better tested, unambiguous "H" sample in Europe clearly dated to the Mesolithic, I'm going to go with Behar's dates and an emergence in the Middle East after the Neolithic transition, and a northern Mediterranean coastal and then inland spread after that.
 
Angela said:
I checked the dates of the major clades in Behar et al, http://www.cell.com/AJHG/abstract/S0002-9297(12)00146-2

If his dating is correct, these are the oldest dates (BP) for the following:

HV: 19,000

H: 12,846

H13: 12,475

H2: 11, 905.3

H4: 10,000

H1: 9,888.6

H5: 9877.6

H2a2 (CRS): 9126.3

H3: 8919

Looking at this, it doesn't seem likely to me that "H" is Paleolithic, and even Mesolithic is doubtful. If it's about 11,000 years old, and it spread in a starburst pattern from the Middle East, then it developed after the Neolithic transition there.

H1 and H3 are very young, and therefore it seems equally unlikely, if these dates are correct, that they were in any Franco-Cantabrian Refugium.

It's certainly possible that HV had arrived in Europe in the Mesolithic, but it seems to be too young for Paglicci 25, which then perhaps is R0, which is plenty old enough.

As for U6, which is ubiquitous in North Africa, it's much older than "H".

So, until we get a better tested, unambiguous "H" sample in Europe clearly dated to the Mesolithic, I'm going to go with Behar's dates and an emergence in the Middle East after the Neolithic transition, and a northern Mediterranean coastal and then inland spread after that.


Of course also a neolithic origin is possible. But I was talking about the epipaleolithic only, which is basically the same very late time frame as the neolithic, just without farming. Another example: Combe-Capelle
In hindsight I'd remove HV from my theory, sticking to H1/H3 only, because it has not been found in the european mesolithic, thus it is possibly way too old for the epipaleolithic. HV in europe (see also Favignana cave) might have been from extinct hunter-gatheres. But the Franchthi cave was inhabited for a very long time until the neolithic, long enough also for HV survival.
 
Of course also a neolithic origin is possible. But I was talking about the epipaleolithic only, which is basically the same very late time frame as the neolithic, just without farming. Another example: Combe-Capelle
In hindsight I'd remove HV from my theory, sticking to H1/H3 only, because it has not been found in the european mesolithic, thus it is possibly way too old for the epipaleolithic. HV in europe (see also Favignana cave) might have been from extinct hunter-gatheres. But the Franchthi cave was inhabited for a very long time until the neolithic, long enough also for HV survival.


So, you're saying Combe Capelle and the Frankhthi Cave samples were H1 and H3? But there isn't any documented and dated mtDNA from those sites is there? Unless I missed it?

I know there was a paper recently that proposed a major population expansion and movement into Europe just before the Neolithic transition, but frankly it doesn't make total sense to me. Why would certain clades from the Middle East start expanding, and not others?

I think we need a whole lot more ancient DNA in order to start figuring these things out...
 
So, you're saying Combe Capelle and the Frankhthi Cave samples were H1 and H3?

I'm saying that it is well possible.

But there isn't any documented and dated mtDNA from those sites is there? Unless I missed it?

No, there isn't. It is just my bet.

I know there was a paper recently that proposed a major population expansion and movement into Europe just before the Neolithic transition, but frankly it doesn't make total sense to me. Why would certain clades from the Middle East start expanding, and not others?

I think we need a whole lot more ancient DNA in order to start figuring these things out...

Certainly. In general I'd not rely much on stability of middle-eastern clades. The ME was highly active and underwent new migrations which could have triggered the emergence of semitic languages, or the neolithic revolution, among many others. I think the neolithic revolution alone could have transformed the genetic makeup of the middle east strongly, similar to the expansion of mongoloid peoples during the asian neolithic. It could be that the ME was much more mediterranean and less West Asian 10000 years ago, like Spain is more mediterranean today than it was 10000 years ago. Just wild speculations of mine.
 
And look at the Paglicci Cave 25 Gravettian sample. It is listed as HV or RO.
http://www.ancestraljourneys.org/ancientdna.shtml

Thanks. By the way, Favignana cave sample has been found to be really HV:


http://www.plosone.org/article/info:...l.pone.0049802

"In addition, the fact that the mtDNA of Oriente B belongs to the HV-1 haplotype is noteworthy, because it has been suggested that most of the HV haplogroups in Europe expanded from the Near East and Caucasus region before the Last Glacial Maximum, having a coalescence age of 30,000±4,000 BP [54][56]. The HV-1 haplogroup, which belongs to the HV-family, is absent in most of Europe and India and it seems to have an epicentre of frequency and diversity in the Trans-Caucasus area. This suggests that the ancestors of the hunter-gatherers of Favignana might ultimately have originated from the Near East and Caucasus region."

However I personally believe that the Atlantic_med admixture was dominant in the Middle east before the neolithic and that the Caucasus component became more important later during the neolithic. But time will tell.

Here is an abstract from a paper analyzing crania from the Sicilian island Favignana with skull pictures:

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science...47248409000268

"Overall, the San Teodoro cranial sample displays a morphometric pattern close to Western European groups of similar antiquity, in particular those from Central and Southern Italy. The morphometric affinities indicate that these people probably came from peninsular Italy by sea during the Late Epigravettian epoch. An alternative hypothesis is that they descended from immigrants that arrived by land during a low sea level episode corresponding to the maximum Würmian regression, about 18,000 years B.P, with gene flow accounting for the morphological homogeneity with the populations of peninsular Italy."

The Combe-Capelle skull is extremely dolichocephalic and leptorhine, which fits to mediterranids and nordids, but not the square-headed Cro-magnids. That's why I'm speculating that the Combe-Capelle could be from a more recent newcomer.
 
Thanks. By the way, Favignana cave sample has been found to be really HV:


http://www.plosone.org/article/info:...l.pone.0049802

"In addition, the fact that the mtDNA of Oriente B belongs to the HV-1 haplotype is noteworthy, because it has been suggested that most of the HV haplogroups in Europe expanded from the Near East and Caucasus region before the Last Glacial Maximum, having a coalescence age of 30,000±4,000 BP [54][56]. The HV-1 haplogroup, which belongs to the HV-family, is absent in most of Europe and India and it seems to have an epicentre of frequency and diversity in the Trans-Caucasus area. This suggests that the ancestors of the hunter-gatherers of Favignana might ultimately have originated from the Near East and Caucasus region."

However I personally believe that the Atlantic_med admixture was dominant in the Middle east before the neolithic and that the Caucasus component became more important later during the neolithic. But time will tell.

Here is an abstract from a paper analyzing crania from the Sicilian island Favignana with skull pictures:

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science...47248409000268

"Overall, the San Teodoro cranial sample displays a morphometric pattern close to Western European groups of similar antiquity, in particular those from Central and Southern Italy. The morphometric affinities indicate that these people probably came from peninsular Italy by sea during the Late Epigravettian epoch. An alternative hypothesis is that they descended from immigrants that arrived by land during a low sea level episode corresponding to the maximum Würmian regression, about 18,000 years B.P, with gene flow accounting for the morphological homogeneity with the populations of peninsular Italy."

The Combe-Capelle skull is extremely dolichocephalic and leptorhine, which fits to mediterranids and nordids, but not the square-headed Cro-magnids. That's why I'm speculating that the Combe-Capelle could be from a more recent newcomer.

Thank you very much for these links; I totally missed them.

Would you say that the Favignana skull is also Mediterranid and Nordid?
 
Thank you very much for these links; I totally missed them.

Would you say that the Favignana skull is also Mediterranid and Nordid?

I don't know. Neither skull images nor any interpretations found. They avoided seafood:
http://www.livescience.com/25102-sicily-skeletons-reveal-prehistoric-diet.html

Anyways the Favignana is 10000 years older than the last inhabitants of Frankhthi cave in Greece. It would be too ambitious to assume a relationship. Favignana is interesting due to HV, but for H1 and H3 it is a different story I think, maybe the Franchthi one.
 
Thanks. By the way, Favignana cave sample has been found to be really HV:


http://www.plosone.org/article/info:...l.pone.0049802

"In addition, the fact that the mtDNA of Oriente B belongs to the HV-1 haplotype is noteworthy, because it has been suggested that most of the HV haplogroups in Europe expanded from the Near East and Caucasus region before the Last Glacial Maximum, having a coalescence age of 30,000±4,000 BP [54][56]. The HV-1 haplogroup, which belongs to the HV-family, is absent in most of Europe and India and it seems to have an epicentre of frequency and diversity in the Trans-Caucasus area. This suggests that the ancestors of the hunter-gatherers of Favignana might ultimately have originated from the Near East and Caucasus region."

However I personally believe that the Atlantic_med admixture was dominant in the Middle east before the neolithic and that the Caucasus component became more important later during the neolithic. But time will tell.

Here is an abstract from a paper analyzing crania from the Sicilian island Favignana with skull pictures:

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science...47248409000268

"Overall, the San Teodoro cranial sample displays a morphometric pattern close to Western European groups of similar antiquity, in particular those from Central and Southern Italy. The morphometric affinities indicate that these people probably came from peninsular Italy by sea during the Late Epigravettian epoch. An alternative hypothesis is that they descended from immigrants that arrived by land during a low sea level episode corresponding to the maximum Würmian regression, about 18,000 years B.P, with gene flow accounting for the morphological homogeneity with the populations of peninsular Italy."

The Combe-Capelle skull is extremely dolichocephalic and leptorhine, which fits to mediterranids and nordids, but not the square-headed Cro-magnids. That's why I'm speculating that the Combe-Capelle could be from a more recent newcomer.

salut - I did not by the paper but I saw (badly enough) the three skulls: they show some kind of 'mediterranean' affinities, but seem to me a bit different from 'combe-capelle' or 'brünn' types (I confess I can mistake on a so meager material) - more "recent shaped"; I did not see the faces from before - Combe-Capelle could very have come from central Europe about the 9000/7000 BC (late datations) - not by western Mediterranea - but it seems that some early neolithical skulls of rough aspect could very well be come from eastern Mediterranea, as well south or north this sea, being descended from the same remote ancestor as 'combe-capelle' but having known a different history, passed through the southern sea after being underwent different mutations (longer upper-face, weaker cheekbones, a frontal slightly more vertical, but other shapes very closer to 'brünn-c-capelle' than to 'cro-magnon': say: underwent a beginning of gracilization
 
If these Sicilian skulls (San Teodoro) are equal to South Italian skulls (which the study suggests) than they most prob. are of the Mediterranid (caucasoid) type; since in during the Neolithic times only 2 types of skulls are found in Italy - the Alpinoid (Caucasoid) and the Mediterranid (Caucasoid);

Smithsonian Institution - Report of the Board of Regents: Vol.45 (1891)
In another Neolithic cave, called the Caverna della Matta [N Italy], an Iberian skull was found with an index of 68, and a Ligurian skull with an index of 84. No anthropologist would admit that these skulls could have belonged to men of the same race.

- Iberian is the old synonym for Mediterranid and Ligurian for Alpinoid;

The Alpinoid (Caucasoid) type was already present at the Neolithic but must have come later than the Mediterranid (Cucasoid) type;
 
Thank you very much for these links; I totally missed them.

Would you say that the Favignana skull is also Mediterranid and Nordid?

Sorry, I confused things. Of course there are the skull images, I was mentioning them by myself and they can be seen in the link. But still I'm not able to classify them.
 
salut - I did not by the paper but I saw (badly enough) the three skulls: they show some kind of 'mediterranean' affinities, but seem to me a bit different from 'combe-capelle' or 'brünn' types (I confess I can mistake on a so meager material) - more "recent shaped"; I did not see the faces from before - Combe-Capelle could very have come from central Europe about the 9000/7000 BC (late datations) - not by western Mediterranea - but it seems that some early neolithical skulls of rough aspect could very well be come from eastern Mediterranea, as well south or north this sea, being descended from the same remote ancestor as 'combe-capelle' but having known a different history, passed through the southern sea after being underwent different mutations (longer upper-face, weaker cheekbones, a frontal slightly more vertical, but other shapes very closer to 'brünn-c-capelle' than to 'cro-magnon': say: underwent a beginning of gracilization

It is good that you mention Brünn, because it is actually a problem. Brünn is aurignacian and possibly the oldest known european skull, whereas Combe-Capelle is only 9500 years old (before 2011 it was believed to be as old as Cro-Magnon and linking of Brünn with Capellids was easy). This means there have been Brünn-capelle shapes in europe once 30000-40000 years ago and once only 9500 years ago. For supporting my bet I could claim that Combe-Capelle has nothing to do with Brünn, but this would not be serious. So Combe-Capelle still could have Brünn-relatives despite being much younger. My bet of Combe-Capelle being proto-mediterranean is very shaky.
 

This thread has been viewed 61287 times.

Back
Top