Tracing the genetic origin of Europe's first farmers

New study

http://vaedhya.blogspot.com.au/2014/09/worldwide-population-y-dna-collated-xu.html

has excel spreadsheets also

Interesting for me is the T-L162 in ancient Peru ..............although I do not belong to this T branch.
T-L162 ( with or without P77 ) .........is clearly the oldest of the T branches as it appears in many spots world wide ...........The T-L131 ( seems much younger) must be, as stated by others to be an "azeri"( lezkins) branch moving in a NW and W pattern and finally much later going S
 
Interesting for me is the T-L162 in ancient Peru

Ancient Peru? Looks like the tested modern Quechua. They also found an instance of haplogroup I in the Quechua. Probably European lines.
 
Information about the I1 skeleton

  • I just spent most of the afternoon and evening researching this find of haplogroup I1 in Hungary from the LBK (Neolithic).
    This is a highly edited version (critical information is different), that I posted in the I1 forum, not knowing that this I1 sample is discussed yet a THIRD time here.


    The article by a Hungarian archeologist, presents results of DNA testing on collections of bones from around Hungary and surrounding areas, from the Neolithic and earlier.

    In the supplementary data are tables that contain a bare minimum of information on each skeleton examined. The lone haplogroup I1 male skeleton is one of six skeletons from some place on planet Mars, or maybe Jupiter, called Balatonszemes-Bagodomb. Google can't even find the place. It turns out to be on the southern shore of Lake Balaton in Hungary, just west of the Carpathian basin, in a region where there are many Starcevo, LBK and transitional sites - but Balatonszemes and Bagodomb are two places near each other, and google maps can't find the second one. Along Lake Balaton they are found in a belt along the northern and western coasts of the lake and the south and east are notably missing them. There are, however, finds from every other cultural epoch in European archeology in the region as well. This was a main route from the lower Danube into Europe.


    There is a vague reference to Zoffmann (2011). Zoffmann isn't in the references (the bibliography), and is mentioned only in the acknowledgements for having provided contextual information about the skeletons that the author never thought to pass on to the reader.


    There is absolutely nothing about how we know the remains are LBK or what PART of the LBK, which is a long and culturally complex period.


    The LBK encompasses the time from 5600 BCE to 4250 BCE, give or take a few hundred years.


    Haplogroup I1 is expected to have a date of origin about 2500 BCE. Specifically, haplogroup I1 has a very long chain of mutations, that separate it from haplogroup I, quite unlike haplogroup I2, which has only a few mutations separating its main subclades that can't be more than just pre-Neolithic in age, from haplogroup I.


    Even though I posted a link to the article yesterday with no problem, today it will not let me post a link, and it also mysteriously tells me I haven't posted recently. ???? Gremlins.


    The article is "Tracing the genetic origin of Europe's first farmers reveals insights into their social organization",
    Anna Szécsényi-Nagy, Guido Brandt, Victoria Keerl, János Jakucs, Wolfgang Haak, Sabine Möller-Rieker, Kitti Köhler, Balázs Mende, Marc Fecher, Krisztián Oross, Tibor Paluch, Anett Osztás, Viktória Kiss, György Pálfi, Erika Molnár, Katalin Sebők, András Czene, Tibor Paluch, Mario Šlaus, Mario Novak, Nives Pećina-Šlaus, Brigitta Ősz, Vanda Voicsek, Krisztina Somogyi, Gábor Tóth, Bernd Kromer, Eszter Bánffy, Kurt Alt.


    But the journal title does not appear since one is SUPPOSED to use the url! The url appears twice in the citation and the journal title does not. So I guess you all will have to google it. It is at biorxiv dot org.

    The authors of the study determined haplogroup by testing for 30 or so specific SNPs. For haplogroup I1, that was M253. M253 is an early found SNP in the chain of mutations that defines I1 that is still in use but may not necessarily be the chronologically last mutation to appear, so it is not necessarily impossible that it did exist in 6000 BCE.


    I have incorrect information about the history of the sample in an earlier post in another Eupedia discussion. I posted that the information is wrong, but moved the discussion over here.


    Data about the specific I1 skeleton is presented in several places in the supplemental data. The haplogroup I1 male is BAB5, from Balatonszemes-Bagodomb, in the Carpathian basin, in Hungary. He was 34 to 40 years old. It is on the southern shore of Lake Balaton. It is mitochondrial haplogroup H. It is the only male from the six people in that set of graves, whose Y DNA was tested. Table S2 makes it look like the data came from Zoffmann 2011, which is who my post yesterday identifies as the excavator, but as the author pointed out to me in an email, Table 1 gives more information. There were a total of 6 skeletons, excavated by the Directorate of Somogy County Museums/ Institute of (location of Lake Balaton), archeological features LBK settlement and graves, fine archeological chronology, Bicske-Bina, Keszthely, grave characteristics, crouched skeletons, 4 on the left side, 2 with grave goods. Archeological references, Bondar-Honti-Kiss 2000, Kiss 2002, Kiss V. - Sebok 2007. Anthropological references K. Zoffmann 2007, 2011.

    In her email, Anna Szecseny-Nagi, the author of the study, told me she agrees with my reservations about the actual age of the skeleton. Viki Kiss is who did the excavation, and says the grave is LBKT. Evidently this grave was not one of the graves that had grave goods. "We did have some problems with this grave, which we are currently analysing for full genome as well. We date BAB5 in two radiocarbon labs, and I can tell you more about it in March-April (2017, this discussion is old), when I have the results. Genomically it seems to be younger then LBKT, even if the archaelogical context was clearly Neolithic...".


    I have seen, and followed up on, speculation that the roots of haplogroup I1 could lie with a thriving Mesolithic people who were in contact with the Neolithic but had no particular reason to join them; such a group could have carried a haplogroup for thousands of years without developing any genetic variation, which is clearly the story of haplogroup I1. it must be said that quite a few Y DNA haplogroups and subclades that were once common in Europe are now rare or extinct, so it is possible I1 once had genetic variation it now lacks. I pursued an observation I found online that the lower/ middle Danube, specifically the Iron Gates, were an ideal situation for such a thing, for instance, the people of Lepenski Vir. It appears from the archeology that the region around Lake Balaton was an even better situation; for LBK was actually born of the assimilation of Mesolithic people by the migrating Neolithic people. The Lepenski Vir theory is missing a clear explanation of how the group moved on to Scandinavia, though similarities in pottery suggest some kind of hop by travelers to the Rhine Delta or Denmark. The Carpathian basin theory is very logical, because the Neolithic people of this area were migrating. They continued to migrate, all the way to Germany. The LBK reached nearly to the Baltic coast and Denmark, and gave rise to a culture immediately to the north that encompassed Denmark and southern Scandinavia, and the western Baltic coast.
    However, intriguing though this is, I would really wait for more information or else another find of ancient haplogroup I1 in the area before fully committing to it.


    Since clearly the author of the study does have an interest in pursuing it, I will mention the suggestion I got on my earlier post to the wrong board, that what is needed is a full Y sequence.



 
The lone haplogroup I1 male skeleton is one of six skeletons from some place on planet Mars, or maybe Jupiter, called Balatonszemes-Bagodomb. Google can't even find the place. It turns out to be on the southern shore of Lake Balaton in Hungary, just west of the Carpathian basin, in a region where there are many Starcevo, LBK and transitional sites - but Balatonszemes and Bagodomb are two places near each other, and google maps can't find the second one.

Hungarians are martians:Jump to: navigation, search "The Martians" were a group of prominent Jewish-Hungarian scientists (mostly, but not exclusively, physicists and mathematicians) who immigrated to the United States in the early half of the 20th century.[1] They included, among others, Theodore von Kármán, John von Neumann, Paul Halmos, Eugene Wigner, Edward Teller, George Pólya, and Paul Erdős. They received the name from a fellow Martian Leó Szilárd, who jokingly suggested that Hungary was a front for aliens from Mars. In an answer to the question of why there is no evidence of intelligent life beyond Earth despite the probability of it existing Szilárd responded "They are already here among us: they just call themselves Hungarians."

It's NOT Bagodomb,it's Bagódomb!

https://www.google.se/maps/place/Ba...832beafb3!8m2!3d46.7868657!4d17.7878262?hl=sv

You should learn Martian!
 
Wasn't an autosomal analysis done of the sample who carried yDna I1, and wasn't he a typical Neolithic farmer? If that's the case then what's all the fuss here?
 
  • I just spent most of the afternoon and evening researching this find of haplogroup I1 in Hungary from the LBK (Neolithic).
    This is a highly edited version (critical information is different), that I posted in the I1 forum, not knowing that this I1 sample is discussed yet a THIRD time here.


    The article by a Hungarian archeologist, presents results of DNA testing on collections of bones from around Hungary and surrounding areas, from the Neolithic and earlier.

    In the supplementary data are tables that contain a bare minimum of information on each skeleton examined. The lone haplogroup I1 male skeleton is one of six skeletons from some place on planet Mars, or maybe Jupiter, called Balatonszemes-Bagodomb. Google can't even find the place. It turns out to be on the southern shore of Lake Balaton in Hungary, just west of the Carpathian basin, in a region where there are many Starcevo, LBK and transitional sites - but Balatonszemes and Bagodomb are two places near each other, and google maps can't find the second one. Along Lake Balaton they are found in a belt along the northern and western coasts of the lake and the south and east are notably missing them. There are, however, finds from every other cultural epoch in European archeology in the region as well. This was a main route from the lower Danube into Europe.


    There is a vague reference to Zoffmann (2011). Zoffmann isn't in the references (the bibliography), and is mentioned only in the acknowledgements for having provided contextual information about the skeletons that the author never thought to pass on to the reader.


    There is absolutely nothing about how we know the remains are LBK or what PART of the LBK, which is a long and culturally complex period.


    The LBK encompasses the time from 5600 BCE to 4250 BCE, give or take a few hundred years.


    Haplogroup I1 is expected to have a date of origin about 2500 BCE. Specifically, haplogroup I1 has a very long chain of mutations, that separate it from haplogroup I, quite unlike haplogroup I2, which has only a few mutations separating its main subclades that can't be more than just pre-Neolithic in age, from haplogroup I.


    Even though I posted a link to the article yesterday with no problem, today it will not let me post a link, and it also mysteriously tells me I haven't posted recently. ???? Gremlins.


    The article is "Tracing the genetic origin of Europe's first farmers reveals insights into their social organization",
    Anna Szécsényi-Nagy, Guido Brandt, Victoria Keerl, János Jakucs, Wolfgang Haak, Sabine Möller-Rieker, Kitti Köhler, Balázs Mende, Marc Fecher, Krisztián Oross, Tibor Paluch, Anett Osztás, Viktória Kiss, György Pálfi, Erika Molnár, Katalin Sebők, András Czene, Tibor Paluch, Mario Šlaus, Mario Novak, Nives Pećina-Šlaus, Brigitta Ősz, Vanda Voicsek, Krisztina Somogyi, Gábor Tóth, Bernd Kromer, Eszter Bánffy, Kurt Alt.


    But the journal title does not appear since one is SUPPOSED to use the url! The url appears twice in the citation and the journal title does not. So I guess you all will have to google it. It is at biorxiv dot org.

    The authors of the study determined haplogroup by testing for 30 or so specific SNPs. For haplogroup I1, that was M253. M253 is an early found SNP in the chain of mutations that defines I1 that is still in use but may not necessarily be the chronologically last mutation to appear, so it is not necessarily impossible that it did exist in 6000 BCE.


    I have incorrect information about the history of the sample in an earlier post in another Eupedia discussion. I posted that the information is wrong, but moved the discussion over here.


    Data about the specific I1 skeleton is presented in several places in the supplemental data. The haplogroup I1 male is BAB5, from Balatonszemes-Bagodomb, in the Carpathian basin, in Hungary. He was 34 to 40 years old. It is on the southern shore of Lake Balaton. It is mitochondrial haplogroup H. It is the only male from the six people in that set of graves, whose Y DNA was tested. Table S2 makes it look like the data came from Zoffmann 2011, which is who my post yesterday identifies as the excavator, but as the author pointed out to me in an email, Table 1 gives more information. There were a total of 6 skeletons, excavated by the Directorate of Somogy County Museums/ Institute of (location of Lake Balaton), archeological features LBK settlement and graves, fine archeological chronology, Bicske-Bina, Keszthely, grave characteristics, crouched skeletons, 4 on the left side, 2 with grave goods. Archeological references, Bondar-Honti-Kiss 2000, Kiss 2002, Kiss V. - Sebok 2007. Anthropological references K. Zoffmann 2007, 2011.

    In her email, Anna Szecseny-Nagi, the author of the study, told me she agrees with my reservations about the actual age of the skeleton. Viki Kiss is who did the excavation, and says the grave is LBKT. Evidently this grave was not one of the graves that had grave goods. "We did have some problems with this grave, which we are currently analysing for full genome as well. We date BAB5 in two radiocarbon labs, and I can tell you more about it in March-April (2017, this discussion is old), when I have the results. Genomically it seems to be younger then LBKT, even if the archaelogical context was clearly Neolithic...".


    I have seen, and followed up on, speculation that the roots of haplogroup I1 could lie with a thriving Mesolithic people who were in contact with the Neolithic but had no particular reason to join them; such a group could have carried a haplogroup for thousands of years without developing any genetic variation, which is clearly the story of haplogroup I1. it must be said that quite a few Y DNA haplogroups and subclades that were once common in Europe are now rare or extinct, so it is possible I1 once had genetic variation it now lacks. I pursued an observation I found online that the lower/ middle Danube, specifically the Iron Gates, were an ideal situation for such a thing, for instance, the people of Lepenski Vir. It appears from the archeology that the region around Lake Balaton was an even better situation; for LBK was actually born of the assimilation of Mesolithic people by the migrating Neolithic people. The Lepenski Vir theory is missing a clear explanation of how the group moved on to Scandinavia, though similarities in pottery suggest some kind of hop by travelers to the Rhine Delta or Denmark. The Carpathian basin theory is very logical, because the Neolithic people of this area were migrating. They continued to migrate, all the way to Germany. The LBK reached nearly to the Baltic coast and Denmark, and gave rise to a culture immediately to the north that encompassed Denmark and southern Scandinavia, and the western Baltic coast.
    However, intriguing though this is, I would really wait for more information or else another find of ancient haplogroup I1 in the area before fully committing to it.


    Since clearly the author of the study does have an interest in pursuing it, I will mention the suggestion I got on my earlier post to the wrong board, that what is needed is a full Y sequence.
Interesting. There is always a chance that a younger body is buried inside ancient historical place, messing up the site for archeologists. I just hope finds like this could be recognized as "fishy", and bones dated just to make sure.
Having said this, as Angela mentioned his autosomal DNA fits exactly as farmer of LBK. So why the suspicion?
 
Is there something wrong with the TRB culture as the carrier of the I1 founder effect in Scandinavia?
 
Is there something wrong with the TRB culture as the carrier of the I1 founder effect in Scandinavia?

these are the oldest I know

Nordic LNSwedenAbekas I [RISE179]M2010-1776 BCICTS674, CTS1301, FI3, CTS10941K1a3Allentoft 2015; Mathieson 2015[FONT=Cumberland,Cumberland AMT,Courier New,Cousine,Liberation Mono,Nimbus Mono L,DejaVu Sans Mono,Bitstream Vera Sans Mono,Courier,Lucida Sans Typewriter,Lucida Typewriter,Monaco,Monospaced]RISE179 Sweden Nordic LN I1-Z2765/CTS3506[/FONT]

Nordic Bronze AgeSwedenAngmollan [RISE207]M1493-1302 BCI1
J1c8a1Allentoft 2015 ; Y-DNA personal communication from author[FONT=Cumberland,Cumberland AMT,Courier New,Cousine,Liberation Mono,Nimbus Mono L,DejaVu Sans Mono,Bitstream Vera Sans Mono,Courier,Lucida Sans Typewriter,Lucida Typewriter,Monaco,Monospaced]RISE207 Sweden Nordic BA I1-M450/S109[/FONT]


note that this was also pre-I1, but very unlikely ancestral to I1 as it is also negativ for some of the SNPs :


SwedenStora Förvar cave, Stora Karlsö Island [SfF11]M7500-7250 cal. BPPre-I1 (7 op 16)Genetiker U5a1Skoglund 2014[FONT=Cumberland,Cumberland AMT,Courier New,Cousine,Liberation Mono,Nimbus Mono L,DejaVu Sans Mono,Bitstream Vera Sans Mono,Courier,Lucida Sans Typewriter,Lucida Typewriter,Monaco,Monospaced]Mesolithic 5500 BC Stora Förvar 11 I1-M253 calls[/FONT]


the LBK I1 in Hungary is also pré-I1
 

Thanks for emailing an author of the paper. It's nice to know they're sequencing the genome of the I1 individual because it'll tell us if he had pre-I1 or not. We have a lot of pre historic Scandinavian genomes. pre-I1 existed in one Mesolithic individual and I1 existed in several late Neolithic/Bronze age individuals. Neolithic and Mesolithic Y DNA is all I2.

Corded Ware Swedes were the same as Corded Ware in Eastern Europe and so far 2/2 have R1a. One had Scandinavian specific R1a-Z284, which takes up about 1/4 of modern Scandinavian Y DNA. Modern Norse can be fitted as about 60-70% Swedish Corded Ware and 30-40% Swedish Funnel Beaker. So, it's possible that I1 is a Funnel Beaker lineage. Modern Scandinavians don't appear to have any Mesolithic Scandinavian ancestry or at least not a significant amount. Because of that I doubt Mesolithic Scandinavians are the source of I1.
 
Thanks for emailing an author of the paper. It's nice to know they're sequencing the genome of the I1 individual because it'll tell us if he had pre-I1 or not. We have a lot of pre historic Scandinavian genomes. pre-I1 existed in one Mesolithic individual and I1 existed in several late Neolithic/Bronze age individuals. Neolithic and Mesolithic Y DNA is all I2.

Corded Ware Swedes were the same as Corded Ware in Eastern Europe and so far 2/2 have R1a. One had Scandinavian specific R1a-Z284, which takes up about 1/4 of modern Scandinavian Y DNA. Modern Norse can be fitted as about 60-70% Swedish Corded Ware and 30-40% Swedish Funnel Beaker. So, it's possible that I1 is a Funnel Beaker lineage. Modern Scandinavians don't appear to have any Mesolithic Scandinavian ancestry or at least not a significant amount. Because of that I doubt Mesolithic Scandinavians are the source of I1.

these are the calls for Stora Forvar

https://genetiker.wordpress.com/y-snp-calls-for-stora-forvar-11/

mind you there is always the possibility of a few false positives/negatives
but as you can see many I1 SNP were tested

afaik there is not data about the calls for the LBK I1
 
these are the oldest I know

Nordic LNSwedenAbekas I [RISE179]M2010-1776 BCICTS674, CTS1301, FI3, CTS10941K1a3Allentoft 2015; Mathieson 2015RISE179 Sweden Nordic LN I1-Z2765/CTS3506

Nordic Bronze AgeSwedenAngmollan [RISE207]M1493-1302 BCI1
J1c8a1Allentoft 2015 ; Y-DNA personal communication from authorRISE207 Sweden Nordic BA I1-M450/S109


note that this was also pre-I1, but very unlikely ancestral to I1 as it is also negativ for some of the SNPs :


SwedenStora Förvar cave, Stora Karlsö Island [SfF11]M7500-7250 cal. BPPre-I1 (7 op 16)Genetiker U5a1Skoglund 2014Mesolithic 5500 BC Stora Förvar 11 I1-M253 calls


the LBK I1 in Hungary is also pré-I1

Thanks, OK so not ruled out, and it seems to be there by the BA. I think was can all agree on that.

This is all speculation, but I've always held the notion that I1 people were the speakers of the Non-IE germanic substratum language that shaped much of the seafaring lexicon. I1 people must have been formidable. The rest of North (West) Europe was virtually replaced, but I1 held strong. Considering the evidence in the substratum this must have been because of their seafaring knowledge.
 
Thanks, OK so not ruled out, and it seems to be there by the BA. I think was can all agree on that.

This is all speculation, but I've always held the notion that I1 people were the speakers of the Non-IE germanic substratum language that shaped much of the seafaring lexicon. I1 people must have been formidable. The rest of North (West) Europe was virtually replaced, but I1 held strong. Considering the evidence in the substratum this must have been because of their seafaring knowledge.

Bell Beaker people arrived in Northern Denmark, they must have been the R1b-U106
Battle Axe/ Nordic LNSwedenLilla Beddinge 56 [RISE98]M2275-2032 BCR1b1a2a1a1M405/S21/U106K1b1a1Allentoft 2015; Mathieson 2015
there was no copper, so they made flint daggers instead of copper daggers
the flint was very high quality and found on that area in Northern Denmark
then they started trading with the farmers in the Baltic area, this is where the seafaring came in
goods from the Baltic were traded with western Europe and the Carpathian basin for metals
it was the Nordic bronze age

we have only one Scandinavian TRB DNA
he was not I1

Gökhem Västergötland [regional TRB]SwedenGok4M4-5 kaI2a1b1 L161.1 xS2639Genetiker 1+ 0 – op 35 onzeker
Funnelbeaker 3000 BC Gökhem 4 I2a1b1-L161.1 calls

could I1 have had contacts with the CW people on the Baltic shores prior to their arrival in southern Scandinavia?
 
Is there something wrong with the TRB culture as the carrier of the I1 founder effect in Scandinavia?

Funny, I was just weighting this possibility before to read your post! I was thinking in an hypothesis for "Germanic" Y U106 staying south the Baltic and giving a lift to I1 peoeple (not too evident for these patriarcal clannic tribes) and the, seeing that in fact the excess of I1 ratio to R-U106 are West and East on the Continent, and not central, I thought in the FBK and its western ramifications, kind of melting pot uniting lands of East with Coast of N-W Europe - a more agricultural (spite maritime too) culture without too clannic system could have helped I1 development before future Proto-Germanics (R-U106) was obliged to take in account and old Y-R1a and "younger" I1 (in demic development).
 
Not speaking here about the S-Central Europe Y-I1 (speculation about one case if I don't mistake) it remember me the excess Y-I1/Y R1bU106 (helas, no I1 subclade by me) in Brittany, some parts of Wales, french North/Picardie, East Germany, when compared to Austrians, Flemings and Dutch people. The partly maritime long-barrows culture which took part I think into FBK concretion had surely a role in this?
 
Bell Beaker people arrived in Northern Denmark, they must have been the R1b-U106
Battle Axe/ Nordic LNSwedenLilla Beddinge 56 [RISE98]M2275-2032 BCR1b1a2a1a1M405/S21/U106K1b1a1Allentoft 2015; Mathieson 2015
there was no copper, so they made flint daggers instead of copper daggers
the flint was very high quality and found on that area in Northern Denmark
then they started trading with the farmers in the Baltic area, this is where the seafaring came in
goods from the Baltic were traded with western Europe and the Carpathian basin for metals
it was the Nordic bronze age

we have only one Scandinavian TRB DNA
he was not I1

Gökhem Västergötland [regional TRB]SwedenGok4M4-5 kaI2a1b1 L161.1 xS2639Genetiker 1+ 0 – op 35 onzeker
Funnelbeaker 3000 BC Gökhem 4 I2a1b1-L161.1 calls

could I1 have had contacts with the CW people on the Baltic shores prior to their arrival in southern Scandinavia?

Yes, to your last question. We had CW move intoScandinavia before Bell Beaker, so I imagine that first it was I1 and R1a CWguys, then R1b-U106 with the development of the Nordic Bronze age. But we do have a non-I1 in TRB so the founder I1 I guess could have come along with the U106 during the emergence of the Nordic Bronze age.

However it happened we have non IE seafaringwords in Germanic along with the weird I1 concentration. I would like to believe that these I1 were farmers that allied with IE's and passed along seafaring knowledge, but this is probably way too simple as are most of our models.
 
Funny, I was just weighting this possibility before to read your post! I was thinking in an hypothesis for "Germanic" Y U106 staying south the Baltic and giving a lift to I1 peoeple (not too evident for these patriarcal clannic tribes) and the, seeing that in fact the excess of I1 ratio to R-U106 are West and East on the Continent, and not central, I thought in the FBK and its western ramifications, kind of melting pot uniting lands of East with Coast of N-W Europe - a more agricultural (spite maritime too) culture without too clannic system could have helped I1 development before future Proto-Germanics (R-U106) was obliged to take in account and old Y-R1a and "younger" I1 (in demic development).

Yes, this is possible too. It's something like this. That kind of success isn't random in this context. They had to have some advantage in comparison to others in pre-IE Europe.
 
I always find it difficult to know whether the H mtDNA haplo group is just plain H or maybe it includes the sub clades but it was not fully analysed. Does anyone know?
 
I'm not an expert in I1 haplogroup. Is correct 5000-4100 ybp for the earlier known branches of this haplogroup? If this origin date showed in YFULL is correct, then I'm extremely surprised. What happened the last 20000 years before this "4 brothers boom"? Looks like they have experienced a heavily extinction.

Is known to which subclade belong those I1 found in western Iran?

I think very interesting this Early Neolithic group. Is known approximately where did this first branching happened?
 
I always find it difficult to know whether the H mtDNA haplo group is just plain H or maybe it includes the sub clades but it was not fully analysed. Does anyone know?

An H DNA sample is essentially never tested for all H subclades. So we essentially never know if an H is plain H. Usually H DNA samples are only tested for a handful of popular H subclades or not tested for any H subclades. This is especially true for ancient H DNA samples. Enough H DNA samples have been tested for several H subclades for us to know the frequencies of some H subclades though.

I created a spreadsheet showing the frequencies of H subclades in ancient and modern Europe. See here. The defining feature of European H is a high frequency of H1. A high frequency is also found in NorthWest Africa but not anywhere else in the world. The frequencies of other somewhat popular H subclades like H5 barely differ between different Europeans and Middle Easterners.
 

This thread has been viewed 47405 times.

Back
Top