# Population Genetics > mtDNA Haplogroups > H >  Haplogroup H1 and H3 entered Europe during neolithic

## spongetaro

Contrary to what most people think, Mtdna haplogroup H1 and H3 may have arrived during the neolithic


http://dna-forums.org/index.php?//bl...t-mtdna-h1-h3/


H3
H3.png
H1
H1.png

----------


## sparkey

This would definitely make us re-think the ancientness of European matrilines if true. Although we're still far less clear on which mtDNA haplogroups came to Europe when than we are with Y-DNA, I know some researchers are leaning towards certain subclades of U5 and maybe U4 as being the principle paleolithic-origin European mtDNA haplogroups. If that's the case, then there is little discrepancy between the ancientness of patrilines and matrilines in Europe, as U4+U5 have comparable distributions in Europe as Y-DNA haplogroup I. It would also give evidence to the "recent arrival," or "fellow-traveler-with-PIE" theory of Basque origins. So, there's a lot of interpretation that hangs on this... hopefully some smart people can sort it out.

----------


## Taranis

Well, we already know that the Basque Y-DNA for the greater part isn't Paleolithic in origin. Of course, the idea that the Basques are descendants of the Paleolithic population is long-standing holy grail, toppling it would make a lot of people feel very uncomfortable. However, I would too think that a Neolithic origin of the Basques fits a lot better with the picture. I would also like to point out out that Basque also has some similarities with the Caucasian and ancient Anatolian/Near-Eastern (the non-IE and non-Semitic ones that is) languages. If there is a relationship though, it must be a pretty old one. It boils down to the old question of how long it takes for members of the same language family to be no longer recognizable as such. We really don't know that.

----------


## Maciamo

H3 is absent from the Middle and Near East, so that disqualifies it from any recent/Neolithic arrival. 

H1 is much more common in Europe than elsewhere, and peaks in parts of Europe that were the most secluded and remote from the Middle East (Norway, British Isles, Basque country), and consequently the least likely to be affected by the advance of Neolithic farmers. 

Everything concurs for a Paleolithic origin of H1 and H3 in Europe.

----------


## sparkey

> H3 is absent from the Middle and Near East, so that disqualifies it from any recent/Neolithic arrival. 
> 
> H1 is much more common in Europe than elsewhere, and peaks in parts of Europe that were the most secluded and remote from the Middle East (Norway, British Isles, Basque country), and consequently the least likely to be affected by the advance of Neolithic farmers. 
> 
> Everything concurs for a Paleolithic origin of H1 and H3 in Europe.


Did you read the link? Quoting:




> Yet back in 2009 Hajer Ennafaa and colleagues pointed out that the greatest diversity of H3 is in North Africa, and that for H1 in the Near East [1]. That suggests that both arrived with early farmers, H3 springing from H* sometime along the Mediterranean route.





> Then came a study from Spain that trained its guns specifically upon the crumbling edifice of the Franco-Cantabrian refuge theory [2]. O. García et al point out that H1 and H3 show a low diversity in Cantabria and particularly among the Basques. They found sub-clade H1t specific to Iberia and calculated a coalescence age for it at 5,800 years. This fitted neatly with their dates for two other mtDNA haplogroups in Iberia to suggest Neolithic radiations: H1r (5,200 years) and HV4a1a (6,500 years). They conclude "In short, we find no well-founded reasons to confirm that the H1 distribution in Europe reflects a human expansion centred on the Franco-Cantabrian area."


To me, saying that H3 is absent from the Near East, therefore it must be Paleolithic would be like saying that R1b-L21 is absent from the Near East, therefore it also must be Paleolithic. It doesn't really follow, does it? And mtDNA is very difficult to date accurately.

----------


## Maciamo

> To me, saying that H3 is absent from the Near East, therefore it must be Paleolithic would be like saying that R1b-L21 is absent from the Near East, therefore it also must be Paleolithic. It doesn't really follow, does it? And mtDNA is very difficult to date accurately.


I admit that I didn't read the link. However the distribution speaks for itself. Both haplogroups are amazingly European, and extend as far as Russia and even Siberia, where R1a has settled, but where Middle Eastern farmers never went. Both haplogroups are too widespread geographically to be as recent as the Neolithic. I very seriously doubt that H* still existed in considerable numbers during the Neolithic. H first appeared circa 35,000 years, and started diversifying into today's top-level subclades from 22,000 to 12,000 years ago, i.e. before the Neolithic. Ancient DNA tests showed that Haplogroup H17 might already have existed 25,000 years ago.

MtDNA is a very short sequence (compared to Y-DNA) and is particularly fickle when it comes to mutations. The same person can very well carry different mutations depending on what group of cells you test (in other words, take 3 times an MtDNA test and you _might_ get slightly different results each time, especially in the HVR1 and HVR2). New mtDNA mutations happen all the time inside the body. Some haplogroups seem to be more volatile than others in this regard (for example hg T and X). This is why I generally don't give much credit to studies of genetic diversity within mtDNA subclades. 

Furthermore, the tree of haplogroup H is huge, new top-level subclades are still being found frequently (contrarily to more vertical haplogroups like the U's or K) and the structure of deep subclades has barely started to take form. At the last count on the PhyloTree, haplogroup H1 had 31 first and second level subclades against only 9 for H3. 3 years ago there was almost nothing. In 3 years there might be hundreds for each (I wonder how they will proceed with the nomenclature for subclades after H1z). This is because it was very expensive until recently to test the full mtDNA sequence. The tree has really started to expand only 1 or 2 years ago. 

Naturally there is always a bias at the beginning towards more heavily studied populations. If there was just a single detailed mtDNA study of the Maghreb and/or Iberia, this is enough to give the impression that this region has a greater genetic diversity than others. Jean Manco's post has four studies in reference: one of the Maghreb and three of Iberia. But nothing for other regions. How can they claim that H1 and H3 are more diverse in one region when they don't test other regions ? Besides, they only tested the HVRI and HVRII ! That's almost completely useless !

Yet, actually, it would make sense if Iberia (and the Caucasus) had a greater diversity of H1 and H3 than northern Europe for two reasons :

1) H1 and H3 both peak in Iberia in terms of percentages (more people means higher chances of mutations occurring)

2) Iberia served as one of the Ice Age refuges, from where European hunter-gatherers re-expanded. If H1 and H3 was confined to a few Ice Age refuges for a few thousand years, and southern European population were higher than northern European ones for many millennia after that, then it is to be expected that the genetic diversity be higher around southern European refuges. The North Caucasus is another peak for H1 and H3, and also served as an Ice Age refuge. The Balkans and Italy, which were the two other European refuges, don't have as much H1 and H3 simply because these regions were heavily settled by Neolithic farmers from the Near East.

Once again everything concurs in favour of a Paleolithic European origin of H1 and H3.

----------


## sparkey

I'm still not convinced either way, myself. What I feel is most likely is that there is no single Paleolithic European haplogroup for mtDNA like there is with Y-DNA. Probably, the assorted Paleolithic European populations had diverse mtDNA that included certain subclades of U5, U4, and maybe HV and others. Lack of diversity could be the result of bottlenecking, and the star pattern we see within H right now could be the result of subsequent expansion, like Y-DNA Haplogroup I1. But it could also be later migrations that expanded, like European R1b. I think we need more full sequence testing and ancient DNA to say for sure... it remains ambiguous to me.

----------


## spongetaro

Here is an extract from an article about the testing of 29 people found in a French neolithic grave:


"The researchers were able to deduce from their findings that the peoples in this region of France were of a genetic type* more closely related to Basque and Spanish populations than current western European populations.* They were also more closely related to peoples in Cyprus, Portugal, Turkey, Italy and Lebanon."

http://content.usatoday.com/communit...s-in-france-/1

Another blow to the Paleolithic origin theory of the Basque

----------


## Maciamo

> Here is an extract from an article about the testing of 29 people found in a French neolithic grave:


I also wanted to mention that two of the 29 people tested belonged to I2a. Their mtDNA was respectively H1 and H3. There is a high chances that they were indigenous hunter-gatherers assimilated to (or captured/killed by) the G2a farmers. The fact that both I2a happen to be H1 and H3 plays in favour of H1 and H3 being Paleolithic haplogroups like I2a.

----------


## Taranis

> I also wanted to mention that two of the 29 people tested belonged to *I2a. Their mtDNA was respectively H1 and H3.* There is a high chances that they were indigenous hunter-gatherers assimilated to (or captured/killed by) the G2a farmers. The fact that both I2a happen to be H1 and H3 plays in favour of H1 and H3 being Paleolithic haplogroups like I2a.


That is a very good point!

----------


## spongetaro

On the map showing the mtdna Haplogroup shared between Treilles individuals and current european populations, the darker zones indicate matches with famous neolithic cultures:

there is a clear match with the atlantic megalithic culturs of Carnac (Britanny) and Stonhenge (Wales, western England); and to the first neolithic cultures of Europe (Northern Greece, Varna culture of Bulgaria)


The other matches correspond to the region comprising north eastern Italy,eastern Switzerland, western and Austria and southern Bavaria which indicates the ancient land of Raetia where today haplogroup G frequency is high.




http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gn...n-on-the-move/

----------


## Maciamo

> On the map showing the mtdna Haplogroup shared between Treilles individuals and current european populations, the darker zones indicate matches with famous neolithic cultures:
> 
> there is a clear match with the atlantic megalithic culturs of Carnac (Britanny) and Stonhenge (Wales, western England); and to the first neolithic cultures of Europe (Northern Greece, Varna culture of Bulgaria)
> 
> 
> The other matches correspond to the region comprising north eastern Italy,eastern Switzerland, western and Austria and southern Bavaria which indicates the ancient land of Raetia where today haplogroup G frequency is high.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


That's for all mtDNA haplogroups of Treilles combined. If we remove H1 and H3, the contrast between light and dark areas on the map will be even greater.

Indeed, it does look like G2a people were the main population behind the Megalithic culture.

----------


## spongetaro

http://www.buildinghistory.org/dista...llbeaker.shtml
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gn...n-on-the-move/

The group of Treilles did belong to the culture of the so called statue-menhir (stelae).
Again, those stelae are located in the alp region, on the ancient land of Raetia (like haplogroupe G2a, mtdna lineage shared betwenn Treilles and present european population...)

----------


## Maciamo

I just wanted to add more evidence to confirm that H1 and H3 were in Europe before the Neolithic.

From Behar et al. (March 2012), which was published 10 months after this thread began. The abstract says :

"_We identified six mtDNA haplogroups, H1j1, H1t1, H2a5a1, H1av1, H3c2a, and H1e1a1, which are autochthonous to the Franco-Cantabrian region and, more specifically, to Basque-speaking populations. We detected signals of the expansion of these haplogroups at ∼4,000 years before present (YBP) and estimated their separation from the pan-European gene pool at ∼8,000 YBP, antedating the Indo-European arrival to the region. Our results clearly support the hypothesis of a partial genetic continuity of contemporary Basques with the preceding Paleolithic/Mesolithic settlers of their homeland._"

Then Pala et al. (May 2012) also agrees in their abstract :

_"Human populations, along with those of many other species, are thought to have contracted into a number of refuge areas at the height of the last Ice Age. European populations are believed to be, to a large extent, the descendants of the inhabitants of these refugia, and some extant mtDNA lineages can be traced to refugia in Franco-Cantabria (haplogroups H1, H3, V, and U5b1), the Italian Peninsula (U5b3), and the East European Plain (U4 and U5a)."_

----------


## Knovas

The following study also pointed out two Upper-Paleolithic results in the Franco-Cantabrian region: H (PS-1) and H6 (CH-1)

http://www.plosone.org/article/info:...one.0034417#s2

The results were re-confirmed by the authors after many speculations concerning its authenticity in different forums.

----------


## hrvclv

Hi everyone. I'm new here. I've just tested. I'm H1bm. And I'm from central France. 
So I wondered : How come my mt-hg is one that is predominantly eastern European ?
So here's my guess. Relying on Maciamo's figures compiled in his Frequencies by Period in prehistoric Europe, I observe that 
- Haplogroup H is absent from paleolithic western Europe.
- Absent from mesolithic western Europe.
- Was rare among neolithic Anatolian farmers before they started moving west.
- Then during the Neolithic, it suddenly accounts for 24% of Cardium pottery people, and 33.5% of LBK ; adding up to a total of 22.5% of neolithic Europe.
-Bronze Age : 35.5% Srubna. 42.5% German Bell Beaker

So here's what I suggest : a European branch of hgmt H would have been the female counterpart of I2 paleolithic HG. Both roamed about Europe long before the LGM. Then they sought refuge southwards - maybe in more than one refuge. But the likeliest locus would be Greece or the northern Balkans. When the ice receded, then moved north again, fanning out towards Bohemia, Poland, Ukraine.
In Belarus or thereabouts, they came into contact with R1a people who were heading (north-)west. And have remained there to this day - accounting for current percentiles in that area.
Some time later, the Eastern farmers moved from Anatolia to the Balkans, where they stayed quite a while. They assimilated the I2 men they didn't kill, and took some of their women with them on their trip further west.
The same thing must have happened in the north, first with LBK G2a EEF, then a few thousand years later, when R1b started expanding. Corded ware had 21.5% H women. Unetice : 20.5%.
This would be how my great-great-H1b-grandmother would have been driven west by my R-M269 (presumably L21 - currently testing) great-grandfather.
It would also explain the current, rather homogeneous levels of H in northern and western Europe. It does not strike out the possibility of some H girls spreading north-west from the Franco-cantabrian refugium. Nor the fact that some branches may have remained in the middle-east way back when their sisters moved to paleolithic Europe. 

Makes sense ?

----------


## LeBrok

Welcome to Eupedia hrvclv.

----------

