# Population Genetics > Autosomal Genetics >  New autosomal analysis of Iberia

## Angela

See:
Clare	Bycroft1,	Ceres	Fernandez-Rozadilla2,	Clara	Ruiz-Ponte2,	Inés	Quintela-García2,3,	Ángel	Carracedo2,3,	Peter	Donnelly1,4†,	Simon	Myers4,1†‡

"Patterns	of	genetic	differentiation	and	the	footprints	of	historical	migrations	in	the	Iberian	Peninsula"

https://www.biorxiv.org/content/bior...50191.full.pdf

"Genetic	differences	within	or	between	human	populations	(population	structure)	has	been	studied	using	a	variety	of	approaches	over	many	years1-5. Recently there	has	been an increasing focus on studying genetic differentiation at fine geographic	scales, such as within countries6-8. Identifying	such	structure allows the study of	recent	population	history,	and	identifies	the	potential	for	confounding	in	association	studies, particularly	when testing rare, often recently	arisen variants9. The	Iberian	Peninsula is	linguistically	diverse,	has	a	complex demographic	history,	and	is	unique	among European regions in having a centuries-long period of Muslim rule10.Previous genetic studies of Spain have examined either a small fraction of the	genome12-14 or	only	a	few	Spanish	regions15,16. Thus,	the	overall	pattern of	fine-scale	population structure within Spain remains uncharacterised. Here we analysegenome-wide	genotyping	array	data for	1,413 Spanish	individuals	sampled from	all	regions	of	Spain. We	identify	extensive fine-scale	structure, down	to	unprecedented	scales, smaller than 10 Km in some places. We observe a major axis of genetic	differentiation	that	runs	from	east	to	west of	the	peninsula. In	contrast,	we	observeremarkable	genetic	similarity	in	the	north-south	direction,	and	evidence	of historical	north-south population movement. Finally, without making particular prior	assumptions	about	source	populations,	we	show that	modern	Spanish	people	have	regionally	varying fractions	of	ancestry from	a	group	most	similar to	modern	north	Moroccans. The	north	African	ancestry results from	an	admixture	event, which	wedate to	860	- 1120	CE,	corresponding to	the	early	half	of	Muslim rule. Our results	indicate that	it	is	possible to	discern	clear	genetic	impacts	of	the	Muslim	conquest	and	population	movements	associated	with	the	subsequent	Reconquista."

They're using people with all four grandparents from the same region, so all the results are reflecting the clusters from around 1900, when there might have already been some modern internal migration. 

"Overall, the	major	axis	of	genetic	differentiation	runs	from	east	to	west,	while	conversely	there	is	remarkable genetic	similarity on the north-south direction. In	a complementary	analysis that	included	Portugal,	although fewer SNPs (Methods),	Portuguese	individuals	co-clustered	with	individuals	in	Galicia (Supplementary Figure	1a),	showing that this	pattern	extends	across	the	whole	Iberian	Peninsula. Indeed,	rather	than	solely	reflecting	modern-day	political boundaries, the broad-scale genetic structure of the region is strikingly	similar	to the linguistic frontiers present in the Iberian Peninsula around 1300 CE	(Figure	1c)."

I'm not so sure about part of the above. It seems to me that the north to south "general" similarity reflects the Reconquista.

"For	all	six	Iberian	clusters	the largest contribution comes from France (63	- 91%), with smaller contributions	that relate to present-day Italian (5 - 17%) and Irish (2	 - 5%) groups. With the	exception	of	the	Basque	cluster,	these	three donor	groups	dominate,	and	contributeproportionally similar amounts throughout Iberia, so probably represent ancient	ancestry components rather than recent migration. In contrast, north Moroccan	ancestry	shows	strong regional	variation (Figure	3c,	Methods). See	Supplementary	Information	for	a	fuller	discussion	of	the	ancestry	profiles."

"To distinguish between possible scenarios that could produce these patterns, we	applied the GLOBETROTTER method20 to each of our six clusters (Methods). GLOBETROTTER infers dates of admixture and the make-up of the source	populations, and tests whether admixture patterns are consistent with a simple	mixing of two groups at a single time in the past, compared to more complex	alternative	models. GLOBETROTTER found strong	evidence (p < 0.01) of admixture	for all six clusters (Methods; Table S3a in Supplementary Information). For all six	clusters,	an	extremely	similar	event	was	inferred (Figure	3b),	in	a	tight	time-range	of	860	- 1120 CE, and with similar source groups, present in varying proportions (4 -10% for the minor group). The major source was inferred to contain almost	exclusively	European	donor	groups,	and	the	minor	source	is	made	up	of	mainly	north	west	African donor groups, including Western Sahara, and to a lesser extent west	Africans	(YRI),	consistent	with	the	overall	ancestry	profiles. The	‘Portugal-Andalucia’	cluster shows the greatest YRI contribution, and also shows some evidence of a	second admixture date, with a more recent event involving only sub-SaharanAfrican-likeand	European-like	source	groups (see	Supplementary	Information for	a	fuller discussion; Supplementary Figure 6). This indicates a recent pulse of subSaharanAfrican	DNA, independent	of	the	north	African component."

[IMG][/IMG]

[IMG][/IMG]

----------


## Coriolan

There is a problem with the text. All the words are attached to one another. 

Sent from my LG-D855 using Tapatalk

----------


## Angela

> There is a problem with the text. All the words are attached to one another. 
> 
> Sent from my LG-D855 using Tapatalk


It looks fine from this end.

----------


## AdeoF

Great find Angela thank you for this. 

"*We speculate that the pattern we see is driven by later internal migratory flows, such as between Portugal and Galicia, and this would also explain why Galicia and Portugal show indistinguishable ancestry sharing with non-Spanish groups more generally*. Alternatively, it might be that these patterns reflect regional differences in patterns of * settlement and integration with local peoples of north African immigrants themselves,* or varying extents of the large-scale expulsion of Muslim people, *which occurred post-Reconquista and especially in towns and cities*"

I think this would the explanation on why Galicia has got quite a bit of E-M81 and a little bit of African admixture.

It's also interesting that Italy north and south have different genetics from each other but, Spain is the opposite in which north and south is similar.

----------


## ROS

Very interesting, it is good that studies are made of the Iberian Peninsula or also called Southwest of Europe, and not interpreted through studies conducted in other parts of Europe.

----------


## Angela

Sorry, wrong thread.

----------


## Maciamo

It's great to see a detailed autosomal analysis of Iberians. The east-west cline was apparent from the Y-haplogroups distribution, although the regions don't match exactly. This study confirms the distinct genetic identity of the Basques, Catalans and Galicians/Portuguese compared to the rest of the Spanish population. We already knew that from linguistics and Y-DNA, but it's good to have autosomal DNA further corroborating it.

----------


## mwauthy

The large contribution from France is interesting at 63%-91%. Might explain why I get such significant Iberian Peninsula scores on various ethnicity estimates. 

The Italian contribution of 5%-17% is surprising as well. I thought it would be higher. Ancestry DNA seems to give people from the Iberian Peninsula higher amounts of Italian on their ethnicity estimates.

----------


## Maciamo

> The large contribution from France is interesting at 63%-91%. Might explain why I get such significant Iberian Peninsula scores on various ethnicity estimates. 
> 
> The Italian contribution of 5%-17% is surprising as well. I thought it would be higher. Ancestry DNA seems to give people from the Iberian Peninsula higher amounts of Italian on their ethnicity estimates.


What they call contribution from France is surely linked to ancient Celtic ancestry, and perhaps even Proto-Celtic. 

The Italian contribution is very likely from the Romans, and in fact the 5-17% (or even up to 20%) corresponds to the levels of Italian admixture reported by Living DNA for individuals from Belgium, Switzerland or Austria, regions that had about the same amount of Roman colonies as Iberia. I expect to find higher Italian ancestry in parts of Iberia with higher R1b-U152 (and esp. Z56) like the Mediterranean coast (esp. Catalonia), Andalusia, central-south Portugal, and perhaps also Galicia, but much lower in the Basque country.

----------


## Angela

> Great find Angela thank you for this. 
> 
> "*We speculate that the pattern we see is driven by later internal migratory flows, such as between Portugal and Galicia, and this would also explain why Galicia and Portugal show indistinguishable ancestry sharing with non-Spanish groups more generally*. Alternatively, it might be that these patterns reflect regional differences in patterns of * settlement and integration with local peoples of north African immigrants themselves,* or varying extents of the large-scale expulsion of Muslim people, *which occurred post-Reconquista and especially in towns and cities*"
> 
> I think this would the explanation on why Galicia has got quite a bit of E-M81 and a little bit of African admixture.
> 
> It's also interesting that Italy north and south have different genetics from each other but, Spain is the opposite in which north and south is similar.


Yes, I think what they're saying is that the Iberian population was pretty homogenous from the Mesolithic through the Neolithic and even the Bronze Age. Geography has a lot to do with that. Contrary to what people speculated for a long time, and which I always contested, the Mediterranean is indeed a barrier to mass migration. Just navigating through the channel between North Africa and Sicily is very perilous. Ulysses tells us all about it. :) Also, the currents and winds in the Mediterranean flow in particular patterns so that travel between even two locales which are very close as the crow flies can be exceedingly difficult. It took very sophisticated navigation advances to counter that, and that happened much further on than the periods we're discussing. 

So, access into the Iberian peninsula flowed mostly in one direction for a very long time, from Italy and then southern France via the sea in the Neolithic, with only minor migration coming from central Europe, and then probably only over the Pyrenees during the Bronze Age, although I'm not sure about that. 

Once in Iberia there are no obstacles to flow between populations, in contrast to the case in Italy, which is an exceedingly mountainous country. Italy can also be accessed more easily by sea from the Aegean and Greece because of those sea and wind currents and because the civilizations to the east were more sophisticated in terms navigation at a much earlier time. Also, crossing the Adriatic is not very difficult. At certain places and seasons, you can see the Balkans from Italy, and there are even in places certain small islands to provide staging positions. I once read an article about farmers literally being able to drive their cattle across, although I can't now find it. 

Geography or location is destiny in many ways. 

They seem to be saying that the east/west cline is because of differing absorption of North African admixture, and Jewish admixture as well, although they don't mention it. They're speculating, of course, but I suppose it's possible that the expulsion was more draconian in the eastern regions, or that the Moorish rank and file were settled more extensively towards the east. 

The case of the Belmonte Jews, who fled to very rural areas in the western portions of Iberia, might be informative. Other groups of not only Jews but people with North African ancestry might have totally lost their sense of Jewish or Moorish identity and dispersed into the general population.



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Histor...ws_in_Belmonte

I'm not saying it definitely happened, but I suppose it's possible. 

I'd add, though, that while perhaps the span of 3% to 10% North African ancestry might be correct, I'm not sure I'd rely completely on Hellenthal's program for detecting the date of the admixture. Like all such programs I think it conflates all the gene flows and sort of "pins" it to the most recent such event. I don't think, in other words that all the "E" and "J" lineages arrived with the Moors. I think it's more complicated than that.

----------


## mwauthy

> What they call contribution from France is surely linked to ancient Celtic ancestry, and perhaps even Proto-Celtic. 
> 
> The Italian contribution is very likely from the Romans, and in fact the 5-17% (or even up to 20%) corresponds to the levels of Italian admixture reported by Living DNA for individuals from Belgium, Switzerland or Austria, regions that had about the same amount of Roman colonies as Iberia. I expect to find higher Italian ancestry in parts of Iberia with higher R1b-U152 (and esp. Z56) like the Mediterranean coast (esp. Catalonia), Andalusia, central-south Portugal, and perhaps also Galicia, but much lower in the Basque country.


Not to side track this topic but to address your Living DNA/Roman influence I feel my scores are quite interesting. 

My mom is French Canadian and should have Roman influences from her Poitou/Aunis ancestors. My dad is Wallonia Belgian and should have some Roman influence as well. However, I received 0% from Central or Northern Italy on Living DNA.

In Cautious Mode I received 63% Great Britain and Ireland which matches my 63% Northwestern on DNA Land. So it corresponds most likely to a Celtic/Germanic mix. I also received 13% North Yorkshire which matches my 13% Scandinavian on Ancestry. 14% was assigned to northwestern related and 22% was european unassigned. 

In Standard Mode the 14% Northwestern related became France so it probably represents some Celtic/Basque like mix. The other 22% was still unassigned.

In Complete Mode the 22% became 9.5% Iberian, 8.3% Southern Italy, and 4.1% Balkan. If there is a Roman influence it is more Roman Empire than Romans from central Italy.

----------


## ROS

If I remember correctly, Morocco had Phoenician colonization, it belonged to the Roman Empire and there must have been colonies, it had Germanic invasions, I believe that many expulsions of Moriscos that were really Iberians ended up in Morocco, my question as an amateur is, how do these genetic contributions of Phoenicians, Romans, Germans, Iberians of which really are own contributions of North Africa in Iberica genetics?

----------


## Maciamo

> Not to side track this topic but to address your Living DNA/Roman influence I feel my scores are quite interesting. 
> 
> My mom is French Canadian and should have Roman influences from her Poitou/Aunis ancestors. My dad is Wallonia Belgian and should have some Roman influence as well. However, I received 0% from Central or Northern Italy on Living DNA.
> 
> In Cautious Mode I received 63% Great Britain and Ireland which matches my 63% Northwestern on DNA Land. So it corresponds most likely to a Celtic/Germanic mix. I also received 13% North Yorkshire which matches my 13% Scandinavian on Ancestry. 14% was assigned to northwestern related and 22% was european unassigned. 
> 
> In Standard Mode the 14% Northwestern related became France so it probably represents some Celtic/Basque like mix. The other 22% was still unassigned.
> 
> In Complete Mode the 22% became 9.5% Iberian, 8.3% Southern Italy, and 4.1% Balkan. If there is a Roman influence it is more Roman Empire than Romans from central Italy.


I always use the complete mode for Living DNA comparisons. I have never seen any Walloon results from Living DNA with 0% of Italian. The lowest was 2% for someone who was half Flemish. The others had between 10% and 20%. 

In about 10 Walloon samples I have seen, half had no Iberian admixture at all. Three had a bit of Basque (1 to 3%) and only one had 2.5% of Iberian. So I think that your Iberian comes mostly from your mother's side (Poitou is a region that scored higher Iberian than the French average in 23andMe too).

----------


## Angela

> If I remember correctly, Morocco had Phoenician colonization, it belonged to the Roman Empire and there must have been colonies, it had Germanic invasions, I believe that many expulsions of Moriscos that were really Iberians ended up in Morocco, my question as an amateur is, how do these genetic contributions of Phoenicians, Romans, Germans, Iberians of which really are own contributions of North Africa in Iberica genetics?


They mention that by other analyses, the strongest resemblance is to western Sahara populations, not coastal communities that might have absorbed Iberian Moriscos or Jews fleeing to North Africa. 
[IMG][/IMG]

I do think it's interesting that the earliest date of admixture is in the Basque and more northern regions, because after only one to two hundred years the Moors were indeed pushed south. 

I agree with you in general though, Ros, in that I think some of this gene flow may be eastern Mediterranean, not necessarily all North African. As I said above, I'm no big fan of Hellenthal's dating algorithm. If I'm interpreting this correctly, you can tell because the date of admixture for the southern regions is later, and that would make no sense, since the flow went south to north. It would make sense if they're only picking up the date of the *last* admixture event, however. 

I also think that the yDna shows what may be post early Bronze Age gene flow from the east, not from North Africa. In fact, post early Bronze Age gene flow from the east into Europe, and not just southern Europe, seems to be rather ubiquitous. 

So, yes, I think the Phoenicians, but perhaps also others might have had some impact. They're relying too much on that algorithm, in my opinion, and I think there are issues with it.

However, in terms of the Neolithic, about which it was posited that some of that "North African" like ancestry might have entered Iberia during that time, I think this data indicates it was probably not the case. It's more recent than that, if not all during the early Middle Ages.

They also don't factor in that some of the extra Yoruba related gene flow in the west, specifically Portugal, has already been shown to be related to reverse migration from the New World.

----------


## mwauthy

> I always use the complete mode for Living DNA comparisons. I have never seen any Walloon results from Living DNA with 0% of Italian. The lowest was 2% for someone who was half Flemish. The others had between 10% and 20%. 
> 
> In about 10 Walloon samples I have seen, half had no Iberian admixture at all. Three had a bit of Basque (1 to 3%) and only one had 2.5% of Iberian. So I think that your Iberian comes mostly from your mother's side (Poitou is a region that scored higher Iberian than the French average in 23andMe too).


I was just curious about what you think the Roman influence would be in my case (if any at all) since I scored 0% Tuscany or Central Italy? When you say your Wallonia samples scored “Italian” are you including the north, central, and south or just Tuscany? I remember reading in the past you thought Living DNA Tuscany percentages in northwestern Europeans might be a good proxy for Roman influence.


To get back on topic I’m still confused about the similarities between southwestern France and the Iberian Peninsula. Is it a Basque like similarity since Basques get 100% Iberian on Ancestry and 23andMe? I get 25% Iberian on some calculators but only 4-8% Basque on other calculators so it’s not a direct correlation for me. Is it a Proto-Celtic like similarity? Is it a pre Indo European type similarity? Or maybe a combination of all of these above?

----------


## Ailchu

> What they call contribution from France is surely linked to ancient Celtic ancestry, and perhaps even Proto-Celtic. 
> 
> The Italian contribution is very likely from the Romans, and in fact the 5-17% (or even up to 20%) corresponds to the levels of Italian admixture reported by Living DNA for individuals from Belgium, Switzerland or Austria, regions that had about the same amount of Roman colonies as Iberia. I expect to find higher Italian ancestry in parts of Iberia with higher R1b-U152 (and esp. Z56) like the Mediterranean coast (esp. Catalonia), Andalusia, central-south Portugal, and perhaps also Galicia, but much lower in the Basque country.


and are you sure that it isn't just neolithic genome, maybe even parts of the additional west asian admixture that was brought during late neolithic, that is labeled as italian because its highest frequency nowadays is in italy? i mean 20% in belgium after around 1500 years is massive.

----------


## Angela

Spain is just as "Neolithic", if not as West Asian, as Italy, but Iberian isn't picked up, so I don't see how that can be it.

----------


## AdeoF

> *I agree with you in general though, Ros, in that I think some of this gene flow may be eastern Mediterranean, not necessarily all North African* 
> 
> *So, yes, I think the Phoenicians, but perhaps also others might have had some impact. They're relying too much on that algorithm, in my opinion, and I think there are issues with it.*
> 
> *However, in terms of the Neolithic, about which it was posited that some of that "North African" like ancestry might have entered Iberia during that time, I think this data indicates it was probably not the case. It's more recent than that, if not all during the early Middle Ages.
> *


Yep that makes sense since they stuck around eastern Spain since they have less north African on average. But western Iberia is more North African shown on the paper but it can be misleading. 



> They seem to be saying that the east/west cline is because of differing absorption of North African admixture, and Jewish admixture as well, although they don't mention it. They're speculating, of course, but I suppose it's possible that the expulsion was more draconian in the eastern regions, or that the Moorish rank and file were settled more extensively towards the east. 
> The case of the Belmonte Jews, who fled to very rural areas in the western portions of Iberia, might be informative. *Other groups of not only Jews but people with North African ancestry might have totally lost their sense of Jewish or Moorish identity and dispersed into the general population*.
> 
> I'm not saying it definitely happened, but I suppose it's possible. 
> 
> 
> I'd add, though, that while perhaps the span of 3% to 10% North African ancestry might be correct, I'm not sure I'd rely completely on Hellenthal's program for detecting the date of the admixture. Like all such programs I think it conflates all the gene flows and sort of "pins" it to the most recent such event. I don't think, in other words that all the "E" and "J" lineages arrived with the Moors. I think it's more complicated than that


That can be a possibility since in the average admixture in Iberia has shown this. In ancestry I got 3% north African so it is possible on what your saying what i do understand is that eastern Spain there was a lot more conflicts around that time in which can explain the lower % from them. I do agree on the bold text since DNA tests have shown that.

Lastly Spain is the closest country to Africa so yeah it's possible for a easier ride then Italy to get there

----------


## Turmfalke

> It's also interesting that Italy north and south have different genetics from each other but, Spain is the opposite in which north and south is similar.


 This is due to the Reconquista and the repopulation policy. Eache of the conquered areas was occupied by Christians from the north in exchange for farmland and certain privileges. That´s why genetics is similar. 


> Once in Iberia there are no obstacles to flow between populations, in contrast to the case in Italy, which is an exceedingly mountainous country. Italy can also be accessed more easily by sea from the Aegean and Greece because of those sea and wind currents and because the civilizations to the east were more sophisticated in terms navigation at a much earlier time. ow find it.


 Spain is the second most mountainous country in Europe, after Switzerland. It has a totally uneven and complex orography with many reliefs, including its mountainous systems. That orography has influenced the creation of separate societies. However, as I said before, it was the Reconquista and the Repopulation that made genetic similarity possible.

----------


## Turmfalke

> .It's also interesting that Italy north and south have different genetics from each other but, Spain is the opposite in which north and south is similar.


 This is due to the Reconquista and the repopulation policy. Eache of the conquered areas was occupied by Christians from the north in exchange for farmland and certain privileges. That´s why genetics is similar. 


> Once in Iberia there are no obstacles to flow between populations, in contrast to the case in Italy, which is an exceedingly mountainous country. Italy can also be accessed more easily by sea from the Aegean and Greece because of those sea and wind currents and because the civilizations to the east were more sophisticated in terms navigation at a much earlier time. ow find it.


 Spain is the second most mountainous country in Europe, after Switzerland. It has a totally uneven and complex orography with many reliefs, including its mountainous systems. That orography has influenced the creation of separate societies. However, as I said before, it was the Reconquista and the Repopulation that made genetic similarity possible.

----------


## Turmfalke

> .It's also interesting that Italy north and south have different genetics from each other but, Spain is the opposite in which north and south is similar.


This is due to the Reconquista and the repopulation policy. Eache of the conquered areas was occupied by Christians from the north in exchange for farmland and certain privileges. That´s why genetics is similar.




> Once in Iberia there are no obstacles to flow between populations, in contrast to the case in Italy, which is an exceedingly mountainous country. Italy can also be accessed more easily by sea from the Aegean and Greece because of those sea and wind currents and because the civilizations to the east were more sophisticated in terms navigation at a much earlier time. ow find it.


Spain is the second most mountainous country in Europe, after Switzerland. It has a totally uneven and complex orography with many reliefs, including its mountainous systems. That orography has influenced the creation of separate societies. However, as I said before, it was the Reconquista and the Repopulation that made genetic similarity possible.

----------


## Ailchu

> Spain is just as "Neolithic", if not as West Asian, as Italy, but Iberian isn't picked up, so I don't see how that can be it.


maybe because the algorithm puts everything to "italian". portuguese people often get high amounts of greek and italian 20-30% on myheritage but i don't know how romans or greeks could have had such an impact on iberian genetics without some kind of genocide.

----------


## ToBeOrNotToBe

So basically, Catalans are the ultimate Spaniards.

----------


## Farstar

Very interesting thread and paper, thank you.

1. It is a pity there is an analysis with Portugal, but not Southern France. It seems clear there should be some continuity of Catalonia into South-West France (Perpinyà, etc.).

2. The clustering in the East-West direction is "politically incorrect" but quite obvious, even at the naked eye. Catalonia+Balearic (but not Valencia; this is somewhat surprising, but it has been said before the Valencians come mostly from Aragonese, despite using Catalan) are a unity in many respects.

3. The map also fits the Roman subdivision, and also the map of Iberic populations.

4. The Reconquista from Asturias' myth seems to need an amendment, since the "resistance against the Muslims" clearly happened in Catalonia, not in Asturias. As ToBeOrNotToBe stated, Catalans seem the ultimate Spaniards, in many respects.

5. Could it be that different nationalities' conflicts within Spain are related to ethnic issues? Is this statement falsable in any way?

----------


## Ailchu

to the one who downvoted my post, could you explain to me how some modern portuguese get 10% sardinian and others 10% greek in myheritage? or how swiss get 30% greek? or how albanians get over 90% greek? did all of this ancestry actually originate in greece in the last 2000-3000 years because of greek conquerors and romans or more recent migrations?

----------


## Roi

I have seen this study now. I wonder where is the DNA footprint of ancient germanic tribes that settled in Iberia in the V century.. specially in NW, according to Y-DNA results, the input should be visible... I know there were few in comparison with the native population at that time, but so where berbers and nevertheless their influence is clear and significative... or may be that suebi, goths, etc are included in the "french" DNA?

----------


## Davidtab

If the admixsure event ocurred between 860-1120 in Galicia and Northern Portugal, It could be caused by northafrican christians escaping of muslims. It is documentated that, for example, city of Lugo was reocupied in 740 by Odoario and his people, who were northafricans. I believe it's extremely rare the E-M81 in Galicia comes from muslims because they stayed there no more than 25 years. But It could come from Christian refugees of northafrica, that's only an idea.

----------


## Davidtab

Galicia, Cantabric mountains were the first territory free of muslims in Iberian Península. Perhaps is not a fool thing to think Galicia received in VIII century a important amount of Christian refugees from actually Marocco.

----------


## DarknessC

I’m not for one surprised it shows up on autosomal

----------


## nuno77

A study from 2005-06 of the Y-DNA of Portugal by its districts.


Attachment 10406


> I have seen this study now. I wonder where is the DNA footprint of ancient germanic tribes that settled in Iberia in the V century.. specially in NW, according to Y-DNA results, the input should be visible... I know there were few in comparison with the native population at that time, but so where berbers and nevertheless their influence is clear and significative... or may be that suebi, goths, etc are included in the "french" DNA?

----------


## Angela

We know from the ancient dna we are starting to get from the Germanic tribes that R1b U-106 and I1 are the lineages to track. If they're not there then that is proof that as we already speculated, and as Ralph and Coop showed in terms of autsomal dna, there just were too few of them to have a significant impact in certain areas of Southern Europe.

See: 
https://journals.plos.org/plosbiolog...l.pbio.1001555

----------


## Roi

I1 and R1b U-106 are in fact present in nortwestern Iberia, at levels comparatively higher than in other areas of the peninsula. According to Maciamo maps, combined "germanic" y-dna reach 10-20% in Galicia; with I1 being at 5-10% in Galicia and R1-U106 standing below 5% in Galicia, where it is still higher than in other areas of Iberia, though. 23andMe's Map's indicate a level of 10-20% of NW European admixture in the same area and 1-5% of French & German admixture, again slightly higher than in other parts of the peninsula. There are other studies that do reflect the influence of germanic peoples in the genetic history of Galicians (Sorry, but I can't post links yet) so I wonder why they don't appear on the referred study. Is it possible that this "central-european DNA" is hidden within the "French like" DNA showed in the study? even though, it seems strange that nowhere in Iberia appears any level of coincidence between iberian populations and germans or other central/northern-europeans (not even in Catalonia, that according to most studies has a level of "germanic" DNA even higher than Galicia)

----------


## Roi

So what do you think about that?

----------


## Ygorcs

> Great find Angela thank you for this. 
> 
> "*We speculate that the pattern we see is driven by later internal migratory flows, such as between Portugal and Galicia, and this would also explain why Galicia and Portugal show indistinguishable ancestry sharing with non-Spanish groups more generally*. Alternatively, it might be that these patterns reflect regional differences in patterns of * settlement and integration with local peoples of north African immigrants themselves,* or varying extents of the large-scale expulsion of Muslim people, *which occurred post-Reconquista and especially in towns and cities*"
> 
> I think this would the explanation on why Galicia has got quite a bit of E-M81 and a little bit of African admixture.
> 
> It's also interesting that Italy north and south have different genetics from each other but, Spain is the opposite in which north and south is similar.


The persecution of Jews and Muslims has indeed been considered to be much less rabid and intense in Portugal than in Spain. Portugal mostly followed the lead of Castile and Aragon, but with less enthusiasm generallyl The Reconquista ended and consolidated in Portugal much earlier, too, which probably allowed for a longer time for the full assimilation of part of the forner Muslims of North African origins at a time when the zealous obsession with religious and ethnic purity was much less in vogue, still in the High Middle Ages. Galicia and Portugal might thus have simply given historical conditions more conducive to the preservation of the North African contribution to their people.

----------


## Carlos

[QUOTE = ToBeOrNotToBe; 548234] Entonces, básicamente, los catalanes son los últimos españoles. [/ QUOTE]

It can be extended a little more.

----------


## Carlos

[CITA = Maciamo; 535088] Es grandioso ver un detallado análisis autosómico de los íberos. El clima este oeste fue evidente en la distribución de haplogrupos Y, aunque las regiones no coinciden exactamente. Este estudio confirma la identidad genética distintiva de los vascos, catalanes y gallegos / portugueses en comparación con el resto de la población española. Ya lo sabíamos por la lingüística y el ADN-Y, pero es bueno tener un ADN autosómico que lo corrobore aún más. [/ QUOTE] 

yes, yes...

----------


## Salento

Edit...

Iberia | Spanish | Navarre, Aragon | 1%

There are others in my Region with the same result.

It’s just 1%, maybe Ancient. Why only Navarre, or Aragon?

Feel free to speculate.

----------


## Angela

Carlos, you know the rule is English only. Cut it out. 

Actually, the day isn't going well at all, if you must know: my dog is sick and I have to take him to the veterinarian. So, I don't need any more headaches, ok?

----------


## Carlos

> Carlos, you know the rule is English only. Cut it out. 
> 
> Actually, the day isn't going well at all, if you must know: my dog is sick and I have to take him to the veterinarian. So, I don't need any more headaches, ok?


It happens fatal, poor, that he recovers soon.

----------


## Carlos

> Edit...
> 
> Iberia | Spanish | Navarre, Aragon | 1%
> 
> There are others in my Region with the same result.
> 
> It’s just 1%, maybe Ancient. Why only Navarre, or Aragon?


Navarre and Aragon, yes, why. Perhaps if it is ancient it is from a time when the borders were not as they are now, and to give a current result the two regions appear. I have five match for mitochondrial DNA with people from Navarra algono de Álava and one from Majones that is in Huesca. Perhaps they have found some mummy that had that little bit of DNA from Navarre and Aragon and maybe the Romans took it to act as a dancer; although they preferred the dancers from Gades, you know because of their exoticism and morocco and SSA, there is no, that the Moors had not yet arrived, so one day we will find out.

----------

