# Population Genetics > Autosomal Genetics >  Analysing Eurasian & African autosomal DNA from Lazaridis et al. 2013

## Maciamo

I have reorganised a bit the K=20 autosomal admixtures from Lazaridis et al. 2013 and assigned geographical regions for each component.



These admixtures bear an uncanny resemblance to those of the Dodecad Project, and one could wonder if that Iosif Lazaridis could indeed be the person hidden behind the pseudonym Dienekes Pontikos. 

Here is a few things we can deduce from these admixtures.


1) *Neolithic farmers* in Europe probably came from the Levant through Anatolia and Greece. For this reason I will call this admixture "East Mediterranean". Their genes are now found throughout Europe, North Africa and the Middle East until western Iran. The modern population most closely related to East Mediterranean Neolithic farmers are the Sardinians, as we already knew. The Basques are almost exactly half Neolithic farmers and half Mesolithic European in descent. The Saami are the only European completely lacking Neolithic farmer admixture. 

2) *Modern Levantines and South Caucasians* are essentially a three-way mix of East Mediterranean, Caucaso-Perso-Gedrosian and Southwest Asian admixture. Egyptians also have two additional admixtures: North African and East African, which are only found at trace frequencies among other Semitic speakers in the Middle East. 

3) In the Middle East, substantial percentages of *Mesolithic European admixture* are only found among the *Turks and the North Caucasians*.

4) *Jewish people* all share the same basic three-way admixtures as modern Levantines, but with additional admixture from the region from where they have settled historically. Ashkenazi Jews have the highest percentages of European admixture, followed by Turkish and North African Jews, who migrated from southern Europe. Other Jews (Georgian, Iraqi, Iranian, Yemenite, Ethiopian) have no European admixture.

5) *There is hardly any East Mediterranean admixture in South Asia*, starting from eastern Iran (Balochistan). *Therefore it is unlikely that agriculture spread from the the Levant to South Asia, but rather developed independently in the Indus Valley*. Neolithic farmers most likely belonged to Y-haplogroups G2, E1b1b (V13 and M34) and perhaps also T, and these haplogroups are almost absent from South Asia (apart from G2a3b1 brought by the Indo-Europeans). The presence of Y-haplogroup J1 and J2 in Central Asia and South Asia should be attributed to other migrations than that of Neolithic farmers from the Levant. The most likely hypotheses is that J1 and J2 were brought instead by Neolithic goat and sheep herders from the Caucasus and Zagros. Copper and Bronze Age expansions from the Caucasus and Iran (Kura-Araxes, etc.) would have brought more J1 and J2 to western South Asia. 

6) The Neolithic farmer sample from Stuttgart (LBK culture, c. 5000 BCE) had only a small amount of Mesolithic European DNA. This means that *Near Eastern farmers did not intermix much with their hunting-gathering neighbour*s, at least during their initial advance across Europe. Intermingling might have progressively increased over the centuries, but what brought the two populations closer together was their conquest by the Indo-Europeans during the Bronze Age, some 2500 years after the arrival of Neolithic farmers in Germany.

7) When looking at the non-Mongolid and non-Indian admixture in Central and North Asia, it can be deducted that the *Bronze Age Indo-Europeans* possessed approximately 40% of Mesolithic European (light blue), 45% of Caucaso-Perso-Gedrosian (beige) and 10% of Near Eastern farmer (bright pink) admixture. They also had about 5% of "Kalash admixture" (see below). The Near Eastern beige and pink components were in all likelihood absorbed by R1b during the 5000+ years of the Neolithic period around modern Kurdistan and the Caucasus, before moving to the Pontic Steppe, and from absorbing Balkano-Carpathian farmers (G2a3b1, J2b2, T1a) in the steppes. This admixture would have come from such maternal lineages as H2a1, H5a, H7, H8, I, J1, K, T1, T2, W and X2 (=> see mtDNA haplogroups associated with R1b people).

8) The *Kalash admixture* (dark green) is found at trace frequencies in among all regions settled by the Indo-Europeans, or in other words in all populations possessing haplogroups R1a or R1b. Since the Mal'ta boy (Y-DNA R*) possessed the highest level of this dark green admixture after the modern Kalash, this admixture was almost certainly a minor genetic component found in the original carriers of haplogroup R. This admixture is virtually absent from Africa, the Arabian peninsula, Sardinia, the Basques, the Saami, and non-Indo-European tribes of South Asia such as the Kharia and Kusunda. What's interesting is that the Kalash are one of the few people who still possess both Y-DNA R* and R1* (in addition to R1a, L and H) according to Firasat et al. (2007).

9) Some Bedouins have 100% of *Southwest Asian admixture* (khaki green). This admixture is found among all populations with substantial levels of Y-haplogroups *J1 and J2*, such as the Arabs, Levantines, Cypriots, Greeks, Sicilians, Maltese, North Africans, and East Africans.

10) *Iberians* have a small percentage of North African admixture, linked to the presence of Y-haplogroup E-M81 and mtDNA L. Iberians also have traces of East African and Southwest Asian admixture. All three admixtures could have come with the Moors during the Islamic period, although it is likely that there was already some North African admixture in Iberia (though probably in isolated populations) at least since the Neolithic period.

11) Despite being Uralic speakers, the *Hungarians* have only tiny amounts of Siberian admixture, just like their Y-DNA and mtDNA suggested.

12) The very low frequency of the Caucaso-Perso-Gedrosian admixture among the *Basques* hints that the autosomal genes of Y-haplogroup R1b got heavily diluted. The dilution could have started already before R1b entered the Basque population. But if a very small number of R1b men came and married Basque women, and their children only married pure Basque women, their autosomal DNA would have become more and more diluted at each generation until hardly any genes from the original R1b patriarchs remained. This would confirm my theory of how did the Basques became R1b and how they did not become Indo-European speakers. A high level of Caucaso-Perso-Gedrosian admixture would have been problematic to explain why the Basques were not speakers of an IE language.

*UPDATE:*

13) The *Caucaso-Perso-Gedrosian admixture* might be a composite of the West Asian branch of macro-haplogroup K, comprising mostly the original autosomal genes of carriers of *Y-haplogroups L and T*. Over time, L and T appear to have been replaced by the paternal lineages of successive invaders, like J1 and J2 during the Neolithic and Chalcolithic, R1a and R1b during the Bronze and Iron Ages, and East Asian lineages (C, N, O, Q) during the Turkic and Mongolian invasions.

14) The *Thai and Cambodians* have about a quarter of *South Asian admixture*, unlike the Chinese, Japanese and Koreans who have none of it. The migration of South Indians to Southeast Asia is historically attested and is linked to the diffusion of Buddhism and Hinduism to the region. It also explains why Cambodians in particular have such dark skin, in sharp contrast with their Vietnamese neighbours.

15) *Northern Han Chinese* have about 10% of *Northeast Asian admixture*, like the Koreans and Japanese, while Han Chinese in central and southern China, as well as ethnic minorities in southern China lack that Northeast Asian admixture.

16) *Altaians* have considerable levels of *Indo-European admixture* (light blue + beige), which probably came from the EBA Afanasevo culture (c. 3600-2400 BCE). Other Northeast Asian people farther east known to carry small percentages of R1a or R1b, like Yakuts, Mongolians, Tuvinians and Xibo, all have traces of Indo-European admixture.

17) Traces of *Northeast Asian ancestry* are found among all *Levantine people*, including European and North African Jews, but also among *Armenians, Bulgarians, Albanians, Greeks and Sicilians*. This is corroborated by the presence of *Y-haplogroup Q* among these populations.

18) *Tuscans* have practically the same admixtures as the Albanians and the Greeks, or even the Turks once their Northeast Asian admixture has been removed. This reinforces the theory of a Greco-Anatolian origin of the Etruscans.

----------


## Sile

> I have reorganised a bit the K=20 autosomal admixtures from Lazaridis et al. 2013 and assigned geographical regions for each component.
> 
> 
> 
> Here is a few things we can learn from these admixtures.
> 
> 
> 1) *Neolithic farmers* in Europe probably came from the Levant through Anatolia and Greece. For this reason I will call this admixture "East Mediterranean". Their genes are now found throughout Europe, North Africa and the Middle East until western Iran. The modern population most closely related to East Mediterranean Neolithic farmers are the Sardinians, as we already knew. The Basques are almost exactly half Neolithic farmers and half Mesolithic European in descent. The Saami are the only European completely lacking Neolithic farmer admixture. 
> 
> ...


Any reason you excluded Albanian, Greek and Tuscan as they do appear in your link ................and all basically all the same.

----------


## kamani

What if the Caucaso-Perso-Gedrosian, supposedly associated with IE, was not initially spread by a R1b population? That would explain why the Basques (high R1b) don't have it.

----------


## Goga

I don't believe it but some from other sites would claim that 'Mesolithic European & North Eurasian' is a better match with IE. And that R1b can be better associated with 'North Eurasian'.

----------


## Maciamo

> Any reason you excluded Albanian, Greek and Tuscan as they do appear in your link ................and all basically all the same.


That was not intentional. I was just tired and pressed by time when I edited the image. It has now been fixed.

----------


## Maciamo

> What if the Caucaso-Perso-Gedrosian, supposedly associated with IE, was not initially spread by a R1b population? That would explain why the Basques (high R1b) don't have it.


Thenwho would have spread it around Europe and Siberia ?

----------


## nordicwarrior

"Mesolithic European and North Eurasian" = Y DNA I and R?

Kind of fuzzy classification. Are we to infer that hg. R is now Mesolithic European?

I ask this tongue in cheek-- long time readers of this site will understand...

----------


## Tabaccus Maximus

There may be a 15,000 year split between the ANE in a Motala individual and the ANE re-introduced into Europe in the Chalcolithic.
So what does it mean to say that Europeans descend from 15% ANE?

----------


## Maciamo

> "Mesolithic European and North Eurasian" = Y DNA I and R?
> 
> Kind of fuzzy classification. Are we to infer that hg. R now Mesolithic European?
> 
> I ask this tongue in cheek-- long time readers of this site will understand...


I have always said that the main haplogroups of Meolithic Europeans were I and R1a. 

In this case, it means that the light blue admixture was found in the Mesolithic European samples (Motala, hg I) and the Paleolithic Siberian sample (Mal'ta boy, hg R).

----------


## nordicwarrior

> I have always said that the main haplogroups of Meolithic Europeans were I and R1a. 
> 
> In this case, it means that the light blue admixture was found in the Mesolithic European samples (Motala, hg I) and the Paleolithic Siberian sample (Mal'ta boy, hg R).


Well this makes sense if we are including Siberia in the boundaries of Europe. I know Europe can be larger or smaller geographically speaking depending on who you ask.

I guess the next question is how long will it be before hg. R1b is included in Paleolithic Europe?

----------


## Alan

I would add R* to "Caucaso-Perso-Gedrosian" because it obviously stem from a common origin of it. Also J* makes more sense for CPG. So R*, J*, T* and L* makes sense.

By the way according to Davidskis results this "Kalash" component is basically the same as Caucasus-Gedrosia. In other words Caucaso-Perso-Gedrosia is like a slightly drifted (East Mediterranean admixed) version of Kalash.

----------


## Maciamo

> Well this makes sense if we are including Siberia in the boundaries of Europe. I know Europe can be larger or smaller geographically speaking depending on who you ask.
> 
> I guess the next question is how long will it be before hg. R1b is included in Paleolithic Europe?


R1b could have been in "Europe" during the Palaeolithic, but that would have been in Northeast Europe, mostly Russia. After all, both R1a and R1b were supposedly mammoth hunters, and these tribes roamed vast geographical areas. Some Palaeolithic R1a and R1b could even have ended up in isolated pockets of Western Europe. That would explain how 5% of Irish belong to the Palaeolithic R1b1* (P25) subclade, which has nothing to do with the Indo-European branch. 

There must have been many small hunter-gathering tribes comprising R1b-P25 lineages. At least one of them settled around eastern Turkey and Kurdistan at the end of the a last glaciation (circa 12,000 years ago) and, I believe, domesticated cattle there. They then dispersed in several branches, one of which (M269) migrated to the Caucasus and the Pontic Steppe and became the Indo-Europeans. You can read about this in more details in my updated R1b history.

The original R1b1* would have been autosomally similar to other Mesolithic Europeans (I or R1a) and would probably have belonged essentially to mtDNA U5 and V.

----------


## Maciamo

> I would add R* to "Caucaso-Perso-Gedrosian" because it obviously stem from a common origin of it. So R*, T* and L* makes sense.


I thought about this too, but the Mal'ta boy didn't have _any_ Caucaso-Perso-Gedrosian, so it can't be linked to R*.




> By the way according to Davidskis results this "Kalash" component is basically the same as Caucasus-Gedrosia. In other words Caucaso-Perso-Gedrosia is like a slightly drifted (East Mediterranean admixed) version of Kalash.


I saw that in the K=19 and K=18 admixtures, but I don't believe it, for 2 reasons : 

1) the Kalash admixture was found in the Mal'ta boy (contrarily to Caucaso-Perso-Gedrosia)

2) the Kalash admixture is found in all populations with substantial percentages of R1a or R1b, but not in other (non-IE) populations with high Caucaso-Perso-Gedrosia, like in the Arabian peninsula or the Georgians, who also have very little Mesolithic European admixture. So there seem to be a clear linked between the Mesolithic European admixture and the Kalash admixture, and both are found in R1a/R1b populations.

----------


## Alan

> I thought about this too, but the Mal'ta boy didn't have _any_ Caucaso-Perso-Gedrosian, so it can't be linked to R*.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I saw that in the K=19 and K=18 admixtures, but I don't believe it, for 2 reasons : 
> 
> 1) the Kalash admixture was found in the Mal'ta boy (contrarily to Caucaso-Perso-Gedrosia)
> ...



Mal'ta did carry it. And this is exactly what I meant with "Kalash" is basically Caucasian-Gedrosia. If we look at the Mal'ta paper. the dark green is far too strong in Western Asia but here this dark green component which was found among Mal'ta completely lacks in non Indo European West Asians. So some of the Caucasus-Gedrosia must have been eaten up by it. But here in Lazaridis paper this dark green is seen as Kalash. So it is very likely that in the lower K's even as you said already in K19 the Kalash and Caucasus_gedrosia were one and the same. So I believe that Caucaso-Perso-Gedrosia is basically a very recently and slightly "Eastern Med" admixed version of this Kalash component. This explains why even in K19 these two are virtually the same. This is why I believe R* was involved in spreading Caucaso-Perso-Gedrosia.

Another good indicator is that R* as well L* lineages are among the Haplogroups the Kalash are rich in.

Maciamo, this is exactly the chart I mean.


http://img43.imageshack.us/img43/2810/hhx4.png

See here, even in the Levant this dark green component, which is a major part of Mal'ta, is so strong while the Kalash component completely lacks. There is no other explanation to me than that Kalash and Caucaso-Perso-Gedrosia must be two parts of one component which was found in Mal'ta. And the "Kalash" version must be the pure one while the CPG is the slightly shifted and East Med admixed one.


And I forget but I disagree with the idea that the yDNA J* exclusively carried Southwest Asian component. I would even add to this Caucaso-Perso-Gedrosia component J1 as well J2. considering that these Haplogroups are also frequent in territories believed to have been (and still are) rich in T*, L* as well R1b* (Sumerians, Elamites etc.). 

However, overall the charts and labels make pretty much sense, though it would have been better to use the term "Caucaso-Irano-Gedrosian" instead (just personal taste here).

----------


## Tabaccus Maximus

> *There is hardly any East Mediterranean admixture in South Asia*, starting from eastern Iran (Balochistan). *Therefore it is unlikely that agriculture spread from the the Levant to South Asia, but rather developed independently in the Indus Valley*


I'm assuming you mean East of Balochistan/Gedrosia. If you look at Mehrgahr in the PPN, you have Near Eastern emmer wheat, barley and cattle, so you should see Near Eastern haplogroups.

I think you see those in the Brahui people who have a respectable showing of the standard NNE haploset, described in other posts. [G, J, E1b + H, HV, T1a]

I think Mehrgahr phase II could be the initial expanse of R1a, R2 in the Indus Valley, potentially ushering in the Pottery Neolithic/Chalcolithc and the obvious choice for people suddenly addicted to Afghan Lapis Lazuilli. I would feel comfortable saying that the Near Eastern presence is there, it's just been swamped by native lineages and steppe migrations in most populations in the Indus Valley.

----------


## Wilhelm

The pink component seems West-Med not East-Med since it peaks in Sardinians...and would be associated with I2...yes, it's a mesolithic haplogroup, but I believe this component entered in Europe already in Mesolithic, remember La Braña had decent amount of Mediterrnean, and also the that Sardinians or EEF have themselves a decent amount of hunter-gatherer ancestry.

----------


## Maciamo

> The pink component seems West-Med not East-Med since it peaks in Sardinians...and would be associated with I2...yes, it's a mesolithic haplogroup, but I believe this component entered in Europe already in Mesolithic, remember La Braña had decent amount of Mediterrnean, and also the that Sardinians or EEF have themselves a decent amount of hunter-gatherer ancestry.


The associations I made above are based on the region of origin, not the region where it is most common now. Obviously Neolithic farmers didn't originated in the West Mediterranean and colonised the Near East !

----------


## Alan

> Another indicator is the macro Haplogroup IJK. Considering that I* as well K* is connected to ANE and WHG, it is unlikely that only J is entirely different.
> .


Another indicator is the macro Haplogroup IJK. Considering that I* as well K* is connected to ANE and WHG, it is unlikely that only the close cousin J is entirely different.

I would rather assume that Southwest Asian was spread by E1b1b* and some subclade of J1*(J1c3d) since it is basically East Mediterranean with an East African shift.

----------


## Goga

Why do you associate L & T with Caucaso-Perso-Gedrosia? 


Accordig to you graph, people in the Caucasus are heavily of Caucaso-Perso-Gedrosia component, but there ain’t much of L & T in Georgia? Georgia is mostly Caucaso-Perso-Gedrosia. And the only haplogorupos that dominate Georgia are G2a and J2a. Also it has been said that folks from the East (Leyla-Tepe (J2a and R1b?)) entered Georgia and other Maykop regions. I believe that those people left J2a (and maybe R1b) marker in the Caucasus. So the best association with Caucaso-Perso-Gedrosia component is J2a.

----------


## Alan

> Why do you associate L & T with Caucaso-Perso-Gedrosia? 
> 
> 
> Accordig to you graph, people in the Caucasus are heavily of Caucaso-Perso-Gedrosia component, but there ain’t much of L & T in Georgia? Georgia is mostly Caucaso-Perso-Gedrosia. And the only haplogorupos that dominate Georgia are G2a and J2a. Also it has been said that folks from the East (Leyla-Tepe (J2a and R1b?)) entered Georgia and other Maykop regions. I believe that those people left J2a (and maybe R1b) marker in the Caucasus. So the best association with Caucaso-Perso-Gedrosia component is J2a.


What Haplogroups nowadays dominate is not always most important to what it was in the past. CPG is also strong in Balochistan and surrounding areas and L* + T* is very prominent there too. T and L are also very common throughout Mesopotamia and Iran as well in Georgia (L* in Laz is very prominent). G2a is definitely connected to East Med and as you see on the chart East Med is very strong in Georgians too (pink component). 

But I agree on the point that J* as well R* very likely played also a role in distributing CPG.

----------


## Goga

> What Haplogroups nowadays dominate is not always most important to what it was in the past. CPG is also strong in Balochistan and surrounding areas and L* + T* is very prominent there too. T and L are also very common throughout Mesopotamia and Iran as well in Georgia (L* in Laz is very prominent). G2a is definitely connected to East Med and as you see on the chart East Med is very strong in Georgians too (pink component). 
> 
> But I agree on the point that J* as well R* very likely played also a role in distributing CPG.


Not sure about R*, but J2 is pure Caucaso-Iranic haplogroup. G2a and J2a are equally distributed in Georgia. And there's no Southwest Asia component in Georgia at all, Georgians have mostly what they call here 'Caucaso-Perso-Gedrosia' component and some minor East Mediterranean. I do agree with you that G2a can be assosiaed with Mediterranean, so we have only J2a left for Caucaso-Perso-Gedrosia. J2a is from NorthWest Iranian Plateau or Zagros mountains.

----------


## Alan

> The pink component seems West-Med not East-Med since it peaks in Sardinians...and would be associated with I2...yes, it's a mesolithic haplogroup, but I believe this component entered in Europe already in Mesolithic, remember La Braña had decent amount of Mediterrnean, and also the that Sardinians or EEF have themselves a decent amount of hunter-gatherer ancestry.


That there is nothing like a native or ancestral "West Med" component is nowadays a recognized fact. In the past it might appeared like it did like many other components but nowadays we know that allot of the components we thought to be "ancestral" were in fact mixtures of more ancient once. The Atlanto_Med component is basically East Med + some WHG admixture.
La Brana was predominantly North European.
the first farmers likely reached Iberia already during the Mesolithic but the majority during the Neolithic. The H&G in EEF exists but it is more a small influence as the East African in Southwest Asian than significant admixture.

----------


## Wilhelm

> The associations I made above are based on the region of origin, not the region where it is most common now. Obviously Neolithic farmers didn't originated in the West Mediterranean and colonised the Near East !


The mediterranean components (the ones which peak in Sardinians) don't originate in the near-aest. They are a mixture of early near-easterns and european (unkown) hunter-gatherers. So, yea the Early European Farmers (EFF) did originate in the West-Mediterranean area.

----------


## Wilhelm

> he H&G in EEF exists but it is more a small influence as the East African in Southwest Asian than significant admixture.


Nope, according to the study they estimate around 33% of european Hunter-Gatherer for the EEF. Also, you can see on the PCA plot they are between the hunter-gathers and near-easterns, but closer to the first. Also on the admixture run, before getting their own component, for example at K=15, they show quite alot of HG component. The study says it pretty clear (textual) : 

*A few lines of evidence suggest that the Stuttgart female harbors ancestry not only from Near Eastern farmers but also from pre-Neolithic European hunter-gatherers:
*
*1. Her position in Fig. 1B, intermediate between the Near East and European hunter-gatherers.
*
*2. The fact that the statistic f4(Stuttgart, Near East; Loschbour, Chimp)is positive (Table S10.1). 
*
*3. The results of ADMIXTURE analysis (SI 9) which show that when the West Eurasian ancestral population is split into European/Near Eastern sub-populations centered in Loschbour and southern Near Easterners respectively (K=
*
*10), Stuttgart shows mixed ancestry from both.*





> La Brana was predominantly North European.


On some calculators is up to *44% mediterrnaean.*

----------


## LeBrok

> Nope, according to the study they estimate around 33% of european Hunter-Gatherer for the EEF.


Can you show us where you found this in the paper. I must have missed it.

----------


## Wilhelm

> Can you show us where you found this in the paper. I must have missed it.


Page 61 : 

http://biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/s...1/001552-3.pdf

----------


## Alan

> Nope, according to the study they estimate around 33% of european Hunter-Gatherer for the EEF. Also, you can see on the PCA plot they are between the hunter-gathers and near-easterns, but closer to the first. Also on the admixture run, before getting their own component, for example at K=15, they show quite alot of HG component. The study says it pretty clear (textual) : 
> 
> *A few lines of evidence suggest that the Stuttgart female harbors ancestry not only from Near Eastern farmers but also from pre-Neolithic European hunter-gatherers:
> *
> *1. Her position in Fig. 1B, intermediate between the Near East and European hunter-gatherers.
> *
> *2. The fact that the statistic f4(Stuttgart, Near East; Loschbour, Chimp)is positive (Table S10.1). 
> *
> *3. The results of ADMIXTURE analysis (SI 9) which show that when the West Eurasian ancestral population is split into European/Near Eastern sub-populations centered in Loschbour and southern Near Easterners respectively (K=
> ...


Let me get this clear. You say the EEF component is made up of 33% H&G but than how can the EEF component be closer to the H&G? I didn't knew that 33% is more than 67%. 

Just like in the paper you provided I said that Early European farmers were basically East Med + some WHG admixture. If it is true that this WHG admixture was 33% than I was only wrong in how strong this admixture really was.

But than again the main point you seem have to missed out, is that this admixture did not occure in the Western Mediterranean but in the East already on the Balkans (which is part of the Eastern Mediterranean) since farmers from the Balkans had the same component and all farmers throughout Europe had it too and the main Haplogroup (in 80% of the cases) was G2a*. Iberia and Sardinia are more a Neolithic isolate than origin.

----------


## Angela

> Nope, according to the study they estimate around 33% of european Hunter-Gatherer for the EEF. *.*


How interesting that you didn't quote the authors' conclusion as to the amount of admixture.

.
"The amount of Near Eastern admixture estimated for 

Stuttgart can be seen in Table S10.2 and *RANGE* 

between 61-98% with estimates increasing as the am
ount of estimated African admixture in BedouinB

increases. Estimates using Dinka or Ju_hoan_North 
as an African outgroup are similar. There are 
reasons to doubt both the lower estimates (near
 60%), since ALDER provides only a lower bound on 
African ancestry, but also the higher estimates (near 
100%) since there is direct evidence that Stuttgart 
has European hunter-gatherer ancestry (Fig. 1B and 
Table S10.1). Determining the precise levels of 
Near Eastern admixture in Stuttgart must await furt
her ancient DNA studies from both Europe and the 
Near East, but we can at least re
asonably claim that most of the 
sample’s ancestry was Near Eastern,
consistent with the mtDNA ev
idence for the Linearbandkeramik, 
which demonstrated a strong Near 
Eastern influence
3-5



As to where they place the geographical region for such admixture...
"The existence of such admixture is also plausible archaeo
logically, as the Linearbandkeramik 
postdates the earliest Neolithic of southeastern Eur
ope, and there may have 
been opportunity for Near 
Eastern Neolithic farmers to acquire a portion of 
European hunter-gatherer ancestry prior to the 

establishment of the central Europ
ean Neolithic, either en route to
 central Europe (e.g., in the 
Balkans) or by mixing with the indigenous central
 European hunter-gathe
rers they encountered.


Their speculations would, in fact, fit rather nicely with some preliminary evidence for admixture of hunter-gatherers and farmers in the Balkans

----------


## Alan

from the paper.



> The amount of Near Eastern admixture estimated for 
> Stuttgart can be seen in Table S10.2 and range 
> between 61-98% with estimates increasing as the am
> ount of estimated African admixture in BedouinB
> increases.


The paper says the Near Eastern admixture is estimated between 61 and 98% and depends on for how "pure" they take the Bedouins. Since my English knowledge isn't the best, I might be wrong but I understand it this way. If they consider that the Bedouins (Southwest Asian) are East African admixed (what they are proven by allot of admixture runs) than the percentage of Stuttgart's Near Eastern admixture gets higher reaches almost 98%. Basically they took Bedouins as proxy for the Near Eastern farmer admixture but we all know that the dominant "Southwest Asian" component in them is East African shifted "ancestral farmer". So taking this into consideration the "Near Eastern ness" of EEF reaches ~ +90%. 
And this is what Davidski and Dienekes said previously. proto-farmer component is "Southwest Asian" minus the East African shift and Mediterranean minus the WHG admixture.

So if I understood the paper correctly. If the Bedouins are considered East African admixed (what they are) the H&G admixture in EEF can be estimated almost as low as 2%

----------


## Angela

> from the paper.
> 
> 
> The paper says the Near Eastern admixture is estimated between 61 and 98% and depends on for how "pure" they take the Bedouins. Since my English knowledge isn't the best, I might be wrong but I understand it this way. If they consider that the Bedouins (Southwest Asian) are East African admixed (what they are proven by allot of admixture runs) than the percentage of Stuttgart's Near Eastern admixture gets higher reaches almost 98%. Basically they took Bedouins as proxy for the Near Eastern farmer admixture but we all know that the dominant "Southwest Asian" component in them is East African shifted "ancestral farmer". So taking this into consideration the "Near Eastern ness" of EEF reaches ~ +90%. 
> And this is what Davidski and Dienekes said previously. proto-farmer component is "Southwest Asian" minus the East African shift and Mediterranean minus the WHG admixture.
> 
> So if I understood the paper correctly. If the Bedouins are considered East African admixed (what they are) the H&G admixture in EEF can be estimated almost as low as 2%


These are two tables from the same supplement section that are helpful...

Sorry, this one was too big to post, so I put it on tiny pic.com
http://tinypic.com/view.php?pic=260a...5#.Us3mJ7RdDRY

This is helpful too
http://tinypic.com/view.php?pic=2iv1...5#.Us3narRdDRY

Here is where they explain why it's difficult to come up with a more precise number:

.
A challenge in estimating mixture proportions for Stuttgart is that the two constituent elements contributing to it may not be represented in our data. The present-day Near East has plausibly been affected by events postdating the migration of Neolithic migrants into Europe, showing negative f3(Near East; Stuttgart, X)where X is MA1, Native American, South Asian, or African (Table 1, Extended Data Table 1). As a result, it is risky to treat any individual Near Eastern population as an unmixed descendant of early Near Eastern farmers. 
Similarly, the ancient European hunter gatherer samples that we have sequenced (Loschbour and Motala12) are very informative, but it is not clear how they relate to the pre-Neolithic inhabitants of the Balkans and central Europe.

Recognizing the challenge posed by the lack of accurate surrogates for the ancestral populations, we hypothesized that Stuttgart is a mixture of an unknown hunter-gatherer population that forms a clade with Loschbour and an unknown Near Eastern population (NE) in proportions 1-and . We do not know the exact NE population contributing ancestry to Stuttgart. However, we explored usingBedouinB as a surrogate, as this is the population that appears at the southern end of the Near Eastern cline (Fig. 1B) and appears to have no Asian ancestry (SI 9). A complication of using the BedouinBpopulation is that it has some African admixture, as indicated by the ADMIXTURE analysis (SI 9). We estimated a lower bound (4.2 ± 0.3%) on this admixture proportion using ALDER1 using the Yoruba as a reference population. The advantage of this linkage-disequilibrium based method is that, unlike f4-ratio estimationno explicit model of population relationships is needed. We can also use the 5.1% estimate from ADMIXTURE K=3, or 7.2% from ADMIXTURE K=4 (SI 9). The two estimates differ because the Yoruba are inferred to have low levels of West Eurasian admixture at K=3, but to belong 100% to their own ancestral component at K=4.

----------


## LeBrok

> The mediterranean components (the ones which peak in Sardinians) don't originate in the near-aest. They are a mixture of early near-easterns and european (unkown) hunter-gatherers. So, yea the Early European Farmers (EFF) did originate in the West-Mediterranean area.






> A few lines of evidence suggest that the Stuttgart female harbors ancestry not only from Near Eastern





> farmers but also from pre-Neolithic European hunter-gatherers:





> 1. Her position in Fig. 1B, intermediate between the Near East and European hunter-gatherers.
> 
> 2. The fact that the statistic f4(Stuttgart, Near East; Loschbour, Chimp)is positive (Table S10.1). 
> 
> 3. The results of ADMIXTURE analysis (SI 9) which show that when the West Eurasian ancestral population is split into European/Near Eastern sub-populations centered in Loschbour and southern Near Easterners respectively (K=
> 
> 10), Stuttgart shows mixed ancestry from both.





> ]On some calculators is up to *44% mediterrnaean.*






> Originally Posted by *Wilhelm* 
> _Nope, according to the study they estimate around 33% of european Hunter-Gatherer for the EEF._


Picking the highest estimated and possible value of 33% (why not pick 7%?), you have proved that you have an agenda. You are not talking science, which shows a range of possibilities and combinations, but you do cherry picking to skew the numbers and show only one possible outcome: "Whatever has to do with Iberia, has to be very European".


To strengthen my argument here are some other of your statements :
-


> EEF originated in Europe


 EEF is very strong in Iberia, so it would be a tragedy for you if EEF didn't originate in Europe. God forbid anything from Near East or Africa! Didn't they concluded in paper that Near Eastern admixture contained 7% African ancestry? Surprisingly you were not eager to share this scientific information from the paper.
- 


> EEF did originate in the West-Mediterranean area


 Well, even better.
-


> LaBrana could be up to 44% mediterranean


Of course! What would be a better proof of being pure European than 44% of WHG admixture?


I would like to stress again at this occasion that nobody really cares about this but you. And yes, be my guest and deny as much as you want and pretend that you don't care either, but I want you to know, that your agenda is very transparent for us "not Iberians". Don't waste too much time pretending, it is more annoying than anything.

----------


## Alan

> These are two tables from the same supplement section that are helpful...
> 
> Sorry, this one was too big to post, so I put it on tiny pic.com
> http://tinypic.com/view.php?pic=260a...5#.Us3mJ7RdDRY
> 
> This is helpful too
> http://tinypic.com/view.php?pic=2iv1...5#.Us3narRdDRY
> 
> Here is where they explain why it's difficult to come up with a more precise number:
> ...


Thanks, so was I right with my assumption that the East African admixture in Bedouins makes it hard to estimate the exact percentage of Near Eastern admixture in "Stuttgart" ?

----------


## Angela

> Thanks, so was I right with my assumption that the East African admixture in Bedouins makes it hard to estimate the exact percentage of Near Eastern admixture in "Stuttgart" ?


That's my interpretation. However, as with the Mal'ta paper and the Reich group papers before that, I think that people are analyzing each paper that comes out as if it were written in stone. I've been guilty of that myself. The academicians who write them make no such claims. As the authors point out in the excerpt above, there is, as yet, no genome for a central European or Balkan hunter gatherer, (according to one paper, not one Greek mesolithic sample has yet come back mtDNA "U") not to mention that there isn't a sample genome for the first Near Eastern farmers or their hunter-gatherer ancestors. (That's one thing that amuses me in all these discussions. It's as if people think the neolithic near eastern farmers were transported here by some alien race...they were just hunter gatherers who happened to invent agriculture and animal husbandry.)

This is a story in progress. 

There is one thing, however, of which I'm sure: a lot of the analysis that goes on seems to be very agenda driven, and one indicator of that is when you see data being misrepresented.

By the way, I totally agree that those clusters revealed in the ADMIXTURE based calculators are indeed not ancestral. There's a lot of "admixture" layers underneath each one.

Ed. That's my interpretation of the data if you choose the Bedouin (actually one group of Bedouins, I believe) as your surrogate for the Near Eastern farmers in the first place.

----------


## nordicwarrior

> ...There is one thing, however, of which I'm sure: a lot of the analysis that goes on seems to be very agenda driven, and one indicator of that is when you see data being misrepresented...


So very true. I don't know if there is another field that is more agenda driven that historical genetics. Everyone has a bias. Everyone. In this very thread Maciamo (the founder of this site) stated that R1b COULD have been in Paleolithic Europe. 

I COULD win a million dollars in the lottery tomorrow, COULD be named as one of People Magazine's top fifty sexyist human-beings on the planet, COULD win the Nobel Peace Prize in Literature... but COULD isn't really that scientific.

And lest you think I'm above such nonsense, I'm not. I'm as pro hg. I1 as anyone I've seen posting here. I do try to let the facts speak for themselves, but yes at times I'll jump into a "haplogroup war" for kicks. The very nature of this subject matter does foster bias. 

Some of us are more honest about it than others.

----------


## Sile

> Another indicator is the macro Haplogroup IJK. Considering that I* as well K* is connected to ANE and WHG, it is unlikely that only the close cousin J is entirely different.
> 
> I would rather assume that Southwest Asian was spread by E1b1b* and some subclade of J1*(J1c3d) since it is basically East Mediterranean with an East African shift.


i would agree with you that E came via Southwest Asian ( arabia) and crashed into *IJK* (L15/S137, L16/S138, L69.1(=G)/S163.1) . 
Also further proof is that J and T in Africa is very young.

IMO - 
This brings me to the agreement , basically with Maciano, that west-asian ( caucasus-perso-gedrosian ) was originally only IJK. 
If I had to place them in a north-south alignment ( which makes no sense but to appease some ), then north would be I, then K and south J
The R entered via the north ( central -asia or near there) to "obtain" west-asian over time.

----------


## Sile

> So very true. I don't know if there is another field that is more agenda driven that historical genetics. Everyone has a bias. Everyone. In this very thread Maciamo (the founder of this site) stated that R1b COULD have been in Paleolithic Europe. 
> 
> I COULD win a million dollars in the lottery tomorrow, COULD be named as one of People Magazine's top fifty sexyist human-beings on the planet, COULD win the Nobel Peace Prize in Literature... but COULD isn't really that scientific.
> 
> And lest you think I'm above such nonsense, I'm not. I'm as pro hg. I1 as anyone I've seen posting here. I do try to let the facts speak for themselves, but yes at times I'll jump into a "haplogroup war" for kicks. The very nature of this subject matter does foster bias. 
> 
> Some of us are more honest about it than others.


yep, true as soon as anyone retains any nationalistic ideas, the data is distorted

----------


## Angela

> So very true. I don't know if there is another field that is more agenda driven that historical genetics. Everyone has a bias. Everyone. In this very thread Maciamo (the founder of this site) stated that R1b COULD have been in Paleolithic Europe. 
> 
> I COULD win a million dollars in the lottery tomorrow, COULD be named as one of People Magazine's top fifty sexyist human-beings on the planet, COULD win the Nobel Peace Prize in Literature... but COULD isn't really that scientific.
> 
> And lest you think I'm above such nonsense, I'm not. I'm as pro hg. I1 as anyone I've seen posting here. I do try to let the facts speak for themselves, but yes at times I'll jump into a "haplogroup war" for kicks. The very nature of this subject matter does foster bias. 
> 
> Some of us are more honest about it than others.


Nordic Quarreler...I know we don't really count, but some of us don't even HAVE yDNA, :) 

I'm one of those people, and I don't even KNOW my father's yDNA, nor, other than to satisfy my curiosity, am I much interested in finding out. Certainly I'm not interested enough to strong arm my reluctant relatives into getting genetic testing. Given his origins, some form of U-152 is a good bet, but others are very possible, and I'm sure I have G2a, E-V13, maybe some 12a and J2a among my ancestors too, at least from the studies I've seen. Am I supposed to have a favorite? And in what contest? Which one first set foot in "Europe"? I honestly couldn't care less. Which one is "Indo-European"? Franky, I don't get what all the fuss is about, again, other than for historical interest.

I do know my mtDNA...it's U2e. Doesn't make me feel any particular sense of identity with Eastern European/Western Siberian hunter gatherers either.

Europe is such a jumble genetically...if nothing else, the Lazaridis et al paper should prove that.

Plus, you may not credit it, but some of us became interested in this field totally as a result of academic interests, and with no preconceptions whatsoever.

At any rate, whatever prejudices or bias anyone may or may not have, just as a matter of integrity one should attempt to lay them aside and analyze (and present) the data as honestly and objectively as humanly possible.

----------


## adamo

That's what your daddy is for; go hold his hand and walk, and ask him what haplogroup he suspects he is XD

----------


## Alan

> i would agree with you that E came via Southwest Asian ( arabia) and crashed into *IJK* (L15/S137, L16/S138, L69.1(=G)/S163.1) . 
> Also further proof is that J and T in Africa is very young.


And I even have some theories how this might have happened. E1b1b* picked up some J1c3d (and maybe T) in the Levant and moved into Norheast Africa as part of the early farmer component. There it took up a little East African admixture and became "Southwest Asian" component. And from exactly this point the Afro-Asiatic speakers formed and they spread this new component throughout the Middle East.

Or

some Afro Asiatic speakers from Northeast Africa immigrated to Levant and mixed with the local farmers. They brought a East African signal with them which produced the Southwest Asian in the Levant.

----------


## nordicwarrior

> ...At any rate, whatever prejudices or bias anyone may or may not have, just as a matter of integrity one should attempt to lay them aside and analyze (and present) the data as honestly and objectively as humanly possible.


<= Politely tapping my glass with a spoon to emphasize full agreement.

Your enlightened viewpoint regarding the sillines of exessive haplogroup identification may indeed stem from your gender. Obviously I'm no Einstein, but I did recognize long ago that the female version of our species is, on par, far more evolved than the standard male. (I know it's foolish to generalize like this, but some things have to be said aloud from time to time.)

Maybe we as a society should encourage more women to take up biological anthropology-- I bet we would get less biased (and more accurate) results. :)

----------


## nordicwarrior

(P.S. Don't let any of the landed gentry R1ba2b1a1b2a2b1C3p0 clan members know that I drink out of a glass. I'd prefer they keep thinking we hg. I1 heathens slurp only from a garden hose.)

----------


## Sile

> And I even have a theory how this might have happened. E1b1b* picked up some J1c3d (and maybe T) in the Levant and moved into Norheast Africa as part of the early farmer component. There it took up a little East African admixture and became "Southwest Asian" component. And from exactly this point the Afro-Asiatic speakers formed and they spread this new component throughout the Middle East.


I see it as part of the recently paper and agree with it, that T and J1 where persian and arab slavers from Oman and Hormuz form the early dark-ages. The T in east africa is very young in time. They enslaved the Negroes, like the europeans did on the west side of Africa.

----------


## Sile

> Nordic Quarreler...I know we don't really count, but some of us don't even HAVE yDNA, :) 
> 
> I'm one of those people, and I don't even KNOW my father's yDNA, nor, other than to satisfy my curiosity, am I much interested in finding out. Certainly I'm not interested enough to strong arm my reluctant relatives into getting genetic testing. Given his origins, some form of U-152 is a good bet, but others are very possible, and I'm sure I have G2a, E-V13, maybe some 12a and J2a among my ancestors too, at least from the studies I've seen. Am I supposed to have a favorite? And in what contest? Which one first set foot in "Europe"? I honestly couldn't care less. Which one is "Indo-European"? Franky, I don't get what all the fuss is about, again, other than for historical interest.
> 
> I do know my mtDNA...it's U2e. Doesn't make me feel any particular sense of identity with Eastern European/Western Siberian hunter gatherers either.
> 
> Europe is such a jumble genetically...if nothing else, the Lazaridis et al paper should prove that.
> 
> Plus, you may not credit it, but some of us became interested in this field totally as a result of academic interests, and with no preconceptions whatsoever.
> ...


U2e ...wow same as my paternal Gmother ...........Her family came from Capoistria to Merlengo Veneto in around 1700. But her family name is ancient in Italy, about 450AD according to the family tree owners ...of which there are about 50.

What is your father? ...my Maternal Gfather is R-Z331

----------


## LeBrok

> (P.S. Don't let any of the landed gentry R1ba2b1a1b2a3b4a2b7 clan members know that I drink out of a glass. I'd prefer they keep thinking we hg. I1 heathens slurp only from a garden hose.)


lol, what garden hoses? From animal bladders and skin sacks, or whatever WHG used for water storage.:27:


Your words about this ongoing R versus I war is always confusing for me, specially if I consider it nonexistent here on Eupedia. Even if somehow I can't recognize this supposed war, I'm sure sparkey (I2c) would quickly step in to deal with it as the moderator.
Perhaps you the one who strongly desire a conflict, or feel a danger coming from all directions,... looking for it, talking about it,...just to feel excited and alive?:76:

----------


## Wilhelm

> How interesting that you didn't quote the authors' conclusion as to the amount of admixture.
> 
> .
> "The amount of Near Eastern admixture estimated for 
> 
> Stuttgart can be seen in Table S10.2 and *RANGE* 
> 
> between 61-98% with estimates increasing as the am
> ount of estimated African admixture in BedouinB



I already know that...but the 98% wouldn't be realistic considering all the factors we know , since on the PCA they are very far from the Bedouins...Also on the ADMIXTURE run they show considerable HG component before getting their own

Also, remember we have also the Dodecads of Gök4 (called Skoglung_Farmer on the study) is highly Atlantic_Baltic (Hunter-Gather show 100% of it) :







> Let me get this clear. You say the EEF component is made up of 33% H&G but than how can the EEF component be closer to the H&G? I didn't knew that 33% is more than 67%.


Yes, that is one of the contradictions I see on this study, that on PCA they are close to HG's, yet on their ancestry estimates they consider around 60-70% near-eastern.





> Picking the highest estimated and possible value of 33% (why not pick 7%?), you have proved that you have an agenda.


It's not about an agenda, it's a bout common sense. If they had only 7% of HG they wouldn't : 

- Cluster so far from near-easterns on PCA plot
- Show so much HG component on ADMIXTURE before showing their own component
- Show positive f-statistics





> To strengthen my argument here are some other of your statements :
> - EEF is very strong in Iberia, so it would be a tragedy for you if EEF didn't originate in Europe. God forbid anything from Near East or Africa!


The EEF containt a lot of HG ancestry, therefore they are a product of Europe. Simple as that. Remember they are *European* farmers..





> Didn't they concluded in paper that Near Eastern admixture contained 7% African ancestry? Surprisingly you were not eager to share this scientific information from the paper.


I already knew this fact, but don't see the need to mention that, since it has nothing to do with anything, this layer of african-admixture in the Near-Eastern happened AFTER the near-east farmers migrations, because these EFF don't show that much african admixture, if any at all. 




> - Well, even better.
> -Of course! What would be a better proof of being pure European than 44% of WHG admixture?


Their HG ancestry is of an unkown kind, but ancestrally related with thre WHG. 




> I would like to stress again at this occasion that nobody really cares about this but you. And yes, be my guest and deny as much as you want and pretend that you don't care either, but I want you to know, that your agenda is very transparent for us "not Iberians". Don't waste too much time pretending, it is more annoying than anything.


Of course I do care about the truth. If you want to believe that the EEF were pure Near-Easterns ok that's up to you, but then you demonstrate you have not understood anything about that study nor about genetics.

----------


## Goga

> What Haplogroups nowadays dominate is not always most important to what it was in the past. CPG is also strong in Balochistan and surrounding areas and L* + T* is very prominent there too. T and L are also very common throughout Mesopotamia and Iran as well in Georgia (L* in Laz is very prominent).


Do you think I'm close if I say that T* (maybe LT*) is 'Perso-Gedrosian', J2* (maybe J*) is 'Caucaso-Persian' and R1* (maybe R*) is 'Caucaso-Gedrosian' in Caucaso-Perso-Gedrosian component?

----------


## Alan

> I already know that...but the 98% wouldn't be realistic considering all the factors we know , since on the PCA they are very far from the Bedouins...Also on the ADMIXTURE run they show considerable HG component before getting their own


Sorry but your reasoning why the 98% "couldn't be" doesn't make much sense and is only your own preference than something scientific.
And if you actually followed the recent articles and discussions, you should have realized that Bedouins are not the Source of Near Eastern farmers but just a suboptimal Isolate of them just like modern Sardinians and Basques.




> Also, remember we have also the Dodecads of Gök4 (called Skoglung_Farmer on the study) is highly Atlantic_Baltic (Hunter-Gather show 100% of it) :


you have such a motivation in pointing out the WHG admixture in the EEFs which could be as low as ~2%, but it doesn't seem to bother you that this Atlantic_Baltic is not the H&G component but includes a huge portion of farmer genes. Even the Sardinians are more Atlantic_Baltic than Southern https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/...QblVRR2c#gid=0 So in your logic even the farmer Isolates of Europe are more H&G than really farmers. 

Also Wiliam as other and I have already pointed out, no matter how much this H&G was in EEF it is very unlikely that this admixture took place in Iberia but in the Eastern Mediterranean.
So or so your Iberiian hypothesis is unlikely and you shouldn't quote scientific articles selectively.

I have to agree here with LeBrok you have a very obvious agenda.

----------


## Alan

> Do you think I'm close if I say that T* (maybe LT*) is 'Perso-Gedrosian', J2* (maybe J*) is 'Caucaso-Persian' and R1* (maybe R*) is 'Caucaso-Gedrosian' in Caucaso-Perso-Gedrosian component?


Thats just an unnecessary differntiation. I don't even know what you try to proof or get by splitting them into these three subtypes. Why should R* be Caucaso_Gedrosian but not the Perso in between? Did R* skip Iran and reached Caucasus through the sky? Goga that was a really silly question.

Almost ANYTHING what reached the Caucasus from Gedrosia or Gedrosia from the Caucasus very likely crossed Iran or East Europe but in this case the through Iran is allot more likely.

About LT* we don't know where it started and tghere is allot of time between those two Haplogroups. T could have started in Mesopotamia while it's brother clade L* in between Mesopotamia-South/Southwest Iran and Balochistan. Or both could even have come from the East together with R*

----------


## Goga

> Thats just an unnecessary differntiation. I don't even know what you try to proof or get by splitting them into these three subtypes. Why should R* be Caucaso_Gedrosian but not the Perso in between? Did R* skip Iran and reached Caucasus through the sky? Goga that was a really silly question.


Because I thought that Gedrosia is closely related to Caucasus componet according to DODECAD K12b. And DODECAD K12b doesn't have 'Persian' ('Iranic') component. That's why.

----------


## Wilhelm

> you have such a motivation in pointing out the WHG admixture in the EEFs which could be as low as ~2%, but it doesn't seem to bother you that Atlantic_Baltic is not the H&G component but includes a decent amoung of EEF genes.


It's not motivation, is what the study saiys ¡t's an unkown HG, not WHG, and yes the Atlantic-Baltic component includes some EEF genes, but since it's 100% in Hunter-Gathers, it's a close component that we have for a rough estimate of HG ancestry. If you look at Sardinians, they score 50% of this component on Dodecad, and at the study of Lazaridis they got rouglhy half of the blue Mesolithic component, so yes they are similar components. 




> So or so your Iberiian hypothesis is unlikely and you shouldn't quote scientific articles selectively.


It's not an iberian hypothesis, it's a West-Med (Sardinia, Iberia, North Italy) ...also we don't know if the East-Med/Central Euro famers were different from western ones, a different source, remember their mtDNA is different,

----------


## nordicwarrior

> lol, what garden hoses? From animal bladders and skin sacks, or whatever WHG used for water storage.:27:
> 
> 
> Your words about this ongoing R versus I war is always confusing for me, specially if I consider it nonexistent here on Eupedia. Even if somehow I can't recognize this supposed war, I'm sure sparkey (I2c) would quickly step in to deal with it as the moderator.
> Perhaps you the one who strongly desire a conflict, or feel a danger coming from all directions,... looking for it, talking about it,...just to feel excited and alive?:76:


Poor LeBrok. 

He goads me yet again into a battle of wits, knowing full well that I will almost effortlessly lop off his head (metaphorically speaking of course) simply by applying my more robust grasp of logic... and my more complete command of the English language. I do admire his bravery though.

Alas my Polish-Canadian friend, I'm off to work this morning so I must sheath my cranial broadsword. You can relax a bit longer... I won't be drinking ale from your skull-cup on this day.

----------


## Angela

> U2e ...wow same as my paternal Gmother ...........Her family came from Capoistria to Merlengo Veneto in around 1700. But her family name is ancient in Italy, about 450AD according to the family tree owners ...of which there are about 50.
> 
> What is your father? ...my Maternal Gfather is R-Z331


As I said, I don't know my dad's yDNA .... he died 20 years ago.

The earliest I can track my mtDNA is back to a Ghelfi-early 1500's. We seem to have liked broadcasting our political affiliations...the surname is all over my family tree, lol.

We also seem to cling to our ancestral areas...like a cluster of datteri clinging to the rocks in the Mediterranean.
http://www.gens.info/italia/it/turis...4#.Us64L7RdDRZ

----------


## Angela

> I already know that...but the 98% wouldn't be realistic considering all the factors we know , since on the PCA they are very far from the Bedouins...Also on the ADMIXTURE run they show considerable HG component before getting their own
> 
> Also, remember we have also the Dodecads of Gök4 (called Skoglung_Farmer on the study) is highly Atlantic_Baltic (Hunter-Gather show 100% of it) :
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, that is one of the contradictions I see on this study, that on PCA they are close to HG's, yet on their ancestry estimates they consider around 60-70% near-eastern.
> ...


I don't think LeBroc *wants* to prove EEF wholly Near Eastern, nor do I think it's necessary to impugn his knowledge of genetics, which he has amply demonstrated here on this site.

The question is why did you produce the 33% figure for the H/G admixture in EEF when you knew it was merely the upper limit of the range, and the authors specifically stated that they didn't believe either that figure or 2%, the lower end of the range, were accurate. That almost makes it seem as if you were attempting to distort the findings. 

I mean, here is the quote itself...

 There are *REASONS TO DOUBT BOTH THE LOWER* (near*60%*), *SINCE ALDER* *PROVIDES ONLY A LOWER BOUND ON AFRICAN ANCESTRY*, *BUT ALSO THE* *HIGHER ESTIMATES*  (near *100%*) since there is direct evidence that Stuttgart 
has European hunter-gatherer ancestry (Fig. 1B and Table S10.1). Determining the precise levels of Near Eastern admixture in Stuttgart must await further ancient DNA studies from both Europe and the Near East, but we can at least reasonably claim that of th* MOST OF THE SAMPLE'S ANCESTRY WAS NEAR EASTERN.*

So, why all this talk of 33% H/G ancestry in EEF, or 2% for that matter, when it's clear that the authors think that both numbers are highly unlikely?

As for the PCA, you don't need me to tell you that it only represents two dimensions, and so while it is some evidence, it has to be taken in context, and the statistical analysis in the supplement is more informative.

In reference to the Dodecad cluster analyses, I have used and analyzed and learned a great deal from them, but it is clear that those clusters do NOT represent ancestral populations, and that there are layers beneath them. 

Later analyses by Dienekes himself made that clear.
http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2012/09...decad-k7b.html
http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2012/08...-k12b-and.html

You'll note that the Atlantic/Baltic component is majority Southern and Caucasus/Gedrosia, with a slice of Siberian. 

Also, none of this has anything to do with the Western Mediterranean. Any differences between western Mediterranean and eastern Mediterranean as components obviously deveoped later, and the cause is probably drift. The admixture with H/G's that produced EEF took place either at the Anatolia/Greek interface, or in the Balkans, and the movement THEN took place toward the western Med. The genome of the Iberian farmer, which is very Oetzi like, should make that clear.

Finally, for clarity, the approx. 4 or 7% African admixture which was mentioned upthread indeed relates to the admixture in the Bedouin, which the authors attempted to remove before using them as a surrogate population for the EEF. I'm not sure that they were the best choice, but that's another issue for another day.

----------


## Sile

> Do you think I'm close if I say that T* (maybe LT*) is 'Perso-Gedrosian', J2* (maybe J*) is 'Caucaso-Persian' and R1* (maybe R*) is 'Caucaso-Gedrosian' in Caucaso-Perso-Gedrosian component?


your forgetting that the highest T % are from north Caucasus with the 8% of North Ossetians to the west side of the Caspian sea ( 7% dagestan Lezgian ) down to 7% Azeri people(Azerbaijani ) , across south caucasas 6% Armenians, 6% zargos mountains of persia/iran and then with 16% assyrians. 

People seem to want to keep attaching LT together, when the older IJKLT is more relevant in this article. The old statement that T and L came from K is in error, it is T and L came from K2 ( a artificial marker never used today) and this is only because geneticists did not have the time to investigate ( as currently being said) that LT *split* from K along with IJ 

IMO if you want a break up ( i do not know why)
L = Perso-Gedrosian
J2 + T = Caucaso-Persian

----------


## Sile

> It's not motivation, is what the study saiys ¡t's an unkown HG, not WHG, and yes the Atlantic-Baltic component includes some EEF genes, but since it's 100% in Hunter-Gathers, it's a close component that we have for a rough estimate of HG ancestry. If you look at Sardinians, they score 50% of this component on Dodecad, and at the study of Lazaridis they got rouglhy half of the blue Mesolithic component, so yes they are similar components. 
> 
> 
> It's not an iberian hypothesis, it's a West-Med (Sardinia, Iberia, North Italy) ...also we don't know if the East-Med/Central Euro famers were different from western ones, a different source, remember their mtDNA is different,


Why you throwing in North-Italy with Sardinian. If you check all autosomal plots today, the closest plot to North-Italy is always Bulgaria, the closest to Sardinian is South-france as per this article .

----------


## Sile

> As I said, I don't know my dad's yDNA .... he died 20 years ago.
> 
> The earliest I can track my mtDNA is back to a Ghelfi-early 1500's. We seem to have liked broadcasting our political affiliations...the surname is all over my family tree, lol.
> 
> We also seem to cling to our ancestral areas...like a cluster of datteri clinging to the rocks in the Mediterranean.
> http://www.gens.info/italia/it/turis...4#.Us64L7RdDRZ


Ghelf war still rages in Italy behind the scenes
with nearly 800 of your surnames 
http://www.cognomix.it/mappe-dei-cog...taliani/GHELFI

----------


## Alan

> IMO if you want a break up ( i do not know why)
> L = Perso-Gedrosian
> J2 + T = Caucaso-Persian


On the first look it appears reasonable but I would be very careful with these kind of clusters (the reason why I didn't gave Goga my opnion). There are isolates in the Caucasus (like the Laz) who have very high frequency of L. Also L* shows presence in allot of Caucasian populations (Chechens, Armenians etc.). We can't say for sure where this or that Haplogroup started exactly. But what we know is that it must have been somewhere between Turkenistan-Kazakhstan-Balochistan-Afghanistan-Iran-Mesopotamia-Eastern Anatolia-Caucasus.

----------


## Wilhelm

> The question is why did you produce the 33% figure for the H/G admixture in EEF when you knew it was merely the upper limit of the range,
> 
> There are *REASONS TO DOUBT BOTH THE LOWER* (near*60%*), *SINCE ALDER* *PROVIDES ONLY A LOWER BOUND ON AFRICAN ANCESTRY*, *BUT ALSO THE* *HIGHER ESTIMATES*  (near *100%*) since there is direct evidence that Stuttgart 
> has European hunter-gatherer ancestry (Fig. 1B and Table S10.1). Determining the precise levels of Near Eastern admixture in Stuttgart must await further ancient DNA studies from both Europe and the Near East, but we can at least reasonably claim that of th* MOST OF THE SAMPLE'S ANCESTRY WAS NEAR EASTERN.*
> 
> So, why all this talk of 33% H/G ancestry in EEF, or 2% for that matter, when it's clear that the authors think that both numbers are highly unlikely?


Because if we take a look at the ADMIXTURe, before the Sardinians/EFF get their own component, they are split between Mesolithic HG and Bedouin : 









> In reference to the Dodecad cluster analyses, I have used and analyzed and learned a great deal from them, but it is clear that those clusters do NOT represent ancestral populations, and that there are layers beneath them. 
> 
> Later analyses by Dienekes himself made that clear.
> http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2012/09...decad-k7b.html
> http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2012/08...-k12b-and.html
> 
> You'll note that the Atlantic/Baltic component is majority Southern and Caucasus/Gedrosia, with a slice of Siberian.


 In the first link, the North-European component appears mostly as Atlantic-Baltic, and in turn, the Atlantic-Baltic appears mostly as Northern-European. In the second link there seems to be an error between the bars and the legend of colors, considering that African appears as 100% South-Asian or Southern as 100% Atlantic-Baltic. In any case, yes there is an common shared ancient ancestry between the north-euro components and the Caucasus ones.




> Also, none of this has anything to do with the Western Mediterranean. Any differences between western Mediterranean and eastern Mediterranean as components obviously deveoped later, and the cause is probably drift. The admixture with H/G's that produced EEF took place either at the Anatolia/Greek interface, or in the Balkans, and the movement THEN took place toward the western Med.


Of course it has to do with western-mediterranean, the difference is not genetic drift, since these populations (SW Euros) have the lowest levels of the ANE ancestry of all West-Eurasia, meaning there have been different sources of hunter-gatherer ancestry as well as near-east farmer ancestry. 




> The genome of the Iberian farmer, which is very Oetzi like, should make that clear.


What iberian farmer ? There is none, In any case, yes they were most likely EEF

----------


## Alan

> Because if we take a look at the ADMIXTURe, before the Sardinians/EFF get their own component, they are split between Mesolithic HG and Bedouin :



This is because Sardinians have additional 25-30% H&G to their EEF and Bedouins are suboptimal for proto-Near Eastern farmer component since using African admixed population as reference will make any other Eurasian appear more H&G as they in reality are. If we had a isolated farmer population in the Levant things might have looked different. Unfortunately Bedouins from Arabia are the only people who retained their farmer ancestry but (unfortunately for scientific reasons) are already admixed with a second wave of East African migrants which brought additional ~7-10% East African genes. For Gods sake how can someone be so obstinate even after so many attempts of so many Users, with considerable knowledge about genetics, to explain it.

----------


## MOESAN

> Another indicator is the macro Haplogroup IJK. Considering that I* as well K* is connected to ANE and WHG, it is unlikely that only the close cousin J is entirely different.
> 
> I would rather assume that Southwest Asian was spread by E1b1b* and some subclade of J1*(J1c3d) since it is basically East Mediterranean with an East African shift.


_I'm tired and cannot go deeply in the central question of this thread, but just concerning this precise point_,_ I say I think the core of the Y-J ancestors were living for a long time between North Near Eastern, the Zagros and South Caucasus (with some rare Y-I* and Y-G*? and Y-T*?) - I think they colonized (more J1 than J2) Arabia taking the strong side upon Y-E1b (M78?)males and their wives, loosing a lot of their 'west-asian' component to take arabian-Red Sea autosomals - drift gave advantage to Y-J1 - 




d_

----------


## Angela

> Because if we take a look at the ADMIXTURe, before the Sardinians/EFF get their own component, they are split between Mesolithic HG and Bedouin : 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In the first link, the North-European component appears mostly as Atlantic-Baltic, and in turn, the Atlantic-Baltic appears mostly as Northern-European. In the second link there seems to be an error between the bars and the legend of colors, considering that African appears as 100% South-Asian or Southern as 100% Atlantic-Baltic. In any case, yes there is an common shared ancient ancestry between the north-euro components and the Caucasus ones.
> ...



Yes, Wilhelm, there is indeed an Iberian farmer, from Burgos, to be precise, and from only 4,000 years ago, (2000 BC) and he's a lot like Oetzi, who is a lot like the Sardinians, but more Southern, to use the old terms, and we know the EEF numbers for Sardinians. There will surely be some differences between the genomes of the various ancient EEFs, but I doubt they'll be earthshattering. The paper should be out soon. I'm sure someone will run his genome through the new tools and models, and then we'll get the precise figures.

Oddný Ósk Sverrisdóttir et al., A late Neolithic Iberian farmer exhibits genetic affinity to Neolithic Scandinavian farmers and a Bronze Age central European farmer

The spread of farming, the neolithisation process, swept over Europe after the advent of the farming lifestyle in the near east approximately 11,000 years ago. However the mode of transmission and its impact on the demographic patterns of Europe remains largely unknown. In this study we obtained : 66,476,944 bp of genomic DNA from the remains of a 4000 year old Neolithic farmer from the site of El Portalón, 15 km east of Burgos, Spain. We compared the genomic signature of this individual to modern-day populations as well as the few Neolithic individuals that has produced large-scale autosomal data. The Neolithic Portalón individual is genetically most similar to southern Europeans, similar to a Scandinavian Neolithic farmer and the Tyrolean Iceman. In contrast, the Neolithic Portalón individual displays little affinity to two Mesolithic samples from the near-by area, La Brana, demonstrating a distinct change in population history between 7,000 and 4,000 years ago for the northern Iberian Peninsula. 


http://www.diva-portal.org/smash/rec...d=diva2:665597

As to the Lazaridis et al paper, the authors know and evaluate the importance of the data in their own paper from the old Admixture tool. They then proceed to use other statistical modeling, and when they write about the amount of the H/G component in EEF, they make it quite clear that they doubt the upper bound around 30%. You linked to the supplemental material yourself, even if you didn't quote all of it, or provide the tables. 

You also might want to take a look at this chart where Dienekes interpreted his components in terms of one another...North European is about 60% Atlantic Med, a sliver of Siberian, and the rest, approaching 40%, is Gedrosian. Atlantic Med is over 90% Caucasus.
http://tinypic.com/view.php?pic=2v8i...5#.Us7_obRdDRY

Or how about this one for Atlantic-Baltic:
http://tinypic.com/view.php?pic=2enb...5#.Us8Bs7RdDRY
Atlantic Baltic comes out as a sliver of Amerindian, close to 70% Caucasus/Gedrosia, and about 30% Southern.

There's nothing confusing about the graphs whatsoever, although I think the use of this method for ancient ancestry purposes is now rather limited. 

Finally, the neolithic spread from the south-east Wilhelm. EEF is an east Mediterranean component with some western H/G added before it ever got to Iberia. Even if these farmers picked up a little more western H/G when they got there, it wouldn't effect the numbers from this paper. The EEF figures we are discussing for the modern European populations are based on the genes of this LBK woman.

You've had a good run, Wilhelm, but when someone is in a hole, the advice is usually to stop digging. 

The data is what it is...and I don't understand what the problem is with accepting it.

----------


## Wilhelm

> This is because Sardinians have additional 25-30% H&G to their EEF


What are you talking about ?? The Stuttgart individual looks like Sardinians, there is no additional HG, where do you get that ? 




> . If we had a isolated farmer population in the Levant things might have looked different. Unfortunately Bedouins from Arabia are the only people who retained their farmer ancestry but (unfortunately for scientific reasons) are already admixed with a second wave of East African migrants which brought additional ~7-10% East African genes. For Gods sake how can someone be so obstinate even after so many attempts of so many Users, with considerable knowledge about genetics, to explain it.


I already know this fact, in fact it's MYSELF who has talked about this layer of african admixture ocurring AFTER the farming migrations , and that is something that is mentioned in the study...and the study attempts to address this problem by outgruping Yorubans.





> Finally, the neolithic spread from the south-east Wilhelm. EEF is an east Mediterranean component with some western H/G added before it ever got to Iberia. Even if these farmers picked up a little more western H/G when they got there, it wouldn't effect the numbers from this paper. The EEF figures we are discussing for the modern European populations are based on the genes of this LBK woman.
> 
> You've had a good run, Wilhelm, but when someone is in a hole, the advice is usually to stop digging. 
> 
> The data is what it is...and I don't understand what the problem is with accepting it.


Im not in any hole, but whatever, im tired of discussing with you guys, if you want to believe that European Farmers have no HG ancestry, and are pure near-easterns, that's fine, but evidence clearly proves my theory.

----------


## Angela

> What are you talking about ?? The Stuttgart individual looks like Sardinians, there is no additional HG, where do you get that ? 
> 
> 
> I already know this fact, in fact it's MYSELF who has talked about this layer of african admixture ocurring AFTER the farming migrations , and that is something that is mentioned in the study...and the study attempts to address this problem by outgruping Yorubans.
> 
> 
> 
> Im not in any hole, but whatever, im tired of discussing with you guys, if you want to believe that European Farmers have no HG ancestry, and are pure near-easterns, that's fine, but evidence clearly proves my theory.


I have NEVER stated, nor do I believe that the EEF had no HG ancestry. Do NOT distort my statements.

----------


## LeBrok

> I have NEVER stated, nor do I believe that the EEF had no HG ancestry. Do NOT distort my statements.


He comes back from time to time and every time it is the same story. Exaggeration, distortion and even lying as per this example. All of this with one goal in mind, to show Iberia as much European as possible, as much white as possible, as much celtic as possible. Anyone entertaining different point of view will be immediately under attack. I'm surprised only Wilhelm showed up this time from all the Celtiberians.

----------


## Alan

> He comes back from time to time and every time it is the same story. Exaggeration, distortion and even lying as per this example. All of this with one goal in mind, to show Iberia as much European as possible, as much white as possible, as much celtic as possible. Anyone entertaining different point of view will be immediately under attack. I'm surprised only Wilhelm showed up this time from all the Celtiberians.


Maybe because the other one have finally accepted the reality. I have generally a good view on Catalans and there is allot of mutual respect between them and my people on many level (there is even a Kurdistan street in Barcelona). I will definitely not change my mind because of some disagreement in individual cases on the net. But I have to admit that allot of Iberians on such Forums have a strong obsession with Britain and phantasies of being pure bred Paleolithic people who found refugees in caves when the Ice Age came, while the rest of all Europe is mixed bred. Allot of them even dislike the "South European" classification and would be rather classified together with Atlantic French and Britains. I mean come on everyone has an small agenda but in such a delusional manner is never good.

But ironically this is only the case on the Internet. I have never came across an Iberian who had such unusual view of themselves. And I have met and seen allot of them. Allot who looked basically Iberian some who looked rather darker and some other of them I could swear who could easilly pass as French, Dutch or German. So there is indeed variety in Iberians.

----------


## Sile

> Maybe because the other one have finally accepted the reality. I have generally a good view on Catalans and there is allot of mutual respect between them and my people on many level (there is even a Kurdistan street in Barcelona). I will definitely not change my mind because of some disagreement in individual cases on the net. But I have to admit that allot of Iberians on such Forums have a strong obsession with Britain and phantasies of being pure bred Paleolithic people who found refugees in caves when the Ice Age came, while the rest of all Europe is mixed bred. Allot of them even dislike the "South European" classification and would be rather classified together with Atlantic French and Britains. I mean come on everyone has an small agenda but in such a delusional manner is never good.
> 
> But ironically this is only the case on the Internet. I have never came across an Iberian who had such unusual view of themselves. And I have met and seen allot of them. Allot who looked basically Iberian some who looked rather darker and some other of them I could swear who could easilly pass as French or German. So there is indeed variety in Iberians.


Catalans, of the ones I know say, its because of their view to be closer to French ( occitan) "northern europe" linguistically and culturally as in the past, than with Castilian "southern Europe" culture which is tied with the berbers. Catalan and Provencal troubadours scurried back and forth between liguria and barcelona

----------


## adamo

According to the old genographic project map, T split off from K in southern Iraq (Sumerian region). One branch split from there and headed from northern Saudi Arabia through Egypt all he way towards Algeria/morocco. The other branch headed from southern Iraq through turkey and towards northeastern italy passing by Slovenia, Hungary etc. I don't know how much of this to believe, but my point is, T has a center of weight near southern Iraq/ south-western Iran, south-central Iran and southeastern Iran. But the easternmost part of Iran bordering Pakistan/Afghanistan is NOT affected by T. L on the other hand, starts augmenting in frequency in easternmost Iran bordering southern Pakistan. It peaks in Pakistan and slightly lower in parts of Afghanistan, and again lower frequencies towards westernmost India.

----------


## adamo

Just look at maps of sister L and T on Wikipedia, you'll get an idea of their vicinity but T peaks in southern Iraq and within the confines of Iran, with a southernmost center of weight from west to east of Iran it is present. It starts to drop heavily near southeasternmost Iran, where small L frequencies begin. L peaks in Pakistan.

----------


## adamo

T is easternmost Middle East. L is Central Asia, truly centered on Pakistan.

----------


## Goga

> I thought about this too, but the Mal'ta boy didn't have _any_ Caucaso-Perso-Gedrosian, so it can't be linked to R*.


You used K=20, but on a lower K=19 run that MA1 Johny-boy has about 1/3 (of total) of Caucas-Gedrosia component. And Kalash even 3/4 of total! That dark green of Kalash is actually Caucasus-Gerosia mixed with South Asian.

----------


## LeBrok

> Maybe because the other one have finally accepted the reality.


Wow, that will be a day! I feel like celebrating already. :)
Now, let's hope that our friends on Balkans can accept each other and new reality.




> . I have generally a good view on Catalans and there is allot of mutual respect between them and my people on many level (there is even a Kurdistan street in Barcelona). I will definitely not change my mind because of some disagreement in individual cases on the net.


I like Spanish culture myself, and even think about buying a house by the sea on day.

----------


## Sile

> According to the old genographic project map, T split off from K in southern Iraq (Sumerian region). One branch split from there and headed from northern Saudi Arabia through Egypt all he way towards Algeria/morocco. The other branch headed from southern Iraq through turkey and towards northeastern italy passing by Slovenia, Hungary etc. I don't know how much of this to believe, but my point is, T has a center of weight near southern Iraq/ south-western Iran, south-central Iran and southeastern Iran. But the easternmost part of Iran bordering Pakistan/Afghanistan is NOT affected by T. L on the other hand, starts augmenting in frequency in easternmost Iran bordering southern Pakistan. It peaks in Pakistan and slightly lower in parts of Afghanistan, and again lower frequencies towards westernmost India.


recheck

T split form K in northern Iran. L split from K in south-east Iran

----------


## LeBrok

> I won't be drinking ale from your skull-cup on this day.


Excellent choice of a vessel. Very animistic and primitive, deserving hg I. :17:...with a smile of R1a comrade tovarishtch.

----------


## adamo

North-central Iran or just northern Iran? Your telling me highest diversity and home of T is northern Iran? Why is it so rare there? L's highest diversity is southeastern Iran....deffinetly seems plausible but there must have been a movement even further east, why did T generally move westwards, wether it be Egypt, Jordan or the rare Phoenician enclaves in Europe? How did that happen? It's definite; T is most present in Europe near Mediterranean coastal regions that were colonizedby Phoenicians (Chios, west Sicily, north Corsica, Ibiza, coastal Campania region, Cadiz (southernmost Spain) but then why is T so rare in Lebanon today? If the Phoenicians had really spread it, wouldn't it be more frequent in Lebanese males? Although it is quite frequent (21%) in nearby jordanian males according to geno 2.0, so what gives? We DO know now that Omani Arabs and shirazi Persians (Shiraz is south-central Iran) brought T to the Horn of Africa and Madagascar, but what of Europe? Other than frequency peaks for T smack on every ancient Phoenician colony site, what evidence is there to corroborate this when looking at the modern genetic composition of Lebanon, for example?

----------


## adamo

I find interesting that one of the only T-PF7443's in geno 2.0 is a southern German fellow, and a man from La Palma, the most western of the Canary Islands of the coast of morocco/Mauritania in the Atlantic Ocean. This pretty much solidifies me to be a Phoenician or Carthaginian ancestor as this was just another "Ibiza" fort to the Phoenicians. I'm not surprised if more T1a1a3's will be discovered on the Canary Islands, Cadiz (al Gadir), Ibiza islands, northern Corsica, or western Sicily, maybe a few regions of coastal Tunisia or morocco would have them as well. Malta would also be a good place to look. I have found a rare southern Sardinian sample to be T-PF7443+ as well.

----------


## adamo

Just to give you an idea, the Phoenicians of Tyre founded sites on Malta, Cadiz (southern Spain) and the entire north-west African empire of Carthage, with it's few isolated city-states. The Tartessians derived from them. They would have left multiple sites on the island of Malta, 5 or so cities on libya's Mediterranean coast, another 5 or so on the Tunisian coast, same for coastal Algeria and 3 sites on the Moroccan coas, whereas southern Spain by the north-African coast has 8 or so Phoenician colonies. Ibiza was colonized and southern Sardinia has 4 Phoenician colonies. Western Sicily had numerous Phoenician colonies as well.

----------


## kamani

Sardinia was a Phoenician colony for a long time and Sardinians do have a lot of the typical Levantine y-dna groups (some in small percentages), but they don't have any South-West Asian or North African component. This means even the Phoenicians did not have much South-West Asian or North-African and were mostly Neolithic Near Easterns.
Region
I2
R1b
G2a
J2
J1
E1b1b
T + (L)
Q

Sardinia
37%
22%
15%
10%
2.5%
10%
1.5%
2%



So the Neolithic Near Eastern y-dna now becomes: E-M78 + E-M123 , G2a, J2, J1, and some R1b. I2 would be their paleolithic HG component.

Another conclusion is that there was no Caucaso-Perso-Gedrosian in the Levant in the time of the Phoenicians. And Caucaso-Perso-Gedrosian is probably associated with R1a, which Sardinians don't have.

----------


## adamo

T is very rare on Sardinia though (although I heard of a T-PF7443+ from there regardless) as are most other Neolithic lineages when taken independently...J2 (10%), E3b (10%), G2a is more frequent although it and E3b were probably not brought by the Phoenicians....when taken together they account for some 30-40% of Sardinian lineages; basically the amount of I-M26 on the island. G2a seems to have been particularly successful on Sardinia and in southern italy for some reason but this isn't reflective of Greece, for example., basically European highs for the G-P15 lineage. G-M201 is found in low frequencies from Iran to the Hindu Kush mountain range tribes near Pakistan, with a probable Iranian origin.

----------


## adamo

In terms of geno 2.0 (haven't checked ftdna) in terms of T-PF7443+ we have four individuals to work with here. Canary Islands, Campania (Caserta) Italy, a Sardinian and a German. I'm gonna go ahead and postulate a Phoenician link. La Palma (he westernmost canary island) had heavy Phoenician/Carthaginian influence from this same men that found Cadiz and Ibiza. The Sardinian is a rare Phoenician probably too, as is my marker (don't forget T is found at 18% in Sciacca Sicily, in the exact domain were the Phoenicians settled.) Marsala, Palermo, Selinunte, Pantelleria island, Erice, Favignana island, Aegadian islands, castellamare del golfo and cefalu were all Phoenician sites. We also know of a 7-8% high on the campanian coast and several central/north italian isolated cities have high frequencies as well. Same for 1-2 isolated pockets near Bavaria. A few regions of Spain and Portugal have interesting frequencies as well, although he spaniards lean towards Phoenician colonization whereas the Portuguese T1b signals are more in line with recent Jewish influence. It is not well understood why Chios has 25% T but it could be do to passing under Persian dominion and some studies on Aegean islands + Crete have found up to 33% T.

----------


## Wilhelm

> He comes back from time to time and every time it is the same story. Exaggeration, distortion and even lying as per this example. All of this with one goal in mind, to show Iberia as much European as possible, as much white as possible, as much celtic as possible. Anyone entertaining different point of view will be immediately under attack. I'm surprised only Wilhelm showed up this time from all the Celtiberians.


Talk about distortion...I never talked about Celts or Celtiberians in this thread, it's you who is obsessed with it. 




> Maybe because the other one have finally accepted the reality.


What I said is just what the study of Lazaridis says, there is no "accepting of reality"... 




> Catalans, of the ones I know say, its because of their view to be closer to French ( occitan) "northern europe" linguistically and culturally as in the past, than with Castilian "southern Europe" culture which is tied with the berbers. Catalan and Provencal troubadours scurried back and forth between liguria and barcelona


This is getting off the track for some weird reason...but neither Catalan culture is "northern European" nor Castilian is "berber" culture, that's nonsense.

----------


## nordicwarrior

> Excellent choice of a vessel. Very animistic and primitive, deserving hg I. :17:...with a smile of R1a comrade tovarishtch.


Now that's funny!

I actually chortled-- no joke!

----------


## Sile

> In terms of geno 2.0 (haven't checked ftdna) in terms of T-PF7443+ we have four individuals to work with here. Canary Islands, Campania (Caserta) Italy, a Sardinian and a German. I'm gonna go ahead and postulate a Phoenician link. La Palma (he westernmost canary island) had heavy Phoenician/Carthaginian influence from this same men that found Cadiz and Ibiza. The Sardinian is a rare Phoenician probably too, as is my marker (don't forget T is found at 18% in Sciacca Sicily, in the exact domain were the Phoenicians settled.) Marsala, Palermo, Selinunte, Pantelleria island, Erice, Favignana island, Aegadian islands, castellamare del golfo and cefalu were all Phoenician sites. We also know of a 7-8% high on the campanian coast and several central/north italian isolated cities have high frequencies as well. Same for 1-2 isolated pockets near Bavaria. A few regions of Spain and Portugal have interesting frequencies as well, although he spaniards lean towards Phoenician colonization whereas the Portuguese T1b signals are more in line with recent Jewish influence. It is not well understood why Chios has 25% T but it could be do to passing under Persian dominion and some studies on Aegean islands + Crete have found up to 33% T.


Your getting confused with origins and high percentages. you always look at T1 for origin instead of just* plain T.* 
Basal T of which represent 4% of all T in the world is found in Syria, Caucasus, Caspian sea area ..................and Nat Geno also says south germany.
T1 is 96% of all T in the world has nothing to do with origins.

So do not worry about high numbers for T1 as these are irrelevant to origin

----------


## Knovas

> Maybe because the other one have finally accepted the reality. I have generally a good view on Catalans


There's no need to not mention my nickname Alan. If you want to say Knovas, just say it.

I'm following the discussion, I do not fear different points of view. I'm simply getting tired of discussing the same exact things again and again. The "Iberian agenda argument" is not very boring, but incredibly boring I'd say. If that's the discussion, then I prefer to stay away.

I'll keep reading anyway. Enjoy ;)

----------


## Alan

> There's no need to not mention my nickname Alan. If you want to say Knovas, just say it.
> 
> I'm following the discussion, I do not fear different points of view. I'm simply getting tired of discussing the same exact things again and again. The "Iberian agenda argument" is not very boring, but incredibly boring I'd say. If that's the discussion, then I prefer to stay away.
> 
> I'll keep reading anyway. Enjoy ;)


I didn't said your name because I believed there are other Iberian users too. Actually I wasn't even thinking about you.

----------


## LeBrok

> There's no need to not mention my nickname Alan. If you want to say Knovas, just say it.
> 
> I'm following the discussion, I do not fear different points of view. I'm simply getting tired of discussing the same exact things again and again. The "Iberian agenda argument" is not very boring, but incredibly boring I'd say. If that's the discussion, then I prefer to stay away.
> 
> I'll keep reading anyway. Enjoy ;)


I always found your opinion balanced and objective. I was thinking about fellas like Lynx, Drac or Cambria.

----------


## adamo

What the bloody heck are you talking about Sile? I'm referring to T1a1a3, my downstream subclade, re-read my posts please. I said nothing of the origins of T*. I said I find it odd how the only T1a1a3's are me (Naples region), canary islander, southern Sardinian and a German fellow in geno 2.0; can you find some more on ftdna?

----------


## Sile

> What the bloody heck are you talking about Sile? I'm referring to T1a1a3, my downstream subclade, re-read my posts please. I said nothing of the origins of T*. I said I find it odd how the only T1a1a3's are me (Naples region), canary islander, southern Sardinian and a German fellow in geno 2.0; can you find some more on ftdna?


What I am saying is that everything you mentioned which has T1 is migrational are *not* places of origin of T-M184 ( Basal) .

Basal places by genetic companies for T-M184 ( T1* is not Basal ) 
Ftdna = South Pakistan
Nat G = North Caucasus ( plus south Germany? only heard of this )
23andme = Shores of the south caspian sea
Ancestry = Assyrian and Kurdish lands
Genomes = Armenia 
and Another company IIRC British/scottish DNA = Uzbekistan
None have mesopotamia , they only have this area for K

----------


## nordicwarrior

Adamo, you do a good job of explaining basic y-DNA relationships.

Could you look into and explain the confusing (to me anyway) status adjustment that we see with the older haplogroup S grouping? Are Melanasians now haplogroup M primarily? 

And moderators... this is related to this thread... although it may not seem so at first glance.

----------


## adamo

That's a difficult question, M and S (Papua new Guinean haplogroups derived from k) are the ones I understand the least; haven't researched them much.

----------


## adamo

Geno 2.0 postulates a west Asian origin, with M70+ involved in kebaran and Emirian culture, nothing more. Ftdna indicates northern Afghanistan not Pakistan.

----------


## Sile

> Geno 2.0 postulates a west Asian origin, with M70+ involved in kebaran and Emirian culture, nothing more. Ftdna indicates northern Afghanistan not Pakistan.


Again you mention M70.....M70 is not basal , M184 is ..................it should be easier to track as there is only 4% in the world

----------


## adamo

So which of the aforementioned locations was T-M184* origin according to you?

----------


## Sile

> So which of the aforementioned locations was T-M184* origin according to you?


see my post #87

----------


## adamo

Really? Pakistan?

----------


## Knovas

> I always found your opinion balanced and objective. I was thinking about fellas like Lynx, Drac or Cambria.


I don't know this Lynx, but he's out of the forum since a very long time I think. I forgot Drac is Catalan origin as well, so I thought he was refering to me.

----------


## Drac II

> There's no need to not mention my nickname Alan. If you want to say Knovas, just say it.
> 
> I'm following the discussion, I do not fear different points of view. I'm simply getting tired of discussing the same exact things again and again. The "Iberian agenda argument" is not very boring, but incredibly boring I'd say. If that's the discussion, then I prefer to stay away.
> 
> I'll keep reading anyway. Enjoy ;)


Curiously enough, the #1 instigator of this "Iberian agenda" hypocritical myth around here is an administrator himself (LeBrok) How exactly was he chosen for this task, which ideally requires an impartial, objective person with no agendas of his own, is a real puzzle.

----------


## Drac II

> I always found your opinion balanced and objective. I was thinking about fellas like Lynx, Drac or Cambria.


Too bad that yours never is, at least certainly not when it comes to "Iberians". One only needs to find someone targeting Iberians for any reason in any given thread and wait a little bit to quite predictably see you adding fuel to the fire. It never fails. Keep on proving us right.

----------


## LeBrok

> Too bad that yours never is, at least certainly not when it comes to "Iberians". One only needs to find someone targeting Iberians for any reason in any given thread and wait a little bit to quite predictably see you adding fuel to the fire. It never fails. Keep on proving us right.


Damn, I'm a profit lol, here he is, showing up only to "protect" Iberian "honor and purity". They never participate in other scientific discoveries and discussions, just for love of science or journey through history of humankind with us, but only come to attack the "enemies" of Iberia, slanders of white celtic heritage, or the ones who "brown" Iberians in any way.
So how dare I call it An Agenda? lol

----------


## Wilhelm

> Damn, I'm a profit lol, here he is, showing up only to "protect" Iberian "honor and purity". They never participate in other scientific discoveries and discussions, just for love of science or journey through history of humankind with us, but only come to attack the "enemies" of Iberia, slanders of white celtic heritage, or the ones who "brown" Iberians in any way.
> So how dare I call it An Agenda? lol


This is second time you mention Celts in this thread when nobody has...see how it's you who is obsessed with it ?

And why did you ban Drac now ?

----------


## Sile

> This is second time you mention Celts in this thread when nobody has...see how it's you who is obsessed with it ?
> 
> And why did you ban Drac now ?


Is he banned? from when

----------


## Wilhelm

> Is he banned? from when


Yes apparently he is banned.

----------


## Goga

> *UPDATE:*
> 
> 13) The *Caucaso-Perso-Gedrosian admixture* might be a composite of the West Asian branch of macro-haplogroup K, comprising mostly the original autosomal genes of carriers of *Y-haplogroups L and T*. Over time, L and T appear to have been replaced by the paternal lineages of successive invaders, like J1 and J2 during the Neolithic and Chalcolithic, R1a and R1b during the Bronze and Iron Ages, and East Asian lineages (C, N, O, Q) during the Turkic and Mongolian invasions.


Sorry, this is just ridiculous! I hope this is a joke! Why? Because J2 was born somewhere between South Caucasian Mountain range and the Zagros mountains. J2 NEVER invaded places like South Caucasus, Kurdistan, Northwestern parts of the Iranian Plateau. Paternal haplogroups J2 has always been native to this area.

----------


## Goga

I want to know that if paternal haplogroup J2 'invaded' Kurdistan during the Neolithic and Chalcolithic then from where? From Africa or China, maybe the Moon, Mars or even Nibiru?

----------


## Kristiina

Hello Maciamo,

I am a new member, I registered today! 

Your map is very interesting but there is something that I want to ask you. Why you think that Atayal are 100% yDNA C and D, while they yDNA frequencies are the following (Su B, 2000 http + :// + pnas.org/content/97/15/8225 ):
H6 (O3a1a) = 29.2%
H7 (O3a2b) = 4.2%
H8 (O3a2c1, former O3e) = 4.2%
H9 (O1a1a) = 54.2%
H10 (O1a2) = 8.3%
In fact, it seems that none of the Taiwanese aboriginal groups (Bunun, Atayal, Yami, Paiwan, Ami) bear other haplogroups than O3 and O1, apart from Yami who have a high frequency of O2a1. I would rather conclude that yDNA D goes primarily with East Asian yellow component, as the highest frequencies of yDNA D are found in Tibetans (e.g. Naxi) and Japanese, and the D frequency is not very high in Cambodians or Thais.
I remember to have checked recently Atayal mtDNA lines, and I was excited to notice that they lack all northeastern mtDNA lines such as C, D and A. 
I would add YDNA C3 in your list. The Arctic component seen in Mal’ta, as well as in Eskimos, Koryaks and Chukchi should include C3. In my opinion C3 should also be included in dark blue Siberian component.

----------


## John123

I see another Scandinav female, Finland in particular, with mtdna I as I suspected it seems I and W within Europe peak in the general Scandinavia region as rarer haplogroups of the region. I was found in Scandinavian skeletons dating to I don't remember when and W peaks at 10% in southern Finland in Europe.

----------


## Theot

> These admixtures bear an uncanny resemblance to those of the Dodecad Project, and one could wonder if that Iosif Lazaridis could indeed be the person hidden behind the pseudonym Dienekes Pontikos.


Dienekes' posts on the old "Racial Myths Message Board" (2003 and earlier) originated from the University of California at Irvine, which just happens to be the school Lazaridis attended during that time. (The original version of that board displayed the IP addresses of the posters, so one could use WHOIS or a similar tool to find the host name.)

Coincidence? I think not.

----------


## HQ420832

> ...
> 
> 10) *Iberians* have a small percentage of North African admixture, linked to the presence of Y-haplogroup E-M81 and mtDNA L. Iberians also have traces of East African and Southwest Asian admixture. All three admixtures could have come with the Moors during the Islamic period, although it is likely that there was already some North African admixture in Iberia (though probably in isolated populations) at least since the Neolithic period.
> 
> ...


On page 65 of the Supplementary information authors write :

"This analysis confirm that gene flow from Sub-Saharan or North African populations has occurred in the Spanish sample. Table S11.2: Estimates of African admixture in Spanish population. The Spanish population may harbor some African-related admixture representing *a fourth wave of migration into Europe,* but affecting Spain much more than the other groups" 

Depending on the population used (Sub-Saharan Yoruba or North African Mozabites) to estimate African admixture in the Spanish sample, the authors got the following percentages and Time of African admixture :

Table S11.2 :
Yoruba : 1.5% ; Time of African admixture : 66.2 generations
Mozabite : 12.6% ; Time of African admixture : 73.7 generations

So most of African admixture In Iberia was probably there before the Moors.

----------


## Sile

> On page 65 of the Supplementary information authors write :
> 
> "This analysis confirm that gene flow from Sub-Saharan or North African populations has occurred in the Spanish sample. Table S11.2: Estimates of African admixture in Spanish population. The Spanish population may harbor some African-related admixture representing *a fourth wave of migration into Europe,* but affecting Spain much more than the other groups" 
> 
> Depending on the population used (Sub-Saharan Yoruba or North African Mozabites) to estimate African admixture in the Spanish sample, the authors got the following percentages and Time of African admixture :
> 
> Table S11.2 :
> Yoruba : 1.5% ; Time of African admixture : 66.2 generations
> Mozabite : 12.6% ; Time of African admixture : 73.7 generations
> ...


ok

-Mozabites have genetically 4 branches of the E hg with a bit of G2 and R1b
- They are berber people and before that they where ancient numidian people
- Numidians fought for Carthage as cavalry troops, they then changed sides and allied with Romans. They eventually where settled by Romans in Spain, Italy and Sardinia.
- They where more white than black in skin colour, the black came about by the migrating yoruba people from west africa via Taureg area into Mozabite/algerian areas...........I do not know when this happened.

Conclusion, since Berbers where pre-arab people, how long have the berbers been in NW africa?

*According to mozabites (who are ibadhites=>dont mix with their neighbor arab and berber sunnis and this since the earlies migration of khawarij ibadites from arabia to north africa and oman escaping the omeyyads)*

----------


## motzart

this is so confusing, I don't understand how R & I can be grouped together, imo MA1 sucks as a yardstick and the r1b from the beaker culture find in germany would be better

----------


## Pax Augusta

> 18) Tuscans have practically the same admixtures as the Albanians and the Greeks, or even the Turks once their Northeast Asian admixture has been removed. This reinforces the theory of a Greco-Anatolian origin of the Etruscans.


Maciamo, what's the source for K-20? Samples from HGDP? Dodecad?

According to Admixture proportions Tuscans have the same as Bergamo (Northern Italy), Bulgarians and Basque country, too. How can this reinforces the theory of a Greco-Anatolian origin of the Etruscans?

Population
EEF
WHG
ANE

Bergamo (Lombard, Northern Italy)
0.715
0.177
0.108

Tuscan
0.746
0.136
0.118

Bulgarian
0.712
0.147
0.141

Basque Country
0.713
0.125
0.163

Greek
0.792
0.058
0.151

Croatian
0.561
0.293
0.145

Sardinian
0.817
0.175
0.008

Albanian
0.781
0.092
0.127

Spanish
0.809
0.068
0.123




Lazaridis 2013: Ancient genomes suggest three ancestral populations for present-day Europeans

"Greeks are compatible with their geographical neighbors in the Balkans (Albanians and Bulgarians) and Italy (Bergamo and Tuscans). Basques and Spanish_North are incompatible with several populations from Mediterranean and Southeastern Europe. Mediterranean and Southeastern Europeans such as Spanish, Albanians, Bulgarians, Bergamo, Tuscans, Croatians, and Hungarians are compatible with each other"

----------


## Pax Augusta

> Dienekes' posts on the old "Racial Myths Message Board" (2003 and earlier) originated from the University of California at Irvine, which just happens to be the school Lazaridis attended during that time. (The original version of that board displayed the IP addresses of the posters, so one could use WHOIS or a similar tool to find the host name.)
> 
> Coincidence? I think not.


I agree. Probably not a coincidence. While he was studying computer science at Irvine, evidently already cultivated his passion.


http://www.cspandasearch.net/scholar...Lazaridis.html

http://contactbee.com/en/contact/view/5000459

----------


## Ubert

> What the bloody heck are you talking about Sile? I'm referring to T1a1a3, my downstream subclade, re-read my posts please. I said nothing of the origins of T*. I said I find it odd how the only T1a1a3's are me (Naples region), canary islander, southern Sardinian and a German fellow in geno 2.0; can you find some more on ftdna?


I wanted to let everyone know I was out here. I am listed with FTDNA-T Haplogroup-T #41158. I share common ancestor with #E17292 Ubert also listed on the FTDNA Haplogroup-T research group. He was tested PF7443+. On Y-search I am the only Ubert. 

I have traced the Ubert lineage back to 1700s Alsace. Glad to know there are others with this very rare subclade within this rare Haplogroup.

----------


## John Doe

I'm E-M35.1 according to 23andme, unfortunately 23andme failed to branch me to a specific subclade. I'm planning to test with FTDNA for more specific results, but until then, which subclade of E-M35.1 is most frequent among Ashkenazi Jews?

----------


## Angela

> I'm E-M35.1 according to 23andme, unfortunately 23andme failed to branch me to a specific subclade. I'm planning to test with FTDNA for more specific results, but until then, which subclade of E-M35.1 is most frequent among Ashkenazi Jews?


You might get rather more informed opinions if you post your question on the ydna "E" pages. 

You might also find this helpful:
http://www.jewishgen.org/DNA/genbygen.html

Or this:
https://www.familytreedna.com/public...ction=yresults
Obviously, many people only tested for very upstream clades.

----------


## John Doe

> You might get rather more informed opinions if you post your question on the ydna "E" pages. 
> 
> You might also find this helpful:
> http://www.jewishgen.org/DNA/genbygen.html
> 
> Or this:
> https://www.familytreedna.com/public...ction=yresults
> Obviously, many people only tested for very upstream clades.


Thanks. :)
Which test should I take with FTDNA in order to find my specific paternal subclade? 37 markers is enough?

P.S I must say that even the 37 markers test is very expensive.

----------


## Yaan

> Thanks. :)
> Which test should I take with FTDNA in order to find my specific paternal subclade? 37 markers is enough?
> 
> P.S I must say that even the 37 markers test is very expensive.


Yes take a basic test and then based on ur matches purchase a snip. U should be E-M123 or E-V22 or *E-V65 , but u could be everything, u will soon find out*

----------


## John Doe

> Yes take a basic test and then based on ur matches purchase a snip. U should be E-M123 or E-V22 or *E-V65 , but u could be everything, u will soon find out*


Thanks. So I should buy the 37 markers and these results will tell me which snp to buy? Will it cost more? Will I have to send a sample twice?

P.S I read that most E3b Ashkenazi Jews (and Sephardi Jews for that matter) turn out to belong to E-M123, which seems to be accounting for over 10% of all male lines (Semino 2004). In the more general distribution, E-M123's most dominant subclade, E-M34, is most frequent in west Asia and northeast Africa, but also exists in southern Europe. I suppose that most E-M123 Ashkenazis belong to E-M34, I'm pretty sure Albert Einstein was E-M34.

----------


## Sile

> I wanted to let everyone know I was out here. I am listed with FTDNA-T Haplogroup-T #41158. I share common ancestor with #E17292 Ubert also listed on the FTDNA Haplogroup-T research group. He was tested PF7443+. On Y-search I am the only Ubert. 
> 
> I have traced the Ubert lineage back to 1700s Alsace. Glad to know there are others with this very rare subclade within this rare Haplogroup.


your line in isogg T is not that old

*T1a1a3* PF7443, PF7444, PF7445, PF7453, PF7457, PF7458

yourDYS390 =24 .........which is said to be on the young side

I must say that the PF7443 is gaining in great numbers of people

----------

