Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
from 2017 (New studies contradict some of the Blogger’s opinions)
ITALIAN MENA
A similar argument can be made in the South with the MENA genetics (middle eastern-north african ed.) Concentrated mainly in areas where the population tends to have darker hair.
This genetics, as explained in my old article on southern Italians , is not attributable to the Saracens (as many people commonly think) but is more Middle Eastern than North African (Sicily for example has about 10% of MENA but, of this, less than 1% is North African) and probably arrived in Italy during the late Roman Empire, as Coon had also suggested in its taxonomic analysis
In Sardinia instead haplogroup I2a1 dominates, which is that of the Ancient Mesolithic Hunter-Gatherers, and is found in the measure of 37.5% (where in continental Italy its presence does not go beyond the 1-3%)
Just started reading this, Salento.
Imo, they're incorrect about some of the details. Perhaps it hasn't been updated recently?
For example, they're incorrect about the relative percentages of Neolithic ancestry in Italy depending on the region.
EEF is actually highest in Northern Italy, then Tuscany, then Central Italy, and then the South. It's because the "Iran Neo/CHG" is highest in the south and that replaced EEF somewhat, and also because of some additional more recent ancestry in places like Sicily, for instance.
As for Sardinia, the latest paper indicates that it wasn't as isolated as used to be believed. The population in the remote mountain plateau from which many of the samples chosen by Cavalli-Sforza originated is a case apart, and, by the way, whether the I2a there came from the Mesolithic inhabitants or a group arriving later in the Neolithic is very much open to question.
Likewise, while it's true that for a long time studies used only the sample from Bergamo for various analyses, researchers now have access to more Northern Italian samples.
Generally speaking, a lot of what they're saying about haplogroups is speculation not yet verified by ancient dna, and I don't find their labels helpful. Calling U-152 Celto-Germanic is anachronistic, for one thing, and certain clades of E1b1b found in Italy definitely arrived after the Neolithic. It's also not helpful relying on old maps that don't show sub-lineages. In the case of E1b1b it's impossible to analyze the arrival of various lineages in Italy without knowing that.
I have the same sort of problems with the autosomal analysis. There aren't "masses" of "Germanic" ancestry anywhere in Sicily. I don't know where that comes from, although that's just one example. In addition, we've come a long way from the Dodecad analyses. By this point, we, in addition to Dienekes, know that those clusters are themselves admixtures, and not the most informative way of analyzing autosomal ancestry. Some of the verbiage also has that old theapricity, forumbiodiversity feeling, filtered through, I would bet, the prism of some of the Northern Italian members who frequented those forums.
It's just wrong in a lot of the particulars, and very outdated, imo.
Sorry, Salento, nothing personal, but that's my opinion.
FWIW, I think the pigmentation map is fine for real "locals"; it's not an accurate description of what you'd see walking around the street anywhere north of Rome. Too bad also that the writer of the article doesn't know the parameters of Emilia versus Romagna, or the location of the Po. If he knew the latter he'd know that the "fairest" areas of Emilia are south of the Po, and the lightest area in that whole region is in the northwestern part of Toscana, just south of the border with Emilia.
Most Yamnaya genomes studied to date exhibit admixedEHG & CHG ancestry with each in robust proportions, oftenwith CHG ancestry higher than 50% (Wang et al. 2018: Figure2c).
https://www.academia.edu/39985565/A..._Language_in_the_Steppes_A_Comment_on_Bomhard
PCA (Fig. 2B ) indicates that all the Anatolian genome sequences from the Early Bronze Age (~2200 BCE) and Late Bronze Age (~1600 BCE) cluster with a previously sequenced Copper Age (~3900 to 3700 BCE) individual from Northwestern Anatolia and lie between Anatolian Neolithic (Anatolia_N) samples and CHG samples but not between Anatolia_N and EHG samples. A test of the form D(CHG, Mbuti; Anatolia_EBA, Anatolia_N) shows that these individuals share more alleles with CHG than Neolithic Anatolians do (Z = 3.95), and we are not able to reject a two-population qpAdm model in which these groups derive ~60% of their ancestry from Anatolian farmers and ~40% from CHG-related ancestry (P = 0.5). This signal is not driven by Neolithic Iranian ancestry, because the result of a similar test of the form D(Iran_N, Mbuti; Anatolia_EBA, Anatolia_N) does not deviate from zero (Z = 1.02).Taken together with recent findings of CHG ancestry on Crete (58), our results support a widespread CHG-related gene flow, not only into Central Anatolia but also into the areas surrounding the Black Sea and Crete. The latter are not believed to have been influenced by steppe-related migrations and may thus correspond to a shared archaeological horizon of trade and innovation in metallurgy (59).
https://science.sciencemag.org/conte...b-figures-data
Here's something interesting I noticed, Yamnaya is 10% more CHG than even Anatolian Bronze-Age on average. Perhaps that's why the Raveane et al paper suggests that it may be underestimated in Modern European populations.
I believe it was only 40% by previous estimates for Yamnaya, in Haak et al 2015.
Hush! Some prominent "bloggers" and "posters" would prefer to bury that.
The CHG percentages vary depending on the location on the steppe and the time period, but yes, from my recollection, most of Yamnaya has 40% or more.
Was the influx of Iranian-like CHG (caucasian hunter gatherer) across Anatolia into Greece & Southern Italy during the EBA (early bronze age) already admixed with Yamnaya or was it somehow more "pristine" at this stage?
I assume that the CHG would have mixed with whatever else was in Anatolia & Greece en route to Italy?
Also, isn't Iran Neo/CHG thought to be a component of Yamnaya, along with EHG & Ancient North Eurasian?
Hi, I'm a Northern (Lombardy)/Central-Southern (mostly Abruzzo with a bit of Umbrian) mix. I suppose I descend from many different Italic peoples.
It's curious for me to see this is an "Italy & Greece" sub-forum, I'm not sure what's the link which I undoubtedly see in the Benelux, Ireland & UK, Spain and Portugal sub-forums for example.
Do you really mean that Umbria and Abruzzo have more in common with Greece than UK has in common with Ireland, Spain with Portugal and Benelux countries have with one another? Sorry but I strongly disagree.Umbria and Abruzzo have much more in common with Greece than the countries you mention. That’s your genetic connection!to Greece.
Do you really mean that Umbria and Abruzzo have more in common with Greece than UK has in common with Ireland, Spain with Portugal and Benelux countries have with one another? Sorry but I strongly disagree.
By the way, also in absolute terms I don't see a special connection of Italy to Greece (except maybe in those parts which were Greek colonies 2500 years ago), not in food, not in architecture, not in religion, pretty much in nothing really.
Nothing but respect for Greece and the Greeks but that's reality of everyday life (and being from norther Italy, geography).
Bottom line the "Italy & Greece" subforum strikes me as odd, but no problem with it I really don't care if that's how the site was designed.
Northern Italy is not a town, contrary to what some may think in the US. And no, really, I did not list any "important Italian connections to Greece", quite the opposite in fact. I rest my case that an "Italy & Greece" subforum is curious, at least as much as a "France & Germany" subforum would be. Anyway I drop it as it seems to be a sensitive issue for you.Italy is not confined to your town, ... and you just listed some important Italian connections to Greece, ... and you showed that the main title is not odd, thanks
Northern Italy is not a town, contrary to what some may think in the US. And no, really, I did not list any "important Italian connections to Greece", quite the opposite in fact. I rest my case that an "Italy & Greece" subforum is curious, at least as much as a "France & Germany" subforum would be. Anyway I drop it as it seems to be a sensitive issue for you.
Cool. Next time an "Italy & France" subforum then because of the Gauls in both France and Northern Italy, or an "Italy & Croatia" one because of Istria and Dalmazia, or an "Italy & Spain" because of the Aragonese rule in Southern Italy, or an "Italy & Britain" subforum because of the Roman Empire, or...You listed the Greek Colonies (Magna Grecia), that’s important enough to contradict your case!
Cool. Next time an "Italy & France" subforum then because of the Gauls in both France and Northern Italy, or an "Italy & Croatia" one because of Istria and Dalmazia, or an "Italy & Spain" because of the Aragonese rule in Southern Italy, or an "Italy & Britain" subforum because of the Roman Empire, or...
Jokes aside, I'm surprised that an Italian wouldn't consider that Italy "alone" makes sense in a subforum. Have it how you like it anyway, as you seem emotionally attacked to the "Magna Graecia" thingy.
So that there are no misunderstandings: I’m not talking about threads (as a matter of fact this is about Italics) I’m talking about this subforum quite randomly (if you ask me unless you are an ancient Greek from Salento) called “Italy & Greece”.yes, Italy alone would obviously make sense, and we have many threads about Italy. You should browse around the forum and see for yourself.
This thread has been viewed 78958 times.