tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post2825849922363302606..comments2024-01-04T04:11:55.717+02:00Comments on Dienekes’ Anthropology Blog: Y-chromosome, mtDNA, and autosomal DNA from Treilles (5,000 years ago, Neolithic France)Dienekeshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02082684850093948970noreply@blogger.comBlogger84125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-11941808352788440942011-07-12T02:06:25.056+03:002011-07-12T02:06:25.056+03:00I am a g2a whose paternal line goes back to France...I am a g2a whose paternal line goes back to France. I just got my autosomal results, and I have a question for you. It lists me as 91.5 percent Western Europe, French and Orcadian. This makes sense to me because this is where my documented origins go. It also said I am 8.5 percent Middle Eastern (Palestinian/Jewish/Mozabite/Bedouin/Druze)<br /><br />I imagine I could be part Jewish, but the rest does not fit any modern documentation, and they say that this is supposed to be about recent ancestry. I've got almost all of my lines 12-13 generations back to France and the British Isles. Is this perhaps a reflection of Neolithic farmers? Has anyone determined how common Middle Eastern genes are in Western European autosomal testing? <br /><br />ThanksGKShttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09374386584844451988noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-46068339065277071872011-06-15T07:27:03.456+03:002011-06-15T07:27:03.456+03:00The Dodecad and Eurogenes analyses can pick up aut...The Dodecad and Eurogenes analyses can pick up autosomal differences between English/Irish and other nearby western European nations. Even between Scandinavians. I think even Portugal sticks out from Spain and the Basques certainly do. England does have a few extra very minor differences from Ireland (eg African) but the overall very deep similarity to Ireland is unaffected. Certainly there is nothing that is of the scale of the Y-haplogroup differences.<br /><br />You can also look at individual profiles of Irishfolk and English folk at Eurogenes and Dodecad and there ARE stark differences. But they are not between the English and the Irish. I think there will be county/shire differences, with rural places like Galway and parts of northern England retaining more basic structure than coastal towns/cities. But these iron out to almost identical.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11000684388615334278noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-51363841609239183642011-06-15T06:23:49.109+03:002011-06-15T06:23:49.109+03:00Thanks Styan. That is exactly the sort of informa...Thanks Styan. That is exactly the sort of information I've been looking for.terrythttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17327062321100035888noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-43651622432761852202011-06-14T15:55:54.960+03:002011-06-14T15:55:54.960+03:00This article and the comments to it cover many sub...This article and the comments to it cover many subjects of interest to me. I have recently been investigating haplogroup G, so it is interesting to find some more ancient examples of it. Unfortunately G2a is a very diverse group with many branches, some found mainly in the Middle East (especially the Caucasus), some mainly in Europe, and some in both regions. Therefore it is a pity that we do not know which of them is represented here. The STRs given are not particularly good for identifying the branches. DYS392 = 11 shows that it is not G2a1, since that group has 392 = 10. Most of the examples in Ysearch belong to G2a3, characterized especially by DYS425 = 14. G2a3 also has many sub-divisions, extending from the Middle East to Europe. Its most important branch in Europe is G2a3b1a2, characterized by DYS388 = 13 and DYS617 = 12. This makes up a very large part of haplogroup G in Western Europe, but it rarely occurs east of Germany and Italy. I think its position within G2a3 is rather similar to the position of R1b1a2a1a1 L11 within R1b1a2 M269.<br /><br />The subject of R1b1a2, its branches, their relationship to autosomal DNA is not very closely connected with the original subject, but it has attracted considerable attention in the comments. Since it is also of great interest to me, I will add my contribution. I think it is a mistake to describe R1b1a2a1a1-b S116 as “Iberian”. This group is common across the whole of Western and Central Europe, and it forms the majority of R1b almost everywhere. The big exception is the Netherlands, North Germany and Denmark, where R1b1a2a1a1-a U106 predominates. R1b1a2a1a1-b2 M153 is common in South-West Europe, but rare in the British Isles. I think this is evidence against the idea of a special connection between the Isles and SW Europe. <br /><br />The R1b1a2a1a1 in Ireland is mainly R1b1a2a1a1-b4 L21. This group is widespread on the continent, but with much lower percentages than in Ireland. In addition, Irish R1b1a2a1a1-b4 L21 is largely made up of specific sub-branches. The most important of these is R1b1a2a1a1-b4b M222 characterized by DYS392 = 14 and DYS448 = 18. This is the group associated with Niall of the Nine Hostages. There are others, for example, one characterized by DYS617 = 13, 572 = 12, 640 = 12, and another with YCA IIb = 24 and DYS531 = 12. These groups are common in Ireland and Scotland, rare in England and almost absent on the continent. I think research should be done to find out if R1b1a2a1a1-b4 from Ireland has a close connection with R1b1a2a1a1-b4 in any particular part of the continent.<br /><br />In England, R1b1a2a1a1-a U106 and R1b1a2a1a1-b3 U152 are more numerous and there is an increased presence of haplogroups other than R1b. It seems that R1b1a2a1a1-b4 L21 must have come to the Isles early and developed distinct branches there. The groups found more in England presumably came later. The Anglo-Saxons and Danes must have made a significant contribution, but it is possible that the difference between y-chromosomes in England and Ireland originated even earlier. I need to collect more evidence on this. I have also looked at the autosomal evidence, especially in Dodecad to see if there are any differences between Ireland and England that may be related to the differences in y-haplogroups. As several people have written above, such differences in autosomal DNA have not appeared so far. It is possible that they do not exist, but I have thought of another possibility. The Dodecad analyses include people from the whole world. Perhaps differences between people from different parts of the British Isles and North-West Europe are too small to appear when comparisons are made with Africans and Asians. I suggest that people, who are as purely Irish or purely English as possible should be compared with each other and with people from the nearest part of the continent. Perhaps this would reveal some interesting differences. The differences between the different branches of R1b1a2a1a1 are actually very small in the context of the overall diversity of the human y-chromosome.Styanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09618856552132704624noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-84864236531847880292011-06-12T21:23:57.289+03:002011-06-12T21:23:57.289+03:00Quick question to the group: how certain are you t...Quick question to the group: how certain are you that the bones in question cover the 200-year span of time? The best info on the age of the bones in the Treilles Cave I was able to find was a "Probable date" of 3,500-2,000 BCE (Maryvonne Naudet and Raymond Vidal, don't know the pub date). As far as I can tell, this comes directly from reference source #14 from the PNAS paper. It appears to be a monograph (in French) and I can't find it.wagonswest33https://www.blogger.com/profile/11565489080796440101noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-63917737904879546232011-06-11T20:13:15.665+03:002011-06-11T20:13:15.665+03:00I don't know the Fst distances of Bulgarians t...<i>I don't know the Fst distances of Bulgarians to other populations, but Tuscans are genetically closer to Turks than to English according to the Fst tables I have (Greeks and South Italians must be genetically even closer to Turks and more distant to English than Tuscans are).</i><br /><br />I argued this on the blog a few months back.<br /><br />I have had extensive personal contact with these three ethnic groups in London and it seems obvious to the eye that Greeks are genetically much closer to Turks than to the English. They are also more similar culturally, in food and music for instance.apostateimpressionshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08992369104954433139noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-46026138194786628422011-06-09T06:26:28.711+03:002011-06-09T06:26:28.711+03:00"R-P312 is not 'Iberian'. R1b expande..."R-P312 is not 'Iberian'. R1b expanded into Ireland, England, and Iberia via central Europe". <br /><br />Perhaps it's not 'Iberian', but R1b1a2a1a1b1b4-L21 cannot have coalesce in Ireland before the Holocene. That is it can be no older than about 10,000 years. Is the whole R1b1a2a1a1b1b-P312 expansion about the same age? Perhaps. Did that expansion begin in SW Europe? Perhaps. But R1b1a2a1a1b1b-P312 shares a region of origin with R1b1a2a1a1b1a-U106, which is basically northern, probably North European Plain. Did the two haplogroups survive as remnants of the Gravettian? Perhaps. Where is R1b1a2a1b-L277 found? That might give us a clue. To me it looks very much as though R1b1a-P297 had spread itself from Anatolia to Afghanistan long ago. About the time that R1b1c-V88 made it to Afria, whenever that was.terrythttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17327062321100035888noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-38937817723608533332011-06-09T05:39:23.885+03:002011-06-09T05:39:23.885+03:00Don't be nitty-picky, Andrew: it's for me ...Don't be nitty-picky, Andrew: it's for me a lot easier to find data for Denmark than for Swchelswig-Holstein or Low Saxony (as separate entities within Germany). It is known that their genetics are similar and I cannot say the same re. all-German genetics. Low Germany is a distinct genetic region that approaches better Denmark than High Germany or even East Germany. <br /><br />"At any rate, Maju's back of napkin estimate suggests that the R1a v. R1b (North Sea hg) ratio is consistent with Vikings as the single largest source of both hgs in Britain". <br /><br />That's not what I gather: I assumed that <b>at most</b> 100% of R1a is of Germanic origin. Part fo it could have arrived with earlier IE flows like Celts from further South but I do not feel like making such complex estimates and I'm hence <b>assuming</b> that 100% of arrived with Germanics (not just Vikings, actually mostly Anglos, Saxons and Jutes). But this is a maximum figure in any case. <br /><br />Based on that I gathered that <b>at most</b> 13 percentual points out of 57 total of R1b1a2a1a1a (R-U106) should have arrived from that same Medieval continental source. That is 23% of the total R1b1a2a1a1a (R-U106) and not "the single largest source". The rest should be older and hence have other source(s), as considered above.Majuhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12369840391933337204noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-57145576652781626362011-06-09T01:50:54.855+03:002011-06-09T01:50:54.855+03:00The point is that the autosomal profile is the sam...The point is that the autosomal profile is the same (near as)for England and Ireland. So any differential incoming haplogroups did not disturb the autosomal base. If is Viking or Anglosaxon sourced then these population whould have to be genetically identical (not likely for the Vikings, possible for Anglosaxons). But as I recall the specific subgroups previously ruled out significant Anglo Saxon input.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11000684388615334278noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-4406179118302851882011-06-08T20:35:19.872+03:002011-06-08T20:35:19.872+03:00Denmark is probably not the optimal reference poin...Denmark is probably not the optimal reference point as its physical connection to the continent probably was less of a barrier to subsequent gene flow than on the other side of the Baltic Sea.<br /><br />At any rate, Maju's back of napkin estimate suggests that the R1a v. R1b (North Sea hg) ratio is consistent with Vikings as the single largest source of both hgs in Britain.Andrew Oh-Willekehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02537151821869153861noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-48478946236631016222011-06-08T13:37:08.339+03:002011-06-08T13:37:08.339+03:00There are other plausible explanations, Joe, notab...There are other plausible explanations, Joe, notably the Maglemosean culture (Epipaleolithic, rooted in Ahrensburgian AFAIK), which extended at both sides of the North Sea, being probably originally based at least partly on the then sinking Doggerland. I am not sure of all the details but I understand that while south and west Britain (and hence surely Ireland) was colonized from France across the Channel, NE Britain was surely colonized by people related to those in the Netherlands, Low Germany and Denmark. <br /><br />Another possible moment of differential colonization is the Neolithic, when most of England was colonized (?) by peoples of modified Danubian culture from NW France, while Cornwall, Wales and Scotland (and hence maybe Ireland) were from the Megalithic zone of Brittany and High Normandy. <br /><br />And then of course the Anglo-Saxons and Danes (Vikings) may have reinforced that pre-existent pattern - but only reinforced. We should not expect that the impact of Anglo-Saxons/Danes would be greater than the apportion of R1a (for example) suggests. So, if R1a is 16% in Denmark and only 6% in England (data taken from Wikipedia), then the impact of Germanic flows cannot be greater than 6/16=0.375 or 38%. <br /><br />That's still pretty big but cannot explain the 57% of R1b1a2a1a1a (R-U106), compared with only 35% in Denmark (because 35x0.38=13, so only 13 percentual points of that 57% English R1b1a2a1a1a can be attributed to Germanic invaders. The rest must be older.Majuhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12369840391933337204noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-48519156433841962622011-06-08T10:23:51.430+03:002011-06-08T10:23:51.430+03:00"Ireland is overwhelmingly dominated by Iberi..."Ireland is overwhelmingly dominated by Iberian R1b1a2a1a1b (79% R1b)"<br /><br />R-P312 is not "Iberian". R1b expanded into Ireland, England, and Iberia via central Europe.n/ahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02378473351485233448noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-62254199155477691312011-06-08T02:53:15.240+03:002011-06-08T02:53:15.240+03:00Ireland is overwhelmingly dominated by Iberian R1b...<i>Ireland is overwhelmingly dominated by Iberian R1b1a2a1a1b (79% R1b). England has a very substantial North Sea R1b1a2a1a1a (about half the R1b)as well as R1b1a2a1a1b (67% R1b).</i><br /><br />Could it be possible that the high levels of North Sea R1b in Britain are due to the Anglo-Saxon invaders? After all, it would explain why the English became a Germanic-speaking people while the Irish remained Celtic-speaking.Average Joehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12203996329459638052noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-62009381813996718502011-06-08T02:43:22.096+03:002011-06-08T02:43:22.096+03:00England bore the brunt of Norman and Viking invasi...<i>England bore the brunt of Norman and Viking invasions in the Middle Ages. Ireland didn't. The North Sea hg of R1b is a fit to this scenario.</i><br /><br />Not true. The Vikings and the Normans had a significant presence in Ireland. In fact, many common Irish surnames such as Doyle, Fitzgerald and Burke indicate Viking or Norman ancestry. Also, if North Sea R1b were brought to Britain by the Vikings and the Normans then we should also see high levels of R1a1 as well which we don't. I think the differences in R1b types in Ireland compared to Britain is due to a "Niall of the Nine Hostages"-effect where the highest status Irishmen were producing the vast majority of the children. For whatever reasons - probably luck - Iberian R1b males gained dominance over North Sea R1b males in Ireland and were, therefore, able to outbreed them.Average Joehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12203996329459638052noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-38983193480393673452011-06-07T23:26:03.905+03:002011-06-07T23:26:03.905+03:00"Ireland is overwhelmingly dominated by Iberi..."Ireland is overwhelmingly dominated by Iberian R1b1a2a1a1b (79% R1b). England has a very substantial North Sea R1b1a2a1a1a (about half the R1b)as well as R1b1a2a1a1b (67% R1b)."<br /><br />England bore the brunt of Norman and Viking invasions in the Middle Ages. Ireland didn't. The North Sea hg of R1b is a fit to this scenario.Andrew Oh-Willekehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02537151821869153861noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-6144500145394791372011-06-07T11:40:32.431+03:002011-06-07T11:40:32.431+03:00http://anpron.eu/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/Ancien...http://anpron.eu/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/Ancient-DNA-reveals-male-diffusion-through-the-Neolithic-Mediterranean-route.pdfAverage Joehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12203996329459638052noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-64700198285118979272011-06-07T06:54:49.049+03:002011-06-07T06:54:49.049+03:00"Everything I read fits with Indo European la..."Everything I read fits with Indo European languages travelling latterly into Europe with an R1a haplogroup probably with West Asian/Balkan genes. It was probably the language of trade, like English, and dominated earlier languages because of this". <br /><br />That would be my interpretation of the situation also. <br /><br />"I consider it quite likely that an R1b-rich population may have carried with it a "West Asian" autosomal component that was gradually diluted as it spread from West Asia to the Atlantic". <br /><br />Yes. Most seem to believe that haplogroup expansion is always automatically associated with autosomal DNA expansion. <br /><br />"Homeopathic type of dilution it seems to me because some of the strongest populations in R1b, like Basques, have less West Asian blood than active component is in an homeopathic remedy". <br /><br />A 'private' lineage that expanded once it reached Western Europe? That is the explanation you've used to explain a similar problem with mtDNA in SE Asia. Of course you're aware of my belief that such an explanation is very unlikely.terrythttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17327062321100035888noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-6998897119386215442011-06-07T06:10:26.603+03:002011-06-07T06:10:26.603+03:00I have been puzzling over England and Ireland. Th...I have been puzzling over England and Ireland. They are almost autosomally identical. The have essentially identical mitochondrial haplogroups, but dramatically different R1b patterns. Ireland is overwhelmingly dominated by Iberian R1b1a2a1a1b (79% R1b). England has a very substantial North Sea R1b1a2a1a1a (about half the R1b)as well as R1b1a2a1a1b (67% R1b). <br /><br />These major differences in Y-haplogroup seem to have made almost NO difference to the autosomal DNA. This is very difficult to understand. Either <br /><br />(1) These incoming R1b haplogroups rose slowly to dominance from a small base (therefore no autosomal change). Perhaps there was a breeding advantage (patriarchy maybe).<br /><br />(2) The populations that these R1b haplogroups came from were ethnically identical to the Isle populations they overwhelmed.<br /><br />(3) These haplogroups arose in situ from within a homogeneous ethnic group. <br /><br />Ireland is prone to cycles of population bust and boom. So it was also possible that the dominance of Iberian R1b is due a reexpansion from a small base, but then I would expect that to affect the mitochondrial haplogroups too. So this does not seem to be the cause.<br /><br />R1b haplogroups in England and Ireland really do NOT look like recent mass migrations of ethnically different men from the east of Europe. Especially not two separate migrations of men in recent times. One from south the other from the north/center. <br /><br />IMO it looks like the people of the Isles are a homogeneous people (North and South blended somewhere else). My working hypothesis is that the difference in Y haplogroups is due to local patriarchy after arrival in the Isles. Ireland was a separate area and subject to more economic upheaval than England. Hence a more extreme effect. <br /><br />The R1b haplogroups could be indigenous to the population or introduced with the patriarchy. What is clear is that they rose to dominance WITHIN the ethnicity, not as an sudden external takeover, as the basic autosomal ethnicity has not been disturbed.<br /><br />The rest of Europe is rather more complicated. It certainly looks like R1b arose in the east, travelled north of the med. But when?Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11000684388615334278noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-78206357714491598032011-06-07T05:32:01.478+03:002011-06-07T05:32:01.478+03:00"I already said "K=4""
My bad..."I already said "K=4""<br /><br />My bad, I did not see that. <br /><br />I will assume then that it is the "W/S Asian" component (middle blue). <br /><br />I'm not sure I can accept these shallow depts, when deeper ones contradict them, i.e. any "West Asian" component vanishes in many of the studied populations. This is the same kind of problem that afflicts 1990s Cavalli-Sforza's PC1 and even as recently as 2007 at the low components of Bauchet's paper (but not at the deeper ones). The problem is that low K components tend to vanish in many populations as their real uniqueness is unveiled at deeper Ks. <br /><br />We get to assume (because the program works that way) that West/South Eurasians are divided in two, and to some extent that is true. But it is a very shallow extent and ultimately meaningless. I'd be nice if these structure algorithms would include a default category for "neither this nor that" because then I am sure many populations that are now split in two at K=2 (K=4 here), etc. will no doubt have that "no affinity" pseudo-cluster as their main home, instead of being forced here or there. <br /><br />Any mathematician with the skills to develop this so much needed algorithm, with an "other" option?<br /><br />"... the components at K=11 represent regional variation, and not the major West Asian/European cline that dominates Caucasoid genetic variation".<br /><br />I would question that to at least some extent. I think that that you have done a great job spotting the real multicolor variation of West Eurasians, which in this particular experiment is best captured at K=10 or lower. The differences between Turks and Germans (specially if you believe in Neolithic replacement) are "regional variation" (i.e. distinct from the great continental differences we sometimes call "races" - much more diluted and hard to spot). For that reason I think that assuming that the first dual clustering that the algorithm is able to form is something definitive implies a strong assumption.<br /><br />"Second, even 0% "West Asian" does NOT imply an absence of "West Asian" admixture, it only implies that this admixture is minimum over the set of studied populations".<br /><br />Same thing in practical terms. How can it be then that at K=4, say, Basques show some 20% W/S Asian component and at K=10 it is zero (minimum). There's a huge difference between zero (minimum) and 20% and that's why I trust more the K level that is able to capture what is Basque-specific (an specificity that has been confirmed once and again, not any accident).Majuhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12369840391933337204noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-64219972638967512762011-06-07T01:20:15.791+03:002011-06-07T01:20:15.791+03:00Good hijacking attempt.
I did not attempt to hija...<i>Good hijacking attempt.</i><br /><br />I did not attempt to hijack the thread, I just presented a broader context for the Fst issue.Onur Dincerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05041378853428912894noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-52687154030956326722011-06-06T21:58:40.938+03:002011-06-06T21:58:40.938+03:00Not sure at what K-depth you mean but at K=11 Iris...<i>Not sure at what K-depth you mean but at K=11 Irish and Russians show similar "West Asian" component - quite low in both cases. </i><br /><br />I already said "K=4", which is also the first one that distinguishes between European and non-European Caucasoids.<br /><br />K=11 is irrelevant for the issue at hand, as the components at K=11 represent regional variation, and not the major West Asian/European cline that dominates Caucasoid genetic variation.<br /><br /><i>On the other hand there are a number of European populations that show NO or almost no presence of West Asian specific blood: Finnish, Lithuanians, Orcadians, Norwegians, Swedes, Sardinians (rather unexpectedly) and Basques. </i><br /><br />First, see above.<br /><br />Second, even 0% "West Asian" does NOT imply an absence of "West Asian" admixture, it only implies that this admixture is minimum over the set of studied populations.<br /><br />See:<br /><br />http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2011/03/note-of-caution-on-admixture-estimates.htmlDienekeshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02082684850093948970noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-57933094822115494132011-06-06T21:43:24.314+03:002011-06-06T21:43:24.314+03:00"... the West Asian component reaches much hi..."... the West Asian component reaches much higher prevalence in Western Europe than in Eastern Europe"...<br /><br />Not sure at what K-depth you mean but at K=11 Irish and Russians show similar "West Asian" component - quite low in both cases. <br /><br />What is interesting in that analysis is that the West Asian components ("West Asian" and "SW Asian") only show up strong in Italy and the Balcans (Romania) in fact. <br /><br />On the other hand there are a number of European populations that show NO or almost no presence of West Asian specific blood: Finnish, Lithuanians, Orcadians, Norwegians, Swedes, Sardinians (rather unexpectedly) and Basques. <br /><br />"So, I consider it quite likely that an R1b-rich population may have carried with it a "West Asian" autosomal component that was gradually diluted as it spread from West Asia to the Atlantic".<br /><br />Homeopathic type of dilution it seems to me because some of the strongest populations in R1b, like Basques, have less West Asian blood than active component is in an homeopathic remedy. Instead populations with relatively high levels of West Asian blood, have low levels of R1b (Italians, Balcanic peoples). <br /><br />I'm really sorry but I'm more likely to believe in sugar pills.Majuhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12369840391933337204noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-72489760347681471902011-06-06T20:19:19.826+03:002011-06-06T20:19:19.826+03:00, if it were true that R1b in West Europe is the r...<i>, if it were true that R1b in West Europe is the result of something that happened 3500 years ago, then there should be a very noticeable genetic distance (FST) between West Europe (60% R1b) and East Europe (10% R1b). Not only is there no noticeable difference.</i><br /><br />You are triply mistaken:<br /><br />First, stop parading your "3500 years" strawman, as I never claimed R1b was 3500-years old in Europe.<br /><br />Second, a sweep of Y-chromosomes by R1b in Western Europe need not necessarily have been associated with a huge shift in autosomal frequencies. It only takes a few generations of mating with locals for an autosomal component to be diluted; moreover, the dilution would increase away from the point-of-origin of R1b<br /><br />Third, there is indeed evidence for a relationship between R1b-rich populations and West Asia compared to R1a-rich populations. For example at K=4 in my recent analysis of West Eurasians:<br /><br />http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2011/04/genetic-structure-of-west-eurasians.html, the West Asian component reaches much higher prevalence in Western Europe than in Eastern Europe. It is 13% in Irish vs. 1.3% in HGDP Russians and >30% in Iberians, and >50% in C/S Italians/Greeks and >60% in populations from West Asia.<br /><br />So, I consider it quite likely that an R1b-rich population may have carried with it a "West Asian" autosomal component that was gradually diluted as it spread from West Asia to the Atlantic.Dienekeshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02082684850093948970noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-63852332848771048702011-06-06T20:00:15.815+03:002011-06-06T20:00:15.815+03:00Dienekes, how about making an admixture study of W...<i>Dienekes, how about making an admixture study of West Asians using only the X-chromosome</i><br /><br />Self reply: because that would result in just 10K SNPs, which is way less than the minimum needed to generate the West Asian clusters seen in the Dodecad Project. Still, it would be a good idea to do this X-chromosome-solo ADMIXTURE analysis to see about sex differences with respect to the bigger continental genetic clusters.<br /><br /><i>I don't know the Fst distances of Bulgarians to other populations, but</i><br /><br />Good hijacking attempt. But back to my point, if it were true that R1b in West Europe is the result of something that happened 3500 years ago, then there should be a very noticeable genetic distance (FST) between West Europe (60% R1b) and East Europe (10% R1b). Not only is there no noticeable difference, but in fact the gradient of FST change is smaller in an east-west direction than in a south-north direction. In example, 1000 km north-south in Europe has an average FST of 0,0018, while 1000km east-west averages 0,0009 FST. And no, this is not because the south received black or North African ancestry, because the same ratio holds true in southeast Europe.<br /><br />And though it may sound, I dunno, not serious perhaps, you can't escape the issue about the trivial little detail of the blond hair and blue eyes of North Europeans, a trivial meanignless characetristic that has big implications precisely because of its meaninglessness. The argument that most of West Europe was physically replaced by Anatolians 3500 years ago means the new people obviously didn't have all these typical charcateristics of modern North Europeans. They had to come about between 3500 ya and 2000 ya, when Romans first described these people. It sounds trivial... it's not. Keep in mind that American Indians retain a notable similarity to East Asians, despite 15000 to 30000 years separation.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7785493.post-70763420004893765602011-06-06T12:40:00.520+03:002011-06-06T12:40:00.520+03:00Fanty,
I agree that population size fluctuations ...Fanty,<br /><br />I agree that population size fluctuations are important, especially on a local scale (but less so on a continental scale). But I don't agree with "The land was empty wilderness." LBK quickly and decisively settled the best agricultural grounds: flat Loess soil valleys. Field rotation or heavy tilling were unknown, so after local resources were depleted, they moved on, but later cultures came back with a vengeance and for good. Steepish slopes could not be worked, and the band of nutrition-poor sandy soils from (now) the Netherlands and northern Germany to east of the Elbe river was not crossed for a millennium or more, and was not settled until population pressure forced people to live there (and very poorly at that until the recent advent of potato and corn farming and artificial fertilizers). But in between was dense original forest with impenetrable underbrush, not highways easily passed by anyone not invited. And no year-round or high-protein source of fodder for horses, by the way.<br /><br />But yes, pockets of different populations likely means much, much lower effective population sizes than what is currently assumed. Something clearly is completely wrong with current time estimates. Differing mutation rates in different genetic regions are hard to blame, because mutations counts will always be dominated by the fastest ones - so the slow ones don't matter unless you really screw up your statistics. Which still is a slight possibility, of course.<br /><br />At any rate, my view is that LBK was dominated by local Danubian mt- and y-DNA with some fraction of Anatolian mixed in, and picking up additional haplogroups along the way, increasingly so at the fringes. Then, after LBK collapse, the fringes (which in part contained DNA from the south and the southern Mediterranean route) started to dominate, leaving mostly pre-LGM haplotypes in Europe. Things did not even remotely come to some kind of mixed balance until about the bronze age. So, what we need is much larger numbers of local test sites and over different time periods: what we have now is not even remotely representative of an average description of haplogroups over time or space.eurologisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03440019181278830033noreply@blogger.com