PDA

View Full Version : Human paleogenetics of Europe - The known knowns and the known unknowns



rms2
11-18-2014, 12:23 AM
Have you all read Human paleogenetics of Europe - The known knowns and the known unknowns (http://www.researchgate.net/publication/268333605_Human_paleogenetics_of_Europe__The_known _knowns_and_the_known_unknowns), Brandt et al, yet? Bernard posted a link to it in the thread on new papers dealing with ancient dna. It's an interesting paper with a lot to it. I printed it out and read it on the train home today.

I think it is probably making a mistake in linking R1b too closely to mtDNA H and drawing R1b out of the West.

This paper links R1b to Bell Beaker and brings Bell Beaker out of Iberia and into Central Europe to an encounter with Corded Ware. Since mtDNA H has shown up in a number of Beaker remains, and R1b in the two Beaker males from the site near Kromsdorf, Germany, the paper concludes that R1b traveled with mtDNA H out of Iberia. It buttresses that conclusion with the fact that R1b is the most common y haplogroup in Western Europe today.

Even if the paper's Beaker-and-R1b-out-of-the-West hypothesis is true, which I doubt, one still has the problem of how and when R1b got into the West in the first place, since it is pretty obvious it arose in Asia.

My own view, which could be wrong, of course, is that, if Beaker did spread from Iberia, it did so at first with a y haplogroup or haplogroups other than R1b. R1b entered Beaker in Eastern or Central Europe and somehow became the predominant Beaker y haplogroup, spreading back to the West.

Time and more ancient y-dna will tell the tale.

Krefter
11-18-2014, 12:40 AM
We'll probably gain more insight into what was happening in Europe in the bronze age in just one month, because that's when Reich said his new paper(with all the genomes from Samara and central Europe) will be published in bioRxiv. As we know from the abstract the Yamna-people who moved into central Europe from the east made a big genetic impact on modern Europeans(inclu. people as far west as Ireland), but there was no mention of western influence.

parasar
11-18-2014, 04:28 AM
Have you all read Human paleogenetics of Europe - The known knowns and the known unknowns (http://www.researchgate.net/publication/268333605_Human_paleogenetics_of_Europe__The_known _knowns_and_the_known_unknowns), Brandt et al, yet? Bernard posted a link to it in the thread on new papers dealing with ancient dna. It's an interesting paper with a lot to it. I printed it out and read it on the train home today.

I think it is probably making a mistake in linking R1b too closely to mtDNA H and drawing R1b out of the West.

This paper links R1b to Bell Beaker and brings Bell Beaker out of Iberia and into Central Europe to an encounter with Corded Ware. Since mtDNA H has shown up in a number of Beaker remains, and R1b in the two Beaker males from the site near Kromsdorf, Germany, the paper concludes that R1b traveled with mtDNA H out of Iberia. It buttresses that conclusion with the fact that R1b is the most common y haplogroup in Western Europe today.

Even if the paper's Beaker-and-R1b-out-of-the-West hypothesis is true, which I doubt, one still has the problem of how and when R1b got into the West in the first place, since it is pretty obvious it arose in Asia.

My own view, which could be wrong, of course, is that, if Beaker did spread from Iberia, it did so at first with a y haplogroup or haplogroups other than R1b. R1b entered Beaker in Eastern or Central Europe and somehow became the predominant Beaker y haplogroup, spreading back to the West.

Time and more ancient y-dna will tell the tale.

They also seem inclined to put mtDNA H as a Mesolithic marker. I still think Mesolithic is a bit too late and it is Upper Paleolithic in Europe.

indicating a widespread and possibly clinal distribution
of haplogroup H in Mesolithic Europe. Under this hypothesis it
seems to be a question of time when the first H lineage will be
reported from Central European hunter-gatherers.


Apparently Eske Willerslev may test the Red Lady [reported H(CRS), but that report was problematic at best].
http://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2014/11/treemix-graphs-with-kostenki14-and-ust.html

I spoke to Eske about the Red Lady of Paviland. I think that he may be checking into testing out that guy. If you don't know who he is, it's a man from Britain, 33kya.

Krefter
11-18-2014, 04:51 AM
parasar, you have to at least admit the evidence suggests most H(it's a diverse lineage) came after the Mesolithic with near eastern-basal Eurasian ancestry.

parasar
11-18-2014, 05:33 AM
parasar, why are you inclined to think mtDNA H is Paleolithic in Europe despite everything ancient DNA says? You have to at least admit the evidence suggests most H(it's a diverse lineage) came after the Mesolithic with near eastern-basal Eurasian ancestry.

1. Places such as the Balkans and Greece have not been studied well and from what little we see U may have been absent in SE portions of Europe.
http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2012/12/talk-by-christina-papageorgopoulou-on.html

She mentions a complete absence of haplogroup U in all her samples so far (either Mesolithic or Neolithic), in contrast to Central European Mesolithic samples where it predominates.

2. I tend to put a lot of value on the presence of precursors and we do know that precursors for H have been found in Italy. N and (pre)HV. http://www.pnas.org/content/100/11/6593.full

Plus as I have noted in various posts I think the so called basal Eurasian is actually basal European (Europe incld. Anatolia). I think this basal European is pre CI tephra in Europe.

Krefter
11-18-2014, 06:06 AM
paraser whenever I say Europe(or any region), I mean it very generally, so mostly mainland Europe, up to the western, southern, and northern edges, and excluding eastern edges like the Volga and Greece. Being legalistic on what's Europe(or whatever region) leads to confusion. If mtDNA H was in Mesolithic Balkans that's just as significant as it being in Mesolithic Anatolia.

It doesn't disporve the mainstream view that mtDNA H(along with other Southeast maternal lineages) became popular and widespread throughout "Europe", in Loschbour, La Brana-1, and Motala-12's old territory till the Neolithic, with the arrival of Balkan, near eastern, east Mediterranean, whatever you want to call it immigrants.

alan
11-18-2014, 07:30 AM
Either R1b is a beaker reflux westwards from central Europe or R1b spread with copper in pre-beaker times. So far the ancient DNA has several strikes against the latter but not conclusive by any means.

parasar
11-18-2014, 02:59 PM
paraser whenever I say Europe(or any region), I mean it very generally, so mostly mainland Europe, up to the western, southern, and northern edges, and excluding eastern edges like the Volga and Greece. Being legalistic on what's Europe(or whatever region) leads to confusion. If mtDNA H was in Mesolithic Balkans that's just as significant as it being in Mesolithic Anatolia.

It doesn't disporve the mainstream view that mtDNA H(along with other Southeast maternal lineages) became popular and widespread throughout "Europe", in Loschbour, La Brana-1, and Motala-12's old territory till the Neolithic, with the arrival of Balkan, near eastern, east Mediterranean, whatever you want to call it immigrants.

Krefter,

To be clear, it is my thinking that basal European/Eurasian is the the oldest component in Europe overall. That is the reason I mentioned the CI tephra. That it underwent a (re)expansion from Mediterranean and SE Europe in the neolithic is another matter.

I see the presence of basal European something like this:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/32/Aurignacian_culture_map-en.svg

While the only confirmation as of now we have is from the Don valley, IMO, the oldest strata from all over Europe should show it.

In that, I slightly disagree with Willerslev's comment. While indeed Scandinavians may be some of the oldest Europeans, there is no reason to think that Mediterraneans are not as old in Europe or even older.
http://cphpost.dk/news/were-scandinavians-the-original-people-of-europe.11545.html


He is actually more closely related to Danes, Swedes, Finns and Russians than he is to the French, Spanish and Germans, so one could argue we are more originally European.

Hando
11-19-2014, 05:45 PM
Either R1b is a beaker reflux westwards from central Europe or R1b spread with copper in pre-beaker times. So far the ancient DNA has several strikes against the latter but not conclusive by any means.

So R1b either originated in Eastern Europe and met Beaker's from Iberia in Central Europe and then became the dominant haplogroup and migrated to Iberia or spread with copper from where to where?

Hando
11-19-2014, 05:48 PM
1. Places such as the Balkans and Greece have not been studied well and from what little we see U may have been absent in SE portions of Europe.
http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2012/12/talk-by-christina-papageorgopoulou-on.html

2. I tend to put a lot of value on the presence of precursors and we do know that precursors for H have been found in Italy. N and (pre)HV. http://www.pnas.org/content/100/11/6593.full

Plus as I have noted in various posts I think the so called basal Eurasian is actually basal European (Europe incld. Anatolia). I think this basal European is pre CI tephra in Europe.
But if it was actually Basal European you're saying it originated in Europe and not NE Africa/Levant as Basal Eurasian is supposed to have been?
And what id CI tephra?

Hando
11-19-2014, 05:53 PM
Krefter,

To be clear, it is my thinking that basal European/Eurasian is the the oldest component in Europe overall. That is the reason I mentioned the CI tephra. That it underwent a (re)expansion from Mediterranean and SE Europe in the neolithic is another matter.

I see the presence of basal European something like this:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/32/Aurignacian_culture_map-en.svg

While the only confirmation as of now we have is from the Don valley, IMO, the oldest strata from all over Europe should show it.

In that, I slightly disagree with Willerslev's comment. While indeed Scandinavians may be some of the oldest Europeans, there is no reason to think that Mediterraneans are not as old in Europe or even older.
http://cphpost.dk/news/were-scandinavians-the-original-people-of-europe.11545.html

Are you saying Aurignacian is the same as Basal European? And Kostenki was Basal European and thus Aurignacian?
I thought WHG were Aurignacian and the oldest modern humans in Europe?

rms2
11-22-2014, 03:27 AM
Here is something from Brandt et al that is interesting for those of us who belong to mtDNA haplogroup U of various types.



. . . [T]here is increasing evidence for a Mesolithic population structure in Eurasia, justifying a closer look at the available data. Malyarchuk et al. (2010) studied the modern-day distribution of subhaplogroup U5
in particular and proposed different places of origin during the Upper Paleolithic for each of the sub-clades, with U5b in the West and U5a in the East. This is in accordance with studies that linked
sub-haplogroups of U5b, such as U5b1b1 and U5b3, with an expansion after the Last Glacial Maximum from southwestern refugia in Franco-Cantabria and Italy, respectively (Achilli et al.,
2005; Pala et al., 2009). So far, final conclusions cannot be drawn from the small number of ancient individuals from each separate aDNA study. However, when taken together it appears that ancient
hunter-gatherer samples confirm the hypothesis of different places of origin for each of the U5 sub-clades, showing higher frequencies of U5b in the West (Chandler et al., 2005; Hervella et al., 2012;
Sanchez-Quinto et al., 2012), with U5a more common in the (North)east (Bramanti et al., 2009; Krause et al., 2010; Der Sarkissian et al., 2013; Lazaridis et al., 2014), and a mixed composition
in Central Europe (Bramanti et al., 2009; Bollongino et al., 2013; Fu et al., 2013) . . .

As such, based on the current state of research, the presence of haplogroups N*, H, U5b, and U4 (albeit at low frequency) and the absence of U2 and U5a, could be interpreted as the
genetic Mesolithic substratum of Southwestern Europe. In contrast, East European hunter-gatherers show a different haplogroup composition, which is based on higher frequencies of U2, U4, and
U5a than in Central and South Europe, very low frequencies of H, and the absence of U5b and N*. (Brandt et al, 2014, p. 5)

parasar
11-22-2014, 04:33 AM
Are you saying Aurignacian is the same as Basal European? And Kostenki was Basal European and thus Aurignacian?
I thought WHG were Aurignacian and the oldest modern humans in Europe?

Kostenki 14 was only partly basal European. I do think that the basal European portion of Kostenki 14 is Aurignacian and his remaining portion is Gravettian.

GailT
11-22-2014, 04:35 AM
I moved this post to the new thread.

parasar
11-22-2014, 04:45 AM
I think Brandt et al. get more things wrong than right here. The greatest diversity of U5a1 and U5a2 is found today in central and northern Europe, and I think it is likely that they originated in LGM refugia in the region from Franco-Cantabria to Italy and the Balkans. U5a has also been found in samples more than 10,000 years old in Germany, so we know U5a was present in central Europe in the Mesolithic. U5b1 clearly originated in the LGM in Iberia, and U5b probably overlapped with the range of U5a. U5b2 might have originated in Franco-Cantabria and U5b3 in Italy, although I don't think we can be that precise, and they might not have been limited to those specific areas.

It seems certain that there were extensive east-west migrations of U5 and U4 in the Mesolithic in which U5 migrated to eastern Europe and central Asia, and U4 migrated from from the east to western Europe in the later Mesolithic. U4 doesn't appear in central Europe (Germany and Sweden) until after 9000 years ago, and it probably originated in an LGM refugium in eastern Europe (perhaps Ukraine and the Black Sea region).

Brandt makes the mistake of looking at the greatest frequency of U5 without accounting for the fact that most of the frequency is represented by a small number of relatively young U5 subclades who probably expanded rapidly among Neolithic populations in eastern Europe. When you appreciate the age and complexity of the tree, it's apparent that you can't make simple generalizations about haplogroups that are very old. For example, we have U5b1b1 migrating to eastern Europe probably in the late Mesolithic, and U5b1b1a originated in eastern Europe. Migrations were probably diverse and complex, and we need to look at individual subclades before we can say anything about geographic origins of migrations.

It is also important to look at the ages of haplogroups when you discuss their geographic origins. There are extremely rare subclades of U2 and U5 represented by a single sample that are at branch points older than the age of the entire haplogroup H. N* and H are not found in western European ancient remains until the Neolithic (although there are unpublished reports of H in Mesolithic Italy or Greece). So there is no evidence yet to support an origin of H in the southwestern European Mesolithic.

Paglicci 12 could be an N* derivative.

rms2
11-22-2014, 12:39 PM
At the risk of duplicating what I posted elsewhere, it is very odd, if U5a originated in the FC Ice Age Refuge or the Italian Ice Age Refuge, that no Mesolithic U5a has been found farther west than the Blätterhöhle in NW Germany, and plenty of it has been found much farther east. Meanwhile, there seems to be no shortage of Mesolithic U5b in the West and much less of it farther east.

rms2
11-22-2014, 01:02 PM
Here is Brandt et al's map of what they call "Event A": "The impact of incoming farmers during the Early Neolithic".

3042