Origin and migration of mt-DNA H

[jeanL]

As per JeanM request in order not to sabotage the other thread of Cardoso.et.al.2013 I will reply to her questions and others here:

Welcome to this forum Jean L.

I didn't get the impression that Gail was arguing that any mtDNA H was pre-Neolithic in Europe. There is general agreement that H was born in the Near East. Its expansion in the Neolithic is visible in the "star-burst" of subclades about that time (as best we can calculate.) See Soares 2009 and Behar 2012 for dating. But that discussion is for another thread really.

Well I would say that the Fu.et.al.2013 paper would seem more accurate in terms of dating, since they used ancient mitochondrial sequences.I don't know if you recall this Table:

mtdna_ages.png

I think the whole idea that mt-DNA H originated in the Middle East comes from the early studies, but has anyone really question the idea of it being born in the Middle East. I mean we have plenty of mt-DNA HV or R0 in Upper Paleolithic Europe, I don't see why mt-DNA H couldn't have originated there.

I think it is unlikely that H was a major haplogroup present in Mesolithic Europe (probably not part of the first wave of people to repopulate northern Europe after the LGM), but it seems possible that H might have arrived in southern Europe in the Mesolithic based on some reports of ancient H samples in Italy or Spain. As far as I know, they have not been published so it will be interesting to see if they can be, or have been, confirmed.

Well the one sequence from Guipuzcoa hasn't been publish other than in that thesis from Marie Lacan, although I think it ought to be publish soon. But the sequences from Cantabria were indeed published by Hervella.et.al.2012. The only issue I could see with that paper though is that the two Magdalenian samples haven't been properly dated.

[lgmayka]

The only issue I could see with that paper though is that the two Magdalenian samples haven't been properly dated.

Were all haplogroup assignments verified by coding region mutations? HVR patterns are not reliable even for modern mtDNA, much less for ancient specimens. For example, HVR1 rCRS can be H, HV, or U.

[jeanL]

Were all haplogroup assignments verified by coding region mutations? HVR patterns are not reliable even for modern mtDNA, much less for ancient specimens. For example, HVR1 rCRS can be H, HV, or U.

According to the authors they used the RFLPs.

[vettor]

So answer this, why can't these scientists declare what is the Original H markers ( the old system was proven inaccurate) , I see thousands of people with plain H marker, surely someone can declare the original and with this finding, then discover the true H origin.

or are we taken for a ride by these scholars/testers as they have no clue!

[GailT]

So answer this, why can't these scientists declare what is the Original H markers ( the old system was proven inaccurate) , I see thousands of people with plain H marker, surely someone can declare the original and with this finding, then discover the true H origin.

Haplogroup H is well defined in terms of its specific mutations, and the rCRS or RSRS systems are each equally accurate. They are each arbitrary references points, and it makes no difference which reference you use, as long as you are consistent.

In most cases you need to test the full mtDNA genome to identify a specific subclade of H. Most of the people who are identified as simply H have only tested the HVR region. But there are some who have tested the full genome and are still identified simply as H. These fall into two groups. There are some people who are H and have no extra mutations, so H is their terminal haplogroup assignment. And there are also people who are H with unique, extra mutations but Phylotree does not yet have a subclade defined for these people. Eventually they will become part of a named subclade of H after we have more samples that are similar to them, so that a subclade can be defined with confidence.

The challenge on identifying the origin of H is that people in H are widely distributed today, and it's difficult to infer the place of origin 14,000 years ago based on the present day distribution. I think there is very strong evidence for the expansion of H among Neolithic farmers. The a secondary question is: when did specific subclades of H arrive in Europe. Did some H arrive in Europe before the first farmers? Can some H subclades be associated with specific migrations?

[Táltos]

The challenge on identifying the origin of H is that people in H are widely distributed today, and it's difficult to infer the place of origin 14,000 years ago based on the present day distribution. I think there is very strong evidence for the expansion of H among Neolithic farmers. The a secondary question is: when did specific subclades of H arrive in Europe. Did some H arrive in Europe before the first farmers? Can some H subclades be associated with specific migrations?

Yes that is a great question. I would like to hear more about mtDNA H23. All information on it seems to be nonexistent. All I can tell about it from the haplogroup origins page is that the overwhelming majority are Irish followed by UK/England/ Scotland, Germany, France, Russia, Sweden, Netherlands, Poland, and Czech Republic. Someone over at 23andme felt that it originated in Germany. He sent me a link to a paper about people leaving Germany to go into Ireland, the UK, and over to the States. It wasn't a paper based on any genetics. It just talked about the migrations of the Germans, which made sense to consider for this purpose. It would be interesting if one of the scientists could somehow link those migrations with H23, or at least something already!

[vettor]

Haplogroup H is well defined in terms of its specific mutations, and the rCRS or RSRS systems are each equally accurate. They are each arbitrary references points, and it makes no difference which reference you use, as long as you are consistent.

In most cases you need to test the full mtDNA genome to identify a specific subclade of H. Most of the people who are identified as simply H have only tested the HVR region. But there are some who have tested the full genome and are still identified simply as H. These fall into two groups. There are some people who are H and have no extra mutations, so H is their terminal haplogroup assignment. And there are also people who are H with unique, extra mutations but Phylotree does not yet have a subclade defined for these people. Eventually they will become part of a named subclade of H after we have more samples that are similar to them, so that a subclade can be defined with confidence.

The challenge on identifying the origin of H is that people in H are widely distributed today, and it's difficult to infer the place of origin 14,000 years ago based on the present day distribution. I think there is very strong evidence for the expansion of H among Neolithic farmers. The a secondary question is: when did specific subclades of H arrive in Europe. Did some H arrive in Europe before the first farmers? Can some H subclades be associated with specific migrations?

Where can we distinguish ( a ftdna project or ) which are H with no mutations from H with extra mutations, ?,
What percentage of H marker with no extra mutations are there ?...........surely the ones with no extra can be a clue via a migrational trend or something else.

I would like to see some type of symbol on these H with no mutation people when I view the various DNA internet places. maybe a bold blue H .

Do other Mtdna markers ( K, T, X, etc) have these problems , ie, Plain marker with no mutations and plain with extra mutations?

[GailT]

Yes that is a great question. I would like to hear more about mtDNA H23. All information on it seems to be nonexistent. All I can tell about it from the haplogroup origins page is that the overwhelming majority are Irish followed by UK/England/ Scotland, Germany, France, Russia, Sweden, Netherlands, Poland, and Czech Republic. Someone over at 23andme felt that it originated in Germany.

There is an ancient mtDNA H23 sample in the LBK culture, presumably dated at around 7000 ybp in the recent Brotherton et al. paper, found at Halberstadt-Sonntagsfeld. So there is evidence of H23 in Germany in the early Neolithic.

[GailT]

Where can we distinguish ( a ftdna project or ) which are H with no mutations from H with extra mutations, ?,
What percentage of H marker with no extra mutations are there ?...........surely the ones with no extra can be a clue via a migrational trend or something else.

On the FTDNA H project page, those that are plain H with no extra mutations are under the heading "Ancestral". There are several more who are not in the project, and they are widely distributed in Europe and Russia. These samples don't have any special value in studying the origins of H because they are from living people. You would need ancient mtDNA samples to get more insight into origins.

[Táltos]

There is an ancient mtDNA H23 sample in the LBK culture, presumably dated at around 7000 ybp in the recent Brotherton et al. paper, found at Halberstadt-Sonntagsfeld. So there is evidence of H23 in Germany in the early Neolithic.

Thank you Gail. I had not heard about that. Very cool. I do hope more will be published soon for the average person such as myself to read up on. I would love to see in book format about the journey of mtDNA H and it's very many branches. I suppose that would be years away though, it is a rather bushy tree.

EDIT-I just found the other thread that Jean M started in regards to the Brotherton et al. paper. There is still much that I have not read through on this site. Lots of good stuff!