Page 72 of 83 FirstFirst ... 2262707172737482 ... LastLast
Results 711 to 720 of 828

Thread: Ancient I-M253 samples list

  1. #711
    Registered Users
    Posts
    1,136
    Location
    USA
    Ethnicity
    Dinaric
    Y-DNA (P)
    I-Y7627
    mtDNA (M)
    H5c

    Bosnia and Herzegovina
    Quote Originally Posted by JonikW View Post
    Or if they do prove to be I1 it bolsters the case that they were outliers who had travelled a long distance. The BES sample looks firmly Belgic for example, based on modelling on this forum.
    Yeah maybe they liked vacationing or retiring in that Southern region of France since the Neolithic, who knows...
    Me personally though, I would prefer Croatia or Greece.

  2. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to oz For This Useful Post:

     JMcB (05-30-2020),  JonikW (05-30-2020),  mwauthy (05-31-2020)

  3. #712
    Registered Users
    Posts
    12
    Sex
    Omitted

    Intriguing though when you consider that the entire Atlantic European cost at middle neolithic got connected through the common megalithic culture. All the way from southernmost Spain to Västergötland in Sweden. By migration? Which way?

  4. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to janan For This Useful Post:

     JonikW (06-01-2020),  mwauthy (06-01-2020)

  5. #713
    Registered Users
    Posts
    985
    Sex

    Quote Originally Posted by janan View Post
    Intriguing though when you consider that the entire Atlantic European cost at middle neolithic got connected through the common megalithic culture. All the way from southernmost Spain to Västergötland in Sweden. By migration? Which way?
    The most likely scenario right now is that somewhere in France a strong Mesolithic community adopted Cardial farmer cultural elements and, one way or another, took Neolithic wives. This clan survived and developed its own characteristics, being on the long run successful and expanded in different directions. First hints come from the recent paper on French Neolithics. I think the results of this paper (https://advances.sciencemag.org/content/6/22/eaaz5344) are of importance for the whole debate:
    However, the situation is different in today’s France, where we observe not only the highest HG ancestry proportion overall when compared to other regions in Europe but it is also found in the oldest individuals from the southern sites of PEN and LBR. This observation is also supported by uniparental markers. Y chromosome lineages in western early farmers in the southern region are exclusively derived from HG (I2a; table S5 and text S5). In contrast, mitochondrial DNA results show a more universal Neolithic diversity profile, as previously reported [i.e., (4, 5)], with only two haplotypes (U5 and U8) that are potentially of HG origin (table S4 and text S4).

    [...]

    Two individuals from the Middle Neolithic OBN site located immediately west of the Rhine (Fig. 1A) also show a high proportion of the HG ancestry component (OBN , in contrast to LBK sites east of the Rhine. To quantify the extra-HG proportion, we modeled LBK from Germany as a mixture of Anatolia_Neolithic and European_HG, and subsequently OBN subgroups as a more proximal mixture model of LBK and European_HG. We find this model well supported (table S11), and obtained up to 31.8% of excess HG ancestry for OBN B. Given the absence of a strong HG contribution in LBK groups east of the Rhine, we assume this to be a local contribution during the centuries following the arrival of first farmers. Moreover, male individuals from OBN carry exclusively the Y chromosome haplogroups I2a1a2 and C1a2b, attributed to HG groups (text S5), providing further evidence for a greater amount of the HG contribution in this region.
    Archaeological research has argued for increased interaction between incoming farmers and indigenous HG in the western Mediterranean during a second stage of the Neolithization process and especially in areas with higher HG population densities, e.g., the Tosco-Emilian Apennine and Po plain (18). We are now able to confirm that these contacts left a traceable biological signal during the Neolithic expansion in southern France. From an archaeological perspective, this suggests that HG have contributed to the clear changes observed within the material culture postdating the pioneer phase.
    Note that ICC individuals from the eastern Adriatic coast have only a very small amount of HG ancestry with a greater affinity to central European groups (see table S8). This fits with the hypothesis of a differentiation of technical traditions within material cultures observed from both sides of Apennine Mountains in Italy: an Adriatic tradition connected to the Balkans and a Tyrrhenian one whose origin is still unknown (41). It is tempting to associate such a strong HG component on the Tyrrhenian side with the characteristic/specific pottery traditions observed in this same region and to consider these original traditions the result of a HG reinterpretation (41). However, the scarcity of genomic data available from central and southern Italy currently does not allow this hypothesis to be tested directly.
    Moreover, ICC individuals from the Iberian Peninsula also carry less HG ancestry. Together, this rejects the hypothesis that ICC-associated individuals represent a uniform genetic horizon per se and argues for more regionally nuanced scenarios of interaction.
    In accordance with the established chronology of first Neolithic settlements in the French territory, the overlapping/synchronous date estimates obtained for southern ICC sites are consistent with the signal of a first HG contribution in the south of France, followed by a subsequent northward expansion of groups carrying this HG legacy
    So here we have such a case, a forager clan taking Neolithic wives and adopting the Neolithic culture. From this or a similar group the shift from G2/H2/T to I2a was initiated on a grand scale.

    Figure S13 is interesting, showing which alliances were formed and that G2 and H2 marched in the West together (from other studies we know T participated as well, compare with Cassidy):
    https://advances.sciencemag.org/cont...aaz5344_SM.pdf

    Also:
    We caution that because the amount of HG ancestry is very low in many Neolithic groups (<10%), it remains difficult to characterize the ultimate source reliably. Nevertheless, our admixture patterns from supported models show clear geographic signals. Neolithic groups associated with the LBK in central Europe (Hungary, Austria, and Germany) carry a small HG proportion, which was likely derived from admixture with HG individuals of the EHG-WHG cline and could have occurred in southeastern Europe during a preceding phase of the Neolithic expansion around 6000–5400 BCE. When using f-statistics of the form f4(Mbuti, test; BDB001, KO1) with our new Mesolithic genome (BDB001) from the Middle-Elbe-Saale region in central Germany as a geographically local HG proxy (instead of using Loschbour, which is located west of the Rhine), we do not find support for a local attraction for LBK groups, but the same pattern as for Loschbour (fig. S5C). This suggests that additional gene flow from neighboring Loschbour-like HG such as BDB001 in central Europe was negligible in the first Neolithic groups. However, the German Baalberge group (4000–3500 BCE) shows a marked increase of such HG ancestry, as well as individuals from the Blätterhöhle group, as has been suggested (5, 6), compared to a combination of both KO1-like and Loschbour-like ancestries for LBK groups (6). We can now show that this increase in WHG ancestry (up to 21.3 ± 1.5% in Baalberge; table S13) is driven by either local Loschbour-like ancestry or an expansion of farming groups from the west carrying this signal during the fifth millennium BCE, as suggested by archaeological data (36). For all studied Neolithic groups west of the Rhine, we observe a different pattern with a higher HG ancestry proportion, even for earliest groups that appears to be of a local (Loschbour-like) HG origin, consistent with archaeological data (2).
    So the small amount of HG ancestry before the expansion of HG dominated groups from the West and possibly North is different and came from the early contacts of farmers with SEE foragers.

    Particularly interesting is the continuity of I2a Neolithic clans in Southern France through the ages. They established themselves and stood their ground. By 4000 BC the G2/H/T clans were reduced to a few places or lower percentages in Europe.

    Cassidy wrote in her thesis that she believes most of the HG reemergence is local, but notes that this can't be said for sure, and there are also opinions and relations pointing to a common source for the I2a/WHG expansion. For the later developments, I think, this is important too:
    Cardial Ware is seen in the Limburg and La Hoguette pottery styles, found inland along the western fringes of LBK’s early distribution (Thorpe 2003; Hofmann 2016). These ceramic types, thought to be the result of indigenous interaction with more southern Impressed Ware groups, may have predated the arrival of LBK in some regions, and indeed are clearly replaced by LBK ware in many areas at a later date, including the southern Netherlands (~5,300 BC) (Cunliffe 2008).
    Its intriguing that the British Neolithic is close to Rössen and Michelsberg (I2a:E1b alliance) and TRB comes from the same root most likely, as did the Atlantic Megalithic. From the fusion of Mesolithic, Cardial and LBK traditions in France. Now where the HG lineage first came up, the most successful and expansive group, is debatable, but going after the recent studies France is now in the focus.
    Last edited by Riverman; 06-01-2020 at 06:30 PM.

  6. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Riverman For This Useful Post:

     mwauthy (06-02-2020),  Pylsteen (06-01-2020)

  7. #714
    Gold Class Member
    Posts
    1,776
    Sex
    Location
    Kent
    Ethnicity
    North Sea/Irish Sea
    Nationality
    British
    Y-DNA (P)
    I1 Z140+ A21912+
    mtDNA (M)
    V
    Y-DNA (M)
    R1b L21+ L371+
    mtDNA (P)
    J1c2l

    Wales England Cornwall Scotland Ireland Normandie
    This Scandinavia paper was posted in the Ancient DNA section and is interesting for its lack of I1: "The Neolithic Pitted Ware culture foragers were culturally but not genetically influenced by the Battle Axe culture herders"

    https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/...002/ajpa.24079

    As a reminder: "The PWC appear in the archeological record between approximately 3400 and 2400 BCE... It has now been shown that there is a strong genetic similarity between individuals from PWC contexts and chronologically older Scandinavian Mesolithic hunter‐gatherer individuals"

    Interestingly, the study was restricted to Gotland. I wonder what a coastal mainland site of this culture would show. I1 must have been out there in parts of Scandinavia, but still awaiting a Bronze Age expansion. Here's the breakdown:

    "We sequenced and analyzed the genomes of 25 individuals from typical Pitted Ware culture burials and from Pitted Ware culture burials with Battle Axe culture influences in order to determine if the different burial types were associated with different gene‐pools…

    "We successfully retrieved Y‐chromosomal haplotypes from six of the PWC males, while two additional males were typed previously (Table 1, Supporting Table S7) (Günther et al., 2018; Skoglund, Malmström, et al., 2014). All males, both from typical PWC burials (n = 4) and from “BAC influenced ” burials (n = 3), belonged to haplogroup I, and individuals with greater genome coverage displayed haplogroups I2a1a and I2a1b lineages."

    EDIT: Added observation and clarity
    Last edited by JonikW; 06-05-2020 at 10:54 AM.
    Living DNA's former Cautious mode:
    Wales-related ancestry: 86.8%
    Cornwall: 8%
    North England-related ancestry: 5.2%
    Y line: Peak District, England. Big Y match: Scania, Sweden; TMRCA 1,250 ybp (YFull);
    mtDNA: traces to Glamorgan, Wales
    Mother's Y: traces to Llanvair Discoed, Wales

  8. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to JonikW For This Useful Post:

     deadly77 (06-05-2020),  JMcB (06-05-2020),  Michał (06-06-2020),  mwauthy (06-05-2020),  oz (06-05-2020),  Riverman (06-05-2020)

  9. #715
    Registered Users
    Posts
    24
    Sex
    Location
    Duisburg
    Ethnicity
    I1
    Nationality
    German
    Y-DNA (P)
    I1-Z140
    mtDNA (M)
    N1

    JonikW: I agree that the Pitted Ware Culture is a likely habitat for haplogroup I1, especially on the northern parts of the Norwegian coast. I1 and I2 may have merged here to the SHG admixture - my expectation is that EHG represents the I1 component, and the relation EHG/WHG mirrors the relation of I1 and I2.
    Last edited by Kaltmeister; 06-05-2020 at 09:49 PM.

  10. The Following User Says Thank You to Kaltmeister For This Useful Post:

     JonikW (06-05-2020)

  11. #716
    Registered Users
    Posts
    985
    Sex

    To me its not that interesting whether I1 was in Scandinavia too in Mesolithic times, but more interesting where the I1 branch survived and expanded from which is now dominant in the region. That must not be the same.

  12. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Riverman For This Useful Post:

     JonikW (06-05-2020),  Michał (06-06-2020)

  13. #717
    Registered Users
    Posts
    1,136
    Location
    USA
    Ethnicity
    Dinaric
    Y-DNA (P)
    I-Y7627
    mtDNA (M)
    H5c

    Bosnia and Herzegovina
    And we still don't have any clear, solid evidence in ancient dna so far to answer any of these questions. It's just getting weird and frustrating at this point.

  14. The Following User Says Thank You to oz For This Useful Post:

     JonikW (06-05-2020)

  15. #718
    Registered Users
    Posts
    985
    Sex

    Quote Originally Posted by oz View Post
    And we still don't have any clear, solid evidence in ancient dna so far to answer any of these questions. It's just getting weird and frustrating at this point.
    That's the fate of the "late bloomers" E-V13 and I1, which seem to have come from a fairly late and rapid expansion.

  16. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Riverman For This Useful Post:

     JonikW (06-05-2020),  Michał (06-06-2020)

  17. #719
    Registered Users
    Posts
    1,136
    Location
    USA
    Ethnicity
    Dinaric
    Y-DNA (P)
    I-Y7627
    mtDNA (M)
    H5c

    Bosnia and Herzegovina
    Quote Originally Posted by Riverman View Post
    That's the fate of the "late bloomers" E-V13 and I1, which seem to have come from a fairly late and rapid expansion.
    Yeah something like that. E-V13 and I2-CTS10228 are quite a mystery as well. But in my opinion I1 for now takes the title as the biggest phantom of ancient DNA in Europe. Mostly because it is a haplogroup that split from I-M170 over 20 thousand years ago. All things considered, that's pretty miraculous if it only started to expand 4-5 thousand years ago or later. Yet we still can't even locate the source of this expansion with any conclusive Adna evidence.

  18. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to oz For This Useful Post:

     JonikW (06-05-2020),  Riverman (06-06-2020)

  19. #720
    Registered Users
    Posts
    985
    Sex

    Quote Originally Posted by oz View Post
    Yeah something like that. E-V13 and I2-CTS10228 are quite a mystery as well. But in my opinion I1 for now takes the title as the biggest phantom of ancient DNA in Europe. Mostly because it is a haplogroup that split from I-M170 over 20 thousand years ago. All things considered, that's pretty miraculous if it only started to expand 4-5 thousand years ago or later. Yet we still can't even locate the source of this expansion with any conclusive Adna evidence.
    To me its almost for certain it expanded in the Nordic Bronze Age. In this time and sphere it rose to a leading clan and elite lineage, which it wasn't before probably. The exact path up to this point is the mystery and the main candidates to me are right now it came with farmers from France or the Pannonia-Carpathian Basin either to Poland/Unetice or directly to Northern Europe or was a forager turned farmer lineage in Northern Europe. When the first hits come in, if the resolution is not high enough, it might still not be the solution, because I1 could have been thinly spread in many people, like E-V13, before the big success in the NBA.
    Last edited by Riverman; 06-06-2020 at 09:49 AM.

Page 72 of 83 FirstFirst ... 2262707172737482 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. List of ancient samples on GEDmatch
    By Tomenable in forum Ancient (aDNA)
    Replies: 503
    Last Post: 10-27-2020, 09:18 PM
  2. Replies: 37
    Last Post: 05-07-2018, 12:05 AM
  3. My current list of U106+ samples in aDNA samples
    By Bollox79 in forum Ancient (aDNA)
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 04-23-2018, 12:51 AM
  4. My list of ancient European y-dna samples
    By venustas in forum Ancient (aDNA)
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 10-14-2017, 05:19 AM
  5. Replies: 18
    Last Post: 05-01-2015, 11:26 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •