+- The GenArchivist Forum (https://genarchivist.com)
+-- Forum: Human Population Genetics (https://genarchivist.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=21)
+--- Forum: Ancient (aDNA) (https://genarchivist.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=181)
+--- Thread: Genetic Genealogy & Ancient DNA (DISCUSSION ONLY) (/showthread.php?tid=96)
RE: Genetic Genealogy & Ancient DNA (DISCUSSION ONLY) - RCO - 05-18-2024
There are J1a-PF7264 clades in Europe and the Balkans since the Iron Age.
https://discover.familytreedna.com/y-dna/J-PF7263/tree
https://www.yfull.com/tree/J-ZS4393/
https://discover.familytreedna.com/y-dna/J-ZS4381/tree
RE: Genetic Genealogy & Ancient DNA (DISCUSSION ONLY) - elflock - 05-18-2024
(05-18-2024, 11:33 AM)pelop Wrote:(05-17-2024, 06:00 PM)elflock Wrote: They're Middleeastern. There's nothing about these J2a-M410+ and J1a clades suggesting a Greek/Aegean connection. The same pattern is observable in all of the Roman era Balkans and other parts of the Roman Empire. As is the Roman mediated increase of E1b (including "European" clade V13) in the Western Balkans.
The branches are of Middle Eastern origin but there's no indication that the inhabitants of Hvar were recent migrants from the Middle East or that they would identify (and be identified) as anything other than Romans. Dalmatian Romance speakers most likely descended from populations like this one.
(05-18-2024, 02:51 AM)elflock Wrote: J1a-PF7264 is not Paleo-Balkan, neither by phylogeny nor aDNA coverage.
It's not paleo-Balkan and yet it has a Balkan-like autosomal profile. And the individual with central European G2a has an Eastern Mediterranean-like autosomal profile. We've seen similar cases of "mismatching" Y DNA and autosomal profiles in Olalde et al 2023 and elsewhere.
We don't dissagree, do we? I made that quite clear in my response in this thread and other threads. That a) the J2a-M410+ & J1a haplogroups are of Middleeastern origin b) that that fact stands in no contradiction with some of their (remains to be seen) auDNA profiles having Paleo-Balkan sources c) that when these uniparentals first appear in the Balkans and Italy (or elsewhere within the former Roman Empire) they're coupled with Middleastern auDNA. Hence I'm not claiming or have claimed they represent fresh out of Anatolia/Levant/North Africa migrants.
As for their, according to you likely "Romance identity", that is a possibility.
RE: Genetic Genealogy & Ancient DNA (DISCUSSION ONLY) - Awood - 05-19-2024
The Hvar samples look like foreign males with local female lineages. No R1, no I2. Oh yeah, real local. How did they get there? Let the historians figure it out.
RE: Genetic Genealogy & Ancient DNA (DISCUSSION ONLY) - Riverman - 05-19-2024
(05-19-2024, 03:41 PM)Awood Wrote: The Hvar samples look like foreign males with local female lineages. No R1, no I2. Oh yeah, real local. How did they get there? Let the historians figure it out.
The Liburnians were a different people, closely related to the Veneti and more influenced by Eastern Urnfield groups (Middle Danubian and Gáva-related). On top of that, the island was settled by Greeks from the islands and we deal with an Imperial Roman population in what might be described as an international harbour.
RE: Genetic Genealogy & Ancient DNA (DISCUSSION ONLY) - elflock - 05-19-2024
(05-19-2024, 03:41 PM)Awood Wrote: The Hvar samples look like foreign males with local female lineages. No R1, no I2. Oh yeah, real local. How did they get there? Let the historians figure it out.
There is one sample with an IA Western Balkan Y-DNA namely I34294 J-L283>Z631. The absolute majority of Dalmatian BA-IA samples belong to J-L283. Most of Hvar samples have non-local Y-DNAs because it is a late antiquity cosmopolitan site that was a Greek settlement before.
RE: Genetic Genealogy & Ancient DNA (DISCUSSION ONLY) - pelop - 05-19-2024
(05-19-2024, 03:41 PM)Awood Wrote: The Hvar samples look like foreign males with local female lineages. No R1, no I2. Oh yeah, real local. How did they get there? Let the historians figure it out.
"Local R1 and I2" in ancient coastal Dalmatia/Illyria? Are there any unpublished samples that the rest of us aren't aware of?
RE: Genetic Genealogy & Ancient DNA (DISCUSSION ONLY) - CLTVTE - 05-21-2024
(05-21-2024, 12:12 PM)Riverman Wrote: The paper is out in Nature:
Quote:Phylogenetic insights into the genetic legacies of Hungarian-speaking communities in the Carpathian Basin
Abstract
This study focuses on exploring the uniparental genetic lineages of Hungarian-speaking minorities residing in rural villages of Baranja (Croatia) and the Zobor region (Slovakia). We aimed to identify ancestral lineages by examining genetic markers distributed across the entire mitogenome and on the Y-chromosome. This allowed us to discern disparities in regional genetic structures within these communities. By integrating our newly acquired genetic data from a total of 168 participants with pre-existing Eurasian and ancient DNA datasets, our goal was to enrich the understanding of the genetic history trajectories of Carpathian Basin populations. Our findings suggest that while population-based analyses may not be sufficiently robust to detect fine-scale uniparental genetic patterns with the sample sizes at hand, phylogenetic analysis of well-characterized Y-chromosomal Short Tandem Repeat (STR) data and entire mitogenome sequences did uncover multiple lineage ties to far-flung regions and eras. While the predominant portions of both paternal and maternal DNA align with the East-Central European spectrum, rarer subhaplogroups and lineages have unveiled ancient ties to both prehistoric and historic populations spanning Europe and Eastern Eurasia. This research augments the expansive field of phylogenetics, offering critical perspectives on the genetic constitution and heritage of the communities in East-Central Europe.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-024-61978-4
Unfortunately, the yDNA results are extremely basal, like just E-M78 for E-V13.
As for mtDNA Y1a (which is also reported in this study), it is its mtDNA Y1a+16189 branch's representatives that clustered extremely closely to the ancient Heilongjiang's AR9.2K_outlier in “The deep population history of northern East Asia from the Late Pleistocene to the Holocene”, who is an yDNA P/yDNA Q-M242 specimen, who should have interacted with the population of AR13-10K (who was determined to belong to yDNA DE or to yDNA C2-M217) in “The deep population history of northern East Asia from the Late Pleistocene to the Holocene”, and actually there appears to be no contradiction to numerous earlier suggestions for such sorts of populations of Northeast China and its neighborhood, though the source of the yDNA DE signal may be ambiguous.
As for other lineages, joining the territories of China and Russia:
Quote:An unexpected case in the prehistory of the Iberian Peninsula: Biogeographical origin analysis through mitochondrial DNA
Abstract
We have determined the mitochondrial haplotype (A73G T16172C C16223T G16257A C16261T) on a Bronze Age Individual from an archaeological site located in Alaejos (Valladolid, Central Spain). This haplotype is typical from N9a2′4′5 or N9a2′4′5′11 mitochondrial haplogroups, which are nowadays widely distributed in the Asian region. Here, we compare and discuss the frequency of this haplogroup in nowadays and in ancient human populations, especially in contemporaries of the individual under study.
Though mtDNA N9a2’4’5’11 is distributed in China, its branch mtDNA N9a2 is almost entirely found in Japan today, and a case of mtDNA N9a2* was reported from a Kazakh individual, which is already relatively geographically close to both Russia and Xinjiang.
Unlike this, mtDNA F1b1 (https://www.yfull.com/mtree/F1b1-a3/) has another case, sharing C13720T mutation, and it was reported from the Liaoning Province of China.
RE: Genetic Genealogy & Ancient DNA (DISCUSSION ONLY) - ChrisR - 05-21-2024
(05-05-2024, 03:06 AM)Manofthehour Wrote: Doctoral thesis: Palaeogenetic analyses on human ancient remains. The Etruscans from Felsina and surroundings: genomic evidence from the Po Valley during the Etruscan period
https://www.repository.unipr.it/handle/1889/5272
"During the Early Iron Age (9th-8th century BCE), the Etruscan civilization flourished in a large area of central Italy with local expansions into neighboring regions, such as Campania and the Po Valley. Palaeogenomic evidence from over 50 ancient human remains coming from necropolyses associated to the Etruscan city of Felsina (present-day Bologna) and dated between the 8th and 6th century BCE (Hallstatt phase), allows to define for the first time the genetic profile of the Etruscan community of the Po Valley area. Archaeological findings show clear evidence of extensive contacts between the Etruscans of Felsina and Celtic-related groups from the Early Iron Age onwards. The newly generated genomic data help to investigate the dynamics underlying the relationship between these two culturally distinct groups and to evaluate the resulting biological impact on the genetic makeup of Felsina. To further explore this point, additional samples from the Po Valley and dated to the Gallic migration period (4th-3rd century BCE, La Tène phase) were added to the dataset. Although most of the Etruscan samples from Bologna carry a local genetic profile, a significative and heterogeneous fraction of the analysed individuals show a high genetic affinity to ancient central and northern European populations. Unexpectedly, almost all the samples coming from the more recent necropolises show an autochthonous signal. Radiocarbon dating revealed the presence of a few individuals belonging to the Roman Imperial period that are are genetically distinct from the previous Iron Age samples, showing an increased affinity to ancient groups from the Caucasus and, in one single case, to subsaharan Africa."
Who has access to Tesi_dottorato_ZaroValentina.pdf and Relazione_finale_ZaroValentina.pdf and knows if and where the Palaeogenomic data is published?
RE: Genetic Genealogy & Ancient DNA (DISCUSSION ONLY) - CLTVTE - 05-21-2024
As for mtDNA L1b1a, reported from “Phylogenetic insights into the genetic legacies of Hungarian-speaking communities in the Carpathian Basin” (“L1b subgroup, dated at about 10 kya, has its frequency maximum in West Africa. According to phylogeographic analyses carried out by Cerezo et al., around 65% of the European L lineages are believed to have arrived during more recent historical periods, such as the Roman period, the Arab conquest of the Iberian Peninsula and Sicily, and the Atlantic slave trade era”), it was suggested in the article that this subclade differentiated about 10000 years ago in Africa, that is, either simultaneously or slightly after the appearance of the ancient individual KolymaM about 10100 years ago in Northeast Siberia. However, Late Neolithic and Bronze Age samples from Northeast China did not show the presence of a Western Eurasian component in “Human genetic history on the Tibetan Plateau in the past 5100 years”.
ADDITION: The case of mtDNA D4b2b from “Phylogenetic insights into the genetic legacies of Hungarian-speaking communities in the Carpathian Basin”. Tibet is not the homeland of mtDNA D4b2b. The highest amount of cases of ancient mtDNA D4b2b* were reported from the Shimao localities in the Middle Yellow river basin in “Ancient Mitogenomes Reveal the Origins and Genetic Structure of the Neolithic Shimao Population in Northern China”, and the Shimao population was treated as the population, related to the Han Chinese in “Human genetic history on the Tibetan Plateau in the past 5100 years”. A few cases of ancient mtDNA D4b2b were reported from ancient Shandong.
However, actually, on Figure S15 “Part of the neighbor-joining phylogenetic tree of mitochondrial haplogroup D4b2” mtDNA D4b2b sample from the Zobor region (mtDNA D4b2b) fell the closest to the modern-day mtDNA D4b2b sample of Yunnan-Thailand-Laos branch, whose one more representative was reported from the “more rice-farming” Jiangsu Province of China. It should explain as well the presence of mtDNA M7c1b2b lineage in the Avar elite, because mtDNA M7c1b2b was observed to reach North China, but mtDNA M7c1b2b was also observed to get into the Tai-Kadai-speaking rice-farming Shan population (“Ancient Mitogenomes Reveal the Origins and Genetic Structure of the Neolithic Shimao Population in Northern China”), and it is the Tai-Kadai populations (which additionally have more mtDNA M7c lineages) that should have contributed mtDNA M7c1b2b to the earlier Austroasiatic Mon population. The Tai-Kadai Shan are known to hold the mythical tradition that their first kings descended from the sun.
As for the mtDNA T1a1 lineage, observed in the Zobor population, it is suggested by Figure S14 “Parts of the neighbor-joining phylogenetic tree of mitochondrial haplogroup T1a” that this lineage could have been of the eastern origin. In this case, “Ancient Mitogenomes Reveal the Origins and Genetic Structure of the Neolithic Shimao Population in Northern China” points to the existence of basal mtDNA T1a1 in the Indo-European Xinjiang Tajik population. Consequently, such particular mtDNA T1a1 cases, connected to the territory of China and adjacent areas of Eastern Eurasia, might have appeared in the Near East from the population, which also included the Indo-Europeans.
RE: Genetic Genealogy & Ancient DNA (DISCUSSION ONLY) - Honestum - 05-24-2024
I don't get some of the changes that have been made in the final version of the paper 'Stable population structure in Europe since the Iron Age, despite high mobility'.
The changes in figure 5 are somewhat perplexing to me.
In the original paper there was a bidrectional arrow between Sardinia and Mainland Italy, which made sense, at least if the Imperial Period and Late Antiquity period were those taken into consideration, well, at least it did make sense for Mainland Italy, since there are two samples from Mainland Italy which cluster with Sardinians, one from a previous study, R104, a male from Crypta Balbi in Rome, that is dated to the 6th-7th century AD and carries uniparental markers that are both specific to Sardinia, in addition to being farmer like autosomally. Then there's the new sample from this study, R11118, a 3-4 year old female child buried in a monumental tomb in the necropolis of Isola Sacra, dated to the Imperial period, 2nd or 3rd centrury AD. This latter sample is genetically similar to Nuragic Sardinians , it's less Yamnaya and East Med shifted than even modern Sardinians, so clearly an outlier in Imperial Mainland Italy.
Things are different for Sardinia, where the imperial samples seem to be too few to establish which ones are outliers, from what I know 2 samples from Cagliari seem to have mostly Eastern Mediterranean admixture, another one from Cagliari is more shifted towards Mainland Europe, then there are some samples from Monte Carru, Alghero and new ones from this study from Imperial Period Sant'Imbenia. Given the high heterogenity of the samples, I don't get how the authors identified some outliers among them.
Anyway, what's really odd is that the authors of this study don't seem to have sorted out these problems in the new version of the study, but instead they seem to have increased the number of oddities.
For instance, now the bidirectional arrow between Sardinia and Italy disappears, and Sardinia seems only to receive genetic outliers from Mainland Italy and not the opposite. Then I wondered, have the Sardinian-like samples been mislabeled? Well, that'd be strange since one of them (R104) comes from another study, and not a preprint but a fully published one, that is 'Ancient Rome: A genetic crossroads of Europe and the Mediterranean'.
So I checked the new paper and the two Sardinian-like outliers are still there in the Imperial Period & Late antiquity Mainland Italy PCA, but now they're not designated as outliers (stars) but normal samples (circles), despite the fact that they still cluster with Sardinians/farmers, and not with the main cluster of Roman Mainland Italy. Have I missed something? What's the reason for this seeimgnly inexplicable change?
Then I looked at the Sardinia graph and now the island seems to be receiving ancestry from North Africa and Iberia, in addition to Mainland Italy. So are we were taking into consideration the Punic period or the Roman one?
And where's the arrow from the Eastern Mediterranean? It's all very confusing, figure 5 doesn't even specify which period it is referring to, and that goes for both papers, the text citing that figure seems to imply that it's taking into consideration the whole period from the Bronze age up until now, but the samples after the Bronze age in Sardinia that have been published until now do not form a cluster, so these samples are outliers in relation to what? Half of the Punic period samples published have North African admixture, so why are they outliers? Are the authors referring to the Copper age North African outlier in Sardinia? But the Copper age doesn't appear to have ever been mentioned in the paper, which seems to take into consideration the Iron age perion onwards.
Figure 2 and figure 3 of the original paper's supplement figures: The Sardinian like samples are both designated as outliers;
Figure 5: Biderictional arrow between Sardinia and Mainland Italy:
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.05.15.491973v1.full.pdf
Figure 2 of the new paper: the Sardinian like samples from Mainland Italy still cluster where they did before but now they're mysteriously not designated as outliers anymore (circles instead of Stars);
Figure 5: Unidirectional arrow from Mainland Italy to Sardinia, new arrows from North Africa and Iberia to Sardinia:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10827293/
RE: Genetic Genealogy & Ancient DNA (DISCUSSION ONLY) - Hodo Scariti - 05-24-2024
(05-21-2024, 05:50 PM)ChrisR Wrote:(05-05-2024, 03:06 AM)Manofthehour Wrote: Doctoral thesis: Palaeogenetic analyses on human ancient remains. The Etruscans from Felsina and surroundings: genomic evidence from the Po Valley during the Etruscan period
https://www.repository.unipr.it/handle/1889/5272
"During the Early Iron Age (9th-8th century BCE), the Etruscan civilization flourished in a large area of central Italy with local expansions into neighboring regions, such as Campania and the Po Valley. Palaeogenomic evidence from over 50 ancient human remains coming from necropolyses associated to the Etruscan city of Felsina (present-day Bologna) and dated between the 8th and 6th century BCE (Hallstatt phase), allows to define for the first time the genetic profile of the Etruscan community of the Po Valley area. Archaeological findings show clear evidence of extensive contacts between the Etruscans of Felsina and Celtic-related groups from the Early Iron Age onwards. The newly generated genomic data help to investigate the dynamics underlying the relationship between these two culturally distinct groups and to evaluate the resulting biological impact on the genetic makeup of Felsina. To further explore this point, additional samples from the Po Valley and dated to the Gallic migration period (4th-3rd century BCE, La Tène phase) were added to the dataset. Although most of the Etruscan samples from Bologna carry a local genetic profile, a significative and heterogeneous fraction of the analysed individuals show a high genetic affinity to ancient central and northern European populations. Unexpectedly, almost all the samples coming from the more recent necropolises show an autochthonous signal. Radiocarbon dating revealed the presence of a few individuals belonging to the Roman Imperial period that are are genetically distinct from the previous Iron Age samples, showing an increased affinity to ancient groups from the Caucasus and, in one single case, to subsaharan Africa."
Who has access to Tesi_dottorato_ZaroValentina.pdf and Relazione_finale_ZaroValentina.pdf and knows if and where the Palaeogenomic data is published?
It seems that the thesis can be read on 1st June 2024.
I'm not sure that the same could be said about the Relazione finale, but it could be the evaluation made by the doctoral commission.
RE: Genetic Genealogy & Ancient DNA (DISCUSSION ONLY) - vlrs - 05-29-2024
(05-29-2024, 03:07 PM)RCO Wrote: North Pontic crossroads: Mobility in Ukraine from the Bronze Age to the early modern period
Lehti Saag et al
Quote:Abstract
The North Pontic region, which encompasses present-day Ukraine, was a crossroads of migration as it connected the vast Eurasian Steppe with Central Europe. We generated shotgun-sequenced genomic data for 91 individuals dating from around 7,000 BCE to 1,800 CE to study migration and mobility history in the region, with a particular focus on historically attested migrating groups during the Iron Age and the medieval period, such as Scythian, Chernyakhiv, Saltiv and Nogai associated peoples. We infer a high degree of temporal heterogeneity in ancestry, with fluctuating genetic affinities to present-day Western European, Eastern European, Western Steppe and East Asian groups. We also infer high heterogeneity in ancestry within geographically, culturally and socially defined groups. Despite this, we find that ancestry components which are widespread in Eastern and Central Europe have been present in the Ukraine region since the Bronze Age.
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2024.05.24.595769v1
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2024.05.24.595769v1.full.pdf
![[Image: oo3hFZ0.jpeg]](https://i.imgur.com/oo3hFZ0.jpeg)
![[Image: Uvbrii3.jpeg]](https://i.imgur.com/Uvbrii3.jpeg)
New Thracian samples being E-V13 and C1a - from what I understand, this is C1a2b Z38888/F16270/PH428 present in Lithuania, Ireland, England, Algeria, Armenians per Wiki source.
RE: Genetic Genealogy & Ancient DNA (DISCUSSION ONLY) - Riverman - 05-29-2024
Worth to mention it is the oldest E-V13 sample we got up to this point and its from a Thraco-Cimmerian/Thracian Hallstatt context.
The exact proportions of Yamnaya : EEF : WHG might help to determine, whether it was coming from
- Late Gáva-Holigrady directly =? somewhere between Mezocsat locals and the Chotin E-V13 carrier)
- via Belegis II-Gáva (Chisiinau-Corlateni group) =? closer to the two E-V13 carriers from Himera?
- from Babadag I-related groups =? unknown
- or from Psenichevo-related groups (like Cozia-Saharna) =? closer to the post-Psenichevo samples from BGR_EIA, around Svilengrad and other sites.
While Basarabi sent colonists there too, later, it appears to be to late for their Soldanesti group colonisation, going by the dating.
More details about the colonisations from Thracian Hallstatt groups in Moldova-Ukraine, see here:
https://genarchivist.com/showthread.php?tid=24&pid=20108#pid20108
Basically all groups from the Tisza-Danube zone sent colonists in succeeding waves to the area.
RE: Genetic Genealogy & Ancient DNA (DISCUSSION ONLY) - J Man - 06-01-2024
Can someone check these samples please?
Scandinavian Late Neolithic samples (I mentioned in the Titles/Abstracts section a few days ago relating to plauge) are up: https://www.ebi.ac.uk/ena/browser/view/PRJEB76142
And another one.
https://www.ebi.ac.uk/ena/browser/view/PRJEB70242 - "Paleogenomic data of Prehistoric Alps individuals"
"New insights into the genetic history of prehistoric populations in Eastern Italian Alps from Mesolithic to Middle Bronze Age and highlights of the importance of this region as a crossroads of human movements in prehistory." 98 files
RE: Genetic Genealogy & Ancient DNA (DISCUSSION ONLY) - Pylsteen - 06-01-2024
(Yesterday, 12:42 AM)alexfritz Wrote: the paper (PHD) is now accessable
Palaeogenetic analyses on human ancient remains. The Etruscans from Felsina and surroundings: genomic evidence from the Po Valley during the Etruscan period
https://www.repository.unipr.it/handle/1889/5272
https://www.repository.unipr.it/bitstream/1889/5272/8/Tesi_dottorato_ZaroValentina.pdf
Uniparentals in her paper translated to SNPs from the ISOGG 15.73 version (NB someone needs to check the raw data):