search this blog

Wednesday, May 17, 2017

European blond hair may have originated on the North Eurasian Mammoth steppe


The quote below is from the recent Mathieson et al. 2017 preprint on the population history of Southeastern Europe and surrounds. Surprisingly, this titbit hasn't received much attention yet considering the fascination that many people have with blond hair and blonds.

The derived allele of the KITLG SNP rs12821256 that is associated with – and likely causal for – blond hair in Europeans [4,5] is present in one hunter-gatherer from each of Samara, Motala and Ukraine (I0124, I0014 and I1763), as well as several later individuals with Steppe ancestry. Since the allele is found in populations with EHG but not WHG ancestry, it suggests that its origin is in the Ancient North Eurasian (ANE) population. Consistent with this, we observe that earliest known individual with the derived allele is the [Siberian] ANE individual Afontova Gora 3 which is directly dated to 16130-15749 cal BCE (14710±60 BP, MAMS-27186: a previously unpublished date that we newly report here).

Here's a really nice shot of one of the last remnants of the Mammoth steppe on the border of Mongolia and the Republic of Tuva (courtesy of Александр Лещёнок at Wikipedia). All it needs is a few mammoths grazing on the horizon and it's like we're back in 15,000 BCE.


I'd say a strong case can be made that modern-day European populations with the highest frequencies of blond hair also show the highest levels of ANE ancestry in Europe (for instance, Baltic Finns, Scandinavians and Balts). You can check the ANE levels in hundreds of modern-day and ancient individuals in my Basal-rich K7 spreadsheet here. The K7 is not a perfect measure of ANE admixture, but I'd say it's accurate enough, especially in relative terms.

On a related note, the Swedish web portal svt.se has an article on the latest ancient DNA research on the peopling of Scandinavia, focusing on the migrations of Western European Hunter-Gatherers (WHG) and Eastern European Hunter-Gatherers (EHG) into the region during the Mesolithic.

De var de första svenskarna

Basically, the article broadly supports the findings of Mathieson et al. 2017, pointing out that WHG were likely blue eyed, dark haired and dark skinned, while EHG probably had variable eye coloring, but lighter hair and skin than WHG. I suppose what this implies is that the blue eyed blond phenotype most common today amongst Northern Europeans, like the Polish Danish tennis player below (picture courtesy of Wikipedia), is a relatively recent, perhaps post-Mesolithic, phenomenon.


What I don't get is why the Early Bronze Age Yamnaya people of the Pontic-Caspian Steppe were apparently so dark haired despite their extreme level of ANE ancestry and relatively close genetic relationship to modern-day Northern Europeans? On the other hand, the Middle Bronze Age Andronovo people of the Kazakh Steppe and South Siberia, who were largely derived from Yamnaya or a closely related group from the Pontic-Caspian Steppe, were probably often blue eyed and blond haired (see here). It's unlikely that natural selection alone could have lightened up the steppe people in such a relatively short time. Or is it?

See also...

Late PIE ground zero now obvious; location of PIE homeland still uncertain, but...

113 comments:

Nirjhar007 said...

Nice landscape :) .

JohnP said...

Some things:
1. It's funny how the Ultra-Politically-Correct Sweden represents WHG as a Negroid (to those people, genetic differences are all about skin colour, and if you're "dark skinned" you can't be any other thing but a Negroid) and ANE as Mongoloid, even though it's their characteristic blonde hair that's being discussed and even though Russians said that ANE people were already Caucasoid.
2. This article here is kinda old (http://www.unz.com/gnxp/the-genetic-architecture-natural-history-of-pigmentation/) but it lays out nicely how Steppe peoples were very blonde and red-haired. Like, It kinda baffles me how many Central Asians, North Indians and Iranians have light hair and/or light eyes, but people insist that the Yamnaya hadn't either traits - you see, modern evidence is undeniable, archaeologists just didn't find the blonde/red haired and blue eyed Yamnayas, like, it's obvious that small finding may not always represent entire populations, specially regarding recessive genes. But also, I'm aware that the Steppes were filled with non-Yamnaya later, from Steppe_EMBA and Steppe_MLBA, very close to Corded Ware, opening the hypothesis of a Corded Ware engulfing of their own conquerors and taking their places afterwards.

Onur Dinçer said...

Continuing from the previous thread...

@Richard Holtman

My uncle is Haplogroup R1b L2 DF90 and I'm Haplogroup G2a S10458 and I score higher than him on all tests that test for steppe ancestry. How is this possible?

I am R1b L2 DF90 too. Can you provide some ancestry information and - if available - DF90 subclade information about your uncle? My email is visible on my blogger profile.

bellbeakerblogger said...

Davidski,

Do you know when all the new genomes will be released?

Samuel Andrews said...

The article is about unpublished Paleo-Neo DNA from Sweden which are " expected shortly.". The article gives mention to Neolithic farmers but only small mention to Corded Ware Herders(?)...

"By that time, more new groups of farmers and herdsmen reached Scandinavia. "

The article indicates SHG contributed some ancestry to modern Scandinavians...

"their genetic material is still present in small amounts in many people in Sweden today."

I found an mtDNA match between a modern Finn and one of the Motala hunter gatherers.. Also when modelled with D-stats Saami come out as 10-20% SHG.

http://mtdnaatlas.blogspot.com/2017/01/finland.html

Davidski said...

@BBB

Do you know when all the new genomes will be released?

When the papers are formally published in journals. Should be soonish.

Samuel Andrews said...

I don't think natural selection can explain everything. IMO, It's very possible the EHG groups had varied pigmentation and the ones who contributed to modern Europeans happened to be paler than the ones who contributed to Catacomb(UkraineHG?) and Yamnaya.

It sounds crazy that blonde hair originated a population closely related to Native Americans but it's totally possible.



Anthro Survey said...

@Davidski & @SimonW

This is somewhat off topic, but a new paper just came out covering Balkans and South Italy. No new aDNA, though. Just in-depth structure, d-stats & admixture analyses of current genomes(including aDNA) and some new samples from the region.

http://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-017-01802-4?WT.feed_name=subjects_genetics

I have not read it in full yet. It seems rather second-rate compared to Laz's work or the three papers recently published, but worth a read anyway.

John Smith said...

Interesting and btw Afonatova had Q1a1 y-dna and this is a fact https://genetiker.wordpress.com/2013/11/24/analyses-of-the-afontova-gora-genome/. His population might have had Q,R2, and R1

bellbeakerblogger said...

@Davidski,
Good, because there's some interesting trends I can see so far. The last leg of the quellengruppe is starting to come into focus which should have been obvious long ago.

Nirjhar007 said...

Yes Anthro, that paper makes some bold statements :

"All populations from Southern Italy (SSI), Greece (both mainland and insular) and Southern Balkans share a predominant Sardinian (Neolithic-like) genetic component which accounts for more than half of their ancestry. This is followed by a relevant Caucasian-like ancestry, which is present at around 24% in all our population samples "


"among our Mediterranean groups, evidence of Yamnaya (and EHG) introgression seems to be present at a lesser extent and was detected mainly in Balkan-related groups"

"These results suggest that the genetic history of Southern Italian and Balkan populations may have been, at least in part, independent from that of Eastern and Central Europe, involving specific migratory events that carried Caucasian and Levantine genetic contributes along the Mediterranean shores"

"This would suggest that a Bronze Age Steppe source may be not highly consistent with all branches of the Indo-European family"

Davidski said...

Good, because there's some interesting trends I can see so far. The last leg of the quellengruppe is starting to come into focus which should have been obvious long ago.

No idea what this means, but we can discuss it when the data comes out, and what the hell, if it's something big let's get a paper out.

Davidski said...

Razib has a write up on the Balkans/Italian paper. Note the last part.

https://gnxp.nofe.me/2017/05/17/the-population-genetic-structure-of-sicily-and-greece/

Such an early period in the interval though can not be the Slavs. What can it be? I suspect that that there are signals of Indo-European migrations in there that are being conflated due to low power to detect them since they are rather modest in demographic impact. The islands such as Sardinia, Crete and Cyprus had non-Indo-European speakers down to the Classical period.

No point me repeating this.

Nirjhar007 said...

They also say :

This complex genetic scenario opens new insights into the recent cultural transformations associated to the Greek- and Albanian-introgressions in Southern Italy that originated the Italian Arbereshe and Greek-speaking ethno-linguistic minorities. Overall, Arbereshe groups confirm the Southern Balkan genetic characterization typical of their putative source populations, whereas Italian Greeks are related to the Mediterranean ‘genetic continuum’ (i.e. to Southern Italians and the Greek-speaking islands); as a consequence, their arrival in Southern Italy could at least predate the recent differentiation of mainland Greece. A possible key of interpretation would stress the Mediterranean genetic signal as the result of ancient links, which were partly modified by more recent historical movements in the Southern Balkans involving Continental Greece and Albania. In this light, the genetic similarity between Greek- and Italian-speaking groups of Southern Italy may suggest long-standing genetic and cultural exchanges originally diffused over the whole region, also outside the ethno-linguistic enclaves that survived until the present times. This would not exclude that continuous interactions between the Italian- and Greek-speaking populations of Southern Italy, especially in contexts of lower geographic isolation, contributed to their present-day genetic similarity in spite of the preserved linguistic differences. Additionally, Greeks from Calabria revealed remarkable signs of genetic drift, which are presumptively ascribable not only to cultural but also to geographic isolation.

Kurd said...

Haplogroups and autosomes are independent of each other, and should never be used as an indicator of any particular ancestry. For example, it is perfectly possible for someone to be Y-J1 or J2 and be 100% Chinese, and by the same token for someone to be Y-C1 and be 100% SW Asian.

Similarly, steppe ancestry in W Asians has nothing to do with what haplogroup they are, and tends to be more correlated with their particular ethnic groups. You can easily have Y- J1 J2 W Asians with more steppe ancestry than R1a or R1b W Asians or visa versa.

Similarly, Iran Neolithic ancestry in Kurds, Baloch and other Iranians is relatively equally distributed regardless of whether they are Y-R2, Y-R1a, R1b, G2a, T, J1 J2, etc., and there is no reason to believe that the population living in Iran in the Neolithic was restricted to just R2 or J2 based on the couple of samples we have recovered. There may have not been the same level of diversity in Y lines as in modern Iranians but there is no reason to assume that it was limited to just a couple of Y lines. Any number of known or as of yet unknown Y lines could have transported Neolithic Iranian DNA to surrounding areas.

Davidski said...

All Italians have steppe ancestry, it's just that many Italians, especially from South Italy, have had it diluted more recently by admixture from West Asia and North Africa.

How is this an argument for Indo-European origins in West Asia? Anyone care to elaborate?

Nirjhar007 said...

I find the suggestion above of Kurd quite agreeable.

JohnP said...

@Nirjhar007
Italy and Greece are one of those places who changed a lot during the ages. For instance, Romans descended from Unetice, but current Italians bear little resemblance.
Those places, along with many other need ancient aDNA, as, for example, both the Greek and Italians flooded themselves with Middle Eastern slaves with a probable 50%CHG 50%Farmer admixture. We need to see what the Etruscans were made of too, how much they contributed, and what about the Celts, Goths, Mycenaean, Pleasgian, etc etc etc

Rob said...

@ |bellbeakerblogger

To me it looks like the Harrison-Heyd model is correct. It just seems they didn;t sample many A1 phase Beaker sites from central Europe

Davidski said...

@Kurd

Any number of known or as of yet unknown Y lines could have transported Neolithic Iranian DNA to surrounding areas.

Nope, Y-HGs and genome-wide DNA show strong correlations in both long-standing modern-day populations and even more so in Neolithic populations, which are usually more homogeneous.

If there was a migration from Iran to the steppe during the Bronze Age, then we should expect to see uniparental markers typical of ancient and modern-day populations from Iran on the Bronze Age Steppe.

We see both South Caspian genome-wide admixture and South Caspian-specific lineages in South Asia, so why not on the Bronze Age steppe?

Sure, you can claim that due to sheer coincidence admixture from Iran on the steppe isn't accompanied by any South Caspian-specific markers, but this means that your argument isn't very strong.

Anthro Survey said...

What was particularly laughable in that paper was how they suggested a non-steppe explanation for Italic languages in Italy because putative steppe contribution is lower there---or something along those lines.... I facepalmed so hard. First of all, they might want to read a thing or two on elite dominance. Secondly, every amateur studying this knows and understands that Italic languages were closely related to the Celtic(now extinct save for the isles). It's even attested in Samnite ethnogenesis, albeit semi-mythical, that their ancestors(at least of their elites)branched off from the Umbrian tribes. Umbrian origin myths in turn stipulate yet a northely source still. Extending the line we....well, you get the idea.

Nirjhar007 said...

The paper is authored by Pioneers of Genetics like Spencer Wells , Luca Pagani etc, I hope they know the technical shit regarding their suggestions.

Personally I can't elaborate on S Italy etc ,as I shouldn't, maybe a local expert should comment to say what makes sense and what not .

Rob said...

Razib forget to mention the "Bronze Age collapse', the Iron Age Montenegrin sample shifted toward central Europe.

The Sarno seems to be implying that Greek IE did not arrive fro the steppe

"In southern Mediterranean Europe, however, our results suggest lower impacts. Any significant Steppe/northern component may have arrived in the south Balkan mainland and southern Italy only later, by which time Indo-European languages of the Italic, Greek and various Balkan branches had already established themselves there. This would suggest that a Bronze Age Steppe source may be not highly consistent with all branches of the Indo-European family (see also Broushaki et al.).'

Anthro Survey said...

And of course the material cultures of the Samnites and their (presumed) Umbrian ancestors, especially in terms of metallurgy, were very much of the Halstatt-LaTene sort. Not really "Mediterranean". Needless to say, the abodes of these tribes were rather Central European, climatically speaking. I say: their founding elites picked a climate to suit their tastes. Supposition, yes, but sensible.

Ric Hern said...

Does the dominant Hair Colour have something to do with the female population ?

My Grandfather had Dark Hair with Ice Blue Eyes and my Grandmother had Brown Hair and Blue eyes. Out of nine children only two,my father and one of his sisters inherited my Grandfathers looks.

My Mother on the other hand had Brown Blond hair and I inherited the same. When observing other people I noticed the same thing.

So ?

When_in_Rome said...

@ JohnP

What Russian paper discussed the ANE appearance?

Simon_W said...

@ Anthro Survey

Thanks for the link. Seems quite interesting, although ancient DNA would be much more useful. I have to read it later in detail when I'll have more time. They seem to be still thinking along the lines Dienekes had propagated years ago and they seem to overestimate the power of ADMIXTURE, like the recent paper on western Iberia.

Rob said...

@ Anthro "Survey"

"I facepalmed so hard. First of all, they might want to read a thing or two on elite dominance"

Actually, there was a significant demographic & cultural changes in Italy in the period 2000-1400 BC; just as proto-Italic languages should be arriving. Given that said intrusions were large, they should be easily detected. Thus no need to clutch at the straws of 'elite conquest'.

bellbeakerblogger said...

@Davidski, looking forward to what lies ahead. @Rob, with the preprint it does seem that there are three source populations, although the apparent Olalde big round alien numbers doesn't show it, at least in the preprint.
But again, remember that each grave was selected for a reason, some for gender questions or others for dating or mixed features. It's possible to subdivide, but it seems three distinct groups converging, maybe not in equal proportions, but very generally.

Simon_W said...

BTW @Anthro Survey

What Umbrian origin myths were you referring to?

@JohnP

I wouldn't say that the Romans (or rather Latins) were derived from Unetice, that seems very speculative to me. You seem to be referring to the the idea that the North Italian EBA Polada culture was derived from Unetice, but I'd say the evidence lies most of all in the tools and bronze weapons and shows similarities to various cultures north of the Alps, also to Singen and Straubing. And Polada also shows similarities to the Bonnanaro culture of Sardinia. And moreover Polada was a culture of northern Italy, it's not evident how this is related to the MBA Apennine culture. According to Bernard Sergent Polada was Ligurian, which is another speculative interpretation, but would make quite sense.

Anthro Survey said...

@Rob

I am well aware of that and the remark was to the point that if people aren't(or if the evidence has not yet materialized) the possibility of elite dominace should not be ruled out.

It's also quite fair to say that if the bringers of Italic branched out from the same(or related) "steppe-enriched" population that brought Celtic languages to their resting places, they were likely in the minority in south italy at the time. Hence, a question of semantics when it comes to how large/small any "elite" would have been to be designated as such.

Simon_W said...

@The topic

The considerable CHG and minor Anatolia_Chl admixture in Yamnaya look like natural culprits for the darker hair colour.

The return to lighter hair in Andronovo and similar groups is less easy to explain, as they didn't have much less CHG and on top of that also European farmer admixture.

But then again, according to Gamba et al. 2014, the Lengyel sample NE7 probably had light brown or dark blond hair and blue eyes. But they based this prediction on other SNPs, not on KITLG SNP rs12821256.

Anthro Survey said...

@Simon_W:

Unfortunately I have not saved the links nor do I remember the names of the accounts, let alone their writers, but in them, there was this tendency of "ascending the boot" in terms of ascribing geogrpahical origins. Of course, this was peppered with the ancients' fairy-tale insights so their credibility should not be overstated but as they say, there's a bit of truth to every myth. Frankly, the evidence does seem to suggest a north-to-south spread from, say, umbria to lucania when you consider linguistics and such.

Rami said...

Blondism occurs quite frequently among Siberian peoples today even , so no surprise AG3 people living in the same region of Northern Asia had it.

Anthro Survey said...

@the Topic:

Hmmmm. It's a reasonable proposal, but fails to explain why lower-steppe but "high"-ANE populations in the MENA spectrum are not particularly light haired apart from the usual dominant/recessive dynamics. (As I understand, CHG and Iran_Neo are somewhat ANE-rich ancestries). In fact, Berbers, a textbook ANE-less basal-rich population, are no less darker-haired as a population than Kurds.One way to reconcile this is to consider various "strains" or subclades of ANE, with diff(of present) frequencies of that allele.

Anthro Survey said...

*if present

Rob said...

@ Anthro

Yes I agree of the links with Celtic for obvious reasons. So if this movement did not occur until c. 1700 BC and came from the Alpine parts of central Europe (rather than the north European plain), then the relative diminished 'steppe admixture' yet prolific U152 needs hold no quandary.

For South Italy, a minority model does make sense.

EastPole said...

Regarding new paper covering Balkans and Italy:

Roman god of love, Cupid, is derived from the same Indo-European root as the name of Slavic Kupala. But Kupala (or kupalo) has Slavic etymology : "bather" (from kupat(i) 'to bathe'.

Rigvedic Apām Napat “Child of the Waters,” is identified with Agni, Agni with Eros, Eros with Cupid.

Agni, Eros, Cupid are related to Slavic words and seem to indicate Slavic religious influences in India, Greece and Italy.

According to the myth Waters/Water Maidens/Muses were nurturing Kupalo/Cupid/Agni/Eros somewhere in Poland aruound 3000 BC . before R1a-Z645 expansion:

http://s22.postimg.org/wjn1gqktt/Kupa_a.jpg

Good article showing links between Agni and Eros:

https://www.academia.edu/8963421/Non-Iranian_origin_of_the_Eastern-Slavonic_god_X%C5%ADrs%C5%AD_Xors_Published_

EastPole said...

Forgot to explain why I think it was in Poland. I used to think it was Western Ukraine but after new genetic data on Globular Amphora and Tripillia I am convinced that Poland was the homeland of that LPIE religion.

Matt said...

Re: pigmentation, bit of a tweet series by it on Mathieson's blog, w/conversation between him and Razib Khan about it:

http://i.imgur.com/69ZUYpy.png (screencapped, but I'm sure it's there if you still want to see it on twitter).

Note "Big caveat though, we don't know if there are other pigmentation variants in WHG that are not common or important today".

(I think this may be fairly possible, as "WHG proper" (Loschbour, Bichon, La Brana, Rochedane etc.) probably only contribute 10% at most of ancestry in West Europe.).

Putting all the qpAdm estimates and pigmentation frequency variants info from this paper side by side, and side by side with Mathieson 2015, and Olalde 2017 - http://i.imgur.com/arQ16sa.png

There's a good correlation between WHG vs EHG and low high derived SLC24A5 and SLC45A2.

But derived SLC24A5 and SLC45A2 can't totally be explained by EHG ancestry in EuroHG. Iron Gates HG has <20% EHG (13% EHG, 7% CHG), but has 50% derived SLC24A5, in contrast to 0% in WHG. While Ukraine HG is majority EHG ancestry but has roughly the same low derived SLC45A2 frequency as Latvian and Iron Gates HG.

(Even more true if you take the unsupervised ADMIXTURE instead of qpAdm - http://i.imgur.com/Znv1KNa.png)

It seems either Motala HG / EHG on balance may be "The fairest of them all" - Motala have a slightly higher frequency of derived SLC45A2, and a drastically higher frequency of derived OCA2, with a 10% lower frequency of SLC24A5.

Another surprise which wasn't commented on in the paper is they seem to have revised and upped Anatolia Neolithic's frequency of derived SLC45A2 to the same as EHG, at around 60%. That would estimate this population as actually quite a bit lighter skinned than any of the EEF who followed then in Europe, and about as light skinned as Bronze Age steppe and Bronze Europeans (and probably lighter skinned than the Yamnaya alone estimate which Mathieson previously published - http://imgur.com/XMbiBXl). Possibly this comes from revising their samples, or from pooling in the Boncuklu and Tepecik-Çiftlik Neolithic along with Barcin Neolithic.

Rob said...

@ BellBeakerBlogger

I think its certainly needs closer analysis.
One thing i did notice is the large gap in samples: the 'Neolithic' samples are from 3500-2900 BC, and BB from 2400 BC. They've left 500 years uncovered.

Matt said...

SimonW: they seem to overestimate the power of ADMIXTURE

I find it kind of hard to assess whether their ADMIXTURE are getting any closer to reality than Dienekes's / Davidski's pre-adna.

On the one hand their ADMIXTURE components do seem to behave more like plausible ancient clusters in that you don't have anything like a "North European" component at 100% in Lithuanians (as with some of Dienekes ADMIXTURE), and the highest is the HG proxy component 60-70% in Polish / Russian, which may not be too far from reality, incorporating total EHG+Narva. However, there is still a lot of compression apparent when running ancient samples into their clusters.

I think they had a nice idea for an approach by breaking up West Eurasians into clusters based on FINESTRUCTURE haplotype structure, then running admixture estimates against those, rather than using population.

I do think probably it's slightly limited by the size of their sample set and choice of samples. For instance, they get a final set of 7 subclusters in the Central-Western European cluster, which is the cluster with the most subclusters. Those all cluster into 1 at their level of analysis (Tree14 - 14 clusters) but split into down into French+Basque vs Others at (Tree22 - 22 clusters), then into separate Basque, French, NW European (Britain+Norway), and East-Central European.

This is just illustrative, but I think many of the clusters they find may be more heterogenous for ancient ancestry than the population labels they have tried to replace.

Unknown said...

Well australoids can have blond and red hair(I know they have different alleles) and MA1 too seems to have south asian australoid admixture in addition to basal-mongoloid hence blond and red hair can indeed be from ENA admixture(from both sides). By the way I found Jones suplement that suggests ancestors of WHG and and of CHG/EEF(Basal Eurasians) split 46000 years ago. Only 1000 years before Oase1 so that would make leftover basal eurasian alleles in Upper Paleolithic Europeans even more plausible because they are near the split.

http://repository.kaust.edu.sa/kaust/bitstream/10754/583053/2/ncomms9912-s1.pdf

zardos said...

Concerning blond hair: It must have been a strong selective pressure.
Most likely related to vitamin D, but also sexual and social selection.
In Yamnaya the CHG was still increasing and things might have been different on the southern steppe. Remind you on BBC and the later trend on the British Isles.

Kurd said...

David,

My comment was not intended to suggest that Yamnaya is directly Iran N or Chl admixed. It was really intended towards the following post made earlier:

Y@Richard Holtman

My uncle is Haplogroup R1b L2 DF90 and I'm Haplogroup G2a S10458 and I score higher than him on all tests that test for steppe ancestry. How is this possible?

By neighboring I meant immediate neighbors where through other types of analysis we have pretty much established that populations to the east and west of the Zagros are Iran N/Chl derived.

I don't think that haplogroups will give us the required evidence we need with regards to the W Asian ancestry of Yamnaya. If anything this needs to be sorted out with rare alleles, haplotypes, and other forms of autosomal comparative analysis, which frankly I have not had the time or interest yet to delve into, but I will soon.

One thing we do know is that Yamnaya shares much more drift with Kotias than Iran N (I don't remember the stats with Iran Chl, however, we also know that Iran N admixed populations such as Kurds, Iranians, and S Asians also share more drift with CHG especially Satsurbilla than with Iran N. Whether this excess shared drift with CHG is due to Kurds, Iranians, and S Asians being more steppe admixed, or whether it is due to input from Iran Chl, or a combination I don't know, since I have not delved into this either yet.

It is logical to assume that the W Asian portion of Yamnaya has CHG instead of Iran N due to geographical proximity. Personally, without additional tests I am inclined to believe that the W Asian input into Yamnaya is not simply straight CHG based on the evidence, but rather a CHG/perhaps more southerly admixed ancient, yet to be discovered, which may be in line with what you are thinking.

Gioiello said...

@ Nirjhar007
I thanked you for the link to this paper of Sarno et al. and quoted what you are underlining now, but my post had also that:

"Be sure, Nirjhar007: R-L51 came from Tyrrhenian Italy through Rhone-Rhine to central Germany!"

Now I see many speaking about Italy without knowing anything of its history and also prehistory. For many reasons it seems to me that this paper is the most "Gioiellian" they wrote, et pour cause!

Tesmos said...

Hair colour is quite complex, you have several SNP's that are responsible for blond hair. rs12821256 is just one SNP that may have originated on the North Eurasian Mammoth steppe yes, but what about the other specific blond SNP's?

Davidski said...

Yeah, ANE admixture at that particular site might just be one of the factors causing blond hair, and not even the main one.

truth said...

It's not very convincing. That would imply West-Asians (Iranians, Tadjiks, etc) being blonder than many European populations (French, Croatian, Swiss, etc.)

Gioiello said...

@ Davidski

Someone spoke of Wells as a warranty of the paper of Sarno et al., but if you delete all what I say about National Geographic, its sponsors (one above all), and his ideology (to demonstrate that there are descendants of Phoenicians in the Mediterranean countries), we won't understand anything of these papers.
We should also compare the previous papers, that I criticized a lot (one of them found tons of R-L51 in the Balkans, but they were R-L23-CTS9219 "Balkan cluster", with all the newbies of Anthrogenica enjoying because the presence of R-L51 in the Balkans and not in Italy would have been demonstrated!), with this, and to see in what it is different.
But I ask to an expert as Davidski: I know that National Geographic for doing that offered its Geno 2.0, which of course wasn't able to demonstrate anything (the paper which would have demonstrated that the Ligurian Apuani deported from Romans had survived in the Sannio is waiting to be finished and published from many years (of course I said to one of the authors that with those data he didn't demonstrate anything), but which tests are at the base of these data, and who did pay for them?

Romulus said...

Extrapolating from a single gene for blonde hair to "European Blonde Hair originated on the steppe" is your typical bullshit on this blog which really says a lot about the guy writing it. There are many genes for blonde hair in Europeans. I am homozygous derived for KITLG and have brown hair. European Phenotypic traits evolved where they are most frequent today, in Northern Europe. Not the Steppe. That's what the aDNA shows.

Gioiello said...

"DNA samples were genotyped by the Gene-by-Gene Lab (Family Tree DNA, Houston, TX) for the ~150,000 markers implemented in the GenoChip 2.0 DNA Ancestry Kit41. Post-processing genotyping checks failed for 30 samples".

Gioiello said...

Of course it is a merit of the authors having spoken of a Mediterranean Islands common background and not of some lost tribes in a la la land way!

Grey said...

Matt

"Note "Big caveat though, we don't know if there are other pigmentation variants in WHG that are not common or important today". (I think this may be fairly possible, as "WHG proper" (Loschbour, Bichon, La Brana, Rochedane etc.) probably only contribute 10% at most of ancestry in West Europe.)."

there's an uncommon (not rare but not common) phenotype along the Irish Sea: pale skin, black hair (often curly) explained in the regions it occurs as shipwrecked sailors from the Spanish armada or some similar type story. if there is a WHG depigmentation gene it might be there.

although it might be hard to tell if people who have it also have the standard ones.

Grey said...

@truth

"It's not very convincing. That would imply West-Asians (Iranians, Tadjiks, etc) being blonder than many European populations (French, Croatian, Swiss, etc.)"

One possibility might be
- bunch of separate ANE populations north of wherever develop their own local depigmentation gene for vitamin D or whatever
- one half expand south with their single local gene
- one half remain in the north and mix together so all their separate local depigmentation genes produce an additive effect

(over simplified but you get the gist)

Samuel Andrews said...

The thing is no one in Europe is overwhelmingly EEF or WHG or Steppe. So any unique trait that is very popular such as blonde-light hair is difficult to trace to a single ancestor.

It's still hard to believe but data so far indicates European fairness is the result of recent widespread natural selection just like lactose persistence. I doubt it is as simple as "Europeans were brown before 3000 BC and suddenly they became white." I'm sure the story is very complex.

One of the few uniquely European pigment traits we can confidently track with DNA is red hair! It might derive from a single ancestor but I doubt it. It has so far only popped up in LNBA Europeans(Sintashta, U106-guy from Sweden, BA Hungary) who are as mixed as modern Europeans, so no help in tracking it to a single ancestor.

Grey said...

EastPole said...
"Roman god of love, Cupid, is derived from the same Indo-European root as the name of Slavic Kupala. But Kupala (or kupalo) has Slavic etymology : "bather" (from kupat(i) 'to bathe'. Rigvedic Apām Napat “Child of the Waters,” is identified with Agni, Agni with Eros, Eros with Cupid."

also Venus/Aphrodite said to be born from sea foam

postneo said...

@Nirjhar
"This would suggest that a Bronze Age Steppe source may be not highly consistent with all branches of the Indo-European family"

I am not supporter of the Steppe hypo, but one grows tired of every paper making some pronouncement on IE with a limited sample set. I guess countering like this is important to balance IE related pronouncements from every steppe dna paper.

Also they have used the qualifier "This would suggest" so its I guess its OK.

Arch Hades said...

Makes me ask more questions than answers them.

A. How blonde were the Neolithic Anatolian farmers? Just as blonde if not blonder than the much more ANE packed Yamnaya people, right? That's the only way to make sense of it because Andronovo and Sintashta have Neolithic farmer ancestry and they are a lot lighter than Yamnaya..and less ANE as well btw.

B. If blondism arose in ANEs then why don't Native Americans have blondism?

JohnP said...

@When_in_Rome
It's in this very blog.
http://eurogenes.blogspot.com.br/2017/05/kostenki14-morphologically-caucasoid.html

@Simon_W
Unetice was the cradle for Italo-Celtic, so, Romans came from it, yes.
What people don't realize is that Italy before Rome was completely different from the Roman times, then, the Roman Italy was completely different from the Ostrogothic Kingdom of Italy, which was completely different from the French and Holy Roman period. Southern Italy was also invaded by Muslims, the Roman imported Middle Eastern slaves, etc Greece is no different.
That's why, for creating an account of the region, hundreds if not thousands of ancient samples from every single epoch would have to be made. This is contrary to, say, Britain, for instance, where the picture of the Island got pretty finished at Bronze Age (even after it being invaded relentlessly after, those invaders were of the same genetic stock).

Ryan said...

@David - What I don't get is why the Early Bronze Age Yamnaya people of the Pontic-Caspian Steppe were apparently so dark haired despite their extreme level of ANE ancestry and relatively close genetic relationship to modern-day Northern Europeans? On the other hand, the Middle Bronze Age Andronovo people of the Kazakh Steppe and South Siberia, who were largely derived from Yamnaya or a closely related group from the Pontic-Caspian Steppe, were probably often blue eyed and blond haired (see here). It's unlikely that natural selection alone could have lightened up the steppe people in such a relatively short time. Or is it?

The simplest solution would be that it came from CWC rather than Yamnaya, no? Just because blonde hair was present in some ANE populations doesn't mean it was present in all of them. If it was you'd see blond hair common in indigenous Americans.

Though maybe it's time to take a look at those old stories of blonde Inuit people.

JohnP said...

@Arch Hades
A. Steppe peoples of Bronze Age were 33% positive for the blonde KITLG rs12821256 and 20% for the MC1R rs2228479 red-hair. They weren't blue/light eyed though.
In contrast, Continental Europe at the same time was 7% for KITLG rs12821256 and 13% for MC1R rs2228479.
Contemporary Northern Europe is 17% KITLG rs12821256 and 7% MC1R rs2228479.
https://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v522/n7555/full/nature14507.html
https://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v522/n7555/extref/nature14507-s8.xlsx
http://www.gnxp.com/new/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/nature14507-s8.ods

B. The time-spam for the appearance of blonde hair is 16130-15749 cal BCE. The definitive separation of Amerindians and Caucasoids happened about ~25000 BCE, so, although ANE have Amerindian genes, they were from a much ancient population. So, basically, they may share ancestors, but from far earlier than the rise of blonde hair.

Mr Snow said...

@JohnP
Actually the north Italian Bell Beaker sample from 4200BP was exactly the same as modern north Italians, so Italy hasn't changed anything since then, funny all the garbage you're saying considering the actual facts.

Ariel said...

What a delusion! Northern Italy was repopulated from zero... lol

JohnP said...

@Ariel
You don't seem to know shit about history, but well, I can't do anything about your stupidity.
When Rome fell, most of Central-North Italy was ravaged by Germanic tribes, some settled, some didn't. For a time, "peace" returned to the peninsula, but many simply left.
It wasn't until Theoderic's arrival that Italy started to revitalize. Then also came the Lombards, then, the Frankish Kingdom, then the Holy Roman Empire, then the Jews from Venice, then the Islamic invasions in the South.
Seriously, have you ever saw a PCA graph of Southern Italians? or where North Italians sit today compared to the past?
You're delusional.

Jason said...

Even the lowest caste Indians like Gond, Paniya have higher ANE than Swedes. Therefore, attributing light hair to the ANE dispersal doesn't seem trustworthy.

Davidski said...

Even the lowest caste Indians like Gond, Paniya have higher ANE than Swedes. Therefore, attributing light hair to the ANE dispersal doesn't seem trustworthy.

Hate to state the obvious here, but Indians aren't Europeans.

Jason said...

Obviously, but they were influenced by similar ANE people and to a significantly higher degree. I just pointed out that even the untouchables have higher ANE than Northern Europeans and you have already shown that ANE increases with caste. Some Mongoloid Siberian people also have very high ANE levels. Why would ANE lead to blond hair only in Europeans?

Davidski said...

@Romulus

You seem pretty angry there. Wonder why? Lots of papers and data coming out, you should be joyous like the rest of us.

By the way, how's that theory of yours about the gentle cline of steppe ancestry from the steppe into Poland before CWC/Yamnaya expansions working out?

Were those Globular Amphora genomes from Poland and Ukraine what you expected?

http://polishgenes.blogspot.com.au/2017/05/globular-amphora-people-starkly.html

truth said...

It's true that some Neolithic farmers (~0% ANE) had high probabilty for blondism :

http://i60.tinypic.com/idrtcn.jpg

Davidski said...

@Jason

Why would ANE lead to blond hair only in Europeans?

Because it may be that only Europeans have the other variants that cause blond hair, or we are missing the variants that prevent blond hair.

So even if blond hair developed and was expressed in an ANE or EHG population, then Asians by and large with higher levels of ANE/EHG than Europeans will still have dark hair.

@truth

Those potentially blond Neolithic farmers may have got their blondism from their WHG ancestry, which became increasingly admixed with ANE at least since Villabruna.

Davidski said...

@JohnP

Please try to avoid the use of the F word here.

Anthro Survey said...

@JohnP

No, it is you who is seems to be delusional, not Ariel. Perhaps trip to the eye doctor might be of some benefit to you, as well. Forgive me, but what you're saying is almost scandalous in anthro/history/genetics circles.

Check the PCA? What about it? They sit and sat(based on the beaker from Parma and Remedello sample) roughly in the same spot. So, where north iberians and SE french sit. They're slighly downshifted today due to some mysterious MENA introgression roughly 2K years ago per Fiorito el al. study but that's about it. In that same study, they samples Val D'Osta, which lacks this inteogression, and it pretty much sits in the SE French section.

Also, nowhere is it indicated that Padania's population was replaced by Germanic invaders. It was one of the most densely populated/urbanized regions in the world at the time and the destruction inflicted was nowhere as profound as on the Danube. That Padanians speak Gallo-Italic tongues and not a variant of German should give you some pause, too. In thr Balkans, they speak Slavic today if you care to know. That Padanics don't have a ton in common culturally with Germanosphere but do w/Provence, Languedoc, as well as places like Arpitania,Burgundy and Poitou should also give you pause.

Btw, Rome didn't exactly "fall" overnight in the west but I'm not going to spend an hour correcting your flawed Gibbonian perspective here.

JohnP said...

@Anthro Survey
Goths were not German, Goths were Goths. They came from the today Bulgaria-Romania region (Thracia-Geate-Dacia) and were called Getae at the time.
Compare the PCA of North Italians - they are closer to Bulgarians today than even from South Italians, which cluster with Ashkenazi Jews.
Unetice was much distant from where Italians are today, being the Czech, Hungarians and Ukrainians the closest.
Now, are you going to consider pre-Romans and compare to modern Italians, disregarding everything in between? Also, they were not like modern Italians like you guys keep suggesting, n-o-t a-t a-l-l.

>>Btw, Rome didn't exactly "fall" overnight in the west but I'm not going to spend an hour correcting your flawed Gibbonian perspective here.<<
Nobody even suggested that, this is you wrongly interpreting my words.

@Davidski
I don't know why banning words. They were created to be used.

Gunther said...

Davidski, don't be so biased because eastern Euros have more ANE. You know very well neolithic farmers had blondes(your comments later here clarify this but the title of this blog post is misleading). You mention Yamnaya, but you forget Corded Ware were also very dark. We now have 5 pure EHG samples(if not more from the new papers), the only blonde(and blue eyed person for that matter) was Samara. If ANE was a particular source of blondness EHG would be very blonde.

Bell Beakers and Unetice were even blonder than Andronovo/Sintashta. Difference? More WHG, or in the short term ENF.

Also, blondness doesn't peak in the most European ANE populations(don't forget Uralic people). SW Finns are the blondest(East Finns are actually pretty dark, according to Lundman and Coon), then Scandinavians/ethnic Estonians, then would come North Germans or the Dutch, not Lithuanians/Latvians or NE Euros. Belgians have the same rate of blondness as Poles, Austrians are blonder than Ukrainians.

Blondness correlates with Bronze Age/Iron Age populations, specifically Germanics and the least Mongoloid admixed Finnic people. After that it'd be WHG, not ANE. All this stuff likely comes from WHGs or paleolithic Europeans(IRF4 and brown hair peaked in WHGs save for KO1, a Goyet sample had red hair, no reason they wouldn't be the source for blondism as well, they weren't "dark haired"), it's just that WHGs had an extremely high in vitamin D diet. It's not a coincidence these traits were just selected for or re-selected for only in highly WHG related populations like Anatolian farmers or ANE.

Calling WHGs "dark skinned" is also absurd. Yakuts, Ulchi/Oroqen and other Siberians are lacking the only known light skin SNP in Mongoloids, yet they're light skinned. Even if WHGs were darker, we're talking Inuit-esque skin, not "brown", and even then, they have a mix of skin tones so the more reddish ones are likely tanned.

Gunther said...

On another note, any ETA on when the files will be released for the Genomic History of South-East Europe paper? There's a ton of goodies in that paper but their PCA has shrinkage(and it's rather messy and unorganized with all those samples on one PCA, would be nice to have some of them seperated).

Davidski said...

Don't give a shit who's the fairest of them all to be honest. But I don't think you know how blond some of the Northwestern Russian pops really are.

The data will be released when the papers come out in journals.

Anthro Survey said...

@JohnP:

Hmm, ok, so you are placing more weight on the gothic migration from what I understand as opposed to subsequent Langobard movements?

There are still a lot of moving parts.

Firstly, the Goths did originate in northern Europe and eventually trekked southward into the Balkans. There is no guarantee they mixed and/or assimilated native "Thracian" elements into their ranks. They may, they may have not.

Whether they did or did not assimilate them, why does the y-haplogroup data from northern italy not indicate any suspicious activity? We don't have an excess of R1a, E-v13, eastern R1b clades, I2 or others there. R1b, u152 in particular, is quite strong in Lombardy-Pied-Emilia. You may point to a couple places where E and J2 are strong(such as Romagna, Liguria or Veneto) but how do we know they're of Balkan origins? Could be from Greeks who colonized the Po delta or, in the case of j2, brought by early Christian settlers from Syria during 1-2nd centuries AD.

Also, we have to be careful in analyzing PCA data as there are caveats. North Italians are not particularly close to Bulgarians and still quite "western", but even if they were, it wouldn't necesserily indicate common recent ancestry. PCA captures basal ancestry(EEF, ANE, etc.). Consider how many Latin Americans map with Kazakhs, Uighurs, Hazara and the like on any given world pca.

JohnP said...

@Anthro Survey
I'm not disregarding the Lombards, but they came after. My previous point (which Davidski deleted) was that after the fall of Rome and subsequent invasions, Italy was pratically repopulated by Ostrogoths, specially in the North. Lombards came after them, many years after in fact, and affected too Italy - Lombards were in fact, from a place where the populations resembled Unetice too.
About the Gothics origins, it's debatable. The Visigoths and Ostrogoths came indeed from Eastern Europe, that's a fact, but it's disputed if their ancestors once came from Sweden. Well, I believe not, and that Gotland was actually founded later by Goths migrating northwards, purely because of the influence of Zalmoxis and later Arian Christianity (today known as Orthodox, Arian =/= Aryan), which were a high mark of them.
Now, about "R1a": This is a truly Eastern European mark, and I what I'm saying would really fall flat if the Goths were R1a. IF the Goths were, indeed. You see, until ~7th Century AD Eastern Europe was populated by many bands of Horse raiders - the Goths, the Huns, the Alans, the Slavs, the Balts, etc but after the migrations and collapse of the Huns, the migration of the Goths, and the settling of the Balts, only 2 populations remained in Eastern Europe: the Alans and the Slavs. The Alans were a Scythian people, and spoke a SATEM Scythian language (today it lives in North Ossetia, also called Alania. "Alan" is another variant of "Aryan", just like "Iran" or "Eire" of Ireland) and they were the biggest force in Eastern Europe until Byzantium favoring the Slavs over them and crushing them. Today, the regions is Slavic, so, all those R1a dominance may be a mark of that time, as ancient populations descended from the Steppes had both R1b and R1a - We need to know which Y-haplogroup the Goths had.

About the PCA, I'm not saying that because North Italians are close to Bulgarians they necessarily share ancestry, but that since their post-Unetice times, they moved away from the Central European cluster, moving slightly towards the (modern) Middle East, and that its clinging to Europe via Bulgaria is a sign.
But yes, I know very well the problems of the PCA, but aDNA direct comparison also favors that.

In the end, let us not forget that modern Italians and Greeks (Iberians too, for the matter), have a distinct presence of Arabian-dna, which came to Europe via the Islamic Invasions and the Ottoman Empire much later.
So, to people saying that "modern Italians are exactly like the ones from millennia ago", this is just nonsense.

Anthro Survey said...

@JohnP: (@Gioiello, what do you think btw?)

The presence of Natufian-like DNA in Italy and Iberia should not be attributed to Islamic invasions, let alone to the Ottoman ones because apart from Otranto's brief conquest(lasting a year or so) those parts of Europe weren't touched by the Ottomans.

And we can't really call it an Ottoman "invasion" of the Balkans. The majority of Muslim administration and armed forces in the Balkans were of local Greek or Rumeliot origins. The heart of the early-mid Ottoman empire was Greater Macedonia and Thrace, not Kayseri or Antioch.

Now, aside from Sicily, Saracens made no permanent conquests in South Italy. Mainly just raiding activity.

There is no reason to think that Natufian-like DNA in S. Italy isn't from Bronze Age upheavals in the East Med or from a huge influx of Syrians and North Africans into Italy during the "globalized" Roman era.

In the case of Iberia, it's debatable. The Berber admixture follows a different gradient than what would be suggested by the timecourse of the Reconquista. Just look at all that SSA and e-m81 in Galicia, lol. Again, no reason to think Pax Romana wouldn't have encouraged Berbers to settle there. Recall also that 80% of the Muslims in 11th century Iberia were of local Muladi stock.

It's extremely unlikely that u-152 came from the east and much more likely it's a marker that was established in the peri-Alpine area during bronze/iron ages. Look at the sample from Provence in the Bell Beaker Behemoth paper. Also, wouldn't it make more sense for it to have a Veneto-Piedmont gradient instead of its polar opposite?

Again, north Italians are "clinging" to Europe by Portugal and Switzerland more so than by Bulgaria. But that funneling effect evident in the PCA is due to these shared biogeogrpahical trends which could have multiple reasons, depending on region: high eef, increasing mena admixture, lower steppe/ANE, lower WHG.

I have to reiterate again that historical records(even if they could be trusted) do not indicate a replacement of Po-Valley's population. It's simply inconceivable to imagine that the New York-Boston-DC Megapolis of its day was wiped out just like that----poof. Culturally, absolutely nothing speaks to this. Lombardy and Romagna have much more of a French/Occitan feel than an Austrian one, let alone Balkan. Not what one would expect from a replacement.

Ryan said...

@David - Because it may be that only Europeans have the other variants that cause blond hair, or we are missing the variants that prevent blond hair

It'd be interesting to see stuff like this study for red hair. I can say for a fact though that East Asian people do not have genes that prevent the occurrence of red hair. My half-Japanese cousin and my half-Chinese niece's mix of black and red hair is very striking.

Gioiello said...


@ Anthro Survey

"(@Gioiello, what do you think btw?)"

Anthro, I didn't replied to JohnP, only that the worst enemies of Italians are Italians themselves. He says to be from Piedmont, because if he had said that he is from Veneto it would be too easy to understand who he is. I said to Stoeni/Vettor/Pretotto not writing anymore to me on eng.molgen. He is hg. T, and hates all the other hgps, even though also T is in Italy at least from 6000 years or more.

JohnP said...

@Anthro Survey
>>I have to reiterate again that historical records(even if they could be trusted) do not indicate a replacement of Po-Valley's population. It's simply inconceivable to imagine that the New York-Boston-DC Megapolis of its day was wiped out just like that----poof. Culturally, absolutely nothing speaks to this. Lombardy and Romagna have much more of a French/Occitan feel than an Austrian one, let alone Balkan. Not what one would expect from a replacement.<<

The records do seem to indicate (all of the north until the Papal States), but you see: Did the Visigoths destroyed Western France and Iberia? No, they assimilated, What about the Franks? Same thing.
There are cases of invaders merging with their conquered cultures too.
Also, the Islamic Invasions of Southern Italy were limited, I know, but there's a thing called "Southern Italians migrating to the North searching for jobs".

@Gioiello
>>the worst enemies of Italians are Italians themselves<<
You couldn't be more right, but I still don't support the separatists of Lega Nord. To me, Italy should stay together, but instead be a Confederation, an Union, with completely autonomous Federations inside, then, we can even think of irredentism!

André de Vasconcelos said...

JohnP, no one really knows what the very first Italics were like, although something similar to Unetice is plausible, however Northern Italy hasn't really changed that much over the historical period, as you imply. And the same applies to the south. And no, "Italy was pratically repopulated by Ostrogoths" is very obviously ridiculous for anyone who has a basic clue on how post-Roman Western Europe was like.
Parma_BB, from circa 2100BC, plots near modern people from Bergamo - or Iberia, which is basically the same for argument's sake - ( https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-jGkFU_CKlUE/WROoHD9U8aI/AAAAAAAAAI4/zKSl9L6Kb0AfwKcE00IJTQKAE3CDRmfbwCLcB/s1600/CWCzone.png ). Two of three Etruscan samples from 500BC plotted somewhere near modern Tuscany trending towards the East, the other one plotted with modern Iberians (http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-1rfyRUeQKSE/VUp1FtC48DI/AAAAAAAAKE0/aprJv89-94k/s1600/etruscans.jpg ), so please explain us how could peoples who "pratically replaced" ancient Italians actually made such a small change. Here's a hint: they were not as numerous as you make them out to be.

Southern Italy is different, not because of 'Islamic invasion' (where's the documents stating the heavy settlement of "Arabs" - as you call them - in the area) but because of historical and cultural connections to the Eastern Mediterranean which have been much, much weaker in the north. Unless, of course, you somehow think that different histories between Southern Italy and Greece provided similar outcomes because both attacked by muslims, but then you'd have to explain this:
"Our results reveal a shared Mediterranean genetic continuity, extending from Sicily to Cyprus, where Southern Italian populations appear genetically closer to Greek-speaking islands than to continental Greece. Besides a predominant Neolithic background, we identify traces of Post-Neolithic Levantine- and Caucasus-related ancestries, compatible with maritime Bronze-Age migrations."
https://gnxp.nofe.me/2017/05/17/the-population-genetic-structure-of-sicily-and-greece/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+RazibKhansTotalFeed+%28Razib+Khan%27s+total+feed%29
To me this reads as Southern Italy being very similar to populations of Greece which were less (or not at all) subject to Slavic settling - the islands. Which means that most of the things you said from the historical period in modern Italy are rubbish.

And if these movements and invasions in Western Europe were so critical in the shaping of it, explain why Galicia seems more 'Mediterranean' (or Farmer-like) than Valencia, considering these historical facts:
-Galicia was populated by Celtic tribes, the Gallaeci, whereas Valencia was populated by non-IE Iberian peoples with cultural ties to Pheonicians, Greeks, and later under Carthaginian political dominance before being occupied by Rome after the Second Punic War. Galicia was only firmly in Roman hands around the Cantabrian Wars.
-SW Galicia was one of the areas with heavier settlement of Germanic peoples, the Suebi (although the core of the Kingdom was in modern Portugal). Valencia was part of the later Visigothic kingdom, but not an area of relevant settlement - if any.
-Galicia was only occupied by Berbers for around 20 years, Valencia remained in Muslim control from 714 until 1238 (with only a temporary break made by Rodrigo Diaz de Vivar).

By the way, the Goths were Germanic, the Getae were Thracian (or Dacian). How could they have been the same people? Don't answer, it's a rhetorical question.

Matt said...

Grey: there's an uncommon (not rare but not common) phenotype along the Irish Sea: pale skin, black hair (often curly) explained in the regions it occurs as shipwrecked sailors from the Spanish armada or some similar type story. if there is a WHG depigmentation gene it might be there.

although it might be hard to tell if people who have it also have the standard ones.


Yeah, though hard to tell if that isn't already explained by the derived IRF4, is a strong site of selection among Ireland / Scotland population vs rest of Europe (linked to darker hair, blue eyes, early greying, freckles / moles and mixed indications re; cancer resiliance and aging)... and there's a bit of an indication that derived IRF4 was at higher frequencies among WHG than we would expect.

But it would be tricky to tell if there some other variants around which were more frequent among WHG than the rest of West Eurasia and hadn't been hit by positive selection. Assume, say, Welsh were 93:7 CE_Beaker:British Neolithic. If Beakers had 25% Atlantic Neolithic (the other 25% Central Europe Neolithic and 50% Yamnaya), then Welsh 30% Atlantic Neolithic. Say Atlantic Neolithic has 28% WHG, then Welsh around 7.5-8.5% WHG.

Now, if that 8% includes some pigmentation variants that were odd, if those weren't strongly favoured by natural selection (unlike IRF4), how easy it would it be to pick them out using the African-European admixture panels and African-European Fst that are what we've used to pick out the main West Eurasian pigmentation variants? Not very easy at all.

The only way I can think of that it might be able to ultimately pick those out is if eventually they we can reliably reconstruct a large size population of high quality WHG genomes (either somehow using modern people, or ancient dna), then look at Fst scores between regions with pigment associations?

JohnP said...

@André de Vasconcelos
Chill out, why people here are so passive-aggressive? You guys are too womanly.
Thank you for all the genetic information you posted. I was making assumptions based on history and culture, trying to fit genetics into it, now I'll reevaluate things when I get the time.
Goths were Germanic, but "Germanic" is just an umbrella term and alone means nothing. Goths were Goths.

@Gunther
I think the closest phenotype of WHG is Neta Alchamister.

Anthro Survey said...

@JohnP:

Migrant workers? The samples they selected from North Italy have been verified to have 4 grandparents from the region.

Besides, the Southerners in the 60s 70s and 80s settled mainly in the Milan-Turin industrial corridor. Also in Genoa. Not so much east of the Adda river or in the eastern Po valley period. I've persinally seen results from full-blooded Padanics and they score exactly how we're used to seeing them score.

Here's a typical southern surname and its spread reflects their settlement patterns.
http://www.gens.info/italia/it/turismo-viaggi-e-tradizioni-italia?t=cognomi&cognome=Gattuso&x=0&y=0#.WR4ggoZHaEc

wot said...

I just watched the program at SVT. Maybe I’m the only one in this thread who’s actually seen it. A short account:

First inhabitants of Scandinavia where hunter-gatherers that came from south west some 10 000 years ago. They were similar to people found in Luxemburg, Spain and Germany, with darker skin and blue eyes. At the same time other hunter-gatherers entered from north east, from Russia, rounded the ice sheet north of it and came down by the Norwegian coast. These had lighter skin and variable eye color. They met and mixed with the south western hunter-gatherers, and their descendants continued to adopt to the conditions of Scandinavia. It is not said what this meant, but presumably a continued evolution towards fair skin and varying hair color.

The later pitted ware culture of marine hunter-gatherers was a continuation from these first hunter-gatherers. They were not farmers that reverted to hunting and gathering, as earlier believed by archeologists. A researcher points out that there is a very clear connection from later to earlier hunter-gatherers. The pitted ware culture spread due to worsening climate and then disappeared rather abruptly around 4000 years ago, maybe because of overuse of resources (seals) or diseases in seals or population. Some of its legacy remains in our present DNA.

The graphic author’s rendering of stone age phenotypes does not look like anything Scandinavian. I suspect this might be due to the well-known political correctness of SVT, a public service media channel where 80 % of journalists are left, according to research. Researcher Mattias Jakobsson, on the other hand, says early hunter-gatherers would blend in well with today’s Swedes.

In the program, it is said that close to one hundred stone age Scandinavian individuals have had their DNA examined. Where are the results? I have only heard about around ten. There might be a tsunami of reports approaching.

Unknown said...

I think the closest phenotype of WHG is Neta Alchamister.

Not likely, she has Basal Eurasian/Natufian influenced gracile MENA phenotype

Grey said...

Matt

"Yeah, though hard to tell if that isn't already explained by the derived IRF4"

yes and yes to the rest as well

Grey said...

Samuel Andrews

"red hair!"

yes - Chinese sources mentioning red hair among the early steppe peoples makes me wonder if that came first and at least some examples of blond are red plus some other additive depigmentation gene.


Grey said...

JohnP

don't forget long before the Goths, Celts/Gauls came over the Alps into the Po valley

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brennus_(4th_century_BC)

so if people in the north look different it might date back to that

#

also a lot of these tribal alliances had a mixture of origins

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bastarnae

Anthro Survey said...

@Grey

North Italians do look significantly different than South Italians, on average, but let's remember that the latter are somewhat atypical for Europe and many of their phenotypes look borderline Syro-Anatolian.

The truth is, North Italians DO have a regular SW Euro look and if people can't see it's because they have a warped perception of how SW Euros actually look like. Their misconceptions of this are thanks to many factors, including images of Latin American, Maltese, South Italian, Lebanese and Jewish folks who have been picked to play S.Euro characters. There's this false concept of the "Mediterranean" that's been pushed around heavily by the restaurant and movie industries alike. The truth is, a lot of them DO very much resemble Sardinians and Iberians if we adjust for pigmentation. There's also tremendous overlap with South France(and France in general), too. They do overlap with Swiss, too.

A good example is the actor Gian Maria Volonte from the dolars trilogy. You tell me whether he passes better in France, SW and Iberia or some faraway land in Pomerania.

German Dziebel said...

@jason

"Why would ANE lead to blond hair only in Europeans?"

You are looking into the core of it.

Davidski quoted only half of the story. I quoted it earlier in full:

It's not a behemoth study. It's a mammoth study.

Blond hair

"The derived allele of the KITLG SNP rs12821256 that is associated with – and likely causal for – blond hair in Europeans4,5 is present in one hunter-gatherer from each of Samara, Motala and Ukraine (I0124, I0014 and I1763), as well as several later individuals with Steppe ancestry. Since the allele is found in populations with EHG but not WHG ancestry, it suggests that its origin is in the Ancient North Eurasian (ANE) [read: backmigrated Amerindians.-G.D.] population. Consistent with this, we observe that earliest known individual with the derived allele is the ANE individual Afontova Gora, which is directly dated to 16130-15749 cal BCE (14710±60 BP, MAMS-27186: a previously unpublished date that we newly report here)."

EDAR

"The derived allele of rs3827760 in EDAR, which is common and has been a target of strong selection in present-day East Asians, is present in a single copy in one Middle Neolithic individual from Latvia (I4435), consistent with previous observations of the allele in huntergatherers from Motala in Sweden.2 This continues to support the possibility that this allele may have originated in the Ancient North Eurasians [read: backmigrated Amerindians.-G.D.] and not necessarily in ancestral East Asians."

Anthro Survey said...

@Andre:

I feel like kicking myself right now and can't believe I hadn't considered this earlier!
Do you think the first introgressions of steppic DNA into Iberia(from the samples we've seen) correspond with the appearance of the Lusitanic group of IE languages there? These are usually termed as "pre-Celtic". Could later introgressions of steppe ancestry (that presumably got their steppe numbers to what they are now) have introduced proper Celtic languages and left Lusitanic to survive in south Galicia/north Portugal? It's so tempting to consider this set of scenarios.

Btw, thanks for linking John to those PCAs. I was too lazy(sorry John).

Grey said...

Anthro

"North Italians do look significantly different than South Italians, on average, but let's remember that the latter are somewhat atypical for Europe and many of their phenotypes look borderline Syro-Anatolian. The truth is, North Italians DO have a regular SW Euro look..."

no worries - i use arguments like this as an excuse to link stuff i think people will find interesting

André de Vasconcelos said...

@Anthro

I don't think so, Lusitanians appear to be much more recent than that, despite some linguistic archaisms, considering the samples from SW Portugal already have yDNA R1b-P312 and steppe ancestry according to Martiniano 2017 (but no CHG, whatever that actually means). It appears thse initial steppe introgressions into Iberia were relatively light when compared to the massive turnovers in Britain and CEU, so it's even possible that these BA Iberian folk didn't even experience a language shift, despite 'steppe males' moving in and leaving relatively successful lineages - possibly because they held some sort of technological advantage which enabled them to have an elite status, maybe related to metallurgy (speculation). It would explain why, by the Roman period, a large portion of Iberia spoke non-IE languages despite being heavily R1b today.

Some people have suggested a connection between Lusitanian and Ligurian, as both seem to be para-Celtic languages, with strong cultural affinities to the Celtic world. I've read somewhere that it was proposed the Lusitanians were originally from the Alps, but there is no actual evidence. On the other hand there seems to be a significant cultural overlap between Lusitanians and their neighbours just to the north (Gallaeci), which still present archaic Late Bronze Age characteristics such as the circular buildings that made us call it 'castro culture'.

Not much in known about the early/first Iron Age in NW Iberia (early first millenium BC), which should be roughly when Lusitanian and Celtic languages arrived, and indeed central european cultural features start to emerge. But with bronze becoming outdated, its economic importance in the Atlantic Bronze as a source of tin diminuished, and led to its collapse, so the material findings are not as common and rich as before.

If you want my guess, Lusitanians arrived slightly ahead of Celts in Iberia, bringing elements of the Hallstatt culture and their archaic para-Celtic language, but not much before them. The Ora Maritima might relate to either their arrival, or those of Celtic background, as it's based on a Greek text from the 6th century BC that recounts the arrival of some snakes (assumed to be a people with symbolic/religious connections to snakes) which drove out the previous inhabitants in what is believed to be modern Portugal

Vincent said...

Recent MENA admix in Italy is extremely low and almost all in Sicily from the Arab occupation - Razib has just acknowledged that fact. Also North and South Italians (incl Sicilians) aren't that different in looks or ancestry.

See Italians 101: http://italianthro.altervista.org/italians.html

Alogo said...

I understand their obvious thought process but maybe it's better to say for the time being that the specific mixture that resulted in the populations inhabiting that area of the Balkans-Ukraine-southern Russia-Karelia-Scandinavia, as far as Mesolithic Europe is concerned, lead to lighter-haired and skinned populations (as far as we can tell going by known SNPs).

David seems to be right about the why of the relative 'fairness' of Europe vs Western Eurasia outside of it. The third major population component in Europe, the Anatolian farmers, seem to have been on the intermediate side for all features while the other components in Asia were generally darker in the first place.

But sorry Gunther, at least modern levels of light skin color in Europe (based on just known SNPs in Europeans, again) do seem to have roots in the East, Anatolia and the steppe/easternmost Europe, with some selection perhaps happening even after (look at SLC24A5 and SLC45A2 frequencies for even Southern Europe). Remember that "Germanics" are the result of important events with roots from the East as well. This might change in the future but it is what it is.

Matt, thanks for the detailed info. Nice reminders and analysis.

Simon_W said...

A few words about the paper by Sarno et al. (after having read it in detail):

- "Significant admixture events successfully dated by ALDER reveal that all Southern Italian and Balkan groups received contributions from populations bearing a Continental European ancestry between 3.0 and 1.5 kya"

3.0 kya, that's about 1000 BC, and indeed there is no evidence for an earlier presence of Italic speakers in Sicily. The IE Sicels have probably reached Sicily in the Final Bronze Age, shortly before 1000 BC. So there's nothing "too late" about this date.

- Figure 5 is the most interesting one. Check the two South Italian clusters. Admixture between a Sardinian-like pop and a Caucasus/Middle Eastern pop is dated by Alder to 5000 - 3000 years ago for various samples. If correct, and I don't see any reason why it should be wrong, this means that Caucasus and Near Eastern admixture in southern Italy and Sicily cannot be attributed to slavery in the Roman era but must go back to earlier migrations. That's of course a very different conclusion than the one arrived at by Busby et al. 2015!

- I find it disturbing how they downplay the importance of aDNA and instead recommend even more dense sampling of modern DNA. I strongly doubt that denser sampling could be of much use. It's definitely time to collect some autosomal aDNA from Southern Italy and Sicily now.

Samuel Andrews said...

WHG and or EHG might be the secret. Think about it's the thing that differentiates Europe from the Middle East more than anything else. Without it Europe would be apart of the Middle Eastern genetic cline.

Two SNPs thought to help determine skin color shouldn't suddenly take them off the list.

Simon_W said...

@JohnP
"Unetice was the cradle for Italo-Celtic, so, Romans came from it, yes."

That's a very bold statement which I don't buy, sorry. But considering all the other nonsense you wrote, there's not much point discussing with you.

MaxT said...

Interesting to note that Basal Y-DNA P* carriers aka Aeta melanesians have blondism but not other Asians. They carry their own variant of blonde hair gene though.

Basal P* is ancestor of both R and Q

Unknown said...



According to Genetiker Kostenki14 already had variants for both blond and red hair and even for mongoloid light skin. Although it seems to be a different variant than the one in EHG.

https://genetiker.wordpress.com/2014/11/14/analyses-of-the-kostenki-14-genome/

TYR rs1393350 GA

batman said...

@ Unknown,

Tx for the link. One may wonder why these results haven't led to a broader discussion of this matter. From the link:

"The results also show Kostenki 14 as having derived alleles associated with red hair, milk digestion, Mongoloid light skin, and blond hair and blue eyes. Some caution must be exercised in interpreting these results, because the Kostenki 14 genome is not nearly as high-coverage as some of the other prehistoric genomes. But the results also can’t simply be dismissed..."

If environmental factors and natural selection are basic principles within the wvolution of human beings - as well as all other beings - this is nothing but expected. Anyone familiar with the human metabolism in general - and the basic needs of human embryos and children, specifically - will know that a pale skin is a pre-requisite to grow and prosper in the northern hemisphere. Due to the dark winters.

Thus it's contradictory to the basic principles of human evolution and diversity to expect that ANY ancient humans could have thrived north of the 55th paralell without a prior de-pigmeentation-process leading to light skin and ditto hair.

---

That Kostenki-14 also show signs of lactase persistance is probably due to the consumation of the milk from goats and/or reindeers. As the arctic climates requires extra-loads of fat, chalk and aminoacids - also - the extraordinary consumption of milk/diaries would reflect a natural need, as defined by an extraordinary climate.

batman said...

Just as a side-note, but the speciation of the North Eurasians - independent of the Africans and S Asians, could be much older than hereto presumed:

http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0177127

MaxT said...

@Batman

....That study is about Graecopithecus, they were not even Homo sapiens, who came much later. Familiarize yourself with hominidae family cuz your comment is pretty stupid.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hominidae#Fossil

MaxT said...

@JohnP

You have to be the stupidest commenter on here. Learn some basic shit.

1. Kostenki14 is not*** ANE. He is closer to WHG if anything.

2. ANE is identified in Mal'ta Buret culture and Afontova Gora culture.

3. Overall, [WHG, ANE, ENA] share more alleles/related to eachother than they are to Basal Eurasian.

4. WHG peaks in Northern Europeans, ANE peaks in EHG/Siberians/N.Americans, ENA peaks in Asians/Australasians.

batman said...

MaxT.

"That study is about Graecopithecus, they were not even Homo sapiens, who came much later"

Later than what? Themselves?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/2017/05/22/europe-birthplace-mankind-not-africa-scientists-find/?WT.mc_id=tmg_share_tw


"Familiarize yourself with hominidae family cuz your comment is pretty stupid"

As if new discoveries and improved analyis never changed an old term? Before the descendants of Lucy and Louis Leakey populated Africa, some 1,2 million years ago, the general assesment among European paleontologist was 35+ millions years BP, to explain the split between hominids and hominins - and the consequent diversity within monkeys and humans.

Today the general assesment have moved from 1,2 million to 6,5 million years ago - and suddenly we have a European ancestor, rather than a African. How stupid can it get, hm?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/2017/05/22/europe-birthplace-mankind-not-africa-scientists-find/?WT.mc_id=tmg_share_tw


Perhaps the later edition of 'Graecopithecus freybergis' - from Petralona -
is today considered A homo erectus. Seemingly, their close, hominin cousins even learned to survive in the arctic - some 1 million years ago. As they persisted throughout the next 850.000 paleolithic years in the cold, dim north, one may even HAVE to assume that they had been able to adapt, by fenotype and genotype, to the dark, arctic environment some 1 million years ago - already.

Pale skin and long, tight nostrils being two such adaptions - nessecary to survive above the 60th parallel, without as much as an old Nixdorf. THEY were obviously anything but "stupid".

https://books.google.no/books/about/Britain.html?id=XeyenQEACAAJ&source=kp_cover&redir_esc=y

Unknown said...


MaxT MA1 is much less ASI than Kostenki14 but MA1 had some basal mongoloid admixture that wasn't present in other Gravettians and Aurignacians. According to Fu and Reich Vestonice16 is Kostenki+ basal-Villabruna and according to Yuan MA1 and Vestonice16 are both more related to each other than to other prehistoric specimens.

http://biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/early/2017/05/01/130989.full.pdf

https://espace.library.uq.edu.au/data/UQ_11037/rpopt.pdf?Expires=1495704752&Signature=f5dJsIP1bJ4D3ICf4UTKiBehPDgx4Q8AUj~SIe4tL1-2n-fkAHl7fKtYDxYQ918mu0UUKM9OfGxw~DC3I-T~QRiGWHUhtl~RnJ4hH5TZNFO7RFouVpXeaBlRRd1fT0t8I7sTswoT9qjwZ3zqV3O-fGfOHUoblz4Aayl7U5IsPGK6sXpacpkketqOf~bXayFbg9C~kj~QJkm-naqsAdVeQkngzUw1~hymGbd2rNcVnGXxeq4g6S04aoF2idHVfE8JAlJ1ov6~MG83dp6BhqtRRzCxV396TyyUjc4AdHqUZrsvchvpYnjPBqNH5MKMfKD8CKGDG7Fgtf9fBgTAiBz2qg__&Key-Pair-Id=APKAJKNBJ4MJBJNC6NLQ

Unknown said...


By the way anyone knows when and where the green eye mutation first appeared? I can't find anything about it but WHGs don't seem to have had green eyes.

SHG and EHG peak in North Europeans but pure WHG peaks in Basques, Estonians, Latvians and Lithuanians(but it is apparently pretty low even amongst them). According to Yuan MA1 is closer to modern Europeans than to Amerindians which again suggests that the vast majority of the hunter gatherer ancestry in modern Europeans from EHG that was mostly ANE since Europeans have BE unlike Amerindians yet according to him they are still closer. I think modern Middle Easterners may have higher non-ANE Gravettian ancestry than modern Europeans because they can be modeled like this:

BedouinB
"Vestonice16" 53.85
"Basal" 29.55
"AfontovaGora3" 11.3
"Esan_Nigeria" 5.25
"MA1" 0.05
"GoyetQ116-1" 0
"Kostenki14" 0
"ElMiron" 0
"Villabruna" 0

Could someone run QpAdm and nMonte like this on Natufians?

Normandie Kent said...

Because Native Americans were already in the Americas when the Mutation arose, and then spread into West Eurasia. They are far older than the Mutation.

hammadbutt said...

Thanks for sharing. Its a Nice easy tips and formula for every men. Such Hair transplant procedure is very effective for hair loss patients.
best hair transplant in dubai