Mesolithic Iberians

[Optimus]

You can read the article from Dienekes here (http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2012/06/mesolithic-iberians-la-brana-arintero.html)!

As expected the Mesolithic Iberians are closer to Northern Europeans than Southern Europeans but there is a strong Asian shift.


Due to the small number of SNPs, I pooled the two Mesolithic individuals into a single composite one; the K7b admixture proportions are: 9.3% African and 90.7% Atlantic_Baltic, which appears consistent with the position of the individuals in the European PCA plot. The sub-1,000 SNPs in common with the K7b do not give me a lot of confidence in the minority element, but, in any case, the high Atlantic_Baltic figure is what I would expect and appears consistent with the similarly high Atlantic_Baltic figure of the Swedish Neolithic hunter-gatherers.

So no Mediterranean component in them which ofcourse was early Neolithic in origin.They were mostly Atlanto-Baltic.

[Optimus]

The global PCA of the two individuals shows a clear shift relative to extant Europeans.


http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-GPh5_xses4o/T-yfvfiTB4I/AAAAAAAAE7A/BOTvHVxxkPg/s1600/brana_global.png

[Damião de Góis]

So howcome this mesolithic sample is 9% african? The moors hadn't invade yet.. :rolleyes:

[Lábaru]

Our Mesolithic ancestors were more Nordic and African than current Iberians?

[Padre Organtino]

Mesolithic Europeans are not direct ancestors of modern Euros with North-Eastern ones carrying the most ancestry from them and the South-Eastern ones being the least related.

[gold_fenix]

the problem is that the neolithic influence in Iberia has been minimum too, too i read something that ADN in older rests found in Iberia had a genetic link with actual iberians , i am more lost than before, i don't see nothing logical

the mix with neanderthal alterated our DNA perhaps, hahhaa

[Stefan]

Does the African come from less time away from Africans, and therefore a closer affinity with non-European populations than modern populations would have with eachother? Or is it a matter of updated gene-flow from the region? The high Atlantic-Baltic seems expected. Anyway, I think this makes sense with what we know about the migrations into Europe generally overshadowing the refugee populations. In Northeastern Europe this was much less the case than in the West, South, and Southeast.

[Optimus]

the problem is that the neolithic influence in Iberia has been minimum too, too i read something that ADN in older rests found in Iberia had a genetic link with actual iberians , i am more lost than before, i don't see nothing logical


That is not truth.Iberia was influenced by early Neolithic the Proto-Mediterraneans G2a carrying people from Near East with the Cardium Pottery culture.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/81/Cardial_map.png/800px-Cardial_map.png



Mesolithic Europeans are not direct ancestors of modern Euros with North-Eastern ones carrying the most ancestry from them and the South-Eastern ones being the least related.

But Iberians have a lot of Atlantic_Baltic component too.How come they are not partially descended from Mesolithic people?

[Lábaru]

That is not truth.Iberia was influenced by early Neolithic the Proto-Mediterraneans G2a carrying people from Near East with the Cardium Pottery culture.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/81/Cardial_map.png/800px-Cardial_map.png




But Iberians have a lot of Atlantic_Baltic component too.How come they are not partially descended from Mesolithic people?

That is a very low influence, 7-10% of whole Iberia.

[Lábaru]

But Iberians have a lot of Atlantic_Baltic component too.How come they are not partially descended from Mesolithic people?


Yes, in fact these Mesolithic percentages could explain not only the high percentage Altantic-Baltic, too the African influence residual, present in areas of Northern Spain as Galicia and Leon ect.. and with no logical explanation until now.

[Optimus]

That is a very low influence, 7-10% of whole Iberia.

It is not a low influence,Iberians score high on Med.The 7-10% comes from late Neolithic Bell Beaker folks.

[Prince Carlo]

That African admix is clearly North West African.

On low Ks NWA admix comes out as African.

[Kanuni]

Interesting.That means that back in Mesolithic times Europe both in South and North was populated by people who were genetically similar and carried mostly the Atlantic_Baltic component.Pretty logical to me.So we have first the Early Neolithics, the Proto-Meds coming from Middle East and spreading toward Southern Europe.Then we have two late Neolithic waves from Anatolia.One of them weird enough started from Southern Portugal with a maritime culture called Bell Beakers while the other one directly from Anatolia affecting genetically more the Balkans and Italy.

I am wondering about whether this Mesolithic people will fall to carry the Y-DNA I.

[Mordid]

boring, yawn..

[Pallantides]

http://eurogenes.blogspot.com.au/2012/06/ancient-dna-from-iberian-mesolithic.html

Two Mesolithic skeletons from North-western Spain have been successfully tested for autosomal DNA, and compared to extant Europeans. The results, published in Current Biology (http://www.cell.com/current-biology/abstract/S0960-9822%2812%2900650-1), showed that they were outside the range of modern European genetic variation, but much more similar to modern Northern Europeans than to Iberians. Apparently, they were also closely related to Mesolithic hunter-gatherers from Northern and Central Europe. That's basically the angle that Science Now (http://news.sciencemag.org/sciencenow/2012/06/ancient-hunter-gatherers-kept-in.html?ref=hp) has taken in covering the story:

Although the first farmers spread quickly across Europe, trading and exchanging culture across thousands of kilometres, many researchers had assumed that Mesolithic nomadic hunter-gatherers lived in small, isolated bands with little contact over long distances. But the genetic picture, Lalueza-Fox says, suggests "highly mobile" groups that kept in touch and interbred continent-wide.

These are interesting outcomes, because modern North, Central and East Europeans produce a very strong “Northern European” cluster in ADMIXTURE analyses. This cluster usually peaks in Baltic-speaking groups, like Lithuanians, and is difficult to break down (see here (http://eurogenes.blogspot.com.au/2012/04/prehistoric-scandinavians-genetically.html)). Also, it correlates very well with clusters that peaked in Swedish hunter-gatherers analysed recently by Skoglund et al. (see here). As a result, I have no doubt that this modern ADMIXTURE cluster is largely of Mesolithic hunter-gatherer origin, and its widespread range in Europe today is at least partly due to the fact that hunter-gatherers from across Europe were very similar genetically.

In this study, the ancient DNA wasn’t compared to Lithuanian samples, which is a shame. Instead, the authors used data from the 1000 Genomes Project, which includes Finns. However, they oversampled the Finns when running their intra-European PCAs. This showed clearly that Finns were different from other Europeans, largely due to fairly recent factors like founder effect and drift, but provided very little information about the hunter gatherers.

[Damião de Góis]

Update from Dienekes blog:


UPDATE II: Using the K12b, the results are: 45% Atlantic_Med, 41.6% North_European, 10.3% East_African, 1% Sub_Saharan.

My own K12b:

http://oi50.tinypic.com/ildngy.jpg

The conclusion was a sharp difference from modern iberians, but to be honest the main differences are the lack of Caucasus and Gedrosia.

[Prince Carlo]

Atlantic med includes Atlantic alleles. :)

[Pallantides]

Mesolithic Iberians/Spanish_D

Gedrosia 0%/6.2%(-6.2%)
Siberian 0%/0%
Northwest_African 0%/5.1%(-5.1%)
Southeast_Asian 0%/0%
Atlantic_Med 45%/52.5%(-7,5%)
North_European 41.6%/22.7%(+18.9%)
South_Asian 0%/0.2%(-0.2%)
East_African 10.3%/0%(+10.3%)
Southwest_Asian 0%/4%(-4%)
East_Asian 0%/0%
Caucasus 0%/8.8%(-8.8%)
Sub_Saharan 1%/0.4%(+0.6%)


Mesolithic Iberians/Portuguese_D

Gedrosia 0%/6%(-6%)
Siberian 0%/0%
Northwest_African 0%/7.7%(-7.7%)
Southeast_Asian 0%/0%
Atlantic_Med 45%/47.5%(-2.5%)
North_European 41.6%/22.3%(+19.3%)
South_Asian 0%/0.9%(-0.9%)
East_African 10.3%/0.1%(+10.2%)
Southwest_Asian 0%/5%(-5%)
East_Asian 0%/0%
Caucasus 0%/9.7%(-9.7%)
Sub_Saharan 1%/0.7%(+0.3%)


Mesolithic Iberians/Norwegian_D

Gedrosia 0%/8.2%(-8.2%)
Siberian 0%/1%(-1%)
Northwest_African 0%/0%
Southeast_Asian 0%/0%
Atlantic_Med 45%/36%(+9%)
North_European 41.6%/54.7%(-13.1%)
South_Asian 0%/0%
East_African 10.3%/0%(+10.3%)
Southwest_Asian 0%/0%
East_Asian 0%/0%
Caucasus 0%/0.1%(-0.1%)
Sub_Saharan 1%/0%(+1%)

[Kanuni]

So Mesolithic Iberians had the Atlantic_Med component afterall.Would the E1b1b subclades explain the EastAfrican admixture there?

[gold_fenix]

E1b1b doen't have meaning where is highest in Spain (Gallicia) too there is a group of isolated people in Spain where is highest with a high often of R1a when in Spain is very low.
I see each day more complex things in these results, in any case the genome decripted in these rests are under of 2%

[Pallantides]

DOD197(me) vs. Mesolithic Iberians

Gedrosia 7.8%/0%(+7.8%)
Siberian 1%/0%(+1%)
Northwest_African 0%/0%
Southeast_Asian 0%/0%
Atlantic_Med 31.6%/45%(-13.4%)
North_European 58.1%/41.6%(+16.5%)
South_Asian 0%/0%
East_African 0%/10.3%(-10.3%)
Southwest_Asian 0%/0%
East_Asian 0%/0%
Caucasus 1.5%/0%(+1.5%)
Sub_Saharan 0%/1%(-1%)

[Optimus]

^I wonder does this mean that Med component is not Neolithic but rather Mesolithic?I mean the presence of Atlantic_Med component at the Hunter Gatherer tells something about it.