The History of Slavs Inferred from Complete Mitochondrial Ge

Any discussions regarding mt-DNA markers, results or questions.

Posts: 640
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 2:15 am

YDNA:
R1a1a
PostPosted: Sat Feb 02, 2013 12:48 pm
GailT wrote:Wow, that is an amazing story. Here is a helpful link. After you study this, maybe we can have an objective discussion about the H5* mtDNA data.


I couldn't care less about H5*. What I care about is the scientific fact that the phylogeography for all the main markers in West Slavic areas is the same and follows the general South Europe > Central Europe > East Europe route.

Posts: 116
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2012 3:38 am
PostPosted: Sat Feb 02, 2013 8:07 pm
Tomatoes wrote:
GailT wrote:Wow, that is an amazing story. Here is a helpful link. After you study this, maybe we can have an objective discussion about the H5* mtDNA data.


I couldn't care less about H5*. What I care about is the scientific fact that the phylogeography for all the main markers in West Slavic areas is the same and follows the general South Europe > Central Europe > East Europe route.


I've already debunked your naive analysis of H5 and H6 using actual GenBank data, which you've ignored. Anyone can spend a few hours looking at data in GenBank and show that the data don't support your conclusions. But you find objective analysis distasteful, and now I learn you coudn't care less about the data. And this is consistent with your constant insults of anyone who disagrees with you. You're obviously not interested in science. When you only look for facts that confirm your belief you're not doing science. Instead, you should be looking for facts that challenge your theories.
User avatar
Posts: 542
Joined: Mon Oct 22, 2012 8:19 am
Location: Family Line Veneto ( italy ) since ~1600
YDNA:
T1a2-Z19945
MtDNA:
H95a
PostPosted: Sat Feb 02, 2013 9:16 pm
GailT wrote:
Tomatoes wrote:
GailT wrote:Wow, that is an amazing story. Here is a helpful link. After you study this, maybe we can have an objective discussion about the H5* mtDNA data.


I couldn't care less about H5*. What I care about is the scientific fact that the phylogeography for all the main markers in West Slavic areas is the same and follows the general South Europe > Central Europe > East Europe route.


I've already debunked your naive analysis of H5 and H6 using actual GenBank data, which you've ignored. Anyone can spend a few hours looking at data in GenBank and show that the data don't support your conclusions. But you find objective analysis distasteful, and now I learn you coudn't care less about the data. And this is consistent with your constant insults of anyone who disagrees with you. You're obviously not interested in science. When you only look for facts that confirm your belief you're not doing science. Instead, you should be looking for facts that challenge your theories.


I can only agree with you.

That's what happens when someone has nationalistic agendas! ..................tunnel-vision
Fathers mtdna - T2b17 ...back to 1860 Bucciol line
Grandfathers mtdna - T1a1e ...back to 1820 Mestriner line
Sons Mtdna - K1a4 ....back to 1840 Tesser line
Maternal grandfather ydna - Ild-P109

Posts: 640
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 2:15 am

YDNA:
R1a1a
PostPosted: Sun Feb 03, 2013 12:50 am
GailT wrote:I've already debunked your naive analysis of H5 and H6 using actual GenBank data, which you've ignored. Anyone can spend a few hours looking at data in GenBank and show that the data don't support your conclusions. But you find objective analysis distasteful, and now I learn you couldn't care less about the data. And this is consistent with your constant insults of anyone who disagrees with you. You're obviously not interested in science. When you only look for facts that confirm your belief you're not doing science. Instead, you should be looking for facts that challenge your theories.


You didn't debunk anything. All the main roads still lead from Southern Europe into Central Europe, and finally into Eastern Europe. Your "discoveries" in Genbank don't change that.

All scientists working in this area agree, not just the Mielnik-Sikorska crew.

Genetic discontinuity between the North Caucasus and the East European Plain contrasts with continuity through Anatolia and the Balkans, suggesting major routes of ancient gene flows and admixture.


Image

Bayazit Yunusbayev et al., The Caucasus as an asymmetric semipermeable barrier to ancient human migrations, Mol Biol Evol (2011) doi: 10.1093/molbev/msr221 First published online: September 13, 2011

Posts: 116
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2012 3:38 am
PostPosted: Sun Feb 03, 2013 3:57 pm
Tomatoes wrote:You didn't debunk anything. All the main roads still lead from Southern Europe into Central Europe, and finally into Eastern Europe. Your "discoveries" in Genbank don't change that. All scientists working in this area agree, not just the Mielnik-Sikorska crew.


Yes, the evidence indicates that Neolithic farmers and herders expanded from the Middle East and Anatolia into Europe. If that is all you claim, than I would agree with you 100%, as I already stated in a previous post. But you claim much more than that - you have a very specific migration route and dates that are highly speculative and contradicted by the available data. My point throughout this discussion is that you can't do a naive phylogeographic analysis that ignores most of the available data. The truth is that we don't yet fully understand the details of pre-histortic migrations, so I have debunked your claim that a flawed study of H5 and H6 proves anything about the origins of Slavs.

Regarding my "discoveries" in GenBank - it's data that anyone can download and analyze with 2 hours effort, which is much less time than I've wasted on this futile debate.
User avatar
Posts: 542
Joined: Mon Oct 22, 2012 8:19 am
Location: Family Line Veneto ( italy ) since ~1600
YDNA:
T1a2-Z19945
MtDNA:
H95a
PostPosted: Mon Feb 04, 2013 5:29 am
Tomatoes wrote:
GailT wrote:I've already debunked your naive analysis of H5 and H6 using actual GenBank data, which you've ignored. Anyone can spend a few hours looking at data in GenBank and show that the data don't support your conclusions. But you find objective analysis distasteful, and now I learn you couldn't care less about the data. And this is consistent with your constant insults of anyone who disagrees with you. You're obviously not interested in science. When you only look for facts that confirm your belief you're not doing science. Instead, you should be looking for facts that challenge your theories.


You didn't debunk anything. All the main roads still lead from Southern Europe into Central Europe, and finally into Eastern Europe. Your "discoveries" in Genbank don't change that.

All scientists working in this area agree, not just the Mielnik-Sikorska crew.

Genetic discontinuity between the North Caucasus and the East European Plain contrasts with continuity through Anatolia and the Balkans, suggesting major routes of ancient gene flows and admixture.


Image

Bayazit Yunusbayev et al., The Caucasus as an asymmetric semipermeable barrier to ancient human migrations, Mol Biol Evol (2011) doi: 10.1093/molbev/msr221 First published online: September 13, 2011



that map should have paths crossing the black sea as lots of migration went from the caucasus to europe with going to either crimea or anatolia
Fathers mtdna - T2b17 ...back to 1860 Bucciol line
Grandfathers mtdna - T1a1e ...back to 1820 Mestriner line
Sons Mtdna - K1a4 ....back to 1840 Tesser line
Maternal grandfather ydna - Ild-P109

Posts: 794
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2012 3:50 pm
Location: Anthrogenica
PostPosted: Thu Feb 07, 2013 10:25 am
Just a quick resume of what we can deduce so far about the story of mtDNA H.

1) Mesolithic European DNA is dominated by U and its subclades. (There have been a number of claims of H in aDNA of this period, but they tend to turn out unsatisfactory.) So it is highly unlikely that Mesolithic R1 would have encountered H.

2) H appears in Neolithic samples from the Near East. It has a burst of subclades around the period that farming was developing there and spreading from there into Europe. It is found in Neolithic European DNA.

3) H appears in Dnieper-Donets, presumably from intermarriage with the neighbouring Cris culture, from whom the D-D adopted farming. It also appears in Cucuteni, with whom Yamnaya intermarried. So it is no surprise to find various forms of H in Andronovo, Bell Beaker and Corded Ware. The IE speakers would have already been carrying H as they spread. Those moving into Europe would encounter more as they mixed with the previous inhabitants.

4) H5 appears in a Pre-pottery Neolithic B Syrian sample of 6800-6000 BC. It evidently spread from there into the Caucasus with Neolithic farmers. The present-day diversity of H5 is highest in the western Caucasus. It had reached Europe by 4625-4250 BC (Rossen culture.) It also appears to have been absorbed into the Yamnaya mixture. H5 has been found in a Tagar (800 BC–100 AD) man on the Russian steppe whose Y-DNA was R1a1a, and in Bell Beaker.

Posts: 640
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 2:15 am

YDNA:
R1a1a
PostPosted: Thu Feb 07, 2013 11:39 am
stoeni wrote:that map should have paths crossing the black sea as lots of migration went from the caucasus to europe with going to either crimea or anatolia


It's not a map of known migrations. It's a map of genetic clines. The samples used don't show any clines running from the Caucasus or Anatolia to Eastern Europe, because Northern Slavs don't carry any recent ancestry like that.

Even if Crimean Tatars were sampled they wouldn't cluster with Ukrainians, but with Nogays. So even then you still wouldn't see a cline from south of the Black Sea and Caucasus to Ukraine.

JeanM wrote:Just a quick resume of what we can deduce so far about the story of mtDNA H.

1) Mesolithic European DNA is dominated by U and its subclades. (There have been a number of claims of H in aDNA of this period, but they tend to turn out unsatisfactory.) So it is highly unlikely that Mesolithic R1 would have encountered H.

2) H appears in Neolithic samples from the Near East. It has a burst of subclades around the period that farming was developing there and spreading from there into Europe. It is found in Neolithic European DNA.

3) H appears in Dnieper-Donets, presumably from intermarriage with the neighbouring Cris culture, from whom the D-D adopted farming. It also appears in Cucuteni, with whom Yamnaya intermarried. So it is no surprise to find various forms of H in Andronovo, Bell Beaker and Corded Ware. The IE speakers would have already been carrying H as they spread. Those moving into Europe would encounter more as they mixed with the previous inhabitants.

4) H5 appears in a Pre-pottery Neolithic B Syrian sample of 6800-6000 BC. It evidently spread from there into the Caucasus with Neolithic farmers. The present-day diversity of H5 is highest in the western Caucasus. It had reached Europe by 4625-4250 BC (Rossen culture.) It also appears to have been absorbed into the Yamnaya mixture. H5 has been found in a Tagar (800 BC–100 AD) man on the Russian steppe whose Y-DNA was R1a1a, and in Bell Beaker.


Hasn't mtDNA H been found in Mesolithic remains from Iberia, Greece and Northwest Africa? I'm pretty sure it has. In any case, it's also been found in plenty of Neolithic European remains apart from those of the Dnieper-Donets.

So how do you know H5 didn't arrive in Syria from the west? And how do you know its high frequency in the Western Caucasus isn't due to extreme drift, which has been well documented in the Caucasus?

Jean, you really need to start thinking outside the box you've locked yourself up in years ago, in which major population movements from the east, including from the steppe and North Caucasus into Europe, are a given, and everything else has to be built around that.

What if the R1 + H populations moved into Central Europe as bits and pieces from several locations somewhere closer to the Mediterranean, like the Balkans and Iberia, and then became the major R1 + H gene pool in Central Europe, before expanding back west and south, and also heading off east, as far as Siberia and China?

Posts: 794
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2012 3:50 pm
Location: Anthrogenica
PostPosted: Thu Feb 07, 2013 1:41 pm
Tomatoes wrote:So how do you know H5 didn't arrive in Syria from the west?

Because the time that there might have been back migration from Europe to the Near East was far earlier - people fleeing the cold of the Ice Age, long before the estimated age of H (12,846 y.a., according to Behar 2012), let alone H5 (9877 y.a., according to Behar 2012). It is these dates that put into doubt the most recent claim of H and H6 (10,945 years old, according to Behar) in Magdalenian Spain. Estimated dates can be wrong of course, but there has been a long history of misinterpreting CRS in ancient mtDNA as H.

The time that we know farmers came from the Near East to Europe fits the burst of expansion in H.

And how do you know its high frequency in the Western Caucasus isn't due to extreme drift, which has been well documented in the Caucasus?


Its frequency probably is. I mentioned diversity. Not that I place too much weight on diversity as a guide to origin. In fact I use H5 of an example of how misleading diversity can be, since H5 most likely arrived in the Caucasus with Neolithic settlers.

Jean, you really need to start thinking outside the box you've locked yourself up in years ago


Projecting again David. :lol:

Posts: 116
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2012 3:38 am
PostPosted: Fri Feb 08, 2013 6:05 am
Dienekes linked to this presentation (in Greek, but the slides are in English). It certainly seems possible that some H could have arrived in southeastern Europe before the Neolithic revolution. And perhaps they identified some early H European samples in this study - will have to wait for the paper. But I'm suspicious of all ancient mtDNA sample IDs based on one or two HVR markers that are not confirmed using tests of coding region markers. If you are going to go to all of the effort to avoid contamination, why not also test the coding region? Yeah, it's difficult and expensive. But if you can't reliably test the coding region, why should anyone trust the HVR results?
PreviousNext

Return to mtDNA Discussions

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron