Saltar para: Post [1], Comentários [2], Pesquisa e Arquivos [3]



Just one of those no shit moments of, I said it first! :

 

 Just over 6 thousand years ago, in Caucasus region of western Azerbaijan near de border of Georgia, not far from tiblisi, 3 young children, were buried in the Mentesh Tepe, in Pits, in the shulaveri-shomu culture, sideways in a contracted position, (I figure this after reading paper ....Lyonnet_etal2015QI.pdf).

* Lyonnet  et al - Mentesh Tepe, an early settlement of the Shomu-Shulaveri Culture in Azerbaijan

 

 

  B . Just over 5 thousand years ago, In Iberia region of south Portugal, near the border of Spain, no far from Lisbon, 3 young Children were buried in Perdigoes site, in Pits, in the pre culture milieu of the bell beakers culture, sideways in a contracted position (I figure this after reading paper A. silva et al)

  

A silva et al -Late Neolithic Pit Burials from perdigões enclosure (Portugal): Preliminary results...

 

 now... 

Of the latter 3 children in Portugal, found in Pit7, one was Mtdna H , meaning is mom was most likely a local girl  since those Haplogroup H girls had been in Iberia for very long time, but… wait for it, wait for it… the second and third DNA were Mtdna U4 and U5. - U4 and U5 are from the southern Russia (Siberia) where actually and funny enough the oldest mutations of R1b (M343) originate something like 16,000 Years ago. We know that, for instance, in Scandinavia where its found in highest percentage in Europe they only show up much later with R1b of bell beaker… see, see. What the hell where they doing in the most southern western part of Europe so early? – They came with the leftovers of the Shulaveri Shomu R1b (M269). Bet you all if and when they figure these boys Y-Dna haplogroup it will be all if not most… R1b!

 

And also I bet you all that, when (I think Lyonnet sent samples for France for analysis) those 3 children from Mentesh Tepe Dna analysis comes out we will find the same HP U4 and U5… and if any Chr Y-dna comes out it will be R1b, all of them. 

 

No shit sherlock!

 

 Nota:Não quero de todo transformar isto num blog de antropologia, que nem é a minha praia pese embora o gosto, mas quero que fique escrito, para a posteriedade.  Quem não se interessar por estes temas ignore e siga em frente, ignorando estes posts. Ainda vou colocar mais uns 2 ou 3 antes de largar o tema. Aliás escrevi em Inglês porque estou a ter hits vindo de fora…. E para que fique escrito e claro o que é cintilante e obvio para mim.

 

 

 

Autoria e outros dados (tags, etc)


12 comentários

Sem imagem de perfil

De Maju a 12.01.2016 às 17:46

U4 is found at low frequencies through all Europe (→ http://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplogroup_U4_mtDNA.shtml) and Portugal is relatively high within the Iberian Peninsula. Not just that, we know it existed at those or higher frequencies in the Epipaleolithic... and now we know it was also present in the Neolithic. U4 was also found in the Chalcolithic (Afonso 2010) and is found today. Always at low frequencies but always present. From what you say you seem to be conscious of this continuity, so why do you lean to an opposite conclusion then? Epipaleolithic → Neolithic → Chalcolithic → present, all them with low but detectable frequencies of U4, suggesting continuity. My impression is that there's an U4 branch specific of Portugal or West Iberia that is probably Paleolithic but that it has not been properly researched. It's too old not to have some distinctive markers.

"BALTIC and Scandinavian HAD none mtdna U4 or U5 by 5000 years before present"

· Stora Forvar (Sweden): 1/2 (Skoglund 2013)
· Bad Dürrenberg (North Germany): 1/1 (Bramanti 2009)
· Kunda culture (Lithuania): 1/2 (Bramanti 2009)
· YOO (Karelia): 2/7 (Der Sarkissian 2011/13)
· Popova (North Russia): 2/2 (Der Sarkissian 2011/13)

All them are from well before 5000 years ago. You probably have the Gotland Pitted Ware in mind but these are all several millennia older, from times when Neolithic in Europe was just arriving to the Aegean or not even that yet.

So U4 was very dense over there but it was also present in Portugal and quite possibly NW Africa (Taforalt): the expansion of U4 is at least Epipaleolithic, maybe late UP, just as the one of U5 with which it shows a strong correlation.

"During the NEOLITHIC PERIOD U4 STANDS OUT BY ITS ABSENCE FROM THE HUNDREDS OF SAMPLES tested to date, except for one Late Neolithic/Chalcolithic sample (c. 3250 BCE) from CATALONIA and one from PORTUGAL (3000 BCE)"...

The first that come to mind are Pitted Ware samples from Götland, which are c. 3500 BCE and sub-neolithic of even fisher-farmer maybe (they had pigs at the very least, maybe also some cereals). There is also U4 in Starcevo culture (Széncsényi-Nági 2014), Gurgy (Burgundy, Rivollat 2015), Granollers (Catalonia, San Pietro 2007) and the one you mention at Perdigoes.

While I hate to recommend this site (I have serious ethic conflicts with the owner), you may want to bookmark it for further reference because, even if not 100% reliable (she manipulates some data sometimes), it's still good for quick reference: http://www.ancestraljourneys.org/europeanneolithicdna.shtml

At the very least is much more up to date than what you copied from Eupedia.
Imagem de perfil

De Olympus Mons a 12.01.2016 às 18:12

Maju,
anyone who reads gets confused.
I said (and the paper) that "by" 5000 years (neolithic in Sweden and baltic) there were none. Hunter gatheres might have it.

Look at the Map you provided Maju -- pocket where I said it (urals), pocket at caucasus where SSC comes from... and Pocket at lithuania .. pocket over bulgaria (Volga Bolgar's) and where pure Rb1 L23 died (:-) ).

.. got to go.. but will get back to it. Not at all convinced.
Sem imagem de perfil

De Maju a 12.01.2016 às 18:36

"I said (and the paper) that "by" 5000 years (neolithic in Sweden and baltic) there were none. Hunter gatheres might have it".

I don't understand what you mean? That right on a narrow temporal parenthesis U4 vanished from most of Europe? That may well be a fluke: in most areas it was and is too low to reasonably expect to find it in the relatively few samples. Also that period is very unevenly sampled.

In any case I don't understand your logic: you hint at a migration from the Caucasus but you know that U4 was already in Portugal before that might have happened, you hint at a relation with R1b-S116 but you know that R1b is rather rare in the Caucasus (Armenians excepted). You have posited no significant archaeological similitudes of any kind, no plausible route of migration (we're talking of some 5000 km). I don't see how you can fathom any credibility to that conjectured connection at all.
Imagem de perfil

De Olympus Mons a 12.01.2016 às 22:49

Thank you for engaging…

fair point. But lets be clear. First we don’t really know nothing we just infer. That is different and it gives a lot of latitude. Either way.

Then,
1 – There is no U4 in Portugal if you discard Chandler et al 2005, because all sides say is unreliable and possibly falsified due to contamination. Even the link you gave me. So, no U4 Portugal before this samples and not before more or less 5,000 year ago. Portugal and Catalonia.

2 - Stora Förvar, Bad Dürrenberg , Spiginas all of those are around 10,000 year old and are from regions “not far” from the urals where U4 was borne and, if you remember that the world is orthodromic, not like we see in a Map in a computer, its then the same distance/effort as to Georgia. So not surprisingly they were there, as there is also lots in Russia samples…Even Bad Dürrenberg , norh Germany, not like baviera or something, is one sample and lets see if it doesn’t turn out H (like happened to others). Lots of U4 much, much later, but all very Bell beaker and Pit ware… Easily spread out of Portugal. But of course all these are very old haplgroups, so 20,000 years being around will always see outliers everywhere specially because probably women were… a “commodity”. And that is why Ydna is so important.

3 – Number declined from source, that is why even places where almos

Of course we need a lot more samples and we need to start having a lot more Y-Dna. Then we will see.
Still… those 6 boys I mentioned… will turn out R1b. I bet you.  it will be just another muddy trick (pun on mudbrick, I know, not that good) in r1b history.
Sem imagem de perfil

De Maju a 13.01.2016 às 00:32

1. I don't think it's likely: the data is relatively old but J. Manco is the one spreading those rumors ONLY because they contradict her pet theory. She equally rejects every single sample that shows mtDNA H in Western Europe. She's not concerned about U4 (that would fit her speculative model, as would U5) but mtDNA H. Anyhow only new data will clarify the issue but as things stand, I'd rather believe reputed researchers Chandler, Sykes and Zilhao than that manipulative greedy [fill in the blank], who is anyhow nothing but an expert in art history.

2. Those are from the Baltic, not the Urals. We do not know that U4 was born at the Urals (why?!) IMO U spread at some point in the early UP, U4 and U5 are its most clear European offshoots, U6 in North Africa (and West Iberia) and other lineages rather seem centered in West Asia or nearby regions.

3. Frequency and source are often not related. Y-DNA Q is most frequent among Native Americans but originated around Iran, Y-DNA R1a is most frequent among Polish, Russians, North Indians... but originated around Iran (also, much later than the former though), Y-DNA R1b is most frequent in West Europe but it originated in Anatolia-Levant almost certainly. MtDNA V is most common among Sámi but for sure that it did not evolve there nor anywhere nearby. It all depends on phylogenetically structured diversity and how it is distributed on the map, not on frequency. And this is a most important lesson you should really take if you want to understand haploid lineages, really. If you don't understand this you won't understand anything.

Imagem de perfil

De Olympus Mons a 14.01.2016 às 11:18

Maju, of course its all vague and difficult to figure out... that's why its like a thriller, a murder scene and detective work... and its why we love it!

But!!! 2 things.
a. From Samara region in Volga (Urals) to say Riga in Latvia in Baltic is a 3 hour flight... because de distance is shorter than what looks like in a map and one would imagine. So no surprise on seeing U4 in there... now, crossing the scary forests to come down southern part of Europe... its a different game.

b. I know current frequency of certain haplogrupo doesn´t mean origin… but there is something strange on that small pocket near samara down to Saratov…. It’s a Hotspot, a small blob of R1b ,R1a and U4…. As if R1b where the population living in one side of the river and R1a de population living on the other side! One must concur its strange. As far as I know oldest mutation from R1b is there, oldest found R1a is in there… and U4 shows up deep dark in there… so for a detective theory it looks solid. :- )

Comentar post



Mais sobre mim

foto do autor


Subscrever por e-mail

A subscrição é anónima e gera, no máximo, um e-mail por dia.


Arquivo

  1. 2021
  2. J
  3. F
  4. M
  5. A
  6. M
  7. J
  8. J
  9. A
  10. S
  11. O
  12. N
  13. D
  14. 2020
  15. J
  16. F
  17. M
  18. A
  19. M
  20. J
  21. J
  22. A
  23. S
  24. O
  25. N
  26. D
  27. 2019
  28. J
  29. F
  30. M
  31. A
  32. M
  33. J
  34. J
  35. A
  36. S
  37. O
  38. N
  39. D
  40. 2018
  41. J
  42. F
  43. M
  44. A
  45. M
  46. J
  47. J
  48. A
  49. S
  50. O
  51. N
  52. D
  53. 2017
  54. J
  55. F
  56. M
  57. A
  58. M
  59. J
  60. J
  61. A
  62. S
  63. O
  64. N
  65. D
  66. 2016
  67. J
  68. F
  69. M
  70. A
  71. M
  72. J
  73. J
  74. A
  75. S
  76. O
  77. N
  78. D
  79. 2015
  80. J
  81. F
  82. M
  83. A
  84. M
  85. J
  86. J
  87. A
  88. S
  89. O
  90. N
  91. D
  92. 2014
  93. J
  94. F
  95. M
  96. A
  97. M
  98. J
  99. J
  100. A
  101. S
  102. O
  103. N
  104. D
  105. 2013
  106. J
  107. F
  108. M
  109. A
  110. M
  111. J
  112. J
  113. A
  114. S
  115. O
  116. N
  117. D


Links

Blogs