Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Ancient DNA Analysis of 8000 B.C. Near Eastern Farmers Supports an Early Neolithic Pi

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Ancient DNA Analysis of 8000 B.C. Near Eastern Farmers Supports an Early Neolithic Pi

    Ancient DNA Analysis of 8000 B.C. Near Eastern Farmers Supports an Early Neolithic Pioneer Maritime Colonization of Mainland Europe through Cyprus and the Aegean Islands
    Eva Fernández,1,2,* Alejandro Pérez-Pérez,3 Cristina Gamba,2 Eva Prats,4 Pedro Cuesta,5 Josep Anfruns,6 Miquel Molist,6 Eduardo Arroyo-Pardo,2 and Daniel Turbón3
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4046922/
    open

    Abstract
    The genetic impact associated to the Neolithic spread in Europe has been widely debated over the last 20 years. Within this context, ancient DNA studies have provided a more reliable picture by directly analyzing the protagonist populations at different regions in Europe. However, the lack of available data from the original Near Eastern farmers has limited the achieved conclusions, preventing the formulation of continental models of Neolithic expansion. Here we address this issue by presenting mitochondrial DNA data of the original Near-Eastern Neolithic communities with the aim of providing the adequate background for the interpretation of Neolithic genetic data from European samples. Sixty-three skeletons from the Pre Pottery Neolithic B (PPNB) sites of Tell Halula, Tell Ramad and Dja'de El Mughara dating between 8,700–6,600 cal. B.C. were analyzed, and 15 validated mitochondrial DNA profiles were recovered. In order to estimate the demographic contribution of the first farmers to both Central European and Western Mediterranean Neolithic cultures, haplotype and haplogroup diversities in the PPNB sample were compared using phylogeographic and population genetic analyses to available ancient DNA data from human remains belonging to the Linearbandkeramik-Alföldi Vonaldiszes Kerámia and Cardial/Epicardial cultures. We also searched for possible signatures of the original Neolithic expansion over the modern Near Eastern and South European genetic pools, and tried to infer possible routes of expansion by comparing the obtained results to a database of 60 modern populations from both regions. Comparisons performed among the 3 ancient datasets allowed us to identify K and N-derived mitochondrial DNA haplogroups as potential markers of the Neolithic expansion, whose genetic signature would have reached both the Iberian coasts and the Central European plain. Moreover, the observed genetic affinities between the PPNB samples and the modern populations of Cyprus and Crete seem to suggest that the Neolithic was first introduced into Europe through pioneer seafaring colonization.

  • #2
    Originally posted by PNGarrison View Post
    Ancient DNA Analysis of 8000 B.C. Near Eastern Farmers Supports an Early Neolithic Pioneer Maritime Colonization of Mainland Europe through Cyprus and the Aegean Islands
    Eva Fernández,1,2,* Alejandro Pérez-Pérez,3 Cristina Gamba,2 Eva Prats,4 Pedro Cuesta,5 Josep Anfruns,6 Miquel Molist,6 Eduardo Arroyo-Pardo,2 and Daniel Turbón3
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4046922/
    open

    Abstract
    The genetic impact associated to the Neolithic spread in Europe has been widely debated over the last 20 years. Within this context, ancient DNA studies have provided a more reliable picture by directly analyzing the protagonist populations at different regions in Europe. However, the lack of available data from the original Near Eastern farmers has limited the achieved conclusions, preventing the formulation of continental models of Neolithic expansion. Here we address this issue by presenting mitochondrial DNA data of the original Near-Eastern Neolithic communities with the aim of providing the adequate background for the interpretation of Neolithic genetic data from European samples. Sixty-three skeletons from the Pre Pottery Neolithic B (PPNB) sites of Tell Halula, Tell Ramad and Dja'de El Mughara dating between 8,700–6,600 cal. B.C. were analyzed, and 15 validated mitochondrial DNA profiles were recovered. In order to estimate the demographic contribution of the first farmers to both Central European and Western Mediterranean Neolithic cultures, haplotype and haplogroup diversities in the PPNB sample were compared using phylogeographic and population genetic analyses to available ancient DNA data from human remains belonging to the Linearbandkeramik-Alföldi Vonaldiszes Kerámia and Cardial/Epicardial cultures. We also searched for possible signatures of the original Neolithic expansion over the modern Near Eastern and South European genetic pools, and tried to infer possible routes of expansion by comparing the obtained results to a database of 60 modern populations from both regions. Comparisons performed among the 3 ancient datasets allowed us to identify K and N-derived mitochondrial DNA haplogroups as potential markers of the Neolithic expansion, whose genetic signature would have reached both the Iberian coasts and the Central European plain. Moreover, the observed genetic affinities between the PPNB samples and the modern populations of Cyprus and Crete seem to suggest that the Neolithic was first introduced into Europe through pioneer seafaring colonization.

    Thanks again for all your scientific posts

    Comment


    • #3
      Who are the Farmers? The first clue

      (QUOTE)
      During the last decade, ancient DNA analyses of Neolithic populations have provided a more reliable picture of the Neolithic transition process at a local scale. Studies have concentrated at the two edges of the two routes of the Neolithic wave of advance: Central/Northern Europe and the Iberian Peninsula/Southern France. In Central Europe and Scandinavia a DDM has been proposed to explain the observed GENETIC DISCONTINUITY between hunter-gatherers and the first farmer populations [19,23–26]. However, recent analyses have suggested the coexistence of genetically distinct hunter-gatherer and farmer groups during several millennia at the same archaeological site, suggesting that the genetic replacement of hunter-gatherers populations was not complete [20]. In North Eastern Iberia and Southern France contradictory interpretations have been proposed to explain the



      (QUOTE)
      In order to examine the genetic background existing in the FIRST Neolithic communities and its impact over the European genetic pool, we have studied 3 archaeological sites in Syria located in two geographic areas in which agricultural practices were FIRST documented: the middle Euphrates valley and the oasis of Damascus (Figure 1). These sites are dated back to the Prepottery Neolithic B period (PPNB). It is during this initial Neolithic

      Xyyman Comment- to eliminate the possibility of contamination they rejected results for various resons. Non-replication of results is one.
      (QUOTE)
      skeletons from Tell Halula and Tell Ramad (see Table S2). Differences in sample recovery success ratios could be a result of the strict screening approach used –in which samples displaying more than 2 negative amplification results were discarded (30% of the aDNA extracts)- and of the differences in efficiency between the amplification strategy used in both laboratories. The overall ratio of endogenous DNA recovery for the studied remains was 23.8%.

      Comment


      • #4
        xyyman comment - It seems that the substrate of the first farmers still exist somewhat.
        (QUOTE)
        Moreover, it was also highly represented in both Cardial/Epicardial (15.56%) and LBK-AVK (23.08%) Early Neolithic datasets. Haplogroup R0 is especially prevalent in the Near East and North Africa with a mean frequency in both regions around 6%. The maximum frequencies of R0 were detected in SOUTH Arabian populations such as BEDOUIN, Oman and Saudi Arabia (Table S7). The rare European haplogroups U* and N* were also detected in 2 individuals in our ancient sample. The mean frequency of haplogroup U* is 2% in the Near East, 0.9% in the Caucasus region and around 1% in Europe, whereas the N* mean frequency is less than 1% in all three datasets. However, both haplogroups reach peaks of frequency in certain populations, such as haplogroup U* in Crete. The case of N* is especially interesting, because apart from Bulgaria, Crete, Romania and Serbia it was only represented in Near Eastern populations (Iran, Jordan, Near Eastern Jews, Oman, Palestine, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Turkmenistan and United Arab Emirates). Moreover, this haplogroup was
        ALSO detected in 4 Neolithic specimens from Catalonia, in North Eastern Spain, associated to the Cardial/Epicardial culture [27]. Carry- over contamination from these samples processed in the same laboratory can be ruled out, as results were validated in a second independent laboratory. Finally, the skeleton H8 belonged to the African L3 lineage, this being the most prevalent African haplogroup found in present-day Near Eastern populations.


        xyyman comment – ruling out contamination
        (QUOTE)
        These criteria include the replication of the results within the same or in a SECOND laboratory, Real-Time PCR estimation of the


        Xyyman comment- so are modern Near Easterners ancestral to modern Europeans – apparently not. Then who is?
        (QUOTE)
        However, most of the attempts to estimate the Neolithic genetic input in those populations and/or to reconstruct the routes of dispersion of the first farmers into Europe have relied on EXTANT DATA FROM MODERN NEAR EASTERN populations [19,24,27,29–31]. In the present research, ancient DNA results from the original human Near Eastern Neolithic communities are presented, to our knowledge, for the first time. The present study shows that even though the mitochondrial variability of the PPNB population is within the limits of modern Near Eastern, Caucasian and South Eastern European populations (Table 3), both haplotype and haplogroup PPNB frequencies clearly deviate from their modern successors (Figures 2 and 3, Tables S5 and S7). This indicates that the mitochondrial DNA make-up of modern Near Eastern populations may NOT reflect

        Xyyman comment- Again, so are modern Near Easterners ancestral to modern Europeans – apparently not. Then who is?
        (QUOTE)
        All the detected haplotypes but one -the basal node of haplogroup K- have a null or limited distribution in the modern genetic pool, suggesting that a great bulk of ancient Neolithic lineages were NOT integrated into their succeeding populations or were erased by subsequent population movements in the region. This is in agreement with previous observations from other Early Neolithic populations [27,46], and underlines the importance of genetic drift processes at the beginning of the Neolithic [16]. Nevertheless, the multi-population comparative analyses performed

        Xyyman comment – who are the Ashkenazi Jews?
        (QUOTE)
        This observation clearly contradicts the results of a recent study, where a detailed phylogeographical analysis of mtDNA lineages has suggested a predominantly EUROPEAN ORIGIN for the Ashkenazi communities [48]. According to that work the majority of the Ashkenazi mtDNA lineages can be assigned to three major founders within haplogroup K (31% of their total lineages): K1a1b1a, K1a9 and K2a2. The

        Xyyman comment – so, Ashkenazi Jews are “primarily” modern Europeans.
        (QUOTE)
        Moreover, in the light of the evidence presented here of a loss of lineages in the Near East since Neolithic times, the absence of Ashkenazi mtDNA founder clades in the Near East should not be taken as a definitive argument for its absence in the past. The genotyping of the complete mtDNA in ancient Near Eastern populations would be required to fully answer this question and it will undoubtedly add resolution to the patterns detected in modern populations in this and other studies.

        Xyyman comment- So the Modern Near Easterners are primarily new migrants to the area. So which population represent best the FIRST Farmers?
        (QUOTE)
        Our PPNB population includes a high percentage (80%) of lineages with a Palaeolithic coalescence age (K, R0 and U*) and differs from the current populations from the same area, which exhibit a high frequency of mitochondrial haplogroups J, T1 and U3 (Table S7). The latter have been traditionally

        Xyyman comment – so modern Near Easterners are NOT a good representation of FIRST FARMERS
        (QUOTE)
        The first suggestion alerts AGAINST the use of modern Near Eastern populations as representative of the genetic stock of the first Neolithic farmers while the second will be explored in depth in the following section.


        Xyyman comment – Iberians EEF carried a rare N* NOT found in the farmers of the Near East. Tic! Toc!
        (QUOTE)
        Moreover, it is absent in Central European and Northern Iberian Paleolithic/Mesolithic mitochondrial backgrounds [20,23,28]. The presence of ‘‘RARE’’ paragroup N* in both Cardial and Epicardial samples from North Eastern Iberia and PPNB populations CONFIRMS THE CONNECTION between BOTH EDGES of the Neolithic expansion previously suggested in [27]. Haplogroup N1a, representing 12.75% of LBK-AVK samples [19,24], is not present in our PPNB sample, making it unlikely that this cluster was introduced FROM the earliest PPNB farmers of this region [23]. A more complex pattern for the LBK-AVK Neolithic expansion route, involving migration

        Comment


        • #5
          So….people…..what did we learn? Nothing? The paper is very informative. I bolded the relevant sections to help out..

          Comment


          • #6
            blabbering

            The “Population Genetics for Dummies” version for all that blabbering above.

            1. modern Near Populations are NOT a good proxy for the First Famers.
            2. The First farmers of Europe on both sides of the “continent” ie Iberia and South East Europe seemed to be closely related. That is where the “leap frog”, pioneering navigation - nonsensical Theory emerged. lol! That is the best they can come up with. "A navy of farmers" lol!

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by xyyman View Post
              So….people…..what did we learn? Nothing? The paper is very informative. I bolded the relevant sections to help out..
              Well, I am still trying to understand it all lol (non scientist here) plus I am new to DNA research. I am U3a1c...my paper trail of my maternal lineage goes to Ireland (County Kerry).

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by xyyman View Post
                The “Population Genetics for Dummies” version for all that blabbering above.

                1. modern Near Populations are NOT a good proxy for the First Famers.
                2. The First farmers of Europe on both sides of the “continent” ie Iberia and South East Europe seemed to be closely related. That is where the “leap frog”, pioneering navigation - nonsensical Theory emerged. lol! That is the best they can come up with. "A navy of farmers" lol!
                When no adaption to a different climate is required, very fast spread of populations along the coast line(s) is a known fact.

                W. (Mr.)

                Comment


                • #9
                  A fact??? Dogma!

                  Is the coast route a fact. Proof? Or is this rabid dogma!? Not even the geneticist has this down as a "fact". Do you know something I and other scientist don't know?

                  They are speculating.

                  The only FACT is ....South East European Farmers and Iberians are closely related. Now after that it is all Theory and speculation NOT fact.

                  Originally posted by dna View Post
                  When no adaption to a different climate is required, very fast spread of populations along the coast line(s) is a known fact.

                  W. (Mr.)
                  Last edited by xyyman; 13 May 2015, 05:10 AM.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Genetics vs Anthropology

                    Some of you may still be confused on what the paper is about and what it is proposing. It is very simple.

                    The FACTS -
                    1. They are observed that the Western European Early Farmers(Iberians) and the South Eastern Early European Farmers are genetically almost identical. The Early Farmers(8000ya) in the Levant are very similar also but the MODERN peoples of the Levant are genetically different but still share “traces” of these Early Farmers.
                    2. The authors conclude that the modern peoples of the Near East are NOT a good proxy of the EEF. There seems to be extensive immigration INTO the Levant AFTER Neolithic times and the ancient population was absorbed.
                    3. Now, although EEF to the East and West are similar there are suttle differences such as mtDNA hg-N*
                    4. In addition the EEF seemed to have appeared simultaneously in Iberia AND the Crete Sardinia, Greece area.

                    The HYPOTHESIS
                    Now begins the HYPOTHESIS ie, how can we explain the FACTS. Anyone? (Rhetorical), not baiting Darren.


                    Let’s do this like a mutliply choice test,

                    1. There was a Navy of Farmers. Navigating the Medit Sea discovery new lands and planting crops.(He! He! He! Sorry!)
                    2. “Beam me down Scottie” was a reality back then. Teleportation existed back then.(equally believable!)
                    3. The EEF came from Atlantis.(Some people believe that(sic))
                    4. The EEF came from a central location in Sahara, radiating outwards. (That is unbelieveable!) mtDNA hg-H is NOT found south of the Medit. The EEF were NOT hg-H. In addtion Sergi the renowned Anthropologist was wrong. So too was Coon. The genetics don’t support the craniometry.
                    5. None of the above. Or any more “creative” ideas.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Bursting bubbles

                      I hate doing this to you people. You know. Bursting that bubble world you live in. Sorry!

                      But this is a "science" forum. There is enough fantasy out there on the internet

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by xyyman View Post
                        Some of you may still be confused on what the paper is about and what it is proposing. It is very simple.

                        The FACTS -
                        1. They are observed that the Western European Early Farmers(Iberians) and the South Eastern Early European Farmers are genetically almost identical. The Early Farmers(8000ya) in the Levant are very similar also but the MODERN peoples of the Levant are genetically different but still share “traces” of these Early Farmers.
                        2. The authors conclude that the modern peoples of the Near East are NOT a good proxy of the EEF. There seems to be extensive immigration INTO the Levant AFTER Neolithic times and the ancient population was absorbed.
                        3. Now, although EEF to the East and West are similar there are suttle differences such as mtDNA hg-N*
                        4. In addition the EEF seemed to have appeared simultaneously in Iberia AND the Crete Sardinia, Greece area.

                        The HYPOTHESIS
                        Now begins the HYPOTHESIS ie, how can we explain the FACTS. Anyone? (Rhetorical), not baiting Darren.


                        Let’s do this like a mutliply choice test,

                        1. There was a Navy of Farmers. Navigating the Medit Sea discovery new lands and planting crops.(He! He! He! Sorry!)
                        2. “Beam me down Scottie” was a reality back then. Teleportation existed back then.(equally believable!)
                        3. The EEF came from Atlantis.(Some people believe that(sic))
                        4. The EEF came from a central location in Sahara, radiating outwards. (That is unbelieveable!) mtDNA hg-H is NOT found south of the Medit. The EEF were NOT hg-H. In addtion Sergi the renowned Anthropologist was wrong. So too was Coon. The genetics don’t support the craniometry.
                        5. None of the above. Or any more “creative” ideas.
                        WHG originated in western Europe.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by xyyman View Post
                          I hate doing this to you people. You know. Bursting that bubble world you live in. Sorry!

                          But this is a "science" forum. There is enough fantasy out there on the internet
                          If one considers climate and climates history as a science, then some other facts may affect the story being portrayed here: 1. During the middle Holocene period, the climate of northern Africa was much better than southern Europe due to a relocation of the upper winds to the South. this ended after the great flood c. 6K BC. During the above period the northern lands of Europe were rising after the departure of the Ice Mass and there was much more land available in Western Europe, especially in the Baltic area where there was land continuity from the west of Ireland to Jutland. 2. In caves of France and England, drawings of animals native to Africa are found. 3. The straits of Gibraltar may not have been navigable and thus a land mass from Africa to England existed. (Not sure on this one but I know the after effects of the flood/Tsunami did open the dardanelles and flood the Black Sea).

                          I would suspect, based on the above, that there was a significant migration out of N. Africa c. 6K to 5K BC., both probably to the East and West as the Winds went northward and Northern Africa became less habitable and southern Europe more habitable.

                          I suspect that migrations from the East,into Western Europe, didn't intensify until about 4K BC.

                          This might be considered an additional item in your list of what-ifs?

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            I know sometimes it is difficult for a “non-Scientist” to understand the difference between a FACT and a Hypothesis ie Truth vs “make believe”. But I am here to help! If anyone is not LEARNING anything hit me up I can explain a different way. I have been criticized for being too repetitive. I don’t want to be ignored. (insert tongue in cheek)

                            For the record - - WHG did not ORIGINATE in Europe. ALL modern humans originated in one geographich region. WHG were one group of humans that settled in Western Europe after OOA. You are rightly proud to be related and have a long history with Western Hunter Gatherers. I have no problem with that. But don’t don’tget it twisted. First, your freckles came from Loshbour/La Brana and NOT Motala. Both whom were black skinned and darker than Neolithic Stuttgart . I hope you understand that. I would be proud too if my ancestors had such a long history/occupation of the land I now live in. But that is probably on your Maternal side. On you Paternal side you are still “new” to Europe being possibly Bronze or Medieval Age. Your light skin came from the incoming Neolithics as all recent genetic studies have shown that. Now , doesn’t that throw a wrench in your pre-conceived belief. It is not as what it seems.

                            BTW – I can back up and cite sources for EVERYTHING I post. EVERYTHING! One guy here did not like when I said “nothing came from the north”. Did he see the new post by Dienekes on the Etruscans. They are NOT Anatolians. I knew that about 3 years ago!!! Babujani et al wrote a paper on it. “They came from the “general south Europe” – whatever that means. Lol! Do you know the Nuragic also came from the “south”? everything came from the south! Everything! . Even the WHG came from the south. Do you want to go down that road?


                            The only way around continuing the myth is to start outright lying or faking DNA results………but I am the Myth Buster. I hope I am not “scaring people off”. But I have faith in my fellow humans. Most are not afraid of the truth. The hit counts keep going up. People are not scared…bro.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Careful now! You cant’t use “black” and “Africa” in the same sentence. Now.... You will scare some people off

                              Originally posted by ironroad41 View Post
                              If one considers climate and climates history as a science, then some other facts may affect the story being portrayed here: 1. During the middle Holocene period, the climate of northern Africa was much better than southern Europe due to a relocation of the upper winds to the South. this ended after the great flood c. 6K BC. During the above period the northern lands of Europe were rising after the departure of the Ice Mass and there was much more land available in Western Europe, especially in the Baltic area where there was land continuity from the west of Ireland to Jutland. 2. In caves of France and England, drawings of animals native to Africa are found. 3. The straits of Gibraltar may not have been navigable and thus a land mass from Africa to England existed. (Not sure on this one but I know the after effects of the flood/Tsunami did open the dardanelles and flood the Black Sea).

                              I would suspect, based on the above, that there was a significant migration out of N. Africa c. 6K to 5K BC., both probably to the East and West as the Winds went northward and Northern Africa became less habitable and southern Europe more habitable.

                              I suspect that migrations from the East,into Western Europe, didn't intensify until about 4K BC.

                              This might be considered an additional item in your list of what-ifs?

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X