- The Minoan mtDNA is clearly “European” and similar to today's populations of Europe, less with those of Anatolia, the Caucasus and Western Asia, and even less with those of North Africa. Therefore debunked the theory that the Minoan culture was outside-and North African- origin.
- According to investigators, Crete was the original settlement in the beginning of the Neolithic period and then the proto-population that created the Minoan civilization a few thousand years later.
- The ancient Minoan mitochondrial DNA is consistent with other archaiogenetika specimens from the Neolithic Europe, that probably means that the minoans were a population associated with the wave of Neolithic colonization introduced the agricultural economy in Europe.
- The minoans also related closely enough and with many modern populations, including several different samples from Crete and the rest of Greece. In an analysis that the nearest modern population is that of the plateau of Lassithi.
- Although the mitochondrial DNA does not offer adequate separation of populations leptomeriakoy, It seems clear that there is a significant degree of continuity between the Minoans and modern Cretans in particular but also modern Greeks and Europeans in General.
- Worst DNA retention in the Elladiko area of Central Europe and Siberia, because of higher temperature and the use of samples from skeletons that have not been recently excavated,, But enough diversification in the samples (some sites give reliable DNA almost always)
- Presence of mitochondrial haplogroups X, K, J, H, T
- Absence of aploomadas U are the most important in Mesolithic Central Europe
- The Greek examples exhibit a great distance with the Mesolithic Central Europe (Fst=0.19-0.2) but both the MED-lithic and Neolithic samples show a small distance from the Neolithic Central Europe (Linearbandkeramik Fst=0.03-0.05)
Absence of Β-Thalassemia mutations to the Minoans
Boreioasiatiki admixture in Northern Europe
A major new study discovered a startling fact about the establishment of European populations: Europeans and particularly Northerners seem to have been mixing with a population element that resembles the populations of Northern Eurasia (Siberia) but the Indians of America (who came from Siberia before 15 thousands of years ago).
This admixture seems to have been influenced to varying degrees all Europeans, but to a greater extent the inhabitants of Northern Europe. The Sardinian population seems to have influenced the minimum degree. Other ancient European DNA studies have shown that otzi (a Neolithic Mummy about 5,3 thousand-year-old who was found in a glacier in the Austrian-Italian border), the Gok4 (a Megalithic resident of Sweden from around the same era), but a resident in Bulgaria and by the iron age all largely similar among themselves and with the modern Sardinioys.
It seems that the past of the continent was much more interesting than’ What,what many nomizane. The dating of immersion between “North-Oriental” element with the ancient Europeans dates back to approximately 2,000 e.g.. with enough range for the assessment.
Two assumptions were made about how to created this phenomenon. In accordance with the first, the admixture due to the arrival of Neolithic populations in Europe from the Middle East and their adulteration with Mesolithikoys inhabitants of Europe who were genetically metatopismenoi to Asia, probably because of hunter-gatherer free movement from East to West during the prehistory in the region of Northern Eurasia. The second hypothesis explains the phenomenon in the case of invasion blended the Indo-European teams in Europe on the part of the Eurasian steppe.
Aplotypiki analysis in 2.257 Europeans
An extremely interesting new study examine the distribution of recent ancestry in many European populations.
So if two people share a long DNA in one of their chrwmatoswmata, then there is a great chance to have a relatively recent common ancestor, While if the length is less, then the common ancestor is transferred in the distant past. After some point in this process of reconstruct eliminates completely the “Mark” of common descent.
Fortunately, however, it is possible with relatively great accuracy to look with approximately half a million genetic markers if two people have common ancestors in the last few thousand years. Once we can do that for two people, We can do it and for two populations. So we conclude whether there was DNA flow among them in history, and to appreciate when was this flow, watching the case on small or large pieces of DNA.
For example, studies in African Americans showed that their genome is a mosaic of European and African DNA in a ratio of about 1 towards 4. Analyzing the relatively large lengths of these pieces, It was concluded that the admixture was-average- about 8 gennies before, i.e. in the middle of the story of the arrival of European colonists and African slaves in the new world.
The new study is interesting enough for the verification of the effects of the medieval population movements (mainly German and Slavs) in Europe.
Shows how Spain, the France, and Italy are small “Mark” the common medieval origin with the countries of the German North, which means rather that moving the Goths, Franks, Loggobardwn, Normans, etc. It resulted in very large changes in Western Europe.
The Spain looks pretty homogeneous country, as we have seen, It was significantly influenced by medieval Visigoths. Instead, the Italy, seems to have a relatively “deep” the population structure of (before 2.300 years at least) which is probably related to the arrival of different populations on its territory (e.g.. The Greeks in the South).
The sample of the Greeks (which was collected in northern Greece) presents the greatest affinity with that of Albanians and secondarily of the inhabitants of FYROM. But all the peoples of the Balkans, including Greeks and Albanians have common medieval ancestors (in the last 1.500 years or so) with the populations of Eastern Europe. The most likely interpretation is that Greeks and Albanians and those affected by the movements of the Slavs in the middle ages, but to a lesser extent than the populations of Eastern Europe who speak Slavic today. Such effect seems and other non-Slavic populations, as the Hungarians and Germans.
The geographical origin and degree of contamination of the Slavic element cannot at present be estimated. My personal estimate based on samples of Dodecad Project and comparing these with the continental Greek from Crete, the Islands, Cyprus, Pontos, and with the Notioitaloys, Turks of Anatolia, and Armenians, show that there is indeed an increased “Nordic” component in the population of continental Greece, which seems like a prop in Anatolikomesogeiako arc from Sicily until Armenia.
In conjunction with the dating of aplotypwn from the new study in the middle ages, It seems quite likely that the absorption of certain Slavic elements to synetelesthike currently. Of course this influx replaced the local population not, who is still basically Mediterranean (the sample of the Greeks placed roughly in the middle of the Italian bed between the North and the South). My personal estimate is that this admixture of 10-20%.
In any case, along with highly new programmes in the field of ancient DNA as the BEAN Project and another great European program for people from the 45.000 until the 4.500 before the present, We will learn in the next few years several things about the prehistory and origins of various European populations.
DNA from the Mesolithic Iberia
The scholars also isolated a small portion of the DNA of two Mesolithikwn aytoswmatikoy hunter-gatherer. Here were faced with a surprise: the Mesolithikoi people seem quite close, of course, with modern Europeans but have a small clear and visible deviation to the side of modern East Asian populations. If only compared with European populations, more Boreioeyrwpaϊkoys similar populations and does not seem to suggest that there is continuity in local population, nor even with Basque who is supposed by some that are descendants of the Mesolithikoy population.
There is here a reversal: While a resident of Neolithic Sweden, It looked more like the modern Negotiation, Here we have Mesolithikoys inhabitants of which resemble Ibirias Boreioeyrwpaioys. The most likely explanation is that before the advent of agriculture in Europe, the continent was inhabited by a population layer which has been absorbed by subsequent migrations but has been preserved to a greater extent in the more remote northern regions. However it seems that this substrate is not dominant but has largely masked by migrations of populations during the Neolithic age and the bronze age.
Two hypotheses have been formulated for the diffusion of agricultural economy in Europe. According to a case idea of agriculture along with the familiar plants and animals species adopted autonomously by European hunters-gatherers. Another hypothesis argues that the Neolithic agro-pastoral “package” and other technologies (as the anagersi Megalithic monuments) transmitted across the continent from colonization of people carrying themselves the new economy at the edges of the continent.
The new study clearly supports the second hypothesis. Samples of hunter-gatherer and farmer coming from a distance of 400 km between them and have difference in very few centuries. Nevertheless exhibit genetic differences between them as important as today's Europeans from two different ends of Europe.
Most important, the agricultural sample resembles the Mediterranean peoples of Europe, and especially Cypriots and Greeks. Samples of hunter-gatherer are outside of the current genetic diversity in Europe, but more similar to the Finns and others Boreioeyrwpaioys.
It seems that at least in the initial phase of the spread of agriculture in Europe there hasn't been a great deal of mixing between the two groups. In Scandinavia, at the edges of Europe, farmers and hunter-gatherers lived separately for 1000 years and yet had not come into wide contact between them, the resulting agricultural sample still resembles with the populations of Mediterranean Europe, that chance came a few millennia earlier.
The autosomal DNA, i.e. the DNA of 22 chromosomes except X/Y is inherited in “tracks”. Each man has a pair of the chromosomal 1, one of the 2, Coke. Each chromosomal DNA consists of some pieces that belonged to his father, and some pieces that belonged to his mother.
THE reconstructing of chromosomes (recombination) a child from the parents of genetically in the passage of generations creates ever-smaller (in length) DNA fragments derived from human's ancestors, After the DNA sequence ever decays and reconstructed in every generation.
The ChromoPainter technique uses statistical methods to extract useful information from DNA, looking at not just what basis has each person in every point of the genome (e.g.. A, C, G, or T) but anasynthetontas it in pieces (chunks) continuous DNA which is identical with other people (e.g.. ACCGGTT).
A ratio helps to understand the usefulness of these techniques. Imagine a book where the text consists of a, b, c, d, … If not just stared at what letters contains a book but also combinations of letters, one could draw the conclusion that a book where we find the combination-ing at the end of words is likely to be written in English, While a book where we find the combination-ano is written in Italian. The ChromoPainter technique uses all elements, from just “letters” to large DNA sequences.
The fact that DNA is inherited in “tracks” called link (linkage). Using well logging information for genetic markers, along with information about the possibility of the chromosomal to “torn/anasyntethei” at every point of the length of the (recombination map), We can compare the DNA of different people much more “Smart”: If you have e.g.. feature common DNA sequences then are likely to be relatives, If you have several short sequences, can belong to the same or kindred peoples, While if you have a little (comparatively) common DNA may belong to separate populations.
Various people have in common the 99% their DNA, but small differences in rest 1% sufficient to create multiple phenotypic differences (e.g.. the color of the eyes or the shape of facial features) but give us secure information on their origin.
Using these techniques well able, using approximately 250 thousands of genetic markers to identify 25 different “populations” in a set 413 people. The whole process took about a week to an average modern computer, and the results are impressive.
I won't explain in detail all the aspects of this analysis. All items are here (in English).
But I will insist on some points. Thanks to the participation in Project Dodecad, I now have a sample 20 Greeks (Greek_D) from various areas within and outside of present-day Greece, as well as a Greek Cyprus (Greek_Cypriot_D). The existing sample is divided in three subgroups:
- pop8 where Greeks from mainland Greece
- pop14 where are Greeks from Crete, the Aegean Sea, Asia minor, Cappadocia and Pontos, with varying degrees of contamination with Greeks from mainland Greece
- pop11 where Greek Cypriots from a published study (Cypriots) one Greek Cypriot Dodecad's Project as well as 3 Turkish Cypriots and one who has partial Turkish origin
Interesting is also the pop22 where you will find a series of people from different nationalities Pontos/languages.
It is important to note that this technique was able to correctly grouped individuals from different populations. Although the populations represented by large sample (like the Greeks, Turks, and Armenians) population subgroups could be antopisei. And in populations where the samples are small (e.g.. in various Balkan groups or in various populations of Pontus) grouping them geographically nearby relatives or correctly populations.
As increasing the number of samples, so will grow and our ability to uncover the structure of different populations.
For example, small samples of Slovenes, Serbs, Bosniaks, etc. grouped now in pop18. The same and small samples of Turkish/Armenian/Lazwn/Muslim Pontian Greeks from Pontos in pop22 group. This group will probably in the future lead to more detailed groups, enough to find more participants from specific areas.
For example, at the moment there is only one pure Cretan in program, situated with several other Greeks in the Group pop14. If you join many Cretans even, It is possible to create a “Cretan team” corresponding with those who have many more Cypriots (pop11). Respectively, If you join many Serbs and Slovenes, It is likely to break the pop18 group and to create groups of Serbs and Slovenes.
There are also populations with no representation, as Albanians, 100% Ellinopontioi, 100% Greeks of the Ionian, Montenegrins, and it is clear that if these groups have common genetic characteristics, These cannot be discovered if none of them in the program!
In a previous post I presented the first results for the sample of 12 Greeks Dodecad Project, demonstrating the Greek position between Southern Europe and Western Asia, with smaller influences from Northern Europe, Middle East, and negligible from Africa, India and the far East.
Western Asia 31.3Sardinia 31.0Northeast Europe 11.7North-west Europe 11.7South-west Asia 8.9Basque 5.1North Africa 0.1East Asia 0.1East Africa 0.1South Asia 0.0Yposacharios Africa 0.0
Dodecad Project: the first dozen of Greeks
- Greater and more stable component is the Southeuropean, which has the maximum of Sardinia and is found throughout Europe, especially South and West Asia
- Next and relatively stable is the Dytikoasiatiki, which is the maximum of the Caucasus and Asia minor and extends from the Atlantic to the India
- THE Nordic following component and are more variable, that is the percentage of in every Greek can vary quite. This component has a maximum in the Baltic but extends strong enough until the northern border of Greece but also in the entire North-Central Europe and Northern Eurasia
- THE Southwest Asian component has the next rate and is quite stable. Has its maximum in Mesanatolikoys populations.
- The percentages of the remaining components are small and quite variable, i.e. someone can have a small percentage while most nearly zero. All together is 0.36% of which the 0.24% can be classified Anatolikoeyrasiatiko (Moggoloeides) and the 0.03% Anatolikoafrikaniko (Ethiopian). Absent the Dytikoafrikaniko element, While there are slight North African (0.04%) and Notioasiatika (0.05%). Probably these figures are within the limits of statistical noise.
Generally the Greeks seem to have anticipated recommendation given their geographical location.
Pingback: Calculate yourself how Greeks are! – Amphipolis