When you're back, you might find it intersting to look at the preprint of the article by Szécsényi-Nagy et al. on 'The maternal genetic make-up of the Iberian Peninsula between the Neolithic and the Early Bronze Age'
From the Abstract: "In contrast to ancient DNA findings from Central Europe, we do not observe a major turnover in the mtDNA record of the Iberian Late Chalcolithic and Early Bronze Age, suggesting that the population history of the Iberian Peninsula is distinct in character."
Thanks, I believe all of these samples were in Christina Roth's teaser. The curious thing is the major discontinuity in the Mesetas in the Beaker period, but the rest of Iberia not at all. The central question to me is the validity of the results of the early papers that were referenced. I suspect the early results are not right, and that has a big impact on the interpretation of the later studies.
I enjoy reading your Bell Beaker posts! I'm going through the archives. (CWC) jv
ReplyDeleteWhen you're back, you might find it intersting to look at the preprint of the article by Szécsényi-Nagy et al. on 'The maternal genetic make-up of the Iberian Peninsula between the Neolithic and the Early Bronze Age'
ReplyDeleteFrom the Abstract: "In contrast to ancient DNA findings from Central Europe, we do not observe a major turnover in the mtDNA record of the Iberian Late Chalcolithic and Early Bronze Age, suggesting that the population history of the Iberian Peninsula is distinct in character."
Thanks, I believe all of these samples were in Christina Roth's teaser. The curious thing is the major discontinuity in the Mesetas in the Beaker period, but the rest of Iberia not at all. The central question to me is the validity of the results of the early papers that were referenced. I suspect the early results are not right, and that has a big impact on the interpretation of the later studies.
Delete