Quote:
Originally Posted by Mynydd
Going by logics, with a 78% in the haplogroup R1b (don't know if that percentage is exact) and another percentage of the North-Western I haplogroup admixture, the chances that a small percentage of an addition from Asia Minor made itself an overall dominant set of traits approach zero.
|
Rather not. If a set of traits, a specific inherited feature combination is more advantageous and successful in a certain population and habitat, it doesnt matter wether it started with 1 or 70 percent, in the end, after a certain number of generations, it will prevail. The only difference between a higher and lower percentage at start would lie in the time the traits need to dominate the respective generation. It means it might take some generations more if at all, since in drastic cases certain genetically determined characteristics can be decisive for a bloodlines survival in one generation even.
I dont say that this happened in the West with just 5 percent of Neolithic newcomers, but its at least POSSIBLE though not necessary, since Aurignacoid traits were present in the respective populations before already.
So we could rather think about a shift inside of the autochthonous populations in the Mediterranoid and Nordoid areas with an additional Neolithic input because of the warmer climate and change of selective pressures even before the Neolithic transition, but even more so afterwards.
Alpinisation and Baltisation is partly similar and not caused by mass migrations or long term undisputed dominance of respective forms, but a shift of selective pressures resulting in a change of genetically determined as well as environmentally caused characteristics of the respective populations.