Here is a compilation from many different studies, for the frequencies of the maternal Sub-Saharan haplogroup mtDNA L, for countries from all around Europe. At the bottom, there is a compilation for the total of Spain. We'll see that spanish percentages are similar to other countries and/or regions of Europe.
For some obscure reasons, on the Wikipedia articles "mtDNA L in Europe", and "African admixture in Europe" there is only Iberia and Italy as european countries having mtDNA L, we will see here that this is not the case, there is in all corners of the continent. And I advise you if you dare to edit those articles, you'll probably get blocked.
Slovaks n = 2/207 0.97% Malyarchuk et al.2006
Czechs n = 1/279 0.36% Malyarchuk et al., 2008
German-Danish n = 1/161 0.62% Richards et al. 1996
Germany n = 1/335 0.30% Achilli et al 2007
Germany n = 4/333 1.20% Pliss et al. 2005
Albania n = 1/42 2.38% Belledi et al. 2000
Bosnia n=1/144 0.70% Achilli et al 2007
Bulgaria n=1/141 0.71% Achilli et al 2007
Balkans n= 1/556 0.18% Regueiro et al. 2012 + King et al. 2011
Poland n = 1/542 0.20% Achilli et al 2007
Poland n = 1/436 0.22% Malyarchuk et al., 2002
Poles n = 1/849 0.12% Malyarchuk et al., 2008
British n=1/100 1.00% Piercy et al. 1993
England n = 2/335 0.60% Achilli et al 2007
England n = 1/142 0.70% Helgason et al., 2001
Great Britain n = 1/114 0.90 % García et al. 2011
Scotland n = 1/891 0.10 % García et al. 2011
Finnish n = 1/50 2.00% Sajantila et al. 1995
Finland n = 1/121 0.83% Achilli et al 2007
Finns n = 3/580 0.52% Pliss et al. 2005
Norway n = 1/74 1.40% Passarino et al 2002
Norwegians n = 2/397 0.50% Pliss et al. 2005
Russia n = 2/683 0.29% Malyarchuk et al. 2008
France n = 1/332 0.30% Achilli et al 2007
France n = 5/692 0.72% Richards et al. 2007
France n = 3/433 0.69% García et al. 2011
France n = 2/320 0.63% Pliss et al. 2005
France 1.40% Gónzalez et al. 2003
Switzerland n=1/228 0.44% Achilli et al 2007
Crete, Greece n= 2/202 0.99% Achilli et al 2007
Italy n = 8/411 1.94% Plaza et al. 2003, Romano et al. 2003
NW Italy n = 100 2.00%
Sardinian n = 2/69 2.90% Di Rienzo and Wilson 1991
Sardinia n =2/370 0.54% Achilli et al 2007
Sicily n= 1/106 0.94% Cali et al. 2001
Sicily n = 2/105 1.90% Achilli et al 2007
Sicily n = 3/465 0.65% Plaza et al. 2003, Romano et al. 2003
South Italy n = 2/313 0.64% Boattini et al. 2013 + Stefania Sarno et al. 2014
Tuscany n= 6/322 1.86% Achilli et al 2007
Marche (Italy) n=8/813 0.98% Achilli et al 2007
Latium(Italy) n=4/138 2.90% Achilli et al 2007
Murlo (Italy) n = 1/86 1.16% Achilli et al 2007
Volterra (Italy) n = 3/114 2.63% Achilli et al 2007
Casentino (Italy) n = 2/122 1.64% Achilli et al 2007
Campania n = 3/313 0.32% Achilli et al 2007
Spain Total n = 51 / 4.329 1.18% From here :
Spain n = 15/813 1.84% Achilli et al 2007
Spain, n = 0/686 0.00% Rhouda 2006
Spain n = 0/233 0.00%, Lopez-Parra 2009
Spain n = 1/251 0.40% Plaza et al. 2003
Spain n = 9/312 2.90% Álvarez et al. 2007
Spain n = 1/108 0.90% Casas et al. 2006 *
Spain n = 2/226 0.88% Maca-Meyer et al. 2003
Spain n = 15/742 2.02% García et al. 2011
Spain (Basques) n = 0/462 García et al. 2011
Spain, Zamora Province** n =10/214 4.67% Álvarez et al. 2010
Spain, n = 8/496 1.61% Pereira et al. 2005
Note that in the García et al. 2011 there is overlapping with other studies, that's why the total shown here is not the same as the total you might get from the study.
- * Note that Casas et al. 2006 only considered L1-L2 sequences to be of sub-Saharan origin.
-** This study inlcudes only a sample from a small town of the province of Zamora, thus it is not very representative of the population of Spain, I prefer wider regions, anyways I have included them.
- Note about the subclade L3, some scholars don't consider it as Sub-Saharan (Maca-Meyer 2003 et al.) in her words :
""L3 is more related to Eurasian haplogroups than to the most divergent African clusters L1 and L2". L3 is the haplogroup from which all modern humans outside of Africa derive"
"Marche (Italy) n=8/813" should be 0.98%, not 9.84%.
ResponderEliminarThe reason why the Wikipedia pages are like that is not "obscure", it is very obviously because of a few anti-Spanish and anti-Portuguese trolls have taken a hold of them and have manipulated them and try to prevent anyone from changing them. You will discover who the main culprits are by going to the discussion sections of those pages. Also, they try to minimize African admixture in Italy as much as possible (and not just from haplogroup studies but also autosomal ones) while increase it as much as possible for Spain and Portugal by carefully selecting what studies to show. More Spanish & Portuguese WikiPedia "veterans" (by this I mean people who have made lots of contributions to WikiPedia) should get involved in this and get control of those pages away from these dishonest users with an obvious agenda.
ResponderEliminarFascinating.
ResponderEliminarWould the author of this post say the averages provided on the eupedia website for mtdna haplogroups are incomplete? They seem consistent mainly with Achilli et al 2007 (although excluding central Spain, which would lower their averages for Spain).
Also, do you know whether most of Spain's L mtdna belonged to the L3 subclade?
Este comentario ha sido eliminado por un administrador del blog.
ResponderEliminarIn fact, upon inspection, in Alvarez et al, 2007, two of the nine L mtdna samples are listed as Moroccan: samples GRX159 and GRX112. So 7 samples belong to spain, 4 of which belong to the L3 subclade. (Interestingly, no L mtdna found in central Spain.)
ResponderEliminarmy mistake, seems these samples are indicated as residing in Morocco rather than being Moroccan (which raises the question of why samples are being classed by place of residence rather than regional origin). anyway, that means five of the nine samples are L3.
EliminarAnd it is not just Wikipedia that engages in such dishonest tactics. Notice also that "Maciamo Hay", pseudonym of the anti-Spanish Belgian hypocrite who runs Eupedia, also blatantly manipulates, even when he is better informed and aware of some of these mtDNA studies. For example, he absurdly tries to dismiss and discredit Rhouda et al. (2006), on the purely self-fabricated grounds that it was supposedly "not published", a statement that is not just false but actually doubly-false: Rhouda et al. (2006) was originally published in the annals of an international genetic conference (Congres International de Biochimie, 2006) and then republished again in 2015 in The International Journal of Multi-disciplinary Sciences (Rhouda et al. 2015) It is very transparent why "Maciamo" dishonestly refuses to accept their results. Had they detected any mtDNA L in their large Spanish sample, rest assured that he would not have come up with any specious "arguments" and would have gladly taken it into account for his "calculations" of mtDNA L frequencies in Spain. The fact that this large Spanish sample was not made up of Basques and still did not find any mtDNA L among them evidently is not to his liking. That's the real reason, nothing else he tries to conjure up as an excuse. You can see his refuted "arguments" here in this thread of his Eupedia forums:
ResponderEliminarhttps://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/new-map-of-mtdna-haplogroup-l.29211/