Just in case the Iceman has some Paleolithic admixture (The Alps strike me as a place where hunters and gatherers could have held out against the farmers quite a while) I think we should get some genomes that are more certainly pure Neolithic–from the bodies buried at Stonehenge for example. I really like my suggestion of the Kurgan Mound Builders as well.

Also OT: It would be interesting and informative to survey our great RK’s blog readership for recommendations for which ancient MH specimens should be sampled for sequencing, as RK did for existing human populations (http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2011/09/which-undersampled-groups-would-you-like-to-see/). RK’s fabulous reader base should turn up some remarkable candidates.

http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/v12/n2/full/5201075a.html

@8

As of right now, it isn’t generally accepted that anybody is primarily descended from UP Europeans, even the Europeans themselves. Berbers seem to be mostly descended from Afroasiatic migrants from the Middle East, although they have both an unusually high frequency of mtDNA haplogroup H and a weird maternal connection to the Saami which suggests distant (emphasis on distant) affiliations with old Europeans.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1199377/

I thought it was generally accepted that the Berbers were UP Europeans who migrated to Africa during the Younger Dryas–probably settling in the Canaries along the way. Why would you assume the migration was in the other direction. The Berbers are clearly not indigenous to Africa.

Alternatively, it is said that the original inhabitants of the island, Guanches, used to worship dogs, mummified them and treated dogs generally as holy animals.[22] The ancient Greeks also knew about a people, living far to the west, who are the “dog-headed ones”, who worshipped dogs on an island.[22] Some hypothesize that the Canary Islands dog-worship and the ancient Egyptian cult of the dog-headed god, Anubis are closely connected[23] but there is no explanation given as to which one was first.

Also, as I speculated about 3 years ago, I think we’ll find evidence that Y-DNA E is from Eurasia. There is no Y-DNA DE* found in Africa AFAIK, but recently some has been found in Syria.
Also, I may be misreading your intent, but the jury is out on whether Y-DNA J is old in Europe. Of course Y-DNA R1b1a2 is very young in Europe, so not finding that in the Guanche would be expected.

Where are you getting that from?

Meanwhile in Maju’s list of Basque mtDNA, my father matches one from Bearn – H5’36.

Doug McDonald also estimates my father at 76% Irish/24% Basque.

http://www.pnas.org/content/103/1/242.full

“Basques and Canary Islanders are clearly associated with modern Europeans. When canonical variates are plotted, neither sample ties in with Cro-Magnon as was once suggested.”

Canary Y haplogroups are mostly J and E, which is what you would expect given that the islands were only settled from NW Africa less than 2,000 years ago.

http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2009/08/ancient-y-chromosomes-from-canary.html

Jantz and Owsley found affinities between UP Europeans and medieval Norse, but I doubt modern Norwegians are a perfect proxy for their ancestors. Carleton Coon seemed to think that the Iron Age Norwegians were exceptional UP survivors and that their descendants have since regressed to the Scandinavian mean.

http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2005/08/affinities-of-early-upper-paleolithic.html

I’m all for a Guanche Full Genome, as they are the nearest morphologically to the Cro-Magnon people of the Late Paleolithic in Europe. They are also probably related to the Iberomaurusian culture of the Maghreb (North African littoral).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iberomaurusian

Plus the Guanche mummified their dead and there are plenty of well preserved mummies in the Canaries and possibly elsewhere in museum collections.

That’s like saying that Tuscans are like (some) Spaniards, almost a subset of Iberians. I really miss the usual E-W Mediterranean axis in this PCA, why does it shows up this way?

Then also who are those Spaniards that diverge more than Basques in the PC1 and PC2 positive extremes? They are like “super-Basques” but with Spanish label.

The combined answer is, I understand, that the only thing measured here is two “Basque” (Basque-plus) components: PC1 is a component that is highest in the Basque-plus cluster and lowest in Russians/North Europeans, instead PC2 is a component highest also in the Basque-plus cluster and lowest among some Spaniards and Italians (notably Sardinians).

Sardinians, like North Basques, seem to have relatively high PC1 component but not as extremes as the “South Basque cum some Spaniards” cluster. The PC2 component seems instead enhanced (after the Basque-plus extreme cluster) for North Basques and North Europeans.

Tuscans and the Spaniards clustering nearby are only defined in negative terms of non-Basqueness.

http://dodecad.blogspot.com/2012/01/k12b-and-k7b-calculators.html

The “Atlantic_Med” component is bimodal in Sardinians and Iberians

Sardinians differ from Basques by having higher Caucasus/no North European compared to no Caucasus/higher North European

It is rather upsetting that the long-awaited arrival of the Iceman genome consists -at the moment- of a genome browser and no download options. As such, it is not really usable at the moment.