Ancient genomes with DNA.Land

If Villabruna was an early EHG (perhaps Pre-ANE admixture EHG) as Maciamo points out, then the reason why present-day Near Easterners are closer to Villabruna, is because descendants of EHG (mixed with CHG) - the Yamnaya culture - migrated to the Near East, spreading IE languages and EHG ancestry there. So Villabruna is not similar to present-day Near Easterners because he came from the Neart East, but because "his" descendants migrated there. Either his descendants, or descendants of other EHGs like him (more likely).

Most likely for the same reason, Yamnaya shows this 12% affinity with present-day Indus Valley population. It is because descendants of Yamnaya (Indo-Aryans) migrated to Indus Valley, not because 12% of Yamnaya ancestors had come from there.
 
Hauteville said:
I've noticed at lot of ancient samples also from Europe score some "Central Asian" (Kalash, Indo Iranian et al.) admixture. I've seen a significant numbers of modern Europeans who score it as well. I guess it's a signal of ancient Indoeuropean stratum.
Click to expand...

Modern Irish people score about 2-3% "Kalash", and Bronze Age Irishmen from Rathlin Island also score this.
 
Angela said:
He doesn't believe, clearly, that the evidence points to them "originating" in far northeastern Europe
Click to expand...

Far northeastern Europe was totally uninhabited at that time, because it was the LGM. Ancestors of EHG survived the LGM somewhere near the Black Sea or somewhere near the Mediterranean Sea, and only later spread north, after the ice sheets had retreated.

Villabruna was not a Near Easterner - he was autosomally either a WHG or an EHG (but probably with less or no ANE).

Simply because he survived the LGM somewhere near Anatolia doesn't make him an "ENF-like" person.

Just like being born in a stable doesn't make one a horse.
 
Tomenable said:
Far northeastern Europe was totally uninhabited at that time, because it was the LGM. Ancestors of EHG survived the LGM somewhere near the Black Sea or somewhere near the Mediterranean Sea, and only later spread north, after the ice sheets had retreated.

Villabruna was not a Near Easterner - he was autosomally either a WHG or an EHG (but probably with less or no ANE).

Simply because he survived the LGM somewhere near Anatolia doesn't make him an "ENF-like" person.

Just like being born in a stable doesn't make one a horse.
Click to expand...

Who claimed he was an ENF person? It sure wasn't me. Let's cut it out with the straw man arguments, ok?

Also, please don't pretend that there weren't some bloggers and posters who were very upset at any suggestion that these people came from Anatolia or even Greece, much less places deeper in the Near East, and insisted that they moved from somewhere in the far northeast to eastern Europe and then moved southwest to the Balkans and Italy, not the reverse, never setting their "proto-Europoid" sacred feet in the Near East. If that kind of attitude was stupid, blame them, not me. I pointed out at the time how dumb that was.

The point I was trying to make was actually in response to Alan's post, and it was to express my opinion that we actually don't know whether this group originated in South Central Asia, although it's possible, nor do we yet know the precise relationship between Villabruna, EHG, CHG etc.

As for your post #21, it honestly amazes me into what rhetorical knots you're willing to tie yourself in order to try to prove that no "real" Near Eastern or Indian genetic material, which I guess to you means "Basal Eurasian" or "ASE" made it into Europeans, or at least not into Slavs. Unfortunately for you, it did, with those pesky Near Eastern farmers become European farmers, and those CHG types who were also very high in "Basal Eurasian". Or did you forget about that?
 
Tomenable said:
Modern Irish people score about 2-3% "Kalash", and Bronze Age Irishmen from Rathlin Island also score this.
Click to expand...


I also myself score 1.1% of ambiguous Central Asian who peaks between Kalash and Indo Iranian.
 
Tomenable said:
Here a paper about that Villabruna skeleton:



Face reconstruction of Villabruna (skip to 2:15):


Looks "North Slavic": :petrified:

Villabruna_face.png
Click to expand...

I'm sorry the frontal doesn't seem corresppnding to the crania picture we have. Concerning the nose, a big part of bet I think. And there is no kind of "north-slavic" phenotype according to me. THanks for the docs, nevertheless.
 
This reconstruction could pass for a modern Italian, especially for a northern Italian.
 
Hauteville said:
This reconstruction could pass for a modern Italian, especially for a northern Italian.
Click to expand...

Not exact, but someone like him, I think?


Types like this are certainly not rare in Emilia...looks like some of my relatives on my dad's side. In fact, my brother looks quite a bit like him, although he hasn't let himself go like this. I tease him that if he doesn't curb his liking for good food, he's going to look like him in old age. :)

Zucchero%20Fornaciari.jpg


zucchero.jpg


He's changed incredibly over the years.
cantanti-sanremo-8.jpg


Irene, his daughter:
timthumb.php
 
Man I0104 from Esperstedt in Germany (Corded Ware culture, his haplogroup was R1a, but a Western subclade of R1a):

CWC_I0104.png
 
Again Central Asian is visible.
 
Karelian hunter I0061 with R1a:

Karelian_HG.png
 
Bell Beaker woman, sample I0112 from Quedlinburg in Germany:

No any "Central Asian" showed up, unlike in case of that Corded Ware sample:

4% "Southwest European" (reference pops: Basques, Iberians, South French):

Bell_Beaker.png


And this is I1300 Chalcolithic woman from El Mirador in Spain:

Chalc_Iberia.png
 
I want to se genomes from Italian BB.
 
Man Oase1 lived ca. 40,000 years ago in Romania, but he was not ancestral to modern Europeans:

The authors analyzed DNA from a 37,000-42,000-year-old modern human from Peştera cu Oase, Romania. They found that on the order of six to nine percent of the genome of the Oase individual is derived from Neanderthals, more than any other modern human sequenced to date. Three chromosomal segments of Neanderthal ancestry are over 50 cM in size, indicating that this individual had a Neanderthal ancestor as recently as four to six generations back. The Oase individual does not share more alleles with later Europeans than with East Asians, suggesting that the Oase population did not contribute substantially to later humans in Europe.
Click to expand...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peștera_cu_Oase#Oase_1

Map:

romania_092004.gif


^^^ "Ancestry Report" from DNA.Land for Oase1 from Peştera cu Oase in Romania looks like this:

Oase.png
 
My credo (for now):
We cannot say 'villabruna' is from Iran plateau (everlasting cradle of the whole humanity) nor affirm 12% 'indus' are from Indus Valley people introduced into Steppes nor 12% 'indus' is the part of Steppes introduced into Indus Valley. Modern auDNA "components" are gerographically determined based upon today location, not ancient location. And drift occurred eliminating some genes and creating new genes in pops. Our hard "job" is to discriminate between elements of far ancient ancestry heritage and elements linked to crossings with compact groups migration: hard! Here, if it's not the best way to calculate genetic global distances, we need a bit of IBD when possible. I suppose the more distant the pops the more difficult it is.
What is sure is that the pops expanding after LGM expanded rather from southern positions, West or East: it leaves us a lot of places though. But I red that nevertheless some Central Asian places were not so cold as others of the same latitude, so if true, Iberia, Italy, S-Balkans, Caucasus-N-East and Iran, India are not the only places to take in account for ancestors places.
 
I know it's very sensible that our ancestors came through someplace between Levant and India, or rather they crossed them, but they had not evolved all of them in the same place and had not yet at those old times specialized forms like to date (say: southern or east-southern 'european' looks). No flag.
Concerning people pf N-E Europe I think their southern component was more on the EEF/Anatolia side than on the CHG-proto-iran side. IT's surely not a hazard if they show almost no 'gedrosia' (less than Basques! interesting here too!) and conversely more 'sardinian' than Basque can have.
 
Whoa, this is really interesting. I know we have to be careful with conclusions, but it's still real data.

Oase 1 is fascinating, as is the Oceania and SE Asian in El Miron, which must be from Goyet.

To keep Alan happy we'll just all come to an understanding that NW and NE European is something like Anatolian Neo/EHG-WHG/Chalc Iran. Does that work Alan? Although it's strange because 3/4 of Villabruna is in modern NE Europeans ( 98% in NW+NE and 1% SW Europe), yet he himself had no basal Eurasian? This is why people are saying that the near Eastern affinity in Villabruna was from Villabruna like populations moving into the Near East and not the other way around. Am I getting this right? And how can this be the case if Yamnaya is such a large part of NE and NW Euros? I could be falling into the trap of interpreting this kind of data backwards. I dunno. I think it's actually that we're still missing large chunks needed to see what actually happened, but this may never change.

The Native American in Early steppe, but not Villabruna and Yamnaya is interesting, as is the lack of Central Asian in Bell Beaker, which I think is in some way related to what I'm getting at in the above musing.
 
I've been reading some really interesting stuff lately. Supposedly they're finding a disruption in the Cosmic Ray background. This is really strange because it's a constant, homogeneous energy theorized to be the left over signal from the Big Bang when the universe was created. The distortion is being seen in a region that is roughly defined by the Iranian plateau. The latest models suggests that the universe itself may have actually grew out of a singularity that emerged in the region. Supposedly a new paper's coming out soon and the rumors are swirling. Apparently there may be parallel Iranian Plateaus that periodically collide with each other. These collisions are the actual source of the energy that causes events like the big bang.
 
Sorry, but why is it exactly that some of us are using an Admixture calculator based on modern populations, which one of its authors says gives only "approximate" or general information for a couple of hundred years into the past even for those modern populations, in order to figure out the relationship of ancient peoples who are only going to be very marginally captured by these tools?

I honestly don't get it. Anything we say based on these things is strictly in the "wild speculation" universe.

See:

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/thread...ulty-determining-ancestry?p=488226#post488226
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

This thread has been viewed 32046 times.

Back
Top