PDA

View Full Version : Yamna: "25% ENF, 30-35% ANE", and 40-45% WHG



Fire Haired14
03-03-15, 02:21
The Haak 2015 genomes have been released. Davidski has been working on them throughout the day. At his blog he said in Eurogenes K15 admixture they're most similar to the Volga ethnic groups; Erzya and Volga Tatars. He says they score 30-35% ANE and around 25% ENF, so it's safe to assume they're scoring 40-45% WHG. He says Yamna are fitting better as 50/50 EHG/Tabassaran not EHG/Aremenian or Iraq_Jew.

So, in ANE K8 and Eurogenes K15 Yamna are most similar to modern pops in far eastern Europe, around where these samples come from. Volga-Russians are starting to look like Bronze age Russians with Siberian admixture. ANE is still quite high there. Udmurt are scoring the highest at 25-28%.

Note: Middle Neolithic Europeans tend to score around 40-50% WHG and 60-50% ENF. So, we can already start getting an idea how much Pontic steppe vs EEF ancestry Euro pops have based on ANE K8. Assuming all my ANE is from the Pontic steppe(which it certainly isn't) I fit as around 30-40% Pontic Steppe and 60-70% EEF. My paternal line R1b-P312 is likely from the ancient Pontic steppe and my maternal line U5b2a2b1 is likely from EEF. Most Europeans probably won't fit as a perfect Yamna+EEF mix because other pops were involved.

Davidski later today will make a post about K15 and ANE K8 analysis of Yamna. I'll post a link to it.

LeBrok
03-03-15, 04:29
The Haak 2015 genomes have been released. Davidski has been working on them throughout the day. At his blog he said in Eurogenes K15 admixture they're most similar to the Volga ethnic groups; Erzya and Volga Tatars. He says they score 30-35% ANE and around 25% ENF, so it's safe to assume they're scoring 40-45% WHG. He says Yamna are fitting better as 50/50 EHG/Tabassaran not EHG/Aremenian or Iraq_Jew.

So, in ANE K8 and Eurogenes K15 Yamna are most similar to modern pops in far eastern Europe, around where these samples come from. Volga-Russians are starting to look like Bronze age Russians with Siberian admixture. ANE is still quite high there. Udmurt are scoring the highest at 25-28%.

Note: Middle Neolithic Europeans tend to score around 40-50% WHG and 60-50% ENF. So, we can already start getting an idea how much Pontic steppe vs EEF ancestry Euro pops have based on ANE K8. Assuming all my ANE is from the Pontic steppe(which it certainly isn't) I fit as around 30-40% Pontic Steppe and 60-70% EEF. My paternal line R1b-P312 is likely from the ancient Pontic steppe and my maternal line U5b2a2b1 is likely from EEF. Most Europeans probably won't fit as a perfect Yamna+EEF mix because other pops were involved.

Davidski later today will make a post about K15 and ANE K8 analysis of Yamna. I'll post a link to it.

Thanks for posting it!

My predictions from this thread http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/30774-Estimating-the-Y-DNA-and-autosomal-admixtures-of-Yamnaya-samples/page2 , post 49 were:
30/45/25 EEF/WGH/ANE respectively.
I was within 5% error of all the ratios. Not bad for eyeballing the charts and making guesstimates in my head, ha?

The only thing I'm surprised is that I thought that these ratios will be more valid in Western Yamnaya and not so far East in Samara.

Now lets see if they had some Gedrosia. I wonder if the Red Sea admixture was already there and the East Asian. My guess will be missing Gedrosia, missing east Asian as belonging to migration period of AD times, and Red Sea being present, as some sort of old hunter gatherer history.

Alan
03-03-15, 04:35
The Haak 2015 genomes have been released. Davidski has been working on them throughout the day. At his blog he said in Eurogenes K15 admixture they're most similar to the Volga ethnic groups; Erzya and Volga Tatars. He says they score 30-35% ANE and around 25% ENF, so it's safe to assume they're scoring 40-45% WHG. He says Yamna are fitting better as 50/50 EHG/Tabassaran not EHG/Aremenian or Iraq_Jew.

So, in ANE K8 and Eurogenes K15 Yamna are most similar to modern pops in far eastern Europe, around where these samples come from. Volga-Russians are starting to look like Bronze age Russians with Siberian admixture. ANE is still quite high there. Udmurt are scoring the highest at 25-28%.

Note: Middle Neolithic Europeans tend to score around 40-50% WHG and 60-50% ENF. So, we can already start getting an idea how much Pontic steppe vs EEF ancestry Euro pops have based on ANE K8. Assuming all my ANE is from the Pontic steppe(which it certainly isn't) I fit as around 30-40% Pontic Steppe and 60-70% EEF. My paternal line R1b-P312 is likely from the ancient Pontic steppe and my maternal line U5b2a2b1 is likely from EEF. Most Europeans probably won't fit as a perfect Yamna+EEF mix because other pops were involved.

Davidski later today will make a post about K15 and ANE K8 analysis of Yamna. I'll post a link to it.


Davids has often it's bias. I know that all bloggers are to some extend biased. But sometimes David just tops that all. There was a time where he claimed Scythians came straight out of the Baltics.

He has even put out basically a new calculator just for Yamna. Why not use K8 calculator at first as he did with all the other work?

From the Reich paper we know that the Yamna cluster in between Mordovians, Lezgin and Mal'ta. How is that possible if Lezgians have close to 10% WHG and much more ENF than Yamna supposed to have? This alone makes it impossible that they are 40-45% WHG and only 25% ENF.
Sindhis with basically only a few percentage of WHG are closer to Yamna as Spaniards or Bergamo Italians. How does that work? I would love to see with how much WHG people turn out in k15 who previously had close to 0% of it.


Irony that he throws a new calculator out which puts the WHG exactly like he predicted, what a suprise it's close to Polish average. Oh and 25% ENF, again what a suprise typical Baltic too. So Yamna was basically Baltic (PIE were Baltics his agenda for quite some time) with more ANE.


Reich calculates that Yamna as 50/50 Iraqi Jew/EHG but David says different. So who should we trust?

So either Reich and co. were messing around with the actual data. Or David is doing his own thing because If that was true figures, fst Distance of Yamna to all Northeast Europeans would be much smaller than the distance to Lezgians. Or Turks wouldn't be as close to Yamna as Greeks. Something here is definitely fishy.

Alan
03-03-15, 05:29
But let's for a second agree with Davids 50/50 tabassaran (Lezgic)/ EHG calculation.

Tabassaran are 10% WHG. EHG are roughly 60% WHG. Thats roughly 35% WHG.

Tabassaran have 60% ENF and the EHG have zero. So thats roughly 30% ENF.

Thats 35/35/30 ANE/WHG/ENF.

So if David says in his new calculator K15 Yamna turns out as 40-45% WHG. Than he indeed threw out a new calculator which turns every population with more WHG than the previous K8 calculator.

Nothing about all this story adds. The way Yamna clusters, the way the mix is described (be it Lezgian/EHG or Iraqi Jew/EHG). If Yamna was indeed like Lezgian/EHG mixed they shouldn't be almost as close to Lezgians as to Mordovians because such a Lezgian/EHG mix would rather turn out like modern Northeast Europeans than actual Lezgians.

Imagine if only half of Yamna ancestry is Lezgian like, how can Lezgians than be some of the closest groups to Yamna?

Something here is either extremely fishy or I am missing something out.

Fire Haired14
03-03-15, 06:01
Alan, I agree Davidski can be a bit east Euro-centric at times but for the most part he isn't.

David didn't make a new calculator. He plugged EHG and Yamna samples into ANE K8 and Eurogenes K15. The Haak 2015 PCA isn't the one all and end all. It's consistent with Yamna's ANE K8 scores but they are scoring much closer to Volga-Russians than to Caucasians. The 50% Armenian score from Haak must not have been a perfect fit and should be further investigated.

Davidski didn't say Yamna perfectly fits as 50/50 tabassaran and EHG, he said they fit better that way than 50/50 EHG/Armenian.

Sile
03-03-15, 06:13
Alan, I agree Davidski can be a bit east Euro-centric at times but for the most part he isn't.

David didn't make a new calculator. He plugged EHG and Yamna samples into ANE K8 and Eurogenes K15. The Haak 2015 PCA isn't the one all and end all. It's consistent with Yamna's ANE K8 scores but they are scoring much closer to Volga-Russians than to Caucasians. The 50% Armenian score from Haak must not have been a perfect fit and should be further investigated.

Davidski didn't say Yamna perfectly fits as 50/50 tabassaran and EHG, he said they fit better that way than 50/50 EHG/Armenian.

what do you mean?.....he joined ANE k8 and K15 into one new calculator

maybe because this favours his R1a theory.

In the end , please need to realise that hunters and farmers lived at the same time in ancient neolithic and mesolithic ............and will be further proven by more british findings

Alan
03-03-15, 06:26
Alan, I agree Davidski can be a bit east Euro-centric at times but for the most part he isn't.

David didn't make a new calculator. He plugged EHG and Yamna samples into ANE K8 and Eurogenes K15. The Haak 2015 PCA isn't the one all and end all. It's consistent with Yamna's ANE K8 scores but they are scoring much closer to Volga-Russians than to Caucasians. The 50% Armenian score from Haak must not have been a perfect fit and should be further investigated.

Davidski didn't say Yamna perfectly fits as 50/50 tabassaran and EHG, he said they fit better that way than 50/50 EHG/Armenian.

Sometimes is good, often fits better.


Either he fusioned two completely different calculators (K8 and K15 which is not ANE/WHG/ENF based) together for whatever reason (probably what Sile said).

Or Eurogenes K15 is indeed new. There is no ANE/WHG/ENF K15 calculator so far.

Why not use at the start the K8 calc. as he had done most of his work with?

As written. His calculation does not fit the Reich paper fst distances, PCA plot or admixture results. Either Reich has done something completely wrong or David is doing his own thing.

Or it might be I am missing something completely.

LeBrok
03-03-15, 07:01
Sometimes is good, often fits better.


Either he fusioned two completely different calculators (K8 and K15 which is not ANE/WHG/ENF based) together for whatever reason (probably what Sile said).

Or Eurogenes K15 is indeed new. There is no ANE/WHG/ENF K15 calculator so far.

Why not use the standard K8 as he had done most of his work with?

As written. His calculation does not fit the Reich paper fst distances, PCA plot or admixture results. Either Reich has done something completely wrong or David is doing his own thing.

Or it might be I am missing something completely.
50/50 EHG/Armenians in Yamnaya was always uneasy to swallow for me, considering that PCA plot shows that Yamnaya guys are twice closer to northern Europeans or to EHG than to Armenians.

Maciamo
03-03-15, 09:03
Thanks for posting this, FireHaired.

As I explained in the thread Estimating the Y-DNA and autosomal admixtures of Yamnaya samples (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/30774-Estimating-the-Y-DNA-and-autosomal-admixtures-of-Yamnaya-samples), I believe that there will be big disparities between Yamna samples depending on whether they are descended from the indigenous R1a hunters, the Neolithic farmers from Old Europe, or the actual R1b cattle herders who were the newcomers who brought the new Yamna culture to the steppe.

The samples tested by Haak et al. 2015 are R1b. My estimation two months ago for the R1b samples was 30% EEF, 30-40% ANE and 30-40% WHG. It is almost exactly what Davidski reported. I had 30% of EEF against 25% of ENF in the samples, but that can be explained by the fact that EEF is ENF with about 10-15% of WHG. Had I given th frequencies for ENF instead of EEF, it would have been 25% ENF, 30-40% ANE and 35-45% WHG, which could be considered an exact match, as no two samples are equal anyway.


What I would be interested to see is how the Yamna samples look like when we run them in calculators like K15, K13 or even K10. I am very curious to know how much of the West European or Atlantic admixture descends mostly from Yamna, as opposed to WHG. The modern West European admixture is probably a compound of both Yamna and Mesolithic WHG, but I bet that at least two thirds of it came from Yamna R1b people.

Like Lebrok, I also wonder about the presence of Gedrosia and Red Sea admixtures in the Yamna samples. My guess is that they will be relatively high in Gedrosian (about 10%), but will have little if any Red Sea (< 1%).

Alan
03-03-15, 12:55
50/50 EHG/Armenians in Yamnaya was always uneasy to swallow for me, considering that PCA plot shows that Yamnaya guys are twice closer to northern Europeans or to EHG than to Armenians.
EHG is not equal to North Europeans. EHG is the dead end of H&G. and fst results showed almost the same distance of EHG to Yamna as Iraqi Jews/Armenians. Also PCA plots showing Yamna twice as close to North Europeans is actually a good fit, but than I already mentioned to be cautious about the PCA plot because it is only 2 dimensional and can't show the exact relationship. fst distances are better there. According to fst distances, the Northern Europeans were also closer Yamna than Armenians are. No one said something different.

The point is that according to these results Yamna should be closer to any Northeast Europeans as to Lezgians what is contra PCA map and fst distance. That's why I am irritated.

This here is the fst distances according to Reich paper.
1-Mordovian 0.018
2-Lezgian/Russian 0.019
3- Czech/Belarusian/Estonian/Hungarian/Icelandic 0.020
4-Norwegian/English 0.021
5-Croatian/French/Lithuanian/Orcadian 0.022
6- Bulgarian 0.023
7- Greek/Turkish 0.026
8-Spanish 0.027
9- Sindhi/Bergamo 0.028
10- Armenian/Sicilian 0.030
11- Basque 0.034


With that much WHG Lezgian, Turkish Sindhi and Armenian should be at the end of that list behind most of the Europeans. And all the Northeast Europeans at the top with North Europeans at second place. Greeks should be allot closer than Turks, because Greeks ANE is close enough to Turkish (only 4% less) and at the same time more than three times as much WHG (26% vs 8%), There ENF is also less than among Turks which again would push them more towards Yamna.

Fire Haired14
03-03-15, 13:36
Here's the ANE K8 score of the Yamna sample with the highest ANE according to Davidski. His opinion right now is that Yamna was a mix of EHG, central Asian hunter gatherers, and pure ENF.

ANE 38.13
South_Eurasian 3.56
ENF 22.88
East_Eurasian 0
WHG 34.5
Oceanian 0
Pygmy 0.01
Sub-Saharan 0.93

Here's the Eurogenes K15 scores of the two EHGs. He mentioned EHG is 40% ANE at most.

Samara_HG

North_Sea 25.51
Atlantic 0.01
Baltic 17.68
Eastern_Euro 41.73
West_Med 0
West_Asian 0
East_Med 0
Red_Sea 0
South_Asian 1.99
Southeast_Asian 0
Siberian 0
Amerindian 12.02
Oceanian 1.07
Northeast_African 0
Sub-Saharan 0


Karelia_HG

North_Sea 23.73
Atlantic 0.13
Baltic 18.89
Eastern_Euro 40.43
West_Med 0
West_Asian 0
East_Med 0
Red_Sea 0
South_Asian 0.26
Southeast_Asian 0
Siberian 0
Amerindian 16.47
Oceanian 0
Northeast_African 0
Sub-Saharan 0.08

Alan
03-03-15, 13:58
Here's the ANE K8 score of the Yamna sample with the highest ANE according to Davidski. His opinion right now is that Yamna was a mix of EHG, central Asian hunter gatherers, and pure ENF.

ANE 38.13
South_Eurasian 3.56
ENF 22.88
East_Eurasian 0
WHG 34.5
Oceanian 0
Pygmy 0.01
Sub-Saharan 0.93



So indeed more like 35% WHG. I though they were at least 40% WHG according to the other calculations.
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/30936-Yamna-quot-25-ENF-30-35-ANE-quot-and-40-45-WHG?p=451196&viewfull=1#post451196

I was off with my ENF figures (expected more to be honest). The appearance of 3.5 % South Eurasian is another proof for me that it was part of Indo Europeans all along (as a minor component) and that ANE was brought to Russia probably from South_Central Asian H&G.

So the new Eurogenes K15 makes the samples appear significantly more WHG?

These results fit much better with the actual Reich paper imo.

Maciamo
03-03-15, 17:06
Here are the K15 admixtures (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1QPTmyarOBBEZfXnLI5L64ueJNG34jgy4QgQ_1nSYtnM/edit#gid=917906623) for all the Yamna, Corded Ware and Bell Beaker samples.

As I predicted no Red Sea admixture in the Yamna (nor Corded Ware) samples, and only traces (<1%) in the German Bell Beaker ones. I have linked this admixture to haplogroup E1b1b and T.

The K15 doesn't have the Gedrosian, but the South Asian is a bit similar and is quite high in Yamna samples (6-7%) but progressively decreases to 3% in Corded Ware and 0 to 3% in German Bell Beakers. It doesn't necessarily mean that R1b people came from South Asia, but just that modern South Asians carry a similar admixture through haplogroup R1a and R2. South Asian was already found in the Mal'ta boy (hg R*) from Siberia.

Likewise, the relatively high Amerindian admixture in the Karelia and Samara samples (16% and 12%) stems from the phylogenetic link between haplogroups Q and R. This admixture progressively decreases to 4-5% in Yamna, 1.5-3.5% in Corded Ware, and 1-3% in Bell Beakers.

The Eastern European admixture is highest in the Mesolithic Karelia and Samara samples (40%), then drops to 25-33% in Yamna, 14-23% in Corded Ware, and 5-18% in German Bell Beakers. This admixture is linked more specifically to haplogroup R1 (EHG).

The West European admixture of Dodecad is divided in North Sea and Atlantic in K15. It is really interesting to see that the Karelia, Samara, Yamna and Corded Ware samples had between 18% and 30% of North Sea (average 25%), but only the Corded Ware had significant levels of Atlantic admixture (20% to 27% except one sample at 8%). Yamna ranged from 0% to 9.7% of Atlantic. German Bell Beaker samples have between 21% and 33%. So it looks like the North Sea admixture is associated with R1b Indo-Europeans, while the Atlantic one could be more widely Mesolithic European.

The East and West Mediterranean admixtures were both at 0% in all samples except Bell Beakers. This is just like the Red Sea admixture. That confirms that the Mediterranean and Red Sea admixtures are both associated with Neolithic farmers, but not Proto-Indo-Europeans. This also proves that the German Bell Beaker samples had already mixed to a considerable extent with Neolithic Europeans.

In contrast, the West Asian admixture was completely absent from Mesolithic HG from Karelia and Samara, but high in Yamna samples (15% to 22.5%), then also decreases progressively. This is the best proof that R1b-M269 people had partial ancestry from the Caucasus/Kurdistan region, which older R1b from Eastern Europe didn't have. It confirms my theory that some R1b people settled in West Asia in the late Palaeolithic, then domesticated cattle around northern Mesopotamia (Assyria/Kurdistan), then moved back across the Caucasus to use the vast expanse of grassland for their cattle. During the few millennia they stayed in West Asia they had married women from neighbouring tribes and acquired West Asian admixture. This happened before Levantine cereal farmers (G2a) moved in the region, or at least before they mixed with R1b people in West Asia, which explains why Yamna people do not have any Mediterranean admixture. Their ENF is purely West Asian (linked to hg J2 rather than G2a, E1b1b). This also means that it is not impossible that a minority of J2 people (J2b2, and maybe also some J2a) were part of the Yamna population. I proposed this several years ago, although I couldn't decide whether J2b came from the Balkans to the steppe, or from West Asia. Now it appears it is from West Asia.


The Baltic admixture doesn't show big variations between Mesolithic (18%), Yamna (10-16%), Corded Ware (12-20%) and Bell Beaker (6-18%) samples. It is the only stable component. It might be linked to the ubiquitous mtDNA U5 (and Y-haplogroup I), found in all Mesolithic Europeans and absorbed by Neolithic farmers too. Nowadays U5 is most common in the Baltic region. I would think that this admixture was named Baltic because U5 genes survived best in this region, not because the Baltic was the source region (which it certainly wasn't since northern Europe was under ice until the end of the Würm glaciation 10,000 years ago).

Alan
03-03-15, 18:09
Here are the K15 admixtures (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1QPTmyarOBBEZfXnLI5L64ueJNG34jgy4QgQ_1nSYtnM/edit#gid=917906623) for all the Yamna, Corded Ware and Bell Beaker samples.

As I predicted no Red Sea admixture in the Yamna (nor Corded Ware) samples, and only traces (<1%) in the German Bell Beaker ones. I have linked this admixture to haplogroup E1b1b and T.

The K15 doesn't have the Gedrosian, but the South Asian is a bit similar and is quite high in Yamna samples (6-7%) but progressively decreases to 3% in Corded Ware and 0 to 3% in German Bell Beakers.

South Asian is a hybrid component in any sense. in some calculators Gedrosia gets broken up into "South Asian" and "West Asian" (predominantly). So I assume that this "South Asian" is actually a portion of Gedrosia. Mal'ta did also have this "South Asian" admixture which later turned out as Gedrosia. And some of the "European" in the Mal'ta paper turned out as Caucasus.

Itwill beinteresting to see the Yamna DNA in k12b.

Sile
03-03-15, 18:19
Here are the K15 admixtures (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1QPTmyarOBBEZfXnLI5L64ueJNG34jgy4QgQ_1nSYtnM/edit#gid=917906623) for all the Yamna, Corded Ware and Bell Beaker samples.

As I predicted no Red Sea admixture in the Yamna (nor Corded Ware) samples, and only traces (<1%) in the German Bell Beaker ones. I have linked this admixture to haplogroup E1b1b and T.

The K15 doesn't have the Gedrosian, but the South Asian is a bit similar and is quite high in Yamna samples (6-7%) but progressively decreases to 3% in Corded Ware and 0 to 3% in German Bell Beakers. It doesn't necessarily mean that R1b people came from South Asia, but just that modern South Asians carry a similar admixture through haplogroup R1a and R2. South Asian was already found in the Mal'ta boy (hg R*) from Siberia.

Likewise, the relatively high Amerindian admixture in the Karelia and Samara samples (16% and 12%) stems from the phylogenetic link between haplogroups Q and R. This admixture progressively decreases to 4-5% in Yamna, 1.5-3.5% in Corded Ware, and 1-3% in Bell Beakers.

The Eastern European admixture is highest in the Mesolithic Karelia and Samara samples (40%), then drops to 25-33% in Yamna, 14-23% in Corded Ware, and 5-18% in German Bell Beakers. This admixture is linked more specifically to haplogroup R1 (EHG).

The West European admixture of Dodecad is divided in North Sea and Atlantic in K15. It is really interesting to see that the Karelia, Samara, Yamna and Corded Ware samples had between 18% and 30% of North Sea (average 25%), but only the Corded Ware had significant levels of Atlantic admixture (20% to 27% except one sample at 8%). Yamna ranged from 0% to 9.7% of Atlantic. German Bell Beaker samples have between 21% and 33%. So it looks like the North Sea admixture is associated with R1b Indo-Europeans, while the Atlantic one could be more widely Mesolithic European.

The East and West Mediterranean admixtures were both at 0% in all samples except Bell Beakers. This is just like the Red Sea admixture. That confirms that the Mediterranean and Red Sea admixtures are both associated with Neolithic farmers, but not Proto-Indo-Europeans. This also proves that the German Bell Beaker samples had already mixed to a considerable extent with Neolithic Europeans.

In contrast, the West Asian admixture was completely absent from Mesolithic HG from Karelia and Samara, but high in Yamna samples (15% to 22.5%), then also decreases progressively. This is the best proof that R1b-M269 people had partial ancestry from the Caucasus/Kurdistan region, which older R1b from Eastern Europe didn't have. It confirms my theory that some R1b people settled in West Asia in the late Palaeolithic, then domesticated cattle around northern Mesopotamia (Assyria/Kurdistan), then moved back across the Caucasus to use the vast expanse of grassland for their cattle. During the few millennia they stayed in West Asia they had married women from neighbouring tribes and acquired West Asian admixture. This happened before Levantine cereal farmers (G2a) moved in the region, or at least before they mixed with R1b people in West Asia, which explains why Yamna people do not have any Mediterranean admixture. Their ENF is purely West Asian (linked to hg J2 rather than G2a, E1b1b). This also means that it is not impossible that a minority of J2 people (J2b2, and maybe also some J2a) were part of the Yamna population. I proposed this several years ago, although I couldn't decide whether J2b came from the Balkans to the steppe, or from West Asia. Now it appears it is from West Asia.


The Baltic admixture doesn't show big variations between Mesolithic (18%), Yamna (10-16%), Corded Ware (12-20%) and Bell Beaker (6-18%) samples. It is the only stable component. It might be linked to the ubiquitous mtDNA U5 (and Y-haplogroup I), found in all Mesolithic Europeans and absorbed by Neolithic farmers too. Nowadays U5 is most common in the Baltic region. I would think that this admixture was named Baltic because U5 genes survived best in this region, not because the Baltic was the source region (which it certainly wasn't since northern Europe was under ice until the end of the Würm glaciation 10,000 years ago).

Why are not the halderstadt and kasdorf farmer samples who are over 1000 years older than the R1's from Haak paper, and found in BB and CW lands, not taken into account here?

Robert6
03-03-15, 18:42
From Polako """"Btw, when I use the K15 output to model the Yamnaya I get 50/50 Samara_HG/Tabassaran. Not really seeing the Armenian/Iraqi Jew connection yet.""""
+ + + +
The information from Estonian Biocenter http://evolbio.ut.ee/chrY/
GS000018396-Tabas17 (Tabasarans, Dagestan_Makhachkala) Z2106 * (Z2106 +, but Z2109-, Z2108-, CTS7763-, CTS8966-). It is the most remote sample Z2106 + at the moment.
GS000018404-Avar9 (Avars, Dagestan_Gergebil) Z2103 * The sample is positive for all SNPs of level Z2103 +
but negative for all known subclades L277-, L584- and Z2106-!

Alan
03-03-15, 19:04
My Eurogenes K15, Dodecad K21b results for comparison.


Eurogenes K15


Population



North_Sea
4.11%


Atlantic
0.32%


Baltic
3.16%


Eastern_Euro
5.35%


West_Med
4.67%


West_Asian
35.01%


East_Med
32.36%


Red_Sea
5.33%


South_Asian
7.54%


Southeast_Asian
-


Siberian
-


Amerindian
1.35%


Oceanian
-


Northeast_African
-


Sub-Saharan
0.81%




Dodecad K12b


Population



Gedrosia
26.51%


Siberian
0.55%


Northwest_African
-


Southeast_Asian
0.66%


Atlantic_Med
8.46%


North_European
6.41%


South_Asian
1.33%


East_African
0.19%


Southwest_Asian
14.49%


East_Asian
0.09%


Caucasus
40.74%


Sub_Saharan
0.57%




Dodecad Globe13


Population



Amerindian
2.16%


East_Asian
-


African
0.49%


North European
4.9%


Southwest Asian
18.2%


Mediterranean
20.9%


West Asian
49.23%




South_Asian
4.12%




I also score ~8% "South Asian" like Yamna. Another proof that this is Gedrosia.

I score ~25% less West Asian in this Eurogenes calculator compared to Dodecad K7,K10a, K12b, Globe13 etc.

I score almost twice as much "North European" components in comparison to K12b or Globe13.

Seems like Eurogenes k15 is among the calculators with least "West Asian" scores and most "North Euro centered" one.
"West Asian" is not always West Asian and "North Euro" not always North European.

Maciamo
03-03-15, 19:12
Why are not the halderstadt and kasdorf farmer samples who are over 1000 years older than the R1's from Haak paper, and found in BB and CW lands, not taken into account here?

I don't know. Davidski (aka Polako) ran the samples in his K15 calculator. I didn't.

Maciamo
03-03-15, 19:17
Seems like Euro. k15 is among the calculators with least "West Asian" scores visible and most "North Eurcentric" one.
So "West Asian" is not always West Asian and "North Euro" not always North European.

Well, obviously these labels describe their maximum frequencies today. But the 'North Sea' admixture may not have been found in Northwest Europe until R1b arrived there 4500-4000 years ago. The North Sea, West Asian and South Asian admixtures found among northern Europeans today actually came from the Pontic Steppe, not from any of these three regions. That ought to put things in perspective.

In your case, I wouldn't be surprised if some of your Baltic and North Sea admixtures are a relic of the Neolithic R1b cattle herders who lived around Kurdistan. Some moved to the steppe, but others remained in West Asia, while yet others (V88) moved to Africa. But of course some Baltic and North Sea could also have come through Central Asia via the Iranian R1a-Z93.

Armoricain
03-03-15, 19:36
Well, obviously these labels describe their maximum frequencies today. But the 'North Sea' admixture may not have been found in Northwest Europe until R1b arrived there 4500-4000 years ago. The North Sea, West Asian and South Asian admixtures found among northern Europeans today actually came from the Pontic Steppe, not from any of these three regions. That ought to put things in perspective.

In your case, I wouldn't be surprised if your Baltic and North Sea admixtures are a relic of the Neolithic R1b cattle herders who lived around Kurdistan. Some moved to the steppe, but others remained in West Asia, while yet others (V88) moved to Africa.

The North _sea component was present before the IE, among the SHG.
Motala12 has 34,36 of it, and Ajv58 ans70 have More than 31% and 33 %.

Maciamo
03-03-15, 19:45
South Asian is a hybrid component in any sense. in some calculators Gedrosia gets broken up into "South Asian and some ither components. So I assume that this "South Asian" is actually a portion of Gedrosia. Mal'ta did also have this "South Asian" admixture which later turned out as Gedrosia. And some of the "European" in the Mal'ta paper turned out as Caucasus.

As seen on results on Iranians in Dodecad v3 (~10% South Asian) vs k12b(30% Gedrosia) respectively. So it is fit to imagine the actual Gedrosia frequency three times higher.

thats roughly 21% Gedrosia.

Itwill beinteresting to see the Yamna DNA in k12b.

I agree that the 'South Asian' is only one part of Gedrosia. The rest is probably hidden within 'West Asian'. If Gedrosia is exactly 'South Asian' + 'West Asian' (unlikely it is a perfect match though), the Yamna samples would have 22 to 29% of Gedrosian. 25% is a reasonable average, which corresponds to what is found in eastern Turkey, Armenia, Georgia and the Northeast Caucasus.

English and Scottish people have 11% to 13% of Gedrosian respectively, presumably about half of the Yamna people. That makes sense since English people have 40% of Yamna DNA, and Scottish people 50% according to Haak et al. 2015.

A high percentage of R1b isn't always a sign of high Yamna ancestry as demonstrated by the case of the Spaniards, and the Basques. Spaniards have only 25 to 30% of Yamna DNA despite having similar R1b levels as British people. Their Gedrosia ranges from 5% (Galicia) to 7.5% (Catalonia). The Basques reach 9%. So there is a correlation to the total R1b percentage in Iberia too, but the ratio isn't the same as in Britain because R1b arrived later and in a more diluted form in Iberia. At equal R1b frequency, the Spanish Gedrosian admixture is half that of the British, and so is their total Yamna admixture. However one looks at it, the Gedrosia to Yamna ratio remains stable though, about 1:4. This means that Yamna people did indeed have approximately 25% of Gedrosian admixture. Everything checks out.

Maciamo
03-03-15, 19:51
The North _sea component was present before the IE, among the SHG.
Motala12 has 34,36 of it, and Ajv58 ans70 have More than 31% and 33 %.

I didn't check these samples. That means that the modern North Sea admixture is a compound of two different sources; about half from Mesolithic northern Europeans, and half from R1b Indo-Europeans. That also explains why the 'North Sea' can exceed 40% today, which is more than Yamna (25%) or Mesolithic Scandinavia (33%).

Just like the Gedrosian can be split in West Asian and South Asian, 'North Sea' should be split in two (e.g. Northwest Europe + Caspian Sea).

Maciamo
03-03-15, 20:05
I checked the population averages for K15 (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/19c_bZjUV_RouKyGyLHmMDw57WwAVabXFJOaso_gcuRE/edit#gid=1872836177) and the Saami of Finland also lack East Med, West Med, Red Sea, West Asian and South Asian, like Karelia and Samara. However they differ in a big way in that the Saami have 12% of Atlantic, where the Mesolithic Karelia and Samara had 0%. Motala12 (Mesolithic Sweden) also had the Atlantic admixture though.




North Sea

Atlantic

Baltic

Eastern_Euro



Finnish Saami
17.7
12.2
20.1
27.0


Mesolithic Karelia
23.7
0.1
18.9
40.4


Mesolithic Samara
25.5
0
17.7
41.7


Mesolithic Sweden
34.3
10.1
26.9
27.5



Interestingly Mesolithic R1a and R1b from Russia both have more 'North Sea' than modern Saami, even though Mesolithic Scandinavians had the most 'North Sea' (about 33%). If percentages don't seem to add up, it's because the Saami have also 20% of Siberian admixture. If we take that out, we get:





North Sea

Atlantic

Baltic

Eastern_Euro



Pre-Uralic Saami
22.1
15.3
25.1
33.8




The Atlantic admixture might have come from a Mesolithic migration from Iberia, perhaps the one that brought mt-haplogroup V.

Angela
03-03-15, 21:08
I don't have access to the Eurogenes population spreadsheets but I could access the Dodecad ones. Armenians in Globe 13 are 48.5 West Asian and 50 per cent what could be roughly called ENF like (20.6 SW Asian and 29.2 Med). Half of that is 24 for West Asian and 25 For ENF. How does that in any way conflict with the Reich Lab formulation that these people were half Armenian like?

Genetiker has run the Yamma sample through Dodecad and MDLF. Very interesting.

Alan
03-03-15, 21:26
I agree that the 'South Asian' is only one part of Gedrosia. The rest is probably hidden within 'West Asian'. If Gedrosia is exactly 'South Asian' + 'West Asian' (unlikely it is a perfect match though), the Yamna samples would have 22 to 29% of Gedrosian. 25% is a reasonable average, which corresponds to what is found in eastern Turkey, Armenia, Georgia and the Northeast Caucasus.

English and Scottish people have 11% to 13% of Gedrosian respectively, presumably about half of the Yamna people. That makes sense since English people have 40% of Yamna DNA, and Scottish people 50% according to Haak et al. 2015.

A high percentage of R1b isn't always a sign of high Yamna ancestry as demonstrated by the case of the Spaniards, and the Basques. Spaniards have only 25 to 30% of Yamna DNA despite having similar R1b levels as British people. Their Gedrosia ranges from 5% (Galicia) to 7.5% (Catalonia). The Basques reach 9%. So there is a correlation to the total R1b percentage in Iberia too, but the ratio isn't the same as in Britain because R1b arrived later and in a more diluted form in Iberia. At equal R1b frequency, the Spanish Gedrosian admixture is half that of the British, and so is their total Yamna admixture. However one looks at it, the Gedrosia to Yamna ratio remains stable though, about 1:4. This means that Yamna people did indeed have approximately 25% of Gedrosian admixture. Everything checks out.


~21% was just a low estimate thats why I edited my previous comment. I agree it is probably around ~25%. I don't think that Gedrosia is a hybrid component. contrary I think "South Asian" is one because South Asian can be divided into two extremely distinct groups. ANI which is West Eurasian and plots side by side with "West Asian", and ASI which is East Eurasian and plots next to Onge.

Alan
03-03-15, 22:32
I don't have access to the Eurogenes population spreadsheets but I could access the Dodecad ones. Armenians in Globe 13 are 48.5 West Asian and 50 per cent what could be roughly called ENF like (20.6 SW Asian and 29.2 Med). Half of that is 24 for West Asian and 25 For ENF. How does that in any way conflict with the Reich Lab formulation that these people were half Armenian like?

Genetiker has run the Yamma sample through Dodecad and MDLF. Very interesting.


Well actually it does. The notion that half of his ancestry is "Armenian" like confused allot of people.

Now looking at the genetiker Dodecad results. It's out of my comprehension, why they used to describe the Near Eastern half as "Armenian like".

The k12b results show his West Asian is pred. Gedrosia with 26% and "only" 7% Caucasus. How on earth did they came to the idea that this could be Armenian like. if Armenians are among the "least" Gedrosia (17%) like population in that region? And at the same time with the highest frequency of ENF (78%).

Kurd, Azeri (Leila Tepe, Kura Araxes) and even Georgians(Maykop, Kura Araxes) would have been a better proxy since they have higher Gedrosia and less ENF.

ElHorsto
04-03-15, 01:02
The strong K12b-Gedrosia predominance and paucity of K12b-Caucasus+Atlantic_Med in Yamna, Samara-HG, Corded yet more supports my theory that Yamna are linked to Central Asia+Iran/Afghanistan rather than Caucasus+Kurdistan. I bet Central Asian hunter-gatherers like Kelteminar people must have been even more K12b-'Gedrosian'.
On the other hand, K12b-'Caucasus' is ANE from ENF farmers. If R1b is related to herders from the south, which I doubt, then they must have come from eastern Iran or even more from east. Else R1b-269 is hunter-gatherer central asian.

Alan
04-03-15, 01:53
The strong K12b-Gedrosia predominance and paucity of K12b-Caucasus+Atlantic_Med in Yamna, Samara-HG, Corded yet more supports my theory that Yamna are linked to Central Asia+Iran/Afghanistan rather than Caucasus+Kurdistan. I bet Central Asian hunter-gatherers like Kelteminar people must have been even more K12b-'Gedrosian'.
On the other hand, K12b-'Caucasus' is ANE from ENF farmers. If R1b is related to herders from the south, which I doubt, then they must have come from eastern Iran or even more from east. Else R1b-269 is hunter-gatherer central asian.

I have also thought about this, and it is indeed possible that they took the South_Central Asian instead of the Caucasus route but ultimately they must have started from the Zagros_Taurus area because Gedrosia is like a twin of Caucasus and one part of "West Asian" while it is relatively distinct from the other components in South_Central Asia.

But than I realized that South_Central Asia has significantly more South Eurasian + Oceanian admixture.

And the ANE+South Eurasian figures for the Near Eastern part fit rather Kurdistan/Caucasus.

What could however have been the case is that Oceanian (ASI) admixture came late to South_Central Asia. But what could have also been the case is that Gedrosia was once stronger in Kurdistan until further migrations deluted it's frequency. Remember Gedrosia peaks in Balochi tribes who are Northwest Iranic and originally from somewhere in Kurdistan according to their own oral traditions. And additional to that the older Kurgans in Kura Araxes and Maykop.


To be honest when I think of it, I really start to believe that these genes in Yamna are so ancient/archaic that they are not well separable into our modern components.
I mean look at the HAAK paper. Up to K19 half of the Yamna ancestry is in a green color which peaks in Western Asian and North Caucasian populations. Until in K20 suddenly half of this green component turns into WHG grey and some distinct Yamna blue component.


Maciamo might be right, it almost seems like some of these genes can't "Decide" where to belong to, as if they are closer to the roots of two modern components. For example maybe some of this "North Sea" and "Baltic" component might be very archaic and represent something which is both "West Asian" and "North European" alike in once. This would explain why the fst distances do not fit well with the Dodecad/Eurogenes admixture results.

Take a look
http://img4.fotos-hochladen.net/uploads/1zaj3ukg5qe.jpghttp://img4.fotos-hochladen.net/uploads/2217ouzrt3i.jpg

Fire Haired14
04-03-15, 04:13
I checked the population averages for K15 (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/19c_bZjUV_RouKyGyLHmMDw57WwAVabXFJOaso_gcuRE/edit#gid=1872836177) and the Saami of Finland also lack East Med, West Med, Red Sea, West Asian and South Asian, like Karelia and Samara. However they differ in a big way in that the Saami have 12% of Atlantic, where the Mesolithic Karelia and Samara had 0%. Motala12 (Mesolithic Sweden) also had the Atlantic admixture though.




North Sea

Atlantic

Baltic

Eastern_Euro



Finnish Saami
17.7
12.2
20.1
27.0


Mesolithic Karelia
23.7
0.1
18.9
40.4


Mesolithic Samara
25.5
0
17.7
41.7


Mesolithic Sweden
34.3
10.1
26.9
27.5



Interestingly Mesolithic R1a and R1b from Russia both have more 'North Sea' than modern Saami, even though Mesolithic Scandinavians had the most 'North Sea' (about 33%). If percentages don't seem to add up, it's because the Saami have also 20% of Siberian admixture. If we take that out, we get:





North Sea

Atlantic

Baltic

Eastern_Euro



Pre-Uralic Saami
22.1
15.3
25.1
33.8




The Atlantic admixture might have come from a Mesolithic migration from Iberia, perhaps the one that brought mt-haplogroup V.

All those components were created from modern genomes and have ENF admixture inside of them. We know Sami have ENF ancestry because on PCAs they plot south by the Volga-Ural not way up north by Mesolithic Europeans. mtDNA V is fairly common in Neolithic farmers. It can defiantly be a near eastern lineage.

Sile
04-03-15, 06:24
All those components were created from modern genomes and have ENF admixture inside of them. We know Sami have ENF ancestry because on PCAs they plot south by the Volga-Ural not way up north by Mesolithic Europeans. mtDNA V is fairly common in Neolithic farmers. It can defiantly be a near eastern lineage.

this is the link to the plotting of all of HAAK samples

http://www.elisanet.fi/mauri_my/tiedostot/pca1o.gif

LeBrok
04-03-15, 06:40
Here are the K15 admixtures (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1QPTmyarOBBEZfXnLI5L64ueJNG34jgy4QgQ_1nSYtnM/edit#gid=917906623) for all the Yamna, Corded Ware and Bell Beaker samples.

As I predicted no Red Sea admixture in the Yamna (nor Corded Ware) samples, and only traces (<1%) in the German Bell Beaker ones. I have linked this admixture to haplogroup E1b1b and T.
T could be the culprit, though it is so hard to connect it with any known population movement or cultural changes, which needed to start in Africa, went through Turkey, then Balkans into North-East Europe and finished in Finland. If it is not Paleolithic or Neolithic in Eastern Europe, and not even early bronze age.
It does show in Late Neolithic in Germany, but these trace amounts might have been carried by first farmers to Europe. However Eastern Europe has elevated levels, compared to the West, that could only come later with separate migration.

Who can we connect Red Sea admixture to? Jewish diaspora or red Sea People? ;)

Perhaps a slow accumulation of smaller migrations from Near East through millennia.

Sile
04-03-15, 06:54
T could be the culprit, though it is so hard to connect it with any known population movement or cultural changes, which needed to start in Africa, went through Turkey, then Balkans into North-East Europe and finished in Finland. If it is not Paleolithic or Neolithic in Eastern Europe, and not even early bronze age.
It does show in Late Neolithic in Germany, but these trace amounts might have been carried by first farmers to Europe. However Eastern Europe has elevated levels, compared to the West, that could only come later with separate migration.

Who can we connect Red Sea admixture to? Jewish diaspora or red Sea People? ;)

Perhaps a slow accumulation of smaller migrations from Near East through millennia.

but the T1a and G2a bones found in CW and BB lands in germany are nearly 2000 years older than any yamnya samples. Is it not logical that these where in central germany still with living descendents when yamnya people entered and these combined into and form BB and CW

haak paper does date all the samples


the likely scenario is 2 routes
1 - from south caspian sea lands , along west side of caspian sea, along the terek river which brings you to the black sea in north caucasus area

2 - from south caspian sea lands , along south side of black sea into europe

both would carry Gedrosian.............T has lots of Gedrosian and west asian in it...............it is know as west-asian marker

Maciamo
04-03-15, 09:14
Genetiker has run the Yamma sample through Dodecad and MDLF. Very interesting.

Thanks for pointing that out. Here are the analyses of the Karelia (https://genetiker.wordpress.com/2015/03/03/analyses-of-a-mesolithic-genome-from-karelia/), Samara (https://genetiker.wordpress.com/2015/03/03/analyses-of-a-hunter-gatherer-genome-from-samara/), Yamna (https://genetiker.wordpress.com/2015/03/03/analyses-of-a-yamna-genome/), Corded Ware (https://genetiker.wordpress.com/2015/03/03/analyses-of-a-corded-ware-genome/) and Bell Beaker (https://genetiker.wordpress.com/2015/03/03/analyses-of-a-bell-beaker-genome/) samples (actually just one of each, not an average).

The results for the Gedrosian admixture (K12b) are:



Sample

Gedrosian admixture



Mesolithic Karelia

6.05



Mesolithic Samara

12.98



Yamna

26.29



Corded Ware

21.94



German Bell Beaker

9.62




This is just what I expected for Yamna. I am a bit perplexed over the two Mesolithic samples through. I shows that the Gedrosian admixture already existed in basal R1a and R1b with no West Asian admixture. That points to a Palaeolithic R1* origin of some of the Gedrosian. However, since Yamna and Corded Ware people have much more of it, it means that some Gedrosian also came from West Asia. That would mean that Gedrosian is not a pure admixture, but a compound, most likely of West Asian, South Asian, and perhaps also what K15 reports as Amerindian, which would be a sort of ANE. That explains why Gedrosia and ANE do not match at all in regions like Northeast Europe, which have a lot of ANE, but little Gedrosian.

Maciamo
04-03-15, 09:17
All those components were created from modern genomes and have ENF admixture inside of them. We know Sami have ENF ancestry because on PCAs they plot south by the Volga-Ural not way up north by Mesolithic Europeans. mtDNA V is fairly common in Neolithic farmers. It can defiantly be a near eastern lineage.

Then I suppose the ENF must be hiding behind the Atlantic component. The Karelia and Samara genomes lacked both ENF and Atlantic. It may not be so simple because Motala12 didn't have ENF either but had 10% of Atlantic.

Maciamo
04-03-15, 10:24
Here is a comparison of the Dodecad K12 (aka dv3) frequencies (the ones I used most for the autosomal maps (http://www.eupedia.com/europe/autosomal_maps_dodecad.shtml) on this site).


Dodecad K12 admixtures



Admixture

Karelia

Samara
Yamna
Corded Ware

Bell Beaker










West European
50.02%
52.07%
49.08%
48.97%
61.53%


East European
33.82%
30.85%
20.88%
21.05%
8.94%


Mediterranean
0%
0%
0.47%
9.04%
19.21%


West Asian
0%
0%
17.42%
15.65%
2.61%


Southwest Asian
0%
0%
0%
0.02%
5.29%


South Asian
3.48%
8.75%
8.42%
5.27%
0.01%


Southeast Asian
0%
0.05%
0%
0%
0%


Northeast Asian
12.68%
8.27%
3.74%
0%
0%


Northwest African

0%
0%
0%
0%
0%


East African

0%
0%
0%
0%
0%


Neo African

0%
0%
0%
0%
0.69%




First of all, it looks like the Amerindian admixture from K15 becomes Northeast Asian in dv3. I assumed that this admixture was a shared component with haplogroup Q, since Q and R evolved from a same Siberian ancestor. Nevertheless, I can't explain why modern West Europeans and even Bell Beaker samples completely lack that admixture if it was present in all R1a and R1b population, including Yamna and Corded Ware. If modern Northwest Europeans inherited about half of their genes from Yamna people, then they should at least have 1 or 2% of Northeast Asian, but it is closer to 0.1%. One explanation is that this Amerindian or Northeast Asian admixture wasn't part of the Mesolithic R1a and R1b gene pool, and that it is only found in the Volga region and Karelia because R1a and R1b people intermarried with Siberian people (Proto-Uralic or pre-Uralic). The R1b people from the Black Sea region, who moved to the Balkans then up to the Danube to Germany (Bell Beaker, then Unetice) almost certainly lacked that Amerindian/Siberian/Northeast Asian admixture. There is no other way to explain its sudden drop to 0% in the Bell Beaker R1b.

What is also surprising is how different the Bell Beaker sample is from the Yamna and Corded Ware. It looks like over half of the Bell Beaker genes came from the Neolithic population of Germany, particularly high in Mediterranean (linked to G2a) and Southwest Asian (linked to J1 and T1a), but comprising also Mesolithic genes (hg I1 and I2, or mtDNA U4 and U5) reported as West European.

Another remarkable thing is that Yamna and Corded Ware people both had 50% of West European admixture, and only 20% of East European. I expected that for R1b Yamna Indo-Europeans, since they brought their genes from the steppe to Western Europe. It is less clear why the R1a population of the Corded Ware wasn't closer to the modern Balto-Slavic R1a people. It suggests that Balto-Slavic people do not descend mostly from the Corded Ware, but rather from other cultures further north like the Fatyanovo–Balanovo culture (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fatyanovo%E2%80%93Balanovo_culture). Although archaeologically it looks like an eastern extension of th Corded Ware, there may only have been a minority of Corded Ware R1a-M458 moving into an essentially R1a-Z280 + I2a1 territory. The Corded Ware itself would have been created by a movement of R1b-L23 people into R1a-M458 territory. Therefore Fatyanovo–Balanovo may have been mainly R1a-Z280 and I2a1 with substantial minorities of R1a-M458 and R1b-L23 from Corded Ware.

I always said that R1b Yamna people were pushed out of the Pontic Steppe by R1a people from the north during the Catacomb culture. These R1a people would have come from the Fatyanovo–Balanovo culture. We only have mtDNA samples from the Catacomb culture (http://www.eupedia.com/genetics/catacomb_culture.shtml), but they are a radical shift from Yamna and Corded Ware samples. Haplogroup U4 jumps from 5% in Yamna and CW to 25% in Catacomb, which I believe is a sign of the arrival of a mostly R1a population with more East European admixture. Catacomb samples are characteristic by their absence of mt-haplogroup K, T, W and X, all West Asian haplogroups that would have come from the South Caucasus/Kurdistan. I expect that these Catacomb samples will lack West Asian admixture just like the Mesolithic Karelia and Samara HG. On the other hand they have 10% of mtDNA C4, which is surely the source of the Amerindian/Siberian admixture in Mesolithic Karelia and Samara.

Sile
04-03-15, 11:25
Here is a comparison of the Dodecad K12 (aka dv3) frequencies (the ones I used most for the autosomal maps (http://www.eupedia.com/europe/autosomal_maps_dodecad.shtml) on this site).


Dodecad K12 admixtures



Admixture

Karelia

Samara
Yamna
Corded Ware

Bell Beaker










West European
50.02%
52.07%
49.08%
48.97%
61.53%


East European
33.82%
30.85%
20.88%
21.05%
8.94%


Mediterranean
0%
0%
0.47%
9.04%
19.21%


West Asian
0%
0%
17.42%
15.65%
2.61%


Southwest Asian
0%
0%
0%
0.02%
5.29%


South Asian
3.48%
8.75%
8.42%
5.27%
0.01%


Southeast Asian
0%
0.05%
0%
0%
0%


Northeast Asian
12.68%
8.27%
3.74%
0%
0%


Northwest African

0%
0%
0%
0%
0%


East African

0%
0%
0%
0%
0%


Neo African

0%
0%
0%
0%
0.69%




First of all, it looks like the Amerindian admixture from K15 becomes Northeast Asian in dv3. I assumed that this admixture was a shared component with haplogroup Q, since Q and R evolved from a same Siberian ancestor. Nevertheless, I can't explain why modern West Europeans and even Bell Beaker samples completely lack that admixture if it was present in all R1a and R1b population, including Yamna and Corded Ware. If modern Northwest Europeans inherited about half of their genes from Yamna people, then they should at least have 1 or 2% of Northeast Asian, but it is closer to 0.1%. One explanation is that this Amerindian or Northeast Asian admixture wasn't part of the Mesolithic R1a and R1b gene pool, and that it is only found in the Volga region and Karelia because R1a and R1b people intermarried with Siberian people (Proto-Uralic or pre-Uralic). The R1b people from the Black Sea region, who moved to the Balkans then up to the Danube to Germany (Bell Beaker, then Unetice) almost certainly lacked that Amerindian/Siberian/Northeast Asian admixture. There is no other way to explain its sudden drop to 0% in the Bell Beaker R1b.

What is also surprising is how different the Bell Beaker sample is from the Yamna and Corded Ware. It looks like over half of the Bell Beaker genes came from the Neolithic population of Germany, particularly high in Mediterranean (linked to G2a) and Southwest Asian (linked to J1 and T1a), but comprising also Mesolithic genes (hg I1 and I2, or mtDNA U4 and U5) reported as West European.

Another remarkable thing is that Yamna and Corded Ware people both had 50% of West European admixture, and only 20% of East European. I expected that for R1b Yamna Indo-Europeans, since they brought their genes from the steppe to Western Europe. It is less clear why the R1a population of the Corded Ware wasn't closer to the modern Balto-Slavic R1a people. It suggests that Balto-Slavic people do not descend mostly from the Corded Ware, but rather from other cultures further north like the Fatyanovo–Balanovo culture (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fatyanovo%E2%80%93Balanovo_culture). Although archaeologically it looks like an eastern extension of th Corded Ware, there may only have been a minority of Corded Ware R1a-M458 moving into an essentially R1a-Z280 + I2a1 territory. The Corded Ware itself would have been created by a movement of R1b-L23 people into R1a-M458 territory. Therefore Fatyanovo–Balanovo may have been mainly R1a-Z280 and I2a1 with substantial minorities of R1a-M458 and R1b-L23 from Corded Ware.

I always said that R1b Yamna people were pushed out of the Pontic Steppe by R1a people from the north during the Catacomb culture. These R1a people would have come from the Fatyanovo–Balanovo culture. We only have mtDNA samples from the Catacomb culture (http://www.eupedia.com/genetics/catacomb_culture.shtml), but they are a radical shift from Yamna and Corded Ware samples. Haplogroup U4 jumps from 5% in Yamna and CW to 25% in Catacomb, which I believe is a sign of the arrival of a mostly R1a population with more East European admixture. Catacomb samples are characteristic by their absence of mt-haplogroup K, T, W and X, all West Asian haplogroups that would have come from the South Caucasus/Kurdistan. I expect that these Catacomb samples will lack West Asian admixture just like the Mesolithic Karelia and Samara HG. On the other hand they have 10% of mtDNA C4, which is surely the source of the Amerindian/Siberian admixture in Mesolithic Karelia and Samara.

what do you mean aka dv3?

from last month, when I ran dv3 elsewhere, it has, as of today given me different results plus it is now situated on the top ( when it was in third spot ) and indication that it has recently been amended...............is this you?

mine K12b is the same



#
Population
Percent


1
Atlantic_Med
35.43


2
North_European
31.73


3
Caucasus
18.92


4
Gedrosia
7.19


5
Southwest_Asian
5.01


6
Northwest_African
1.64




and the Dv3


Population



East_European
11.63%


West_European
37.66%


Mediterranean
32.05%


Neo_African
-


West_Asian
13.26%


South_Asian
-


Northeast_Asian
-


Southeast_Asian
0.32%


East_African
-


Southwest_Asian
3.54%


Northwest_African
1.54%


Palaeo_African
-

Maciamo
04-03-15, 11:28
what do you mean aka dv3?

from last month, when I ran dv3 elsewhere, it has, as of today given me different results plus it is now situated on the top ( when it was in third spot ) and indication that it has recently been amended...............is this you?

mine K12b is the same



#
Population
Percent


1
Atlantic_Med
35.43


2
North_European
31.73


3
Caucasus
18.92


4
Gedrosia
7.19


5
Southwest_Asian
5.01


6
Northwest_African
1.64




and the Dv3

I don't know what you are talking about. Dv3 means Dodecad version 3, which is K=12.

Sile
04-03-15, 11:38
I don't know what you are talking about. Dv3 means Dodecad version 3, which is K=12.

then there are 2 versions....Dv3 ( which is k=12 ) and also K12b in operation at present

which do you refer too

Armoricain
04-03-15, 12:28
[QUOTE = Maciamo; 451257] Ensuite, je suppose l'ENF doit se cacher derrière la composante de l'Atlantique. Les génomes Carélie et Samara manquaient ENF et de l'Atlantique. Il peut ne pas être si simple parce Motala12 ne avait pas non plus, mais ENF eu 10% de l'Atlantique. [/ QUOTE]

Dans Eurogenes K8, la composante de l'Atlantique est composé de 45.81 du WHG, 42.17 of ENF and 12.01 of ANE

Armoricain
04-03-15, 12:36
I don't understand, i posted my previous message in english and it's translated in french

Alan
04-03-15, 13:16
Another remarkable thing is that Yamna and Corded Ware people both had 50% of West European admixture, and only 20% of East European. I expected that for R1b Yamna Indo-Europeans, since they brought their genes from the steppe to Western Europe.
That is true, but I expect both R1a and R1b to be more connected to West than East European.
I remember back in the days when you made your Dodcad maps and were confused why Kurds scored more "West European" instead of "East European". I told you that even Ukrainians(pred R1a),North Caucasians and even South_Central Asians(pred R1a) scored more West than East European and therefore it would be better to assume that West European component is genetically more connected to Yamna and Andronovo, since it is also closer to West Asian based on fst distance.


And about the "South Asian" component in v3. As I said it is based on the Reich ANI/ASI model. ANI was basically every West Eurasian admixture in South_Central Asians. And it was remarkebly close to West Asian component. ASI on the other hand is basically everything East Eurasian.

Looking at the Yamna Gedrosia vs South Asian scores, comparing it with my data (which is almost identical in that case) and than taking in mind what Dienekes said, that "South Asian" in Iranians and more so in Kurds is almost completely ANI. I come to the conclusion this South Asian in Yamna is predominantly ANI which is basically a portion of West Asian admixture and reached very early South_Central Asia from Kurdistan. Gedrosia is 92% West Asian +8% ANI(derived from Proto West Asian) because in calculators with a Gedrosia component the South Asian disappears.

Dienekes called this "South Asian" component a zombie. here is the full article
http://dodecad.blogspot.de/2011/05/more-zombies-ancestral-north-indians.html


More Zombies: Ancestral North Indians and Ancestral South Indians reborn

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-FFgv5Ekbf5s/TePJ635DfYI/AAAAAAAADyw/fCws28qg-ds/s1600/nj.png



Gedrosia might be the component connected to R* all along.

Maciamo
04-03-15, 13:42
I don't understand, i posted my previous message in english and it's translated in french

Good one. That made me laugh. Computers translate of their own will now ? Don't you have Google Translate or a similar Add-on installed on your browser ?

Fire Haired14
04-03-15, 22:51
Then I suppose the ENF must be hiding behind the Atlantic component. The Karelia and Samara genomes lacked both ENF and Atlantic. It may not be so simple because Motala12 didn't have ENF either but had 10% of Atlantic.

This is because Atlantic also has alot of WHG and little ANE. It's largely of Mesolithic and Neolithic west European origin which is why EEFs and WHGs score in it.

Angela
06-03-15, 21:11
In case some of our Board members haven't yet read it, both Patterson and Lazaridis commented on the Eurogenes blog. I think the post from Lazaridis provides some food for thought:

Iosif Lazaridis (Broad) (http://www.blogger.com/profile/02909375406671520230) said... It's great that our data is finally out there, and I hope it will be useful to the wider community.

Just a quick comment: There are significantly negative f3(Yamnaya; Near East, Karelia_HG) and f4(Karelia_HG, Yamnaya; Near East, Chimp) for many Near Eastern/Caucasus populations. We are clear in our paper that we don't think we have a good surrogate for the admixing population, and we mainly model Yamnaya with Armenians/Iraqi Jews because they top these statistics.

You get a negative correlation like Fig. S9.20 with different Near Eastern/Caucasus populations. Percentages vary (39% BedouinB, 47% Druze, 48% Iraqi Jew, 53% Armenian, 68% Lezgin). African admixture (which many Near Easterners like BedouinB have, see Moorjani et al. 2011) reduces these estimates, while for populations like Lezgins (who have lower Near Eastern ancestry), you need proportionally more Lezgin input into the Yamnaya to account for the same amount of dilution. We estimated (Lazaridis et al. 2014) that Lezgins are 71% Near East, so .68*.71 = 48%, which seems about right.

Overall, I think that ~50% is a good ballpark estimate, but there's only so much you can do without an actual ancient Near Eastern genome.

Alan
06-03-15, 21:25
In case some of our Board members haven't yet read it, both Patterson and Lazaridis commented on the Eurogenes blog. I think the post from Lazaridis provides some food for thought:

Iosif Lazaridis (Broad) (http://www.blogger.com/profile/02909375406671520230) said... It's great that our data is finally out there, and I hope it will be useful to the wider community.

Just a quick comment: There are significantly negative f3(Yamnaya; Near East, Karelia_HG) and f4(Karelia_HG, Yamnaya; Near East, Chimp) for many Near Eastern/Caucasus populations. We are clear in our paper that we don't think we have a good surrogate for the admixing population, and we mainly model Yamnaya with Armenians/Iraqi Jews because they top these statistics.

You get a negative correlation like Fig. S9.20 with different Near Eastern/Caucasus populations. Percentages vary (39% BedouinB, 47% Druze, 48% Iraqi Jew, 53% Armenian, 68% Lezgin). African admixture (which many Near Easterners like BedouinB have, see Moorjani et al. 2011) reduces these estimates, while for populations like Lezgins (who have lower Near Eastern ancestry), you need proportionally more Lezgin input into the Yamnaya to account for the same amount of dilution. We estimated (Lazaridis et al. 2014) that Lezgins are 71% Near East, so .68*.71 = 48%, which seems about right.

Overall, I think that ~50% is a good ballpark estimate, but there's only so much you can do without an actual ancient Near Eastern genome.

So Lezgians are actually 68% "Yamna like". Explains why they are closest to Yamna just next to Mordovians. I hope they will bring out a second paper in which they use more populations and clarify some things.

Angela
06-03-15, 22:11
In case some of our Board members haven't yet read it, both Patterson and Lazaridis commented on the Eurogenes blog. I think the post from Lazaridis provides some food for thought:

Iosif Lazaridis (Broad) (http://www.blogger.com/profile/02909375406671520230) said... It's great that our data is finally out there, and I hope it will be useful to the wider community.

Just a quick comment: There are significantly negative f3(Yamnaya; Near East, Karelia_HG) and f4(Karelia_HG, Yamnaya; Near East, Chimp) for many Near Eastern/Caucasus populations. We are clear in our paper that we don't think we have a good surrogate for the admixing population, and we mainly model Yamnaya with Armenians/Iraqi Jews because they top these statistics.

You get a negative correlation like Fig. S9.20 with different Near Eastern/Caucasus populations. Percentages vary (39% BedouinB, 47% Druze, 48% Iraqi Jew, 53% Armenian, 68% Lezgin). African admixture (which many Near Easterners like BedouinB have, see Moorjani et al. 2011) reduces these estimates, while for populations like Lezgins (who have lower Near Eastern ancestry), you need proportionally more Lezgin input into the Yamnaya to account for the same amount of dilution. We estimated (Lazaridis et al. 2014) that Lezgins are 71% Near East, so .68*.71 = 48%, which seems about right.

Overall, I think that ~50% is a good ballpark estimate, but there's only so much you can do without an actual ancient Near Eastern genome.

I don't see the point of getting into a lather about the precise ENF and ANE numbers in the ANE 8 run. In the case of ANE who knows if it will any longer be useful. Perhaps the Mal'ta genome is too old*? The ENF from that run may be off for all we know. When we get a Near Easter farmer we'll know.

That said, these are the ENF numbers for the populations Lazaridis mentioned:
Iraqi Jews: 83%
Druse:80%
Armenians:77%
Lezgin:58%

*Ed. and too poor quality, as well as too widespread all over the world, and so not very helpful for tracking migrations into Europe.

Sile
06-03-15, 23:42
I don't understand, i posted my previous message in english and it's translated in french

is this site in french for you when you enter?

check bottom left bar ...does it say english

Armoricain
07-03-15, 08:54
Thanks for your help.
I don't understand, the site is in English when I enter.
Certainly a wrong manipulation, but the problem is resolved

MOESAN
19-04-15, 18:30
Thanks for pointing that out. Here are the analyses of the Karelia (https://genetiker.wordpress.com/2015/03/03/analyses-of-a-mesolithic-genome-from-karelia/), Samara (https://genetiker.wordpress.com/2015/03/03/analyses-of-a-hunter-gatherer-genome-from-samara/), Yamna (https://genetiker.wordpress.com/2015/03/03/analyses-of-a-yamna-genome/), Corded Ware (https://genetiker.wordpress.com/2015/03/03/analyses-of-a-corded-ware-genome/) and Bell Beaker (https://genetiker.wordpress.com/2015/03/03/analyses-of-a-bell-beaker-genome/) samples (actually just one of each, not an average).

The results for the Gedrosian admixture (K12b) are:



Sample

Gedrosian admixture



Mesolithic Karelia
6.05


Mesolithic Samara
12.98


Yamna
26.29


Corded Ware
21.94


German Bell Beaker
9.62



This is just what I expected for Yamna. I am a bit perplexed over the two Mesolithic samples through. I shows that the Gedrosian admixture already existed in basal R1a and R1b with no West Asian admixture. That points to a Palaeolithic R1* origin of some of the Gedrosian. However, since Yamna and Corded Ware people have much more of it, it means that some Gedrosian also came from West Asia. That would mean that Gedrosian is not a pure admixture, but a compound, most likely of West Asian, South Asian, and perhaps also what K15 reports as Amerindian, which would be a sort of ANE. That explains why Gedrosia and ANE do not match at all in regions like Northeast Europe, which have a lot of ANE, but little Gedrosian.

I agree - this 'gedrosia' question is what I tried to explain in my fuzzy english in some post: modern 'gedrosia' in central South Asia is MORE THAN the old 'gedrosia' we find among Siberia or Russia ancient skeletons (Mal'ta, Ust'Ushim and co) - spite what was said I think some of the N-W Europe modern 'gedrosia' is from the most ancient one found in Northern Eurasia, the same PARTIAL modern 'gedrosia' in today Central Southern Asian, maybe carried there by Y-R descendants and now mixed with other labelled 'gedrosia' of more southern origin - so whan we speak today of 'gedrosia' among modern populations, we cannot be sure it's the SAME 'gedrosia'

MOESAN
19-04-15, 18:36
here a metric aspect but we can link it to the present topic rather than to put in in "anthropology"
A. Kazarnitsky « Onthe biological distinctness of the Pit Grave / Yamanaya people in theNorthern Caspian : cranial evidence »
He shows differencesbetween the populations of different sites labelled 'PitGrave'/'Yamnaya' and focalizes on the today Kalmykia-Astrakhan regionand surroundings North-West the Caspian Sea.
According to him the'yamnaya' people of N-W Caspian were very different from the peopleof Maykop and the people of Shengavit in Armenia, these last onesvery apart from all the others.
As always nowadaysin metrics abstracts there is no more measures or indexesgiven nor typology, I even did not see words like 'dolichocephalic'or 'brachycephalic', but on what I thought understand the N-W Caspian'yamanya' were rather brachycephalic and euryprosop (broad-faced),with a projecting enough nose – compared to the Neolithic steppicpeople of Lower Dniepr region, they were broader skulled, shorterskulled (perhaps higher skulled : « simotic » ???not found in dictionary), with skulled a bit smaller : not toofar from some people in the Southern Siberia (Andronovo too?) butwith higher orbits and more projecting noses and more profile facesthan them.
Still according tohim, even if less broad-skulled – but not less broad-faced - thanthe N-W Caspian 'yamnaya' , the Neolithic people of Lower Dnieprwere more broad-skulled (or less long-skulled) than the ancientMesolithic people of the North Caspian Steppes. These neolithic menwere from North the Pont to the Baltic sea and the Upper Volga,and would have expanded in the Steppes about 2500 BC (?).
He put in the gametoo the Chalcolithic people of Sredny Stog and Khvalynsk and alsopeople of Khlopkov-Bugor and Dzhangar in N-W Caspian : he foundthe Sredny-Stog & Khvalinsk chalco people halfway to Mesoliticpeople and to Pit Grave epople (not the specific N-WCaspian ones here!) and the N-W Caspian chalco between theNeolithic Dniepr people and the N-W Caspian Pit Grave people.
Without any picturenor indexes it's very uneasy to speak of types and to extract somelesson from all that : all the way it seams the Pit Grave peopleof N-W Caspian region were different from other Pit Gravepeople and a bit different from Neolithic Lower Dniepr people, beingthe farther outlayers the Maykop and South Caucasus sites people. Itseems that at Chalcolithic the Dniepr Neolithic people approached theN-W Caspian area. The russian scholar excludes a mesologic importantimput to explain the partial brachycephaly of the Neolithic Dnieprmen compared to the Mesolithic people of the same regions and ratherput it on the account of a demic influx.
My poorconclusions : the mesolithic people of the North Pontic regionwould have contained a lot of 'brünnoid' types ; either a lotof them emigrated eastwards towards the Donets and Volga region, orwere pushed, and the new people were more on the side of a'cromagnoid' partiallybrachycephalized type (so kind of 'borrebylike' type, forming thespinal column of the badly defined 'east-baltic' type of oldanthropology, a mean type without too much consistance) ; Ithink what Coon called his 'neo-danubian' type was for the most acrossing of southern 'danubian' types from Anatolia (throughCucuteni/Tripolje?) with a 'borrebylike' type. This mix was surelygiven birth at Neolithic times... inmore eastern parts of Europe the 'borrebylike' type was the dominantone. The finnic-ugric specialists saw also this type as the principalelement among their ancestors, before mongoloid elements wereincorporated. True ? False ? I don't know. The steppictribes sent a mix where dominated the high statured dolichocephals,among them the ancient Mesolithic people. The raw description givenpush me to think the N-W Caspian Pit Grave people already had someaspects recalling the 'dinaric' type (as noted in ancient works inmore than a place among the Steppes people themselves). Come therefrom where ? Old question ! (I cannot expell theCarpathians of my mind ! By the way I visited the partlyhungarian Mara Muresh region in N-W Carpathians Romania and I saw aclear 'dinaric' influence among them, mixed with other types ;almost no typical 'mediterranean' look – but the more often highskulls doesn't exclude the 'danubian' influence, maybe one of the'dinaric complex' element).
Tocome again on this very subject, we see here the so widely spred'yamnaya' people were not completely homogenous and their genesis isnot too clear. Moves West-East and East-West and North-South andSouth-North seem having taken place at different times, and telling the hane from the egg is not so easy. Aside of that, I should bet thefirst eastern and northern HGs (more on the 'brünn' side) wererather of Y-I(2)affiliation and perhaps they took part in the 'dinaric' typeelaboration if this one is only a genetic complex crossings result asit seems it is (plus a bitof brachycephal like 'alpine' or'borreby A' both of 'cromagnoid' filiation plus a bit of some kind ofhigh skulled 'mediterranean'.

I add that spite believing some 'danubian mediterranean' (neol, Y-G2?) came into Steppes from the Cucuteni-Tripolje last periods, I give the first place of 'southerners' into the I-E mix to the South-Central Asian people (by origin): that doesn't exclude they lately came across Caucasus after being passed South the Caspian Sea, coming from East, as some cultural aspects could show - more than a move took place in History, sometimes on opposite directions (W>>E at early Neolithic south the Caspian, but E>>W after...