PDA

View Full Version : Was the teal admixture of Yamna brought to the steppe by Y-haplogroup G1 ?



Maciamo
11-04-15, 10:13
Last week Davidski wondered (http://eurogenes.blogspot.be/2015/04/the-teal-people-did-they-actually-exist.html) if the teal people really existed and if so who they were (referring to the teal admixture from Haak et al. 2015 (http://biorxiv.org/content/early/2015/02/10/013433) found in Yamna samples). My theory so far had been that R1b-P297 had mixed with West Asian people around the South Caucasus (or rather between East Anatolia and Northwest Iran) during the Early Neolithic before crossing over the Caucasus with their cattle. In this scenario, R1b-M269 and L23 would have arrived in the steppe in a fully hybrid form, roughly half Northeast European (from the paternal R1b side, with some maternal U5a1) and half West Asian (from the maternal H8, H15 and J1b1a side).

But the new paper on haplogroup G1 (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/31099-Haplogroup-G1-rare-and-interesting) by Balanovsky et al. made me reconsider. I still stand by my old theory, except that R1b-M269 may have come back to the northern side of the Caucasus with less West Asian admixture than in the Yamna samples - perhaps 3/4 Northeast European and 1/4 West Asian (teal admixture). The extra teal admixture would have come from intermingling with other Neolithic migrants from West Asia to the Steppe, a group composed of Y-haplogroup G1 (and possibly T1a) and mt-haplogroups HV, H5a, N1a, I, W and X2. These people would have carried nearly 100% of teal West Asian admixture.

A strong argument in favour of a G1 population carrying mtDNA N1a, I, W and X is that all these lineages are basal Eurasian, as opposed to the bulk of Eurasian Y-DNA descended from macro-haplogroup IJK and of mtDNA descended from macro-haplogroup R.

A second argument is that all these basal Eurasian haplogroups are found in Central Asia, the Altai and Mongolia today, despite the very small frequency of R1b or European autosomal DNA.

A third argument is that most populations related to the Mongols or Turks have much higher frequencies of the teal West Asian admixture than the Mesolithic European blue admixture in the K=19 admixtures (http://biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/suppl/2015/02/10/013433.DC1/013433-1.pdf) from Haak 2015 (I won't use K=20 as it is confusing). Yamna people were about 50-50, so it is not possible that the Indo-Europeans were the only ones who brought the teal admixture to Central Asia, Siberia and Mongolia. Only the Mansi and the Tubalar have 50-50 for these two admixtures. The Alatians and Kyrgyz have twice more teal than blue. The Yakuts, Uyghurs, Turkmens, Uzbeks and Hazars have about 5x more teal than blue. The Tu, Mongola and Xibo have a few percent's of teal but hardly any blue.

As the R1b tribes were the ones who supposedly developed the first bronze weapons, their first "victims" were their immediate Neolithic neighbours in the steppe. G1 men were killed, enslaved or in any case prevented from passing their Y chromosomes. Their lineages only survived south of the Caucasus, among the ancestors of the Bashkirs in Central Asia, and at the eastern end of the Eurasian steppe among the Mongols. G1 was brought back to Central Asia by the Mongols in the 13th century.

Female lineages were absorbed by the Yamna R1b people, which increased their West Asian admixture from 1/4 to nearly 1/2.


As a side note, I have long pondered the possibility that T1a male lineages made up a small minority of the Proto-Indo-Europeans (just like G2a3b1 and J2b2). It is possible that T1a were the last survivors of this G1 + T1a Neolithic Steppe population. Another possibility is that they came with R1b across the Caucasus. A third possibility, which I think is the most likely, is that T1a came through the Balkans. After all, T1a peaks in S-E Europe today and has been found among LBK Neolithic samples in Germany.

Sile
11-04-15, 11:14
Last week Davidski wondered (http://eurogenes.blogspot.be/2015/04/the-teal-people-did-they-actually-exist.html) if the teal people really existed and if so who they were (referring to the teal admixture from Haak et al. 2015 (http://biorxiv.org/content/early/2015/02/10/013433) found in Yamna samples). My theory so far had been that R1b-P297 had mixed with West Asian people around the South Caucasus (or rather between East Anatolia and Northwest Iran) during the Early Neolithic before crossing over the Caucasus with their cattle. In this scenario, R1b-M269 and L23 would have arrived in the steppe in a fully hybrid form, roughly half Northeast European (from the paternal R1b side, with some maternal U5a1) and half West Asian (from the maternal H8, H15 and J1b1a side).

But the new paper on haplogroup G1 (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/31099-Haplogroup-G1-rare-and-interesting) by Balanovsky et al. made me reconsider. I still stand by my old theory, except that R1b-M269 may have come back to the northern side of the Caucasus with less West Asian admixture than in the Yamna samples - perhaps 3/4 Northeast European and 1/4 West Asian (teal admixture). The extra teal admixture would have come from intermingling with other Neolithic migrants from West Asia to the Steppe, a group composed of Y-haplogroup G1 (and possibly T1a) and mt-haplogroups HV, H5a, N1a, I, W and X2. These people would have carried nearly 100% of teal West Asian admixture.

A strong argument in favour of a G1 population carrying mtDNA N1a, I, W and X is that all these lineages are basal Eurasian, as opposed to the bulk of Eurasian Y-DNA descended from macro-haplogroup IJK and of mtDNA descended from macro-haplogroup R.

A second argument is that all these basal Eurasian haplogroups are found in Central Asia, the Altai and Mongolia today, despite the very small frequency of R1b or European autosomal DNA.

A third argument is that most populations related to the Mongols or Turks have much higher frequencies of the teal West Asian admixture than the Mesolithic European blue admixture in the K=19 admixtures (http://biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/suppl/2015/02/10/013433.DC1/013433-1.pdf) from Haak 2015 (I won't use K=20 as it is confusing). Yamna people were about 50-50, so it is not possible that the Indo-Europeans were the only ones who brought the teal admixture to Central Asia, Siberia and Mongolia. Only the Mansi and the Tubalar have 50-50 for these two admixtures. The Alatians and Kyrgyz have twice more teal than blue. The Yakuts, Uyghurs, Turkmens, Uzbeks and Hazars have about 5x more teal than blue. The Tu, Mongola and Xibo have a few percent's of teal but hardly any blue.

As the R1b tribes were the ones who supposedly developed the first bronze weapons, their first "victims" were their immediate Neolithic neighbours in the steppe. G1 men were killed, enslaved or in any case prevented from passing their Y chromosomes. Their lineages only survived south of the Caucasus, among the ancestors of the Bashkirs in Central Asia, and at the eastern end of the Eurasian steppe among the Mongols. G1 was brought back to Central Asia by the Mongols in the 13th century.

Female lineages were absorbed by the Yamna R1b people, which increased their West Asian admixture from 1/4 to nearly 1/2.


As a side note, I have long pondered the possibility that T1a male lineages made up a small minority of the Proto-Indo-Europeans (just like G2a3b1 and J2b2). It is possible that T1a were the last survivors of this G1 + T1a Neolithic Steppe population. Another possibility is that they came with R1b across the Caucasus. A third possibility, which I think is the most likely, is that T1a came through the Balkans. After all, T1a peaks in S-E Europe today and has been found among LBK Neolithic samples in Germany.

I will ask the following questions, hope you have a theory
1 - In the Haak paper for LBK Neolthic samples in Germany ...50% of the Ydna is G2a and 50% of the mtdna is N1a1a ( not always the same skeleton )..........how is it that this N1a1a and G2a which are both found in the Caucasus are not already in union in the caucasus , but are in union in Germany.

here is a paper on mtdna N1a
http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2148/10/304

2 - Your T1a theory on a balkan travel to germany ( if you refer to the haak paper ) means that G2a went on the same path as both markers are roughly the same age.

3 - If R1b crossed from south caucasus to north caucasus and also in reverse, then why do we not see G2a and the N1a mtdna doing the same thing with R1b..............why was these G2a, T1a, N1a1a not part of a northern black sea path into germany?

I have read also this latest "haak" supplemtary paper of this same query
http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/royprsb/suppl/2015/03/20/rspb.2015.0339.DC1/rspb20150339supp1.pdf

bicicleur
11-04-15, 11:47
it is the question who was first, the chicken or the egg
who was first on the steppe, R1b or G1 ?
TMRCA estimates are becoming more and more acurate lately, but unfortunately acurate TMRCA estimates for both G1 and R1b branches are still lagging

Maciamo
11-04-15, 12:40
I will ask the following questions, hope you have a theory
1 - In the Haak paper for LBK Neolthic samples in Germany ...50% of the Ydna is G2a and 50% of the mtdna is N1a1a ( not always the same skeleton )..........how is it that this N1a1a and G2a which are both found in the Caucasus are not already in union in the caucasus , but are in union in Germany.

here is a paper on mtdna N1a
http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2148/10/304

I am not sure I understand your question. Both G1 and G2a are basal Eurasian and linked to mtDNA N1a.



2 - Your T1a theory on a balkan travel to germany ( if you refer to the haak paper ) means that G2a went on the same path as both markers are roughly the same age.

T1a followed the same path as G2a along the Danube from the Balkans to Germany, but it doesn't mean that the two haplogroups reached Europe together, and even less that they have the same origin.

During the Early Neolithic, there could have been many independent groups of farmers and herders, some belonging to G2a, others to G1, T1a, J1, R1b... Some cultivated cereals (G2a), others raised cattle (R1b), or sheep or goats or pigs. I think that J1 and T1a were more goat herders and didn't arrive to Europe with G2a. But both groups might have converged between northern Greece and Serbia to form the Starcevo culture.



3 - If R1b crossed from south caucasus to north caucasus and also in reverse, then why do we not see G2a and the N1a mtdna doing the same thing with R1b..............why was these G2a, T1a, N1a1a not part of a northern black sea path into germany?

R1b and R1a lived in eastern Europe during the late Palaeolithic and Mesolithic, while G2a didn't. Some R1b hunters had ventured south and ended up south of the Caucasus just before the development of the Neolithic, perhaps passing through the flat land that is now the Caspian Sea, but which wasn't a sea until the glaciers started melting after 10,000 BCE.

The Caucasus is a formidable natural barrier. It is not easily crossed. We shouldn't expect a lot of migrations from side to side any time in (pre)history. The case of R1b cattle herders moving back to their ancestral Ice Age land is very special and unique. They may have known from oral tradition that there were vast expanses of prairies north of the mountains, which motivated them to seek a way across or around (along the Black Sea or Caspian Sea coast) the mountains, which would be a boon for their cattle. Other people didn't bother because they lacked the knowledge and motivation. The only exception may have been G1 people. Actually considering the possible origin of G1 in Iran, and the wide distribution of G1 across Central Asia, it is also possible that G1 didn't cross the Caucasus but circumnavigated the newly formed Caspian Sea through Central Asia. G1 had an eastward expansion to South, Central and North Asia, while G2a went west to Europe and North Africa. G1 is associated with the Caucaso-Gedrosian teal admixture, while G2a is the Mediterranean orange admixture.

Alan
11-04-15, 15:30
So at last Davidski has realized that it doesn't work with K6 and the conservative ANE, WHG, ENF for whatever reason. Maybe they are too old for this.

This calculator now does fit the actual Haak study and if you take "European blue", "West-Central Asian teal" and "South Asian light green" together it reflects the fst distances on the Haak paper well.

LeBrok
11-04-15, 16:28
So at last Davidski has realized that it doesn't work with K6 and the conservative ANE, WHG, ENF for whatever reason. Maybe they are too old for this.

This calculator now does fit the actual Haak study and if you take "European blue", "West-Central Asian teal" and "South Asian light green" together it reflects the fst distances on the Haak paper well.
Is this new K6 admixtures put together somewhere nicely to have a look? A link, please, if you can.

Alan
11-04-15, 22:36
Is this new K6 admixtures put together somewhere nicely to have a look? A link, please, if you can.

I think you misunderstood me. The K6_Yamna calculator is the "older" calculator and it is not of much use because it is too basic(can only differentiate between "European", "Near Eastern", "SSA", "Amerindian", "East Asian", "South Asian" and even there it also depends which population you use as refference for the components) and it contradicts the results of the actual study. The peer reviewed study of Haak uses at least K16.

However this new Eurogenes "teal 9" Calculator uses now K9which is at least more accurate than K6 and does not contradict the actual study that much
Yet I still think to get most accurate results we would need to use K16 (16 ancestral groups) like Haak did.

Sile
12-04-15, 02:31
I think you misunderstood me. The K6_Yamna calculator is the "older" calculator and it is not of much use because it is too basic(can only differentiate between "European", "Near Eastern", "SSA", "Amerindian", "East Asian", "South Asian" and even there it also depends which population you use as refference for the components). The peer reviewed study of Haak uses at least K16.

However this new Eurogenes "teal 9" Calculator uses now K9 it's not perfect but it is at least more accurate than K6 and does not contradict the actual study that much
Yet I still think to get most accurate results we would need to use K16 (16 ancestral groups) like Haak did.

I cannot find anything between K12 and K23 on gedmatch .....................why is this

Alan
12-04-15, 02:36
I cannot find anything between K12 and K23 on gedmatch .....................why is this

Gedmatch uses nostly the blogger calculators. I remember at least Dodcead K12. But the peer reviewed studies go as far as K20.

K6 is too low and innacurate in favor of some groups (in K6_Yamna it was the Northeast Europeans). I remember seeing Calculators as far as K16 (with 16 ancestral components).

Sile
12-04-15, 02:37
I wonder if BritainsDna company is correct in nmaing mtdna N1a ...the Pot Makers .....................maybe they are par tof BB culture

conclusion of N1a in central Europe is
Conclusions
Based on the current N1a haplogroup phylogeny and phylogeographic information on the farmer mtDNA associated subclades distribution, we suppose that the farmer lineages-DEB3, FLO1, and HAL2 might be derived from local communities and that they would have adopted the farming culture indigenously. Therefore, the results of the present study are somewhat difficult to reconcile with the hypothesis that the N1a lineages were brought into central Europe by the Neolithic farmers from the Near East by a major demic diffusion event. Moreover, the evidence from phylogeographic analysis of N1a lineages emphasizes that European farmer N1a lineages might have been originated from different sources- from eastern Europe (for N1a1a1), from Near East via southern Europe (for N1a1b and perhaps for N1a1a3), and from local central European source (for N1a1a2). It is thus clear that Neolithic farmers' migration into central Europe did not occur in a uniform way; indeed these results indicate that the Neolithic transition process was more complex in central Europe and possibly the farmer N1a lineages were brought in through the 'leapfrog' colonization process [5 (http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2148/10/304#B5),28 (http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2148/10/304#B28)].

Robert6
12-04-15, 13:20
Fig 2. Frequency distribution map of haplogroup G1. http://s019.radikal.ru/i632/1504/4f/a536b3be5dfb.png

http://s019.radikal.ru/i632/1504/4f/a536b3be5dfb.png

elghund
12-04-15, 17:51
R1b and R1a lived in eastern Europe during the late Palaeolithic and Mesolithic, while G2a didn't. Some R1b hunters had ventured south and ended up south of the Caucasus just before the development of the Neolithic, perhaps passing through the flat land that is now the Caspian Sea, but which wasn't a sea until the glaciers started melting after 10,000 BCE.

The Caspian Seal (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caspian_seal) has been indigenous to the Caspian Sea for over two million years. Maybe the sea was smaller in the ice age it must have been big enough to host all the aquatic biodiversity it has maintained.

LeBrok
12-04-15, 17:55
The Caspian Seal (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caspian_seal) has been indigenous to the Caspian Sea for over two million years. Maybe the sea was smaller in the ice age it must have been big enough to host all the aquatic biodiversity it has maintained.
Good observation. Caspian Sea sometimes was much larger than today when got filled with all the water from melting glacials during Ice Age.

bicicleur
13-04-15, 12:55
during the last ice age, the caspian sea was about 1/3 of today in size
after the ice age, the caspian sea expanded twice and even spilled over to the black sea, but that is probably more than 10.000 years ago
I dont think 5-6000 years ago (when cattle would have crossed the Caucasus) the caspian sea was smaller than today
17000 years ago epigravettians arrived in georgia/armenia from Europe, 12000 years ago they left during the youngest dryas cold period
http://www.digitorient.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/Montoya-et-al.-2013-JHE-in-press.pdf
https://www.academia.edu/2563557/From_the_Late_Upper_Palaeolithic_to_the_Neolithic_ in_north-western_Armenia_Preliminary_results

After the youngest dryas epigravettians never came back in Transcaucasia. Who had taken their place? G1? R1a?

LeBrok
13-04-15, 16:11
during the last ice age, the caspian sea was about 1/3 of today in size
after the ice age, the caspian sea expanded twice and even spilled over to the black sea, but that is probably more than 10.000 years ago
I dont think 5-6000 years ago (when cattle would have crossed the Caucasus) the caspian sea was smaller than today
17000 years ago epigravettians arrived in georgia/armenia from Europe, 12000 years ago they left during the youngest dryas cold period
http://www.digitorient.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/Montoya-et-al.-2013-JHE-in-press.pdf
https://www.academia.edu/2563557/From_the_Late_Upper_Palaeolithic_to_the_Neolithic_ in_north-western_Armenia_Preliminary_results

After the youngest dryas epigravettians never came back in Transcaucasia. Who had taken their place? G1? R1a?
I think it is safe to say that waters fluctuated between 1/3 and twice today's size during Ice Ages and Intergalactic periods.

bicicleur
14-04-15, 10:52
A third argument is that most populations related to the Mongols or Turks have much higher frequencies of the teal West Asian admixture than the Mesolithic European blue admixture in the K=19 admixtures (http://biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/suppl/2015/02/10/013433.DC1/013433-1.pdf) from Haak 2015 (I won't use K=20 as it is confusing). Yamna people were about 50-50, so it is not possible that the Indo-Europeans were the only ones who brought the teal admixture to Central Asia, Siberia and Mongolia. Only the Mansi and the Tubalar have 50-50 for these two admixtures. The Alatians and Kyrgyz have twice more teal than blue. The Yakuts, Uyghurs, Turkmens, Uzbeks and Hazars have about 5x more teal than blue. The Tu, Mongola and Xibo have a few percent's of teal but hardly any blue.



all the tribes discussed in the paper are G1a, G1b is not discussed here and split from G1a more than 10000 years ago

all G1a seems to have their origin in Mongolia, where their tribes split 10000 years ago :

Kazakh Argyn clan associated with the Mongols in 1405 AD
Kangly Bashkirs originated from 8th century Pechenegs , a Turkic tribe
Hersheni Armenians split from Kangly Bashkirs 8000 years ago and are linked with 8th century Abasids from eastern Iran

so if Turks and Mongols have more teal admixture, you have a good point
but the shortest road from Iran to Mongolia is not across the Caucasus, it is through Kirgizia to the Altai Mts, and G1a left at least 10.000 years ago (when they split in Mongolia)
so the question remains, how did yamna-people get in contact with G1a?

just a guess of mine : N1c is a more likely candidate to have brought the teal admixture
N1c brought pottery from northern China into Siberia 13000 years ago
this type of pottery arrived in Europe through Khvalynsk culture, north of the area where the Yamna R1b-Z2103 were typed by Haak et al
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khvalynsk_culture