PDA

View Full Version : Over 50 ancient R1a samples in the context of archaeological cultures



Tomenable
02-08-15, 04:29
By now there are at least 53 Ancient samples with R1a haplogroup (+ 1 Medieval R1a from Usedom, marked as "Med" below). I've made a map showing their locations in the context of archaeological cultures (data from Ancestral Journeys website (http://www.ancestraljourneys.org) was of great help):

http://s24.postimg.org/jakvc9379/Ancient_R1a_C.png

http://s24.postimg.org/jakvc9379/Ancient_R1a_C.png

Red Deer Island cemetery - http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/handle/2027.42/24870
CW or Corded - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corded_Ware_culture
BattleAxe - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corded_Ware_culture#Nomenclature
Urnfield - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urnfield_culture
Zhizhitskaya* - http://www.hermitagemuseum.org/wps/portal/hermitage/digital-collection/25.+Archaeological+Artifacts/3551584/?lng=
Iron Age* - http://s23.postimg.org/4ztqxfocr/Anaszkino_1.png and http://s30.postimg.org/7uf1w47gx/Anashkino_2.png
Andronovo - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andronovo_culture and http://www.csen.org/BAR%20Book/04%20...Bronze.Int.pdf (http://www.csen.org/BAR%20Book/04%20Part%203.%20Bronze.Int.pdf)
Sintashta - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sintashta_culture
Karasuk - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karasuk_culture
Pazyryk - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pazyryk_culture
Xiaohe mummies - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lop_Nur#Xiaohe_Burial_Site , https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yuezhi (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yuezhi)https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wusun
Mezhovskaya - http://www.academia.edu/3742220/Ancient_Indo-Europeans._Chelyabinsk_Rifei_2002_496_pp
Tagar - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tagar_culture
Tachtyk (Tashtyk) - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tashtyk_culture
Altai Scythian - http://www.researchgate.net/publication/260249780_Climate-Induced_Changes_in_Population_Dynamics_of_Siberian _Scythians_%28700-250_BC%29
Tanais kurgan - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tanais#History
Xiongnu - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xiongnu
Medieval (Usedom) - http://www.diss.fu-berlin.de/diss/servlets/MCRFileNodeServlet/FUDISS_derivate_000000008413/Dissertation_Freder.pdf

*Note: Iron Age refers to another R1a sample from the same region where Zhizhitskaya. Iron Age sample was from Anashkino:

Check pages 183 - 184:

http://www.mas.ncl.ac.uk/~nas13/AS/2009BAR_Int_Ser1964_Dolukhanov_etal.pdf

Sile
02-08-15, 08:48
By now there are at least 53 Ancient samples with R1a haplogroup (+ 1 Medieval R1a from Usedom, marked as "Med" below). I've made a map showing their locations in the context of archaeological cultures (data from Ancestral Journeys website (http://www.ancestraljourneys.org) was of great help):

http://s24.postimg.org/jakvc9379/Ancient_R1a_C.png

http://s24.postimg.org/jakvc9379/Ancient_R1a_C.png

Red Deer Island cemetery - http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/handle/2027.42/24870
CW or Corded - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corded_Ware_culture
BattleAxe - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corded_Ware_culture#Nomenclature
Urnfield - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urnfield_culture
Zhizhitskaya* - http://www.hermitagemuseum.org/wps/portal/hermitage/digital-collection/25.+Archaeological+Artifacts/3551584/?lng=
Iron Age* - http://s23.postimg.org/4ztqxfocr/Anaszkino_1.png and http://s30.postimg.org/7uf1w47gx/Anashkino_2.png
Andronovo - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andronovo_culture and http://www.csen.org/BAR%20Book/04%20...Bronze.Int.pdf (http://www.csen.org/BAR%20Book/04%20Part%203.%20Bronze.Int.pdf)
Sintashta - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sintashta_culture
Karasuk - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karasuk_culture
Pazyryk - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pazyryk_culture
Xiaohe mummies - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lop_Nur#Xiaohe_Burial_Site , https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yuezhi (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yuezhi)https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wusun
Mezhovskaya - http://www.academia.edu/3742220/Ancient_Indo-Europeans._Chelyabinsk_Rifei_2002_496_pp
Tagar - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tagar_culture
Tachtyk (Tashtyk) - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tashtyk_culture
Altai Scythian - http://www.researchgate.net/publication/260249780_Climate-Induced_Changes_in_Population_Dynamics_of_Siberian _Scythians_%28700-250_BC%29
Tanais kurgan - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tanais#History
Xiongnu - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xiongnu
Medieval (Usedom) - http://www.diss.fu-berlin.de/diss/servlets/MCRFileNodeServlet/FUDISS_derivate_000000008413/Dissertation_Freder.pdf

*Note: Iron Age refers to another R1a sample from the same region where Zhizhitskaya. Iron Age sample was from Anashkino:

Check pages 183 - 184:

http://www.mas.ncl.ac.uk/~nas13/AS/2009BAR_Int_Ser1964_Dolukhanov_etal.pdf

But there are zero R1a in Central Europe in Neolithic times

arvistro
02-08-15, 10:01
Belarus/Baltics/Karelia probably featured some r1a from Mesolithic to XXI century.

Tomenable
02-08-15, 11:37
But let's remember that R1a from Karelia was not under M198, but a more ancient branch R1a1*.

Just like that R1b from Neolithic Iberia was V88, the same branch which is now common in Africa.

Here are modern matches for R1a from Tanais kurgan:

http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?2882-Tanais-Kurgan-has-R1a


I've created his profile on Ysearch and searched for a matches, the closest 5 at the distance of 1 were:
Surikov (Russia) 13 25 16 11 11 11 10 13 11 30 15 14 20 12 16 11 23
Anokhin (Russia) 13 25 15 11 11 11 10 13 11 30 15 14 20 13 15 11 23
TkáÄ(sic!) (Slovakia) 13 25 16 11 11 11 13 30 15 14 20 13 16 11 23
Webber (Unknown, probably England) 14 24 15 11 11 11 12 11 10 13 11 30 15 9 10 11 11 24 14 19 31 12 15 15 16 11 10 19 21 15
Constantinov (Russia) 13 25 16 11 11 11 12 10 13 11 30 15 9 10 11 14 19 32 12 13 15 19 21 11 15 14 24


And matches for Corded Ware R1a from Eulau in Geemany:


Best of 2008: Corded Ware DNA from German:

One of the biggest hits of the year for this blogger was the discovery of Y-DNA haplogroup R1a in three Corded Ware skeletons from a burial site in Eulau, eastern Germany. It's an important result, because it links a major Bronze Age archeological complex with one of the most dominant Y-chromosome haplogroups in Europe today.

All three individuals were confirmed to be paternally related via their shared Y-STR haplotype. Nevertheless, the outcome appears far from a random coincidence. Consider that in Europe today R1a shows highest frequencies in Poland and Western Russia, which are both located in former Corded Ware territory, and where the Eulau R1a haplotype appears to have its closest modern matches. Moreover, the Corded Ware culture is often classified as an Indo-European culture by archeologists and linguists, while at the same time R1a has been posited as a marker of the early Indo-Europeans by some geneticists. Needless to say, I'm expecting R1a to be a common, and perhaps dominant marker among Corded Ware samples when more of them make it to the lab.

The consensus haplotype of the three individuals (based on most complete profile) gave two exact matches in an European population sample of 11,213 haplotypes in a set of 100 populations (as of July 2008, Release ‘‘23’’ from 2008–01-15): one individual from Poland (1/939 from Gdansk) and one from Russia (1/48 from Tambov).

The Y haplotype was predicted using the Web-based program Haplotype Predictor (9). The three individuals of grave 99 belong to haplotype R1a, with a probability of 100% based on the Y-STR profile of individual 3 (10). To confirm haplogroup status, we further amplified an 85-bp fragment covering the Y-SNP marker SRY10831.2 characteristic for R1a (11). Primer sequences are given in Table S6. Sequences and sequenced clones from independent extract of all three individuals show the specific GA transition identifying R1a (Fig. S5).

Tomenable
02-08-15, 11:50
But there are zero R1a in Central Europe in Neolithic times

Zhizhitskaya was a culture contemporary with Corded Ware (it was surrounded by Corded Ware cultures from all sides):

They practiced agriculture, and they were also lake fishermen. Both N1c and R1a were found in that culture:

http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?172936-Baltic-Finnic-N1c-arrival-in-the-Baltic-Sea-region&p=3622337&viewfull=1#post3622337


N1c1 was found in Zhizhitskaya culture in Smolensk Russia on the eastern border of Belarus dated to 4,500 years.

The Zhizhitskaya archaeological culture was surrounded by Corded-Ware culture. The differences between the Zhizhitskaya and Corded-Ware is the material culture of the former being built on tombs in the lake near water. Furthermore, people of Zhizhitskaya had agricultural practices similar to those of central Europe. Make a mental note N1c1 in Zhizhitskaya is 4,500 years old.

The Comb Ceramic culture which included the Narva culture encompassed territories of north-eastern Europe. There is some debate about the language of inhabitants of the Narva culture. Some scholars suggest that inhabitants were paleo-European speakers based on evidence of toponyms and hydronyms. The Comb Ceramic culture was replaced by Corded-ware horizon associated with IE family of languages by scholars. Proto-Finnic speakers migrated to Baltic shore around 3,000 from Volga-Ural direction as per Finnish scholars.

Who could spread N1c1 in the Baltic region in the light of this information? All three - paleo-Europeans, Indo-Europeans and proto-Finnic could be responsible for spreading N1c1 into the Baltic region. It was certainly not proto-Finnic speakers in western Russia, Smolensk 4,500 years ago given linguistic evidence. From Smolensk Russia, N1c1 could travel along Daugava/western Dvina River into northern Belarus, Latvia and Lithuania.

http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?4664-Request-Y-DNA-haplogroup-results-from-Allentoft-2015/page25&highlight=RISE493


There is indeed something to that effect in another paper in the same volume as the DNA results. It says (pp. 67-68):


A new cultural tradition was formed on the boundary of 4–3 mill. cal. BC, which was named Zhizhitskaya culture of pile dwellings. It was formed on the basis of usviatskaya middle Neolithic culture, which can explain finds of vessels attributed to these both cultures in one horizon. It was also on the boundary of 4–3 mill. cal. BC when bearers of Balkan agricultural traditions appeared in Sennitsky and Zhizhitsky archaeological microregions. A particular cultural complex was formed here under their influence.

Russian archaeologists traditionally label as Neolithic all cultures with pottery (including hunter-gatherers with pottery), so it was not clear to me before that Zhizhitskaya people were actually practising agriculture. I thought they were lake fishermen.

It is possible that Zhizhitskaya were originally N1c and R1a entered that population from neighbouring Corded Ware.

arvistro
02-08-15, 11:59
Was not there one even older R1a from that Belorussian study?

Also I am not sure if that was N1c1 or N1c in that study. In materials it is marked N1c, it is most likely N1c1 (just they did not check?) but I think it was never explicitly stated so.

arvistro
02-08-15, 12:02
Here info on that study, featuring 6000 years old R1a:
http://eurogenes.blogspot.ca/2015/02/ancient-r1a1-and-n1c-from-western-russia.html?m=1

Tomenable
02-08-15, 12:08
Yes, I know this Russian study, unfortunately they don't say what subclade of R1a it was.

Karelian hunter had M459*, a side branch of M459 (while its main branch evolved into M198).


Was not there one even older R1a from that Belorussian study?

You are right, one was Mesolithic - apart from those Zhizhitskaya ones. I will update the map later.

arvistro
02-08-15, 12:17
The same river Serteya had R1a 6000 years ago and R1a 4500 years ago.
It might be one was local, other was Corded alternatively both could be local.

Edit: N1c was also found there 4500 years ago. Interesting. Must read on Serteya.

One would expect N1c to be intrusive based on data, but it could well be both were intrusive :)

Tomenable
02-08-15, 12:42
This paper also has info on Serteya and Naumovo, IIRC:

http://www.mas.ncl.ac.uk/~nas13/AS/2009BAR_Int_Ser1964_Dolukhanov_etal.pdf

arvistro
02-08-15, 15:42
R1a in NE Europe arrived from Syberia at some point. Probably.
Question is when. Together with pottery or before?
We only know that Mesolithic NE Europe has given only R1a so far (2/2).

Another question is when and how R1a the Corded Ware daddy, ancestor of 99% modern ones, arrived to the North of Black Sea. We only know that Yamna samples were R1b so far.

Third question is when N1c arrived to these lands. According to probability theory there is a better chance he arrived after R1a.

Tomenable
02-08-15, 15:59
It is possible that all of R (including both R1a, R1b and R2) ultimately came from these 20,000 years old Siberian ice age refugia:

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/30809-Kennewick-Man-Was-Native-American?p=463666&viewfull=1#post463666

http://s13.postimg.org/lwt6blh2v/Ice_Age_Max_Map.gif

People from these Siberian refugia also migrated to the Americas (being up to 38% of all ancestors of Native Americans):

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/30809-Kennewick-Man-Was-Native-American?p=463644&viewfull=1#post463644

I wonder if hg Q also existed in those Siberian refugia, or was it picked up later from Mongoloids? Because most of Native American ancestry is East Asian rather than Siberian (only up to 38% is Siberian), but they have mostly Q when it comes to Y-DNA.

Of course Q is closely related to R (both descend from common ancestor haplogroup P).

Today the most common haplogroup among Mongoloids is O, which evolved from NO (just like N did):

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/79/Yhaplotree.JPG

Autosomal mutation which defines Mongoloid physical traits, is EDAR 370A, which evolved perhaps +/- 30,000 years ago (?):

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/30809-Kennewick-Man-Was-Native-American?p=463645&viewfull=1#post463645


Mongoloids are defined by mutation EDAR 370A, which evolved perhaps some 30,000 years ago:

93% of all Han Chinese have it, and this mutation is believed to be responsible for many of typical East Asian features:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ectodysplasin_A_receptor


(...) is thought to be responsible for a number of differences between these populations, including the thicker hair, more numerous sweat glands, smaller breasts, and dentition characteristic of East Asians.[5] (...) The 370A mutation arose in humans approximately 30,000 years ago, and now is found in 93% of Han Chinese and in the majority of people in nearby Asian populations. (...)

Interestingly, many of Scandinavian hunter-gatherers had this Mongoloid mutation, implying a prehistoric gene flow from East Asia:

http://biorxiv.org/content/early/2015/03/13/016477


(...) The derived allele [370A] in the Motala samples lies on the same haplotype as in modern East Asians (Extended Data Figure 4) implying a shared origin. The statistic f4 (Yoruba, Scandinavian hunter-gatherers, Han, Onge Andaman Islanders) is significantly negative (Z=-3.9) implying gene flow between the ancestors of Scandinavian hunter-gatherers and Han so this shared haplotype is likely the result of ancient gene flow between groups ancestral to these two populations. (...)

If you find any Mongoloid features in Swedes or Poles, they are likely from those prehistoric Motala-like (SHG) hunters:

http://polishgenes.blogspot.com/2012/04/prehistoric-scandinavians-genetically.html

And not from Medieval Mongol invasions of Europe - "No Mongolian admixture in Poland":

http://polishgenes.blogspot.com/2013/03/no-mongolian-admixture-in-poland.html

But N1c carriers in prehistoric Europe (such as those 4500 years old from Belarus) rather did not have EDAR 370A.

Has that N1c sample from Zhizhitskaya culture been tested for "Mongoloid admixture" ???

BTW - those Motala hunter-gatherers belonged to I2 haplogroup, and some of them still had that admixture.

Tomenable
02-08-15, 16:35
We only know that Yamna samples were R1b so far.

And that's strange.

In Yamna we find R1b (so far), in Corded & Andronovo-Sintashta R1a, but autosomally there was large overlap between all of them.

It's a similar mysterious case like with these Siberian refugia of Mal'ta and Afontova Gora. Only R was found there, but Q could also be there, because up to 38% of Native American ancestry is from those refugia, and Native Americans are mostly Q, which is closely related to R. Perhaps in both cases there were some founder effects of Y-DNA lineages migrating in various directions.

As for that EDAR Mongoloid mutation - it arose 30,000 years ago, but it probably took a long time before it spread to modern frequency of 93% among Han Chinese. 30,000 years ago, haplogroups O and N were probably still at their ancestral NO stage.

So it is possible that EDAR 370A arose before NO split into N and O, but it was initially present only at low frequencies, and was later under strong positive selective pressure only in the East (reaching the present-day peak frequency of 93% among Han Chinese). This would explain, why most of N1c in Europe has no Mongoloid features, while most of N in North-East Asia has them.

Compare it to lactase persistence mutations, which arouse long time ago, but were increasing in frequency over long time periods.

As for EDAR 370A among prehistoric SHGs - it probably came with the northernmost gene flow possible: along the Arctic Ocean.

That EDAR 370A was probably under strong positive selection only among peoples who lived in extremely cold (!) climate.

It is obvious just by looking at them, that Mongoloids are much more cold-adapted people than Caucasoids.

bicicleur
02-08-15, 16:47
R1a in NE Europe arrived from Syberia at some point. Probably.
Question is when. Together with pottery or before?
We only know that Mesolithic NE Europe has given only R1a so far (2/2).

Another question is when and how R1a the Corded Ware daddy, ancestor of 99% modern ones, arrived to the North of Black Sea. We only know that Yamna samples were R1b so far.

Third question is when N1c arrived to these lands. According to probability theory there is a better chance he arrived after R1a.

pottery came from China through Siberia into Europe, probably with N1c
IMO R1a came from Trancaucasia and crossed the Caucasus maybe 11 ka, after the youngest dryas
this has been discussed before :
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/29701-New-R1a-Paper-by-Underhill-et-al-(2014)
and
http://dienekes.blogspot.be/2014/03/major-new-article-on-deep-origins-of-y.html

Tomenable
02-08-15, 16:50
Bicicleur do you know which are the oldest anthropologically "Mongoloid" skeletons found so far? IMO ancestors of East Asians evolved in northern extremities of Asia, and only later expanded southward, into what is now China, Mongolia, Koreas, Japan and farther south, partially replacing & partially mixing with previous inhabitants (this substrate is especially evident in South-East Asians).

bicicleur
02-08-15, 17:11
It is possible that all of R (including both R1a, R1b and R2) ultimately came from these 20,000 years old Siberian ice age refugia:

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/30809-Kennewick-Man-Was-Native-American?p=463666&viewfull=1#post463666

http://s13.postimg.org/lwt6blh2v/Ice_Age_Max_Map.gif

People from these Siberian refugia also migrated to the Americas (being up to 38% of all ancestors of Native Americans):

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/30809-Kennewick-Man-Was-Native-American?p=463644&viewfull=1#post463644

I wonder if hg Q also existed in those Siberian refugia, or was it picked up later from Mongoloids? Because most of Native American ancestry is East Asian rather than Siberian (only up to 38% is Siberian), but they have mostly Q when it comes to Y-DNA.

Of course Q is closely related to R (both descend from common ancestor haplogroup P).

Today the most common haplogroup among Mongoloids is O, which evolved from NO (just like N did):

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/79/Yhaplotree.JPG

Autosomal mutation which defines Mongoloid physical traits, is EDAR 370A, which evolved perhaps +/- 30,000 years ago (?):

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/30809-Kennewick-Man-Was-Native-American?p=463645&viewfull=1#post463645



But N1c carriers in prehistoric Europe (such as those 4500 years old from Belarus) rather did not have EDAR 370A.

Has that N1c sample from Zhizhitskaya culture been tested for "Mongoloid admixture" ???

BTW - those Motala hunter-gatherers belonged to I2 haplogroup, and some of them still had that admixture.


Mal'ta was R* , not R1 or R2
IMO the origin of Q and R was near the Altaï Mts
But I don't think 24000 y.o. Mal'ta R* survived, it went extinct.
Another 17000 y.o. Afantova Gora skeleton was tentatively typed Q1a1 ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_Q-M242#Y-Haplogroup_Q_in_Ancient_sites ) while Native Americans are Q1a2-derived
Maybe R1a, R1b and R2 survived LGM near the Hindu Kush :
http://www.cemml.colostate.edu/cultural/09476/afgh05-009.html
http://www.cemml.colostate.edu/cultural/09476/afgh02-01enl.html
http://www.cemml.colostate.edu/cultural/09476/afgh02-02enl.ht
from where both R1a and R1b moved west to NW Iran after LGM
till youngest dryas (12 ka) there was eastern epigravettian in both Trans- and Ciscaucasia (haplogroup I)
but after youngest dryas they were replaced in Transcaucasia by R1a/R1b
R1a crossed the Caucasus from transcaucasia somewhere after the youngest dryas
R1b-V88 was in Anatolia 8 ka from where they left to Africa with cattle
R1b-M73 & M269 also crossed the Caucasus but later than R1a
IMO CW R1a ancestors lived on the steppe or in the forests north of the Caucasus

bicicleur
02-08-15, 17:22
Bicicleur do you know which are the oldest anthropologically "Mongoloid" skeletons found so far? IMO ancestors of East Asians evolved in northern extremities of Asia, and only later expanded southward, into what is now China, Mongolia, Koreas, Japan and farther south, partially replacing & partially mixing with previous inhabitants (this substrate is especially evident in South-East Asians).

I don't know.
I guess it was before LGM.
There were 2 waves into Siberia : IUP (initial upper paleolithic with blades mad with Levalois technique) which came from Hindu Kush (48 ka) to Altaï (45 ka) and further through Mongolia ,probably both haplo N & O
and EUP (early upper paleolithic with microblades made from cilindric cores) which arrived in Altaï mountains (38 ka : probably Q & R). This expanded along Yenessei, Angara & Lena rivers (Dyuktai cave).
Does that make sense for the spread of Mongoloïd types?

arvistro
02-08-15, 17:28
pottery came from China through Siberia into Europe, probably with N1c
IMO R1a came from Trancaucasia and crossed the Caucasus maybe 11 ka, after the youngest dryas
this has been discussed before :
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/29701-New-R1a-Paper-by-Underhill-et-al-(2014)
and
http://dienekes.blogspot.be/2014/03/major-new-article-on-deep-origins-of-y.html
So, you suggest N1c was in Europe before 3000 bce and it is the small amount of samples why first N1c was caught 2500 bce?

Do you think Swiderian culture was already R1a?

Tomenable
02-08-15, 17:47
Mal'ta was R*, not R1 or R2
It is quite possible that R1 did not yet exist 24,000 years ago:

http://www.yfull.com/tree/R1/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_R1

Moreover, Mal'ta boy was one individual, and he was R*.

But his cousin could be R1, his another cousin could be R2, etc. They could be in the same population.


which arrived in Altaï mountains (38 ka : probably Q & R).
Q and R did probably not yet exist 38,000 years ago.

R arose some 31,400 years ago (33,500-29,300) according to YFull:

http://www.yfull.com/tree/R/

Q arose some also around the same time as R according to YFull:

http://www.yfull.com/tree/Q/


Another 17000 y.o. Afantova Gora skeleton was tentatively typed Q1a1
This is great news indeed, thanks!


while Native Americans are Q1a2-derived

Both Q1a1 and Q1a2 are descended from Q1a, and they could be literally cousins at the beginning.

Is Q1a M378 ??? - http://www.yfull.com/tree/Q-M378/

LeBrok
02-08-15, 18:36
Bicicleur do you know which are the oldest anthropologically "Mongoloid" skeletons found so far? IMO ancestors of East Asians evolved in northern extremities of Asia, and only later expanded southward, into what is now China, Mongolia, Koreas, Japan and farther south, partially replacing & partially mixing with previous inhabitants (this substrate is especially evident in South-East Asians).
How about the peking man?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peking_Man
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/41/Peking_Man.jpg/220px-Peking_Man.jpg

bicicleur
02-08-15, 18:45
Ray Banks has some age estimates too, but not for all haplogroups.
Most of his estimates are older than YFull, e.g. for C age his estimate is 75000 years
https://sites.google.com/site/compositeytree/c
the Ust-Ishim bone was 45000 years old, according to Genetiker he had 2 out of 7 SNP's of K-M2335 http://www.yfull.com/tree/K-M2335/
So Ust-Ishim was pré-NO. IMO opinion it is likely that NO split into N & O in Altaï Mts 45000 years ago.
As for Q & R maybe they are younger than 38000 years, but I think older than what YFull says because there are so many known SNP's for Q1b branch
If Q & R are less than 38000 years old, then P1 arrived in Altaï Mts 38000 years ago and Q and R were born a bit later

Q in YFull :
L274 = Q1
L275 = Q1b
L472 = Q1a
F1096 = Q1a1
L56 = Q1a2

bicicleur
02-08-15, 18:50
How about the peking man?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peking_Man
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/41/Peking_Man.jpg/220px-Peking_Man.jpg

the Peking man was probably a homo erectus, who left Africa +/- 1.900.000 years ago

there were some 40.000 y.o. bones found of a modern human in a cave near Beijing
his mtDNA is B , Y-DNA is unknown
no artefacts or tools found - culture unknown

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tianyuan_man

maybe some haplo N who had lost the way

bicicleur
02-08-15, 19:19
So, you suggest N1c was in Europe before 3000 bce and it is the small amount of samples why first N1c was caught 2500 bce?

Do you think Swiderian culture was already R1a?

pottery existed more than 20.000 years ago near the Yangtze river, China
13000 years ago it entered eastern Siberia, probably with haplo N
it spread further west till Europe it crossed Ural some 9000 years ago
maybe this was not N, but R1a
the pottery may well have been spread by the women who were with haplo N : note that the Karelian R1a1* HG had mtDNA C1g
a mesolithic sample near Irkutsk, Siberia also turned out mtDNA C : http://www.ancestraljourneys.org/mesolithicdna.shtml

first Swiderian was allready in Poland before the youngest dryas, and also there would be a link with Solutrean. That is why I think it is haplo I
Kunda, Narva and Zedmar seem to be Swiderian-derived, and they all had mt-DNA U5b or U4 : http://www.ancestraljourneys.org/mesolithicdna.shtml
I think all people of Swiderian or later derived cultures finally got extinct, most of them replaced by R1a (and maybe also N and other I)

Sile
02-08-15, 20:02
It is quite possible that R1 did not yet exist 24,000 years ago:

http://www.yfull.com/tree/R1/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_R1

Moreover, Mal'ta boy was one individual, and he was R*.

But his cousin could be R1, his another cousin could be R2, etc. They could be in the same population.


Q and R did probably not yet exist 38,000 years ago.

R arose some 31,400 years ago (33,500-29,300) according to YFull:

http://www.yfull.com/tree/R/

Q arose some also around the same time as R according to YFull:

http://www.yfull.com/tree/Q/


This is great news indeed, thanks!



Both Q1a1 and Q1a2 are descended from Q1a, and they could be literally cousins at the beginning.

Is Q1a M378 ??? - http://www.yfull.com/tree/Q-M378/


You need to study your fyull dates, N is 10000 years older than R1, the likely conclusion, is that N ( China/mongolia ) and R1a ( BMAC ) met in central asia before heading west.

LeBrok
03-08-15, 01:12
the Peking man was probably a homo erectus, who left Africa +/- 1.900.000 years ago

there were some 40.000 y.o. bones found of a modern human in a cave near Beijing
his mtDNA is B , Y-DNA is unknown
no artefacts or tools found - culture unknown

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tianyuan_man

maybe some haplo N who had lost the way
He asked when first mongoloid features popped up. I'm sure Homo Sapiens mixed with East Asian Homo Erectus (the peking man like people) and created East Asian phenotype.

Tomenable
03-08-15, 03:05
That Peking Man doesn't look East Asian. He doesn't look like any group of modern humans.

But if I have to choose from, then he looks more like Veddoid or Australoid than like East Asian.

http://s5.tinypic.com/1ffd6h.jpg

bicicleur
03-08-15, 07:31
He asked when first mongoloid features popped up. I'm sure Homo Sapiens mixed with East Asian Homo Erectus (the peking man like people) and created East Asian phenotype.

I don't know whether homo erectus DNA has been sequenced and compared with modern human DNA

I guess if any admixture would be detected it would be big news

LeBrok
03-08-15, 09:56
I don't know whether homo erectus DNA has been sequenced and compared with modern human DNA

I guess if any admixture would be detected it would be big news
I think it will be one day. The same way there was a big news when finally we learned that Homo Sapiens had sex with Neanderthals. Neanderthals were Homo Erectus, so why not the same scenario had place in East Asia between Home Sapiens and their Home Erectus?

LeBrok
03-08-15, 10:02
That Peking Man doesn't look East Asian. He doesn't look like any group of modern humans.

But if I have to choose from, then he looks more like Veddoid or Australoid than like East Asian.

http://s5.tinypic.com/1ffd6h.jpg
You are right, he looks more like predecessor of East Asians. ;)

bicicleur
03-08-15, 12:06
I think it will be one day. The same way there was a big news when finally we learned that Homo Sapiens had sex with Neanderthals. Neanderthals were Homo Erectus, so why not the same scenario had place in East Asia between Home Sapiens and their Home Erectus?

no, Neanderthals nor Denisovans were homo erectus who had left Africa allready 1.900.000 years ago
Neanderthals and Denisovans left Africa much later

see this tree based on mtDNA :

http://www.cell.com/action/showImagesData?pii=S0960-9822%2813%2900215-7

Tomenable
03-08-15, 18:18
We are only something like 2% - 3% Neanderthal.

However, there was probably a lot of sex with Neanderthals - but most of that sex produced infertile offspring (let's call them "mules"), while only a small % of the offspring was fertile, and could pass that tiny Neanderthal admixture to next generations:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/01/140129134956.htm


(...) Using this and other types of information, the team found that some areas of the modern non-African human genome were rich in Neanderthal DNA, which may have been helpful for human survival, while other areas were more like "deserts" with far less Neanderthal ancestry than average.

The barren areas were the "most exciting" finding, said first author Sriram Sankararaman of HMS and the Broad Institute. "It suggests the introduction of some of these Neanderthal mutations was harmful to the ancestors of non-Africans and that these mutations were later removed by the action of natural selection."

The team showed that the areas with reduced Neanderthal ancestry tend to cluster in two parts of our genomes: genes that are most active in the male germline (the testes) and genes on the X chromosome. This pattern has been linked in many animals to a phenomenon known as hybrid infertility, where the offspring of a male from one subspecies and afemale from another have low or no fertility.

"This suggests that when ancient humans met and mixed with Neanderthals, the two species were at the edge of biological incompatibility," said Reich, who is also a senior associate member of the Broad Institute and an investigator at the Howard Hughes Medical Institute. Present-day human populations, which can be separated from one another by as much as 100,000 years (such as West Africans and Europeans), are fully compatible with no evidence of increased male infertility. In contrast, ancient human and Neanderthal populations apparently faced interbreeding challenges after 500,000 years of evolutionary separation.

"It is fascinating that thesetypes of problems could arise over that short a time scale," Reich said. (...)

If humans could only barely produce fertile offspring with Neanderthals, then I don't think that they could with Erectus. I don't doubt that humans had sex with Erectus (today there are on this planet numerous zoophiles who like having sex with far more distant mammal species, such as sheep!), but it's almost certain that they couldn't produce offspring, or at least fertile offspring.

Yetos
03-08-15, 20:10
That Peking Man doesn't look East Asian. He doesn't look like any group of modern humans.

But if I have to choose from, then he looks more like Veddoid or Australoid than like East Asian.

http://s5.tinypic.com/1ffd6h.jpg

http://media4.picsearch.com/is?1Oem49SHlgXeZ9ATJiXaX9HKu8FvoKBS3Ppg75-fYjk&height=341

I think New Guinea people still have that look

but that nose I think survived in Central Asia looking

LeBrok
03-08-15, 23:38
no, Neanderthals nor Denisovans were homo erectus who had left Africa allready 1.900.000 years ago
Neanderthals and Denisovans left Africa much later

see this tree based on mtDNA :

http://www.cell.com/action/showImagesData?pii=S0960-9822%2813%2900215-7
I would swear that Neanderthals used to be classified as homo erectus. Anyway it doesn't mean that they couldn't procreate together.

LeBrok
03-08-15, 23:45
http://media4.picsearch.com/is?1Oem49SHlgXeZ9ATJiXaX9HKu8FvoKBS3Ppg75-fYjk&height=341

I think New Guinea people still have that look

but that nose I think survived in Central Asia looking
There must have been a separate migration which went form East Africa to Australia.

bicicleur
04-08-15, 09:25
We are only something like 2% - 3% Neanderthal.

However, there was probably a lot of sex with Neanderthals - but most of that sex produced infertile offspring (let's call them "mules"), while only a small % of the offspring was fertile, and could pass that tiny Neanderthal admixture to next generations:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/01/140129134956.htm



If humans could only barely produce fertile offspring with Neanderthals, then I don't think that they could with Erectus. I don't doubt that humans had sex with Erectus (today there are on this planet numerous zoophiles who like having sex with far more distant mammal species, such as sheep!), but it's almost certain that they couldn't produce offspring, or at least fertile offspring.

there is another issue : modern humans probalby never met Peking Man, he was probably extinct before modern humans got there

there is another species : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homo_floresiensis
probably another descendant of homo erectus
he must have had contact with modern humans as he went extinct recently
they were dwarfs hunting dwarf elephants and dwarf hippos

bicicleur
04-08-15, 15:55
There must have been a separate migration which went form East Africa to Australia.

maybe some early haplo A arrived there before descendants of haplo CT and mixed with later arrivals without leaving any Y- or mtDNA

MOESAN
05-08-15, 20:47
I agree for the most. I 'm a bit amazed how you can read so much threads and provide docs. you're searching facts and not only opinions and I appreciate that.
Sorry I can't send you a "numeral" drink !
after this bursting of applauds I go back to the thread: what would be fine would be have the detailed SNPs of all these diverse Y-R1a to weight possibilities of moves.

MOESAN
05-08-15, 20:48
You are right, he looks more like predecessor of East Asians. ;)

I'm OK with your feeling

Sile
05-08-15, 20:49
maybe some early haplo A arrived there before descendants of haplo CT and mixed with later arrivals without leaving any Y- or mtDNA

What is haplogroup CT ?
where is this stated

I do not see it here
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paragroup

but see it as meaning every haplogroup from C to T as per this paper
Van Oven M, Van Geystelen A, Kayser M, Decorte R, Larmuseau HD (2014). "Seeing the wood for the trees: a minimal reference phylogeny for the human Y chromosome". Human Mutation 35 (2): 187–91. doi (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_object_identifier):10.1002/humu.22468 (https://dx.doi.org/10.1002%2Fhumu.22468). PMID (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PubMed_Identifier) 24166809 (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24166809).

bicicleur
06-08-15, 09:25
We are only something like 2% - 3% Neanderthal.

However, there was probably a lot of sex with Neanderthals - but most of that sex produced infertile offspring (let's call them "mules"), while only a small % of the offspring was fertile, and could pass that tiny Neanderthal admixture to next generations:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/01/140129134956.htm



If humans could only barely produce fertile offspring with Neanderthals, then I don't think that they could with Erectus. I don't doubt that humans had sex with Erectus (today there are on this planet numerous zoophiles who like having sex with far more distant mammal species, such as sheep!), but it's almost certain that they couldn't produce offspring, or at least fertile offspring.

I found this article today :

http://www.thewire.com/technology/2011/09/it-wasnt-just-neanderthals-ancient-humans-had-sex-other-hominids/42117/?utm_content=bufferd3b80&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer

it is rather vague in details

MOESAN
06-08-15, 12:52
We are only something like 2% - 3% Neanderthal.


If humans could only barely produce fertile offspring with Neanderthals, then I don't think that they could with Erectus. I don't doubt that humans had sex with Erectus (today there are on this planet numerous zoophiles who like having sex with far more distant mammal species, such as sheep!), but it's almost certain that they couldn't produce offspring, or at least fertile offspring.

I see here you don't read my more serious posts: in a thread about human mutants I spoke about some monsters with elephant noses, squale tails and others surprising features; in fact they are not mutants, but old crossings showing we can have descendants even with very different species!
To be seriously serious I agree with you for very far cousins like Homo Erectus, even if I've no proof. Concerning Neanderthal and us, it recalls me the same question with tigers, lions, panthers, or horses and donkeys or zebres.

MOESAN
06-08-15, 12:59
I found this article today :

http://www.thewire.com/technology/2011/09/it-wasnt-just-neanderthals-ancient-humans-had-sex-other-hominids/42117/?utm_content=bufferd3b80&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer

it is rather vague in details


I have some doubts ober the accuracy of this kind of affirmations before proofs; simulations are simulations, only simulations, produced by our theories;
and others ligneages shared DNA are not by themselves a proof of efficient interbreeding. Always the question of very ancient common ancestors.

bicicleur
06-08-15, 14:37
I have some doubts ober the accuracy of this kind of affirmations before proofs; simulations are simulations, only simulations, produced by our theories;
and others ligneages shared DNA are not by themselves a proof of efficient interbreeding. Always the question of very ancient common ancestors.

so do I
I just refer to the article as it is
afaik there is even no homo erectus DNA available
I suppose they are just comparing certain strings in modern human DNA which may have been inserted at some time and then further being chopped with each consecutive generation
as I mentioned, the article is rather vague in details

LeBrok
06-08-15, 16:53
I found this article today :

http://www.thewire.com/technology/2011/09/it-wasnt-just-neanderthals-ancient-humans-had-sex-other-hominids/42117/?utm_content=bufferd3b80&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer

it is rather vague in details

Lacking actual DNA, Hammer and his team did what any modern scientist would do: they wrote a computer program. Using modern human DNA, Hammer says, they were able to "simulate history" and sort of reverse-engineer human DNA. In doing so, they found evidence that Homo sapiens not only had sex with Neanderthals, they also interbred with Homo erectus, the "upright walking man," Homo habilis, the "tool-using man," and possibly others. Hammer says that despite earlier skepticism about interbreeding between human species and despite the belief that humans were an exception to certain laws of evolution, our DNA shows otherwise.
That's why I think we should be able to find some Chinese looking Home Erectus. Some men can find sheep attractive, so sex with other hominids was a sure thing.

bicicleur
06-08-15, 17:34
it is very likely homo erectus was extinct before modern humans arrived in northern/central China

on the other hand modern humans were in the Levant and the Persian Gulf 125000 years ago while Neanderthal was in the Levant 200000 years ago and in the Zagros Mountains 80000 years ago
in both areas Neanderthal went extinct 40-50000 years ago
modern human tribes that still survive today - descendants of haplo CT - left the Middle Eastern area only 55-45.000 years ago

so they had a very long time to interact
why then is there so little Neanderthal DNA left in modern humans?

why then there is so little Neanderthal DNA ?

From the archeological record, it's inferred that Neanderthals evolved in Europe or western Asia and spread out from there, stopping when they reached water or some other significant obstacle. (During the ice ages, sea levels were a lot lower than they are now, so there was no English Channel to cross.) This is one of the most basic ways modern humans differ from Neanderthals and, in Pääbo's view, also one of the most intriguing. By about forty-five thousand years ago, modern humans had already reached Australia, a journey that, even mid-ice age, meant crossing open water. Archaic humans likeHomo erectus "spread like many other mammals in the Old World," Pääbo told me. "They never came to Madagascar, never to Australia. Neither did Neanderthals. It's only fully modern humans who start this thing of venturing out on the ocean where you don't see land. Part of that is technology, of course; you have to have ships to do it. But there is also, I like to think or say, some madness there. You know? How many people must have sailed out and vanished on the Pacific before you found Easter Island? I mean, it’s ridiculous. And why do you do that? Is it for the glory? For immortality? For curiosity? And now we go to Mars. We never stop."

I find this explanation rather vague. Maybe it's an element, but there is more to it.
50.000 years ago modern humans develloped a technology based on stone blades, that is when expansion from SW Asia started
why was Neanderthal not part of it?

there is also the human who mixed with Neanderthals in Europe some 40.000 years ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pe%C8%99tera_cu_Oase
but it looks like this branch went extinct

somehow branches with to much Neanderthal DNA couldn't compete with the modern humans that had stone blades


7392

levallois tool , Neanderthals and modern humans

7393

blade tools as develloped by modern humans in the Middle East +/- 50.000 years ago

MOESAN
06-08-15, 18:39
I had understood your point

LeBrok
07-08-15, 02:54
it is very likely homo erectus was extinct before modern humans arrived in northern/central China Actually Neandertals, Denisovans, and who know what home sapines, could have mixed with home erectus of Asia 500-200 years ago. Erectus got extinct the same Neanderthal did, passing only few genes from mating.
This is the main idea of this article, that hominids mixed whenever they met.


so they had a very long time to interact
why then is there so little Neanderthal DNA left in modern humans? Actually it is estimated that up to 40% of Neanderthal genes circulate in humans. It is just that in one person there is about 2-4% of it. For example my 3% Neanderthal might be completely different than your 3%.



I find this explanation rather vague. Maybe it's an element, but there is more to it.
50.000 years ago modern humans develloped a technology based on stone blades, that is when expansion from SW Asia started
why was Neanderthal not part of it?

there is also the human who mixed with Neanderthals in Europe some 40.000 years ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pe%C8%99tera_cu_Oase
but it looks like this branch went extinct

somehow branches with to much Neanderthal DNA couldn't compete with the modern humans that had stone blades Surly human's technology was more advanced, but it might have been our social side that gave humans the top advantage. Humans shared ideas across Europe, while Neanderthal groups were very isolated.

MOESAN
08-08-15, 00:12
I'm OK with your feeling

I made a clown of myself: I was speaking about the picture of some "australoid" man (Tomenable post # 26) and not the reconstitution of the true "old" Peking man (700000 BP?);
I show no evident ressemblance in any modern human category of current days concerning this last. Sorry.

MOESAN
08-08-15, 00:22
[QUOTE=LeBrok;464028]Actually Neandertals, Denisovans, and who know what home sapines, could have mixed with home erectus of Asia 500-200 years ago. Erectus got extinct the same Neanderthal did, passing only few genes from mating.
This is the main idea of this article, that hominids mixed whenever they met.

Actually it is estimated that up to 40% of Neanderthal genes circulate in humans. It is just that in one person there is about 2-4% of it. For example my 3% Neanderthal might be completely different than your 3

If true it undermines my reserves about ancien DNA sharings: in this case it is rather the proof of relatively recent crossings and not only remote ancestral community or we would be obliged to imagine Neanderthal was our direct ancestor ligneage - what a quick lost of DNA!!! - or that we are different modern ligneages with a very more remote ancestor shared with Neanderthal - but our relative homogeneity as modern humans is too great then -

Rethel
08-08-15, 00:30
By now there are at least 53 Ancient samples with R1a haplogroup (+ 1 Medieval R1a from Usedom, marked as "Med" below). I've made a map showing their locations in the context of archaeological cultures (data from Ancestral Journeys website (http://www.ancestraljourneys.org) was of great help):

http://s24.postimg.org/jakvc9379/Ancient_R1a_C.png

http://s24.postimg.org/jakvc9379/Ancient_R1a_C.png



Very wonderfull job! Thanks!:smile::good_job:

Can you add dates?

LeBrok
08-08-15, 05:27
I made a clown of myself: I was speaking about the picture of some "australoid" man (Tomenable post # 26) and not the reconstitution of the true "old" Peking man (700000 BP?);
I show no evident ressemblance in any modern human category of current days concerning this last. Sorry.
I understood correctly and took it as acknowledgment of my sarcastic remark. :)

LeBrok
08-08-15, 05:32
Actually Neandertals, Denisovans, and who know what home sapines, could have mixed with home erectus of Asia 500-200 years ago. Erectus got extinct the same Neanderthal did, passing only few genes from mating.
This is the main idea of this article, that hominids mixed whenever they met.

Actually it is estimated that up to 40% of Neanderthal genes circulate in humans. It is just that in one person there is about 2-4% of it. For example my 3% Neanderthal might be completely different than your 3

If true it undermines my reserves about ancien DNA sharings: in this case it is rather the proof of relatively recent crossings and not only remote ancestral community or we would be obliged to imagine Neanderthal was our direct ancestor ligneage - what a quick lost of DNA!!! - or that we are different modern ligneages with a very more remote ancestor shared with Neanderthal - but our relative homogeneity as modern humans is too great then -
Yes, the only great homogeneity I can see is when watching Amazon or Inuit tribes. They all look like brother and sisters. For the rest of us we are quite mixed, and still carrying snippets of genetic material belonging to many lines of hominids. Well Amazon and Inuits still carry the same ancestral material from Neanderthals and who knows who, but at least they look homologous. ;)

Tomenable
09-08-15, 17:18
Approximate dating of R1a (and suspected R1a) samples from Europe.

Sample from Tanais kurgan is at least 3000 years old (at least 1000 BC).

All dates in BC, except for Medieval Usedom sample (n.e. = AD):

Map + dates (http://s4.postimg.org/lfkhruvn1/Datowanie_R1a.png)

http://s4.postimg.org/lfkhruvn1/Datowanie_R1a.png

MOESAN
12-08-15, 14:52
Zhizhitskaya was a culture contemporary with Corded Ware (it was surrounded by Corded Ware cultures from all sides):

They practiced agriculture, and they were also lake fishermen. Both N1c and R1a were found in that culture:

http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?172936-Baltic-Finnic-N1c-arrival-in-the-Baltic-Sea-region&p=3622337&viewfull=1#post3622337



http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?4664-Request-Y-DNA-haplogroup-results-from-Allentoft-2015/page25&highlight=RISE493



It is possible that Zhizhitskaya were originally N1c and R1a entered that population from neighbouring Corded Ware.

Interesting. I wonder if the CombCeramic culture did not already know Y-N1c and "old" northern Y-R1a speaking neither I-Ean nor Uralic speaking (maybe their language had some far links with proto-Uralic, nevertheless? I 'm tempted to think Y-R1b of the times had a less large territory than the Y-R1a ones, territory I sea rather East the Caspian; these R1b would have carried more 'gedrosia'-like auDNA"tribes"; at contrario, the ancient North N1c and R1a would have had very little of 'gedrosia'; their later "balticization" plus some Uralic imputs at the mergins would explain the poor presence of 'gedrosia' among today Balts? this deserves a very precise surveys of R1a and N1c phylogeny among ancient and current population of the region, here I have a short knowledge...

arvistro
12-08-15, 17:19
No, all ancient Baltic samples had Gedrosia. Only modern ones lack.

arvistro
12-08-15, 17:38
I visualise it this way for Baltic region. As constant streams from two sources:
1) from South/West - possibly I people, after Neolithic some other people G?joined in.
2) from East - first R1a folk archaic clades, then 'R1a folk + N' folk appears, probably during Comb Ceramic

And then comes Corded Ware and eats almost everything.

MOESAN
13-08-15, 18:41
No, all ancient Baltic samples had Gedrosia. Only modern ones lack.


OK but which samples (dates and supposed culture)? I 've only K15 for ancient DNA, without 'gedrosia' in it (only 'westasian').

arvistro
13-08-15, 20:12
Karelia EHG, Samara EHG, Corded Ware, had Gedrosia.
Actually need to check Estonian CW and Lithuanian late BA samples specifically.

Tomenable
14-08-15, 05:04
Can you add dates?

Here you are (all dates in BC unless stated that in AD):

Ancient samples of R1a from Europe:

http://s27.postimg.org/z29u09qxv/R1a_Europe_dates.png

http://s27.postimg.org/z29u09qxv/R1a_Europe_dates.png

Modern distribution of R1a in Eurasia for comparison:

http://s11.postimg.org/8lih8edcj/1177epk.png

Ancient samples of R1a from Asia:

http://s23.postimg.org/nen0yig57/R1a_Asia_dates.png

http://s23.postimg.org/nen0yig57/R1a_Asia_dates.png

Modern distribution of R1a-Z93 in Asia for comparison:

http://cdn.eupedia.com/images/content/Haplogroup-R1a-Z93-Asia.png

MOESAN
16-08-15, 13:14
Karelia EHG, Samara EHG, Corded Ware, had Gedrosia.
Actually need to check Estonian CW and Lithuanian late BA samples specifically.

Karelia and Samara EHGs had surely high enough ANE in them, and the northern 'gedrosia' found in ancient DNA was part of this ANE element; we have to search for relic populations, descendants of postmagdalenian WHG arrived in some Northeast Europe proper region, and weakly mixed with early EEF neolithic people (more female mediated), I think... hyptothesis of mine needing more basis, I fear...

MOESAN
16-08-15, 13:58
Karelia and Samara EHGs had surely high enough ANE in them, and the northern 'gedrosia' found in ancient DNA was part of this ANE element; we have to search for relic populations, descendants of postmagdalenian WHG arrived in some Northeast Europe proper region, and weakly mixed with early EEF neolithic people (more female mediated), I think... hyptothesis of mine needing more basis, I fear...

I answer myself, because I wrote to quickly and said nonsense -
OK concerning gedrosia and ANE, but the WHG explanation cannot work for males ligneages because Y-R1a was surely absent in Western Europe at mesolithic times!!! sorry, I'm ashamed! (it's the Lorient Interceltic Festival week and I slept too less!

Tomenable
24-08-15, 15:47
Samples of Ancient R1a from Europe in chronological sequence: (http://s27.postimg.org/z29u09qxv/R1a_Europe_dates.png)

UZOO74 - Red Deer Island, Karelia - 5500-5000 BC
A3 - Serteya VIII, Smolensk Oblast - 4000 BC
RISE434 - Tiefbrunn, Bavaria - 2880-2630 BC
RISE436 - Tiefbrunn, Bavaria - 2868-2580 BC
RISE446 - Bergrheinfeld, Bavaria - 2829-2465 BC
EUL9(99-3) - Eulau, Sachsen-Anhalt - 2600 BC
EUL11(99-2) - Eulau, Sachsen-Anhalt - 2600 BC
EUL12(99-4) - Eulau, Sachsen-Anhalt - 2600 BC
RISE94 - Viby, Götaland - 2621-2472 BC
A8 - Naumovo, Pskov Oblast - 2500 BC
A9 - Serteya II, Smolensk Oblast - 2500 BC
RISE61 - Kyndeløse, Zealand - 2650-2300 BC
ESP11 - Esperstedt, Saxony-Anhalt - 2473-2348 BC
RISE431 - Łęki Małe, Greater Poland - 2286-2048 BC
Rogalin1 near Hrubieszów, Lublin Region - 2000 BC
Rogalin2 near Hrubieszów, Lublin Region - 2000 BC
RISE42 - Marbjerg, Zealand - 2191-1972 BC
HAL36 - Halberstadt, Sachsen-Anhalt - 1113-1021 BC
Tanais kurgan - Azov steppes, Maeotia - at least 1000 BC
M10 - Lichtenstein Cave near Dorste, Lower Saxony - 1000 BC
M11 - Lichtenstein Cave near Dorste, Lower Saxony - 1000 BC
RISE598 - Turlojiškė, Sudovia - 908-485 BC
A4 - Anashkino hillfort, Pskov Oblast - 800-400 BC

Do we have high-resolution data on subclades of at least some of them?