PDA

View Full Version : Teaser: EEF was 90% Anatolian



Fire Haired14
04-10-15, 03:58
Another teasar from authors with 34 (6300 BC)Neolithic Western Anatolian genomes: Close genetic relationship of Neolithic Anatolians to early European farmers: (http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?709-New-DNA-Papers&p=112243&viewfull=1#post112243)

BTW: By EEF I mean Early Neolithic European genomes from Hungary, Croatia, Germany, and Spain dating between 5000 and 5500 BC.

This abstract is consistent with ANE K8 results Davidski got for a low coverage Neolithic Western Anatolian(see results here (http://eurogenes.blogspot.com.au/2015/06/first-look-at-ancient-genome-from.html)). By most estimates I've seen this makes all modern Europeans at least 30%+ Neolithic Anatolian. It makes some over 50%, there's a lot of regional variation. Neolithic Anatolian ancestry is highest in Southern Europe.

There's certainly Neolithic Anatolian-type ancestry in West Asia today as well it's just harder to detect because we don't know who the other ancestors of West Asians. We know Yamnaya and WHG-types are main other ancestors of Europeans and therefore can model them more easily.

Fluffy
04-10-15, 04:34
3 hundred Yankee's lie stiff in southern dust, we got 3 hundred thousand before they conquered us.

Angela
04-10-15, 04:44
Another teasar from authors with 34 (6300 BC)Neolithic Western Anatolian genomes: Close genetic relationship of Neolithic Anatolians to early European farmers: (http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?709-New-DNA-Papers&p=112243&viewfull=1#post112243)

BTW: By EEF I mean Early Neolithic European genomes from Hungary, Croatia, Germany, and Spain dating between 5000 and 5500 BC.

This abstract is consistent with ANE K8 results Davidski got for a low coverage Neolithic Western Anatolian(see results here (http://eurogenes.blogspot.com.au/2015/06/first-look-at-ancient-genome-from.html)). By most estimates I've seen this makes all modern Europeans at least 30%+ Neolithic Anatolian. It makes some over 50%, there's a lot of regional variation. Neolithic Anatolian ancestry is highest in Southern Europe.

There's certainly Neolithic Anatolian-type ancestry in West Asia today as well it's just harder to detect because we don't know who the other ancestors of West Asians. We know Yamnaya and WHG-types are main other ancestors of Europeans and therefore can model them more easily.

Where are you getting your "estimates"? It's pretty easy to "estimate" just by using the EEF numbers in Lazardis et al. Very few European groups only have 30%, and most of those are low population countries.
7442

Sile
04-10-15, 04:44
3 hundred Yankee's lie stiff in southern dust, we got 3 hundred thousand before they conquered us.

what's is this comment all about?:startled::confused2:............are your ancestors from one of the 4 northern slave-states ( Missouri, Kentucky, Maryland or Delaware )

Sile
04-10-15, 04:47
Another teasar from authors with 34 (6300 BC)Neolithic Western Anatolian genomes: Close genetic relationship of Neolithic Anatolians to early European farmers: (http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?709-New-DNA-Papers&p=112243&viewfull=1#post112243)

BTW: By EEF I mean Early Neolithic European genomes from Hungary, Croatia, Germany, and Spain dating between 5000 and 5500 BC.

This abstract is consistent with ANE K8 results Davidski got for a low coverage Neolithic Western Anatolian(see results here (http://eurogenes.blogspot.com.au/2015/06/first-look-at-ancient-genome-from.html)). By most estimates I've seen this makes all modern Europeans at least 30%+ Neolithic Anatolian. It makes some over 50%, there's a lot of regional variation. Neolithic Anatolian ancestry is highest in Southern Europe.

There's certainly Neolithic Anatolian-type ancestry in West Asia today as well it's just harder to detect because we don't know who the other ancestors of West Asians. We know Yamnaya and WHG-types are main other ancestors of Europeans and therefore can model them more easily.

you do realise that Laz only ever mentioned EEF and that the ENF term was fabricated by amateurs based on suspect numbers.

Fluffy
04-10-15, 04:55
what's is this comment all about?:startled::confused2:............are your ancestors from one of the 4 northern slave-states ( Missouri, Kentucky, Maryland or Delaware )

No no. I was just listening to the song I'm a good ol rebel and felt like saying that.

Fire Haired14
04-10-15, 05:31
Where are you getting your "estimates"? It's pretty easy to "estimate" just by using the EEF numbers in Lazardis et al. Very few European groups only have 30%, and most of those are low population countries.
7442

Near Eastern ancestry that is not EEF raises EEF scores. Ashkenazi Jews are the best example of this. There's SW Asian and Steppe-derived Near Eastern ancestry in Europe.

Angela
04-10-15, 18:44
Near Eastern ancestry that is not EEF raises EEF scores. Ashkenazi Jews are the best example of this. There's SW Asian and Steppe-derived Near Eastern ancestry in Europe.

Well, let's follow this through logically then. If steppe ancestry raises EEF (presumably through the half "modern Near Eastern" in the Yamnaya), and any other post Neolithic gene flows into Europe from the area of the Near East raise EEF (presumably through people who were a mix of EEF/ANE), then if we take 10 points off that EEF figure, what's left might be an approximation for "early Near Eastern farmer" in modern Europeans, yes? It has to be the same genes, doesn't it, or it wouldn't raise the EEF number?

So, IF that's correct, we have the following for early Neolithic farmer ancestry in Europe:
The isolated far north east: Estonians 22%, Lithuanians 26%
Scots, Belorussians: 30-32%
Ukrainians: 36%
English, Czechs (perhaps a good stand in for Germans?) 40%
Hungarians 46%
Southern French (Southwest France) 58%
Northern Italians/Bulgarians 61%
Tuscans 64%
Spaniards 71%
Sicilians 80%

and so on.

This isn't very far from the numbers your source provided. At least 30% for far northern Europe. The difference is that it's closer to around 60% at least for southern Europe, not 50%, and from 40 to close to 50% for northwest and central Europe.

Those happen to be the kind of numbers I've been proposing for years, but of course, I'm an amateur. When the paper comes out later this week we'll see what the experts have to say about it.

Oh, and you keep saying that SWAsian came to Europe post Neolithic Fire-Haired, and I keep showing you that it was in the Neolithic farmers:

See:7443

Now, how precisely do you know that the SW Asian in northern Italians, for example, which is 5.3, less than in Oetzi (7.8 in Tuscans, which is just about the same) is all from post Neolithic gene flow and does not survive from the Neolithic? The answer, Fire-Haired, is that you can't know, and neither can anyone else until we get ancient dna showing that it was all wiped out and then re-introduced.

I think we should all have learned by now to stick to comparisons with ancient samples instead of "extrapolating" components, yes?

Sigfrido
04-10-15, 19:11
Wasn't Barcin Neolitich farmer about 20% Red Sea? And how much SWA would he score? 25%?

Angela
04-10-15, 19:39
Wasn't Barcin Neolitich farmer about 20% Red Sea? And how much SWA would he score? 25%?

I don't have any data for Red Sea for Barcin. The only thing I ever saw was the following, which doesn't make much sense to me because it shows Stuttgart with over 10% SWAsian, and Barcin with none.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1rTFReasuRyyWY169OhCjoW9bvVByu-Lrb50Xqu76Pak/edit#gid=0

Stuttgart would have been Barcin like with 10% European hunter-gatherer, so how could LBK have more SWAsian than Barcin?

Perhaps the Barcin sample is so low coverage that it's giving false results?

Fire Haired14
04-10-15, 21:24
Oh, and you keep saying that SWAsian came to Europe post Neolithic Fire-Haired, and I keep showing you that it was in the Neolithic farmers:

See:7443

Now, how precisely do you know that the SW Asian in northern Italians, for example, which is 5.3, less than in Oetzi (7.8 in Tuscans, which is just about the same) is all from post Neolithic gene flow and does not survive from the Neolithic? The answer, Fire-Haired, is that you can't know, and neither can anyone else until we get ancient dna showing that it was all wiped out and then re-introduced.

I think we should all have learned by now to stick to comparisons with ancient samples instead of "extrapolating" components, yes?

I have not looked at any data recently. I'll wait for more research. Davidski thinks there was movements from SW Asia into SE Europe in the Bronze and Iron ages. He thinks there was lots of contact with SW Asians in those periods. I don't know what archaeology/history says about that. From what I remember it isn't much of a stretch to model most SE Europeans as EEF+Yamnaya or EEF+Yamnaya+SW Asian. I'm undecided on this topic(except for some like Sicilians with very low WHG and still ANE). mtDNA wise there isn't much of a West Asian signal(see here (http://mtdnaatlas.blogspot.com/2015/10/part-2-looking-for-mtdna-diversity-in.html)), but typical West Asian clades do appear. I want to see Y DNA data. I know there's a lot of J2 and E1b in SE Europe but apparently it's of differnt clades than what's in SW Asia. It's confusing, who could be the source, an unsampled people?

I think we should be more open-minded about possible origins like people were before ancient DNA. We can generally model everyone in a big region in the same ancestral components but within every region/ethnicity there's 1,000s of years and generation after generation of specificity. EEF in one region isn't the same as EEF in another region. Labels like EEF, WHG, etc. are real but mask diversity.

My philosophy on genetics is: No one in the past knew much about history or geography, beyond their little region and a few generations. If given the opportunity to mix with someone who is genetically very differnt most of the time populations will do that to some degree. Ancestral origins are complicated. They're only simple if a population remains isolated which rarely happens. Even in genetically uniform(eg America) regions you have lots of differnt ethnic groups who mix with each other.

And so considering how big West Asia, Europe, Central Asia is and how many generations and years we're talking about there's 1,000s of possibilities.

Angela
04-10-15, 21:47
As to the following, we agree:

Fire-Haired:I think we should be more open-minded about possible origins like people were before ancient DNA. We can generally model everyone in a big region in the same ancestral components but within every region/ethnicity there's 1,000s of years and generation after generation of specificity. EEF in one region isn't the same as EEF in another region. Labels like EEF, WHG, etc. are real but mask diversity.

My philosophy on genetics is: No one in the past knew much about history or geography, beyond their little region and a few generations. If given the opportunity to mix with someone who is genetically very differnt most of the time populations will do that to some degree. Ancestral origins are complicated. They're only simple if a population remains isolated which rarely happens. Even in genetically uniform(eg America) regions you have lots of differnt ethnic groups who mix with each other.

And so considering how big West Asia, Europe, Central Asia is and how many generations and years we're talking about there's 1,000s of possibilities.

As to the other part of your comment, I'm totally open to whatever the ancient dna will show. I would add, however, what I said to someone else just recently. It doesn't matter when certain genetic material entered your family or "ethnic" line, or with what particular culture. It's the same genes. So, I disagree that the EEF, for example, or more precisely the early Near Eastern farmer ancestry somehow became "different" because it was packaged with different genes at different times. As Lazaridis pointed out, all the many migrations into Europe and within Europe were just different combinations, in different proportions, of the same basic ancient populations. Many of the distinctions that get made just smack to me of unattractive "isms" of one sort or another. I'll leave it at that.

Sigfrido
05-10-15, 08:16
How so? Bronze and Iron Age Armenians had zero SWA, while modern Armenians are actually Northern Iraqis with about 5% Indo Europeans admixture from proto Armenians. If S Euros have additional SWA compared to Oetzi, it comes from Barcin like farmers.

Yamnaya got its middle eastern ancestry from a Georgian like people who also have zero SWA.

Angela
05-10-15, 16:00
How so? Bronze and Iron Age Armenians had zero SWA, while modern Armenians are actually Northern Iraqis with about 5% Indo Europeans admixture from proto Armenians. If S Euros have additional SWA compared to Oetzi, it comes from Barcin like farmers.

Yamnaya got its middle eastern ancestry from a Georgian like people who also have zero SWA.

Are you addressing me?

I'm not quite sure I understand you, but if you mean that it's very strange that Barcin could have 0 SWAsian, and Stuttgart over 10% and Oetzi over 7%, I agree. The Barcin sample isn't very good, so maybe we can't capture the finer points. I also hope it's included in the new Lazaridis paper so we can see what they make of it.

The argument that I believe Fire-Haired is repeating is that somehow all the SW Asian in Neolithic Italians got wiped out and was then replaced by migrations in the Bronze Age and Iron Age and perhaps in the Roman era. As I think you're implying, Bronze Age migrations would imply "Yamnaya", yes? They presumably wouldn't have any. Unless perhaps they're talking about Bronze Age migrations by way of Crete, which might have picked up some? By Iron Age, Fire-Haired's sources would seem to perhaps mean the Etruscans. Even if we assume that they or some part of their ancestry came from the northern Aegean/Anatolia, I'm not sure they would have had any at that time. Then there's the Roman era.

My general point was that I am increasingly skeptical about any conclusions drawn totally from modern dna. Only ancient dna will tell us whether the SW Asian brought to Italy in the Neolithic is totally absent in subsequent eras only to reappear specifically, perhaps, in the Roman era.

Angela
05-10-15, 16:23
It occurred to me to check the SW Asian for some European groups:

Belorussians: 1.9

Bulgarians: 6.4 (more than the North Italians, but slightly less than Tuscans)

Finns: 2.6

Georgians: 0

Greeks: 10.1

Hungarians 3.0

Lezghins: .6

Turks: 10.3

This would seem to indicate that the SW Asian did not come with Yamnaya. So, that 3% in Hungarians and 2.6% in Finns is probably a hold over from the EEF? Therefore, I suppose one could infer that at least half if not more of the SW Asian in northern Italians, as just one example, might be a remnant from the Neolithic, but as I said I think the only reliable answers will come from ancient dna.

Sigfrido
05-10-15, 16:49
I am not sure I've understood your post... Anyway I was addressing Fire Haired and his argument that Italians have additional post neolitich SWA ancestry from Anatolia.

Angela
05-10-15, 17:34
I am not sure I've understood your post... Anyway I was addressing Fire Haired and his argument that Italians have additional post neolitich SWA ancestry from Anatolia.

That's fine. From now on if you don't want other people to respond to your posts perhaps you should specifically address the person to whom you're responding.

As for my post, no problem. I think there are others who will understand it.

Fire Haired14
05-10-15, 21:27
How so? Bronze and Iron Age Armenians had zero SWA, while modern Armenians are actually Northern Iraqis with about 5% Indo Europeans admixture from proto Armenians. If S Euros have additional SWA compared to Oetzi, it comes from Barcin like farmers.

Yamnaya got its middle eastern ancestry from a Georgian like people who also have zero SWA.

I'm not saying SW Asian-type blood in Italians is from Yamnaya. I'm saying it from unknown Bronze and Iron age people(s) from the Near East(Syria, Iraq, Lebanon, etc.). ADMIXTURE isn't law and the components should be taken as trends not percentages of ancestry from real populations(SW Asian components don't represent a real group of people). So, if Neolithic farmers score in SW Asian that doesn't take away other lines of evidence there's SW Asian ancestry in Italy.

Anyways, this is an idea I'm flirting with and waiting for more data. I'm not 100% for any theory. I don't know anything about history which might dis agree with SW Asians moving to Italy and Balkans in Bronze and Iron ages. The pieces of evidence I have are from methods that can't be taken too literally, like ADMIXTURE and PCA. The most legitimate evidence is Y DNA. But for Sicilians there's no debate. We know they have Near Eastern ancestors who were not EEF. It makes sense from what I've heard of Sicilian history(not saying I know a lot).

If SW Asians moved in large numbers to Italy in 1500-800 BC we'd have no idea because there were no written records. No one had a world map back then and SW Asians would just be seen as another ethnic group. No one would write down later that "SW Asians" came to "Italy" they'd say "Bla Bla people from the sea" mixed with "Italic tribes". Besides we don't have many written records preserved and oral tradition of ethnic groups mixing in the past wasn't wroth writing about.

Alan
06-10-15, 02:04
Near Eastern ancestry that is not EEF raises EEF scores. Ashkenazi Jews are the best example of this. There's SW Asian and Steppe-derived Near Eastern ancestry in Europe.

There seems to be three sources of farmer/herder (Western farmers aka EEF, Eastern farmers aka Teal and Southern farmers) DNA which get eaten up as EEF by some amateur calculators true, But not in Lazaridis paper which in fact does seem to differ roughly between EEF, Teal like and South farmers.

SW Asian is not necessary South farmer or Late Neolithic. Since all farmer groups share good majority of their ancestry it is very likely that there is overlap in their overall DNA. Means South farmers might have been around 70% SW Asian but EEF probably had some (<10%) SW Asian too. Teal on the other hand seems to lacked SW Asian almost completely.

Alan
06-10-15, 02:35
How so? Bronze and Iron Age Armenians had zero SWA, while modern Armenians are actually Northern Iraqis with about 5% Indo Europeans admixture from proto Armenians. If S Euros have additional SWA compared to Oetzi, it comes from Barcin like farmers.

Yamnaya got its middle eastern ancestry from a Georgian like people who also have zero SWA.

1.Some correction here. Bronze Age Armenian samples had zero SWA, by Iron Age the SWA was slowly appearing and rising from 2 to 6%. A Semite origin is obvious in that case because this is the time period when Assyrians and related tribes were penetrating into Mesopotamia and Urartu.

2. Modern Armenians are not like "North Iraqis (if by North Iraqi you mean Kurds) + 5% Indo European" in fact it seems the opposite. Armenians seem to be a some percentages more EEF shifted(with minor more South farmer admixture) than North Iraqis what can be explained with an origin slightly further West and with contacts to Semite populations of the Levant type (probably catched up in Cilicia). North Iraqis (I think you mean Kurds) have more of the Gedrosian and North European elements which drifts them rather to Indo Europeans.

But all this is very complicated between the Neolithic and middle ages there were dozens of back and forth migrations totaly changing the genetic landscape.

Bronze and Iron Age Armenians were like halfway Teal and halfway EEF, they can be "best" described like a mix of North Caucasians and Italians (Tuscans) with Tajik/Yaghnobi(minus the East Eurasian) admixture.

Sigfrido
06-10-15, 06:48
By North Iraqis I meant Assyrians, Iraqi Jews... Kurds are more Iranic-Caucasian with all that Gedrosia and also some North Euro linked to ANE.

Alan
06-10-15, 07:05
By North Iraqis I meant Assyrians, Iraqi Jews... Kurds are more Iranic-Caucasian with all that Gedrosia and also some North Euro linked to ANE.

Well than by reffering only to Assyrians and Iraqi Jews as "North Iraqis" you are making a huge mistake here. If anything I would have thought it would be clear by now that North Iraq was in ancient times more akine to Kurds. North Iraq which was basically Urartu/Subaru/Iranic by that time was like Bronze and Iron Age Armenian samples which as I have explained above were more like a cross between North Caucasians, Tuscans and Tajiks/Yaghnobis(minus the East Eurasian), And to this BaArmenians the Kurds are among the Top 5 closest groups based on fst distance tables and oracle. This mixture comes closer to Kurds, with Kurds being slightly more southern ( 5-10% less North Euro replaced by +5-10 more SWA than Bronze Age samples) shifted.

Assyrians and Iraqi Jews actually represent populations who are a mix of Southern and Eastern (teal) farmers and represent not ancient North Iraqis but a Iron Age mixture between ancient South Levantine Semites and Sumerian/IndoEuropean/Caucasic groups. Akkadians for example are very well documented as conquerers but not natives of Mesopotamia in general. From this merging of Akkadians and Sumerians the Assyrians and Babylonians were born. And than Assyrians conquered North Mesopotamia until they were driven out by the Medes in alliance with Scythians/Cimmerians and the Babylonians.

Alan
08-10-15, 17:15
Another teasar from authors with 34 (6300 BC)Neolithic Western Anatolian genomes: Close genetic relationship of Neolithic Anatolians to early European farmers: (http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?709-New-DNA-Papers&p=112243&viewfull=1#post112243)



I don't get why some people still insist on calling these farmers "West Anatolian farmers" if even the paper calls them simply Anatolian farmers.

And if my words are not trusted here the words of David

Capra,

As I've said before, Central Anatolian Neolithic farmers have been tested and they're no different from Western Anatolian Neolithic farmers.



There is no genetic difference between West and Central Anatolian farmers. North Mesopotamian (Southeast Anatolia) farmers not been tested yet. But the Early Neolthic samples of this region should be alike to EEF before they mix with ANE groups in mid-late Neolithic.

Angela
08-10-15, 19:03
I don't think Fire-Haired has any agenda. People may just be writing that because of the wording of the abstract.

Obviously, some people have had some sort of access to the work of other groups indicating that this "homogeneous" farming population also inhabited central Anatolia. Or perhaps the Lazaridis paper does address it tangentially.

If I had to bet, I would say that the population down near the "launch point" for EEF proposed by Paschou et al near the border of southeastern Anatolia/north-central Levant is also similar.

That's what's indicated by all the archaeology papers I've posted here about the early Neolithic in the Near East. There were exchanges of seeds, domesticated animals and technology going back to at least 11,000 BC for all areas of what used to be called the Fertile Crescent. Would it be parsimonious to propose that after thousands of years living in the same area, with basically the same culture, these people did not admix? I don't think so.

If there were slightly divergent populations I think they would have been in the far south and northeast.

Alan
08-10-15, 21:43
I don't think Fire-Haired has any agenda. People may just be writing that because of the wording of the abstract.



I didn't meant to accuse him of an agenda in this case. I simply wanted to clarify a few things, since I still often see some people talking about "West Anatolian farmers" in this sence as if they got their WHG from Balkans/Greece.

Angela
08-10-15, 22:00
I didn't meant to accuse him of an agenda in this case. I simply wanted to clarify a few things, since I still often see some people talking about "West Anatolian farmers" in this sence as if they got their WHG from Balkans/Greece.

Yes, I think you're right to do that. Some people either haven't heard or absorbed the new data, and perhaps some really would prefer it not to have turned out this way.

MOESAN
08-10-15, 23:06
As to the following, we agree:


As to the other part of your comment, I'm totally open to whatever the ancient dna will show. I would add, however, what I said to someone else just recently. It doesn't matter when certain genetic material entered your family or "ethnic" line, or with what particular culture. It's the same genes. So, I disagree that the EEF, for example, or more precisely the early Near Eastern farmer ancestry somehow became "different" because it was packaged with different genes at different times. As Lazaridis pointed out, all the many migrations into Europe and within Europe were just different combinations, in different proportions, of the same basic ancient populations. Many of the distinctions that get made just smack to me of unattractive "isms" of one sort or another. I'll leave it at that.


OK Angela, but if Neolithic different populations in Europe show very different distributions of genes - even if these genes are all of them found in say: Anatolia - we can try to know if the causes are more recent drifts after reaching Europe OR are differences pre-existing in the source great region; even if today all these genes are evenly distributed in Anatolia (it's an example, pure theory) they could have had very different distributions too in ancient Anatolia... Just splitting hairs.
All that will not change our ffuture.
Bone net (regional french)

Fire Haired14
08-10-15, 23:38
I didn't meant to accuse him of an agenda in this case. I simply wanted to clarify a few things, since I still often see some people talking about "West Anatolian farmers" in this sence as if they got their WHG from Balkans/Greece.

I was being a safe-thinker. I wasn't aware of any news about Neolithic genomes from anywhere east of West Anatolia.

MOESAN
09-10-15, 17:15
We study 1.2 million genome-wide single nucleotide polymorphisms on a sample of
26 Neolithic individuals (~6,300 years BCE) from northwestern Anatolia . Our analysis
reveals a homogeneous population that was genetically similar to early farmers
from Europe (FST=0.004±0.0003 and frequency of 60% of Y-chromosome haplogroup
G2a). We model Early Neolithic farmers from central Europe and Iberia as a
genetic mixture of ~90% Anatolians and ~10% European hunter-gatherers, suggesting
little influence by Mesolithic Europeans prior to the dispersal of European farmers
into the interior of the continent. Neolithic Anatolians differ from all present-day
populations of western Asia, suggesting genetic changes have occurred in parts of
this region since the Neolithic period. We suggest that the language spoken by the
homogeneous Anatolian-European Neolithic farmers is unlikely to have been the
same as that spoken by the Yamnaya steppe pastoralists whose ancestry was derived
from eastern Europe and a different population from the Caucasus/Near East
[Haak et al. 2015], and discuss implications for alternative models of Indo-European
dispersals.


this abstract passed by Anthrogenica speaks of 60% Y-G2a in West Anatolia: who knows which others Y haplos were there, it would be interetsing I suppose!

LeBrok
09-10-15, 17:29
We study 1.2 million genome-wide single nucleotide polymorphisms on a sample of
26 Neolithic individuals (~6,300 years BCE) from northwestern Anatolia . Our analysis
reveals a homogeneous population that was genetically similar to early farmers
from Europe (FST=0.004±0.0003 and frequency of 60% of Y-chromosome haplogroup
G2a). We model Early Neolithic farmers from central Europe and Iberia as a
genetic mixture of ~90% Anatolians and ~10% European hunter-gatherers, suggesting
little influence by Mesolithic Europeans prior to the dispersal of European farmers
into the interior of the continent. Neolithic Anatolians differ from all present-day
populations of western Asia, suggesting genetic changes have occurred in parts of
this region since the Neolithic period. We suggest that the language spoken by the
homogeneous Anatolian-European Neolithic farmers is unlikely to have been the
same as that spoken by the Yamnaya steppe pastoralists whose ancestry was derived
from eastern Europe and a different population from the Caucasus/Near East
[Haak et al. 2015], and discuss implications for alternative models of Indo-European
dispersals.this abstract passed by Anthrogenica speaks of 60% Y-G2a in West Anatolia: who knows which others Y haplos were there, it would be interetsing I suppose!
That's the question we asked too, and now wait for more results. I'm betting for mostly I2a, the dominant WHG's Y. Though we should see other Mesolithic hgs already found through Europe.

MOESAN
09-10-15, 17:41
We study 1.2 million genome-wide single nucleotide polymorphisms on a sample of
26 Neolithic individuals (~6,300 years BCE) from northwestern Anatolia . Our analysis
reveals a homogeneous population that was genetically similar to early farmers
from Europe (FST=0.004±0.0003 and frequency of 60% of Y-chromosome haplogroup
G2a). We model Early Neolithic farmers from central Europe and Iberia as a
genetic mixture of ~90% Anatolians and ~10% European hunter-gatherers, suggesting
little influence by Mesolithic Europeans prior to the dispersal of European farmers
into the interior of the continent. Neolithic Anatolians differ from all present-day
populations of western Asia, suggesting genetic changes have occurred in parts of
this region since the Neolithic period. We suggest that the language spoken by the
homogeneous Anatolian-European Neolithic farmers is unlikely to have been the
same as that spoken by the Yamnaya steppe pastoralists whose ancestry was derived
from eastern Europe and a different population from the Caucasus/Near East
[Haak et al. 2015], and discuss implications for alternative models of Indo-European
dispersals.


this abstract passed by Anthrogenica speaks of 60% Y-G2a in West Anatolia: who knows which others Y haplos were there, it would be interetsing I suppose!

MOESAN
09-10-15, 17:42
@Lebrok:
possible -
sorry for the repetition of my post: a technical mistake of mine (the old age!)

Angela
09-10-15, 23:53
From the Lazaridis presentation thanks to Razib Khan's tweets:

EEF were homogeneous


Common source of EEF was Anatolia based on archaeology.


mtDNA similar to EEF. Y mostly G2a2. They also had J2 H and I at low frequency, and some C1 too


Anatolian neolithic is close to EEF on pca, but EEF shifted toward WHG


Anatolian neolithic is different from modern Anatolian and SE europe populations.


Indo-european steppe = EHG + near eastern. New data shows Eneolithic samara was 75% EHG ancestry plus 25% "armenian" 5,200 to 4,000 BCE


Poltavka people 3000 to 2200 BC basically like Yamnaya, 50% EHG and 50% armenian-like.


Srubnaya was different... 2/3 yamnaya 1/3 middle neolithic European


Yamnaya/poltavka went from R1b to R1a in the Srubnaya period. z93 group found on bronze age steppe samara


There was back migration of EEF to the steppe after the initial yamnaya migration. (This one I don't get.)

Angela
10-10-15, 00:30
From the Lazaridis presentation thanks to Razib Khan's tweets:

EEF were homogeneous


Common source of EEF was Anatolia based on archaeology.


mtDNA similar to EEF. Y mostly G2a2. They also had J2 H and I at low frequency, and some C1 too


Anatolian neolithic is close to EEF on pca, but EEF shifted toward WHG


Anatolian neolithic is different from modern Anatolian and SE europe populations.


Indo-european steppe = EHG + near eastern. New data shows Eneolithic samara was 75% EHG ancestry plus 25% "armenian" 5,200 to 4,000 BCE


Poltavka people 3000 to 2200 BC basically like Yamnaya, 50% EHG and 50% armenian-like.


Srubnaya was different... 2/3 yamnaya 1/3 middle neolithic European


Yamnaya/poltavka went from R1b to R1a in the Srubnaya period. z93 group found on bronze age steppe samara


There was back migration of EEF to the steppe after the initial yamnaya migration. (This one I don't get.)

I suppose it could mean that the EEF that went to the steppe went into the creation of Srubnaya. Srubnaya leads right up to the borders of where Andronovo began. I wonder how the models would work with a source population coming from this more southern region rather than from the area where Corded Ware developed?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Srubna_culture

Oh, and the Mathieson et al paper on selection is going to be adjusted in light of new DNA data. Maybe we'll finally get a little more clarity on the see saw between selection and migration in terms of depigmentation snps.
http://biorxiv.org/content/early/2015/03/13/016477


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

Fire Haired14
10-10-15, 01:06
mtDNA similar to EEF. Y mostly G2a2. They also had J2 H and I at low frequency, and some C1 too

Same as Early Neolithic Y DNA. Not suprised by I/C1, because WHGs just like Loschbour lived in Anatolia. BTW, G2a2 is the same type of G2a found in EEF. And, I'm interested in what type of J2 it was. "Balkan" J2b2?



Anatolian neolithic is different from modern Anatolian and SE europe populations.

And yesterday we were told an EEF-type people moved into Africa from SW Asia less than 4500 yo. Simplistic thinking would say Steppe people and a mystery West Asian pop moved into Near East and SE Europe. It might be that simple. In this abstract (http://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2015/07/a-little-more-on-genome-wide-affinities.html) they say a new more Near Eastern or Caucasus people migrated to Anatolia in the Late Neolithic. ]

Alan
10-10-15, 01:25
From the Lazaridis presentation thanks to Razib Khan's tweets:

EEF were homogeneous


Common source of EEF was Anatolia based on archaeology.


mtDNA similar to EEF. Y mostly G2a2. They also had J2 H and I at low frequency, and some C1 too


Anatolian neolithic is close to EEF on pca, but EEF shifted toward WHG


Anatolian neolithic is different from modern Anatolian and SE europe populations.


Indo-european steppe = EHG + near eastern. New data shows Eneolithic samara was 75% EHG ancestry plus 25% "armenian" 5,200 to 4,000 BCE


Poltavka people 3000 to 2200 BC basically like Yamnaya, 50% EHG and 50% armenian-like.


Srubnaya was different... 2/3 yamnaya 1/3 middle neolithic European


Yamnaya/poltavka went from R1b to R1a in the Srubnaya period. z93 group found on bronze age steppe samara


There was back migration of EEF to the steppe after the initial yamnaya migration. (This one I don't get.)



So as expected, I is not really a Haplogroup taken by WHG groups but always a local part of the EEF.

As I proposed in the past, I think Haplogroup "I" was once a relatively frequent Haplogroup from Iran all the way into Europe.

Oh an those Samara (R1b?) also had 25% "Teal like". Nice seems the Teal wives theory is dying a slow death.

Alan
10-10-15, 01:56
Another thing, R1a z93 found in Yamna, and going by the tweets it seems like from an EEF(Neolithic) culture (Most likely Cucuteni-tripolye). Those guys seem to be the ancestors of both Sintashta and Corded Ware. As some people have speculated Corded Ware isn't the ancestor of Sintashta but both derive from the same source.

Fire Haired14
10-10-15, 02:12
Another thing, R1a z93 found in Yamna, and going by the tweets it seems like from an EEF(Neolithic) culture (Most likely Cucuteni-tripolye). Those guys seem to be the ancestors of both Sintashta and Corded Ware. As some people have speculated Corded Ware isn't the ancestor of Sintashta but both derive from the same source.

There's no mention of R1a-Z93 in Yamnaya or CT. There's mention of R1a in Srubnaya period and "Bronze age" R1a-Z93 in Samara. Srubnaya is 1800-1200 BC so younger than Sintashta and Corded Ware.

Angela
10-10-15, 02:21
Fire Haired14;468231]Same as Early Neolithic Y DNA. Not suprised by I/C1, because WHGs just like Loschbour lived in Anatolia. BTW, G2a2 is the same type of G2a found in EEF. And, I'm interested in what type of J2 it was. "Balkan" J2b2?

Fire-Haired, where has it been revealed that WHGs just like Loschbour lived in Anatolia? Let's wait for the paper to see whether it's a case of a back-migration of a Loschbour like population into Anatolia post LGM, or whether this was a case where a group moved to Europe from the Near East and the two groups then drifted apart over thousands of years, or some other unknown scenario.



And yesterday we were told an EEF-type people moved into Africa from SW Asia less than 4500 yo. Simplistic thinking would say Steppe people and a mystery West Asian pop moved into Near East and SE Europe. It might be that simple. In this abstract (http://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2015/07/a-little-more-on-genome-wide-affinities.html) they say a new more Near Eastern or Caucasus people migrated to Anatolia in the Late Neolithic.

Fire Haired, that may or may not be true as you have formulated it, but the abstract to which you linked has nothing to say about the matter. It's talking about EARLY Neolithic gene flow.

"Anatolia played a key role in the Eurasian Neolithisation. The expansion from this area was driven west and northwards by migration, but we know little about the actual establishing of Neolithic societies in Anatolia, and what kind of population dynamics affected their gene pool. We present the first ancient genome wide data from a 6700 year old Anatolian excavated from a late Neolithic context in Kumtepe. We show that this individual display genetic similarities to the European Neolithic genepool, which anchors the Neolithic expansion in Europe to Anatolia. Further, the Kumtepe individual does not only contain the genetic element that is frequent in early European farmers, but also a component found mainly in modern-day populations from the Near East and Caucasus, suggesting gene flow into Anatolia in the late Neolithic. The scene presented by Kumtepe is compatible with gene flow into Europe from or through the Neolithic core area in Anatolia. And it is likely that this occurred early, perhaps just after the Neolithic core area had been established in southeastern Anatolia. This area was entangled in a complex web of contacts with other parts of the Near East, and the distribution of genetic variation in early European farmers suggests that the contacts with the European continent also remained and replenished with people's constant movements in and out of Anatolia."

This is part of the reason I've been saying for so long that the "farmer" population was probably homogeneous for a very long time. It may have all radiated out from somewhere around southeastern Anatolia.

Angela
10-10-15, 02:29
Guys, from a Dienekes post on the Allentoft et al paper:
http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2015/06/into-out-of-and-across-eurasian-steppe.html

"The third conclusion is that the later steppe cultures of the Sintashta and Andronovo (putative Indo-Iranians according to some), were not a continuation of the Yamnaya-Afanasievo people, but had extra Neolithic farmer ancestry. So, it seems that Neolithic farmers entered the steppe, and the development of steppe cultures did not happen in isolation. Whether this involved migration of Corded Ware people (as the authors prefer), who were already a mixture of Yamnaya and Neolithic farmers, or some other mixture of Neolithic farmers with steppe populations (e.g., Tripolye plus Yamnaya) remains to be seen."

Fire Haired14
10-10-15, 02:40
This is part of the reason I've been saying for so long that the "farmer" population was probably homogeneous for a very long time. It may have all radiated out from somewhere around southeastern Anatolia.

Are you saying Kumtepe Anatolian is continuation of homogeneous EEFs? But there was Caucasus(Teal?)l in the 6700 BP Anatolian.. This abstract is saying a new people moved into Anatolia after EEF's ancestors left. They were of the same distant Near Eastern-stock but still differnt. That's my interpretation at least.

Alan
10-10-15, 02:43
There's no mention of R1a-Z93 in Yamnaya or CT. There's mention of R1a in Srubnaya period and "Bronze age" R1a-Z93 in Samara. Srubnaya is 1800-1200 BC so younger than Sintashta and Corded Ware.

This tweet I mean


Yamnaya/poltavka went from R1b to R1a in the Srubnaya period. z93 group found on bronze age steppe samara

Alan
10-10-15, 02:46
Are you saying Kumtepe Anatolian is continuation of homogeneous EEFs? But there was Caucasus(Teal?)l in the 6700 BP Anatolian.. This abstract is saying a new people moved into Anatolia after EEF's ancestors left. They were of the same distant Near Eastern-stock but still differnt. That's my interpretation at least.



6700 BP is around mid-late Neolithic. By that time the EEF group must have mixed with ANE groups from the Iranian Plateau, Caucasus and further east. forming the teal farmers.

Alan
10-10-15, 02:46
Guys, from a Dienekes post on the Allentoft et al paper:
http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2015/06/into-out-of-and-across-eurasian-steppe.html

"The third conclusion is that the later steppe cultures of the Sintashta and Andronovo (putative Indo-Iranians according to some), were not a continuation of the Yamnaya-Afanasievo people, but had extra Neolithic farmer ancestry. So, it seems that Neolithic farmers entered the steppe, and the development of steppe cultures did not happen in isolation. Whether this involved migration of Corded Ware people (as the authors prefer), who were already a mixture of Yamnaya and Neolithic farmers, or some other mixture of Neolithic farmers with steppe populations (e.g., Tripolye plus Yamnaya) remains to be seen."

From the tweets it doesn't sound like Sintashta is Corded Ware derived, but both are derived from the same source.

Angela
10-10-15, 03:05
Are you saying Kumtepe Anatolian is continuation of homogeneous EEFs? But there was Caucasus(Teal?)l in the 6700 BP Anatolian.. This abstract is saying a new people moved into Anatolia after EEF's ancestors left. They were of the same distant Near Eastern-stock but still differnt. That's my interpretation at least.

No, that's not what I'm saying. What I'm saying is that this has to do with ANATOLIA relatively early, i.e. 4700 BC. COULD movements from this area have continued to feed into Europe? Possibly, maybe even probably*, but there is no proof in this abstract or study. That's all I mean.

There's way too much speculation on the internet being proposed as certainty and not enough waiting for ancient dna.

*I've actually suggested before that perhaps a mid-to-late Neolithic flow of slightly different farmers might be responsible for the J2 and E-V13 in Sopot and Lengyel. The samples are dated to, coincidentally, 4700 BC.
http://ubm.opus.hbz-nrw.de/volltexte/2015/4075/pdf/doc.pdf

If you look at the graphics in the paper you'll see that their influence spread throughout Europe.

The flow of similar populations into Europe in the Bronze, Iron or Imperial periods and their extent is still to be determined.

Alan
10-10-15, 03:16
No, that's not what I'm saying. What I'm saying is that this has to do with ANATOLIA relatively early, i.e. 4700 BC. COULD movements from this area have continued to feed into Europe? Possibly, maybe even probably*, but there is no proof in this abstract or study. That's all I mean.

There's way too much speculation on the internet being proposed as certainty and not enough waiting for ancient dna.

*I've actually suggested before that perhaps a mid-to-late Neolithic flow of slightly different farmers might be responsible for the J2 and E-V13 in Sopot and Lengyel. The samples are dated to, coincidentally, 4700 BC.
http://ubm.opus.hbz-nrw.de/volltexte/2015/4075/pdf/doc.pdf

If you look at the graphics in the paper you'll see that their influence spread throughout Europe.

The flow of similar populations into Europe in the Bronze, Iron or Imperial periods and their extent is still to be determined.


Exactly, thats also what I proposed. A mid-late Neolithic expansion of J2 with a different type of farmers, (probably now Teal admixed).

Angela
10-10-15, 03:46
So as expected, I is not really a Haplogroup taken by WHG groups but always a local part of the EEF.

As I proposed in the past, I think Haplogroup "I" was once a relatively frequent Haplogroup from Iran all the way into Europe.

Oh an those Samara (R1b?) also had 25% "Teal like". Nice seems the Teal wives theory is dying a slow death.


Well, it will be important to see the specific "I" clades present in Neolithic Anatolia and their frequency. After all, there was I2a in the WHG of Europe, and the farmers picked up 10% initially and what, another perhaps 10-15% in the subsequent millennia. (Hopefully Lazaridis will give some clues about this.)Unless we're going to posit it was all female WHG flow.

I don't know what to make of this slow drip of "Armenian like" genes into these steppe people over such a long period of time. I mean it starts 5200 BC all the way to 3000 BC. Are we supposed to think that even hunter-gatherers all the way up in Samara wanted Armenian wives so badly that they traveled all the way to the Caucasus or south Caucasus to get them? Or that there was some sort of long distance trade network in them? What could hunter-gatherers have given for them? Isn't it very unusual also for the woman's culture to come to predominate?

Honestly, I'm stumped. Is it possible these mtDna lineages from the Near East had some sort of selective advantage? More fertility? H has more resistance to sepsis, doesn't it?

As for the J2, I'm presuming they didn't have ANE in 7000 BC, since Lazaridis said they're homogeneous. It had arrived by 4700 BC perhaps. Maybe there was more J2 to the east, and those J2 received the ANE and then more of them moved west? Or maybe the Neolithic J2 were J2b, and the ANE admixed farmers were J2a?

I wonder when the pre-print will go up. They might wait until after it's presented at the conference next week.

Tomenable
10-10-15, 04:13
Unless we're going to posit it was all female WHG flow.
Actually, HG haplogroups of Y-DNA are quite strong in modern Europe, even though HG autosomal ancestry is less so. By contrast EEF ancestry is higher autosomally, but they were 60% G2a in terms of Y-DNA, and most of this is gone in modern Europe (only Georgia has such a level of G2a).


Well, it will be important to see the specific "I" clades present in Neolithic Anatolia and their frequency.So far there is no evidence that any clades of I were present in Anatolia. Hunter-Gatherers in Anatolia could have different Y-DNA haplogroups. All haplogroups were eventually carried by various groups of HGs (unless these haplogroups are younger than the emergence of agriculture).

Angela
10-10-15, 04:15
Goodness, I forgot! No E-V13 or E-M78. Either it hadn't arrived yet, or it (or it's precursor) was already in Europe. So maybe the Natufian was G2?

Of course, the equivalent of E-V13 was with J2 in Sopot by 4700 BC. I wonder if the Kuntepe people were also different in having not only ANE but maybe a bit of Nilotic flow or something.

What would really be a kick is if it turned out to be Mesolithic and beat all the other ylineages except I and C to Europe. That would be one for Maciamo. :)

LeBrok
10-10-15, 04:27
From the Lazaridis presentation thanks to Razib Khan's tweets:

EEF were homogeneous


Common source of EEF was Anatolia based on archaeology.


mtDNA similar to EEF. Y mostly G2a2. They also had J2 H and I at low frequency, and some C1 tooAnatolia is shaping up as hunter-gatherer refuge during LGM. If not a true refuge than easily accessible continuity with Balkans and Europe in general. Thanks to a land bridge through dry Bosporus, before Black Sea flood.


Anatolian neolithic is close to EEF on pca, but EEF shifted toward WHGThis is what we expected. The farther farmers went into Europe the more their mixed with "fresh" WHGs. This also confirms that mixing of farmers with WHG was quite limited, as genetic and cultural differences would imply, and also seen by observation of recent history, like colonization of America and Australia.



Anatolian neolithic is different from modern Anatolian and SE europe populations.Any numbers on how different, 25% of replacement or even as much as 50%?



Indo-european steppe = EHG + near eastern. New data shows Eneolithic samara was 75% EHG ancestry plus 25% "armenian" 5,200 to 4,000 BCEAny clarification if this Armenian like is from WHG/ANE side or ENF? To see 50% of Armenian like was a bit "shocking" in still HG/herders societies. 25% is more like it, and possibly half of it being WHG/ANE admixture.



Poltavka people 3000 to 2200 BC basically like Yamnaya, 50% EHG and 50% armenian-like.I hope we will see more defined "Armenian like" finally. How much EEF/ENF?



Srubnaya was different... 2/3 yamnaya 1/3 middle neolithic EuropeanSome people suggest it was a beginning of Scythian/Sarmatian culture. I'm reading a discovery of z93 there, right? I believe Z93 pushed R1b from East to the West.



Yamnaya/poltavka went from R1b to R1a in the Srubnaya period. z93 group found on bronze age steppe samara Now it will be great to figure out where these R1b went to! Western and South Europe? Some through Caucasus into Anatolia? I don't mean the first or even even second wave of R1b into Europe. I'm implying entrance of Celts, Mycenaeans and Hittites at this time period. The last remaining R1b of the Steppe.



There was back migration of EEF to the steppe after the initial yamnaya migration. (This one I don't get.)EEF were numerous, especially in warm climate times, times good for farming. They were the once mostly creating demographic pressure on surrounding populations. When the steppe was warmer and wetter we could expect stronger invasion of farmers. Possibly after initial Yamnaya migration the time was perfect for farming.

LeBrok
10-10-15, 04:42
Another thing, R1a z93 found in Yamna, Yamnaya horizon is huge. What part of Yamnaya were the Z93 from?

a
nd going by the tweets it seems like from an EEF(Neolithic) culture (Most likely Cucuteni-tripolye). Cucuteni had influence in West of Yamnaya. I'm expecting Maykop farmers influence in the East. Both carried extensive EEF/ENF admixture.


Those guys seem to be the ancestors of both Sintashta and Corded Ware. As some people have speculated Corded Ware isn't the ancestor of Sintashta but both derive from the same source.
One cultural source yes, but geographically they were separated into few groups. Otherwise we would have same R1a and R1b subclades in all IE cultures, but we don't. I'm still baffled with this one big IE culture of unmixed populations. How did they pull it off, lol.

LeBrok
10-10-15, 04:45
Exactly, thats also what I proposed. A mid-late Neolithic expansion of J2 with a different type of farmers, (probably now Teal admixed).
Very possible, I always thought about them as pottery or copper age expansion. One of the important technology period.

Angela
10-10-15, 04:49
Actually, HG haplogroups of Y-DNA are quite strong in modern Europe, even though HG autosomal ancestry is less so. By contrast EEF ancestry is higher autosomally, but they were 60% G2a in terms of Y-DNA, and most of this is gone in modern Europe (only Georgia has such a level of G2a).

So far there is no evidence that any clades of I were present in Anatolia. Hunter-Gatherers in Anatolia could have different Y-DNA haplogroups. All haplogroups were eventually carried by various groups of HGs (unless these haplogroups are younger than the emergence of agriculture).

I'm not following you.Unless Razib Khan misheard, there was indeed yDna I present in the Anatolian Neolithic 7000 BC. If they were the same I2a as some of the I2a in the Neolithic communities in Europe then Alan is saying it could have been carried into Europe with the farmers. I'm saying we can't know that until we get the subclade information.

@LeBrok
Razib seems to indicate that the yDna "I" and "C" were minority lineages among these people. For Anatolia to be an LGM refuge for WHG wouldn't we have to have G2a or perhaps H in Europe in the Mesolithic as well as I and C? (Not that I don't think that's possible at least in terms of the Greek islands etc. There was that intriguing study showing the Mesolithic mtDna in that area was very "Near Eastern" farmer like already. Boattini et al also found that one cluster of G2a in Italy is very old.") Of course, he may have misheard. The paper will tell us.

As to the early HG days on the steppe, it does seem like 25% "Armenian-like". It apparently reached the 50% level only later. I don't know how much of it was ANE. I've seen internet estimates of maybe 20%? From the things Patterson has said, I think the WHG was minimal.

I think you're right: I think that Yamnaya R1b moved elsewhere, perhaps some down through the Caucasus, maybe some into southern Europe (the Mycenaens) having picked up more "farmer" along the way. I think the "Celts" were earlier, perhaps?

LeBrok
10-10-15, 04:52
I don't know what to make of this slow drip of "Armenian like" genes into these steppe people over such a long period of time. This is because crops didn't grow well in the Steppe and forested northern area. From now on there was more like a steady trickle of farmer genome into population of steppe and forest, mostly when times were good for farming in the steppe. EEF steadily grew in Steppe over millennia of contact. This is how I see it.

Alan
10-10-15, 04:52
I think yDNA, I, J2(b?)and C1 in this Anatolian samples, might represent the "WHG " like ancestry in EEF.

We know that C, I is connected to WHG/UHG like ancestry. J2b? as close cousin to I and K possibly too.

Angela
10-10-15, 04:54
This is because crops didn't grow well in the Steppe and forested northern area. From now on there was more like a steady trickle of farmer genome into population of steppe and forest, mostly when times were good for farming in the steppe. EEF steadily grew in Steppe over millennia of contact. This is how I see it.

Yes, that makes sense, but only through female gene flow?

LeBrok
10-10-15, 04:57
Goodness, I forgot! No E-V13 or E-M78. Either it hadn't arrived yet, or it (or it's precursor) was already in Europe. So maybe the Natufian was G2? All signs point to Natufians being G2. At least I got used to this idea, from my initial E hg guess.

LeBrok
10-10-15, 05:01
Yes, that makes sense, but only through female gene flow?
In Samara samples yes. We'll see what samples from other communities tell us.

LeBrok
10-10-15, 05:06
Razib seems to indicate that the yDna "I" and "C" were minority lineages among these people. For Anatolia to be an LGM refuge for WHG wouldn't we have to have G2a or perhaps H in Europe in the Mesolithic as well as I and C? (Not that I don't think that's possible at least in terms of the Greek islands etc. There was that intriguing study showing the Mesolithic mtDna in that area was very "Near Eastern" farmer like already. Boattini et al also found that one cluster of G2a in Italy is very old.") Of course, he may have misheard. The paper will tell us.

We can suppose that WHG from Anatolian refuge had spread into Europe few thousands of years earlier, when LGM was gone around 18 to 12kya, before farmers G2a colonized Western Anatolia at 12-10kya.

Angela
10-10-15, 05:07
In Samara samples yes. We'll see what samples from other communities tell us.

It's late so I'm not going to look it up :) but it's just occurred to me that there was no farming on the steppe of any kind in 5200 BC...not until much, much later. David Anthony thought it spread from Neolithic Europe and didn't go very far east, so now I'm not so sure this explains it.

Alan
10-10-15, 05:19
Anatolia is shaping up as hunter-gatherer refuge during LGM. If not a true refuge than easily accessible continuity with Balkans and Europe in general. Thanks to a land bridge through dry Bosporus, before Black Sea flood.

Unlikely refuge more likely continuity of WHG/UHG like H&G before they merged with Basal Eurasian like groups in Anatolia and became EEF. UHG/WHG like ancestry in EEF is up to 50-60%. This I and C1 Haplogroup (possibly also J2b?) represent this UHG/WHG like ancestry. Thats my theory.




Any numbers on how different, 25% of replacement or even as much as 50%?

Anatolia(West and Central Turkey) insane 50-60%!



Any clarification if this Armenian like is from WHG/ANE side or ENF? To see 50% of Armenian like was a bit "shocking" in still HG/herders societies. 25% is more like it, and possibly half of it being WHG/ANE admixture.

Not really shocking, they were herders. Herding is an agricultural technique evolved around the Zagros mountains. It's more interesting to see 25% farmer/herder DNA in Samara H&G. This is not EEF but Teal (what you call here ENF). And it's (Bronze Age Armenian like. Not to confuse with modern groups.



I hope we will see more defined "Armenian like" finally. How much EEF/ENF?

With "Armenian like" here they mean the BaArmenian sample this is like 4/5 West Asian + 1/5 North European.



Some people suggest it was a beginning of Scythian/Sarmatian culture. I'm reading a discovery of z93 there, right? I believe Z93 pushed R1b from East to the West.

Scythian possible, Sarmatian unlikely those are a group of middle Iranic period going by recent genetic data most likely arriving from West Iran (Media) and mixing with the local Scythian groups. With other words a combination between Medes and Scythians.



Now it will be great to figure out where these R1b went to! Western and South Europe? Some through Caucasus into Anatolia? I don't mean the first or even even second wave of R1b into Europe. I'm implying entrance of Celts, Mycenaeans and Hittites at this time period. The last remaining R1b of the Steppe.

Interesting I find here that the Samara EHG sample had 25% Teal admixture. This could indicate where the R1b Haplogroup came from. Before R1b was replaced by R1a in the Steppes. It probably went East and West (becoming Afanasevo and Proto Celts.

Alan
10-10-15, 05:21
Very possible, I always thought about them as pottery or copper age expansion. One of the important technology period.

J2(b?) here either represents the UHG/WHG ancestry in EEF or it is an early arrival of Eastern farmers from the east. correcrt.

LeBrok
10-10-15, 05:32
J2(b?) here either represents the UHG/WHG ancestry in EEF or it is an early arrival of Eastern farmers from the east. correcrt.
I believe there was only one and uniform source of farmers of 100% G2a haplogroup, the Natufians. All the rest of haplogroups were picked up during their expansion. Perhaps J2 was present somewhere from Eastern Anatola to Mesopotamia and expended from there with farmers during one of their technological revolutions; husbandry, pottery, textiles, copper, better village organization, etc.

Nobody1
10-10-15, 08:52
Close genetic relationship of Neolithic Anatolians to early European farmers

And, whats the news?
Ever heard of Archaeology?
Archaeology has already illustrated that fact decades ago; Along with the fact that the sedentary-agricultural spread was physical not cultural; A fact that Genetics (testing Neolithic (farmers) corpses all over Europe) completely manifested;

Sigfrido
10-10-15, 11:10
Scythian possible, Sarmatian unlikely those are a group of middle Iranic period going by recent genetic data most likely arriving from West Iran (Media) and mixing with the local Scythian groups. With other words a combination between Medes and Scythians.Few Alans were probably mixed with North Caucasians, but both Scythians and Sarmatians were an off shoot of Sintasha, so surely not West Asian.

Tomenable
10-10-15, 12:27
Could that Near Eastern / Armenian / "Teal" admixture in Yamnaya come from the Caucasus region?:

David Anthony writes that Indo-European speakers had close contacts with Proto-Kartvelian speakers:


(...) The Semitic and Caucasian vocabulary that was borrowed into Proto-Indo-European through Kartvelian therefore contains roots that belonged to some Pre-Kartvelian or Proto-Kartvelian language in the Caucasus. This language had relations, through unrecorded intermediaries, with Proto-Indo-European on one side and Proto-Semitic on the other. That is not a particularly close lexical relationship. If Proto-Kartvelian was spoken on the south side of the North Caucasus Mountain range, as seems likely, it might have been spoken by people associated with the Early Transcaucasian Culture (also known as the Kura-Araxes culture), dated about 3500–2200 BCE. They could have had indirect relations with the speakers of Proto-Indo-European through the Maikop culture of the North Caucasus region. Many experts agree that Proto-Indo-European shared some features with a language ancestral to Kartvelian but not necessarily through a direct face-to-face link. Relations with the speakers of Proto-Uralic were closer. (...)

Modern group most genetically similar to "Teal" people, are not Armenians, but Mingrelians from Georgia:

http://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2015/10/yamnayas-exotic-ancestry-kartvelian.html


I've made a discovery. The Near Eastern-related ancestors of the Yamnaya steppe pastoralists were also the ancestors of present-day Georgian Mingrelians, or their very close relatives, and in all likelihood speakers of Kartvelian, which has a long history in the Caucasus. (...)

TreeMix is very specific and precise about this. In my analyses, based on a couple of different methods, the Mingrelians are the only population chosen as a source for the Near Eastern-related ancestry in the Yamnaya.

Keep in mind, this is an unsupervised test and the algorithm has an infinite number of choices, because migration edges can run from any part of the tree, and yet it chooses the Mingrelians. By the way, if anyone's wondering, I did also try the Bronze Age Armenians, to no avail. (...)

Mingrelians live in north-western Georgia, around the town of Zugdidi:

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-ISMchUu58TA/VhHYy0R2nzI/AAAAAAAADhs/X4HX5KakhW0/s790/790px-Kartvelian_languages.svg.png

So, apparently we don't need to hypothesize any migrations/admixtures from the "Near East proper" (= areas south of the Caucasus) to explain Yamnaya genetics. They were a mixture of EHG ancestry and farmers from the Caucasus region (= between the Black Sea and the Caspian Sea).

Check also:

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

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kura%E2%80%93Araxes_culture

Sigfrido
10-10-15, 12:40
Georgians are still 80% Middle Eastern or so...

Tomenable
10-10-15, 12:49
Georgians are mostly "Caucasus-Gedrosia", not "Near East" (not Levant-Anatolia).

I think that EEF were mostly Levant-Anatolia = "Syrian", not "Mingrelian" / "Armenian".

Caucasus-Gedrosia admixture peaks in Georgia and in Iran (hence it's name):

http://img138.imageshack.us/img138/6542/caucasus.jpg

The best proxy for Near Eastern ancestry of Neolithic farmers in Europe, are modern Syrians (and Sardinians of course).

While the best proxy for "Teal" ancestry of Yamnaya, are Mingrelians from Georgia, and - to a lesser extent - Armenians.

IIRC, also modern Kalash people have high level of that "Teal" ancestry.

Tomenable
10-10-15, 13:00
We cannot label all of that as "Near Eastern". Those were two distinct admixtures. The one carried by Early Neolithic EEF farmers who expanded into Europe from Western Anatolia, can be called "Levant-Anatolia" or maybe "Levant-Anatolia-Mesopotamia", while the one carried later by Proto-Indo-Europeans during the Copper Age (Eneolithic) and the Bronze Age, was a different admixture, it can be called "Caucasus-Gedrosia".

Alan
10-10-15, 14:03
Could that Near Eastern / Armenian / "Teal" admixture in Yamnaya come from the Caucasus region?:

David Anthony writes that Indo-European speakers had close contacts with Proto-Kartvelian speakers:



Modern group most genetically similar to "Teal" people, are not Armenians, but Mingrelians from Georgia:

http://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2015/10/yamnayas-exotic-ancestry-kartvelian.html



Mingrelians live in north-western Georgia, around the town of Zugdidi:

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-ISMchUu58TA/VhHYy0R2nzI/AAAAAAAADhs/X4HX5KakhW0/s790/790px-Kartvelian_languages.svg.png

So, apparently we don't need to hypothesize any migrations/admixtures from the "Near East proper" (= areas south of the Caucasus) to explain Yamnaya genetics. They were a mixture of EHG ancestry and farmers from the Caucasus region (= between the Black Sea and the Caspian Sea).

Check also:

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

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kura%E2%80%93Araxes_culture

Georgians ultimately arrived there from the Near East. As I said in the past what is today Caucasus like was once Mesopotamian, East Anatolian and Iranian P,lateau like. BaArmenian actually look more like NorthCaucasians, Tuscans with something Tajik like(without the East Eurasian admixture).

Proto Caucasian languages seem to have started off slightly SOuth.

Sigfrido
10-10-15, 14:08
Georgians cluster with Iranians. So they are middle easterners with a North and South Asian drift.

Alan
10-10-15, 14:28
Few Alans were probably mixed with North Caucasians, but both Scythians and Sarmatians were an off shoot of Sintasha, so surely not West Asian.

Going by the Andronovo theory ALL Iranic tribes started off ultimately in Sintashta-BMAC.


It's frustrating when people comment on things they don't really seem to understand. When Sarmatians formed, that was during Middle Iranic period which is between 300 BC and 800 AD. Sintashta died out by 1800 BC. Do the math.

In this month a Russian paper about Sarmatian-Alan DNA appeared those guys had typical ydna found in West Iran and West India and their aDNA shows strong signs of admixture from West Iranic groups.


Add to that we have historic accounts and strong arguments for an Median origin of Sarmatians. All those ancient writers were not high on drugs, they knew the regions. And recently more and more of what Herodotus said seems correct despite it being claimed to be bogus in the past. (Herodotus was right about the Armenians, Phrygian, Greek connection, He also was right about the Massagetae, Alans and the Medes- Arianoi connection).

Some Greek-Roman sources on this


The peoples of Madai first dwelt in North-west Iran, being called the Medes along with Medan. Their capital was Hagmatana (Persian) or Agbatana in Greek. They were called Ma-da-ai, in the Assyrian inscriptions and became associated and linked up with the Medanites who invaded their territory from the west. Thus the names Madai and Medes were used interchangeably, but the Medanites formed the ruling class.
After the defeat of the Scythians in 584 BC, a colony of Medes was established along the Don River. They thus moved north of the Black Sea and into Scythia
The Greeks called them the Sauro-Matae and they spoke the Scythian tongue which was much like that of the peoples of Persia and were also known as Surmatai or Syrmatai. It would appear that many Elamites, who dwelt adjacent to the Madai in Iran, probably migrated with them into south-eastern Europe [see Is.21:2].
Many ancient writers refer to them. Strabo mentions the Matiani or Matieni as does Herodotus and Pliny. Ammianus Marcellinus speaks of the Sauro-matians dwelling near the Hister (modern Danube). We also know that the Sea of Azov was anciently known as Maeotis Palus; on its shores dwelt the Maioti or Maiotiki.
The Sarmatian dagger and sword used by these people were exactly like that of the Medes. Researcher, Sulimirski, maintains that "the Sarmatians were...closely akin to the ancient Medes, Parthians and Persians."
Rostovtzeff wrote that "the Scythian kingdom—a formation almost completely Iranian, a northern counter-part of the kingdom of Darius and Xerxes...the Sarmatians, whose Iranian nationality is not disputed".
Herodotus wrote that the Medes were beginning to settle in the Ukraine even in his time. He maintained that there was a people who "dress in the Median fashion" and who "claim to be colonists from Media" that "live north of Thrace...beyond the Danube". Pliny noted that "Next come the two mouths of the river Don, where the inhabitants are the Sarmatae, said to be descended from the Medes".

In ancient Texts (Bible, Tora, Quran) the Medes are reffered to as Madai. Herodotus and Greeks often called them Matiene and according to Greek_Roman sources the name Sauro-matae basically means "Lizard" Medes (probably because of their armor which resembled that of lizards).

http://img5.fotos-hochladen.net/uploads/2zpuwsj19ty.png

As we know and as I pointed out previously often enough. The Parthians themselves are directly descend of Medes (mostly Medes themselves) but had an early Scythian Elite admixture (the Arsacids). This is also pointed out by Roman sources.


As the region inhabited by Parthians, Parthia first appears as a political entity in Achaemenid (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Achaemenid) lists of governorates ("satrapies") under their dominion. Prior to this, the people of the region seem to have been subjects of the Medes (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medes),
7447

Alan
10-10-15, 14:29
Georgians cluster with Iranians. So they are middle easterners with a North and South Asian drift.

By any chance aren't you once again the same guy (with different account) who called Kardu a light skinned Iraqi? Cause you really sound like him.

Sigfrido
10-10-15, 14:36
"Medes" and "Persians" were a mix of : 95% Middle Eastern farmers and 5% of Sintasha nomads. Sarmatians were native of Northern Kazakhstan and later mixed with Scythians and proto Slavs in Eastern Europe. All those groups were an offshoot of Sintasha and Corded Ware. Nothing to do with MENAs from Iraq and Iran.

Alan
10-10-15, 14:42
"Medes" and "Persians" were a mix of : 95% Middle Eastern farmers and 5% of Sintasha nomads. Sarmatians were native of Northern Kazakhstan and later mixed with Scythians and proto Slavs in Eastern Europe. All those groups were an offshoot of Sintasha and Corded Ware. Nothing to do with MENAs from Iraq and Iran.

5% Sintashta since you have ancient Mede and Persian genomes by hand. Just in case you didn't know even modern Persians and Kurds can be labeled as ~30- 40% Sintashta.

You have as much knowledge about history and archeology as a Warlord about democracy. :laughing:

Yep you are that confused Joeyc. keep throwing unscientific claims and comments into the room based on wrong completely wrong arguments.

Sigfrido
10-10-15, 16:51
Talking about being confused. LoL!Dude, you and Iranians cluster with Georgian like Eastern farmers. You have ZERO relonship with Sintasha. Get over it!

MOESAN
10-10-15, 19:10
So as expected, I is not really a Haplogroup taken by WHG groups but always a local part of the EEF.

As I proposed in the past, I think Haplogroup "I" was once a relatively frequent Haplogroup from Iran all the way into Europe.

Oh an those Samara (R1b?) also had 25% "Teal like". Nice seems the Teal wives theory is dying a slow death.

; you are jumping to conclusions a bit quickly I thin - what kind of Y-I??? the mesolothic VASTE distribution (allover from Western Europe to Steppes, I think) of Y-I put this migration into very old old times I suppose - we can also suppose as some scientisst the Y-I subclades of today in Transcaucasus are return ones? Evidently we can suppose that Y-I* came in ancient times from a region close to Y-J* cradle, I don"t contest that but for the present question of Neolithic???
concerning mtDNA and auDNA through females (and surely some males, except mt one!) I agree it could be old enough, BUT not linked by force to PIE period: Neolithic reached Steppes before Metals I suppose, and not by force (again) through Caucasus only... let's wait and see

MOESAN
10-10-15, 19:12
Pastoralism is very often tied to agriculture at some stage - and Steppes are vaste, we can expect some different leves of penetration in ancient times

MOESAN
10-10-15, 19:13
There's no mention of R1a-Z93 in Yamnaya or CT. There's mention of R1a in Srubnaya period and "Bronze age" R1a-Z93 in Samara. Srubnaya is 1800-1200 BC so younger than Sintashta and Corded Ware.

useful precision, Fire Haired

MOESAN
10-10-15, 19:25
Yes, that makes sense, but only through female gene flow?


I wrote that before but I'm not sure all this "neolithical" mt DNA is truly or uniquely southern??? some could have moved southwards too, not only northwards?
mt DNA is so complicated in distribution of subclades!

Angela
10-10-15, 19:51
Alan: With "Armenian like" here they mean the BaArmenian sample this is like 4/5 West Asian + 1/5 North European.

I don't think so. I think the Haak et al paper specifically says "modern" Armenian like, not BaArmenian like.


Alan: Unlikely refuge more likely continuity of WHG/UHG like H&G before they merged with Basal Eurasian like groups in Anatolia and became EEF. UHG/WHG like ancestry in EEF is up to 50-60%. This I and C1 Haplogroup (possibly also J2b?) represent this UHG/WHG like ancestry.

I don't think we know yet where "Basal Eurasian" hunter-gatherers mixed with UHGs. (We don't even precisely know yet how "Basal Eurasian" is defined, where it was centered, etc.etc. Hopefully, this paper will tell us.) Perhaps the admixture took place in central or northwestern Anatolia, perhaps it was in southeast Anatolia/north-central Levant. The first farmers to leave the Near East were the ones who set off from the area of southeast Anatolia/north-central Levant for Cyprus, and I don't know of any indication that they were appreciably different from the ones further up the coast. Time will tell, I suppose


LeBrok: Very possible, I always thought about them as pottery or copper age expansion. One of the important technology period.

You mean the mid-to-late Neolithic that perhaps brought J2 and E-V13 to Europe 4700 BC? I think that's too late for pottery. These are some commonly accepted dates:
PPN1:10,000 BCE to 8,800 BCE (Earliest sites perhaps Gobekli Tepe, then Levant sites
PPN2: 8800 BCE to 6400 BCE
PN: 6400 BCE

Given those dates, I hope the paper goes into some detail about the archaeological setting of these 7000 BCE samples. By the time of Kumtepe, which Fire-Haired brought up, which is 4700 BCE (the same date when we find J2 and E-V13 in Europe) you're way into the Pottery Neolithic. Interestingly, if this source is correct, they were already using copper. (although no evidence of copper making) So, could this have any connection to the appearance of copper working in the Balkans?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kumtepe

I would advise caution, however, as I'm not sure about the reliability of Wiki as a source.

I also think we have to be cautious about assuming that the authors meant that the Kumtepe sample was different because it had ANE. So far as I know the paper hasn't been published, and the genome hasn't been published. Perhaps it's more southerly gene flow in place of, or in addition to, ANE, which would make sense if E-V13 is not Mesolithic in Europe but came later from the south.

(Just parenthetically, from reading up more on Kumtepe, this whole Troad area was considered the "Aegean world" by 4700 BCE, not really the "Anatolian" world. That has implications genetically as well.)



Tomenable: Could that Near Eastern / Armenian / "Teal" admixture in Yamnaya come from the Caucasus region?

From south of it originally and/or as I've been saying for years, from the direction of Kazakstan, which had experienced its own genetic flow from the south.



Tomenable: Modern group most genetically similar to "Teal" people, are not Armenians, but Mingrelians from Georgia:

Georgians are a modern population with ancestry from the north. Armenians are also a modern population, of course. However, the Reich Lab has access to and is probably quite far along in analyzing all sorts of ancient samples from the Caucasus and beyond. If Lazaridis is still calling the admixing population "modern Armenian-like", I'll stick with that until the Lab publishes something that changes it.


Tomenable: We cannot label all of that as "Near Eastern". Those were two distinct admixtures. The one carried by Early Neolithic EEF farmers who expanded into Europe from Western Anatolia, can be called "Levant-Anatolia" or maybe "Levant-Anatolia-Mesopotamia", while the one carried later by Proto-Indo-Europeans during the Copper Age (Eneolithic) and the Bronze Age, was a different admixture, it can be called "Caucasus-Gedrosia".

I could just say ditto to Alan's post, but I'll reiterate for precision and clarity: the group that accounts for approx. 50% of Yamnaya ancestry and perhaps a little less of Corded Ware Ancestry is heavily Near Eastern farmer in terms of ancestry. These people didn't only go west, or northwest into Europe, and southwest into North Africa, and directly south into East Africa, they also went north and east to the Caucasus, and into Central Asia, and toward India. I've posted all the archaeological data showing that.

We don't know yet precisely when or where, but at some point these farmer groups admixed with ANE. Maybe it happened north of the Caucasus, maybe south of the Caucasu. Maybe it happened relatively early as a sort of more eastern farmer group. Maybe it happened a few thousand years into the process but before they even reached the Caucasus. Maybe the admixture happened in the Caucasus. We don't know yet. We need ancient dna. This admixed group then made it into the Steppe. At least the farmer part and perhaps the whole admixed genome originally came from south of the Caucasus. (or also by way, perhaps, of Kazakstan)

As to whether it was more "Georgian like" or more "Armenian like", as I said, I'll wait for upcoming papers. I'll also wait for upcoming papers to see how much of it was ANE and how much of it was original Near Eastern farmer.

@Nobody 1: You've been gone a while. :) The big deal is because people have spent the better part of a year convincing themselves and trying to convince everybody else that there was massive admixing in Europe of Neolithic farmers from the Near East and Mesolithic European WHGs. The reality seems to be perhaps 10% initially (around the Danube Gates?) and then perhaps 10-15% (the paper will give us the details) over the next couple of thousand years.

Ed. for clarity.

arvistro
10-10-15, 20:15
So, I was right CW (and modern Balts) had extra EEF compared to Yamna.
Lovely :)

Greying Wanderer
11-10-15, 00:35
...

I don't know what to make of this slow drip of "Armenian like" genes into these steppe people over such a long period of time. I mean it starts 5200 BC all the way to 3000 BC. Are we supposed to think that even hunter-gatherers all the way up in Samara wanted Armenian wives so badly that they traveled all the way to the Caucasus or south Caucasus to get them? Or that there was some sort of long distance trade network in them? What could hunter-gatherers have given for them? Isn't it very unusual also for the woman's culture to come to predominate?

Honestly, I'm stumped. Is it possible these mtDna lineages from the Near East had some sort of selective advantage? More fertility? H has more resistance to sepsis, doesn't it?

...

Apparently mtdna has an influence on metabolic rate and cold climates so I wonder about selection, maybe there were HG clades that provided more body heat but at the cost of some negative side effect and as farming/herding spread it lost some of its competitive advantage.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3998521/

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22929588


What could hunter-gatherers have given for them?

lumps of copper?

Greying Wanderer
11-10-15, 00:43
My guess...

Yamnaya:
- cos horses, spread around steppe as tribes and
- cos copper, spread everywhere but as miner/metal worker minority not tribal invaders
- second group acted as catalyst to majority populations they settled among

Corded Ware
- cultural son/brother of Yamnaya but
- Corded Ware got access to bronze weapons first and
- stomped Yamnaya and then spread over the steppe and south to India

Goga
11-10-15, 10:44
My guess...

Yamnaya:
- cos horses, spread around steppe as tribes and
- cos copper, spread everywhere but as miner/metal worker minority not tribal invaders
- second group acted as catalyst to majority populations they settled among

Corded Ware
- cultural son/brother of Yamnaya but
- Corded Ware got access to bronze weapons first and
- stomped Yamnaya and then spread over the steppe and south to India
You live in a dream wolrd. Corded Ware went never to the Steppes. There is no hg. I1, R1a-Z282 etc. in India. There're no haplogoups in South CentralAsia from Europe, but from the Iranian Plateau, like hg. R1a-Z94, J2a etc.

So, what the **** are you talking about?

Tomenable
11-10-15, 11:02
March 2015 paper "Eight thousand years of natural selection" has recently been updated, with new samples as well as new figures included:

http://biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/early/2015/10/10/016477.full.pdf

Check Extended Data Figure 2 - it shows Anatolia Neolithic / WHG among Pre-IE populations, as well as Armenian Neolithic / EHG among IEs:

Note: Anatolia Neolithic includes local HG ancestry absorbed by farmers in Anatolia. WHG is only what was later absorbed in Europe:

http://s1.postimg.org/8s7j5xipr/EDF2.png

http://s1.postimg.org/8s7j5xipr/EDF2.png

Goga
11-10-15, 11:11
Is this for me? Yeah, I think that Europe was Indo-Europized from Yamnaya.

But Indo-Europeans from Yamna who Indo-Europized Europe came from the Iranian Plateau.


Yamnaya was already for a HUGE part West Asian itself!


FIRST: PIE migrated from the Iranian Pateau into Maykop/Yamnaya horizon.
SECOND: Folks from Yamnaya/Steppes migrated into Europe.

Tomenable
11-10-15, 11:14
New samples include so-far the oldest R1a sample from the steppe (2925 - 2536 BCE):

"Potapovka I, kurgan 5, grave 6
Ÿ- 10432 / SVP42
Potapovka I is an important cemetery of the late MBA or MBA2 Sintashta-culture era, but
this grave shows that an older MBA Poltavka cemetery was located in the same place on the
Sok River, in the transitional forest-steppe zone of Samara oblast. Grave 6 was dated 2925-
2536 calBCE (4180 ± 84 BP: AA12569), centuries older than the MBA2 grave pit that cut
through it, removing about 60% of the Grave 6 skeleton. Grave 6 was that of a male
(confirmed genetically) age 35-45 years, his foot bones stained with red ochre, buried with
the lower leg bones of a sheep or goat. His Y-chromosome haplotype was R1a1a1b2a (...)
His MtDNA haplotype was U5a1c. Another Poltavka grave under kurgan 3 was cut through in
the same way, so Potapovka 1 seems to have been established in the MBA2 directly on top
of an older Poltavka cemetery."

This is typically Indo-Iranic R1a-Z94, but it is as old as R1a from Corded Ware in Bavaria.

============================================

It is from 2925-2536 BC, much older than the 2nd oldest sample from this area (2298-2045 BC):

http://s21.postimg.org/d2640an07/R1a_Dates.png

http://s21.postimg.org/d2640an07/R1a_Dates.png

Yet still slightly younger than the oldest R1b samples from the steppe:

http://s11.postimg.org/chf938e43/R1b_Dates.png

http://s11.postimg.org/chf938e43/R1b_Dates.png

Goga
11-10-15, 11:19
The light green color of Yanaya is at least 50% from the Iranian Plateau itself. So this graphs are really manipulative..



R1a1a1b2a is not THAT old. MY Mesopotamian R1a* marker is older. So, I'm not impressed. They should research old bones on the Iranian Plateua, there're plenty of them. I'm sure they will fight really ARCHAIC R1a* and R1b* there...

Goga
11-10-15, 11:34
This is typically Indo-Iranic R1a-Z94.Nice, thanks!!! The known fact is that R1a-Z94 evolved in the Iranian Plateau. This is another evidence for me that folks from the Iranian Plateau migrated into the Steppes and brought R1a-Z94, R1b and J2a with them!

Tomenable
11-10-15, 11:40
The known fact is that R1a-Z94 evolved in the Iranian Plateau

Known from what evidence? There are no ancient Z94 samples from that area so-far.

Goga
11-10-15, 11:57
Known from what evidence? There are no ancient Z94 samples from that area so-far.Because there are no ancient samples researched so far at all.

Read Underhill et al., 2014 one more time: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=24667786

Most RECENT ACADEMIC study on R1a.

According to the authors: "phylogeographic data lead us to conclude that the initial episodes of R1a-M420 diversification occurred in the vicinity of Iran and Eastern Turkey"



Iranian Plateau has MUCH more R1a-Z94 than the Steppes and even the Northern Caucasus. If Z94 came from the Steppes R1a would be alot more diverse in the Caucaus. But its NOT!
Instead, Caucasus has more European (Slavic) R1a-M558. It is from the DIRECT interaction between Caucasus and the Steppes





http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Ua7ZyaGax7E/UzmBytAVaHI/AAAAAAAACEI/zZnbCE94eLc/s1600/Haplogroup+R1a+MiddleEast.png (http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Ua7ZyaGax7E/UzmBytAVaHI/AAAAAAAACEI/zZnbCE94eLc/s1600/Haplogroup+R1a+MiddleEast.png)




http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-weDAwuIni8Q/UzmCWv_H6KI/AAAAAAAACEQ/L72IwM5Uq9c/s1600/Haplogroup+R1a+Caucasus.png (http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-weDAwuIni8Q/UzmCWv_H6KI/AAAAAAAACEQ/L72IwM5Uq9c/s1600/Haplogroup+R1a+Caucasus.png)






R1a in West Asia is more diverse and ancestral to India. In Central Asia and India there's much more recent R1a which is dominant.





http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-rWXCvL4GZrw/UzmCbNmiSdI/AAAAAAAACEY/4RKvn8PPSrM/s1600/Haplogroup+R1a+Central+Asia.png (http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-rWXCvL4GZrw/UzmCbNmiSdI/AAAAAAAACEY/4RKvn8PPSrM/s1600/Haplogroup+R1a+Central+Asia.png)


http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-czsmXz__Wr8/UzmCfK8YxsI/AAAAAAAACEg/VgirHZED4DM/s1600/Haplogroup+R1a+South+Asia.png (http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-czsmXz__Wr8/UzmCfK8YxsI/AAAAAAAACEg/VgirHZED4DM/s1600/Haplogroup+R1a+South+Asia.png)

Tomenable
11-10-15, 12:09
There are also ancient DNA samples of Srubna culture (6/6 = 100% R1a):

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

Males:

Novosel’ki, Kurgan 6, grave 4 - R1a1a1b2, MtDNA type U5a1f2
Barinovka I, kurgan 2, grave 17 - R1a1a1b2; MtDNA type J2b1a2a
Uvarovka I, kurgan 2, grave 1 - R1a1a1b2; MtDNA type T2b4
Spiridonovka IV, kurgan 1, grave 11 - R1a1; his MtDNA type U5a1
Spiridonovka IV, kurgan 2, grave 5 - R1a1a, MtDNA type H5b
Spiridonovka II, kurgan 1, grave 1 - R1a1a1b2a2a; MtDNA type H3g

Females:

Rozhdestvenno I, Kurgan 5 grave 7 - MtDNA type K1b2a
Rozhdestvenno I, Kurgan 4 grave 4, skeleton 2 - MtDNA type I1a1
Barinovka I, kurgan 2, grave 24 - MtDNA type T1a1
Spiridonovka IV, kurgan 1, grave 15 - MtDNA type U5a1
Spiridonovka IV, kurgan 2, grave 1 - MtDNA type H6a1a
Spiridonovka IV, kurgan 1, grave 6 - MtDNA type U5a2a1
Spiridonovka II, kurgan 11, grave 12 - MtDNA type H3g
Spiridonovka II, kurgan 1, grave 2 - MtDNA type H2b

Tomenable
11-10-15, 12:16
folks from the Iranian Plateau migrated into the Steppes and brought R1a-Z94, R1b and J2a with them!

As for J2a. Goga - haplogroup J has just been found in Mesolithic Karelia, alongside R1a (!) - he was Eastern Hunter-Gatherer:

From page 43 out of 46:

http://biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/early/2015/10/10/016477.full.pdf

"(...) In eastern Europe outside the steppe, a new individual from the Karelia region resembles the two previously published EHG individuals5 autosomally, but surprisingly belongs to Y-chromosome haplogroup J usually associated with Near Eastern populations (Supplementary Data Table 1). (...)"

So we now have 3 samples of EHG hunters (2 from Karelia, 1 from Samara) and they had three different Y-DNA haplogroups:

- J
- R1b
- R1a

Yet, autosomally they were all very similar to each other!

Tomenable
11-10-15, 12:39
Re #92: Minnesota has much more I1 than Alabama. But it doesn't mean that the Sioux had more I1 than the Creek.

Modern populations =/= ancient populations. There have been numerous population replacements in the steppes.

Goga
11-10-15, 12:53
As for J2a. Goga - haplogroup J has just been found in Mesolithic Karelia, alongside R1a (!) - he was Eastern Hunter-Gatherer:

From page 43 out of 46:

http://biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/early/2015/10/10/016477.full.pdf

"(...) In eastern Europe outside the steppe, a new individual from the Karelia region resembles the two previously published EHG individuals5 autosomally, but surprisingly belongs to Y-chromosome haplogroup J usually associated with Near Eastern populations (Supplementary Data Table 1). (...)"

So we now have 3 samples of EHG hunters (2 from Karelia, 1 from Samara) and they had three different Y-DNA haplogroups:

- J
- R1b
- R1a

Yet, autosomally they were all very similar to each other!Yeah, this is getting very interesting. J is from West Asia.
I did always believe that R1a came from Iranian Plateau and migrated into Europe.

But I thought that it was before R1b & J2a entered the Steppes. And I still think it was the case. And now they found ancient J with R1a in Europe. These findings make my believes even stronger that R1a came from the Iranian Plateau. Or do people really think that J was NATIVE to Europe. That would be crazy…


Assimilated folks originally from West Asia. Nothing more, nothing less..


According to me the only true European haplogroups are C(ro-Magnon), N1c1, I1 etc...

Tomenable
11-10-15, 12:56
Here is the link to new version of the paper (10 October 2015):

http://www.biorxiv.org/content/early/2015/10/10/016477.abstract?%3Fcollection=


Or do people really think that J was NATIVE to Europe That would be crazy…

There was not one European hunter population but two - WHGs and EHGs.

As we can see WHG haplogroups were much different from EHG haplogroups.

Eastern European Hunters were R1a, R1b and J. WHGs were mostly I and C.

I wonder what subclade of J did that hunter belong to.

Tomenable
11-10-15, 14:06
In post #88 I was mistaken about Potapovka I, kurgan 5, grave 6 being "the oldest" R1a sample from the steppe!

I have not noticed this even older sample, until now:

This is 7200-6000 years old Copper Age R1a from Saratov region in the Volga steppe, from Khvalynsk culture:

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/31631-Volga-Steppe-Khvalynsk-culture-%28Copper-Age%29-from-5200-4000-BC-R1a-and-R1b-together!

What's more important - a sample of R1b was also found in the same archaeological site! R1a + R1b together.

I guess this points to Khvalynsk culture as the original community of Proto-Indo-European speakers:

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

Greying Wanderer
11-10-15, 15:02
Or do people really think that J was NATIVE to Europe. That would be crazy…

Weighted more towards Central Asia imo like a more easterly version of I.

MOESAN
11-10-15, 21:05
I don't think so. I think the Haak et al paper specifically says "modern" Armenian like, not BaArmenian like.



I don't think we know yet where "Basal Eurasian" hunter-gatherers mixed with UHGs. (We don't even precisely know yet how "Basal Eurasian" is defined, where it was centered, etc.etc. Hopefully, this paper will tell us.) Perhaps the admixture took place in central or northwestern Anatolia, perhaps it was in southeast Anatolia/north-central Levant. The first farmers to leave the Near East were the ones who set off from the area of southeast Anatolia/north-central Levant for Cyprus, and I don't know of any indication that they were appreciably different from the ones further up the coast. Time will tell, I suppose



You mean the mid-to-late Neolithic that perhaps brought J2 and E-V13 to Europe 4700 BC? I think that's too late for pottery. These are some commonly accepted dates:
PPN1:10,000 BCE to 8,800 BCE (Earliest sites perhaps Gobekli Tepe, then Levant sites
PPN2: 8800 BCE to 6400 BCE
PN: 6400 BCE

Given those dates, I hope the paper goes into some detail about the archaeological setting of these 7000 BCE samples. By the time of Kumtepe, which Fire-Haired brought up, which is 4700 BCE (the same date when we find J2 and E-V13 in Europe) you're way into the Pottery Neolithic. Interestingly, if this source is correct, they were already using copper. (although no evidence of copper making) So, could this have any connection to the appearance of copper working in the Balkans?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kumtepe

I would advise caution, however, as I'm not sure about the reliability of Wiki as a source.

I also think we have to be cautious about assuming that the authors meant that the Kumtepe sample was different because it had ANE. So far as I know the paper hasn't been published, and the genome hasn't been published. Perhaps it's more southerly gene flow in place of, or in addition to, ANE, which would make sense if E-V13 is not Mesolithic in Europe but came later from the south.

(Just parenthetically, from reading up more on Kumtepe, this whole Troad area was considered the "Aegean world" by 4700 BCE, not really the "Anatolian" world. That has implications genetically as well.)



From south of it originally and/or as I've been saying for years, from the direction of Kazakstan, which had experienced its own genetic flow from the south.


Georgians are a modern population with ancestry from the north. Armenians are also a modern population, of course. However, the Reich Lab has access to and is probably quite far along in analyzing all sorts of ancient samples from the Caucasus and beyond. If Lazaridis is still calling the admixing population "modern Armenian-like", I'll stick with that until the Lab publishes something that changes it.



I could just say ditto to Alan's post, but I'll reiterate for precision and clarity: the group that accounts for approx. 50% of Yamnaya ancestry and perhaps a little less of Corded Ware Ancestry is heavily Near Eastern farmer in terms of ancestry. These people didn't only go west, or northwest into Europe, and southwest into North Africa, and directly south into East Africa, they also went north and east to the Caucasus, and into Central Asia, and toward India. I've posted all the archaeological data showing that.

We don't know yet precisely when or where, but at some point these farmer groups admixed with ANE. Maybe it happened north of the Caucasus, maybe south of the Caucasu. Maybe it happened relatively early as a sort of more eastern farmer group. Maybe it happened a few thousand years into the process but before they even reached the Caucasus. Maybe the admixture happened in the Caucasus. We don't know yet. We need ancient dna. This admixed group then made it into the Steppe. At least the farmer part and perhaps the whole admixed genome originally came from south of the Caucasus. (or also by way, perhaps, of Kazakstan)

As to whether it was more "Georgian like" or more "Armenian like", as I said, I'll wait for upcoming papers. I'll also wait for upcoming papers to see how much of it was ANE and how much of it was original Near Eastern farmer.

@Nobody 1: You've been gone a while. :) The big deal is because people have spent the better part of a year convincing themselves and trying to convince everybody else that there was massive admixing in Europe of Neolithic farmers from the Near East and Mesolithic European WHGs. The reality seems to be perhaps 10% initially (around the Danube Gates?) and then perhaps 10-15% (the paper will give us the details) over the next couple of thousand years.

Ed. for clarity.

a metric surveys about Neolithic people (Pinhasi) mentioned that two early neolithic wave occurred into South Europe, the first one maybe come from more Southeastern parts (North Crescent) and maybe by sea; the survey concluded that, even if countaining some within variability, the populations of Neo Nikomedia (Greece) and SKC cultures shew strong similarities with the Southcentral Anatolia settlement of Catal Höyük, itself maybe a drifted subpopulation, in any case neatly different from the the PPNB diverse populations more East or more South, themselves not too homogenous, and different too from other neolithic populations of Europe (highly heterogenous LBK of Germany and Cardial ones; we can infer the dominent type, not taxinomicly precised in the survey, was the old "danubian" type of old athropology, found even later in Anatolia but then mixed with new 'southern' types surely come later - in his survey, the Neolithic people of the Danube Gorge show very great differences too, I put on the count of stronger WHG imput - in short, Anatolia was not inhabited by similar groups in all its regions (Cayüna in East closer to Fertile Crescent poeple, homogenous or not -
concerning Armenians of today, they have links with 'southwest-asian' or "bedawin" and also with Western 'mediterranean' (so EEF in part); the Steppes populations of Metals Ages seem having been without this EEF component, if I red well - and BA Armenians were different and closer to Steppes people - so if we accept the qualification of "armenianlike" with the modern meaning of the word, we can suppose the shared DNA is only the without-EEF one ?
and what if Armenia received steppic DNA from North and not the contrary, what said some scientists even recently? the "southern" part of steppic people could have been picked earlier than the Metals Ages, and not by force from Transcaucasus?

Angela
11-10-15, 23:14
Moesan, this is what the new paper has to say:
"These results support hypothesis of a common ancestral population of EEF prior to their dispersal along distinct inland/central European and coastal/Mediterranean routes."
http://biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/early/2015/10/10/016477.full.pdf

This is coming not only from Mathieson and Lazaridis. It's also coming from Reich, Pinhasi and Haak. I don't know how that squares with the anthropology, but I think Pinhasi must know what he's written before and what is being proposed now. I'm not going to argue with it.

I know that modern Armenians are different from Bronze Age Armenians. Neolithic "Armenians" might be different yet. All I know is that based on their statistics, the same people who are analyzing ancient Caucasus samples believe that the population that mixed with the EHG to form the Yamnaya and other steppe groups was 50% modern Armenian like. That leads me to believe that they think the original admixing population, whatever language it spoke, and whatever yDna it carried, was more "southern" than Bronze Age Armenians or Georgians.

I might be wrong, of course. Or they might change their position. We'll see what they say when they revisit the issue when they release the Caucasus genomes and their analysis.

Fire Haired14
11-10-15, 23:38
Something important to remember is: There's an assumption among many posters that Bell Beaker, Unetice, Corded Ware, Sintashta, Andronovo were basically the same as Northern Europeans. This isn't the case. All of them had more ANE-affinity than all Northern Europeans except maybe Balts. Davidski has noted that they're all closest to Balts, and then next NE Euros, Scandinavians, and Irish: maybe because those people are at the fringe and more isolated. Andronovo and Corded Ware in particular had a lot of ANE, being maybe 80% Yamnaya. Meaning all modern Northern Europeans have more non-Steppe ancestry than people who lived in their lands 4,000-4,500 years ago.

West Germans for example have lots of extra non-Steppe ancestry. In D-stats they're not significantly closer to Bell Beaker than to Middle Neolithic. I suspect most is EEF-derived but we can't assume. Lots can happen in 4,000 years it doesn't stay stagnant.

It's kind of the same situation as with Bronze age Armenians and modern Armenians. There's kind of continuation but slight differences. And I've read ethnic posters trying to link their ethnic/linguistic group to some Late Neolithic culture. This is crazy. There's been lots of movement of people since circa 2500 BC. We basically have a pure Indo Iranian genome in Hungary at 900 BC. Andronovo-descendants moved into Europe and brought the Chariot and Iron. In the oldest written records we see the primary modern languages: Germanic and Slavic expanded after 0AD. There's tons of mixing that happened. Then there's the Great Migration era at the end of the Roman empire.

Goga
11-10-15, 23:41
Weighted more towards Central Asia imo like a more easterly version of I.
They found archaic hg. IJ* on the Iranian Plateau. The most diverse area of J is in Kurdistan. You can find there all archaic J* subgroups. J1 was born somewhere in the Middle East, J2a was born on the Iranian Plateau. So J is definitely from West Asia. Has nothing to do with the Steppes.When R1a came from the Iranian Plateau and migrated into Europe hg. J went also with those folks.For me it’s a definitive prove that R1a is from the Iranian Plateau!

Fire Haired14
12-10-15, 00:27
They found archaic hg. IJ* on the Iranian Plateau. The most diverse area of J is in Kurdistan. You can find there all archaic J* subgroups. J1 was born somewhere in the Middle East, J2a was born on the Iranian Plateau. So J is definitely from West Asia. Has nothing to do with the Steppes.When R1a came from the Iranian Plateau and migrated into Europe hg. J went also with those folks.For me it’s a definitive prove that R1a is from the Iranian Plateau!

Doesn't mean J could have wandered outside of West Asia like 20,000 years ago. And the J isn't evidence R1a is from West Asia. Besides modern R1a is R1a1a1-M417. So wherever M417 is from is where 99% of modern R1a is from. I tend to think it's from EHG, however there's plenty of room for it to be from teal. If Teal got the EHGs out of a depressing primitive lifestyle, wouldn't they be the elites and patriarchs?

Goga
12-10-15, 00:50
Doesn't mean J could have wandered outside of West Asia like 20,000 years ago. And the J isn't evidence R1a is from West Asia. Besides modern R1a is R1a1a1-M417. So wherever M417 is from is where 99% of modern R1a is from. I tend to think it's from EHG, however there's plenty of room for it to be from teal. If Teal got the EHGs out of a depressing primitive lifestyle, wouldn't they be the elites and patriarchs?No, that is to far for 1 person alone. He migrated with a big group. That type of R1a in Europe is very young and evolved very recent, mostly evolved from Z282. And it not diverse and that's an indication that there was a founder effect. Founder effects in that AREA makes sense because those areas were sparsely populated, because of the cold climate and difficult conditions.

The folks from West Asia stared to migrated into Europe again AFTER The last glacial period, the so called Weichselian ice age 11000 years ago. Before that Europe was covered by ice. Only native haplogroups lived there, like Nordic N1c1. After the last ice age R1a was maybe one of the first that migrated into Europe together with J.

Didn't you learn about the Weichselian ice age at school? This is a very basic knowledge. 20,000 years ago there was ice age in Europe. Nobody in West Asia would be that crazy to move into the ice and start a new life, that would be suicide!


Folks from West Asia started to migrate into Europe after the ice sheets went to melt down and that happened AFTER Weichselian ice age, MAX 11000 years ago AND West Asian R1a is MORE that 11000 years old.

Greying Wanderer
12-10-15, 02:31
They found archaic hg. IJ* on the Iranian Plateau. The most diverse area of J is in Kurdistan. You can find there all archaic J* subgroups. J1 was born somewhere in the Middle East, J2a was born on the Iranian Plateau. So J is definitely from West Asia. Has nothing to do with the Steppes.When R1a came from the Iranian Plateau and migrated into Europe hg. J went also with those folks.For me it’s a definitive prove that R1a is from the Iranian Plateau!

I'm not saying steppe, I'm thinking hill country along the southern edge of the steppe.

http://media-2.web.britannica.com/eb-media/45/4445-004-5806C32A.jpg

pure guess though so could be wrong