teal CHG component in Yamna and Afanasievo arrived during Khvalynsk period

bicicleur 2

Regular Member
Messages
6,367
Reaction score
1,401
Points
113
check this, I think it is realy interesting



attachment.php


there are 3 Khvalynsk genomes which you can find in above chart

Samara EneolithicRussiaKhvalynsk II, Volga River, Samara [I0122/SVP 35]M4700-4000 BCR1b1M415H2a1Mathieson 2015
Samara EneolithicRussiaKhvalynsk II, Volga River, Samara [I0433/SVP 46]M4700-4000 BCR1a1M459U5a1iMathieson 2015
Samara EneolithicRussiaKhvalynsk II, Volga River, Samara [I0434/SVP 47]M4700-4000 BCQ1aF2676U4a2 or U4dMathieson 2015


2 are mainly EHG (blue) with some WHG (navy blue), basically the same like the Karelia and Samara HG (also on the chart)
they have no teal (CHG)

they are R1a1 and Q1a and mtDNA U4 and U5, U4 and U5 are WHG in origin

the 3rd has 22 % teal (CHG), 71 % EHG and no WHG
he is a newcomer
he is R1b1 and mtDNA H2a1, H2a1 is CHG in origin
he may have been pré-R1b-V88 (but very early V88 then, spliting from the main V88 branch ca 16-17 ka)

the Yamnaya (Pit Grave on the chart) and Afanasievo are a mixture of mainly this newcomer and some the 2 others
Yamnaya and Afanasievo have about 16 % CHG, 82 % EHG and only 1 % WHG

Yamnaya and Afanasievo people probably arrived in the Volga area during Khvalynsk period.
That is way before Maykop.
 
This confirms that R1b may have entered the Steppe during the Khvalynsk period, perhaps as an offshoot from the contemporary Leyla Tepe culture in Azerbaijan. It is very clear from these three samples that only the R1b guy is an outsider with Caucasian admixture. This R1b guy also lacks the dark blue WHG admixture, which hints that in the Epipaleolithic R1a and R1b were originally EHG, but while R1a people intermingled with WHG tribes (linked to I2a, and surely that I2a2a-L701 found in Yamna), some R1b tribes had already moved south of the Caucasus, where they mixed with the teal people - indubitably linked to Y-haplogroup J, and probably J2b in this was, as J2b is found at relatively high frequency in the Volga-Ural region.
 
Last edited:
2 are mainly EHG (blue) with some WHG (navy blue), basically the same like the Karelia and Samara HG (also on the chart)
they have no teal (CHG)

they are R1a1 and Q1a and mtDNA U4 and U5, U4 and U5 are WHG in origin


Looks like pottery people migration from lake Baikal with language:
Capture.png

"Individuals from Lokomotiv and Shamanka II were found to possess haplogroups K,
R1a1 and C3, and individuals from Ust’-Ida and Kurma XI were found to belong to haplogroups Q, K and unidentified SNP (L914). For those individuals belonging to haplogroup Q, further experimentation to examine sub-haplogroups of Q revealed that these individuals belong to sub-haplogroup Q1a3"


the 3rd has 22 % teal (CHG), 71 % EHG and no WHG
he is a newcomer
he is R1b1 and mtDNA H2a1, H2a1 is CHG in origin
he may have been pré-R1b-V88 (but very early V88 then, spliting from the main V88 branch ca 16-17 ka)

the Yamnaya (Pit Grave on the chart) and Afanasievo are a mixture of mainly this newcomer and some the 2 others
Yamnaya and Afanasievo have about 16 % CHG, 82 % EHG and only 1 % WHG

Yamnaya and Afanasievo people probably arrived in the Volga area during Khvalynsk period.
That is way before Maykop.

If the R1b1 came from afanasievo area with language, what kind of problem is it?

1.yamna pit grave originated in pit house:

Botai pit house
8c150444f613a61669c63b2c7b1cbd5e.JPG


2. afanasievo was related with botai horse domestication culture and Tocharian. But David Anthony explained that Repin culture brought the horse domestication culture of botai into afanasievo, but looks like the explanation is not persuasive at all.

3. mtDNA of afanasievo is H. However, H was already found in Korea 7,000y ago(right one in the picture). Unfortunately there is no research paper, but the top research center has the DNA sample now, where recently a paper regarding Gengiskan Ydna was published. is there some member able to contact David Reich to call the research center to get auDNA of the sample? I think it is very important for Indoeuropean Culture. I am 99% sure the samples belong to ANE R or Q, even if it was reported that they EEF from Harz area in Germany.
2014091602315_3.jpg


- stealing women is just a routine job of Indoeuropean, which became a tradition of exogamy of nomad, I think

When it comes to understanding the origin of European culture, there’s another reason for looking at the Yamnaya. The very foundation of Rome may be steeped in their traditions. According to studies of IndoEuropean mythology, young Yamnaya men would go off in warlike groups, raping and pillaging for a few years, then return to their village and settle down into respectability as adults. Those cults were mythologically associated with wolves and dogs, like youths forming wild hunting packs, and the youths are said to have worn dog or wolf skins during their initiation. Anthony has found a site in Russia where the Yamnaya killed wolves and dogs in midwinter. He says it’s easy to imagine groups
sacrificing and consuming the animals as a way to symbolically become wolves or dogs themselves. Bodies in Yamnaya graves on the western steppes frequently have pendants of dog canine teeth around their necks. Anthony says that all this offers solid archaeological evidence for the youthful “wolf packs” of Indo-European legends – and sees a link to the myth of the foundation of Rome. “You’ve got two boys, Romulus and Remus
and a wolf that more or less gives birth to them,” he says. “And the earliest legends of the foundation of Rome are connected with a large group of homeless young men who were given shelter by Romulus. But they then wanted wives, so they invited in a neighbouring tribe and stole all their women. You can see that
whole set of early legends as being connected possibly with the foundation of Rome by youthful war bands.
 
This confirms that R1b may have entered the Steppe during the Khvalynsk period, perhaps as an offshoot from the contemporary Leyla Tepe culture in Azerbaijan. It is very clear from these three samples that only the R1b guy is an outsider with Caucasian admixture. This R1b guy also lacks the dark blue admixture, which, if I remember well, is WHG.

yes the WHG is from the Swiderian culture, which arrived in Eastern Europe prior to the EHG folks ; they brought the mtDNA U4/U5/U2e into Eastern Europe
it is logical that the Karelians have some more WHG than the Samara HG / Khvalynsk folks

the fact that the R1b Khvalynsk doesn't have WHG proves that he is a newcomer
the fact that he has CHG indicates he comes from south of the Caucasus

the subsequent Afanasievo/Yamna genomes could be explained more or less as 2/3 newcomer admixed with 1/3 of the 2 earlier Khvalynsk genomes

these are the Y-calls for the Khvalynsk newcomer :

https://genetiker.wordpress.com/y-snp-calls-for-i0122/

1 out of 14 calls for R1b-V88 is positive, but it may be a false call as it is not confirmed by more positive calls nearby

Leyla-Tepe is contemporary with Khvalynsk culture, but not older, so this newcomer is more likely to come from a common ancestor with Leyla Tepe than from Leyla Tepe itself

apart from all this, it seems more and more likely to me that the first tribe that melted copper ores, both in Tal-i Iblis and in eastern Serbia may have been R1b-V88

these are the paleo/mesolithic western European genomes :

A Paleo Meso WHG.png

attachment.php


you can see the oldest genomes evolving from +/- 50 % WHG into practically 100 % WHG by abt 18.5 ka
both the El Miron and the Villabruna clusters are 100 % WHG

the later Motala genomes (7.5 ka) have EHG (blue) admixture, which is logical because pottery arrived into Scandinavia from Eastern Europe

in the pitted ware, apart from blue EHG also light blue appears which is EEF
 
I think there's a problem with the dataset considering Karelia shows up as only roughly ~70% 'EHG'. For reference, here's what the author of the blog believes the different colors to represent:

Capture.PNG

I'd venture a guess that this makes it quite useless for the sort of fine-scale analysis you are trying to do.
 
I think there's a problem with the dataset considering Karelia shows up as only roughly ~70% 'EHG'. For reference, here's what the author of the blog believes the different colors to represent:

View attachment 8216

I'd venture a guess that this makes it quite useless for the sort of fine-scale interpetration you are trying to do.

the reference you post is slightly different, it is for K = 16, while the tables I post are for K = 14

30 % WHG in Karelia makes perfect sense as I explained above in my post # 6
 


3. mtDNA of afanasievo is H. However, H was already found in Korea 7,000y ago(right one in the picture). Unfortunately there is no research paper, but the top research center has the DNA sample now, where recently a paper regarding Gengiskan Ydna was published. is there some member able to contact David Reich to call the research center to get auDNA of the sample? I think it is very important for Indoeuropean Culture. I am 99% sure the samples belong to ANE R or Q, even if it was reported that they EEF from Harz area in Germany.
2014091602315_3.jpg

I have lots of anciant DNA from western Eurasia but not so much from eastern Eurasia. (except Kitoi and some Chinese neolithic)
Could you share some of your sources with me?
 
the reference you post is slightly different, it is for K = 16, while the tables I post are for K = 14

30 % WHG in Karelia makes perfect sense as I explained above in my post # 6

While the dataset is slightly different, the results are roughly similar. Since the 'White God' seems unwilling to divulge what he thinks his results are supposed to prove, this is still my best guess.

Yet more 'WHG' in Karelia would imply that the very concept of 'EHG' should be called into question, since the Karelians already derived a large part of their ancestry from a similar source population in previous models. This means 'EHG' becomes another hypothetical population - at this point ADMIXTURE-based analyses would have pretty much outlived their usefulness IMHO. Hence the author of the blog deceptively referring to this component as 'Gravettian'.
 
I have lots of anciant DNA from western Eurasia but not so much from eastern Eurasia. (except Kitoi and some Chinese neolithic)
Could you share some of your sources with me?
Sorry, as I said, there is no research paper at all. Nobody care about neolithic foreigners in Korea.
However, it was shocking that long skulls with crouched positions were found 3 or 4 years ago. Only the reporters were concerned with the sensational issue.
So they traced the origin of sample. They requested the above mentioned research center to get aDNA, where they got only mtDNA H. With the DNA, they went germany to meet so many scholars. German geneticist told them that modern people don't have that H, but EEF at germany had. And they concluded that the people were EEF from germany. But I don''t think the neolithic weakest EEF could not enter korean peninsular, b/c Korea was surrounded by neolithic wolf and lions, Hg N, R and Q at that time. so I thought R or Q carried Hg H or woman w/ Hg H.
Their pottery was similar to The Linear Pottery OF GERMANY.:
252A9A3A5420E07D1E4B84
 
This confirms that R1b may have entered the Steppe during the Khvalynsk period, perhaps as an offshoot from the contemporary Leyla Tepe culture in Azerbaijan. It is very clear from these three samples that only the R1b guy is an outsider with Caucasian admixture. This R1b guy also lacks the dark blue admixture, which, if I remember well, is WHG.
Though he has a lot of this red element mofe popular in central Asia (I guess) and missing from Iranian Farmer. Maybe this R1b came from east side of Caspian and not from South Caucasus?
 
I think there's a problem with the dataset considering Karelia shows up as only roughly ~70% 'EHG'. For reference, here's what the author of the blog believes the different colors to represent:

View attachment 8216

I'd venture a guess that this makes it quite useless for the sort of fine-scale analysis you are trying to do.

I totally agree. The creator's explanation plus the fact that Karelia isn't 100% EHG tells you it's off. Plus, it doesn't comport with any of the academic papers on the subject.

I wouldn't give it any serious consideration at all in terms of percentages.
 
A foreigner DNA would match quite well with pots (paper online Pottery from the Volga area in the Samara and South Urals region from Eneolithic to Early Bronze Age):

According to the evidence from
the early stage of the Eneolithic
Samara culture, we can identify
two typological groups of pottery,
because the difference between
them is confirmed technologically.
One of them predominates and finds
its origin in the traditions of the local Neolithic culture.
The other group is considered outlandish, connected
with the Azov-Dnieper and Tripolsky cultures
from the northern Black Sea region.
The outlandish settlers, who were not as numerous,
must have been assimilated, but they added originality
to the Samara culture and gave rise to the Eneolithic
period in the Volga-Ural area. Thereafter, regular
economic ties with the northern Black Sea and
Balkan region developed, supplying ready-made copper
products throughout the Eneolithic period.
 
the fact that the R1b Khvalynsk doesn't have WHG proves that he is a newcomer
...
Leyla-Tepe is contemporary with Khvalynsk culture, but not older, so this newcomer is more likely to come from a common ancestor with Leyla Tepe than from Leyla Tepe itself

Not necessarily. Khvalynsk could have been founded by R1a-dominant tribes, and saw the arrival of Leyla Tepe R1b newcomers after the Khvalynsk period had started. The number of R1b people grew faster until over time they became dominant and the culture became Yamna. Note that there is a 500 year gap between the end of Khvalynsk (4000 BCE) and the beginning of Yamna (3500 BCE). Such transitional periods between clear-cut archeoloogical cultures is generally a sign of population change. So in my opinion, R1b entered the Steppe during Khvalynsk as a foreign element, not as a founder of Khvalynsk culture, just like R1b invaded the pre-existing Bell Beaker culture but did not found it.

apart from all this, it seems more and more likely to me that the first tribe that melted copper ores, both in Tal-i Iblis and in eastern Serbia may have been R1b-V88

I think you mean R1b1-P25, as R1b1c-V88 is not ancestral to R1b1a2-M269.

R1b-tree.gif
 
This confirms that R1b may have entered the Steppe during the Khvalynsk period, perhaps as an offshoot from the contemporary Leyla Tepe culture in Azerbaijan. It is very clear from these three samples that only the R1b guy is an outsider with Caucasian admixture. This R1b guy also lacks the dark blue WHG admixture, which hints that in the Epipaleolithic R1a and R1b were originally EHG, but while R1a people intermingled with WHG tribes (linked to I2a, and surely that I2a2a-L701 found in Yamna), some R1b tribes had already moved south of the Caucasus, where they mixed with the teal people - indubitably linked to Y-haplogroup J, and probably J2b in this was, as J2b is found at relatively high frequency in the Volga-Ural region.

Don't trust ADMIXTURE analysis especially . All Eneolithic Samara guys had CHG admixture. The Q1a guy had the most CHG out of the three. The R1b guy had more EHG than Yamnaya, he was mostly EHG. The most likely CHG uniparental representative in the Eneolithic Samara guys is the mtDNA H2a1 in the R1b guy.
 
I totally agree. The creator's explanation plus the fact that Karelia isn't 100% EHG tells you it's off. Plus, it doesn't comport with any of the academic papers on the subject.

I wouldn't give it any serious consideration at all in terms of percentages.

it is a K = 14 admixture run on a large dataset
the colours do not match 100 % to a predefined genome
but upon inspection of the results it becomes clear which colour matches which genome most closely
and the results make perfect sense

e.g. EEF = Stutgart genome doesn't make any more sense than the light blue colour in this table, because the Stutgart genome is not a pure ancestor, it would be much more logical to define the Boncuklu genomes as EEF

you are right that the light blue colour isn't an exact match of EEF, but it at least is as workable as the Stutgart genome which is more or less arbitrarily chosen as the best ancestral candidate from a small sample group
in this tabel the light blue is more like the Barcin genomes than the Stutgart :

D1 EEF Europa Asia Minor EN.jpg D2 EN LN CA Europe.jpg
attachment.php
attachment.php


again you see a gradual increase of navy bleu (similar to WHG) admixture from EN to MN, LN and CA (copper age) which makes perfect sense
 
it is a K = 14 admixture run on a large dataset
the colours do not match 100 % to a predefined genome
but upon inspection of the results it becomes clear which colour matches which genome most closely
and the results make perfect sense

e.g. EEF = Stutgart genome doesn't make any more sense than the light blue colour in this table, because the Stutgart genome is not a pure ancestor, it would be much more logical to define the Boncuklu genomes as EEF

you are right that the light blue colour isn't an exact match of EEF, but it at least is as workable as the Stutgart genome which is more or less arbitrarily chosen as the best ancestral candidate from a small sample group
in this tabel the light blue is more like the Barcin genomes than the Stutgart :

View attachment 8217 View attachment 8218
attachment.php
attachment.php


again you see a gradual increase of navy bleu (similar to WHG) admixture from EN to MN, LN and CA (copper age) which makes perfect sense

It doesn't matter, Bicicleur, the percentages are wrong. It's a flawed analysis, as Fire-Haired also pointed out. Admixture alone can't be used, you have to look at formal statistics as well. Plus, even in terms of admixture the percentages are off from those in the academic papers.
 
and here you can see what the teal actualy means in this table (at the top of this image) :

CHG Iran EN Armenian Assyrian.png

attachment.php
 

This thread has been viewed 24797 times.

Back
Top