PDA

View Full Version : MDLP K11 Result : Unetice/Tumulus/Urnfield into Northwestern Europe?



Northener
19-02-17, 22:46
Modern Europeans are genetically close to their ancestors of the late Bronze Age. To say it in another way: the genetic cards were shaken at the end of the Bronze Age.

Looking at my aDNA in the MDLP K11 matches with:

1 Halberstadt_LBA @ 1.753964
2 Alberstedt_LN @ 1.883032
3 Bell_Beaker_Germany @ 2.323992
4 Bell_Beaker_Czech @ 3.536243
5 British_Celtic @ 4.103508
6 British_AngloSaxon @ 5.348632
7 British_IronAge @ 5.791267
8 Nordic_MN_B @ 5.830501
9 Nordic_LN @ 6.482782
10 Unetice_EBA @ 6.646599

So my modern North Dutch aDNA comes close to Halberstadt LBA, that’s an example drawn from the Urnfield culture (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urnfield_culture). According to the website civfanatics this was “ Y-DNA from Late Bronze Age Lusatian Culture (as part of Urnfield horizon), from Halberstadt-Sonntagsfeld in Saxony-Anhalt.This is the first - so far - ancient Y-DNA from the Lusatian Culture (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lusatian_culture) (Biskupin in Poland is the most famous site of this culture). He was named in this study as individual Halberstadt_LBA, I0099’.

Nr 2 Alberstedt (-LN) lays 80 km Northwestwards of Halberstadt and is sometimes associated with the Bell Beakers.

Questions: is this an example of Unetice/Tumulus/Urnfield turning Northwestwards? Was the NW Europe heavily influenced by the (post) Bell Beakers of central Europe?

Any thoughts about this?

LeBrok
19-02-17, 23:37
Big shift in Bronze Age happened with CW migration from Eastern Europe. The LBA I0099 is very like Hinxon 3 and 4 from England, and very close to yours/modern Dutch. However there were farther changes in Poland, but I'm not sure when they happened. Maybe with Slavic migration?



?
Hinxton-1

F999921
Hinxton-2
F999922
Hinxton-3
F999925
Hinxton-4, R DF-25

F999926
Hinxton-5
M107790
I0099


Cambridgshire, UK

Cambridgshire, UK
1.3kya

Cambridgshire, UK
1.3kya

Cambridgshire, UK
2kya

Cambridgshire, UK
1.3kya

Germany, Halberstedt LNBA


Run time


Run time
7.65

Run time
7.58

Run time
11.96

Run time
7.12

Run time
11.67


S-Indian
-

S-Indian
-

S-Indian
-

S-Indian
0.15

S-Indian
-

S-Indian
1.28


Baloch
12.04

Baloch
11.48

Baloch
12.09

Baloch
11.05

Baloch
9.93

Baloch
11.84


Caucasian
3.04

Caucasian
0.74

Caucasian
6.57

Caucasian
5.82

Caucasian
0.91

Caucasian
6.75


NE-Euro
50.86

NE-Euro
55.83

NE-Euro
49.73

NE-Euro
49.98

NE-Euro
54.31

NE-Euro
49.39


SE-Asian
-

SE-Asian
-

SE-Asian
0.67

SE-Asian
-

SE-Asian
0.47

SE-Asian
-


Siberian
-

Siberian
0.05

Siberian
-

Siberian
-

Siberian
0.14

Siberian
-


NE-Asian
-

NE-Asian
0.49

NE-Asian
-

NE-Asian
-

NE-Asian
-

NE-Asian
-


Papuan
-

Papuan
0.1

Papuan
-

Papuan
-

Papuan
-

Papuan
-


American
-

American
0.11

American
0.45

American
-

American
-

American
-


Beringian
-

Beringian
0.46

Beringian
-

Beringian
1.27

Beringian
-

Beringian
-


Mediterranean
31.57

Mediterranean
29.25

Mediterranean
29.09

Mediterranean
30.78

Mediterranean
32.11

Mediterranean
30.33


SW-Asian
1.23

SW-Asian
-

SW-Asian
-

SW-Asian
0.06

SW-Asian
1.16

SW-Asian
-


San
-

San
0.15

San
-

San
-

San
-

San
-


E-African
-

E-African
0.64

E-African
-

E-African
-

E-African
-

E-African
-


Pygmy
0.54

Pygmy
-

Pygmy
0.32

Pygmy
-

Pygmy
-

Pygmy
-


W-African
0.71

W-African
0.7

W-African
1.09

W-African
0.88

W-African
0.98

W-African
0.37

MarkoZ
20-02-17, 00:32
German researchers often stress the importance of the Schönfelder culture (the perpetrators of the horrific massacre on the Corded Ware people) in the development of the Urnfield system. They were in fact the first Central Europeans to cremate their dead and bury them in the eponymous urnfields. While the Urnfield culture in the proper sense emanated from Austria-Italy, it may well have had more ancient roots in North-Central Europe. Perhaps some of the affinity seen here can partly be explained this way, too.

The Schönfelders also had the characteristic face urns ('Gesichtsurnen') that would later spread into Denmark and beyond, presumably with the expansion of the Jastorf culture.

Twilight
20-02-17, 07:17
Interesting, it doesn't look line Basal entered the British Isles until Roman times. According to MDLP 11, All three genome samples; British-Iron Age, British Celts and Anglo-Saxons lacked the Basal Genome. However it appears that the Romans carried 54.4% Basal. Do you know where the Roman's got the Basal genome? Concidering what the spreadsheet is saying I'm surprised but astonished that my Basal admixture is 2.5%.

Anyways, yes most the genetic cards were shaken but I disagree that that would be all the cards; at least for some European Countries. Ancient Civilizations were still moving around; either by invasion, or perhaps trade. For example, the Celts in the British Isles went via 4 waves of invasion; the Romans, Anglo-Saxons, Vikings and Romans.




MDLP K11 2xOracle and OracleX4

Admix Results (sorted):



#
Population
Percent


1
WHG
36.40


2
Neolithic
32.93


3
EHG
25.73


4
Basal
2.56


5
Iran-Mesolithic
2.28



(735) End of data. popN=151

Finished reading population data. 161 populations found.
11 components mode.

--------------------------------

Least-squares method.

Using 1 population approximation:
1 Alberstedt_LN @ 3.313489
2 Bell_Beaker_Germany @ 3.771106
3 British_Celtic @ 3.844605
4 Halberstadt_LBA @ 5.427621
5 British_IronAge @ 6.497814
6 Bell_Beaker_Czech @ 7.082164
7 Nordic_MN_B @ 7.822927
8 Nordic_LN @ 8.433519
9 British_AngloSaxon @ 8.450976
10 BenzigerodeHeimburg_LN @ 8.571537
11 Unetice_EBA @ 9.658846
12 Nordic_BA @ 9.805140
13 Nordic_BattleAxe @ 11.004900
14 Nordic_IA @ 11.325181
15 Bell_Beaker @ 11.605810
16 Corded_Ware_Proto_Unetice_Poland @ 11.924611
17 Nordic_LBA @ 12.085502
18 Irish_BA @ 12.918762
19 Unetice_MBA @ 14.439532
20 Corded_Ware_Estonia @ 14.755296

Using 2 populations approximation:
1 50% Srubnaya_LBA +50% Vatya_MBA @ 2.750289


Using 3 populations approximation:
1 50% Corded_Ware_Germany +25% Halberstadt_LBA +25% Hungary_CA @ 1.275412


Using 4 populations approximation:
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1 Alberstedt_LN + Corded_Ware_Germany + Corded_Ware_Germany + Hungary_CA @ 1.240832
2 Corded_Ware_Germany + Corded_Ware_Germany + Halberstadt_LBA + Hungary_CA @ 1.275412
3 BenzigerodeHeimburg_LN + Corded_Ware_Germany + Hungary_CA + Poltavka_MBA_outlier @ 1.287134
4 Bell_Beaker_Germany + Corded_Ware_Germany + Corded_Ware_Germany + Hungary_CA @ 1.304865
5 Corded_Ware_Estonia + GermanStuttgart_LBK + Poltavka_MBA_outlier + Poltavka_MBA_outlier @ 1.405681
6 Corded_Ware_Estonia + GermanStuttgart_LBK + Poltavka_MBA_outlier + Poltavka_MBA_outlier @ 1.405681
7 British_AngloSaxon + Hungary_CA + Karsdorf_LN + Poltavka_MBA_outlier @ 1.414091
8 Bell_Beaker_Czech + Corded_Ware_Germany + Corded_Ware_Germany + Hungary_CA @ 1.414984
9 Corded_Ware_Germany + Halberstadt_LBA + Hungary_CA + Poltavka_MBA_outlier @ 1.471531
10 Nordic_BattleAxe + Hungary_CA + Poltavka_MBA_outlier + Poltavka_MBA_outlier @ 1.488618
11 Corded_Ware_Germany + Hungary_CA + Poltavka_MBA_outlier + Unetice_EBA @ 1.521471
12 Bell_Beaker_Czech + Corded_Ware_Germany + Hungary_CA + Poltavka_MBA_outlier @ 1.538290
13 Corded_Ware_Germany + GermanStuttgart_LBK + Poltavka_MBA_outlier + Unetice_EBA @ 1.544106
14 Corded_Ware_Germany + GermanStuttgart_LBK + Poltavka_MBA_outlier + Unetice_EBA @ 1.544106
15 Corded_Ware_Germany + Hungary_CA + Nordic_LN + Poltavka_MBA_outlier @ 1.589053
16 Nordic_BattleAxe + Corded_Ware_Germany + Hungary_CA + Poltavka_MBA_outlier @ 1.612934

Northener
20-02-17, 16:53
@Twilight () @Markoz( ) @LeBrok ()
thanks for your contributions!!!

Basically it would be nice, with our different backgrounds and knowledge, if we can combine major developments with regional phenomenons and genetic facts and figures with archeological findings. May be it's trivial but there is a shared Saxon-denominator-eighter Anglo (Hinxton), Lower (mine) or Anhalt (Haltstadt) ;)

I think there are in this period -the Bronze Age- certain major trends, which formed the genetic matryoshka, with pictures (derived from Fokkens, Bell Beakers 2012) of the archeological situation of my aDNA region.

1. as LeBrok stated the influence of the Corded Ware or single grave.
See this picture of the single grave, my aDNA is from the region in the most North Eastern part (light yellow, in the 'head formed part') of the Netherlands, clearly with single grave findings, so corded ware, and also with an AOOB development which is Beaker out of Corded Ware.
http://i67.tinypic.com/10wpa8i.jpg

2. then we see the occurrence of the Bell Beakers, this looks very hybrid or eclectic, partly from a maritime expansion originated in Iberia, the Maritime Beakers (so higher Med compared to NE Europe?), partly formed out of the single grave, but very connected with the German Bell Beakers at least for my region:
http://i65.tinypic.com/2n9ck9i.jpg


and (3) may be partly from development from more central European, south eastern of my aDNA area. This last development is Unetice/Tumulus/Urnfield. In the past they qualified this as some kind of Celtic development. This is a very interesting one Markoz the Schönfelder culture was unfamiliar for me Markoz. But I guess this could also have lead to the Sögel Wohlde Kreis (https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sögel-Wohlde-Kreis). The Sögel Wohlde Kreis was 'responsible' for another finding, a grave of a chieftain, in my aDNA region (even exactly at my mothers place of birth).

Prof Harry Fokkens (1998):
''The northern Netherlands is part of the northern group (NW Germany and Denmark) especially of the Sögeler Kreis characterized by a number of distinctive men's graves. The Drouwen grave is the best known Dutch example. It's remarkable that the Elp culture has never been presented as the immigration of a new group of people. Because clearly this period was a time when a number of new elements made their entry while others disappeared. The disappearance of beakers, the appearance of the Sögel men's graves with the first 'swords', among other things, the fully extended burial posture, under barrows; all the factors have been reason enough in the past to conclude that the Elp culture (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elp_culture) an immigration of Sögel warriors."

And last nut not least recent theories about the Germanic ethnogenises place the development of the Germanic language in exactly the region of Halbertstadt-Alberstedt! (Wolfram Euler, Sprache und Herkunft der Germanen (Hamburg/London 2009). Sometimes because of a supposed hybrid Germanic/Celtic sticker, they called the Elp culture also the Northwest Block (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nordwestblock)....

And I guess (@Twilight) this close connection could be due to first of all the influence of the Rhenish Bell Beakers (Beakerfolk). And second, of course, the Saxon invasion in the aftermath of the Romans.

I know it's fragmented,not overall comprehensive yet, and all through the eyelashes, but may be you can complete (or correct) it?

Twilight
20-02-17, 21:06
@Twilight () @Markoz( ) @LeBrok ()
thanks for your contributions!!!

Basically it would be nice, with our different backgrounds and knowledge, if we can combine major developments with regional phenomenons and genetic facts and figures with archeological findings. May be it's trivial but there is a shared Saxon-denominator-eighter Anglo (Hinxton), Lower (mine) or Anhalt (Haltstadt) ;)

I think there are in this period -the Bronze Age- certain major trends, which formed the genetic matryoshka, with pictures (derived from Fokkens, Bell Beakers 2012) of the archeological situation of my aDNA region.

1. as LeBrok stated the influence of the Corded Ware or single grave.
See this picture of the single grave, my aDNA is from the region in the most North Eastern part (light yellow, in the 'head formed part') of the Netherlands, clearly with single grave findings, so corded ware, and also with an AOOB development which is Beaker out of Corded Ware.
http://i67.tinypic.com/10wpa8i.jpg

2. then we see the occurrence of the Bell Beakers, this looks very hybrid or eclectic, partly from a maritime expansion originated in Iberia, the Maritime Beakers (so higher Med compared to NE Europe?), partly formed out of the single grave, but very connected with the German Bell Beakers at least for my region:
http://i65.tinypic.com/2n9ck9i.jpg


and (3) may be partly from development from more central European, south eastern of my aDNA area. This last development is Unetice/Tumulus/Urnfield. In the past they qualified this as some kind of Celtic development. This is a very interesting one Markoz the Schönfelder culture was unfamiliar for me Markoz. But I guess this could also have lead to the Sögel Wohlde Kreis (https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sögel-Wohlde-Kreis). The Sögel Wohlde Kreis was 'responsible' for another finding, a grave of a chieftain, in my aDNA region (even exactly at my mothers place of birth).

Prof Harry Fokkens (1998):
''The northern Netherlands is part of the northern group (NW Germany and Denmark) especially of the Sögeler Kreis characterized by a number of distinctive men's graves. The Drouwen grave is the best known Dutch example. It's remarkable that the Elp culture has never been presented as the immigration of a new group of people. Because clearly this period was a time when a number of new elements made their entry while others disappeared. The disappearance of beakers, the appearance of the Sögel men's graves with the first 'swords', among other things, the fully extended burial posture, under barrows; all the factors have been reason enough in the past to conclude that the Elp culture (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elp_culture) an immigration of Sögel warriors."

And last nut not least recent theories about the Germanic ethnogenises place the development of the Germanic language in exactly the region of Halbertstadt-Alberstedt! (Wolfram Euler, Sprache und Herkunft der Germanen (Hamburg/London 2009). Sometimes because of a supposed hybrid Germanic/Celtic sticker, they called the Elp culture also the Northwest Block (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nordwestblock)....

And I guess (@Twilight) this close connection could be due to first of all the influence of the Rhenish Bell Beakers (Beakerfolk). And second, of course, the Saxon invasion in the aftermath of the Romans.

I know it's fragmented,not overall comprehensive yet, and all through the eyelashes, but may be you can complete (or correct) it?

Sure thing I'd love too, ruling out some haplogroups and posting some samples so we can use the "Order of elimination" since these genomes seem to date to Mesolithic times at least.


Here is the history of the British Isles and my hypothesis' please feel free to edit if something is not right or out of place :) .


Mesolithic: I2a1, I2a2a (WHG/Tardinoisian Culture?)
Neolithic: I2, (G2a/Neolithic Newcomers?)
Copper Age: I2, G2a, (T/Iranian Mesolithic or assimilated Southern Yamna; Caucasian Neolithic?), (R1b/ EHG/Southern Yamna?), (E-V13/African?)
Roman British Isles: I2, G2a, (T; Thomas Jefferson was Ydna T), R1b, E-V13, (J2b/Basal?)


J2b is the only new Ydna was arrived in England during Roman times.
http://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplogroup_J2_Y-DNA.shtml#Roman


http://www.eupedia.com/genetics/britain_ireland_dna.shtml
http://www.eupedia.com/europe/neolithic_europe_map.shtml

LeBrok
20-02-17, 21:54
I played with my genetic Models a bit again. :)
I managed to recreate the BA "German" and IA Saxon, which are very alike, and very close to modern Dutch. I used 55% of German Corded Ware, 40% Swedish Farmer (which represents a type of Norther Farmer adaptation) and 5% SHG. I tried many different farmers and hunter gatherers, and cultures but the models were not as good as this one. Keep in mind that German CW is already a composition of 50% Yamnaya, 40% WHG and 10%EEF.

First 3 guys are the Source with proportion of participation. First one is German CW, second is Swedish Farmer and third Scandinavian Hunter Gatherer. Forth guys is the model, which is composed of first 3. Fifth and Sixth are the 2 guys we are trying to understand their ancestry composition.





Source
0.55

Source
0.4

Source
0.05

Model


Target


Target



M224345
I0103

F999934
Gökhem2

F999917
I-L416

BA/IA NW Germanics
M107790
I0099

F999925
Hinxton-4, R DF-25


Germany Espersted, BA
4.5 kya

Sweden
5kya

Motala 12 Östergötland, Sweden
7 kya

Composition

Germany, Halberstedt BA
3.1kya

Cambridgshire, UK
2kya


Run time
12.04

Run time
7.82

Run time
8.67

Run time


Run time
11.67

Run time
11.96


S-Indian
0

S-Indian
0

S-Indian
0

S-Indian
-

S-Indian
1.28

S-Indian
0.15


Baloch
20.73

Baloch
0

Baloch
0

Baloch
11.40

Baloch
11.84

Baloch
11.05


Caucasian
5.6

Caucasian
6.67

Caucasian
0

Caucasian
5.75

Caucasian
6.75

Caucasian
5.82


NE-Euro
56.52

NE-Euro
30.03

NE-Euro
90.24

NE-Euro
47.61

NE-Euro
49.39

NE-Euro
49.98


SE-Asian
0

SE-Asian
0

SE-Asian
0

SE-Asian
-

SE-Asian
-

SE-Asian
-


Siberian
0

Siberian
0

Siberian
0.07

Siberian
0.00

Siberian
-

Siberian
-


NE-Asian
0

NE-Asian
0.6

NE-Asian
0

NE-Asian
0.24

NE-Asian
-

NE-Asian
-


Papuan
0

Papuan
0.21

Papuan
0.57

Papuan
0.11

Papuan
-

Papuan
-


American
1.92

American
0

American
1.58

American
1.14

American
-

American
-


Beringian
0.26

Beringian
0

Beringian
0.68

Beringian
0.18

Beringian
-

Beringian
1.27


Mediterranean
14.53

Mediterranean
55.04

Mediterranean
6.83

Mediterranean
30.35

Mediterranean
30.33

Mediterranean
30.78


SW-Asian
0

SW-Asian
4.94

SW-Asian
0

SW-Asian
1.98

SW-Asian
-

SW-Asian
0.06


San
0

San
0

San
0

San
-

San
-

San
-


E-African
0

E-African
0

E-African
0

E-African
-

E-African
-

E-African
-


Pygmy
0

Pygmy
0

Pygmy
0

Pygmy
-

Pygmy
-

Pygmy
-


W-African
0.44

W-African
2.51

W-African
0

W-African
1.25

W-African
0.37

W-African
0.88

Northener
20-02-17, 22:06
I played with my genetic Models a bit again. :)
I managed to recreate the BA "German" and IA Saxon, which are very alike, and very close to modern Dutch. I used 55% of German Corded Ware, 40% Swedish Farmer (which represents a type of Norther Farmer adaptation) and 5% SHG. I tried many different farmers and hunter gatherers, and cultures but the models were not as good as this one. Keep in mind that German CW is already a composition of 50% Yamnaya, 40% WHG and 10%EEF.

First 3 guys are the Source with proportion of participation. First one is German CW, second is Swedish Farmer and third Scandinavian Hunter Gatherer. Forth guys is the model, which is composed of first 3. Fifth and Sixth are the 2 guys we are trying to understand their ancestry composition.





Source
0.55

Source
0.4

Source
0.05

Model


Target


Target



M224345
I0103

F999934
Gökhem2

F999917
I-L416

BA/IA NW Germanics
M107790
I0099

F999925
Hinxton-4, R DF-25


Germany Espersted, BA
4.5 kya

Sweden
5kya

Motala 12 Östergötland, Sweden
7 kya

Composition

Germany, Halberstedt BA
3.1kya

Cambridgshire, UK
2kya


Run time
12.04

Run time
7.82

Run time
8.67

Run time


Run time
11.67

Run time
11.96


S-Indian
0

S-Indian
0

S-Indian
0

S-Indian
-

S-Indian
1.28

S-Indian
0.15


Baloch
20.73

Baloch
0

Baloch
0

Baloch
11.40

Baloch
11.84

Baloch
11.05


Caucasian
5.6

Caucasian
6.67

Caucasian
0

Caucasian
5.75

Caucasian
6.75

Caucasian
5.82


NE-Euro
56.52

NE-Euro
30.03

NE-Euro
90.24

NE-Euro
47.61

NE-Euro
49.39

NE-Euro
49.98


SE-Asian
0

SE-Asian
0

SE-Asian
0

SE-Asian
-

SE-Asian
-

SE-Asian
-


Siberian
0

Siberian
0

Siberian
0.07

Siberian
0.00

Siberian
-

Siberian
-


NE-Asian
0

NE-Asian
0.6

NE-Asian
0

NE-Asian
0.24

NE-Asian
-

NE-Asian
-


Papuan
0

Papuan
0.21

Papuan
0.57

Papuan
0.11

Papuan
-

Papuan
-


American
1.92

American
0

American
1.58

American
1.14

American
-

American
-


Beringian
0.26

Beringian
0

Beringian
0.68

Beringian
0.18

Beringian
-

Beringian
1.27


Mediterranean
14.53

Mediterranean
55.04

Mediterranean
6.83

Mediterranean
30.35

Mediterranean
30.33

Mediterranean
30.78


SW-Asian
0

SW-Asian
4.94

SW-Asian
0

SW-Asian
1.98

SW-Asian
-

SW-Asian
0.06


San
0

San
0

San
0

San
-

San
-

San
-


E-African
0

E-African
0

E-African
0

E-African
-

E-African
-

E-African
-


Pygmy
0

Pygmy
0

Pygmy
0

Pygmy
-

Pygmy
-

Pygmy
-


W-African
0.44

W-African
2.51

W-African
0

W-African
1.25

W-African
0.37

W-African
0.88























Thanks! Keep in mind that my aDNA is more typically North Dutch in stead of South Dutch, and even for North Dutch my results are sometimes more Nordic in the admixtures

Regarding the facts and figures and Halberstadt this is a relevant comment from Simon W on Eurogenes:

" Simon_W said...
@ Colin Welling


According to Haak et al. the Scottish top the list of Yamnaya ancestry on the British Isles with 48.6% according to Figure S9.25. Unfortunately this figure doesn't include Germans and Austrians. It does include Czechs, though, who have slightly more than that, with 48.8%. Now you might rightly object that Czechs, although geographically in central Europe, have eastern European Slavic admixture.


German Corded Ware is modeled as 79.1% Yamnaya, and German Bell Beaker as 50.5% Yamnaya in chapter S9. So you can see a dilution of Yamnaya ancestry from Corded Ware to Bell Beaker. And if the Scottish were nearly pure Bell Beakers from Germany, they might just fit. However, Unetice from the early Bronze Age in central Europe is modeled as 57.1% Yamnaya, and judging from Figure 3 Halberstadt_LBA from late Bronze Age Germany has even more Yamnaya ancestry than Unetice. So whatever Yamnaya ancestry modern Germans may have, Bronze Age central Europeans had more than enough to explain the Yamnaya ancestry in northwestern Europeans.


Indeed, Corded Ware itself didn't expand to northwestern Europe. But neither did Yamnaya! It was post-Corded Ware central Europeans who expanded to northwestern Europe. Obviously they already started doing so in the Bell Beaker period.


And that there were recent founder effects and y-DNA bottlenecks in most European populations is no longer a theory, and neither is the recent rapid bifurcation of R1a and R1b:
http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2015/05/more-y-chromosome-super-fathers.html


Of course there was a massive migration that caused a dramatic autosomal change, but this doesn't preclude that the yDNAs go back to just a couple of successful patriarchs.


Indeed there was Yamnaya in Hungary, possibly with R1b. So it's not impossible that Bell Beaker R1b is from these, though it might just as well be from Corded people. In any case Hungary wasn't overflowing with R1b, that much can be said right now... And as Allentoft et al. have just repeated: The highest level of Yamnaya affinity is found in Corded people, the lowest in Bronze Age Hungary, while German Bell Beakers were intermediate.

Ultimately both Northwest European R1b and Corded Ware R1b were from Yamnaya."

LeBrok
20-02-17, 23:40
Thanks! Keep in mind that my aDNA is more typically North Dutch in stead of South Dutch, and even for North Dutch my results are sometimes more Nordic in the admixtures

Regarding the facts and figures and Halberstadt this is a relevant comment from Simon W on Eurogenes:

" Simon_W said...
@ Colin Welling


According to Haak et al. the Scottish top the list of Yamnaya ancestry on the British Isles with 48.6% according to Figure S9.25. Unfortunately this figure doesn't include Germans and Austrians. It does include Czechs, though, who have slightly more than that, with 48.8%. Now you might rightly object that Czechs, although geographically in central Europe, have eastern European Slavic admixture.


German Corded Ware is modeled as 79.1% Yamnaya, and German Bell Beaker as 50.5% Yamnaya in chapter S9. So you can see a dilution of Yamnaya ancestry from Corded Ware to Bell Beaker. And if the Scottish were nearly pure Bell Beakers from Germany, they might just fit. However, Unetice from the early Bronze Age in central Europe is modeled as 57.1% Yamnaya, and judging from Figure 3 Halberstadt_LBA from late Bronze Age Germany has even more Yamnaya ancestry than Unetice. So whatever Yamnaya ancestry modern Germans may have, Bronze Age central Europeans had more than enough to explain the Yamnaya ancestry in northwestern Europeans.I'm not too serious about validity of my Models, but it is certainly fun trying to figure possible combinations, that's why I'm doing it. I might be way off sometimes, sometimes probably right on. Few interesting things I learned doing them. One is that there is no way of recreating CW with very high Baloch without using 50% or more Yamnaya. Or recreating LBA/IA "German" without 50% of EEF, because of very high Mediterranean admixture. So there are things that can't be changed and are obvious, but one the other hand exact tuning might be way off.

There is always a question about the Samara Outlier guy. He is quite different than the rest of known Yamnayans. I wonder if he is more like new discovered Ukrainian HG, or he was perhaps from NW Yamnaya population. Well, technically he belongs to Yamnaya Culture, but he is very, very distinct genetically. I can use him to reconstruct Estonia CW and couple of CW Swedes, and receive 90% of Yamnaya admixture in them. When I use typical Yamnaya sample the Baloch and Caucasian shoots way too high and Med drops too low. The problem might be that Yamnaya in Estonia is probably not the same as Yamnaya in Germany, though both sources come from Yamnaya culture. This might be confusing, that's why I avoid calling Samara Outlier, Yamnaya. We might need to rename few things when we have genomes from all the Yamnaya.




And that there were recent founder effects and y-DNA bottlenecks in most European populations is no longer a theory, and neither is the recent rapid bifurcation of R1a and R1b:
http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2015/05/more-y-chromosome-super-fathers.htmlOf course there was a massive migration that caused a dramatic autosomal change, but this doesn't preclude that the yDNAs go back to just a couple of successful patriarchs.


Indeed there was Yamnaya in Hungary, possibly with R1b. So it's not impossible that Bell Beaker R1b is from these, though it might just as well be from Corded people. In any case Hungary wasn't overflowing with R1b, that much can be said right now... And as Allentoft et al. have just repeated: The highest level of Yamnaya affinity is found in Corded people, the lowest in Bronze Age Hungary, while German Bell Beakers were intermediate.

Ultimately both Northwest European R1b and Corded Ware R1b were from Yamnaya.I agree. Bronze Age in Northern Europe looks like a very crazy period. Whole populations were dying off, and new ones explode from small pockets. Never mind huge invasions to start with.

Northener
21-02-17, 10:01
I'm not too serious about validity of my Models, but it is certainly fun trying to figure possible combinations, that's why I'm doing it. I might be way off sometimes, sometimes probably right on. Few interesting things I learned doing them. One is that there is no way of recreating CW with very high Baloch without using 50% or more Yamnaya. Or recreating LBA/IA "German" without 50% of EEF, because of very high Mediterranean admixture. So there are things that can't be changed and are obvious, but one the other hand exact tuning might be way off.

There is always a question about the Samara Outlier guy. He is quite different than the rest of known Yamnayans. I wonder if he is more like new discovered Ukrainian HG, or he was perhaps from NW Yamnaya population. Well, technically he belongs to Yamnaya Culture, but he is very, very distinct genetically. I can use him to reconstruct Estonia CW and couple of CW Swedes, and receive 90% of Yamnaya admixture in them. When I use typical Yamnaya sample the Baloch and Caucasian shoots way too high and Med drops too low. The problem might be that Yamnaya in Estonia is probably not the same as Yamnaya in Germany, though both sources come from Yamnaya culture. This might be confusing, that's why I avoid calling Samara Outlier, Yamnaya. We might need to rename few things when we have genomes from all the Yamnaya.



I agree. Bronze Age in Northern Europe looks like a very crazy period. Whole populations were dying off, and new ones explode from small pockets. Never mind huge invasions to start with.

On second thought. Don't underestimate your ability with facts and figures LeBrok! And of course I know they are tentative. But it gives another perspective. And in interaction with archeological findings you can make an reconstruction. Until new facts and findings can 'overrule' them. There are always new "Samara Outlier guys or girls...."

Two remarks:
1. Looking at my own facts an figures I see that my NE component is higher than in the "Hinxton-Halberstadt" axis! (Although not Hinxton 2 and 5.....).

# Population Percent
1 NE-Euro 55.26 (close to your Polish result!)
2 Mediterranean 28.6
3 Baloch 8.79
4 Caucasian 6.09
5 Papuan 0.77
6 S-Indian 0.49
Due to?
- was my aDNA region North-Dutch a pocket zone of HG (Ertebølle-like)?
- the effect of the Funnelbeaker? Look at this picture again, again Fokkens (2012), the green dots are the Funnel beaker, you don't have to question if the Funnel Beaker had it's impacts lot's of green dots in my region:
http://i66.tinypic.com/wwc95w.png
Which component in your model could cause a higher Harappa NE Europe?

2. Am I right that Single Grave/Corded Ware is more Northeastern Europe and Unetice/Tumulus/Urnfield is more Southeastern Europe. Both can be partly rooted in Yamnaya. But the routes and the (genetical) packages can be partly different. The Unetice/Tumulus/Urnfield has some kind of "pre-celtic" image.

LeBrok
21-02-17, 20:13
My models are pointing to the fact that West and Central Corded Ware were made mostly of East Yamnaya source, with some additional WHG and EEF. Northern Corded however were mostly made of Yamnaya Outlier (most likely something like Ukrainian HG of West Yamnaya) with a little bit of EEF added. The third group, Baden/Hungarian Bronze Age was made of some mix of half and half of EEF and WHG, possibly a mix that happened in North Cucuteni, and possible enriched by 10% of Anatolia BA. This is my general view of Bronze Age of north Europe.

Two days ago, I did a progress in deciphering LBA/IA Germanics/Saxons. Good results came from mixing German CW with Nordic Farmer and some extra of SHG. The results are very close to modern Dutch, denoting no major changes in this area since IA.

Yesterday I was trying to understand why modern Poles are different than CW or Unetice. Especially ratio of Baloch to Caucasian is flipped and Med is a 3rd lower. I picked the best sample of Unetice (considered the main ancestor) and started to mix it with other guys/girls from same area and timeframe. I started getting good results when added BR2 to the mix, the guy from Baden/Hungarian Bronze Age. What surprised me the most was that I got the best results when I eliminated Unetice completely and added more EHG to the Bronze guy. Here it is:



Unetice
0

Baden
0.7

EHG
0.3








F999948
Rise150, Poland, slask 1750 BC
F999933
BR2, J-M67
M218547
I0124

Model of modern Polish



Poland, slask 3.75 kya
3.5kya

Hungary, Ludas-Varjú-dűlő,
3.3kya

Samara HG
7.6 kya

Composition

Mine



Run time
8.44

Run time
15.13

Run time
5.57

Run time


Run time
20.5


S-Indian
0

S-Indian
0

S-Indian
0

S-Indian
0

S-Indian
0.62


Baloch
14.65

Baloch
3.15

Baloch
14.33

Baloch
6.504

Baloch
7.47


Caucasian
2.73

Caucasian
14.73

Caucasian
0

Caucasian
10.311

Caucasian
10.05


NE-Euro
53.54

NE-Euro
46.18

NE-Euro
75.62

NE-Euro
55.012

NE-Euro
57.28


SE-Asian
0

SE-Asian
0.2

SE-Asian
0

SE-Asian
0.14

SE-Asian
0.54


Siberian
0

Siberian
0

Siberian
0

Siberian
0

Siberian
1.22


NE-Asian
0

NE-Asian
0

NE-Asian
0

NE-Asian
0

NE-Asian
0.35


Papuan
0.48

Papuan
0.18

Papuan
0

Papuan
0.126

Papuan
-


American
0.22

American
0

American
9.62

American
2.886

American
-


Beringian
0.49

Beringian
0

Beringian
0.15

Beringian
0.045

Beringian
0.07


Mediterranean
27.12

Mediterranean
31.73

Mediterranean
0

Mediterranean
22.211

Mediterranean
21.53


SW-Asian
0

SW-Asian
3.33

SW-Asian
0

SW-Asian
2.331

SW-Asian
0.86


San
0

San
0

San
0

San
0

San
-


E-African
0.34

E-African
0

E-African
0

E-African
0

E-African
-


Pygmy
0

Pygmy
0

Pygmy
0

Pygmy
0

Pygmy
-


W-African
0.42

W-African
0.48

W-African
0.2

W-African
0.396

W-African
-



It was shocking, I didn't expect this at all. Then I remembered this map I've seen some time ago about BR2 connection to modern Poland.


http://www.pnas.org/content/113/2/368/F3.large.jpg


Samara HG in my model is the EHG, not the Outlier. It is the best proxy so far, and I think the true source should be EHG from North who instead of American admixture had Syberian (the Finnish type?)

This Hungarian Bronze was very influential all over the Europe even in Anatolia. Was it connected to Celts, Italics, Dacians, Slavs? On other hand Eastern Yamnaya/Unetice was more of Germanic/Insular Celtic story? Also the East Yamnaya/Germany doesn't have any presence in Asia at all these days. On other hand BR2/West Yamnaya penetrates into the Asia. (IE?)

The final changes of Germanic/Yours genome and admixtures should have something to do with this Hungarian Bronze age spread. I speculate that this happened after BA collapse in Iron Age, with final stage much later with East Germanic and Slavic expansions.

Northener
21-02-17, 22:43
This Hungarian Bronze was very influential all over the Europe even in Anatolia. Was it connected to Celts, Italics, Dacians, Slavs? On other hand Eastern Yamnaya/Unetice was more of Germanic/Insular Celtic story? Also the East Yamnaya/Germany doesn't have any presence in Asia at all these days. On other hand BR2/West Yamnaya penetrates into the Asia. (IE?)

The final changes of Germanic/Yours genome and admixtures should have something to do with this Hungarian Bronze age spread. I speculate that this happened after BA collapse in Iron Age, with final stage much later with East Germanic and Slavic expansions.

Bull's eye! But the timing must be earlier. What in Polen is the case is indeed a big puzzle..... But for the Elp culture c.q. Sögeler Kreis (my aDNA region) the 'Hungarian influence' is very very clear!

See above the quote from prof. Fokkens about the Sôgel warrior/chieftain grave. This Sögel warrior is connected with the Tumulus culture.
And guess what on the German (https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sögel-Wohlde-Kreis) and Dutch (https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sögel-Wohldegroep) wikipedia it's stated that the type of swords of the Sögel warrior is rooted, or even produced, in eastern Hungary!

What about an old posting on Eupedia from 20-09-11, 21:36 #1
Asturrulumbo
"It has been proposed that R1b-U106 was diffused during the Iron Age Hallstatt Culture. I think it may have been earlier, in the Bronze Age, more specifically with the expansion of the Tumulus Culture.
Here's what the Celtic Encyclopedia has to say about the Tumulus Culture:
The Tumulus Culture was recognized for its use of the single grave with a covering mound. The warriors of the Tumulus Culture were highland horse-riding cattle-herders and lived in fortified villages. Like their predecessors the Unetice, the Tumulus Culture was well-situated to receive stimuli from other regions via the established overland trade routes.
Between BC 1800 to BC 1200, Unetice-Tumulus, highland warriors began to appear in the west of Europe. They were well-armed and they spread the use of the tumulus from Bohemia to the Rhine north of the Main, then into Switzerland, Belgium, Britain and Ireland. The tumulus was in vogue for most of Europe during the Middle Bronze Age.
The tumuli of the Tumulus Culture were very similar to those of the Goidel, Unetice, Wessex and Aremorican in form but in content and number they were quite different. Grave evidence has shown that the four groups were different cultures practising a similar Burial style.
The Bavarian group was recognized for its long swords with solid hilts. Excavation of the tumuli of Hungary exposed battle axes, while the Danube groups were noted for sickle-shaped dress pins and baked clay altars with decorations of horn, boats and triangles. the tumuli of eastern France revealed bodies lying in their back in an east-west direction with the head toward the rising sun. Grave goods included pottery with designs reminiscent of the older wooden cups. Boars were an important part of the grave goods in France. In the north, objects of sun worship have been found.
The early tumulus graves contained inhumed bodies but later graves contained cremated bodies as the transition to the Urnfield Culture began. The gods were shown as symbols rather than abstracted images. The sun god was represented by the sun wheel or the left-facing swastika of the Kurgan culture, which was used by the Celts and others from India to Ireland. The fire goddess was represented by the triangle or the right-facing swastika.
The people of the Tumulus Culture developed a profitable bronze industry in weapons, jewelry and tools. During BC 15th-12th centuries, Tumulus-Urnfield warriors raided east through Thrace and Illyria, crossed the Strait of Bosporus to Anatolia, then wreaked havoc in Syria, Palestine, and Egypt.
The Egyptians referred to this group as the Sea Peoples and many of them worked as mercenaries for the Phoenicians who were developing their commercial trade route throughout the Mediterranean and into the Atlantic. They were described as ferocious warriors who wore their hair in a very stiff style.
Alright, so, ¿why have the Tumulus culture as a canditate for the northern spread of U106? There are many reasons. First of all, there are archaeological reasons: R1b1a, a haplogroup sometimes assumed to have gotten to W. Europe more from the southwest than the northwest, probably thus entered Northern Europe from the south. The northern expansion of the Tumulus culture could be seen as just that (it could have had a Founder Effect in those areas), as the earlier Unetice Culture was more localized around Bohemia. The Urnfield and Hallstatt cultures also saw expansions to the north, but what I believe is a telling point against these cultures is that if theirs was the expansion."

Close to the fire?

Northener
21-02-17, 22:52
M

The final changes of Germanic/Yours genome and admixtures should have something to do with this Hungarian Bronze age spread. I speculate that this happened after BA collapse in Iron Age, with final stage much later with East Germanic and Slavic expansions.

One add in the making of the swords this is on the Dutch wiki about the Sögel Kreis even connected with the Poltavka cuture (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poltavka_culture)so how close do we get to the Yamnaya heirs ;)

Angela
21-02-17, 23:01
My models are pointing to the fact that West and Central Corded Ware were made mostly of East Yamnaya source, with some additional WHG and EEF. Northern Corded however were mostly made of Yamnaya Outlier (most likely something like Ukrainian HG of West Yamnaya) with a little bit of EEF added. The third group, Baden/Hungarian Bronze Age was made of some mix of half and half of EEF and WHG, possibly a mix that happened in North Cucuteni, and possible enriched by 10% of Anatolia BA. This is my general view of Bronze Age of north Europe.

Two days ago, I did a progress in deciphering LBA/IA Germanics/Saxons. Good results came from mixing German CW with Nordic Farmer and some extra of SHG. The results are very close to modern Dutch, denoting no major changes in this area since IA.

Yesterday I was trying to understand why modern Poles are different than CW or Unetice. Especially ratio of Baloch to Caucasian is flipped and Med is a 3rd lower. I picked the best sample of Unetice (considered the main ancestor) and started to mix it with other guys/girls from same area and timeframe. I started getting good results when added BR2 to the mix, the guy from Baden/Hungarian Bronze Age. What surprised me the most was that I got the best results when I eliminated Unetice completely and added more EHG to the Bronze guy. Here it is:



Unetice
0

Baden
0.7

EHG
0.3








F999948
Rise150, Poland, slask 1750 BC
F999933
BR2, J-M67
M218547
I0124

Model of modern Polish



Poland, slask 3.75 kya
3.5kya

Hungary, Ludas-Varjú-dűlő,
3.3kya

Samara HG
7.6 kya

Composition

Mine



Run time
8.44

Run time
15.13

Run time
5.57

Run time


Run time
20.5


S-Indian
0

S-Indian
0

S-Indian
0

S-Indian
0

S-Indian
0.62


Baloch
14.65

Baloch
3.15

Baloch
14.33

Baloch
6.504

Baloch
7.47


Caucasian
2.73

Caucasian
14.73

Caucasian
0

Caucasian
10.311

Caucasian
10.05


NE-Euro
53.54

NE-Euro
46.18

NE-Euro
75.62

NE-Euro
55.012

NE-Euro
57.28


SE-Asian
0

SE-Asian
0.2

SE-Asian
0

SE-Asian
0.14

SE-Asian
0.54


Siberian
0

Siberian
0

Siberian
0

Siberian
0

Siberian
1.22


NE-Asian
0

NE-Asian
0

NE-Asian
0

NE-Asian
0

NE-Asian
0.35


Papuan
0.48

Papuan
0.18

Papuan
0

Papuan
0.126

Papuan
-


American
0.22

American
0

American
9.62

American
2.886

American
-


Beringian
0.49

Beringian
0

Beringian
0.15

Beringian
0.045

Beringian
0.07


Mediterranean
27.12

Mediterranean
31.73

Mediterranean
0

Mediterranean
22.211

Mediterranean
21.53


SW-Asian
0

SW-Asian
3.33

SW-Asian
0

SW-Asian
2.331

SW-Asian
0.86


San
0

San
0

San
0

San
0

San
-


E-African
0.34

E-African
0

E-African
0

E-African
0

E-African
-


Pygmy
0

Pygmy
0

Pygmy
0

Pygmy
0

Pygmy
-


W-African
0.42

W-African
0.48

W-African
0.2

W-African
0.396

W-African
-



It was shocking, I didn't expect this at all. Then I remembered this map I've seen some time ago about BR2 connection to modern Poland.


http://www.pnas.org/content/113/2/368/F3.large.jpg


Samara HG in my model is the EHG, not the Outlier. It is the best proxy so far, and I think the true source should be EHG from North who instead of American admixture had Syberian (the Finnish type?)

This Hungarian Bronze was very influential all over the Europe even in Anatolia. Was it connected to Celts, Italics, Dacians, Slavs? On other hand Eastern Yamnaya/Unetice was more of Germanic/Insular Celtic story? Also the East Yamnaya/Germany doesn't have any presence in Asia at all these days. On other hand BR2/West Yamnaya penetrates into the Asia. (IE?)

The final changes of Germanic/Yours genome and admixtures should have something to do with this Hungarian Bronze age spread. I speculate that this happened after BA collapse in Iron Age, with final stage much later with East Germanic and Slavic expansions.

That's very interesting LeBrok, but if your second scenario were correct, and the modern Polish genome is Bronze Age Hungarian plus EHG, then wouldn't that imply that modern Polish genomes don't really descend from Yamnaya in the sense that they don't descend from that admixed population in the eastern steppe identified by people like David Anthony as being the epicenter of the "Indo-Europeans"? Or maybe I'm not understanding you correctly.

Of course, I was thinking of this in connection to Italian genetics, and it's been assumed, I think, that the Italics, for example, were tied to Unetice, yes? Yet it's true that most Italians, I think, from what I've seen here of personal results, and from the graphics above, were heavily influenced by Bronze Age Hungarian, much more so than any other Bronze Age populations.

I've been intrigued since I saw that graphic because this Bronze Age Hungarian admixture is particularly strong in my own area of eastern Liguria, far northwestern Toscana. If an additional surge came with Goths, Lombards, and given all the Lombard castles in our area, that might make sense.

The Insular Celt might have arrived with the first millennium BC Gallic migrations, which can be seen in the Rathlin diagram.

LeBrok
22-02-17, 05:36
That's very interesting LeBrok, but if your second scenario were correct, and the modern Polish genome is Bronze Age Hungarian plus EHG, then wouldn't that imply that modern Polish genomes don't really descend from Yamnaya in the sense that they don't descend from that admixed population in the eastern steppe identified by people like David Anthony as being the epicenter of the "Indo-Europeans"? Or maybe I'm not understanding you correctly. It's correct. I'm still surprised that the numbers took me there. There is also a chance that with time, due to DNA mutations and new alleles, one admixture transformed into other. Perhaps Baloch turned into Caucasian? Otherwise what could have happened to all the Baloch of Yamnaya, high as 33%. It is at 5% in today's Russia, Poland and Ukraine. Same story with 10% of American admixture in Yamnaya and Samara. It doesn't even show at 1% in said area.


Of course, I was thinking of this in connection to Italian genetics, and it's been assumed, I think, that the Italics, for example, were tied to Unetice, yes? Yet it's true that most Italians, I think, from what I've seen here of personal results, and from the graphics above, were heavily influenced by Bronze Age Hungarian, much more so than any other Bronze Age populations.

I've been intrigued since I saw that graphic because this Bronze Age Hungarian admixture is particularly strong in my own area of eastern Liguria, far northwestern Toscana. If an additional surge came with Goths, Lombards, and given all the Lombard castles in our area, that might make sense.

The Insular Celt might have arrived with the first millennium BC Gallic migrations, which can be seen in the Rathlin diagram.
We could compose moder NW Italians like this:




0.3


0.5


0.2








Remedello Average

F999933
BR2, J-M67
M536324
I1658

Italian Model

Modern NW Italian





Hungary, Ludas-Varjú-dűlő,
3.3kya

Armenia EBA

Composition





Run time


Run time
15.13

Run time
8.22

Run time


Run time



S-Indian
-

S-Indian
-

S-Indian
0.27

S-Indian
0.05

S-Indian
-


Baloch
-

Baloch
3.15

Baloch
25.53

Baloch
6.68

Baloch
6.00


Caucasian
11.03

Caucasian
14.73

Caucasian
56.75

Caucasian
22.02

Caucasian
20.00


NE-Euro
21.25

NE-Euro
46.18

NE-Euro
4.79

NE-Euro
30.42

NE-Euro
33.00


SE-Asian
0.61

SE-Asian
0.20

SE-Asian
-

SE-Asian
0.28

SE-Asian
0.61


Siberian
-

Siberian
-

Siberian
-

Siberian
-

Siberian
-


NE-Asian
-

NE-Asian
-

NE-Asian
-

NE-Asian
-

NE-Asian
-


Papuan
-

Papuan
0.18

Papuan
-

Papuan
0.09

Papuan
-


American
-

American
-

American
-

American
-

American
-


Beringian
-

Beringian
-

Beringian
-

Beringian
-

Beringian
-


Mediterranean
60.61

Mediterranean
31.73

Mediterranean
5.88

Mediterranean
35.22

Mediterranean
34.00


SW-Asian
5.50

SW-Asian
3.33

SW-Asian
6.45

SW-Asian
4.60

SW-Asian
6.00


San
-

San
-

San
-

San
-

San
-


E-African
-

E-African
-

E-African
-

E-African
-

E-African
-


Pygmy
0.08

Pygmy
-

Pygmy
-

Pygmy
0.03

Pygmy
-


W-African
0.92

W-African
0.48

W-African
0.33

W-African
0.58

W-African
-





















This is roughly 50% EEF, 25% WHG, and 25% BA Armenian (Part of Yamnaya admixture?, ANE). One problem is that in South Europe Caucasian admixture is so high, that I always need to go to the source (Armenia) to get enough. BR2 is also modeled with 10% Armenia to help his high Caucasian, the rest was 40%EEF, and 50%WHG. Now we need to find a huge invasion from Armenia/Anatolia during Bronze Age to prove me right. ;)

Angela
22-02-17, 15:50
It's correct. I'm still surprised that the numbers took me there. There is also a chance that with time, due to DNA mutations and new alleles, one admixture transformed into other. Perhaps Baloch turned into Caucasian? Otherwise what could have happened to all the Baloch of Yamnaya, high as 33%. It is at 5% in today's Russia, Poland and Ukraine. Same story with 10% of American admixture in Yamnaya and Samara. It doesn't even show at 1% in said area.


We could compose moder NW Italians like this:




0.3


0.5


0.2








Remedello Average

F999933
BR2, J-M67
M536324
I1658

Italian Model

Modern NW Italian





Hungary, Ludas-Varjú-dűlő,
3.3kya

Armenia EBA

Composition





Run time


Run time
15.13

Run time
8.22

Run time


Run time



S-Indian
-

S-Indian
-

S-Indian
0.27

S-Indian
0.05

S-Indian
-


Baloch
-

Baloch
3.15

Baloch
25.53

Baloch
6.68

Baloch
6.00


Caucasian
11.03

Caucasian
14.73

Caucasian
56.75

Caucasian
22.02

Caucasian
20.00


NE-Euro
21.25

NE-Euro
46.18

NE-Euro
4.79

NE-Euro
30.42

NE-Euro
33.00


SE-Asian
0.61

SE-Asian
0.20

SE-Asian
-

SE-Asian
0.28

SE-Asian
0.61


Siberian
-

Siberian
-

Siberian
-

Siberian
-

Siberian
-


NE-Asian
-

NE-Asian
-

NE-Asian
-

NE-Asian
-

NE-Asian
-


Papuan
-

Papuan
0.18

Papuan
-

Papuan
0.09

Papuan
-


American
-

American
-

American
-

American
-

American
-


Beringian
-

Beringian
-

Beringian
-

Beringian
-

Beringian
-


Mediterranean
60.61

Mediterranean
31.73

Mediterranean
5.88

Mediterranean
35.22

Mediterranean
34.00


SW-Asian
5.50

SW-Asian
3.33

SW-Asian
6.45

SW-Asian
4.60

SW-Asian
6.00


San
-

San
-

San
-

San
-

San
-


E-African
-

E-African
-

E-African
-

E-African
-

E-African
-


Pygmy
0.08

Pygmy
-

Pygmy
-

Pygmy
0.03

Pygmy
-


W-African
0.92

W-African
0.48

W-African
0.33

W-African
0.58

W-African
-


















This is roughly 50% EEF, 25% WHG, and 25% BA Armenian (Part of Yamnaya admixture?, ANE). One problem is that in South Europe Caucasian admixture is so high, that I always need to go to the source (Armenia) to get enough. BR2 is also modeled with 10% Armenia to help his high Caucasian, the rest was 40%EEF, and 50%WHG. Now we need to find a huge invasion from Armenia/Anatolia during Bronze Age to prove me right. ;)

I've been saying for years (often to the usual suspect(s) if you remember :))that the elevated "Caucasus" which showed up in southern Italy in analyses like 23andme could have been in part a movement from Crete/Greece, which was evidenced in archaeology through pottery etc. although there's really no sign of mass turnover. (On the other hand, once you get past the Pannonian plain, there's no obvious signs of mass turnover in central and northern Europe either.) The Caucasus levels in southern Italy are approximately the same as those in Greece, even with the Slavic migrations into Greece, and with the fact that the Greek samples usually used are from Thessaly in the north. (Other admixture analyses show elevated Caucasus even in northern Italy as your own analysis shows.)

The evidence that is accumulating seems to support my initial speculation that in that period of history there was an explosion of both genes and technology from both the north and south Caucasus in many directions. It set up ripple effects where other peoples were absorbed, in some cases adopting Indo-European languages. The process and the admixture levels with actual "Yamnaya" people were different in each place. It's not one distinct ethnicity traveling unchanged throughout the world. That was heresy for some people when I said it then, but I think it might turn out to be true.

Coming back specifically to your analysis, what then would have been the autosomal composition of the Italics, the people who would have presumably brought Indo-European languages to Italy? Where is EHG hiding in your components. After all, there are areas in Italy with 60% and more R1b. Also, how did the Bronze Age sample get his "Armenian" ancestry? Did the movement from the South Caucasus, perhaps along the northern part of Anatolia and across the Hellespont into Europe reach Central Europe? Or, was there an unsampled population somewhere around the Black Sea which spoke an Indo-European language, but which had a lot of Caucasus, more than Corded Ware, say, and some of the "elevated" Caucasus in Italy, Greece, the Balkans etc. comes from them?

Northener
22-02-17, 16:49
My models are pointing to the fact that West and Central Corded Ware were made mostly of East Yamnaya source, with some additional WHG and EEF. Northern Corded however were mostly made of Yamnaya Outlier (most likely something like Ukrainian HG of West Yamnaya) with a little bit of EEF added. The third group, Baden/Hungarian Bronze Age was made of some mix of half and half of EEF and WHG, possibly a mix that happened in North Cucuteni, and possible enriched by 10% of Anatolia BA. This is my general view of Bronze Age of north Europe.

Two days ago, I did a progress in deciphering LBA/IA Germanics/Saxons. Good results came from mixing German CW with Nordic Farmer and some extra of SHG. The results are very close to modern Dutch, denoting no major changes in this area since IA.

Yesterday I was trying to understand why modern Poles are different than CW or Unetice. Especially ratio of Baloch to Caucasian is flipped and Med is a 3rd lower. I picked the best sample of Unetice (considered the main ancestor) and started to mix it with other guys/girls from same area and timeframe. I started getting good results when added BR2 to the mix, the guy from Baden/Hungarian Bronze Age. What surprised me the most was that I got the best results when I eliminated Unetice completely and added more EHG to the Bronze guy. Here it is:



Unetice
0

Baden
0.7

EHG
0.3








F999948
Rise150, Poland, slask 1750 BC
F999933
BR2, J-M67
M218547
I0124

Model of modern Polish



Poland, slask 3.75 kya
3.5kya

Hungary, Ludas-Varjú-dűlő,
3.3kya

Samara HG
7.6 kya

Composition

Mine



Run time
8.44

Run time
15.13

Run time
5.57

Run time


Run time
20.5


S-Indian
0

S-Indian
0

S-Indian
0

S-Indian
0

S-Indian
0.62


Baloch
14.65

Baloch
3.15

Baloch
14.33

Baloch
6.504

Baloch
7.47


Caucasian
2.73

Caucasian
14.73

Caucasian
0

Caucasian
10.311

Caucasian
10.05


NE-Euro
53.54

NE-Euro
46.18

NE-Euro
75.62

NE-Euro
55.012

NE-Euro
57.28


SE-Asian
0

SE-Asian
0.2

SE-Asian
0

SE-Asian
0.14

SE-Asian
0.54


Siberian
0

Siberian
0

Siberian
0

Siberian
0

Siberian
1.22


NE-Asian
0

NE-Asian
0

NE-Asian
0

NE-Asian
0

NE-Asian
0.35


Papuan
0.48

Papuan
0.18

Papuan
0

Papuan
0.126

Papuan
-


American
0.22

American
0

American
9.62

American
2.886

American
-


Beringian
0.49

Beringian
0

Beringian
0.15

Beringian
0.045

Beringian
0.07


Mediterranean
27.12

Mediterranean
31.73

Mediterranean
0

Mediterranean
22.211

Mediterranean
21.53


SW-Asian
0

SW-Asian
3.33

SW-Asian
0

SW-Asian
2.331

SW-Asian
0.86


San
0

San
0

San
0

San
0

San
-


E-African
0.34

E-African
0

E-African
0

E-African
0

E-African
-


Pygmy
0

Pygmy
0

Pygmy
0

Pygmy
0

Pygmy
-


W-African
0.42

W-African
0.48

W-African
0.2

W-African
0.396

W-African
-



It was shocking, I didn't expect this at all. Then I remembered this map I've seen some time ago about BR2 connection to modern Poland.


http://www.pnas.org/content/113/2/368/F3.large.jpg


Samara HG in my model is the EHG, not the Outlier. It is the best proxy so far, and I think the true source should be EHG from North who instead of American admixture had Syberian (the Finnish type?)

This Hungarian Bronze was very influential all over the Europe even in Anatolia. Was it connected to Celts, Italics, Dacians, Slavs? On other hand Eastern Yamnaya/Unetice was more of Germanic/Insular Celtic story? Also the East Yamnaya/Germany doesn't have any presence in Asia at all these days. On other hand BR2/West Yamnaya penetrates into the Asia. (IE?)

The final changes of Germanic/Yours genome and admixtures should have something to do with this Hungarian Bronze age spread. I speculate that this happened after BA collapse in Iron Age, with final stage much later with East Germanic and Slavic expansions.


Again this is very exciting (for me)! At the end of the Bronze Age, Northwestern Europe and especially the Elp culture area; North Dutch, Northwest Germany and Jutland. This culture had always an in between germanic-celtic image. Like for example the Cimbri. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cimbri#Origins) About the old-Frisians: same story.

The "hungarian-bronze age" gave definitely a push in the development of the Nordic Bronze Age. The Sögel warriors had this type of swords:
http://i63.tinypic.com/1zyy3d0.jpg

Wiki: "Swords found together with the Nebra skydisk, ca. 1600 BC. Typologically, these swords are of the Sögel type, but their shape and decoration shows influence of the Hajdúsámson-Apa type found in Hungary."

and
"Typologically, the swords from Nebra and Vreta belong to the Sögel blades, which copy the shape and decoration of Hajdúsámson-Apa swords [...] Concerning the provenance of the swords, the area between the rivers Danube and Tisza in present-day Hungary and Romania has been suggested, as also the production in present Germany [...] Vandkilde (1996:240) proposed that these swords and daggers of the Sögel and Wohlde type in southern Jutland could have been manufactured locally." Roland Schwab, Inga Ullén, Christian-Heinrich Wunderlich, A sword from Vreta Kloster, and black patinated bronze in Early Bronze Age Europe, Journal of Nordic Archaeological Science 17, 27–35 (2010)."

These Sögel warrior were all well groomed with Mycenaean kind of razor blades, see:
https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/antiquity/article/div-classtitlethe-nordic-razor-and-the-mycenaean-lifestylediv/E7C1E8A4C0C0F3FC14D54427C83BF046
http://dc.uwm.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1505&context=etd

and a dissertation about women in the Sögel Bronze Age:
http://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:197017/FULLTEXT01.pdf

I could go on....

It would be nice if in a paper genetics (facts and figures) and archeological findings could come together. Kurgan 2.0?

About your last remark LeBrok: "Now we need to find a huge invasion from Armenia/Anatolia during Bronze Age to prove me right. ;)" May be this article (I only scanned it) can give some clues: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0128810

MarkoZ
22-02-17, 17:34
One problem is that in South Europe Caucasian admixture is so high, that I always need to go to the source (Armenia) to get enough. BR2 is also modeled with 10% Armenia to help his high Caucasian, the rest was 40%EEF, and 50%WHG. Now we need to find a huge invasion from Armenia/Anatolia during Bronze Age to prove me right. ;)

Later metal age immigration from the Near East into Europe is to be expected. One such migration could have followed the spread of the long sword made of arsenical bronze from Alaca Höyük in the middle of the third millennium BC, which subsequently spread into the Caucasus, the Levant & the Aegean. I suppose the widespread use of long swords would confer a significant advantage to the people who already produced them when the rest of the world still used daggers.

The problem is that at this point migrations would have become harder to trace, as they wouldn't necessarily have been accompanied by a characteristic inventory of pottery & other material goods as was the case with earlier movements of peoples into sparsely populated areas. As much as I don't like the idea, with the advent of more sophisticated weaponry roaming warbands and elite dominance might have actually been a more frequent occurrence.

This is a good summary of the sword evidence: https://books.google.de/books?id=WX3WCgAAQBAJ&pg=PA150&lpg=PA150&dq=Alaca+H%C3%B6y%C3%BCk+sword&source=bl&ots=oRJsAqqZov&sig=yllKvOMP8CBVxx83MStF_vyZeGM&hl=de&sa=X&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=Alaca%20H%C3%B6y%C3%BCk%20sword&f=false

It seems the route was either Anatolia or Levant (the authors suggest Lebanon) -> Crete -> Aegean

BR2's Y-DNA might be evidence of an eastern migration, though autosomally he's already fully European, isn't he?

LeBrok
22-02-17, 20:20
All interesting comments and good questions. I will respond later when I have time to wrap my mind around it. Don't expect too much. The numbers took me in different direction than I expected, and I'm dealing with 4 different Bronze Age sources of population to reconcile, explain Yamnaya (or Ymanya like) signal in all Europe, and decide who IEs were. It was easy before; IE Yamnayans conquered the whole Europe and Central/South Asia, that's why everybody speaks IE language. The problem is that when Yamnaya culture ended, typical genetically Yamnayan stopped existing right away too, and was gone forever. Unlike Anatolian Farmers who spread wide and didn't lose their strong genetic signature for thousands of years.

Perhaps in some papers direct East Yamnaya genetics is overestimated, because it blends (overlaps genetically) to a very high degree with WHG (high NE Euro in both) and with Armenian Bronze (Baloch and Caucasian). So perhaps saying that modern Poles are 50% Yamnaya or Italians are 25% Yamnaya, denoting direct ancestry from East Yamnaya, we should be rather saying that they have 50% and 25% same DNA as East Yamnaya, which doesn't point to direct genetic transfer. It implies only common genetic sources for both, like WHG, CHG and the h-gs with lots of Baloch. This could be the same phenomenon making Ashkenazy Jews genetically like Sicilians, though they didn't "grew up" together.

Having said that, to be well understood, and assuming that my models are roughly right, they don't negate a possibility that all Europeans might have direct East Yamnaya ancestry, though it will be impossible to implement them into models in higher than 10% amount, except in North West Europe.

Angela
22-02-17, 20:59
All interesting comments and good questions. I will respond later when I have time to wrap my mind around it. Don't expect too much. The numbers took me in different direction than I expected, and I'm dealing with 4 different Bronze Age sources of population to reconcile, explain Yamnaya (or Ymanya like) signal in all Europe, and decide who IEs were. It was easy before; IE Yamnayans conquered the whole Europe and Central/South Asia, that's why everybody speaks IE language. The problem is that when Yamnaya culture ended, typical genetically Yamnayan stopped existing right away too, and was gone forever. Unlike Anatolian Farmers who spread wide and didn't lose their strong genetic signature for thousands of years.

Perhaps in some papers direct East Yamnaya genetics is overestimated, because it blends (overlaps genetically) to a very high degree with WHG (high NE Euro in both) and with Armenian Bronze (Baloch and Caucasian). So perhaps saying that modern Poles are 50% Yamnaya or Italians are 25% Yamnaya, denoting direct ancestry from East Yamnaya, we should be rather saying that they have 50% and 25% same DNA as East Yamnaya, which doesn't point to direct genetic transfer. It implies only common genetic sources for both, like WHG, CHG and the h-gs with lots of Baloch. This could be the same phenomenon making Ashkenazy Jews genetically like Sicilians, though they didn't "grew up" together.

Having said that, to be well understood, and assuming that my models are roughly right, they don't negate a possibility that all Europeans might have direct East Yamnaya ancestry, though it will be impossible to implement them into models in higher than 10% amount, except in North West Europe.

Well, I'm glad I'm not the only one here now who thinks that's a possibility. :)

Northener
23-02-17, 10:31
The problem is that at this point migrations would have become harder to trace, as they wouldn't necessarily have been accompanied by a characteristic inventory of pottery & other material goods as was the case with earlier movements of peoples into sparsely populated areas. As much as I don't like the idea, with the advent of more sophisticated weaponry roaming warbands and elite dominance might have actually been a more frequent occurrence.

The archeologist Prof. H. Fokkens pointed at this (1998):''The northern Netherlands is part of the northern group (NW Germany and Denmark) especially of the Sögeler Kreis characterized by a number of distinctive men's graves. The Drouwen grave is the best known Dutch example. It's remarkable that the Elp culture has never been presented as the immigration of a new group of people. Because clearly this period was a time when a number of new elements made their entry while others disappeared. The disappearance of beakers, the appearance of the Sögel men's graves with the first 'swords', among other things, the fully extended burial posture, under barrows; all the factors have been reason enough in the past to conclude that the Elp culture was an immigration of Sögel warriors."

Genetic figures could support this theory of Fokkens.

PS also an accurat passage from the Oxford Handbook of the European Bronze Age (https://books.google.nl/books?id=6ZQeAAAAQBAJ&pg=PA735&dq=Sogel+Wohlde+culture&hl=nl&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjl397dwLrRAhXGXRQKHXIhDx8Q6AEIHzAA#v=on epage&q=Sogel%20Wohlde%20culture&f=false).

MarkoZ
23-02-17, 14:17
That excerpt basically hits the nail on the head. Thanks for posting. The problem gets even more complicated when language becomes a factor. The Urnfield phenomenon, for example, seems to be associated with at least Germanic, Celtic, Tartessian & Etruscan. That'll be almost impossible to disentangle.

Northener
23-02-17, 14:50
That excerpt basically hits the nail on the head. Thanks for posting. The problem gets even more complicated when language becomes a factor. The Urnfield phenomenon, for example, seems to be associated with at least Germanic, Celtic, Tartessian & Etruscan. That'll be almost impossible to disentangle.

Exactly Markoz! Euler(2009) stated that there were lots of loan-words from Celtic into Germanic. But he was in the conviction that the Celtic influence was more or less a cultural and commercial relationship.
On basis of archeological and genetic facts and figures we can presume that the influence was bigger, most probably a migration of at least a warrior elite. And the loanwords of Euler fit in the environment of this elite (from about 1000 BC, so during the Elp or Sogel-Wohlde culture).
Excuse me for my northwestern bias. But based on the Frisian history the definitive Germanisation was not earlier than in the 4th century AD (along the Anglo Saxon invasion of England). Before that some kind of 'in between Celtic-Germanic' could be the case.


Sent from my iPad using Eupedia Forum (http://r.tapatalk.com/byo?rid=89698)

Northener
24-02-17, 19:04
@LeBrok @MarkoZ

Kristian Kristiansen and Thomas B. Larsson give in the Rise of Bronze Age Society (Cambridge 2004) a clear reconstruction.

They describe two dominant interaction Bronze Age zones:
1. the Steppe corridor (more north eastern Europe, Yamna related )
2. the Mediterranean corridor (from East Med to England, with an Mycenaean/ Minoan dominance)

With the Carpathian/Hungarian region with the early Bronze age tell culture as a kind of hub in the middle.

The linking pin with Northwestern Europe (=Southern Scandinavia, NW Germany and North Dutch) was the tumulus culture. In Northwestern Europe the Bronze Age packages of the two interactions zones 'cumulated' trough the tumulus culture.

"The adaptions in Scandinavia of new chiefly institutions and of new technological skills in metallurgy, house building, ship construction etc. we have to envisage a fairly massive inflow of southern, foreign artisans and chiefs during this period. But a similar movement southwards of Scandinavian chiefs and artisans who stayed away for years to become skilled artisans and warriors was part of the operation of network."

"If we add to this the Mycenaean and Minoan evidence so strongly manifest in the Scandinavian tradition we are confronted with direct and indirect evidence of a directional transmission of goods people and knowledge."

In the tumulus culture was a major impuls for the Nordic Bronze Age and forms a warrior culture with long distance trade, marriage and prestige network even up until the Hungarian (https://www.academia.edu/5994694/János_Dani_Research_of_Pit-grave_culture_kurgans_in_Hungary_in_the_last_three _decades) region. No wonder that after the Corded Ware there was with the Tumulus Culture again a major impuls of Yamna genes (Balloch) streamed right up the Northwest!?

Northener
25-02-17, 18:08
That's very interesting LeBrok, but if your second scenario were correct, and the modern Polish genome is Bronze Age Hungarian plus EHG, then wouldn't that imply that modern Polish genomes don't really descend from Yamnaya in the sense that they don't descend from that admixed population in the eastern steppe identified by people like David Anthony as being the epicenter of the "Indo-Europeans"? Or maybe I'm not understanding you correctly.

Of course, I was thinking of this in connection to Italian genetics, and it's been assumed, I think, that the Italics, for example, were tied to Unetice, yes? Yet it's true that most Italians, I think, from what I've seen here of personal results, and from the graphics above, were heavily influenced by Bronze Age Hungarian, much more so than any other Bronze Age populations.

I've been intrigued since I saw that graphic because this Bronze Age Hungarian admixture is particularly strong in my own area of eastern Liguria, far northwestern Toscana. If an additional surge came with Goths, Lombards, and given all the Lombard castles in our area, that might make sense.

The Insular Celt might have arrived with the first millennium BC Gallic migrations, which can be seen in the Rathlin diagram.

Angela, in stead of the well known impact of the Hungarian Bronze Age c.q. Tumulus (incl. pre and post) culture and people on the Italian genetics, the same influence on NW European genetics is up until now underestimated (I guess). The models of LeBrok show a significant influence of the Unetice/Tumulus/Urnfield (Hungarian Bronze Age, partly Yamna heir) culture on NW Europe. The Nordic Bronze Age got a big boost from the Tumulus culture. Most evident: the Elp culture! (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elp_culture) From the Frisians till the Cimbri, the Celtic influence was always suspected. But never fully recognized....why?

PS may be it's all due to the Roman Julius Casear who stated that east of the Rhine were "en bloc" Germans....;)

MOESAN
25-02-17, 19:57
All interesting comments and good questions. I will respond later when I have time to wrap my mind around it. Don't expect too much. The numbers took me in different direction than I expected, and I'm dealing with 4 different Bronze Age sources of population to reconcile, explain Yamnaya (or Ymanya like) signal in all Europe, and decide who IEs were. It was easy before; IE Yamnayans conquered the whole Europe and Central/South Asia, that's why everybody speaks IE language. The problem is that when Yamnaya culture ended, typical genetically Yamnayan stopped existing right away too, and was gone forever. Unlike Anatolian Farmers who spread wide and didn't lose their strong genetic signature for thousands of years.

Perhaps in some papers direct East Yamnaya genetics is overestimated, because it blends (overlaps genetically) to a very high degree with WHG (high NE Euro in both) and with Armenian Bronze (Baloch and Caucasian). So perhaps saying that modern Poles are 50% Yamnaya or Italians are 25% Yamnaya, denoting direct ancestry from East Yamnaya, we should be rather saying that they have 50% and 25% same DNA as East Yamnaya, which doesn't point to direct genetic transfer. It implies only common genetic sources for both, like WHG, CHG and the h-gs with lots of Baloch. This could be the same phenomenon making Ashkenazy Jews genetically like Sicilians, though they didn't "grew up" together.

Having said that, to be well understood, and assuming that my models are roughly right, they don't negate a possibility that all Europeans might have direct East Yamnaya ancestry, though it will be impossible to implement them into models in higher than 10% amount, except in North West Europe.

you're right when you show the today admixtures results are not by force an one way -one time phenomenon -

Bollox79
01-03-17, 02:13
Apparently I have to have 10 posts to post a link... so here is my tenth post lol... but I do have something to say about this thread!

Bollox79
01-03-17, 02:16
Angela, in stead of the well known impact of the Hungarian Bronze Age c.q. Tumulus (incl. pre and post) culture and people on the Italian genetics, the same influence on NW European genetics is up until now underestimated (I guess). The models of LeBrok show a significant influence of the Unetice/Tumulus/Urnfield (Hungarian Bronze Age, partly Yamna heir) culture on NW Europe. The Nordic Bronze Age got a big boost from the Tumulus culture. Most evident: the Elp culture! (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elp_culture) From the Frisians till the Cimbri, the Celtic influence was always suspected. But never fully recognized....why?

PS may be it's all due to the Roman Julius Casear who stated that east of the Rhine were "en bloc" Germans....;)

Two skeletons from the "Gladiator" cemetery at Driffield Terrace Roman era 1th-4th cent had autosomal affinities with NE Europe. Both were U106 and sub group z156. I share some SNPs under z156 with 3drif-16 and several more with 6drif-3 - the mention of U106 and NE influence made me think of this... here is the graph for 6drif-3 - keep in mind these samples are about 1800ish years old...

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/ba/1e/e5/ba1ee58bba3c83dd8c25513825f78faf.jpg

Bollox79
01-03-17, 02:24
info on the Driffield skeletons there were DNA tested available here: http://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms10326

Northener
01-03-17, 11:44
info on the Driffield skeletons there were DNA tested available here: http://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms10326
Thank you!
Some recent relevant research, Hawkes (2014): https://books.google.nl/books?id=whEcBQAAQBAJ&pg=PT277&lpg=PT277&dq=rhenish+tumulus&source=bl&ots=6acvmBySh3&sig=2AIffzwMLYWx8eRefp05WQ3hTYY&hl=nl&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjz8bqN_7TSAhVJLhoKHYFXBEcQ6AEIGjAA#v=on epage&q=rhenish%20tumulus&f=false

add: although recent, the original is from 1940 ;)

Northener
01-03-17, 22:06
I'm not too serious about validity of my Models, but it is certainly fun trying to figure possible combinations, that's why I'm doing it. I might be way off sometimes, sometimes probably right on. Few interesting things I learned doing them. One is that there is no way of recreating CW with very high Baloch without using 50% or more Yamnaya. Or recreating LBA/IA "German" without 50% of EEF, because of very high Mediterranean admixture. So there are things that can't be changed and are obvious, but one the other hand exact tuning might be way off.

There is always a question about the Samara Outlier guy. He is quite different than the rest of known Yamnayans. I wonder if he is more like new discovered Ukrainian HG, or he was perhaps from NW Yamnaya population. Well, technically he belongs to Yamnaya Culture, but he is very, very distinct genetically. I can use him to reconstruct Estonia CW and couple of CW Swedes, and receive 90% of Yamnaya admixture in them. When I use typical Yamnaya sample the Baloch and Caucasian shoots way too high and Med drops too low. The problem might be that Yamnaya in Estonia is probably not the same as Yamnaya in Germany, though both sources come from Yamnaya culture. This might be confusing, that's why I avoid calling Samara Outlier, Yamnaya. We might need to rename few things when we have genomes from all the Yamnaya.



I agree. Bronze Age in Northern Europe looks like a very crazy period. Whole populations were dying off, and new ones explode from small pockets. Never mind huge invasions to start with.


LeBrok on Eurogenes I found a really excellent posting about your brainteaser with the model. And it gives a very good insight about why the the tumulus culture looks crucial in the creation of the modern NW European. Especially in the North Sea region. Elp or Sögel is a tumulus/urnfield offspring from about 1800 BC. But I guess stil a good candidate for the spread of R1b U106/S.

As said in a previous posting my autosomal DNA comes close to: 1 Halberstadt_LBA In the posting Halberstadt_LBA is crucial in his reasoning.

It's a long and excellent comment from G. Dekaen on Eurogenes (25 feb 2017 (https://eurogenes.blogspot.nl/2015/02/massive-migration-from-steppe-is-source.html?m=0&commentPage=3)) about "Massive migration from the steppe is a source for Indo-European languages in Europe (Haak et al. 2015 preprint)" I doubted if i should publish it here. But for our quest it's so crucial.... I hope he agrees with it.....

"Judging from Figure 3, we can see that:


Early Neolithics: 90-100% farmer, 0-10% HG
Middle Neolithics: 80% farmer, 20% HG (Esperstedt with 40% HG is outlier)
LN Corded: 80% Yamna, 15% farmer, 5% HG
LN Bell Beaker: 45% Yamna, 40% farmer, 15% HG
LN Karsdorf: 75% Yamna, <5% farmer, 20% HG (outlier, likely Yamna+HG)
LN Benzingerode/Aberstedt: 40% Yamna, 60% farmer
EBA Unetice: 45% Yamna, 25% farmer, 30% HG
LBA Halberstadt: 55% Yamna, 45% farmer
Modern Czechs (closest we have to Germans) : 50% Yamna, 35% farmer, 15% HG
Modern Belarussian (to compare to Corded): 50% Yamna, 25% farmer, 25% HG


CA Hungary: 80% farmer, 20% HG
BA Hungary: 15% Yamna, 50% farmer, 35% HG (Note: K16 shows that the two individuals that make up BA Hungary are very different, one seemingly 0% Yamna, 50% farmer, 50% HG (!) and the second being 30% Yamna, 50% farmer, 20% HG which might show a significant HG bounceback here along with the possibility that mixing in Hungary was not complete yet by 1600BC)
Iron Age Hungarian (from K16): 60% Yamna, 40% farmer
Modern Hungarians: 45% Yamna, 40% farmer, 15% HG


Some ideas:


1. Corded and Bell Beaker are quite different, with the latter potentially being the by-product of a 50-50 cross of Corded and MNE.


2. Bell Beaker and Unetice are somewhat discontinuous as there seems to be a substantial reduction in farmer DNA with a concomitant rise in HG DNA with apparent stability in Yamna ancestry. At first, I thought this would lend credence to my idea that Unetice derives in large part from a source NE. of the Steppe in E. Corded/Fatyanovo-Balanovo as a result of interaction between this possibly non-IE culture and NW IE. Catacomb culture from the south. However, Unetice's Y-DNA is clearly WHG and NOT from NE. Europe, so it could represent a local resurgence of HGs in C. Europe.


3. Discontinuity between BA Unetice and LBA Halberstadt, which is unlike any non-southern European population in that it lacks HG. However, a 50-50 mix of Unetice descendants and Halberstadt would seem to perfectly match Czech's component distribution. I wonder what is the archaeological affiliation of Halberstadt? It's funny, Halberstadt looks like it's Early Hallstatt/Late Urnfield which I figured would be the descendants of, and hence quite similar to Unetice, yet Halberstadt is quite different from Unetice.

4. There seems to have been a significant change between Corded Ware and modern Belarussians (let alone Lithuanians or Estonians). There was at least a 40% demic displacement following Corded that culminated in the creation of Belarussians. The cumulative change of this/these population(s) was (40-90% displacement): 5-45% Yamna, 40-26.1% farmer, 55-27.2% HG. Given that the absolute minimum HG input was 27%, we need to look for a very strongly HG population which eliminates almost all of W. Europe (BB only had 15% HG, Norwegians only have 15% HG, Scots are the only ones close with 20-25% HG, Icelanders have 20% HG, followed by Orcadians who have about 17% HG). Intriguingly, Unetice basically seems to fit the bill at 45% Yamna, 25% farmer, 30% HG, and if we accept this, it would mean an 80-90% replacement by Unetice; the existence of Y-DNA I2 in Belarus today at 10-20% would seem to indicate an influx from the West at some point, but probably not an 80-90% replacement, so we can probably rule this out. There could have been a separate resurgence of EHG in Corded territory with Y-DNA R1a instead. On a similar note, I have a feeling this post-Corded change came from E. Corded/Fatyanovo-Balanovo along with the BA expansion of blue eyes; that population likely had a moderate amount of Yamna, moderate farmer and high HG to fit the requirements perfectly. In-fact, it seems that all modern N. Euro populations differ considerably from Corded in having much higher HG, so I wouldn't be surprised if there was a second major population expansion after Yamna that involved a group with much higher HG, from a population with roughly similar proportions as Unetice, but with possibly different Y-DNA (Unetice can't explain post-Corded change). In-fact, maybe we need to look for a dual expansion, one from resurgent C. Euro HGs/Unetice that re-expanded I2 and a separate E. Corded expansion of R1a, both of which increased blue eyes throughout Europe. This reminds me of this map from the ancient Bulgarian study that showed some sort of expansion out of C. Europe post-3000BC:
http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2014/05/ancient-dna-from-balkans-iron-age-thrace.html


5. Building on the above, considering that both EBA Unetice and BA Hungary show a sizable increase in HG in the EBA/MBA, the post-2500BC resurgence in HG can possibly be traced back to Central Europe/Pannonia and with an expansion of Y-DNA I specifically (Carpathians/Alps mountain refuge?). This seems to match all the Unetice samples being Y-DNA I2, along with IIRC the vast majority of Y-DNA from later Urnfield as well, which AFAIK is generally considered to have expanded from roughly the same area as Unetice, S. Germany/Czech/Austria etc. It seems that Y-DNA I2 is particularly associated with this phenomenon, so I'm not sure how Y-DNA I1 fits in and how it went from C. Europe to Scandinavia.


6. Between the CA and BA, Hungarians acquired significant HG mixture separate from the Yamna influx. I wonder what the cause was behind this simultaneous increase in HG in C. Europe 2200-1500BC?


7. Modern Hungarians can be modeled pretty successfully as a 50-50 mix of IA Hungarian with the more Yamna-like BA Hungarian. This would also seem to confirm that Yamna influence into the Balkans was much weaker (30%) compared to its expansion across N. Europe (German Beaker 45% Yamna).
or is it Basal Eurasian?
kept in Extended Data Table 2.


I forgot to mention for point 4 that, the study indicates that Corded was the result of a single, major expansion from Yamna and not a gradual process, which would seem to indicate that Corded was a pretty homogeneous culture (except perhaps its Eastern fringes?). This is the reason why I think we can directly compare these German Corded samples with Belarussians from farther East.


I was also just thinking that if there was a post-Yamna double expansion of HG from C. Europe/Unetice and E. Corded, this would help explain why fringe populations in NW. Europe like Scots and Norwegians have higher Yamna than Belarussians, Czechs, Hungarians - who were closer to Yamna and hence would be expected to have more Yamna - because these people were right in the heart of Europe, at the center of these two later, Yamna diluting expansions.


Here is my K16 breakdown (I used a ruler for proportions, so it should be reasonably accurate, sample size in brackets):


W.C.S.N HGs (14): 0% NE, 100% HG, 0% C. Asian
EHG (2): 0% NE, 80% HG, 15% C. Asian, 5% S. American
Early Neolithics (27): 75-85% NE, 15-20% HG, mostly zero, but trace elements (10 and 5%) C. Asian in Stuttgart/EN Hungary
Middle Neolithics (9): 70% NE, 30% HG, 0% C. Asian
Yamnaya (9): 0% NE, 50% HG, 50% C. Asian
LN Corded (4): <5% NE, 60% HG, 35% C. Asian
LN Karsdorf (1): 0% NE, 60% HG, 40% C. Asian
LN Bell Beaker (6): 25% NE, 55% HG, 20% C. Asian
LN Benzingerode Bell Beaker (3): 15% NE, 60% HG, 25% C. Asian
LN Alberstedt Bell Beaker (1): 30% NE, 50% HG, 20% C. Asian
EBA Unetice (7): 20% NE, 55% HG, 25% C. Asian
LBA Halberstadt (1): 20% NE, 55% HG, 25% C. Asian
Modern Czechs (closest we have to Germans): 25% NE, 50% HG, 25% C. Asian
Modern Belarussians (to compare to Corded): 20% NE, 55% HG, 25% C. Asian


CA Hungary (CO1) (1): 70% NE, 30% HG, 0% C. Asian
BA Hungary (BR1) (1): 35% NE, 60% HG, 5% C. Asian
BA Hungary (BR2) (1): 35% NE, 45% HG, 20% C. Asian
IA Hungary (IR1) (1): 20% NE, 40% HG, 35% C. Asian, 5% Siberian
Modern Hungarians: 30% NE, 45% HG, 25% C. Asian


CA Iceman (1): 75% NE, 25% HG, 0% C. Asian
Modern Bergamo: 40% NE, 35% HG, 25% C. Asian
So, western, central, southern and northern HGs seem to be 100% HG whereas the NE. Euro HGs would seem to have minor traces of the Teal C. Asian component, slightly more in Samara than in Karelia. The existence of pretty basal R1a and R1b among these EHGs testifies to R1a/b being either native to EHGs in NE. Europe OR was brought into NE. Europe via the C. Asian component and was gradually diluted/"decoupled" from its original ancestral background. I think we can effectively eliminate an origin of R1a/b among the ancestors of Neolithics in the Mid. East/West Asia proper. As some have been correct to point out, many of the most basal lineages of R1, R1a and R1b are located in N. Iran (was it also E. Turkey?) which is more strongly associated with the C. Asian than NE component, the former being around 50% with the latter 30% in Iran. Combined with Malta being R* (and IIRC, a basal Bhutanese R1b) and the general scarcity/absence of any R among farmers in Europe, I think we can generally rule out a "West Asian/Mid. East" origin of R1a/b and opt instead for either a C. Asian or NE. European. The Spanish R1b may simply be an early/rare case of R1b decoupling from its C. Asian roots and gradually making its way west with the spread of agriculture; this might also explain how we find an early Y-DNA H2 in C. Europe 5500BC which maybe came from close to Iran and also traveled westward. Alternatively, the Spanish R1b could be decoupled from EHGs that traveled westwards and were assimilated by Neolithics. I'm not sure which is more likely.


I also find the K20 interesting in that it distinguishes between "western" and "eastern" HGs. The "eastern" HG seems to be a merger of parts of the old HG and steals 50-70% from the Teal C. Asian component. This could be further evidence linking Teal C. Asia and EHGs together with R1a/b as the boundaries between these seem to be smaller - and hence, prospective gene flow increases/is more likely - than between the EHGs and the NE component. La Brana, the SHGs and the Hungarian HG seem to be purely "western," whereas curiously, Loschbour is shown as a 50% "western" and 40% "eastern" mix (with 10% NE). This might mean that the Hungarian HG may have been a little more representative of SE. HGs rather than C. HGs and that C. HGs had influence from EHGs, which might be attested by the finding of mtDNA U2e and U4 among Mesolithic German HGs. Still, it's even more curious why Motala and other SHGs show up as 100% "western" when they SHOULD be far more "eastern" shifted than Loschbour since they have vast amounts of mtDNA U2a and U4. As for the EHGs, they turn out to be 60% "eastern," 35% "western" and 5% S. American. Whatever the minutia, the point I'm trying to make here is that if you look at the ancient and modern samples, you see some very interesting changes. Among Neolithic cultures, you see that about 100% of all assimilated HGs are of the western/southern variety. This changes entirely with Yamna and ALL following cultures showing a massive shift to "eastern" HGs until finally we get to modern populations where the Grey "western" HG component is entirely missing/extinct. Mysteriously, it seems to even disappear/not exist among pre-IE peoples like Sardinians, Basques or people with no IE connection like NW Africans. How did this happen and what does it suggest?


Well, if we extract the Teal C. Asian component (based on K19) from "eastern" HGs to leave only the EHG component in Blue, we can see that EHGs have a frequency ratio of 35:55 "western" HG to "eastern" HG, Loschbour/C. Euro HGs are 50:40, and La Brana/Hungary/Swedish HGs are 100:0. Yamna is 5:20 meaning they absorbed EHGs and not WHGs (we obviously knew that already). Corded is 10:20 also suggesting EHGs (unsurprising because Corded is completely intrusive in Germany). Bell Beaker is 10:25 and Benzingerode Beaker is 15:25 again suggesting EHG influx rather than a contribution from local Loschbour-like HGs. Unetice is 15:35 indicating a continued increase in the EHG:WHG ratio over time until finally, we get to BA Hungarian and LBA Halberstadt which provide the strongest evidence for my hypothesis. I pointed out earlier that the BA Hungarian sample has two very different samples (BR1 and BR2); I believe the earlier 2200-2000BC BR1 to represent the first sample which has a ratio of 25:25 reflecting probably a C. + S. Euro HG mixture. It is only in the Late Bronze Age however that we begin to see samples that are truly "modern" and reflective of the final transformations of the European gene pool (as I have argued). Notice BR2, 1300-1100BC has zero "western" HG and 35% EHG as well as LBA Halberstadt, 1100-1000BC having zero "western" HG and 35% EHG. I think this is pretty clear evidence of a post-2000BC/MBA influx of EHGs from somewhere north of Yamna and E. of German Corded, very likely in the Fatyanovo-Balanovo zone that I have postulated. Cultures that followed Unetice probably played a big role in this, namely Tumulus and Urnfield, and maybe we can even incorporate the Seima-Turbino phenomenon in this since IIRC, it has some sort of connection with Tumulus and seems like a pretty good candidate for bringing an MBA, super-EHG influx into Europe considering it originated way far east.


The IA Hungarian (IR1) sample shows a 20:15 ratio. This individual is obviously heavily derived from the Steppe given he has the highest C. Asian of any ancient sample in K20 (and a decently high K16). Given how high his WHG is in K20 (20%), it's very likely that all of IR1's NE (25%) together with his WHG descends from the Balkans, perhaps, the last stragglers of BR1? The question I have is, is the 15% EHG a part of the "native" Balkanites (since BR1 also had 25% EHG), but that would leave no EHG to remain on the Steppe (and I consider it unlikely IR1 came without any EHG), or was the EHG brought with IR1 and the "native" Balkanites had primarily NE+WHG composition.


Overall, K20 shows us that the HG "resurgence" in BA Europe came not from native/"western" HGs, but rather from "eastern" HGs. Furthermore, the changes from the BA to now show that there was a continued influx of "eastern" HG post-BA that ended up completely replacing "western" HG. That would seem to lend credence to my idea that Fatyanovo-Balanovo was the source of further population expansions post-Yamna and possibly the springboard for at least NW IE languages from Catacomb culture.


Yamna completely lacks the Neolithic component found in every other EN and MN culture! Neolithic European cultures therefore did not penetrate into Yamna as far as the Volga. Conversely, given the complete absence of Teal/C. Asian among Euro EN and MN cultures, this component was not present in the Middle East responsible for the Neolithic migration wave into Europe until after 6000BC. Teal likely didn't come through the Caucasus into Yamna because all the Caucasus peoples have 20-30% Neolithic and 50-60% Teal components, so if Teal came through the Caucasus into Yamna, Yamna would also have NE but they don't, therefore the Teal in Yamna must've come through C. Asia. You can try to make the case that the Caucasus was 100% Teal at that time, but I don't find that believable, I'm almost certain they had NE. This also means that all the mtDNA H found in Yamna was either C. Asian or less likely, EHG and had little to do with Euro/Mid East Neolithics unless it became "decoupled." Furthermore, if NE didn't reach Volga Yamna, I think that strengthens my case that the later Fatyanovo-Balanovo even further north also lacked NE, probably had even more EHG than Yamna and was responsible for an MBA increase in EHG and very likely, also blue eyes and blonde hair throughout C./N. Europe. IIRC, the northernmost pigmentation samples from Yamna near the Volga-Kama had 33% blue eyes, the highest anywhere in the Yamna cultural horizon.


I believe PIE existed in the N. Caucasus mountains from 3500-3000BC. Yamna shows essentially zero genetic contact with the Caucasus meaning either IE didn't spread into Yamna OR it spread through elite dominance. Since it's much easier/simpler for a language to spread via the momentum of population expansion rather than a complex process of political domination, I think it unlikely PIE spread into Yamna via elite dominance (although given the wealth of Maykop, it IS still possible!). Instead, I think the evidence is stronger for IE languages spreading from the Caucasus into Catacomb culture. The existence of mtDNA R1 at 8.3% in Catacomb may hint at the start of a Caucasus-->Catacomb movement of IE speakers and so we should see the NE component start showing up in Catacomb; we know that at some point, NE must've showed up in the Volga/Urals pre-Slavic expansion because all the Volga populations have it to some degree, Catacomb would be a strong candidate for this. IF this did not happen, then we have two main possibilities: PIE was spoken in another mountainous area with yew trees, the plough, cart, and copper around 3000-3500BC which can only be the Carpathians/Crimea(?) OR PIE transferred their language to Yamna/Catacomb via elite dominance. PIE originating with C. Asian component in C. Asia is impossible since there are no yew trees there (nor carts etc.), the closest ones are in Tajikistan. Here is a distribution map of the yew tree groups:
http://www.worldbotanical.com/TAXNA_files/image002.gif


It's interesting to examine the sequence of K16 changes from culture to culture post-Yamna in C. Europe (Germany, Hungary, N. Italy). The CA Hungarian and MN Farmers sample show us a ratio of 2.5:1 NE:HG among C. Euro CA farmers just before the Yamna expansion. Using that, we can see that German Corded represented a minimum 95% replacement of CA/MN farmers (no farmer substrate). Also, given the 1:1 HG:C. Asian ratio in Yamna, only 35% out of the 60% of HG in Corded could be explained by Yamna influx, meaning that as the Yamnayans crossed through Belarus/Poland into Germany, they brought an additional 25% HG with them (significant EHG substrate). That could explain the LN Karsdorf sample as a straight Yamna-EHG hybrid (and in-fact, Karsdorf at K20 has a 10:30 WHG:EHG ratio, testifying to its eastern provenance and NOT being native to Germany). German Bell Beaker shows a significant bounce-back of NE and a drop in HG and C. Asian and can be pretty successfully modeled as a mixture of 35% MN/CA Farmer and 65% LN Corded. I doubt this farmer contribution was TRB (or anything more western) because the EHG:WHG ratio between Corded and Beaker doesn't change much (if anything, HGs become slightly MORE EHG during Bell Beaker), so I wouldn't be surprised if Bell Beaker might be some sort of Globular Amphora + Corded combo. Benzingerode Beakers are more Corded, being about 80% Corded and 20% MN/CA Farmer. Using Yamna instead of Corded is less successful in modeling Bell Beaker as a mix with MN/CA Farmers, but that could be due to the Yamna samples being so far east.


From Bell Beaker to Unetice, we see relative continuity with a steady increase in the EHG:WHG ratio indicating continued migrations from NE. Europe. The same applies from EBA Unetice to LBA Halberstadt, the K16 proportions remain identical, but WHG at K20 disappears completely due to continued migrations involving EHGs, making LBA Halberstadt direct ancestors of C. Euros like Czechs/Germans.


As for Belarussians and Corded Ware, post-Corded we see a minimum of 30% total demic displacement. Going from 30-90% replacement, the cumulative change is from (a) population(s) with 64.2-23.1% NE, 34.2-51.7% HG, 1.8-25.1% CAS. Considering that after 3000BC, there aren't really any cultures left in E./C. Europe without any Central Asian (CAS), we can increase the minimum to at least 40% replacement with the following cumulative requirements: 48.5-23.1% NE, 40.8-51.7% HG, 10.6-25.1% CAS. This doesn't really help to narrow down possibly migrations too much considering we're looking at a 5000 year timeframe, but we can essentially eliminate any migration from S. of the Alps/Carpathians or the Caucasus. At some point, Belarus must have gone from ultra-low NE during Corded to 20% present NE, maybe that was with Urnfield/Lusatian considering Urnfield seems to have been a major player and source of migrations during the MBA. Also, at some point, the remaining WHG in Belarus (which almost certainly existed since it was present in Yamna/Corded) must've disappeared from a migration from further east.
The change from CA Hungary to BR1 is really an oddity. BR1 indicates at least a 50% replacement of previous CO1 inhabitants (max. of 50% CO1 substrate in BR1) with a doubling of HG compared to CO1.This HG had a WHG:EHG frequency ratio of 25:25, and this combined with its only 5% CAS makes it extremely unlikely that this overall HG increase came from the east. It seems to reflect a local (and short-lived), perhaps combined C. Euro + S. Euro HG resurgence. BR1 is likely a dead end, that was neither IE nor left too many descendants today. BR2 represents an entirely new population with zero WHG, attesting to some sort of NE. Euro migration and can be pretty successfully modeled as a mixture of 50% CO1 with 50% of a NE. Euro population north of Yamna with 10% more HG and 10% less CAS. BR2, like LBA Halberstadt seems like a perfect, direct ancestor of Hungarians, with only a minor change of -5% NE and +5% CAS, so we seem to have a relatively stabilized European gene pool by 1000BC and major changes taking place between 2000-1000BC. IR1 doesn't seem to have affected the Hungarian population after BR2 given it has 5% Siberian, N1c Y-DNA, G2a mtDNA, and a 20:5 WHG:EHG ratio, all of which are extremely uncharacteristic of modern Hungarians. Yet again, another dead end IMO.


Nevertheless, IR1 may be pretty useful in determining the genetic composition of the Steppe and at what point it ceased to play a major demographic role in Europe. If IR1 truly represents Cimmerians, given its date of 800-1000BC, we can associate it with at least the Novocherkassk/Chernogorovka culture and assert that this culture and the Steppe from then on (given the gradual increase in Asiatic DNA) had a minimal demographic impact on Europe. If IR1 had 5% Siberian and if we estimate that its 20% WHG and 25% NE were picked up in the Balkans, then we can estimate that Steppe cultures from at least 1000BC in Ukraine probably had around 10% Siberian and zero/little NE, and therefore couldn't be the ancestors of basically any Europeans today. Even populations that experienced Steppe invasions for 1000 years (Moldavians/Romanians, Bulgarians, Hungarians) display only the faintest traces of Siberian <1%. It should've been obvious to everyone judging from the very Asiatic Scythian mtDNA circa 500BC and their likely R1a-Z93 that Scythians are not the ancestors of basically anyone in Europe. This same analysis is relevant for later Turkic peoples. I have previously postulated that Srubna may also have been the source of some MBA migrations between 2000-1000BC as a result of Catacomb+Fatyanovo-Balanovo mixture and a back-migration onto the Steppe followed by an expansion into Europe increasing blue eyes/blonde hair in a similar manner as Andronovo. The question on my mind is, did Srubna - which ended 1200BC - also have this 10% Siberian or did it end via migrations from further east by people who brought the 10% Siberian DNA, i.e. Andronovo/Karasuk. Maybe it was the very last major migration from the Steppe before nomadism became dominant?


Following Otzi, 3300BC, N. Italy experienced a cumulative population change of at least 50% to the modern day. The cumulative genetic proportion of this change ranging from 50-90% replacement was: 12-40.4% NE, 40-32.9% HG, 60-26.7% CAS. This strongly points to the most significant migration post-3000BC coming from around the Steppes.


As for C. Asia itself, we can confirm HG (specifically EHG) throughout the entire C. Asia as far South as Afghanistan and into Gujaratis and Sindhis, but no further. It seems to be a pretty constant 5-10% (elevated 15% among Tajik Pamirs). However, Burusho also seem to have 10% HG, did this come from Indo-Iranians? I doubt it, Burusho have shown to be tied with Kalash for having the most ANE in the Old World and I find it extremely unlikely that Burusho got their 35% ANE entirely from the powerful Indo-Iranian people without also switching their language like just about everyone else in the region. Furthermore, Burusho have high R1a (25%), R1b* (10%), C (8%), have a strong Siberian and E. Asian autosomal component and alleged links with Yeniseian languages farther north which might hint at time spent on the Steppe. The question is when? It's possible they could've been on the Steppe as early as Andronovo since Andronovo will likely have some E. Asian component due to having Y-DNA C (although no E. Asian seems to have filtered through to the 1000BC IR1 sample). Alternatively, Burusho E. Asian/Siberian ancestry (both absent in all I-I peoples) could perhaps be via Turkic contacts since there are Turkic loanwords into Burusho. This pre-I-I HG substrate could explain why Tajiks have a bit more HG than the other C. Asians (who could be mostly pre-II substrate descended like Pathans, Gujarats, Sindhs or have had their HG diluted by Turkic migrations, Turkmen, Uzbek) because Tajiks have HG from both the pre-I-I substrate and the later I-Is themselves. So, maybe HG already existed in C. Asia at 5-10% with the Indo-Iranian people bringing an additional 5-10%. Either way, if the Yamnayan 1:1 ratio between HG and CAS holds, then roughly 10-30% of C. and S.C. Asian genes derive from Yamna Indo-Iranians.


On a similar note, I found it interesting that Chuvash almost completely lack the E. Asian component that generally exists at a ratio of 1:2 E. Asian:Siberian (K16) among Oghuz Turks like Altaians/Tubalars. It's not entirely absent though because we can see it at trace frequencies in K17, 18 and 20. Given that Chuvash have 20% Siberian (a large part of which may derive from their Mari substrate who are known to have around 25% Siberian), we should expect to see about 10% of the Yellow component. Either Chuvash is yet another case of elite dominance by a Steppe people and language shifting by the local substrate OR Oghur Turks were noticeably different from their Oghuz cousins in being much less E. Eurasian. I consider the elite dominance model the most likely since that seems to be a pattern among modern Turkic-speaking peoples (Turks, Azerbaijans, Kumyks, Gagauz etc. all are predominantly "natives" of non-Turkic ancestry). We know many/most of the "Turkic" loans into Mongol came from an unknown Oghuric language, so they interacted closely early on. That makes it unlikely that Oghuz became "Mongolified" with extra E. Asian while somehow Oghurs escaped that fate. Therefore, Oghurs were likely just as E. Asian as Oghuz Turks. What's also interesting is that Altai Turks (assumed to be the Turkic homeland) differ considerably from their alleged Altaic relatives, the Tungus and Mongols in having what seems to be genuinely Yamna ancestry (1:1 HG: CAS ratio) in the amount of 30% for Tubalars and about 20% for Altaians and Kyrgyz (with some extra CAS not Yamna-derived). We can compare this to Tajik Pamiris who likely have 35% Yamna ancestry. Mongols like the Daur and Oroqen have none, nor do Tungus like the Hezhen and Ulchi. It's tempting (and sensible) to say that this Yamna component in Oghuz Turks reflects the Indo-Iranian Steppe substrate that was assimilated by Turks. Alternatively, it's possible, this could partially represent Turks having slightly higher W. Eurasian, non-Yamna substrate from pre-IE HGs that existed in Siberia since we know Euro HGs existed far to the east.
Also of interest is that the K16 has seven Uralic samples and not one (not even the far eastern Mansi and Ket-admixed Selkups) have any of the yellow East Asian component. Nor do the Yukaghirs, which I think suggests (given the ubiquity of this yellow E. Asian component among all Altaics) that Uralo-Yukaghiric did not originate/spread from the Baikal (IIRC, Jaska's idea), but further west and was not associated with Altaic languages (IIRC Janhunen's idea), OR Altaic was associated with Uralo-Yukaghiric and was primarily Siberian, only later absorbing E. Asian OR that Uralo-Yukaghiric WAS in the Baikal before Altaic moved in. I think all in all, this evidence strengthens cases of Uralic homelands further north and west of the Baikal. Even the Mansi which are among the eastern-most of Uralic peoples (apart from small tribes of Samoyeds) have about 30% HG, 20% C. Asian, 40% Siberian, 5% Far East Siberian. Some of that HG-C. Asian might be Yamna derived as Ugrics allegedly have a pastoralist history (max 40% Yamna ancestry). Saami in comparison are 50% WHG, 20% C. Asian, 20% Siberian, 10% N. Eastern, 5% Far East Siberian. It would've been great if they tested those 1500BC HGs from Karelia as well to see how much Siberian and Far E. Siberian pre-Saamic peoples had, maybe Saami/F-U people lowered Siberian rather than raised it in Finland? What is Uralic's connection to Far E. Siberian? I wouldn't be surprised if in both Mansi/Saami cases, they acquired this from some pre-Uralic contact/substrate.


Some other observations:


-Karelia HG is 60-62% WHG, 38-40% ANE in comparison to Motala12 being 80% WHG, 20% ANE. If we know EHGs were 60% WHG, 40% ANE and we know that Armenians (15% ANE) are 5% HG and 50%, we can calculate how much ANE CAS has. So, 2% of Armenian ANE comes from HGs, and the remaining 13% comes from their 50% CAS meaning CAS is 26% ANE. Surprisingly, that's less than EHG. Yamna is 50% HG, 50% CAS, so they likely had about 33% ANE.


-As for R1a, maybe it was more popular to the N. of the Steppe and expanded after R1b? We should remember that all these R1b samples come from a small area and are probably not fully representative of all Yamna. I'm confident that R1a WILL be found in the Yamna culture because Samara and Karelia seem to be very close, so I would imagine R1a/b existing in a single population; furthermore, Corded Ware which is supposed to be 75-80% Yamna has 3/3 R1a samples it seems which almost certainly guarantees R1a existing in Yamna as well.


-No Haplo I or N from the Steppe or E. Euro forest-zone/HGs prior to 3000BC. Y-DNA N's absence from the Steppe until 1000BC (Gamba IR1) could mean that it expanded across N. Eurasia 3000-1000BC through the Forest-Belt and gradually filtered onto the Steppes. N is fairly infrequent among Turkic groups AFAIK, so could this be an indication that early Steppe Nomads like Cimmerians and Scythians were Ugrics or had a very strong Ugric substrate (Scythian mtDNA is also super-eastern, mtDNA F1b, A4, D, that doesn't even fit Uralics, might even be Turkic!) Either way, I think we're seeing some pretty solid evidence for early Turkic and Ugric substrate/peoples all the way in the western Steppes as early as 1000-500BC.

-Starcevo had Y-DNA H2! I'm not too familiar with H, but could this mean either H was introduced into India via the Neolithic (possibly with Dravidian languages?) OR this H2 originates from India/S.C. Asia, and traveled westward with agriculture. Given Starcevo lacks the CAS component in K16, could this mean ANE was absent in/near India/South-Central Asia 5000-6000BC? Stuttgart has 10% CAS, we also see it in one EN Hungary sample at <5%, so maybe it just got diluted/decoupled and there WAS CAS/ANE in India? Interestingly, Stuttgart's HG admixture seems to be EHG-derived, not WHG, so maybe some of the CAS comes from the assimilated EHGs? Judging by the absence of CAS in Munda-speaking Kharia, I think we can say that prior to Dravidians, India probably didn't have CAS and low ANE (Lodhi are also supposed to be Munda speaking, but they look admixed which explains their CAS; MA1 is mostly HG and CAS, only about 10% S. Asian which is the dominant component among all S. Asian Aryan speakers, so S. Asian is not very strong in ANE). Kalash lack the NE component that exists in other Iranic peoples like Tajiks and Pashtuns, not sure why (maybe they have less non-Yamnayan/I-I substrate?). It also looks like there may be a second H2, I0405 from Spain_MN that can be either I2a1a1 or H2. If it is I2a1a1, it is of the type popular among Sardinians and SW. Euros/Basques.


-The absence of Y-DNA J and E3b once again points to these lineages likely being largely confined to SE. Europe until maybe the MBA or EBA.


-They confirmed what many (including myself) have speculated before, that mtDNA I, T1, W, U2e, U4, U5a (and probably R1 & C1g IMO) strongly represent the inflow of ANE into Europe. Both EHGs and Yamna have mtDNA C, yet lack the Siberian component which I think means we can consider at least C1g/C4a6 as ANE. IIRC, we also have an mtDNA C sample from PPNB in Syria. It's interesting that they list H (certain subclades) as also being representative of ANE. That might explain the H found in Karelian HGs earlier. It's also interesting that they don't associate mtDNA J with Early Neolithics, I wonder where that leaves it? In the Fernandez study on PPNB from Syria, J was noticeably absent while being present in Mesolithic Greece, so could it be a southern HG marker?


-P. 51 confirms the presence of mtDNA H among Southern HGs (Spanish?) at a remarkably high frequency of 38.5%; U5b is another 38.5%, N* 15.4% and U4 (!) 7.7% and NO U5a. C. Euro HGs (I guess Germany) are equal parts U5a, U5b 32.1% each, followed by U 14.3%, U2 10.7%, U4 7.1%, U8 3.6%. E. Euro HGs are equal parts U5a and U4, 26.7% each followed by 20% U2, 20% C, 6.7% H.


-I hope they manage to add pigmentation data for the final print. Given the large scale of this study in time and geographic scope, it could really help settle many questions, like the timing/expansion of blue eyes, light skin and blonde/red hair, especially given the odd results we've seen from Yamna/Catacomb compared to later Andronovo. There must be some serious discrepancy there. I'm interested to see what pigmentation these EHGs and Samaran Yamnayans had; it's one of the main reasons I'm skeptical of Yamna being the last major demic displacement in Europe and accounting for the spread of IE. My theory is that blue eyes and blonde hair was likely spread by EHGs, especially during the MBA. Western HGs are universally dark-skinned, dark-haired and blue-eyed, but we saw from some of the Swedish HGs (IIRC, Motala12 and StoraForvar11) that some were light-skinned - and I consider it no coincidence that SHGs who are partially EHG are also partially light-skinned - meaning EHGs could also have been light-skinned, in addition to Andronovans being very blonde and heavily EHG derived. I think the connection is strong. EHG also seems to correlate almost perfectly with the European peaks in blonde hair and blue eyes, NE. Europe. Lastly, the Volga Yamna sample from a previous pigmentation study found the highest amount of blue eyes there out of the entire Yamna, 33%."

Northener
02-03-17, 12:38
Let me recapture it in just simple statements and in exaggerated form. Aimed to be an impulse for the discussion here.


Thesis: the tumulus culture (1600-1200 BC) is a key figure in spreading the Bronze Age in Europe and left a clear “genetic footprint” in specific NW Europe.


Why?
1. The tumulus culture spread from central Europe the “Bronze age package” to NW Europe.
2. The tumulus culture is (at least partly) rooted in Yamna, had Steppe roots.
3. Recent findings confirm that the spread of the Bronze is basically a “men’s world” (ratio 1:10), so: “tumulus warrior”.
4. NW Europe is well known for its “tumulus warrior” burials (known as Sögel-Wohlde, Elp-culture etc etc).
5. In parts of NW Europe the genetic impact of Yamna on modern people looks greater than in parts of NE Europe even if the last area is geographically closer to the Yamna heartland.
6. Last but not least about Y-DNA R1B S21/U106: who else than the “tumulus warrior” could be responsible for a fast spread, and even a founder effect in NW Europe, of it?


Does this survive a cross fire? Where did I go wrong?


>>>>>>>>>>
Images, sign at Borger/Drouwen (my aDNA area) which explains that this is the only burial of a "tumulus warrior" left, which was "once one of the many"
http://www.marijkeabbing.nl/images/nieuws%202011/11-12-28%20001.jpg
and
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/cd/Grafheuvel_tussen_Borger_en_Drouwen.jpg

MarkoZ
02-03-17, 13:28
Not to quibble over details, but I prefer to see the excess of Yamnaya affinity observed in NW Europe (Norway/Orkneys) as a result of the proximity to Finland. In Haak's model present day Finns exhibit by far the highest affinity to Yamnaya (~70%) of all populations, albeit with a worse fit due to their minor recent Siberian ancestry (which is why the researchers chose to dismiss them).

The Central European late Bronze Age in contrast seems to have lead to a general decline of Yamnaya affinity vis-à-vis Corded Ware.

Northener
02-03-17, 15:45
Not to quibble over details, but I prefer to see the excess of Yamnaya affinity observed in NW Europe (Norway/Orkneys) as a result of the proximity to Finland. In Haak's model present day Finns exhibit by far the highest affinity to Yamnaya (~70%) of all populations, albeit with a worse fit due to their minor recent Siberian ancestry (which is why the researchers chose to dismiss them).

The Central European late Bronze Age in contrast seems to have lead to a general decline of Yamnaya affinity vis-à-vis Corded Ware.

Yes, but where the Tumulus culture had it's biggest effect there it enhanced the Yamna. And that's in the North Sea area. (And probably the sum gets higher in the areas around the North Sea which had already a CW influence, like North Dutch, North Germany, Denmark).

It's general accepted that the formation of the modern European was a at the end of the Bronze Age a fait accompli. And looking at the historical facts the dynamics at that time came from central Europe and not from the European fringe like Finland. There was not an strong expending Bronze age culture from Finland, at least I'am not familiar with it.

The central European Tumulus was in stead very expansive......it affected especially the North Sea area (Low Countries, NW Germany,Denmark, Norway, England, Scotland).

Look at this picture from Haak e.a. (2015):
http://i65.tinypic.com/2n1s461.jpg

Halberstadt_LBA urnfield (the heir of tumulus) had absolute the most Yamna affinity in the Bronze Age period. Not surprisingly nr 1 in my MDLP K11 ancient admixture.....

LeBrok
02-03-17, 18:34
Let me recapture it in just simple statements and in exaggerated form. Aimed to be an impulse for the discussion here.


Thesis: the tumulus culture (1600-1200 BC) is a key figure in spreading the Bronze Age in Europe and left a clear “genetic footprint” in specific NW Europe.


Why?
1. The tumulus culture spread from central Europe the “Bronze age package” to NW Europe.
2. The tumulus culture is (at least partly) rooted in Yamna, had Steppe roots.
3. Recent findings confirm that the spread of the Bronze is basically a “men’s world” (ratio 1:10), so: “tumulus warrior”.
4. NW Europe is well known for its “tumulus warrior” burials (known as Sögel-Wohlde, Elp-culture etc etc).
5. In parts of NW Europe the genetic impact of Yamna on modern people looks greater than in parts of NE Europe even if the last area is geographically closer to the Yamna heartland.
6. Last but not least about Y-DNA R1B S21/U106: who else than the “tumulus warrior” could be responsible for a fast spread, and even a founder effect in NW Europe, of it?


Does this survive a cross fire? Where did I go wrong?


>>>>>>>>>>
Images, sign at Borger/Drouwen (my aDNA area) which explains that this is the only burial of a "tumulus warrior" left, which was "once one of the many"
http://www.marijkeabbing.nl/images/nieuws%202011/11-12-28%20001.jpg
and
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/cd/Grafheuvel_tussen_Borger_en_Drouwen.jpg Sorry for not responding to your observations. Shortage of time and lack of knowledge on Tumulus movements. In general I don't see anything wrong with your scenario.

Northener
02-03-17, 19:04
Sorry for not responding to your observations. Shortage of time and lack of knowledge on Tumulus movements. In general I don't see anything wrong with your scenario.

Thanks LeBrok, due to personal circumstances I've temporally more time, I just recently came on the Tumulus/Urnfield track. Fascinating. I guess it's a kind of 'game chancer' ;) in the creation of the modern European in many parts of it....

Elizabeth60
03-03-17, 08:03
I'm Irish and I also get Alberstedt_LN unfortunately can't post my MDLP K11 here as it won't let me. It won't even let me post the typed info.

Northener
03-03-17, 10:47
I'm Irish and I also get Alberstedt_LN unfortunately can't post my MDLP K11 here as it won't let me. It won't even let me post the typed info.

Makes me curious. Alberstedt is Corded Ware/ Bell Beaker....how about your Halberstadt -LBA score? Hopefully Gedmatch will soon function again!

Elizabeth60
03-03-17, 13:57
Gedmatch functions but Eupedia won't even let me type in the results even though I haven't used links. Very frustrating.

1. Alberstedt LN is at 3.214328
2. Bell Beaker Germany is at 3.965995
3. British Celtic is at 4.107708
4. Halberstadt LBA is at 4.965898

Brother's result is

1. Alberstedt LN at 2.086311
2. Bell Beaker Germany at 2.908377
3. Halberstadt LBA at 3.645068
4. British Celtic at 3.776918

I've typed these results in full previously but have given up. Hopefully these will post. I'll post the full amount whenever I get to 10 posts.

Northener
03-03-17, 18:52
The Carpathian (Steppe influenced)-Tumulus-Nordic Bronze Age connection, in
“Cultural Perspectives on the Beginnings of the Nordic Bronze Age”. Offa 67/68 (2010/11), pp.51-77 (https://www.academia.edu/14210096/_Cultural_Perspectives_on_the_Beginnings_of_the_No rdic_Bronze_Age_._Offa_67_68_2010_11_pp.51-77)


And catch! Didn't know these articles from Helle Vandkilde before, but they underline, and can be added with genetic evidence!!!


Breakthrough of the Nordic Bronze Age. Transcultural warriorhood and a Carpathian crossroad in the 16th century BCE. European Journal of Archaeology 17 (4) 2014, 602–633
"The breakthrough of the Nordic Bronze Age (NBA) c. 1600 BC as a koiné within Bronze Age Europecan be historically linked to the Carpathian Basin. Nordic distinctiveness entailed an entanglement ofcosmology and warriorhood, albeit represented through different media in the hotspot zone (bronze) and in the northern zone (rock). In a Carpathian crossroad between the Eurasian Steppes, the Aegean world and temperate Europe during this time, a transcultural assemblage coalesced, fusing both tangible and intangible innovations from various different places. Superior warriorhood was coupled to beliefs in a
tripartite cosmology, including a watery access to the netherworld while also exhibiting new fighting technologies and modes of social conduct. This transculture became creatively translated in a range of hot societies at the onset of the Middle Bronze Age. In southern Scandinavia, weaponry radiated momentous
creativity that drew upon Carpathian originals, contacts and a pool of Carpathian ideas, but ultimately drawing on emergent Mycenaean hegemonies in the Aegean. This provided the incentive for a cosmology-rooted resource from which the NBA could take its starting point."


Pictures from the first publication.
The Steppe-Carpathian-Nordic perspective
http://i65.tinypic.com/21awc3o.png


The Carpathian-Nordic Bronze Age perspective:
http://i67.tinypic.com/20zy5b4.png

This explains to me why after corded ware (=North European Plain), trough the tumulus and urnfield cultures, central europe and northwestern Europe got an extra Yamna impuls. In the end this explains why modern Norway got more Steppe genes than modern Belarus!

MarkoZ
03-03-17, 19:16
Yes, but where the Tumulus culture had it's biggest effect there it enhanced the Yamna. And that's in the North Sea area. (And probably the sum gets higher in the areas around the North Sea which had already a CW influence, like North Dutch, North Germany, Denmark).

It's general accepted that the formation of the modern European was a at the end of the Bronze Age a fait accompli. And looking at the historical facts the dynamics at that time came from central Europe and not from the European fringe like Finland. There was not an strong expending Bronze age culture from Finland, at least I'am not familiar with it.

The central European Tumulus was in stead very expansive......it affected especially the North Sea area (Low Countries, NW Germany,Denmark, Norway, England, Scotland).

Look at this picture from Haak e.a. (2015):


Halberstadt_LBA urnfield (the heir of tumulus) had absolute the most Yamna affinity in the Bronze Age period. Not surprisingly nr 1 in my MDLP K11 ancient admixture.....

I think I didn't express myself very well. The proximity of Finland isn't significant due to cultural innovation emanating from the north-east. Rather, Finland is the very nucleus of Corded Ware ancestry. It's the absence of foreign influence that makes northern Fennoscandians the closest descendants of Corded Ware. The principal locale of the Nordic Bronze Age in present day Sweden is already relatively less like CW as compared to Norway.

The Halberstadt-Sonntagsfeld Iron Age individual is in all likelihood representative of the greater Central-North European plain. Case in point, he wasn't a warrior chief - he was originally assigned to the local LBK Neolithic stratum due to the relative poverty of grave goods.

Northener
03-03-17, 19:22
I think I didn't express myself very well. The proximity of Finland isn't significant due to cultural innovation emanating from the north-east. Rather, Finland is the very nucleus of Corded Ware ancestry. It's the absence of foreign influence that makes northern Fennoscandians the closest descendants of Corded Ware. The principal locale of the Nordic Bronze Age in present day Sweden is already relatively less like CW as compared to Norway.

The Halberstadt-Sonntagsfeld Iron Age individual is in all likelihood representative of the greater Central-North European plain. Case in point, he wasn't a warrior chief - he was originally assigned to the local LBK Neolithic stratum due to the relative poverty of grave goods.

See my previous posting, ends with the statement: "This explains to me why after corded ware (=North European Plain), trough the tumulus and urnfield cultures, central europe and northwestern Europe got an extra Yamna impuls. In the end this explains why modern Norway got more Steppe genes than modern Belarus!"

MarkoZ
03-03-17, 20:02
See my previous posting, ends with the statement: "This explains to me why after corded ware (=North European Plain), trough the tumulus and urnfield cultures, central europe and northwestern Europe got an extra Yamna impuls. In the end this explains why modern Norway got more Steppe genes than modern Belarus!"

Let just preface my post by saying that I want whatever Helle Vandkilde is having :smile:. This abstract went way over my head it seems - can't say I understood what she's trying to say there.

I guess the reason I find it hard to follow your line of thought is because the Corded Ware affinity in present day northern Europeans is significantly reduced across the board, with the sole exception of Finland. Why would the Tumulus culture with its core in Bohemia-Bavaria have brought additional Corded Ware genes, when we'd actually need a reduction of affinity over the course of the later metal ages to arrive at modern levels?

Northener
03-03-17, 20:28
Let just preface my post by saying that I want whatever Helle Vandkilde is having :smile:. This abstract went way over my head it seems - can't say I understood what she's trying to say there.

I guess the reason I find it hard to follow your line of thought is because the Corded Ware affinity in present day northern Europeans is significantly reduced across the board, with the sole exception of Finland. Why would the Tumulus culture with its core in Bohemia-Bavaria have brought additional Corded Ware genes, when we'd actually need a reduction of affinity over the course of the later metal ages to arrive at modern levels?

We can see that Tumulus is derived from the Carphatian Bronze Age hub. Crossroads Steppe and Mycenaean routes. As you can see in the picture above the Carpathian hub is partly rooted in most western corner Steppe Zone.

This is what S.A. Grigoryev (http://csc.ac.ru/news/1998_2/2-11-1.pdf) stated about the relationship Steppe and Tumulus:
" During XVI-XV centuries artefacts closely related to Seyma tradition became typical for hoards in Pannonia, France and England. Thus, these bronzes distribution marks the moving of Celts.
A new wave of newcomers left F’odorovo culture sites. Some include usually this culture, together with Alakul culture, in Andronovo culture. However, all attempts to find its local roots had no success. But these roots are in North-Western Iran and South Azerbaijan: cremation in stone boxes and cysts under mounds, clay props for hearth, oval dishes, polished ware. Complex of metal have analogies in Circumpontic area, but first of all, in Sumbar culture in South-Western Turkmenistan. Potteries from Central Asia have been found in some F’odorovo sites.
Typical F’odorovo artefacts are known up to Dnieper river. However, a contact of F’odorovo tribes with first wave of newcomers is more important for us. As a result of this contact new cultures were formed, which fix this contact and a gradual displacement of these populations to the West: Chernoozerie in Irtish basin, Cherkaskul in the Urals, Suskan and Prikazanskaia in Volga-Kama region, Pozdniakovo in Oka basin. These cultures combine cremation and inhumation, mounds and flat burials, bronzes of Seyma and F’odorovo types.
Next moving of these tribes to the West leads to forming of Sosnitzkaia culture on the left-bank of Dnieper, Trzciniec-Komarov culture from Dnieper to Vistula and Tumulus culture in Central and Northern Europe. These cultures reflect localisation of Balts, Slavs and Germans."

So central and nordic/nw Europe got an extra Steppe influx. See the scores of Norway and Scotland (Haak 2015).

That doesn't exclude your statement that in Central Europe between the Bronze Age and nowadays, trough other population developments, the Yamna percentage is somewhat been lowered.

Northener
03-03-17, 20:46
Let just preface my post by saying that I want whatever Helle Vandkilde is having :smile:. This abstract went way over my head it seems - can't say I understood what she's trying to say there.

I guess the reason I find it hard to follow your line of thought is because the Corded Ware affinity in present day northern Europeans is significantly reduced across the board, with the sole exception of Finland. Why would the Tumulus culture with its core in Bohemia-Bavaria have brought additional Corded Ware genes, when we'd actually need a reduction of affinity over the course of the later metal ages to arrive at modern levels?

And one add Markoz, see also my MDLP K11 result this comes close to Halbertstadt-LBA (from Tumulus heir Urnfield culture) pretty high in Yamna (more than Unetice). So I'am a present day Northern European but with a significant Yamna level!

Northener
03-03-17, 23:25
Let just preface my post by saying that I want whatever Helle Vandkilde is having :smile:. This abstract went way over my head it seems - can't say I understood what she's trying to say there.

I guess the reason I find it hard to follow your line of thought is because the Corded Ware affinity in present day northern Europeans is significantly reduced across the board, with the sole exception of Finland. Why would the Tumulus culture with its core in Bohemia-Bavaria have brought additional Corded Ware genes, when we'd actually need a reduction of affinity over the course of the later metal ages to arrive at modern levels?

One other explanation which Dekaen has give is that certain Steppe populations, like the Seima-Turbino, may be not have been counted as Yamna but as EHG...


Sent from my iPad using Eupedia Forum (http://r.tapatalk.com/byo?rid=89698)

MarkoZ
04-03-17, 11:47
We can see that Tumulus is derived from the Carphatian Bronze Age hub. Crossroads Steppe and Mycenaean routes. As you can see in the picture above the Carpathian hub is partly rooted in most western corner Steppe Zone.

This is what S.A. Grigoryev (http://csc.ac.ru/news/1998_2/2-11-1.pdf) stated about the relationship Steppe and Tumulus:
" During XVI-XV centuries artefacts closely related to Seyma tradition became typical for hoards in Pannonia, France and England. Thus, these bronzes distribution marks the moving of Celts.
A new wave of newcomers left F’odorovo culture sites. Some include usually this culture, together with Alakul culture, in Andronovo culture. However, all attempts to find its local roots had no success. But these roots are in North-Western Iran and South Azerbaijan: cremation in stone boxes and cysts under mounds, clay props for hearth, oval dishes, polished ware. Complex of metal have analogies in Circumpontic area, but first of all, in Sumbar culture in South-Western Turkmenistan. Potteries from Central Asia have been found in some F’odorovo sites.
Typical F’odorovo artefacts are known up to Dnieper river. However, a contact of F’odorovo tribes with first wave of newcomers is more important for us. As a result of this contact new cultures were formed, which fix this contact and a gradual displacement of these populations to the West: Chernoozerie in Irtish basin, Cherkaskul in the Urals, Suskan and Prikazanskaia in Volga-Kama region, Pozdniakovo in Oka basin. These cultures combine cremation and inhumation, mounds and flat burials, bronzes of Seyma and F’odorovo types.
Next moving of these tribes to the West leads to forming of Sosnitzkaia culture on the left-bank of Dnieper, Trzciniec-Komarov culture from Dnieper to Vistula and Tumulus culture in Central and Northern Europe. These cultures reflect localisation of Balts, Slavs and Germans."

So central and nordic/nw Europe got an extra Steppe influx. See the scores of Norway and Scotland (Haak 2015).

That doesn't exclude your statement that in Central Europe between the Bronze Age and nowadays, trough other population developments, the Yamna percentage is somewhat been lowered.

So what this means is that a new cultural impetus came from the steppe and fed into the Central European traditions among others via the Carpathian route? Well, this would certainly make the sudden appearance of the aforementioned artefact hoards less enigmatic, since these would have been rather atypical for Central Europe at the time. I hadn't heard of this connection until now, but then there isn't anyone more knowledgeable in matters Eastern European archaeology than Grigoryev so no doubt it's real.

Northener
04-03-17, 14:26
So what this means is that a new cultural impetus came from the steppe and fed into the Central European traditions among others via the Carpathian route? Well, this would certainly make the sudden appearance of the aforementioned artefact hoards less enigmatic, since these would have been rather atypical for Central Europe at the time. I hadn't heard of this connection until now, but then there isn't anyone more knowledgeable in matters Eastern European archaeology than Grigoryev so no doubt it's real.

Yes that's exactly what I mean!
And with that culture there came also some genes I guess[emoji847]


Sent from my iPad using Eupedia Forum (http://r.tapatalk.com/byo?rid=89698)

Northener
04-03-17, 17:05
So what this means is that a new cultural impetus came from the steppe and fed into the Central European traditions among others via the Carpathian route? Well, this would certainly make the sudden appearance of the aforementioned artefact hoards less enigmatic, since these would have been rather atypical for Central Europe at the time. I hadn't heard of this connection until now, but then there isn't anyone more knowledgeable in matters Eastern European archaeology than Grigoryev so no doubt it's real.

On Gedmatch there is a possibility to compare your autosomal DNA with the "golden oldies".
Today I compared it on different levels, this is the result:


1. Ust-Ishim Siberia 45kya up to 6cM, Omsk, Seima-Turbino
2. Clovis Montana 12,5 kya up to 4cM, Native America, ANE like
3. Loschbour Lux 8 kya up to 4cM, WHG
4. Nei Hungary 7,2 kya up to 4cM, Neoltihic Hungary
5. LBK Stuttgart 7 kya up to 3cM, Neolithic Southern Germany
6. Br 2 Hungary 3,2 kya up to 3cM Bronze Age Hungary
7. Rise Sweden 3,7 KY up to 3 cM R1b U106 Corded Ware Sweden


When you overlook this result you can easily see from where the wind blows.....from the east, cold Steppe blow! Especially number 1 is related to the Seima-Turbino. This is an old finding from Omsk. Omsk is the heartland of the Seima-Turbino (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seima-Turbino_phenomenon). The second one, a native American, is related to ANE. Also far Northeastern Russia.
The others speak for themselves.

Maybe bias but according to me this fits in the Steppe-Carpathian-NW Europe pattern.

Northener
05-03-17, 14:39
PS overlooked one the 5 cm one, makes it:

1. Ust-Ishim Siberia 45kya up to 6cM, Omsk, Seima-Turbino

2. Ne 1 Hungary 7,2 kya up to 5cM, Neoltihic Hungary

3. Clovis Montana 12,5 kya up to 4cM, Native America, ANE like
4. Loschbour Lux 8 kya up to 4cM, WHG
5. LBK Stuttgart 7 kya up to 3cM, Neolithic Southern Germany
6. Br 2 Hungary 3,2 kya up to 3cM Bronze Age Hungary
7. Rise Sweden 3,7 KY up to 3 cM R1b U106 Corded Ware Sweden

Northener
06-03-17, 22:36
Is there a second wave of Steppe folk, from the outmost western stronghold of the Steppe folk at that time; the Carpathian (Hungarian) region into Central and NW Europe around 1600 BC?


Yes! Archeology and genetics come together....


"In Northern Germany and Denmark, where all the processes were underway but some at a later date than in more southerly areas, celts and spear-heads with a decorated socket inheriting directly Seima-Turbino traditions, appear only from the timecorresponding to stage Br B/1 in Southern Germany(Fig. 97) [Müller-Karpe, 1980, Taf. 501, 504, 506]"


https://www.academia.edu/3742220/Anc...nsk_Rifei_2002




As said I compared my aDNA trough Gedmatch with old aDNA material. This was the result:


1. Ust-Ishim Siberia 45kya up to 6cM, Omsk, Seima-Turbino
2. Ne 1 Hungary 7,2 kya up to 5cM, Neoltihic Hungary
3. Clovis Montana 12,5 kya up to 4cM, Native America, ANE like
4. Loschbour Lux 8 kya up to 4cM, WHG
5. LBK Stuttgart 7 kya up to 3cM, Neolithic Southern Germany
6. Br 2 Hungary 3,2 kya up to 3cM Bronze Age Hungary
7. Rise Sweden 3,7 KY up to 3 cM R1b U106 Corded Ware Sweden