Corded Ware Culture admixture against Yamnayans

Sorry I'm being so dense. Isn't Rise 522, labelled Yamnaya, 33.24% Baloch and 6.58% Caucasus? Isn't that 40% of the total genome of Yamnaya?

There seems to have been a steady flow north, as Samara had about 14%, which then increased to 33%.
 
Sorry I'm being so dense. Isn't Rise 522, labelled Yamnaya, 33.24% Baloch and 6.58% Caucasus? Isn't that 40% of the total genome of Yamnaya?

There seems to have been a steady flow north, as Samara had about 14%, which then increased to 33%.
Look at Iranian Neolithic. It had 24% of Caucasian. In what proportions they had to mix with Samara to drop Caucasian to 6% in Yamnaya? 1 to 3. NE Euro in Samara drops a quarter, 25% in transition to Yamanya. It also gives 1 to 3 ratio, when considering that they mixed with Iranian Farmer who had 0 of it.
 
Look at Iranian Neolithic. It had 24% of Caucasian. In what proportions they had to mix with Samara to drop Caucasian to 6% in Yamnaya? 1 to 4. NE Euro in Samara drops a quarter, 25% in transition to Yamanya. It also gives 1 to 4 ratio, when considering that they mixed with Iranian Farmer who had 0 of it.

early people in the steppe were EHG admixed with some WHG
the people coming in from south of the Caucasus were also EHG, but had mixed with CHG en route

that is at least what K=14 is telling me
 
early people in the steppe were EHG admixed with some WHG
Nope, EHG is a lot of WHG admixed with ANE. In Harappa NE Euro and Baloch.
the people coming in from south of the Caucasus were also EHG, but had mixed with CHG en route
that is at least what K=14 is telling me[/QUOTE]Where did you get this? Post the run.
Harappa shows that there was a little admixture 4% of EHG in CHG, but no Caucasian CHG admixture in Samara EHG. It denotes some EHG migration into CHG before neolithic.
 
the people coming in from south of the Caucasus were also EHG, but had mixed with CHG en route

that is at least what K=14 is telling me

where do you see it? (that is in pre-Bronze samples)

By the way there are interesting people: Hungary BA (so after the CW) was 25% WHG, 25% EHG, 50% EEF (just seems a simple mix between SHG and LBK); there is no CHG... why? the Pannonian plain is the natural pass to go from the steppes to Central Europe, and moreover the ecosystem fits weel herders.

Another set of five samples (C Asia Minor PN) that I dn't know from which paper come deliver 75% EEF and 25% CHG, it's Central Asia Minor Pre-Neolithic? that would be quite interesting for all questions about peopling Europe if such pop also expanded into it.
 
where do you see it? (that is in pre-Bronze samples)

there are 3 khvalynsk genomes
2 are similar to Karelian and Samara HG
the 3rd is Yamna-like (Yamna could be a mixture of 2/3 of this 3rd Khvalynsk and 1/3 Karelian/Samara HG)
 
@Lebrok,
Impossible.

That is what I don’t get it. If there was a movement of people into North Caucasus from south Caucasus that took agriculture and some pastoral lifestyle it would be the Shulaveri-Shomu that were a vast amount of people in Georgia that disappeared and were replaced by 4900bc.
And if I am right it was them (the SSC) taking PIE language (as Joahnnes Krause at Max plank seem to indicate) and taking (IMO) R1b-M269 and L23 into several places around the planet them their genetics is…. Complicated. Shulaveri Shomu will be a mix of Balkan Hunter gatheres///Balkan Farmers///Anatolia Barcin///Kotias.

  1. You first notice “them” in Fikertepe (6600BC-5900BC) . If they were fikirtepe they were very admix with whatever you get of Balkan (like Bulgaria) as huntergatherer. So, if am right we should never forget that actually there had to be a link to Starčevo culture or the Kőrös culture or the Criş culture. Its just that SCK had not much Barcin Admix, and while they were moving the south shores of Black sea in Anatolia they admix a lot with Barcin, so by Fikiertepe they would be Starcevo like mixing with Barcin. (http://r1b2westerneurope.blogs.sapo.pt/the-forefathers-of-the-shulaveri-shomu-3917)


  1. When in 6000bc they arrive into South Caucasus, into the land of CHG, they were getting the CHG admix increased. And increased because let’s not assume that CHG stayed put in Georgia and not moved along south cost of black sea?! – ridiculous. So even Fikertepe should have some CHG.



  1. So when Mentesh tepe fell and Shulaveri where gone… You can track them as a stressed out pop in the Kuban river, even getting kicked out by Maykop. So maybe were them already admixed with more EHG arriving to samara and become a large component of Khvalynsk and Yamnaya in Samara… (http://r1b2westerneurope.blogs.sapo.pt/from-shulaveri-shomu-to-kubans-3429 )


Just my take. And I will be right in the end. :)
 
Why would Iran farmers go to steppe by crossing mountains and not just go up via eastern caspian? Dont think steppe 4000bc had much Iran neolithic. but ok.

Why eastern Caspian, ?............they will travel via western Caspian like they do today, where most of people live ......

Eastern caspian is too hard , they had to deal with the fast flowing oxus river


Between Azeri lands in western southern caspian sea area to Daghestan in western northen caspian sea area, we find nearly every different Ydna haplogroup

drinking water is needed to survive , from the Aral sea it flowed to the caspian sea, then from the caspian sea into the black sea. The black sea did not penetrate into the Aegean sea until ~9000BC, so people like Villabruna could cross from Anatolia into europe without getting wet
 
@Lebrok,
Impossible.

That is what I don’t get it. If there was a movement of people into North Caucasus from south Caucasus that took agriculture and some pastoral lifestyle it would be the Shulaveri-Shomu that were a vast amount of people in Georgia that disappeared and were replaced by 4900bc.
And if I am right it was them (the SSC) taking PIE language (as Joahnnes Krause at Max plank seem to indicate) and taking (IMO) R1b-M269 and L23 into several places around the planet them their genetics is…. Complicated. Shulaveri Shomu will be a mix of Balkan Hunter gatheres///Balkan Farmers///Anatolia Barcin///Kotias.

  1. You first notice “them” in Fikertepe (6600BC-5900BC) . If they were fikirtepe they were very admix with whatever you get of Balkan (like Bulgaria) as huntergatherer. So, if am right we should never forget that actually there had to be a link to Starčevo culture or the Kőrös culture or the Criş culture. Its just that SCK had not much Barcin Admix, and while they were moving the south shores of Black sea in Anatolia they admix a lot with Barcin, so by Fikiertepe they would be Starcevo like mixing with Barcin. (http://r1b2westerneurope.blogs.sapo.pt/the-forefathers-of-the-shulaveri-shomu-3917)


  1. When in 6000bc they arrive into South Caucasus, into the land of CHG, they were getting the CHG admix increased. And increased because let’s not assume that CHG stayed put in Georgia and not moved along south cost of black sea?! – ridiculous. So even Fikertepe should have some CHG.



  1. So when Mentesh tepe fell and Shulaveri where gone… You can track them as a stressed out pop in the Kuban river, even getting kicked out by Maykop. So maybe were them already admixed with more EHG arriving to samara and become a large component of Khvalynsk and Yamnaya in Samara… (http://r1b2westerneurope.blogs.sapo.pt/from-shulaveri-shomu-to-kubans-3429 )


Just my take. And I will be right in the end. :)
Sorry I'm not familiar with Shulaveri and their faith. Here are more Harappa samples, perhaps will tell you something more.

NE1 HungaryEN Anatolia, Barcin?CHG, Satsurblia georgia 13kyaIranian Neolithic 10,000 yearsKvalinsk HG
Population Population Population Population Population
S-Indian- S-Indian- S-Indian0.62S-Indian6.13S-Indian-
Baloch- Baloch- Baloch36.63Baloch62.71Baloch20.2
Caucasian28.27Caucasian37.64Caucasian54.15Caucasian24.97Caucasian-
NE-Euro12.13NE-Euro0.86NE-Euro3.84NE-Euro- NE-Euro71.08
SE-Asian- SE-Asian- SE-Asian0.59SE-Asian- SE-Asian-
Siberian- Siberian- Siberian0.77Siberian- Siberian-
NE-Asian- NE-Asian- NE-Asian- NE-Asian- NE-Asian-
Papuan- Papuan- Papuan0.15Papuan0.35Papuan-
American- American- American- American- American6.89
Beringian- Beringian- Beringian- Beringian- Beringian1.7
Mediterranean45.75Mediterranean47.24Mediterranean- Mediterranean- Mediterranean-
SW-Asian13.45SW-Asian14SW-Asian- SW-Asian3.88SW-Asian-
San- San- San- San0.18San-
E-African- E-African- E-African- E-African- E-African-
Pygmy0.05Pygmy- Pygmy0.25Pygmy- Pygmy-
W-African0.35W-African0.27W-African3.01W-African1.78W-African0.13

For more explanation about harappa admixture go here:
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/thread...e-your-admixtures-to-ancient-and-contemporary
 
Sorry I'm not familiar with Shulaveri and their faith. Here are more Harappa samples, perhaps will tell you something more.

For more explanation about harappa admixture go here:
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/thread...e-your-admixtures-to-ancient-and-contemporary


HI Lebrok,
Nope. I think this references is too admixed already. We need to have more crude references. We need to have a lot more samples from Balkans, from south Caucasus (mostly here) and North Caucasus.
 
where do you see it? (that is in pre-Bronze samples)

By the way there are interesting people: Hungary BA (so after the CW) was 25% WHG, 25% EHG, 50% EEF (just seems a simple mix between SHG and LBK); there is no CHG... why? the Pannonian plain is the natural pass to go from the steppes to Central Europe, and moreover the ecosystem fits weel herders.

Another set of five samples (C Asia Minor PN) that I dn't know from which paper come deliver 75% EEF and 25% CHG, it's Central Asia Minor Pre-Neolithic? that would be quite interesting for all questions about peopling Europe if such pop also expanded into it.
Indeed Hungarian BA is peculiar. Not much, or non at all, Iranian/CHG admixture. There is however a big increase in EHG/WHG, the rest is of EEF type farmer. He might be a mixture of West Yamnaya and Cucuteni.
Corded Ware guys look almost all the same, mostly EHG/WHG with 5-10% of Iranian Neolithic/CHG, and 5-10% of EEF. The EEF thy could have picked up from local farmers.
 
HI Lebrok,
Nope. I think this references is too admixed already. We need to have more crude references. We need to have a lot more samples from Balkans, from south Caucasus (mostly here) and North Caucasus.
Armenian ChalcolithicArmenia MBAM930063Armenia LBAM691697
Population Population Population
S-Indian0.27S-Indian- S-Indian-
Baloch17.64Baloch23.13Baloch28.22
Caucasian41.35Caucasian38.66Caucasian30.75
NE-Euro20.25NE-Euro18.57NE-Euro24.77
SE-Asian- SE-Asian- SE-Asian-
Siberian- Siberian0.54Siberian-
NE-Asian- NE-Asian- NE-Asian-
Papuan- Papuan0.92Papuan-
American0.55American1.3American1.54
Beringian- Beringian0.59Beringian-
Mediterranean11.12Mediterranean9.34Mediterranean6.98
SW-Asian8.81SW-Asian4.94SW-Asian6.38
San- San- San-
E-African- E-African- E-African-
Pygmy- Pygmy- Pygmy-
W-African- W-African1.99W-African1.36


EN Anatolia, Barcin?CHG, Satsurblia georgia 13kyaIranian Neolithic 10,000 years
Population Population Population
S-Indian- S-Indian0.62S-Indian6.13
Baloch- Baloch36.63Baloch62.71
Caucasian37.64Caucasian54.15Caucasian24.97
NE-Euro0.86NE-Euro3.84NE-Euro-
SE-Asian- SE-Asian0.59SE-Asian-
Siberian- Siberian0.77Siberian-
NE-Asian- NE-Asian- NE-Asian-
Papuan- Papuan0.15Papuan0.35
American- American- American-
Beringian- Beringian- Beringian-
Mediterranean47.24Mediterranean- Mediterranean-
SW-Asian14SW-Asian- SW-Asian3.88
San- San- San0.18
E-African- E-African- E-African-
Pygmy- Pygmy0.25Pygmy-
W-African0.27W-African3.01W-African1.78


Most Armenian admixtures look local, except 20% of NE Euro. NE Euro didn't exist here in such numbers before, look at 3 guys below Armenians. Seems like there was a big Yamnaya invasion into Armenia at the end of Neolithic.
 
By the way there are interesting people: Hungary BA (so after the CW) was 25% WHG, 25% EHG, 50% EEF (just seems a simple mix between SHG and LBK); there is no CHG... why? the Pannonian plain is the natural pass to go from the steppes to Central Europe, and moreover the ecosystem fits weel herders.

do you mean these people :

VatyaHungarySzazhalombatta-Foldvar [RISE254]M2128-1909 BCIFI2, CTS2514, CTS3384
or I2a1 (Tagankin) (Z2657/CTS7669/PF3765+ Z2673/CTS12003/PF3846+ Z2652/CTS4568/PF3733+, FGC18615/Y12523- FGC18580/Y7862- FGC18589/Y5341- S6669-, Z2616/S5140+ V1191/Z2611/PF3638+)
J1c9Allentoft 2015; Mathieson 2015; additional info from Vladimir Tagankin
VatyaHungaryErd 4 [RISE479]M
I2a2a1a2aL1229T2bAllentoft 2015; Mathieson 2015
VatyaHungaryErd 4 [RISE480]F


U5a2aAllentoft 2015
VatyaHungaryErd 4 [RISE483]F


H2a1Allentoft 2015
VatyaHungaryErd 4 [RISE484]F


T1a1Allentoft 2015
Middle Bronze AgeHungaryBattonya Voris Oktober [RISE349]F2034-1748 BC

T2b3Allentoft 2015
MarosHungarySzoreg - C [RISE373]F1886-1696 BC

K1a2aAllentoft 2015
MarosHungarySzoreg - C [RISE374]M1866-1619 BCG2aF3088
or (Kendall) G2a2a1a (PF3177)
T2bAllentoft 2015; Mathieson 2015; add info from Ted Kendall
Gáta/WieslburgHungaryM85 Enese elkerül? 02. Kóny, Proletár-d?l? II [KON 6]
1770-1760 BCR1b1a2M269U5b1Szécsényi-Nagy 2015 thesis
VatyaHungarySzazhalombatta-Foldvar [RISE247]M1746-1611 BCI2a2a1CTS9183H11aAllentoft 2015; Mathieson 2015


Vatya-Maros-Gata/Wieslburg 4.1-3.6 ka?

Both Hungarian EN and CA have EEF with some WHG, but no EHG nor CHG
Hungarian has EHG added, but also a fraction of CHG
 
Another set of five samples (C Asia Minor PN) that I dn't know from which paper come deliver 75% EEF and 25% CHG, it's Central Asia Minor Pre-Neolithic? that would be quite interesting for all questions about peopling Europe if such pop also expanded into it.

TurkeyBoncuklu [Bon004] PPNM6500-6200 BCG2a2b2b – F705
N1a1a1http://www.cell.com/current-biology/fulltext/S0960-9822(16)30850-8Bon004 Pre-Pottery Neolithic > 8300 G2a2b2b-F705 callsCentraal Anatolia PPN 85 % EEF + 5 % steppe + 5 % WHG + 4 % CHG + 1 % (Karitiana/ Natufi/ Papua)
TurkeyBoncuklu [Bon002] PPNF


K1ahttp://www.cell.com/current-biology/fulltext/S0960-9822(16)30850-8
TurkeyBoncuklu [Bon005] PPNF


N1a1a1http://www.cell.com/current-biology/fulltext/S0960-9822(16)30850-8
TurkeyBoncuklu [Bon001] PPNM8212 – 7952 BCG2a2b2b1a – PF3422
U3http://www.cell.com/current-biology/fulltext/S0960-9822(16)30850-8Bon001 Pre-Pottery Neolithic 8212–7952 G2a2b2b1a-PF3422 calls
TurkeyTepecik-Ciftlik [Tep001] Pottery NeolithicM7500-5800 BCG, J2 or R1b
K1ahttp://www.cell.com/current-biology/fulltext/S0960-9822(16)30850-8Tep001 Pottery Neolithic 7500–5800 G, J2, or R1b callsCentraal Anatolia PN 75 % EEF + 20 % CHG + 2 % natufi + 1 % steppe + 1 % Papua + 1 % (WHG/ Eskimo/ Karitiana)
TurkeyTepecik-Ciftlik [Tep006] Pottery NeolithicM7500-5800 BCC1a2 – Y10446
N1a1a1http://www.cell.com/current-biology/fulltext/S0960-9822(16)30850-8Tep006 Pottery Neolithic 7500–5800 C1a2-Y10446 calls
TurkeyTepecik-Ciftlik [Tep003] Pottery NeolithicM7500-5800 BCG2a2a – PF3159*
N1b1ahttp://www.cell.com/current-biology/fulltext/S0960-9822(16)30850-8Tep003 Pottery Neolithic 7500–5800 G2a2a-PF3159* calls
TurkeyTepecik-Ciftlik [Tep002] Pottery NeolithicF


K1a12ahttp://www.cell.com/current-biology/fulltext/S0960-9822(16)30850-8
TurkeyTepecik-Ciftlik [Tep004] Pottery NeolithicF


N1a1a1http://www.cell.com/current-biology/fulltext/S0960-9822(16)30850-8


why does Boncuklu only have 4% CHG ,while Tepecik has 20%?
Boncuklu is older, it is PPN, while Tepecik is PN
it look like the CHG came along with the pottery

gr1.jpg
 
TurkeyBoncuklu [Bon004] PPNM6500-6200 BCG2a2b2b – F705
N1a1a1http://www.cell.com/current-biology/fulltext/S0960-9822(16)30850-8Bon004 Pre-Pottery Neolithic > 8300 G2a2b2b-F705 callsCentraal Anatolia PPN 85 % EEF + 5 % steppe + 5 % WHG + 4 % CHG + 1 % (Karitiana/ Natufi/ Papua)
TurkeyBoncuklu [Bon002] PPNF


K1ahttp://www.cell.com/current-biology/fulltext/S0960-9822(16)30850-8
TurkeyBoncuklu [Bon005] PPNF


N1a1a1http://www.cell.com/current-biology/fulltext/S0960-9822(16)30850-8
TurkeyBoncuklu [Bon001] PPNM8212 – 7952 BCG2a2b2b1a – PF3422
U3http://www.cell.com/current-biology/fulltext/S0960-9822(16)30850-8Bon001 Pre-Pottery Neolithic 8212–7952 G2a2b2b1a-PF3422 calls
TurkeyTepecik-Ciftlik [Tep001] Pottery NeolithicM7500-5800 BCG, J2 or R1b
K1ahttp://www.cell.com/current-biology/fulltext/S0960-9822(16)30850-8Tep001 Pottery Neolithic 7500–5800 G, J2, or R1b callsCentraal Anatolia PN 75 % EEF + 20 % CHG + 2 % natufi + 1 % steppe + 1 % Papua + 1 % (WHG/ Eskimo/ Karitiana)
TurkeyTepecik-Ciftlik [Tep006] Pottery NeolithicM7500-5800 BCC1a2 – Y10446
N1a1a1http://www.cell.com/current-biology/fulltext/S0960-9822(16)30850-8Tep006 Pottery Neolithic 7500–5800 C1a2-Y10446 calls
TurkeyTepecik-Ciftlik [Tep003] Pottery NeolithicM7500-5800 BCG2a2a – PF3159*
N1b1ahttp://www.cell.com/current-biology/fulltext/S0960-9822(16)30850-8Tep003 Pottery Neolithic 7500–5800 G2a2a-PF3159* calls
TurkeyTepecik-Ciftlik [Tep002] Pottery NeolithicF


K1a12ahttp://www.cell.com/current-biology/fulltext/S0960-9822(16)30850-8
TurkeyTepecik-Ciftlik [Tep004] Pottery NeolithicF


N1a1a1http://www.cell.com/current-biology/fulltext/S0960-9822(16)30850-8


why does Boncuklu only have 4% CHG ,while Tepecik has 20%?
Boncuklu is older, it is PPN, while Tepecik is PN
it look like the CHG came along with the pottery
Definitely CHG/Caucasian admixture expansion. Are any of these in Gedmatch to check admixtures?
 
Haven't we known for a while that CHG like ancestry moved into Anatolia and the Levant as time passed, just as "Anatolian farmer" type ancestry moved north and east? That's what the papers have pointed out, as well as some of the amateur bloggers.

Some analyses also have a bit of it in Copper Age people of Europe like Otzi, and in some of the Hungarians, although not all. I think we may see a lot more of it coming at that time, and later in the Bronze Age, once we get some more ancient southern European samples.

There were two big movements out of the Near East. One was from a group centered around Anatolia and the Levant, and one was from the southern Caucasus/Iran. The latter moved into India and southwest into the rest of the Near East, and north as well, ultimately reaching the steppe. The former went into Europe, across North Africa, down into the Arabian peninsula and into Africa and also west and north west into other areas of the Near East. It's a sort of bifurcated "Womb of Nations" to use Dienekes' old term. That ancestry is what binds all those areas together. As pertains to Europe, you have that "Caucasus" type ancestry entering Europe both from the southeast and the east with steppe people.

As for percentages of "Caucasus", or "Iranian farmer", or "southern" or whatever , using admixture programs which use modern people instead of ancient genomes as references is always going to give a distorted picture, because those groups are admixed themselves. Plus, as a counterbalance to admixture, you need to use formal stats. Finally, we need to get access to the papers which have analyzed lots of samples from the Caucasus and surrounding areas for the relevant time periods. Until then, we won't know how much ANE or EHG or whatever was south of the Caucasus at relevant times.

Anyway, that's how I see it.
 
There is only a Hungary BA sample in the K = 14, and without further refs I don't who was.

why does Boncuklu only have 4% CHG ,while Tepecik has 20%?
Boncuklu is older, it is PPN, while Tepecik is PN
it look like the CHG came along with the pottery

Seems reasonable, but surely after the regional domestication of a given plant or a given animal there was a dinamic burst of migrations and expansion: herders occupying areas were barley can't grow, barley where wheat can't resist temperatures, goat-herders in mountains and forests where sheeps have not a so easy access, etc.
 
As for percentages, using admixture programs which use modern people instead of ancient genomes is always going to give a distorted picture.

108% true...
 
Haven't we known for a while that CHG like ancestry moved into Anatolia and the Levant as time passed, just as "Anatolian farmer" type ancestry moved north and east? That's what the papers have pointed out, as well as some of the amateur bloggers.

Some analyses also have a bit of it in Copper Age people of Europe like Otzi, and in some of the Hungarians, although not all. I think we may see a lot more of it coming at that time, and later in the Bronze Age, once we get some more ancient southern European samples.

There were two big movements out of the Near East. One was from a group centered around Anatolia and the Levant, and one was from the southern Caucasus/Iran. The latter moved into India and southwest into the rest of the Near East, and north as well, ultimately reaching the steppe. The former went into Europe, across North Africa, down into the Arabian peninsula and into Africa and also west and north west into other areas of the Near East. It's a sort of bifurcated "Womb of Nations" to use Dienekes' old term. That ancestry is what binds all those areas together. As pertains to Europe, you have that "Caucasus" type ancestry entering Europe both from the southeast and the east with steppe people.

As for percentages of "Caucasus", or "Iranian farmer", or "southern" or whatever , using admixture programs which use modern people instead of ancient genomes as references is always going to give a distorted picture, because those groups are admixed themselves. Plus, as a counterbalance to admixture, you need to use formal stats. Finally, we need to get access to the papers which have analyzed lots of samples from the Caucasus and surrounding areas for the relevant time periods. Until then, we won't know how much ANE or EHG or whatever was south of the Caucasus at relevant times.

Anyway, that's how I see it.
The difference I guess, is that Caucasus admixture in Neolithic Anatolia is from CHG mostly and only minimal from Iranian Neolithic. Caucasus admixture in Yamnaya is mostly from Iranian Neolithic and only minimal from CHG.
 

This thread has been viewed 91336 times.

Back
Top