The genomic history of southeastern Europe-Mathiesen et al

bicicleur said:
what is the dating?

only basal R, no subclades identified
my guess would be R2 or R1b-V88
Click to expand...

I agree with that. It might even be some extinct R*. After all I* also shows up a bit everywhere in Europe during the Mesolithic and Neolithic.
 
Apsurdistan said:
there's T too? so pretty much everything except I1
this is bullshit
Click to expand...

Why do you expect to find I1 in Mesolithic orEarly Neolithic samples ? I1 didn't exist back then. It was just I* (or pre-I1, meaning that only some of the 300+ defining mutations existed). The I1 reported by Szécsényi-Nagy 2014 in the LBK culture is almost surely pre-I1. That pre-I1 would have spread from Hungary to Germany with the advance of LBK, then maybe to to already Scandinavia with Funnelbeaker farmers.

I1 as we know it appeared less than 5000 years ago, either during the late Funnelbeaker or the early Corded Ware/Battle-Axe culture. One likely scenario is that the ancestor of all modern I1 was one lucky man assimilated by Corded Ware tribes who adapted well, rose to prominence, and whose descendants expanded quickly as Corded Ware tribes spread over Scandinavia. An alternative scenario is that I1 was a founder lineage among a small group of Funnelbeaker farmers who expanded to Scandinavia, eventually reaching Finland before the Corded Ware. Since the TMRCA of I1 is just at the limit of the Funnelbeaker and Corded Ware cultures, and that it is just an estimate that could be off by a few centuries, it is not possible to know for sure at present. However there is no reason to expect any I1 among the Balkans, Baltic or Steppe samples tested in this paper.
 
It's my understanding that almost all the R1a in the Balkans, certainly in Greece, is Balto-Slavic, so Medieval. There is a respectable amount of Yamnaya type R1b. The ancient samples for the Bronze Age show little downstream R1a or R1b in the Balkans, although there's I2a.

In terms of autosomal dna, there's about 10% "steppe" in the Early Bronze Age Balkans. There's more later, but as I said before, I think the 30% figure is misleading because it includes the one Z93 sample with very high steppe. I don't know if most of the Indo-European speakers took a different route, or just passed through, but there certainly doesn't seem to be any mass migration there in the Bronze Age. We only have one Iron Age Sample, but it has even less steppe.

Maybe more samples will change the situation, but that's what we have for now, and we have quite a few Bronze Age samples; I quickly counted 11, with a lot from Bulgaria, right on the path.

For accuracy, nobody had chariots in 4000 BC.

For now I'm going with the idea that there was a WHG related population in Anatolia.

As to the relationships between the hunter-gatherers, there is this from the paper.

View attachment 8676

The Neolithic R in Iran is from Ganj Dareh, Iran, as they all are, and is dated 8000 to 7700 BC. The other male is listed as CT. It's all in Table 5, right after the Globular Amphora and Iron Gates samples.

Ed. The Mycenaeans could still be Z93, of course, but a very small autosomal impact?

We are now reaching mental breakdown territory. Italic is related to Iranic, not Celtic? "Say it ain't so, Joe!":rolleyes:
 
LeBrok said:
Wherever it was hiding in h-gs, at one point was picked up by proto germanic farmers, and afterwards exploded with germanic population. In one of most successful tribes. Unless you think it landed in IA Europe with Martians?
Click to expand...

Of course it can be explained without magic or aliens, but it's unique. There's barely any sign of it before IA, then it explodes in Germanic speakers.
 
Angela said:
For now I'm going with the idea that there was a WHG related population in Anatolia.

As to the relationships between the hunter-gatherers, there is this from the paper.

View attachment 8676

The Neolithic R in Iran is from Ganj Dareh, Iran, as they all are, and is dated 8000 to 7700 BC. The other male is listed as CT. It's all in Table 5, right after the Globular Amphora and Iron Gates samples.
Click to expand...

The attachment is broken
 
Alan said:
How can Villabruna look like EHG minus the ANE, if the whole difference of WHG to EHG is the extend of ANE admixture ;)
That is not possible.

EHG, SHG, WHG all seem to be the same with only their ANE admixture being the differenting point. And Balkan H&G seem to be something of their own too. Predominantly WHG (93%) with little ANE admixture (~7%).
Click to expand...

And actually I don't think the only difference is "ANE", at least it doesn't appear that way in some runs.

Maybe people mean to say that EHG descends from Villabruna where as WHG descends from a Villabruna cousin, or something like that? I dunno, but it's the 2nd or 3rd time I've heard it.
 
epoch said:
But it doesn't provide the game changer on account of the LGM or pre-LGM roots of WHG.
Click to expand...

Exactly. It's what we would have expected given Villabruna and Baltic HGs. It's good. There is order in the universe.
 
holderlin said:
I said historically. Meaning "as far as we know for sure". Of course they had to have been there before then, but I disagree with your time frames. Don't espouse science with your claims as if you're using pure logic, please. Luwain is really the only sub-group and it isn't as diverges from Hittite as you claim.

I agree that Anatolian/proto-Hittite, or whatever you want to call it must have diverged from PIE by 4000BC, but these would have been mobile people with horses and chariots. They could have moved into Anatolian suddenly, just as the Mycenaeans did in Greece. In fact they could have been displaced from the Balkans by migrating Greek speakers, which is what appears to be happening on the Balkan peninsula.

The Hittite people also appear to have originally been seated away from where this bronze age sample was taken, in the East around Hattusa, from which Luwic would likely have diverged from later. And it's only one sample. I'd like to see a few more younger samples. That's all.

It's possible that Anatolian came from the East, but I don't think it's more likely than the Balkans given all of the other evidence we have about IE dispersals.
Click to expand...

as there is no clear sign of migration, neither intermediate DNA, and as you suggest Luwian split from Hittite rather late, the Anatolians moving into Anatolia were probably just a small group which subsequently expanded within Anatolia

they were probably just simple herders, early Hittites didn't have charriots neither any specific technology
 
Maciamo said:
Why do you expect to find I1 in Mesolithic orEarly Neolithic samples ? I1 didn't exist back then. It was just I* (or pre-I1, meaning that only some of the 300+ defining mutations existed). The I1 reported by Szécsényi-Nagy 2014 in the LBK culture is almost surely pre-I1. That pre-I1 would have spread from Hungary to Germany with the advance of LBK, then maybe to to already Scandinavia with Funnelbeaker farmers.

I1 as we know it appeared less than 5000 years ago, either during the late Funnelbeaker or the early Corded Ware/Battle-Axe culture. One likely scenario is that the ancestor of all modern I1 was one lucky man assimilated by Corded Ware tribes who adapted well, rose to prominence, and whose descendants expanded quickly as Corded Ware tribes spread over Scandinavia. An alternative scenario is that I1 was a founder lineage among a small group of Funnelbeaker farmers who expanded to Scandinavia, eventually reaching Finland before the Corded Ware. Since the TMRCA of I1 is just at the limit of the Funnelbeaker and Corded Ware cultures, and that it is just an estimate that could be off by a few centuries, it is not possible to know for sure at present. However there is no reason to expect any I1 among the Balkans, Baltic or Steppe samples tested in this paper.
Click to expand...

So was I1 found then in Funnelbeaker samples and CW? You're just basically saying I1 has to be a really young hg. Well that's the only way to make sense out of it, until some samples are found pre-metal age. If they found I1 in neolithic Hungary why would you not expect it to be found more in the same area, Balkans, Ukraine, pre-neolithic or post... it would only make sense. Unless that Hungary sample was not really I1. Was I* or I2 the ancestor of I1?

Also what happened to the C? Seems like that hg was widespread through Europe. Does anyone have a clue what happened to it along with the other ones like F and H? They're not common in modern Europe. They just went extinct? Ok but why and I guess it can't be explained yet.
 
Last edited:
MarkoZ said:
Thanks, I think you've hit the nail on the head, either Funnelbeaker or Battle Axe it is. Related to that it just occurred to me that we have no samples whatsoever from Finland, do we?
Click to expand...

My best guess would be that if I1 is older it's place of origin would most likely be in the northeast Europe area and it migrated west into Scandinavia north Europe and dispersed from there perhaps sometime after the mesolithic, who knows when.
I just think I1 is one of the most puzzling HGs yet it barely gets any attention. Apparently it's not too important or interesting, I guess only the ones like R1 that happens to be the majority of Europeans is.
 
Last edited:
Angela said:
I've just clicked on it, Epoch, and it works for me. Maybe you have to be logged in? If not, it's here on Iosif's twitter.

https://twitter.com/iosif_lazaridis
Click to expand...

C_eLId5XoAA_wXl.jpg


This?
 
epoch said:
C_eLId5XoAA_wXl.jpg


This?
Click to expand...
Yes. Disappointed? I didn't mean to imply it was the Ten Commandments fresh from the mountain top! :)

To the board:

Is this still correct?
Single Grave?, Denmark, RISE61 [4], R1a

Battle-Axe, Sweden, RISE94 [4], R1a
Battle-Axe?, Sweden, RISE98 [4], R1b
 
epoch said:
I don't think you can tell that yet. Pure unadmixted UP WHG has now been found from Switzerland to Serbia, from Sicily to Villabruna, right?
Click to expand...

I think she can, since we have studies that exactly prove this. A study a year ago clearly stated that Paleolithic mainland Europeans were distinct from any known modern population. And WHG pops up just by mesolithic.

EDIT: Come to think of it, those Peloponesse Neolithics have even less WHG than Anatolians. The Admixture graphs shown in the Supp Info shows it to have a common origin to the non-WHG part of Anatolians. The text mentions it shies away from WHG in comparison to Anatolian. While this is not proof, my feeling is that this points to Anatolians being on te receiving end of WHG admixture.
Click to expand...

A clear distinction needs to be made here between WHG and WHG like. Anatolian farmers as well South Levantine farmers all the way to Natufian H&G have WHG like ancestry. It is unlikely that they received it. What the paper is actually trying to tell us is, that Peloponesse farmers derive from a different wave of farmers a merging of farmers coming from South Anatolia/the Levant as well Iranian Plateau. That is the reason it has less WHG like ancestry
 
holderlin said:
I said historically. Meaning "as far as we know for sure". Of course they had to have been there before then, but I disagree with your time frames. Don't espouse science with your claims as if you're using pure logic, please. Luwain is really the only sub-group and it isn't as diverges from Hittite as you claim.
Click to expand...

Holderin the problem is you seem to have weak knowledge on some of these things you open up. A corner stone of the Kurgan Hypothesis is that the Anatolian branch reached Anatolia by 4000 BC because of linguistics, this are not my claims this is part of the theory, just because it doesn't taste you, don't claim it is a lie someone made up. Linguists date the arrival to 4000 BC. Your linguistic understanding is very low

I agree that Anatolian/proto-Hittite, or whatever you want to call it must have diverged from PIE by 4000BC, but these would have been mobile people with horses and chariots. They could have moved into Anatolian suddenly, just as the Mycenaeans did in Greece.
Click to expand...
Yep they went on a long journey with their ultra advanced chariots (chariots are an Indo_Iranian thing by the way. 4000 BC Indo Europeans didn't had the spoked wheel charriots) without even the need to stop anywhere.

In fact they could have been displaced from the Balkans by migrating Greek speakers, which is what appears to be happening on the Balkan peninsula.
Click to expand...

by migrating Greek speakers who according to the Kurgan hypothesis should have brought Steppe admixture with them. So you are telling me the reason why there is no or only sporadic Steppe admixture, is that they were replaced by another.... Steppe people? Please...
 
Fire Haired14 said:
Yes a lot of I2a2a. For a long time it seemed I2a1 dominated ancient European I2a but at least in Eastern Europe there was more I2a2a than I2a1.
Click to expand...

in my quest towards BB's and towards a link with Y-I2a2 I was longing for a place between far West and far North-East, not too far from Vucedol and close to Moldavia and Tripolje, and I thought in the Carpathians: they are not too far from Balkans (at this date I did not know about I2a2 in Balkans) and we find some old I2a2 in Ukraina too - sure it proves nothing about BB's and some Y-I2a2 lineages have surely an other story,but my bet concerning geography was not to bad it seems -
 
holderlin said:
OK, so.

This is very interesting and clarifies a lot of things, but it's nothing earth shattering to me:


  • We have an early group of Levantine/South Anatolian farmers in the Peloponnese. This is interesting, but the fact that there were more than one population of farmers moving into the Balkan peninsula isn't too surprising. It would be more strange if there was only a single source. I wish we had their Y-HGs, but we can probably make a good guess with this
the possible PPNB colonisation hypothesis had been already put by someones, without DNA, supposing at least 2 early different waves of farmers into S-E Europe - I wonder if Y-E1b upstream to E-V13 was not already among them (Pelopponese is a hotspot for E-V13 in Europe)
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
MOESAN said:
in my quest towards BB's and towards a link with Y-I2a2 I was longing for a place between far West and far North-East, not too far from Vucedol and close to Moldavia and Tripolje, and I thought in the Carpathians: they are not too far from Balkans (at this date I did not know about I2a2 in Balkans) and we find some old I2a2 in Ukraina too - sure it proves nothing about BB's and some Y-I2a2 lineages have surely an other story,but my bet concerning geography was not to bad it seems -
Click to expand...

I answer myself (sorry): in fact spite some lineages could be interesting about Chaclo-Bronze, it seems Y-I2a2 was spred in Western Europe (long enough) before metal ages, as well In Iberia and Britain: have we the dates for the 11 ones of Britain Neolithic? Megalithic cultures specificity? A profane question.
 
Angela said:
Yes. Disappointed? I didn't mean to imply it was the Ten Commandments fresh from the mountain top! :)

To the board:

Is this still correct?
Single Grave?, Denmark, RISE61 [4], R1a

Battle-Axe, Sweden, RISE94 [4], R1a
Battle-Axe?, Sweden, RISE98 [4], R1b
Click to expand...
Their cluster for WHG in that graph is composed of Loschbour, La Brana, and Villabruna, as far as I can remember. I can't find the quote. If it's wrong, please post so I can correct the record.

The supplement and tables can be accessed here:
http://biorxiv.org/content/early/2017/05/09/135616.figures-only

This is unexpected: The gold encrusted Varna King's ydna is listed as CT. The R1 sample has no grave goods.

"ANI152 / VAR43Supine inhumation of a mature-senile male (50-65 years). The grave is extraordinary richlyfurnished with seven heavy copper implements, more than 1000 single gold items, jewelrymade out of the shells of Spondylus and imported minerals, and highly sophisticated flinttools. The social interpretation of VAR43 is mainly based on the rich grave goods and only insmall part based on the so far reported anthropological data. Muscle marks on the skeletonshow that the bones were exposed to great physical stress until shortly before his death. The 12strong muscles of his lower arm even suggest continuous work. The bones from VAR43 showarthritis on the cervical spine, the hands, and the feet. The left hip and especially the left kneewere also affected. A squatting facet on the left tibia of the individual can be seen as anindication for preferentially sitting in squatting position, which hints at a working position.The presence of calculus on the teeth points to a diet containing protein. However, there is noevidence of cavities or so-called enamel hypoplasia, which is typically seen as an indicator ofstress during childhood development and could point to periods of malnutrition. This impliesa continuously good diet and could in itself be taken as a sign of higher social status of theindividual. Due to its outstandingly rich inventory, the grave shows strong interactions in asocial network analysis with many others in the course of the chronological development ofthe cemetery. Within this network the strongest relations are given to some symbolic gravesat the very end of the development of Varna I, which is confirmed by positioning of VAR43into the 6st phase of the cemetery in the correspondence analysis.• ANI153 / VAR44Partially destroyed probably supine burial of a young male (13+ years). No grave goodsreported."

Ed. The y is listed specifically as: CT:M5578:6619341C->A; CT:M5738:17909505G->A;
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

This thread has been viewed 184989 times.

Back
Top