Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
I'm ready to accept your explanations but somethings stay unclear to me:
'gedrosia' seems OLD and very largely spred in Central Asia for a very long time - not WestAsian (geographically speaking) at all...
Major ethnic groups of Pakistan in 1980. The pink color represents the Baloch ethnic group. Balochistan or Baluchistan[1] (Balochi: بلوچستان, lit. Land of the Baloch) is an arid desert and mountainous region on the Iranian plateau in south-western Asia, northwest of the Arabian Sea.
travelled across East Eurasian regions where they had or picked 'gedrosia' bearers, and I don't see that near the Zagros, where apparently 'gedrosia' was absent in old times, before steppic invasions or penetrations of later periods, whatever these last bearers: Iranian I-Eans, Turkmens, even Mongols...
I don't see that near the Zagros, where apparently 'gedrosia' was absent in old times
I've apriori no problem with our first Y-R1v being come from SOuth Caucasus, but for now it doesn't check the data: it could seem absurd, but simetimes I think seeing the contrary, Y-R1b intruding from North or South-East in South-Caucasus regions (but not native, again, to Zagros) -
It's a "reflex" answer, I'll try to look again at my notes (by example about Kostenki, Mal'ta, Ust'Ishim friends) -
Found Kostenki genome, interestingly no Caucasus but already some Gedrosia.
K12b
PS. He was partially lactose tolerant.
- 26.45% North_European
- 19.54% Atlantic_Med
- 15.98% South_Asian
- 11.83% Gedrosia
- 6.59% Southeast_Asian
- 4.92% East_African
- 4.58% Southwest_Asian
- 4.39% Sub_Saharan
- 3.28% Siberian
- 2.00% Northwest_African
- 0.45% East_Asian
- 0.00% Caucasus
https://genetiker.wordpress.com/2014/11/14/analyses-of-the-kostenki-14-genome/
His location was in European Russia, halfway between Moscow and Black Sea. The genome is very old, 40 ky, and possibly is not fully comparable with all admixtures. Some of them needed much longer to show up, to come to be fully formed. However, 0 Caucasus probably means that Caucasus was on the other side of Caucasus Mountains in Middle East, and probably not fully formed yet. Heavy mixture of ENF with Caucasus in early farmers alludes to closeness of these two on South Side of Caucasus Mountains, and lack of contact to HGs from the North.
Gedrosia is rather high in Kostenki (though probably also not fully formed yet), and it is at similar level as Gedrosia in Samara samples. As we know it is completely missing from first farmers from Near East. For these reasons, I'm going to move epicenter of Gedrosia from SE off Caspian to NE off Caspian, Kazakhstan. Knowing that Mal'ta genome contained some Gedrosia too, and Gedrosia containing ANE, it places both in Central Asia contact area. It doesn't seem there was a contact between them and area where ENF and Caucasus were formed in Near East.
His all Atlantic Med, might mean WHG component.
Here is KO1, the hunter gatherer from Hungary, Early Neolithic. Thanks to Genetiker again:
https://genetiker.wordpress.com/2014/10/23/analyses-of-an-early-neolithic-hungarian-genome/
K12b
Looks like there is a big portion of hunter gatherer in Atlantic Med admixture. Again some history of Sub Saharan Africa is showing in this hunter, WHG. Neither Caucasus (nor ENF) nor Gedrosia was reaching to Europe Center at this time, well, before Neolithic farmers showed up.
- 70.14% North_European
- 27.50% Atlantic_Med
- 1.72% Sub_Saharan
- 0.40% Siberian
- 0.21% Southeast_Asian
- 0.02% East_Asian
- 0.01% East_African
- 0.00% Caucasus
- 0.00% Gedrosia
- 0.00% Northwest_African
- 0.00% South_Asian
- 0.00% Southwest_Asian
He is a weird dude and very old. He shows some relation with ENF, from way back. Things must have changed there during LGM. When we look at Samars, almost from same area as Kostenki, the genome is quite different. Kostenki like population could have died out or were pushed back into Caucasus Mountains by northern HGs. He does plot extremely close to modern guys from Caucasus.Atlantic is by majority ENF with some WHG admixture. And going by the other components (SOuthwest Asian he has it) I am pretty convinced this is ENF.
Don't forget Kostenki already had Basal Eurasian.
He is a weird dude and very old. He shows some relation with ENF, from way back. Things must have changed there during LGM. When we look at Samars, almost from same area as Kostenki, the genome is quite different. Kostenki like population could have died out or were pushed back into Caucasus Mountains by northern HGs. He does plot extremely close to modern guys from Caucasus.
As I mentioned before, he is so old, that the admixtures as we know them were not fully developed yet, and his admixtures might not be very accurate I'm afraid.
Yamna:
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/30944-Autosomal-results-of-Neolithic-genome-from-Iberia/page2
K12b
Atlantic med is very low. It is hard to find any farmer genes in this genome. To bad there is only one Yamna sample tested for K12b, perhaps this individual didn't mix well yet.
- 60.18% North_European
- 26.29% Gedrosia
- 4.89% Atlantic_Med
- 4.50% Siberian
- 2.12% Caucasus
- 2.02% South_Asian
- 0.00% East_African
- 0.00% East_Asian
- 0.00% Northwest_African
- 0.00% Southeast_Asian
- 0.00% Southwest_Asian
- 0.00% Sub_Saharan
Seams like the main genetic influence came from Gedrosia territory. I'm picturing Kazakhstan area.
I think if Gedrosia was a farmer marker from Near East we should be getting at least some Southeast Asian signal. The K17 confirms lack of farmer ENF/EEF admixture:
MDLP Ancient Roots K17
https://genetiker.wordpress.com/2015/03/03/analyses-of-a-yamna-genome/
- 46.02% Ancestral_East_European_ANE
- 14.40% Caucasian-Basal
- 9.65% Ancestral_North_Indian
- 8.93% Uralic
- 7.46% West_European_HG
- 4.49% Ancestral_West_Siberian
- 4.46% Amerindian
- 1.43% Circumpolar
- 1.41% Ancestral_Sami-Finnic
- 1.10% Ancestral_South_Indian
- 0.30% Melano-Austronesian
- 0.18% Ancestral_East_Siberian
- 0.08% Ancestral_Mediterranean_EEF
- 0.03% African_Sub_Saharian
- 0.03% South_East_Asian
- 0.01% Archaic_African
- 0.01% Near-East-Basal
That's why I'm suspecting that Gedrosia came from around Kazakhstan as HG or Pastoralist admixture. Anything from other side of Caucasus should have farmer heavy genome at this late neolithic time.
I think if Gedrosia was a farmer marker from Near East we should be getting at least some Southeast Asian signal. The K17 confirms lack of farmer ENF/EEF admixture:
MDLP Ancient Roots K17
https://genetiker.wordpress.com/2015/03/03/analyses-of-a-yamna-genome/
- 46.02% Ancestral_East_European_ANE
- 14.40% Caucasian-Basal
- 9.65% Ancestral_North_Indian
- 8.93% Uralic
- 7.46% West_European_HG
- 4.49% Ancestral_West_Siberian
- 4.46% Amerindian
- 1.43% Circumpolar
- 1.41% Ancestral_Sami-Finnic
- 1.10% Ancestral_South_Indian
- 0.30% Melano-Austronesian
- 0.18% Ancestral_East_Siberian
- 0.08% Ancestral_Mediterranean_EEF
- 0.03% African_Sub_Saharian
- 0.03% South_East_Asian
- 0.01% Archaic_African
- 0.01% Near-East-Basal
That's why I'm suspecting that Gedrosia came from around Kazakhstan as HG or Pastoralist admixture. Anything from other side of Caucasus should have farmer heavy genome at this late neolithic time.
There is at least 75% ENF in EEF. So if EEF doesn't show in Yamna it is very unlikely that there is substantial ENF in Yamna. I would be surprised if other components have more than 10% of ENF. If we find Gedrosia in Neolithic in Near East I will agree with you that it contained ENF.Let's take Tajiks as example.
They have ~45% ENF. => https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet...qMYVFKXrUdnThmQJVMtjczLhoTs/edit#gid=74932529
But they have ~25% Atlantic_Med/Caucasus/Southwest Asian => https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0ArJDEoCgzRKedEY4Y3lTUVBaaFp0bC1zZlBDcTZEYlE#gid=0
20% ENF remain.
So which of these remaining components are the most likely source for the rest of the ENF. We have to chose between North European, Gedrosia, South Asian or Siberian.
I bet my money on Gedrosia. And we shouldn't forget the relation between Gedrosia and Caucasus is like the relation between Northwest European and Northeast European. So if Caucasus is predominantly ENF, so Gedrosia must have allot of ENF itself.
And we also had already this discussion about low EEF. It isn't something new.
The reason why the EEF is so low is because Yamna does not have the European farmer type ancestry. Their ENF ancestry is directly the highland pastoralist type. So EEF is unlikely to show up.
There is at least 75% ENF in EEF. So if EEF doesn't show in Yamna it is very unlikely that there is substantial ENF in Yamna. I would be surprised if other components have more than 10% of ENF. If we find Gedrosia in Neolithic in Near East I will agree with you that it contained ENF.
So here it is, the results of the R1b1 sample from 5100 BC late neolithic Spain.
K12b
- 74.26% Atlantic_Med
- 18.37% Caucasus
- 3.70% Southwest_Asian
- 3.67% Northwest_African
- 0.00% East_African
- 0.00% East_Asian
- 0.00% Gedrosia
- 0.00% North_European
- 0.00% Siberian
- 0.00% South_Asian
- 0.00% Southeast_Asian
- 0.00% Sub_Saharan
Typical European farmer with the typical Mediterranean/Southwest Asian/Caucasus DNA + some North European from admixing with WHG (also typical for European farmers).
This is quite irritating. We have Samara H&G with not much sign of ENF but yet we have another R1b with typical farmer DNA.
.
I do not agree!
The Spanish neolithic is different from the Neolithic of Europe central as LBK.
See the difference:
LBK (F999916)
#PopulationPercent
1Atlantic_Med 54.922
Caucasus30.33
Southwest_Asian10.784
Northwest_African3.795
North_European0.146
Southeast_Asian0.06
The Spanish Neolithic have more Atlantic_Med and less of caucasus and SW_Asian.
I do not know why everyone thinks Atlantic-Med comes from near-east!
Only SW_Asian and caucasus were probably brought by farmers of Near-East
I do not agree!
The Spanish neolithic is different from the Neolithic of Europe central as LBK.
See the difference:
LBK (F999916)
#PopulationPercent
1Atlantic_Med 54.922
Caucasus30.33
Southwest_Asian10.784
Northwest_African3.795
North_European0.146
Southeast_Asian0.06
The Spanish Neolithic have more Atlantic_Med and less of caucasus and SW_Asian.
I do not know why everyone thinks Atlantic-Med comes from near-east!
Only SW_Asian and caucasus were probably brought by farmers of Near-East
Atlantic Med is probably best described as a combination of Neolithic farmer alleles from the Near East and a minority WHG component. The creator of the calculator being used by you as well as by the poster Alan explained the relationship of these components here:
http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2012/08/inter-relationships-of-dodecad-k12b-and.html
http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2012/09/inter-relationships-between-dodecad-k7b.html
The graphs are particularly interesting. Note that S.W. Asian is just a "specialized" form of "Caucasus", and "Caucasus" goes into "Atlantic Med".
I wouldn't quarrel with Alan's estimate of about a 25% or so WHG percentage in Atlantic Med.
It's important to realize that these calculators, while they were useful in their day, produce components which represent much more recent geographical "poolings" which are the result of many layers of migration. Formal stats are much more informative. For that, you have to read Lazaridis et al, and Haak et al.
http://biorxiv.org/content/early/2013/12/23/001552
http://biorxiv.org/content/early/2015/02/10/013433
In Haak et al, the resnorm stats are particularly interesting. As you can see, the French are 69% Early Neolithic. (Of course, these numbers are the result not only of Neolithic migrations, but also of those of Bronze Age "Indo-Europeans".) It would be impossible to reach numbers like this if only S.W.Asian and Caucasus represented migration of peoples with ancestry from the Near East.
View attachment 7147
In the last paper of Haak, french are 43 % EN ( not 69%) 57 % WHGAtlantic Med is probably best described as a combination of Neolithic farmer alleles from the Near East and a minority WHG component. The creator of the calculator being used by you as well as by the poster Alan explained the relationship of these components here:
http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2012/08/inter-relationships-of-dodecad-k12b-and.html
http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2012/09/inter-relationships-between-dodecad-k7b.html
The graphs are particularly interesting. Note that S.W. Asian is just a "specialized" form of "Caucasus", and "Caucasus" goes into "Atlantic Med".
I wouldn't quarrel with Alan's estimate of about a 25% or so WHG percentage in Atlantic Med.
It's important to realize that these calculators, while they were useful in their day, produce components which represent much more recent geographical "poolings" which are the result of many layers of migration. Formal stats are much more informative. For that, you have to read Lazaridis et al, and Haak et al.
http://biorxiv.org/content/early/2013/12/23/001552
http://biorxiv.org/content/early/2015/02/10/013433
In Haak et al, the resnorm stats are particularly interesting. As you can see, the French are 69% Early Neolithic. (Of course, these numbers are the result not only of Neolithic migrations, but also of those of Bronze Age "Indo-Europeans".) It would be impossible to reach numbers like this if only S.W.Asian and Caucasus represented migration of peoples with ancestry from the Near East.
View attachment 7147
In the last paper of Haak, french are 43 % EN ( not 69%) 57 % WHG
(figure S9.24 p.120)
That is maybe different in the paper of 2013 ?
But I agree with Gervais, there is a difference between the Atlantic Neolithics and those of the Bassin Danunian, the Caucasian component is higher in the LBKs
in terms of the initial farmers, whether they were "Cardial" or "LBK", I haven't seen anything which would indicate major differences.
This thread has been viewed 33261 times.