Latest Reich talk on ancient Dna

CrazyDonkey said:
Could have been and was done without much admixture along the way, hop-scotching via Crete -> Sicily -> Sardinia -> Iberia. The establishment of the Iberian "entrepots" has been theorized as part of the chalcolithic expansion in search of new sources for copper (with the Balkan copper mines being worked out). If M269 was a smith or prospector, he would have had special skills. Or he could have been a trader (establishing a "trading post"). While no copper mines from before 3,000 BCE have been found, that doesn't mean they didn't exist. If a trader/smith, he needn't have mined it, but could have traded finished tools for raw ore and other items.

Vila Nova de Sao Pedro was "ground-zero" for megalithism and is within reach of many copper and tin mines in western and northwestern Iberia. It is also on the way to Cornwall, where copper and tin mining became the likely source of wealth that paid for Stonehenge (from c. 3,100 BCE).

The idea of R1b originating in an ice-age "refuge" south of the Pyrenees has been disproved.

Immigration up the Danube (or across the Carpathians) is possible, but the Yamnaya CHG-component (Yamnaya = Khvalynsk + CHG) might not have been present in Sredny Stog or Suvorova, with their expansion that collapsed "Old Europe" and opened the lower Danube dating from c. 4,000 BCE. Yamnaya don't show up at the Dnieper Rapids until after the collapse of "Old Europe" - they could have been the force that shoved the Suvorova off the steppe. Any Suvorova leading-edge would have had to transit already settled lands (Global Amphora, for instance).
Click to expand...

Just want to add, that: Nothing is never disproved in Genetic studies. I wouldn't take too much conclusions about were paleolithic lineages were at some point. When there was a paper about LBK few years ago and that an Hungarian Farmer seemed to show the earliest form of I1 ever. I swear people started to talk about I1 coming from Anatolia or what not. And now there is an Azilian I1 from Spain, wich was always a deduction from a lot of people. Villabruna is just a sample and an age, not the whole story of R1b. R1b in Solutrean is still a deduction that a lot of people made over the years, and not so much related to the mainstream Solutrean Hypothesis. Solutrean and Swiderian samples would be interesting to confirm or infirm some of those deductions.
 
halfalp said:
Diversity made scientists believe in 2010 that R1b-M269 must have been absolutely linked with LBK expansion in Europe. Null. This concept is just flawed or made of vulgar mathematics.
Click to expand...
I don't know why scientists linked M269 with LBK expansion; the mathematics has never pointed in that direction. It has, however, always indicated that Western-coalescing basal clades of M269 branched away from Eastern/Steppe coalescing ones in the 5th or early 4th millennium BC - not at the time of LBK expansion, nor at the time of the 3rd millennium BC Bell Beaker expansion.

halfalp said:
You keep talking about M269* and L23* in Armenia, about Diversity and make claims like L51 probably came from Anatolia or the Middle-East with Metallury, while L51 absolutely doesn't exist in the Middle-East or Anatolia.
Click to expand...
L51 doesn't exist in early samples in the Steppe either, but that doesn't stop many people claiming that it originated and developed there.
In fact, it doesn't exist in any early samples, but this clearly doesn't mean that it didn't exist at all. For all we know, its existence could have been in the early Middle East or Anatolia, or the Steppe, or Western Europe, or all three.

halfalp said:
If there is a M269* population at some point in Pontic Steppe who just happened to be related with the one who are going South of the Caucasus, your entire hypothesis gonna shipwrecked. Also Balkans and Samara Region have way more basal M269* and L23* than South Caucasus/Middle-East, once again this discussion about Basal clades, diversity is just flawed and is going nowhere ever.
Click to expand...
What are the specific examples of where you can show that diversity analysis yields flawed results. From what I have seen, the results are broadly consistent with archaeological evidence, and are only subject to material inaccuracy where the dataset is small.
 
halfalp said:
Just want to add, that: Nothing is never disproved in Genetic studies. I wouldn't take too much conclusions about were paleolithic lineages were at some point. When there was a paper about LBK few years ago and that an Hungarian Farmer seemed to show the earliest form of I1 ever. I swear people started to talk about I1 coming from Anatolia or what not. And now there is an Azilian I1 from Spain, wich was always a deduction from a lot of people. Villabruna is just a sample and an age, not the whole story of R1b. R1b in Solutrean is still a deduction that a lot of people made over the years, and not so much related to the mainstream Solutrean Hypothesis. Solutrean and Swiderian samples would be interesting to confirm or infirm some of those deductions.
Click to expand...

Unless you want to claim that R1b in Yamnaya came from Iberia...
 
halfalp said:
If it survived somewhere, it probably was somwhere Near Balkans and Near Steppe, but without EEF.
Click to expand...
We know that M269 survived somewhere, otherwise it wouldn't exist now. Over its formation period of 7,000 years, it probably survived in all sorts of places, and any claim that it only survived in one single spot for that many millennia is simplistic and highly unlikely. The question is not the various places where it could have survived, but where extant branches of M269 began to develop and thrive, and the data would suggest this is most likely outside of the Steppe in collaboration/admixture with Balkan Chalcolithic EEF.
 
halfalp said:
I start to believe that actually, were a subclade is Basal, is the less likely place where it originates.
Click to expand...
There is no logic basis for supporting such a belief.

halfalp said:
Wouldn't be the original spot of an haplogroup mostly never show Basal subclade because of constant replacement by younger clades?
Click to expand...
There is constant replacement by younger clades everywhere, regardless of whether the basal clade stayed put or moved somewhere else.
 
CrazyDonkey said:
Immigration up the Danube (or across the Carpathians) is possible, but the Yamnaya CHG-component (Yamnaya = Khvalynsk + CHG) might not have been present in Sredny Stog or Suvorova, with their expansion that collapsed "Old Europe" and opened the lower Danube dating from c. 4,000 BCE. Yamnaya don't show up at the Dnieper Rapids until after the collapse of "Old Europe" - they could have been the force that shoved the Suvorova off the steppe. Any Suvorova leading-edge would have had to transit already settled lands (Global Amphora, for instance).
Click to expand...

CrazyDonkey said:
Which returns to a two-wave theory with the first wave of "newcomers" hitting Iberia, with assimilation, but then being overrun by a stronger second wave, with site-abandonment and population-replacement (of y-dna lineages), but not necessarily language-replacement.
Click to expand...

Yes.

CHG was present in the Balkans (Suvorovo) and at the Dnieper long before Yamnaya, just at a lower level. The first Western wave had little CHG (e.g. El Portalon), the second had more (R1b Bell Beaker, with CHG addition from the Dnieper and the Western Caucasus); and Yamnaya was a later wave still (from the Caspian) that had little or no impact on Iberia.
 
These are my calculation estimates of autosomal fits to Spanish Bronze Age -
Optimal - 36% Spanish Neolithic, 29% Central European Bell Beaker, 28% ATP3, 5% Bulgarian Chalcolithic, 2% other - 95% match
Optimal for purely Central European Bell Beaker invasion - 61% Central European Bell Beaker, 39% Spanish Neolithic - 91.4% match
Optimal for purely Yamnayan invasion - 80% Spanish Neolithic, 20% Samara Yamnayan - 88.2% match

On this basis:
1. I consider talk of a 'Yamnayan' invasion of Iberia to be misleading.
2. I consider that the communities of early newcomers like ATP3 most likely made a significant contribution to Spanish Bronze Age DNA.
 
halfalp said:
This could be J1, J2b2, or even something else, but M269 doesn't make sense in terms of datas we already have. It's basically just shadow right now, and nothing is telling that extra CHG and early Chalcolithic in Steppe have to come together. This could be Chalcolithic Balkans, or Chalcolithic Armenia.

And most of R1b subclades seems to become Basal in modern Armenia, but there is some Basal R1a in modern Tunisia, do R1a likely come from ancient Tunisia? I start to believe that actually, were a subclade is Basal, is the less likely place where it originates. Dont have Africans way more Basal V88 than Sardinians? Wouldn't be the original spot of an haplogroup mostly never show Basal subclade because of constant replacement by younger clades?
Click to expand...

There is some basal R1a in Tunisia - precisely one person's lineage. Most of the rest is centred around Iran.
 
Pip said:
Yes.

CHG was present in the Balkans (Suvorovo) and at the Dnieper long before Yamnaya, just at a lower level. The first Western wave had little CHG (e.g. El Portalon), the second had more (R1b Bell Beaker, with CHG addition from the Dnieper and the Western Caucasus); and Yamnaya was a later wave still (from the Caspian) that had little or no impact on Iberia.
Click to expand...

Lower Danube, Carpathian Basin, Hungarian Plains, Central Germany, and the Low Countries were genetic "mixing bowls" - it is futile to try to chart a single y-dna vector across all of Europe. At each juncture, new outputs can emerge from earlier inputs - the Indo-Europeans look to have elected their chiefs, if from "elite" clans. Bell Beakers from central Europe likely combined a variety of strains, new and old.
 
Post confusion,,,,,,,,,, sorry
 
ToBeOrNotToBe said:
There is some basal R1a in Tunisia - precisely one person's lineage. Most of the rest is centred around Iran.
Click to expand...
The basal R1a sample found in Tunisia is of a type that shows only minor STR diversity from samples in the Steppe - the estimate (from very limited data) is that its yDNA split from the Steppe samples' yDNA only in the late Bronze Age. Its 'basal' status and STR diversity are not indicative of R1a having a Tunisian origin, and there is nothing flawed in using this approach to analyse it.
 
CrazyDonkey said:
Lower Danube, Carpathian Basin, Hungarian Plains, Central Germany, and the Low Countries were genetic "mixing bowls" - it is futile to try to chart a single y-dna vector across all of Europe. At each juncture, new outputs can emerge from earlier inputs - the Indo-Europeans look to have elected their chiefs, if from "elite" clans. Bell Beakers from central Europe likely combined a variety of strains, new and old.
Click to expand...
My analysis suggests that Central European Bell Beaker (at least the German variety) was not a genetic mixing bowl at all, but that it almost wholly optimally fits Balkan/East Carpathian populations.

However, even if this were not the case, the addition of ATP3 to the mix fits Spanish Bronze Age better than just the 'genetic mixing bowl' that Bell Beaker populations would have represented. Why assume a migration wholly from R1b-M269 Bell Beaker a thousand miles away when admixture partly from local Iberian R1b-M269 fits better?
 
Pip said:
My analysis suggests that Central European Bell Beaker (at least the German variety) was not a genetic mixing bowl at all, but that it almost wholly optimally fits Balkan/East Carpathian populations.

However, even if this were not the case, the addition of ATP3 to the mix fits Spanish Bronze Age better than just the 'genetic mixing bowl' that Bell Beaker populations would have represented. Why assume a migration wholly from R1b-M269 Bell Beaker a thousand miles away when admixture partly from local Iberian R1b-M269 fits better?
Click to expand...

Three samples (ATP3, ATP7, ATP2) over a millennium (3,400-2,400), regardless of where they came from, hardly constitute a "wave", compared to 13 over 400 years (2,400-2,000), or 40+ over 600 years (1,900-1,300).
 
Pip said:
There is no logic basis for supporting such a belief.

There is constant replacement by younger clades everywhere, regardless of whether the basal clade stayed put or moved somewhere else.
Click to expand...

Then explain the Basal or Diversity characters of R1b-L23 and Z2103 in Armenia and R1a-Z93 in India. R1a-Z93 should be Basal in the Samara Region if we follow Prehistoric Datas and the logic that were it begins, is were it is the most Basal or Diverse. If it's not, it's that the Logic behind it must be completely reworked.

Logic is simple, if humans are dying, and the world is logic; then the universe is of the same logic and God is mortal.
 
halfalp said:
Then explain the Basal or Diversity characters of R1b-L23 and Z2103 in Armenia and R1a-Z93 in India. R1a-Z93 should be Basal in the Samara Region if we follow Prehistoric Datas and the logic that were it begins, is were it is the most Basal or Diverse. If it's not, it's that the Logic behind it must be completely reworked.

Logic is simple, if humans are dying, and the world is logic; then the universe is of the same logic and God is mortal.
Click to expand...

If God is mortal then it is simply..... not God
 
CrazyDonkey said:
Three samples (ATP3, ATP7, ATP2) over a millennium (3,400-2,400), regardless of where they came from, hardly constitute a "wave", compared to 13 over 400 years (2,400-2,000), or 40+ over 600 years (1,900-1,300).
Click to expand...

There weren't waves of samples, only waves of people. How many samples have been published isn't particularly relevant.

13 people from the late third millennium BC hardly constitutes a wave either. Even the 40 people over the second millennium - many of them might simply have been offspring of the same few people - too few of them to have constituted a 'wave'. Ergo, as we decide we cannot term any of them waves, is it best to ignore them all as if they had never happened and conclude they must have left no genetic legacy whatosever?

CrazyDonkey said:
Three samples (ATP3, ATP7, ATP2) over a millennium (3,400-2,400), regardless of where they came from, hardly constitute a "wave", compared to 13 over 400 years (2,400-2,000), or 40+ over 600 years (1,900-1,300).
Click to expand...
My analysis suggests that the 40+ people from the second millennium BC (and presumably also the 13 from the late third millennium BC) were in any case partly descended from the same communities that spawned the three ATP samples. As I have previously indicated, much as it might be convenient to assume that the El Portalon people entirely disappeared into thin air without leaving a genetic trace and were replaced wholly by Yamnayans pouring in directly from Central Russia, the autosomal data simply does not support this assumption.
 
halfalp said:
Then explain the Basal or Diversity characters of R1b-L23 and Z2103 in Armenia and R1a-Z93 in India. R1a-Z93 should be Basal in the Samara Region if we follow Prehistoric Datas and the logic that were it begins, is were it is the most Basal or Diverse. If it's not, it's that the Logic behind it must be completely reworked.
Click to expand...
The STR data that I have seen does not suggest basal diversity of either L23 or Z2103 in Armenia, nor Z93 in India. Any such conclusions are probably based on what you would call 'vulgar mathematics', or perhaps were arrived at when we had far too little data to support a reliable conclusion.

halfalp said:
Logic is simple, if humans are dying, and the world is logic; then the universe is of the same logic and God is mortal.
Click to expand...
Fashions die, logic doesn't.
 
Pip said:
The STR data that I have seen does not suggest basal diversity of either L23 or Z2103 in Armenia, nor Z93 in India. Any such conclusions are probably based on what you would call 'vulgar mathematics', or perhaps were arrived at when we had far too little data to support a reliable conclusion.


Fashions die, logic doesn't.
Click to expand...

Why would Underhill be wrong imo? And were is the real basal diversity of all those lineages then?
 
etrusco said:
If God is mortal then it is simply..... not God
Click to expand...

It's just a phrase to explain that, if Logic exists, then everything is Logic. Wich mean you can virtually understand wrongness of something you dont know a lot about, just by having an overall logic approach. Funny thing, IE gods are Mortal, instead of the Abrahamic one. Sounds more natural and logic to me.
 
halfalp said:
Why would Underhill be wrong imo? And were is the real basal diversity of all those lineages then?
Click to expand...
No idea. From the samples I've seen, the greatest basal diversity for both L23 and Z2103 coalesce to a most likely origin point in Southern Poland, but this is from a very small basal sample size. The diversity of the next major branchings suggest France (L51) and Armenia (branches of Z2103) as later expansion points of extant clades. In other words, it is an open question with no clear answer over a wide geographic area - with the Western Steppe in the middle of it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

This thread has been viewed 98204 times.

Back
Top