New Leak: CWC=73% Yamna, modern North Euros=50% Yamna.

Goga said:
Unlike Yamnaya Horizon people, ancient original Iranic tribes (from Leyla-Tepe) were neither Mongoloid nor WHG folks. Yamnaya had some WHG and were partly Mongoloid, while proto-Iranic folks lacked both of those components. Also ancient (proto-)Iranic languages had close ties with the Caucasian languages, and culturally/archeologically there were very much links with Near-Eastern (Mesopotamian) cultures...[/QUOTE

Where did you pick Yamnaya people were heavily 'mongoloid'??? are you not confusing with some remnants of the Altaï region? (and yet there were near there also stations almost without any 'mongoloid' components... by the way, WHG notion cannot be compared the same time as a 'mongoloid' notion -
and the theory you defend (with some good but not definitive arguments) of the origin of ancient Iranians speakers in or around the Zagros, you consider as certain, put you to emit suppositions about the ?HG absence in them... and also to consider Yamnaya could not have any link with these ancient Iranian speakers - I'm not as sure as you! I'm tempted to think Yamanya people were speaking an already satemized I-Ean language or a language on the way to satemization (But I'm not sure)
Click to expand...
 
Templar said:
Why are people still using ENF as a category? ENF are a "hybrid" population of near eastern farmers and SE hunter gatherers. There is already data out there that has separated the two different components of ENF.
Click to expand...

I think you are confusing ENF with EEF. ENF is the Near Eastern with hunter&Gatherers admixture already been taken out.
 
Aberdeen said:
ENF does not mean what you think it means. And we were actually using EEF (early European farmers as a category - it's a mixture of hunter gatherers and ENF (early Near Eastern farmers). But there is no sample of ENF that I know of.
Click to expand...

There is Eurogenes K8 did extract the WHG like portion (which was close to 1/5 of total EEF) out of EEF and called this ENF/Near Eastern.
 
motzart said:
Yamnaya were not partly Mongoloid. For this reason I don't believe we will see N in their y dna.

The Yamna culture of the Pontic-Caspian steppe is recorded for an enormous territory between the North-Western Pontic area and Trans-Uralia. Its sites are known here in the basin of the Emba and Tobol rivers, the Karaganda region and further eastward (Merpert 1974). The Yamna population generally belongs to the European race. It was tall (175.5cm), dolichocephalic, with broad faces of medium height. Among them there were, however, more robust elements with high and wide faces of the proto-Europoid type, and also more gracile individuals with narrow and high faces, probably reflecting contacts with the East Mediterranean type (Kurts 1984: 90).

http://dienekes.blogspot.ca/2006/05/anthropological-types-of-corded-ware.html
Click to expand...

Sorry dude gave you a negative rep. while was trying to give you thumps up. Definitely agree Yamna=Mongoloid link is totally, absolutely ridiculous no place for debate there.
 
MOESAN said:
Goga said:
Unlike Yamnaya Horizon people, ancient original Iranic tribes (from Leyla-Tepe) were neither Mongoloid nor WHG folks. Yamnaya had some WHG and were partly Mongoloid, while proto-Iranic folks lacked both of those components. Also ancient (proto-)Iranic languages had close ties with the Caucasian languages, and culturally/archeologically there were very much links with Near-Eastern (Mesopotamian) cultures...
Click to expand...

Where did you pick Yamnaya people were heavily 'mongoloid'??? are you not confusing with some remnants of the Altaï region? (and yet there were near there also stations almost without any 'mongoloid' components... by the way, WHG notion cannot be compared the same time as a 'mongoloid' notion -
and the theory you defend (with some good but not definitive arguments) of the origin of ancient Iranians speakers in or around the Zagros, you consider as certain, put you to emit suppositions about the ?HG absence in them... and also to consider Yamnaya could not have any link with these ancient Iranian speakers - I'm not as sure as you! I'm tempted to think Yamanya people were speaking an already satemized I-Ean language or a language on the way to satemization (But I'm not sure)
Click to expand...
Look at the Saami. Saami are the most aboriginal folks in Europe. I believe that the native Northern Europeans, before Indo-Europization by language, were already partly 'Mongoloid'. The most ancient haplogroup they found in Europe is C and C is one of the most popular haplogroups among the so called 'Mongoloid' people in East Asia. And N1c1 is also native to Saami. So, the so haplogroups that you can find in East Asia, also have been found in Europe. And they're very old and ancient. So that's why I tend to believe that native (Northern) Europeans were partly Mongoloid. WHG is native to Europe, so WHG has to be partly Mongoloid too. People who have some of WHG are therefore also partly 'Mongoloid'. If we assume that Yamnaya folks in North of Yamnaya Horizon had more WHG than Yamnaya folks south of it, than we can assume that they were more 'Mongoloid'.

Proto-Iranians had almost no WHG in them. There's no WHG in Central Asia among the East-Iranic speakers. And there's no WHG at all among the Indic people etc. But there's WHG in Yamnaya, that's why the latest scientific paper comes to the conclusion that proto-Iranians were NOT from Yamnaya. It's not my conclusion, but the conclusion of the scientists who from Cambridge who did the reseach.

People who lived in Yamnaya gave birth to Celto-Italic and Germanic etc. languages, but those who migrated into Yamnaya came from Maykop & Leyla-Tepe. Yamnaya was not proto-Satem. It it's possible that a group that migrated into the Yamnaya and gave birth to Balto-Slavic could be related to a group that stayed around the Mayko & Leyla-Tepe that gave birth to proto-Iranic languages, or even Graeco-Aryan. There're also very close links between ancient Iranic and ancient Greek, think about Graeco-Aryan family: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graeco-Aryan . So, satemization could occure in the Maykop Horizon. Those people who NEVER migrated into Yamnaya, gave birth to Graeco-Anatolian (like Hittites, Armenian etc. or maybe even so called Graeco-Aryan), Tocharian, Indic and Iranic languages...
 
Alan said:
There is Eurogenes K8 did extract the WHG like portion (which was close to 1/5 of total EEF) out of EEF and called this ENF/Near Eastern.
Click to expand...

I know, but a calculation is not the same as an actual set of bones that can be studied, such as Motala 12 or MA1 from Mal'ta. If someone ever finds those early Near Eastern Farmers who were the source for the majority of DNA that went into creating the EEF samples found in Europe, their DNA will probably resemble the theoretical results but at point nobody has found the bones yet, and those people don't exist anymore because of changes to Near Eastern populations. So at this point those ancient Near Eastern farmers are still theoretical, even though they must have actually existed at one time.
 
JS Bach said:
Most of the 4,000-year-old, fair-haired, caucasoid mummies found in the Tarim Basin in NorthWestern China belonged to mtdna C4: http://www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplogroup_R1a_Y-DNA.shtml#Tarim_mummies I think C is both Mongoloid and Caucasoid.
Click to expand...

I haven't found any legit academic research on the tarim mummies, mostly bloggers(often raciest) who say they were blonde hair blue eye gods. On Jean Manco's site it says all had black and brown hair. I want to learn who these people really were. without anti-east Asian propaganda and race stuff. I heard on Eurogenes Blog all their R1a was negative for Z93, which is interesting. I tend to think they were IE immigrants from the steppe and closely related to Samara Yamna with significant east Asian ancestry.
 
LeBrok said:
They should test late natufian skulls for the first Near Eastern Farmers.
Click to expand...

They do seem like the most logical candidates. But, as we all know, the most logical answer isn't always the right one. Still, it would be interesting to see what the results of such tests would be.
 
Fire Haired14 said:
I haven't found any legit academic research on the tarim mummies, mostly bloggers(often raciest) who say they were blonde hair blue eye gods. On Jean Manco's site it says all had black and brown hair. I want to learn who these people really were. without anti-east Asian propaganda and race stuff. I heard on Eurogenes Blog all their R1a was negative for Z93, which is interesting. I tend to think they were IE immigrants from the steppe and closely related to Samara Yamna with significant east Asian ancestry.
Click to expand...

There are lot of Tarim mummies with light hairs (blond, redhead, light brown) for example Cherchen man, the Uruqmi woman, the Loulan beauty, the Hami mummy etc...lot of pictures around the net can be found with lot of Tarim mummies with light or blond hairs.

And no, there are not just blogger (racist or not), Victor Mair himself describe them with light hairs (but also various historical accounts), so it's very official.
 
Fire Haired14 said:
Angela, It can't be random with theoretical Yamna that posters at Eurogenes came to the same conclusion as Reich. We're not far off. It's not you guys being critcal I don't like, it's that you act as if everything but what I'm saying is true. It seems biased.

>Not all north Euros are the same. Northeast are surely more than 50% Yamna-like, probably 60-70% for some. 50% is probably a low-bound estimate for someone at the southern end of north European genetics like Germans.

>Yamna+EEF=xCWC or north Euros. Yamna+EEF+SHG/BHG=CWC and north Euros. You've forgotten about hunter gatherer admixture. Much of east Europe was hunter gatherer country when IEs arrived. This is why north Euros have as much WHG as Gok2 and Basque, but significantly less ENF.

>Corded ware does cluster in north-central Europe on PCAs, this is what Laz said.

>There appears to have been mostly genetic stagnation in north Europe starting with Corded ware samples, to 3,000YBP samples, to present-day samples. Corded ware will probably cluster around east Europe or a little east of them.

> Mathematically it is impossible for Mesolithic Scandinavians and modern west Asians to be the main source of ANE in Europe.

>We know from now over a dozen genomes from pre-bronze age west Europe that everyone was ENF+WHG, and were mostly something in-between Stuttgart and Gok2. We also have a pretty good idea what Samara Yamna was based on leaks. So ENF/WHG+Yamna+x=Euros.X fits as being something in-between Loschbour and EHG(65 WHG, 35 ANE).
Click to expand...


I think you're assuming that I disagree with the general proposition that Yamnaya people changed the genomes in Europe, when actually I find the argument pretty convincing. What I object to is this certainty as to specific percentages when it is all based on constructs instead of, as with Lazaridis et al, actual genomes of ancient people.

In addition, it's not as if the predictions have been consistent. These numbers seem to change with every new run. That doesn't exactly inspire confidence. Nor does it inspire confidence when I read things like, well, we can't have population x have y percentage of z component, because then that would move Corded Ware out of north central Europe. It might ultimately prove that it can cluster there, but these kinds of comments lead to doubts about the process.

Now we have this new leak about northern Europeans being approximately 50% Yamnaya. To repeat, if Corded Ware was 75% Yamnaya like, and northern Europeans are 50% Yamnaya like, they can't cluster together. In your own post above, you say that Corded Ware clusters in north Central Europe, and then in the next breath you say they will cluster east of eastern Europe. Both things cannot be true at the same time. Of course, it would be helpful to know how the authors of the paper are defining "northern" Europe. That's why it's necessary to wait for the paper. Frankly, I don't understand why all these simulations are being done in the first place, when the paper is about to be published.

There is also the leak about Yamnaya being able to be fit as 66% of a population "related to" Yamnaya. If that is the case, then perhaps modern northern Europeans might perhaps be fit as 50% of this "related" Indo-Europeanized (perhaps more northern forest steppe) group rather than Yamnaya Indo-European group. What if, for example, this related group moved into northern Europe and then was Indo-Europeanized later? I don't want to get into the particulars of the archaeology here, but early Corded does not have many of the "signatures" of the Indo-European package.

Also, I don't see how there can have been genetic stagnation in north Europe starting with Corded Ware to the present day when Reich specifically says that the genomes exhibited this 75% Yamnaya signature for 1500 years and then changed to the more modern 50% signature. What caused the change is a separate issue.

As to the make up of the actual Yamnaya Indo-Europeans, if 50% of them was "Armenian like", then whatever was not ANE in these ancient Armenian like people was early Near Eastern farmer. So, perhaps anywhere from 40-50% is feasible. Until we get an Early Near Eastern farmer sample, however, this is all highly speculative. In addition, of course, northern Europeans would have "ENF" from the pre-Yamnaya inhabitants.
 
Goga said:
LMAO, the only person here in denial is you! First you came up with the Scythians who were actually VERY LATE East Iranians and originally from SouthCentral Asia. Scythians are not a good example to search for the origins of the Iranic people. Scythians were just a very small part of a greater Iranic race. Scythians were one of the very few who expanded. 99.99% of all Iranic tribes have never been in the Steppes nor around the Yamanya Horizon. Iranian (Aryan) race has nothing to do with Yamnaya. There's 0 evidence that Iranians came from Yamnaya. Some believe they came from BMAC, and some believe they came from an area between Northern Zagros mountains and Leyla-Tepe. I believe that they came from West Asia due to their language and culture similarities with other West Asian peoples. Just STOP linking yourself with the ancient Iranian. It's becoming ridiculous! You have nothing to do with the ancient Iranic at all. You don’t even speak our language for God sake. You don't speak Iranic, you don't have an Iranic culture, brother, you're not Iranic (Aryan), and stop making yourself ridiculous...
Click to expand...

..And you're not Dutch, and never will be.
 
Angela, you're getting stuck on name terms. Remember not all north Euros are the same. Laz mentioned in a leak earlier some north Euros have more Yamna than others. Balts are probably over 60% Yamna. If Corded ware clusters around Balts or just south or east of them, that'll be very close to all north-central Europeans. Laz said himself Corded ware clusters with north-central Euros. So what's the issue? You're disagreeing with the people who actually have CWC DNA.
 
Angela, the abstract never said central Europeans remained 75% Yamna up until 3,000YBP. All they said is Yamna ancestry remained in all the samples after Corded ware, up to 3,000YBP, and as we know is obviously still there today. The corded ware samples he had had arrived in central Europe from the steppe only several hundred years before, they were new arrivals, so of course they had more Yamna than anyone nowadays.

With ANE K8 Davidski created a PCA of west Eurasia, which is nearly identical to a PCA based on genotype. What this means is ENF, WHG, and ANE in ANE K8 are very real ancestral components which make up almost all the ancestry of present-day west Eurasians. Also, why did I come up with the same 50% figure as Laz, if ANE K8 was far off? ANE K8 is the best we have. I'm willing to admit it isn't good enough, but that doubt doesn't stop me from trying.
 
The system proposed is completly wrong when they have to eliminate central europeans and add them into northern european numbers to make it work. This is the proposal and its wrong.........
 
Sile said:
The system proposed is completly wrong when they have to eliminate central europeans and add them into northern european numbers to make it work. This is the proposal and its wrong.........
Click to expand...

No one is hooked up on those terms. Laz says north Euros have about 15% ANE, even though Balts have close to 20% and central euros have around just over 10%. If most north-central Euros have a certain number, they'll say they all do.
 
Fire Haired14 said:
No one is hooked up on those terms. Laz says north Euros have about 15% ANE, even though Balts have close to 20% and central euros have around just over 10%. If most north-central Euros have a certain number, they'll say they all do.
Click to expand...

You better ask the people ( you will be surprised) , you will find that they need to mix central and north to make their scenario work
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

This thread has been viewed 43392 times.

Back
Top