Massive migration from the steppe is a source for Indo-European languages in Europe

[Alan]

I don't think Yamnaya brought Armenian-like admixture to the steppe.
Armenians arrived 1200 BC and have quite someR1b-L23
Maybe Armenians have Yamnaya-like admixture

View attachment 7073

the reason why Reich used the notion "Armenian like" is because
Armenians speak a Indo European language, and he wanted to indicate that their is a high possibility that the Indo European language was brought to Yamna actually from there.

From what I heard from other Users, there are other groups as well fitting as Armenians. This is why they used "Armenian like". Undoubtley half of Armenian ancestry probably came with the Phrygians.

This "Armenian like" population which contributed to Yamna must have been a nowadays died out population who have contributed into the ethnogenesis of Armenians, as well others of the region.

 

[Alan]

your mixing up the data from pages 23 and 25
page 23 has modern and ancient charts. The page 25 refers to the ancient chart on page 23

I am using figure 3. Which has a "Yamna component" to show how much of their ancestry Europeans inherited from Yamna. In this figure they use EEF, WHG and Yamna. EEF is a specific type of farmer DNA which is nowadays less common in Western Asia and not equivalent to ENF.
http://s1133.photobucket.com/user/jeanlohizun/media/Haaketal2015-Figure-3_zpsf94c99b9.jpg.html

 

[Sile]

I am using figure 3. Which has a "Yamna component" to show how much of their ancestry Europeans inherited from Yamna. In this figure they use EEF, WHG and Yamna. EEF is a specific type of farmer DNA which is nowadays less common in Western Asia and not equivalent to ENF.
http://s1133.photobucket.com/user/jeanlohizun/media/Haaketal2015-Figure-3_zpsf94c99b9.jpg.html

yes I too am using figure 3, but the bottom part which states ancient


look at page 25...pop label for analysis .............this is used for the ancient part of the figure 3 ancients

 

[Aberdeen]

I definitely think there's a danger that a lot of people will get confused about the difference between:

(a) the question of where the Indo-European language may have originated from;

(b) the original spread of R1a and R1b around Europe by BB and CW people; and

(c) the arrival of the Bronze Age cultural package in Europe.

I think it's helpful to remember that those things are related but they are not the same things. And we have no proof that BB or CW spoke IE languages.

 

[Yaan]

Pal, when they test ancients they do not get every SNP. They make a sound call with what they find.
now, the Thracian known as K8 ( the royal one from crimea ) had contaminated DNA and his test was ruled out.

the other thracian 192-1 was shown to have SNP 's for ydna H1b1 and also was found his mtdna which is U3b


don't rule out all 4 thracian samples because one was found contaminated

Once again, there is not a ancient Y DNA from the Balkans, not a single, and H was never in Europe, before 16th century, so pls stop with this

 

[bicicleur 2]

I definitely think there's a danger that a lot of people will get confused about the difference between:

(a) the question of where the Indo-European language may have originated from;

(b) the original spread of R1a and R1b around Europe by BB and CW people; and

(c) the arrival of the Bronze Age cultural package in Europe.

I think it's helpful to remember that those things are related but they are not the same things. And we have no proof that BB or CW spoke IE languages.

they are not the same but they are connected
I have little doubt that the clades downsrtream of R1a-M417 and R1b-M269 spoke IE
that includes BB and CW people
the difference between BB and CW is that CW came en masse, so they were the majority when they arrived and imposed their language
first BB may have arrived in small groups, and I guess they learned to speak the language of their hosts

 

[Sile]

Once again, there is not a ancient Y DNA from the Balkans, not a single, and H was never in Europe, before 16th century, so pls stop with this

I do not know what your agenda is but the paper also confirms a ydna H




I0110174 (Starcevo_EN)

This individual was assigned to haplogroup H2 (L281:8353840T→G). Upstream haplogroup F was also supported (P142:7218079G→A, P145:8424089G→A, P138:14199284T→C,P316:16839641A→T, P14:17398598C→T, P159:18097251C→A). An individual bearing mutation P96 which also defines Haplogroup H2 was found in the Netherlands ; while haplogroup H is rare inpresent-day Europeans, its discovery in I0174 suggests that it was present in Neolithic Europe


mtdna of this individual is N1a1a1b

his age is between 5710 - 5550 years

 

[Yaan]

I do not know what your agenda is but the paper also confirms a ydna H




I0110174 (Starcevo_EN)

This individual was assigned to haplogroup H2 (L281:8353840T→G). Upstream haplogroup F was also supported (P142:7218079G→A, P145:8424089G→A, P138:14199284T→C,P316:16839641A→T, P14:17398598C→T, P159:18097251C→A). An individual bearing mutation P96 which also defines Haplogroup H2 was found in the Netherlands ; while haplogroup H is rare inpresent-day Europeans, its discovery in I0174 suggests that it was present in Neolithic Europe


mtdna of this individual is N1a1a1b

his age is between 5710 - 5550 years

No I do not know what ur agenda is but there is not a single Y DNA from the Balkans and there is not a single H Y DNA tested.

 

[Yetos]

No I do not know what ur agenda is but there is not a single Y DNA from the Balkans and there is not a single H Y DNA tested.

there is 1 in Thracian

 

[Sile]

No I do not know what ur agenda is but there is not a single Y DNA from the Balkans and there is not a single H Y DNA tested.

Argue with the people who wrote the Haak paper about your agenda that H ydna is not in europe until the date you claim

 

[sparkey]

No I do not know what ur agenda is but there is not a single Y DNA from the Balkans and there is not a single H Y DNA tested.

To be clear, the H2 Starcevo sample that Sile is referring to was from Hungary, not the Balkans.

There have also been samples from earlier studies, mostly LBK and mostly from Germany, that were reported as F* but did not test P96, making H2 a very likely possibility for them as well. But again, nothing from the Balkans.

 

[Yaan]

Argue with the people who wrote the Haak paper about your agenda that H ydna is not in europe until the date you claim

No there is not, I do not care if ancient Thracian were A, the fact is that they are not tested!, I do not want to argue with u, u seem really nice guy, just there is not a single Y DNA from Ancient Balkans, not a single one, and there is not a single ancient human tested for Y DNA H, as for when H entered we can discuss ofc, but there is not data from Balkans!!

So when there is data from Balkans I will be more then happy to discuss it with knowledge guy like u, u seem to know a lot , up to then I leave u guys to discuss the R1b, for me it just proves when we already knew that it comes from Anatolia

 

[Yaan]

To be clear, the H2 Starcevo sample that Sile is referring to was from Hungary, not the Balkans.

There have also been samples from earlier studies, mostly LBK and mostly from Germany, that were reported as F* but did not test P96, making H2 a very likely possibility for them as well. But again, nothing from the Balkans.

Well, this is something totally different, but Hungary is not Balkans, there are no Thrachians there and F* is not H.

 

[Sile]

To be clear, the H2 Starcevo sample that Sile is referring to was from Hungary, not the Balkans.

There have also been samples from earlier studies, mostly LBK and mostly from Germany, that were reported as F* but did not test P96, making H2 a very likely possibility for them as well. But again, nothing from the Balkans.

his post #206 stated...no H in europe befor ethe 16th century

 

[Alan]

I think he is being "Gypsophobic" but let me help abit against his H* phobia. The H found in the Thracian and Neolithic European samples is H2(former known H1b) while Roma H is H1a?. There was also a Syrian neolithic? sample who turned out as H. So this can't be coincidence.

H was definitely part of the neolithic movement.

 

[Alan]

I even started to think for long time now. Is it possible that it was some of Haplogroup H who brought farming to India?

 

[Robert6]

Is there any link for Thracian H2 (old F3, new H1b) ????
Where can I read about this?
Also H2 (old F3, new H1b) in Neolithic Syria?

 

[Finalise]

I can't believe Reich all of a sudden revamped the entire WHG component. A few months ago, there were discussions of how Europeans have this deep ancestry from Loschbur related WHG, and all of a sudden now it's only 10% or so, and Yamna-EHG is the new component.I have a feeling that the "Yamna" component will be taken apart and divided again.

 

[Robert6]

Well, this is something totally different, but Hungary is not Balkans, there are no Thrachians there and F* is not H.

Yaan
the H2 (old F3, new H1b) is European + West Asian haplogroup
the H1 (old H, new H1a) is Indian and Roma haplogroup

 

[bicicleur 2]

I even started to think for long time now. Is it possible that it was some of Haplogroup H who brought farming to India?

H is paleolithic in India
H started to split very early , more than 40.000 years ago , and all subclades are present in India
so it is very unlikely that H brougth farming to India
it is very likely tough that once farming was introduced in the Indus valley, subclades of H helped to spread farming further south
the people who spread farming further south were the Dravidians