Eupedia Forums
Site NavigationEupedia Top > Eupedia Forum & Japan Forum
Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 119

Thread: Teasers: Anatolians of 6300 BC Y DNA G2a, ancestral to EEF

  1. #26
    Baron Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    19-05-12
    Posts
    259
    Points
    5,537
    Level
    21
    Points: 5,537, Level: 21
    Level completed: 98%, Points required for next Level: 13
    Overall activity: 0%


    Country: Canada



    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    The analysis in the El Portalon paper had regional HG groups appearing closer to the local farmers relative to other hunter gatherers, so I suspect there was some mixture between the two. For example, La Brana is closer to El Portalon farmers than Motala is to El Portalon. Although both the hunter gatherers and farmers were relatively homogeneous, there was regional variation. It seems the farmers were more homogeneous because it was a fairly rapid transition, the largest variation being which hunter gatherers were absorbed along the way.

    I'll be interested to see which hunter gatherers were closest to the NW Anatolian farmers. I guess Balkan ones if we had such a sample.

  2. #27
    Baron Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    19-05-12
    Posts
    259
    Points
    5,537
    Level
    21
    Points: 5,537, Level: 21
    Level completed: 98%, Points required for next Level: 13
    Overall activity: 0%


    Country: Canada



    Quote Originally Posted by bicicleur View Post
    correct, there was a lot of "F" too
    how much of this is left? practically none
    why would the original first G2a still be there then?

    Actually all the G branches found to date in the European Neolithic are rare ones today, so neither they nor the H2 branch were all that successful. However, the fact that NW Caucasus yields a high % of the common G variation in Europe today might offer some clues that one of these waves was successful in Europe. It should be of note that the common G haplotype in Europe which is under G-P303, I don't recall which branch, was found in a La Tene burial, as well as 2 R1b haplotypes. Something similar was found in medieval Austria with 2 Gs and 4 R1bs.

  3. #28
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Fluffy's Avatar
    Join Date
    05-11-14
    Posts
    177
    Points
    4,291
    Level
    19
    Points: 4,291, Level: 19
    Level completed: 11%, Points required for next Level: 359
    Overall activity: 1.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b U152 L2 L20
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H1n

    Ethnic group
    Dutch / French
    Country: Canada-Ontario



    [QUOTE=Aaron1981;466737]Actually all the G branches found to date in the European Neolithic are rare ones today, so neither they nor the H2 branch were all that successful. However, the fact that NW Caucasus yields a high % of the common G variation in Europe today might offer some clues that one of these waves was successful in Europe. It should be of note that the common G haplotype in Europe which is under G


    Like G2a L497?
    Species adapt to their environment,
    and those who do so best (the fittest) survive and prosper the most.

  4. #29
    Elite member Achievements:
    VeteranThree FriendsRecommendation Second Class25000 Experience Points
    Awards:
    User with most referrers

    Join Date
    14-11-10
    Posts
    2,504
    Points
    25,862
    Level
    49
    Points: 25,862, Level: 49
    Level completed: 32%, Points required for next Level: 688
    Overall activity: 13.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1a1a1
    MtDNA haplogroup
    HV2a1 +G13708A

    Ethnic group
    Kurdish
    Country: Germany



    Some comments I made on Eurogenes comment section and which I think make some sense.

    @Awood

    "
    Modern Middle Eastern people, including people from the Levant have the Teal component which is found in Yamnaya. If NW Anatolia = true farmer, or let's call it a Stuttgart on EEF steroids, then I suspect there will be no "Teal", unlike all ME populations today. "

    The main shift that happened in the Levant is a "Southern/Southwestern Farmer" expansion which came via the Afro_Asiatic speakers. Modern Levantines don't really have that much ANE what shifts them more away from EEF is the significantly higher Red Sea Element which is most likely the result of Afro_Asiatic expansion evident from acient samples of Armenia where we see a constant increase of Red Sea element.

    Teal or what I call the Eastern farmers were probably around the Iranian Plateau, Southeast Caucasus Mesopotamia and East Anatolia by mid-late neolithic. Mesopotamia, East Anatolia and Caucasus must have been the connection point of East and West farmers by late neolithic. And modern Jordan the meeting point of South and West farmers. South farmer expansions into northern Levant and East/South farmers expansions into Anatolia must have almost completely eradicated the Western farmers. This is also clearly evident by historic context. Assyrian, Aramaic and Arab expansion towards North, Iranic, Turkic and other Indo European expansion from the Iranian Plateau/East Anatolia/Transcaucasus into Central/West Anatolia and as far as Levant.


    Coldmountains said
    "So Y-DNA I among EEFs could originate from Anatolia in the end and not from assimilated WHGs? "

    possibility is there but not necessary, because some Balkanian farmers had already additional (~5-20%) real WHG admixture, so I could have been catched up there. While ironically Central European farmers were mostly identical to Anatolian farmers.


    I think the explanation for this is simple. Here we are dealing with a farming complex of Anatolian farmers and their descend the Balkanian farmers who probably absorbed real WHG admixture.

    Now it's not like Central European farmers had to have arrived automatically from those Balkanian farmers after they earlier left from Anatolia. Think about it. What forces farmers to migrate?

    Shortage of land. Now imagine first Anatolian farmers reaching Balkans. A second group from Anatolia starting it's journey but Balkans are already occupied by farmer groups. So the most logical thing is you migrate a step further into Central Europe. Now other waves of farmers leave the Balkans and Anatolia for new farmland. This is probably how some Iberian farmers end up being identical to Balkan farmers while other identical to Anatolian. This is not because they absorbed allot of additional WHG in Iberia but because they are descend of those Balkan farmers who already absorbed real WHG in the Balkans!

    And about Haplogroup I, I think it was a Haplogroup spaning the region between Europe all the way into the Iranian Plateau and Levant.

  5. #30
    Satyavrata Achievements:
    Three FriendsRecommendation First ClassVeteran50000 Experience PointsTagger First Class
    Maciamo's Avatar
    Join Date
    17-07-02
    Location
    Lothier
    Posts
    8,689
    Points
    682,168
    Level
    100
    Points: 682,168, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 4.0%


    Ethnic group
    Italo-celto-germanic
    Country: Belgium - Brussels



    Quote Originally Posted by Arame View Post
    Maciamo

    Well generally I agree with Your explications about why some old lineages get extinct but there are also others events that happen when two different groups contacts.

    When Europeans first contacted with Aztecs, more than a million native Americans died just because they had no immunity against smallpox. So the adaptive immune system fitness (which itself is related to HLA system ) can play a major selective role.

    Another factor of selective pressure especially on males is the 'immunity' against the alcohol and other natural 'antidepressants'. Many Siberian populations have very poor tolerance of alcohol for example.

    Also one should take into account the population density. When the technology develops there is a possibility to a population density increase. For example if one territory has 100% of G2a with density of 10 people on sq.km. A new technology brought by J2 that increase the population density to 20 people/sq.km. This will bring down the G2 frequency by two times to 50%, without any killing.
    The situation of the Europeans reaching the Americas is completely different because the two groups had been genetically separated for over 15,000 years and they evolved in completely different natural environments during that time, exposed to different microbes. In Eurasia all populations constantly had some sort of contact with their immediate neighbours - if not every year, at least once in a generation for at least one individual in the group, which is enough for diseases to spread and for immunity to get roughly evened out at the continental level.

    Novelties like alcohol could also spread faster among neighbouring populations than the speed of natural selection to modify the gene pool.

    Anyway, if immunity played any role in "wiping out" Neolithic lineages, it should have affected both paternal and maternal lineages, which isn't the case at all. Nowadays over 60% of European mtDNA can be traced back to Neolithic farmers. I am not just referring to top level haplogroups like H or K, but very deep subclades that haven't changed at all since the Neolithic, such as H1e1a, H1e1a3, K1a3a3, K1a4a1, T2a1b1, T2c1d2, etc. And as I said above, autosomally it is clear that over half of European DNA was inherited from Neolithic farmers. That is definitely not a sign of massive population replacement. Only on the paternal side.
    My book selection---Follow me on Facebook and Twitter --- My profile on Academia.edu and on ResearchGate ----Check Wa-pedia's Japan Guide
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    "What is the use of living, if it be not to strive for noble causes and to make this muddled world a better place for those who will live in it after we are gone?", Winston Churchill.

  6. #31
    Satyavrata Achievements:
    Three FriendsRecommendation First ClassVeteran50000 Experience PointsTagger First Class
    Maciamo's Avatar
    Join Date
    17-07-02
    Location
    Lothier
    Posts
    8,689
    Points
    682,168
    Level
    100
    Points: 682,168, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 4.0%


    Ethnic group
    Italo-celto-germanic
    Country: Belgium - Brussels



    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Aaron1981 View Post
    Actually all the G branches found to date in the European Neolithic are rare ones today, so neither they nor the H2 branch were all that successful. However, the fact that NW Caucasus yields a high % of the common G variation in Europe today might offer some clues that one of these waves was successful in Europe. It should be of note that the common G haplotype in Europe which is under G-P303, I don't recall which branch, was found in a La Tene burial, as well as 2 R1b haplotypes. Something similar was found in medieval Austria with 2 Gs and 4 R1bs.
    That's exactly why I have maintained for the last 6 years that most G2a in Europe (L141.1, what I am used to call G2a3b, even if the nomenclature has changed since) is descended from Bronze Age Indo-Europeans like R1b1a2, and that this G2a-L141.1 originated in the Maykop culture alongside R1b lineages found in Europe today. We should soon know if that was correct (at least if they test enough Maykop samples to have something representative).

  7. #32
    Advisor Achievements:
    VeteranThree Friends50000 Experience PointsRecommendation Second Class
    Awards:
    Posting Award
    Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    14,822
    Points
    249,063
    Level
    100
    Points: 249,063, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 99.6%


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: USA - New York



    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    I think it's probably the case, as I've previously proposed, that WHG in Europe is descended from a hunter-gatherer population that existed in the Near East.

    Of course, the migration of these hunter-gatherers into Europe would have been before the LGM, so there was plenty of time for WHG to undergo a lot of drift.

    Therefore, if we're going to be precise in our terminology and not confuse people once more, the Anatolian farmers did not have WHG.

    So, it seems there were at least two groups of hunter-gatherers in the ancient Near East who combined to form the first farmers. There's this population ancestral to the WHG whom we could perhaps call the UHG, and some "Basal Eurasian" hunter-gatherers.

    I certainly hope that the Reich Lab clarifies the issue, including the origin and nature of this "Basal Eurasian" hunter gatherer component, and its proportional presence in the first farmers of Anatolia.

    If they can't do it maybe it's time that they let it go or modify it, like they modified their initial formulation that Europeans had an "Amerindian" component.


    Non si fa il proprio dovere perchè qualcuno ci dica grazie, lo si fa per principio, per se stessi, per la propria dignità. Oriana Fallaci

  8. #33
    Elite member Achievements:
    Veteran10000 Experience Points
    epoch's Avatar
    Join Date
    13-09-13
    Posts
    779
    Points
    10,483
    Level
    30
    Points: 10,483, Level: 30
    Level completed: 89%, Points required for next Level: 67
    Overall activity: 2.0%


    Country: Netherlands



    Quote Originally Posted by Alan View Post
    Some comments I made on Eurogenes comment section and which I think make some sense.
    A lot of the Mediterranean soils are very rich soils - terra rossa e.g. - whereas Central European fertile soils are restricted to loess and river clay. The latter is not easily worked. LBK settlement very roughly matches loess soils. I tend to think this led to enough space left in LBK areas - The areas had huge peat bogs, fenns and non-productive forests - for WHG to keep living alongside LBK, whereas in the Mediterranean contact was inevitable. We know later Middle European neolithics got admixed with WHG and Haak et al does state that immediately before the big Corder Ware turn over there was an *additional* surge of WHG. That must have been remaining WHG groups.

    Davidski once said we Middle Europeans are roughly 1/4 EEF, 1/4 local WHG and 1/2 Steppe. That may not be the exact numbers but we do show enough affinity to Loschbourg and KO1 to warrant such an idea.


    http://eusoils.jrc.ec.europa.eu/proj.../pages/87.html

    http://cdn.eupedia.com/images/content/LBK_culture.png

    https://helemaalloss.files.wordpress..._hires7613.jpg

  9. #34
    Elite member Achievements:
    Veteran10000 Experience Points
    epoch's Avatar
    Join Date
    13-09-13
    Posts
    779
    Points
    10,483
    Level
    30
    Points: 10,483, Level: 30
    Level completed: 89%, Points required for next Level: 67
    Overall activity: 2.0%


    Country: Netherlands



    Quote Originally Posted by Angela View Post
    I think it's probably the case, as I've previously proposed, that WHG in Europe is descended from a hunter-gatherer population that existed in the Near East.
    No, can't be. Lazardis derived the proportion of EEF versus WHG from Stuttgart and Loschbour, which would lump the Near Eastern WHG decent in EEF. Still, everybody in Europe came out with a proportion of WHG. Also, Haak had this table which clearly states something similar:


  10. #35
    Regular Member Achievements:
    VeteranThree Friends25000 Experience Points
    Sile's Avatar
    Join Date
    04-09-11
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    5,120
    Points
    29,699
    Level
    52
    Points: 29,699, Level: 52
    Level completed: 96%, Points required for next Level: 51
    Overall activity: 37.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    T1a2 -Z19945..Jura
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H95a1 ..Pannoni

    Ethnic group
    North Alpine Italian
    Country: Australia



    Quote Originally Posted by epoch View Post
    No, can't be. Lazardis derived the proportion of EEF versus WHG from Stuttgart and Loschbour, which would lump the Near Eastern WHG decent in EEF. Still, everybody in Europe came out with a proportion of WHG. Also, Haak had this table which clearly states something similar:

    As i stated in post#11 ...............there is no teal in LBKT_EN and this orange is in central Germany ..............the age difference between these new "troad" Anatolians of 6300BC to the orange of LBK_EN in germany is less than 800 years

    you will find nearly zero of WHG in these troad people
    có che un pòpoło no 'l defende pi ła só łéngua el xe prónto par èser s'ciavo

    when a people no longer dares to defend its language it is ripe for slavery.

  11. #36
    Advisor Achievements:
    VeteranThree Friends50000 Experience PointsRecommendation Second Class
    Awards:
    Posting Award
    Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    14,822
    Points
    249,063
    Level
    100
    Points: 249,063, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 99.6%


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: USA - New York



    Quote Originally Posted by bicicleur View Post
    correct, there was a lot of "F" too
    how much of this is left? practically none
    why would the original first G2a still be there then?

    and yes, sometimes the newcomers took local women
    but that don't mean no new women arrived
    just look at early neolithic and middle neolithic mtDNA
    if you don't look at the subclades, you'll find the same components but not in the same proportion, there are clear shifts
    in the early neolithic the main components are T and K
    in the middle neolithic many of them are replaced by H
    if you then look at the subclades, you'll notice even more differences

    the first European farmers didn't have a monopoly on EEF
    otherwise it would be impossible for R1b to become totally EEF
    This is the Brandt et al analysis of ancient mtDna. I know we now have more samples, but maybe this can serve just to get the discussion going.


    The total lack of the "U" lineages in the early Neolithic goes along with the findings that there was virtually no H/G introgression in the early phases of the Neolithic in Europe. The uptick in the Middle Neolithic could correlate with the uptick in WHG ancestry in late Neolithic and Copper Age Europeans. Interestingly, that occurs before the changes to mtDna brought about by Corded Ware and Bell Beaker, which, if you're using just those lineages labelled Early Bronze Age, aren't very large. (Some of those are obviously "EHG" type lineages.)

    The problematic lineage is "H", given those somewhat controversial Mesolithic "H" samples in Iberia, and the later high frequencies of "H" in Neolithic Portugal. It will be very informative to see what specific lineages of "H" were present in the Anatolian Neolithic. Most importantly, was there "basal" H1 and H3? When we have that information it will be much easier to figure out if, whether or not a few very basal "H" lineages made it to Iberia in the Mesolithic, the vast majority of it is Neolithic Near Eastern, and which sub-lineages went "west" to go with the EEF into Europe "early", and which "H" and other lineages (U3?) went east into the Caucasus, then the steppe and only then entered Europe from the east.

  12. #37
    Advisor Achievements:
    VeteranThree Friends50000 Experience PointsRecommendation Second Class
    Awards:
    Posting Award
    Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    14,822
    Points
    249,063
    Level
    100
    Points: 249,063, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 99.6%


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: USA - New York



    Quote Originally Posted by Alan View Post
    Some comments I made on Eurogenes comment section and which I think make some sense.

    To prove this scenario you'd actually need Balkan (and or Greek) farmer samples from before the date of LBK which show introgressed "actual" WHG, wouldn't you?

    Maybe I've lost track. Do we even have contemporaneous, much less earlier farmer samples (as compared to LBK) from the Balkans which show more "WHG" even as defined by blogger calculators?

    Or is the increase from mid to late Neolithic samples?

  13. #38
    Elite member Achievements:
    Veteran10000 Experience Points
    epoch's Avatar
    Join Date
    13-09-13
    Posts
    779
    Points
    10,483
    Level
    30
    Points: 10,483, Level: 30
    Level completed: 89%, Points required for next Level: 67
    Overall activity: 2.0%


    Country: Netherlands



    Quote Originally Posted by Aaron1981 View Post
    The analysis in the El Portalon paper had regional HG groups appearing closer to the local farmers relative to other hunter gatherers, so I suspect there was some mixture between the two. For example, La Brana is closer to El Portalon farmers than Motala is to El Portalon. Although both the hunter gatherers and farmers were relatively homogeneous, there was regional variation. It seems the farmers were more homogeneous because it was a fairly rapid transition, the largest variation being which hunter gatherers were absorbed along the way.

    I'll be interested to see which hunter gatherers were closest to the NW Anatolian farmers. I guess Balkan ones if we had such a sample.


    No, the gist of it was that KO1, a Hungarian HG contemporary to neolithics, was more related to farmers than all other HGs and therefore they concluded admixture in the Balkans was the most probable scenario.




    This also clearly shows the re-uptake of HG by later, local neolithic cultures such as Funnel Beaker. See Gok2's higher affiliation to Loschbour.

  14. #39
    Elite member Achievements:
    VeteranThree FriendsRecommendation Second Class25000 Experience Points
    Awards:
    User with most referrers

    Join Date
    14-11-10
    Posts
    2,504
    Points
    25,862
    Level
    49
    Points: 25,862, Level: 49
    Level completed: 32%, Points required for next Level: 688
    Overall activity: 13.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1a1a1
    MtDNA haplogroup
    HV2a1 +G13708A

    Ethnic group
    Kurdish
    Country: Germany



    Quote Originally Posted by Angela View Post
    I think it's probably the case, as I've previously proposed, that WHG in Europe is descended from a hunter-gatherer population that existed in the Near East.

    Of course, the migration of these hunter-gatherers into Europe would have been before the LGM, so there was plenty of time for WHG to undergo a lot of drift.

    Therefore, if we're going to be precise in our terminology and not confuse people once more, the Anatolian farmers did not have WHG.

    So, it seems there were at least two groups of hunter-gatherers in the ancient Near East who combined to form the first farmers. There's this population ancestral to the WHG whom we could perhaps call the UHG, and some "Basal Eurasian" hunter-gatherers.

    I certainly hope that the Reich Lab clarifies the issue, including the origin and nature of this "Basal Eurasian" hunter gatherer component, and its proportional presence in the first farmers of Anatolia.

    If they can't do it maybe it's time that they let it go or modify it, like they modified their initial formulation that Europeans had an "Amerindian" component.

    Absolutely agree.

    Here one of my comments about that matter on Eurogenes comment section.

    Alberto said

    "I certainly didn't mean that there were WHGs as such (Loschbour types) in Syria or the Levant. Here we should probably notice that we're talking about the same kind of component and it's just a degree of it that changes."

    Right, as I said in one of my earlier posts. we are dealing with a West Eurasian Hunther and Gatherers population ancestral to WHG too but pre WHG.

    What is here showing up as "WHG" in EEF is not really WHG but a relative population of WHG which was in the Near East since the beginning and might even be (Probably) ancestral to WHG itself.

    Just look at this graph it explains the relation of EEF and WHG well.
    http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-YbYK8NzQNA...1600/model.png

  15. #40
    Elite member Achievements:
    VeteranThree FriendsRecommendation Second Class25000 Experience Points
    Awards:
    User with most referrers

    Join Date
    14-11-10
    Posts
    2,504
    Points
    25,862
    Level
    49
    Points: 25,862, Level: 49
    Level completed: 32%, Points required for next Level: 688
    Overall activity: 13.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1a1a1
    MtDNA haplogroup
    HV2a1 +G13708A

    Ethnic group
    Kurdish
    Country: Germany



    Quote Originally Posted by Angela View Post
    To prove this scenario you'd actually need Balkan (and or Greek) farmer samples from before the date of LBK which show introgressed "actual" WHG, wouldn't you?

    Maybe I've lost track. Do we even have contemporaneous, much less earlier farmer samples (as compared to LBK) from the Balkans which show more "WHG" even as defined by blogger calculators?

    Or is the increase from mid to late Neolithic samples?
    My thoughts were made because of the Vinca individual and that a recent paper appeared saying Iberian farmers are directly descend from Balkan farmers. It was merely a speculation but I still think that is the case and we have it to do with a farming complex along Anatolia and Balkans. In this scenario Balkans are a secondary homeland to the earliest fertile crescent farmers who reached the Balkans and mixed there probably with real WHG people and might have catched up yDNA I there (If not "I" was present in Western Asia already).

  16. #41
    Advisor Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteran25000 Experience Points
    Awards:
    Most Popular
    bicicleur's Avatar
    Join Date
    27-01-13
    Location
    Zwevegem, Belgium
    Posts
    5,254
    Points
    41,757
    Level
    63
    Points: 41,757, Level: 63
    Level completed: 9%, Points required for next Level: 1,193
    Overall activity: 52.0%


    Country: Belgium - Flanders



    Quote Originally Posted by Angela View Post
    This is the Brandt et al analysis of ancient mtDna. I know we now have more samples, but maybe this can serve just to get the discussion going.


    The total lack of the "U" lineages in the early Neolithic goes along with the findings that there was virtually no H/G introgression in the early phases of the Neolithic in Europe. The uptick in the Middle Neolithic could correlate with the uptick in WHG ancestry in late Neolithic and Copper Age Europeans. Interestingly, that occurs before the changes to mtDna brought about by Corded Ware and Bell Beaker, which, if you're using just those lineages labelled Early Bronze Age, aren't very large. (Some of those are obviously "EHG" type lineages.)

    The problematic lineage is "H", given those somewhat controversial Mesolithic "H" samples in Iberia, and the later high frequencies of "H" in Neolithic Portugal. It will be very informative to see what specific lineages of "H" were present in the Anatolian Neolithic. Most importantly, was there "basal" H1 and H3? When we have that information it will be much easier to figure out if, whether or not a few very basal "H" lineages made it to Iberia in the Mesolithic, the vast majority of it is Neolithic Near Eastern, and which sub-lineages went "west" to go with the EEF into Europe "early", and which "H" and other lineages (U3?) went east into the Caucasus, then the steppe and only then entered Europe from the east.
    it is strange, 5500-3500 BC 'early neolithic' and H are moving in opposite direction as if they were 2 competing groups
    after 3500 BC U moves in again
    and what about LN/EBA, they don't strike me as specific Yamnaya, Yamanya looks more like U + 'early neolithic' in terms of mtDNA

    U was probably native to the steppe since LGM, so would some group crossing the Caucasus just prior to Yamnaya have brought the 'early neolithic' to the steppe ?

    there is still to much guessing involved

    furthermore since 2200 BC there is a comeback of H at the expense of all other mtDNA lines
    how could that be explained?

  17. #42
    Advisor Achievements:
    VeteranThree Friends50000 Experience PointsRecommendation Second Class
    Awards:
    Posting Award
    Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    14,822
    Points
    249,063
    Level
    100
    Points: 249,063, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 99.6%


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: USA - New York



    Quote Originally Posted by Alan View Post
    My thoughts were made because of the Vinca individual and that a recent paper appeared saying Iberian farmers are directly descend from Balkan farmers. It was merely a speculation but I still think that is the case and we have it to do with a farming complex along Anatolia and Balkans. In this scenario Balkans are a secondary homeland to the earliest fertile crescent farmers who reached the Balkans and mixed there probably with real WHG people and might have catched up yDNA I there (If not "I" was present in Western Asia already).
    VINCA and LBK are roughly simultaneous cultures. I'd have to go back and check the date of Stuttgart and that Vinca sample to see the specific chronology.

    Anyway, every paper we've seen so far, including the Olalde paper to which you're referring indicates that all the farmers were basically homogeneous until the Mid-to-Late Neolithic, which correlates with what Haak et al said, and when they seemed to pick up some minor WHG component in varying amounts. I'm not inclined to muddy the waters right now based on that one sample. It's important to remember, too, that there might be a few percent difference between the early European farmers and the earlier Anatolian ones.

    Hopefully, the new Reich Lab paper will clarify a lot of these things. I'll wait for them before I formulate any firm conclusions about all of this. I think the speech is Thursday? Perhaps the paper will be online shortly after that.

    Oh, sorry I didn't give points for some of your posts upthread. I was profligate with them and I'm all out!

  18. #43
    Elite member Achievements:
    Three FriendsRecommendation Second ClassVeteran50000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    07-09-14
    Posts
    4,484
    Points
    58,142
    Level
    74
    Points: 58,142, Level: 74
    Level completed: 73%, Points required for next Level: 408
    Overall activity: 7.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b
    MtDNA haplogroup
    W6

    Ethnic group
    Polish
    Country: Poland



    Quote Originally Posted by Angela
    I think it's probably the case, as I've previously proposed, that WHG in Europe is descended from a hunter-gatherer population that existed in the Near East.
    Angela look at present-day frequency distribution of WHG ancestry in Europe - does it look like immigration from the Near East? I don't think so. WHG in Europe is descended partially from local hunters absorbed by farmers, and partially from Proto-Indo-Europeans through EHG component (which was present among PIEs and which - as we know - consisted of WHG and ANE).

    The same applies to ANE - it is partially descended from PIE, and partially from an earlier immigration of Siberian hunters. For instance, we know that some % of ANE was present already among SHGs, long before PIEs came to Scandinavia.

    So higher percent of ANE among present-day groups such as Norwegians or Lithuanians can be the result not just of greater degree of population replacement by PIEs, but also of presence of some ANE already in local pre-IE substratum.

    It has been proven time and again that Middle Neolithic and especially Late Neolithic farmers in places such as Scandinavia, North-Central Europe (LBK, Lengyel, TRB), North-Eastern Europe and Northern Iberia did assimilate local hunters. We observe increase of WHG ancestry already in those Middle-to-Late Neolithic samples.

    The idea that expansion of farming was entirely through replacement of local hunters holds only for Early Neolithic times, and only for Southern and South-Central Europe.

    So there is really no need to speculate about WHG ancestry coming from Anatolia. It was local, European, and increased over time from Early Neolithic to Late Neolithic. Had it come from Anatolia, it would have been present in large amounts already in Early Neolithic samples from Southern Europe or Hungary.

    By the way - I would
    like to see some autosomal data for farmers from North-Eastern Europe, such as Zhizhitskaya Culture.

    It does not seem likely that Zhizhitskaya farmers-and-fishermen had mostly Near Eastern ancestry.

  19. #44
    Advisor Achievements:
    VeteranThree Friends50000 Experience PointsRecommendation Second Class
    Awards:
    Posting Award
    Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    14,822
    Points
    249,063
    Level
    100
    Points: 249,063, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 99.6%


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: USA - New York



    Quote Originally Posted by bicicleur View Post
    it is strange, 5500-3500 BC 'early neolithic' and H are moving in opposite direction as if they were 2 competing groups
    after 3500 BC U moves in again
    and what about LN/EBA, they don't strike me as specific Yamnaya, Yamanya looks more like U + 'early neolithic' in terms of mtDNA

    U was probably native to the steppe since LGM, so would some group crossing the Caucasus just prior to Yamnaya have brought the 'early neolithic' to the steppe ?

    there is still to much guessing involved
    You're right, we need a lot more info on all of this. The problem with that Brandt et al analysis is that the "H' lineage isn't broken down into sub lineages. Maybe it was different ones entering from different directions. Maybe Fire-Haired will come back in and tell us what his compilation shows about subgroups of H by steppe vs western Europe and then regionally within western Europe itself.

  20. #45
    Advisor Achievements:
    VeteranThree Friends50000 Experience PointsRecommendation Second Class
    Awards:
    Posting Award
    Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    14,822
    Points
    249,063
    Level
    100
    Points: 249,063, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 99.6%


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: USA - New York



    Quote Originally Posted by Tomenable View Post


    Angela look at present-day frequency distribution of WHG ancestry in Europe - does it look like immigration from the Near East? I don't think so. WHG in Europe is descended partially from local hunters absorbed by farmers, and partially from Proto-Indo-Europeans through EHG component (whcih was present among PIEs and which - as we know - consisted of WHG and ANE).

    The same applies to ANE - it is partially descended from Proto-Indo-Europeans, and partially from an earlier migration wave of Siberian hunters.

    For instance, we know that some % of ANE was present already among Swedish Hunter-Gatherers, long before Indo-Europeans came to Scandinavia.

    So higher percent of ANE among present-day Northern Europeans (Norwegians or Lithuanians) can be the result not only of greater degree of population replacement by PIEs, but also of more significant presence of ANE in local pre-Indo-European substrate.
    I actually don't totally disagree with you about the ANE in those areas. I've suggested this as a possibility before and been shut down. :) I've also suggested that even the replacement figures might be a little misleading, because we don't know whether that replacement figure is based on actual mixing with actual people from the steppe, or it's just that there were a lot of EHG like people already there and that this is inflating the admixture amount.

    I also totally agree that there was some resurgence of WHG starting around the mid-Neolithic. No one seems to hear me when I say that. :)

    (There could also have been some reservoir of WHG in some parts of areas adjacent to the steppe that got caught up with the "Indo-European" movements and went toward central and northern and to some extent southern Europe. Or perhaps it's just hard to tell EHG from WHG in certain analyses.)

    I'm not talking about any of that. I'm talking about thousands of years earlier, before the LGM. I know you can't think that the WHG sprang from the soil of Europe . That would be a bit like my aged great aunt (97), when I asked her where she thought we came from, looking up at the hills that surround my valley and saying, "We've always been here." It's a comforting thought, but I'm afraid population genetics teaches us differently. :) Europe is a sink genetically, not a source.

    Those WHG had to come from somewhere. Given some recent papers finding links between the Gravettian and the greater Near East, I don't think it's at all outlandish to suggest that this is the origin of the similarity between UHG and WHG.

    However, that's just speculation. Let's wait a few days and see what the experts have to say.

  21. #46
    Elite member Achievements:
    VeteranThree FriendsRecommendation Second Class25000 Experience Points
    Awards:
    User with most referrers

    Join Date
    14-11-10
    Posts
    2,504
    Points
    25,862
    Level
    49
    Points: 25,862, Level: 49
    Level completed: 32%, Points required for next Level: 688
    Overall activity: 13.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1a1a1
    MtDNA haplogroup
    HV2a1 +G13708A

    Ethnic group
    Kurdish
    Country: Germany



    Quote Originally Posted by Tomenable View Post


    Angela look at present-day frequency distribution of WHG ancestry in Europe - does it look like immigration from the Near East? I don't think so. WHG in Europe is descended partially from local hunters absorbed by farmers, and partially from Proto-Indo-Europeans through EHG component (which was present among PIEs and which - as we know - consisted of WHG and ANE).

    The same thing could be said about EEF itself. if we take a look at EEF someone might think it started all in Europe. I think the recent papers should have teached us otherwise. We have complete population replacements in all of West Eurasia.

    I am very convinced that by mid-late neolithic the early neolithic farmers had diverged into three rather distinct groups. One mixing with ANE populations from the Iranian Plateau and further east creating the teal people. One absorbing some East African DNA and becoming proto Afro_Asiatic like people (Southern farmers) and the proto EEF (western) farmers. Looking at the remnants of WHG in North Africa, the Levant and Anatolia itself, there is a clear indiciation that this component was widespred in all these regions.

  22. #47
    Elite member Achievements:
    Three FriendsRecommendation Second ClassVeteran50000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    07-09-14
    Posts
    4,484
    Points
    58,142
    Level
    74
    Points: 58,142, Level: 74
    Level completed: 73%, Points required for next Level: 408
    Overall activity: 7.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b
    MtDNA haplogroup
    W6

    Ethnic group
    Polish
    Country: Poland



    Quote Originally Posted by Angela View Post
    I'm not talking about any of that. I'm talking about thousands of years earlier, before the LGM. I know you can't think that the WHG sprang from the soil of Europe . That would be a bit like my aged great aunt (97), when I asked her where she thought we came from, looking up at the hills that surround my valley and saying, "We've always been here." It's a comforting thought, but I'm afraid population genetics teaches us differently. :) Europe is a sink genetically, not a source.

    Those WHG had to come from somewhere. Given some recent papers finding links between the Gravettian and the greater Near East, I don't think it's at all outlandish to suggest that this is the origin of the similarity between UHG and WHG.

    However, that's just speculation. Let's wait a few days and see what the experts have to say.
    Well, I agree that ancestors of WHG surely came from somewhere, considering that we all ultimately stem from Africa.

    Ultimately all Non-Africans are descended from that "Out-of-Africa tribe", which had L3 mtDNA and CT Y-DNA:

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3104569/

    However, modern Eurasians generally do not appear to be African autosomally, which means that if a population lives for a long time in relative isolation from other populations, then it developes its own discrete autosomal component.

    And indeed WHG could be such a local development. Ancestors of WHG probably came from areas between the Black Sea and the Caspian Sea, crossing the Caucasus. But at that time they probably did not appear to be "WHG" autosomally.

    What we call "autosomal WHG" could evolve in Europe over thousands of years.

    It is possible that no significant amount of WHG will be found in ancient DNA samples from outside of Europe.

  23. #48
    Elite member Achievements:
    Three FriendsRecommendation Second ClassVeteran50000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    07-09-14
    Posts
    4,484
    Points
    58,142
    Level
    74
    Points: 58,142, Level: 74
    Level completed: 73%, Points required for next Level: 408
    Overall activity: 7.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b
    MtDNA haplogroup
    W6

    Ethnic group
    Polish
    Country: Poland



    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Alan
    The same thing could be said about EEF itself. if we take a look at EEF someone might think it started all in Europe.
    Not really.

    At least not according to these m
    aps posted by Anglecynn (I don't know what's their ultimate source):

    EEF (actually he calls it "Near Eastern"; shouldn't it be ~80% in Sardinia?):



    WHG (looks correct in Estonia at ~51%, but exaggerated in some regions?):



    ANE (this one rather seems correct everywhere; Sardinians have no ANE):



    From: http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthre...ll=1#post64896

    Not sure how accurate are these maps, though.

  24. #49
    Elite member Achievements:
    Three FriendsRecommendation Second ClassVeteran50000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    07-09-14
    Posts
    4,484
    Points
    58,142
    Level
    74
    Points: 58,142, Level: 74
    Level completed: 73%, Points required for next Level: 408
    Overall activity: 7.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b
    MtDNA haplogroup
    W6

    Ethnic group
    Polish
    Country: Poland



    This is probably where ancestors of WHG came from (Bicicleur was the one who suggested this):

    In terms of Y-DNA they were descended from IJ - I crossed the Caucasus, while J stayed in the south:

    But in my opinion they were not yet "WHG" autosomally back then. That evolved only later, in Europe:



    Edit:

    Or maybe WHG did not evolve in Europe and actually came to Europe (as Angela has suggested) - but from North-Western Africa? Why is there so much WHG there today compared to the Middle East - between 12% and 16% ???

    ========================================

    East Asian admixture (I guess in North Africa it was spread by Turks from Anatolia?):



    Sub-Saharan African admixture (Basques seem to lack it, compared to other Iberians):


  25. #50
    Elite member Achievements:
    Three FriendsRecommendation Second ClassVeteran50000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    07-09-14
    Posts
    4,484
    Points
    58,142
    Level
    74
    Points: 58,142, Level: 74
    Level completed: 73%, Points required for next Level: 408
    Overall activity: 7.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b
    MtDNA haplogroup
    W6

    Ethnic group
    Polish
    Country: Poland



    Alan,

    Maciamo's map of EEF admixture is in agreement with that map posted by Anglecynn:

    (except for Sardinia where Maciamo's map shows - correctly - 80% and the other map wrongly only 65%):



    Which sources say that EEF admixture is higher in Europe than in the Middle East ???

Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •