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

[bicicleur 2]

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?

 

[Angela]

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!

 

[Tomenable]

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.

 

[Angela]

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.

 

[Angela]

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.

 

[Alan]

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.

 

[Tomenable]

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.

 

[Tomenable]

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 maps 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/showthr...ope-fair-comment&p=64896&viewfull=1#post64896

Not sure how accurate are these maps, though.

 

[Tomenable]

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):

 

[Tomenable]

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 ???

 

[LeBrok]

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.

I think you are right. I suspect WHG of Balkans staid in Anatolian refuge while WHG of Iberia had refuge in Iberia. They could have been split during LGM for 10 thousand years drifting genetically apart.

 

[epoch]

Not really.

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

From: http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthr...ope-fair-comment&p=64896&viewfull=1#post64896

Not sure how accurate are these maps, though.

He seems to add the WHG component of EEF to WHG. Lazardis did not. Lazardis did however add the WHG component of Yamnaya to WHG. On the basis of these maps you would conclude that either farmers got extra WHG admixture, or Anatolia's indigenous WHG admixture decreased.

 

[bicicleur 2]

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.

afaik KO1 skeleton was found in a neolithic site

Korös

Hungary

Tiszaszölös-Domaha´za [KO1]

M

5780-5650 BC

I2a I2a1a2a1-L1287 xL233

Genetiker 18+ 22- op 82

autosomal HG, no EEF

R3

Gamba 2014

according to Genetiker he is HG, not EEF which contradicts your D functions

 

[Sile]

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.

this latest paper states mtdna L3 is 8000 years old


https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25130626

Over the sands and far away: interpreting an Iberian mitochondrial lineage with ancient Western African origins.
Pardiñas AF1, Martínez JL, Roca A, García-Vazquez E, López B.
Author information
Abstract
OBJECTIVES:

There is an ongoing effort to characterize the genetic links between Africa and Europe, mostly using lineages and haplotypes that are specific to one continent but had an ancient origin in the other. Mitochondrial DNA has been proven to be a very useful tool for this purpose since a high number of putatively European-specific variants of the African L* lineages have been defined over the years. Due to their geographic locations, Spain and Portugal seem to be ideal places for searching for these lineages.
METHODS:

Five members of a minor branch of haplogroup L3f were found in recent DNA samplings in the region of Asturias (Northern Spain), which is known for its historical isolation. The frequency of L3f in this population (≈1%) is unexpectedly high in comparison with other related lineages in Europe. Complete mitochondrial DNA sequencing of these L3f lineages, as well phylogenetic and phylogeographic comparative analyses have been performed.
RESULTS:

The L3f variant found in Asturias seems to constitute an Iberian-specific haplogroup, distantly related to lineages in Northern Africa and with a deep ancestry in Western Africa. Coalescent algorithms estimate the minimum arrival time as 8,000 years ago, and a possible route through the Gibraltar Strait.

 

[bicicleur 2]

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?):

IMO the IJ split happened +/- 42 ka in Transcaucasia (findings in Ortvale Klde and Dzudzuana caves, Georgia)
I crossed the Caucasus and stayed in Mezmayskaya cave, from where it expanded into Europe 33 ka, they were the Gravettians
the crucial thing was at Mezmayskaya they had developped borers to drill eyes in bone needles
the Gravettians had better clothing and tents and so they outcompeted Aurignacians on the cold steppe which was all over Europe
Aurignacians even didn't know needles

J would have stayed in Transcaucasia till the onset of LGM and then have moved south to SW Asia (Kebaran industry in the Levant)

WHG would be Y-DNA I and mtDNA U
I don't know whether U was allready in Europe with Aurignacians or they came from Transcaucasia too

during neolithic revolution J was one of the main components in SW Asia, allthough they didn't bring the first farming to Europe

I and J being brothers would account for some similarities in DNA

 

[bicicleur 2]

this latest paper states mtdna L3 is 8000 years old


https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25130626

Over the sands and far away: interpreting an Iberian mitochondrial lineage with ancient Western African origins.
Pardiñas AF1, Martínez JL, Roca A, García-Vazquez E, López B.
Author information
Abstract
OBJECTIVES:

There is an ongoing effort to characterize the genetic links between Africa and Europe, mostly using lineages and haplotypes that are specific to one continent but had an ancient origin in the other. Mitochondrial DNA has been proven to be a very useful tool for this purpose since a high number of putatively European-specific variants of the African L* lineages have been defined over the years. Due to their geographic locations, Spain and Portugal seem to be ideal places for searching for these lineages.
METHODS:

Five members of a minor branch of haplogroup L3f were found in recent DNA samplings in the region of Asturias (Northern Spain), which is known for its historical isolation. The frequency of L3f in this population (≈1%) is unexpectedly high in comparison with other related lineages in Europe. Complete mitochondrial DNA sequencing of these L3f lineages, as well phylogenetic and phylogeographic comparative analyses have been performed.
RESULTS:

The L3f variant found in Asturias seems to constitute an Iberian-specific haplogroup, distantly related to lineages in Northern Africa and with a deep ancestry in Western Africa. Coalescent algorithms estimate the minimum arrival time as 8,000 years ago, and a possible route through the Gibraltar Strait.

one could speculate L3f came from Africa along with R1b-V88 8000 years ago, and that R1b-V88 was detected at Els Trocs

Spain

Els Trocs [Troc3]

M

5178-5066 BC

R1b1c

M415+, M343+, [L754 equivalent: L774/PF6245/YSC277+, PF1144+, V88 eqivalent: PF6376+]

M478-, PF6399-, L265-, L150-, M269-, V35-, V69- R1b1c(xR1b1c2, R1b1c3)

pre-T2c1d2

Haak 2015; personal comm Sergey Malyshev, review of Y-DNA raw data

on the other hand, wasn't there E-M81 in Asturias, which couldn't be Moorish
and TMRCA for E-M81 is just 2100 years

 

[epoch]

afaik KO1 skeleton was found in a neolithic site

Korös

Hungary

Tiszaszölös-Domaha´za [KO1]

M

5780-5650 BC

I2a I2a1a2a1-L1287 xL233

Genetiker 18+ 22- op 82

autosomal HG, no EEF

R3

Gamba 2014

according to Genetiker he is HG, not EEF which contradicts your D functions

No, it doesn't: The goal was to check the affinity famers had with different known HG's, in order to see which is most likely the source of the WHG admixture. The fact that KO1 was contemporary to neolithic could be influential, though. Perhaps KO1 was slightly admixted with farmers.

 

[epoch]

And if you take a look at this, Gokhem 4 is far more WHG admixted than Gok2.

 

[Sile]

No, it doesn't: The goal was to check the affinity famers had with different known HG's, in order to see which is most likely the source of the WHG admixture. The fact that KO1 was contemporary to neolithic could be influential, though. Perhaps KO1 was slightly admixted with farmers.

no....the goal is to check if the 6300BC anatolian farmers are compatible with the central european farmers belonging to LBK_EN

it has nothing to do with hunters or any markers that exceed thousands of years from these Anatolians

 

[Sile]

IMO the IJ split happened +/- 42 ka in Transcaucasia (findings in Ortvale Klde and Dzudzuana caves, Georgia)
I crossed the Caucasus and stayed in Mezmayskaya cave, from where it expanded into Europe 33 ka, they were the Gravettians
the crucial thing was at Mezmayskaya they had developped borers to drill eyes in bone needles
the Gravettians had better clothing and tents and so they outcompeted Aurignacians on the cold steppe which was all over Europe
Aurignacians even didn't know needles

J would have stayed in Transcaucasia till the onset of LGM and then have moved south to SW Asia (Kebaran industry in the Levant)

WHG would be Y-DNA I and mtDNA U
I don't know whether U was allready in Europe with Aurignacians or they came from Transcaucasia too

during neolithic revolution J was one of the main components in SW Asia, allthough they didn't bring the first farming to Europe

I and J being brothers would account for some similarities in DNA

IMO, the IJ split occurred around trabazon