Eupedia Forums
Site NavigationEupedia Top > Eupedia Forum & Japan Forum
Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst ... 345
Results 101 to 119 of 119

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

  1. #101
    Elite member Achievements:
    Veteran10000 Experience Points
    arvistro's Avatar
    Join Date
    06-08-14
    Posts
    1,003
    Points
    13,109
    Level
    34
    Points: 13,109, Level: 34
    Level completed: 66%, Points required for next Level: 241
    Overall activity: 8.0%


    Country: Latvia



    Quote Originally Posted by Alan View Post
    Maybe better Horses??? suited for the mountainous regions and steppe lands to herd the animals? Who knows, it doesn't always needs to have a reason. Just like it doesn't have a logical reason why I like some colors more than other.
    No, it does need reason. History is sequence of cause and effect. Maybe it is not interesting to you to find what was the reason, but it is interesting to me.

    Better horses? So, did they domisticate horse before mixing with EEF?

    Edit: there is another option - of adventurous group(s) of EEF going out of their Eco niche and cooperating/ mixing with locals to survive outside. Then these teal folk would be mix of early pioneers and ANE hunters.
    Something similar might have happened in North Europe before CW.

    Then model would go:
    Fertile lands - homogenous EEF people
    Non fertile lands - mixing with natives

  2. #102
    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 arvistro View Post
    No, it does need reason. History is sequence of cause and effect. Maybe it is not interesting to you to find what was the reason, but it is interesting to me.

    Better horses? So, did they domisticate horse before mixing with EEF?
    I red somewhere that there are signs of horse breeding somewhere in South_ Central Asia as far back as 10000 BC don't know if it is true.
    And no not everything needs a cause and effect or for us logical reason. Or can you tell me what was the cause for the Big Bang. This is one of the many reasons why I personally believe in God :)
    The history of horse breeding goes back millennia. Though the precise date is in dispute, humans could have domesticated the horse as far back as approximately 4500 BCE. However, evidence of planned breeding has a more blurry history.

    One of the earliest people known to document the breedings of their horses were the Bedouin of the Middle East, the breeders of the Arabian horse. While it is difficult to determine how far back the Bedouin passed on pedigree information via an oral tradition, there were written pedigrees of Arabian horses by CE 1330.[16] The Akhal-Teke of West-Central Asia is another breed with roots in ancient times that was also bred specifically for war and racing. The nomads of the Mongolian steppes bred horses for several thousand years as well.
    4500 BC should be late Neolithic. It isn't clear and was also just an not so serious Idea with the horses.

  3. #103
    Elite member Achievements:
    Veteran10000 Experience Points
    arvistro's Avatar
    Join Date
    06-08-14
    Posts
    1,003
    Points
    13,109
    Level
    34
    Points: 13,109, Level: 34
    Level completed: 66%, Points required for next Level: 241
    Overall activity: 8.0%


    Country: Latvia



    2 out of 2 members found this post helpful.
    As to this matter - I edited previous post meanwhile:
    "There is another option - of adventurous group(s) of EEF going out of their Eco niche and cooperating/ mixing with locals to survive outside. Then these teal folk would be mix of early pioneers and ANE hunters.
    Something similar might have happened in North Europe before CW.

    Then model would go:
    Fertile lands - homogenous EEF people
    Non fertile lands - mixing with natives".

    So, there are some options. Anyway I think it is a good question.

    _________________
    I might as well reply - " it does not need a cause because we dont know what caused the big bang" to why IEs languages spread accross Eurasia; why EEF genes were so successful in Europe; why CW had r1a but Yamna R1b mostly.

    If scientists took your approach, we would have no science..

  4. #104
    Advisor Achievements:
    VeteranThree Friends50000 Experience PointsRecommendation Second Class
    Awards:
    Posting Award
    Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    14,833
    Points
    250,081
    Level
    100
    Points: 250,081, 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 arvistro View Post
    I know they had some WHG, it was there since beginning and part of EEF. They spread miles and did not change autosomally in Europe until Mid-late Neolithics, when extra WHG was absorbed.
    However in East they met ANE and mixed with it. Why?
    Did ANE folk farmed? If ANE were hunters like WHG then why in the West no WHG was absorbed but in East ANE was absorbed?

    Or they both got absorbed around late Neolithic when something climatical happened.
    That would be my guess. Climate change, resulting in failure of some crops, but also putting stress on hunter-gatherers too.

    Look at the fall of the Roman Empire: climate change, Germanic tribes moving because of famine etc. (In 113 BC, for example, the Cimbri showed up in Noricum asking for food and land for farming.) The Huns, whose grasslands had failed, were also pushing them from the East.

    I hate to be nitpicking all the time, but terms are important; clarity of language leads to clarity of thought as well as vice versa. :) All we know so far is that the ENF of the Near East may have had a "WHG like" component. Let's wait for the paper to see how close that component was to the European hunter-gatherers. If there was a period of thousands of years after the split they might not have been all that similar any longer.


    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

  5. #105
    Advisor Achievements:
    VeteranThree Friends50000 Experience PointsRecommendation Second Class
    Awards:
    Posting Award
    Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    14,833
    Points
    250,081
    Level
    100
    Points: 250,081, 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 arvistro View Post
    As to this matter - I edited previous post meanwhile:
    "There is another option - of adventurous group(s) of EEF going out of their Eco niche and cooperating/ mixing with locals to survive outside. Then these teal folk would be mix of early pioneers and ANE hunters.
    Something similar might have happened in North Europe before CW.

    Then model would go:
    Fertile lands - homogenous EEF people
    Non fertile lands - mixing with natives".

    So, there are some options. Anyway I think it is a good question.

    _________________
    I might as well reply - " it does not need a cause because we dont know what caused the big bang" to why IEs languages spread accross Eurasia; why EEF genes were so successful in Europe; why CW had r1a but Yamna R1b mostly.

    If scientists took your approach, we would have no science..
    We cross posted. :) Yes, this is another option. Perhaps also if the climate worsened then farmers might be more willing to adopt some hunter-gatherer strategies, resulting in some admixture?

  6. #106
    Elite member Achievements:
    Three FriendsRecommendation Second ClassVeteran50000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    07-09-14
    Posts
    4,500
    Points
    58,424
    Level
    74
    Points: 58,424, Level: 74
    Level completed: 92%, Points required for next Level: 126
    Overall activity: 76.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b
    MtDNA haplogroup
    W6

    Ethnic group
    Polish
    Country: Poland



    Quote Originally Posted by Angela
    Look at the fall of the Roman Empire: climate change, Germanic tribes moving because of famine etc. (In 113 BC, for example, the Cimbri showed up in Noricum asking for food and land for farming.) The Huns, whose grasslands had failed, were also pushing them from the East.
    Generally speaking - it was the Roman Migrant Crisis. :)

  7. #107
    Advisor Achievements:
    VeteranThree Friends50000 Experience PointsRecommendation Second Class
    Awards:
    Posting Award
    Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    14,833
    Points
    250,081
    Level
    100
    Points: 250,081, 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
    Generally speaking - it was the Roman Migrant Crisis. :)
    I'm not going to touch that even with a ten foot pole.

  8. #108
    Advisor Achievements:
    VeteranThree Friends50000 Experience PointsRecommendation Second Class
    Awards:
    Posting Award
    Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    14,833
    Points
    250,081
    Level
    100
    Points: 250,081, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 99.6%


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: USA - New York



    Sorry, just saw this post:

    Alan;467048]Dodecad K10a the first and most used source for Red Sea percentages as far as I know.
    Ah, now I see the source of my confusion. I'm familiar with the Dodecad 10a percentages for "Red Sea", and your numbers seemed way off.

    Alan:Taking into account the Bronze and early Iron Age Armenian samples and how they almost lacked or had noise percentage of any Red Sea component, this is clearly an evidence that all modern Northern Middle Eastern population as well many South European (no matter they like it or not) have some Afro-Asiatic admixture. In the Northern Middle East among non Semites it is around ~10-15%. Among Semites such as Assyrians it is ~25% and modern Levantines such as Lebanese ~40%! The rest of their aDNA is probably pre Afro_Asiatic Levantine.
    I didn't read it carefully enough. So, now that I'm clear that the numbers refer to "Afro-Asiatic", my question becomes where do you get your figures for "Afro-Asiatic"? I'm aware of the existence of "Afro-Asiatic" languages, but not of an "Afro-Asiatic" component.

    I did assume that some very noisy percentage of it was always part of it at least among some EEF farmers. It is possible that some Red Sea was already present among the earliest farmers but Red Sea is not automatically Red Sea most of the Red Sea showing up in EEF is actually the EEF portion of Red Sea itself.
    Actually there's quite a bit of Red Sea in the early farmers of Europe:

    Stuttgart: 4.45
    Hungarian Early Neolithic: 5.49

    Even in Copper Age Hungary it was still at 4.59.

    Unfortunately, I can't find a 10A run on Otzi or Remedello. (If someone has a link that would be great.) It would be particularly interesting to compare them to the "Red Sea" level for North Italians (.8), Tuscans (2.3), Sicilians (5.6).


    “I remember K10a Red Sea description as a even mix of Southwest Asian and East African. And according to a comment of Dienekes East African is like even mix of SSA and Caucasian(most likely EEF). So Red Sea 3/4 EEF 1/4 SSA fits.”
    I don’t doubt that there might be some SSA in “Red Sea”; however, I’m not sure that ¼ is the right proportion.


    Let’s look at it this way. These are the proportions of Red Sea in some northeast European and East European populations:
    Finns 2.0
    Lithuanians 1.9
    Russians 1.6
    Poles 1.2
    I don’t recall ever seeing that Finns are .5 SSA. Their only extra-West Eurasian ancestry is Siberian, so far as I know.


    “The Southwest Asian component itself contains like ~50% Red Sea if you compare K10a to World9 calculator this get's obvious.”
    To be precise, it depends on the population. Southwest Asian in Tuscans on K12b is 7.3. Red Sea is 2.3. That’s much less than 50%. In other groups like the Finns, it’s a lot more than 50%. Southwest Asian in them is 2.2, and Red Sea is 2.0.


    “According to that they have 6.1% Red Sea. And I honestly doubt that all of it in South Europe is Neolithic European but majority of it probably Semite. That also makes historically sense. If we expect that max 2% of it is EEF Neolithic. Than 4% is Afro_Asiatic related, that makes a total of 12% (Semite) influx into Sicily for example. Thats significantly less than Lebanon with 40% but it's there.”
    I don’t see how you can be so secure in your conclusions based on the evidence in our possession. We know that a Copper Age Hungarian had 4.59 “Red Sea”. I wish I had a figure for Remedello, but I don’t think it would be far off to assume that they had about the same amount given all the analyses we’ve seen. Now, we don’t have any samples from further south in Italy for either the Copper Age or the Bronze Age. So, we don’t know if that approximately 4.6 “Red Sea” was cut by the Yamnaya invasions, and the later Celtic ones. That might be a permissible conclusion given the 2.3 number for Toscana, and the .8 for northern Italians. Now, turning to the southern Italians/Sicilians, we don’t know, as I said, what “Red Sea” number they had before the Yamnaya invasions. What we do know is that they weren’t as affected by the Yamnaya invasions, and the Yamnaya invasions which did affect them might have been rather different than the ones that impacted central and Northern Europe.

    So, absent some ancient dna how could we possible know that “the majority of it is probably Semite”? What if 3% or 4% was there since the Neolithic ? Then, I don’t know what “Semite” means in this context. Again, that’s a linguistic term. If by that you mean 12% of the ancestry of southern Italians/Sicilians comes from a few Phoenician emporia I think that’s highly unlikely. If we’ve learned anything, it should be that significant changes in the genome come from significant migrations.

    If, on the other hand, you’re saying there was some impact from Red Sea heavy populations during the Muslim occupation of Sicily and briefly of mainland southern Italy, that is much more likely. That would have come from a heavily Berber group. Berbers have nothing to do with Semites other than a shift In most cases to a Semitic language (Arabic). (Berbers, from what I can make out, are predominantly EEF people with perhaps some archaic North African forager and a big chunk of mostly recent SSA, i.e. post Arabic slave trade.) Obviously, some Levant derived people might have formed part of the invading forces.

    If we’re going to speculate about the impact of this invasion and occupation (not a Semite percentage), I think ydna studies are a pretty good guide. Numerous scholars have attributed about 6% of the yDna of Sicily, in particular, to those invasions. Very little mtDna can be attributed specifically to them. So, if I were going to speculate, I’d say the autosomal impact might be around that or a little less.

    The only other possibility would be some input from slavery in the Roman era. Again, as I've said before, I don' know why any slaves from the Levant would have such a disproportionate effect compared to slaves from northern and western and eastern Europe.

    Bottom line, I'm no longer doing all that much speculating. That was much more fun when it seemed we’d never get ancient dna and we couldn’t be proven wrong. :) Seriously, I’ll wait for samples from these periods to see what changes different migrations brought.


    “The oldest Bronze Age Armenian samples have 0-2% Red Sea this rises with every century the samples get younger, by few percentage ending by modern Populations with 5%(non Semite NWA) -17%(Semite Levantines) Red Sea”."
    I have the same skepticism about these conclusions. We don’t have any Neolithic samples from this area. What if it was at 4-5% levels as it was in Neolithic Europe. Then, these low levels of “Red Sea” might just be the result of admixture from the steppe. After all, these kinds of burials are those of the new “elite”. What was the “Red Sea” level in those who survived? Perhaps, after some good amount of time, there was a resurgence, as there was in Europe, through some admixture.

    I’m not saying it all didn’t happen in the way that you’re speculating. I’m just saying there are alternate possibilities, and we won’t know until we have the relevant ancient dna.
    Last edited by Angela; 19-09-15 at 23:11.

  9. #109
    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 MOESAN View Post


    OK: I wrote my precedent post without having red your present post: Agree! this "teal" today equivalent would culminate among Tadjiks, perhaps???
    more likely proto-bactrians or proto-sogdians .................Tajiks seem too modern
    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.

  10. #110
    Elite member Achievements:
    1000 Experience Points1 year registered

    Join Date
    21-01-14
    Posts
    537
    Points
    3,837
    Level
    17
    Points: 3,837, Level: 17
    Level completed: 97%, Points required for next Level: 13
    Overall activity: 4.0%


    Country: UK - Wales



    arvistro
    Fertile lands - homogenous EEF people
    Non fertile lands - mixing with natives".
    Especially if non-fertile = more pastoralist and HGs found it easier to adopt to pastoralism than crop farming.

    Climate change is plausible too or even both i.e. climate change -> fertile crop farming regions becoming more pastoralist -> more mixing with local HGs.

  11. #111
    Elite member Achievements:
    Veteran10000 Experience Points
    arvistro's Avatar
    Join Date
    06-08-14
    Posts
    1,003
    Points
    13,109
    Level
    34
    Points: 13,109, Level: 34
    Level completed: 66%, Points required for next Level: 241
    Overall activity: 8.0%


    Country: Latvia



    And now we need some maps on land fertility zones for early/mid/late Neolithics :))

  12. #112
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    15-07-13
    Location
    Ticino
    Posts
    138
    Points
    5,103
    Level
    21
    Points: 5,103, Level: 21
    Level completed: 11%, Points required for next Level: 447
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R-A7992

    Ethnic group
    Swiss
    Country: Switzerland



    I never see the full paper... hasn't it been published yet?

  13. #113
    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 arvistro View Post
    And now we need some maps on land fertility zones for early/mid/late Neolithics :))
    Check Loess grounds in Europe.

  14. #114
    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
    Ah, now I see the source of my confusion. I'm familiar with the Dodecad 10a percentages for "Red Sea", and your numbers seemed way off.
    ? Which of my Red Sea estimations were way off? I said Sicilian Red Sea should be ~6.25 % vs 6.1% per Dodecad K10a

    Quote Originally Posted by Angela View Post
    I didn't read it carefully enough. So, now that I'm clear that the numbers refer to "Afro-Asiatic", my question becomes where do you get your figures for "Afro-Asiatic"? I'm aware of the existence of "Afro-Asiatic" languages, but not of an "Afro-Asiatic" component.

    Actually there's quite a bit of Red Sea in the early farmers of Europe:

    Stuttgart: 4.45
    Hungarian Early Neolithic: 5.49

    Even in Copper Age Hungary it was still at 4.59.

    Unfortunately, I can't find a 10A run on Otzi or Remedello. (If someone has a link that would be great.) It would be particularly interesting to compare them to the "Red Sea" level for North Italians (.8), Tuscans (2.3), Sicilians (5.6).

    Afro_Asiatic = genes spred by Afro_Asiatic speakers that doesn't necessary mean there is an "Afro_Asiatic" component (surely there was once). I collect all genes spred by Afro_Asiatic speakers (Semites, North Africans etc), under this term.

    One Big reason why all this Red Sea/SSA can't be pre Bronze Age is simply cause at least by Bronze Age when the first Indo Europeans arrived the frequency of every component would have been deluted various times. So just because Neolithic or pre Neolithic H&G or EEF samples had few percentage pf SSA or Red Sea as example, that doesn't necessary mean exactly the same percentage of SSA or Red Sea is Pre Bronze Age derived. Thats simply impossible. That is why modern Red Sea frequency =/= EEF Red Sea frequency

    "Even in Copper Age Hungary it was still at 4.59."
    The younger the EEF samples the higher actually the Red Sea component should get simply because it was a slow process how this component from the Southwest of the Near East spred into EEF. By mid-late Neolithic of the Near East already the first waves of South and Eastern farmers expanded but as I said "Red Sea " should have been always there just that the earliest Red Sea apearing here is actually the EEF portion of Red Sea and not vica versa. Simply just like Mal'ta is not Amerindian admixed but Amerindians are partly ANE.

    Let’s look at it this way. These are the proportions of Red Sea in some northeast European and East European populations:
    Finns 2.0
    Lithuanians 1.9
    Russians 1.6
    Poles 1.2
    I don’t recall ever seeing that Finns are .5 SSA. Their only extra-West Eurasian ancestry is Siberian, so far as I know.
    Of course you are right this doesn't work everywhere and in populations where there is almost non SSA, you will still see some noisy results, thats unfortunate part of every calculator. One main reason, as I wrote above, this is the EEF (unmixed) portion of Red Sea showing up there. But this works actually for South Europe and the Near East where we know there are few percentages of SSA. I know what Dienekes said Red Sea being halfway Southwest Asian and East African like and from the fst tables I know that the East African component was almost halfway Caucasian/SSA.

    Also I took different calculators into consideration for my theory of Red Sea being ~1/4 (or maybe 1/5 since it only appears in the higher Ks and doesn't really seem like a 100% stable component) because it almost always eats up 1/4 to 1/5 of the SSA component. The point is that Red Sea eats up significant percentage of SSA when it's there and if not, simply some EEF portion of it shows of as "Red Sea".

    Since we used South Italian/Sicilian samples already let's do it here again. In globe13 they have ~1.2% SSA. In K10a they have 0% but 6.1% Red Sea, the only component I see which could be responsible for the disappearance of the SSA is the Red Sea component. I might have been wrong with my estimation of ~1/4 though, It could be less (more like 1/5) you are right there.

    To be precise, it depends on the population. Southwest Asian in Tuscans on K12b is 7.3. Red Sea is 2.3. That’s much less than 50%. In other groups like the Finns, it’s a lot more than 50%. Southwest Asian in them is 2.2, and Red Sea is 2.0.
    Right my mistake, just like above it is not possible to give an exact percentage of that. But it works roughly in that way I think.

    Sorry but I am a bit lazy to answer the rest of your comment because of other work to do now.

  15. #115
    Advisor Achievements:
    VeteranThree Friends50000 Experience PointsRecommendation Second Class
    Awards:
    Posting Award
    Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    14,833
    Points
    250,081
    Level
    100
    Points: 250,081, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 99.6%


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: USA - New York



    @Alan,
    I quoted the paragraph in your original post which I said confused me. I said that it was my error. Yes, your "Red Sea" figures were correct. Is it clear now?

    The bottom line question is, did the Indo-European invasions totally change, or at least drastically change, the genetic landscape in Italy after around 2000 BC? ( I use that date because we have the Remedello sample, which still looks very EEF.) IF it did, wiping out all or most of the "Red Sea", among other things, then there must have been another large change afterwards to bring it back up.

    We lack the ancient DNA to clarify the issue. That's all I'm saying. I'm no longer in the business of speculating from modern dna. I'm also not invested in one particular result versus another. Unfortunately, other than scientists and academics, many of the people (not all) who are posting on this topic on the internet seem to be racists, including most of the Italians. You may have encountered them. However, that's not how I roll.

    No need to respond, I think we're straight now. :)

  16. #116
    Advisor Achievements:
    VeteranThree Friends50000 Experience PointsRecommendation Second Class
    Awards:
    Posting Award
    Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    14,833
    Points
    250,081
    Level
    100
    Points: 250,081, 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 Brennos View Post
    I never see the full paper... hasn't it been published yet?
    I just checked again, and the paper is to be presented on Friday, October 9th.

    https://ep70.eventpilotadmin.com/web...HG15&id=161004

    It will probably be online around that time if the Reich Lab follows its usual pattern. I think, as we always do, that we're doing a bit of speculating, the results of which may or may not be supported by the actual paper.

  17. #117
    Elite member Achievements:
    Tagger Second ClassThree FriendsVeteran25000 Experience Points
    Fire Haired14's Avatar
    Join Date
    20-04-14
    Posts
    2,194
    Points
    28,146
    Level
    51
    Points: 28,146, Level: 51
    Level completed: 55%, Points required for next Level: 504
    Overall activity: 31.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b DF27*
    MtDNA haplogroup
    U5b2a2b1

    Country: USA - Illinois



    Quote Originally Posted by Angela View Post
    @Alan,
    I quoted the paragraph in your original post which I said confused me. I said that it was my error. Yes, your "Red Sea" figures were correct. Is it clear now?

    The bottom line question is, did the Indo-European invasions totally change, or at least drastically change, the genetic landscape in Italy after around 2000 BC? ( I use that date because we have the Remedello sample, which still looks very EEF.) IF it did, wiping out all or most of the "Red Sea", among other things, then there must have been another large change afterwards to bring it back up.

    We lack the ancient DNA to clarify the issue. That's all I'm saying. I'm no longer in the business of speculating from modern dna.
    I'm going to ask Daviski to do analysis with Remedello(esp. 2000 BC one) and Italians. I haven't payed attention to his work lately, but you're right it seems in 2000 BC they were still basically EEF. Remedello must represent a large part of the EEF-side of at least North Italians. Since, Italian regional genetic variation might go back very far in time, maybe Remedello is only an ancestor of North Italians.

    Davidski should get an idea what's differnt with Remedello and people in that region today and who caused the difference.

  18. #118
    Advisor Achievements:
    VeteranThree Friends50000 Experience PointsRecommendation Second Class
    Awards:
    Posting Award
    Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    14,833
    Points
    250,081
    Level
    100
    Points: 250,081, 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 Fire Haired14 View Post
    I'm going to ask Daviski to do analysis with Remedello(esp. 2000 BC one) and Italians. I haven't payed attention to his work lately, but you're right it seems in 2000 BC they were still basically EEF. Remedello must represent a large part of the EEF-side of at least North Italians. Since, Italian regional genetic variation might go back very far in time, maybe Remedello is only an ancestor of North Italians.

    Davidski should get an idea what's differnt with Remedello and people in that region today and who caused the difference.
    Thanks for your interest, Fire-Haired, but there is no way anyone can elucidate this without ancient dna from a whole variety of areas and time periods in Italy, ancient dna which is not currently available.

    For example, we need samples from 2000 BC from further south in Italy to see if they are like Remedello. (Remedello also has to be compared to ancient dna from areas of the steppe further west than Yamnaya. I've been saying for months, really for years, that it may be that the steppe groups who moved into Europe might not have all been exactly the same, or even if they were all basically the same at the origin point, they might have been, by way of admixtures along the way and over the years, different by the time that they reached Italy. Given the Remedello genome, either many of the "cultural" hallmarks attributed to the steppe groups could and were adopted by Mid-Neolithic Copper Age groups without cultural exchange, or some of the steppe groups brought very little genetic change with them.)

    Then we need samples from, say, 1800 BC to 800 BC from all over Italy to see if there was a later genetic change that shows more influence from "Indo-European" groups, and then some from Magna Graecia and northern Italy for the period from then to the days of the Roman Empire, to see what changes were brought by the Greeks and the Celts to their specific areas, and then from the medieval period to see if there was one more change and its signficance.

    We might get some clues if the paper on ancient Etruscan dna ever comes online.

    I find it interesting, in light of all of this and the recent Hellenthal group (Busby et al) paper on admixture in the last 1500 years that the prior paper on an El Portalon genome (dated to 2000 BC ) said that it plotted with modern Tuscans in a PCA.

    See: Daskalaki et al 2014
    https://www.diva-portal.org/smash/ge...FULLTEXT01.pdf

    Discussed here at:
    http://www.eupedia.com/forum/archive...p/t-29796.html

    Is the 2000 BC genome analyzed in the Daskalaki et al paper the same as ATP 20 dated to the same time period?

    If it is, why does Daskalaki et al have a PCA that looks like this:
    PCA Daskalaki et al Portalon genome 2000 BC.PNG

    Versus a PCA from Guenther et al that looks like this:
    Gruenther et al Portalon Chalcolithic and Bronze Age Iberians.jpg

    Am I not looking at them properly?

    I'm aware that ATP 20 is low coverage, yes? So, that sample isn't plotted on the Greunther et al PCA. However, would he have been far from the other Chalcolithic samples?

    Also, where is this specifically "steppe" pull in this PCA? It just looks like more hunter gatherer, doesn't it, of the Central European Mesolithic and Scandinavian Mesolithic and SHG variety. The only EHG might come in through EHG?

  19. #119
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    15-07-13
    Location
    Ticino
    Posts
    138
    Points
    5,103
    Level
    21
    Points: 5,103, Level: 21
    Level completed: 11%, Points required for next Level: 447
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R-A7992

    Ethnic group
    Swiss
    Country: Switzerland



    Quote Originally Posted by Angela View Post
    I just checked again, and the paper is to be presented on Friday, October 9th.

    https://ep70.eventpilotadmin.com/web...HG15&id=161004

    It will probably be online around that time if the Reich Lab follows its usual pattern. I think, as we always do, that we're doing a bit of speculating, the results of which may or may not be supported by the actual paper.
    Many thanks, Angela!

Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst ... 345

Posting Permissions

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