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

[bicicleur 2]

I am just looking at the D-stats of the Oase 1 paper. Firstly, it clearly looks like Oase 1 (one of the first European AMHs) didn't leave anything noticeable in the European population. It is equally distant to Loschbour and East-Asians, for that matter. It seems only very slightly leaning towards MA1 and American Indians. Z value lower than 2. That equidistance to old Europeans and East-Asians seems similar to Ust'ishim. But Ust'Ishims D-stat show it be far more related to about anything other than Oase 1, which points IMO to Oase 1 being an isolate, a dead end.

But look at the affinity of Kostenki 14 to Loschbour! Also, to a lesser extent but still substantial, to MA1.

please note : Loschbourg, Kostenki 14, MA1, all three had mtDNA U

 

[MOESAN]

If EEF component was brought primarily by G2a carrying tribes, then why is G2a so scarce (5% or lower) but EEF so prevalent (50% or more)? Something is not adding up here.I think the EEF in Western Europe for example, might not be from the very first farmers, but rather from Bell Beakers (just one example) who settled later and had 1/3rd EEF from Cucuteni or whatever. In other words, there is a very good chance the EEF component in most Europeans might have travelled with later non-farming people who had substantial EEF component from Cucuteni-Tripolye or whatever other non-directly Anatolian place.I personally think the R1b people, who were EEF + 'other' components, whether they were IE or not, Bell Beaker or not, are responsible for the spread of that component in Western Europe, rather than the seemingly first G2a farmers.

I' ve not killed a hane to scrutinize its guts but I think what you say here is senseful: a part of our today "EEF" and "WHG" in Western Europe is not only the remnant of old foragers and old farmers already settled there but also a proportion of the auDNA apported to Europe from East at metals ages, augmented by EHG (?) and ANE (!).
It could explain the spreading of I-Ean languages as not everytime the result of an elite domination. Just a thought at this stage of knowledge.

 

[MOESAN]

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.

Thanks Angela, I was forgetting these data, whatever the corrections we could get now about them; that said, all that is based upon findings of human sepultures; I suspect we didn't search the more remote parts of Europe for DNA and also the HGs culture allowed less sepultures findings in proportion to their number? (not sure, it's true) - By the way, what about Neolithical cultures remnants as the S.O.M. ones and the Eiffel region in Western Rheinland? I'm curious to see what kind of DNA was among these people, classified 'neolithical' but with a strong influence of "primitive" morphologic features??? (Loschbour was of these regions, but not 'neolithical'.

 

[MOESAN]

I complete my #83: this hairs splitting doesn't change my today opinion that some WHG and EEF DNA came from East at Metals Ages, as said Angela and others, with some reasons I think.

 

[MOESAN]

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.

I regreat these manipulations of data making the different works not comparable and obliging us to do brain gymnastik all the time. It shows too the relativeness of all these works about auDNA, I think, even if we can extract some stuff from these ones.

 

[Alan]

Since many people seem to equate Teal with Caucaso_Gedrosia. Here is a comment I made already explaining the small difference between both.

"Teal" from the early Yamna paper is very similar to Caucaso_Gedrosian but not exactly the same. Teal contains some "North Euro" type ancestry too which probably comes mostly in connection with the ANE package.

Caucaso_Gedrosian in Yamna is around ~40% however Teal (K19) from the Yamna paper makes up 50-60% of the Yamna genome

http://biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/suppl/2015/02/10/013433.DC1/013433-1.pdf


So how can we imagine those teal people? Well they must have been similar to the Bronze Age Armenian sample the EEF component excluded of course. They had 25% Caucasus, 25% Gedrosia, 20% North Euro and 25% Atl-Med.

I think this Bronze Age Armenian sample fits as perfect example for my theory that Mesopotamia, East Anatolia and Trans Caucasus was the merging point of Eastern Teal- and Western EEF farmers by mid-late neolithic.

I could imagine that the proto teal farmers/herders from Southeast Caucasus, Iranian Plateau and South_Central Asia were similar to that with significantly less Atl_Med and slightly less Caucasus and more Gedrosia in comparison. Something in that range 50% Gedrosia, 10% Atl_Med, 15% Caucasus and 20% North Euro.

So Teal similar but not the same as Caucaso_Gedrosia

 

[MOESAN]

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

I agree for the most concerning the arrival of the "teal" element you see as a "East-Farmers" group - by the way I see in it some little central Asian component too picked easternmost an northernmost - speaking about the Y-DNA of Semites compared to their mt and auDNA could be intresting but it's not the question here -
just concerning the Iberian farmers I don't completely agree: the Middle Neolithic folks had more 'WHG' than the Early neolithic folks in Iberia; I do think they picked new 'WHG' DNA in West, whta doesn' t exclude a part taken in the Balkans (the Y-I2a1a so common in South could have been picked in Western Balkans Dalmatia by "maritime" farmers, along to add to the previous basic Y-G2a population. in other parts of Iberia, Portugal, anthropology seems showing LOCAL crossings; already, in Neolithic, skeletons of Ticuso and Solana, both in Castile, showed some differences I put on the account of crossings with HGs (my personal reading of measures and features, not Bible)

 

[MOESAN]

Since many people seem to equate Teal with Caucaso_Gedrosia. Here is a comment I made already explaining the small difference between both.

OK: I wrote my precedent post without having red your present post: Agree! this "teal" today equivalent would culminate among Tadjiks, perhaps???

 

[Alan]

I agree for the most concerning the arrival of the "teal" element you see as a "East-Farmers" group - by the way I see in it some little central Asian component too picked easternmost an northernmost

True, thats the ~ 5% I missed out purposely. It's something South Eurasian like.

OK: I wrote my precedent post without having red your present post: Agree! this "teal" today equivalent would culminate among Tadjiks, perhaps???

Lezgians with slightly more Gedrosia or Tajiks excluding the East Eurasian admixture with slightly less South Eurasian admxture and a bit of Atl_Med, Exactly. But take in mind thats a coincidence. I doubt any modern population is 100% representative for any ancient component. Since all of them have absorbed additional admixture in the thousand of years.

Just look at this.

Flesh-coloured/Orange = EEF/West Farmers
Pink/Rose=Southern farmers
Teal= East Farmers

http://biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/suppl/2015/02/10/013433.DC1/013433-1.pdf

Take in mind there is intersection between those components. For example the Proto South or East Farmers had some of the flesh-colored EEF too. Thats simply cause those components overlap with at least ~60% of their ancestry. at the end of the day they have ultimately the same origin for most. Only difference between Western and Southern farmers seems to be an East African shift through a Red Sea type component.
And the main difference between East and West farmers is that East farmers have very strong ANE component.

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.

Take in mind Afro_Asiatic does not equal Southern Farmer. Afro_Asiatic speakers must have been the main source of Southern farmer admixture but Proto Afro_Asiatic speakers themselves must have been a mixture of the rose/Southern (70%) and EEF/Western(30%) admixture. This is why I estimate the Semite admixture higher than just the rose component is showing.


As example Iranians have ~10% of the rose component. thats roughly ~14.5% of Semite admixture.

 

[Sile]

True, thats the ~ 5% I missed out purposely. It's something South Eurasian like.



Lezgians with slightly more Gedrosia or Tajiks excluding the East Eurasian admixture with slightly less South Eurasian admxture and a bit of Atl_Med, Exactly. But take in mind thats a coincidence. I doubt any modern population is 100% representative for any ancient component. Since all of them have absorbed additional admixture in the thousand of years.

It's quite astonishing how the components of the Lazaridis 2013 fit well the Teal/Eastern, EEF/Western and Southern farmers.

Just look at this.

Flesh-coloured/Orange = EEF/West Farmers
Pink/Rose~Southern farmers
Teal= East Farmers

http://biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/suppl/2015/02/10/013433.DC1/013433-1.pdf

Take in mind there is intersection between those components. For example the Proto South or East Farmers had some of the flesh-colored EEF too. Thats simply cause those components overlap with at least ~60% of their ancestry. at the end of the day they have ultimately the same origin for most. Only difference between Western and Southern farmers seems to be an East African shift through a Red Sea type component.
And the main difference between East and West farmers is that East farmers have very strong ANE component.

Taking into account the Bronze and early Iron Age Armenian samples and how they almost lacked or had nose 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 Afro-Asiatic admixture.

Didn't these "teal" farmers arrive nearly 2000 years after the "orange" farmers had already established themselves between germany and anatolia ( including the corridor in between) ?

 

[Alan]

Didn't these "teal" farmers arrive nearly 2000 years after the "orange" farmers had already established themselves between germany and anatolia ( including the corridor in between) ?

Yes. But they existed all around Eastern West Asia, South_Central Asia and the Steppes by mid-late Neolithic already.

Teal farmers/herders are simply a mid-late neolithic phenomenon of EEF farmers meeting ANE people on the IranianPlateau/Southeast Caucasus and South_Central Asia. So before they became teal they must have been very EEF like. The same the case with Southern Farmers before they absorbed a bit of East African admixture (so was the Red Sea component born 3/4 EEF 1/4 SSA) and so was born the Proto Afro_Asiatic speakers in/around Egypt.

 

[MOESAN]

True, thats the ~ 5% I missed out purposely. It's something South Eurasian like.



Lezgians with slightly more Gedrosia or Tajiks excluding the East Eurasian admixture with slightly less South Eurasian admxture and a bit of Atl_Med, Exactly. But take in mind thats a coincidence. I doubt any modern population is 100% representative for any ancient component. Since all of them have absorbed additional admixture in the thousand of years.

Just look at this.

Flesh-coloured/Orange = EEF/West Farmers
Pink/Rose=Southern farmers
Teal= East Farmers

http://biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/suppl/2015/02/10/013433.DC1/013433-1.pdf

Take in mind there is intersection between those components. For example the Proto South or East Farmers had some of the flesh-colored EEF too. Thats simply cause those components overlap with at least ~60% of their ancestry. at the end of the day they have ultimately the same origin for most. Only difference between Western and Southern farmers seems to be an East African shift through a Red Sea type component.
And the main difference between East and West farmers is that East farmers have very strong ANE component.

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.

Take in mind Afro_Asiatic does not equal Southern Farmer. Afro_Asiatic speakers must have been the main source of Southern farmer admixture but Proto Afro_Asiatic speakers themselves must have been a mixture of the rose/Southern (70%) and EEF/Western(30%) admixture. This is why I estimate the Semite admixture higher than just the rose component is showing.


As example Iranians have ~10% of the rose component. thats roughly ~14.5% of Semite admixture.

Thanks for answer; I did not succeed in loading the link you provide me - what you said seems nevertheless intuitively correct; juste the same question: what is the true "nucleus" basic component in admixtures: they seem only approaches; is 'east-african' an admixture of supposed genuine 'bedawin' component with diverse SSAfricans, or is 'red-sea' an admixture, as you say, of 'east-african' and classical 'near-eastern' or basic 'EEF'??? uneasy to answer with my data; I shall try to download your link with more success; &: beside: it would be interesting having the admixture of Yemenite Jews in the pooling with 'red-sea': 'll see that.
nos vad nos da

 

[Angela]

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.

What is your source for these percentages for the Red Sea component? There are calculators and then there are calculators.

The same the case with Southern Farmers before they absorbed a bit of East African admixture (so was the Red Sea component born 3/4 EEF 1/4 SSA) and so was born the Proto Afro_Asiatic speakers in/around Egypt.

Why would you assume that at least some part of it wasn't always in the "farmer" genome, through the Natufians, for example? It would then have spread everywhere the farmers went. It may have been cut slightly in the northern Near East when those peoples absorbed a lot of ANE.

Have Oetzi or Stuttgart or NE or any of the ancient farmers been run through calculators that have that component? I know, for example, that Otzi had a S.W.Asian Component, which Dienekes said was related to the "Red Sea" component. (7.6%, comparing, for example, to 7.1% for Tuscans, 5.6 for Northern Italians, and 12.5% for Southern Italians/Sicilians.)



Also, could you explain your reasoning that Red Sea is 1/4 SSA?

As to scientific evidence that people don't want to accept because of their prejudices or "ethnic" myths, I try very hard to point it out when I see it, even when it is certain Italians who are doing it. (It's also important to realize that population genetics aficionados from any country are not always representative of most citizens in that country.) Unfortunately, it sometimes seems like a many headed hydra, one in each part of the world, including the Middle East, as I'm sure you know. Northern Middle Easterners do not, in my experience, want to be associated with Arabs, for example, perhaps because of the SSA admixture.

 

[arvistro]

Yes. But they existed all around Eastern West Asia, South_Central Asia and the Steppes by mid-late Neolithic already.

Teal farmers/herders are simply a mid-late neolithic phenomenon of EEF farmers meeting ANE people on the IranianPlateau/Southeast Caucasus and South_Central Asia. So before they became teal they must have been very EEF like. The same the case with Southern Farmers before they absorbed a bit of East African admixture (so was the Red Sea component born 3/4 EEF 1/4 SSA) and so was born the Proto Afro_Asiatic speakers in/around Egypt.

Was there something happening mid-late Neo around the globe that made early farmers to open up for other genes?

In Europe they expanded as pretty homogenous over large territories (so, I assume same thing East). But then in Mid-late they received portion of WHG in Europe and apparently around same time portion of ANE in East.
Some climate challenge?

 

[Alan]

What is your source for these percentages for the Red Sea component? There are calculators and then there are calculators.

Dodecad K10a the first and most used source for Red Sea percentages as far as I know.

Why would you assume that at least some part of it wasn't always in the "farmer" genome, through the Natufians, for example? It would then have spread everywhere the farmers went. It may have been cut slightly in the northern Near East when those peoples absorbed a lot of ANE.

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. But than there is some SSA (1-3%) among EEF farmers but the point is that a Red Sea (1/4 SSA) component rised exponentially in Northern West Asia and as well probably in Europe. 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 imagine that Proto Semites had 1/3 of their aDNA as Red Sea while the rest was rather Mediterranean as I explained above why I think that way.

So Iranians have ~5% Red Sea. 5%* 3= ~15%. The reason why I take the full 5% instead of decreasing it by 1-2% as I did it above, is because among Iranians we are probably dealing with Teal Farmers and I suspect that Teal farmers had close to non Red Sea. So almost all Red Sea in Iranians is probably real Semitic.

Have Oetzi or Stuttgart or NE or any of the ancient farmers been run through calculators that have that component? I know, for example, that Otzi had a S.W.Asian Component, which Dienekes said was related to the "Red Sea" component. (7.6%, comparing, for example, to 7.1% for Tuscans, 5.6 for Northern Italians, and 12.5% for Southern Italians/Sicilians.)

Southwest Asian is related but not the same as Red Sea.

2 points

1. Ötzi is a late Neolithic sample, by this time some more Red Sea definitely reached already the farmers slowly. It's not like Red Sea came by one big migration it was a slow process as we see on the Armenian samples.

2. The portion that shows up as Southwest Asian is the EEF portion of Southwest Asian itself. The Southwest Asian component itself contains like ~50% Red Sea if you compare K10a to World9 calculator this get's obvious. Since Red Sea itself can be decribed as 3/4 Caucasian and 1/4 SSA as by Dienekes himself, than Southwest Asian itself only contains 1/8 SSA. So Southern Italians having 12,5% Southwest Asian means they have like ~6.25% Red Sea. What seems pretty much correct if you take a look at the Spreadsheet
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1q1LKZqeQRS28WjwyAQPs5I7QBUWv3Q3mF9bVpJp6eX0/edit#gid=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.

On the other hand Spaniards have like 1.6% Red Sea. Half of it probably Neolithic and other half Semite related. Thats a total of 2.4% Semite admixture, but than despite Red Sea component eating up all SSA in Italians( which is a strong indiciation that SSA in Italy came via Semites) there still remains 1.5% SSA in Spaniards. Thats a strong indiciation that this SSA in Spaniards has a different source. Post Neolithic source, since majority of Neolithic SSA gets eaten up by Red Sea already. So let's say 1.25% is post Neolithic (just my estimation) and Morrocans are like 1/5 SSA, thats like 6.25% North African admixture. A total of 8.75% Afro_Asiatic admixture for Spaniards I assume. I know I will get some hate for these estimations but it's just my theory so calm down.

View attachment 7419

Also, could you explain your reasoning that Red Sea is 1/4 SSA?

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.

As to scientific evidence that people don't want to accept because of their prejudices or "ethnic" myths, I try very hard to point it out when I see it, even when it is certain Italians who are doing it. (It's also important to realize that population genetics aficionados from any country are not always representative of most citizens in that country.) Unfortunately, it sometimes seems like a many headed hydra, one in each part of the world, including the Middle East, as I'm sure you know. Northern Middle Easterners do not, in my experience, want to be associated with Arabs, for example, perhaps because of the SSA admixture.

Yep that might be one reason for allot who are into genetics but not exactly the main reason: The main reason is a geopolitical. Let me give you a hint. Biggest sponsors of ISIS in Syria are Qatar beside Turkey, and Al Qaida in Yemen, Afghanistan, Syria(AL Nusra) and around the world, Saudi Arabia.

And expect Saudi Arabia (which did take allot of refugees it seems, though they are also fault for the miserey) non of the Arab Gulf states such as qatar, UAE took a single refugee.

Thats just one example why even Arabic speaking Levantines themselves! do not want to be associated with them.

 

[Alan]

Was there something happening mid-late Neo around the globe that made early farmers to open up for other genes?

In Europe they expanded as pretty homogenous over large territories (so, I assume same thing East). But then in Mid-late they received portion of WHG in Europe and apparently around same time portion of ANE in East.
Some climate challenge?

East farmers always had some WHG related admixture and the main difference to West farmers is that they mixed strongly with ANE(~40%) groups and this already in Southeast Caucasus and the Iranian Plateau. This merging with ANE groups deluted their EEF down to 60%. This is why the pseudo "WHG" in the East of West Asia is half as much as in the West (Levant and Anatolia).

 

[arvistro]

East farmers always had some WHG and the main difference to West farmers is that they mixed strongly with ANE(~40%) groups and this already in Southeast Caucasus and the Iranian Plateau. This merging with ANE groups deluted their EEF. This is why the pseudo "WHG" in the East of West Asia is half as much as in the West (Levant and Anatolia).

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.

 

[Alan]

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.

Why do I like brighter colors to wear? No one knows

The same with ANE. They definitely existed in the region between Southeast Caucasus and South_Central Asia. And when the EEF farmers met them they merged and became Teal farmers(herders). Maybe the ANE H&G had something to offer the EEF farmers in the East what the WHG didn't had to offer in the West? At the end of the day WHG did also mix with EEF farmers just in lesser amount. Also take in mind EEF itself is a mixture of UHG(WHG related) and Basal Eurasian two older populations. So there was indeeed mixing going on for long time.

The reason why I estimate 60% EEF and 40% ANE for Teal farmers is because the Caucaso_Gedrosia component itself is like ~30% ANE. Teal should have more ANE.

 

[arvistro]

WHG did not mix with EEF until very late. The EEF was born with portion of WHG/uhg genes.

So, good question what ANE had to offer.
Alternative farming? Buckwheat (read on wiki history, started allegedly in SE Asia ca 6000 bce, documented in Finland ca 5300 bce)? Herding?

 

[Alan]

So, good question what ANE had to offer.
Alternative farming? Buckwheat (read on wiki history, started allegedly in SE Asia ca 6000 bce, documented in Finland ca 5300 bce)? Herding?

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.