Teaser: EEF was 90% Anatolian

By North Iraqis I meant Assyrians, Iraqi Jews... Kurds are more Iranic-Caucasian with all that Gedrosia and also some North Euro linked to ANE.
 
By North Iraqis I meant Assyrians, Iraqi Jews... Kurds are more Iranic-Caucasian with all that Gedrosia and also some North Euro linked to ANE.

Well than by reffering only to Assyrians and Iraqi Jews as "North Iraqis" you are making a huge mistake here. If anything I would have thought it would be clear by now that North Iraq was in ancient times more akine to Kurds. North Iraq which was basically Urartu/Subaru/Iranic by that time was like Bronze and Iron Age Armenian samples which as I have explained above were more like a cross between North Caucasians, Tuscans and Tajiks/Yaghnobis(minus the East Eurasian), And to this BaArmenians the Kurds are among the Top 5 closest groups based on fst distance tables and oracle. This mixture comes closer to Kurds, with Kurds being slightly more southern ( 5-10% less North Euro replaced by +5-10 more SWA than Bronze Age samples) shifted.

Assyrians and Iraqi Jews actually represent populations who are a mix of Southern and Eastern (teal) farmers and represent not ancient North Iraqis but a Iron Age mixture between ancient South Levantine Semites and Sumerian/IndoEuropean/Caucasic groups. Akkadians for example are very well documented as conquerers but not natives of Mesopotamia in general. From this merging of Akkadians and Sumerians the Assyrians and Babylonians were born. And than Assyrians conquered North Mesopotamia until they were driven out by the Medes in alliance with Scythians/Cimmerians and the Babylonians.
 
Last edited:
Another teasar from authors with 34 (6300 BC)Neolithic Western Anatolian genomes: Close genetic relationship of Neolithic Anatolians to early European farmers:

I don't get why some people still insist on calling these farmers "West Anatolian farmers" if even the paper calls them simply Anatolian farmers.

And if my words are not trusted here the words of David
Capra,

As I've said before, Central Anatolian Neolithic farmers have been tested and they're no different from Western Anatolian Neolithic farmers.

There is no genetic difference between West and Central Anatolian farmers. North Mesopotamian (Southeast Anatolia) farmers not been tested yet. But the Early Neolthic samples of this region should be alike to EEF before they mix with ANE groups in mid-late Neolithic.
 
I don't think Fire-Haired has any agenda. People may just be writing that because of the wording of the abstract.

Obviously, some people have had some sort of access to the work of other groups indicating that this "homogeneous" farming population also inhabited central Anatolia. Or perhaps the Lazaridis paper does address it tangentially.

If I had to bet, I would say that the population down near the "launch point" for EEF proposed by Paschou et al near the border of southeastern Anatolia/north-central Levant is also similar.

That's what's indicated by all the archaeology papers I've posted here about the early Neolithic in the Near East. There were exchanges of seeds, domesticated animals and technology going back to at least 11,000 BC for all areas of what used to be called the Fertile Crescent. Would it be parsimonious to propose that after thousands of years living in the same area, with basically the same culture, these people did not admix? I don't think so.

If there were slightly divergent populations I think they would have been in the far south and northeast.
 
I don't think Fire-Haired has any agenda. People may just be writing that because of the wording of the abstract.

I didn't meant to accuse him of an agenda in this case. I simply wanted to clarify a few things, since I still often see some people talking about "West Anatolian farmers" in this sence as if they got their WHG from Balkans/Greece.
 
I didn't meant to accuse him of an agenda in this case. I simply wanted to clarify a few things, since I still often see some people talking about "West Anatolian farmers" in this sence as if they got their WHG from Balkans/Greece.

Yes, I think you're right to do that. Some people either haven't heard or absorbed the new data, and perhaps some really would prefer it not to have turned out this way.
 
As to the following, we agree:


As to the other part of your comment, I'm totally open to whatever the ancient dna will show. I would add, however, what I said to someone else just recently. It doesn't matter when certain genetic material entered your family or "ethnic" line, or with what particular culture. It's the same genes. So, I disagree that the EEF, for example, or more precisely the early Near Eastern farmer ancestry somehow became "different" because it was packaged with different genes at different times. As Lazaridis pointed out, all the many migrations into Europe and within Europe were just different combinations, in different proportions, of the same basic ancient populations. Many of the distinctions that get made just smack to me of unattractive "isms" of one sort or another. I'll leave it at that.


OK Angela, but if Neolithic different populations in Europe show very different distributions of genes - even if these genes are all of them found in say: Anatolia - we can try to know if the causes are more recent drifts after reaching Europe OR are differences pre-existing in the source great region; even if today all these genes are evenly distributed in Anatolia (it's an example, pure theory) they could have had very different distributions too in ancient Anatolia... Just splitting hairs.
All that will not change our ffuture.
Bone net (regional french)
 
I didn't meant to accuse him of an agenda in this case. I simply wanted to clarify a few things, since I still often see some people talking about "West Anatolian farmers" in this sence as if they got their WHG from Balkans/Greece.

I was being a safe-thinker. I wasn't aware of any news about Neolithic genomes from anywhere east of West Anatolia.
 
We study 1.2 million genome-wide single nucleotide polymorphisms on a sample of
26 Neolithic individuals (~6,300 years BCE) from northwestern Anatolia . Our analysis
reveals a homogeneous population that was genetically similar to early farmers
from Europe (FST=0.004±0.0003 and frequency of 60% of Y-chromosome haplogroup
G2a). We model Early Neolithic farmers from central Europe and Iberia as a
genetic mixture of ~90% Anatolians and ~10% European hunter-gatherers, suggesting
little influence by Mesolithic Europeans prior to the dispersal of European farmers
into the interior of the continent. Neolithic Anatolians differ from all present-day
populations of western Asia, suggesting genetic changes have occurred in parts of
this region since the Neolithic period. We suggest that the language spoken by the
homogeneous Anatolian-European Neolithic farmers is unlikely to have been the
same as that spoken by the Yamnaya steppe pastoralists whose ancestry was derived
from eastern Europe and a different population from the Caucasus/Near East
[Haak et al. 2015], and discuss implications for alternative models of Indo-European
dispersals.


this abstract passed by Anthrogenica speaks of 60% Y-G2a in West Anatolia: who knows which others Y haplos were there, it would be interetsing I suppose!
 
We study 1.2 million genome-wide single nucleotide polymorphisms on a sample of
26 Neolithic individuals (~6,300 years BCE) from northwestern Anatolia . Our analysis
reveals a homogeneous population that was genetically similar to early farmers
from Europe (FST=0.004±0.0003 and frequency of 60% of Y-chromosome haplogroup
G2a). We model Early Neolithic farmers from central Europe and Iberia as a
genetic mixture of ~90% Anatolians and ~10% European hunter-gatherers, suggesting
little influence by Mesolithic Europeans prior to the dispersal of European farmers
into the interior of the continent. Neolithic Anatolians differ from all present-day
populations of western Asia, suggesting genetic changes have occurred in parts of
this region since the Neolithic period. We suggest that the language spoken by the
homogeneous Anatolian-European Neolithic farmers is unlikely to have been the
same as that spoken by the Yamnaya steppe pastoralists whose ancestry was derived
from eastern Europe and a different population from the Caucasus/Near East
[Haak et al. 2015], and discuss implications for alternative models of Indo-European
dispersals.this abstract passed by Anthrogenica speaks of 60% Y-G2a in West Anatolia: who knows which others Y haplos were there, it would be interetsing I suppose!
That's the question we asked too, and now wait for more results. I'm betting for mostly I2a, the dominant WHG's Y. Though we should see other Mesolithic hgs already found through Europe.
 
We study 1.2 million genome-wide single nucleotide polymorphisms on a sample of
26 Neolithic individuals (~6,300 years BCE) from northwestern Anatolia . Our analysis
reveals a homogeneous population that was genetically similar to early farmers
from Europe (FST=0.004±0.0003 and frequency of 60% of Y-chromosome haplogroup
G2a). We model Early Neolithic farmers from central Europe and Iberia as a
genetic mixture of ~90% Anatolians and ~10% European hunter-gatherers, suggesting
little influence by Mesolithic Europeans prior to the dispersal of European farmers
into the interior of the continent. Neolithic Anatolians differ from all present-day
populations of western Asia, suggesting genetic changes have occurred in parts of
this region since the Neolithic period. We suggest that the language spoken by the
homogeneous Anatolian-European Neolithic farmers is unlikely to have been the
same as that spoken by the Yamnaya steppe pastoralists whose ancestry was derived
from eastern Europe and a different population from the Caucasus/Near East
[Haak et al. 2015], and discuss implications for alternative models of Indo-European
dispersals.


this abstract passed by Anthrogenica speaks of 60% Y-G2a in West Anatolia: who knows which others Y haplos were there, it would be interetsing I suppose!
 
@Lebrok:
possible -
sorry for the repetition of my post: a technical mistake of mine (the old age!)
 
From the Lazaridis presentation thanks to Razib Khan's tweets:

EEF were homogeneous


Common source of EEF was Anatolia based on archaeology.


mtDNA similar to EEF. Y mostly G2a2. They also had J2 H and I at low frequency, and some C1 too


Anatolian neolithic is close to EEF on pca, but EEF shifted toward WHG


Anatolian neolithic is different from modern Anatolian and SE europe populations.


Indo-european steppe = EHG + near eastern. New data shows Eneolithic samara was 75% EHG ancestry plus 25% "armenian" 5,200 to 4,000 BCE


Poltavka people 3000 to 2200 BC basically like Yamnaya, 50% EHG and 50% armenian-like.


Srubnaya was different... 2/3 yamnaya 1/3 middle neolithic European


Yamnaya/poltavka went from R1b to R1a in the Srubnaya period. z93 group found on bronze age steppe samara


There was back migration of EEF to the steppe after the initial yamnaya migration. (This one I don't get.)
 
From the Lazaridis presentation thanks to Razib Khan's tweets:

EEF were homogeneous


Common source of EEF was Anatolia based on archaeology.


mtDNA similar to EEF. Y mostly G2a2. They also had J2 H and I at low frequency, and some C1 too


Anatolian neolithic is close to EEF on pca, but EEF shifted toward WHG


Anatolian neolithic is different from modern Anatolian and SE europe populations.


Indo-european steppe = EHG + near eastern. New data shows Eneolithic samara was 75% EHG ancestry plus 25% "armenian" 5,200 to 4,000 BCE


Poltavka people 3000 to 2200 BC basically like Yamnaya, 50% EHG and 50% armenian-like.


Srubnaya was different... 2/3 yamnaya 1/3 middle neolithic European


Yamnaya/poltavka went from R1b to R1a in the Srubnaya period. z93 group found on bronze age steppe samara


There was back migration of EEF to the steppe after the initial yamnaya migration. (This one I don't get.)

I suppose it could mean that the EEF that went to the steppe went into the creation of Srubnaya. Srubnaya leads right up to the borders of where Andronovo began. I wonder how the models would work with a source population coming from this more southern region rather than from the area where Corded Ware developed?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Srubna_culture

Oh, and the Mathieson et al paper on selection is going to be adjusted in light of new DNA data. Maybe we'll finally get a little more clarity on the see saw between selection and migration in terms of depigmentation snps.
http://biorxiv.org/content/early/2015/03/13/016477


 
Last edited:
mtDNA similar to EEF. Y mostly G2a2. They also had J2 H and I at low frequency, and some C1 too

Same as Early Neolithic Y DNA. Not suprised by I/C1, because WHGs just like Loschbour lived in Anatolia. BTW, G2a2 is the same type of G2a found in EEF. And, I'm interested in what type of J2 it was. "Balkan" J2b2?


Anatolian neolithic is different from modern Anatolian and SE europe populations.

And yesterday we were told an EEF-type people moved into Africa from SW Asia less than 4500 yo. Simplistic thinking would say Steppe people and a mystery West Asian pop moved into Near East and SE Europe. It might be that simple. In this abstract they say a new more Near Eastern or Caucasus people migrated to Anatolia in the Late Neolithic. ]
 
From the Lazaridis presentation thanks to Razib Khan's tweets:

EEF were homogeneous


Common source of EEF was Anatolia based on archaeology.


mtDNA similar to EEF. Y mostly G2a2. They also had J2 H and I at low frequency, and some C1 too


Anatolian neolithic is close to EEF on pca, but EEF shifted toward WHG


Anatolian neolithic is different from modern Anatolian and SE europe populations.


Indo-european steppe = EHG + near eastern. New data shows Eneolithic samara was 75% EHG ancestry plus 25% "armenian" 5,200 to 4,000 BCE


Poltavka people 3000 to 2200 BC basically like Yamnaya, 50% EHG and 50% armenian-like.


Srubnaya was different... 2/3 yamnaya 1/3 middle neolithic European


Yamnaya/poltavka went from R1b to R1a in the Srubnaya period. z93 group found on bronze age steppe samara


There was back migration of EEF to the steppe after the initial yamnaya migration. (This one I don't get.)



So as expected, I is not really a Haplogroup taken by WHG groups but always a local part of the EEF.

As I proposed in the past, I think Haplogroup "I" was once a relatively frequent Haplogroup from Iran all the way into Europe.

Oh an those Samara (R1b?) also had 25% "Teal like". Nice seems the Teal wives theory is dying a slow death.
 
Another thing, R1a z93 found in Yamna, and going by the tweets it seems like from an EEF(Neolithic) culture (Most likely Cucuteni-tripolye). Those guys seem to be the ancestors of both Sintashta and Corded Ware. As some people have speculated Corded Ware isn't the ancestor of Sintashta but both derive from the same source.
 
Another thing, R1a z93 found in Yamna, and going by the tweets it seems like from an EEF(Neolithic) culture (Most likely Cucuteni-tripolye). Those guys seem to be the ancestors of both Sintashta and Corded Ware. As some people have speculated Corded Ware isn't the ancestor of Sintashta but both derive from the same source.

There's no mention of R1a-Z93 in Yamnaya or CT. There's mention of R1a in Srubnaya period and "Bronze age" R1a-Z93 in Samara. Srubnaya is 1800-1200 BC so younger than Sintashta and Corded Ware.
 
Fire Haired14;468231]Same as Early Neolithic Y DNA. Not suprised by I/C1, because WHGs just like Loschbour lived in Anatolia. BTW, G2a2 is the same type of G2a found in EEF. And, I'm interested in what type of J2 it was. "Balkan" J2b2?

Fire-Haired, where has it been revealed that WHGs just like Loschbour lived in Anatolia? Let's wait for the paper to see whether it's a case of a back-migration of a Loschbour like population into Anatolia post LGM, or whether this was a case where a group moved to Europe from the Near East and the two groups then drifted apart over thousands of years, or some other unknown scenario.

And yesterday we were told an EEF-type people moved into Africa from SW Asia less than 4500 yo. Simplistic thinking would say Steppe people and a mystery West Asian pop moved into Near East and SE Europe. It might be that simple. In this abstract they say a new more Near Eastern or Caucasus people migrated to Anatolia in the Late Neolithic.

Fire Haired, that may or may not be true as you have formulated it, but the abstract to which you linked has nothing to say about the matter. It's talking about EARLY Neolithic gene flow.

"Anatolia played a key role in the Eurasian Neolithisation. The expansion from this area was driven west and northwards by migration, but we know little about the actual establishing of Neolithic societies in Anatolia, and what kind of population dynamics affected their gene pool. We present the first ancient genome wide data from a 6700 year old Anatolian excavated from a late Neolithic context in Kumtepe. We show that this individual display genetic similarities to the European Neolithic genepool, which anchors the Neolithic expansion in Europe to Anatolia. Further, the Kumtepe individual does not only contain the genetic element that is frequent in early European farmers, but also a component found mainly in modern-day populations from the Near East and Caucasus, suggesting gene flow into Anatolia in the late Neolithic. The scene presented by Kumtepe is compatible with gene flow into Europe from or through the Neolithic core area in Anatolia. And it is likely that this occurred early, perhaps just after the Neolithic core area had been established in southeastern Anatolia. This area was entangled in a complex web of contacts with other parts of the Near East, and the distribution of genetic variation in early European farmers suggests that the contacts with the European continent also remained and replenished with people's constant movements in and out of Anatolia."

This is part of the reason I've been saying for so long that the "farmer" population was probably homogeneous for a very long time. It may have all radiated out from somewhere around southeastern Anatolia.
 
Guys, from a Dienekes post on the Allentoft et al paper:
http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2015/06/into-out-of-and-across-eurasian-steppe.html

"The third conclusion is that the later steppe cultures of the Sintashta and Andronovo (putative Indo-Iranians according to some), were not a continuation of the Yamnaya-Afanasievo people, but had extra Neolithic farmer ancestry. So, it seems that Neolithic farmers entered the steppe, and the development of steppe cultures did not happen in isolation. Whether this involved migration of Corded Ware people (as the authors prefer), who were already a mixture of Yamnaya and Neolithic farmers, or some other mixture of Neolithic farmers with steppe populations (e.g., Tripolye plus Yamnaya) remains to be seen."
 

This thread has been viewed 49190 times.

Back
Top