Eupedia Forums
Site NavigationEupedia Top > Eupedia Forum & Japan Forum
Page 11 of 17 FirstFirst ... 910111213 ... LastLast
Results 251 to 275 of 412

Thread: The genetic structure of the world’s first farmers

  1. #251
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran10000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    14-12-10
    Posts
    1,603
    Points
    20,999
    Level
    44
    Points: 20,999, Level: 44
    Level completed: 28%, Points required for next Level: 651
    Overall activity: 2.0%


    Country: Serbia



    Quote Originally Posted by arvistro View Post
    Not with the dialect of that language which later developed into Uralic (I'd say it developed from guys who stayed in/near Khvalynsk?), but with dialect of that language which became PIE.
    If Indo-Uralic is right, then there is no "Uralic influence into PIE", it would be like saying there is Gaelic influence into Persian. PIE and Uralic are then sister language groups.

    P.s.
    For Anatolian and Indo-Uralic link:
    "Some Indo-Uralic Aspects of Hittite" (Alwin Kloekhorst).
    Problem is those studies can be speculative. Proto-Indo-Uralic language, what gives Kloekhorst, whether (and where) existed, where is evidence.

    Even Proto Uralic languages seem much younger than earlier opinions. Hakinnen (2012) give that Proto-Uralic emerged about 2,800 BC. It is after Indo-European, it doesn't matter if you take in account Anatolian or Kurgan hypothesis.

    Yes, Uralic languages could impact on Indo-European but this should no be exaggerated. And, Indo-European influenced Uralic. Hakinnen (2012) argue where it happened, in Steppe.

    According Hakkinen (2012):

    I stage 2,800 BC Early Archaic Indo-European borrowings to Early Proto Uralic,

    II stage 2,300 BC Late Archaic (Northwest) Indo European borrowings to Late Proto Uralic

    III stage 1,800 BC Northwest Indo European borrowings to Uralic dialects .

  2. #252
    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



    With these SNP's, then this T is part of the T1a1 group ...............so paper was wrong
    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.

  3. #253
    Advisor Achievements:
    VeteranThree Friends50000 Experience PointsRecommendation Second Class
    Awards:
    Posting Award
    Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    14,741
    Points
    242,560
    Level
    100
    Points: 242,560, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 99.6%


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: USA - New York



    [QUOTE=MOESAN;482443]
    Quote Originally Posted by Angela View Post
    We need Armenian N!
    OK for a possible Anatolian contribution concerning WHG+LevtN (every new simulation sends new reference population, funny indeed!) intoArmenia: why not?
    Concerning comparions metals age Armenia with CHG, as Armenia shows levels of WHG and LevtN, if Armenia was issued from old CHG, this new admixture would reduce the EHG and IranN (=CHG) in itself. Or if Armenia was previously a mix of WHG and LevtN (=Anatolia)+ the admixture with CHGs from N-Caucasus would also produce less EHG in itself tha in the donor CHG pop. So I think and CHG and Armenia had high levels of IranN, but Armenia received new EHG non-Caucasus, so surely Steppic. Some papers all the way seem showing metals ages Armenia had affinities with Yamnaya, not only 'westasian'; Genetiker whatever the worth of his work, "found" some East-Asia (rather 'amerind' or 'siberian') in BA Armenians what does not seem come through iran at these dates but was found in almost every supposed Steppic influenced pops. On a plotting of Davidsky BA Armenians are shifted towards Lezgins, and Tadjiks, closer to these last ones than Georgians or Adygei, far from the today Armenians and even Iranians. I 'm not sure all that would be without any signification at all? and EHG of some weight in CSW Asia at these dates? I don't buy before more infos.
    We could say, it's true, that the supposed "steppic" admixture would not prove a cultural influence of North Caucasus upon South, but rather an osmosis after colonization of North by South Caucasus? Who knows? All the way I discard a colonization by Tadjiks from East at those times, for good sense and archeological reasons.
    The problem is that the Armenian sample can't be modeled with an influx of early steppe.

    That might just mean we don't yet have samples from the proximate population.

    Just a point about Kurd's work on creating admixture analyses based on these samples: very interesting.

    As expected, North Africans turn out to be mainly Levant Neolithic with about 20% SSA.

    One thing that some of the commentary may be missing in terms of populations like the Palestinians and the Jordanians is that as time passed I think there was diffusion from Arabia north, intensified perhaps with the Muslim invasions, an Arabia which I think might have remained rather "Natufian" like because they didn't admix to the same extent with the Anatolian Neolithic or Iranian Neolithic groups.

    So, perhaps it's not necessarily the case that they haven't changed at all since the early Neolithic, but that the area went from Natufian to Levant Neolithic and back to a slightly more "Natufian like" configuration.

    Just throwing this out as some speculation.


    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

  4. #254
    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 Sile View Post
    With these SNP's, then this T is part of the T1a1 group ...............so paper was wrong
    The marker as per genetiker is T1 .............and not T1a

  5. #255
    Elite member Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteran25000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    25-10-11
    Location
    Brittany
    Age
    70
    Posts
    4,304
    Points
    34,349
    Level
    57
    Points: 34,349, Level: 57
    Level completed: 9%, Points required for next Level: 1,101
    Overall activity: 40.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b - L21/S145*
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H3c

    Ethnic group
    more celtic
    Country: France



    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Tomenable View Post
    I really doubt that EHG had actual WHG admixture. It was probably just some "WHG-like" ancestry, but not actual WHG.

    It is probably a similar case as with Corded Ware having Yamna ancestry, while in reality it could be just "Yamna-like".

    All that are simulations, modelings, it depends on what you call WHG or EHG: historical population or principal component? I am a bit doubtfull about all these admixture inequal results. What prevents somebody to "make" EHG as WHG+ANE? or something else?
    Same for IranN in CHG? What kind of CHG? were not the first CHG reference people older than IranN? (or I missed something, possible).
    First we had Neolithic EEF (pure in some modelings) after we have EEF+WHG, after EEF+WHG+CHG: what next? Shared genes, yes, but what more?
    the only value of this is some reliability in global distances and affinities between populations, but what about who gave or received to or from who? Finally the plottings say almost more than all these admixtures results, changing sometime dramatically by time, even among scientist world.

  6. #256
    Advisor Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteran25000 Experience Points
    Awards:
    Most Popular
    bicicleur's Avatar
    Join Date
    27-01-13
    Location
    Zwevegem, Belgium
    Posts
    5,232
    Points
    41,171
    Level
    62
    Points: 41,171, Level: 62
    Level completed: 64%, Points required for next Level: 479
    Overall activity: 7.0%


    Country: Belgium - Flanders



    Quote Originally Posted by Sile View Post
    The marker as per genetiker is T1 .............and not T1a
    indeed, positive for L206-T1
    negative for L162-T1a1, L131-T1a2 and Y11151-Y8614 as per Yfull Tree https://www.yfull.com/tree/T/
    no calls for intermediate positions

  7. #257
    Princess Achievements:
    Overdrive10000 Experience PointsVeteranThree Friends
    davef's Avatar
    Join Date
    19-06-16
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    2,188
    Points
    10,301
    Level
    30
    Points: 10,301, Level: 30
    Level completed: 59%, Points required for next Level: 249
    Overall activity: 29.0%


    Ethnic group
    Italian, Irish, Jewish
    Country: USA - New York



    @MOESAN
    This is why I joined this forum. You won't find me in any other ethnic forum. I learned nothing from "scientists" who insist that the Egyptians were Scottish because a pharaoh had "Celtic" y dna or calling y dna found throughout the Middle East and Europe "Roman".

  8. #258
    Elite member Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    09-12-15
    Posts
    406
    Points
    5,479
    Level
    21
    Points: 5,479, Level: 21
    Level completed: 86%, Points required for next Level: 71
    Overall activity: 17.0%


    Country: Canada



    How come Levant Neolithic got caucasoid light skin two genes, having 66% components of 100% black skin Natufians? Moreover, He was getting overload of vitamin D from Sun everyday. However, this fact applied to the situation of dark WHG and EEF w/ the 2 skin gene in Europe around 8,000ybp to 5,000ybp.

    Another interesting thing is Levant bronze, the descendant of this levant neolithic, lost Levant Neolithic SLC45A2.

  9. #259
    Elite member Achievements:
    Veteran10000 Experience Points
    arvistro's Avatar
    Join Date
    06-08-14
    Posts
    998
    Points
    12,842
    Level
    34
    Points: 12,842, Level: 34
    Level completed: 28%, Points required for next Level: 508
    Overall activity: 0%


    Country: Latvia



    Quote Originally Posted by Garrick View Post
    Problem is those studies can be speculative. Proto-Indo-Uralic language, what gives Kloekhorst, whether (and where) existed, where is evidence.

    Even Proto Uralic languages seem much younger than earlier opinions. Hakinnen (2012) give that Proto-Uralic emerged about 2,800 BC. It is after Indo-European, it doesn't matter if you take in account Anatolian or Kurgan hypothesis.

    Yes, Uralic languages could impact on Indo-European but this should no be exaggerated. And, Indo-European influenced Uralic. Hakinnen (2012) argue where it happened, in Steppe.

    According Hakkinen (2012):

    I stage 2,800 BC Early Archaic Indo-European borrowings to Early Proto Uralic,

    II stage 2,300 BC Late Archaic (Northwest) Indo European borrowings to Late Proto Uralic

    III stage 1,800 BC Northwest Indo European borrowings to Uralic dialects .
    The main guy behind Indo-Uralic is not Kloekhorst, it is Kortlandt, who is quite a big name in mainstream linguistics.

    For Indo-Uralic concept:
    http://www.kortlandt.nl/publications/art269e.pdf - An outline of Proto-Indo-European
    http://www.kortlandt.nl/publications/art203e.pdf - The Indo-Uralic verb
    http://www.kortlandt.nl/publications/art216e.pdf - Indo-Uralic and Altaic (more like bonus article)

    As to Uralic age, I actually agree to Hakkinen, but one daughter's TMRCA can be way younger than other daughter's TMRCA, look at Baltic and Slavic and Balto-Slavic.

  10. #260
    Advisor Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteran25000 Experience Points
    Awards:
    Most Popular
    bicicleur's Avatar
    Join Date
    27-01-13
    Location
    Zwevegem, Belgium
    Posts
    5,232
    Points
    41,171
    Level
    62
    Points: 41,171, Level: 62
    Level completed: 64%, Points required for next Level: 479
    Overall activity: 7.0%


    Country: Belgium - Flanders



    [QUOTE=Angela;482485]
    Quote Originally Posted by MOESAN View Post

    The problem is that the Armenian sample can't be modeled with an influx of early steppe.

    That might just mean we don't yet have samples from the proximate population.

    Just a point about Kurd's work on creating admixture analyses based on these samples: very interesting.

    As expected, North Africans turn out to be mainly Levant Neolithic with about 20% SSA.

    One thing that some of the commentary may be missing in terms of populations like the Palestinians and the Jordanians is that as time passed I think there was diffusion from Arabia north, intensified perhaps with the Muslim invasions, an Arabia which I think might have remained rather "Natufian" like because they didn't admix to the same extent with the Anatolian Neolithic or Iranian Neolithic groups.

    So, perhaps it's not necessarily the case that they haven't changed at all since the early Neolithic, but that the area went from Natufian to Levant Neolithic and back to a slightly more "Natufian like" configuration.

    Just throwing this out as some speculation.
    Arabs are J1-P58.
    Their origin is the Levant as Arab is a west-Semitic language.
    They probably arrived in the Levant during Levantine EBA, as Levant BA is 44 % Iran Chl.
    They moved into Arabia not earlier than ca 5 ka, way after Natufian era.

    The Nabateans that moved into the area after the deportation of the Israelites by the Assyrians was probably an Arab backmigration. That was 6th cent. BC.

  11. #261
    Advisor Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteran25000 Experience Points
    Awards:
    Most Popular
    bicicleur's Avatar
    Join Date
    27-01-13
    Location
    Zwevegem, Belgium
    Posts
    5,232
    Points
    41,171
    Level
    62
    Points: 41,171, Level: 62
    Level completed: 64%, Points required for next Level: 479
    Overall activity: 7.0%


    Country: Belgium - Flanders



    Quote Originally Posted by Angela View Post

    Just a point about Kurd's work on creating admixture analyses based on these samples: very interesting.

    As expected, North Africans turn out to be mainly Levant Neolithic with about 20% SSA.
    Angela, this might be very interesting.
    So N-Africa is 80 % Levant Neo and just 20 % SSA.
    Are Berbers also 80 % Levant Neo?

    Till now we only know for sure E1b1b1b2-Z830 is Natufian.
    If Berbers are Levant Neo we can be sure E1b1b1b-Z827 is Natufian.
    In that case Berbers are a backmigration into Africa as cattle or ovicaprid herders.




    The same applies for Somalians and E-V32 which is a subclade of E-V68.

    E1b1b1a1b_V32_Distribution.jpg
    If Somalians are 80 % Levant Neo, we can be pretty sure E-V68 was Natufian too, and hence the common ancestor of all, E1b1b1-M243 (alias E1b1b1-M35) too. In that case, also E-V6 and E-V92 are backmigrations to Ethiopia.
    Are Somalia and Ethiopia also 80 % Levant Neo?

  12. #262
    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 bicicleur View Post
    indeed, positive for L206-T1
    negative for L162-T1a1, L131-T1a2 and Y11151-Y8614 as per Yfull Tree https://www.yfull.com/tree/T/
    no calls for intermediate positions
    I am confused how it works for myself

    I am negative for L206 ..................but positive to its equal..... L490

    both L206 and L490 .........then can form M70

    I find this strange

  13. #263
    Elite member Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    09-12-15
    Posts
    406
    Points
    5,479
    Level
    21
    Points: 5,479, Level: 21
    Level completed: 86%, Points required for next Level: 71
    Overall activity: 17.0%


    Country: Canada



    Quote Originally Posted by arvistro View Post
    The main guy behind Indo-Uralic is not Kloekhorst, it is Kortlandt, who is quite a big name in mainstream linguistics.

    For Indo-Uralic concept:
    http://www.kortlandt.nl/publications/art269e.pdf - An outline of Proto-Indo-European
    http://www.kortlandt.nl/publications/art203e.pdf - The Indo-Uralic verb
    http://www.kortlandt.nl/publications/art216e.pdf - Indo-Uralic and Altaic (more like bonus article)

    As to Uralic age, I actually agree to Hakkinen, but one daughter's TMRCA can be way younger than other daughter's TMRCA, look at Baltic and Slavic and Balto-Slavic.
    Do you also consider American Indian language regarding PIE?
    Some member said in http://dienekes.blogspot.ca/2015/03/...sintashta.html.
    The Native American component in Western Eurasians most likely is due in part to a more recent back migration from the Americas, and this population brought with them languages that formed the basis of Indo-European.
    Kang et al. have published data showing distinctively Native American YHG Q-M3 from individuals from the cemetery at Barköl in the Xinjiang region of China. (See Y chromosomes of ancient Hunnu people and its implication on the phylogeny of East Asian linguistic families. LL. Kang, TB. Jin, F. Wu1, X. Ao, SQ. Wen, CC. Wang, YZ. Huang, XL. Li, H. Li,) The M3 variant of Y DNA type Q is widely thought to have originated in North America and is almost certainly is a marker for a back migration.
    Recently, I have been comparing Tocharian to the Iroquoian languages of North America. As I pointed out in an earlier post, the Proto-Tocharian word for 'wagon' closely resembles the modern Cherokee counterpart (with redupilication) and is based on the cognate verb root *PIE *-kwel- / Cherokee -gwal-meaning 'to turn, rotate'.
    The form for ‘old’ in most Indo-European languages is based on *PIE *sen- ‘old’ which bears an obvious resemblance to equivalent forms in Dene-Yeniseian languages: ex. Ket sīn, Tlingit shaan (of people) and Navajo sání. However, the form for ‘old’ in Tocharian B closely resembles its equivalent in Iroquoian languages both phonetically and morphologically:
    Toch B ktsaitstse ‘old’ ( = -ktsai- + -tstse ).
    Compare with: Iroquoian Mingo kekëhtsi (-KËHTSI- Verb Root.) katkëhtsistha' ‘to become old’ (-at- (Middle prefix, -këhtsi- /someone is old/, -st- Base suffix. -atkëhtsist- ) and Iroquoian Oneida: -kstʌ- ‘old, aged’; -kstʌhaˀ- ‘to become old’, both of which are based on *Proto Northern Iroquoian *{ -kẽhtsi- } 'be old’ (Julian).
    The Tocharian word for 'dirty', kraketstse ( = -krake- + -tstse ), has the same base suffix as ktsaitstse and, more to the point, this base suffix closely resembles the Iroquoian Mingo counterpart -st-.
    While Kang relates the genetic findings from the Barköl site to the hypothesis that the Xiongnu (Huns?) spoke Yeniseian, it is just as likely that they may have spoken a language related to Tocharian, which was attested in the Tarim basin in the same region of western China.

    Regarding :
    Even Proto Uralic languages seem much younger than earlier opinions. Hakinnen (2012) give that Proto-Uralic emerged about 2,800 BC.
    "The oldest ones have been discovered from the remains of Liao civilization - xinglongwa culture (BC 6200 - 5400 BC) -.[1] It appears in 4200 BC in Finland and 4000 BC in the Korean Peninsula, so theUrheimat is assumed to be Liao region and spread afterward to North Europe through Siberia and to Korean peniusla. This is possibly related to Uralic migration and spread ofhaprogroup N (Y-DNA).[2]" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comb_Ceramic

  14. #264
    Advisor Achievements:
    VeteranThree Friends50000 Experience PointsRecommendation Second Class
    Awards:
    Posting Award
    Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    14,741
    Points
    242,560
    Level
    100
    Points: 242,560, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 99.6%


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: USA - New York



    [QUOTE=bicicleur;482495]
    Quote Originally Posted by Angela View Post

    Arabs are J1-P58.
    Their origin is the Levant as Arab is a west-Semitic language.
    They probably arrived in the Levant during Levantine EBA, as Levant BA is 44 % Iran Chl.
    They moved into Arabia not earlier than ca 5 ka, way after Natufian era.

    The Nabateans that moved into the area after the deportation of the Israelites by the Assyrians was probably an Arab backmigration. That was 6th cent. BC.
    I agree with all that. I just think that yDna is sometimes a poor predictor of total genomic "identity", and particularly so in Arabia.

    Angela, this might be very interesting.
    So N-Africa is 80 % Levant Neo and just 20 % SSA.
    Are Berbers also 80 % Levant Neo?

    Till now we only know for sure E1b1b1b2-Z830 is Natufian.
    If Berbers are Levant Neo we can be sure E1b1b1b-Z827 is Natufian.
    In that case Berbers are a backmigration into Africa as cattle or ovicaprid herders.
    It was the Sahawaris who got that score. However, I'm exercising some caution since this is a preliminary run, and he says Iran Neolithic will increase somewhat in subsequent runs, as I would expect it to. We've known for a long time from other calculators, however, that North Africans don't have very much "Caucasus", so I don't expect the general parameters to be very much different.

    My speculation has always been that this would be the case for North Africans, although I used to frame it as a two pronged movement of the Neolithic from the Near East, both moving east to west, but one along the North Mediterranean and one along the South Mediterranean. That isn't to say that their own hunter-gatherers didn't contribute something to their genomes. We've seen from other calculators that there's some WHG in them, for example, particularly as you head westward.

    The gene flow, no matter the era, has always been from the Near East and from the rest of Africa, with perhaps a bit from north of Gibraltar.

    This makes sense of how 23andme has seen the split in the Near East, with Palestinians and Jordanians clustering more with Egyptians than with Anatolians. Some of that may have to do with the slave trade, with movements north into Gaza of Egyptians etc., but a lot of it has to do with old divisions within the Near East itself.


    Oh, Somalis are slightly different. Provisionally, this is what they're getting:

    Natufian: 52%
    SSA: 45-46%

    Indians are getting a ton of Iran Neolithic. Iran Neolithic itself gets a bit of ASI in his analysis, which doesn't surprise me at all.

    Phenotypes do really tell you a bit about admixture if you pay close attention. As Kurd mentioned, it's sometimes difficult to tell the difference between a northwest Indian and an Iranian. It even happens with Armenians.

    The same applies to North Africa. There are a few tribes which have very little SSA, so you can occasionally find North Africans who to my eyes just look like Southern Europeans, and some look like Near Easterners.

    If someone told me Emmanuelle Chriqui was Spanish, I wouldn't doubt it for a second.


  15. #265
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    30-03-11
    Posts
    246
    Points
    9,303
    Level
    28
    Points: 9,303, Level: 28
    Level completed: 93%, Points required for next Level: 47
    Overall activity: 2.0%


    Country: Spain - Asturias



    Quote Originally Posted by Sile View Post
    I am confused how it works for myself

    I am negative for L206 ..................but positive to its equal..... L490

    both L206 and L490 .........then can form M70

    I find this strange
    Finally I was able to confirm all I1707 positives using ICV software. The problem was that using Felix's tool I could not find any positive upstream IJK.

  16. #266
    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



    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by johen View Post
    How come Levant Neolithic got caucasoid light skin two genes, having 66% components of 100% black skin Natufians? Moreover, He was getting overload of vitamin D from Sun everyday. However, this fact applied to the situation of dark WHG and EEF w/ the 2 skin gene in Europe around 8,000ybp to 5,000ybp.
    You are confusing dark skin with black. Natufians had dark skin in comparison to most modern West Eurasians. They were basically brown skinned, brown eyed and dark haired people like early Mal'ta was.
    Last edited by Alan; 25-06-16 at 14:06.

  17. #267
    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



    People here and on many other places are confusing Natufians with Arabians and think the Natufians are best preserved by moden South_Levantines and Arabians. However the reason why Natufians plot next to Levant and Arabia is just coincidence, without a doubt Arabians and modern Levantines are not pure Levant_Neo, but rather a complex mix of Iran_Neo, Levant_Neo and some SSA (~5-10%). This however coincidantly plots them just close to Natufians and Levant Neo. Remember the Near Eastern Roman soldier from Britain? Which ploted inbetween South_Levant and Arabians? But on admixture calculators differed by having less CHG admixture, slightly less Red Sea and less SSA (I think there wasn't any) and being more Eastmed according to calculators.

    So Natufians, Levant_Neo =/= modern Arabians or Levantines.
    Last edited by Alan; 25-06-16 at 03:40.

  18. #268
    Elite member Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteran25000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    25-10-11
    Location
    Brittany
    Age
    70
    Posts
    4,304
    Points
    34,349
    Level
    57
    Points: 34,349, Level: 57
    Level completed: 9%, Points required for next Level: 1,101
    Overall activity: 40.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b - L21/S145*
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H3c

    Ethnic group
    more celtic
    Country: France



    Quote Originally Posted by johen View Post
    How come Levant Neolithic got caucasoid light skin two genes, having 66% components of 100% black skin Natufians? Moreover, He was getting overload of vitamin D from Sun everyday. However, this fact applied to the situation of dark WHG and EEF w/ the 2 skin gene in Europe around 8,000ybp to 5,000ybp.

    Another interesting thing is Levant bronze, the descendant of this levant neolithic, lost Levant Neolithic SLC45A2.
    Don't focuse too much about the distribution of some rare genes; an autosomals analysis of thousands and thousands of genes doesn't need a great number of individuals but some rare picked genes or haplos are irrelevant statistically and need far greater samples than the ones we have to date from anDNA.

  19. #269
    Elite member Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteran25000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    25-10-11
    Location
    Brittany
    Age
    70
    Posts
    4,304
    Points
    34,349
    Level
    57
    Points: 34,349, Level: 57
    Level completed: 9%, Points required for next Level: 1,101
    Overall activity: 40.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b - L21/S145*
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H3c

    Ethnic group
    more celtic
    Country: France



    [QUOTE=bicicleur;482495]
    Quote Originally Posted by Angela View Post

    Arabs are J1-P58.
    Their origin is the Levant as Arab is a west-Semitic language.
    They probably arrived in the Levant during Levantine EBA, as Levant BA is 44 % Iran Chl.
    They moved into Arabia not earlier than ca 5 ka, way after Natufian era.

    The Nabateans that moved into the area after the deportation of the Israelites by the Assyrians was probably an Arab backmigration. That was 6th cent. BC.
    There has been an error. The quote you did in your "#259 is not mine but an Angela (kind) answer to me about EHG and Chalco-Bronze Armenians. What doesn't disprove your proper commentaries. It could be the nasal shape (common, not general)of most Arabs or arabized people of Near-Eastern and Arabia (and even some Ethiopians) is an inheritage from Iranic-S-E Caucasus, a population rich for Y-J of any sort. (guess), when the genuine first levantine-mediterranean form was a rather stright nose without this "agressivty" in shape. This last guess about nose is at the mergin of this thread, it's true.

  20. #270
    Elite member Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteran25000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    25-10-11
    Location
    Brittany
    Age
    70
    Posts
    4,304
    Points
    34,349
    Level
    57
    Points: 34,349, Level: 57
    Level completed: 9%, Points required for next Level: 1,101
    Overall activity: 40.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b - L21/S145*
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H3c

    Ethnic group
    more celtic
    Country: France



    [QUOTE=Angela;482485]
    Quote Originally Posted by MOESAN View Post

    The problem is that the Armenian sample can't be modeled with an influx of early steppe.

    Could you go more into details, please. (I have not read all the paper, for my greater shame, and even if so, I would nee to read it more than a time, so poor is arrived my immediate memory) so if the paper says something precise about it...
    Thanks beforehand and buona notte.

  21. #271
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran10000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    14-12-10
    Posts
    1,603
    Points
    20,999
    Level
    44
    Points: 20,999, Level: 44
    Level completed: 28%, Points required for next Level: 651
    Overall activity: 2.0%


    Country: Serbia



    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by arvistro View Post
    The main guy behind Indo-Uralic is not Kloekhorst, it is Kortlandt, who is quite a big name in mainstream linguistics.

    For Indo-Uralic concept:
    http://www.kortlandt.nl/publications/art269e.pdf - An outline of Proto-Indo-European
    http://www.kortlandt.nl/publications/art203e.pdf - The Indo-Uralic verb
    http://www.kortlandt.nl/publications/art216e.pdf - Indo-Uralic and Altaic (more like bonus article)

    As to Uralic age, I actually agree to Hakkinen, but one daughter's TMRCA can be way younger than other daughter's TMRCA, look at Baltic and Slavic and Balto-Slavic.
    “Speculative” or “controversial” doesn’t mean “impossible”.

    What is problem?

    Data, records, evidence.

    According to Sammallahati (1988) there are only 150 reconstructable lexical items for Proto-Uralic. For Proto Fino-Ugric situation is somewhat better.

    Nobody can prove Indo-Uralic hypothesis and mainstream scientists cannot accept it.

    In “Grammar of Modern Indo-European”:

    (quote)
    Indo-Uralic or Uralo-Indo-European is therefore a hypothetical language family consisting of Indo-European and Uralic (i.e. Finno-Ugric and Samoyedic). Most linguists still consider this theory speculative and its evidence insufficient to conclusively prove genetic affiliation.
    (end of quote)


    Of course it is not unreasonably that Indo European and Uralic can be related but evidence missing and therefore this matter is speculative.

    As for wider story, controversial Nostratic hypothesis, proposed by Pedersen (1903), which developed several variants (one of them by Russian scientist Starostin includes: Afro-Asiatic, Kartvelian, Indo-European, Uralic, Dravidian, Altaic, Eskimo-Aleut) , maybe some of variants make sense. Who will prove it?


    Today computerized statistical and mathematical methods are increasingly used and perhaps use of appropriate algorithms will say, with high reliability, what is probability that proto Indo-Uralic existed.

    But statistical and mathematical methods are not omnipotent. From interpretations of team of scientists, assumptions, literature, data and established model, inputs and used algorithm, results will depend on.

    You can see, Gray and Atkinson (2003) and wider scientific team including these authors (2012) using computerized mathematical-statistical methods got results in support of Anatolian hypothesis, and Chang et al (2015) found support for Steppe hypothesis.

    Try of multilateral comparison and significance testing of Indo-Uralic issue by Kessler, Lehtonen (2006) didn’t get result. Authors conclude:

    (quote)
    Now we will be the first to admit that the failure to find positive results in any single test set is by no means definitive, and it is imaginable that our results would have been more positive if any number of parameters had been changed. But until new evidence emerges, it is difficult to avoid the conclusions that the Indo-Uralic hypothesis is not well supported by the sort of data afforded by multilateral lexical comparison.
    (end of quote)

  22. #272
    Elite member Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points
    holderlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    01-12-14
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    761
    Points
    7,381
    Level
    25
    Points: 7,381, Level: 25
    Level completed: 67%, Points required for next Level: 169
    Overall activity: 0%


    Country: USA - Washington



    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by bicicleur View Post
    Mota Cave HG E1b1a didn't have Neanderthal
    I glossed over this, sort of interesting. So you're thinking E1b was African rather than Basal Eurasian. When I first read that I thought you were driving at Natufian being Basal Eurasion.

    I think it's relevant to note that R1b-V88 SSAs don't have any Neanderthal left either.
    Last edited by holderlin; 25-06-16 at 03:42. Reason: I didn't read his whole post

  23. #273
    Advisor Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteran25000 Experience Points
    Awards:
    Most Popular
    bicicleur's Avatar
    Join Date
    27-01-13
    Location
    Zwevegem, Belgium
    Posts
    5,232
    Points
    41,171
    Level
    62
    Points: 41,171, Level: 62
    Level completed: 64%, Points required for next Level: 479
    Overall activity: 7.0%


    Country: Belgium - Flanders



    [QUOTE=Angela;482499]
    Quote Originally Posted by bicicleur View Post



    It was the Sahawaris who got that score. However, I'm exercising some caution since this is a preliminary run, and he says Iran Neolithic will increase somewhat in subsequent runs, as I would expect it to. We've known for a long time from other calculators, however, that North Africans don't have very much "Caucasus", so I don't expect the general parameters to be very much different.
    Can you provide me a link Angela?

  24. #274
    Advisor Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteran25000 Experience Points
    Awards:
    Most Popular
    bicicleur's Avatar
    Join Date
    27-01-13
    Location
    Zwevegem, Belgium
    Posts
    5,232
    Points
    41,171
    Level
    62
    Points: 41,171, Level: 62
    Level completed: 64%, Points required for next Level: 479
    Overall activity: 7.0%


    Country: Belgium - Flanders



    Quote Originally Posted by holderlin View Post
    I glossed over this, sort of interesting. So you're thinking E1b was African rather than Basal Eurasian. When I first read that I thought you were driving at Natufian being Basal Eurasion.

    I think it's relevant to note that R1b-V88 SSAs don't have any Neanderthal left either.
    I see Natufian as an admixture of E1b1b1 and Basal Eurasian.
    For Basal Eurasian I guess G and/or H.
    However if G is Basal Eurasian NW Anatolian, LBK and Cardial Ware should have had more of it.

    I don't think of E as the source of Basal Eurasian, because Hotu Cave mesolithic had even more of it.
    Both E and Basal Eurasian were very low on Neanderthal admixture.


    I think it's relevant to note that R1b-V88 SSAs don't have any Neanderthal left either.
    Where did you get this info?

  25. #275
    Advisor Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteran25000 Experience Points
    Awards:
    Most Popular
    bicicleur's Avatar
    Join Date
    27-01-13
    Location
    Zwevegem, Belgium
    Posts
    5,232
    Points
    41,171
    Level
    62
    Points: 41,171, Level: 62
    Level completed: 64%, Points required for next Level: 479
    Overall activity: 7.0%


    Country: Belgium - Flanders



    Quote Originally Posted by Sile View Post
    I am confused how it works for myself

    I am negative for L206 ..................but positive to its equal..... L490

    both L206 and L490 .........then can form M70

    I find this strange
    Where is L490 on the tree?
    I don't find it, neither in Yfull, nor in Isogg.

Page 11 of 17 FirstFirst ... 910111213 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

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