Eupedia Forums
Site NavigationEupedia Top > Eupedia Forum & Japan Forum
Page 7 of 17 FirstFirst ... 56789 ... LastLast
Results 151 to 175 of 412

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

  1. #151
    Advisor Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteranTagger First Class50000 Experience PointsRecommendation First Class
    Awards:
    Discussion Ender
    LeBrok's Avatar
    Join Date
    18-11-09
    Location
    Calgary
    Posts
    10,331
    Points
    113,888
    Level
    100
    Points: 113,888, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b Z2109
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H1c

    Ethnic group
    Citizen of the world
    Country: Canada-Alberta



    Quote Originally Posted by Tomenable View Post
    Even in the Middle East alone, there could be few independent starts:

    "Farming invented twice in Middle East, genomes study reveals":

    http://www.nature.com/news/farming-i...eveals-1.20119
    Yes, It happened more times that we realised just recently. I even found, watching YouTube :) Amazon Jungle tribe in walf way to agriculture. Women were farming some starchy root but men were still hunting. Their base diet was already mostly starches with only addition of game meat.
    Take notice that in all these known cases of agriculture, the invention of farming was local, "self grown" for centuries and millennia, and not imported knowledge. Pan intended. :)
    Be wary of people who tend to glorify the past, underestimate the present, and demonize the future.

  2. #152
    Elite member Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points
    holderlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    01-12-14
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    770
    Points
    8,078
    Level
    26
    Points: 8,078, Level: 26
    Level completed: 88%, Points required for next Level: 72
    Overall activity: 0%


    Country: USA - Washington



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Tomenable View Post
    Thanks for this info! Are you sure that the Non-R1a sample from Xiaohe was indeed T1a1+?:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_T-M184

  3. #153
    Elite member Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points
    holderlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    01-12-14
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    770
    Points
    8,078
    Level
    26
    Points: 8,078, Level: 26
    Level completed: 88%, Points required for next Level: 72
    Overall activity: 0%


    Country: USA - Washington



    Quote Originally Posted by Angela View Post
    I don't recall mixing up dates or saying that the original Basal Eurasians were always farmers. No group was "always farmers". All groups were originally hunter gatherers. What I was speculating is that the group or groups which developed agriculture had very high Basal Eurasian percentages.
    I wasn't talking about you in particular. There were a few different proposals making references to things that were inconsistent with the dating or didn't make sense in this way.

    We just need more is all. Just one more paper. Yeah. That's all, just a couple older samples from Iran and the Levant.......and one mesolithic from India......just one . That would do it.......maybe.......for while. BUT WE NEEEEEEED MOAR NOOOOOOOOW

    I'm not nerdy enough and don't have enough time to run stats for months in between papers. I become a cosmic monster who consumes ancient DNA with an unappreciative lust and sloppiness. Much like Galactus consumes planets and NEEDS to keep feeding to maintain his life force.

  4. #154
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    17-03-16
    Posts
    526
    Points
    5,076
    Level
    21
    Points: 5,076, Level: 21
    Level completed: 6%, Points required for next Level: 474
    Overall activity: 30.0%


    Country: Greece



    2 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by holderlin View Post
    No not at all, nor do I care one way or another. Remember that in particular.

    There's older R1b all over the steppe thousands of years before Kura Axes. Not to mention among the oldest WHG in Italy too. These earlier steppe cultures are no doubt precursors to Yamnaya and I don't know how many times I have to repeats this on deaf ears. By archaeological standards there is remarkable continuity from Samara to Yamnaya. No one is making this shit up. Keep in mind Neolithic Armenia was L2, and it's not until bronze age that this R1b shows up, along with a pull towards the steppe. This is consistent with the apparent steppe/Iranian diffusion beginning in the chalcolithic.



    Yes, even still.



    I don't know what you're saying here, but no I don't think Yamnaya R1b came from Iranian Chalcolithic for all the same reasons I've already stated. If we see a large set of R1b in Maykop or something like that then I'll change my tune, but I think we'll see J as expected.



    Hittite actually needed to separate from PIE waaaaaaaaay before 2000BC for anything to make sense so the simple Kurgans in Anatolia = Anatolian languages was never adequate. The gradual infiltration of archaic IE much earlier actually makes perfect sense, which is exactly what we're seeing in BA Armenia.
    In Bronze Age J2b and E1b also appear in Armenia. Also this site http://www.ancestraljourneys.org/cop...zeagedna.shtml considers L1a samples as 'Copper Age/Chalcolithic'

    The location of the L1a samples is this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Areni-1_cave_complex

    The location of the Kura-Araxes R1b sample is this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kalavan

    In middle Bronze Age R1b is found here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nerkin_Getashen

    In middle Bronze Age E1b appears in the same place

    In late Bronze Age J2b appears near R1b and E1b https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norabak

  5. #155
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1 year registered1000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    07-06-16
    Posts
    72
    Points
    2,020
    Level
    12
    Points: 2,020, Level: 12
    Level completed: 57%, Points required for next Level: 130
    Overall activity: 0%


    Country: France



    Quote Originally Posted by Tomenable View Post
    Even in the Middle East alone, there could be few independent starts:

    "Farming invented twice in Middle East, genomes study reveals":

    http://www.nature.com/news/farming-i...eveals-1.20119
    Several waves of Migration. I think so too. The first EEF wave to Europe must have been mainly Y-Haplogroups G, 10 000 ybp from Near East, it's pretty clear. But R1b-M269>L23 followed few thousand years after , the L23 mutation is 6500 years old, this is still Neolithic age. The problem is where did they come from?

  6. #156
    Regular Member Achievements:
    5000 Experience PointsVeteran
    berun's Avatar
    Join Date
    24-11-15
    Posts
    1,085
    Points
    9,648
    Level
    29
    Points: 9,648, Level: 29
    Level completed: 50%, Points required for next Level: 302
    Overall activity: 3.0%


    Country: Spain - Catalonia



    Originally Posted by holderlin No not at all, nor do I care one way or another. Remember that in particular.

    There's older R1b all over the steppe thousands of years before Kura Axes. Not to mention among the oldest WHG in Italy too. These earlier steppe cultures are no doubt precursors to Yamnaya and I don't know how many times I have to repeats this on deaf ears. By archaeological standards there is remarkable continuity from Samara to Yamnaya. No one is making this shit up. Keep in mind Neolithic Armenia was L2, and it's not until bronze age that this R1b shows up, along with a pull towards the steppe. This is consistent with the apparent steppe/Iranian diffusion beginning in the chalcolithic.

    I don't know what you're saying here, but no I don't think Yamnaya R1b came from Iranian Chalcolithic for all the same reasons I've already stated. If we see a large set of R1b in Maykop or something like that then I'll change my tune, but I think we'll see J as expected.

    Hittite actually needed to separate from PIE waaaaaaaaay before 2000BC for anything to make sense so the simple Kurgans in Anatolia = Anatolian languages was never adequate. The gradual infiltration of archaic IE much earlier actually makes perfect sense, which is exactly what we're seeing in BA Armenia.
    There was ancestral R1b in the Samara and and Khvalinsk cultures of course, but now we have another ancestral R1b guy in Armenia before any IE migration to Armenia, so we can choose now from were the Yamnayan and Armenian Z2103 popped up, and this one appears 6300 years ago, when Armenia was recently occupied by Neolithic farmers and herders; just a bottleneck effect over some R1b pioneer herders could explain Z2013 in Yamnaya. Also there is the statistical problem that demographics and the migratory sense is pointing just the opposite direction.

    Of course Anatolian languages are the most divergent and they might be older, but you can check Italian and French how they have evolved from Latin and how they are yet near languages, you only need another substrate. It's necessary to don't dimiss archaeology: by 3000 BC Troy I-III was flourishing till a cultural disruption about 2100-1850, and kurgans with chariots appear in east Anatolia by 2300 BC along new ceramics; in fact by 3000 BC the cultural influences came from Uruk, and more precisely in Armenia these influences came from Syria (ware), what is worst, the Kura-Araxes in Armenia arrived in 3350-3000 from the east. As for language the Assyrian docs put no-IE Hattians in Anatolia in the III millenium and their Hattic language was yet written by IE Hittites in the half of the II millenium, so recent was the IE migration by then.

    By the way it was good that somebody realized that the paper was forgetting the R1b guy data, which also doesn't receive any analysis in the paper... usualy I see how some authors try to get from 2+2 a 10 or even -2, but that its quite new for me.

  7. #157
    Elite member Achievements:
    Tagger Second ClassThree FriendsVeteran25000 Experience Points
    Fire Haired14's Avatar
    Join Date
    20-04-14
    Posts
    2,195
    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 Voyager View Post
    Several waves of Migration. I think so too. The first EEF wave to Europe must have been mainly Y-Haplogroups G, 10 000 ybp from Near East, it's pretty clear. But R1b-M269>L23 followed few thousand years after , the L23 mutation is 6500 years old, this is still Neolithic age. The problem is where did they come from?
    R1b-M269 first pops up in Western Europe 4600 years ago. It was absent in EEF. No other Neolithic people came to Western Europe besides EEF, then in the Bronze age Steppe people with R1b came. This is all old news.

  8. #158
    Elite member Achievements:
    VeteranThree FriendsRecommendation Second Class25000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    14-11-10
    Posts
    2,504
    Points
    28,134
    Level
    51
    Points: 28,134, Level: 51
    Level completed: 54%, Points required for next Level: 516
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1a1a1
    MtDNA haplogroup
    HV2a1 +G13708A

    Ethnic group
    Kurdish
    Country: Germany



    Quote Originally Posted by bicicleur View Post
    I'm starting to think the same, Basal Eurasians were G people or it came from India with that H2 which appears in both Levant, Anatolian and European Neo.
    I already said this in the past various times, I do believe also that Basal Eurasian is connected to G, makes sense if you look at the yDNA tree.

    Basal Eurasian is the first branch to split up from the main Eurasian body.

    So is G from HIJK. Basal Eurasian => G was found in Iran_Neo too. And I think these ar ethe guys who brought Basal Eurasian and they must have evolved somewhere on the southern coast of Iran.

    I still have my doubts that E1b1b or even E in general came from Africa, if that was the case we would see stronger signal between Sub Saharan Africans and Natufians than SSA to other Eurasians however SSA shares as much with Natufians as it shares with other Eurasians. This indicates that it can't have come from Africa, while on the opposite hand we do have Eurasian signals already in Mota and it is around ~4%.

  9. #159
    Elite member Achievements:
    VeteranThree FriendsRecommendation Second Class25000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    14-11-10
    Posts
    2,504
    Points
    28,134
    Level
    51
    Points: 28,134, Level: 51
    Level completed: 54%, Points required for next Level: 516
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1a1a1
    MtDNA haplogroup
    HV2a1 +G13708A

    Ethnic group
    Kurdish
    Country: Germany



    Quote Originally Posted by bicicleur View Post
    If I remember well, we can expect some DNA from that area as well.
    But if there is such leak, I'd take it with a big pinch of salt.
    There may have been some R1a-Z93 in India prior to Indo-Aryans, but I don't expect any of that at the source of the Indus civilization.
    If so, it will be the biggest surprise of the year, and there have allready been a few now.

    I think R1a-Z93 is a bit to young for the roots of the Indus civilization.
    If there is one scenario which has been confirmed by DNA till now, it is about the origin of IE.
    It is not compatible with R1a-Z93 at the roots of the Indus civilization.
    This can only mean that Z93 was already there prior to Indo Europeans, or Harrapans have more connection to Indo Europeans as we previously thought.

  10. #160
    Elite member Achievements:
    VeteranThree FriendsRecommendation Second Class25000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    14-11-10
    Posts
    2,504
    Points
    28,134
    Level
    51
    Points: 28,134, Level: 51
    Level completed: 54%, Points required for next Level: 516
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1a1a1
    MtDNA haplogroup
    HV2a1 +G13708A

    Ethnic group
    Kurdish
    Country: Germany



    Quote Originally Posted by epoch View Post
    Take a look at this: Are these loan words?
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indo-U...sible_cognates

    Furthermore, the theory for instance linguists such as Kortlandt are pushing is that PIE is derived from a common Indo-Uralic stem, on a Caucasian substrate. Almost all serious scenario's have two major influences: Uralic and Caucasian. Hence the positioning of the original Urheimat roughly in between these.
    the Indo_Uralic theory is a controversial theory, also the theory actually supports the idea that Uralic and Indo European came from South_Central Asia, and this is what I actually said, it could very well be that EHG and even the whole Indo European package came from South_Central Asia.







    E
    HG is partly WHG, so maybe that was a vector. Frankly, I don't have a clue. But I wouldn't connect ANE that strictly to a language group if I were you. Proto-Uralic is not connected to all American Indian languages for that matter.
    Let's let this possibility open but I don't think WHG will be the source.


    "Watar", ne- for negation, "me" for I, me, etc. See the list above.
    How do we know that these are Uralic loanwords?? What about see being Indo European loanwords in Uralic? Nevermind.



    Haplogroups are not languages, even as they sometimes, or even often, have a relationship. Furthermore, if you want to propose a different origin, make the case for it.
    Have you actually been following this thread from the start I did make my proposals in many posts. 1. PIE is from the Iranian Plateau, reached the Steppes via the Caucasus (influx from Iranian Plateau to Caucasus and Steppes supported by archeology) or via East of the Caspian. In this scenario Indo European might have evolved on the Iranian Plateau and the Steppes could be a secondary homeland to the major European branches of Indo European, while Hittite didn't even cross the Steppes but directly moved into Anatolia.
    Or Indo European evolved after some Iran_Calcolthic dudes reached the Steppes and merged with the EHG of Samara.

    2. Indo European could have a South_Central Asian origin in itself and reached the Steppes via East of the Caspian. If that is not the case at least the EHG individuals probably came from South_Central Asia and reached Samara via the East Caspian route.

    Note South_Central Asia in this case for me is the region between Afghanistan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, Kazakhstan and Tajikistan.

  11. #161
    Elite member Achievements:
    VeteranThree FriendsRecommendation Second Class25000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    14-11-10
    Posts
    2,504
    Points
    28,134
    Level
    51
    Points: 28,134, Level: 51
    Level completed: 54%, Points required for next Level: 516
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1a1a1
    MtDNA haplogroup
    HV2a1 +G13708A

    Ethnic group
    Kurdish
    Country: Germany



    Quote Originally Posted by Fire Haired14 View Post
    That model had high standard errors and is therefore not a realistic model for Anatolia_N. Anatolia_N doesn't fit well as a mixture of other ancient genomes. We need more ancient genomes to learn who the ancestors of Anatolia_N were. It probably has some Iran_Neolithic ancestry but not a lot, definitely not 34%. Anatolia_N is also definitely not 27% WHG. Anatolia_N appears to be a brother to Levant_N.



    Iran Chl is a mixture of CHG(or Iran Neolithic. Both were similar) and Levant_Neolithic. Armenia_EBA is a mixture of CHG, Levant_Neolithic(or Anatolila_Neolithic. Both were similar), and EHG.
    It is not even clear if EHG or WHG. Armenian EBA does not shows any more significant EHG(or WHG) admixture than Iranian or Anatolian Calcolthic. In fact Armenian Calcolthic had twice as much of it already. In fact the "EHG" in Armenian EBA looks identical to that of CHG. With other words Armenian EBA looks like CHG with Anatolian_Neo admixture. Or alterntively and better fitting Armenia EBA can be modeled as Armenia_Chl + Iran_Chl

    With other words the "EHG/WHG" admixture was present there already during the mesolithic and in much higher frequency even already during the calcolthic.


  12. #162
    Elite member Achievements:
    VeteranThree FriendsRecommendation Second Class25000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    14-11-10
    Posts
    2,504
    Points
    28,134
    Level
    51
    Points: 28,134, Level: 51
    Level completed: 54%, Points required for next Level: 516
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1a1a1
    MtDNA haplogroup
    HV2a1 +G13708A

    Ethnic group
    Kurdish
    Country: Germany



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by holderlin View Post

    Everything actually makes very good sense though. We see EHG start to pop up in Iran and the Zagros around the chalcolithic, which is when we started to see the Teal increase in Steppe samples. Not surprised to see R1b in bronze age Armenia as it comes with some EHG and is the perfect spot and time for the arrival of the Anatolian languages, keeping in mind that neolithic Armenia was all L2(?) Kura axes however is highly unlikely to be IE. Probably Hurrian or Caucasian or ancestral to those languages. Also as we move to the late Bronze age in Armenia we see a shift towards the steppe, which is consistent with ever increasing steppe influence as we move through the bronze age.


    No, Iran_CHL does not have any EHG. CHG which is mesolithic does however have, Armenian EBA level, "EHG like" admixture. Armenian EBA looks pretty much like Armenian CHL + Iran CHL. Armenian Calcolthic has significantly higher frequency of "EHG " like ancestry (note they do not differentiate EHG-WHG in the graph it seems) than Armenian EBA. So whatever happened in the Armenian EBA it actually decreased the "EHG" admixture.



    We'll have to see what the P* in neolithic Iran is. If it's R1b that could be a surprise to some, but it shouldn't be. R2 at this point would make more sense.
    Suprise

    And why do you think R2 at this point makes more sense? I doubt anyone would have thought of R2 if not a dubious Blogger brought this theory up.
    Last edited by Alan; 22-06-16 at 20:12.

  13. #163
    Elite member Achievements:
    VeteranThree FriendsRecommendation Second Class25000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    14-11-10
    Posts
    2,504
    Points
    28,134
    Level
    51
    Points: 28,134, Level: 51
    Level completed: 54%, Points required for next Level: 516
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1a1a1
    MtDNA haplogroup
    HV2a1 +G13708A

    Ethnic group
    Kurdish
    Country: Germany



    Quote Originally Posted by holderlin View Post
    And actually, the admixture in ANI might make linguistic sense. Iranian actually appears to be a bastardized version of Indic that was passed down through oral tradition more so than written. So Indic being associated perhaps with earlier (less admixed?) steppe makes sense.
    Alone through this statement I get the impression that you don't have much clue about the whole subject. If you actually knew a little bit of genetics, linguistics and archeology such you wouldn't have written this comment. This statement doesn't make linguistically, let alone genetically sense.

    The extend of phantasy in some of your theories rival the phantasy found in Gogas.
    Last edited by Alan; 22-06-16 at 20:12.

  14. #164
    Elite member Achievements:
    VeteranThree FriendsRecommendation Second Class25000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    14-11-10
    Posts
    2,504
    Points
    28,134
    Level
    51
    Points: 28,134, Level: 51
    Level completed: 54%, Points required for next Level: 516
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1a1a1
    MtDNA haplogroup
    HV2a1 +G13708A

    Ethnic group
    Kurdish
    Country: Germany



    Quote Originally Posted by berun View Post
    No surprise to see in Armenia the same clade that appear among yamnayans two hundred years after? In a culture (Kura-Araxes) related to Maykop? And knowing that what we know by sure now is that there was a migration northwards? By simple chance the presence of R1b in Yamnaya is debt to such migration instead of EHG going south: because the demographical difference is high enough and the expansive nature of the neolithic are giving more numbers.

    Kurgans appear in Anatolia around 2000 BC, the time for Anatolian languages... so to late for that.

    Another (big) problem doing this R1b clade being a paleolithic migrant is that its TMRCA is after Armenia was already populated by Neolithics...
    People who base their theories on things they read on blogger websites are not usualy known for common sense.

    It's always the same game, the blogger doesn't have the courage to defend his ideas on foreign ground and sends his deputies to spred his word.

    And no there isn't any "Basal" R1b nor R1a around Samara, they don't seem to know what basal means. No m343 or l62 found. There are many R1 lineages but all slightly downstream.
    Last edited by Alan; 22-06-16 at 21:10.

  15. #165
    Advisor Achievements:
    VeteranThree Friends50000 Experience PointsRecommendation Second Class
    Awards:
    Posting Award
    Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    16,227
    Points
    335,211
    Level
    100
    Points: 335,211, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 99.6%


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: USA - New York



    1 members found this post helpful.
    From Iosif Lazardis:

    "It's great to see the data already being analyzed and I hope it will be useful in your analyses!

    I just wanted to leave a brief comment that the model of Steppe_EMBA as a mixture of EHG+CHG is rejected (Table S7.11), while that of EHG+Iran_ChL is not. Note that in Table S7.11 we are modeling Steppe_EMBA and the references with respect to 13 outgroup populations (the set O9ALNW), not all of which are included in the TreeMix graph.

    It is possible for some models to succeed with a particular set of outgroups (both EHG+CHG and EHG+Iran_ChL are feasible with only the O9 set of outgroups; Table S7.10), but for some of them to be rejected when additional outgroups are introduced (Table S7.11). As we mention further down, that doesn't mean there is no CHG-related ancestry in Steppe_EMBA as we can model it as a 3-way mixture involving CHG as one of the sources. What it does mean, however, is that CHG+EHG cannot be the only sources, as this model is rejected (Table S7.11). A further test of our overall model is that when we withhold Iran_ChL as a source, and infer mixture proportions by intersecting the EHG->Steppe_EMBA and Levant_N+Levant_BA clines (p. 134), we get fairly reasonable agreement (mixture proportions).

    We try to be cautious in our interpretation of the admixture models, because of three factors: (i) we don't know the geographical extent of populations like "CHG" or "Iran_ChL" so admixture from Iran_ChL does not imply admixture from geographical Iran or CHG from the geographical Caucasus, (ii) we do not have samples from many places and it's very likely that slightly different mixtures than the sampled populations existed elsewhere, (iii) it is possible that the actual history of admixture may be more complex than the simplest parsimonious models identified by the analysis.

    Overall, our admixture analysis rejects several possible models (such as EHG+CHG) and thus puts constraints on what may have happened, and also proposes some models that are more resilient to rejection (such as EHG+Iran_ChL+CHG). But, by no means should these be regarded as the final word or unique solutions, but rather as one possible way that the data can be modeled."

    Nice of him to clarify for people who haven't read the Supplement carefully.

    From RK:
    "
    Just a quick point: even if southern admixture did arrive via the Caucasus, there is little reason to assume that it was pure CHG, free from Iran_N ancestry by the time it entered on the steppe. In the timeframe between the Khvalynsk and the Yamnaya where southern ancestry increased a great deal, the Caucasus was already agricultural, and for quite some time. Even in the pre-Khvalynsk period this was already the case. Tying in cultural packages with genetics, the demographic impact of Iran_N ancestry in India and Iran would almost definitely be repeated in the Caucasus. If southern ancestry in Yamnaya was limited to Kotias hunter-gatherers exclusively, then almost pure CHG Hunter-Gatherers must have existed hidden somewhere between the agricultural Caucasus and the emerging pastoral Yamnaya for thousands of years, and then on top of that somehow gene flow was limited to the HG groups, which I find very unlikely."

    That seems sensible to me.


    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

  16. #166
    Elite member Achievements:
    VeteranThree FriendsRecommendation Second Class25000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    14-11-10
    Posts
    2,504
    Points
    28,134
    Level
    51
    Points: 28,134, Level: 51
    Level completed: 54%, Points required for next Level: 516
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1a1a1
    MtDNA haplogroup
    HV2a1 +G13708A

    Ethnic group
    Kurdish
    Country: Germany



    Quote Originally Posted by Angela View Post
    From Iosif Lazardis:

    "It's great to see the data already being analyzed and I hope it will be useful in your analyses!

    I just wanted to leave a brief comment that the model of Steppe_EMBA as a mixture of EHG+CHG is rejected (Table S7.11), while that of EHG+Iran_ChL is not. Note that in Table S7.11 we are modeling Steppe_EMBA and the references with respect to 13 outgroup populations (the set O9ALNW), not all of which are included in the TreeMix graph.

    It is possible for some models to succeed with a particular set of outgroups (both EHG+CHG and EHG+Iran_ChL are feasible with only the O9 set of outgroups; Table S7.10), but for some of them to be rejected when additional outgroups are introduced (Table S7.11). As we mention further down, that doesn't mean there is no CHG-related ancestry in Steppe_EMBA as we can model it as a 3-way mixture involving CHG as one of the sources. What it does mean, however, is that CHG+EHG cannot be the only sources, as this model is rejected (Table S7.11). A further test of our overall model is that when we withhold Iran_ChL as a source, and infer mixture proportions by intersecting the EHG->Steppe_EMBA and Levant_N+Levant_BA clines (p. 134), we get fairly reasonable agreement (mixture proportions).

    We try to be cautious in our interpretation of the admixture models, because of three factors: (i) we don't know the geographical extent of populations like "CHG" or "Iran_ChL" so admixture from Iran_ChL does not imply admixture from geographical Iran or CHG from the geographical Caucasus, (ii) we do not have samples from many places and it's very likely that slightly different mixtures than the sampled populations existed elsewhere, (iii) it is possible that the actual history of admixture may be more complex than the simplest parsimonious models identified by the analysis.

    Overall, our admixture analysis rejects several possible models (such as EHG+CHG) and thus puts constraints on what may have happened, and also proposes some models that are more resilient to rejection (such as EHG+Iran_ChL+CHG). But, by no means should these be regarded as the final word or unique solutions, but rather as one possible way that the data can be modeled."

    Nice of him to clarify for people who haven't read the Supplement carefully.

    From RK:
    "
    Just a quick point: even if southern admixture did arrive via the Caucasus, there is little reason to assume that it was pure CHG, free from Iran_N ancestry by the time it entered on the steppe. In the timeframe between the Khvalynsk and the Yamnaya where southern ancestry increased a great deal, the Caucasus was already agricultural, and for quite some time. Even in the pre-Khvalynsk period this was already the case. Tying in cultural packages with genetics, the demographic impact of Iran_N ancestry in India and Iran would almost definitely be repeated in the Caucasus. If southern ancestry in Yamnaya was limited to Kotias hunter-gatherers exclusively, then almost pure CHG Hunter-Gatherers must have existed hidden somewhere between the agricultural Caucasus and the emerging pastoral Yamnaya for thousands of years, and then on top of that somehow gene flow was limited to the HG groups, which I find very unlikely."

    That seems sensible to me.
    Would love to give that a thumps up but can't.

    This all makes allot of sentence. Remember when the CHG samples were modeled using blogger calculators? CHG turned out as roughly ~30% "Gedrosia" and ~50% Caucasus .

    HOWEVER the Yamna samples modeled with the same calculator had ~27% "Gedrosia" but only ~3% Caucasus. Where was all the "Caucasus" gone? Obviously this didn't fit very much and everyone was expecting a more Gedrosia like group to be the source for the Teal admixture.

    Now we have Iran_Neo/Chl samples and those from the wording of the study and where it is found and in whom it peaks (Balochi), indicate that this is the more Gedrosia like source we were searching for. Or at least Iran_Chl makes more sense than CHG.

    Now someone post that one Eurogenes, where some people don't seem to have enough archeological and historic understanding and still believe mesolithic CHG+EHG is the best model for Bronze Age Yamna.

  17. #167
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran10000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    30-03-11
    Posts
    249
    Points
    10,077
    Level
    30
    Points: 10,077, Level: 30
    Level completed: 22%, Points required for next Level: 473
    Overall activity: 0%


    Country: Spain - Asturias



    Quote Originally Posted by Alan View Post
    I already said this in the past various times, I do believe also that Basal Eurasian is connected to G, makes sense if you look at the yDNA tree.

    Basal Eurasian is the first branch to split up from the main Eurasian body.

    So is G from HIJK. Basal Eurasian => G was found in Iran_Neo too. And I think these ar ethe guys who brought Basal Eurasian and they must have evolved somewhere on the southern coast of Iran.

    I still have my doubts that E1b1b or even E in general came from Africa, if that was the case we would see stronger signal between Sub Saharan Africans and Natufians than SSA to other Eurasians however SSA shares as much with Natufians as it shares with other Eurasians. This indicates that it can't have come from Africa, while on the opposite hand we do have Eurasian signals already in Mota and it is around ~4%.
    E1b carriers looks heavily admixed with Eurasians, you only need to see their mtDNA haplogroups. If we would expect strong signals of shared autosomal DNA, we would expect E1b carriers conserving their original mtDNA but this is not the case. They are clearly "hybrids".

  18. #168
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1 year registered1000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    07-06-16
    Posts
    72
    Points
    2,020
    Level
    12
    Points: 2,020, Level: 12
    Level completed: 57%, Points required for next Level: 130
    Overall activity: 0%


    Country: France



    Quote Originally Posted by Fire Haired14 View Post
    R1b-M269 first pops up in Western Europe 4600 years ago. It was absent in EEF. No other Neolithic people came to Western Europe besides EEF, then in the Bronze age Steppe people with R1b came. This is all old news.
    That 's true until the next discoveries. The R1b-L23 must have been somewhere between Europe and Near East, 6500 years ago.
    We try to understand the all story with less than 1% of the words.
    Last edited by Voyager; 23-06-16 at 00:09.

  19. #169
    Advisor Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteran50000 Experience Points
    bicicleur's Avatar
    Join Date
    27-01-13
    Location
    Zwevegem, Belgium
    Posts
    5,449
    Points
    50,781
    Level
    69
    Points: 50,781, Level: 69
    Level completed: 74%, Points required for next Level: 369
    Overall activity: 19.0%


    Country: Belgium - Flanders



    1 members found this post helpful.
    according to Genetiker the Ganj Dareh Iran goat herders were R2

    https://genetiker.wordpress.com/2016...ent-near-east/

  20. #170
    Elite member Achievements:
    Three FriendsRecommendation Second ClassVeteran50000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    07-09-14
    Posts
    4,582
    Points
    66,418
    Level
    79
    Points: 66,418, Level: 79
    Level completed: 98%, Points required for next Level: 32
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b
    MtDNA haplogroup
    W6

    Ethnic group
    Polish
    Country: Poland



    1 members found this post helpful.
    PCA chart (ancient pops):

    https://twitter.com/iosif_lazaridis



    Modern pops highlighted:


  21. #171
    Advisor Achievements:
    VeteranThree Friends50000 Experience PointsRecommendation Second Class
    Awards:
    Posting Award
    Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    16,227
    Points
    335,211
    Level
    100
    Points: 335,211, 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 Alan View Post
    Would love to give that a thumps up but can't.

    This all makes allot of sentence. Remember when the CHG samples were modeled using blogger calculators? CHG turned out as roughly ~30% "Gedrosia" and ~50% Caucasus .

    HOWEVER the Yamna samples modeled with the same calculator had ~27% "Gedrosia" but only ~3% Caucasus. Where was all the "Caucasus" gone? Obviously this didn't fit very much and everyone was expecting a more Gedrosia like group to be the source for the Teal admixture.

    Now we have Iran_Neo/Chl samples and those from the wording of the study and where it is found and in whom it peaks (Balochi), indicate that this is the more Gedrosia like source we were searching for. Or at least Iran_Chl makes more sense than CHG.

    Now someone post that one Eurogenes, where some people don't seem to have enough archeological and historic understanding and still believe mesolithic CHG+EHG is the best model for Bronze Age Yamna.
    I'm not clear about where you disagree with Lazaridis. He is saying CHG + EHG is rejected, while EHG + Iran Chalcolithic is not. He's also implying, I think, that they don't yet have the sample from the specific population which went north. If they did, the fits would obviously be better. During the Chalcolithic there were probably a number of populations in the northern Near East with slightly different mixes of ancestries. The one that did go north may have picked up more Levant or Anatolia EEF, but be relatively close to Iran Chalcolithic.

    At any rate it's pretty clear, in my opinion, that Yamnaya is not a mix of EHG and some population of CHG which had been north of the Caucasus for thousands of years. This was mixture from the actual Near East.

  22. #172
    Elite member Achievements:
    VeteranThree FriendsRecommendation Second Class25000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    14-11-10
    Posts
    2,504
    Points
    28,134
    Level
    51
    Points: 28,134, Level: 51
    Level completed: 54%, Points required for next Level: 516
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1a1a1
    MtDNA haplogroup
    HV2a1 +G13708A

    Ethnic group
    Kurdish
    Country: Germany



    Quote Originally Posted by Fire Haired14 View Post
    R1b-M269 first pops up in Western Europe 4600 years ago. It was absent in EEF. No other Neolithic people came to Western Europe besides EEF, then in the Bronze age Steppe people with R1b came. This is all old news.
    R1b pops up in 5000 BC EEF individual in Iberia. How was it absent in EEF?

  23. #173
    Elite member Achievements:
    VeteranThree FriendsRecommendation Second Class25000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    14-11-10
    Posts
    2,504
    Points
    28,134
    Level
    51
    Points: 28,134, Level: 51
    Level completed: 54%, Points required for next Level: 516
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1a1a1
    MtDNA haplogroup
    HV2a1 +G13708A

    Ethnic group
    Kurdish
    Country: Germany



    Quote Originally Posted by Angela View Post
    I'm not clear about where you disagree with Lazaridis. He is saying CHG + EHG is rejected, while EHG + Iran Chalcolithic is not. He's also implying, I think, that they don't yet have the sample from the specific population which went north. If they did, the fits would obviously be better. During the Chalcolithic there were probably a number of populations in the northern Near East with slightly different mixes of ancestries. The one that did go north may have picked up more Levant or Anatolia EEF, but be relatively close to Iran Chalcolithic.

    At any rate it's pretty clear, in my opinion, that Yamnaya is not a mix of EHG and some population of CHG which had been north of the Caucasus for thousands of years. This was mixture from the actual Near East.
    I never said I disagree with Lazaridis. Did I give that impression? I said I agree with him that CHG can't be the "Teal source" of Yamna.

  24. #174
    Elite member Achievements:
    Three FriendsRecommendation Second ClassVeteran50000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    07-09-14
    Posts
    4,582
    Points
    66,418
    Level
    79
    Points: 66,418, Level: 79
    Level completed: 98%, Points required for next Level: 32
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b
    MtDNA haplogroup
    W6

    Ethnic group
    Polish
    Country: Poland



    R1b pops up in 5000 BC EEF individual in Iberia.
    Yes but V88 rather than M269.

  25. #175
    Elite member Achievements:
    Veteran10000 Experience Points
    arvistro's Avatar
    Join Date
    07-08-14
    Posts
    1,004
    Points
    13,128
    Level
    34
    Points: 13,128, Level: 34
    Level completed: 69%, Points required for next Level: 222
    Overall activity: 7.0%


    Country: Latvia



    1 members found this post helpful.

Page 7 of 17 FirstFirst ... 56789 ... 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
  •