New map of Yamna admixture (Eurogenes Steppe K10)

But the Indo-Aryans invaded India from 1800 BCE, almost exactly at the same time as IE invaded Iberia with El Argar.

Which proofs do you have for this statement about El Argar culture?

@all, for the Basque issue it is naive to go on without knowing the primary sources in each paper: they were got from rural Basques with Basque surnames or they included all actual Basques? (about a 50% with a recent migratory history and with usual Spanish surnames).

https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maqueto

For the case of the "non-Yamnayan EHG" DNA, the best solution would be to take into account only the Calcho_Iran and then double such percent (the other half of EHG origin) to know the real Yamnayan DNA.
 
I have made a map based on the very scarce data from Haak et al. (2015). There was so little data that I had to lump Scandinavians together, and I did the same for Croats, Serbs, Bosnians and Slovenes. Anyway the map cannot be anywhere near accurate without data for all countries and regions.

Yamna-admixture_Haak.png



It doesn't look that different from Eurogenes Steppe K10, except that Haak's estimate are twice higher because they use only 3 populations instead of 10. With no reliable regional data for large countries and so many unsampled countries, it's hard to get a clear picture. Both peak in northern and eastern Europe. The main difference is that Haak reports more Yamna in the Basques and comparatively less in South Italians and Albanians.

Yamna-admixture.png
 
Before making claims like this, look into where the Oleni Ostrov burials are situated a little more than not at all. Looks pretty close to the Baltics to me:

View attachment 8119

It also looks like a good place of origin for some of the excess hunter-gatherer seen in outlying groups like the Sami, Estonians or Finns.

Fire Haired was talking about these two cultures: Kunda, Narva:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kunda_culture

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narva_culture

They were 100% WHG according to soon-to-be-published data.

This explains where "actual WHG" admixture in Balts came from.
 
YES. What I don’t get it is why every time I raise those options I get immediately eviscerated by ten guys (especially at eurogenes!).

Maybe you Angela can enlighten me a little bit. If Karelia was EHG (and already R1a). If there is SHG which is a mix of EHG and WHG, if apparently there is even EHG and SHG in the Balkans 7000bc… why in hell people insistently talk about a bunch of guys that show up near the freaking urals, as a uber event in Europes ancestry?

Also how do we know that CWC = massive Yamnya migration (sort of) if the region where they thrived might have been loaded up with EHG and even guys that were R1a?

http://biorxiv.org/content/early/2015/10/18/029421.full.pdf+html

Our results provide new links between modern and ancient inhabitants of Eurasia. Siberians share 38% of ancestry with descendants of the 45,000-year-old Ust-Ishim people, who were previously believed to have no modern-day descendants. Western Siberians trace 57% of their ancestry to the Ancient North Eurasians, represented by the 24,000-year-old Siberian Malta boy. In addition, Siberians admixtures are present in lineages represented by Eastern European hunter-gatherers from Samara, Karelia, Hungary and Sweden (from 8,000-6,600 years ago), as well as Yamnaya culture people (5,300-4,700 years ago) and modern-day northeastern Europeans. These results provide new evidence of ancient gene flow from Siberia into Europe.

8 ka HG
DNA in Europe is already diluted

if you want pure WHG, look at Bichon
 
so how do we know that CWC = massive Yamnya migration (sort of) if the region where they thrived might have been loaded up with EHG and even guys that were R1a?

Kunda and Narva cultures = no any R1a and no any EHG, 100% WHG and their Y-DNA was haplogroup I.

Today areas formerly occupied by Kunda and Narva cultures are dominated by R1a and N1c haplogroups.
 
I have made a map based on the very scarce data from Haak et al. (2015). There was so little data that I had to lump Scandinavians together, and I did the same for Croats, Serbs, Bosnians and Slovenes. Anyway the map cannot be anywhere near accurate without data for all countries and regions.

Yamna-admixture_Haak.png

Sorry and thanks. I did not see it.
 
There is a very easy explanation to the discrepancy in percentages. Haak et al. are only using 3 populations (EEF, WHG, Yamna), while Eurogenes uses 10 populations. Inevitably the breakdown will be more detailed with 10 populations and some DNA that was classified as Yamna in Haak may end up being Hindu Kush or other admixtures (e.g. Siberian for the Finns and Sami). The Basques, for example, have as much Hindu Kush as Yamna/Steppe in the Steppe K10. Some individuals have 5% of Hindu Kush and 0% of Steppe.

I also don't think that Haak et al. are less biased or more professional than David from Eurogenes. After all, Wolfgang Haak and Johannes Kraus recently proposed that ludicrous theory that Indo-European languages spread both with Anatolian Neolithic farmers and with Bronze Age Steppe invaders, as if they were unable to let go of their fetish Neolithic theory that contradicts all genetic and linguistic evidence, not to mention common sense and logic. I wonder how they haven't got fired from their university yet. Why would they get paid to come up with theories that spit in the face of scientific evidence?
You fail to understand that Hindu Kush auDNA in the Basques IS from the Yamnaya Horizon. HinduKush is correlated to the Gedrosia and those early PIE people who invaded Yamnaya from the south and Indo-Europized it were full of Gedrosia/Hindu Kush.

Maybe 'Anatolian Neolithic farmers Model' is wrong, but the 'Armenian Model' combined with the 'Yamnaya Model' makes a lot more sense and in agreement with archeologic and genetic evidence.
 
Last edited:
For the case of the "non-Yamnayan EHG" DNA, the best solution would be to take into account only the Calcho_Iran and then double such percent (the other half of EHG origin) to know the real Yamnayan DNA.

Well, even that way wouldn't be reliable: what prevents that Calcho_Iran DNA stopped in Samara leaving the best unoccupied (forest-steppe and forest)?
 
If you compare this :

Yamna-admixture.png



to this :

East-European-admixture.gif



and these :

Gedrosian-admixture.gif

Caucasian-admixture.gif


what can we conclude ?
 
It's good that you mention India. Indian Brahmins have at most 15-20% of Steppe DNA. In fact, since they descend from Sintashta rather than Yamna, their Steppe DNA should be higher in EHG than CHG.
I don't know where you got your info from, but Indo-Aryans that invaded India were from BMAC and NOT from the Steppes at all. IMO: BMAC was mostly CHG-GEDROSIA, belonged to R2a, R1a-Z93, J2a, G2a etc. folks..

Indo-Aryan%252BMigration%252BInto%252BNepal.jpg


http://balkhandshambhala.blogspot.nl/2015/07/bmacoxus-civilization1600-bc.html



Or do you think that Indo-Aryans had AIRPLANES and other flying machines and FLEW directly from the Steppes into India, by skipping the SouthCentral Asia / BMAC? There is no LOGOS in your story..
 
Fire Haired was talking about these two cultures: Kunda, Narva:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kunda_culture

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narva_culture

They were 100% WHG according to soon-to-be-published data.

This explains where "actual WHG" admixture in Balts came from.
I would not rush things. WHG were even further to East as well and something tells me most modern WHG in Balts arrived together with Balts from somewhere Dnieper, already R1a-ized.
Like we discuss when whg was picked by euro farmers, on way or on spot or both.
 
Kunda and Narva cultures = no any R1a and no any EHG, 100% WHG and their Y-DNA was haplogroup I.

Today areas formerly occupied by Kunda and Narva cultures are dominated by R1a and N1c haplogroups.

well, pré-WHG I guess, haplo I*

WHG is Villabruna haplo I2 and mtDNA U5b

so, Narva as well ?

when was Kunda replaced by EHG then ?
 
Kunda and Narva cultures = no any R1a and no any EHG, 100% WHG and their Y-DNA was haplogroup I.

Today areas formerly occupied by Kunda and Narva cultures are dominated by R1a and N1c haplogroups.
This is really interesting, Tomenable! Does that mean that N1c arrived to present Lithuanian territory with CWC, not Kunda, as previously believed?
 
This is really interesting, Tomenable! Does that mean that N1c arrived to present Lithuanian territory with CWC, not Kunda, as previously believed?

This is what I wrote on the new version of the N1c page last year already. However, the Narva culture had pottery, so it's not impossible that N1c had already reached the Baltic by that time, even if Narva people still predominantly belonged to Y-haplogroup I.
 
You fail to understand that Hindu Kush auDNA in the Basques IS from the Yamnaya Horizon. HinduKush is correlated to the Gedrosia and those early PIE people who invaded Yamnaya from the south and Indo-Europized it were full of Gedrosia/Hindu Kush.

Maybe 'Anatolian Neolithic farmers Model' is wrong, but the 'Armenian Model' combined with the 'Yamnaya Model' makes a lot more sense and in agreement with archeologic and genetic evidence.

I know that Hindu Kush is from PIE Steppe people too. But the map I made was only for the 'Steppe' component, which I think correlates more with the EHG admixture of Proto-Indo-Europeans, while the Hindu Kush correlates more with their CHG or Gedrosia admixture. I explained above that Eurogenes's Yamna admixture was about half lower than Haak's, because the Steppe K10 calculator has 10 populations instead of 3, and a lot of Haak's Yamna ended up being Hindu Kush or Siberian in Eurogenes. So Haak's Yamna admixture is a composite of the various ancestries that make up Yamna (EHG, ANE, CHG), while Eurogenes split them apart.

One question that hasn't been clearly answered yet is why do Western Europeans have so much more Hindu Kush or Gedrosian than Northeast Europeans? Did it only come with R1b PIE? J2 people could also have brought some when they migrated from West Asia to Greece and Italy, but ironically Greece and Italy have less Gedrosia than Western Europe, and especially the British Isles.
 
I don't know where you got your info from, but Indo-Aryans that invaded India were from BMAC and NOT from the Steppes at all. IMO: BMAC was mostly CHG-GEDROSIA, belonged to R2a, R1a-Z93, J2a, G2a etc. folks..

Or do you think that Indo-Aryans had AIRPLANES and other flying machines and FLEW directly from the Steppes into India, by skipping the SouthCentral Asia / BMAC? There is no LOGOS in your story..

Of course they came from the BMAC, but a few centuries earlier they came from Sintashta. That's proven. R1a-Z93* was found in EBA Russia. Deal with it.
 
Of course they came from the BMAC, but a few centuries earlier they came from Sintashta. That's proven. R1a-Z93* was found in EBA Russia. Deal with it.
Huh? Do you have any evidence that Sintashta folks migrated into BMAC? BMAC culture is actually OLDER than and pre-date Sintashta, like Maykop is older than and pre-date Yamnaya. Actually, they have found BMAC influences in the Andronovo Horizon.

BMAC = 2300 BCE , AT LEAST
Sintashta = 2100 BCE


They found also J1 in pre-Neolithic Karelia, that doesn't mean that J1 is from Finland..


That R1a-Z93* in EBA Russia was an invader from the Iranian Plateau who brought Gedrosia auDNA into the Steppes. How do you think there is so much Gedrosia auDNA in the ancient Steppe samples? Exactly, that R1a-Z93* was NATIVe to the Iranian Plateau and therefore to the BMAC culture. Has NOTHIGN to do with the Steppes at the first place.

+ there is almost no ancient Y-DNA N & Q in Northern India (some of it is from late Turkic tribes), so there was no migration from the Steppes into the BMAC.


You have to deal it.


You said first that Indo-Iranians went directly to India from Sintashta by AIRPLANES. I truly don't know what your sources are. No LOGOS at all.


Aryans that invaded India were from BMAC and NOT Sintashta/Steppes. FACT! BMAC was an Eastern Iranian culture full of Iranian Plateau auDNA! FACT! Aryans that invaded India from BMAC were mostly Iranian Plateau folks. CHECK!


And it is in agreement with nowadays findings. Modern Iranian & Indian people have still a lot Iranian Plateau (Caucaso-Gedrosia) auDNA. FACT! This means that ancient Iranian (Aryan) and Indic people were mostly Caucaso-Gedrosia folks. They had NOTHIGN to do with Europe or EurAsian Steppes, it is YOU that have to deal with it
 
Last edited:
This is what I wrote on the new version of the N1c page last year already. However, the Narva culture had pottery, so it's not impossible that N1c had already reached the Baltic by that time, even if Narva people still predominantly belonged to Y-haplogroup I.

Oh I am confused now... I know that one culture in the early neolithic in Lithuania did not have pottery and they were very much into rein deer hunting, it may be them who gave current Lithuanians our N1c ?
 
This is what I wrote on the new version of the N1c page last year already. However, the Narva culture had pottery, so it's not impossible that N1c had already reached the Baltic by that time, even if Narva people still predominantly belonged to Y-haplogroup I.

Have you added the N1c samples that were found by Chekunova et al in the Late Neolithic Serteya culture of Western Russia? They appear to be dated to roughly 2500-2000 B.C. .

Source: https://www.academia.edu/9452168/Ar...azurkevich_A._Polkovnikova_M._Dolbunova_E._ed (p. 290)

From the supplemental material:

2.jpg

RC-Dates:

Capture.jpg
 

This thread has been viewed 74283 times.

Back
Top