New map of Yamna admixture (Eurogenes Steppe K10)

This soon-to-be-publushed paper on East Baltic aDNA has ~80 samples spanning from Mesolithic to Iron Age.

I only know snippets of information but supposedly they did not find any N1c until the end of the Bronze Age.

Dagne said:
Does that mean that N1c arrived to present Lithuanian territory with CWC, not Kunda, as previously believed?

Nope, no any N1c in CWC. It looks like N1c arrived to present Lithuanian-Latvian-Estonian territory after CWC.

But let's wait until the publication because these are "unconfirmed rumours".

when was Kunda replaced by EHG then ?

It was never replaced by "pure EHG". Kunda-Narva WHG was replaced by CWC in Copper / Early Bronze Age.
 
This soon-to-be-publushed paper on East Baltic aDNA has ~80 samples spanning from Mesolithic to Iron Age.

I only know snippets of information but supposedly they did not find any N1c until the end of the Bronze Age.



Nope, no any N1c in CWC. It looks like N1c arrived to present Lithuanian-Latvian-Estonian territory after CWC.

But let's wait until the publication because these are "unconfirmed rumours".
Great news.


It was never replaced by "pure EHG". Kunda-Narva WHG was replaced by CWC in Copper / Early Bronze Age.
Rather coexisted for 700 years and were slowly assimilated.
 
This soon-to-be-publushed paper on East Baltic aDNA has ~80 samples spanning from Mesolithic to Iron Age.

I only know snippets of information but supposedly they did not find any N1c until the end of the Bronze Age.



Nope, no any N1c in CWC. It looks like N1c arrived to present Lithuanian-Latvian-Estonian territory after CWC.

But let's wait until the publication because these are "unconfirmed rumours".



It was never replaced by "pure EHG". Kunda-Narva WHG was replaced by CWC in Copper / Early Bronze Age.


So the paper will confirm what I have posted all this time based on the present linguistic and genetic data.

N1c was also connected to the fortified settlements and metallurgy appearing in to the region, hard pill to swallow for those spreading theories of Uralic hunter gatherers invading armed with bone arrows and riding reindeer.

I still expect Tacitus quotes about Fenni from time to time, they still carry entertainment value.
 
I have made a map of the Hindu Kush admixture. Oddly enough the Basque have more of it than other North Spanish and South French people.

Hindu_Kush-admixture.png



The Hindu Kush admixture is very similar to the Gedrosian admixture, but very strangely exhibits the opposite gradient in Italy.

Gedrosian-admixture.gif
 
I have made a map of the Hindu Kush admixture. Oddly enough the Basque have more of it than other North Spanish and South French people.

Hindu_Kush-admixture.png



The Hindu Kush admixture is very similar to the Gedrosian admixture, but very strangely exhibits the opposite gradient in Italy.

Gedrosian-admixture.gif


Gedrosian was carried by Celts?
 
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?

This "calculator" was an experiment, according to its own creator, designed to look at specific issues. Steppe does not equal Yamnaya here. Yamnaya included a lot of the ancestry that was broken out in the calculator, including Hindu Kush, which is the Gedrosia element of Yamnaya. It's also totally outdated in other ways as it was created before the release of the most recent ancient genomes. It just cannot be used.

The Haak et al data and genome analysis, which hasn't been challenged by anyone, to my knowledge, is based on actual complete Yamnaya genomes. That paper was a joint effort of the Reich Lab as well as the Haak people, the two premier genetics labs in the world; they're not going to falsify data. Plus, as I said, no one has challenged it. Indeed the results have been replicated by other people.

You may disagree with Krause's analysis of the data in terms of proposing a modified theory of IE expansions, and you may agree with that of Anthony. That doesn't mean that the Krause hypothesis is contrary to science. They are merely interpreting the data in a different way. They may be right or they may be wrong. That poster, which is all that the speculation is based upon, may be a work in progress. Or, they may have already analyzed ancient dna data to which we're not privy. We just don't know yet.

As to the creator of this calculator, I'll just say that you don't know whom you're dealing with...


.
 
I knew N1c couldn't be a Baltic hunter gatherer. N1c, Siberian admixture, and Uralic languages in Northeast Europe all probably have the same post-CWC source. Then again its arrival might be different for different regions.
 
But the map I made was only for the 'Steppe' component,
Then you should rename it into the 'map of Steppe admixture'. Since it doesn't correspondent well with the 'Yamnaya admixture'. At this moment your map is MISLEADING and full of contradictions. Like now according to your map there is more Yamnaya admixture in Finno-Ugric/Saami people than European Indo-Europeans. Like you said Yamnaya Admixture is more than Steppe Admixture.

Steppe admixture in NorthEastern Europe existed even before the arrival of late second stage Yamnaya PIE.
So, a lot Steppe ancestry in NorthEastern Europe has nothing to do with second stage Proto-Indo-European speakers from Yamnaya.

Yamnaya = Steppe + NorthWest Asia.


So, you should rename your map into 'map of Steppe admixture' or change your percentages about the Yamnaya ancestry.
 
Absolutely crazy, no way to deal with it, if I have understood well Gedrosia was the actual Chalco_Iran component... but it is near to absent in the steppe, but the worst is to check how the Yamnayan component in the Baltic countries is high there but devoid of Gedrosian (so it came there Yamnayans pure-EHG??). I usualy see admixture calculations with low confidence but such data is providing a mad situation, something must go wrong.
 
I knew N1c couldn't be a Baltic hunter gatherer. N1c, Siberian admixture, and Uralic languages in Northeast Europe all probably have the same post-CWC source. Then again its arrival might be different for different regions.
I started to think that to, before I realized that this map is WRONG on many levels. After seeing his map I started to believe that Saami have more Corded Ware admixture than Norwegians, lol. But I was mislead by a wrong map. It was stupid of me, not to make additional examination of data.

So, hold on a minute. The map of Maciamo doesn't hold any ground and is at least misleading. I don't think Maciamo tried to mislead us on purpose. He is still making mistakes by using sources from people with hidden twisted agenda.


His map is not about Yamnaya but the Steppes. And there IS a correlation between the Steppes admixture AND Y-DNA hg. like N1c1 & Q.
 
Last edited:
N1c in Finno-Ugrians correlates with Siberian & East Asian rather than Steppe admixtures.

But Lithuanians despite having a lot of N1c have not much of N1c-related autosomal DNA.
 
Absolutely crazy, no way to deal with it, if I have understood well Gedrosia was the actual Chalco_Iran component... but it is near to absent in the steppe.
Very simple. Modern European Steppe folks (like Russians) have NOTHING to do with the ancient Iranic Central Asian Steppe folks. Only the ancient Indo-Iranized Steppes folks were full of Gedrosia. While modern Eastern Europeans don't have that admixture, sicne Eastern Europeans have nothing in common with the ancient Indo-Iranized Steppes folks. The only common thing between ancient Indo-Iranized tribes and modern day Eastern Europeans is the Steppes admixture.

Those ancient Indo-Iranized Steppes folks are now Turkified and speak Turkic language as their native language and do consider themselves as Turks/Tatars.


With other words. Eastern Europeans (Balto-Slavs) are NOT directly related to Indo-Iranized cultures in the Steppes. And those ancient Indo-Iranized folks of the Steppes are now native Turkic/Tatar people of Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, Kyrgyzstan.


Caucasus_central_asia_political_map_2000.jpg



Those Shintashta/Androno Steppes folks who were once Indo-IRANIZED by people (Aryans) from the Iranian Plateau were later Turkified and those Indo-Iranized Steppe cultures became Tatars/Turks.
 
Last edited:
N1c in Finno-Ugrians correlates with Siberian & East Asian rather than Steppe admixtures.

But Lithuanians despite having a lot of N1c have not much of N1c-related autosomal DNA.
Lithuanians are like Estonians. And Estonians are Finno-Ugric people. That's why I believe that N1c is correlated to the Steppes admixture.

Many people say that the Baltic countries are populated by NATIVE Steppes folks, and they are only Indo-Europized people by language and not genetically. So, actually they don't have much of the Yamnaya admixture.
 
Lithuanians are like Estonians. And Estonians are Finno-Ugric people. That's why I believe that N1c is correlated to the Steppes admixture.

Many people say that the Baltic countries are populated by NATIVE Steppes folks, and they are only Indo-Europized people by language and not genetically. So, actually they don't have much of the Yamnaya admixture.

Goga, relax, you and the rest of Kurds can be the purest Arians in you want so.
I have never met a real Arian, but I know some real Finno-Ugric people, they are nice, so I don't mind being like Estonian, or like Steppe folk and I am very proud of having more hunter gather heritage than the rest of the Europeans.
 
Anthropologyst Raisa Denisova on Baltic populations (1997). It is just WOW how correct she seems to be in light of (upcoming) dna.
On WHG I guess:
Thus archaeological data indicate that the migration of the Maglemosian people concluded several chronologically successive migrations of late Paleolithic peoples from the West to the East. This suggests that at the end of that period, a genetic fund was being established in populations resident in the territory that is southwest of Latvia -- the Pripet basin and the Upper Dnieper valley. This genetic fund was part of a larger genetic system of late Paleolithic residents in Northern Europe. For that reason, people who settled on lands around the Upper Dnieper and the Upper Daugava during the late Paleolithic period had close genetic links to the most ancient populations of the Middle European lowlands. That could mean that during the Mesolithic period, an anthropologically similar group of peoples lived from the Netherlands in the West to the Middle Russian highlands to the East. Local residents may have been possessed of the morphological elements of ancient Northern European peoples, whose roots were linked to the late Paleolithic populations of Europe.


A curious detail (more WHG to the East??):
Even though the Niemen and the Daugava are separated only by a few hundred kilometers of dry land, the territory between the two rivers remained uninhabited for quite a long time. The most ancient settlements in southern Lithuania are some 2,000 years older than the first settlements on the shores of the Daugava. Moreover, the first residents in Latvia arrived not through Lithuania, as would seem logical, but rather from the Southeast, using the Dnieper river and the Upper Daugava for this purpose.
OR
Searching for indications of Kundian culture in the late Paleolithic period, Dr. Jaanits has pointed to two possible conclusions. First of all, distinct post-Svidrian traditions in the Kundian culture can be interpreted as pointing to a direct genetic link with Svidrian culture in Poland. Secondly, characteristics of the Svidrian culture flint artifacts are typical of the late Paleolithic period across a fairly vast section of Eastern Europe (including the Dnieper-Don-Desna, the Volga and the Oka regions). This allows specialists to see roots of the Kundian culture in the late Paleolithic period in Eastern Europe (K. Jaanits 1990).


On arrival of EEF to Baltics:
Differences in facial width in Europe became particularly distinctive at the beginning of the Atlantic period, when farming was begun in Europe. At this time, facial width distinctly separated morphological forms in Northern Europe from those in the Mediterranean region -- two distinct geographic regions. Massive, broad-faced morphological forms dominated in northern and northeastern Europe, while gracile, narrow-faced forms are found most often in Middle Europe and the continent's southeastern reaches. During the Atlantic period, narrow-faced populations gradually moved in the northerly and northeasterly direction. They reached the Baltic region only during the Bronze Age.


But here Eastern vibes (EHG? R1a or N1c?), caught by Denisova, but apparently missed from upcoming Baltic aDNA study:
around the mid-5th century BC there was a new migration of people into Latvia, people who were characterized by the metisized anthropological type. An analysis of anthropological elements in these inhabitants points to distinctly eastern components. Skulls of anthropologically similar inhabitants have been found in the Olenij Ostrov Mesolithic burial ground, where some of the buried individuals unquestionably had typical eastern components.

Even though no ceramics have been found in the Zvejnieki burial grounds (mid-5th century BC), there is no reason to doubt that the burial grounds belonged to the early Neolithic period. Evidence of this is given by other early Neolithic graves in the Zvejnieki burial grounds (4500-3000 BC), where there was also no tradition of placing clay pots in people's graves.


Full English text here:
http://estudijas.lu.lv/mod/page/view.php?id=30367

edit: for Eastern vibes missed by study. Perhaps they focused more on Lithuania. Which indeed did not have those. Let's see wht will be their samples.
 
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.
When are you going to fix that page?
"The merger of the two groups, Indo-European R1a and Uralic N1c1, gave rise to the hybrid Kiukainen culture (2300-1500 BCE). Modern Baltic people have a roughly equal proportion of haplogroup N1c1 and R1a, resulting from this merger of Uralic and Slavic cultures."???
This little text has more bugs or unprofessional wordings than anything prepared by our IT department. Role of Kiukainen in modern Balts = 0. What Slavic culture 2000 BCE? Even Balto-Slavs might be too early (NW IE-an would fit better). Proto-Uralic is dated ~ 2000 BCE and already participated in Baltic ethnogenesys via Kiukanen?
 
N1c in Finno-Ugrians correlates with Siberian & East Asian rather than Steppe admixtures.

But Lithuanians despite having a lot of N1c have not much of N1c-related autosomal DNA.


Wishful thinking taken to the extreme. :LOL:
 
When are you going to fix that page?
"The merger of the two groups, Indo-European R1a and Uralic N1c1, gave rise to the hybrid Kiukainen culture (2300-1500 BCE). Modern Baltic people have a roughly equal proportion of haplogroup N1c1 and R1a, resulting from this merger of Uralic and Slavic cultures."??? This little text has more bugs or unprofessional wordings than anything prepared by our IT department. :cool-v:

Role of Kiukainen in modern Balts = 0. What Slavic culture 2000 BCE? Even Balto-Slavs might be too early (NW IE-an would fit better). Proto-Uralic is dated ~ 2000 BCE and already participated in Baltic ethnogenesys via Kiukanen?

I absolutely agree!
 
N1c carriers have mainly used this same corridor as all other groups that have spread across Eurasia, they did not follow the Arctic Ocean.
Siberian peoples are not "super-Finns", they are people they encountered in Northern Eurasia.

map-eurasiansteppe.jpg
 

This thread has been viewed 74463 times.

Back
Top