Eupedia Forums
Site NavigationEupedia Top > Eupedia Forum & Japan Forum
Page 24 of 25 FirstFirst ... 1422232425 LastLast
Results 576 to 600 of 604

Thread: Ancient genomes from Caucasus inc. Maykop

  1. #576
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    07-08-18
    Posts
    842


    Country: Germany



    So much for all those old models. Barely any EHG in Yamnaya and Hajji Firuz admixture is just about zero:

    https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets...it?usp=sharing

    Yamnaya/CWC increasingly look like immigrants.

  2. #577
    Regular Member ToBeOrNotToBe's Avatar
    Join Date
    31-12-16
    Posts
    1,111


    Country: United Kingdom



    Quote Originally Posted by markod View Post
    So much for all those old models. Barely any EHG in Yamnaya and Hajji Firuz admixture is just about zero:

    https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets...it?usp=sharing

    Yamnaya/CWC increasingly look like immigrants.
    Wdym barely any EHG in Yamnaya, where is that coming from?

  3. #578
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    07-08-18
    Posts
    842


    Country: Germany



    Quote Originally Posted by ToBeOrNotToBe View Post
    Wdym barely any EHG in Yamnaya, where is that coming from?
    Just speculation, but the confounding variable might have been native Ukranian and Baltic admixture.

    The confusion about the CHG component in EHG should have been a red flag already IMHO. It's very difficult to pick those components apart once they have coalesced and stablelized

  4. #579
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    18-08-15
    Posts
    1,499

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R-L2
    MtDNA haplogroup
    J1c5a

    Ethnic group
    Swiss
    Country: Switzerland



    Quote Originally Posted by markod View Post
    So much for all those old models. Barely any EHG in Yamnaya and Hajji Firuz admixture is just about zero:

    https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets...it?usp=sharing

    Yamnaya/CWC increasingly look like immigrants.
    Can you explain the results of those sheets? CWC cannot have 0 WHG and EHG and 0.5% Yoruba or 1.2% of Levant_Neo. That is virtually impossible.

  5. #580
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    30-09-16
    Posts
    175


    Country: Canada



    The WHG is contained mainly in Globular Amphora, the EHG mainly in Progress Eneolithic.

  6. #581
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    07-08-18
    Posts
    842


    Country: Germany



    Quote Originally Posted by halfalp View Post
    Can you explain the results of those sheets? CWC cannot have 0 WHG and EHG and 0.5% Yoruba or 1.2% of Levant_Neo. That is virtually impossible.
    Why? CWC is just north Caucasian Steppe with additional local ancestry, esp. GAC which had lots of Mesolithic ancestry.

  7. #582
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    18-08-15
    Posts
    1,499

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R-L2
    MtDNA haplogroup
    J1c5a

    Ethnic group
    Swiss
    Country: Switzerland



    Quote Originally Posted by markod View Post
    Why? CWC is just north Caucasian Steppe with additional local ancestry, esp. GAC which had lots of Mesolithic ancestry.
    If you consider WHG and EHG are real entities and not just offshoots of CHG. Then it's mathematically impossible. We are changing terminology for nothing here. So modern Baltic people with high WHG, is in fact just GAC ancestry and not WHG. Also the GAC paper of 2017-2018 speaks about 100% EEF wich itself only countains little WHG. So taking the terminologies of your sheets, Yoruba and Levante_Neolithic represent Basal Eurasian, then. Also why if WHG is picked up by GAC, why is there a distinction between GAC and Barcin wich is virtually the same ancestry, and not a distinction between GAC and WHG?

  8. #583
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    07-08-18
    Posts
    842


    Country: Germany



    Quote Originally Posted by halfalp View Post
    If you consider WHG and EHG are real entities and not just offshoots of CHG. Then it's mathematically impossible. We are changing terminology for nothing here. So modern Baltic people with high WHG, is in fact just GAC ancestry and not WHG. Also the GAC paper of 2017-2018 speaks about 100% EEF wich itself only countains little WHG. So taking the terminologies of your sheets, Yoruba and Levante_Neolithic represent Basal Eurasian, then. Also why if WHG is picked up by GAC, why is there a distinction between GAC and Barcin wich is virtually the same ancestry, and not a distinction between GAC and WHG?
    I'm equally suspicious of CHG as anything more than a transient population. For those Steppe samples I think the source population will most likely be in the east.

    Afaik the Mesolithic Huto cave samples already were intermediate between CHG and EHG. Probably not eastern enough though.

  9. #584
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    18-08-15
    Posts
    1,499

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R-L2
    MtDNA haplogroup
    J1c5a

    Ethnic group
    Swiss
    Country: Switzerland



    Quote Originally Posted by markod View Post
    I'm equally suspicious of CHG as anything more than a transient population. For those Steppe samples I think the source population will most likely be in the east.

    Afaik the Mesolithic Huto cave samples already were intermediate between CHG and EHG. Probably not eastern enough though.
    The problem is that EHG needs WHG and CHG needs EHG. So here i dont know what i'm talking about, but exactly how could WHG be in East Caspian? The EHG needed in CHG cannot be ANE itself, because it's already in Iran_Neo. Also, remember ourselves that Dzudzuana is not directly related with CHG, but is highly related with Anatolian and Levante Neolithic. It looks like the ancestor of CHG, but not CHG proper have to come from Eastern Europe and get BA ancestry South of the Caucasus at some point. We are probably talking here about something that old as Epigravettian in North Caucasus.

  10. #585
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    07-08-18
    Posts
    842


    Country: Germany



    Quote Originally Posted by halfalp View Post
    The problem is that EHG needs WHG and CHG needs EHG. So here i dont know what i'm talking about, but exactly how could WHG be in East Caspian? The EHG needed in CHG cannot be ANE itself, because it's already in Iran_Neo. Also, remember ourselves that Dzudzuana is not directly related with CHG, but is highly related with Anatolian and Levante Neolithic. It looks like the ancestor of CHG, but not CHG proper have to come from Eastern Europe and get BA ancestry South of the Caucasus at some point. We are probably talking here about something that old as Epigravettian in North Caucasus.
    Most of this will probably be answered when the source of the East Eurasian ancestry seeping into West Eurasia in the timeframe between Dzudzuana and Huto/Karelia (as well as speculatively Villabrunna) is discovered.

  11. #586
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    18-08-15
    Posts
    1,499

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R-L2
    MtDNA haplogroup
    J1c5a

    Ethnic group
    Swiss
    Country: Switzerland



    Quote Originally Posted by markod View Post
    Most of this will probably be answered when the source of the East Eurasian ancestry seeping into West Eurasia in the timeframe between Dzudzuana and Huto/Karelia (as well as speculatively Villabrunna) is discovered.
    My bet is that Cultures, Ancestral Components and Haplogroups gonna confuse together when more samples we gonna have. It looks like there were switch in lineages but continuity of ancestral components and culture in Paleolithic era. But with the datas we have actually, there is only 2 propositions: EHG and pre-CHG came both from Eastern Europe ( North Caucasus included ) while pre-CHG probably in the Bolling-Allerod migrated South to become proper-CHG. Or Pre-EHG and CHG came from Iran, at a time when Iran was actually mostly of ANE ancestry without Basal Eurasian, and that Pre-EHG became EHG in Eastern Europe ( through Caucasus or East Caspian ), while CHG mingle with BA later on.

  12. #587
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    07-08-18
    Posts
    842


    Country: Germany



    Quote Originally Posted by halfalp View Post
    My bet is that Cultures, Ancestral Components and Haplogroups gonna confuse together when more samples we gonna have. It looks like there were switch in lineages but continuity of ancestral components and culture in Paleolithic era. But with the datas we have actually, there is only 2 propositions: EHG and pre-CHG came both from Eastern Europe ( North Caucasus included ) while pre-CHG probably in the Bolling-Allerod migrated South to become proper-CHG. Or Pre-EHG and CHG came from Iran, at a time when Iran was actually mostly of ANE ancestry without Basal Eurasian, and that Pre-EHG became EHG in Eastern Europe ( through Caucasus or East Caspian ), while CHG mingle with BA later on.
    I think that for now there are any number of possibilities. It would probably be interesting to take a good look at where HGs tended to live during the LGM. I don't think that will tell us much about the genesis of the steppe tribes though. It would be better to look for their immediate ancestors and then work from there.

    Before the Advent of population genomic a very common view among archaeologists used to be that the origin of the the Kurgan cultures lay in the cave settlements of the eastern Caspian like Dam Dam Chesme, Dzebel and others. I would love to see whether such a chronology could be supported with ancient DNA.

  13. #588
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    18-08-15
    Posts
    1,499

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R-L2
    MtDNA haplogroup
    J1c5a

    Ethnic group
    Swiss
    Country: Switzerland



    Quote Originally Posted by markod View Post
    I think that for now there are any number of possibilities. It would probably be interesting to take a good look at where HGs tended to live during the LGM. I don't think that will tell us much about the genesis of the steppe tribes though. It would be better to look for their immediate ancestors and then work from there.

    Before the Advent of population genomic a very common view among archaeologists used to be that the origin of the the Kurgan cultures lay in the cave settlements of the eastern Caspian like Dam Dam Chesme, Dzebel and others. I would love to see whether such a chronology could be supported with ancient DNA.
    Yes, but lithic material is a tricky one. It's like Solutrean, Swiderian and Clovis. I think you are talking about the Bullet-shaped core found in South Urals and East Caspian that FrankN were talking about right? So now, what is the probability that Solutrean and Swiderian peoples had the same autosomal component and y-dna haplogroups while they have clearly the same lithic culture origin?

  14. #589
    Regular Member ToBeOrNotToBe's Avatar
    Join Date
    31-12-16
    Posts
    1,111


    Country: United Kingdom



    Quote Originally Posted by halfalp View Post
    Yes, but lithic material is a tricky one. It's like Solutrean, Swiderian and Clovis. I think you are talking about the Bullet-shaped core found in South Urals and East Caspian that FrankN were talking about right? So now, what is the probability that Solutrean and Swiderian peoples had the same autosomal component and y-dna haplogroups while they have clearly the same lithic culture origin?
    I wouldn’t write off the Solutrean hypothesis so easily, even if it wasn’t demic diffusion the lithic material really is quite similar. More and more, it’s looking like plenty of populations migrated into the Americas.

  15. #590
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    18-08-15
    Posts
    1,499

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R-L2
    MtDNA haplogroup
    J1c5a

    Ethnic group
    Swiss
    Country: Switzerland



    Quote Originally Posted by ToBeOrNotToBe View Post
    I wouldn’t write off the Solutrean hypothesis so easily, even if it wasn’t demic diffusion the lithic material really is quite similar. More and more, it’s looking like plenty of populations migrated into the Americas.
    I'm still convinced by the y-dna R ( maybe R1b ) and Solutrean culture link, but i'm not interested into the trans-atlantic Solutrean Hypothesis. In Europe, Solutrean and Swiderian have a strong lithic link, but do we know such link coming from Siberia? Like AG, didn't have the same lithic reductions. What is interesting is that the preceding culture of Swiderian was Ahrensburgian, wich is mostly Baltic Magdalenian. So were did that Solutrean-like Lithic culture came from?

  16. #591
    Regular Member ToBeOrNotToBe's Avatar
    Join Date
    31-12-16
    Posts
    1,111


    Country: United Kingdom



    Quote Originally Posted by halfalp View Post
    I'm still convinced by the y-dna R ( maybe R1b ) and Solutrean culture link, but i'm not interested into the trans-atlantic Solutrean Hypothesis. In Europe, Solutrean and Swiderian have a strong lithic link, but do we know such link coming from Siberia? Like AG, didn't have the same lithic reductions. What is interesting is that the preceding culture of Swiderian was Ahrensburgian, wich is mostly Baltic Magdalenian. So were did that Solutrean-like Lithic culture came from?
    i really doubt it would be Y DNA R considering it’s mostly M269.

  17. #592
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    18-08-15
    Posts
    1,499

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R-L2
    MtDNA haplogroup
    J1c5a

    Ethnic group
    Swiss
    Country: Switzerland



    Quote Originally Posted by ToBeOrNotToBe View Post
    i really doubt it would be Y DNA R considering it’s mostly M269.
    I mean R broadly. But M269 cannot be part of the Solutrean, it's a way older culture.

  18. #593
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    21-05-18
    Posts
    36

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R-CTS3087
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H16

    Country: USA - California



    So what is the deal with Steppe Maykop? I keep seeing on Eurogenes all this West Siberian Neolithic talk, but what samples are they deriving this ancestral component from? I cannot find anything online about it. What is it exactly? How do they even differentiate the ANE in these samples? There is also the presence of EDAR in the Steppe Maykop, as well as in the Mesolithic Motala hunter gatherers of Sweden and in Karelia. Could we be looking at something connected to the spread of mtDNA C1 and Y-DNA R/Q during the Upper Paleolithic, or was this also a gene present in the earliest West Eurasians/Paleo-Europeans, but due to selection, it has been diluted to non-existence in most of Europe. Much of this can be solved if we simply had more ancient East Eurasian samples.

  19. #594
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    18-08-15
    Posts
    1,499

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R-L2
    MtDNA haplogroup
    J1c5a

    Ethnic group
    Swiss
    Country: Switzerland



    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Johnson View Post
    So what is the deal with Steppe Maykop? I keep seeing on Eurogenes all this West Siberian Neolithic talk, but what samples are they deriving this ancestral component from? I cannot find anything online about it. What is it exactly? How do they even differentiate the ANE in these samples? There is also the presence of EDAR in the Steppe Maykop, as well as in the Mesolithic Motala hunter gatherers of Sweden and in Karelia. Could we be looking at something connected to the spread of mtDNA C1 and Y-DNA R/Q during the Upper Paleolithic, or was this also a gene present in the earliest West Eurasians/Paleo-Europeans, but due to selection, it has been diluted to non-existence in most of Europe. Much of this can be solved if we simply had more ancient East Eurasian samples.
    I think this West Siberian Neolithic makes reference either to something Botai-like or with Baikal Neolithic, mainly liked with y-dna N1c and Q1a. But i'm not sure.

  20. #595
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    07-08-18
    Posts
    842


    Country: Germany



    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Johnson View Post
    So what is the deal with Steppe Maykop? I keep seeing on Eurogenes all this West Siberian Neolithic talk, but what samples are they deriving this ancestral component from? I cannot find anything online about it. What is it exactly? How do they even differentiate the ANE in these samples? There is also the presence of EDAR in the Steppe Maykop, as well as in the Mesolithic Motala hunter gatherers of Sweden and in Karelia. Could we be looking at something connected to the spread of mtDNA C1 and Y-DNA R/Q during the Upper Paleolithic, or was this also a gene present in the earliest West Eurasians/Paleo-Europeans, but due to selection, it has been diluted to non-existence in most of Europe. Much of this can be solved if we simply had more ancient East Eurasian samples.
    Afaik ANE/AG are bad proxies for the eastern ancestry of EHG. Neolithic Baikal might be better.

  21. #596
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    20-06-19
    Posts
    10


    Country: Australia



    Are they still alive?

  22. #597
    Junior Member 4mypeople's Avatar
    Join Date
    24-06-19
    Posts
    6

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b1b2a1a1
    MtDNA haplogroup
    R1a

    Ethnic group
    English,Irish,Scottish,Belgian,French,Norwegian
    Country: Canada



    Maternal Haplogroup R1a here, my Eurogenes Hunter Gatherer VS Farmer results:

    Population
    Anatolian Farmer 11.06 Pct
    Baltic Hunter Gatherer 51.40 Pct
    Middle Eastern Herder -
    East Asian Farmer -
    South American Hunter Gatherer 0.53 Pct
    South Asian Hunter Gatherer 2.13 Pct
    North Eurasian Hunter Gatherer 0.08 Pct
    East African Pastoralist -
    Oceanian Hunter Gatherer -
    Mediterranean Farmer 34.52 Pct
    Pygmy Hunter Gatherer 0.28 Pct
    Bantu Farmer -

  23. #598
    Elite member epoch's Avatar
    Join Date
    13-09-13
    Posts
    779


    Country: Netherlands



    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Johnson View Post
    So what is the deal with Steppe Maykop? I keep seeing on Eurogenes all this West Siberian Neolithic talk, but what samples are they deriving this ancestral component from? I cannot find anything online about it. What is it exactly? How do they even differentiate the ANE in these samples? There is also the presence of EDAR in the Steppe Maykop, as well as in the Mesolithic Motala hunter gatherers of Sweden and in Karelia. Could we be looking at something connected to the spread of mtDNA C1 and Y-DNA R/Q during the Upper Paleolithic, or was this also a gene present in the earliest West Eurasians/Paleo-Europeans, but due to selection, it has been diluted to non-existence in most of Europe. Much of this can be solved if we simply had more ancient East Eurasian samples.
    The deal is that qpAdm can't make feasible models of Steppe Maykop unless you add Karitiana Indians. And that admixture also pops up in Botai.

  24. #599
    Advisor bicicleur's Avatar
    Join Date
    27-01-13
    Location
    Zwevegem, Belgium
    Posts
    5,731


    Country: Belgium - Flanders



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by epoch View Post
    The deal is that qpAdm can't make feasible models of Steppe Maykop unless you add Karitiana Indians. And that admixture also pops up in Botai.
    steppe maykop is late Khvalynsk
    a mix of steppe DNA with a touch of Siberian
    a mix of Y-DNA R1a, R1b-M478 and Q1a2
    they were whiped out by Yamna, who also had steppe DNA but much less or no Siberian DNA

  25. #600
    Elite member
    Join Date
    10-12-15
    Posts
    643


    Country: Canada



    Quote Originally Posted by bicicleur View Post
    steppe maykop is late Khvalynsk
    a mix of steppe DNA with a touch of Siberian
    a mix of Y-DNA R1a, R1b-M478 and Q1a2
    they were whiped out by Yamna, who also had steppe DNA but much less or no Siberian DNA
    However, Yamna R1b adapted the wagon burial culture of Q1a as an elite culture. So I think it is just a transition w/o conflict within the same culture zone of sunhead/animal culture, like in altai. I think it would be a problem that modern people classification tool, genetics, applies to ancient people. Actually we don't know how the ancient people classified themselves.

    Overview of archaeological sources confirming the astronomical dating We consider it necessary to argue our position particularly on correct attribution First Sunduk and Seraphim Stone to Okunev and Andronovo cultures of Khakassia As was convincingly shown by the studies of Khakassia University archeological laboratory under the direction of A. Gotlib [19], D. A. Kirillova and M.A. Podol`skaya publications [20,21], sanctuaries of the same kind in Khakassia existed during different periods of the Bronze Age – from Afanas`ev to Karasuk culture. Okunev ceramics were discovered on four sve (Khakassia term meaning «stronghold on a mountain») examined by these authors. On Chebaki sve that is located 30 km south-west from the described objects A. I. Gottlieb discovered Okunev and Karasuk ceramics. D. A. Kirillova and M.A. Podol`skaya studied sve Kyzul hai, located on the right bank of Black Ius river between s. Ustinkino and s. Podkamen`, 25 km north-west from the objects described in the article. Okunev, Karasuk and Andronivo ceramics were discovered in the Kyzul hai sve. Structures such as system of swells, marking and isolating inner space and the «wall» made of dry masonry of sandstone slabs [22] similar to the objects described in the mentioned sources were discovered on the First Sundu territory. Based on that as well as on the object`s chronology in accordance to the observations of Arkturus on the First Sunduk we came to the conclusion that the First Sunduk is the monument of Okunev and Andronovo cultures. We are also sure that should archeological excavations be conducted Okunev, Karasuk, Andronovo and Afanas`ev ceramics are found. Seraphim Stone was attributed to the Okunev culture because of two images placed in situ on the Stone that are certainly attributed to the Okunev culture. Judging by the Arcturus and Betelgeuse observation, we can attribute Seraphim Stone to the Okunev-Andronovo culture. The presence of the two atypical images that define astronomically significant directions and cannot be attributed

Page 24 of 25 FirstFirst ... 1422232425 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
  •