Eupedia Forums
Site NavigationEupedia Top > Eupedia Forum & Japan Forum
Results 1 to 25 of 40

Thread: How CHG did look like?

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    12-11-19
    Posts
    1
    Points
    25
    Level
    1
    Points: 25, Level: 1
    Level completed: 49%, Points required for next Level: 25
    Overall activity: 0%


    Country: Spain - Extremadura



    How CHG did look like?

    I've seen reconstructions about WHG, yamnayas, ANE, neolithic farmers, etc but I haven't see yet a reconstruction of the CHG

  2. #2
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteran10000 Experience Points
    Stuvanè's Avatar
    Join Date
    25-09-16
    Location
    Milan
    Posts
    356
    Points
    20,009
    Level
    43
    Points: 20,009, Level: 43
    Level completed: 18%, Points required for next Level: 741
    Overall activity: 25.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    J2
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H1e

    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: Italy



    If the origin of this ancestral group in the Caucasus-Iranian area were actually ascertained, I'd bet with sufficient peace of mind that their members looked very close to the current peoples of those regions. Instinctively I'm thinking of guys like Chechen President Dudaev or Freddie Mercury, who was of Pharsi ancestry

    images.jpegmercury.jpg

    Sent from my SM-J730F using Eupedia Forum mobile app

  3. #3
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1000 Experience Points1 year registered
    dosas's Avatar
    Join Date
    10-10-18
    Posts
    53
    Points
    3,505
    Level
    17
    Points: 3,505, Level: 17
    Level completed: 14%, Points required for next Level: 345
    Overall activity: 55.0%


    Country: Afghanistan



    Correct me if I am wrong, but I think Georgians are the modern group with the highest CHG component.



    So, I guess, they would probably look similar to these people:






  4. #4
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteran10000 Experience Points
    Stuvanè's Avatar
    Join Date
    25-09-16
    Location
    Milan
    Posts
    356
    Points
    20,009
    Level
    43
    Points: 20,009, Level: 43
    Level completed: 18%, Points required for next Level: 741
    Overall activity: 25.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    J2
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H1e

    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: Italy



    Quote Originally Posted by dosas View Post
    Correct me if I am wrong, but I think Georgians are the modern group with the highest CHG component.



    So, I guess, they would probably look similar to these people:





    I agree.
    Pretty beautiful, amazing CHG ladies

    Sent from my SM-J730F using Eupedia Forum mobile app

  5. #5
    Advisor Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteran50000 Experience Points
    bicicleur's Avatar
    Join Date
    27-01-13
    Location
    Zwevegem, Belgium
    Posts
    5,622
    Points
    54,247
    Level
    72
    Points: 54,247, Level: 72
    Level completed: 14%, Points required for next Level: 1,303
    Overall activity: 77.0%


    Country: Belgium - Flanders



    1 members found this post helpful.
    according to Laziridis CHG = Dzudzuana admixed with ANE
    and Dzudzuana = WHG admixed with Basal Eurasian
    Dzudzuana is the major component in Natufian and in Anatolian Neolithic

  6. #6
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1000 Experience PointsVeteran

    Join Date
    18-03-17
    Posts
    415
    Points
    3,001
    Level
    15
    Points: 3,001, Level: 15
    Level completed: 84%, Points required for next Level: 49
    Overall activity: 3.0%


    Ethnic group
    swiss,italian
    Country: Germany



    Quote Originally Posted by bicicleur View Post
    according to Laziridis CHG = Dzudzuana admixed with ANE
    and Dzudzuana = WHG admixed with Basal Eurasian
    Dzudzuana is the major component in Natufian and in Anatolian Neolithic
    Dzudzuana= WHG admixed with Basal Eurasian or more like Basal Eurasian admixed with WHG?

  7. #7
    Advisor Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteran50000 Experience Points
    bicicleur's Avatar
    Join Date
    27-01-13
    Location
    Zwevegem, Belgium
    Posts
    5,622
    Points
    54,247
    Level
    72
    Points: 54,247, Level: 72
    Level completed: 14%, Points required for next Level: 1,303
    Overall activity: 77.0%


    Country: Belgium - Flanders



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ailchu View Post
    Dzudzuana= WHG admixed with Basal Eurasian or more like Basal Eurasian admixed with WHG?
    if I remember well, Dzudzuana is 72 % WHG + 28 % Basal Eurasian

  8. #8
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1000 Experience PointsVeteran
    etrusco's Avatar
    Join Date
    29-01-17
    Location
    lombardy
    Posts
    75
    Points
    2,061
    Level
    12
    Points: 2,061, Level: 12
    Level completed: 71%, Points required for next Level: 89
    Overall activity: 2.0%


    Country: Italy



    Quote Originally Posted by bicicleur View Post
    if I remember well, Dzudzuana is 72 % WHG + 28 % Basal Eurasian

    Yes that is what is reported there. But I wonder who was this WHG population? Does that mean that Gravettians were already WHG like ( Villabruna like) . Because Dzudzuana is something like 10000 years older than Villabruna IIRC.

    Because also Anatolian hunter gather were modeled the same way AHG= 75% WHG + 25% Basal.

    So it seems all western eurasian populations were one way or the other WHG derived because also

    Natufians= 50% WHG+ 50% Basal and
    EHG= 40/50% WHG and the rest ANE

  9. #9
    Advisor Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteran50000 Experience Points
    bicicleur's Avatar
    Join Date
    27-01-13
    Location
    Zwevegem, Belgium
    Posts
    5,622
    Points
    54,247
    Level
    72
    Points: 54,247, Level: 72
    Level completed: 14%, Points required for next Level: 1,303
    Overall activity: 77.0%


    Country: Belgium - Flanders



    Quote Originally Posted by etrusco View Post
    Yes that is what is reported there. But I wonder who was this WHG population? Does that mean that Gravettians were already WHG like ( Villabruna like) . Because Dzudzuana is something like 10000 years older than Villabruna IIRC.
    Because also Anatolian hunter gather were modeled the same way AHG= 75% WHG + 25% Basal.
    So it seems all western eurasian populations were one way or the other WHG derived because also
    Natufians= 50% WHG+ 50% Basal and
    EHG= 40/50% WHG and the rest ANE
    the Vestonice gravettian cluster was admixed with Sungir-like DNA
    there must have been gravettians who remained unadmixed WHG, because their descendants, the Villabruna was unadmixed WHG

    IMO, WHG = haplo IJ
    after split, I = Gravettian, WHG in it's unadmaxid form (Villabruna)

    I think the IJ split happened in Transcaucasia, which was inhabited by modern humans since 42 ka.
    From there I went to Mezmaiskaya Cave, NW Caucasus, which was inhabited by modern humans since 39 ka.

    In Transcaucasia, J was also WHG, it first admixed with Basal Eurasian (26 ka Dzudzuana) and later with ANE to form the 13 ka epigravettian Satsurblia CHG

    In eastern Europe, R1b-L754 ANE admixed with the pure, unadmixed WHG to form EHG

  10. #10
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1 year registered1000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    10-12-18
    Posts
    46
    Points
    1,161
    Level
    9
    Points: 1,161, Level: 9
    Level completed: 6%, Points required for next Level: 189
    Overall activity: 1.0%


    Country: Canada



    Quote Originally Posted by etrusco View Post
    Yes that is what is reported there. But I wonder who was this WHG population? Does that mean that Gravettians were already WHG like ( Villabruna like) . Because Dzudzuana is something like 10000 years older than Villabruna IIRC.

    Because also Anatolian hunter gather were modeled the same way AHG= 75% WHG + 25% Basal.

    So it seems all western eurasian populations were one way or the other WHG derived because also

    Natufians= 50% WHG+ 50% Basal and
    EHG= 40/50% WHG and the rest ANE
    Given how it was substantially present in both western Asia and in Europe, and how there was an east to west movement of this type of ancestry within stone age Europe, I would guess that they would have come from somewhere in the Balkans.

  11. #11
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1 year registered1000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    10-12-18
    Posts
    46
    Points
    1,161
    Level
    9
    Points: 1,161, Level: 9
    Level completed: 6%, Points required for next Level: 189
    Overall activity: 1.0%


    Country: Canada



    Just a bit of advice: use Iran HG/neolithic and CHG as different components. As far as CHG are concerned, only a broken skull and a single bone in another sample are the known cases. As far as Iran HGs are concerned- there was variation in them, but they were generally cromagnid with a variation of slender (Hotu cave female 2) to stocky form (Hotu cave female 3). I would say that proto-Iranid is a good approximation but the skull of Hotu cave female 2 looks more Eurafricanid -unreduced compared to modern Eurafricanids of course- than proto-Iranid.

  12. #12
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1000 Experience Points1 year registered
    dosas's Avatar
    Join Date
    10-10-18
    Posts
    53
    Points
    3,505
    Level
    17
    Points: 3,505, Level: 17
    Level completed: 14%, Points required for next Level: 345
    Overall activity: 55.0%


    Country: Afghanistan



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by aleph View Post
    Just a bit of advice: use Iran HG/neolithic and CHG as different components.


    Iran_Neo doesn't seem to eat up any of their CHG component (Imer), it seems to dig into the Natufian.

    Also, I don't take seriously the pseudoscience of craniometry classification, I am sorry.

  13. #13
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points
    kingjohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    05-09-16
    Posts
    375
    Points
    6,837
    Level
    24
    Points: 6,837, Level: 24
    Level completed: 58%, Points required for next Level: 213
    Overall activity: 40.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    E-M84

    Country: Uruguay



    Quote Originally Posted by dosas View Post


    Iran_Neo doesn't seem to eat up any of their CHG component (Imer), it seems to dig into the Natufian.

    Also, I don't take seriously the pseudoscience of craniometry classification, I am sorry.

    you are a smart man

  14. #14
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1 year registered1000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    10-12-18
    Posts
    46
    Points
    1,161
    Level
    9
    Points: 1,161, Level: 9
    Level completed: 6%, Points required for next Level: 189
    Overall activity: 1.0%


    Country: Canada



    Quote Originally Posted by dosas View Post


    Iran_Neo doesn't seem to eat up any of their CHG component (Imer), it seems to dig into the Natufian.

    Also, I don't take seriously the pseudoscience of craniometry classification, I am sorry.
    Yes typically there is a little Iran neolithic on the side in Caucasus just like there is a little bit of CHG on the side in Iran and Iraq. As far as craniometry is concerned, that part of my post is a descriptor for the skulls in question. Modern day Georgians are considerably more brachycephalized than the old Maykop people of the Caucasus who were generally dolichocephalic, so CHG wouldn't look exactly like Georgians (as opposed to what you claimed earlier on). We don't have complete CHG skulls, so Maykop might have been the closest approximation.

  15. #15
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1000 Experience Points1 year registered
    dosas's Avatar
    Join Date
    10-10-18
    Posts
    53
    Points
    3,505
    Level
    17
    Points: 3,505, Level: 17
    Level completed: 14%, Points required for next Level: 345
    Overall activity: 55.0%


    Country: Afghanistan



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by aleph View Post
    so CHG wouldn't look exactly like Georgians (as opposed to what you claimed earlier on). We don't have complete CHG skulls, so Maykop might have been the closest approximation.
    I didn't claim that they looked exactly like Georgians. I wrote and I quote (you can just scroll up to verify) that they would probably look similar to these people.

    Better brush up your reading comprehension skills. And I really don't care about your personal investment in this or for your obvious predispositions (i.e. craniometry classification of humans made by racist ideologues).

  16. #16
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1 year registered1000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    10-12-18
    Posts
    46
    Points
    1,161
    Level
    9
    Points: 1,161, Level: 9
    Level completed: 6%, Points required for next Level: 189
    Overall activity: 1.0%


    Country: Canada



    Quote Originally Posted by dosas View Post
    I didn't claim that they looked exactly like Georgians. I wrote and I quote (you can just scroll up to verify) that they would probably look similar to these people.
    Fair enough

  17. #17
    Elite member Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteran25000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    25-10-11
    Location
    Brittany
    Age
    71
    Posts
    4,538
    Points
    45,351
    Level
    65
    Points: 45,351, Level: 65
    Level completed: 85%, Points required for next Level: 199
    Overall activity: 5.0%

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

    Ethnic group
    more celtic
    Country: France



    Quote Originally Posted by dosas View Post
    I didn't claim that they looked exactly like Georgians. I wrote and I quote (you can just scroll up to verify) that they would probably look similar to these people.

    Better brush up your reading comprehension skills. And I really don't care about your personal investment in this or for your obvious predispositions (i.e. craniometry classification of humans made by racist ideologues).
    Who is racist, did you say? observation is one thing, classification an other thing. Classification was a try to understand the composition and story of population, at those times, and all the scholars invested then in this kind of research were not racists. (very often they were pluridisciplinary), if a lot was naive enough.

  18. #18
    Advisor Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteran50000 Experience Points
    bicicleur's Avatar
    Join Date
    27-01-13
    Location
    Zwevegem, Belgium
    Posts
    5,622
    Points
    54,247
    Level
    72
    Points: 54,247, Level: 72
    Level completed: 14%, Points required for next Level: 1,303
    Overall activity: 77.0%


    Country: Belgium - Flanders



    1 members found this post helpful.
    yes the whole Villabruna cluster, they all have similar autosomal DNA, it is WHG



    actualy, instaed of WHG I should have referred to 'common west eurasian' as Laziridis labeled it

  19. #19
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1 year registered1000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    10-12-18
    Posts
    46
    Points
    1,161
    Level
    9
    Points: 1,161, Level: 9
    Level completed: 6%, Points required for next Level: 189
    Overall activity: 1.0%


    Country: Canada



    Quote Originally Posted by bicicleur View Post
    yes the whole Villabruna cluster, they all have similar autosomal DNA, it is WHG



    actualy, instaed of WHG I should have referred to 'common west eurasian' as Laziridis labeled it
    The "Villabruna" cluster should have been more aptly named "Continenza" cluster, but I guess Continenza is a more recent discovery.

  20. #20
    Advisor Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteran50000 Experience Points
    bicicleur's Avatar
    Join Date
    27-01-13
    Location
    Zwevegem, Belgium
    Posts
    5,622
    Points
    54,247
    Level
    72
    Points: 54,247, Level: 72
    Level completed: 14%, Points required for next Level: 1,303
    Overall activity: 77.0%


    Country: Belgium - Flanders



    Quote Originally Posted by aleph View Post
    The "Villabruna" cluster should have been more aptly named "Continenza" cluster, but I guess Continenza is a more recent discovery.

    bichon and losschbour are good references as well

  21. #21
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1 year registered1000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    10-12-18
    Posts
    46
    Points
    1,161
    Level
    9
    Points: 1,161, Level: 9
    Level completed: 6%, Points required for next Level: 189
    Overall activity: 1.0%


    Country: Canada



    Quote Originally Posted by bicicleur View Post
    bichon and losschbour are good references as well
    Both Bichon and Loschbour have some of the Aurignacian-magdalenian (Goyet type) ancestry along with some ANE as well. They are still mostly Continenza/WHG, but not as good of a proxy as Continenza mesolithic itself.
    "sample": "BEL_Loschbour:Average",
    "fit": 3.2962,
    "ITA_Grotta_Continenza_Meso": 95,
    "BEL_GoyetQ116-1": 3.33,
    "RUS_AfontovaGora3": 1.67

    Interestingly, Loschbour is a little more core-WHG like than Villabruna 1. Lol they could have called it a whole lot of things other than the "Villabruna cluster".

    I don't have access to Bichon, but it has more of the Aurignacian-Magdalenian type ancestry than Loschbour does as per the "Survival of late Pleistocene hunter-gatherer ancestry in the Iberian peninsula". I'd wager than Loschbour and Continenza mesolithic are better approximations for the main ancestral component of the "Villabruna cluster" than Villabruna 1 and Bichon samples are.

  22. #22
    Elite member Achievements:
    Veteran10000 Experience Points
    epoch's Avatar
    Join Date
    13-09-13
    Posts
    781
    Points
    11,252
    Level
    32
    Points: 11,252, Level: 32
    Level completed: 1%, Points required for next Level: 698
    Overall activity: 8.0%


    Country: Netherlands



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by aleph View Post
    Both Bichon and Loschbour have some of the Aurignacian-magdalenian (Goyet type) ancestry along with some ANE as well. They are still mostly Continenza/WHG, but not as good of a proxy as Continenza mesolithic itself.
    "sample": "BEL_Loschbour:Average",
    "fit": 3.2962,
    "ITA_Grotta_Continenza_Meso": 95,
    "BEL_GoyetQ116-1": 3.33,
    "RUS_AfontovaGora3": 1.67

    Interestingly, Loschbour is a little more core-WHG like than Villabruna 1. Lol they could have called it a whole lot of things other than the "Villabruna cluster".

    I don't have access to Bichon, but it has more of the Aurignacian-Magdalenian type ancestry than Loschbour does as per the "Survival of late Pleistocene hunter-gatherer ancestry in the Iberian peninsula". I'd wager than Loschbour and Continenza mesolithic are better approximations for the main ancestral component of the "Villabruna cluster" than Villabruna 1 and Bichon samples are.
    The Loschbour model in the "Survival" paper has a P-value below 0.05 which is basically a fail. If you have a look at Fu's Ice Age paper in Table S7.3 Loschbour has a higher GoyetQ116-1 level than Bichon when compared to Villabruna. Maybe a tad of Magdalenian went into the making of WHG proper, by the way.

  23. #23
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1000 Experience PointsVeteran
    etrusco's Avatar
    Join Date
    29-01-17
    Location
    lombardy
    Posts
    75
    Points
    2,061
    Level
    12
    Points: 2,061, Level: 12
    Level completed: 71%, Points required for next Level: 89
    Overall activity: 2.0%


    Country: Italy



    Quote Originally Posted by aleph View Post
    Both Bichon and Loschbour have some of the Aurignacian-magdalenian (Goyet type) ancestry along with some ANE as well. They are still mostly Continenza/WHG, but not as good of a proxy as Continenza mesolithic itself.
    "sample": "BEL_Loschbour:Average",
    "fit": 3.2962,
    "ITA_Grotta_Continenza_Meso": 95,
    "BEL_GoyetQ116-1": 3.33,
    "RUS_AfontovaGora3": 1.67

    Interestingly, Loschbour is a little more core-WHG like than Villabruna 1. Lol they could have called it a whole lot of things other than the "Villabruna cluster".

    I don't have access to Bichon, but it has more of the Aurignacian-Magdalenian type ancestry than Loschbour does as per the "Survival of late Pleistocene hunter-gatherer ancestry in the Iberian peninsula". I'd wager than Loschbour and Continenza mesolithic are better approximations for the main ancestral component of the "Villabruna cluster" than Villabruna 1 and Bichon samples are.
    also questions for @epoch

    What is the relationship between Villabruna and Ostuni?
    Was Ostuni already very similar to Villabruna or was from a different cluster?
    Did Ostuni have Basal Eurasian or ANE?

  24. #24
    Regular Member Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points
    kingjohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    05-09-16
    Posts
    375
    Points
    6,837
    Level
    24
    Points: 6,837, Level: 24
    Level completed: 58%, Points required for next Level: 213
    Overall activity: 40.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    E-M84

    Country: Uruguay



    nice thanks for sharing :)
    do i read the diagram correct ?
    and the tafrolat = 45% ancestral north african +55% common west Eurasian ?
    regards
    adam

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

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