New studies says that Anatolian IEs came from East

This seems to be basically what Reich suggests, but he places the original PIE homeland just south of the Caucasus rather than just north of the Caucasus.

What I find implausible about Reich's South Caucasus hypothesis is that PIE clearly spread and diverged at least as late as the Copper Age, but the South Caucasus and even, in fact, the North Caucasus were already packed with ANF and some Iran_Neolithic ancestry by that time, but very little EHG admixture, whereas the PIE expansion seems to be related with a much more Progress or Vonyuchka-like genetic profile, that is, a mix of a "pure" CHG-related people with a lot of EHG-related people (in fact, the steppe admixture in most Europeans have more EHG than the average Yamnaya and Progress/Vonyuchka, suggesting some dilution from mixing with Sredny Stog II and Late Khvalynsk-like groups before spreading to other parts of Europe). Therefore, I still think a steppe origin just north of the Caucasus is more likely.

And the presence of some small percentage of Progress/Vonyuchka-like admixture virtually everywhere in West Asia from Chalcolithic Anatolia to Chalcolithic Turkmenistan is really intriguing for me, though it could be explained by something else, like a higher than average ANE influence in those lands from older times (but it could also mean ancestry from a people with very similar genetic history to those presumably early PIE speakers in the Caucasus piedmont).
 
Let's wait for the Dzudzuana release, and see how Steppe individuals and Kotias/Satsurblia reacts towards Dzudzuana ancestry.

Is there a new release on Dzudzuana?

Laziridis said CHG can be modelled as Dzudzuana + ANE, and EHG as WHG + ANE.
These admixtures obviously happened before the dating of Kotias/Satsurblia.
 
Is there a new release on Dzudzuana?

Laziridis said CHG can be modelled as Dzudzuana + ANE, and EHG as WHG + ANE.
These admixtures obviously happened before the dating of Kotias/Satsurblia.

No, nothing about Dzudzuana came. In what they said, CHG is supposed to be dominantly Dzudzuana, little bit of ANE and little bit of Deep Ancestry. But the question is, is CHG in the Steppe really like Kotias or Satsurblia? Is there Deep Ancestry in them? There is clearly an ancestry on the line of Dzudzuana on the Steppe, wich CHG looks as the best proxy here, but it might not be exactly that. Without Dzudzuana, we cannot differentiate different levels of ancestry somehow like CHG but not exactly it. For what i remember in the graphs, there was no Deep Ancestry in Eastern Europe in Neolithic and Mesolithic + Samara, but there was Dzudzuana ancestry. Weirdly that they did not directly compared it with Yamnaya samples, instead of Mesolithic samples that dont really matter for the following history, but let's wait and see.
 
No, nothing about Dzudzuana came. In what they said, CHG is supposed to be dominantly Dzudzuana, little bit of ANE and little bit of Deep Ancestry. But the question is, is CHG in the Steppe really like Kotias or Satsurblia? Is there Deep Ancestry in them? There is clearly an ancestry on the line of Dzudzuana on the Steppe, wich CHG looks as the best proxy here, but it might not be exactly that. Without Dzudzuana, we cannot differentiate different levels of ancestry somehow like CHG but not exactly it. For what i remember in the graphs, there was no Deep Ancestry in Eastern Europe in Neolithic and Mesolithic + Samara, but there was Dzudzuana ancestry. Weirdly that they did not directly compared it with Yamnaya samples, instead of Mesolithic samples that dont really matter for the following history, but let's wait and see.

Laziridis supplements page 32

View attachment 11800
attachment.php


CHG is moddeled as 63 % of something ancestral to Dzudzuana and 37 % of something ancestral to Mal'ta (ANE)
 
Laziridis supplements page 32

View attachment 11800
attachment.php


CHG is moddeled as 63 % of something ancestral to Dzudzuana and 37 % of something ancestral to Mal'ta (ANE)

In the extended datas Conservative and Speculative, CHG has at least more than 10% of Deep Ancestry and almost the same % of AG3 so ANE ancestry. So i might guess the 37% are ANE from Dzudzuana + AG3? But then where comes into that picture the Deep Ancestry?
 
What I find implausible about Reich's South Caucasus hypothesis is that PIE clearly spread and diverged at least as late as the Copper Age, but the South Caucasus and even, in fact, the North Caucasus were already packed with ANF and some Iran_Neolithic ancestry by that time, but very little EHG admixture, whereas the PIE expansion seems to be related with a much more Progress or Vonyuchka-like genetic profile, that is, a mix of a "pure" CHG-related people with a lot of EHG-related people (in fact, the steppe admixture in most Europeans have more EHG than the average Yamnaya and Progress/Vonyuchka, suggesting some dilution from mixing with Sredny Stog II and Late Khvalynsk-like groups before spreading to other parts of Europe). Therefore, I still think a steppe origin just north of the Caucasus is more likely.

And the presence of some small percentage of Progress/Vonyuchka-like admixture virtually everywhere in West Asia from Chalcolithic Anatolia to Chalcolithic Turkmenistan is really intriguing for me, though it could be explained by something else, like a higher than average ANE influence in those lands from older times (but it could also mean ancestry from a people with very similar genetic history to those presumably early PIE speakers in the Caucasus piedmont).

Interestingly the two male samples of Progress, PG2001 and PG2004 are the one that were found as R1b-V1636, such as the one from Late Kura-Araxes. Coincidence?
 
In the extended datas Conservative and Speculative, CHG has at least more than 10% of Deep Ancestry and almost the same % of AG3 so ANE ancestry. So i might guess the 37% are ANE from Dzudzuana + AG3? But then where comes into that picture the Deep Ancestry?

further in the supplements CHG is also modelled with 3 and 4 ancestors, but Dzudzuana and ANA remain the main components
 
further in the supplements CHG is also modelled with 3 and 4 ancestors, but Dzudzuana and ANA remain the main components

What does ANA stands for? Ancient North African?
 
What I find implausible about Reich's South Caucasus hypothesis is that PIE clearly spread and diverged at least as late as the Copper Age, but the South Caucasus and even, in fact, the North Caucasus were already packed with ANF and some Iran_Neolithic ancestry by that time, but very little EHG admixture, whereas the PIE expansion seems to be related with a much more Progress or Vonyuchka-like genetic profile, that is, a mix of a "pure" CHG-related people with a lot of EHG-related people (in fact, the steppe admixture in most Europeans have more EHG than the average Yamnaya and Progress/Vonyuchka, suggesting some dilution from mixing with Sredny Stog II and Late Khvalynsk-like groups before spreading to other parts of Europe). Therefore, I still think a steppe origin just north of the Caucasus is more likely.

And the presence of some small percentage of Progress/Vonyuchka-like admixture virtually everywhere in West Asia from Chalcolithic Anatolia to Chalcolithic Turkmenistan is really intriguing for me, though it could be explained by something else, like a higher than average ANE influence in those lands from older times (but it could also mean ancestry from a people with very similar genetic history to those presumably early PIE speakers in the Caucasus piedmont).

there was already U2,U4 and U5 mtDNA in the Caucasus

Y & mtDNA statrs.jpg

and R1b-V1636 was already in Transcaucasia Kura-Araxes
 
sorry, typo, it should have been ANE - anciant north eurasian

Ok but the question now is, what was the Deep Ancestry in Iran_Neo? Clearly, CHG is not Iran_Neo right? And Dzudzuana and therefore ANF didn't have ( or not that much ) Deep Ancestry, so was the CHG in Steppe, CHG, Dzudzuana or Iran_Neo or even Something Else?
 
What I find implausible about Reich's South Caucasus hypothesis is that PIE clearly spread and diverged at least as late as the Copper Age, but the South Caucasus and even, in fact, the North Caucasus were already packed with ANF and some Iran_Neolithic ancestry by that time, but very little EHG admixture, whereas the PIE expansion seems to be related with a much more Progress or Vonyuchka-like genetic profile, that is, a mix of a "pure" CHG-related people with a lot of EHG-related people (in fact, the steppe admixture in most Europeans have more EHG than the average Yamnaya and Progress/Vonyuchka, suggesting some dilution from mixing with Sredny Stog II and Late Khvalynsk-like groups before spreading to other parts of Europe). Therefore, I still think a steppe origin just north of the Caucasus is more likely.

And the presence of some small percentage of Progress/Vonyuchka-like admixture virtually everywhere in West Asia from Chalcolithic Anatolia to Chalcolithic Turkmenistan is really intriguing for me, though it could be explained by something else, like a higher than average ANE influence in those lands from older times (but it could also mean ancestry from a people with very similar genetic history to those presumably early PIE speakers in the Caucasus piedmont).

dating PCA K=x.jpg

do we have autosomal in the Caucasus prior to the eneolithic (>6.7 ka)?

I think the Anatolian neolithic arrived not before the eneolithic in the Caucasus.
Deduct the Anatolian neolithic in the Caucasus, and Caucasus and steppe become pretty similar
 
there was already U2,U4 and U5 mtDNA in the Caucasus

View attachment 11801

and R1b-V1636 was already in Transcaucasia Kura-Araxes

The Progress R1b-V1636 individuals are dated 1000 years earlier than the Late Kura-Araxes one. The idea of Anatolian languages coming from Late KA, but originally from Piedmont of North Caucasus can make sense, and also explain the " archaism " of Anatolian Languages with others. But if this is what happened, we could argue that the entire Steppe spoked something related with each other and PIE.
 
further in the supplements CHG is also modelled with 3 and 4 ancestors, but Dzudzuana and ANA remain the main components

Still Lazaridis is saying :

" According to this model, a common population contributed ancestry to Gravettians (represented by Vestonice16) and to a “Common West Eurasian” population that contributed all the ancestry of Villabruna and most of the ancestry of Dzudzuana which also had 28.4±4.2% Basal Eurasian ancestry21 "
 
Still Lazaridis is saying :
" According to this model, a common population contributed ancestry to Gravettians (represented by Vestonice16) and to a “Common West Eurasian” population that contributed all the ancestry of Villabruna and most of the ancestry of Dzudzuana which also had 28.4±4.2% Basal Eurasian ancestry21 "
View attachment 11811
attachment.php


yes, dzudzuana is modelled 72 % Common West Eurasian and 28 % Basal Eursian
IMO Common West Eurasian is haplo IJ when it split into I and J (43 ka)
Vestonice is Common West Eurasian admixed with Kostenki-Sungir
Magdalenian (El Miron cluster) is Common West Eurasian admixed with West-European Aurignacian (Goyet 35 ka)
WHG (Villabruna cluster) is Common West Eurasian with some drift
 
View attachment 11811
attachment.php


yes, dzudzuana is modelled 72 % Common West Eurasian and 28 % Basal Eursian
IMO Common West Eurasian is haplo IJ when it split into I and J (43 ka)
Vestonice is Common West Eurasian admixed with Kostenki-Sungir
Magdalenian (El Miron cluster) is Common West Eurasian admixed with West-European Aurignacian (Goyet 35 ka)
WHG (Villabruna cluster) is Common West Eurasian with some drift

Is it safe to label an ancestral component to specific haplogroups?
 
Is it safe to label an ancestral component to specific haplogroups?

in this case, I think it is a good bet
43 ka, and I guess in Transcaucasia, arrival of the first humans in what was Neanderthal territory before
isolated from other modern humans
I don't think much admixing happened there and then, but they thrived and expanded, some into Europe (Mezmayskaya 39 ka, also inhabited by Neanderthals before)
 

This thread has been viewed 20677 times.

Back
Top