Does anyone know why this happens? (Vahaduo)

In my opinion Proto-Balto-Slavs are descended rather from Steppe folks of the Sredni Stog culture - where early R1a-M417 was found - and not from Steppe folks of the Yamnaya culture. This is why I included both of these populations in my model and I just let the algorithm choose the better fitting one - as you can see in my case Sredni Stog is entirely preferred over Yamnaya.

Globular Amphora is a good representation for those "Old Europe" farmers who lived along the way of Steppe folks expansion from Ukraine towards the Baltic Sea.

POL_BKG_N_outlier1 - this person lived in times of Lengyel culture but autosomally was one of the remnants of pure hunter-gatherers along the south Baltic coast.

PS:

Population average "Polish" in this model does score some Yamnaya - contrary to my results - however, just like in my case Sredni Stog is preferred over Yamna.
 
This is strange for a modern Lithuanian not to pick Corded_Ware_Baltic_early, what is this Corded Ware Baltic early then? Is it Scandinavian CWC or East Baltic CWC? Scandinavian one may have some components (SHG or early farmer) that shift the modelling off.

Dagne I think that Corded_Ware_Baltic_Early was a "fresh off the bout" (or rather: "fresh off the horse") migrant straight from Ukraine's Steppe.

Corded_Ware_Baltic_Late - on the other hand - was already mixed with local population, which is why it is more similar to modern Lithuanians.

So it seems CWC_Baltic_Early didn't have any extra components, quite the opposite - it was missing some crucial components, absorbed later.

Edit:

This average includes these 3 individuals:

Corded_Ware_Baltic_early:Gyvakarai1
Corded_Ware_Baltic_early:I4629
Corded_Ware_Baltic_early:Plinkaigalis242

=====

List of populations closest to CWC_Baltic_early based on scaled version of coordinates:

ffskGXb.png
 
Even if I add to this model various Yamnaya subgroups and Poltavka, still Sredny Stog is preferred:

Target: Tomenable_scaled
Distance: 4.5234% / 0.04523438
65.4 UKR_Sredny_Stog_En_o4
18.2 Anatolia_Barcin_N
11.2 POL_BKG_N_o1
5.2 RUS_Poltavka
0.0 POL_Globular_Amphora
0.0 RUS_Karelia_HG
0.0 WHG
0.0 Yamnaya_KAZ_Karagash
0.0 Yamnaya_KAZ_Mereke
0.0 Yamnaya_RUS_Kalmykia
0.0 Yamnaya_RUS_Samara
0.0 Yamnaya_UKR

View attachment source_populations2.zip

Of course I realize that sample already had Neolithic Farmer admixture, but it lived in the Steppe.
 
How about my model (using scaled coordinates):

Your populations are still in the model, but I added two extra (my choices) to see which ones will be preferred:

Your samples = black
My populations = red

Polish16:

Target: Polish:polish16
Distance: 4.3672% / 0.04367198
58.6 UKR_Sredny_Stog_En_o4
18.8 Anatolia_Barcin_N
14.2 POL_BKG_N_o1
7.8 RUS_Karelia_HG
0.6 Yamnaya_RUS_Samara
0.0 WHG

Polish average:

Target: Polish
Distance: 5.0922% / 0.05092215
56.0 UKR_Sredny_Stog_En_o4
20.4 Anatolia_Barcin_N
15.0 POL_BKG_N_o1
7.2 Yamnaya_RUS_Samara
1.4 RUS_Karelia_HG
0.0 WHG

=======

Data used:

SOURCE:

Code:
Yamnaya_RUS_Samara,0.1255849,0.089028,0.0426986,0.1153479,-0.0287232,0.0450564,0.0036033,-0.0025642,-0.0559032,-0.0728943,0.0018222,3.32e-05,-0.0026924,-0.0233041,0.0366141,0.0157633,-0.0012316,-0.0017879,-0.0038408,0.0137704,-0.0031749,0.0007557,0.0110649,0.0186102,-0.004537UKR_Sredny_Stog_En_o4:I6561,0.127482,0.11577,0.047894,0.070737,0.010771,0.026216,0.00376,0.008077,-0.017385,-0.030069,-0.008282,0.005845,0.005798,-0.029038,0.013436,0.005834,-0.005215,-0.003801,-0.006034,0.002126,-0.010981,0.004081,0.000616,0.017713,-0.003952
WHG,0.1246365,0.116278,0.184789,0.189279,0.1546445,0.0464355,0.0131605,0.0372675,0.0890705,0.017768,-0.0153455,-0.015811,0.0159065,-0.0030275,0.053338,0.0582065,0.00502,0.016343,-0.0093015,0.055589,0.0944585,0.0111905,-0.049607,-0.160866,0.0170045
POL_BKG_N_o1,0.134311,0.11577,0.190446,0.187987,0.136025,0.063866,0.017156,0.03046,0.069743,-0.011481,-0.003897,-0.017534,0.023934,-0.004679,0.03013,0.053168,0.016428,0.004054,-0.002137,0.05315,0.074743,0.012613,-0.035249,-0.135682,0.017364
Anatolia_Barcin_N,0.1175998,0.180118,0.0035312,-0.101158,0.0510443,-0.0483875,-0.0043582,-0.0069334,0.0362287,0.0807473,0.0079718,0.0118803,-0.0234545,0.0004691,-0.0419807,-0.0101913,0.0233091,0.0019866,0.0136954,-0.0097489,-0.0142249,0.0057723,-0.0041232,-0.0031658,-0.0043437
RUS_Karelia_HG,0.1236877,0.0321583,0.129855,0.2101663,-0.010361,0.0571723,-0.0196627,-0.0234603,-0.002659,-0.0860153,0.0182957,-0.0184337,0.0333497,-0.039085,0.018865,0.0295237,-0.0148203,0.0031673,-0.0044413,0.012506,-0.007487,0.0169817,0.0093667,-0.021007,-0.0103383
UKR_Sredny_Stog_En_o4,0.127482,0.11577,0.047894,0.070737,0.010771,0.026216,0.00376,0.008077,-0.017385,-0.030069,-0.008282,0.005845,0.005798,-0.029038,0.013436,0.005834,-0.005215,-0.003801,-0.006034,0.002126,-0.010981,0.004081,0.000616,0.017713,-0.003952

TARGET:

Code:
Polish,0.1318405,0.1292694,0.0698685,0.0577382,0.0406754,0.0217127,0.0086781,0.0108626,-0.0009329,-0.0185524,-0.0043488,-0.0064187,0.013093,0.0186295,-0.0070244,-0.0005595,0.0015455,-7.41e-05,0.0026948,0.0012872,-0.0031286,-0.0031185,0.0056063,-0.0033328,-8.76e-05
Polish:Polish16,0.137726,0.125926,0.069767,0.06783,0.042162,0.01757,0.00188,0.000462,0.002454,-0.019499,-0.011042,-0.004946,0.010555,0.010735,-0.000679,0.013524,-0.003651,-0.002407,-0.002514,0.001876,-0.00861,-0.004699,0.002835,-0.008314,-0.004431

I've always used scaled coordinates.
I use earlier populations as a source. You use later cultures and stay out of context.
 
Even if I add to this model various Yamnaya subgroups and Poltavka, still Sredny Stog is preferred:
Target: Tomenable_scaled
Distance: 4.5234% / 0.04523438
65.4 UKR_Sredny_Stog_En_o4
18.2 Anatolia_Barcin_N
11.2 POL_BKG_N_o1
5.2 RUS_Poltavka
0.0 POL_Globular_Amphora
0.0 RUS_Karelia_HG
0.0 WHG
0.0 Yamnaya_KAZ_Karagash
0.0 Yamnaya_KAZ_Mereke
0.0 Yamnaya_RUS_Kalmykia
0.0 Yamnaya_RUS_Samara
0.0 Yamnaya_UKR
View attachment 12053
Of course I realize that sample already had Neolithic Farmer admixture, but it lived in the Steppe.


'UKR_Srendy' you used Already has an 'excess' of EHG and hides the EHG / Rarelia in the east when added to the model.

Target: UKR_Sredny_Stog_En_o4
Distance: 3.5594% / 0.03559414

60.2Yamnaya_RUS_Samara
26.8Anatolia_Barcin_N
10.0RUS_Karelia_HG
2.8WHG
0.2MAR_Iberomaurusian
 
Compare Finland and Poland with Norway for example:


Target: Finnish
Distance: 5.1847% / 0.05184738


Anatolia_Barcin_N 30.6
Yamnaya_RUS_Samara 30.0
RUS_Karelia_HG 27.0
WHG 9.8
Nganassan 2.6

Target: Polish:polish16
Distance: 4.6207% / 0.04620698

37.2 Anatolia_Barcin_N
28.6 Yamnaya_RUS_Samara
24.4 RUS_Karelia_HG
9.8 WHG

Target: Norwegian
Distance: 4.8877% / 0.04887723
46.2 Yamnaya_RUS_Samara
35.6 Anatolia_Barcin_N
13.2 WHG
5.0 RUS_Karelia_HG

Did you see the big difference? The difference gets even bigger when we include Irish in the comparison

Target: Irish
Distance: 4.9374% / 0.04937387
49.8Yamnaya_RUS_Samara
36.4Anatolia_Barcin_N
13.8WHG

No EHG in Ireland. But the closer you get to Finland and Eastern Europe, the more EHG.

Finns are closer to Poles than Norwegians for the same reason.







Distance to:Finnish
0.05559852Polish:polish16
0.06710421Norwegian

Target: Finnish
Distance: 5.3291% / 0.05329137


72.0 Polish
28.0 Norwegian
 
Dagne I think that Corded_Ware_Baltic_Early was a "fresh off the bout" (or rather: "fresh off the horse") migrant straight from Ukraine's Steppe.

Corded_Ware_Baltic_Late - on the other hand - was already mixed with local population, which is why it is more similar to modern Lithuanians.

So it seems CWC_Baltic_Early didn't have any extra components, quite the opposite - it was missing some crucial components, absorbed later.

Edit:

This average includes these 3 individuals:

Corded_Ware_Baltic_early:Gyvakarai1
Corded_Ware_Baltic_early:I4629
Corded_Ware_Baltic_early:Plinkaigalis242

=====

List of populations closest to CWC_Baltic_early based on scaled version of coordinates:

ffskGXb.png
Thanks!

Well, Baltic Hunter Gatherers and Immigrant Herders (Early Baltic Corded Ware) did not mix in the Baltic territory for quite a long time - they had different diet, lifestyle and lived in different places. So it is not like IE herders conquered the land - basically they stayed apart. The herders needed to deforest fertile grassland while the forest Neolithic inhabitants lived in swampy places next to rivers because they mainly ate fish. I imagine that Hunter Gatherers were like Yeti or Bigfoot - they were somewhere around, but no one could really meet or see them apart from traces that they left.

In broad terms these Early Baltic Corded Ware individuals from Plinkaigalis and Gyvakarai did not have that much of hunter gatherer (compared to earlier or later Eastern Baltic peoples) or any neolithic farmer while the later corded ware had (*because they eventually started to mix with local HG and also farmers mediated from more western CWC horizon).

Early Baltic Corder Ware is quite close to Yamnaya from Kalmykia, too, which is just a bit North of the Northern Caucasus.
Amazing, how similar CWC individuals are, how widely they spread, and how far they could have travelled during their lifetime. For Baltic archeologists it was always difficult to find remains of housing for CWC. It was explained that it is because they were herders and constantly on a move or because they travelled like campaigns of mercenaries/warriors who kept on coming and going rather than settled in one place for all seasons.
 
Last edited:

This thread has been viewed 13585 times.

Back
Top