What does "Iranian related ancestry" mean?

[Regio X]

Interesting, so Sardinians have to be the most Dzudzuana-like population in the world today ?

Dzudzuana is too old, but ok. Sardinians score 77-87% for Anatolian Hunter-Gatherer in models using G25 (depending on Settings and stuff), and AHG in turn was supposedly a "Dzudzuana relic", so I believe Sardinians are perhaps the most "Dzudzuana-like" among moderns, or simply the closest to Dzudzuana. Other areas apparently very rich in AHG are La Rioja, Corsica, Bergamo, Basque C. etc.

For isolating components I used as sources AHG itself, WHG, Natufian, Taforalt, Shum Laka 8000, Kotias, Karelia, Iran Meso, East Asian, Kenya Neo and others (including moderns, when I don't find ancient sources, such Australians etc.).

 

[ratchet_fan]

@Ygorcs @rachet
Always Lazaridis et al. You guys can check some models here: https://www.biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/suppl/2018/09/20/423079.DC1/423079-1.pdf
Afaik, p-values above 0.05 are more meaningful, and higher p-values could indicate more feasible models (which doesn't mean that they should be taken literally; we have examples of supposed good models evidencing shared ancestry rather than actual ancestry).

You may find models for the same components in more than one table, so explore them. For example, models for Anatolia N may be found in tables S3.1, S3.2 and S3.5.

rachet, as for uniparentals markers, are you talking abt. modern lineages in Caucasus/Iran that could be related to these old components such ENA?

Yes I'm talking about what ydnas and mtdnas could account for the ENA.

 

[ratchet_fan]

Well, from Razib Khan's review of "

he seems to feel they're correct in their conclusions.

"In the paper, they used whole genomes to reconstruct the ancestral steppe/Iranian population without any residual “Ancient Ancestral South Indian” (AASI), the latter of which has no West Eurasian. They did the same for the AASI. These reconstructions are always dicey, but they made a good faith effort to check their work. On the whole, that section was impressive. The authors seem to be roughly aligned with the results in Narasimhan et al. 2019. The AASI seems to be homogeneous, with the exception of attempting to model them from donors which were Munda or Burusho, both groups with deep East Asian admixture (illustrating the problem with deconvolution). Second, they show that the AASI are not clustering with the Andamanese, which makes sense since these groups diverged closer to 40,000 years ago. Finally, the steppe/Iranian group looks most like Armenian middle-to-late Bronze Age people. A synthesis of steppe and some Iranian-like ancestry."

Now, does he mean by steppe/Iranian group the "Iranians" of the steppe, or just the steppe people living on the eastern steppe. I'd say the Iranian speaking people on the steppe? So, then, what's the definition of steppe in the last sentence? Does it also include CHG/Iranian like of the "steppe" people, but just a little more?

The whole thing gets very tricky when every term isn't precisely defined.

The paper:
https://academic.oup.com/mbe/article/36/8/1628/5364274

The Khan article:
https://www.gnxp.com/WordPress/2020...ute-carrier-family-genes-are-importantbut-how

Interesting.

Also I thought the Burusho were one of the more West Eurasian populations in that part of the world. How do they have deep East Asian admixture? Genghis Khan given wikipedia says they have y C3 (at 8%, O3 at 3%).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burusho_people#Genetics

 

[spruithean]

Who did it?!

You’ve literally posted about this concept in several other threads under your previous account you’ve been using the same or similar talking points to push your “PIE out of Iran” theory in close association with your “Germanic out of Iran” theory. The genetic and linguistic data still does not support either of your theories.

 

[Ygorcs]

You’ve literally posted about this concept in several other threads under your previous account you’ve been using the same or similar talking points to push your “PIE out of Iran” theory in close association with your “Germanic out of Iran” theory. The genetic and linguistic data still does not support either of your theories.

There's a 3rd one, too, spruithean; "Italic out of Iran". Apparently the IE language evolution could only happen within the borders of present-day Iran, so every new stage of the evolution and dispersal of the IE language family necessarily came from that same factory. :embarassed:

 

[ratchet_fan]

You’ve literally posted about this concept in several other threads under your previous account you’ve been using the same or similar talking points to push your “PIE out of Iran” theory in close association with your “Germanic out of Iran” theory. The genetic and linguistic data still does not support either of your theories.

Not just Germanic but the differentiated sub branches are from Iran too. North Germanics are from Gilan and Mazandaran. High German speakers from Khuzestan, Low German speakers from Iranian Kurdistan, English Speakers from Iranian Azerbaijan. Also don't forget about noble Goths of Khorasan.

 

[Shahmiri]

There's a 3rd one, too, spruithean; "Italic out of Iran". Apparently the IE language evolution could only happen within the borders of present-day Iran, so every new stage of the evolution and dispersal of the IE language family necessarily came from that same factory. :embarassed:

And "Hellenic out of Iran" (Mugan plain) and "Indo-Iranian out of Iran (Tepe Hissar),... But as I said in this thread: https://www.eupedia.com/forum/threa...-Elamite)-was-deciphered-an-IE-language/page2 It is wrong to call Gutian as a Germanic language, these are just Proto-Indo-European dialects, there were actually just some minor differences between these dialects.
Tat language in the Caucasus and Tajiki language in Tajikistan are Persian dialects, it doesn't mean that they are direct descendants of Old Persian, the first one relates to Titi dialect in the northwest of Iran and second one to Khorasani dialect in the northeast of Iran.

 

[halfalp]

Do somebody remember the difference between Iran_Neo like Ganj Dareh and Iran_Chl like Hajji Firuz? What ancestry increased, decreased or was introduced?

 

[Shahmiri]

Not just Germanic but the differentiated sub branches are from Iran too. North Germanics are from Gilan and Mazandaran. High German speakers from Khuzestan, Low German speakers from Iranian Kurdistan, English Speakers from Iranian Azerbaijan. Also don't forget about noble Goths of Khorasan.

I know what you mean but among all Indo-European languages of Europe, Proto-Germanic as an IE dialect seems to be the only one which was still spoken in Iran in the first half of the 1st millennium BC. In fact it can be considered as the last IE dialect.

 

[Anfänger]

I know what you mean but among all Indo-European languages of Europe, Proto-Germanic as an IE dialect seems to be the only one which was still spoken in Iran in the first half of the 1st millennium BC. In fact it can be considered as the last IE dialect.

Lol you are so clueless. They are making fun of you because of the bullshit you post day in and day out.

 

[Anfänger]

Do somebody remember the difference between Iran_Neo like Ganj Dareh and Iran_Chl like Hajji Firuz? What ancestry increased, decreased or was introduced?

Iran_Chl is a blend of all stone Age near eastern source populations:



After 5000BC there were no unadmixed Iran Neolithics left. In my opinion when "Iranian related " arrived in Southern Europe it was actually something related to Iran_Chl rather than Iran_N.

Modern Iranians are basically Iran_Chl+Turkmenistan Iron Age (Yaz-culture, Early IE-Iranians).

 

[halfalp]

Iran_Chl is a blend of all stone Age near eastern source populations:

View attachment 12261

After 5000BC there were no unadmixed Iran Neolithics left. In my opinion when "Iranian related " arrived in Southern Europe it was actually something related to Iran_Chl rather than Iran_N.

Modern Iranians are basically Iran_Chl+Turkmenistan Iron Age (Yaz-culture, Early IE-Iranians).

Thanks. Do you know roughly the difference between Anatolian_Chl and Iran_Chl?

 

[Anfänger]

Thanks. Do you know roughly the difference between Anatolian_Chl and Iran_Chl?

To me Anatolia_Chl looks like Anatolia_N+Iran_Chl on a cline. In eastern Anatolia Iran_Chl is 60% while in western Anatolia Iran_Chl is 35%. There is also a minor component of CHG which is higher in Northern Anatolia Black Sea Coast.



But this is my opinion. Maybe others have better a explanation.

 

[ratchet_fan]

Thanks Anfanger for helping us at least get something useful out of this thread.

 

[halfalp]

To me Anatolia_Chl looks like Anatolia_N+Iran_Chl on a cline. In eastern Anatolia Iran_Chl is 60% while in western Anatolia Iran_Chl is 35%. There is also a minor component of CHG which is higher in Northern Anatolia Black Sea Coast.

View attachment 12262

But this is my opinion. Maybe others have better a explanation.

Thanks, i would have thought that Anatolia_Chl would have some Levant_N ancestry independant of Iran_Chl. Because Levant_Chl does have Anatolia_N ancestry right?

 

[Shahmiri]

Figure 2 in "The Arrival of Steppe and Iranian Related Ancestry in the Islands of the Western Mediterranean" clearly shows that Iran_N came to Europe in the Bronze Age.

As you see red color doesn't exist in neolithic ones in Greece, Croatia, Iberia, France, ..., so this "Iranian related ancestry" relates to Bronze Age migrations.

 

[Shahmiri]

In the Bronze Age this "Iranian-related ancestry" came to Anatolia and then Hittite, Luwian and some other IE cultures appeared there, in 2,000 BC it came to Greece and 1,500 BC in South of Italy, what appeared there?

DNA analysis unearths origins of Minoans, the first major European civilization

DNA analysis is unearthing the origins of the Minoans, who some 5,000 years ago established the first advanced Bronze Age civilization in present-day Crete. The findings suggest they arose from an ancestral Neolithic population that had arrived in the region about 4,000 years earlier.

It seems to be clear in Greece it was not Minoan culture, so what was it?

 

[spruithean]

Figure 2 in "The Arrival of Steppe and Iranian Related Ancestry in the Islands of the Western Mediterranean" clearly shows that Iran_N came to Europe in the Bronze Age.

As you see red color doesn't exist in neolithic ones in Greece, Croatia, Iberia, France, ..., so this "Iranian related ancestry" relates to Bronze Age migrations.

You really ought to read the paper you’ve clipped this image from and try to understand the context and the timing and even take a look at any PCA plots. These studies still do not support your theories.

 

[Shahmiri]

You really ought to read the paper you’ve clipped this image from and try to understand the context and the timing and even take a look at any PCA plots. These studies still do not support your theories.

Would you please tell me what I should read in this paper?!

https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/584714v1.full

We detect Iranian-related ancestry in Sicily by the Middle Bronze Age 1800-1500 BCE, consistent with the directional shift of these individuals toward Mycenaeans in PCA (Fig. 2b).

What does it mean?

This is not my theory, look at Journal of European Studies, most of scholars already believe Indo-European culture originated in South of Caucasus or Iran.

 

[Anfänger]

Thanks, i would have thought that Anatolia_Chl would have some Levant_N ancestry independant of Iran_Chl. Because Levant_Chl does have Anatolia_N ancestry right?

You are right Levant_Chl does have Anatolia_N even the older Pre-Pottery Neolithics have a lot of Anatolia_N:



The Natufians spread south to Africa and the Arabian Peninsula. I am not aware of huge movements of Natufians to Anatolia.