Genetic history of Calabrian Greeks reveals ancient events and long term isolation in

[Malaparte]

TAnatolian Neolithic ancestry moved north into the Caucasus before an admixed group moved south.

Could you please elaborate on this. I am not familiar with the fact that Anatolian Neolithic moved in this direction. I thought it moved west into Europe, with some of it moving south into the Levant.

 

[Angela]

Could you please elaborate on this. I am not familiar with the fact that Anatolian Neolithic moved in this direction. I thought it moved west into Europe, with some of it moving south into the Levant.

We knew this all the way back in the days when Dienekes was posting, but it's been confirmed.

See Wang et al:

In contrast, the oldest individuals from the northern mountainflank itself, which are three first-degree-related individuals fromthe Unakozovskaya cave associated with the Darkveti-MeshokoEneolithic culture (analysis label ‘Eneolithic Caucasus’) showmixed ancestry mostly derived from sources related to theAnatolian Neolithic (orange) and CHG/Iran Neolithic (green) inthe ADMIXTURE plot (Fig. 2c). While similar ancestry profileshave been reported for Anatolian and Armenian Chalcolithic andBA individuals9,19, this result suggests the presence of this mixedancestry north of the Caucasus as early as ~6500 years ago

This ancestry persists inthe following centuries at least until ~3100 yBP (1100 calBCE), asrevealed by individuals from Kura-Araxes from both the northeast (Velikent, Dagestan) and the South Caucasus (Kaps, Armenia), as well as MBA/LBA individuals (e.g. Kudachurt,Marchenkova Gora) from the north. Overall, this Caucasusancestry profile falls among the ‘Armenian and Iranian Chalcolithic’ individuals and is indistinguishable from other KuraAraxes individuals (Armenian EBA) on the PCA plot (Fig. 2),suggesting a dual origin involving Anatolian/Levantine and IranNeolithic/CHG ancestry, with only minimal EHG/WHG contribution possibly as part of the AF ancestry9.Admixture f3-statistics of the form f3(X, Y; target) with theCaucasus cluster as target resulted in significantly negative Zscores (Z < −3) when CHG (or AG3 in Late Maykop) were usedas one and Anatolian farmers as the second potential source(Supplementary Table 4). We also used qpWave to determine thenumber of streams of ancestry and found that a minimum of twois sufficient (Supplementary Table 5).

Details on page 5 and subsequent pages
https://reich.hms.harvard.edu/sites/reich.hms.harvard.edu/files/inline-files/s41467-018-08220-8.pdf

 

[Jovialis]

The thread on the 2018 Lazaridis study of Dzudzuana is, for me, both fascinating and very hard to follow. Seems relevant here.

Indeed, I hope that paper will finally be fully-published one day, or at least get a chance to see what the samples look like on ENA. Authors have released samples prior to papers being fully-published in the past, so here's hoping.

 

[Jovialis]

If Southern Italians have genetic continuity since the Late Neolithic/Early Bronze Age, than perhaps their ethnogenesis was similar to that of the "Northern" model for the Mycenaeans.

An Anatolia_N/CHG related people who were enriched by Steppe admixture.

 

[Jovialis]

If Southern Italians have genetic continuity since the Late Neolithic/Early Bronze Age, than perhaps their ethnogenesis was similar to that of the "Northern" model for the Mycenaeans.

An Anatolia_N/CHG related people who were enriched by Steppe admixture.

Not to say this was it, end of story. But perhaps it could be largely responsible for their admixture proportions. From the study the thread is based on:

Previous surveys on the ancient genetic legacy of Southern Italy pointed to genetic contributions linking Southern Italy and Mediterranean Greek islands with Anatolia and the Caucasus tracing back to migratory events occurred during the Neolithic and the Bronze Age, in which the Mediterranean served as a preferential crossroad3,13,27. In particular, while the expansion of Anatolian Neolithic farmers significantly impacted all the Peninsula, differential Bronze-Age contributions were observed for Southern Italy with respect to Northern Italian populations. Bronze Age influences in the gene pool of Southern Italians have been in fact associated to a non-steppe Caucasian-related ancestry carried along the Mediterranean shores at the same time, but independently from the Pontic-Caspian Steppe migrations that occurred through Continental Europe. Consistently with this viewpoint, genetic analyses performed by comparing our modern populations with the main ancient ancestral sources have displayed the clustering of analysed Southern Italian groups with Neolithic and Bronze Age samples from Anatolian, Aegean Minoan and Mycenaean populations, as opposed to the affinity of Northern Italy with Late-Neolithic and Bronze-Age samples from continental Europe (Suppl. Figure S8). Accordingly, both f3-outgroup, qpGraph and qpAdmixture analyses (Fig. 4, Suppl. Figure S9, Suppl. Figure S10) revealed influences related to a Steppe ancestry in the Northern Italian groups, instead paralleled in Southern Italy by an analogous Caucasian-related contribution from a non-Steppe CHG/Iran_N source. Importantly, the same ancestral sources are equally shared both by the present-day “open” (i.e. not-isolated) Southern Italian populations of Benevento, Castrovillari and Catanzaro, as well as by the geographically and linguistically-isolated communities of the Aspromonte mountain area (Fig. 4, Suppl. Table S8), thus signaling a common genetic background that possibly predates the linguistic hypotheses originally suggested about the times of formation of the Greco language in Southern Italy. Accordingly, we hypothesize that the genetic continuity between Southern Italian populations and the other Mediterranean groups may date back to these Neolithic and post-Neolithic events and may have been subsequently maintained and in some cases reinforced by continuous and overlapping gene flows following similar paths of diffusion and interaction between populations, among which the migrations of Greek-speaking people during the classical era (Magna Graecia) and/or in Byzantine and subsequent times. (Sarno et al. 2021)

 

[blevins13]

Not to say this was it, end of story. But perhaps it could be largely responsible for their admixture proportions. From the study the thread is based on:

So basically, this enrichment event or events were big enough to cause language shift in Greece correct?


Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum

 

[Jovialis]

I'm not an expert in language, but they do share a lot of cultural similarities. I think the Proto-Greeks and language probably came from the north, and mixed with Minoans and people like the Minoans, to ultimately produce the Mycenaeans

When I use them for modeling with Italian populations, they are more of a proxy in that situation. The Minoans are a good proxy population for the Anatolia/CHG-IN signal that was prevalent the Mediterranean.

 

[Angela]

Not to say this was it, end of story. But perhaps it could be largely responsible for their admixture proportions. From the study the thread is based on:

Good work, Jovialis. I have two questions, though.

What, given there's a significant amount of R1b U152, for example, in Sicily and Calabria, would explain there's 0 % Beaker in them?

Also, Tuscans are not very different at all from, say, Emilians or some Ligurians globally. What would explain the drastic shift from Northern Italy to Tuscans?

 

[brick]

Good work, Jovialis. I have two questions, though.

What, given there's a significant amount of R1b U152, for example, in Sicily and Calabria, would explain there's 0 % Beaker in them?

Also, Tuscans are not very different at all from, say, Emilians or some Ligurians globally. What would explain the drastic shift from Northern Italy to Tuscans?

There are two Tuscan averages on the original Dodecad K12b datasheet: Tuscan HGDP (7 individuals), TSI30 Metspalu/1000Genomes (21 individuals), Jovialis is using only the former. When all averages are included the shift is less drastic.


Dodecad K12b original datasheet

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Udc_oP9yYMZR0RYXLMjP6l60D8k3_0cXny8DzZzx0Co/edit#gid=0

 

[Malaparte]

Between this thread, the Mycenaean thread, and the Daunian thread, I tend to lose track of which issues are relevant where.

First, with regard to Catacomb, what are its components? Is it 50% EHG and 50% CHG, as with Yamnaya, or does it have additional EHG (or ANE)?

Second, although people like Robert Drews have argued for a direct takeover by IE warrior elites of sites in Greece giving rise to Mycenae, with the implication that Catacomb ancestry arrived in Greece directly (without admixture on the way), we have no evidence an unmediated movement into Southern Italy. The Catacomb that reached Italy would have been heavily admixed before arriving.

Third, if Drews is wrong and Catacomb ancestry moved into Greece by gradually working its way down through the Balkans, then is not plausible that this ancestry also moved west through Serbia and across the Adriatic into Central Italy? (And wouldn't the Daunian conversation apply here?)

Fourth, which R1b lineages did Catacomb carry? The Romans appear to descend from Bell Beaker R1b-U152. But maybe it was Catacomb ancestry that brought the IE gods and religion? That is, maybe the Romans got their blood from Bell Beaker, but their religion from Catacomb?

 

[brick]

Between this thread, the Mycenaean thread, and the Daunian thread, I tend to lose track of which issues are relevant where.

First, with regard to Catacomb, what are its components? Is it 50% EHG and 50% CHG, as with Yamnaya, or does it have additional EHG (or ANE)?

Second, although people like Robert Drews have argued for a direct takeover by IE warrior elites of sites in Greece giving rise to Mycenae, with the implication that Catacomb ancestry arrived in Greece directly (without admixture on the way), we have no evidence an unmediated movement into Southern Italy. The Catacomb that reached Italy would have been heavily admixed before arriving.

Third, if Drews is wrong and Catacomb ancestry moved into Greece by gradually working its way down through the Balkans, then is not plausible that this ancestry also moved west through Serbia and across the Adriatic into Central Italy? (And wouldn't the Daunian conversation apply here?)

Fourth, which R1b lineages did Catacomb carry? The Romans appear to descend from Bell Beaker R1b-U152. But maybe it was Catacomb ancestry that brought the IE gods and religion? That is, maybe the Romans got their blood from Bell Beaker, but their religion from Catacomb?

 

[Angela]

There are two Tuscan averages on the original Dodecad K12b datasheet: Tuscan HGDP (7 individuals), TSI30 Metspalu/1000Genomes (21 individuals), Jovialis is using only the former. When all averages are included the shift is less drastic.


Dodecad K12b original datasheet

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Udc_oP9yYMZR0RYXLMjP6l60D8k3_0cXny8DzZzx0Co/edit#gid=0

Still seems too steep to me for the HGDP sample. It's like they're from completely different provinces. From my own results, yes, I'm always closer to TSI than to the HGDP sample, but the differences aren't huge. Also, where is the Italian_Tuscany sample from? Is it an academic paper? I have the same question for Liguria. Is it the mountain Ligure villages or are those used for Piemonte?

Never have I seen such a big difference between Emilia and Romagna, either; a difference, yes, but not so drastic What paper provides those two samples, and where were they collected?

The biggest question I have is how could Southern Italians have Italic ancestry, which is clear from the yDna as well as other analyses, and yet have no Northern Italian Beaker? I've always thought those samples are a bit problematic, given one has almost no steppe, one a little bit, and one a significant amount. Clearly, at the time they lived there hadn't been a complete homogenization. For this analysis, which samples were used?

 

[brick]

Still seems too steep to me for the HGDP sample. It's like they're from completely different provinces. From my own results, yes, I'm always closer to TSI than to the HGDP sample, but the differences aren't huge. Also, where is the Italian_Tuscany sample from? Is it an academic paper? I have the same question for Liguria. Is it the mountain Ligure villages or are those used for Piemonte? Never have I seen such a big difference between Emilia and Romagna, either; a difference, yes, but not so drastic What paper provides those two samples, and where were they collected?

These are from the original Dodecad K12b datasheet and are academic samples

North_Italian_HGDP (n = 11)
TSI30_Tuscan (n = 21)
Tuscan_HGDP (n = 7)
Sardinian_HGDP (n = 24)

These are from original Dodecad K12b datasheet and are not academic samples

N_Italian_D (n = 5)
O_Italian_D (n = 5)
C_Italian_D (n = 13)
Sicilian_D (n =15)
S_Italian_Sicilian_D (n = 10)

The rest are from Vahaduo. I don't know what their provenance is. All averages in the same PCA follows a similar pattern though.

The biggest question I have is how could Southern Italians have Italic ancestry, which is clear from the yDna as well as other analyses, and yet have no Northern Italian Beaker? I've always thought those samples are a bit problematic, given one has almost no steppe, one a little bit, and one a significant amount. Clearly, at the time they lived there hadn't been a complete homogenization. For this analysis, which samples were used?

For this analysis only one Bell Beaker Northern Italy sample have been used, the one with the most Steppe.

 

[Angela]

These are from the original Dodecad K12b datasheet and are academic samples

North_Italian_HGDP (n = 11)
TSI30_Tuscan (n = 21)
Tuscan_HGDP (n = 7)
Sardinian_HGDP (n = 24)

These are from original Dodecad K12b datasheet and are not academic samples

N_Italian_D (n = 5)
O_Italian_D (n = 5)
C_Italian_D (n = 13)
Sicilian_D (n =15)
S_Italian_Sicilian_D (n = 10)

The rest are from Vahaduo. I don't know what their provenance is. All averages in the same PCA follows a similar pattern though.

For this analysis only one Bell Beaker Northern Italy sample have been used, the one with the most Steppe.

Yes, I know about the provenance of the Dodecad samples, and trust them. Pity about the rest.

 

[Jovialis]

Good work, Jovialis. I have two questions, though.

What, given there's a significant amount of R1b U152, for example, in Sicily and Calabria, would explain there's 0 % Beaker in them?

Also, Tuscans are not very different at all from, say, Emilians or some Ligurians globally. What would explain the drastic shift from Northern Italy to Tuscans?

Good observations, I'm not sure why that is so. These calculators also have a tough time assigning the proper amounts of WHG vs Steppe.

 

[ihype02]

Well, I can tell you that in my husband's paternal villages there's a lot of G2a (his yDna) and the eastern R1a, plus a lot of J2a, so I would think Greece or Anatolia, unless the G2a is REALLY old.

This is from a yDna project for Reggio Calabria. There's certainly E as well, a lot of it just labeled E-M35. How and when it arrived I have no idea, and a lot of these people didn't really get detailed testing done, as I'm sure I don't need to tell you, which makes it difficult to make educated guesses. There's quite a bit of R-M269 as well as some I. Of course, this isn't a random sample.

There are three Panetta's, like our American politician, all forms of R.

There's one Bova, who is E-M35. I'd guess E-V13, but who knows.

A few family surnames have different yDna. It just goes to show you can't be sure just by surname.

IMO, G2a will turn out to be a major native South Italian-line. Also Ancient Greek carried this line in good numbers too. Here is a list of Kalymnos. Davidski said that the upcoming R1b in Ancient Greece is not Z2103. (maybe L23?)

Kalymnos (based on 52 matches):

E (5.7%):

E-V13
E-M78
E-L677

G (19.2%):

G-CTS11562 x7
G-PF3345
G-M342 x2

J2a (34.6%):

J2a-M319 x2
J2a-L25 x3
J2a-L26
J2a-M67 x4
J2a-L70 x6
J2a-L24
J2a-M92

J2b (3.8%):

J2b-M12
J2b-M241

J1 (13.4%):

J1a-CTS15/Z1828 x2
J1-Z2215 x5


I2 (3.8%):

I2a-M223
I2a-S12195

I1 (3.8%):

I1-M253
I1-M227

R1b (9.6%):

R1b-BY250
R1b-Z2108
R1b-P297
R1b-L23 x2

R1a (9.6%):

R1a-Z93 x4
R1a-M417


This type of R1a has also been seen in Rhodes. How much of this type is in Southern Italy?

https://anthrogenica.com/showthread...reek-islands-post-the-averages-of-your-region

 

[bigsnake49]

IMO, G2a will turn out to be a major native South Italian-line. Also Ancient Greek carried this line in good numbers too. Here is a list of Kalymnos. Davidski said that the upcoming R1b in Ancient Greece is not Z2103. (maybe L23?)

Kalymnos (based on 52 matches):

E (5.7%):

E-V13
E-M78
E-L677

G (19.2%):

G-CTS11562 x7
G-PF3345
G-M342 x2

J2a (34.6%):

J2a-M319 x2
J2a-L25 x3
J2a-L26
J2a-M67 x4
J2a-L70 x6
J2a-L24
J2a-M92

J2b (3.8%):

J2b-M12
J2b-M241

J1 (13.4%):

J1a-CTS15/Z1828 x2
J1-Z2215 x5


I2 (3.8%):

I2a-M223
I2a-S12195

I1 (3.8%):

I1-M253
I1-M227

R1b (9.6%):

R1b-BY250
R1b-Z2108
R1b-P297
R1b-L23 x2

R1a (9.6%):

R1a-Z93 x4
R1a-M417


This type of R1a has also been seen in Rhodes. How much of this type is in Southern Italy?

https://anthrogenica.com/showthread...reek-islands-post-the-averages-of-your-region

Is this from one of the commercial companies or scientific article? Never mind, it is from commercial companies.

 

[Angela]

We need academic samples. Plus, Rhegion (Reggio Calabria) was founded by the Chalcidese, Sybaris (Sibari) and Kroton (Crotone) by the Achaeans and finally Lokroi Epizephyroi (Locri) by settlers from the ancient Greek region known as Locride.

Why would anyone pick data from Kalymnos for a comparison?