Neolithic Anatolia-Kinship Patterns

Angela

Elite member
Messages
21,823
Reaction score
12,325
Points
113
Ethnic group
Italian
It would be nice to get hold of these new Neolithic samples.

See:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0960982221004231

"[h=2]Highlights[/h]•Genetic kinship estimated from co-buried individuals’ genomes in Neolithic Anatolia
•Close relatives are common among co-burials in Aşıklı and Boncuklu
•Many unrelated infants found buried in the same building in Çatalhöyük and Barcın
•Neolithic societies in Southwest Asia may have held diverse concepts of kinship


[h=2]Summary[/h]The social organization of the first fully sedentary societies that emerged during the Neolithic period in Southwest Asia remains enigmatic,1 mainly because material culture studies provide limited insight into this issue. However, because Neolithic Anatolian communities often buried their dead beneath domestic buildings,2 household composition and social structure can be studied through these human remains. Here, we describe genetic relatedness among co-burials associated with domestic buildings in Neolithic Anatolia using 59 ancient genomes, including 22 new genomes from Aşıklı Höyük and Çatalhöyük. We infer pedigree relationships by simultaneously analyzing multiple types of information, including autosomal and X chromosome kinship coefficients, maternal markers, and radiocarbon dating. In two early Neolithic villages dating to the 9th and 8th millennia BCE, Aşıklı Höyük and Boncuklu, we discover that siblings and parent-offspring pairings were frequent within domestic structures, which provides the first direct indication of close genetic relationships among co-burials. In contrast, in the 7th millennium BCE sites of Çatalhöyük and Barcın, where we study subadults interred within and around houses, we find close genetic relatives to be rare. Hence, genetic relatedness may not have played a major role in the choice of burial location at these latter two sites, at least for subadults. This supports the hypothesis that in Çatalhöyük,3, 4, 5 and possibly in some other Neolithic communities, domestic structures may have served as burial location for social units incorporating biologically unrelated individuals. Our results underscore the diversity of kin structures in Neolithic communities during this important phase of sociocultural development."

I can't think of which social units.

 
Thanks for sharing(y)
Tell you the truth it become boring again same y haplogroups( C,G2, ) i think H3a is maybe a surprise ... :unsure:

I think here are the genome( source other thread not anthrogenica):unsure:

https://www.ebi.ac.uk/ena/browser/v...60JPCgYS6XrWn-Kcq83pMJ1tLT1RQunHpp1hUPth3hcLQ

ID 33 Aşıklı Höyük 7945–7890 U3a G2a2b
ID 1885 F Çatalhöyük K1a 6905-6885 .84 G2a2a1
ID 2033 F.84 / 86 6690-6590 H2a2a1d H3a1 Çatalhöyük
ID 2779 Çatalhöyük H2a2a C1a2 F.265
ID 5357 Çatalhöyük 7035-661 N1a

P.s
I do know though that y haplogroup H was found in neolithic europe context before
 
Stratigraphic level / areaBuildingCalibrated 14C date (cal. BCE)Age classMolecular sexGenome coverageMitochondrial DNA haplogroupY chromosome haplogroup
2Aşıklı Höyük2AAB7585–7475 (95%)Young adultXX0.02H2a2a-
33Aşıklı Höyük2CC7945–7890 (9%)
7870–7595 (86%)
ChildXY0.07U3aG2a2b
40Aşıklı Höyük2BBH7935–7915 (1%)
7825–7590 (94%)
Old adultXX0.03N1a1a1-
128Aşıklı Höyük4B38225–7955 (95%)ChildXX5.03K1a4-
129Aşıklı Höyük4B38170–8115 (6%) 8060–8045 (1%)
8010–7985 (1%)
7970–7735 (86%)
Young adultXX0.79K1a4-
133Aşıklı Höyük4B18170–8115 (8%)
8060–8040 (1%)
8010–7980 (2%)
7975–7735 (84%)
Old adultXX1.16K1a4-
131Aşıklı Höyük4B18200–8110 (16%)
8095–8035 (7%)
8015–7740 (72%)
ChildXX0.09T2c1a-
136Aşıklı Höyük4B18175–8110 (7%)
8090–8075 (1%)
8065–8040 (1%)
8015–7705 (84%)
7695–7655 (2%)
AdultXX0.15T2c1a-
30006 F.7615ÇatalhöyükNorth G1146645–6495 (94%)
6490–6480 (1%)
InfantXX0.07K1a4-
8587 F.1013ÇatalhöyükNorth G114-NeonateXX0.14T2e-
2728 F.258ÇatalhöyükSouth M506695-6505 (95%)InfantXX0.08K1a-
2842 F.274ÇatalhöyükSouth M506690-6505 (95%)ChildXX0.09K1a-
2017 F.96ÇatalhöyükSouth M506815–6790 (2%)
6775–6595 (93%)
NeonateXX0.03T2-
1885 F.84ÇatalhöyükSouth M506905–6885 (1%)
6825–6635 (92%)
6625–6600 (2%)
ChildXY0.07K1aG2a2a1
2033 F.84/86ÇatalhöyükSouth M506690–6590 (95%)ChildXY0.01H2a2a1dH3a1
2779 F.265ÇatalhöyükSouth M50-InfantXY0.27H2a2aC1a2
5357 F.576ÇatalhöyükSouth K177035–6680 (93%)
6670–6650 (2%)
InfantXY0.06N1a1a1C1a2
21855 F.8214ÇatalhöyükSouth K17-ChildXX0.07H2a2a1-
21981 F.8153ÇatalhöyükSouth N89-InfantXX0.09K1a17-
5747 F.1064ÇatalhöyükSouth M916640–6490 (95%)InfantXX0.12T2c1-
11739 F.1912ÇatalhöyükTP Q-R-6235–6075 (95%)Middle adultXX0.20K1b1-
20217 F.3931ÇatalhöyükTP Q-R-6415–6240 (95%)ChildXX0.06K1a4b-
 
Interesting, that the later (Ceramic) Neolithic Anatolians didn't show any affinity to CHG/Iran_N, but had around 10% Levantine admixture.


Aceramic Neolithic-period populations had lower within-group genetic diversity (measured using the f3-statistic) than did Ceramic Neolithic groups (Figures 1D and S2C, and Tables Z8 and Z9) and carried a higher fraction of short runs of homozygosity (ROH) than most Ceramic Neolithic genomes (Figure S3G). This temporal increase in diversity, also noted in earlier studies,20 could be explained by two non-exclusive scenarios, namely population growth and genetic admixture. By testing D(Outgroup, X; Aceramic Anatolian, Ceramic Anatolian), where X represents an early Holocene Zagros or Levantine population, we found results compatible with southern and eastern gene flow into Central and West Anatolia between roughly 7,500 and 6,500 cal BCE (Figure 1E and Table Z4) as previously suggested.21,26 Using qpAdm, we could also model Ceramic Neolithic Anatolian populations as mixtures of c.90% Aceramic Neolithic Anatolian ancestry (estimate ± 1 standard error: 89%–92% ± 2%–4%) and c.10% Levantine ancestry (8%–11% ± 2%–4%) (models that included Zagros or Caucasus populations were not supported) (Table Z10). Notably, the timing of increased population mobility is contemporaneous with a stronger reliance on agriculture and animal husbandry as food sources, a shift to larger buildings, likely population growth, and possible shifts in patterns of social organization, as we describe below.

https://www.cell.com/current-biology/fulltext/S0960-9822(21)00423-1
 
Interesting, that the later (Ceramic) Neolithic Anatolians didn't show any affinity to CHG/Iran_N, but had around 10% Levantine admixture.




https://www.cell.com/current-biology/fulltext/S0960-9822(21)00423-1

I've been saying for years until I was blue in the face that it would turn out that a lot of Anatolian farmers had at least 10% Levantine Neolithic or related.

You had to use your logic. The hunter-gatherers at Boncuklu learned farming from the Levant. In almost all cases the movement of agriculture came with a certain amount of migration.

It also had to be because Early European farmers and Chalcolithic people like Otzi had it, and so some streams of the Neolithic had to carry it.

People just didn't want to believe it, for reasons we all know.
 
I've been saying for years until I was blue in the face that it would turn out that a lot of Anatolian farmers had at least 10% Levantine Neolithic or related.

You had to use your logic. The hunter-gatherers at Boncuklu learned farming from the Levant. In almost all cases the movement of agriculture came with a certain amount of migration.

It also had to be because Early European farmers and Chalcolithic people like Otzi had it, and so some streams of the Neolithic had to carry it.

People just didn't want to believe it, for reasons we all know.

it was known at least since 2019 with the paper that brought to light the Anatolian hunter-gatherer component that Ceramic Farmers had around 10% Levan_N, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6425003/ .
 
What does even ancient dna mean to some people?
 
it was known at least since 2019 with the paper that brought to light the Anatolian hunter-gatherer component that Ceramic Farmers had around 10% Levan_N, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6425003/ .
Indeed, we know it since Feldman et al.

Going by Feldman, actually the first farmers would have arrived to Anatolia more than 10k years ago bringing some Iran ancestry and at that point no Levant yet. Y-DNA G was there in this AAF period already. Perhaps the very first Gs that supposedly brought agriculture to Anatolia were either Iran-like or a mixture of it with AHG. Is so, not that surprising, if we think there's this ~9500 years old G2b sample from Iran with local ancestry. Later, in the ACF period, the Levant Neo ancestry would have arrived, bringing perhaps some E, T, H (all found in Levant Neo), to add up to some G, C, perhaps also J and a type of I, before the migration to Europe. This new paper doesn't seem to contradict it, since they talk on ACF as a mixture of AAF and 10% Levant (not AHG plus Levant).
So it seems the very first farmers in Anatolia (AAF) were closer to Iran than to Levant in ancestry, but Barcin already had both. Tepecik would have had extra Iran and Levant in comparison to Barcin, iirc. Levant Neo per se had some Anatolian as well, and if I'm not mistaken Iran Neo had a bit of it too.
 
Last edited:
I have seen some argue that the G2a in Early European Farmers (EFF)/Anatolian Neolithic Farmers (ANF), is derived from populations related to CHG/Iran_Neo, rather than Anatolian Hunter Gatherers (AHG) or Levantine Neolithic Farmers (Leavnt_N). There may be some currency to that theory, especially when one considers the genetic affinities between the Iron Gates Hunter Gatherers and AHG, and that Anatolian Aceramic farmers (AAF) inherit about 10% of their genes from a gene pool related to the CHG/Iran_Neo. This has has been demonstrated in the Y-DNA of some EEF samples. R17 and R19, two samples from the Neolithic site at Ripabianca di Monterado, Marche, Italy, were determined to carry Y-DNA Haplogroups J2a-PreY29673 and J2a-S11842, while I5068 and I5207, two samples from the Linear Pottery Culture in Austria, were found to belong to J2a-Z6048. Y-DNA Haplogroup J2a-Z6055 has been found in two EEF samples, I5078 from the Sopot MN in Croatia, and I1902/FEB3a from the Lengyel LN, in Hungary. All of these samples had minor amounts of CHG/Iran_N-related ancestry, and I believe the "Iceman" Otzi had minor amounts of CHG/Iran_N ancestry as well. This would mean that all Europeans have CHG/Iran_N-related ancestry from ANF/EEF, and not just from Western Steppe Herders (WSH). The Levant Neolithic ancestry found in ACF, also means that all Europeans have Levant_N/Natufian ancestry via ANF/EEF correct, or am I mistaken?
 
I have seen some argue that the G2a in Early European Farmers (EFF)/Anatolian Neolithic Farmers (ANF), is derived from populations related to CHG/Iran_Neo, rather than Anatolian Hunter Gatherers (AHG) or Levantine Neolithic Farmers (Leavnt_N). There may be some currency to that theory, especially when one considers the genetic affinities between the Iron Gates Hunter Gatherers and AHG, and that Anatolian Aceramic farmers (AAF) inherit about 10% of their genes from a gene pool related to the CHG/Iran_Neo. This has has been demonstrated in the Y-DNA of some EEF samples. R17 and R19, two samples from the Neolithic site at Ripabianca di Monterado, Marche, Italy, were determined to carry Y-DNA Haplogroups J2a-PreY29673 and J2a-S11842, while I5068 and I5207, two samples from the Linear Pottery Culture in Austria, were found to belong to J2a-Z6048. Y-DNA Haplogroup J2a-Z6055 has been found in two EEF samples, I5078 from the Sopot MN in Croatia, and I1902/FEB3a from the Lengyel LN, in Hungary. All of these samples had minor amounts of CHG/Iran_N-related ancestry, and I believe the "Iceman" Otzi had minor amounts of CHG/Iran_N ancestry as well. This would mean that all Europeans have CHG/Iran_N-related ancestry from ANF/EEF, and not just from Western Steppe Herders (WSH). The Levant Neolithic ancestry found in ACF, also means that all Europeans have Levant_N/Natufian ancestry via ANF/EEF correct, or am I mistaken?

That small but not negligible gene flow from the Levant, Caucasia and the Zagros/Iranian Plateau, which also explains how J2a, J2b and E1b1b were present in Neolithic Europe even when the Near Eastern influx was still virtually only ANF, can also be noticed even in a basic ancestry model using averaged genetic coordinates from the Global25 database. The fits are not very good (~4.8-6.5% except for the Boncuklu ANF, which displays a much lower and reasonable genetic distance), but I think they point, even if without much precision, to a reality.

Target: Levant_PPNC
Distance: 6.1629% / 0.06162869 | R5P
60.2 Levant_Natufian
39.8 TUR_Pinarbasi_HG (AHG)

Target: Levant_PPNB_contam
Distance: 5.4041% / 0.05404055 | R5P
56.6 Levant_Natufian
43.4 TUR_Pinarbasi_HG

Target: Levant_PPNB

Distance: 5.0305% / 0.05030543 | R5P
57.6 Levant_Natufian
42.4 TUR_Pinarbasi_HG

Target: TUR_Tepecik_Ciftlik_N
Distance: 5.5290% / 0.05528991 | R5P
71.4 TUR_Pinarbasi_HG
15.4 Levant_Natufian
13.2 GEO_CHG


Target: TUR_Kumtepe_N
Distance: 6.4517% / 0.06451701 | R5P
75.4 TUR_Pinarbasi_HG
9.4 IRN_Belt_Cave_Mesolithic_low_res
8.8 GEO_CHG
6.4 Levant_Natufian


Target: TUR_Boncuklu_N
Distance: 2.9586% / 0.02958591 | R5P
92.4 TUR_Pinarbasi_HG
4.8 IRN_Belt_Cave_Meso_low_res
2.8 GEO_CHG


Target: TUR_Barcin_N
Distance: 4.8313% / 0.04831264 | R5P
92.0 TUR_Pinarbasi_HG
4.4 Levant_Natufian
3.6 GEO_CHG


Target: IRN_Ganj_Dareh_N
Distance: 6.6560% / 0.06656007 | R5P
93.2 IRN_HotuIIIb_Meso
5.4 IRN_Belt_Cave_Meso_low_res
1.4 GEO_CHG
 
So there is legit Levant_N admixture in all EEFs then. Off topic. What is your view of the A1 and E1a samples found in Europe, in Sweden, Finland, Sardinia, Sicily, England, Scotland, Ireland, Poland, and Russia even. I think that both are Neolithic markers of some kind related to Ancestral North Africans, or a hypothetical Ancestral East African population, these populations being branches of humanity that split off before the main dispersal of AMH into Eurasian 60-70k ybp. There is some unexplained link to Basal Eurasians too.
 
So there is legit Levant_N admixture in all EEFs then. Off topic. What is your view of the A1 and E1a samples found in Europe, in Sweden, Finland, Sardinia, Sicily, England, Scotland, Ireland, Poland, and Russia even. I think that both are Neolithic markers of some kind related to Ancestral North Africans, or a hypothetical Ancestral East African population, these populations being branches of humanity that split off before the main dispersal of AMH into Eurasian 60-70k ybp. There is some unexplained link to Basal Eurasians too.

only time will tell and ancient dna
to back it up:unsure:
i don't know about
A1 and e1a ( to me personally they look like roman or carthaginian influnce ):cool-v:

about a3b2-m13
he is different and look to me like trans -med migration from north africa
but old enough neolithic

that will explain cases in yfull from sardinia to far away poland ::)
https://www.yfull.com/tree/A-V2667/

https://www.yfull.com/tree/A-FGC38299/

here is an interesting paper :

https://genomebiology.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13059-018-1393-5


Outside Africa, both A3-M13 and R-V88 harbour sub-lineages geographically restricted to the island of Sardinia and both seem to indicate ancient trans-Mediterranean contacts. The phylogeography of A3-M13 suggests that the direction of the movement was from Africa to Sardinia, while R-V88 topology indicates a Europe-to-Africa migration. Indeed, our data suggest a European origin of R-V88 about 12.3 kya, considering both the presence of two Sardinian R-V88 basal clades (R-M18 and R-V35) and that the V88 marker arose in the R-M343 background, which in turn includes Near-Eastern/European lineages [52]. It is worth noting that the arrival of R-V88 in the Sahara seems to have occurred between 8.67 and 7.85 kya (considering as an upper limit the time estimates of the last node including a European-specific lineage, while the lower limit is the coalescence age of all the African-specific lineages), refining the time frame of the trans-Saharan migration proposed in previous studies [37, 56]. The route of R-V88 toward the lake Chad basin probably passed through northeastern Africa rather than Arabia, considering the absence of R-V88 in the Horn of Africa. Interestingly, both A3-M13 and R-V88 European sub-clades coalesced in ancient times (> 7.62 kya for A3-M13/V2742 and between 12.34 and 8.67 kya for R-V88/M18 and R-V88/V35) (Additional file 2: Figures S2 and S5). So it is possible that both clades were widespread in southern Europe, where they have been replaced by the Y haplogroups brought by the following recurrent migration waves from Asia



 
only time will tell and ancient dna
to back it up:unsure:
i don't know about
A1 and e1a ( to me personally they look like roman or carthaginian influnce ):cool-v:

about a3b2-m13
he is different and look to me like trans -med migration from north africa
but old enough neolithic

that will explain cases in yfull from sardinia to far away poland ::)
https://www.yfull.com/tree/A-V2667/

https://www.yfull.com/tree/A-FGC38299/

here is an interesting paper :

https://genomebiology.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13059-018-1393-5


Outside Africa, both A3-M13 and R-V88 harbour sub-lineages geographically restricted to the island of Sardinia and both seem to indicate ancient trans-Mediterranean contacts. The phylogeography of A3-M13 suggests that the direction of the movement was from Africa to Sardinia, while R-V88 topology indicates a Europe-to-Africa migration. Indeed, our data suggest a European origin of R-V88 about 12.3 kya, considering both the presence of two Sardinian R-V88 basal clades (R-M18 and R-V35) and that the V88 marker arose in the R-M343 background, which in turn includes Near-Eastern/European lineages [52]. It is worth noting that the arrival of R-V88 in the Sahara seems to have occurred between 8.67 and 7.85 kya (considering as an upper limit the time estimates of the last node including a European-specific lineage, while the lower limit is the coalescence age of all the African-specific lineages), refining the time frame of the trans-Saharan migration proposed in previous studies [37, 56]. The route of R-V88 toward the lake Chad basin probably passed through northeastern Africa rather than Arabia, considering the absence of R-V88 in the Horn of Africa. Interestingly, both A3-M13 and R-V88 European sub-clades coalesced in ancient times (> 7.62 kya for A3-M13/V2742 and between 12.34 and 8.67 kya for R-V88/M18 and R-V88/V35) (Additional file 2: Figures S2 and S5). So it is possible that both clades were widespread in southern Europe, where they have been replaced by the Y haplogroups brought by the following recurrent migration waves from Asia




Very interesting thanks, I find it interesting that the only places in Africa where A is widespread is in eastern Africa, and to a lesser extent southwest Africa. There is a slight link with R1b-V88. I wonder if A will be found in Epipaleolithic North Africa, maybe in the Ancestral North African ancestry of the Iberomaurusians. Who knows, we need more ancient DNA from African and West Asia in general.
 
It would be nice to get hold of these new Neolithic samples.


Here they are:

Dodecad K12b

Code:
Anatolian_N:Ash002,0,1.94,6.33,0,37.51,0,0,1.25,12.09,0,40.88,0
Anatolian_N:Ash033,0,0,6.1,0,25.48,0,0,1.58,23.08,0,43.75,0
Anatolian_N:Ash040,0,0,9.16,0,37.94,0,0,0,2.73,0,46.45,3.73
Anatolian_N:Ash128,0,0,3.15,0.49,40.66,4.48,0,0.49,10.35,0.57,36.38,3.44
Anatolian_N:Ash129,0,0,4.95,0.64,44.13,0.19,0,0,8.97,0.74,39.08,1.29
Anatolian_N:Ash131,0,0,4.59,0,45.65,0.42,0,0,11.35,0,37.99,0
Anatolian_N:Ash133,0,0,2.3,0.55,43.73,4.22,0,1,10.43,0,36.62,1.15
Anatolian_N:Ash136,0,0,3.54,0,42.23,0.19,0,0,12.28,0,38.05,3.71
Anatolian_N:CCH144,0.25,0,2.92,0,29.41,0,0,0,17.31,0.38,47.4,2.33
Anatolian_N:CCH163,0,1.43,3.99,0,41.17,0,0,0,13.58,0,39.81,0
Anatolian_N:CCH285,0,0,6.23,0,47.83,0,0,0.25,12.72,0,31.83,1.14
Anatolian_N:CCH289,0,0,3.5,0,37.83,0,0,0,14.97,1.39,41.06,1.26
Anatolian_N:CCH290,0,0,1.17,1.6,45.08,0,0,2.05,0,0,49.79,0.31
Anatolian_N:CCH294,0,0.03,6.54,0,33.4,0,0,2.59,15.09,0,42.13,0.21
Anatolian_N:CCH311,0,0,1.74,0,44.32,0,0,1.06,15.76,0,35.78,1.34
Anatolian_N:cth006,0,0,4.77,0,27.06,0,0,1.51,33.04,0,33.62,0
Anatolian_N:cth217,0,0,0,0,40.55,0,0,0,16.71,0,42.73,0
Anatolian_N:cth728,0,2.85,0,0,36.45,0,0,0,14.9,0,45.3,0.49
Anatolian_N:cth739,0,0,0.52,0.8,37.47,0,0,1.24,14.55,0.16,43.76,1.49
Anatolian_N:cth747,0,0,0,0,33.04,2.77,0,1.23,15.25,0.45,47.27,0
Anatolian_N:cth842,0,0,0,6.83,49.59,0,0,1.68,5.4,0,36.5,0
Anatolian_N:pch034,0,0,0.64,0.09,36.89,0,0,0,16.99,0,43.91,1.48
 
Distance to:Jovialis
20.11626456Anatolian_N:Ash128
21.99068439Anatolian_N:Ash133
23.41107217Anatolian_N:CCH294
23.41879160Anatolian_N:Ash002
23.81781056Anatolian_N:CCH289
24.19871691Anatolian_N:cth747
24.43856379Anatolian_N:Ash136
24.49771418Anatolian_N:CCH163
24.94076382Anatolian_N:cth739
25.36733727Anatolian_N:pch034
25.49868428Anatolian_N:Ash129
25.62431072Anatolian_N:cth728
25.67385440Anatolian_N:CCH311
25.94644484Anatolian_N:Ash131
26.09467379Anatolian_N:CCH144
26.12457272Anatolian_N:cth217
26.92346374Anatolian_N:Ash033
27.19030342Anatolian_N:CCH285
27.69969494Anatolian_N:Ash040
29.79260982Anatolian_N:cth842
30.54109035Anatolian_N:cth006
32.50674392Anatolian_N:CCH290
 
So there is legit Levant_N admixture in all EEFs then. Off topic. What is your view of the A1 and E1a samples found in Europe, in Sweden, Finland, Sardinia, Sicily, England, Scotland, Ireland, Poland, and Russia even. I think that both are Neolithic markers of some kind related to Ancestral North Africans, or a hypothetical Ancestral East African population, these populations being branches of humanity that split off before the main dispersal of AMH into Eurasian 60-70k ybp. There is some unexplained link to Basal Eurasians too.

E1a maybe yes, but A1 is not related to Ancestral North Africans who were quite different on look/phenotype from both SSA and Eurasians. They took their own evolutionary path.

Remember the Shum Laka from Western Africa were not even A, some A00, which means deeper Y-DNA lineage than A yet undetected in modern humans. Yet, Shum Laka must have contributed some degree of autosomal to SSA.
 
Dodecad G13:

Code:
Anatolian_N:Ash002,2.69,0.59,0,0,18.16,0,56.31,0,0,14.96,4.78,0,2.51
Anatolian_N:Ash033,0,0,0,2.35,34.69,0,43.17,0,0.41,19.37,0.01,0,0
Anatolian_N:Ash040,0,0,3.58,0,18.28,0,58.15,0,0,15.64,3.82,0,0.53
Anatolian_N:Ash128,0.41,0,4.48,0.14,15.31,0.62,51.91,0.38,0,16.09,10.38,0,0.27
Anatolian_N:Ash129,0,0,2.03,0.34,15.16,1.32,57.54,0.31,0,15.99,7.32,0,0
Anatolian_N:Ash131,0,0,0,0.82,14.33,0,60.92,0,0.67,15.93,6.55,0.79,0
Anatolian_N:Ash133,0,0,2.04,0,15.87,0.61,54.87,0.5,0.03,14.14,11.35,0,0.58
Anatolian_N:Ash136,0,0,5.52,0,17.24,0,54.38,0,0.13,14.35,8.37,0,0
Anatolian_N:CCH144,0,0,0.7,0.78,24.42,0,45.84,1.18,0,26.72,0.36,0,0
Anatolian_N:CCH163,1.62,0,0.57,0,22.29,0,56.07,0,0,11.05,8.39,0,0
Anatolian_N:CCH285,0,0,3.22,0,19.16,0,60.51,0,0,13.45,3.66,0,0
Anatolian_N:CCH289,0,0,1.48,0,25.78,0,52.54,3.12,0.27,16.81,0,0,0
Anatolian_N:CCH290,0,0,1.35,0,12.46,0,67.95,0,2.35,15.22,0.67,0,0
Anatolian_N:CCH294,0,0,1.89,0,23.58,0,53.3,0.11,0.79,18.69,0,0,1.64
Anatolian_N:CCH311,0,0,2.25,0,19.61,0,53.79,0,0,19.34,5.01,0,0
Anatolian_N:cth006,0,0,0,2.46,37.04,0,47.46,1.01,0,11.27,0.75,0,0
Anatolian_N:cth217,0,0,0,0.7,26.06,0,54.31,0.08,0,14.26,4.59,0,0
Anatolian_N:cth728,1.96,0.19,0,1.8,20.17,0,56.42,1.13,0,17,1.33,0,0
Anatolian_N:cth739,0,0,2.45,0.14,20.48,0,55,0.66,1.68,18.95,0,0,0.65
Anatolian_N:cth747,0,0,1.2,0,23.56,0.92,46.37,0,0,22.58,5.37,0,0
Anatolian_N:cth842,0,0,0,0,22.08,0,57.71,0,3.58,12.41,3.25,0,0.96
Anatolian_N:pch034,0,0,1.35,0.79,23.75,0,49.25,1.09,0,18.07,5.71,0,0
 

This thread has been viewed 16086 times.

Back
Top