Southern Ancestry in "Steppe"

[Northener]

^^^ Now you and your dad score like a typical North Dutch. Your mom seems more Danish-like (Frisian?).

No Dad is more coastal (Groningen), mom is from Drenthe that has the oldest populations of the Netherlands.

This is from a Frisian:



Angles made this for me:

right pops:
Villabruna
Vestonice16
Ust_Ishim_published.DG
Kostenki14.SG
GoyetQ116-1_udg_published
MA1.SG
GanjDareh
BOT14.SG
Kostenki
S_Mbuti-3.DG
A_Papuan-16.DG
A_Han-4.DG
Andaman.SG


left pops:
NorthenerDad_NL
Denmark_IA
Ansarve_Megalithic (I wanted to have a "farmer" source. The choice of Ansarve can be disputed, but anyway, according to the results the question has no real importance ...)


best coefficients: 1.025 -0.025
totmean: 1.025 -0.025
boot mean: 1.027 -0.027
std. errors: 0.100 0.100
fixed pat wt dof chisq tail prob
00 0 11 5.192 0.921515 1.025 -0.025 infeasible
01 1 12 5.260 0.948719 1.000 0.000
10 1 12 113.107 1.45072e-18 0.000 1.000
best pat: 00 0.921515 - -
best pat: 01 0.948719 chi(nested): 0.068 p-value for nested model: 0.793938




left pops:
Northenermum_NL
Denmark_IA
Ansarve_Megalithic




best coefficients: 0.984 0.016
totmean: 0.984 0.016
boot mean: 0.986 0.014
std. errors: 0.097 0.097




fixed pat wt dof chisq tail prob
00 0 11 6.040 0.870674 0.984 0.016
01 1 12 6.066 0.912698 1.000 0.000
10 1 12 122.121 2.33258e-20 0.000 1.000
best pat: 00 0.870674 - -
best pat: 01 0.912698 chi(nested): 0.026 p-value for nested model: 0.871204


The p-values of the nested models are astronomic. According to this analysis Northerner parents are "pure" Danish from the Iron Age. Btw Denmark_IA is for the three individuals from Margaryan. Of course I used imputed genomes for Northener's parents (947035 SNPs). For the experts, I've taken the risk to keep the transitions.

I guess this is quit accurat.

 

[Tomenable]

Haute Garonne samples form Biagini 2019 fall within 50-55% Anatolia_N range.

I marked Haute Garonne as 55-60% based on samples from Jerome's Project.

 

[Tomenable]

Biagini 2019 study has many samples, but they cover only 7 departments in total:

- PdD samples names starting with C = Auvergne, Puy-de-Dome department
- HG samples names starting with T = Occitanie, Haute Garonne department
- BdR samples names starting with S = Provence, Marseille (Bouches-du-Rhone)
- IeV names starting with B = Rennes Bretagne, Ille-et-Vilaine department
- BR samples names starting with A = Alsace, Bas-Rhin department
- NO names starting with N = Hauts de France, Nord department
- PAR samples (names without letter) = from the city of Paris

 

[Flann Fina]

Thanks for the calculator:

Target: Flann_scaled
Distance: 4.0932% / 0.04093182

41.4 West_Eurasian:TUR_Barcin_N
40.6 West_Eurasian:Yamnaya_RUS_Samara
15.2 West_Eurasian:WHG_I18752.
2.8 West_Eurasian:NOR_Meso

 

[Tomenable]

I guess this is quit accurat.

But it seems he did not include any ancient populations from the Netherlands in this analysis.

So you scored "pure Danish". Maybe if ancient NL was included, you would score differently.

 

[Northener]

But it seems he did not include any ancient populations from the Netherlands in this analysis.

So you scored "pure Danish". Maybe if ancient NL was included, you would score differently.

That would be a question indeed. If only....

How reasonable is it that it surpasses this result??

best coefficients: 0.984 0.016
totmean: 0.984 0.016
boot mean:0.986 0.014

Ok only 100% is better:bigsmile:

 

[torzio]

OK here is a preliminary version.

Anatolia Neolithic admix in France by department. There are still many departments with no samples, I left them blank for now:
Marne Department has only one sample and it looks like an outlier with too much of Neolithic Farmer admixture for this latitude:

(lateer I will post an updated / final version in a new thread)

map looks like the linguistic split of french languages .................L'Oil ......french and frankish ( german ) mix and
L'Oc french and italian/catalan mix

 

[Tomenable]

^^^ Here is updated version: https://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/42493-Autosomal-Maps-of-France

 

[Tomenable]

Check please my new "World 10,000 Years Ago" calculator here:

https://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/42500-Tomenable-10-Thousand-Years-Ago-K42-G25-calc

BTW - I wonder if Crimean Hunter-Gatherers were CHG-related or related to UKR_Meso (I think they could be CHG-like, it is possible):

https://www.researchgate.net/public...n_the_Mesolithic_of_Europe_A_View_from_Crimea

Location of sites inhabited by Crimean Hunter-Gatherers:

https://www.researchgate.net/figure...tioned-in-the-text-Shan-Koba-1_fig1_301566524

Shan-Koba (1), Murzak-Koba (2), Fat'ma-Koba (3), Grot Skalist'iy (4), Shpan-Koba (5), Laspi 7 (6), BBBP-2 and MM-2 (7)

^^^
And prehistoric Kuban region could also be inhabited by a CHG-like population - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kuban

 

[Tomenable]

New previously unknown Proto-Yamnaya group is discovered:

https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.05.04.490594v1

"We identify hitherto genetically undescribed hunter-gatherers from the Middle Don region that contributed ancestry to the later Yamnaya steppe pastoralists."

 

[Tomenable]

^^^ IMO this new paper will prove that PIE homeland = Middle Don River area and PGmc homeland = Nordic BA.

Supporters of "southern origins" (respectively Iran/Armenia for PIE and Jastorf for PGmc) will be disappointed.

 

[Anfänger]

Dude, this is the third time I‘m telling someone on this thread that my thread is NOT about PIE Homeland.

Also HGs from Middle Don being a source for Yamnaya is perfectly fine with my hypothesis that CHG/Iran-related and EHG-related groups mixed on the steppe. The source for CHG/Iran is either in the Lower Don or the Lower Volga, the former seems more likely according to this new paper.

 

[Tomenable]

"427 We demonstrate that this “steppe” ancestry (Steppe_5000BP_4300BP) can be modelled as a
428 mixture of ~65% ancestry related to herein reported hunter-gatherer genomes from the Middle Don
429 River region (MiddleDon_7500BP) and ~35% ancestry related to hunter-gatherers from Caucasus
430 (Caucasus_13000BP_10000BP) (Extended Data Fig. 4). Thus, Middle Don hunter-gatherers, who
431 already carry ancestry related to Caucasus hunter-gatherers (Fig. 2), serve as a hitherto unknown
432 proximal source for the majority ancestry contribution into Yamnaya genomes. The individuals in
433 question derive from the burial ground Golubaya Krinitsa (Supplementary Note 3). Material culture
434 and burial practices at this site are similar to the Mariupol-type graves, which are widely found in
435 neighbouring regions of Ukraine, for instance along the Dnepr River. They belong to the group of
436 complex pottery-using hunter-gatherers mentioned above, but the genetic composition at Golubaya
437 Krinitsa is different from the remaining Ukrainian sites (Fig 2A, Extended Data Fig. 4)."

 

[Tomenable]

^^^
So there is no ancestry from south of the Caucasus.

And 2/3 of Yamnaya ancestry is from Middle Don HG.

 

[Tomenable]

"Our results thus document genetic contact between populations from the Caucasus and the Steppe region as early as 7,300 years ago."

 

[Anfänger]

Where do they say where this southern ancestry comes from ? Nowhere it seems.
7300 years ago is 5300 BC, again this is perfectly fine with my hypothesis that they moved north from the southern Caucasus before 6500BC and then they mixed on the steppe for the most part.

 

[Tomenable]

From Caucasus_13000BP_10000BP ???

 

[Anfänger]

From Caucasus_13000BP_10000BP ???

New samples from Georgia it seems. They don’t seem to be different compared to the ones we already have.

Edit: In this particular context they are probably referring to Satsurblia and Kotias though.

 

[Tomenable]

Pretty cool guy with R1b haplogroup:

"Mades?, NEO752; Jorl?se 03.06.06-53, Zealand. Wetland with bog skeleton
Anders Fischer and Lisbeth Pedersen
In a peat cutting area in Minor Aamose, next to Lake Mades?, a well-preserved human
cranium was found c. 1.75 m below surface. Museums have received several Stone Age
items from the same cutting, including two flint daggers of Late Neolithic date. They are all
interpreted as the result of sacrificial deposition - cf. text on Jorl?se Mose above. According
to a physical anthropological inspection of 1945 (K. Br?ste unpublished notes,
Anthropological Laboratory) the skull represents a male c. 50 years of age. It has healed
impact scars on its forehead and is characterised by unusually robust facial characteristics,
including ‘nearly ape-like eyebrows [supraorbital ridge]’ (Figure S6.14; cf.
comments as to a potential genetic background for these characteristics, mentioned within the above
presentation of the Borreby site). Via a radiocarbon date (3523?44 14C years BP, AAR-8302)
it can be dated to the South Scandinavian Late Neolithic."

^^^ And his ancestry proportions:

 

[Anfänger]

Pretty cool guy with R1b haplogroup:

"Mades�, NEO752; Jorl�se 03.06.06-53, Zealand. Wetland with bog skeleton
Anders Fischer and Lisbeth Pedersen
In a peat cutting area in Minor Aamose, next to Lake Mades�, a well-preserved human
cranium was found c. 1.75 m below surface. Museums have received several Stone Age
items from the same cutting, including two flint daggers of Late Neolithic date. They are all
interpreted as the result of sacrificial deposition - cf. text on Jorl�se Mose above. According
to a physical anthropological inspection of 1945 (K. Br�ste unpublished notes,
Anthropological Laboratory) the skull represents a male c. 50 years of age. It has healed
impact scars on its forehead and is characterised by unusually robust facial characteristics,
including ‘nearly ape-like eyebrows [supraorbital ridge]’ (Figure S6.14; cf.
comments as to a potential genetic background for these characteristics, mentioned within the above
presentation of the Borreby site). Via a radiocarbon date (3523�44 14C years BP, AAR-8302)
it can be dated to the South Scandinavian Late Neolithic."

^^^ And his ancestry proportions:

There must be something wrong with the modeling. There is no way that these samples don't have any WHG or very little at least. Middle Don is probably picking up all the WHG in these Scandinavian samples, to compensate the lack of WHG in steppe.

Actually, I don't see Middle Don as good proxy for steppe ancestry. These are HGs that already have a small component of CHG/Iran but need additional 35%. What kind of stupid wording is this ? Instead they could have said they have to little CHG/Iran to be the proximal source for Yamnaya, just like Khavlynsk which also has a small component CHG/Iran but not enough.