Eupedia Forums
Site NavigationEupedia Top > Eupedia Forum & Japan Forum
Page 14 of 48 FirstFirst ... 4121314151624 ... LastLast
Results 326 to 350 of 1180

Thread: David Reich Southern Arc Paper Abstract

  1. #326
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    25-12-21
    Posts
    674

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    J2B2-L283/Z638

    Country: United States



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Johnson View Post
    We have R1b-P297 in Eastern European HGs during the Mesolithic, and P297 is the common ancestor of M269 and Y13200/M73; the oldest V2219/V88 males on record are from Southeastern Europe too. West Asia has a complete dearth of any R1/Q before the LCA and EMBA. In fact, the oldest R1b West Asian male on record is ART038 (3365-3102 calBCE), and he belongs to R1b-V1636*, a subclade/lineage found over 1k years earlier in Eastern Europe, in Khvalynsk and Progress.

    These are the 57 oldest R1b samples on record:

    Palaeolithic_Epigravettian Villabruna, Villabruna, Italy, 12268-11851 calBCE, mtDNA: U5b2b, Y-DNA: R1b-L754(xV2219, xP297, xV1636), FuNature2016

    WHG Iboussieres31-2, Aven des Iboussières à Malataverne, Rhône-Alpes, France, 10050-9400 BCE, mtDNA: U5b1, Y-DNA: R1(xR1a; xR1b-PH155, xR1b-V2219, xR1b-V88), MathiesonNature2018

    Serbia_IronGates_Mesolithic I5235, Padina, Serbia, 9221-8548 calBCE, mtDNA: U5b2c*, Y-DNA: R1b-V88>Y127541, MathiesonNature2018

    Serbia_IronGates_Mesolithic I5240, Padina Serbia, 9140-8570 calBCE, mtDNA: U5a1c3*, Y-DNA: R1b-V88>Y127541, MathiesonNature2018

    Serbia_IronGates_Mesolithic Vlasa32, Vlasac, Serbia, 7791-7518 calBCE, mtDNA: U5a2a, Y-DNA: R1b-L754(xL389, xV88), MarchibioRxiv2020

    Serbia_IronGates_Mesolithic I5237, Padina, Serbia, 9300-5800 BCE, mtDNA: U5a2f1, Y-DNA: R1b-V88>Y127541, MathiesonNature2018

    Romania_IronGates_Mesolithic I4081, Ostrovul Corbului, Romania, 7581-7191 calBCE, mtDNA: H13, Y-DNA: R1b-L754(xP297, xV1636, xV88), MathiesonNature2018

    Latvia_HG I4630, Zvejnieki, Latvia, 7471-7073 calBCE, mtDNA: U5a2c, Y-DNA: R1b-P297(xM269, xY13202), MathiesonNature2018

    Ukraine_Mesolithic I1734, Vasil'evka, Ukraine, 7451-7056 calBCE, mtDNA: U5b2d, Y-DNA: R1b-V88>PF6362*, MathiesonNature2018

    Romania_IronGates_Mesolithic M96, Iron Gates, Schela Cladovei, Romania, 7250-6500 calBCE, mtDNA: U5a1c3*, Y-DNA: R1b-V2219>FTA35720, GonzalezFortesCurrBiol2017

    Romania_IronGates_Mesolithic M95, Schela Cladovei, Romania, 7125-6603 calBCE, mtDNA: U5b2c, Y-DNA: R1b-V2219>Y244169, GonzalezFortesCurrBiol2017

    Romania_IronGates_Mesolithic I4655, Schela Cladovei, Romania, 7059-6571 calBCE, mtDNA: K1, Y-DNA: R1(xR1a; xR1b-M269, xR1b-V88), MathiesonNature2018

    Serbia_IronGates_Mesolithic I4916, Hajduka Vodenica, Serbia, 7035-6590 calBCE, mtDNA: U5b2b-a3a, Y-DNA: R1b-V2219>FTA35720, MathiesonNature2018

    Romania_IronGates_Mesolithic I5408, Ostrovul Corbului, Romania, 7022-6485 calBCE, mtDNA: K1i, Y-DNA: R1b-V2219>Y244183*, GonzalezFortesCurrBiol2017

    Romania_IronGates_Mesolithic I5411, Schela Cladovei, Romania, 7000-6300 BCE, mtDNA: U5a1c1, Y-DNA: R1b-V2219>Y244183, MathiesonNature2018

    Serbia_IronGates_Mesolithic Vlasa37, Vlasac, Serbia, 6767-6461 calBCE, mtDNA: K1f, Y-DNA: R1b-V2219>V88*, Hofmanová2017

    Serbia_IronGates_Mesolithic I5772, Vlasac, Serbia, 7100-5900 BCE, mtDNA: U5a2a, Y-DNA: R1b-V2219>V88, MathiesonNature2018

    Serbia_IronGates_N I4666, Lepenski Vir, Serbia, 6222-5912 calBCE, mtDNA: H40, Y-DNA: R1b-V2219, MathiesonNature2018

    Latvia_HG I4432, Zvejnieki, Latvia, 6072-5920 calBCE, mtDNA: U5a2c*, Y-DNA: R1b-Y13200>Y240021, MathiesonNature2018

    Serbia_IronGates_Mesolithic I5232, Padina, Serbia, 6061-5841 calBCE, mtDNA: K1-a4*, Y-DNA: R1b-V2219>FTA35718, MathiesonNature2018

    Latvia_HG I4626, Zvejnieki, Latvia, 5838-5631 calBCE, mtDNA: U2e1, Y-DNA: R1b-Y13200>Y240021, MathiesonNature2018 (New data; Individual first published in JonesCurrBiol2017)

    Latvia_HG I4439, Zvejnieki, Latvia, 5769-5628 calBCE, mtDNA: U5b1d1*, Y-DNA: R1b-Y13200>Y240021, MathiesonNature2018

    Samara_HG I0124, Samara Oblast, Russia, 5660-5535 calBCE, mtDNA: U5a1d, Y-DNA: R1b-Y13200>Y13202, MathiesonNature2015

    Latvia_HG I4434, Zvejnieki, Latvia, 5611-5382 calBCE, mtDNA: U5a2d3, Y-DNA: R1b-Y13200>FTA35755*, MathiesonNature2018

    Ukraine_N I4114, Dereivka, Ukraine, 5474-5324 calBCE, mtDNA: U5a1, Y-DNA: R1b-V2219, MathiesonNature2018

    Ukraine_N I5891, Dereivka, Ukraine, 5467-5230 calBCE, mtDNA: U4d, Y-DNA: R1b-V2219>V88, MathiesonNature2018

    Ukraine_N I5893, Dereivka, Ukraine, 5371-5218 calBCE mtDNA: U5a2a, Y-DNA: R1b-V2219>V88, MathiesonNature2018

    Ukraine_N I3718, Dereivka, Ukraine, 5359-5212 calBCE mtDNA: U5a1b, Y-DNA: R1b-V2219, MathiesonNature2018

    Ukraine_N I5879, Dereivka, Ukraine, 5324-5132 calBCE, mtDNA: U5a1b, Y-DNA: R1b-V2219, MathiesonNature2018

    Italy_HG_N R6, Grotta Continenza, Italy, 5318-5084 calBCE, mtDNA: K1-a, Y-DNA: R1b-V88>Y8451*, AntonioScience2019

    Germany_EN_LBK XN191, Baden-Württemberg, Germany, 5316-5081 calBCE, mtDNA: I1, Y-DNA: R1b-L754, RivollatSciAdv2020

    Ukraine_N I5890, Dereivka, Ukraine, 5291-5058 calBCE, mtDNA: U5a1b, Y-DNA: R1b-V2219, MathiesonNature2018

    Ukraine_N I5881, Dereivka, Ukraine, 5215-5052 calBCE, mtDNA: U5a1b, Y-DNA: R1b-V2219>V88, MathiesonNature2018

    Spain_EN I0411, Els Trocs, Spain, 5298-5059 calBCE, mtDNA: K1a2a, Y-DNA: R1b-V88>Y8451*, OlaldeScience2019

    Spain_EN I0410, Els Trocs, Spain, 5298-5057 calBCE, mtDNA: T2c1d or T2c1d2, Y-DNA: R1b-V88>Y8451*, MathiesonNature2015

    Spain_EN CHA002, Cueva de Chaves, Spain, 5302-5061 calBCE, mtDNA: K1a2a, Y-DNA: R1b-V88>Y8451, VillalbaMoucoCurrBiol2019

    Lithuania_EMN_Narva Donkalnis7, Donkalnis, Lithuania, 5374-4939 calBCE, mtDNA: U5a2d1, Y-DNA: R1b-Y13200>Y13202, MittnikNatCommun2018

    Ukraine_N I5878, Dereivka, Ukraine, 5301-5067 calBCE, mtDNA: U4b1a1a, Y-DNA: R1b-V2219, MathiesonNature2018

    Ukraine_N I4112, Dereivka, Ukraine, 5500-4500 BCE, mtDNA: U5a2a, Y-DNA: R1b-V2219>V88, MathiesonNature2018

    Ukraine_N I5883, Dereivka, Ukraine, 5209-4998 calBCE, mtDNA: U4a, Y-DNA: R1b-V2219, MathiesonNature2018

    Ukraine_N I5892, Dereivka, Ukraine, 5301-4952 calBCE, mtDNA: U4a1, Y-DNA: R1b-L754(xL389), MathiesonNature2018

    Latvia_HG I4628, Zvejnieki, Latvia, 5304-4848 calBCE, mtDNA: U5a2d4, Y-DNA: R1b-Y13200>Y240021, MathiesonNature2018

    Steppe_Eneolithic PG2001, Progress 2, Russia, 4994-4802 calBCE, mtDNA: I3a, Y-DNA: R1b-V1636*, WangNatCommun2019

    Khvalynsk_Eneolithic I0122, Samara Oblast, Russia, 4936-4730 calBCE (FRE: 4500-4300 BCE?), mtDNA: H2a1, Y-DNA: R1b-V1636*, MathiesonNature2015

    Estonia_EMN_Narva Kivisaare3, Kivisaare, Estonia, 4776-4542 calBCE, mtDNA: U5a2d, Y-DNA: R1b-P297(xM269, xY13202), MittnikNatCommun2018

    Bulgaria_C I2181, Smyadovo, Bulgaria, 4606-4447 calBCE, mtDNA: HV15, Y-DNA: R1b-M269, MathiesonNature2018 (no call without Iosif Lazaridis)

    Bulgaria_C I2430, Smyadovo, Bulgaria, 4602-4403 calBCE, mtDNA: K1a26, Y-DNA: R1b-V2219, MathiesonNature2018

    Varna_Eneolithic ANI153, Varna, Bulgaria, 4550-4368 calBCE, mtDNA: U4, Y-DNA: R1b-V2219>V88, MathiesonNature2018

    Latvia_MN I4436, Zvejnieki, Latvia, 4318-4051 calBCE, mtDNA: U4a1a1d, Y-DNA: R1b-Y13200>FTA35755*, MathiesonNature2018

    Latvia_MN I4627, Zvejnieki, Latvia, 4311-3978 calBCE, mtDNA: U4a1, Y-DNA: R1b-Y13200*, MathiesonNature2018 (new data; individual first published in JonesCurrBiol2017)

    Steppe_Eneolithic PG2004, Progress 2, Russia, 4240-4047 calBCE, mtDNA: H2, Y-DNA: R1b-V1636*, WangNatCommun2019

    Comb_Ceramic Tamula3, Tamula, Estonia, 3796-3641 calBCE, mtDNA: U4d2, Y-DNA: R1b(xV2219, xV1636, xM269), MittnikNatCommun2018

    Bohemia_TRB I14169, Makotřasy, Czech Republic, 3800-3500 BCE (inferred), mtDNA: N1a1a1a2, Y-DNA: R1b-V2219>V88, PapacSciAdv2021

    Bohemia_TRB I14176, Makotřasy, Czech Republic, 3700-3500 BCE (inferred), mtDNA: K1a4a1, Y-DNA: R1b-V2219>V88, PapacSciAdv2021

    Bohemia_TRB I14173, Makotřasy, Czech Republic, 3638-3522 BCE (inferred), mtDNA: K1-a4, Y-DNA: R1b-V2219>V88, PapacSciAdv2021

    Baalberge_MN I0559, Quedlinburg, Germany, 3654-3527 calBCE, mtDNA: HV, Y-DNA: R1b-V2219>V88, MathiesonNature2015

    Blatterhohle_MN I1593, Blatterhole Cave, Germany, 3644-3528 calBCE, mtDNA: U5b2a2, Y-DNA: R1b-V2219>V88, LipsonNature2017
    Yeah but look at the mutation dates for those.

    M269 >13,000 years ago

    RP297 > 15,000 years ago

    We're talking almost 10,000 years prior to IEs for that mutation. That's 20% of the time humans have been out of Africa.

    If CHGs have ANE, and R1b was originally an ANE lineage, I wouldn't rule out a southern R1b invasion into the steppes.

  2. #327
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    25-12-21
    Posts
    674

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    J2B2-L283/Z638

    Country: United States



    1 members found this post helpful.
    To be honest, I always wondered how the hell did Steppe people manage to keep a near perfect 50/50 EHG/CHG mix. Them "going south for wives", would not be a one time thing, but throughout the generations. This would mean they would overwhelmingly be CHG. The same thing happened to Steppe invaders of southern Europe. Every generation took EEF wives not just the first, and the steppe lineage became a minority.

    It makes much more sense for a group of CHG males to expand into the steppe and take EHG wives that one time, and keep rapidly expanding towards Europe. We saw this with Panonian Avars that gradually became more Slavic/European as they pushed westward.



    This model explains the "Iranian Neolithic-like"/"Armenian-like" component of Yamnaya, and the early split of Anatolian.

    If this is true, then the "Caucausian" misnomer would, through some ****** up twist of fate, actually be correct

  3. #328
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    17-03-16
    Posts
    581


    Country: Greece



    R1b>L754 also reached Oman at least 5-6k years ago.

    There could have been an R1b population that followed a route like Central Asia > Iran > Europe

    (Personally I don't think this has something to do with PIE but that's a different story.).

  4. #329
    Baron
    Join Date
    19-05-12
    Posts
    331


    Country: Canada



    Right to the point. So when's the data coming out? The rest is fluff

  5. #330
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    14-02-21
    Posts
    21

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b-U106 > Z8

    Country: USA - North Carolina



    Quote Originally Posted by A. Papadimitriou View Post
    But Kossina did not place PIE in the steppes.

    And also what is worse, Kossina's view Corded Ware = PIE or
    Anthony's Yamnaya = PIE?
    Corded Ware != PIE, but Corded Ware was mostly ground zero for the Indo-European expansion.

    CWC > Srubnaya > Sintashta-Andronovo > Indic & Iranic
    CWC > BBC > Italic & Celtic, probably more
    CWC > Battle Axe Culture > Nordic Bronze Age > Germanic
    CWC > Balto-Slavic > Baltic & Slavic
    CWC Probably also penetrated into the balkans IIRC, because someone brought along Globular Amphorae ancestry, but Greeks/Phrygians/Armenians (Thracian? Not sure, Thracian may be BBC) are the exception and most likely come from Catacomb which comes from Yamnaya.

    And obviously, Tocharians and Anatolians don’t come from CWC, but they didn’t come from Yamnaya either.

  6. #331
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    14-02-21
    Posts
    21

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b-U106 > Z8

    Country: USA - North Carolina



    Quote Originally Posted by enter_tain View Post
    To be honest, I always wondered how the hell did Steppe people manage to keep a near perfect 50/50 EHG/CHG mix. Them "going south for wives", would not be a one time thing, but throughout the generations. This would mean they would overwhelmingly be CHG. The same thing happened to Steppe invaders of southern Europe. Every generation took EEF wives not just the first, and the steppe lineage became a minority.

    It makes much more sense for a group of CHG males to expand into the steppe and take EHG wives that one time, and keep rapidly expanding towards Europe. We saw this with Panonian Avars that gradually became more Slavic/European as they pushed westward.



    This model explains the "Iranian Neolithic-like"/"Armenian-like" component of Yamnaya, and the early split of Anatolian.

    If this is true, then the "Caucausian" misnomer would, through some ****** up twist of fate, actually be correct
    I thought the whole crux of this “Out of Armenia” argument was that steppe people DIDN’T keep a 50/50 split, and that CHG/Iran ancestry increased on the steppe during the eneolithic for the same reasons it increased in anatolia (an Indo-Anatolian invasion). If admixture event happened during the Mesolithic or Neolithic, it would be unable to explain Anatolian as it predates linguistic estimates for the split of Anatolian and Indo-European.

    Although, I don’t recall Steppe ancestry being 50/50 CHG-EHG. I Thought it was more like 60% EHG 40% CHG

    Quote Originally Posted by enter_tain View Post
    Yeah but look at the mutation dates for those.
    Quote Originally Posted by enter_tain View Post

    M269 >13,000 years ago

    RP297 > 15,000 years ago

    We're talking almost 10,000 years prior to IEs for that mutation. That's 20% of the time humans have been out of Africa.

    If CHGs have ANE, and R1b was originally an ANE lineage, I wouldn't rule out a southern R1b invasion into the steppes.
    10,000 years prior to the IEs, but not long after Satsurblia. M269 maybe even before it. Some studies put its formation earlier at 10k ybp, making it 3000 years earlier than the post-ANE Satsurblia sample.

  7. #332
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    21-05-18
    Posts
    52

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b-CTS3087
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H16

    Country: United States



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by enter_tain View Post
    To be honest, I always wondered how the hell did Steppe people manage to keep a near perfect 50/50 EHG/CHG mix. Them "going south for wives", would not be a one time thing, but throughout the generations. This would mean they would overwhelmingly be CHG. The same thing happened to Steppe invaders of southern Europe. Every generation took EEF wives not just the first, and the steppe lineage became a minority.
    It makes much more sense for a group of CHG males to expand into the steppe and take EHG wives that one time, and keep rapidly expanding towards Europe. We saw this with Panonian Avars that gradually became more Slavic/European as they pushed westward.

    This model explains the "Iranian Neolithic-like"/"Armenian-like" component of Yamnaya, and the early split of Anatolian.

    If this is true, then the "Caucausian" misnomer would, through some ****** up twist of fate, actually be correct
    That’s very unlikely in my view. For one EHGs have a lot more ANE than CHGs. Secondly, West Asia before the EMBA is dominantly G, J, and E, and to a lesser extent H, T, L, and R2. Zero ANFs, ICHGs, Levantine farmers, and Iberomaurusians/North African farmers have R1 or Q1, and at some point, if we find any of the aforementioned with R1, they’ll belong to clades that have their origins in the Villabruna, Iron Gates, and Ukraine_Mesolithic clusters (R1b-L754*, R1b-V2219/V88, R1a-M459(xM198), etc.). However, the aforementioned R1b subclades ultimately derive from proto-EHGs. R1b-M269’s formation date range is 12900-9800 BCE (mean: 11300 BCE); its TMRCA is 5100-3700 BCE (mean: 4400 BCE). This is the oldest M269 bearer we have:

    Bulgaria_C I2181, Smyadovo, Bulgaria, 4606-4447 calBCE, mtDNA: HV15, Y-DNA: R1b-M269, MathiesonNature2018 (no call without Iosif Lazaridis)

    I2181 has around 46.1% Yamnaya in qpAdm, with a standard deviation of 17.4%. In admixture analysis, he picked up EHG, and a larger Yamnaya_Samara component. I2181 and the Varna outlier are both on the Khvalynsk cline, unlike the other Balkans Chalcolithic samples: https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-gpo-jpYFs...ppe_clines.png

    Satsurblia (the sample with ANE) on the other hand dates to 11461-11225 calBCE, and he belongs to J1b-FT34521, so he was relatively contemporaneous with M269’s formation date, but so was the EHG admixed Villabruna man (12268-11851 calBCE, mtDNA: U5b2b, Y-DNA: R1b-L754(xV2219, xP297, xV1636)). Furthermore, M269’s earliest formation date range predates both samples by 700-1500 years at the most; neither one is relevant to the history of R1b-M269. The fact of the matter is this, the oldest R1 bearers are from Europe, and wherever there is R1b there is EHG and ANE autosomal DNA. West Asia has no R1 before the LCA-EMBA, so viewing ICHGs as the donor population is completely baseless, especially when we look at the data.

  8. #333
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    21-04-21
    Posts
    39


    Country: United Kingdom



    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Johnson View Post
    We have R1b-P297 in Eastern European HGs during the Mesolithic, and P297 is the common ancestor of M269 and Y13200/M73; the oldest V2219/V88 males on record are from Southeastern Europe too. West Asia has a complete dearth of any R1/Q before the LCA and EMBA. In fact, the oldest R1b West Asian male on record is ART038 (3365-3102 calBCE), and he belongs to R1b-V1636*, a subclade/lineage found over 1k years earlier in Eastern Europe, in Khvalynsk and Progress.
    These are the 57 oldest R1b samples on record:
    Palaeolithic_Epigravettian Villabruna, Villabruna, Italy, 12268-11851 calBCE, mtDNA: U5b2b, Y-DNA: R1b-L754(xV2219, xP297, xV1636), FuNature2016
    WHG Iboussieres31-2, Aven des Iboussières à Malataverne, Rhône-Alpes, France, 10050-9400 BCE, mtDNA: U5b1, Y-DNA: R1(xR1a; xR1b-PH155, xR1b-V2219, xR1b-V88), MathiesonNature2018
    Serbia_IronGates_Mesolithic I5235, Padina, Serbia, 9221-8548 calBCE, mtDNA: U5b2c*, Y-DNA: R1b-V88>Y127541, MathiesonNature2018
    Serbia_IronGates_Mesolithic I5240, Padina Serbia, 9140-8570 calBCE, mtDNA: U5a1c3*, Y-DNA: R1b-V88>Y127541, MathiesonNature2018
    Serbia_IronGates_Mesolithic Vlasa32, Vlasac, Serbia, 7791-7518 calBCE, mtDNA: U5a2a, Y-DNA: R1b-L754(xL389, xV88), MarchibioRxiv2020
    Serbia_IronGates_Mesolithic I5237, Padina, Serbia, 9300-5800 BCE, mtDNA: U5a2f1, Y-DNA: R1b-V88>Y127541, MathiesonNature2018
    Romania_IronGates_Mesolithic I4081, Ostrovul Corbului, Romania, 7581-7191 calBCE, mtDNA: H13, Y-DNA: R1b-L754(xP297, xV1636, xV88), MathiesonNature2018
    Latvia_HG I4630, Zvejnieki, Latvia, 7471-7073 calBCE, mtDNA: U5a2c, Y-DNA: R1b-P297(xM269, xY13202), MathiesonNature2018
    Ukraine_Mesolithic I1734, Vasil'evka, Ukraine, 7451-7056 calBCE, mtDNA: U5b2d, Y-DNA: R1b-V88>PF6362*, MathiesonNature2018
    Romania_IronGates_Mesolithic M96, Iron Gates, Schela Cladovei, Romania, 7250-6500 calBCE, mtDNA: U5a1c3*, Y-DNA: R1b-V2219>FTA35720, GonzalezFortesCurrBiol2017
    Romania_IronGates_Mesolithic M95, Schela Cladovei, Romania, 7125-6603 calBCE, mtDNA: U5b2c, Y-DNA: R1b-V2219>Y244169, GonzalezFortesCurrBiol2017
    Romania_IronGates_Mesolithic I4655, Schela Cladovei, Romania, 7059-6571 calBCE, mtDNA: K1, Y-DNA: R1(xR1a; xR1b-M269, xR1b-V88), MathiesonNature2018
    Serbia_IronGates_Mesolithic I4916, Hajduka Vodenica, Serbia, 7035-6590 calBCE, mtDNA: U5b2b-a3a, Y-DNA: R1b-V2219>FTA35720, MathiesonNature2018
    Romania_IronGates_Mesolithic I5408, Ostrovul Corbului, Romania, 7022-6485 calBCE, mtDNA: K1i, Y-DNA: R1b-V2219>Y244183*, GonzalezFortesCurrBiol2017
    Romania_IronGates_Mesolithic I5411, Schela Cladovei, Romania, 7000-6300 BCE, mtDNA: U5a1c1, Y-DNA: R1b-V2219>Y244183, MathiesonNature2018
    Serbia_IronGates_Mesolithic Vlasa37, Vlasac, Serbia, 6767-6461 calBCE, mtDNA: K1f, Y-DNA: R1b-V2219>V88*, Hofmanová2017
    Serbia_IronGates_Mesolithic I5772, Vlasac, Serbia, 7100-5900 BCE, mtDNA: U5a2a, Y-DNA: R1b-V2219>V88, MathiesonNature2018
    Serbia_IronGates_N I4666, Lepenski Vir, Serbia, 6222-5912 calBCE, mtDNA: H40, Y-DNA: R1b-V2219, MathiesonNature2018
    Latvia_HG I4432, Zvejnieki, Latvia, 6072-5920 calBCE, mtDNA: U5a2c*, Y-DNA: R1b-Y13200>Y240021, MathiesonNature2018
    Serbia_IronGates_Mesolithic I5232, Padina, Serbia, 6061-5841 calBCE, mtDNA: K1-a4*, Y-DNA: R1b-V2219>FTA35718, MathiesonNature2018
    Latvia_HG I4626, Zvejnieki, Latvia, 5838-5631 calBCE, mtDNA: U2e1, Y-DNA: R1b-Y13200>Y240021, MathiesonNature2018 (New data; Individual first published in JonesCurrBiol2017)
    Latvia_HG I4439, Zvejnieki, Latvia, 5769-5628 calBCE, mtDNA: U5b1d1*, Y-DNA: R1b-Y13200>Y240021, MathiesonNature2018
    Samara_HG I0124, Samara Oblast, Russia, 5660-5535 calBCE, mtDNA: U5a1d, Y-DNA: R1b-Y13200>Y13202, MathiesonNature2015
    Latvia_HG I4434, Zvejnieki, Latvia, 5611-5382 calBCE, mtDNA: U5a2d3, Y-DNA: R1b-Y13200>FTA35755*, MathiesonNature2018
    Ukraine_N I4114, Dereivka, Ukraine, 5474-5324 calBCE, mtDNA: U5a1, Y-DNA: R1b-V2219, MathiesonNature2018
    Ukraine_N I5891, Dereivka, Ukraine, 5467-5230 calBCE, mtDNA: U4d, Y-DNA: R1b-V2219>V88, MathiesonNature2018
    Ukraine_N I5893, Dereivka, Ukraine, 5371-5218 calBCE mtDNA: U5a2a, Y-DNA: R1b-V2219>V88, MathiesonNature2018
    Ukraine_N I3718, Dereivka, Ukraine, 5359-5212 calBCE mtDNA: U5a1b, Y-DNA: R1b-V2219, MathiesonNature2018
    Ukraine_N I5879, Dereivka, Ukraine, 5324-5132 calBCE, mtDNA: U5a1b, Y-DNA: R1b-V2219, MathiesonNature2018
    Italy_HG_N R6, Grotta Continenza, Italy, 5318-5084 calBCE, mtDNA: K1-a, Y-DNA: R1b-V88>Y8451*, AntonioScience2019
    Germany_EN_LBK XN191, Baden-Württemberg, Germany, 5316-5081 calBCE, mtDNA: I1, Y-DNA: R1b-L754, RivollatSciAdv2020
    Ukraine_N I5890, Dereivka, Ukraine, 5291-5058 calBCE, mtDNA: U5a1b, Y-DNA: R1b-V2219, MathiesonNature2018
    Ukraine_N I5881, Dereivka, Ukraine, 5215-5052 calBCE, mtDNA: U5a1b, Y-DNA: R1b-V2219>V88, MathiesonNature2018
    Spain_EN I0411, Els Trocs, Spain, 5298-5059 calBCE, mtDNA: K1a2a, Y-DNA: R1b-V88>Y8451*, OlaldeScience2019
    Spain_EN I0410, Els Trocs, Spain, 5298-5057 calBCE, mtDNA: T2c1d or T2c1d2, Y-DNA: R1b-V88>Y8451*, MathiesonNature2015
    Spain_EN CHA002, Cueva de Chaves, Spain, 5302-5061 calBCE, mtDNA: K1a2a, Y-DNA: R1b-V88>Y8451, VillalbaMoucoCurrBiol2019
    Lithuania_EMN_Narva Donkalnis7, Donkalnis, Lithuania, 5374-4939 calBCE, mtDNA: U5a2d1, Y-DNA: R1b-Y13200>Y13202, MittnikNatCommun2018

    Ukraine_N I5878, Dereivka, Ukraine, 5301-5067 calBCE, mtDNA: U4b1a1a, Y-DNA: R1b-V2219, MathiesonNature2018

    Ukraine_N I4112, Dereivka, Ukraine, 5500-4500 BCE, mtDNA: U5a2a, Y-DNA: R1b-V2219>V88, MathiesonNature2018
    Ukraine_N I5883, Dereivka, Ukraine, 5209-4998 calBCE, mtDNA: U4a, Y-DNA: R1b-V2219, MathiesonNature2018
    Ukraine_N I5892, Dereivka, Ukraine, 5301-4952 calBCE, mtDNA: U4a1, Y-DNA: R1b-L754(xL389), MathiesonNature2018

    Latvia_HG I4628, Zvejnieki, Latvia, 5304-4848 calBCE, mtDNA: U5a2d4, Y-DNA: R1b-Y13200>Y240021, MathiesonNature2018

    Steppe_Eneolithic PG2001, Progress 2, Russia, 4994-4802 calBCE, mtDNA: I3a, Y-DNA: R1b-V1636*, WangNatCommun2019
    Khvalynsk_Eneolithic I0122, Samara Oblast, Russia, 4936-4730 calBCE (FRE: 4500-4300 BCE?), mtDNA: H2a1, Y-DNA: R1b-V1636*, MathiesonNature2015
    Estonia_EMN_Narva Kivisaare3, Kivisaare, Estonia, 4776-4542 calBCE, mtDNA: U5a2d, Y-DNA: R1b-P297(xM269, xY13202), MittnikNatCommun2018

    Bulgaria_C I2181, Smyadovo, Bulgaria, 4606-4447 calBCE, mtDNA: HV15, Y-DNA: R1b-M269, MathiesonNature2018 (no call without Iosif Lazaridis)
    Bulgaria_C I2430, Smyadovo, Bulgaria, 4602-4403 calBCE, mtDNA: K1a26, Y-DNA: R1b-V2219, MathiesonNature2018

    Varna_Eneolithic ANI153, Varna, Bulgaria, 4550-4368 calBCE, mtDNA: U4, Y-DNA: R1b-V2219>V88, MathiesonNature2018
    Latvia_MN I4436, Zvejnieki, Latvia, 4318-4051 calBCE, mtDNA: U4a1a1d, Y-DNA: R1b-Y13200>FTA35755*, MathiesonNature2018
    Latvia_MN I4627, Zvejnieki, Latvia, 4311-3978 calBCE, mtDNA: U4a1, Y-DNA: R1b-Y13200*, MathiesonNature2018 (new data; individual first published in JonesCurrBiol2017)
    Steppe_Eneolithic PG2004, Progress 2, Russia, 4240-4047 calBCE, mtDNA: H2, Y-DNA: R1b-V1636*, WangNatCommun2019
    Comb_Ceramic Tamula3, Tamula, Estonia, 3796-3641 calBCE, mtDNA: U4d2, Y-DNA: R1b(xV2219, xV1636, xM269), MittnikNatCommun2018
    Bohemia_TRB I14169, Makotřasy, Czech Republic, 3800-3500 BCE (inferred), mtDNA: N1a1a1a2, Y-DNA: R1b-V2219>V88, PapacSciAdv2021
    Bohemia_TRB I14176, Makotřasy, Czech Republic, 3700-3500 BCE (inferred), mtDNA: K1a4a1, Y-DNA: R1b-V2219>V88, PapacSciAdv2021
    Bohemia_TRB I14173, Makotřasy, Czech Republic, 3638-3522 BCE (inferred), mtDNA: K1-a4, Y-DNA: R1b-V2219>V88, PapacSciAdv2021
    Baalberge_MN I0559, Quedlinburg, Germany, 3654-3527 calBCE, mtDNA: HV, Y-DNA: R1b-V2219>V88, MathiesonNature2015
    Blatterhohle_MN I1593, Blatterhole Cave, Germany, 3644-3528 calBCE, mtDNA: U5b2a2, Y-DNA: R1b-V2219>V88, LipsonNature2017
    Iran_N had R2 and BMAC plenty of Q which was probably from BMAC farmers admixing with the previous Keltiminar culture WSHG

  9. #334
    Regular Member real expert's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-09-16
    Posts
    623


    Country: Germany



    2 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by enter_tain View Post
    Is there any definitive proof that Yamnaya paternally descend from R1b EHGs? Let's not forget R1b is a Pan-Eurasian DNA found even in Mesolithic Europe and branches like V88 are native to the Middle East. I know EHGs had R1b, but was it the direct branches that gave rise to Yamnaya?

    Let's not forget even CHGs had ANE admixture. If L23 is some Middle Eastern Y-DNA that made its way to the steppes and mixed with EHG females, that would turn this theory upside down.

    You have to update your info. R1b-V88 is NOT native to the Middle East but to Eastern Europe.


    Newly reported samples belonging to haplogroup R1b were distributed between two distinct groups depending on whether they formed part of the major European subclade R1b1a1b (R1b-M269). Individuals placed outside this subclade were predominantly from Eastern European Mesolithic and Neolithic contexts, and formed part of rare early diverging R1b lineages. Two Ukrainian individuals belonged to a subclade of R1b1b (R1b-V88) found among present-day Central and North Africans, lending further support to an ancient Eastern European origin for this clade.


    (Allentoft et al. 2022, Population Genomics of Stone Age Eurasia, Supplementary Information Part 1)


    we identified R1b-V88 markers in 10 mainland European ancient samples, all dating to before 3000 BC. Two very basal R1b-V88 (with several markers still in the ancestral state) appear in Serbian hunter-gatherers as old as 9,000 BCE, which supports a Mesolithic origin of the R1b-V88 clade in or near this broad region. The haplotype appears to have become associated with the Mediterranean Neolithic expansion … it is found in an individual buried at the Els Trocs site in the Pyrenees (modern Aragon, Spain), dated 5,178-5,066 BC and in eleven ancient Sardinians of our sample. Interestingly, markers of the R1b-V88 subclade R1b-V2197, which is at present day found in most African R1b-V88 carriers, are derived only in the Els Trocs individual and two ancient Sardinian individuals. This configuration suggests that the V88 branch first appeared in eastern Europe, mixed into Early European farmer (EEF) individuals (after putatively sex-biased admixture), and then spread with EEF to the western Mediterranean. … A west Eurasian R1b-V88 origin is further supported by a recent phylogenetic analysis that puts modern Sardinian carrier haplotypes basal to the African R1b-V88 haplotypes. The putative coalescence times between the Sardinian and African branches inferred there fall into the Neolithic Subpluvial (“green Sahara”, about 7,000 to 3,000 years BCE). Previous observations of autosomal traces of Holocene admixture with Eurasians for several Chadic populations (Haber et al. 2016) provide further support for a hypothesis that at least some amounts of EEF ancestry crossed the Sahara southwards. … our analysis provides evidence that R1b-V88 traces back to eastern European Mesolithic hunter gatherers and later spread with the Neolithic expansion into Iberia and Sardinia. [And from there into Africa]
    (Marcus et al. 2020, Genetic history from the Middle Neolithic to present on the Mediterranean island of Sardinia, Supplementary Information, p.25)


  10. #335
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    25-12-21
    Posts
    674

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    J2B2-L283/Z638

    Country: United States



    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Johnson View Post
    That’s very unlikely in my view. For one EHGs have a lot more ANE than CHGs. Secondly, West Asia before the EMBA is dominantly G, J, and E, and to a lesser extent H, T, L, and R2. Zero ANFs, ICHGs, Levantine farmers, and Iberomaurusians/North African farmers have R1 or Q1, and at some point, if we find any of the aforementioned with R1, they’ll belong to clades that have their origins in the Villabruna, Iron Gates, and Ukraine_Mesolithic clusters (R1b-L754*, R1b-V2219/V88, R1a-M459(xM198), etc.). However, the aforementioned R1b subclades ultimately derive from proto-EHGs. R1b-M269’s formation date range is 12900-9800 BCE (mean: 11300 BCE); its TMRCA is 5100-3700 BCE (mean: 4400 BCE). This is the oldest M269 bearer we have:

    Bulgaria_C I2181, Smyadovo, Bulgaria, 4606-4447 calBCE, mtDNA: HV15, Y-DNA: R1b-M269, MathiesonNature2018 (no call without Iosif Lazaridis)

    I2181 has around 46.1% Yamnaya in qpAdm, with a standard deviation of 17.4%. In admixture analysis, he picked up EHG, and a larger Yamnaya_Samara component. I2181 and the Varna outlier are both on the Khvalynsk cline, unlike the other Balkans Chalcolithic samples: https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-gpo-jpYFs...ppe_clines.png

    Satsurblia (the sample with ANE) on the other hand dates to 11461-11225 calBCE, and he belongs to J1b-FT34521, so he was relatively contemporaneous with M269’s formation date, but so was the EHG admixed Villabruna man (12268-11851 calBCE, mtDNA: U5b2b, Y-DNA: R1b-L754(xV2219, xP297, xV1636)). Furthermore, M269’s earliest formation date range predates both samples by 700-1500 years at the most; neither one is relevant to the history of R1b-M269. The fact of the matter is this, the oldest R1 bearers are from Europe, and wherever there is R1b there is EHG and ANE autosomal DNA. West Asia has no R1 before the LCA-EMBA, so viewing ICHGs as the donor population is completely baseless, especially when we look at the data.
    Well I'm trying to reconcile David Reich's abstract with what we have so far. Obviously they discovered a new pocket of DNA in the Middle East.

    Although it seems that their largest proof seems to be that Anatolia was "impenetrable", which is not saying much.

  11. #336
    Regular Member real expert's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-09-16
    Posts
    623


    Country: Germany



    1 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Angela View Post
    Oh, he knows I have them, and if he attacks me or bothers me in any way I will indeed post them.

    That's why that all stopped.

    Btw, I don't even need screenshots for certain things like "predictions".

    Did he or did he not say, to slavish applause, that the Mycenaeans would turn out to be blonde, blue eyed very Corded Ware like people? That was one week before the Lazaridis paper came out.

    Or how about how he, and your so called linguistic expert insisted and insisted that the Etruscans, or at least their "elites" would turn out to be Middle Eastern migrants from the 1st century B.C.

    I could go on and on; I have a list.

    If you deny this, then you're a dishonest broker.

    To think I pegged you for a nice guy when you first posted here.

    You know, if you don't like us here, feel free to visit theapricity or Stormfront while you wait for anthrogenica to come back online

    Your assertion about Davidski sounds trustworthy. With that being said, I personally haven‘t come across these specific topics, old posts, and outrageous claims of him, at all. My impression of Davidski is that at times he comes off as rude but he's very knowledgeable in genetics for better or worse. For instance, concerning his conclusions about the Bell Beakers and their relation to the Corded Ware people, he was right. Nonetheless, Davidski must have been high to predict and confidently suggest that the Mycenaeans would turn out to be blonde, blue-eyed very CWC-like people. He failed terribly in that regard. And that's why he may have begun to tone down the rhetoric. The thing is that researchers do take him seriously and obviously read his blog too. In one genetic study, the scholars referred to Davidski, for instance. Thus I think he‘s kinda forced to display discipline and basically summarize what the studies say and comment on them without being carried away by his personal agenda. His blog obviously changed into becoming more moderate and tame. At least compared to what you‘ve witnessed. In my opinion, we should read any conclusions, suggestions, or interpretations of DNA findings regardless of the political affiliation of the involved researchers, with caution.







  12. #337
    Advisor Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    21,258


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: USA - New York



    3 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by real expert View Post

    Your assertion about Davidski sounds trustworthy. With that being said, I personally haven‘t come across these specific topics, old posts, and outrageous claims of him, at all. My impression of Davidski is that at times he comes off as rude but he's very knowledgeable in genetics for better or worse. For instance, concerning his conclusions about the Bell Beakers and their relation to the Corded Ware people, he was right. Nonetheless, Davidski must have been high to predict and confidently suggest that the Mycenaeans would turn out to be blonde, blue-eyed very CWC-like people. He failed terribly in that regard. And that's why he may have begun to tone down the rhetoric. The thing is that researchers do take him seriously and obviously read his blog too. In one genetic study, the scholars referred to Davidski, for instance. Thus I think he‘s kinda forced to display discipline and basically summarize what the studies say and comment on them without being carried away by his personal agenda. His blog obviously changed into becoming more moderate and tame. At least compared to what you‘ve witnessed. In my opinion, we should read any conclusions, suggestions, or interpretations of DNA findings regardless of the political affiliation of the involved researchers, with caution.






    Well, I've been following these sites for about thirteen years, so there's that. I was in the original Dienekes samples, for example, and know many posters from there. I mostly just posted on dna-forums and the 23andme site, but would also lurk on other sites, now almost defunct, and Stormfront, to see what the Nazis were up to, and theapricity. Some of his more outrageous statements were made on Stormfront, where he was a prominent poster. Of course, it's all scrubbed now, because he wanted recognition from academics. He got it, as did Dienekes, who was as different as chalk from cheese, in a Behar paper if I remember correctly, and I know Patterson goes on Eurogenes to explain his programs.

    You won't, for example, find his comment that all Southern Italians should be kicked out of Europe. What does that sound like to you if not Nazism? I guess now that all the Ashkenazim have been taken care of, the people who plot near them on PCAs are next. Just surprised the Greeks weren't added too, or perhaps their Slavic percentage saved them. You certainly will no longer find his comment that his father came from northeastern Poland and joined one of the brigades that fought for the Germans; perhaps an SS brigade. Of course, one can't be hanged for the sins of one's father. Amon Goethe's daughter is horrified by what her father did, and there are many others. Eichman's children, on the other hand, are true believers.

    Anyway, enough about his political beliefs per se.

    The point is that he allows those political beliefs to color his analyses. In fact, his analyses are done specifically to further his political beliefs.

    The two examples I gave about the Mycenaeans and the Etruscans are but two of many examples. If you read Eurogenes I don't know how you missed them.

    Regardless, the point is, as you say, all his analyses should be read with caution, if for no other reason than that his methods are not at all transparent. Even a commercial operation like 23andme has a white paper, and academic papers have to provide enough data on their methods so that others could see if the results could be re-produced. That's why there's such a crisis in psychology and sociology: a huge percentage of the results in academic papers in those fields can't be reproduced.


    Non si fa il proprio dovere perchè qualcuno ci dica grazie, lo si fa per principio, per se stessi, per la propria dignità. Oriana Fallaci

  13. #338
    Elite member
    Join Date
    25-10-11
    Location
    Brittany
    Age
    73
    Posts
    5,407

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b - L21/S145*
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H3c

    Ethnic group
    more celtic
    Country: France



    Quote Originally Posted by enter_tain View Post
    To be honest, I always wondered how the hell did Steppe people manage to keep a near perfect 50/50 EHG/CHG mix. Them "going south for wives", would not be a one time thing, but throughout the generations. This would mean they would overwhelmingly be CHG. The same thing happened to Steppe invaders of southern Europe. Every generation took EEF wives not just the first, and the steppe lineage became a minority.

    It makes much more sense for a group of CHG males to expand into the steppe and take EHG wives that one time, and keep rapidly expanding towards Europe. We saw this with Panonian Avars that gradually became more Slavic/European as they pushed westward.



    This model explains the "Iranian Neolithic-like"/"Armenian-like" component of Yamnaya, and the early split of Anatolian.

    If this is true, then the "Caucausian" misnomer would, through some ****** up twist of fate, actually be correct
    Not convincing. There is no universal model of intermatings along History. Every kind of model can be found. If R1b had flirted with south Caucasus, it was after an arrival from Central Asia and rather through southern Caspian, I think(not sure, it's true).

  14. #339
    Elite member
    Join Date
    25-10-11
    Location
    Brittany
    Age
    73
    Posts
    5,407

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b - L21/S145*
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H3c

    Ethnic group
    more celtic
    Country: France



    1 members found this post helpful.
    I wrote 'central Asia': I thought in fact: mergins between eastern Europe and west-central Asia. ( so: Steppes)

  15. #340
    Regular Member real expert's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-09-16
    Posts
    623


    Country: Germany



    Quote Originally Posted by Angela View Post
    Well, I've been following these sites for about thirteen years, so there's that. I was in the original Dienekes samples, for example, and know many posters from there. I mostly just posted on dna-forums and the 23andme site, but would also lurk on other sites, now almost defunct, and Stormfront, to see what the Nazis were up to, and theapricity. Some of his more outrageous statements were made on Stormfront, where he was a prominent poster. Of course, it's all scrubbed now, because he wanted recognition from academics. He got it, as did Dienekes, who was as different as chalk from cheese, in a Behar paper if I remember correctly, and I know Patterson goes on Eurogenes to explain his programs........


    The two examples I gave about the Mycenaeans and the Etruscans are but two of many examples. If you read Eurogenes I don't know how you missed them........
    Simply because I don’t read Stormfront. Plus, I started to read Eurogenes blog relatively recently and more frequently after the Roman paper leak and rumors. In terms of the Etruscans, there were always two camps of scholars. Some scholars believed that the Etruscans were indigenous people of Italy. Others believed that they were immigrants from Asia Minor. The first was vindicated by DNA. Besides, in my view, the Myceneans came out Mediterranean-like as expected. Hence, I just skimmed over some comments on the Mycenean paper and not really followed the discussion closely.

  16. #341
    Regular Member real expert's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-09-16
    Posts
    623


    Country: Germany



    Quote Originally Posted by MOESAN View Post
    I wrote 'central Asia': I thought in fact: mergins between eastern Europe and west-central Asia. ( so: Steppes)
    Siberia is located in North and not Central Asia, as many say. Just saying.

  17. #342
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    12-10-16
    Posts
    1,223


    Country: Albania



    The Italian population may have grown as well: three census were ordered by Augustus, also assuming role of Roman censor, in order to record the number of Roman citizens throughout the empire. The surviving totals were 4,063,000 in 28 BC, 4,233,000 in 8 BC, and 4,937,000 in AD 14, but it is still debated whether these counted all citizens, all adult male citizens, or citizens sui iuris.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Italy#cite_note-20

    EDIT: I doubt it had such a big increase now that I think about it. Probably an error based on the census because citizen status did not include slaves.

    "Rome differed from Greek city-states in allowing freed slaves to become citizens
    . After manumission, a male slave who had belonged to a Roman citizen enjoyed not only passive freedom from ownership, but active political freedom (libertas), including the right to vote."






  18. #343
    Regular Member torzio's Avatar
    Join Date
    10-05-19
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    3,185

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    T1a2 - SK1480
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H95a

    Ethnic group
    North Italian
    Country: Australia



    Quote Originally Posted by ihype02 View Post
    The Italian population may have grown as well: three census were ordered by Augustus, also assuming role of Roman censor, in order to record the number of Roman citizens throughout the empire. The surviving totals were 4,063,000 in 28 BC, 4,233,000 in 8 BC, and 4,937,000 in AD 14, but it is still debated whether these counted all citizens, all adult male citizens, or citizens sui iuris.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Italy#cite_note-20

    EDIT: I doubt it had such a big increase now that I think about it. Probably an error based on the census because citizen status does not include slaves.

    "Rome differed from Greek city-states in allowing freed slaves to become citizens
    . After manumission, a male slave who had belonged to a Roman citizen enjoyed not only passive freedom from ownership, but active political freedom (libertas), including the right to vote."






    Italian population in 1410 was 13.5 million

    Italian Population in 1860 when Italy formed ................without Lombardy, Veneto, Trentino or Friuli was 22 million ...............by 1870 when these joined except Trentino they bought in nearly 9 million extra people
    Fathers mtdna ...... T2b17
    Grandfather paternal mtdna ... T1a1e
    Sons mtdna ...... K1a4p
    Mothers line ..... R1b-S8172
    Grandmother paternal side ... I1-CTS6397
    Wife paternal line ..... R1a-PF6155

    "Fear profits man, nothing"

  19. #344
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    25-12-21
    Posts
    674

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    J2B2-L283/Z638

    Country: United States



    2 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by MOESAN View Post
    Not convincing. There is no universal model of intermatings along History. Every kind of model can be found. If R1b had flirted with south Caucasus, it was after an arrival from Central Asia and rather through southern Caspian, I think(not sure, it's true).
    It could be. The only issue is we have not found the origin of M269 yet. It just "appears" in Yamnaya. But given its dating of >13,000 years it should be found in Khvalynsk if they were indeed the ancestors of Yamnaya.

    The great thing about the now-defunct Anatolian theory of PIE was that it explained the "early branching" of the Anatolian language. The current R1b steppe doesn't. Reich is clearly trying to explain this.

  20. #345
    Regular Member Ghani's Avatar
    Join Date
    12-09-17
    Posts
    38

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    Q-M25
    MtDNA haplogroup
    W

    Ethnic group
    Kurds
    Country: Iran



    2 members found this post helpful.
    My impression of Davidski is that at times he comes off as rude but he's very knowledgeable in genetics for better or worse

    He may come across as knowledgeable by hobbyists who are themselves not data scientists or geneticists but the fact that he relies on PCA based methods such G25 for genetic distances or conclusions when there are many papers out there on why not to rely on PCAs for conclusions on genetic mixing histories or geneflows, or can’t himself process raw DNA sequence data from ENA tells me that he simply is a good amateur but isn’t a true data scientist or geneticist like Patterson of Broad or Dilawer of Eurasian DNA or even Dienekes.

    I remember the arguments he had with Dienekes which really showed how ignorant he was about some of the genetics programs. The fact that he butts heads with David Reich without having reliable evidence to back his position also doesn’t help his case
    Last edited by Ghani; 24-07-22 at 08:52.

  21. #346
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    23-04-22
    Posts
    141


    Country: India



    The fact is that different Indo-European peoples lived in Iran, for example as I said ancient Illuri people in Luristan were Illyrian, Gaeli people in Gilan were Celtic but Kurds in Kurdistan were Indo-Iranian.


  22. #347
    Regular Member mount123's Avatar
    Join Date
    30-12-21
    Posts
    608

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    J2b-L283>Y52453

    Country: Kosovo



    What's the deal with pseudo-scientific couch potato input like the one above? It amazes me that some people really don't know boundaries.

  23. #348
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    23-04-22
    Posts
    141


    Country: India



    Quote Originally Posted by mount123 View Post
    What's the deal with pseudo-scientific couch potato input like the one above? It amazes me that some people really don't know boundaries.
    All of them have been mentioned in the world's most cited scientific journals, like Nature and Scientific Culture, for example about Celtic people look at this article by Prof. Xavier Rouard which was published this year: https://sci-cult.com/did-indo-europe...nary-approach/


  24. #349
    Regular Member kingjohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    05-09-16
    Posts
    1,775

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    Rare e-fgc7391
    MtDNA haplogroup
    h3ap

    Country: Uruguay



    Quote Originally Posted by Ghani View Post
    He may come across as knowledgeable by hobbyists who are themselves not data scientists or geneticists but the fact that he relies on PCA based methods such G25 for genetic distances or conclusions when there are many papers out there on why not to rely on PCAs for conclusions on genetic mixing histories or geneflows, or can’t himself process raw DNA sequence data from ENA tells me that he simply is a good amateur but isn’t a true data scientist or geneticist like Patterson of Broad or Dilawer of Eurasian DNA or even Dienekes.
    I remember the arguments he had with Dienekes which really showed how ignorant he was about some of the genetics programs. The fact that he butts heads with David Reich without having reliable evidence to back his position also doesn’t help his case

    you nail it
    i think dilawer is very good ( i know some people dont like his calculators in geneplazza
    but i do )
    he was also banned from anthrogenica
    if i am not wrong
    ancestery :
    mostly western jewish here is the overlapp with south europe[U]

    "Know where you came from and where you are going."

    Direct paternal line : mizrahi from damascus

  25. #350
    Regular Member Er Monnezza's Avatar
    Join Date
    17-01-18
    Posts
    165


    Country: Italy



    1 members found this post helpful.
    There has been migration from the Steppe to the Southern Arc as early as 4206-3925 BC (Areni_C samples from Armenia, not far from the border with Iran 39°43′53″N 45°12′13″E).

    Target: ARM_Areni_C
    Distance: 0.0148% / 0.01476239 | R4P
    29.1 IRN_Hajji_Firuz_C:I4351___BC_5970___Coverage_64.70 %
    29.0 AZE_Caucasus_lowlands_LN:MTT001___BC_5688___Covera ge_73.36%
    25.1 RUS_Progress_En:PG2001___BC_4900___Coverage_75.05%
    16.8 HUN_ALPc_Szakalhat_MN:I2743___BC_5100___Coverage_2 1.55%

    Target: ARM_Areni_C
    Distance: 0.0206% / 0.02062109 | R4P
    53.8 IRN_Hajji_Firuz_C:I4351___BC_5970___Coverage_64.70 %
    20.3 HRV_Sopot_MN:I3498___BC_5731___Coverage_42.90%
    14.5 RUS_Karelia_HG:I0061___BC_6500___Coverage_87.22%
    11.4 GEO_CHG:KK1___BC_7728___Coverage_99.87%

    Target: ARM_Areni_C
    Distance: 0.0193% / 0.01926070 | R5P
    31.7 IRN_Hajji_Firuz_C:I2323___BC_5960___Coverage_39.79 %
    30.6 AZE_Caucasus_lowlands_LN:MTT001___BC_5688___Covera ge_73.36%
    14.5 RUS_Karelia_HG:I0061___BC_6500___Coverage_87.22%
    13.9 HUN_Starcevo_N:I0174___BC_5608___Coverage_19.59%
    9.3 GEO_CHG:KK1___BC_7728___Coverage_99.87%

Page 14 of 48 FirstFirst ... 4121314151624 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •