A genetic probe into the ancient and medieval history of Southern Europe and WestAsia

They say and know very well that there is continuous geneflow from Anatolia to Greece, I don't see why they should be pissed off?

OK, I must have misunderstood then, I retract my statement about them.

Not commenting on g25 stuff.
 
They say and know very well that there is continuous geneflow from Anatolia to Greece, I don't see why they should be pissed off?
"Levantine-input" means that, in addition to an Anatolian shift, there was another one that increased Natufian/PPNB-related ancestry both in Greece and Anatolia, probably during the Hellenistic period and after.
SampleTUR_Barcin_NGEO_CHGIRN_Ganj_Dareh_NLevant_NatufianRUS_Samara_HG
TUR_Muğla_Değirmendere_615_BC69,214,912,91,51,5
TUR_Gordion_653-646_BC56,924,710,57,40,5
Greek_Dodecanese57,313,313,87,87,8
I'm a bit confused, though: this paper seems to have found asditional levantine input in Myceneans too, which was not present in the previous models from Lazaridis.

That sample you posted from Gordium is from the VII century BC, well before the hellenistic age.

They even modeled Anatolian Neolithic as being partly PPN, wich should also be a novelty, since, if I remember correctly, the consensus was that Anatolian Neolithic Farmers were not admixed.
 
I'm a bit confused, though: this paper seems to have found asditional levantine input in Myceneans too, which was not present in the previous models from Lazaridis.
That sample you posted from Gordium is from the VII century BC, well before the hellenistic age.
They even modeled Anatolian Neolithic as being partly PPN, wich should also be a novelty, since, if I remember correctly, the consensus was that Anatolian Neolithic Farmers were not admixed.

If you go by the above poster's model most of the new Mycenean samples have the typically high Barcin, around an average of 10% CHG and/or a converse amount of Iran N. with varying rates of EHG and negligible Natufian/PPNB. There's one sample (Mycenean Attica female) that has higher PPNB (closer to new Minoan samples) so could she have had some Minoan lineage?
 
What Lazaridis wrote on Twitter about the movement from Anatolia to the west. It is obvious that if there really was this movement it was everywhere to the east of Italy, in the whole Balkans, and it can also be found elsewhere, even to the west and to north of Italy, although autosomal DNA hides it more.

But many ancient samples are still missing. For the Bronze and Iron Ages from Italy, for example.
7eYS0WI.jpg


https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.08.30.458211v1

I did not know about this paper, just went through it (the arXiv version). It sheds quite some light to Ev13, is there any thread where it is being discussed?
 
If you go by the above poster's model most of the new Mycenean samples have the typically high Barcin, around an average of 10% CHG and/or a converse amount of Iran N. with varying rates of EHG and negligible Natufian/PPNB. There's one sample (Mycenean Attica female) that has higher PPNB (closer to new Minoan samples) so could she have had some Minoan lineage?

Mycenaeans vs "Greek_Deep_Mani", the most akin modern Greek reference.

FJkJVFo.png
 
Mycenaeans vs "Greek_Deep_Mani", the most akin modern Greek reference.

There is no need to use 7 components for such analisys, only 3 components should be used . Some of the components corelate to each other.
By using 3 or max 4 components you will get more reliable results. More components will results in random categorization with one main component or another.
 
Mycenaeans vs "Greek_Deep_Mani", the most akin modern Greek reference.

FJkJVFo.png

Pretty darn close comparison. So my understanding is that there was a second wave of Anatolian ancestry (a bit different and more Southern shifted than the Barcin wave) that added the additional Iran N, Natufian and/or PPNB to Bronze age Greeks. The (pre-Mycenean?) Peloponnesian N sample has very high Barcin (85-90%) and minor CHG (brought in by Neolithic farmers) may represent the indigenous population prior to both the IE advance and second wave of Anatolian admixture.
 
Lazaridis concluded that the X chr analysis shows that the CHG didn't over-contribute on the X. This goes against the simple notion that the ubiquity of the specific M269 lineage meant that the EHG population rolled over the CHG population in the Steppe.

And yet, the CHG were not known to have this specific R1b M269 lineage. These conflicting facts can be explained by time. The population of EHG and CHG were combined but for some reason over a thousand years or so, the R1b lineage emerged as the dominant Y with perhaps a minor J2b component.

For one Y group to dominate a population they must have had strange mating customs. Or, the founding group of this population was small but spread rapidly and successfully, with the R1b having some advantage.

The steppe was a violent place; there's archaeological data showing that. Constant raiding between different patriarchal groups could lead to y line extinction.
 
Levant_PPN is about 45% EEF/ANF (Tur_ Barcin_N).

Thanks. Even with that in mind, though, they still seems a little bit more levant admixed. Roughly at the same level of the sample from deep_Mani (6% Natufian), if we want to draw an average, or even more.
 
Francesco: I think what Er Monnezza's admixture charts show is that that PPN_Levant is a fundamentally different population than the older Natufians. PPN_Levant starts around 10,000 BC and ends around 6,500 BC, divided into PPN A and B with B reaching all the way into Mesopotamia. Natufian goes back to 13,000 BC and runs into early PPN which succeeded it. I have 2 sets of analyses, G25 comparing the the Levant PPN samples in that spreadsheet with the Natufians. I did the same thing in Dodecad 12B. What the data suggest to me is that there was a shift in the ancestry of Levant PPN vs. the earlier Natufian Levant consisent with gene flow from outside the Levant coming into it from somewhere else. I don't think Genetic drift can explain that big a move in the Levant given the 2 cultures overlapped and are in the same region. Levant PPN likely received geneflow from the North from Anatolia into it and also from its NE/East from the Caucuses (CHG) and Iran_Neolithic type ancestry.


G25 Natufian Source population, Levant PPN target populations
Distance to:Levant_PPNC:I1699
0.11022788Levant_Natufian:I0861
0.11308591Levant_Natufian_contam:I1072


Distance to:Levant_PPNB:I1710
0.14201055Levant_Natufian:I0861
0.15008466Levant_Natufian_contam:I1072


Distance to:Levant_PPNB:I1707
0.11076375Levant_Natufian:I0861
0.11830639Levant_Natufian_contam:I1072


Distance to:Levant_PPNB:I0867
0.12512512Levant_Natufian:I0861
0.12705731Levant_Natufian_contam:I1072


Distance to:Levant_PPNB:BAJ001
0.08157877Levant_Natufian:I0861
0.08472717Levant_Natufian_contam:I1072


Distance to:Levant_PPNB_contam:I1704
0.11323380Levant_Natufian:I0861
0.11653658Levant_Natufian_contam:I1072


Dodecad 12b: Source Natufians, Targe population Levant PPN

Distance to:Levant_N:I1710:Lazaridis_2016
24.16226811Natufian:I0861:Lazaridis_2016
25.62379753Natufian:I1687:Lazaridis_2016
29.07266070Natufian:I1685:Lazaridis_2016
33.20384616Natufian:I1069:Lazaridis_2016
33.73085531Natufian:I1690:Lazaridis_2016
46.82121955Natufian:I1072:Lazaridis_2016

Distance to:Levant_N:I1707:Lazaridis_2016
20.71038387Natufian:I0861:Lazaridis_2016
24.37743629Natufian:I1687:Lazaridis_2016
28.89521068Natufian:I1685:Lazaridis_2016
31.09131390Natufian:I1069:Lazaridis_2016
32.45980591Natufian:I1690:Lazaridis_2016
44.86275515Natufian:I1072:Lazaridis_2016


Distance to:Levant_N:I1704:Lazaridis_2016
5.75796839Natufian:I1687:Lazaridis_2016
13.76355332Natufian:I0861:Lazaridis_2016
14.00219269Natufian:I1069:Lazaridis_2016
14.00769074Natufian:I1690:Lazaridis_2016
19.52983871Natufian:I1685:Lazaridis_2016
23.87275853Natufian:I1072:Lazaridis_2016


Distance to:Levant_N:I1699:Lazaridis_2016
18.79742536Natufian:I0861:Lazaridis_2016
21.44123597Natufian:I1687:Lazaridis_2016
24.90379088Natufian:I1685:Lazaridis_2016
27.79432316Natufian:I1069:Lazaridis_2016
28.90752151Natufian:I1690:Lazaridis_2016
41.57611333Natufian:I1072:Lazaridis_2016


Distance to:Levant_N:I0867:Lazaridis_2016
17.82867073Natufian:I0861:Lazaridis_2016
19.85513284Natufian:I1687:Lazaridis_2016
25.34251566Natufian:I1685:Lazaridis_2016
27.39744331Natufian:I1069:Lazaridis_2016
28.42078641Natufian:I1690:Lazaridis_2016
41.02833046Natufian:I1072:Lazaridis_2016



You can see the movement of Levant Neolithic in this PCA from Lazaridis et al 2016 "Genomic insights into the origin of farming in the ancient Near East" Figure 1 (p.420)

OfZmkxg.jpg
 
QUHtQBF.png

pQyNjz6.png


Albanian and Greek are descended directly from the Yamnaya. We see a cline from Yamnaya, all the way to Greece_N, and Albania_N. With samples like Yamnaya_Bulgaria_o, and Logkas_MBA intermediary. Mycenaean clearly on the cline as well closer to the original Neolithic people in Greece. I think it is possible this same dynamic played out in southern Italy as well, during the Bronze Age. My own halopgroup is from the Yamnaya in the Balkans EBA, which also shows up in Mycenaean Greece.
 
From this other table you posted, it seems they were even more levant admixed...or does it depends on using Levant_PPN instead of Natufian?

RdJBBal.png
So the two with 40 and 56% PPNB are outliers? That seems really high when you look at other samples that have like 3% PPNB. So I guess there was some diversity within this population and/or visitors from the Near East. The two Kastrouli (Phocis) samples have 0% PPNB and very high Barcin possibly a result of isolation?
 
Albanian and Greek are descended directly from the Yamnaya .

EDIT

I had read it wrong, Jovialis. I had read Albanians and Greeks instead of their languages. My fault.


Interesting one. Where did you find it Jovialis?

pQyNjz6.jpg
 
When we talk about Anatolian admixture we usually mean LBA and after. Not pre historical components.
Atticans of the Homeric time are closer to Thracians than they are to West Anatolians. Just sayin'.

I also don't know whom you mean by "we".

Anatolian admixture started with the early Neolithic and was continuous over time, certain through the Bronze Age of Homer's time, and given the Marathon sample, into the Roman period. That's without talking about the Byzantine period.

We know from this paper that Mycenaeans were, on average, only 10% steppe. They were, however, 22% CHG.

If we're going to do comparisons, then we should have the stats to back them up, i.e. the steppe admixed Thracians, the Mycenaeans, and the Anatolian Bronze Age samples. We should use the groups used in this new paper perhaps.
 
They say and know very well that there is continuous geneflow from Anatolia to Greece, I don't see why they should be pissed off?

"Levantine-input" means that, in addition to an Anatolian shift, there was another one that increased Natufian/PPNB-related ancestry both in Greece and Anatolia, probably during the Hellenistic period and after.

SampleTUR_Barcin_NGEO_CHGIRN_Ganj_Dareh_NLevant_NatufianRUS_Samara_HG
TUR_Muğla_Değirmendere_615_BC69,214,912,91,51,5
TUR_Gordion_653-646_BC56,924,710,57,40,5
Greek_Dodecanese57,313,313,87,87,8

Yes, they admit there was continuous gene flow from Anatolia, but what they, and you, have always been about is that there was specifically gene flow from the Levant which made permanent changes to the Italian genetic signature. So, the fact that some of that "Levantine" you claim to find through the discredited G25 may have arrived through Anatolian people is, I'm sure, unwelcome.
 
QUHtQBF.png

pQyNjz6.png


Albanian and Greek are descended directly from the Yamnaya. We see a cline from Yamnaya, all the way to Greece_N, and Albania_N. With samples like Yamnaya_Bulgaria_o, and Logkas_MBA intermediary. Mycenaean clearly on the cline as well closer to the original Neolithic people in Greece. I think it is possible this same dynamic played out in southern Italy as well, during the Bronze Age. My own halopgroup is from the Yamnaya in the Balkans EBA, which also shows up in Mycenaean Greece.

So basically, the Greek language was create as Lingua Franca used for trade between between Minions and other Indoeuropian populations? Correct?! But Armenians ended up speaking Similar languages? This is confusing to me?

As far as I know Armenian and Greek are close, while Albanian is not that close.

According to this Greeks have come rather late in Greece 1500 BCE.


Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum
 

This thread has been viewed 39810 times.

Back
Top