• Don't want to see ads? Install an adblocker like uBlock Origin or use a Europe-based privacy-friendly browser like Vivaldi or Mullvad.

Autosomal analysis of Yamna, Corded Ware and Bell Beaker samples

Apparently when I feel smthg is wrong, it is wrong. David checked Lithuanian ba again and this is his latest statement:
The Lithuanian BA sample is very similar to Lithuanians, except it's a little more northern, suggesting more HG ancestry.

Which is what I would expect.
 
Agree until the 4000 BC and around, because after the 4000 BC we see an increasing densitiy of megalithic momuments on Ataltnic façade, sepultures and territories marks, all of which needed a dense enough population, for I think. Some tries for archeodemography estimated the bigger increase in Germany was around the megalithic period, not the BB's one, before Urnfields; perhaps this new science requires some more time to publish more accurate results. But I think the introgression of Western megaliths into West Germany between 4000 and 3000 BC, along Loire and East France trail is sufficient to prove Atlantic shores were not a desert. By the way, physical changes occurred among future Brittany people at theses times, before others changes at and after BBs times. Megalithic types on the way to Long Barrows types, with some cromagnoid accretions, and what seems an other HG people from West of France (more 'capelloid') would have left the Atlantic shores to take along Garonne river towards North Mediterranea, maybe pushed by the new.comers or coming with them? the problem of Western France for skeletal remnants is its soil acidity.
 
ElHorsto said:
Balts start to resemble the Basques in terms of mystery :)

I do think that certain significant autosomal changes did happen in NE Europe. Perhaps a necessary question would be: how much of which admixture is necessary to transform Gedrosia into something else.

Gedrosia is also a mystery in Basques. They shouldn't have it, given their low ANE and West-Asian scores in all other calculators.
Click to expand...

I agree things are not too easy. But 'gedrosia' is not so low among Basques compared to other SW Europeans. and 'ANE' is an older concept a sa whole, based upon Mal'ta if I'm not wrong. 'ANE' is "larger" than 'gedrosia'. possibly, the all 'ANE' for Basque was in its 'gedrosia', almost as in Celts, when in east Europe, the former 'ANE' component was split into more than a new component. and I repeat, old 'gedrosia' IS NOT EQUAL to new 'gedrosia' of Baluchis. these components are a bit unsteady products of diverse poolings. By the way, Basques should not have Y-R1b in the proportions they have, but they have!
 
arvistro said:
Baltics and West Russia is place of 0 Gedrosia..[/QUOTE

We are speaking of Past. Things changed more than a time meanwhile. As I already said in ancient times some countries could have been run across by more than an ethny before these ethnies begun to cross one with another, aside some females rapts. I see Y-R1b-U106 or future U106 passing South the Baltic, maybe without too much contacts with sedentary ex HGs neolithicized population which had NO 'gedrosia' when the U106's had. its possible the most of ex-HGs Y-R1a of North did not have ancient 'gedrosia'. And perhaps it was the same cas with Y-N1 people speaking finnic-uralic, who could have reinforced this lack of 'gedrosia'
The today Baltic speaking people are not only primary I-Ean speakers and their 'ANE' was without 'gedrosian ANE', possibly.
I see Corded entering Scandinavia, at first without too much contacts with the stayed aback populations of South Baltic shores (Y-I1?) and no more contacts with first Y-R1b-U106. More than a wave entered Scandinavia after first Neolithic people. I think the most of the fusion between Y(R1b, Y-R1a and Y-I1 occurred in or around southern Scandinavia during Bronze, before creating Jastorf culture? the 'west-asian- or 'gedrosia' component were perhaps stronger in Scandinavia before the Germanic concretion and diminshed by I1 (0%)+ R1b (smaller %?) actions?
concerning ancient and current components; I think they have all of them their advantages and defects. Porosity between 'Caucasus', 'east-med', 'gedrosia' and even 'south-asian' in 'west-asian' by instance. old 'south-asian' surely split off into some of 'west-asian', 'gedrosia', even 'caucasus according to runs.
Click to expand...
 
arvistro said:
Gedrosia used to be in Meso Karelia and Samara as noted couple of posts up and very rich in (German) Corded Ware. It looks like Balts landed from ??? moon?? to avoid it.
Or its just a glitch in calculators.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I think a glitch in the calculator is the most likely explanation for Lithuanians have 0% Gedrosia. I guess the algorithm just doesn't do its job in picking up a similar component in them. Since the ancient Western European Hunter Gatherers don't have it either though, maybe that suggests that Balts are the modern populations most closely related to them.

I'm glad to see that heated debate between Dienekes and Davidski trashing each others' calculators. I doubt any of those calculators are perfect by any stretch. And I don't know which of them is the best. I would by no means want to discard the whole K12b calculator based on that, though. I hope someone else comes along with a different calculator.

One thing I think that the new 4,000 ybp Swedish U106 sample has shown about the calculators though, is that when the Eurogenes K15 West Med (Sardinian-like Ancient Farmers) component shows up, the Dodecad K12b Gedrosia component shows up as well. Or rather, the algorithm distinguishes it from the other components.


Afterthought: Actually, those ancient Swedish Hunter-Gatherers didn’t have Y-dna R. They were all Y-dna I, as far as I know. So the Gedrosia may well have come with the Y-dna R. Mal’ta (Y-dna R*) had 24% Gedrosia, Anzick 1 (Y-dna Q) had 8% Gedrosia, and the 4000 ybp Paleo-Eskimo (Y-dna Q) had 5%, so Gedrosia may well be associated with Y-dna R and maybe Q too. But how did the current East Europeans end up with so little of it? Polish: 0.5%, Ukranians: 0.3%, Belorussians: 0%. I guess another explanation might be they heavily mixed with a different population that was associated with Y-dna I or another haplogroup. I don’t understand how they could have selectively lost Gedrosia otherwise.
 
Last edited:
'gedrosia' was well represented among very ancient people or Central Asia South Siberia, not to different from some of the famous ANE - I think in Ust-Ishim, Mal'ta, Kostentki14 -
but this 'gedrosia' component of Central Asia Eastern Eurasia is NAMED 'gedrosia' because TODAY its more high frequence is among Baluchis, ALONG with other genes labelled 'gedrosia' too for the same present days reasons, even if these last ones had never been present in Central Asia and around (all that if I have well understood the pooling work).
So, a set of genes maybe has been common in a huge territory between Northeast Europe, East Eurasia Central Asia and after some separations of tribes they has been kept by every new population but not all of them and not allways the same ones; some of the most southern ones became 'gedrosia' in nomenclature when some of the more northern did not: a "washing" of ancient DNA by modern namings? surely they were some old asian 'gedrosia' in North (see Karelia) but less tha in South, and some more mutations plus exchanges of genes with foreign population achieved to "clean" definitely?
for these reason, I would be glad to know if the N-W Europe (Celtic, Germanic) 'gedrosia' elements are sharedthe with the S-Caucasus-Near-Eastern 'gedrosia'...
sorry for my laborious english and the noise maid by my brain gering. In some way I repaet myself, trying to be clearer, what is not sure!
 
gearing, repeat - sorry
 
IN fact I partly agree with JS Bach.

+ We can also see things otherwise
there were 'gedrosia' and 'gedrosia' and there is new 'gedrosia' - my above explanation plays a role in the question, I think. But we could say: old 'gedrosia' was for the most an Eastern component for Eurasia (it seems confirmed with some East Asian populations) and the introgression in Eastern Europe (not Eurasia) came by SOutheast, through Caucasus, and did not concern northernmost populations accultured later, before they became Balts and Slavs???
I avow I think the first explanation (ancient N and new S 'gedrosia') has more weight but?
I recall if it can be useful that Balts and Slavs favor 'sardinian' at the depend of 'basque' when Scandinavians, Western Europeans do the opposite; even Finland is more 'basque' and less 'sardinian' than Balts and Slavs... W
 
Interesting. In one source Gimbutas derived Balts from Lower Dnieper and related folk in Fatyanovo from middle Dnieper. Which is basically Sredny Stog.
But also GAC folk was there.
Anyway those all were Gedrosia rich populations. Maybe "East European" eats "Gedrosia".
I ve seen different estimates from 75% (with additional SHG and ENF) to 98% Lithuanians from CW Estonia. Archeologically there is nothing to suggest otherwise. Will re-read anthropology study by Raisa Denisova on Balts.
 
I can think of a third possible explanation now for why Lithuanians have 0% Gedrosia. I was reading one of the comments on the Eurogenes site where the poster was providing an explanation for why the admixture results of the Bell Beaker samples varied so widely among the samples. And he said the reason for that was because the algorithm had to randomly choose what categories to place the SNPs in because the mutations hadn’t occurred yet, at that point in history. And if a better algorithm were used, there wouldn’t be as much variance among those Bell Beaker samples in their results. I think that’s what may be happening with the ancient DNA samples here. That is, the Gedrosia in the Mal’ta boy may actually just be phantom Gedrosia, since the algorithm is guessing between the North_European and Gedrosia sister clades. And likewise for Anzick 1 (18% North_European) and the Paleo Eskimo (12% North_European). And likewise also for Karelia, Yamna and Corded Ware. And since those aforementioned Eastern European countries have so little R1b, maybe that’s the answer. I definitely like this one better than my second explanation, and now it’s a toss-up between whether I like this explanation better than my first explanation of there being a glitch in the calculator. A question is, are NorthWest European and NorthEast European languages so different as to warrant such a stark contrast in Gedrosia?
 
JS Bach said:
I can think of a third possible explanation now for why Lithuanians have 0% Gedrosia. I was reading one of the comments on the Eurogenes site where the poster was providing an explanation for why the admixture results of the Bell Beaker samples varied so widely among the samples. And he said the reason for that was because the algorithm had to randomly choose what categories to place the SNPs in because the mutations hadn’t occurred yet, at that point in history. And if a better algorithm were used, there wouldn’t be as much variance among those Bell Beaker samples in their results. I think that’s what may be happening with the ancient DNA samples here. That is, the Gedrosia in the Mal’ta boy may actually just be phantom Gedrosia, since the algorithm is guessing between the North_European and Gedrosia sister clades. And likewise for Anzick 1 (18% North_European) and the Paleo Eskimo (12% North_European). And likewise also for Karelia, Yamna and Corded Ware. And since those aforementioned Eastern European countries have so little R1b, maybe that’s the answer. I definitely like this one better than my second explanation, and now it’s a toss-up between whether I like this explanation better than my first explanation of there being a glitch in the calculator. A question is, are NorthWest European and NorthEast European languages so different as to warrant such a stark contrast in Gedrosia?
Click to expand...
I also think there is some problem with calculators. It is impossible that generosity could disappear completely from Eastern Europe, being at pretty high level few thousand years.
 
LeBrok said:
I also think there is some problem with calculators. It is impossible that generosity could disappear completely from Eastern Europe, being at pretty high level few thousand years.
Click to expand...

Maybe, but reread my 104# 106# - maybe too a part of the explanation -
and about 'basque' and 'sardinian' components of some poolings: as a matter of fact, Basque population is not void of 'gedrosia' when Sardinian population is...
a population of the region comprised between SE Poland, E Carpathians and NW Ukraina could have been left a moment aside the great first changes, a population with high %s of WHG + a bit lowest %s of classical EEF ('sardinianlike') ? So Y-I2a(1) + some Y-G2a, later impacted by Y-R1a northeastern people, themselves rich enough in WHG/EHG + ANE ??? No 'gedrosia ' with the northeastern Y-R1a people and no 'gedrosia' with the former EEF and WHG ???
 
MOESAN said:
Maybe, but reread my 104# 106# - maybe too a part of the explanation -
and about 'basque' and 'sardinian' components of some poolings: as a matter of fact, Basque population is not void of 'gedrosia' when Sardinian population is...
a population of the region comprised between SE Poland, E Carpathians and NW Ukraina could have been left a moment aside the great first changes, a population with high %s of WHG + a bit lowest %s of classical EEF ('sardinianlike') ? So Y-I2a(1) + some Y-G2a, later impacted by Y-R1a northeastern people, themselves rich enough in WHG/EHG + ANE ??? No 'gedrosia ' with the northeastern Y-R1a people and no 'gedrosia' with the former EEF and WHG ???
Click to expand...
I would agree that we could see Gedrosia diminishing to lower numbers through times, but not vanishing completely. There was no total population replacement there. Therefore problem needs to be the calculators.
 
LeBrok said:
I would agree that we could see Gedrosia diminishing to lower numbers through times, but not vanishing completely. There was no total population replacement there. Therefore problem needs to be the calculators.
Click to expand...

So, let's wait for other calculators... the two explanations can converge to the present apparent result?
 
MOESAN said:
So, let's wait for other calculators... the two explanations can converge to the present apparent result?
Click to expand...

I agree. I guess we'll wait and see in the next 5 or 10 years what the results will bring. No way modern Germans can have 7% Gedrosia, Corded Ware 22%, and then Lithuanians and Belorussians 0%. I can see maybe 3 percent but not zero.
 
Do we know Gedrosia for RISE000? The Estonian CW sample?
If this guy had Gedrosia, then Lithuania must have one too.
 
arvistro said:
Do we know Gedrosia for RISE000? The Estonian CW sample?
If this guy had Gedrosia, then Lithuania must have one too.
Click to expand...

Is this the one you mean?

RISE00Sope, EstoniaF999955FH5a1~2000 years

http://www.y-str.org/p/ancient-dna.html


Population

[TD="bgcolor: #ffffff, align: right"][/TD]

[TD="bgcolor: #ffffff"]Gedrosia[/TD]
[TD="bgcolor: #FFFFFF, align: right"]9.76%[/TD]

[TD="bgcolor: #ffffff"]Siberian[/TD]
[TD="bgcolor: #FFFFFF, align: right"]0.27%[/TD]

[TD="bgcolor: #ffffff"]Northwest_African[/TD]
[TD="bgcolor: #ffffff, align: right"]-[/TD]

[TD="bgcolor: #ffffff"]Southeast_Asian[/TD]
[TD="bgcolor: #ffffff, align: right"]-[/TD]

[TD="bgcolor: #ffffff"]Atlantic_Med[/TD]
[TD="bgcolor: #FFFFFF, align: right"]32.02%[/TD]

[TD="bgcolor: #ffffff"]North_European[/TD]
[TD="bgcolor: #FFFFFF, align: right"]56.99%[/TD]

[TD="bgcolor: #ffffff"]South_Asian[/TD]
[TD="bgcolor: #FFFFFF, align: right"]0.96%[/TD]

[TD="bgcolor: #ffffff"]East_African[/TD]
[TD="bgcolor: #ffffff, align: right"]-[/TD]

[TD="bgcolor: #ffffff"]Southwest_Asian[/TD]
[TD="bgcolor: #ffffff, align: right"]-[/TD]

[TD="bgcolor: #ffffff"]East_Asian[/TD]
[TD="bgcolor: #ffffff, align: right"]-[/TD]

[TD="bgcolor: #ffffff"]Caucasus[/TD]
[TD="bgcolor: #ffffff, align: right"]-[/TD]

[TD="bgcolor: #ffffff"]Sub_Saharan[/TD]
[TD="bgcolor: #ffffff, align: right"]-[/TD]
 
Million thanks! Can you add modern Lithuanians and Estonians with same calc!
 
arvistro said:
Million thanks! Can you add modern Lithuanians and Estonians with same calc!
Click to expand...

I didn't find Estonians for Dodecad K12b, but I found two Lithuanian samples there.

Here are the Dodecad K12b results, and also the Eurogenes K15 results.

I guess since more than 93% of the genes of these modern Balts comes from the first four categories in Eurogenes 15, maybe they are the most closely related to the ancient European hunter-gatherers.

Actually, the Caucasus component in the modern samples looks like the Gedrosia component in the 2,000-year-old sample.


y-str.org

[TD="class: xl68"]Dodecad K12b[/TD]

[TD="class: xl63"]Population[/TD]
[TD="class: xl63, width: 109"]Lithuanian_D[/TD]
[TD="class: xl63, width: 133"]Lithuanians[/TD]
[TD="class: xl66, width: 64"]RISE00[/TD]

[TD="class: xl63, width: 144"]Source[/TD]
[TD="class: xl64, width: 109"]Dodecad[/TD]
[TD="class: xl64, width: 133"]Behar[/TD]

[TD="class: xl63, width: 144"]N[/TD]
[TD="class: xl65, width: 109"]9[/TD]
[TD="class: xl65, width: 133"]9[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]1[/TD]

[TD="class: xl63, width: 144"]Gedrosia[/TD]
[TD="class: xl65, width: 109"]0[/TD]
[TD="class: xl65, width: 133"]0[/TD]
[TD="class: xl67, width: 64"]9.76%[/TD]

[TD="class: xl63, width: 144"]Siberian[/TD]
[TD="class: xl65, width: 109"]0[/TD]
[TD="class: xl65, width: 133"]0[/TD]
[TD="class: xl67, width: 64"]0.27%[/TD]

[TD="class: xl63, width: 144"]Northwest_African[/TD]
[TD="class: xl65, width: 109"]0[/TD]
[TD="class: xl65, width: 133"]0[/TD]
[TD="class: xl66, width: 64"]-[/TD]

[TD="class: xl63, width: 144"]Southeast_Asian[/TD]
[TD="class: xl65, width: 109"]0[/TD]
[TD="class: xl65, width: 133"]0[/TD]
[TD="class: xl66, width: 64"]-[/TD]

[TD="class: xl63, width: 144"]Atlantic_Med[/TD]
[TD="class: xl65, width: 109"]13.9[/TD]
[TD="class: xl65, width: 133"]13.7[/TD]
[TD="class: xl67, width: 64"]32.02%[/TD]

[TD="class: xl63, width: 144"]North_European[/TD]
[TD="class: xl65, width: 109"]73.7[/TD]
[TD="class: xl65, width: 133"]77.1[/TD]
[TD="class: xl67, width: 64"]56.99%[/TD]

[TD="class: xl63, width: 144"]South_Asian[/TD]
[TD="class: xl65, width: 109"]0.7[/TD]
[TD="class: xl65, width: 133"]0.1[/TD]
[TD="class: xl67, width: 64"]0.96%[/TD]

[TD="class: xl63, width: 144"]East_African[/TD]
[TD="class: xl65, width: 109"]0[/TD]
[TD="class: xl65, width: 133"]0[/TD]
[TD="class: xl66, width: 64"]-[/TD]

[TD="class: xl63, width: 144"]Southwest_Asian[/TD]
[TD="class: xl65, width: 109"]1.6[/TD]
[TD="class: xl65, width: 133"]1[/TD]
[TD="class: xl66, width: 64"]-[/TD]

[TD="class: xl63, width: 144"]East_Asian[/TD]
[TD="class: xl65, width: 109"]0[/TD]
[TD="class: xl65, width: 133"]0[/TD]
[TD="class: xl66, width: 64"]-[/TD]

[TD="class: xl63, width: 144"]Caucasus[/TD]
[TD="class: xl65, width: 109"]10.1[/TD]
[TD="class: xl65, width: 133"]8[/TD]
[TD="class: xl66, width: 64"]-[/TD]

[TD="class: xl63, width: 144"]Sub_Saharan[/TD]
[TD="class: xl65, width: 109"]0[/TD]
[TD="class: xl65, width: 133"]0[/TD]
[TD="class: xl66, width: 64"]-[/TD]



[TD="class: xl70"]Eurogenes K15[/TD]

[TD="class: xl67"]Population[/TD]
[TD="class: xl68, width: 64"]RISE00[/TD]
[TD="class: xl65, width: 64"]Estonian[/TD]
[TD="class: xl65, width: 64"]Lithuanian[/TD]

[TD="class: xl67, width: 122"]North_Sea[/TD]
[TD="class: xl69, width: 64"]37.87%[/TD]
[TD="class: xl71, width: 64"]26.23[/TD]
[TD="class: xl66, width: 64"]20.15[/TD]

[TD="class: xl67, width: 122"]Atlantic[/TD]
[TD="class: xl69, width: 64"]30.48%[/TD]
[TD="class: xl71, width: 64"]16.33[/TD]
[TD="class: xl66, width: 64"]15.72[/TD]

[TD="class: xl67, width: 122"]Baltic[/TD]
[TD="class: xl69, width: 64"]18.50%[/TD]
[TD="class: xl71, width: 64"]30.12[/TD]
[TD="class: xl66, width: 64"]36.36[/TD]

[TD="class: xl67, width: 122"]Eastern_Euro[/TD]
[TD="class: xl69, width: 64"]13.16%[/TD]
[TD="class: xl71, width: 64"]20.68[/TD]
[TD="class: xl66, width: 64"]21.18[/TD]

[TD="class: xl67, width: 122"]West_Med[/TD]
[TD="class: xl68, width: 64"]-[/TD]
[TD="class: xl71, width: 64"]1.83[/TD]
[TD="class: xl66, width: 64"]2.5[/TD]

[TD="class: xl67, width: 122"]West_Asian[/TD]
[TD="class: xl68, width: 64"]-[/TD]
[TD="class: xl71, width: 64"]0.56[/TD]
[TD="class: xl66, width: 64"]1.63[/TD]

[TD="class: xl67, width: 122"]East_Med[/TD]
[TD="class: xl68, width: 64"]-[/TD]
[TD="class: xl71, width: 64"]0.01[/TD]
[TD="class: xl66, width: 64"]0.61[/TD]

[TD="class: xl67, width: 122"]Red_Sea[/TD]
[TD="class: xl68, width: 64"]-[/TD]
[TD="class: xl71, width: 64"]0.00[/TD]
[TD="class: xl66, width: 64"]0.34[/TD]

[TD="class: xl67, width: 122"]South_Asian[/TD]
[TD="class: xl68, width: 64"]-[/TD]
[TD="class: xl71, width: 64"]0.53[/TD]
[TD="class: xl66, width: 64"]0.61[/TD]

[TD="class: xl67, width: 122"]Southeast_Asian[/TD]
[TD="class: xl68, width: 64"]-[/TD]
[TD="class: xl71, width: 64"]0.02[/TD]
[TD="class: xl66, width: 64"]0.06[/TD]

[TD="class: xl67, width: 122"]Siberian[/TD]
[TD="class: xl68, width: 64"]-[/TD]
[TD="class: xl71, width: 64"]2.13[/TD]
[TD="class: xl66, width: 64"]0.13[/TD]

[TD="class: xl67, width: 122"]Amerindian[/TD]
[TD="class: xl68, width: 64"]-[/TD]
[TD="class: xl71, width: 64"]1.09[/TD]
[TD="class: xl66, width: 64"]0.36[/TD]

[TD="class: xl67, width: 122"]Oceanian[/TD]
[TD="class: xl68, width: 64"]-[/TD]
[TD="class: xl71, width: 64"]0.46[/TD]
[TD="class: xl66, width: 64"]0.19[/TD]

[TD="class: xl67, width: 122"]Northeast_African[/TD]
[TD="class: xl68, width: 64"]-[/TD]
[TD="class: xl71, width: 64"]0.00[/TD]
[TD="class: xl66, width: 64"]0.11[/TD]

[TD="class: xl67, width: 122"]Sub-Saharan[/TD]
[TD="class: xl68, width: 64"]-[/TD]
[TD="class: xl71, width: 64"]0.00[/TD]
[TD="class: xl66, width: 64"]0.06[/TD]
 
Last edited:
Rise00 is marked late Neolithic or bronze age. It should therefore be 2000 bce (4000 years old) not 2000 BP.

If we go by blindly by stats:
K15 stats show that CW was more Western than modern Balts.
North Sea + Atlantic higher than Baltic + East European in RISE 00.

K12b. Either CW population in Baltics got major replaced by something North Euro + Caucasus rich.
Or Gedrosia ~ Caucasus and CW simply assimilated some more North Euros.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top