Genetic ancestry changes in Stone to Bronze Age transition in the East European plain

You're going to be disappointed. R1a has been found in Europe in multiple sites all without Iran_N admixture. There's nothing to indicate R1a will pop up in Central Iran. And that Bronze Age Levantine came from Central Asian. He can't be modeled without Central Asian admixture or Steppe_MLBA admixture.

Same applies to R1b. Also given how much admixture there was between Anatolia_N, CHG, Iran_N and Levant_N no R1a or R1b in those places either.

In the ancient times Central Asians couldn't fly over Iran to reach the Levant, anyway it is not important because this haplogroup is R1a-M417, not a subclade of R1a-Z93, and Central Asia is not in the Europe but Greater Iran:

Greater_Iran_Map.png
 
I didn't get what you mean, do you mean R1a-M417 is Proto-Indo-European haplogroup? So both Bronze Age Fatyanovo and Levant were Proto-Indo-European cultures in the 3rd-2nd millennium BC?!
The fact is that none of ancient samples from the 3rd-2nd millennium BC in India, Iran, Levant and other regions where Indo-Iranian lived is R1a-Z93, according to "The Formation of Human Populations in South and Central Asia", by Vaghees Narasimhan et al., Steppe ancestry reached South Asia after 1000 BC, about 600 years after the appearance of Indo-Iranian culture in the Levant.

Haplogroups don't speak languages nor practice any culture. What we can say is if a certain haplogroup or clade of haplogroup is strongly linked to a certain population or culture of antiquity and was diffused together with the expansion of the former. Of course the haplogroup remains (unless the lineages die out entirely) long after the language and the culture have changed or even have totally disappeared due to acculturation enacted by another population (e.g. Turkic arriving in medieval Anatolia, Hungarian arriving in medieval Pannonia).

You seem to have some trouble following the chronological order of things:

TMRCA R1a-M417 - 5400 YBP (earliest samples in Northeastern Europe; earliest samples of R1a as a whole date to the Mesolithic alsster in Northeastern Europe)
PIE language - spoken roughly between 5000 and 6500 YBP (major expansion between 5400-4600 YBP linked to spread of steppe ancestry)
CWC - 4900-4300 YBP - population of mostly steppe ancestry + some EEF
Fatyanonovo-Balanovo - eastern offshoot of CWC, 4900-4000 YBP - population of mostly CWC-like background and lots of R1a-M417 and especially Z93
Sintashta - >4200 YBP - population still mostly of steppe ancestry + some EEF and closely related to CWC

PIE changed over time and became hundreds of different languages. The culture of people speaking it diverged as much or even more so, because of admixture with others and isolation from each other. The haplogroups, though, remained the same, only developing new subclades.

What's so hard to understand, really?

The fact is that none of ancient samples from the 3rd-2nd millennium BC in India, Iran, Levant and other regions where Indo-Iranian lived is R1a-Z93, according to "The Formation of Human Populations in South and Central Asia", by Vaghees Narasimhan et al., Steppe ancestry reached South Asia after 1000 BC, about 600 years after the appearance of Indo-Iranian culture in the Levant.

Indo-Iranians lived mostly in Central Asia until the mid 2nd millennium B.C., and they may have established in at least some parts of Iran only in the 1st millennium B.C., so it's not surprising you won't find a lot of R1a-Z93 there in the 3rd-2nd millennium B.C., particularly when we know there is an almost unforgivable paucity of aDNA samples from the BA and IA Iran and South Asia until now.

Also, you need to decide what you really believe. First you say R1a-M417 and R1a-Z93 particularly are linked to Indo-Iranian peoples from Poland (sic) to India, then you now say "none of ancient samples from the 3rd-2nd millennium BC in India, Iran, Levant and other regions where Indo-Iranian lived is R1a-Z93". Contradictory statements, don't you think so?

The fact Narasimhan found steppe ancestry only in samples dating to after 1000 B.C., among very few samples from South Asia that he got, is honestly too little for us to claim confidently that there wasn't R1a nor steppe ancestry in South Asia before 1000 B.C. It's a very large and already then very populous place, and steppe ancestry must've been initially much more localized than it is now.

The Levantine samples from MBA clearly had links with a population movement of Central Asian origins, totally coherent with the way most scientists now assume that PIE and steppe ancestry arrived there: Eastern Europe > North-Central Asia > South-Central Asia > Iran/Transcaucasia > Levant.
 
In the ancient times Central Asians couldn't fly over Iran to reach the Levant, anyway it is not important because this haplogroup is R1a-M417, not a subclade of R1a-Z93, and Central Asia is not in the Europe but Greater Iran:

Are you telling us you don't know Z93 is nothing but a subclade of M417? :confused::unsure:
Are you also willingly ignoring all the aDNA studies demonstrating a massive genetic turnover in BA North-Central Asia coming from EASTERN EUROPE followed by an appearance of heavy steppe admixture in South-Central Asia not much later? Your ethnic pride and ideology are making you blind.
 
In the ancient times Central Asians couldn't fly over Iran to reach the Levant, anyway it is not important because this haplogroup is R1a-M417, not a subclade of R1a-Z93, and Central Asia is not in the Europe but Greater Iran:

Greater_Iran_Map.png

R1a-Z93 in Greater Iran (even the parts in Central Asia) is intrusive from the Kazakh steppe and ultimately the Pontic steppes.
 
Also the Levantine R1a guy is likely an Indo-Aryan not Iranian anyways. There's also theories that the first Indo-Iranians to inhabit the Iranian plateau were Indo-Aryans based on place names.
 
Shahmiri: To be honest, 2 of the 3 components in Fatyanovo are southern in origin: CHG and Levantive. And we know that R1a1 is not original in WHG. R1a1 is obviously seeping through into the north along with these southern components, getting fixated for short periods but eventually being replaced by new waves. z93 in particular is an ephemeral phenomenon in the North and it tends to be a marker for turkic, scythic, or jewish origins; that is, for foreign origin. it is an odd dynamic but there are no real indications for the in situ genesis of R1a1 in the Northern Steppe. Much of it seems derived from elsewhere. Northern MtDNA U4, U5, and U2 are also very much derivative of the more prolific N and R lines in the South. The european steppe peoples are also very much Siberian in their basic genetics as well as culture and ethos similar to the Uralics, Mongols, Hunnics, and others who have moved freely through that territory for ages.
 
Also, you need to decide what you really believe. First you say R1a-M417 and R1a-Z93 particularly are linked to Indo-Iranian peoples from Poland (sic) to India, then you now say "none of ancient samples from the 3rd-2nd millennium BC in India, Iran, Levant and other regions where Indo-Iranian lived is R1a-Z93". Contradictory statements, don't you think so?

No, because I believe Iran is the source, not the destination. It is actually what geneticists believe: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_R1a

1024px-R1a_origins_%28Underhill_2010%29_and_R1a1a_oldest_expansion_and_highest_frequency_%282014%29.jpg


According to "Ancient Migratory Events in the Middle East: New Clues from the Y-Chromosome Variation of Modern Iranians", by Grugni, et al.: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3399854/

All the R1a Y chromosomes belong to the M198* paragroup with frequencies ranging from 0% to 25%. Indeed neither the “European” M458 nor the “Pakistani” M434 have been observed in our samples.

R1a-M417 is a subclade of R1a-M198, isn't it? Based on your chronology, would you please explain why all the R1a Y chromosomes in Iran belong to the M198* paragroup? Ok, R1a-M417 came from Central Asia, what about this chronological order:

Iran (M198) > Central Asia (M417) > Levant (M417)
Iran (M198) > Central Asia (M417) > Eastern Europe (M417/Z93) > Pakistan (M434)
 
No, because I believe Iran is the source, not the destination. It is actually what geneticists believe: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_R1a

1024px-R1a_origins_%28Underhill_2010%29_and_R1a1a_oldest_expansion_and_highest_frequency_%282014%29.jpg


According to "Ancient Migratory Events in the Middle East: New Clues from the Y-Chromosome Variation of Modern Iranians", by Grugni, et al.: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3399854/

R1a-M417 is a subclade of R1a-M198, isn't it? Based on your chronology, would you please explain why all the R1a Y chromosomes in Iran belong to the M198* paragroup? Ok, R1a-M417 came from Central Asia, what about this chronological order:

Iran (M198) > Central Asia (M417) > Levant (M417)
Iran (M198) > Central Asia (M417) > Eastern Europe (M417/Z93) > Pakistan (M434)

Underhill 2014 and Grugni 2012 again? Do you have any other genetic evidence, preferably more updated and with more specific information on haplogroups? You've been here for many months repeating ad nauseam Underhill 2014 and Grugni 2012. Is that all?

Also, I'm afraid you're still misinterpreting what the results of Grugni et al. regarding R1a in Iran really mean. The authors' phrasing was really poor and misleading, indeed. As far as I can see, they tested the samples for R1a-M458 and R1a-M434. If not present those clades, they assigned the sample to the upstream clade R1a-M198. They didn't get more specific than that: M434, M458 or "the rest" of M198, with all its many clades besides M434 and M458. There is nothing basal (M198*) about that, it's simply residual (M198xM458,M434). That is made clear by their picture about the haplogroups they tested, in which they distinguish only M198 generically, M458 or M434 more specifically, and nothing else:

lchlm0IRR1ut1839zPp8TRlJK4P0F2uH3nQPbGFeiSIgcY PmRIAAAQIECBAgEBcQIuN2KgkQIECAAAEC1QoIkdUuvcYJECBAgAABAnEBITJup5IAAQIECBAgUK2AEFnt0mucAAECBAgQIBAXECLjdioJECBAgAABAtUKCJHVLr3GCRAgQIAAAQJxASEybqeSAAECBAgQIFCtgBBZ7dJrnAABAgQIECAQFxAi43YqCRAgQIAAAQLVCgiR1S69xgkQIECAAAECcQEhMm6nkgABAgQIECBQrYAQWe3Sa5wAAQIECBAgEBcQIuN2KgkQIECAAAEC1Qp8AR6GW0VUfFyeAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC
 
https://imgur.com/a/FS6p8md (picture)

Therefore, what the study really indicates is that R1a in Iran is not either M434 (common in Pakistan) nor M458 (common in Europe), but other clades of M198. You're mistaken, another reason why you should look for other, preferably more updated, sources to substantiate your views.
lchlm0IRR1ut1839zPp8TRlJK4P0F2uH3nQPbGFeiSIgcY%20PmRIAAAQIECBAgEBcQIuN2KgkQIECAAAEC1QoIkdUuvcYJECBAgAABAnEBITJup5IAAQIECBAgUK2AEFnt0mucAAECBAgQIBAXECLjdioJECBAgAABAtUKCJHVLr3GCRAgQIAAAQJxASEybqeSAAECBAgQIFCtgBBZ7dJrnAABAgQIECAQFxAi43YqCRAgQIAAAQLVCgiR1S69xgkQIECAAAECcQEhMm6nkgABAgQIECBQrYAQWe3Sa5wAAQIECBAgEBcQIuN2KgkQIECAAAEC1Qp8AR6GW0VUfFyeAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC
 
Shahmiri: To be honest, 2 of the 3 components in Fatyanovo are southern in origin: CHG and Levantive. And we know that R1a1 is not original in WHG. R1a1 is obviously seeping through into the north along with these southern components, getting fixated for short periods but eventually being replaced by new waves. z93 in particular is an ephemeral phenomenon in the North and it tends to be a marker for turkic, scythic, or jewish origins; that is, for foreign origin. it is an odd dynamic but there are no real indications for the in situ genesis of R1a1 in the Northern Steppe. Much of it seems derived from elsewhere. Northern MtDNA U4, U5, and U2 are also very much derivative of the more prolific N and R lines in the South. The european steppe peoples are also very much Siberian in their basic genetics as well as culture and ethos similar to the Uralics, Mongols, Hunnics, and others who have moved freely through that territory for ages.

Your entire post is full of anachronism, a chronology that is totally upside down (R1a and Z93 in particular far predate Scythian, Jewish or Turkic presence in Europe or actually even Scythian, Jewish and Turkic cultures themselves, they are essentially LBA/IA phenomena). Besides, what Levantine origin in Fatyanovo and other parts of Northern Europe? That just doesn't exist. And where is R1a anywhere in the ancient DNA samples from West/Southwest Asia from any time before the MLBA? Nowhere at least so far.
 
Shahmiri: To be honest, 2 of the 3 components in Fatyanovo are southern in origin: CHG and Levantive. And we know that R1a1 is not original in WHG. R1a1 is obviously seeping through into the north along with these southern components, getting fixated for short periods but eventually being replaced by new waves. z93 in particular is an ephemeral phenomenon in the North and it tends to be a marker for turkic, scythic, or jewish origins; that is, for foreign origin. it is an odd dynamic but there are no real indications for the in situ genesis of R1a1 in the Northern Steppe. Much of it seems derived from elsewhere. Northern MtDNA U4, U5, and U2 are also very much derivative of the more prolific N and R lines in the South. The european steppe peoples are also very much Siberian in their basic genetics as well as culture and ethos similar to the Uralics, Mongols, Hunnics, and others who have moved freely through that territory for ages.

Well said, the steppe was the land of nomads, such as Turkic, Mongolic, Uralic and Hunnic people, not Hittites, Persians, Greeks, Romans, Indians and other major Indo-European people, of course there were some IE people like Scythians who migrated there and adopted a nomadic lifestyle, but the absolute majority of Indo-Europeans had an agricultural lifestyle. We see nothing in Greek, Indian and other Indo-European cultures which show they originally wandered in the steppe, the fact is that Indo-Europeans didn't migrate like nomads, but they conquered other lands and imposed their own culture on them. The main reason which could cause the migration of IE farmers was drought and famine which happened in the West Asia, especially Iran, several times.
 
Underhill 2014 and Grugni 2012 again? Do you have any other genetic evidence, preferably more updated and with more specific information on haplogroups? You've been here for many months repeating ad nauseam Underhill 2014 and Grugni 2012. Is that all?

Also, I'm afraid you're still misinterpreting what the results of Grugni et al. regarding R1a in Iran really mean. The authors' phrasing was really poor and misleading, indeed. As far as I can see, they tested the samples for R1a-M458 and R1a-M434. If not present those clades, they assigned the sample to the upstream clade R1a-M198. They didn't get more specific than that: M434, M458 or "the rest" of M198, with all its many clades besides M434 and M458. There is nothing basal (M198*) about that, it's simply residual (M198xM458,M434). That is made clear by their picture about the haplogroups they tested, in which they distinguish only M198 generically, M458 or M434 more specifically, and nothing else:

lchlm0IRR1ut1839zPp8TRlJK4P0F2uH3nQPbGFeiSIgcY PmRIAAAQIECBAgEBcQIuN2KgkQIECAAAEC1QoIkdUuvcYJECBAgAABAnEBITJup5IAAQIECBAgUK2AEFnt0mucAAECBAgQIBAXECLjdioJECBAgAABAtUKCJHVLr3GCRAgQIAAAQJxASEybqeSAAECBAgQIFCtgBBZ7dJrnAABAgQIECAQFxAi43YqCRAgQIAAAQLVCgiR1S69xgkQIECAAAECcQEhMm6nkgABAgQIECBQrYAQWe3Sa5wAAQIECBAgEBcQIuN2KgkQIECAAAEC1Qp8AR6GW0VUfFyeAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC

Other than Underhill and Grugni, as you read in Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_R1a According to Di Cristofaro et al. "All Iranian R1a individuals carried the M198 and M17 mutations except one individual in a sample of Iranians from Gilan (n=27), who was reported to belong to R1a-SRY1532.2(xM198, M17)." Malyarchuk et al. found R1a1-SRY10831.2 in 20.8% (16/77) of a sample of Persians collected in the provinces of Khorasan and Kerman in eastern Iran, ...

Do you really think all genetic studies regarding R1a in Iran are wrong? In fact they don't know that these are just Z95, not M198 and SRY1532.2!!
 
Shahmiri: To be honest, 2 of the 3 components in Fatyanovo are southern in origin: CHG and Levantive. And we know that R1a1 is not original in WHG. R1a1 is obviously seeping through into the north along with these southern components, getting fixated for short periods but eventually being replaced by new waves. z93 in particular is an ephemeral phenomenon in the North and it tends to be a marker for turkic, scythic, or jewish origins; that is, for foreign origin. it is an odd dynamic but there are no real indications for the in situ genesis of R1a1 in the Northern Steppe. Much of it seems derived from elsewhere. Northern MtDNA U4, U5, and U2 are also very much derivative of the more prolific N and R lines in the South. The european steppe peoples are also very much Siberian in their basic genetics as well as culture and ethos similar to the Uralics, Mongols, Hunnics, and others who have moved freely through that territory for ages.

I can't believe how much misinformation is in this post.

1. There's no Levantine ancestry in Fataynovo. There's nothing to indicate the farmer ancestry isn't EEF like (ie. admixed with WHG).
2. CHG has plenty of northern ancestry itself.
3. Who cares if 2/3 components are southern? What matters is the proportions. EHG is probably still the dominant component.
4. Z93 originated in the North as did its brother clades under Z283. And Z645's brother clade CTS4385 also originated in the North
5. There's nothing southern about R1a. Saying that requires a lot of special pleading. We have P1* and R* in North Eurasia. As well as R1a and R1b in EHG. Yet no R1a and R1b in the South before the bronze age.
6. U2e, U4 and U5 may ultimately have a southern origin but these didn't exist in the South for most of their history. y I has a southern origin too but it developed and diversified in the North as did U2e, U4 and U5.
 
No, because I believe Iran is the source, not the destination. It is actually what geneticists believe: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_R1a

1024px-R1a_origins_%28Underhill_2010%29_and_R1a1a_oldest_expansion_and_highest_frequency_%282014%29.jpg


According to "Ancient Migratory Events in the Middle East: New Clues from the Y-Chromosome Variation of Modern Iranians", by Grugni, et al.: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3399854/



R1a-M417 is a subclade of R1a-M198, isn't it? Based on your chronology, would you please explain why all the R1a Y chromosomes in Iran belong to the M198* paragroup? Ok, R1a-M417 came from Central Asia, what about this chronological order:

Iran (M198) > Central Asia (M417) > Levant (M417)
Iran (M198) > Central Asia (M417) > Eastern Europe (M417/Z93) > Pakistan (M434)

All Iranian R1a does not belong to this paragroup. Its almost all under Z93. Can you stop using papers from 2012 and 2014? The structure of R1a has been worked out a lot since then and we have so much more ancient DNA since then.
 
Well said, the steppe was the land of nomads, such as Turkic, Mongolic, Uralic and Hunnic people, not Hittites, Persians, Greeks, Romans, Indians and other major Indo-European people, of course there were some IE people like Scythians who migrated there and adopted a nomadic lifestyle, but the absolute majority of Indo-Europeans had an agricultural lifestyle. We see nothing in Greek, Indian and other Indo-European cultures which show they originally wandered in the steppe, the fact is that Indo-Europeans didn't migrate like nomads, but they conquered other lands and imposed their own culture on them. The main reason which could cause the migration of IE farmers was drought and famine which happened in the West Asia, especially Iran, several times.

What the hell do the Uralics have to do with the steppe?
 
Other than Underhill and Grugni, as you read in Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_R1a According to Di Cristofaro et al. "All Iranian R1a individuals carried the M198 and M17 mutations except one individual in a sample of Iranians from Gilan (n=27), who was reported to belong to R1a-SRY1532.2(xM198, M17)." Malyarchuk et al. found R1a1-SRY10831.2 in 20.8% (16/77) of a sample of Persians collected in the provinces of Khorasan and Kerman in eastern Iran, ...

Do you really think all genetic studies regarding R1a in Iran are wrong? In fact they don't know that these are just Z95, not M198 and SRY1532.2!!

And now you're using two papers from 2013.
 
All Iranian R1a does not belong to this paragroup. Its almost all under Z93. Can you stop using papers from 2012 and 2014? The structure of R1a has been worked out a lot since then and we have so much more ancient DNA since then.

Would you please inform me? What are new studies regarding Iranian R1a?
 

This thread has been viewed 30736 times.

Back
Top