Latest Reich talk on ancient Dna

ToBeOrNotToBe said:
In the Carpathian Basin, the Bell Beaker culture came in contact with communities such as the Vučedol culture
Click to expand...

When used to model Czech Beakers, Vucedol stubbornly scores Zero.

That's no matter though, because the L21 Beakers have Steppe ancestry consistent with a Corded Ware source.
Click to expand...

This could also (and probably does) mean that the steppe element in CW and BB came from the same original (autosomal) stock.

Mtdna H1 in my opinion won't help much in distinguishing Iberian local females from steppe newcomers, at least until we have specific subclades in sufficient numbers. Below is a map of H1b hotspots, to clarify what I mean. They can hardly pass for Iberian.

c6r8tPw.jpg
 
Angela said:
It occurred to me that if we look at the "newcomer" samples from the upcoming Olalde paper on Bell Beaker in Spain, and if they are at all representative, the migration was definitely not male skewed.

dDoPqY2.png


It's difficult to count them, but it looks to be fairly even.

The Reich Lab has maintained that for quite a while. It was the subject of that controversy they had last year, where they issued a response to someone else's paper, a paper which had said it was basically a male dominated migration.

If, therefore, 60% of the ancestry of the subsequent admixed people was local, then presumably it would be because they practiced some sort of polygamy, yes?
Click to expand...

The difficulty is in distinguishing the ancestry that is local, as local Iberian DNA was pretty similar to the non-local South East European DNA with which German Bell Beaker appears to have admixed.

It is possible that Iberian male and female newcomers (like German Bell Beakers) brought similar mixed aDNA with them and were largely endogamous, and that newcomer males only appear more steppic, because their yDNA had become dominated by R1b lineages.
 
hrvclv said:
When used to model Czech Beakers, Vucedol stubbornly scores Zero.

This could also (and probably does) mean that the steppe element in CW and BB came from the same original (autosomal) stock.
Click to expand...
Central European Bell Beaker does not fit autosomally with either Vucedol or Corded Ware, as none of these three derive from the others. However, the 'steppe' element in all three looks to have derived from a recent common source (Suvorovo/Khvalynsk); and we can see this was the case for Vucedol and Bell Beaker, as both show the same yDNA R1b-L23 with a TMRCA of only 4,100 BC.
 
I have run some best-fit autosomal calculations for Spain, which show some curious developmental results:
1. A primary input of Steppe-infused DNA, with no BB component, and EEF elements 100% Balkanic and 0% Iberian
2. A resurgence of local DNA to 90% indigenous Iberian
3. A development of secondary Steppe-infused DNA, with a substantial (30%) R1b Bell Beaker component, and an EEF split of 57% and 43% between Balkan and Iberian sources respectively.

I suppose what this indicates is that the EEF component within Iberian Bronze Age R1b looks a good mix of the East European EEF that came over with it and the Iberian EEF (presumably from female sources) that it encountered in a second wave of inward migration.
 
Pip said:
I have run some best-fit autosomal calculations for Spain, which show some curious developmental results:
1. A primary input of Steppe-infused DNA, with no BB component, and EEF elements 100% Balkanic and 0% Iberian
2. A resurgence of local DNA to 90% indigenous Iberian
3. A development of secondary Steppe-infused DNA, with a substantial (30%) R1b Bell Beaker component, and an EEF split of 57% and 43% between Balkan and Iberian sources respectively.

I suppose what this indicates is that the EEF component within Iberian Bronze Age R1b looks a good mix of the East European EEF that came over with it and the Iberian EEF (presumably from female sources) that it encountered in a second wave of inward migration.
Click to expand...

What would that primary input of steppe DNA be? Even before the BB era of the Bronze Age?
 
Ailchu said:
sure that happened. but do we actually know the relative number of incoming people? what exactly are those 40%?
Click to expand...

My guess is that 40% was the resulting average "steppe" admixture. Only two of the samples cited were close to 100% "steppe", which means that the invading group was already heavily admixed with non-steppe populations. Without new influxes, the "steppe" contribution to the autosomal would undergo rapid dilution, even if the y-dna contribution stayed steady or increased.
 
Last edited:
Ygorcs said:
What would that primary input of steppe DNA be? Even before the BB era of the Bronze Age?
Click to expand...

If pre-Neolithic that's just wrong surely, that would mean a replacement of WHG Mesolithic types with some kind of Steppe population before farmers arrived, but we have WHG and farmer samples in Iberia separated by only a few hundred years.

Unless you were talking about Spanish BA - in which case it demonstrates a copper age migration to Spain, mixing heavily with the farmers, before gaining additional Steppe during the Bronze Age - where have I heard that before in the context of L51? That's totally in-line with ATP3, btw.

Also, one thing I've just realised - how can you date all of this? If, say, pure farmers mixed with pure Steppe, one generation before that both were equally separate, so you could either say they were farmers, then acquired Steppe, or you could say they were Steppe, then they acquired farmer.
 
@Ygorcs
@Angela

Hello Ygorcs and Angela.
First of all I apologize for my total ignorance of Paleogenetics.
My primary ascendancy is Iberian, and I do not know relatives who have come from another region of Europe other than the Iberian Peninsula.
As my autossomic results show below (FTDNA and MyHeritage), I am 64% ~ 67% Iberian, to which are addded 20% ~ 26% Central / North-West Europe, as well as added the traditional North African Iberian component (~ 5%) and a typical Brazilian component (3% ~ 4% SSA DNA).
Considering my ignorance on the subject, as I have already said, my autosomal results seems to corroborate Reich's analysis: I have a high Iberian indigenous component to which a predominantly Central European load was added and also was added a smaller load of North Africa.
Am I delirious in my ignorance or what did I just conclude could have some true background?
Greetings.

Family Tree DNA Results:

EUROPEAN87%
*Iberia67%
*West and Central Europe20%
MIDDLE EASTERN5%
*North Africa5%
AFRICAN3%
*West Africa3%
TOTAL95%
TRACE RESULTS
Southeast Europe< 2%
Sephardic< 2%
South Central Africa< 2%

MyHeritage DNA results:
EUROPE90.7%
South Europe73.9%
*Iberian64.3%
*Italian9.6%
North and West Europe16.8%
*North and West European16.8%
AFRICA9.3%
North Africa5%
*North African5%
West Africa4.3%
*Nigeria4.3%
TOTAL100%
 
Last edited:
Angela said:
It occurred to me that if we look at the "newcomer" samples from the upcoming Olalde paper on Bell Beaker in Spain, and if they are at all representative, the migration was definitely not male skewed.

dDoPqY2.png


It's difficult to count them, but it looks to be fairly even.

The Reich Lab has maintained that for quite a while. It was the subject of that controversy they had last year, where they issued a response to someone else's paper, a paper which had said it was basically a male dominated migration.

If, therefore, 60% of the ancestry of the subsequent admixed people was local, then presumably it would be because they practiced some sort of polygamy, yes?
Click to expand...

It could be elite burials, with non-elites not being buried, at least not in the cemeteries where the samples were found. The Viking aristocracy, for instance, took elite "Viking" wives, but their concubines from anywhere.
 
CrazyDonkey said:
It could be elite burials, with non-elites not being buried, at least not in the cemeteries where the samples were found. The Viking aristocracy, for instance, took elite "Viking" wives, but their concubines from anywhere.
Click to expand...

That doesn't explain why the women are slightly more eastern throughout. The first eastern males are already at about 60% steppe, while the women are at 75-80%.
 
markod said:
That doesn't explain why the women are slightly more eastern throughout. The first eastern males are already at about 60% steppe, while the women are at 75-80%.
Click to expand...

This could just be sample bias tho. We apparently found in Iberia the Steppic women with high Steppe but with Steppe men, while in India we found Steppic Women with apparently Local Men. It's probably just one side of the interactions.
 
halfalp said:
This could just be sample bias tho. We apparently found in Iberia the Steppic women with high Steppe but with Steppe men, while in India we found Steppic Women with apparently Local Men. It's probably just one side of the interactions.
Click to expand...

I agree, but since they seem have samples from all over Iberia I'd think that the 'easterners' must have been in France.
 
markod said:
I agree, but since they seem have samples from all over Iberia I'd think that the 'easterners' must have been in France.
Click to expand...

Another option is that, males were the major gender from the Steppe package and they kept mostly the Steppe women for themselves in tandem with taking local women. I think we are dismissing too much that BB Pottery a part, this expansion was basically Horsemen with Bows and Arrows as shown in an old Mathiesen paper, so the exact imagination we would expect from the Yamnayan-rich R1b expansion and later cogned by R1a Scytho-Iranians. Meaning the real Steppe package. Who knows what their behavior was, but just imagine them as Prehistoric European Mongols.
 
halfalp said:
Another option is that, males were the major gender from the Steppe package and they kept mostly the Steppe women for themselves in tandem with taking local women. I think we are dismissing too much that BB Pottery a part, this expansion was basically Horsemen with Bows and Arrows as shown in an old Mathiesen paper, so the exact imagination we would expect from the Yamnayan-rich R1b expansion and later cogned by R1a Scytho-Iranians. Meaning the real Steppe package. Who knows what their behavior was, but just imagine them as Prehistoric European Mongols.
Click to expand...

But where are the local women?
 
markod said:
That doesn't explain why the women are slightly more eastern throughout. The first eastern males are already at about 60% steppe, while the women are at 75-80%.
Click to expand...

the men took wives from everywhere - from the steppe and from the west as well

they had some pussy magnet ;)
 
Ygorcs said:
What would that primary input of steppe DNA be? Even before the BB era of the Bronze Age?
Click to expand...
A population descending from the same population as R1b Bell Beaker, but EEF-heavier. ATP3 helps date it to circa 3,400 BC, pre-Bronze Age.
 
markod said:
That doesn't explain why the women are slightly more eastern throughout. The first eastern males are already at about 60% steppe, while the women are at 75-80%.
Click to expand...

Maybe they picked up Steppe (or at least high Steppe) from Yamnaya or CWC women? As well as IE?

Those women could be CWC women, or Yamnayans diluted with some farmer ancestry.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

This thread has been viewed 98848 times.

Back
Top