New Leak: CWC=73% Yamna, modern North Euros=50% Yamna.

Finno-Ugric people were and are Mongoloid, while Yamnaya people were a mix of Mongoloid race and folks from the Maykop Horizon (Caucasus) and Iranian Plateau (South Caspian Sea). Remember that Yamnaya people were Indo-Europized by folks from the Maykop / Leyla-Tepe before some of them migrated into Europe...
 
Yamnaya folks were NOT early, but rather LATE proto-Indo-Eauropeans that gave birth to most Indo-European languages inside Europe, while EARLY or very first proto-Indo-Europeans gave birth to Greco-?Anatolian, Tochtarian, Iranian (Aryan) and Indic languages. Those first proto-Indo-Eruopeans came from an area between Maykop and Leyla-Tepe...
 
Ah okay, I got ENF and EEF confused. The sample for ENF is Stuttgart I think. Haven't really been keeping up with these new autosomal categories as of late. What is the sample population for EEF?

ENF = early neolithic farmer
UHG = unknown hunter gather
ANE

go to gedmatch and under eurogenes ANE 7 ....there is documentation as well

these represent you most ancient numbers,

AFTER this comes your mutation into
EEF
WHG
ANE

so, I went from 50% UHG to 20% WHG
from 36% ENF to 69% EEF
from 11% ANE to 10.5% ANE

so as explaine dto me, ENF, UHG etc is older than EEF and WHG
 
Yamnaya folks were NOT early, but rather LATE proto-Indo-Eauropeans that gave birth to most Indo-European languages inside Europe, while EARLY or very first proto-Indo-Europeans gave birth to Greco-?Anatolian, Tochtarian, Iranian (Aryan) and Indic languages. Those first proto-Indo-Eruopeans came from an area between Maykop and Leyla-Tepe...

That could be, and none of us know for sure were PIE came from and were all historical IE languages spread from(Caucasus, steppe?).

Indo Iranian languages though are connected to Yamna. Don't take this personally, and no one is being Eurocentric about IEs. North Europe being less densely populated and having less complex societies(IEs in Asia could have simply become the upper-class and overtime blended in with locals) before Indo Europeans could be why Indo Europeans were most successful in spreading their genes there than Indo Iranians were in Asia. Sycthians were Indo Iranian and we have their mtDNA, which was very similar to Yamna. There's really no way around that, Indo Iranians have a similar steppe origin as IE languages in Europe.
 
That could be, and none of us know for sure were PIE came from and were all historical IE languages spread from(Caucasus, steppe?).

Indo Iranian languages though are connected to Yamna. Don't take this personally, and no one is being Eurocentric about IEs. North Europe being less densely populated and having less complex societies(IEs in Asia could have simply become the upper-class and overtime blended in with locals) before Indo Europeans could be why Indo Europeans were most successful in spreading their genes there than Indo Iranians were in Asia. Sycthians were Indo Iranian and we have their mtDNA, which was very similar to Yamna. There's really no way around that, Indo Iranians have a similar steppe origin as IE languages in Europe.
Of course there's a link between Yamnaya on one side and Greco-Anatolian, Tochtarian, Iraninic and Indic languages on other side. Because, proto-Indo-Europeans that gave birth to Iranic, Indic, Tochtarian etc. migrated into the Yamnaya Horizon LATER. And no, Scythians were very late EAST Iranic (Iranized) tribes that migrated from Central Asia into the Steppes and mixed with the locals. Some other ancient original Iranic tribes (and their ancestors) never lived around Yamnaya Horizon in their existence. I mean Iranian tribes like the Mitanni & Kassites, Medes, Sagartians, Persians, Bactrians, Sogdians, Parthians, Kambojas, Drangiana, Dahaeans, Massageteans, etc. never had any connection (or direct links) with the Yamnaya Horizon...
 
Unlike Yamnaya Horizon people, ancient original Iranic tribes (from Leyla-Tepe) were neither Mongoloid nor WHG folks. Yamnaya had some WHG and were partly Mongoloid, while proto-Iranic folks lacked both of those components. Also ancient (proto-)Iranic languages had close ties with the Caucasian languages, and culturally/archeologically there were very much links with Near-Eastern (Mesopotamian) cultures...
 
No one ever said Yamna-type ancestry in Europe is from Yamna. It is statistically impossible for Mesolithic HGs like Motala12 and anyone in west Asia to have given Europeans any substantial ANE. The next place to look is east Europe, and ~5k ones fit very nicely as the main source. No one besides Yamna or a close relative could have done this.

Your thinking is far too simplistic. Nobody said that the apparent link between WHG and ANE comes from Mesolithic hunter gatherers like Motala 12. Modern Finns have the highest level of WHG in Europe but that doesn't make them all descendents of Motala.
 
What do you think about Finnic people bringing ANE to the baltic?

That seems to be a possible source of ANE in modern northern European populations that is other than Yamnaya. If you look at the Genetics section of this website, you'll find that Finns are not at all like Yamnaya and have very little of the Y haplotype R that was found in the remains that were used as a model for ANE. And yet there is a band of elevated ANE across northern Russia and into Finland. I think it may come from the mtDNA side, since the original model for ANE was mtDNA U and Finns have a lot of U5. But that can't be the full story because ANE is also elevated across other northern European countries that don't have DNA similar to Finns and probably have varying levels of Yamnaya ancestry. All we can say for certain is that claiming that modern northern Europeans have 50% Yamnaya ancestry on the basis of ANE is far too simplistic.
 
Unlike Yamnaya Horizon people, ancient original Iranic tribes (from Leyla-Tepe) were neither Mongoloid nor WHG folks. Yamnaya had some WHG and were partly Mongoloid, while proto-Iranic folks lacked both of those components. Also ancient (proto-)Iranic languages had close ties with the Caucasian languages, and culturally/archeologically there were very much links with Near-Eastern (Mesopotamian) cultures...

Yamnaya were not partly Mongoloid. For this reason I don't believe we will see N in their y dna.

The Yamna culture of the Pontic-Caspian steppe is recorded for an enormous territory between the North-Western Pontic area and Trans-Uralia. Its sites are known here in the basin of the Emba and Tobol rivers, the Karaganda region and further eastward (Merpert 1974). The Yamna population generally belongs to the European race. It was tall (175.5cm), dolichocephalic, with broad faces of medium height. Among them there were, however, more robust elements with high and wide faces of the proto-Europoid type, and also more gracile individuals with narrow and high faces, probably reflecting contacts with the East Mediterranean type (Kurts 1984: 90).


http://dienekes.blogspot.ca/2006/05/anthropological-types-of-corded-ware.html
 
Of course there's a link between Yamnaya on one side and Greco-Anatolian, Tochtarian, Iraninic and Indic languages on other side. Because, proto-Indo-Europeans that gave birth to Iranic, Indic, Tochtarian etc. migrated into the Yamnaya Horizon LATER. And no, Scythians were very late EAST Iranic (Iranized) tribes that migrated from Central Asia into the Steppes and mixed with the locals. Some other ancient original Iranic tribes (and their ancestors) never lived around Yamnaya Horizon in their existence. I mean Iranian tribes like the Mitanni & Kassites, Medes, Sagartians, Persians, Bactrians, Sogdians, Parthians, Kambojas, Drangiana, Dahaeans, Massageteans, etc. never had any connection (or direct links) with the Yamnaya Horizon...


Goga, languages can be learned without heavy gene flow. Indo Iranian speakers don't have to have alot of Yamna ancestry to speak a language derived from Yamna.

No one is trying to insult west Asians. Why can't you get this. Stop denying you think this, it's obvious. Try to think about this objectively.
 
Goga, languages can be learned without heavy gene flow. Indo Iranian speakers don't have to have alot of Yamna ancestry to speak a language derived from Yamna.

No one is trying to insult west Asians. Why can't you get this. Stop denying you think this, it's obvious. Try to think about this objectively.
LMAO, the only person here in denial is you! First you came up with the Scythians who were actually VERY LATE East Iranians and originally from SouthCentral Asia. Scythians are not a good example to search for the origins of the Iranic people. Scythians were just a very small part of a greater Iranic race. Scythians were one of the very few who expanded. 99.99% of all Iranic tribes have never been in the Steppes nor around the Yamanya Horizon. Iranian (Aryan) race has nothing to do with Yamnaya. There's 0 evidence that Iranians came from Yamnaya. Some believe they came from BMAC, and some believe they came from an area between Northern Zagros mountains and Leyla-Tepe. I believe that they came from West Asia due to their language and culture similarities with other West Asian peoples. Just STOP linking yourself with the ancient Iranian. It's becoming ridiculous! You have nothing to do with the ancient Iranic at all. You don’t even speak our language for God sake. You don't speak Iranic, you don't have an Iranic culture, brother, you're not Iranic (Aryan), and stop making yourself ridiculous...
 
Yamnaya were not partly Mongoloid. For this reason I don't believe we will see N in their y dna.

The Yamna culture of the Pontic-Caspian steppe is recorded for an enormous territory between the North-Western Pontic area and Trans-Uralia. Its sites are known here in the basin of the Emba and Tobol rivers, the Karaganda region and further eastward (Merpert 1974). The Yamna population generally belongs to the European race. It was tall (175.5cm), dolichocephalic, with broad faces of medium height. Among them there were, however, more robust elements with high and wide faces of the proto-Europoid type, and also more gracile individuals with narrow and high faces, probably reflecting contacts with the East Mediterranean type (Kurts 1984: 90).


http://dienekes.blogspot.ca/2006/05/anthropological-types-of-corded-ware.html
Just wait and see. Yamnaya Horizon was a huge terrotory. People who lived North of it were partly Mongoloid, people who lived near the Caspian Sea were partly Caucasoid. I think some people North of Yamnya Horizon belonged to the 'Mongoloid' haplogroups like N1c1, C, while some people South of Yamnaya belonged to West-Central Asian R1b, R1a, R2a, J2a etc. haplogroups. The only EUROPOID haplogroup was hg. 'I', 'I1', 'I2' etc. I think a lot of Yamnaya people belonged to those Europoid haplogroups. But ANE component is NOT Europoid. Also, EUROPID people are light in complexion, while Yamnaya folks were dark in complexion. But maybe very first Europoid folks had also dark complexions, I don't know that...
 
Angela, people have been discussing those issues you mentioned alot over the last several months. Most of us think Yamna was 25% ANE, 40% ENF, and 35% WHG in terms of ANE K8. The reason we think this is because of the gazillions of scenarios we've played out. When we use this theoretical Yamna north euros always fit best as 50% or more Yamna, which is consistent with this leak. Many of us have known north Euros are mostly Yamna for a long time, by connecting the dots from other leaks.

Yamna was not 50% near eastern, they were 50% something similar to modern Armenians, who are a little more near eastern than Stuttgart. The reason north euros today have less ENF than Yamna is because of Late Neolithic farmers like Gok2(who had as much WHG as Balts) and then also late Neolithic hunter gatherers like Ajv58, who had no near eastern ancestry. We have to remember most of northeastern Europe when IEs arrived was hunter gatherer country.

Balts actually fit better as a mix of something similar to Motala12 and theortical Yamna, with no EEF in the equation. CWC was not Yamna+EEF, it was Yamna+HG+EEF.

The last thing I want to say is you're not the first person to give those doubts. People have disected those ideas, and there's no doubting anymore Yamna-types made a very big genetic impact on Europe, largely or mostly in the early bronze age. Reich knows this because he has central Euro genomes ranging from 7,000-3,000YBP, right before historical times, and Yamna ancestry stayed and was probably at a modern-like level. If ANE 3,000YBP was much lower than it is today, he would say something.

With all due respect, Fire Haired, that 50% scenario was floated here on this site based on simple arithmetic. Also, from what I can tell, and this is not addressed to you personally, all those "gazillian" scenarios and playing around with the data had, as perhaps their primary purpose, it seems to me, the desire to cluster Corded Ware in north central Europe, and based on this last leak, it can't cluster there, or in Poland for that matter. Corded Ware is 75% (or 66%) Yamnaya according to Reich and Company. Northern Europeans are now, according to them, 50% Yamnaya. Surely you see that the calculations were off? Corded Ware is both more eastern and more southern in all likelihood. Nor are northeastern Europeans majority Yamnaya, as was also proposed. They can't be, as they have the least "West Asian" or "Near Eastern" ancestry in Europe. So, two out of three of the "conclusions" were incorrect, unless I'm missing something.

Furthermore, the intermarriage that occurred with the prior inhabitants is what made Corded Ware 75% Yamnaya, and not 100% Yamnaya. According to Reich, that 75% figure remained constant for 1500 years. It didn't change and become 50% because of mixture with Gok type people, who are EEF with only a bit of additional WHG by the way. The change occurred after that, and I'm not convinced some of the change didn't happen after 1000 BC. We'll know for sure if they get samples after that date for autosomal analysis.

Finally, Fire Haired, critical, skeptical thinking is very important in any intellectual endeavor, and should be applied to internet bloggers and academics alike. There's nothing nefarious about it.
 
LMAO, the only person here in denial is you! First you came up with the Scythians who were actually VERY LATE East Iranians and originally from SouthCentral Asia. Scythians are not a good example to search for the origins of the Iranic people. Scythians were just a very small part of a greater Iranic race. Scythians were one of the very few who expanded. 99.99% of all Iranic tribes have never been in the Steppes nor around the Yamanya Horizon. Iranian (Aryan) race has nothing to do with Yamnaya. There's 0 evidence that Iranians came from Yamnaya. Some believe they came from BMAC, and some believe they came from an area between Northern Zagros mountains and Leyla-Tepe. I believe that they came from West Asia due to their language and culture similarities with other West Asian peoples. Just STOP linking yourself with the ancient Iranian. It's becoming ridiculous! You have nothing to do with the ancient Iranic at all. You don’t even speak our language for God sake. You don't speak Iranic, you don't have an Iranic culture, brother, you're not Iranic (Aryan), and stop making yourself ridiculous...

I understand your feelings about this, and I have to say that I feel the same frustration for my own folks. When people claim that I am a demongolicized Swede, I feel annoyed. I am just quite regular north European, and a result of even tens of thousands of years' of admixtures. I surely carry a considerable chunk of Corded Ware and my EEF (33%) may come in part from Yamnaya. My East Asian ancestry which is emphasized ad nauseam is small (7%) and most of it is Native American like and probably linked with the Siberian microblade cultures.
 
Last edited:
Angela, It can't be random with theoretical Yamna that posters at Eurogenes came to the same conclusion as Reich. We're not far off. It's not you guys being critcal I don't like, it's that you act as if everything but what I'm saying is true. It seems biased.

>Not all north Euros are the same. Northeast are surely more than 50% Yamna-like, probably 60-70% for some. 50% is probably a low-bound estimate for someone at the southern end of north European genetics like Germans.

>Yamna+EEF=xCWC or north Euros. Yamna+EEF+SHG/BHG=CWC and north Euros. You've forgotten about hunter gatherer admixture. Much of east Europe was hunter gatherer country when IEs arrived. This is why north Euros have as much WHG as Gok2 and Basque, but significantly less ENF.

>Corded ware does cluster in north-central Europe on PCAs, this is what Laz said.

>There appears to have been mostly genetic stagnation in north Europe starting with Corded ware samples, to 3,000YBP samples, to present-day samples. Corded ware will probably cluster around east Europe or a little east of them.

> Mathematically it is impossible for Mesolithic Scandinavians and modern west Asians to be the main source of ANE in Europe.

>We know from now over a dozen genomes from pre-bronze age west Europe that everyone was ENF+WHG, and were mostly something in-between Stuttgart and Gok2. We also have a pretty good idea what Samara Yamna was based on leaks. So ENF/WHG+Yamna+x=Euros.X fits as being something in-between Loschbour and EHG(65 WHG, 35 ANE).
 
An annoying thing is I was saying this stuff last year and even the year before.

When everyone else thought Mesolithic Russians were 100% ANE(I said they were mostly WHG which is true), Yamna had little to no WHG(I said they had significant WHG which is true), or that SHG-types and west Asian-types gave Europe ANE(I said Yamna-types were the main source which is true).

On Eurogenes half a year ago when Davidski created is PIE zombie, I was telling everyone Yamna had significant WHG and was not 50% ANE, but they ignored me.

Post after Post I said Lithuanian-types replaced most of the Neolithic pops of Northwest Europe(Which is true), and people ignored me because my ideas were simplistic. Most of what I said was true, while the complex theories many other gave were wrong. Yet, people on these forums people have forgotten I believed this stuff long before Reich leaks, and they still think my ideas are coming out of my ass.
 
An annoying thing is I was saying this stuff last year and even the year before.

When everyone else thought Mesolithic Russians were 100% ANE(I said they were mostly WHG which is true), Yamna had little to no WHG(I said they had significant WHG which is true), or that SHG-types and west Asian-types gave Europe ANE(I said Yamna-types were the main source which is true).

On Eurogenes half a year ago when Davidski created is PIE zombie, I was telling everyone Yamna had significant WHG and was not 50% ANE, but they ignored me.

Post after Post I said Lithuanian-types replaced most of the Neolithic pops of Northwest Europe(Which is true), and people ignored me because my ideas were simplistic. Most of what I said was true, while the complex theories many other gave were wrong. Yet, people on these forums people have forgotten I believed this stuff long before Reich leaks, and they still think my ideas are coming out of my ass.

I have never ever read one comment about Russian hunter gatherers being "100% ANE". You misread something I said recently about how the ANE portion of Russian hunter gatherers affected the ANE level of Yamnaya and you wrongly concluded that I was suggesting that Russian hunter gatherers were 100% ANE. If you could misread my comments that badly, you probably misread what other people have said. Nobody has ever suggested that Russian hunter gatherers are only descended from people who lived thousands of years ago - that wouldn't be possible. Please stop with the simplistic misinterpretations and tendency to see different viewpoints as personal attacks.
 
As one person at forumbiodiversity called it the revolution of indo-europeanisation, still rolling today.

If there were any early N in Yamnaya, they left no descendants.
 
Last edited:
It looks like our "theoretical Yamna" isn't far off because our estimates of Yamna ancestry in Europe are consistent with this leak(see here and here).

If modern North Euros are 50% Yamna than Krefters "Theoretical Yamna" is indeed off a bit as I and some others have told him few times.

Since when does the speculated 35% WHG fit 50% of ancestry? Considering that WHG would have increased towards West and since we know North Euros who are on average 46% WHG are half way Yamna. WHG estimation should be around 20-25%, simply because 20-25% * 2 = 40-50%. This fits the modern WHG in North Europe. However 35% *2 = 70% far too high.
And the ~20% ANE estimation doesn't make much sense alone from the fact that Northeast Euros score 18% ANE already. movement towards West should decrease ANE scores to almost half. Is he speculating that ANE stayed almost the same throughout the western movement ? I don't get it. Another fact which makes this estimation of 25% rather unlikely is that Reich said that Yamna had allot more ANE than modern Europeans. Why should he say this if the ANE scores of Yamna were close to that of North Europeans? Does that make sense? :)

Since we know ANE in Yamna was stronger and got weaker while moving towards West and we know North Euros are halfway Yamna. The Avergae North Euro ANE, which is around 17% should be doubled.

So 16%*2 =34%

And the rest is ENF since Corded already clusters slightly Southwest of modern North Euros because those got additional Baltic Hunters like ancestry after. And Yamna is even slightly further Southeast of CW.

This looks much more like Angelas and my estimation of 20-25% WHG, 30% ANE and 45-50% ENF.

50 /2 = 25% ENF
~23*2= 46% WHG
~34/2= 18% ANE

Add 4% more to WHG and 3% more to ENF and you got the typical Lithuanian scores.
 

This thread has been viewed 43389 times.

Back
Top