Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
When are you going to fix that page?
"The merger of the two groups, Indo-European R1a and Uralic N1c1, gave rise to the hybrid Kiukainen culture (2300-1500 BCE). Modern Baltic people have a roughly equal proportion of haplogroup N1c1 and R1a, resulting from this merger of Uralic and Slavic cultures."???
This little text has more bugs or unprofessional wordings than anything prepared by our IT department. Role of Kiukainen in modern Balts = 0. What Slavic culture 2000 BCE? Even Balto-Slavs might be too early (NW IE-an would fit better). Proto-Uralic is dated ~ 2000 BCE and already participated in Baltic ethnogenesys via Kiukanen?
I started to think that to, before I realized that this map is WRONG on many levels. After seeing his map I started to believe that Saami have more Corded Ware admixture than Norwegians, lol. But I was mislead by a wrong map. It was stupid of me, not to make additional examination of data.
So, hold on a minute. The map of Maciamo doesn't hold any ground and is at least misleading. I don't think Maciamo tried to mislead us on purpose. He is still making mistakes by using sources from people with hidden twisted agenda.
His map is not about Yamnaya but the Steppes. And there IS a correlation between the Steppes admixture AND Y-DNA hg. like N1c1 & Q.
Have you added the N1c samples that were found by Chekunova et al in the Late Neolithic Serteya culture of Western Russia? They appear to be dated to roughly 2500-2000 B.C. .
Source: https://www.academia.edu/9452168/Ar...azurkevich_A._Polkovnikova_M._Dolbunova_E._ed (p. 290)
From the supplemental material:
View attachment 8120
RC-Dates:
View attachment 8121
I have not studied those.Arvistro, are there R1a sub-groups you would connect to the N1c in spread and timeline?
what can we conclude ?
Proto-Uralic is dated ~ 2000 BCE [/FONT][/COLOR]
Thanks. I hadn't seen it. I will add it to the N1c page.
Actually I was misled too. I thought that this Steppe K10 was really based on Yamna genomes, but the discussion here has convinced me that it is only something like the EHG component of Yamna, if the Yamna genomes were used at all.
Apart from Steppe K10, there is also Eurasia K14 calculator, which is available on Gedmatch.
Here is how several ancient samples score in Eurasia K14 (I merged K2 and K3 in the table):
http://s16.postimg.org/xktrcr9px/Eurasia_K14_Steppe.png
Actually I was misled too. I thought that this Steppe K10 was really based on Yamna genomes, but the discussion here has convinced me that it is only something like the EHG component of Yamna, if the Yamna genomes were used at all. I have now renamed it 'Steppe admixture'. Sorry for the confusion. It's true that I should be less trusting of other people's work. I can't understand how people have 'hidden agendas' or agendas of any kind. That's just not how my mind work. I only care about finding the truth, whatever it is. I don't understand why people have difficult to accept data that contradict their preconceived ideas or why people can't admit that they are wrong when faced with undeniable facts. I readily admit my mistakes, learn from them and try not to make them again.
"The hunter-gatherer admixture in the early farmers of the Balkans is not closely related to the hunter-gatherer admixture that is predominant in present-day Europeans. This suggests that the waves of farmers that contributed most of the migrants to northern and western Europe were not ones that mixed substantially with local Balkan hunter-gatherers. "
I think that they have not taken into account what is already known: Balkan Farmers spread till reaching Paris and Berlin (LBK) till meeting Cardials in the west and meeting "rich" Mesolithics in the North. Of course the Balkan Farmers got their EHG autosomal that lately would be blended with the let's say "steppe" DNA which already had EHG DNA. The WHG autosomal in western Europeans must be taken somewhere in Italy and/or Iberia as the Mediterranean wave was jumping from uninhabited island to island (Cyprus, Crete, Sardinia?).
@Angela, the abstract says
The hunter-gatherer admixture in the early farmers of the Balkans is not closely related to the hunter-gatherer admixture that is predominant in present-day Europeans. This suggests that the waves of farmers that contributed most of the migrants to northern and western Europe were not ones that mixed substantially with local Balkan hunter-gatherers.
They say what is already known, the Balkan farmers were not the colonizers of north and west Europe, so their HG share didn't spread there. But if they conclude that only the unmixed Balkan farmers reached these regions... they would do a bad bussiness.
This thread has been viewed 75477 times.