I know that phenotype studies are not as useful as genetic data but what were those results ?
As sometimes I was imprecise. It concerned detailed Steppic tribes, but not exactly Catacomb nor Yamna. It concerned Alakul of Western Kazakhstan and the distances (metric) between them as a mean and other averaged tribes. In fact, on the top of ties with robust Steppic elements of EHG origin, as Kozincev said, these steppic pop's showed ties with western people; but these ties could concern as well EEF so
southern;
it's true that the
eastern 'med' element seems appearing too. And it could be more ancient than the EEF one, surely Chalco or post Chalco in the Steppes. I another tribe of Steppes he found some ties with a Kura-Araxes group, if my memory is good.
data to manipulate with "care".
Alakul, western Kazakhstan : early Catacomb,
Molochnaya (–1.35); Pit Grave, Ingulets (–0.36); early
Catacomb, Verkhne-Tarasovka, Lower Dnieper (0.44);
late Timber Grave, Volga–Ural area (0.54); Kemi-Oba,
Crimea (0.88).Nine-trait set:early Catacomb, Molochnaya
(–1.39); Pit Grave, Ingulets (–0.88); Timber Grave, ground
burials, Ukraine (–0.79), Pit Grave, Kakhovka, Lower
Dnieper (–0.67);
Parkhay II, Turkmenia, Middle and Late
Bronze Age (–0.61);
Tiszapolgar, Hungary, Chalcolithic,
5th–4th millennia BC (No.197) (–0.38); late Timber
Grave, Volga–Ural area (–0.16);
Rössen, eastern France,
Neolithic, 5th millennium BC (No.43) (–0.09);
Globular
Amphorae, Germany and Poland,
Early Bronze Age (early
3rd millennium BC) (No.192)(–0.07); Timber Grave,
Ukraine, pooled (–0.03);
Lengyel, Hungary, Neolithic,
5th millennium BC (No.40) (0.07);
Meklenburg, Germany,
Early Bronze Age, 4th–3rd millennia BC (No.107) (0.07);
Aveyron, France, Early Bronze Age, 3rd century BC
(No.99) (0.09);
Unetice, Germany and Czechia, Bronze
Age, 3rd–2nd millennia BC (No.208) (0.09); Linear Band
Pottery, Neolithic, 6th millennium BC (No.14) (0.11); Pit
Grave, Yuzhny Bug (0.20); Veterov, Austria, Bronze Age,
III–II millennia BC (No.205) (0.21).