Teal people found: Caucasians!

[Angela]

Tomenable:
Let's clarify something - I'm not saying that Corded Ware for sure descended from Yamnaya, but that it either descended from Yamnaya, or had a recent common ancestor with Yamnaya (for example Khvalynsk, but maybe something else). And by the way - it seems quite probable that the westward movement of R1b-L51 (or pre-L51 which later gave birth to L51) into Europe also preceded the emergence of Yamnaya culture, so if we are going to claim that PIE did not exist before Yamnaya, and Yamnaya were the VERY FIRST PIEs, then it is possible that L51 was not part of the PIE culture. So far Yamnaya appears to be overwhelmingly Z2103, which is "Eastern" R1b.

.

That's logical in my opinion.

Tomeable:I'm not sure if Corded Ware was formed by a Pre-Yamnaya group (ancestral to both Corded Ware and to Yamnaya - that could be for example Khvalynsk), or by some part of Yamnaya who emigrated in that direction. But you are definitely going ahead of the data when you assert with such boldness that "more CHG-like" = Indo-European and "more EHG-like" = Indo-Europeanized. I'm also not sure if Corded Ware were heavier in EHG - weren't they 75% Yamnaya and 25% EEF + WHG ??? So where is that "more EHG", they had just as much EHG as Yamnaya, their additional amount of "some HG" came from local Central European EEF + WHG, not from EHG.

Tomenable, you are once again attributing to me things I never said. Words are my business. I choose them very deliberately. I really would urge you to read my posts a little more carefully. If you're interested in what I think, of course.

I absolutely never said that more CHG = more Indo-European. What I have been saying for a couple of years is that, assuming the Pontic-Caspian steppe is the uhrheimat, the people who spread the Indo-European languages and culture may not have been, based on the data we have available so far, one genetically identical group who spread around the world. Even in the Yamnaya horizon there may have been variation (see the interesting work done by Kurd on Anthrogenica among other things). Then, as these groups spread out, I think they probably mixed with slightly different groups, depending on the path of the migration. So, within a rather short amount of time in terms of world history, the "Indo-Europeans" of these later periods might have been quite different depending on the place and the time. So, indeed, the people spreading the Indo-European language and culture in the far north might have been EHG heavy, while the people spreading the Indo-European language and culture in the south or southeast might have been more CHG heavy and probably more EEF heavy. That's why I've said repeatedly that I'm very interested to see Mycenean genomes, for example.

Now it's fine to disagree with my speculations, which by definition are getting ahead of the data , but please disagree with what I actually said.

This doesn't mean that I don't agree with Anthony that if you're going to locate the Indo-European language, culture and people north of the Caucasus, you're looking at 4200-3000 BC in the Yamnaya horizon.

Tomenable: Although Khvalynsk was more EHG than CHG, even Yamnaya was still slightly more EHG (Yamnaya_Samara appears as 47% CHG and 53% EHG in Mathieson 2015). So why this assumption that CHG were the "original" PIEs, and EHG were "Indo-Europeanized" ??? Of course a smaller group can sometimes assimilate a more numerous group, but in this case EHG has some numerical advantage. And as you know, R1b was present already in Samara EHG, who did not have any CHG admixture. So once again, we don't know if R1b in Yamnaya originated from EHGs, or from CHGs, or yet from someone else (both EHGs tested so far were J).

For the first part of your statement, see my prior comment. As to the latter part, this is precisely what I stated has not yet been established to my satisfaction, but which I thought you had decided was clear, to wit that R1b in Yamnaya was from EHGs, and all the "teal" was from women.

Tomenable: In Iran there are both basal R1a clades and basal R1b clades. Underhill in his 2014 study on R1a, suggested that R1a perhaps originated from Iran. So if "Teal people" or CHGs came from to the steppe from areas to the south of Caucasus, we cannot exclude the possibility that they carried R1a with them, just like we cannot exclude the possibility that R1b-M269 emerged among EHGs (not among CHGs), because we know for sure, that some R1b existed among EHGs.

Indeed. As far as I'm concerned there is no certainty yet.

 

[bicicleur 2]

I'm going to make a YouTube video describing the basics we've learned with 230 ancient genomes in the last 2 years. You'll get to hear my voice .

If you look at a map. South Europe takes up a small minority of Europe. It's the three peninsulas: Iberia, Italy, and Balkans. The rest of Europe genetically can be labelled "North Europe", including countries as far south as Hungary and Croatia.
View attachment 7526

North Europe is essentially EEF/WHG+Yamanya. They're all very closely related. However Italy/Iberia/Balkan have no recent ancestors. What makes South Europe a genetically defined region is they're united in being differnt from North Europe because they have less Yamnaya. The "EF" signal is strongest there, but those common ancestors lived some 8,000 years ago.

North Europe was not Isolated

Yamnaya and EEF/WHG were not the same people at all. Yamnaya wasn't European, EEF/WHG was the European of 3000 BC. Today Yamnaya is considered European, because North Europeans have so much Yamnaya. It doesn't make sense to describe North Europe as isolated region. It was the least isolated region of Europe. It faced massive non-European migrations. South Europe, especially Sardinia, was isolated. Also, just as Yamnaya came into North Europe, as did West Asians come into South Europe. The West Asian migrations into South Europe are more mysterious because of a lack of ancient DNA from there.

I look forward to your presentation.
There are more differences between north and south than just Yamnaya tough.
Neolithic didn't spread all the way north in the first instance, which makes there is more WHG left in the north.
Yamanaya spread first in the Carpathian basin and northern Europe, but it also spread from north to south Europe
Italic people probably arrived from the Carpathian basin and also had Yamnaya
Furthermore there were Celts in Iberia and northern Italy

 

[Angela]

Fire-Haired: If you look at a map. South Europe takes up a small minority of Europe. It's the three peninsulas: Iberia, Italy, and Balkans. The rest of Europe genetically can be labelled "North Europe", including countries as far south as Hungary and Croatia

Sorry, Fire-Haired, I hate to break it to you, but empty or almost empty tracts of land don't count. You're good with numbers, and seem to have the time, so why don't you tally up population numbers for Iberia, Italy, southern France and the Balkans and compare that total to the rest.

 

[Rethel]

So Angela is right, that nobody today can claim that they are "pure and superior Proto-Indo-Europeans".

Tomenable,
do you have right % of polish gemone? If not, you cannot call yourself a Pole... :innocent:
Do you have right % of Tomenable-surname aDNA? If not, you cannot bear your surname.
This is exactly the same, what you are agree now with Angela, and if more you'll be submissive
to such ideas, then less sens the whole thing will have. Angela has an agenda "I am noone" like
Le who is from "the whole earth" - so for such people this all stuff = meaningless percentages...

And it is even maybe very well, because such people maybe really are a little more objective, and
something good can came from their thougts also, but it does not mean that their whole view and
definitions are correct, especially if they do not share any traditional values or care about priciples.

It doesn't mean that in elementary stuff they are wrong, no, becasue as I mentioned, it can
bring some good, like Gimbutess's hatred for men and blind adoration of females gave pretty
good side effect in kurgan theory. Everything else, what she liked was probably wrong, but
in this what she hated the most - she was right.

Agenda titled "noone is noone" - is very bad agenda, at least sensless... on the same level of
badness (in wich this first agenda is very helpfull[!]), is agenda titled: "I am C, but whole life I
was thinking that I am R, so R must be EHG, and I am superman, because I have 2% more ehg
than avarage person, end even If I am not R, then now I am becasue I have persentage" - it's
so stupid, but the agenda "noone" tells such a person, that he's right, because its meaningless.

This two are even worse agendas than "I am R so R must be EHG or WHG".

It does not matter how big percentage of whatever aDNA, R could be, or what
percentage had in the past because could had even pygmy, but still will be R.

What can have matter it is simply curiousity what % had at the beginning or how it was changing
during time and space, but if you are curious, you will be call racist or having some agenda which
is bad in the eyes of noagnenda agenda. And it seems to me, that now you are capitulating before
that warped viewpoint, becasue you want be nice. But it leads to borg collective. Wish be one?

 

[LeBrok]

Yamnaya and EEF/WHG were not the same people at all. Yamnaya wasn't European, EEF/WHG was the European of 3000 BC. Today Yamnaya is considered European, because North Europeans have so much Yamnaya. It doesn't make sense to describe North Europe as isolated region. It was the least isolated region of Europe. It faced massive non-European migrations. South Europe, especially Sardinia, was isolated. Also, just as Yamnaya came into North Europe, as did West Asians come into South Europe. The West Asian migrations into South Europe are more mysterious because of a lack of ancient DNA from there.

Last time I checked Yamnaya was in Europe. Refresh your geography dude.

 

[LeBrok]

@Angela,

I don't understand why you are angry at Tomenable. He isn't a Balto-Slavic=Superior IE race. He hasn't posted anything suggesting that's what he thinks.

Sometimes he is biased towards his home region, but I agree, never in sense of racial superiority.

 

[LeBrok]

Isn't there also a divide for North-West and North-East, defined by less EEF and more WHG in North-East ???

Yamnaya levels are similar all the way from Ireland to Latvia, but there are differences in the other two components.

IIRC Germans, and even Scandinavians (except for Finns and maybe Swedes), have more EEF than Balts or North-East Slavs.

Maybe I'm wrong, though. Maybe these differences aren't significant enough to justify another division apart from south/north.

I agree, there is no strong division, but rather gradual change. I would have a problem where to draw the line.

 

[Angela]

@Angela,

I don't understand why you are angry at Tomenable. He isn't a Balto-Slavic=Superior IE race. He hasn't posted anything suggesting that's what he thinks.

As I said, I have great respect for Tomenable as a poster here. I also have never seen any indication whatsoever that he's some sort of Nordicist racist. I'm sorry if that was the impression I gave; it certainly wasn't my intention.

At any rate, we have smoked the peace pipe, or whatever might be in keeping with "Indo-European" culture (a virtual exchange of gifts? reciprocal virtual feasts?), and are now in perfect amity, if not in perfect agreement.

Thank-you for your concern. (I mean that, by the way. I'm not condescending to you. )

 

[Angela]

I think that PIE language emerged only when EHG mixed with CHG / Teal.

Before they mixed, both groups spoke other languages (PIE is simply not so old).

Maybe Teal / CHG spoke something Kartvelian-like, and EHG maybe Uralic-like.



==========================

But already Khvalynsk was a mix of EHG and Teal / CHG. It did not start with Yamna.

That's how it seems to me as well, at least for now.

 

[Fire Haired14]

Sorry, Fire-Haired, I hate to break it to you, but empty or almost empty tracts of land don't count. You're good with numbers, and seem to have the time, so why don't you tally up population numbers for Iberia, Italy, southern France and the Balkans and compare that total to the rest.

Population size doesn't matter. I'm talking about land. In that sense South Europe is three peninsulas. Each is kind in it's own world, like British Isles and Scandinavia. The rest of Europe is a continuous piece of land like Siberia.

Last time I checked Yamnaya was in Europe. Refresh your geography dude.

Remember, Europe is a man made location, like England or Canada. According to geography Georgians are European. But we don't consider them European genetically.

 

[Fire Haired14]

Not a post

 

[Angela]

An autosomal map for Caucasian Hunter-Gatherer (CHG) - or "Teal" - admixture:

http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?5833-Teal-discovered-!!/page42

And here a map for IBD sharing with Caucasian Hunter-Gatherers / Teal people:

Seems to correlate well with Indo-European speakers (look e.g. at Germano-Slavic levels vs. Finno-Ugric levels).

Not only Finnic-speakers have low levels of CHG / Teal admixture & IBD sharing, but also for example Sardinians.

In India North Indians (who are IE-speakers) have high levels, while South Indians (Dravidian-speakers) not.

I haven't had time to think this through yet. Why would there be such a disparity between the admixture and the IBD analysis for Italy. It's much less for IBD, plus, the results are reversed north vs south.

 

[Angela]

Fire Haired14opulation size doesn't matter. I'm talking about land. In that sense South Europe is three peninsulas. Each is kind in it's own world, like British Isles and Scandinavia. The rest of Europe is a continuous piece of land like Siberia.

What you said is that: "South Europe takes up a small minority of Europe." That isn't true even in terms of land mass, much less in terms of population, as you would discover if you did the math. This kind of imprecise language isn't helpful.

Fire-Haired:Remember, Europe is a man made location, like England or Canada. According to geography Georgians are European. But we don't consider them European genetically.

As far as I'm concerned, "Europeans" didn't really exist genetically until about 2000 BC when the major part of this tripartite admixture occurred. So, if the Yamnaya people weren't yet Europeans then neither were the MN or the WHG or the EEF. The definition of "Europeans" is very much time dependent.

 

[arvistro]

I haven't had time to think this through yet. Why would there be such a disparity between the admixture and the IBD analysis for Italy. It's much less for IBD, plus, the results are reversed north vs south.
I haven't had time to think this through yet. Why is there such a disparity between the admixture and I

Same with Balts and Germans.
Technically I understand it this way:
IBD ("identical by descent"?) is some hypothetical degree up to which population might be descendant of CHG (or CHG like) population.
Admixture is what portion of genes could be assigned to CHG (or CHG like) population box versus being put into other reference populations/clusters boxes used in analysis.

If what I think is right, IBD should not change by adding other reference populations into equation.
On other hand Admixture should be very sensitive to what other reference populations (other boxes) are.
For example, if only WHG was used together with CHG to find admixture, then all Euros would show increased CHG (because EEF and ANE portion would split between WHG and CHG), because any units used in analysis would be put by model into either CHG or WHG box.
If however a lot of reference populations were used, then CHG ratio would decrease as it may be eaten by other references.

So, to your question, disparity might be because part of what is considered CHG by admixture is assigned to CHG for lack of better reference population. Apparently some other reference folk is needed, the closest to which (of used folks) is CHG.
Alternatively it is drift - used to be CHG, drifted away enough to become non-recognized as IBD, but still being closest to CHG of all other available choices.

 

[bicicleur 2]

Population size doesn't matter. I'm talking about land. In that sense South Europe is three peninsulas. Each is kind in it's own world, like British Isles and Scandinavia. The rest of Europe is a continuous piece of land like Siberia.



Remember, Europe is a man made location, like England or Canada. According to geography Georgians are European. But we don't consider them European genetically.

geographical border is Greater Caucasus, north of Georgia

 

[bicicleur 2]

well Fire Hair , it looks like you will have to work very secure and use proper definitions , or you'll get lots of critics ..

 

[Angela]

Same with Balts and Germans.
Technically I understand it this way:
IBD ("identical by descent"?) is some hypothetical degree up to which population might be descendant of CHG (or CHG like) population.
Admixture is what portion of genes could be assigned to CHG (or CHG like) population box versus being put into other reference populations/clusters boxes used in analysis.

If what I think is right, IBD should not change by adding other reference populations into equation.
On other hand Admixture should be very sensitive to what other reference populations (other boxes) are.
For example, if only WHG was used together with CHG to find admixture, then all Euros would show increased CHG (because EEF and ANE portion would split between WHG and CHG), because any units used in analysis would be put by model into either CHG or WHG box.
If however a lot of reference populations were used, then CHG ratio would decrease as it may be eaten by other references.

So, to your question, disparity might be because part of what is considered CHG by admixture is assigned to CHG for lack of better reference population. Apparently some other reference folk is needed, the closest to which (of used folks) is CHG.
Alternatively it is drift - used to be CHG, drifted away enough to become non-recognized as IBD, but still being closest to CHG of all other available choices.

Great explanation, Arvistro. Thanks.

 

[Alan]

She isn't even Jewish (AFAIK), but it doesn't mean that your post is not Anti-Semitic. Using Jewish as a slur is.



Because no EHG with N1c1 has been found so far. As I wrote, I don't work with presumptions but with evidence.

It's possible that N1c1 existed among EHGs but no samples have been found so far.

You have EHGs with R1b, R1a and J - but none with N1c1.

Goga had his moments again it seems. Sometimes things he says make some sense but sometimes it's better to ignore him.

 

[Alan]

But when they fled into the Tarim Basin, they assimilated many Tocharians and Iranians.

Also aren't Uyghurs almost identical genetically with Tajiks, who are Iranians (both in language and genes) ??? This would imply that Turkic genetic influence is either low in Uyghurs, or high in Tajiks - the former being much more likely than the later.

Edit:

I think I confused Uyghurs with Kyrgyz people - Kyrgyz people are similar genetically to Tajiks (IIRC). Uyghurs are different.

You have confused both Uyghurs, Kyrgyz for Turkmens who are indeed very similar to Tadjiks autosomally and most likely the most "pure " Iranic group being absorbed or turkified.

However even Uyghurs and Krygyz have a decent amount of Iranic and Tocharian admixture.

 

[Alan]

I'm going to make a YouTube video describing the basics we've learned with 230 ancient genomes in the last 2 years. You'll get to hear my voice .

If you look at a map. South Europe takes up a small minority of Europe. It's the three peninsulas: Iberia, Italy, and Balkans. The rest of Europe genetically can be labelled "North Europe", including countries as far south as Hungary and Croatia.
View attachment 7526

North Europe is essentially EEF/WHG+Yamanya. They're all very closely related. However Italy/Iberia/Balkan have no recent ancestors. What makes South Europe a genetically defined region is they're united in being differnt from North Europe because they have less Yamnaya. The "EF" signal is strongest there, but those common ancestors lived some 8,000 years ago.

North Europe was not Isolated

Yamnaya and EEF/WHG were not the same people at all. Yamnaya wasn't European, EEF/WHG was the European of 3000 BC. Today Yamnaya is considered European, because North Europeans have so much Yamnaya. It doesn't make sense to describe North Europe as isolated region. It was the least isolated region of Europe. It faced massive non-European migrations. South Europe, especially Sardinia, was isolated. Also, just as Yamnaya came into North Europe, as did West Asians come into South Europe. The West Asian migrations into South Europe are more mysterious because of a lack of ancient DNA from there.

Croatia, Serbia, Albania and Romania definitely belongs to South Europe. The rest what you consider as "North Europe" I would put into a "Central_North European" cluster.

Central_North Europe "vs" South Europe.

But Inside those cluster there is also a smaller divide. Central-Northwest with more EF and less WHG compared to Central_Northeast with more WHG and less EF.

And Southwest Europe with slightly more EF and less Yamna and Southeast with slightly less EF and more Yamna.

Isn't there also a divide for North-West and North-East, defined by less EEF and more WHG in North-East ???

Yamnaya levels are similar all the way from Ireland to Latvia, but there are differences in the other two components.

IIRC Germans, and even Scandinavians (except for Finns and maybe Swedes), have more EEF than Balts or North-East Slavs.

Maybe I'm wrong, though. Maybe these differences aren't significant enough to justify another division apart from south/north.

I don't know about Finns but Swedes(~37%) definitely have more EF than Balts(~25%?). Looking at their stats I would consider and place Sweden, Denmark and Norway as the Northwest part of the cluster. Interestingly they are also geographically considered as part of Northwest Europe while Finnland not.

Yes it seems that it was easier for Yamnaya to replace previous population in the north, because it had been less numerous to begin with. Southern regions with higher population density and more sophisticated cultures were affected as well, but not so much.

As I said in the past, Central and South Europe was more attractive for the early farmers in comparison to Northeast Europe as extreme example, which is colder and less suited than even the green highlands of the Scottland. Must be another reason why the Northwest has more EF than Northeast. Even most of Scandinavia (especially the South) should have been better for farming. Therefore the population density in those regions must have been allot higher. And because of that especially South Europe via contact to Western Asia had early Civilizations and should have been more isolated from nomadic herders. I don't think the Early PIE were really warlike people I imagine them more like the "typical immigrants" leaving their homeland for better land/life in every possible direction, and "overpopulating over time regions of Europe, West Asia and South_Central Asia. And as we know the newcomers are always likely to breed more and sometimes bring disseases only they are "immune" to. I kinda think this is how they seriously expanded their language. Not very different from how the Early farmers expanded in search of new land.