search this blog

Wednesday, March 8, 2017

Iberian Bell Beakers: zero steppe admix, no R1b?


Does anyone more versed in Iberian archeology than myself know if some of those new Iberian samples in the Lipson et al. preprint actually qualify as Bell Beakers?

If so, it would mean that, unlike all Central European Bell Beakers sequenced to date, at least some of the earliest Spanish Bell Beakers lacked admixture from the Eurasian Steppe. It would also suggest that, again, unlike Central European Bell Beakers, which show a high incidence of R1b, early Spanish Bell Beakers were rich in I2a2a. From the Lipson et al. supp info, pages 36-37, emphasis is mine:

Dolmen “El Sotillo” (Álava)

El Sotillo megalithic site is located in the Alava Rioja county (Basque country), between the limit of Laguardia-Guardia and Leza municipalities, at the south of the historical territory of Alava. The site is 617 meters above the sea level. It was discovered in 1955 by Domingo Fernández Medrano and excavated by himself, José Miguel Barandiran and Juan M. Apellániz in 1963 [90].

It is a megalithic tomb with a corridor and an almost circular chamber, formed by nine slab stones, a corridor and a tumulus of eleven meters of diameter. During the excavation, numerous lithic tools were uncovered, including six pedunculated arrowheads of silex, a bone and a metal arrowheads, a metal burin, retouched flakes, two fragments of foliaceous projectile points, etc. There are some Bell Beaker pottery remains and a cup with incised decorations.

The remains of thirteen individuals, including eleven adults (six of them males) were retrieved. The radiocarbon dates placed the initial use of the site at the Late Chalcolithic period, the Bell Beaker period (4390+30, 4350+30, 4040+30, 4000+40 BP). After a hiatus of about half a millennium, the usage of the structure as funerary place increased during the Middle Bronze Age period (3550+30, 3430+30, 3380+30, 3360+30, 3360+30, 3320+30, 3160+30, 3120+30 BP), with one date from the Late Bronze Age (2740+30 BP).

La Chabola De La Hechicera (Álava)

The dolmen of La Chabola de la Hechicera [90] is located in the Alava Rioja county, in the municipality of Elvillar. It is a corridor megalithic burial composed by a circular chamber formed by eight slab stones, and a corridor delimited by six slabs and covered by a large slab stone. It was erected during the Late Neolithic and was used in different periods, until the Bronze Age. It was discovered in 1935 by Álvaro de Gortazar and has been excavated in several campaigns by different researchers (1936 José Miguel Barandiaran, 1947 Carlos Sáenz de Tejada, Álvaro Gortazar y Domingo Fernández Medrano, 1974 Juan María Apellániz and 2010-2011 José Antonio Mujika y Javier Fernández Eraso).

During these works, the remains of at least 39 individuals have been retrieved. Sylex arrowheads, personal ornaments (such as necklace beads and pendants made from different materials), an idol made of bone and pottery remains (including a well-preserved Bell Beaker cup in the Ciempozuelos style) were also retrieved. Twelve different radiocarbon dates were generated, yielding dates from the Late Neolithic to the Bronze Age: 3170+130; 3280+40; 4380+40; 4420+30; 4430+40; 4440+40; 4480+40; 4650+40; 4670+40; 4940+30; 4980+30 BP.


Citation...

Lipson et al., Parallel ancient genomic transects reveal complex population history of early European farmers, bioRxiv, Posted March 6, 2017, doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/114488

111 comments:

Nirjhar007 said...

That upcoming BBC paper is needed.

BTW OM should comment ...

Gioiello said...

"The remains of thirteen individuals, including eleven adults (six of them males) were retrieved. The radiocarbon dates placed the initial use of the site at the Late Chalcolithic period, the Bell Beaker period (4390+30, 4350+30, 4040+30, 4000+40 BP). After a hiatus of about half a millennium, the usage of the structure as funerary place increased during the Middle Bronze Age period (3550+30, 3430+30, 3380+30, 3360+30, 3360+30, 3320+30, 3160+30, 3120+30 BP), with one date from the Late Bronze Age (2740+30 BP)".

ES.1/4 Iberia CA El Sotillo 42.6 -2.6 2571–2347 M H3 I 0.07 25.6±2.8 ±
ES-6G-110 Iberia CA El Sotillo 42.6 -2.6 2916–2714 M H3 I2a2a 0.05 25.7±3.2 ±
Inventario0/4 Iberia CA El Sotillo 42.6 -2.6 2481–2212 M X2b I2a2a 0.12 30.0±2.5 56±23

They were thirteen, six men
and seven women and children
sulla strada da Girgenti a Misilmeri
and remained in three
tre somari o tre cavalli
(paraphrasing a song of Domenico Modugno)

Chad Rohlfsen said...

OM doesn't want to comment. He's now seeing he was wrong and R1b is from Eastern Europe with steppe migrations.

Nirjhar007 said...

I am linking the informative comment by Alberto , its quite relevant to the subject .
http://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2017/03/neolithic-europe-its-complicated-lipson.html?showComment=1488966010036#c5508433753079975833

Mark Moore (Moderator) said...

Maybe what has been found is some trade goods from Bell Beakers to a WHG group who was just ahead of the population wave from the Steppe? I.E. they were not Bell Beakers during that period, but the BB were close enough so that they were trading for their stuff ahead of merging with them.

Cossue said...

Here it is a relatively old (1995) paper on early metal working in Galicia (2500-1700 BCE)and its relation with individual cists, mounds, etc... But, if I am reading it correctly, the author says that they are NOT generally associated with Bell Beaker, er, beakers?: http://tp.revistas.csic.es/index.php/tp/article/view/421/435.

Also of interest, the more recent (2207) paper by Dirk Brandherm: https://revistas.uam.es/cupauam/article/viewFile/1193/1156



bellbeakerblogger said...

Interesting that two of these individuals are H3 and I2a's. Basically, they look like quintessential Basques without the R1b.

Some Eupedia posters had predicted this previously under http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/26805-New-mtDNA-Y-DNA-frequencies-for-the-Basques

It'll be interesting to see how they compare to modern Basques in the full genome. I bet it's close.

mickeydodds1 said...

Another scalp for the General :)

Cossue said...

Also, this paper, in English, on some of the early gold productions from Galicia and its Atlantic and continental relations:

https://www.academia.edu/762496/Pieces_of_Prehistoric_Jewellery_in_the_Northwest_of_the_Iberian_Peninsula

And another one, on all over corded beakers in Iberia and its Continental links: https://www.academia.edu/561851/Del_Campaniforme_cordado_AOC_en_el_Noroeste_hisp%C3%A1nico._Un_extra%C3%B1o_e_inesperado_invitado.

bellbeakerblogger said...

As Alberto mentioned in the previous thread, and I think Cossue here, is that some sites like Los Simos have a better chance of having steppe admixture, perhaps because of its relation to an AOC beaker or because it is more of an individual burial.
Other places like Los Millares or some of the megalithic burials, probably not so much, since it was an older culture that began incorporating Beaker ideologies. Of course it's possible that the Maritime tradition was a completely (genetically) unrelated development from the AOC tradition and the two became fused on the Rhone or Lower Rhine, which is kind of the Harrison, Heyd view in addition to others.

Anyhow, some places like the Isles will be fairly straight forward, Beakers running up beaches. Iberia may take a while to fully understand IMO.

Romulus said...

How can you say they have zero steppe admix when they lumped EHG in with 'HG' and didn't test for CHG?

Romulus said...

I would be very surprised if these samples didn't have steppe admix given that they post-date ATP2 and ATP3 which clearly did.

Romulus said...

Did you look at the graph in the supplemental info before you made this post?

http://i.imgur.com/3CNr1tU.jpg

Seems that the Iberian samples get VERY close to BLATTERHOHLE from the Early Neolithic to the Copper age. What did we find in Blatterhole again? R 1 d? e? f? g? lmnop?

Chad Rohlfsen said...

They got closer to Blatterhohle because they have more WHG. Blatterhohle isn't ancestral to Western Europeans. They came from further east later on.

Olympus Mons said...

Interesting, however:

a. All google a map, any map, of Bell beakers and then look at this samples Map. – Notice the lack of overlay? – So for bell beaker assessment this is irrelevant. Not many places show a greater probability of not finding Bell beaker burials.
b. Same is true for most of samples found in northern Spain. Samples taken from runaway caves in mountains won’t really represent correctly the Iberia LN and Chalc of Iberia.

The only relevant part is the following:


The later Iberians have large proportions of hunter-gatherer ancestry , approximately 23% for MN (from the site of La Mina, in north-central Iberia) and 27% for CA, and also relatively old ALDER dates (approximately 50 generations, or 1400 years), indicating that most of the admixture occurred well before their respective sample dates. Both populations have evidence of ancestry related to LB1 and to a different WHG individual, suggesting that in contrast to the earlier admixture, the large increase in hunter-gatherer ancestry between the EN and MN had a non-local origin


During 4th millennia Iberia saw a staggering increase in population, and that brought WHG ancestry different from the previous La Brana. It’s the amount of WHG in those south populations that is intriguing not the ones hiding in the mountains.

Where did that different WHG came from? --- Obviously North Africa, where a vast amount of people disappeared at the same time as Iberia from the south moving northbound saw a huge increase in population. Until we have South Spain, South Portugal, 4th millennia we cant make up out minds about the admix that came to dominate Iberia during the 3rd millennia. Tagus estuary river first half of 3rd millennia will tell who the Bell beakers were. Other than that… go ahead and all play Game of thrones.



Romulus said...

@Chad

What makes you think Blatterhohle will be 100% WHG when Latvia LN wasn't? The Blatterhohle samples are a thousand years younger than Latvia LN1.

Nirjhar007 said...

There is a new paper of this grand aDNA season ;) :

Ancient mitochondrial lineages support the prehistoric maternal root of Basques in Northern Iberian Peninsula

Leire Palencia-Madrid, Sergio Cardoso, Christine Keyser, Juan Carlos López-Quintana, Amagoia Guenaga-Lizasu and Marian M de Pancorbo

Abstract
The Basque population inhabits the Franco-Cantabrian region in southwest Europe where Palaeolithic human groups took refuge during the Last Glacial Maximum. Basques have been an isolated population, largely considered as one of the most ancient European populations and it is possible that they maintained some pre-Neolithic genetic characteristics. This work shows the results of mitochondrial DNA analysis of seven ancient human remains from the Cave of Santimamiñe in the Basque Country dated from Mesolithic to the Late Roman period. In addition, we compared these data with those obtained from a modern sample of Basque population, 158 individuals that nowadays inhabits next to the cave. The results support the hypothesis that Iberians might have been less affected by the Neolithic mitochondrial lineages carried from the Near East than populations of Central Europe and revealed the unexpected presence of prehistoric maternal lineages such as U5a2a and U3a in the Basque region. Comparison between ancient and current population samples upholds the hypothesis of continuity of the maternal lineages in the area of the Franco-Cantabrian region.
http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/ejhg201724a.html

Nirjhar007 said...

Iberia (~5000 BC) had U5a2a .

u5b is from ~2000 BC .

bellbeakerblogger said...

Nirjhar, your timing couldn't be better. I posted what I think could be a connection, but I'm still thinking through it.

Ryan said...

I'd just point out David that according to this paper, those samples do actually have some steppe admixture via a population like KO-1 or Villabruna.

Nirjhar007 said...

7 samples ,

u5a2a ~5000 BC
T2b ~2000 BC

H1 ~1700 BC

U5b ~1700 BC

R0 1600-1500 BC

U3a 1400-1300 BC

H1 ~300BC

I am not certain, as I am getting from friend and I am pasting here :) .

Ryan said...

Previous post didn't go through I think so hopefully not a double post...

David - these samples are steppe admixed, from a population like KO-1 or Villabruna. That's one of the findings of the paper. The WHG resurgence in Iberia is from a fairly eastern WHG group that had some ANE.

bellbeakerblogger said...

Only seven?

Chad Rohlfsen said...

Romulus,

I never said they were 100% WHG, but they have the most. Iberia CA has more WHG than the EN, which is why they're closer to Blatterhohle. It's not about direct admixture.

Nirjhar007 said...

Yes BBB ,Its already in the abstract :)

'' This work shows the results of mitochondrial DNA analysis of seven ancient human remains from the Cave of Santimamiñe in the Basque Country dated from Mesolithic to the Late Roman period. In addition, we compared these data with those obtained from a modern sample of Basque population, 158 individuals that nowadays inhabits next to the cave. ''

Ryan said...

Another finding of the paper was that this added WHG is best modeled as ongoing admixture rather than a single pulse. So this may actually be a process of groups with more WHG and ANE moving into Iberia over time, and these samples may only be part way through this process.

Gioiello said...

Supplements of the paper of Paliaga Madrid 2017 are for free. There is a mess of data. Go to "European Journal of Human Genetics".

Gioiello said...

http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/ejhg201724a.html

Romulus said...

@Ryan

Maybe they came from flooded doggerland.

Gioiello said...

@ Romulus
"@Ryan

Maybe they came from flooded doggerland".

Better from flooded Adriatic, but I wouldn't be ironic about the Isles, having all the most ancient haplogroupos, and also R-L11, R-CTS7556 after my R-Z2110 ancestor of all the eastern European R-CTS9219...

Ryan said...

@Romulus - I think the Danube basin in or around where KO-1 lived is actually the most likely case, since R1b seems to expand from the Danube, but the question of what role now-flooded areas played in shaping today's demographics is an interesting one. We'd be pretty blind to these areas due to the lack of samples, and I'd imagine a lot of them were very rich environments with significant populations. I'd bet a lot of the best environments from pre-8000 kya are now under water, which probably skews our view of that period quite a bit.

Matt said...

@Ryan: David - these samples are steppe admixed, from a population like KO-1 or Villabruna. That's one of the findings of the paper. The WHG resurgence in Iberia is from a fairly eastern WHG group that had some ANE.

On this, that could work to explain the shift from LB+LO (La Brana+Loschbour) to LB+V (La Brana+Villabruna) if you had pure "eastern WHG" or highly admixed moving population into Iberia in the Copper Age.

On the other hand, if you have anything like the Hungarian Copper Age samples moving into Iberia, they're about 10-13% HG, similar to Iberia_EN, vs 24% in Iberia_MN. If you mixed about 50% Hungarian CA with 50% Iberia_MN, you'd wouldn't get Iberia_CA, you'd get a population with 18% HG.

(That is, generally mixing with any of the actual Eastern or Central European farmer populations we have would tend to make WHG in Iberia go down, unless counterbalanced by another big dose of local La Brana HG. You wouldn't have a WHG resurgence, but a WHG decline between Iberia_MN and Iberia_CA, if they'd mixed mainly with Hungary_CA or Hungary_LN or even Germany_MN.)

I don't know if there's any archaeology that speaks for movements of highly HG populations into Iberia in the Copper Age, or earlier (no adna at the moment that speaks for anything like that). Could happen - I'm by no means an archaeology expert here and there's no adna for it.

It'd seem I'd expect generally any HG rich groups from Eastern Europe would have a relatively low population density.

I guess another related point is that if Iberia_MN were substantially replaced by a population with a late admixture date with almost pure "eastern WHG", you'd expect the ALDER dates they have to shift, which doesn't really happen. The ALDER dates indicate that Iberia_CA and Iberia_MN both got most of its HG a long time ago - e.g. a slowly accumulating process over time, with quite a big pulse early in the Neolithic - in a bit of a contrast to the Germany MN and Blatterhohle, and even Hungary.

Matt said...

@ Ryan, I guess another complementary points about it seeming unlikely to me that Iberia_CA would be replaced in any large measure by "eastern HG" rich population that was richer in HG than any European Neolithic or Chalcolithic farmers would also be to question why this group does not disrupt the autosomal status quo in Hungary of the time? Hungarian Chalcolithic samples rise modestly in WHG, if at all, compared to LN. If you have a disruptive, heavily "eastern WHG" population traveling about, it seems like they would affect local cultures first (Hungary, Polish Lengyel_LN) but those cultures remain lower in WHG than the Iberians.

This all said, looking at the Figure2A in the paper, there does seem to be some *reduction* in HG comparing later Iberia Chalcolithic samples (2500BC) to earlier Chalcolithic samples (3000BC). So that may actually explain why there's a change in the HG valance - farmers from East-Central Europe entering into Iberia (maybe Remedello Culture North Italians, or South Germany?)... Or this could just be reading too much into a statistically non-significant difference within Iberia_CA...

Gioiello said...

Unfortunately I cannot read Anthrogenica beyond the Activity stream

_rms2 [Richard Stevens] replied to a thread Parallel ancient genomic transects reveal complex population history of early Europea in Ancient (aDNA)
I've got to admit I'm starting to wonder if R1b didn't spend the LGM in the Balkans or even Italy (don't tell Gioiello I said that) and then expanded...

And the English is too much difficult to me, it seems Welsh after four centuries of Latin influence. But did I understand well?

Davidski said...

@Romulus

How can you say they have zero steppe admix when they lumped EHG in with 'HG' and didn't test for CHG?

What makes you think Blatterhohle will be 100% WHG when Latvia LN wasn't? The Blatterhohle samples are a thousand years younger than Latvia LN1.


All of the Iberia CA and Blatterhohle MN cluster along the Anatolia-WHG cline on the PCA. See Extended Data Figure 1.

So it's clear that they're straight two-way mixtures of Near Eastern farmers and WHG, with no Eneolithic/Bronze Age steppe admixture.

Btw, Latvia LN1 clusters near Yamnaya.

Romulus said...

@Davidski

so where is CHG on that PCA? Top Right? how do you know it is EEF or CHG pulling the samples top the top right quadrant?

David Rabaez said...

Hello David,

Can you get the global 10 coordinates of the Iberia_CA?

Regards

David

Davidski said...

Iberia_CA is marked as Iberia_Chalcolithic in the Global 10 datasheet.

But these samples don't yet include the samples buried with the Bell Beaker artifacts. I'll add them when the data is published.

Ryan said...

@Olympus - "Where did that different WHG came from? --- Obviously North Africa, where a vast amount of people disappeared at the same time as Iberia from the south moving northbound saw a huge increase in population."

I don't think that's all that obvious. Why should North African samples be more similar to Villabruna / KO-1 than to La Brana? Because they're more near-eastern?

@David - "So it's clear that they're straight two-way mixtures of Near Eastern farmers and WHG, with no Eneolithic/Bronze Age steppe admixture."

Uh. Why does it have to be just Eneolithic/Bronze Age steppe admixture? You yourself documented Upper Paleolithic steppe admixture in Villabruna, which this paper supports now too. I have a hard time seeing where the ANE cline is supposed to be though - do you know? I think there may be two clines in the neolithic populations too - one towards KO-1 and another towards Villabruna (or are a long ways apart on the PCA).

Davidski said...

Ryan, you're talking about pre-Neolithic North Eurasian admixture, possibly from the Mammoth steppe, but that's speculative. It came very early from the east, one way or another, and all Neolithic Europeans have it.

So I'm not sure why you keep bringing it up here? Do you think that Central European Bell Beakers actually have an excess of this type of eastern ancestry, rather than Yamnaya-related admixture from the Eneolothic/Bronze Age steppe, or what?

Olympus Mons said...

@Ryan.
We have no clue what North African Late neolithic population was. All we know is that they were the ones undergoing the most violent Climatic event, the birth of the Sahara desert.

Just watching Katie Manning work is clear that the vanishing of north African population was simultaneous with new, vast, population in Iberia. - So if someone is looking for a different population with a different WHG ancestry arriving to Iberia... why is the obvious not good?





Rob said...

@ Matt

"It'd seem I'd expect generally any HG rich groups from Eastern Europe would have a relatively low population density."

I think there is the theoretical possibility of Balkan coppper age "refugees" fleeing the 4000 BC event ; bringing copper with them.

They'd be ANE admixed, high WHG, and come via Italy (I get some reads for Remedello as a putative source of MNE ancestry AT9).

Olympus Mons said...

@Davidski.
Is it possible to look for CHG itself in those Iberia samples with added Whg?

Rob said...

@ oM

North Africa at this time would consist of Natufian ancestry, + " Levant Neolithic" , and perhaps some elements of basal "paleo hunter gatherer" stuff. Certainly nothing "WHG" like

Olympus Mons said...

@Rob.
Which Chalc North African aDna are you talking about?

Rob said...

The one I saw with my crystal ball.
Just like the Crystal ball which told me about early Iberian Beaker being MNE and I2.
I know you didn't listen but do you at least remember?

Ryan said...

David - "Ryan, you're talking about pre-Neolithic North Eurasian admixture, possibly from the Mammoth steppe, but that's speculative. It came very early from the east, one way or another, and all Neolithic Europeans have it."

Yes, I am. I would point out though that the North Eurasian admixture in EHG may have the same source though. The distinction between the two may be false - if you know of any evidence that the ANE portion of EHG's ancestry is more recent than Villabruna I'd love to see it.

Figure 1 D supports that:

"(D) Hunter-gatherer genetic cline (derived from MDS analysis; Supplementary Information section 5) as a function of longitude."

The further east you go in Europe, the more similar the hunter-gatherers become to EHG and less similar to La Brana / El Miron. What do you think is driving that cline if not ANE?

"So I'm not sure why you keep bringing it up here? Do you think that Central European Bell Beakers actually have an excess of this type of eastern ancestry, rather than Yamnaya-related admixture from the Eneolothic/Bronze Age steppe, or what?"

Yes I do - or at least I think it's a possibility that needs to be considered. It's not like someone built a giant wall from Karelia to the Black Sea to stop ANE from spreading further west. This paper and most others seem to suggest that there was a WHG-EHG spectrum across Europe, and I think it's important to keep in mind that not all ANE admixture necessarily came from Yamnaya. Is it really a stretch to think that a hunter gatherer in the Ukrainian Carpathians may have shared some extra ancestry with a hunter gatherer in the Ukrainian steppe?

And it's not just me. Lipson et al. explicitly raises this issue.

"The later Iberians have large proportions of hunter-gatherer ancestry, approximately 23% for MN (from the site of La Mina, in north-central Iberia) and 27% for CA, and also relatively old ALDER dates (approximately 50 generations, or 1400 years), indicating that most of the admixture occurred
well before their respective sample dates. Both populations have evidence of ancestry related to LB1 and to a different WHG individual, suggesting that in contrast to the earlier admixture, the large increase in hunter-gatherer ancestry between the EN and MN had a non-local origin."

From Extended Data Table 2:

Iberia EN 10.0 ± 0.8% LB* 10.4 ± 0.8% LB*
Iberia MN 23.3 ± 1.1% LB* + LO 24.8 ± 1.1% LB* + LO
Iberia CA 26.8 ± 0.7% LB* + LO/K/V* 27.6 ± 0.7% LB* + V*

The hunter gatherer component of Iberians becomes increasingly eastern over time. And as noted above, "eastern" hunter gatherer ancestry seems to mean more similar to EHG.

Also see Figure 7.1 from the supplementary information, which shows KO-1 as having admixture from Ma-1.

Matt said...

@ Rob: It all seems very theoretical at the moment. If you've got a incoming population that mixes with Iberia_MN (24% HG) to get to Iberia_CA (28% HG), then, if the new population were 1/3 of ancestry and Iberia_MN 2/3, the new population would have be about 40% WHG to explain the difference. Sort of like an equivalent to the Blatterhohle samples. Remedello if anything seem to have less HG ancestry than Iberia_CA.

We have no such population at the moment, and in many ways seems not so likely in the Balkans, with Hungary and Polish Lengyel at fairly low levels of WHG by the late Neolithic (around 13% in each IRC, well below Iberia_MN or Iberia_CA).

Then again Mathieson states "The population admixture was patchy across both space and time, varying in magnitude between 0% and 30% for different early Balkan farming populations" (https://ep70.eventpilot.us/web/page.php?page=IntHtml&project=ASHG16&id=160122024), so there could, somehow be an odd (to me) situation where the Balkans had these very HG rich Neolithic farmer groups lacking in Central-East Europe. But it's a puzzle about what exactly the Balkan HG will be like ("evidence of local admixture from hunter-gatherers related to those from Scandinavia and Eastern Europe" ... "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")

Olympus Mons said...

@Rob,
Nothing here is about Bell beakers.
My travel time machine...
That stock (later bell beakers) arrived to Iberia by 3300BC. With very different people. Most like ditches and enclosures but not them. they liked small walled settlements in small mounds overseeing rivers.
by 3100 BC they ruled the left side of Tagus river. Especially where the river was cross-able what we know as VNSP and behind Zambujal. Sure. Some of that population was I2 as others were even E1b. - But later known as bell beakers where from a area where 12% were actually hiperbrachy and the majority 46% were mesochephalic.

by 2800BC they moved to Galiza and out of iberia altogher not stopping where this samples were from. Later some were in the south meseta and where today is Madrid. Look at a Map. Bell beaker never (mostly) were in those areas. So has to be taken into account when mentioning Bell beakers.


Note: Not lack of inhumations in delta nile. How come no aDna from those guys?


Matt said...

Don't have much more to add on this topic on the topic of ANE and KO1. Note, if you go by their ADMIXTUREGRAPH, KO1 has about (0.09*0.87) = 7.8% EHG ancestry, and 3% ANE ancestry (since their model gives EHG as 39% ANE). (Extrapolate and a population picking up an extra 10% KO1 related ancestry would get a grand total of 0.3-0.4% ANE ancestry increase.)

Other comments of interest from their supplement:

"Using both f4 -statistics and admixture graphs, we obtained largely concordant results, with no other hunter-gatherers appearing to be closer references for the hunter-gatherer ancestry in farming populations (although late hunter-gatherers from France and Germany, in particular Ranchot88, are roughly interchangeable with Loschbour)".

While it is unlikely that any of our Neolithic populations would have admixture directly from EHG, by allowing for two components of hunter-gatherer ancestry, we would expect to detect signals of potential admixture from a hunter-gatherer source intermediate between WHG and EHG (e.g., Scandinavian hunter-gatherers [5]). Again, we find that the best fits are very similar to those obtained with our primary scaffold model, with little evidence of Eastern European hunter-gatherer ancestry in our Neolithic groups

In order to avoid any bias due to the fact that Loschbour was shotgun-sequenced, we replicated our primary analyses using capture data instead; we note that these only cover a subset of 390k SNPs,so that the model using the capture version was fit on the smaller set of SNPs .... We also note that for Iberia MN, a Loschbour-related component was nearly significant with both versions. We thus concluded that the original results were robust. The one change we made in presenting the results was for Iberia CA, which in the graph with capture Loschbour data fit best with LB1-related ancestry plus a component related to any of the other three WHG individuals; to be conservative, we adopted this combination for our primary results.


Also, some may be interested in checking out the Supplementary table. Has some f4 stat results for Ukraine_HG and some populations labelled Balkans_Neolithic and EEF_Macedonia, who I'm not sure were treated in the main text.

Chad Rohlfsen said...

Ryan,

I think you're misinterpreting the info. They mean non-local as in not LaBrana. That means WHG with less or no Magdalenian admixture. Odds are that means France or an unsampled part of Iberia.

Davidski said...

@Ryan

We have samples from Lithuanian Narva, Copper Age Hungary, and Middle Neolithic Germany.

All of these groups have ANE ancestry, but nowhere near enough to produce German and Czech Bell Beakers without ~50% input from something like Yamnaya. That's why they cluster in the Anatolia-WHG cline, while Yamnaya, and all samples with significant Yamnaya-related ancestry, are forced east and pushed out of this cline.

So you can't argue that there was a gentle cline of Yamnaya-like ancestry from Germany to the steppe dating to the Neolithic. Nothing has changed since the Haak et al. paper, despite all of these new samples.

The Yamnaya component along with its excess ANE entered Central Europe suddenly during the LNBA period and rearranged the genetic profile of Central and Eastern Europe very quickly, from typically Middle Neolithic to more or less modern-day. Central European Bell Beakers are a product of this process.

a said...

Any plans to add Khvalynsk and Samara HG samples to basal K7 spreadsheet? Maybe I just don't see them among the 700 samples?

Matt said...

Re: the supplement table, several f4 statistics for populations labelled "Balkans_MP_Neolithic" look to show strongest Z score signals of admixture with Ukraine_HG. Though not by much in excess of "WHG_Koros_Hungary_EN_HG" (i.e. KO1). Others within the same label show no significant Z score with any HG sample.

This may be a preview of the admixture which Mathieson was referring to in his abstract.

Likewise a mix of robust Z and non significant Z in the in the samples labelled "Balkans_Dzhulyunitsa_Neolithic" (Bulgaria?) and "Balkans_Neolithic", though these have no stat against Ukraine_HG.

Strongest f4 stats against a "Balkans_MP_Neolithic" sample look comparable to strongest "Iberia_Chalcolithic", but unlike for those, they don't look consistently high across the samples and some are low.

Likewise for "Balkans_Dzhulyunitsa_Neolithic" - one sample of three given looks as high as "Iberia_EN" and the other two are non-sig, and for "Balkans_Neolithic" one of four is high and the other three non-sig.

Ryan said...

@Chad - As I said, it's a possibility to be considered. I'm not hanging my hat on it. I'm also relying on David's suggestion Villabruna had admixture from ANE, and I also think the EHG/WHG cline is suggestive of some European-wide ANE admixture (which I think David agrees with based on above).

Let me put it this way. Suppose:

1) The primary difference between WHG groups is varying levels of affinity to EHG.

2) The variation in affinity to EHG is best explained as variable levels of ANE ancestry. IE the primary difference between EHG and any given WHG groups is that EHG has greater affinity to ANE.

You raise a good point about Magadalenian admixture that confounds point 2, though I'd call it Aurignacian really as El Miron already had some ancestry related to Villabruna.

A couple points from the Fu paper to consider here:

Rochedane, Ranchot88, Loschbour and LaBrana1 show greater affinity to GoyetQ116-1 (Aurignacian) and El-Miron than Villabruna. KO-1 shows less affinity to GoyetQ116-1 / El Miron than Villabruna.

Bichon, Loschbour, La Brana1, Hungarian.KO1 share more ancestry with Han than Villabruna does.

So yah... I guess a simple WHG/EHG cline isn't such a great idea.

@David/Chad - for extended data figure 1, which direction to you think ANE would be?

Ariel said...

A devil's advocate picture showing an alternative origin for western european R1b: http://imgur.com/a/pmwMo (I don't necessarily believe in this explanation)

Ryan said...

@David - I agree with you re: German/Czech Bell Beakers, but I'm thinking more about Iberia, where they weren't living right on top of Corded Ware people.

For Middle Neolithic Germany though - how much ANE are we talking about do you think? And how comparable are your numbers to the Lipson estimates do you think (your K8 WHG numbers look higher but I know you've been meaning to update it)?

Suppose the German Bell Beakers are 50% Corded Ware and 50% "core" Bell Beaker - in your K8 you'd get core Bell Beaker as ~50% WHG, 44% Near Eastern and ~6% ANE. That's a Basque person.

Nirjhar007 said...

Dave,

This is an important looking paper by Dr. Kivisild , you should blog ?.

The study of human Y chromosome variation through ancient DNA.

Kivisild T1,2.
Author information
1
Department of Archaeology and Anthropology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, CB2 1QH, UK. tk331@cam.ac.uk.
2
Estonian Biocentre, 51010, Tartu, Estonia. tk331@cam.ac.uk.
Abstract
High throughput sequencing methods have completely transformed the study of human Y chromosome variation by offering a genome-scale view on genetic variation retrieved from ancient human remains in context of a growing number of high coverage whole Y chromosome sequence data from living populations from across the world. The ancient Y chromosome sequences are providing us the first exciting glimpses into the past variation of male-specific compartment of the genome and the opportunity to evaluate models based on previously made inferences from patterns of genetic variation in living populations. Analyses of the ancient Y chromosome sequences are challenging not only because of issues generally related to ancient DNA work, such as DNA damage-induced mutations and low content of endogenous DNA in most human remains, but also because of specific properties of the Y chromosome, such as its highly repetitive nature and high homology with the X chromosome. Shotgun sequencing of uniquely mapping regions of the Y chromosomes to sufficiently high coverage is still challenging and costly in poorly preserved samples. To increase the coverage of specific target SNPs capture-based methods have been developed and used in recent years to generate Y chromosome sequence data from hundreds of prehistoric skeletal remains. Besides the prospects of testing directly as how much genetic change in a given time period has accompanied changes in material culture the sequencing of ancient Y chromosomes allows us also to better understand the rate at which mutations accumulate and get fixed over time. This review considers genome-scale evidence on ancient Y chromosome diversity that has recently started to accumulate in geographic areas favourable to DNA preservation. More specifically the review focuses on examples of regional continuity and change of the Y chromosome haplogroups in North Eurasia and in the New World.
PMID: 28260210 DOI: 10.1007/s00439-017-1773-z
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28260210

Gioiello said...

@ Nirjhar007
"Dave,
This is an important looking paper by Dr. Kivisild, you should blog?"

KIVISILD: WHO? [But in Italian it is better: Kivisild: Chi [ki]]?

A geneticist, who writes that, doesn't understand anything about haplogroup R1b
"In contrast to preceding Early and Middle Neolithic sections of time, a large proportion of the Y chromosomes recovered from Bronze Age remains of Central Europe, Northern Caucasus and the Steppe belt of Russia belong to a couple of sub-clades of haplogroups R1a-M420 and R1b-M343 (Fig. 7). Late Neolithic, Early Bronze Age and Iron Age samples from Central and Western Europe have typically the R1b-L11, R1a1-Z283 and R1a-M417 (xZ645) affiliation while the samples from the Yamnaya and Samara neighbourhood are different and belong to sub-clades R1b11-Z2105 and R1a2-Z93 (Allentoft et al. 2015; Cassidy et al. 2016; Haak et al. 2015; Mathieson et al. 2015; Schiffels et al. 2016). The R1b11-Z2015 lineage is today common in the Caucasus and Volga-Uralic region while being virtually absent in Central and Western Europe (Broushaki et al. 2016). Interestingly, the earliest offshoot of extant haplogroup R1b-M343 variation, the V88 subclade, which is currently most common in Fulani speaking populations in Africa (Cruciani et al. 2010) has distant relatives in Early Neolithic samples from across wide geographic area from Iberia, Germany to Samara (Fig. 7). In a similar way, early offshoots of the R1b and R1a phylogenies, including R1b lineages derived at P297 and ancestral at M269, and R1a lineages which are derived at M459 while ancestral at M198 and M417 markers have been found in mid-Holocene hunter-gatherer samples in a wide area in Eastern Europe, from Karelia, Latvia and Samara region (Haak et al. 2015; Jones et al. 2017; Mathieson et al. 2015). Extremely rare extant sub-clades of R1a, such as R1a4-YP5061, R1a5-YP1272, and R1a6-YP4141 (Fig. 7), may bear witness to a long-term continuity of such old genetic lineages while the majority of present-day R1a and R1b lineages in West Eurasia derives from just a handful of Late Neolithic/Early Bronze Age male founders".

Samuel Andrews said...

@Matt,
"the supplement table, several f4 statistics for populations labelled "Balkans_MP_Neolithic""

I can't find any samples in the paper or supplements labeled Balkan. What paper are you referring to?

Matt said...

@ Samuel, the paper we are all discussing and the tables on the supplements page. Try:

http://biorxiv.org/highwire/filestream/33184/field_highwire_adjunct_files/1/114488-2.xlsx

http://biorxiv.org/highwire/filestream/33184/field_highwire_adjunct_files/2/114488-3.xlsx

(Not sure exactly what the differences between these tables are)

From page:

http://biorxiv.org/content/early/2017/03/06/114488.figures-only

Check out the tab "Indiv f4", it includes rows such that Pop1 is an outgroup, Pop 2 are HG (various WHG + "Ukraine_HG", no SHG / BHG / EHG), Pop3 is the Anatolian or Macedonian Neolithic, and Pop4 includes various EN, MN, LN, CA farmers from across Europe (inc. samples labelled "Balkans_MP_Neolithic", "Balkans_Dzhulyunitsa_Neolithic", "Balkans_Neolithic").

(Screenshot: http://i.imgur.com/kgHWZVx.png)

Olympus Mons said...

@Ryan,

Suppose the German Bell Beakers are 50% Corded Ware and 50% "core" Bell Beaker - in your K8 you'd get core Bell Beaker as ~50% WHG, 44% Near Eastern and ~6% ANE. That's a Basque person

Thanks. That is what I've been asking for long. Because its what we "know" happened! - A male Iberian (cant see how not R1b) taking a Corded ware women and you get german Bell beakers. Its what anthropology, mtdna and Nm dental traits tell us.

Nirjhar007 said...

Ratna ,

I find the paper more or less fine , but indeed,this is based on available, handful of complete sequences, which are skewed mostly .

Gioiello said...

@ Nirjhar007

"Ratna,
I find the paper more or less fine, but, indeed, this is based on available, handful of complete sequences, which are skewed mostly".

This is my last post with my methods. We'll see who reached the truth:

OLDEST R-L23-Z2105
It seems that there are other data to add to what I said before about the oldest haplotypes also of R-L23-Z2105 in Western Europe than in Eastern Europe also amongst the descendants of Samara.
Also the R-L23-Z2015* have some haplotypes older in Western Europe, as YF07907 from Parma (Italy), to be added to these htps above all from Western Europe
526066 Daniel Frank/(Francis?) Jordan, b ca 1909 Unknown Origin R-L23
12 24 13 10 12-14 12 12 13 13 13 29 16 9-10 11 11 25 16 19 28 14-15-16-18 10 10 19-23 15 16 14 17 36-39 11 12 11 9 15-16 8 10 10 8 10 11 12 23-23 17 11 12 12 15 9 12 22 20 12 12 11 13 10 11 12 12
557529 John Carter, 1752-1841 United Kingdom R-Z2103
12 24 14 10 11-15 12 12 13 12 13 28 16 9-9 11 11 25 15 18 28 15-15-16-17 11 12 20-23 17 16 17 18 37-37 12 12 11 9 16-16 8 10 10 8 10 10 12 23-23 16 10 12 12 15 9 12 22 20 13 12 11 13 11 11 12 11 34 13 9 16 12 26 26 19 12 11 13 12 10 9 12 12 10 11 11 31 12 13 24 13 10 10 19 15 17 12 24 20 12 15 24 12 24 18 10 14 17 9 12 11
310308 Najd سبيع Saudi Arabia R-L23
12 24 15 11 11-14 12 12 13 13 13 29 17 9-10 11 11 25 15 19 30 15-16-16-18 10 12 19-23 16 15 18 17 37-37 12 12 11 9 15-16 8 10 10 8 10 11 13 23-24 16 10 12 12 14 9 12 24 20 14 12 11 13 11 11 12 12 33 15 9 16 12 26 26 19 13 11 13 12 10 9 12 12 10 11 11 30 12 13 24 13 10 10 22 15 18 12 22 18 12 15 24 12 24 18 10 14 17 9 11 11
and also at the base of R-L23-Z2106-Z8131*. These are the mutations from YFull at this level (STRs):
DYR152 10 → 10.a
DYS607 15 → 16
DYS456 16 → 15
DYS447 25 → 24
DYR75 13 → 14
But
62899 Rev. William Holmes, b. 1739 and d. 1823 Ireland R-Z8131
12 24 14 11 11-15 12 12 11 14 13 32 15 9-10 11 11 25 14 19 27 15-16-16-16 12 12 19-23 16 17 20 17 34-36 11 12 11 9 15-16 8 11 10 8 10 11 12 23-23 15 10 12 12 15 8 13 23 21 12 12 11 13 11 11 12 11
maintains DYS456=16, DYS447=25. Of course these markers may mutate forward and backward, in fact they changed also from R-Z2106 to R-Z2108/Z2109 and to my R-Z2110, but very likely Holmes doesn't derive from the eastern European or Asian haplotypes, demonstrating once more that linked hpts were not only at Samara but remained in Western Europe (from where I think they came).

Nirjhar007 said...

Hey Ratna, can link me the supplementary info of that basque paper :P

Gioiello said...

Nirjhar007
Which paper are you speaking about? The link to this paper we are discussing has been given from Davidski too:
Lipson et al., Parallel ancient genomic transects reveal complex population history of early European farmers, bioRxiv, Posted March 6, 2017, doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/114488

Nirjhar007 said...

Iberian Basque Country amtDNA ,

http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/ejhg201724a.html

Gioiello said...

You find Supplementary meterial on the same link

AbstractInfo/HistoryMetricsSupplementary material
Preview PDF


Supplementary information
Supplementary Table 1
Supplementary Table 2

Gioiello said...

For that you have to go to the "European Journal of Human Genetics", (8 March 2017) | doi:10.1038/ejhg.2017.24

Nirjhar007 said...

For some reason me and some friends are only seeing the abstract .

If you have the supplementary link, paste here .

Gioiello said...

We all see only the abstract, because the paper isn't for free, but through the link with the review you may uopload the Supplements. Anyway I cannot give an attachment here

Gioiello said...

Only through your private mail at Goettingen...

Nirjhar007 said...

Might be some error , I will notify them .

Goettingen ? oh not again please :P .

But you can send a link here of the supply through google drive . After uploading them . So whop can't see can take a look .

Gioiello said...

I may give you an ida of the hgs:
Haplogroup
X2
H1j1
HV4a1
R0
T1a1'3
R0
R0
J1c2e2
H1j1
X2b
H1j1
R0
H3c2
R0
H1n6
U5b1f
H27
H1j1
HV0
R0
R0
H1j1
J1c
R0
R0
J1c2e2
R0
U5b1f
X2c
J1c1
R0
H1j1
H5a3a1
HV0
T2b
U5b1f
H3c2
K1a
R0
K1a
H1a3a3
R0
J2a1a1e
J1c
R0
HV0
HV0
J1c5c1
R0
H1j1
U5a1
K1a4a1g
H2a2b
J1c5c1
H2a2b
R0
U5b
X2
R0
H2a2b
R0
U5b1f
H3c2
U5b
T2b
U2e1
R0
R0
HV0
T2b
R0
R0
R0
U2e1
U5b1g
H2a2b
R0
T2
R0
R0
H1j1
J1c1
J1c2e2
J1c5c1
H1a3b
R0
I3a
U5b1c1
R0
R0
U5b1c1
HV0
H1b
U5b
U5b1f
R0
R0
I3a
R0
J1c1
H1j1
R0
H1c
R0
U2e1
H1j1
H3c2
R0
X2
H3c2
R0
H2a2b
H27
R0
T2b
H1c
W6
H1j1
H1a3a3
H1j1
R0
H1a3b
U5b1f
J2a1a1e
U5b1c1
H1j1
U5b1c1a
U5b1f
H1j1
J1c2e2
H1j1
J1c2e2
U5a1a2
H1j1
J1c2e2
HV4a1
R0
H5
H15a1b
HV0
U5b2a1a
HV0
T2b
U5b1f
R0
R0
K1a
R0
H1j1
R0
R0
H1j1
HV0
K1a
J1c1
U5b1c1a
H3c2
U7

Volodymyr Lutsyk said...

It turns out Maciamo was right on Eupedia back in 2014: "I have explained before why it is extremely unlikely that R1b spread from southwest Iberia towards Central Europe. I would like to stress now that the Bell Beaker phenomenon was not an ethnic culture like most other cultures of the period, but rather represents a huge multicultural trade network inside which a variety of new artefacts, customs and ideas were exchanged and diffused.

In my eyes, the Bell Beaker phenomenon was indeed caused by the contact between the Megalithic people of Western Europe (who were an ethnic fusion Mesolithic inhabitants and Neolithic immigrants from the Near East) and the Indo-European cultures of Central Europe. What is striking about the Bell Beaker period is that it does not replace any anterior culture, but simply juxtaposes itself on top of pre-existing cultures and new cultures alike. The Bell Beaker phenomenon last from 2800 to 1800 BCE and was contemporaneous with the following cultures.

A) The Megalithic culture emerged in Western Europe (incl. Sardinia) as soon as the Neolithic reached the region, starting from c. 5500 BCE and only came to an end with the arrival of Bronze Age cultures from Central Europe, starting c. 2200 BCE in Britain and lasting as late as 1200 BCE in isolated parts of Iberia.

B) The Corded Ware culture existed from 2900 to 2350 BCE in Germany, Central Europe and the Baltic. It is associated with the partial replacement of Neolithic LBK- and TRB-related male lineages by R1a lineages.

C) The Unetice culture replaced the Corded Ware culture in Germany, Bohemia and western Poland from 2300 BCE and lasted until 1800 BCE. It marks the fusion of R1b lineages with Corded Ware lineages, although R1b tribes were already present around Hungary at least since 3000 BCE, and arrived in Germany during the Corded Ware period". http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/29565-Bell-Beakers-were-a-multicultural-phenomenon-trade-network-not-an-ethnic-culture

Davidski said...

The Unetice culture replaced the Corded Ware culture in Germany, Bohemia and western Poland from 2300 BCE and lasted until 1800 BCE. It marks the fusion of R1b lineages with Corded Ware lineages.

Unetice was mostly I/I2, probably with some R1a.

R1b shows up after Unetice, with the Bell Beakers.

Volodymyr Lutsyk said...

And his another good comment: "But after a while, Indo-European R1b folks from Germany realised that Megalithic people were rich, yet were very weak militarily. They could buy prestige bronze weapons from them, but didn't know how to mass produce them to equip armies. So some R1b adventurers started to raid Bell Beaker/Megalithic settlements. When they saw how easy it was to defeat them and how profitable such raids were, they intensified their incursions, overrunning first the Low Countries and France (c. 2400-2200 BCE), then crossing over to Britain (2100 BCE) and Ireland (2000 BCE), and eventually crossing the Pyrenees and establishing minor settlements in parts of Spain (from 1800 BCE)".

Davidski said...

Sounds like nonsense.

Volodymyr Lutsyk said...

"Unetice was mostly I/I2, probably with some R1a".
Do you think it might explain low levels of R1b among Slavs and elevated I2? As to R1b - central European Bell Beakers are the most likely ancestry group for Western European R1b as of now.

Volodymyr Lutsyk said...

"Sounds like nonsense."
Well, this is exactly what Europeans did to the early 19th century number one world economy - China that is.

Dmytro said...

"Unetice was mostly I/I2, probably with some R1a".
Do you think it might explain low levels of R1b among Slavs and elevated I2?


Probably irrelevant as to I2 since the Unetice clades are not fundamentally ancestral to the Slavic CTS 10228. They're not L-621.

Gioiello said...

@ Volodymyr Lutsyk

This is what I wrote to Maciamo Hay about his last R1b tree on Eupedia:
Apart R2, does Maciamo Hay find any hint in aDNA that gives reason to his unreasonable theory about an undemonstrated origin of R1a and R1b in Middle East?
Mal'ta boy (ANE Cluster) - 24,000 YBP - Upper Paleolithic - R (side branch to R1 and R2?)
Villabruna (WHG Cluster) - 14,000 YBP - Upper Paleolithic - R1b
Latvia_HG3 (~85 WHG, ~15 ANE?) - 7,791 YBP - Mesolithic - R1b1a1a1
Latvia_HG3 (~85 WHG, ~15 ANE?)- 7,252 YBP - Mesolithic - R1b1a1a1
Karelia HG (~45 WHG, ~55 ANE?)- 7,550 YBP - Mesolithic - R1a
Samara HG (~45 WHG, ~55 ANE?) -7,640 YBP - Mesolithic - R1b
Ukraine N1 (~66 WHG, ~33 ANE?) - 6,469 YBP - Neolithic / Mesolithic? - R1a1
(Can't remember did any Afontova Gora people sampled show for R? As that would matter. Jean Manco's Ancestral Journeys page didn't show that so not sure. Couldn't find any precision about the placing of the EHGs.).
(WHG and ANE values based on Basal K7).
Then the earliest Near East Neolithic descended / influenced populations with R1 go:
Spain, Els Trocs (I0410) - 7295-7066 YBP - Early Neolithic - R1b1 (only 1 sample and IRC a branch not common in modern Europe)
Yamnaya - Early Bronze Age 5300 YBP - R1b1a2 (many samples!)
(Lots of various other Steppe Early Bronze Age populations as well, plus LN1).
Spain_ATP3 - Chalcolithic - 5516–5362 YBP - R1b1a1a2 (1 sample only)
Armenia_EBA, Kura-Araxes- Bronze Age - 4619-4465 YBP - R1b1a1b (1 sample only)
(IRC Spanish samples are outliers in populations who generally appear dominated by y-dna haplogroup I2a2).
R2 is found in early Near East like
Iran Neolithic, Ganj Dareh (I1945)- 10000-9700 YBP - Neolithic - R2a (1 sample only)
(Matt from Eurogenes blog)
R-V88 from Italy: definitely demonstrated
R-V88 Z30230/Y7770 * V88/PF6279 * PF6332+59 SNPs15400 ybp, TMRCA CI 95% 13400 10200 ybp" class="age"formed 17100 ybp, TMRCA 11700 ybp
R-V88*
⦁ id:YF07201 [ITALY and GBR]
R-M18 PF6372 * PF6319 * YP5453+34 SNPs
⦁ id:ERS256975 ITA [IT-CA]
⦁ id:ERS256965 ITA [IT-CA]
R-Y7777 SK2065/FGC21014/Y7777 * Y7768 * FGC21018/Y8460+10 SNPs10200 ybp, TMRCA CI 95% 11000 8200 ybp" class="age"formed 11700 ybp, TMRCA 9600 ybp
R-Y7777*
⦁ id:YF07902 GBR [and ITALY and France]
R-Y8451 FGC20993/Y7786 * FGC21063/Y7784 * FGC21033/Y8445+15 SNPs8200 ybp, TMRCA CI 95% 8900 6400 ybp" class="age"formed 9600 ybp, TMRCA 7600 R-Y8451*
R-V35 V35
⦁ id:ERS256961 ITA [IT-CA]
The R-V88 in Iberia (7100 YBP) very likely with the migration from Italy Zilhao spoke about. All African and Middle Easterner subclades aren't older than 5000 years.

Cossue said...

I'm confused: So Unetice people were high in steppe admixture, but were not -at least with the data we have- predominantly R1b nor R1a, but European WHG I?

Romulus said...

The I found in Unetice almost certainly didn't come directly from WHGs or SHGs but from Baden or Funnelbeaker farmers.

Unetice had I2a2b, I2c2, I2

I2a2b is found in Baden thousand years prior and I2a2 itself is obviously is a Neolithic farmer derived marker given the abundance we have of it now in those sites.

I2c is found in Hungarian Neolithic and I2c is found even in Neolithic Anatolia at the earliest stage of the Neolithic.

Cossue said...

Ok, thanks. Still that would imply that the heavily steppe admixed Unetice were not characterized by a single, dominant, male line. Also, the I2a2 in El Sotillo males is the the same good old I2b1 (m223)?

Rob said...

Romulus
I2a2 is ultimately a WHG lineage. There's no I2a2 in ANFs.


Cossue
It seems like I2a2 married a lot of CWC women (?). In fact; it was all over Europe (from steppe to Iberia); but for somehow between 2000 BC and now; it's frequency has plummeted.

Grey said...

Ryan

"This paper and most others seem to suggest that there was a WHG-EHG spectrum across Europe, and I think it's important to keep in mind that not all ANE admixture necessarily came from Yamnaya."

Especially if WHG-EHG weren't strictly western and eastern but more coastal and interior. The physical geography would make the coastal group more western and the interior group more eastern but could mean a sliver of EHG stretching down into western Europe.

I don't think it would make much difference to the whole story (cos low population density) but might explain anomalous ydna clades etc.

Grey said...

Romulus
"Unetice had I2a2b, I2c2, I2. I2a2b is found in Baden thousand years prior and I2a2 itself is obviously is a Neolithic farmer derived marker given the abundance we have of it now in those sites."

Evidence from the US points at HGs having a hard time adapting to farming but what about sedentary pottery using wetlands HGs?

It seems to me people like that might be pre-adapted to farming and if they were in contact with farmers at the edge of farming viability (where the farmers were weakest and couldn't displace them) then I wonder if they could adopt mixed farming-HG like Ertebolle and their (initially) LBK pigs?

truth said...

Maciamo of Eupedia is a lost case. He still thinks that Neolithic farmers ancestry peaks in Sicilians, instead of Sardinians. Despite all of the PCA and admixtures we have had these last years from different studies.

Romulus said...

@Rob

I think I2a2 is a WHG lineage indigenous to West Ukraine/Eastern Balkans that was one of the earliest WHG lineages absorbed into farming cultures and spread by farmers.

Ryan said...

@David - Re: Unetice, I wouldn't be surprised if we eventually get samples with R1b from them too, would you? I2 dominating isn't that surprising - in your K8 model the Unetice samples have more WHG than any group not living around the Baltic (barring WHG samples themselves). They're the high water mark for WHG ancestry south of Gdansk.

Romulus said...

Rathlin beakers have more WHG than Unetice.

Ryan said...

@Romulus - Ah, good point. Not in the spreadsheet I was looking at.

Matt said...

In Basal K7, group averages for "Villabruna-related" in ancient samples looks to go:

Iberia_CA: 63.2, Iberia_BA: 62.3, Iberia_MN: 61.6, Hungary_BA: 61.2, Esperstedt_MN: 59.6, Baalberge_MN: 59.9, Sweden_MN: 58.2, Nordic_LN_Sweden: 57.8, Bell_Beaker_Germany: 57.4, England_Roman: 56.7, England Anglo-Saxon: 56.5, Unetice_Germany: 55.9, Remedello_BA: 55.4, Poland_EBA: 55.1, Hungary_CA: 54.4, Iberia_EN: 54.35, Corded_Ware_Estonia: 53.84, Bell_Beaker_Czech: 53.56, Iceman_MN: 53.13 (then I get lazy about going down any further).

Using the Fsts to estimate differentiation by population averages from the components, increasing distance from "Villabruna-related" among ancients goes:

Hungary_BA, Iberia_BA, Nordic_LN_Sweden, Bell_Beaker_Germany, Iberia_Chalcolithic, England_Roman, England_Anglo-Saxon, Unetice_Germany, Iberia_MN, Poland_EBA, Corded_Ware_Estonia, Bell_Beaker_Czech, Esperstedt_MN, Baalberge_MN

batman said...

It's still somewhat thought-evoking that Russian geneticians seems to disagree with a "massive migration" from the Russian yamna-culture towards western Europe.

"For haplogroup R1b, we identified a previously unstudied “eastern” branch, R1b-GG400, found in East Europeans and West Asians and forming a brother clade to the “western” branch R1b-L51 found in West Europeans. The ancient samples from the Yamnaya archaeological culture are located on this eastern branch, showing that the paternal descendants of the Yamnaya population – in contrast to the published autosomal findings - still live in the Pontic steppe and were not an important source of paternal lineages in present-day West Europeans."

https://ep70.eventpilot.us/web/page.php?page=IntHtml&project=ASHG16&id=160121213

batman said...

Concernig the origin of y-dna I there's little to no doubt that the NW refugia has to carry the main responsibility to both I2 and I1. However way one runs the pony.

Aram said...

Olympos

I think this linguistic exercises will interest You. It is about Your V88 theory.

Several Ancient Egyptian numerals are cognates of Indo European or Proto Indo European equivalents


https://www.academia.edu/357726/Several_Ancient_Egyptian_numerals_are_cognates_of_Indo_European_or_Proto_Indo_European_equivalents

https://www.academia.edu/1892168/ANCIENT_EGYPTIAN_WORDS_COGNATES_OF_THEIR_EQUIVALENTS_IN_PROTO_INDO_EUROPEAN_AND_VARIOUS_INDO-EUROPEAN_LANGUAGES

Nirjhar007 said...

Thank you Aram , I will try to verify them .

Gioiello said...




@ Nirjhar007
"Thank you Aram , I will try to verify them".

Completelt mad:

look at "100"

Aram said...

Offtop

It seems rumours of death Sintashta was premature.

This Scythian R1a was already present in Sintashta. https://www.yfull.com/tree/R-S23592/
This SNP is confirmed by genetiker and Tagankin

It is frequent today in Kyrgyzstan.
But the age of Kyrgyz cluster is 1100ybp

Olympus Mons said...

@Aram,
Hey, will definitly read it.
There will be a time when folks here dealing with aDna will realize that they are following people (Shocking), and people always follow Kinship networks. Understanding that is understating people movements.

Nirjhar007 said...

Yeah Ratna, that comparison of symbol similarity is just accidental resemblance.

Olympus Mons said...

@aram,
Yes. Tremendous. It always amazes me the ability of our brains for "pretend not to" (see, hear, understand,etc). It the confirmation and motivational bias that is fascinating.

You know what - Those 6th Fayum (especially B) arriving populations (6th millennia), might have been PIE speakers. Definitely this paper and the references to all others over the last decades that have addressed that event of similarities of ancient Egyptian and PIE is delicious.
People follow kinship and Merimde and El-omari had Kinship network with fayum (so were accepted among them)...
Anyway, Delicious.

Gioiello said...

@ Olimpus Mons

"@aram,
Yes. Tremendous. It always amazes me the ability of our brains for "pretend not to" (see, hear, understand,etc). It the confirmation and motivational bias that is fascinating".

One person who writes that: "Hundred: Snt (“shent”) clearly a cognate of French cent (hundred)" is a moron, who perhaps is a scholar of Old Egypt but doesn't understand anything about linguistics. The same are you when speak about genetics, history and all the rest. Fortunately that science is verified or disproved from "proofs"...


mooreisbetter said...

This post is an example of the reductio ad absurdem that one typically sees in DNA fora.

The world is black or white. Ancient populations had predominantly one marker.

Nonsense.

Could this be as simple as what we already know?

-The powerful Megalith builders of western Europe were predominantly I2

-Humans trade goods.

In other words, some wealthy prehistoric European had some foreign goods?

Why the drama?

David Rabaez said...

Hi David, you can indicate the percentage that can have Iberia_MN, Iberia_CH and Iberia_CA of WHG and Farmer.

Thanks

Regards

Davidski said...

Why the drama?

Because it suggests that the Iberian Bell Beakers = Western European R1b-L51 idea is a lame duck.

So it's more evidence of a massive impact by Bronze Age steppe herders on Western Europe, which is still being denied by some.

Davidski said...

@David Rabaez

The estimates are here under the HG% column...

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B9o3EYTdM8lQMlpkck9QVjIwLUE/view?usp=sharing

Gioiello said...

@ Davidski
"Why the drama?
Because it suggests that the Iberian Bell Beakers = Western European R1b-L51 idea is a lame duck.
So it's more evidence of a massive impact by Bronze Age steppe herders on Western Europe, which is still being denied by some".

Another proof that the expansion of R1b was from Western Europe and not from the Kurgans. I have said that my R-L23-Z2110 is very likely the oldest (6100 YBP as to YFull or 7200 or 8100 as to other calculations) and that the subclades CTS7556 and Y5592 expanded from western Europe (the most part of samples are in the Isles, perhaps not because more tested) and that the huge subclade CTS9219, to-day above all in eastern Europe, came from West. Now my relative from marriage GiorgioTognarelli, very likely from Fivizzano, Lunigiana, Tuscany, Italy, resulted R-L23-CTS9219*, even though Y18959 failed, but he is negative for the subclades, also for the tiny ones of the smal's tree (tested: L25, CTS9940, PF3928, F2610, CTS2791, CTS8563).

David Rabaez said...

Davidski Thanks!!!

:)

huijbregts said...

@Alberto
Can you send me a copy of the script you are offering? (ger.huijbregts@planet.nl).
Thanks