search this blog

Thursday, June 29, 2017

52 ancient mitogenomes from the South Caucasus (Margaryan and Derenko et al. 2017)


Over at Current Biology at this LINK. I'm having a look now to see how this new data compare to ancient mtDNA from the Eneolithic/Bronze Age steppe.

Summary: The South Caucasus, situated between the Black and Caspian Seas, geographically links Europe with the Near East and has served as a crossroad for human migrations for many millennia [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7]. Despite a vast archaeological record showing distinct cultural turnovers, the demographic events that shaped the human populations of this region is not known [8, 9]. To shed light on the maternal genetic history of the region, we analyzed the complete mitochondrial genomes of 52 ancient skeletons from present-day Armenia and Artsakh spanning 7,800 years and combined this dataset with 206 mitochondrial genomes of modern Armenians. We also included previously published data of seven neighboring populations (n = 482). Coalescence-based analyses suggest that the population size in this region rapidly increased after the Last Glacial Maximum ca. 18 kya. We find that the lowest genetic distance in this dataset is between modern Armenians and the ancient individuals, as also reflected in both network analyses and discriminant analysis of principal components. We used approximate Bayesian computation to test five different demographic scenarios explaining the formation of the modern Armenian gene pool. Despite well documented cultural shifts in the South Caucasus across this time period, our results strongly favor a genetic continuity model in the maternal gene pool. This has implications for interpreting prehistoric migration dynamics and cultural shifts in this part of the world.

Margaryan and Derenko et al., Eight Millennia of Matrilineal Genetic Continuity in the South Caucasus, Current Biology 27, 1–6 July 10, 2017, DOI: 10.1016/j.cub.2017.05.087

Update 30/06/2017: There are only 10 mitogenomes in this paper that are older than or contemporaneous with the Yamnaya culture of Eastern Europe (Neolithic to Early Bronze Age). But it's pretty clear that the sampled ancient groups could not have contributed maternal ancestry to the Yamnaya people, because most of their mtDNA haplogroups and/or subclades look unusual in the context of the mtDNA diversity of Eneolithic/Bronze Age steppe groups (bolded results below). For more on the controversy surrounding the "southern" ancestry in Yamnaya, see here and here.

H2+152 5900-5600 BC
H15a1 5900-5600 BC
I1 5925-5717 BC
U8b1a1 4486-4320 BC
K3 3000-2800 BC
R1a1 3000-2800 BC
J1b1b1 3000-2800 BC
K3 3039-2864 BC
H14b2 3449-3091 BC
T1 3500-3200 BC

Interestingly, what isn't mentioned in this paper is that the post-Early Bronze Age (EBA) maternal gene pool in the South Caucasus appears to have been influenced by migrations from the Pontic-Caspian steppe. Note, for instance, the presence of haplogroups U4a, U2e1e and U5a1b in the samples dated to the Middle Bronze Age (MBA), Late Bronze Age (LBA) and Early Iron Age (EIA), respectively. These markers look more at home on the steppe than in the South Caucasus.

See also...

Armenian confirmation bias

Strong mitogenomic continuity on the Armenian Plateau since the early Neolithic

47 comments:

bellbeakerblogger said...

Well, there's the other half of Yamnaya.

Davidski said...

@BBB

I'm assuming you're being ironic. The pre-Yamnaya mitogenomes from this paper don't match the "southern" mtDNA on the Bronze Age steppe.

I1 5925-5717 BC NEO
H2+152 5900-5600 BC NEO
H15a1 5900-5600 BC NEO
K3 3000-2800 BC EBA
R1a1 3000-2800 BC EBA
K3 3039-2864 BC EBA
H14b2 3449-3091 BC EBA
T1 3500-3200 BC EBA
J1b1b1 3000-2800 BC EBA
U8b1a1 4486-4320 BC CHL

See list of relevant steppe samples here...

http://eurogenes.blogspot.com.au/2016/10/steppe-boys-farmer-girls.html

Davidski said...

So now we have pre-Yamnaya mtDNA from the Southern and Northern Caucasus (the latter from Maikop) and it includes lineages that aren't on the steppe during the Bronze Age. Interesting.

bellbeakerblogger said...

I'm looking at Figure S1 in the supplementary. Unless I'm reading this wrong, their correspondence analysis basically has Ararat, Erzrum and Artsakh and the ancients right on top of each other. So the specific subclades in so little data may not be relevant quite yet.

bellbeakerblogger said...

"The plot clearly shows the clustering of the ancient group together with the modern European, Armenian, and Caucasian populations."

Olympus Mons said...

Gosh!!! the first Dna for Shulaveri Shomu!!! And Aknashen (as with Aratashen), therefore the isolate ones.
I1
H2+152
H15a1

Samuel Andrews said...

I've almost completed a mtDNA haplotype analysis of 20,000 samples from West Eurasia. I'll post about it at my blog within a week. Sadly though all the studies with Caucasus mtDNA are behind paywall. Hopefully this study gives access to the Armenian mitogenomes.

George Okromchedlishvili said...

These are from Armenia basically. Hardly telling about what could have mixed with Yamnaya

bellbeakerblogger said...

I stand corrected. Didn't look at the subclades, just went off the aforementioned figure S1.

If Ivanova is correct that Maikop represents an expansion from Iran, not the s Caucasus, then possibly this had also been occuring in the North Caspian as well. CHG?

Rob said...

Majkop is just the northern tip of a horizon of chalcolithic Kurgan barrows in southern Caucasus and East Anatolia which date to 4000 - 3000 BC.
These are different & earlier to the 2200 BC kurgans which look like movements south from north.

Nirjhar007 said...


Dave,
All the Polish Iron Age are I1, G and I2. Does that mean R1a arrived recently from India ?? .

Davidski said...

What do you mean by all? They're three samples.

And why India, why not from near the Lithuanian border, where a 100% R1a-M417 population lived during the Bronze Age?

http://eurogenes.blogspot.com.au/2017/03/the-genetic-history-of-northern-europe.html

Don't worry about Poland, worry about India. AIT is a reality.

EastPole said...

Davidski
“What do you mean by all? They're three samples.

And why India, why not from near the Lithuanian border, where a 100% R1a-M417 population lived during the Bronze Age?

http://eurogenes.blogspot.com.au/2017/03/the-genetic-history-of-northern-europe.html

Don't worry about Poland, worry about India. AIT is a reality.”


David, where do you think R1a-Z93 originated? Corded Ware or Yamnaya?
Very old Z93 clades are found in Russia, Poland and neighboring western Europe:

http://s17.postimg.org/z1rqr91hr/screenshot_244.png

AIT is not a reality IMO.
Theory that Indo-European language speakers, who called themselves Aryans, stream into India sometime around 2,000 BC – 1,500 BC bringing with them Sanskrit and a distinctive set of cultural practices is not proven.
In my opinion Sanskrit language and Vedic culture is the original Indian creation, not an import from the steppe or from Europe.
They were influenced by some IE from the steppe as this is the only way similarity between Sanskrit and Slavic languages can be explained. But nobody on the steppe spoke Sanskrit or worshiped Vedic gods the way Indians did.

As I’ve shown in previous tread Tocharian and Turkic languages borrowed from Slavic. What was the Y-DNA of the tribe from which they borrowed all those Slavic words? I think that if it can be shown that some R1a-Z93 present in Turkic tribes was originally from Corded Ware and not an import from India and Iran then R1a-Z93 original language was related to Slavic.

Salden said...

So Elhaik's at it again with yet another paper denying Ashkenazi Jews have a large amount of Levantine ancestry out of some crusade.

http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fgene.2017.00087/full

Needless to say, the good posters over at Anthrogenetica weren't impressed by it.

Davidski said...

@East Pole

I think that the proto-Aryans lived in far Eastern Europe and moved to South Asia during the Bronze Age. I also think that the data currently available supports the idea that this was an invasion.

By the way, I updated the blog entry.

Coldmountains said...

@EastPole
Z93 has nothing to do with Slavs . It is indeed from Corded Ware but Corded Ware was neither Slavic nor Balto-Slavic but ancestral to both Indo-Iranians and Balto-Slavs. R1a-Z93 among Turks is from Iranics and of steppe origin. There was no contact between Corded Ware and Turks

EastPole said...

@Coldmountains
“Z93 has nothing to do with Slavs . It is indeed from Corded Ware but Corded Ware was neither Slavic nor Balto-Slavic but ancestral to both Indo-Iranians and Balto-Slavs. R1a-Z93 among Turks is from Iranics and of steppe origin. There was no contact between Corded Ware and Turks.”

I used to think exactly as you. But now there is more and more evidence that Indo-Iranians are derived from Yamnaya and not from Corded Ware, i.e. they are closer to Yamnaya then to Sintashta and Andronovo.
If Indo-Iranians came from Yamnaya, then what languages were spoken in Sintashta and Andronovo?
It can be that Yamnaya was IE, Sintashta/Andronovo was Slavic and Indo-Iranians came from Yamnaya influenced by Sintashta/Andronovo, which would explain some links between Indo-Iranian and Slavic languages.

Slavic influences on Tocharian and Turkic also need explanations:

http://s4.postimg.org/qoj7p2525/Tocharian_Slavic.jpg

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/2561023_Reconstructing_the_Evolutionary_History_of_Indo-European_Languages_Using_Answer_Set_Programming

It is all speculation, I am just searching for best answers. You should also try to move with new data.

Coldmountains said...

@EastPole
There is no way that Indo-Iranians are from Yamnaya. Yamnaya was R1b-Z2103 and Yamnayas spoke some Centum dialects of PIE. Indo-Iranians are from Corded Ware>Middle Dnhepr> Abashevo>Sintashta/Andronovo. The question is only if they were similar to some early Corded Ware people in the Baltic region which lacked EEF or if they carried from the beggining much EEF like later Sintashta. There are no slavic influences on Tocharian. Slavic languages did not even exist when the the ancestor of Tocharian was spoken in the East European steppe

Slumbery said...

Coldmountains

"Yamnayas spoke some Centum dialects of PIE"

How do you know that?

Ryan said...

@Slumbery - it's a hunch based on Yamnaya and Centum speaking groups both having higher frequencies of R1b. I think it's a good hunch, and is probably segregating based on time - ie groups that centum-satem transition happened in CWC, and anyone derived from CWC is satem and anyone deriving from earlier splits from PIE is centum.

Slumbery said...

@Ryan

It would pose some creative challenge to derive Indo-Aryans from CWC. Not coming together with autosomal DNA on the detailed level, neither really with archaic Y-DNA.
Also the fact that any satem - centum differentiation is bound to be ages younger than the R1b - R1a branching warns us to be careful.

Not too mention that the satem - centum differentiation can be the effect of a later (Bronze age?) geographical sprachbund, instead of being "genetic". Meaning that the branching of IE can pretty much pre-date the satem-centum differentiation.

So this speculation is, well, too speculative.

Jijnasu said...

"But nobody on the steppe spoke Sanskrit or worshiped Vedic gods the way Indians did."
I do agree no-one one the steppe spoke Sanskrit but as regards the vedic gods several of them were probably part of the proto-indo-iranian pantheon and that part of the statement isn't true

Slumbery said...

@Ryan

Some additional thought: if I look at the map of satem and centum languages, the first thing that comes into my mind is that I actually see a separation by time. Groups that moved out first and got separated from the "central" region are centum, then satemisation came and groups that moved out later (or did not move that much at all) are satem. CWC was probably already in disintegrating phase (or even ended) when the change happened and the Eastern end of it (Balts and Slavs) got satem, while the western end (Germans) is centum.
This also explain why Tocharian was centum. They moved out early and far and got separated.

Ric Hern said...

@Slumbery

So did Centum developed independently in Hittite and Tocharian ?

Ric Hern said...

When did Irish become a VSO language ? Was it because of some outside influence on Indo-European Migrants ?

Ric Hern said...

If R1b arrived later in Central Europe than R1a, should there not be a bigger VSO influence visible in Germanic, Baltic or Slavic ?

Slumbery said...

@Ric Hern


Independent development not impossible, but see my post about time based differentiation. Both Hittite and Tocharian are early separations.

I think the VSO question is not particularly for me, but word orders can change back and forth within the same language easily. So the word order is not diagnostic of the deep origin of a language at all.

Gioiello said...

There is also an mt K1a1b1e like mine but with the extra mutations 114T 189G 16093C. I have the extra mutation 11204C, but basal subclades are found in Tuscany. There is someone who does think that this haplogroup came from Caucasus?
3. HQ176413(Italy) FTDNA K1a1b1e 14-SEP-2010
A73G A263G 309.1C 315.1C C497T A750G T1189C A1438G A1811G A2706G A3480G A4769G C7028T A8860G G9055A T9698C G9932A A10398G A10550G T11204C T11299C A11467G A11470G G11719A G11914A A12308G G12372A C14167T C14766T T14798C A15326G A15924G T16224C T16311C T16519C
An American woman, linked to my mother not more than 5 generations ago, hasn't the mutation in 11204, thus demonstrating that also my Tuscan line was basal only a few generations ago, and other basal subclades are in Tuscany and in Sicily from Pisans emigrated to Sicily after the Florentine conquest of Pisa at the beginning of the 15th century.

Ryan said...

@Slumbery - "Also the fact that any satem - centum differentiation is bound to be ages younger than the R1b - R1a branching warns us to be careful. "

I'm not saying that's where the split happened, just that satem speaking ethnicities seem to be much more R1a rich than centum speaking ethnicities, and that this probably reflects earlier divisions.

Not sure how you could say it doesn't fit Y-DNA. R1a is most prevalent with CWC.

"Groups that moved out first and got separated from the "central" region are centum, then satemisation came and groups that moved out later (or did not move that much at all) are satem."

This is exactly what I'm suggesting.

On Germanic, I'd just add that Scandinavia is pretty heavily R1b still.

Slumbery said...

@Ryan

"Not sure how you could say it doesn't fit Y-DNA. R1a is most prevalent with CWC."

But not the branch that is dominant in Indo_Iranians (at it is rare and probably later-coming even present day in the ex-CWC area), also no other European haplogroups of the CWC area are bought to Asia. I would except more HgI and EEF turning up if CWC was THE center of differentiation.

"I'm not saying that's where the split happened, just that satem speaking ethnicities seem to be much more R1a rich than centum speaking ethnicities, and that this probably reflects earlier divisions."

I can't argue with this observation, but I can add, that this can be totally accidental, meaning the only cause is the position of the bulk of these haplogroups when the satemisation happened.

Ric Hern said...

How many Indo-European languages are VSO languages ? Why would so few Indo-European Languages change their wordorder completely ?

postneo said...

VSO like morphology splits predate IE

Vincent said...

@Ric Hern

"When did Irish become a VSO language ? Was it because of some outside influence on Indo-European Migrants ?"

There are noticeable and non-random syntactic parallels (including VSO word order) between Insular Celtic and Afroasiatic languages. See here: http://www.jolr.ru/files/(101)jlr2012-8(160-164).pdf

EastPole said...

@Vincent
“There are noticeable and non-random syntactic parallels (including VSO word order) between Insular Celtic and Afroasiatic languages. See here: http://www.jolr.ru/files/(101)jlr2012-8(160-164).pdf”


There are also many parallels (including VSO word order) between Celtic and Slavic:


http://s17.postimg.org/sqieggrtb/screenshot_245.png


https://books.google.pl/books?id=T4uLBQAAQBAJ&pg=PA218&lpg=PA218&dq=slavic+vso+svo&source=bl&ots=t9o7KP4hlS&sig=C_ZNbj5p8Qvd2CTNGCsKpXh33Kg&hl=pl&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiDi_7ir-bUAhXIbRQKHS8qAawQ6AEINDAB#v=onepage&q=slavic&f=false


http://www.korenine.si/zborniki/zbornik06/serafimov_celtoslav06.pdf

Ric Hern said...

Interesting. Thanks.

Ric Hern said...

Thanks.

Coldmountains said...

@Slumberry

R1a-Z645 was found in Corded Wäre which is ancestral to Indo-iranian Z93/Z94. Alsowe have no Samples from Abashevo which was likely ancestral to Indo-Iranians. Indo-Iraniane are derived f4om Corded Ware forest steppe tribes.

Vincent said...

The author of that PDF is not what I'd call a reputable source. Elsewhere he is claiming that Thracians were basically Slavs. Here's a quote from one of the nutjob's ridiculous blog posts: "Slavs was just an alternative name for the Getae, just like Hellenes is an alternative name for the Greeks, and Germans is an alternative name for the people, who call themselves Deutschen."

http://sparotok.blogspot.it/2013/09/who-were-thracians.html?m=1

Rob said...

lol that same author also claims Gauls and ancient Cretean were Slavs

Arza said...

@ EastPole
But nobody on the steppe spoke Sanskrit

Hmm. I'm regularly using Sanskrit dictionary as a dictionary of Very Old Polish, so the language of the steppes was rather closer to Sanskrit, at least when it comes to the vocabulary. I see Sanskrit as a snapshot which preserved some old forms and especially monosyllabic roots and Balto-Slavic as an uninterrupted continuation that preserved the rules how the words are created and how they interact with each other.

Mycenaean genomes will be a test for your "Central Asian Slavs" hypothesis. Greek is slightly closer to Slavic than to Indo-Iranian... maybe Sintashta was Mycenaean? Greco-Aryan with a Slavic twist.

PS Mam z rzadka używane konto tam, gdzie bywał Dzielny Lew. Spóźniłem się na najciekawsze dyskusje. Co do Mickiewicza... przydałoby się spisać w końcu, ale wciąż gonię króliczka. I racja, wyjątkowo ciekawe czasy idą.

Ten pdf z korenine... miazga.

Nirjhar007 said...

and that brings us to modern y-dna empires of Europa :
http://brilliantmaps.com/europe-dna-borders/

Gioiello said...

Anyway the pathway of this Armenian K1a1b1e is from Italy for the mutation in 16093C:
5. JQ704056 Behar K1a1b1e 07-APR-2012
A73G A263G 315.1C C497T A750G T1189C A1438G A1811G A2706G A3480G A4769G C7028T A8521G A8860G G9055A T9698C G9932A A10398G A10550G T11299C A11467G A11470G G11719A G11914A A12308G G12372A C14167T C14766T T14798C A15326G A15924G T16093C T16224C T16311C T16519C
7. JQ706057(Italy) Behar K1a1b1e 07-APR-2012
A73G A263G C497T A750G T1189C A1438G A1811G A2706G A3480G A4769G C7028T A8860G G9055A T9698C G9932A A10398G A10550G T11299C A11467G A11470G G11719A G11914A A12308G G12372A C14167T C14766T T14798C A15326G A15924G T16093C T16224C T16311C T16519C

Armenian K1a1b1e is only 3400-3200 years old, i.e. very likely belonged to the Indo-European component in the Armenian pool come from the Balkans (29% of the Armenian autosome).
Mine is a sample as to an inquiring about Y and mt DNA should be done: not on haplogroups percentage, but each haplotype in its pathway.

EastPole said...

@Arza
“Mycenaean genomes will be a test for your "Central Asian Slavs" hypothesis. Greek is slightly closer to Slavic than to Indo-Iranian... maybe Sintashta was Mycenaean? Greco-Aryan with a Slavic twist”

I don’t know. Mycenaeans may have nothing to do with Slavs. We will see. I have recently discovered that Eleusis was founded by Thracians:

https://books.google.pl/books?id=ds1Wg01wzeYC&pg=PA22&lpg=PA22&dq=Eleusis+Thracian&source=bl&ots=au_Cq4g-K-&sig=99CIUdAk7w-qRgT_3MYirvL73zo&hl=pl&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjq4fzy3-fUAhUGbhQKHSLMAzsQ6AEIOTAC#v=onepage&q=Eleusis%20Thracian&f=false

So Slavic influences in Greek may be from or via Thracians.

Orphic and Pythagorean influences came to Greece from the North Eastern Hyperboreans with or via Thracians. When you go deep into it you will see many similarities with Rigveda.

PS. Miałem konto tam, gdzie bywał Dzielny Lew, ale po awarii komputera straciłem hasło. Po nieudanych próbach logowania mój IP chyba został zablokowany. Wojewoda tam robi ciekawe rzeczy. Chętnie bym wrócił, ale nie mam kontaktu. Poza tym nie mamy tam moderatora, a użeranie się z trollami zniechęca. Wydaje mi się, że trzymam króliczka za uszy, na 95%. Kluczem jest zrozumienie religii i ustalenie z pomocą genetyki co skąd pochodzi.

ak2014b said...

"What do you mean by all? They're three samples."

Not to do with anything else Nirjhar007 claimed. Just mentioning that four, out of a total of six male Iron Age genomes from Poland made available so far, have now been analysed. The results are I1, I2, and 2 x G2, thereby also confirming the ones that were already reported a few days earlier. A further Medieval sample being I1 was also confirmed.

Bear in mind that the results of the remaining two males aren't yet known and all 6 of the male Iron Age Polish samples are from Kowalewko.

Gioiello said...

The H15a1 sample, 7900-7600 YBP, is in line with Behar 2012b ages

H15a1 6136.3 2389.3

and is a basal clade
21. MF362769(Armenian) Margaryan H15a1 29-JUN-2017
T55C T57C A263G 309.1C 309.2C 315.1C A750G A1438G A4769G T6253C A8860G T11410C C14953T A15326G

H15 has been found in Iran and Yemen
1. KC911292(Iran) Derenko H15 20-NOV-2013
T55C A56T T57C A263G 315.1C A750G A1438G A4122G A4769G T6253C A8860G G14384A A15326G T16092C T16357C T16519C
2. KM986579(Yemen) Vyas H15 21-MAR-2015
T55C T57C T131C T152C A263G 309.1C 315.1C A750G A1438G G3693A A4122G A4769G T6253C T7609C A8860G C9731T A15326G T16092C T16519C

i.e. the oldest diffusion of the haplogroup, but H15a is European and also H15b, with diffusion of H15b1 and H15b2 both to Europe and Caucasus.
With these data it is difficult to say that H15 was born in Middle East, Caucasus or Iran rather than Europe. Of course only the aDNA of the oldest subclades could say more. It is also difficult to say that H15a1 was born in Armenia and it is there since then, but of course H15a1a, H15a1a1, H15a1b may have had an expansion from Caucasus.

Gioiello said...

CRS A263G A750G A1438G A4769G A8860G A15326G
H15 T55C T57C T6253C
1. KC911292(Iran) Derenko H15 20-NOV-2013
T55C A56T T57C A263G 315.1C A750G A1438G A4122G A4769G T6253C A8860G G14384A A15326G T16092C T16357C T16519C
2. KM986579(Yemen) Vyas H15 21-MAR-2015
T55C T57C T131C T152C A263G 309.1C 315.1C A750G A1438G G3693A A4122G A4769G T6253C T7609C A8860G C9731T A15326G T16092C T16519C
H15a T11410C
H15a1 C14953T
H15a1a C11143T
H15a1a1 C16366T
H15a1b 44.1C T146C G11914A C16184T
H15b T3847C
H15b1 A15715G
H15b2 T8699C T13818C
Of course to say that KC911292 and KM986579 are H15* is only an artifice due to the lacking of a third sample with some of the three mutations (A4122G T16092C and T16519C) they have in common. These samples belong to a possible H15c come to Iran and Yemen after a long journey we don't know from where.

814 אורנה ניצבת said...

H15a1a
Levant
Black Sea
Ukraine
Cechy
Holland
Israel

Short family travel.
Allergic to FAVA.
G6PD

Any relatives?