I found a really good
archaeological paper on the agricultural transition in what is now eastern Ukraine. It helps to explain not only the origins of agriculture on the Western Steppe, but probably also the ancestry of Khvalynsk, Yamnaya and other closely related steppe pastoralist groups, as a three-way mixture between North Eurasian foragers and early Balkan and Caucasus farmers. This fits very nicely with my qpAdm models showing significant Late Neolithic Lengyel-related input in Yamnaya (see
here).
Abstract: This paper presents the results of the first archaeobotanical investigation of NeolithicChalcolitich-period sites in eastern Ukraine and southwest Russia. The goal of this research is to understand the timeline of the earliest appearance and possible geographical origins of domesticated plants species in the region of study. The research conducted consists of the retrieval and study of macrobotanical remains and the analysis of plant impressions in pottery. Three possible corridors of influence upon agriculture in eastern Ukraine are postulated in this paper, originating from the Balkans, the Caucasus, and the Eurasian steppe.
At the same time, in contrast to what many still claim in the comments here and elsewhere, it's extremely unlikely now that Y-chromosome haplogroups R1a and R1b were introduced onto the steppe by these farmers (see
here and
here). Clearly, they appear to be paternal markers native to Eastern Europe, in so far as they've been present in the region since at least the Mesolithic.
It's rather improbable that we can say the same about the R1a and R1b in the Near East and South Asia, which of course means that we're edging closer and closer to solving the Indo-European
Urheimat question, because R1a-M417 and R1b-M269 are by far the best candidates for the main Y-haplogroups of the Proto-Indo-Europeans (see
here).
Citation...
Giedre Motuzaite-Matuzeviciute,
The earliest appearance of domesticated plant species and their origins on the western fringes of the Eurasian Steppe,
Documenta Praehistorica, Vol 39 (2012), DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.4312/dp.39.1
See also...
Steppe boys, farmer girls
Two starkly different Neolithic traditions in the Lower Volga basin
That's all right what you say, but don't forget what I think having demonstrated from so long: that Yamnaya had only some subclades of R1b, whereas the origin and the expansion (and also of the IE languages) happened from Italy or at least Western Europe after the Younger Dryas. The same very likely for R1a, with a different pathway... now that also my theory that Jewish Ashkenazi Q3 derived from Italy (of course also Q came like R from the Siberian corridor):
ReplyDeletehttps://bmcevolbiol.biomedcentral.com/…/1…/s12862-016-0870-2
"In Europe there are at least two branches: one in Dutch and Germans, and another in Ashkenazi Jews. These branches split from a common root 3000+/-700 years ago (Table 2, Additional file 2: Table S1): before the Jewish migration into Europe in Roman times [46]. Further screening in both Europe and the Levant is needed to determine whether the ancestors of the Ashkenazi acquired this lineage from the Levantine homeland or from the European host populations".
From your tree it seems clear to me that Ashkenazim introgressed from Italy. Once again!
I think it's highly unlikely that Mesolithic Eastern European foragers got their R1a and R1b from Italy.
ReplyDeleteIt's a pity that we don't know the languages of North Balkan farmers. If they were G2a2 then most probably they were Hattic/NWC like languages speakers.
ReplyDeleteOn the other side we have good knowledge of Near Eastern/Caucasus farmers languages. And we see a lot off lexical parallels in PIE.
Wine in Kartvelian. tawr Semitic, GU(D) Sumerian bull, ox. Agro 'field' AGARAK in Sumerian, awara in Hurrian. Also the word for donkey (Ass, Asinus) can be of Afro-Asiatic origin.
So the million dollar question is with whom and where PIE had contacts with the bearers of this words. This question is also intrinsically related to the CHG rich component in Steppe EMBA.
It's also interesting to note that in IE founder myths the role of two brothers is very important. Their reconstructed names are Manu and Yemi. And we really have two brother lineages. :) Of course it is a just coincidence.
ReplyDelete@ Davidski
ReplyDelete"I think it's highly unlikely that Mesolithic Eastern European foragers got their R1a and R1b from Italy".
Of course I think that the expansion after the Younger Dryas from Italy happened in all directions, so they may have come to Samara also from other places, like Balkans, Central Europe or even Northern Europe, but I wouldn't search for other places.
Where are in Russia to-day R1b1-L389*, R-V88*, R-V88-M18, R-V88-V35, R-M335 etc etc? They aren't because they weren't. And above all there isn't R-L51 and subclades, neither my R-L23-Z2110 and all the subclades till R-L23-CTS9219 expanded clearly from West...
@Gioiello
ReplyDeleteYour stories about the so-called Italian refugem are getting more and more bizarre. I’m afraid soon we’ll have a chance to hear breathtaking stories with Biblical narrative about all living creatures coming from the God-blessed Italian refugem.
And my special gift for you (migration routes of R1b folks)
http://s020.radikal.ru/i707/1702/d4/44302d880037.jpg
@ Azarov Dmitry
ReplyDeleteAs you said that my theory are "bizarre", I permit calling you @ Bizarov...
1) About Bible and Jews , first of all I am an atheist, and perhaps you should read the review I did on 2009 to the book of Shlomo Sand The invention of the Jewish people, and I suggest you to read also the book (if you know Hebrew you may read also Matai ve-ech humtza ha-'am ha-Yehudi):
"The Invention of the Jewish People of Shlomo Sand is certainly one of the most important work in historiography in this beginning of the 21st century. Being he able to master Hebrew beside the most important European languages, he has given a complete and deep picture of the question. Following the recent methodological theories on the non neutrality of the research (every result is determined more by the project than by the data, which are used to demonstrate that and not the contrary as it should be, and he has had the kindness to recognize that the Italian philosopher and historian Benedetto Croce had already theorized this by his theory of the "contemporaneity" of historiography), he has been able to reveal all the assumptions of many knots of the Jewish history. There are no proof that Jewish history began with Abraham in 19th century BC and probably neither that Jewish history began in the 13th century BC after the Sea Peoples invasion and the fall of Hittite Empire, which is the theory currently followed on the history books. And there are no proof either of the kings around the 10th century. No Saul, no David, no Salomon. No temple. Jewish history (and the writing of the Bible) began in the 6th century, after the Exile. From there Jewish history is a mix of facts and theories, used for demonstrating political agendas. The book is very rich of these episodes till the present. First of all the theory of a Jewish race that descends directly from Abraham and that justifies the theory of the aliyah, the return to "promised land" for the Zionists. The proofs have never supported these theories: neither archeology nor genetics. Not only the Jewish communities in the world are genetically linked to the peoples among them they are living (Ashkenazim are autosomally Europeans, etc.), but, in spite of the funds generously given to the most famous Jewish scholars, they have failed (no Cohen Modal Haplotype, etc.). Every people has born from the fusion during many thousands of years of different supplies. If the law that forbids weddings of Jews with other people will be maintained, after some thousands of years also Jews of Israel will be a "people", genetically determined. The same happened to Ashkenazim, which are the result of a thousand years of inbreeding of not more than 25,000 individuals of different origin, mostly Italians, Germans of the Rhine Valley, East Europeans, Khazarians and perhaps someone who escaped from Middle East.
But also Sand, as every researcher, has his agenda, and it is the present that urges him: "The ideal project for solving the century-long conflict and sustaining the closely woven existence of Jews and Arabs would be the creation of a democratic binational state between the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan River" (p. 311).
But we must see if this is possible, i.e. if the Arab fundamentalism will accept this helping hand. Beside Croce I would quote another Italian historian (and politician): "Perché uno uomo che voglia fare in tutte le parte professione di buono conviene ruini infra tanti che non sono buoni" (Il Principe)".
2) About you map and the origin of R1b from Southern Asia, I'll believe you when some aDNA from there will be found older than Villabruna, Italy, of 14000 years ago.
@Gioliello
ReplyDelete1) About Bible and Jews , first of all I am an atheist, and perhaps you should read the review I did on 2009 to the book of Shlomo Sand The invention of the Jewish people, and I suggest you to read also the book (if you know Hebrew you may read also Matai ve-ech humtza ha-'am ha-Yehudi):
Ok. I got it. Jesus was Italian and all mammals, R1b folks and Jews came from Italy as well. You are so pathetic.
@Azarov Dmitry
ReplyDeleteI've got some bad news for you.
Based on current and upcoming ancient DNA results, your R1b expansion map is about as likely as the Italian R1b refugium theory.
@ Davidski
ReplyDelete"@Azarov Dmitry
I've got some bad news for you.
Based on current and upcoming ancient DNA results, your R1b expansion map is about as likely as the Italian R1b refugium theory".
That Bizarov is out of head was clear to everyone, but about my theory consider that in its whole I expressed above, and I have Villabruna 14000 years ago, and he has nothing. I am seeing that he is an R1a1a1* (Ysearch WBSJG). If he gave some terminal SNP, I could say if his ancestors came from West (Northern West). Anyway if you get news, give them. We are ready.
Put the kettle on and wait patiently.
ReplyDelete@Gioiello aka Bizarre Italian
ReplyDeleteI am seeing that he is an R1a1a1* (Ysearch WBSJG). If he gave some terminal SNP, I could say if his ancestors came from West.
Ha-ha-ha-ha. You gonna tell me the story about migration of my R1a subclade from Italy? You are really pathetic.
@ Bizarov
ReplyDeleteI didn't say that you came from Italy, but certainly from Northern-Western Europe. Anyway Italy, beyond R1a-M420*, has also the oldest R-Z93*
R-Z93 Z2479/M746/S4582/V3664 * Z93/F992/S2024500 ybp, TMRCA CI 95% 5400 4000 ybp" class="age" formed 5000 ybp, TMRCA 4700 ybp
⦁ id:ERS256938ITA [IT-CA]
R-Z93*
⦁ id:YF07986 ITA [IT-SA] [very likely Grisi, an Italian-American who is in contact with me]
⦁ id:YF03565
⦁ id:YF01991 RUS
I think that R1a* was in the Italian Refugium with R1b1. We'll see next if it will be found there, when Reich & Co test some aDNA from Italy beyond the 5 samples tested so far.
@ Al Bundy
I make scientific hypotheses waiting for proves or disproves, and not sentimental journeys...
Whats the Polish GAC news mate?.
ReplyDeleteRatna,
ReplyDeleteR1a is very rare in Italy, I think it can be brought by Greeks and some Easterners, even Persians arrived in Italy . Italy is a sort of genetic trash bin of Europe and Mediterranean ! ;) .
But of course some more aDNA is a must .
Italy is a sort of genetic trash bin of Europe and Mediterranean!
ReplyDeleteSort of like India.
Don't troll.
ReplyDeleteSort of like India.
Don't troll. .
India has a very good frequency you know it :) . And of course some revelations are coming .
@Davidski,
ReplyDeleteYes very interesting. what is it I always say? follow the Spelt wheat... why don't you do that. Ctrl-F and spelt.
Spelt, a rarely cultivated wheat, (and a trademark also of Bell beakers for that matter) was a trademark of the Shulaveri-Shomu in the 6th millenia BC in Georgia... when they disbanded in 4.9KBC you have agriculture showing north of Caucasus and spelt being cultivated in the north Caucasus as well. A coincidence, I am sure.
ReplyDeleteAB,
Yes but aDNA can do many things , Ratna was right on Mesolithic R1b in Italy .
About PIE issue Latins were very close to PIE as well, though attested later to Indic and Greek . It must be remembered also, that many languages went extinct from PIE world , some were lately discovered like Anatolian and Tocharian , that changed many aspects . Certainly there are others waiting to be discovered , we even don't have a good document on Scythian languages of 1st Millennium BC.
So even though Linguistics is more matured than aDNA , it also has a fair distance to travel.
Shhhiiittt... just do Ctrl F and write "Shulaveri-Shomutepe Culture" and read from that to the end... they tell it all.
ReplyDeleteAwkward that you David find this paper interesting. I thought that Steppe was the epicenter of all creation.
OM,
ReplyDeleteI always ask you to give reference : Here on Wiki We read :
''The earliest archaeological evidence of spelt is from the fifth millennium BC in Transcaucasia, north-east of the Black Sea, though the most abundant and best-documented archaeological evidence of spelt is in Europe.[7] Remains of spelt have been found in some later Neolithic sites (2500–1700 BC) in Central Europe.[7][8] During the Bronze Age, spelt spread widely in central Europe. In the Iron Age (750–15 BC), spelt became a principal wheat species in southern Germany and Switzerland, and by 500 BC, it was in common use in southern Britain.[7]''
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spelt#History
And of course some revelations are coming.
ReplyDeleteYes, I know, but you won't like these revelations.
This is informative regarding OM's suggestion :
ReplyDelete''The assortment of domesticated species found on the sites of the Aratashen-Shulaveri-Shomutepe culture during the 1960s to 1980s (Lisitsyna and Prischepenko, 1977) is evidence for a large variety that includes hulled and naked barley (Hordeum vulgare), einkorn (Triticum monococcum), emmer (T. dicoccum), hexaploid wheats (T. spelta, T. aestivum), and millets (Panicum miliaceum, Setaria italica). However, some of these identifications have been questioned (Zohary and Hopf, 2004). All of these species were cultivated in the northern part of western Asia in the eighth to seventh millennia bc, and the introduction of most of them to the Caucasus seems probable.
However, recent excavations have confirmed some originality of plant use in the Neolithic Caucasus: hexaploid wheat (T. aestivum) largely predominates over emmer, with einkorn being very rare (Hovsepyan and Willcox, 2008; Lyonnet et al., 2012). Even in the Mil steppe culture (Kamiltepe), where naked barley (Hordeum vulgare) is the main cultivated crop and the percentage of wheat is very low, the only wheat identified is Triticum aestivum (Lyonnet et al., 2012). This free-threshing wheat is of particular significance because it is quite rare in Neolithic sites in western Asia during the same period (seventh–sixth millennia bc) (Guliyev and Nishiaki, 2012). This evidence suggests that not all domesticated plants were introduced from western Asia, but some species could have been locally domesticated.
In fact, the naked hexaploid wheat (T. aestivum) is a derivative of the hulled variety, spelt (T. spelta), which was also reported from sixth-millennium bc contexts on the Kura River plain (Arukhlo) (Zohary and Hopf, 2004). Molecular studies of hexaploid wheats show that this Asian spelt originated from the hybridization of a tetraploid wheat with the diploid wild grass Aegilops tauschii (squarrosa) (Petersen et al., 2006). Other studies have shown that populations of Aegilops tauschii native to Armenia and the southwest part of the Caspian Sea belt are closest to the genome D found in hexaploid wheat (Dvorak et al., 1998), confirming this as an area where hexaploids originated (Kilian et al., 2009).''
http://www.oxfordhandbooks.com/view/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199935413.001.0001/oxfordhb-9780199935413-e-13
Yes Dave , cause I will love them .
ReplyDeleteBut I am not a prophet ;) .
@ Gordon
ReplyDeleteHow may Italian R-Z93*
R-Z93 Z2479/M746/S4582/V3664 * Z93/F992/S202 4500 ybp, TMRCA CI 95% 5400 4000 ybp" class="age" formed 5000 ybp, TMRCA 4700 ybp
⦁ id:ERS256938 ITA [IT-CA]
have come from Indian subcontinent?
R-Z94 Z95/F3568 * Z94/F3105/S3404000 ybp, TMRCA CI 95% 5400 4000 ybp" class="age" formed 4700 ybp, TMRCA 4700 ybp
R-Y37 Y39/M560 * Z29078/M12253 * Z29076/M12222+2 SNPs 3000 ybp, TMRCA CI 95% 5100 3000 ybp" formed 4000 ybp, TMRCA 4000 ybp
R-Y37*
⦁ id:ERR445247
⦁ id:NA20897 GIH
⦁ id:HG04194 BEB
Even though you are an academic and I am not, only a retired teacher of the High School, don't ask me what I think about Euphratians. I have an high consideration of friendship.
About Italy as a "sink", ask Jews, also the best and more open minded like Ted Kandell, how did they come out after fighting against me.
I am not fighting against anyone . But valid possibilities should be mentioned always .
ReplyDeleteIndia is heavily under sampled . You need a paper of about 2000 samples to get a hint!.
And please don't call Gordon. I am not him . I call you Ratna, as it was your Avatar and I find, the name more convenient, to write ;) .
I have to explain the meaning of the "fighting". When there has been a Jew and an European close, for Jews the European was always a "cryptic Jew" etc. I have demonstrated that pretty always happened the other way around. So you all think that an "Italian" always came from elsewhere, but as to R1b1* so far the result is: Italy 1 - Rest of the World 0. I am waiting confident the aDNA next to come...
ReplyDeleteP.S. I used the nickname "Rathna" on Anthrogenica, but you, not being "Gordon", know very well Sanskrit and write "Ratna"...
Ultimately both R1a and R1b arrived there from Central Asia during Mesolithic, they are not 'native' to Eastern Europe.
ReplyDeleteWe need aDNA from Central Asia, East Asia and various parts of the steppes.
Additionally, aDNA & auDNA of R1* individual to see what he was like.
Ratna,
ReplyDeleteYou don't need to be a linguist, to know from which word, the name was taken :) .
@Gioiello
ReplyDeleteEnough with the Jews this Jews that. It's offensive, and I'm not even a Jew.
Imagine if someone here was blaming all Italians for...whatever.
Ultimately both R1a and R1b arrived there from Central Asia during Mesolithic, they are not 'native' to Eastern Europe.
ReplyDeleteYou probably mean Siberia not Central Asia. In any case, Mesolithic forager = indigenous in my book.
Also, the Proto-Indo-Europeans were not pure "Siberian" foragers when they expanded out of Eastern Europe, they were a specific and complex mixture as per my post above.
Did the steppe people have to resort to Three-ways because of a shortage of women?
ReplyDeleteIRC, it looks like the sequence of R so far at the moment in ancient HG is
ReplyDeleteMal'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)
(Mostly cross checked these against "crazy man" Genetiker's blog, so apologies if I got anything wrong from that or my own error in mislabeling or I've over simplified or missed anything).
@ Davidski
ReplyDeleteYours is an argumentum ab auctoritate, anyway a phallacia. I always ask if an assertion is true or wrong and anyway we are waiting for your "proofs" about aDNA. Also of Italians they have spoken a lot, and very frequently without no knowledge... but I am always here and thank you for your hospitality and not using the argumentum ad bandendum. I posted a lot also about "conspiracy", which you forbade me treating of, elsewhere.
Nirjhar007,
ReplyDeletewiki? - Give me a break.
Spelt- sort of (unconfirmed) at Vinca 6th, confirmed at Shulaveri-Shomu at 6th, then at north Caucasus on 5th and Merimde delta Egypt on 5th, in northern Portugal at early 3rd (bell beaker), and common at bell beaker sites in central Europe.
Nirjhar007,
ReplyDeleteJust to be clear.
Arukhlo was the "capital" of Shulaveri.
"Spelt....which was also reported from sixth-millennium bc contexts on the Kura River plain (Arukhlo) (Zohary and Hopf, 2004). Molecular studies of hexaploid wheats show that this Asian spelt originated from the hybridization of a tetraploid wheat with the diploid wild grass Aegilops tauschii (squarrosa) (Petersen et al., 2006)."
Yes, Spelt, locally developed by SHulaveri. What a fascinating bunch they were. :)
And then, all the crazies came out to play...
ReplyDelete@OM
ReplyDeleteIdk if you've seen Dvorak et al 2012; their view is that spelt originates from a cross between hexaploid wheat and emmer, rather than hexaploid free-threshing wheat evolving from spelt. Also, modern European and Asian spelts may have independent origins.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22378960
@Aram
ReplyDeleteAlso the word for donkey (Ass, Asinus) can be of Afro-Asiatic origin.
The word you're thinking of is actually Sumerian - anse. Written Akkadian sometimes used the Sumerogram ANSE, but the actual Akkadian word is imērum. If you remove the case ending, you end up with imēr, which is a cognate of the Hebrew ḥămōr and Arabic ḥamar. Akkadian always drops the first letter of Semitic triconsonantal roots when it's a guttural, so this fits the pattern perfectly, meaning the proto-Semitic word had to be based on the consonants ḥ-m-r.
@Davidski,
ReplyDeleteMaybe the EEFish stuff in Yamnaya is from the Caucasus.
@Matt
ReplyDeleteAG2 is too damaged/contaminated to call, AG3 is female. MtDNA of the latter is R1b though :-)
Matt
ReplyDeleteinteresting list
villabruna will have to be explained eventually but a gap of 7000 years leaves a lot of room
@capra.
ReplyDeleteThanks, will read it.
Spelt might be a skill. one must know how to do the Hybridization.
It could happen several times along the millennia. Odd enough, north Iberia still has lots of Spelt even today.
BTW how much spelt was there in the S-S sites? Are we talking about sparse finds or actual growing it as a preferred crop? I can't find anything about it in recent reports.
ReplyDelete@Capra,
ReplyDeleteDon't think spelt was ever the preferred one. Was something like a last resource because is very resilient to soils and temperature. but not that productive or tasty.
On SS sites I don't think was the one most found... on the other hand to catalog it as spelt I think one needs to have a perfect imprint and that does not happen often.
@Samuel,
ReplyDelete"Maybe the EEFish stuff in Yamnaya is from the Caucasus."
I think so. Davidski asked a couple days ago, what Barcin had to do with R1b... but there is a fact most disregard - Agriculture into Europe did not follow Protocol and went trough Thrace and up west and north. Nope. seemed to jump into Greece and avoid those that lived in north Anatolia at shores of Black sea and in Thrace (althouhg not really). those were the Fikirtepe (which I think became later Shulaveri) that border Barcin for a millennia and ended up with EEFis dna that gave it by 5th millennia to the steppe.
@Samuel
ReplyDeleteMaybe the EEFish stuff in Yamnaya is from the Caucasus.
Perhaps, but not all of it, considering the decent fits that Lengyel LN provides for Yamnaya and the mtDNA clues...
http://eurogenes.blogspot.com.au/2016/10/steppe-boys-farmer-girls.html
and how different is Lengyel from Barcin?
ReplyDeleteDifferent enough.
ReplyDeleteyeah, i bet.
ReplyDeleteIt's freely available, so you can test it yourself. But of course you're out of your depth.
ReplyDelete@OM
ReplyDeleteThanks. Hard to sort out what's spontaneous hybridization and what's deliberate selection and cultivation.
@Matt
ReplyDelete"Spain_ATP3 - Chalcolithic - 5516–5362 YBP - R1b1a1a2"
Really? ATP3 was an R1b-M269? According to whom? It isn't mentioned on Jean Manco's site.
And Yamnaya isn't R1b1a2 - that would be R1b-V88 according to the latest ISOGG tree. Instead most Yamnaya samples are downstream of R1b-L23.
ReplyDelete@ Simon_W
ReplyDelete"Really? ATP3 was an R1b-M269? According to whom? It isn't mentioned on Jean Manco's site.
And Yamnaya isn't R1b1a2 - that would be R1b-V88 according to the latest ISOGG tree. Instead most Yamnaya samples are downstream of R1b-L23".
Of course Jean Manco has been one of the worst opponents of me, thus she used all the data pro domo sua. Only after a remark of mine she wrote that Villabruna is in Veneto and not in "Sud Tyrol" (something that could make it less Italian, even though "Tyroleans" are genetically above all not "Echt Deutch" but from the old peoples of the region like Rhaetians and others). The defeats of hers are coming, as about mt hg. H which she believed weren't in Europe before the Middle Easterners. A defeat for her and her friend GailT...
Of course at Yamanya we have only R-L23 or nearby, nothing upstream and downstream, thus Yamnaya isn't the source of hg. R1b.
Procedure with these was that I wrote down what I remembered, cross checked against literature, then had a browse over Genetiker's blog to try and get finer structure than was present in the lit (Davidski's comment that he may have some kooky views but can call y dna SNPs right being fresh in my mind).
ReplyDeleteHe didn't have any info on the Yamnaya (or Pit Grave as he calls them) that I could so, so I just used what came out of Haak's paper on its preprint on BioRxiv, which looked highly specific anyway to my eyes (which aren't too attuned to the finestructure of the Y-dna tree). Apologies if that's been subject to change.
Genetiker did have one on ATP3 which I noticed when browsing through his lists of Y-SNP calls, so I dumped that in. Google "Y-SNP calls from Copper and Bronze Age Spain" and it should take you to his blog entry.
I had a quick look over Jean's page for the AfonotovaGora as it came up in a search but otherwise didn't consult it.
@Matt
ReplyDeleteAh alright. My main curiosity was about ATP3, I thought that perhaps someone had come up with some new evidence about its yDNA. There used to be lengthy discussions about it on this blog, and soon sceptical opinions were expressed by some that the evidence wasn't sufficient to call it an R1b-M269, and of course Genetiker's interpretation fit with his pet theory about a WHG origin of R1b in western Europe. SNP calling on ancient DNA is really a tricky game, but considering what e.g. Ted Kandell wrote ( http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?1646-Genome-of-a-late-Neolithic-Iberian-farmer&p=107950&viewfull=1#post107950 ) it seems to make sense to call it an R1b-M269, after all. But considering that Yamnaya had R1b-L23, which is much younger than R1b-M269 according to yfull, ATP3's lineage may be simply a dead end that split from the surviving main branch of R1b-M269 long ago.
@Gioiello
ReplyDeleteThe Yamnaya samples RISE548, I0444, I0429, I0438, I0370 and RISE550 are R1b-Z2103, which is downstream of R1b-L23. Yamnaya samples RISE547 and RISE555 are R1b-Z2106, which is even a step more downstream, and Yamnaya samples I0439 and I0231 are downstream of R1b-Z2109, which is downstream of R1b-Z2106. Hence my opinion that most Yamnaya samples are downstream of R1b-L23 makes sense.
@ Simon_W
ReplyDelete"@Gioiello
The Yamnaya samples RISE548, I0444, I0429, I0438, I0370 and RISE550 are R1b-Z2103, which is downstream of R1b-L23. Yamnaya samples RISE547 and RISE555 are R1b-Z2106, which is even a step more downstream, and Yamnaya samples I0439 and I0231 are downstream of R1b-Z2109, which is downstream of R1b-Z2106. Hence my opinion that most Yamnaya samples are downstream of R1b-L23 makes sense".
Of course I agree with you and I've written a lot about which of these subclades were in Samara/Yamnaya and which very likely were in Western Europe, thus not come from Yamnaya. But Yamnaya (and to-day Eastern Europe and Central Asia) lacks all the upstream and downstream subclades, for that I think that Yamnaya or elsewhere Italy (and after the after Younger Dryas migration to Balkans, central, north and western Europe and also Iberia after the 7500 years ago migration of Zilhao) aren't the source of hg. R1b. I am seeing that also these last paper tested hundreds of samples from Iberia, but I am waiting that also Italy is tested for hundreds of samples and not the only 5 Y tested so far. I am sure about my analyses. An opponent less (two besides) so far: Jean Manco and GailT. The others will follow.
@Simon.
ReplyDeleteHaving ATP3 as M269 in 3300-3500 bc will never be accepted here. At a time of huge population arrival at Iberia what we are talking here is M269 arriving at the same time as U5a and this mixed with a population that settled mainly in south iberia( not east iberia, nor northeast) therefore most likely coming from north africa.
Might not be nothing. But surely makes me hopeful.
But the suspicion is valid . In a neutral POV , that sample was of poor coverage, no?.
ReplyDeleteAtp3 was k1a2b. K1a2 was very common at fikirtepe and barcin. For someone like me that says fikirtepe became shulaveri and shulaveri gave M269 to the rest of the planet via north africa migration...surely makes a nice coincidence.
ReplyDelete@Nirjhar007.
ReplyDeleteSure. But if even davidski is saying "genetiker sure can call snps" then the skill is valid 360. Not only when serves one bias. Right?
@simon
ReplyDeleteI dont know how real it was or how it ended..but the R1b story of the boy king tutankhamon in egypt also was called an old dead end M269...was it not?
Yes if genetiker suggests it, then it may affirm the case for R1b-M269 in Chalcolithic Iberia :) . But still , they will say it came from S Russia , like for that Italian R1b they did at first ! ;) . lol .
ReplyDeleteIndeed As per Genetiker , it was M-269 :
ReplyDeleteBelow are the Y-SNP calls for ATP3, a sample from El Portalón cave in the Atapuerca Mountains of Spain. Positive calls are in bold, and negative calls are in non-bold.
The calls show that ATP3 belonged to Y haplogroup R1b1a1a2-M269. .
https://genetiker.wordpress.com/y-snp-calls-for-atp3/
You guys can keep whining as much as you like, but the vast majority of the R1a-M417 in South Asia and R1b-M269 in Iberia are derived from the Bronze Age steppe.
ReplyDeleteSimon ,
ReplyDelete'' But considering that Yamnaya had R1b-L23, which is much younger than R1b-M269 according to yfull, ATP3's lineage may be simply a dead end that split from the surviving main branch of R1b-M269 long ago. ''
If we apply the same logic , then the CWC M417s were also dead ends?.
See OM ? the Unshakable mantra :D :
ReplyDeleteYou guys can keep whining as much as you like, but the vast majority of the R1a-M417 in South Asia and R1b-M269 in Iberia are derived from the Bronze Age steppe.
Dave,Why vast majority? aren't they all ? :D , correct your mantra!. lol.
@Matt
ReplyDeleteWe have very little ANE samples or uniparental markers. Considering the fact that once a lot of samples of Neolithic Middle-East or Paleolithic Europe came about the picture got far more complicated, the ANE story could be a bit more complicated as well.
Bronze age steppe buzz is exactly that. A buzz by the inferiority complex of the most irrelevant, uneventful genetics in human history.
ReplyDeleteThat is the reason we are so patiently putting up with it...
Its alright, it's alright. All will be fine in the end..now now. Its going to be alright. Yes. Steppe was also important in human history.
Would love to see aDNAs from Sredny Stog and Ukrainian Trypillya cultures. Anthropologically speakin, that was a two-way mixture process. There are multiple robust Dnieper-Donetsk hunter-gatherer like women in Trypolye, as well as gracile Mediterranean types in Sredny Stog.
ReplyDeleteLooking forward to results coming from the Steppes as my line followed R1a & R1b......Sure hope to know someday where my maternal line was in the Mesolithic period.........Southern Ukraine? Caucasus? Central Asia........would like to know the mtDNA's of the Elshanka Culture. Was she a Hunter-Gatherer or a Farmer-Girl bought into the Steppe from Iran, somewhere else? Was she in Central Asia as this line is fairly common there today. I'll keep researching my H6a1 (seems H6a would be the root as H6a2 was in Poltavka Culture AND H6a1a & H6a1b where still hanging around in Central Asia in 900 AD- Magyar warriors mtDNA found in Northern Hungary ) Grandmothers and following articles on R1a & R1b and the migrations from the Steppes. I'm also hoping to unravel the migration of H6a1a Germany into the CWC. Was this a migration from a Ukrainian Catacomb Culture? Was she in the early Yamnaya migrations into the Balkans? Did my line end up in the Balkans in 700 AD because of a Roman-Era Gothic or Vandal migration or was she a Slav, an Antes? Thanks for keeping folks like me informed of new articles and papers on these ancient migrations!
ReplyDeleteThis recent paper is interesting. https://www.academia.edu/31311945/Directly_dated_broomcorn_millet_from_the_northwestern_Caucasus_Tracing_the_Late_Bronze_Age_route_into_the_Russian_steppe
ReplyDelete@OM
ReplyDeleteI don't know either. With a quick internet search I can't find any firm evidence that Tutankhamun was R1b-M269. What I found for instance:
https://archaeologynewsnetwork.blogspot.ch/2011/01/dna-experts-disagree-over-tutankhamun.html#tTmPYBDWfEPqvFmv.97
I suppose if such firm evidence had ever been published it would have been covered on this or on Dienekes' blog.
@Nirjhar007 et al.
See, the thing is... ATP3 has been found positive/derived for SNP PF6518. Not for M269. At present, marker PF6518 is one out of 105 (!!) SNPs that are phylogenetically equivalent to M269. That means, all living males with R1b-M269 are also positive for PF6518 and 104 more markers. According to yfull, the TMRCA of all living R1b-M269 people is 4500 BC. But, the mutations typical for this clade started to evolve much earlier, about 11300 BC. And we don't know at what date each mutation arose. Hence it is perfectly possible and logical that ATP3 may have had any number between 1 and 105 of the markers that are equivalent to M269. Hence it is possible that the lineage leading to him split from the lineage leading to all living R1b-M269 males at any time between 11300 BC and 4500 BC. Hence it's easy to see that the explanation for ATP3's yDNA probably is, that hunter-gatherers roaming through Europe have been distantly related in western Europe and in the east.
It's just a brute undeniable fact, maybe to some people a bitter fact,that Yamnaya had R1b-L23, many of them were even derived for downstream markers, which means there can be no doubt that they had the complete R1b-L23 with the two equivalent markers. And R1b-L23 is young, you can see it yourself on yfull. It would be extremely hard to explain how it could have spread from western Europe to the steppe in such a short, late Neolithic (!) time frame, with all those sedentary farmers inbetween. That's just a silly idea. And nobody can deny that Yamnaya was closer to modern R1b-L23 people than ATP3, because there is no evidence that ATP3 had R1b-L23.
@ Simon_W
ReplyDelete"According to yfull, the TMRCA of all living R1b-M269 people is 4500 BC".
Of course you are wrong in all what you say. After my letters to YFull on its FB pages and the new tree, the dates are:
R-PF7562FGC31931/V2381 * PH1631/V2850 * Z29759/FGC31957/BY1713+10 SNPs5800 ybp, TMRCA CI 95% 67004600 ybp" class="age"formed 6500 ybp, TMRCA 5600 ybpinfo
R-PF7562*
⦁ id:YF02895TUR [TR-61]
R-PF7563PF7563/V23474600 ybp, TMRCA CI 95% 73003800 ybp" class="age"formed 5600 ybp, TMRCA 5300 ybp⦁ info
R-PF7563*
⦁ id:YF07420
⦁ id:YF03278ГомельскаяобластьBLR [BY-HO]
R-Z29758Z29758 * Z297643800 ybp, TMRCA CI 95% 73003800 ybp" class="age"formed 5300 ybp, TMRCA 5300 ybp⦁ info
R-Z29758*
⦁ id:YF07766
R-PF7566Z29760 * PF7566 * Z29785+3 SNPs
⦁ id:ERS256986ITA [IT-CA]
R-V3286V3870/Z29776 * Z29767 * Z29771+17 SNPs
⦁ id:ERS256983ITA [IT-CA]
⦁ id:ERS256985ITA [IT-CA]
YF07766 is Joe Merante, an Italian American from Calabria I follow from many years. Thus the separation of the subclade is now 5300 years and not 4500, and only 300 years before is the R-PF7562*, and, when all my remarks about the SNPs considered are accepted also from YFul, the ages will be much older.
What you don't understand is if you find an R1b1 at Villabruna, it does mean that there was a tribe of many R1b1 only one of them survived and gave birth to all the subclades.
@Gioiello
ReplyDeletePlease note that I wrote 4500 BC = 6500 bp approximately. So what I wrote is 100% correct. But anyway, all of this is quite irrelevant, because my point was to point out that R1b-M269 has many, many phylogenetically equivalent markers, and these started to accumulate many thousands of years before the TMRCA of living R1b-M269 people.
R1b1 at Villabruna is fine, but doesn't prove that R1b-L23 is from Italy or western Europe.
@ Simon_W
ReplyDeleteIn fact the dates of YFull are Years Before Present, thus 4500YBP was 2500 BC. Now they say 5300YBP, thus 3300 BC. Anyway after my remarks they put 800 years more, and the subclade R-PF7562* found in Anatolia is closer than before, anyway that is a tiny clade which hasn't anything to do with all the subclades deeply rooted in Italy.
Yes, you may think what you want about Villabruna, I am waiting that someone tests more than 5 samples in aDNA from Italy, whereas we have hundreds or thousands from elsewhere. So far take into account that R-V88 from Italy is completely demonstrated.
THANKS, PARASAR
ReplyDeleteToday, 05:38 PM
parasar replied to a thread from western Yamna to Europe : a I2a2 + R1b-M269 joined venture ? in Ancient (aDNA)
I'm just saying that Villbruna fits perfectly the locus of expansion for L389 and V88 types in Europe - M73 north and north-east (Latvia, Samara...
78 replies | 2061 view(s)
The role of Hunter-gather element on the territory of modern Moldova and Ukraine saw a marked increase through the late Trypilya period. These changes were especially noticeable in the centre of Ukraine. http://www.harmony.com.ua/text/319.html
ReplyDeleteAs to the Caucasus component (Caucasus Hunter-Gatherer component), I should point out the presence of Kemi-Oba culture in the South of Ukraine 3700-2800BCE before it was replaced with Yamna culture. Most archeologists see direct links of this culture with more southern Maykop culture. They maintain that the representatives of Kemi-Oba culture got into the Crimea first and later spread and intermixed with the local people of Sredny Stog and Yamna culture in the South of Ukraine. Anthropologically speaking, the people of Kemi-Oba culture were similar to the series in Maykop and Kura-Araxes cultures.
ReplyDeleteInteresting comments Vlod
ReplyDeleteI think you're right
One of the Khvalynsk samples is well on the way to looking like Yamnaya in regards to his EHG/CHG ratio, and the earliest Yamnaya samples are already a very stable blend of these components.
ReplyDeleteSo Kemi-Oba looks too young to be the source of CHG in early Yamnaya.
Yes, that R1b, CHG shifted, Khvalynsk guy indeed looks like an immigr... I mean recently married a Caucasus chick :)
ReplyDeleteHe does have typically Northeast Caucasian mtDNA: H2a1.
ReplyDeleteHaving said that, the Q1a guy has the highest level of CHG out of the three available Khvalynsk samples. Make of that what you will.
ReplyDeleteIt's like this...
Samara_Eneolithic I0122 (R1b) CHG 16.4%
Samara_Eneolithic I0433 (R1a) CHG 12.8%
Samara_Eneolithic I0434 (Q1a) CHG 33.8%
Hence his position on the PCA.
http://eurogenes.blogspot.com.au/2015/11/the-khvalynsk-men.html
Ah yeah, you're right.. (I did know that).
ReplyDeleteH2a was found in MEsolithic Karelia too.
We need more samples methinks..
But if Kemi Oba is too late, and if Majkop comes out something like Armenia Chalcolithic (as some have reasonably argued; and is thus *not* the correct admixing population for Yamnaya steppe), then the only other possible choice is something like Meshoko-Svobodnoe
"So Kemi-Oba looks too young to be the source of CHG in early Yamnaya."
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion, Kemi-Oba and Maykop cultures should be perceived as a part of much broader impulse which has its beginnings in late Ubaid period (5000-4000 BC). From there it first spread to Central Caucusus and manifested itself in the form of Leyla-Tepe culture (4350-4000) in modern Azerbaijan and later spread to Northern Caucasus and Southern Ukraine.