Abstract: The Canaanites inhabited the Levant region during the Bronze Age and established a culture which became influential in the Near East and beyond. However, the Canaanites, unlike most other ancient Near Easterners of this period, left few surviving textual records and thus their origin and relationship to ancient and present-day populations remain unclear. In this study, we sequenced five whole-genomes from ~3,700-year-old individuals from the city of Sidon, a major Canaanite city-state on the Eastern Mediterranean coast. We also sequenced the genomes of 99 individuals from present-day Lebanon to catalogue modern Levantine genetic diversity. We find that a Bronze Age Canaanite-related ancestry was widespread in the region, shared among urban populations inhabiting the coast (Sidon) and inland populations (Jordan) who likely lived in farming societies or were pastoral nomads. This Canaanite-related ancestry derived from mixture between local Neolithic populations and eastern migrants genetically related to Chalcolithic Iranians. We estimate, using linkage-disequilibrium decay patterns, that admixture occurred 6,600-3,550 years ago, coinciding with massive population movements in the mid-Holocene triggered by aridification ~4,200 years ago. We show that present-day Lebanese derive most of their ancestry from a Canaanite-related population, which therefore implies substantial genetic continuity in the Levant since at least the Bronze Age. In addition, we find Eurasian ancestry in the Lebanese not present in Bronze Age or earlier Levantines. We estimate this Eurasian ancestry arrived in the Levant around 3,750-2,170 years ago during a period of successive conquests by distant populations such as the Persians and Macedonians. ... However, the present-day Lebanese, in addition to their Levant_N and Iranian ancestry, have a component (11-22%) related to EHG and Steppe populations not found in Bronze Age populations (Figure 3A). We confirm the presence of this ancestry in the Lebanese by testing f4(Sidon_BA, Lebanese; Ancient Eurasian, Chimpanzee) and find that Eurasian hunter-gatherers and Steppe populations share more alleles with the Lebanese than with Sidon_BA (Figure 3B). We next tested a model of the present-day Lebanese as a mixture of Sidon_BA and any other ancient Eurasian population using qpAdm. We found that the Lebanese can be best modelled as Sidon_BA 93±1.6% and a Steppe Bronze Age population 7±1.6% (Figure 3C; Table S6).Haber et al., Continuity and admixture in the last five millennia of Levantine history from ancient Canaanite and present-day Lebanese genome sequences, bioRxiv, Posted May 26, 2017, doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/142448 See also... Yamnaya-related ancestry proportions in Europe and west Asia A homeland, but not the homeland
Friday, May 26, 2017
Canaanite genomes (Haber et al. 2017 preprint)
Over at bioRxiv at this LINK:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
152 comments:
Excellent work!
@Salden:
What do you think about the historical phenomenon taking place in palestine that I attributed to that? Main culprit?
If you respond, plz do so here to keep in line w/main topic thread.
Yes! I feel a bit vindicated, since I was off when I proposed that J2a convected the Neolithic to Europe. J1-P58, now in MBA Sidon and Late EBA Jordan. Fits with a movement from Western Iranian region into the Levant in the EBA. Could be Kura-Araxes--right timing! Also J2b1-M205, likely originating in the same area of Iran (n.b. the M12* in aDNA Iran).
The J2a's we see there now must be later--?Anatolia/Hittites/Mitanni/Armenians etc...The aboriginal Canaanites seem to be J1-P58 and J1b1-M205. Both these are found on Cyprus from my Cypriot Y paper.
"We found that the Lebanese can be best modelled as Sidon_BA 93±1.6% and a Steppe Bronze Age population 7±1.6%"
Sidon_BA 93% + 7% steppe!
Based on this paper, would Syrians also be similar to Lebanese in admixture?
Everyone in the Middle East(xNorth Africa) probably has some Steppe in them. Steppe-specific mtDNA like U5a1a1 and U5a1b1 exists in the Middle East including the Levant. R1b-Z2103 in the Middle East could definitely derive from a Steppe-Caucasus-Middle East migration.
@SamuelAndrews
In Middle East, Iranians and Turkish have highest so far, around 15-25% steppe. In Levant, it's pretty small, less than 9%-0%. In Caucasus it's also pretty low for some reason, Armenians are 6%-14% steppe, it's even less in Georgians.
@ Roy King
". J1-P58, now in MBA Sidon and Late EBA Jordan. Fits with a movement from Western Iranian region into the Levant in the EBA. Could be Kura-Araxes--right timing! Also J2b1-M205, likely originating in the same area of Iran (n.b. the M12* in aDNA Iran)."
How does the data support such a scenario ?
The best donor population in their model was Iran Chalcolithic, not K-A; and the historical evidence they site is diaspora / exodus from mesopotamia in the wake of Akkadian collapse
@Samuel Andrews, Rob and all others well-versed in the technicalities of formal stats in reference to figure 3B:
1)if two or more statistics are negative, can one surmise anything meaningful about their relative magnitudes? I notice that CHG also gives a negative statistic, not just steppe and WHG-SHG-EHG continuum, but it attains a lower magnitude. Iran_Neo gives positive stats(fails to reject null hypothesis).
2) So, could the negative values we see for steppe groups(i.e. More alleles sharing with them) be attributable to something other than steppic introgression?
Could there have been another migration from the Northern Middle East after Sidon's date that brought more CHG-leaning as opposed to Iran_Neo-leaning DNA?
CHG, after all, shares more alleles with ANE and WHG and, in turn, with steppic populations than Iran_Neo(Hotu , etc) does.
As for what it might have been if not steppe----hard to say. Anatolians? Armenian highlanders? Assyrians?
Everyone please note that I do subscribe to the (nuanced) Kurgan hypothesis but it seems somewhat unrealistic for there to have been such influence in the Levant. 7% value can mean either that kurgan peoples migrated to the levant undiluted OR that it arrived in a package. The first is unlikely. In the second scenario, if the "package" population is given a generous value of 33% steppe, that would imply a 7x3=21% change in levantine population since Sidon's date. If steppe admixture of the putative newcomers is lowered to 20 and 10%, the change is even bigger---indicating large scale replacement. What can account for this? The records don't suggest anything strange to that effect whatsoever.
There are multiple layers of admixture from the steppe in the Levant dating to different periods, from the Bronze Age to the historical period.
It's likely that some of the contributing groups were basically like Yamnaya, while others only had minor Yamnaya, Sintashta and/or Scythian admixture.
Hurrians/Kura-Araxes possibly did bring some steppe ancestry to the Levant, because the Iron Age genome from Iran, F38, is from a Hurrian site, has Yamnaya admixture and belongs to R1b-Z2103.
I want to say that the most likely source of the "steppe admixture" in the Lebanese was indirect. No Yamnaya groups ventured that far south. But actually, coded ware style axes have been found as far as Israel !
Whatever the case, I think steppe admixture in Levant came mediated via K-A like groups. Indeed, KA expansion reached the north tip of the Levant
But we would need to exclude later "Crusader" and romans as the major course of admixture
Is that doable Dave ?
@ Cavallo Sforzesco said...
Excellent work!
Who is usurping the nickname I gave to Cavalli Sorza and that Davidski Always deletes?
Very interesting, but that hg. J weren't older than 5000 years in Middle East and introgressed from Caucasus (or Iran), I am saying from so long through the uniparental markers of to-day and the YFull tree. The mt lines are extinct, and no influence of Phoenicians in the Mediterranean peoples has been demonstrated (for lacking more samples from ME, the authors say), and this very likely dislikes who probably funds these studies from so long ...
But Rob and Dave---
KA culture(lasting till 2000BC or so) predates BOTH the Cananite samples discussed in the paper(~1600BC) and the modern Christian Lebanese. So it can't really explain the supposed difference in steppe content.
I was thinking more along the lines of Mitanni and Hittite expansions? Either way, if we preclude "yamnaya groups moving that far south", the population replacement between 1600BC and 600 AD was huge if we do the math. lol (I say 600AD because Levantine Christian DNA was pretty much set by then. 6th century AD was the last major chance for significant admix at which time it would have been from Ghassanids who were ~0% steppe).
That's an interest bit of detail, Rob! Could this have been a bartered item, tho, as opposed to some steppic introgression?
I think KA just accounts for the CHG/Iran-ward shift in the Sidon samples relative to Levant_Neo.
@Rob
I'm skeptical that there's any significant admixture from Crusaders in the Near East, even in Lebanese Christians. The uniparental markers don't seem to support it.
But it's hard to discount Roman admixture, because that could mean a lot of things, even Roman soldiers of Sarmatian or other Iranian origin settling in the Levant.
By the way, when I say basically like Yamnaya I mean even something like the early Sarmatians.
@ Davidski
Please explain: " When we substituted present-day Near Easterners with a panel of 150 present-day populations available in the Human Origins dataset, we found only Sardinians and Italian_North shared significantly more alleles with Sidon_BA compared with the Lebanese (Figure S7). Sardinians are known to have retained a large proportion of ancestry from Early European farmers (EEF) and therefore the increased affinity to Sidon_BA could be related to a shared Neolithic ancestry.
We computed f4(Lebanese, Sardinian/Italian_North; Sidon_BA, Levant_N) and found no evidence of increased affinity of Sardinians or Italian_North to Sidon_BA after the Neolithic (both Z-scores are positive)" (p. 5).
It seems that all that influence of Phoenicians upon Sardinains isn't demonstrated, and Sardinians, like Etruscans, may have come from the EEF from North (Central Europe) and not by sea, of course in different times. The origin from Northern Anatolia/Aegean Sea was anyway of the "European stock". Massimo Pittau linked Sardinian language with Etruscan.
Well written study . A fine piece of pre-print .
Except they keep talking about Iranians and Iranian ancestry when referring to ancient populations from what is now Iran and potential admixture from these populations.
They need to change that.
I actually think the Mycenaeans, Dave will also show ,similar Steppe Like Ancestry .
Yeah, no shit they will.
But Iran Chalcolithic ancestry is not Iranian or Steppe ancestry. These are three different things.
The reason Steppe ancestry shows up in the Levant is because of population movements from the steppe to the Near East after the population movements of groups like Iran Chalcolithic.
Mycenaeans will show Steppe ancestry, not anything from Iran.
I don't know, perhaps they will show Iran in significant proportions , while the Steppe like not so much and perhaps EEF+ WHG?.
Will be interesting to know the Paternal Groups also. They will be the first references of IE groups from pre-history .
With more dense sampling of West Asia I am sure we will find better source for Iran Chl like admixture in BA Levant. Because it is very very unlikely tha J1 P58 comes from South Zagros. It entered Levant via North Iraq.
@Nirjhar007: What are your thoughts on my off-chance scenario---7% steppe in qpAdm and the negative signal in formal stats in 3B is not mostly attributable to actual steppe ancestry. Well, see my first and second comment here.
@Anthro Survey
How do you suppose that R1b-Z2103 and R1a-Z93 ended up in the Levant?
I think once more studies like this come out with dna samples from the actual historical record it is going to cause a massive influx of general interest in personal genome testing. Your average Joe could not care less about his ancestral relationship to a Neolithic Farmer or Steppe Nomad (Indo European speaking or not), but being able to connect your paternal marker directly to a Caananite, a real living individual from the biblical epoch, is amazing. I agree this is a great study and hope to see more like it.
@Davidski
Oh, I'm not saying there's zero steppe ancestry in the Levant but it's likely much more modest than 7%.
R1a-z93 in Muslims could be easily be attributed to immigrants from Khorasan/Iran during the Islamic era. If it's found in Christians, I'll be surprised---- maybe due to some Achaemenid nobles settling there.
R1b-z2103 to Hittities/Mitanni. Also to Armenians---ancient or medieval.
Afroasiatic languages are deeply rooted in Africa:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afroasiatic_languages#/media/File:Hamito-Semitic_languages.jpg
On the basis of the very small amount of ancient DNA we currently have from the area, I would presume that yDNA E is the most important yDNA behind the Afroasiatic populations and yDNA J and the influence from Iran/Mesopotamia is one of the most significant factors in the differentiation of the Semitic family from the rest of the Afroasiatic family.
@ Kristiina
Of course, but also the other Afro-Asiatic languages may be seen as the languages of the Africa not Sub-Saharian. If also the Bushmen spoke a language linked to Camitic, I have some difficulties to understand which language the A00 (and A and B) Africans spoke.
Perhaps it is more parsimonious to think that hg. J brought its Semitic branch already differentiated from a Camitic branch spoken from Natufians...
In fact Semitic languages in the Horn of Africa were brought from hg J from Arabia.
Perhaps end of the hope for IE from Iran!
@Gioiello
Omotic and Cushitic languages are older in the Horn of Africa and these populations are surely mostly yDNA E. I think that the Semitic languages in the Horn of Africa are more recent.
According to Wikipedia:
"a recent study by Kitchen et al. proposed through the use of Bayesian computational phylogenetic techniques that "contemporary Ethiosemitic languages of Africa reflect a single introduction of early Ethiosemitic from southern Arabia approximately 2800 years ago", and that this single introduction of Ethiosemitic underwent "rapid diversification" within Eritrea and Ethiopia."
In Sidon, there are two mtDNA haplotypes that have a clear connection to Iran: R2 and N1a3a
Iran Early Neolithic Zagros Tepe Abdul Hosein AH1/AH2 8000 BC R2
Iron Age Tepe Hasanlu Zagros Iran F38 N1a3a
The others have a connection with Anatolia and Europe. K1a2 has been found e.g. in Neolithic Barcın Western Anatolia 6 BC and in Menteşe Neolithic Anatolia and also in Neolithic Kleitos Greece 4.1 BC K1a2. K1a2 has also been detected in modern Iran Qashqai.
H1bc seems to be a European haplotype.
Unexpectedly, also HV1b seems to be a European haplotype, but HV1b1a is found in Yemen and Somalia, and this Sidon sample is in between these two, i.e. HV1b1.
Speaking of AA languages, someone on anthrogenica proposed that much of the SSA found in the MENA region today owes itself to the spread of Afro-Asiatic. According to this theory, the first speakers were (mobile) nomadic herders from what is today North Sudan/soutern egypt. They would have been mostly Natufian-like with substantial Nilo-Saharan type of SSA ancestry which would be diluted upon emigration to the Maghreb, Messopotamia and Arabia.
Kristiina
I have some difficulty reconciling the notion that Semitic tribes descend from haplogroup E AA speakers, who kept their language despite a large introgression from somewhere opposite (Zagros region), especially via Males.
Of course, this is applying the commonly held PIE principle.
@ Kristiina
"I think that the Semitic languages in the Horn of Africa are more recent".
I was just saying the same, already known from so long.
"Unexpectedly, also HV1b seems to be a European haplotype, but HV1b1a is found in Yemen and Somalia, and this Sidon sample is in between these two, i.e. HV1b1".
HV came from a refugium in Sicily/Southern Italy, as not only I am saying from solog, but said also from a peer revuiewd paper.
I thouht and wrote from so long that also R0a-b came from there, in spite of its diffusion in Arabia and nearby.
Rob,
I have a theory if you will bear with me. I think if we put some faith in the Nostratic superfamily, it would imply a distant but common origin of Indo-Europeans and Afro-asiatic.
In my view, the early people of Iran_N will most likely represent the Afro-asiatic people and the admixture of Iran_N across the Middle East would represent the spread of Afro-asiatic. One problem with this theory would probably be with regard to how Afro-asiatic spread into Africa.
On the other hand, the Neolithic population in South Asia is clearly related to the Iranian Neolithic people. However this does not prove a migration from Iran into South Asia but more likely a common origin of both groups. Perhaps the people of South Asian Neolithic, who were likely of ANI stock and also more ANE shifted than Iran_N, went on to spread the IE languages via Central Asia, NE Iran and the Caucasus, in a later period. This would also mean ANI admixed with CHG and/or Iranian chalcolithic groups as a vector for spread of IE languages into SE Europe and into the steppe.
Since we do not have ancient samples from South Asia, we are unable to verify it. Iran_N, to my mind, looks more Afro-asiatic than IE.
The branch of E that was found in Cardial Ware is the _brother_ of the Egyptian E V22.
https://www.yfull.com/tree/E-Z1919/
So where their common ancestor lived?
In Levant or in Egypt? Is there evidence that Cardial Ware comes from Egypt?
Jaydeep
There are more realistic scenarios out there. For example that AA umerheit was in Levant not in Africa which some scholars suggested while ago. And the P58 is not actually from Zagros but from a place close to Levant. For example Hassuna culture who's pottery expanded toward Levant.
----
Militarev is the leading linguistic proponent of the Levantine origin for Afrasian (“Levant theory”, opposed to Afroasiatic Urheimat in Northeast Africa theory proposed by Christopher Ehret, Roger Blench and others) linking the proto-Afrasian speakers to the Levantine Natufian culture. He co-authors with Leonid Kogan two volumes of Semitic Etymological Dictionary, which received highly favorable reviews. Militarev also compiled the genealogical tree of world languages, including tentative dates of their branching obtained glottochronologically, based on research by the Moscow School of Comparative Linguistics including his own research on Afrasian dated by him to the 10th millennium B.C.E.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Militarev
Unfortunately I cannot post here a map of Natufians done from Vincenzo Pasariello and centred in Arabian peninsula. Thus everything is clear: AA was the Language of Natufians expanded to Africa, and Semite languages formed at the periphery of the Natufian world where hg. J dominated and later expanded their languages to Middle East, Arabia and the Horn of Africa.
But in Southern Mesopotamia they spoke Sumerian. I don't know how that would fit into all this.
Is that J2b12a1a the same as J-Z631? If so, the sample carrying it is dated to 3650 YBP, and YFull has this haplogroup as formed 3700 YBP, so it must have been one of the first carriers of it:
https://www.yfull.com/tree/J-Z631/
Alberto
No it is not the same. I guess it is an error.
Z631 is part of J2b2 not of J2b1.
@Aram
Ok. But that's strange. Why do they use the same nomenclature?
https://isogg.org/tree/ISOGG_HapgrpJ.html
http://www.yseq.net/product_info.php?products_id=8813
Where can you check the reliable ones?
Sumerians could have different Y dna. Like T or J2a. Or even more exotic things. But if Sumerians also are loaded with P58 then offcourse ...
Alberto
This is a comment from Anthrogenica
_-------
The J2b individual isn't J2b2, he is ancestral at J2b2 and some downstream positions and is most probably J2b1-M205, so you were actually right. Also, the J1 individual is just P58, we'll have to wait raw data for downstream clades.
http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?10725-Ancient-DNA-from-Bronze-Age-Lebanon-(Haber-et-al-2017)&p=238831&viewfull=1#post238831
Instinctively, I do not believe in the Iranian origin of the Afroasiatic family. For example, in the Ehret model (1995), Semitic is only a small branch in the very African trunk:
Omotic North Omotic
South Omotic
Erythrean
Cushitic
Beja
Agaw
East–South Cushitic (Eastern Cushitic, Southern Cushitic)
North Erythrean
Chadic
Boreafrasian (Egyptian, Berber, Semitic)
However, for me a Natufian origin makes sense.
Morever, we cannot reserve yDNA J for the Semitic family. Satsurblia and Kotias were yDNA J in Caucasus at a very early date. Still today, J is very widespread in Caucasus (both J1 and J2). Northwest Caucasians, Georgians and Armenians all carry a significant amount of yDNA J. If I remember correctly, J is the main yDNA of the Northeast Caucasian speaking populations and J-M67 seems to be the main yDNA of Nakh.
Were any Philistine genomes done or are they planned for a study?
@Aram
Thanks. I see it now on table S4 of the supplements.
Instinctively, I tend to connect Alarodian(Hurro-Urartian and some caucasus languages) and even Elamo-Dravidian with most clades/subclades of J. I think L can also be connected to these to some extent as well---definitely with ElamoDravidian. Interestingly, a couple of the bronze age Armenian samples were L.
E is clearly more of an AA thing----either originating during natufian era in levant or in a natufianized Egypt/Sudan somewhere(which would explain a lot of the ssa).
Meanwhile I was writing this of YFull page at FB
They say that Jews are intelligent, but why there are many stupids who think to be Jews without being that?
Gioiello Tognoni Very interesting, but that hg. J weren't older than 5000 years in Middle East and introgressed from Caucasus (or Iran), I am saying from so long through the uniparental markers of to-day and the YFull tree. The mt lines are extinct, and no influence of Phoenicians in the Mediterranean peoples has been demonstrated (for lacking more samples from ME, the authors say), and this very likely dislikes who probably funds these studies from so long ...
Allan Benassi Gioiello Tognoni. You really need to look at the J2 Middle East group on FTDNA, which shows a very different situation. Most of the samples are not on YFULL yet.
Gioiello Tognoni Allan Benassi, frequency doesn't mean ancientness. Hg. J with I was the hg. of the Western European hunter-gatherers, and expanded to Caucasus and later to India, and Middle East etc. It has nothing to do in its origin with Semites, Camites or Africans. The oldest J found so far is from Satsutblia, Caucasus, 13000 years ago.
Allan Benassi You mentioned the YFULL tree. Look at the structure and then look at the group. The ages are there.
Allan Benassi J2 formed in the Geographical location that is now known as Iran and it spread out to other areas of the fertile crescent, out via the Mediterranean to Southern Europe and North Africa and through Anatolia up to the Caucasus. J2 is definitely a Levantine/West Asian/Middle East haplogroup.
Gioiello Tognoni It depends on what you do mean for Levantine/West Asian/Middle East. aDNA demonstrates that Northern Anatolia was European as to the DNA, Middle East was Natufian (hg E), and Iran was another thing: hg G and some J. But the oldest J is in the Caucasus and Finland. When you find a J older than 13000 years in Middle East, Arabia, Egypt or also Iran and India, write to me: gioiellotgnn06@gmail.com.
Allan Benassi J2 formed in Persia/Iran (West Asia) and then spread out to Iraq, Syria, Canaan and Anatolia (the Levant) and downward toward the Arabian Peninsula (all of these areas are known as the Middle East and more recently started to be referred to as the Near East). You seem to be sounding a little muddled when it comes to the J hapologroup, especially when you refer to J possibly originating in the Caucasus and Finland! The scientific and anthropological evidence does not back up what you are saying and it appears that your theory is based on nothing more than conjecture, or wishful thinking.
Gioiello Tognoni This is the first expansion to India
J-Z2432 Z8266 * ZS308/Y12366 * Z2432+25 SNPs 8600 ybp, TMRCA CI 95% 9900 7300 ybp" class="age"formed 9700 ybp, TMRCA 8600 ybp
but conyemporaneus to the presence in Italy
J-L283 Z622 * Z2520 * Z8409+61 SNPs 8600 ybp, TMRCA CI 95% 7000 4800 ybp" class="age"formed 9700 ybp, TMRCA 5900 ybp
Always India and Italy
J-PF5008 PF5039 * PF5044 * PF5022+19 SNPs 17200 ybp, TMRCA CI 95% 17800 14000 ybp" class="age"formed 18500 ybp, TMRCA 15900 ybp
J-PF5008*
⦁ id:HG01589PJL
J-L581 PF5041 * PF5035 * PF5058+20 SNPs 14000 ybp, TMRCA CI 95% 16900 13400 ybp" class="age"formed 15900 ybp, TMRCA 15100 ybp
⦁ id:ERS256817ITA [IT-CA]
The oldest in the Caucasus
J-PF4610 PF5105 * F1227 * PF5091+18 SNPs17200 ybp, TMRCA CI 95% 19700 17200 ybp" class="age"formed 18500 ybp, TMRCA 18400 ybp
This sample from Middle East seems old
J-S15572 S15572 * Y24686 * Z35815+1 SNPs 11100 ybp, TMRCA CI 95% 14400 11100 ybp" class="age"formed 12700 ybp, TMRCA 12700 ybp
J-S15572*
⦁ id:ERR1395578JOR
but only because hasn't another sample to compare.
Gioiello Tognoni Allan Benassi, strangely your surname is also in Italy, but very likely you aren't an Italian. You may speak how long you want, but theories are verified from proofs: show me an J older that 13000 years in your places and I'll believe you.
Allan Benassi Yes, that's right, I'm not Italian in origin. I'm a Sephardic Jew. My ancestors settled in Spain and Portugal before the Inquisition and then fled to Venice and then Ferrara in the Middle of the 16th century. Have you looked at the FTDNA Middle East Project yet. It's interesting.
Allan Benassi Benassi is a variant of Nassi.
Gioiello Tognoni If you send me your haplotype, I'll say you if you are a Jew or an European introgressed in the Jewish pool as the most part of the European Jews.
Gioiello Tognoni Strangely (but not much) I didn't find Benassi in Ysearch. Why you all Jews are hidding your haplotypes?
Allan Benassi I can save you the effort! I'm J-L283, CTS6190. I'm in the same terminal clade as the Cohanim (mostly made up of Sephardim and Ashkenazim). I'm clustered with two men from Northern Italy (Genova and Florence).
Gioiello Tognoni Everyone knows that the MCH was, for saying the less, a nonsense...
Allan Benassi Gioiello Tognoni Lol. Well, that's partially true. I'm a member of the J2b_455-8 Project and the Jewish Heritage Project. I guess you wouldn't be a member of either of those!
Allan Benassi It depends on what you mean by 'a nonsense'. There are three branches of J that are Cohanim, so clearly they can't all be the descendants of Aaron, that's true. However, if you are just using it as a way of tracing your ancestry back as far as you can and interested in looking at heritage and tradition then it has its place. It's interesting nonetheless.
Gioiello Tognoni It needs a great hate for Italy for thinking not being Italian in descending from a sister clade of this:
J-Z585 Z2505 * Z585 4400 ybp, TMRCA CI 95% 6300 4400 ybp" class="age"formed 5300 ybp, TMRCA 5300 ybp
J-Z585*
⦁ id:NA20763TSI
J-YP113YP63 * Z28754/YP139 * YP131+34 SNPs
J-YP113*
J-M5903M5903
⦁ id:ERS256802ITA [IT-CA]
J-YP50YP162 * YP82 * YP50+1 SNPs
J-YP50*
⦁ id:ERS256797ITA [IT-CA]
J-YP49YP49 * M7773 * Y24698
⦁ id:ERS256801ITA [IT-CA]
⦁ id:ERS256800ITA [IT-CA]
Gioiello Tognoni Benassi doesn't mean "ben Nassi", but derives very likely from Bene "well", Benazzo, Benasso. Also your surname is fake "Jewish". Ahahahahahah
Another possibility is to investigate the different J1-L620 basal branch: J1-FGC6064 as a possible clue about the origin and localization of J1-L620 in the Mesolithic and afterwards, just before the Southern Bronze Age movement to Southern Mesopotamia, the Arabian Plate and Levant, of course nowadays we already have J1-Y6305-Satsurblia and the CHG-Iranian component as a big breakthrough. I think the parallel J1-FGC6064 branch mostly remained in Northern Iran where some small groups moved to distant places like Portugal, England and we will be able to know the internal structure of FGC6064 in Iran, Iranian Qatari, Eastern Anatolia and in the Caspian Sea only after a good NGS article about the Iranian J1 types and structures, what has never been done. I think we are going to find some native J1 branches associated with Iran and Iranian speaking languages since the beginning. I have good Iranian-Gilaki STR matches at YHRD in my own cluster but unfortunately they have never been SNP investigated. https://www.academia.edu/5889836/Western_European_J1-M365_position_in_the_J1_haplogroup_Y_chromosome_phylogenetic_tree
So there is a European influx in the Lebanese. Would that also be in the Iraqi_Jew sample used by Fu et al to point to Middle-Eastern affinity in WHG? In other words, did Fu et al got it backwards and is that affinity European admixture into the present day Middle East by WHG?
@David
Again, if you can spare the time, could you do something like:
Mbuti Levant_Neolithic Kostinki14 Villabruna
Mbuti Levant_Neolithic Kostenki14 Bichon
@epoch
Mbuti Levant_Neolithic Kostenki14 Villabruna 0.0464 8.951 710555
Mbuti Levant_Neolithic Kostenki14 Bichon 0.0310 5.932 806519
@Davidski
That is about what Fu et al has with Iraqi_Jew.
Mbuti Iraqi_Jew K14 Villabruna 0.0038 7.8 1125277
Mbuti Iraqi_Jew K14 Bichon 0.0037 7.9 1669947
Whatever it is that created that affinity, it is hardly changed by the several Middle-Eastern admixture events, it seems.
Anthro Survey said...
"Everyone please note that I do subscribe to the (nuanced) Kurgan hypothesis but it seems somewhat unrealistic for there to have been such influence in the Levant. 7% value can mean either that kurgan peoples migrated to the levant undiluted OR that it arrived in a package."
there was a slave trade from the Crimea to near/middle east going back a long way (bronze age onwards iirc) until the Russian conquest in the 1800s (iirc).
@Davidski
And this?
Mbuti Iran_Neolithic Kostenki14 Villabruna
Mbuti Iran_Neolithic Kostenki14 Bichon
Mbuti Iran_Neolithic Kostenki14 Loschbour
Mbuti Iran_Ch Kostenki14 Villabruna
Mbuti Iran_Ch Kostenki14 Bichon
Mbuti Iran_Ch Kostenki14 Loschbour
@Everyone,
Do any of you have new ideas about the genesis of "Steppe" after the most recent papers? BTW, by Steppe I mean what Yamnaya was and what the non-EEF/WHG part of LNBA Europeans was.
The origin of "Steppe" isn't solved. Eastern Yamnaya is still the only Steppe group we have DNA from. To understand how the R1a Z93, R1a Z283, R1b Z2103, R1b P312 groups we see in the Bronze age formed demands loads of more genomes from the Steppe.
IMO, Yamnaya Samara wasn't native to Samara. I think all or a lot of ancestry came from somewhere further south. Think about it. Ancient DNA demonstrates that Steppe groups often migrated far away from their homes and isolated themselves from natives(Corded Ware, Afanasievo, Srubanaya, British Bell Beaker).
Ukraine HGs don't look like they can be an ancestor of Steppe. They have too much WHG. The Ukraine HGs are from East Ukraine, very close to where Yamnaya is supposed to have originated, but they're probably not an ancestor of Yamnaya. But if HGs with more ANE than EHG contributed ancestry to Steppe than that would leave room for WHG heavy Ukraine HGs tocontribute ancestry to Steppe.
Resolving how Steppe got its CHG ancestry IMO is the most important part of the puzzle. Did CHG migrate en masse into EHG territory like EEF did into Europe? Did CHG admix heavily only in the south and then a EHG/CHG hyprid population replace EHG populations further north? There are an unlimited amount of possibilities.
Last thought is the new R1b Z2103 results in Hungary and Croatia indicate even Western Yamnaya had R1b Z2103. I just don't see how Corded Ware's R1a M417 or Bell Beaker R1b P312 could derive from Yamnaya.
Russia is the only place Steppe could have originated because even Hunter gatherers in eastern Ukraine were almost as much WHG as they were EHG.
@Samuel Andrews
May they admixted north of the steppe.
@Samuel Andrews
Do any of you have new ideas about the genesis of "Steppe" after the most recent papers? BTW, by Steppe I mean what Yamnaya was and what the non-EEF/WHG part of LNBA Europeans was.
Formula of the so-called steppe admixture looks like this:
R1a/R1b heavy loaded with CHG/Iran Neo admixture migrating from the Iranian Plateau + hot and horny European girls with big boobs and tones of WHG and EHG admixture = steppe admixture, pseudo – steppe admixture and whatever steppe admixture you like.
@Azarov
I hope you are sarcastic else you are a moron with a weird obsession for "European" girls. There is nothing about R1a/R1b which points to a CHG/Iran Neo origin.
And you are obviously hopeless cocksucker without brains and sense of humor.
Many here seem to FORGET that all Haplogroups that descent from Haplogroup K ( including K ) originate north of the Zargos Mountains.
and
What are EEF classified before being classified EEF .........think about it
@Samuel Andrews
I think Davidski's hypothesis accounts for the extra WHG in Ukraine HG.
With the great mobility that probably came with horse domestication, populations across the Pontic Caspian and surrounding area could have undergone extensive admixture, bringing in lots of EHG from populations farther north and east on the steppe.
Only after this initial mixing took place did large scale introgression from CHG take place from the south and spread outwards from there.
@Sam, "Last thought is the new R1b Z2103 results in Hungary and Croatia indicate even Western Yamnaya had R1b Z2103"
Where is this from? New results?
Trying to stay on topic...
Does anyone remember that one of the hunters in Karelia was something like J1 along with R1a.
Obviously in these Siding individuals the CHG half must be explained by the migration of an overwhelming CHG population.
I thought at the time, and even in the early Samara period there was evidence of southerly admixture.
What's the earliest evidence of CHG above the seas?
5000 b.c.?
It is a bit surprising that the authors suggest a source for Eurasian admixture in the Levant being the Persians and Macedonians(??).
I would replace Macedonians with Mycenaeans and other LBA/IA Aegean populations, like the Sea Peoples. Also the very strong ties and population movements between the Levant and Cyprus could have introduced such minor admixture.
Well obviously haplogroups J2/J1 in Europe didn't come from Natufians or Neoltich Levantines, but from neolithic/chalcolithic Caucasians/Iranians or a population related to them. These groups also overrun Eastern Europe and mixed with Eastern European HGs forming the Yamna culture. And still some here think that J2/J1 and excess Basal Eurasian admixture in South East Europe arrived straight out of Levantine Slaves during the Roman Empire. These people never stop amazing me.
@http://italicroots.lefora.com
These groups also overrun Eastern Europe and mixed with Eastern European HGs forming the Yamna culture. And still some here think that J2/J1 and excess Basal Eurasian admixture in South East Europe arrived straight out of Levantine Slaves during the Roman Empire.
Tell us how much J1/2 there is on the Bronze Age European Steppe in Khvalynsk, Yamnaya and Srubnaya.
@BBB
What's the earliest evidence of CHG above the seas?
To date in Khvalynsk, as much as in Yamnaya in one individual with Y-hg Q and mtDNA U4, but the source and date of admixture are uncertain.
http://eurogenes.blogspot.com.au/2017/02/the-khvalynsk-men-2_16.html
Kurgans had only nobles however, not commoners. Still I believe that J1/J2 farmers were killed and their women impregnated by EHGs, forming steppe groups. Something like that didn't happen in South Eastern Europe and J1/J2 men were able to pass on their y-dna haplogroups alongside the excess Basal Eurasian admixture.
When there is a Karelian hunter with J, who essentially is autosomaly the same as the orher EHG's, we can see there is movements from the Iranian Plateau to the deep steppe since atleast the mesolithic.
@saman sistani
When there is a Karelian hunter with J, who essentially is autosomaly the same as the other EHG's, we can see there is movements from the Iranian Plateau to the deep steppe since at least the mesolithic.
I'd say the Mesolithic J came from the North Caucasus, from a population already heavily diluted with EHG.
@Davidski,
"I'd say the Mesolithic J came from the North Caucasus, from a population already heavily diluted with EHG."
Yes I believe you are correct, but wouldn't the J's have ultimately came from the south of the Caucasus, and as they diffused more northerly, they would pick up more EHG along a cline. IIRC CHG was a mixture of Iran Neo and EHG.
Saman---wasn't CHG a mixture of Iran_Neo and pseudo EHG? But this, I mean: didn't it come to acquire ANE and Villabruna-related separately as opposed to mixing with actual EHG people?
@ Bbb
"What's the earliest evidence of CHG above the seas".
Actually CHG or something like it on ADmixture first appears in one of the Varna females which date to 45/430o BC.
Davidski's date for the Khvalynsk men is wrong by 1000 years, and have been revised down to 42/4000 BC - 3600 BC.
Varna doesn't appear to have much if any CHG. It has a lot of EHG though.
The Khvalynsk guy already has CHG on a par with some Yamnaya. So this admixture might predate Khvalynsk.
It would be interesting to have a map with the timeline of the aDNA so that we have all the data on a board.
it's possible?
Regards
I'm sure it's possible, and someone might have done it already.
I'll be running the data and analyzing it when it's released.
@David Rabaez:
That is an excellent idea and was thinking about this too! I was thinking it can be a collab project of some kind involving regular posters here. What do you think?
I'm exploring the idea that J2b1-M205 migrated earlier to the Levant than J1-P58. The fact that Chalcolithic Israel is 17% Chalcolithic Iran using admixture points to an earlier expansion from Iran (or its proxies) to the SW, perhaps bringing viniculture from Urmia to Israel/Palestine. J1-P58 seems to make sense as a Hurrian or K-A migration to the Levant. Note that J2b1-M205 has a distribution in Cyprus in accord with a Chalcolithic to EBA migration from the Levant to the island.
Obviously it does not predate Khvalynsk much at all because it would not be completely missing from all samples before 4000 BC, to date
I'm not sure on about Varna outlier yet. They model it as 43% "Yamnaya" in Supp T 4
@David Rabaez
Something like this?
http://umap.openstreetmap.fr/en/map/ancient-human-dna_41837#3/44.40/55.02
@Arza:
I was thinking something along the lines of a map with colored bars standing at relevant locations and changing color proportions over time to reflect demographic change in the area. Essentially, youtube material.
https://www.yfull.com/tree/R-Y20253/
I have a Lebanese in my haplogroup. How did he get there? It belongs to a noble family and its ancestors says that they go back to the year 1,200. Crusaders, Romans?
Note also that U3a'c was found circa 4700 BCE at Seh Gabi, Iran and U3a in Chalcolithic Israel circa 4400 BCE!
https://www.google.com/maps/d/viewer?mid=13IKIpTRYwzqqlmAb_d1kCvConFE&hl=en_US&ll=44.77793589631628%2C21.533203125&z=3
Btw, for all you R1b enthusiasts out there:This is a great map but they need to update it. The bofurcation between r-l51 and z-103 is really interesting to visualize.
I think the map with the timeline should be treated as a collaborative project in which specialists in various subjects contribute their grain of sand. It would be nice and we would have all the data in a single place, so many data are appearing that it becomes complicated to have everything in the head. For example, http://geacron.com/home-en/?sid=GeaCron846024.
@ Anthro Survey
https://www.google.com/maps/d/viewer?mid=13IKIpTRYwzqqlmAb_d1kCvConFE&hl=en_US&ll=44.77793589631628%2C21.533203125&z=3
Firstly Jean Manco put Villabruna, R1b1a, 14000 years ago, in Tyrol (only after a letter of mine she put him in Belluno Province, Veneto, Italy). Now she put him in Nowhere.
"Manco a farlo apposta" we say in Italian.
The awakening will be hard. Not only she shall write her book again, but imagine if she shall refund his shoppers!
@epoch
Mbuti Iran_Neolithic Kostenki14 Villabruna 0.0137 2.493 716391
Mbuti Iran_Neolithic Kostenki14 Bichon 0.0156 2.841 823008
Mbuti Iran_Neolithic Kostenki14 Loschbour 0.0113 2.056 815524
Mbuti Iran_ChL Kostenki14 Villabruna 0.0271 6.144 807309
Mbuti Iran_ChL Kostenki14 Bichon 0.0238 5.342 965639
Mbuti Iran_ChL Kostenki14 Loschbour 0.0234 5.421 957873
If you can decide on the different eras that each need a map and gather consistent data for each of these era (a good amount of populations). I'd be more than happy to create the maps out of the data.
Creation of a map with interactive timeline
http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?10748-Creation-of-a-map-with-interactive-timeline&p=239489#post239489
Regards
@ Davidksi
I read on Anthrogenica that the Mycenaean aDNA paper will be released very soon. Any idea about when will it be released and/or any leaks about results?
I don't know exactly when, but yes, apparently very soon.
Haven't heard anything about the results.
Yesterday I read someone on Anthrogenica say it would come "in a couple of days", but as expected no source was given. Take it for what it's worth
I was the source. It might be that soon. Let's wait and see.
Guess I need to start paying more attention to who writes what ahah
@Roy King
I checked with Davidski's Global 10 data the Jordan_EBA samples and the best source of admixture is also Iran Chalcolithic. In the PCA of the paper they look quite similar to these later Canaanites, though with a bit less Iran Chalcolithic, as can also be seen in the model:
Jordan_EBA:I1730
Levant_Neolithic:I0867 71.3 %
Iran_Chalcolithic:I1661 23.6 %
Iran_Neolithic:I1290 5.1 %
Armenia_EBA:I1658 0 %
Yamnaya_Samara:I0231 0 %
Kotias:KK1 0 %
Iran_Late_Neolithic:I1671 0 %
Iran_Hotu:I1293 0 %
Barcin_Neolithic:I0707 0 %
Armenia_Chalcolithic:I1631 0 %
That sample is dated to 2489-2299 calBCE. So it slightly predates the 4.2K event. But that's in line with the revised chronology from this paper (1):
Radiocarbon evidence dates the end of the Early Bronze II–III urban culture of the southern and central Levant consistently to around 2500 BC. However, the process of de-urbanisation had already started at the beginning of the Early Bronze Age III period, sometime in the early 3rd millennium BC. The "collapse" of the first cities was not a sudden event; it was a prolonged process that continued for several centuries and, based on chronological data at our disposal, occurred independently of and earlier than the rapid climate change which took place around 2200 BC. By that time, the southern Levant had already returned to agro-pastoralism and the fortified cities had lain in ruins for centuries.
There is the archaeological connection to the Kura-Araxes culture (2):
In conclusion, evidence is surely mounting that Khirbet Kerak tradition and practice shares several significant traits with Kura-Araxes/ETC communities in South-Eastern Anatolia, significantly expanding the range of shared cultural attributes beyond ceramic technology and giving more substance to the hypothesized migration from this region to the Levant shortly after 2900 BC.
I have no idea whether those could be 2 different phenomenons or part of the same one. Though the Armenia_EBA samples do have a good amount of Iran Chalcolithic admixture, and overall both populations are more similar than different to each other (so it could be regional differences among the K-A horizon).
1 - https://www.academia.edu/19337931/H%C3%B6flmayer_F._2015._The_Southern_Levant_Egypt_and_the_4.2_ka_BP_Event._In_2200_BC_-_Ein_Klimasturz_als_Ursache_f%C3%BCr_den_Zerfall_der_Alten_Welt_edited_by_H._Meller_H.W._Arz_R._Jung_and_R._Risch_113_30._Halle_Saale_._Landesdenkmalamt_f%C3%BCr_Denkmalpflege
2 - https://www.academia.edu/31576978/New_Evidence_for_the_Anatolian_Origins_of_Khirbet_Kerak_Ware_People_at_Tel_Bet_Yerah_Israel_ca._2800_BC
@ Davidski
My hypothesis: Mycaeneans came from North, from the Balkans. They were a little group of chiftains, so they engaged many mercenaries, also from Italy. If my hypothesis of the EEF from Northern Anatolia/Aegean Sea were the "Etruscans" (we find amongst them the oldest R-L23 like my Z2110 and the L277 of Bertolini separated 6000 or more years from the people who went to Samara, the first descendants of the Villabrunas to South-East), but Mycaeneans were more linked to the nucleous of IE we find in Samara and Central Europe, thus autosomally more linked to them. Y: R-L23, perhaps some R1a, I2, perhaps E-V13 or some J.
The most revealing would be what differences at a G-W level exist between Minoans and Myceneans, indeed if they at all segregate genetically.
I suspect BA Greece would have significant northern shift c.f. the first Greek farmers, effected by the fact that from c. 4000 BC distinct central (Boleraz-Baden) and east-central European (Cernavoda) influences can be seen.
Then c. 2200 BC we could expect to see Anatolian Bronze Age impact (certain wheel made pots, house forms) offsetting the above genetic shifts, but then again post-Vucedol migrations from Dalmatia would again impact a northern shift.
It'll be complex..
@Alberto
Thanks for those two fascinating papers! With the revised higher chronology and the broad evidence of Khirbet-Kerak migration to the Southern Levant, I would wager that I1730 (J2b1-M205) might reflect the KA migration from the NE (Eastern Anatolia/NW Iran etc...)
The J1-P58 might be reflective of the Amorites.
@New calculator using new samples. Above all we must look to autosomal results to compare ancient R1b-Z2110,to our ancestoral Villabruna R1b and others.
Any idea when the new samples will be released? Is it time for all inclusive R1b sample/calculator? With so many new samples including the ones in this paper, possible to make a calculator using only [20-30samples]@ 7000K-14000K year old R1b samples: combined with the newer R1b @ 3k-5K/Yamnaya-Poltavka data set?
Using my ancestors Italian R1b kit Kit M236020- I score 48.93! ancestral WHG with my 14K ancestor, who scores 90.64! Hopefully a new Eurogenes R1b test can be made, with Balkan,Ukrainian,Latvian,Russian samples. Here is an ancient calculator from puntDNAL.
puntDNAL K10 Ancient Oracle results:
puntDNAL K10 Ancient Oracle
Admix Results (sorted):
# Population Percent
1 WHG 90.64
2 Sub-Saharan 4.42
3 ENF 3.29
4 Siberian 0.83
5 Oceanian 0.59
6 E_Asian 0.23
------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------
1 WHG 48.93
2 CHG 27.18
3 ENF 20.65
4 Beringian 1.36
5 Amerindian 0.79
6 Siberian 0.7
7 ASI 0.4
-----------------------------------------------------
@ Salden
"In light of the evidence, I speculate that the more Natufian Palestinians aren't just migrants from Arabia and Egypt but could also be descended from groups who were in the Levant prior to the coming of what became the Caananites and related groups."
Ha, that may seem possible theoretically, but it looks extremely unlikely. The more natural explanation takes note of the fact that the Palestinians are Arabs, hence speaking a South Semitic language from Arabia, and it acknowledges that there was a Muslim expansion in the early Middle Ages.
I think there's really no need for unlikely theories like yours. The Palestinians have all rights to be right where they are now, IMHO. There's no need for justification via autochthony.
So, the three Jordan_EBA samples are from the area where the Ammonites lived in historical times, and the new Sidon_BA samples are from what later became the Phoenician land. And in all likelihood the ancient Israelites were genetically intermediate between these samples, and very similar to both.
The Steppe admixture that mixed into the Levant 3.75 - 2.17 kya may be mostly from the Hittites and/or the Sea Peoples. The Hittite empire extended quite far to the south
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Datei:Hittite_Empire.png
and even the bible mentions the Hittites (though it's controversial that it refers to the real Anatolian Hittites), and the Philistines in the Southern Levant are often said to be derived from Sea Peoples.
What I find rather strange is how the f4 stat (Lebanese_Christian, Test; Sidon_BA, Chimp) is negative for all sorts of European populations, even for Icelanders and the English. Although it's significant only for Sardinians and North Italians. But doesn't this mean nonetheless that Sidon_BA shares more alleles with Europeans than with Lebanese_Christians?
Having "Iran_CHL" ancestry should not indicate the contributing individuals arrived from Iran. Rather the elephant in the room are the ancient Mesopotamians whom we have no ancient data, although we can make some inferences. The more ancient CHG and his younger cousins from Iran_Chl likely formed a band across the Caucasus mountains, the Zagros, as well as the eastern portion of the Middle East. In truth, the eastern brother of EEF who separated from one another...what is it, 24000 years ago(?), and have been competing for territory ever since.
Any new info about that south-asia paper?
@Roy King
Interesting about source of J2b in Cyprus. I understand you refer to evidence from the paper published last year. Can you pin point exactly the evidence about the source and timing of J2b in Cyprus? Also, based on current aDNA evidence, what would you conclude about the source of J2a in Cyprus or for that matter Crete?
@Simon_W
Yes, that's something we've seen with formal stats when dealing with populations with diverse admixture. The results are not very realistic in those direct stats.
Davidski put together an Fst matrix that looks quite more useful for admixed populations (and less useful for the ones with low diversity, like Onge, Kalash, Native Americans,...). So for Near Eastern populations the results look much more as expected:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1xi4IiHUW3ZwkeVT03eqhk7-wqIgy-oQyBrrFSTuUO30/edit?usp=sharing
There is Jordan_EBA, so if you sort that column in descending order you will see that modern populations from the area are closest to it, while North Europeans are further away.
@ Alberto
Thanks for the hint.
@salden,
these days I ask... paper from Whom?
@ Alberto and @ Simon_W, yes, been away this weekend, so didn't have time to properly post earlier, but this was my objection to uses of the outgroup F-statistic - Fst gives a quite sharply different rank ordering of distance, for the Jordan_EBA, who look pretty indistinguishable here from Sidon_BA.
For Levant_N, using a set of Fst calculated by Davidski vs his latest D-stats datasheet (of the form D(Chimp,Ancient)(Mbuti,X) - http://eurogenes.blogspot.co.uk/2016/10/on-gamkrelidze-ivanovs-dubious-map.html):
http://i.imgur.com/sV4ROCz.png
This seems like an issue across populations where the more "basal" (or just more heterozygous populations) just seem depressed in the D-stat: http://imgur.com/a/sbcS5. Comparisons here are for EHG, WHG, Neolithic to Bronze Age populations from the Near East and Europe.
If you take the Levant_N example, by Fst Saudis are (in the panel I could cross compare) in the top 2 populations in relatedness to Levant_N, only more distant than Italian_Sicilian. If you look at the D-stat, then Saudis are more distant than Polish and Lithuanians from Levant_N.
Similarly, if take Fst, Iranians are among the 5 closest populations to Iran_Chalcolithic. Take the D-stat, and they're more distant than Polish and Belarusians. Armenians are the closest population to Armenia_Chalcolithic by Fst, but as distant as Ukrainians, and more distant than all Europeans, when we take the D-stat measure.
Likewise the f4(Lebanese_Christian, Test;Sidon_BA, Chimpanzee) stat here implies that the closest Middle Eastern population to Sidon_BA (Assyrian) is more differentiated from Sidon_BA than the most differentiated European population in their panel (Croats).
I don't know if this issue is due to diverse admixture though, or some systematic bias in how the D-stats perform in more heterozygous populations.
I definitely would not draw with confidence that the Palestinians are descended from a disruptively different migrating population necessarily; they are closer to Jordan_EBA by Fst than Assyrians:
http://i.imgur.com/pXaeVof.png.
@Simon_W
I think the most likely scenario is that Palestinians are a mixture of Sidon-like people and folks from Arabia who came in several waves to the area. Ghassanids jump to mind. But it seems the settlement of nomadic Arabians was most significant in the middle ages and certainly mid-late Ottoman era.
So it's ironic how Israelis and Palestinians are both partially of immigrant origins: one being part European and one part Arabian.
Talking about Jerusalem, you may read in the Bible the following in Ezekiel 6 th century BCE:
" Thus saith the Lord God unto Jerusalem; Thy birth and thy nativity is of the land of Canaan; thy father was an Amorite, and thy mother an Hittite"
Te writers were conscious of some previous mixtures-
@Jijnasu
There are a couple of papers in the works on ancient DNA from South Asia. At least one may have been submitted by now, but I don't know.
Historical linguistics seem not support the origin of Semitic languages in Mesopotamia. I did a very fast check and according to Wikipedia:
”The East Semitic languages are one of six current divisions of the Semitic languages, the others being Northwest Semitic, Arabian, Old South Arabian (also known as Sayhadic), Modern South Arabian, and Ethio-Semitic. The East Semitic group is attested by two distinct languages, Akkadian and Eblaite, both of which have been long extinct. They stand apart from other Semitic languages, traditionally called West Semitic, in a number of respects. Historically, it is believed that this linguistic situation came about as SPEAKERS OF EAST SEMITIC LANGUAGES WANDERED FURTHER EAST, SETTLING IN MESOPOTAMIA DURING THE THIRD MILLENNIUM BCE, AS ATTESTED BY AKKADIAN TEXTS FROM THIS PERIOD. By the beginning of the second millennium BCE, East Semitic languages, in particular Akkadian, had come to dominate the region. They were influenced by the non-Semitic Sumerian language and adopted cuneiform writing.
However, the exact phonological make-up of the languages is not fully known, and the absence of features may have been the result of the inadequacies of Sumerian orthography to describe the sounds of Semitic languages rather than their real absence.
The word order in East Semitic may also have been influenced by Sumerian, being subject–object–verb rather than the West Semitic verb–subject–object order.”
"The Central Semitic languages are a proposed intermediate group of Semitic languages, comprising the Late Iron Age, modern dialect of Arabic (prior to which Arabic was a Southern Semitic language), and older Bronze Age Northwest Semitic languages (which include Aramaic, Ugaritic, and the CANAANITE LANGUAGES OF HEBREW AND PHOENICIAN)."
@ Kristiina
I said that Semite lamguages were born at the periphery of the Natufian world where hg. J dominated, amd J wasn't clearly "Natufian", but introgressed from Caucasus, Iran or elsewhere. I think that I/J belonged to the European hunter-gatherers as R1 etc. We'll see next from the aDNA.
A quick note on Arabs and Arabians of the south Levant. If you look into the historical records, you will realize that Arabians have a deep rooted connection with the Southern Levant pre dating Judaism,Christianity or Islam. From Midian to Qedar and Geshem the Arabian.
@Gioiello:
I am in agreement with you regarding J/I being strongly associated with and originating in Paleolithic hunter gatherer groups of Western Eurasia(not just Europe but also Northern parts of the Middle east).
Now, what haplogroups do you think were strongly associated with basal eurasians and/or basal-rich groups predating natufians?
To make my question even more specific(and difficult): which haplogroups did these basal rich groups carry that were not obtained from admixture w/Eurasian Hunter gatherers and/or SSAs?
I think T and E were cleary associated with early basal-rich populations but don't know whether they were ultimately obtained from admixture w/Eurasians or SSAs.
What exotic haplogroups exist in Arabia and southern Iran today? This can provide clues.
@ Anthro Survey
I'd agree with you about hgs T and E, but I am not an expert of autosome, and about Y E I think it is too old and too widespread for coming from only one place. I'd say only some E subclades.
This study may be compatible with Juris Zarins' theory of the origin of the Semitic languages.
During the 8.2 kiloyear aridity event, nomadic pastoralism is created by farmers forced to abandon their settlements in northern Mesopotamia, who then spread across the periphery of the Levant and down into Arabia. It seems likely now that these people were Iran Chalcolithic/CHG related and probably carried Yhg J in large numbers. They adopt an Afroasiatic Language that becomes proto Semitic from their nearby settled Natufian like Levantine farmers or perhaps the related Harifian foragers in the Negev desert, who they may have had frequent contact with despite the new pastoralists inhabiting a different ecological niche and thus not frequently mixing.
Later, some of these pastoralists, like the Akkadians, migrate into Mesopotamia proper and settle into urban farmer civilizations. Now the 4.2 kiloyear aridity hits. The collapse of settled Mesopotamian society pushes Semitic speaking farmer refugees into the Levant, where they finally mix with the Natufian like farmers. Or perhaps the temporary decline of Levantine cities allows still mobile Semitic shepherds to introgress and settle in Canaan. Or both, perhaps something of a knock on effect like what happened with the Goths and other Germanics fleeing the Huns into Roman territory. Thus the birth of the Canaanite genotype we see today.
ydna J - my current guess...
IJ were (very roughly) the layer of HGs from the latitudes below the steppe (and above Natufians) and the I/J split was the end result of a physical separation (I west, J east) by a physical obstacle - (LGM related?) - my guess at the rough dividing line between the two being the Black Sea ish.
So three rectangles - a long one at the top (steppe R1) and two half-ones below (WHG-like ydna I and CHG-like ydna J). The long rectangle connecting both would then be how some J individuals could get hooked up with a steppe group and ended up in the far west and maybe vice versa.
(How and when R1 got to the northern rectangle other people can argue about.)
Some of those HGs (often those around lakes/wetlands imo cos higher pop. density) then developed farming (or partial farming) where wild versions of various soon to be domesticated crops were in local abundance. After that it gets complicated.
@Creative
A quick note on Arabs and Arabians of the south Levant. If you look into the historical records, you will realize that Arabians have a deep rooted connection with the Southern Levant pre dating Judaism,Christianity or Islam. From Midian to Qedar and Geshem the Arabian.
Depends on what you mean by “Arab” and when you consider Judaism to have come into existence. The term translated as “arab” in various ancient Semitic languages simply refers to people who live in the desert/wilderness, and doesn’t necessarily imply a particular ethnolinguistic group. The so-called Midianite pottery occurs primarily in and around the Araba valley where the first known historical language was Edomite, a Canaanite language. The first mention of the Qederites dates to 738 BCE and Qeder appears to have been Northwest Arabia rather than the Levant, though on the immediate periphery. The Biblical references to Qeder are in relatively late texts which are full of anachronistic elements. It’s not until the Second Century BCE there is clear evidence of Arab presence in the personal names of Nabateans, and yet all their early inscriptions were still in Aramaic.
Then again, the 5.9 kiloyear event as the origin of Semitic herders lines up better with the latest Bayesian inference studies about the language. So maybe this is when the Semitic language transfer from settled post Natufian Levantines to mobile Iran Chalc herders happened.
Maghreb
a bit of wild speculatin...
I think the Atlantic Megalith culture was a kind of early maritime trading (mini) empire with its base in Southern Portugal (med. climate so suited to neolithic farming package) and initially anyway, various kinds of resource extraction settlements along the Atlantic coast
- soft metals in Brittany, Ireland and SW Britain
- the widely traded flint from the flint mine in northern Denmark
- amber from the Baltic
- and imo Skara Brae / Orkneys as a neolithic version of the Newfoundland banks.
Now that might be all wrong but *if* correct and *if* there is some kind of NW Africa connection to the Atlantic Megalith culture then it might have the same reason i.e. a resource extraction site of some kind.
One candidate might be Akjoujt in Mauritania which had a copper mine at least as far back as 1000 BC but was abandoned later for lack of wood.
So dna from around there might be interesting..
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copper_metallurgy_in_Africa#Ore_Sources
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mauritania
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Akjoujt
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/place/Akjoujt,+Mauritania/@19.5387988,-15.5146098,7.5z/data=!4m5!3m4!1s0xe9bacace9ecaa5f:0x32fcc85fcf9e1219!8m2!3d19.7461122!4d-14.3879205
@ Synome
I wonder if the Iran Chalcolithic-like population which moved into Levant and was Proto -Semitic would be some post-Halaf culture group in the upper Euphrates- Tigris. This might fit into a a pastoral group on the periphery (initially) of the AA world of farmers.
@ Matt
I see that also alot with Dstats. Slight recent African admixture is affecting all the scenarios you described, which seems to be absent in the ancients you mentioned. So dstats, which correlate with TOTAL drift history since Eurasians split from chimps or African (depending on your outgroup). So any slight recent input from the most divergent pops from W Eurasians (SSA, E Asian, etc) seems to have a large impact on W Eurasian dstats, and overshadows some IBD sharing that may exist.
For example, consistent with what you state, in D (kurds, Balochi1, Baloch2, out) where kurds and balochi1 are allowed to vary, the stat becomes very significantly +ve if I use one of my elevated SSA Balochi1 members, even when I substitute other W Asians for Kurds, who are less related to Balochis than Kurds are to Balochis
@Labayu
The Levant and Arabs go hand in hand, ever since Gindibu.
The Arabs in Antiquity: Their History from the Assyrians to the Umayyads
https://books.google.com/books/about/The_Arabs_in_Antiquity.html?id=pUepRuQO8ZkC&redir_esc=y
@Kurd, hmmm... It could be that. Though this effect also shows up with LNBA European samples though - http://i.imgur.com/T7zmoMO.png and is quite apparent in the Early Neolithic samples also - http://i.imgur.com/rcEVO7S.png.
I have yet to be convinced of the ubiquity of low level African admixture though.
We should have pretty robust stats of the form, for example:
D(Armenia_Chal,Armenian_recent,Mbuti,Chimp)
D(Armenia_Chal,Armenian_recent,Yoruba,Chimp)
D(Armenia_MLBA,Armenian_recent,Mbuti,Chimp)
D(Armenia_MLBA,Armenian_recent,Yoruba,Chimp)
D(Iran_Chal,Iranian,Mbuti,Chimp)
D(Iran_Chal,Iranian,Yoruba,Chimp)
D(Jordan_EBA,Lebanese,Mbuti,Chimp)
D(Jordan_EBA,Lebanese,Yoruba,Chimp)
D(Bell_Beaker_German,German,Mbuti,Chimp)
D(Bell_Beaker_German,German,Yoruba,Chimp)
(and cross compare with various African groups - Mota, Biaka, Esan, etc.)
if we have ubiquitous admixture in recent samples explaining differences between Fst and formal stat. The moderns who are close in ancestry to the ancient but for African admixture should be systematically closer to a significant degree. It's easy now to lens these samples against ancient equivalents, in the D-stat.
The Levant and Arabs go hand in hand, ever since Gindibu.
The Arabs in Antiquity: Their History from the Assyrians to the Umayyads
https://books.google.com/books/about/The_Arabs_in_Antiquity.html?id=pUepRuQO8ZkC&redir_esc=y
Except that book's entire thesis is that the term "arab" didn't refer to an ethnolinguistic group in antiquity, which is exactly as I said.
It's possible Gindibu did speak some Arabic dialect. It's been argued that his name is a cognate of the Arabic jundub, but that doesn't necessarily make it Arabic considering the vast number cognates shared between the various Semitic languages spoken in the region, many of which clearly entered into Arabic from related languages. But suppose his army did speak Arabic, how would the presence of that army in Orontes Valley for a single battle as part of a coalition that also included the biblical Ahab of Israel indicate a presence of Arabs prior to Judaism? Especially since, it's never mentioned in the Assyrian sources that his territory is subsequently conquered, which is the case with the rest, suggesting that his territory was likely in the northern Arabian desert, on the periphery of the Levant, also exactly as I said.
Following the Zarins theory, these early pastoralists would be a parallel development to the Halaf culture, both having descended from PPNB cultures in Upper Mesopotamia that disappeared during the 8.2 Kya event.
The herders may have had continuing interactions with their settled neighbors, but the Halaf culture and their descendants probably wouldn't be Semitic speakers in this model. In fact, my guess is that they may have spoken a language ancestral to Sumerian, and gradually moved southeastward towards the Persian gulf, becoming the Ubaid culture, and then finally Sumerians. The connection between Ubaid and Sumer is well established. What is much less clear is what language the early Ubaid and Halaf spoke, and the nature of the transition between them.
Matt,
So what are the results of those stats you posted
@ Synome
"The herders may have had continuing interactions with their settled neighbors, but the Halaf culture and their descendants probably wouldn't be Semitic speakers in this model. In fact, my guess is that they may have spoken a language ancestral to Sumerian, and gradually moved southeastward towards the Persian gulf, becoming the Ubaid culture, and then finally Sumerians. The connection between Ubaid and Sumer is well established. What is much less clear is what language the early Ubaid and Halaf spoke, and the nature of the transition between them."
Yes, from vague recollection in the early Ubaid period, it is northern Mesopotamia which is more densely settled, and gradually southern Mesopotamia fills in subsequently. I recall that the northern origin of Sumerians had been popular amongst linguists, seems there is archaeological support.
Might also explain why some have even argued for evidence of early / pre-IE contact with Sumerian.
I care about the genetics part of discussion not linguistic. But I was thinking if IE didn't originate in the Pontic Caspien Steppe how can we explain the basal IE language Tocherian?
The Anatolian branch seems to be all the non-Steppe PIE theories have. But no contemporary languages in Mesoptamia and the Levant were IE even though they had loads of Iran Neolithic and CHG ancestry.
Another piece of evidence for the Steppe origin of IE languages is that a huge majority of the first recorded languages in Europe were IE. Celtic and Germanic and Slavic and then later Latin expanded recently but why did so many distinct IE branches(7 branches?) exist in early historical Europe which didn't have much CHG/Iran Neo ancestry but lots of Steppe ancestry?
The main branch outside of Europe; Iranian and ultimately Indo-Iranian, can confidently be traced back to the Steppe more than anyother IE branch. Archaeology and now genetics trace the Sycthians and Sarmations back to Andronovo. Our only post-Chalcolithic genomes from Iran have a dose of Steppe ancestry. The same R1a Z93 branches which existed in Srubnaya exist in modern Iran at appreciable frequencies. It's totally believable that Iranian speaking groups in Southern Russia migrated through the Caucasus.
The Egyptian aDNA is up boys and girls...
https://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms15694
http://www.nature.com/news/mummy-dna-unravels-ancient-egyptians-ancestry-1.22069
Lots of mtDNA R0a, T1a, J2a2, U6a, and HV1 in ancient Egypt. That's exactly what one would expect looking at modern mtDNA.
T1a, J2a2, and R0a are probably Natufian lineages. European-specific T1a1 first appears in Yamnaya. This is good evidence some of Yamnaya's Near Eastern ancestry was from "Western Farmers"(EF, Natufian).
@Kurd and Matt
A while ago Nick Patterson answered Alberto that all kinds of bad DNA may cause attraction to outgroups, advised against using Chimps and for Mbuti for exactly that reason (Chimp is more "exotic" and therefore more susceptible to it) and advised to look at transversions only if at all possible:
http://eurogenes.blogspot.nl/2016/05/yamnaya-khvalynsk-extra-chg-maybe.html?showComment=1463691125766#c1128934991871964864
"Strikingly, the mummies were more closely related to ancient Europeans and Anatolians than to modern Egyptians."
@Epoch2013, if so then what outgroup formal stats are usable? If any? Or should papers like this one just not be using that methodology at all?
@Matt
First, I just bring the message :-)
But I think that, considering what Nick Patterson said, if you want to prove admixture of an outgroup rather than a population you check against an outgroup, you'd have to at least have more than one statistic proving your point.
Latest papers had New Generation samples and Shot Gun samples and ran them both. If the admixture keeps up you're on to something I'd say.
@ epoch2013, sorry, not aiming to shoot the messenger here. Just odd that papers from the "Reich group" are using outgroup f3 and f4 stats at all if what you're saying follows.
Could you rephrase on the "But I think that, considering what Nick Patterson said, if you want to prove admixture of an outgroup rather than a population you check against an outgroup, you'd have to at least have more than one statistic proving your point."? I can't parse this.
@Matt
Yes, that wasn't well phrased. What wanted to bring across is that I think Nick Pattersons advice is that to substantiate on an SSA admixture you probably need more than one piece of evidence. So, for instance, show that a similar admixture is visible in a number of samples, that it remains visible with and without transversions and so on.
>Based on this paper, would Syrians also be similar to Lebanese in admixture?
Syrians seem to have more bedouin admixture and less albeit still high CHG.
>If you take the Levant_N example, by Fst Saudis are (in the panel I could cross compare) in the top 2 populations in relatedness to Levant_N, only more distant than Italian_Sicilian. If you look at the D-stat, then Saudis are more distant than Polish and Lithuanians from Levant_N.
Could this be due to more recent African, Levantine and South Asian admixtures in modern Saudis?
@ Gioiello said...
Who is usurping the nickname I gave to Cavalli Sforza...
I think Gioiello will be the next Italian Nobel prize after Dulbecco and Levi-Montalcini! LOL!
I'm just trolling you a little... Don't worry, be happy! :D
@ Cavallo Sforzesco
"@ Gioiello said...
Who is usurping the nickname I gave to Cavalli Sforza...
I think Gioiello will be the next Italian Nobel prize after Dulbecco and Levi-Montalcini! LOL!
I'm just trolling you a little... Don't worry, be happy! :D"
I am waiting that also some Farfugliani or Sgaramello answer...
@ Cavallo Sforzesco
"I think Gioiello will be the next Italian Nobel prize after Dulbecco and Levi-Montalcini! LOL!"
Having demonstrated through my theories how many morons, often with a PhD , didn't merit it, perhaps they could give it to me for that.
It looks more like a politically motivated study.
Any person who knows the history of the Levant knows that modern day Lebanese aren't indigenous to Lebanon, all sects came to Lebanon in the last 1500 years at different phases, Lebanon is a refugee camp due to its mountainous terrain and relatively unstrategic position compared to Palestine, Syria and Iraq.
I sencerly cannot understand why people bother looking back 4000 years ago to trace an ancient descendant rather than reading how modern history events are related to acquiring a specific haplogroup.
The main aim of this manipulative study is giving the notion that Canaanites were solely J2 because modern day Lebanon has a high frequency of this Haplogroup (Kurdish Arabized Muslims and Anatolian Maronites and Druze) despite previous studies were Canaanite showed a J1 and E1 haplogroup affinity.
Someone really wanted to take away Palestinians' claim as descendants of the Canaanites and no better candidate than the Lebanese who always aspired for deffrentiating themselves as cellestial species from their surrounding.
And why was this study published in an orchestrated manner in all leading news sites in the same day? (27-28 July) zionist funded propaganda?!
Lebanon and Palestine had open borders for thousands of years and the populations intermarried and interchanged migrants since ever, now according to Israel's wishes one mile to the north resides the Phoenicians and one mile to the south lives Arab Palestinian?
Post a Comment