Who remembers kum4 from
Omrak et al. 2016? I'm pretty sure now that this individual packs a lot of ancestry from the Pontic-Caspian (PC) steppe.
If so, that's a big deal, because her Chalcolithic (or Late Neolithic?) burial was located at Kumtepe. That is, in the same part of Anatolia as the later settlement of Troy, which may have been founded by early Anatolian speakers from Eastern Europe (see
here).
The qpAdm mixture models below, featuring kum4 and the likely older kum6, also from Kumtepe, are based on qpfstats output. qpfstats is a new program from the David Reich Lab specifically designed to help analyze low coverage ancients (see
here). And kum4 is certainly that.
TUR_Kumtepe_N_kum4
RUS_Progress_En 0.383±0.114
TUR_Barcin_N 0.617±0.114
chisq 7.868
tail prob 0.247957
Full output
TUR_Kumtepe_N_kum4
IRN_Seh_Gabi_C 0.325±0.150
TUR_Barcin_N 0.675±0.150
chisq 14.736
tail prob 0.0224096
Full output
TUR_Kumtepe_N_kum6
RUS_Progress_En 0.121±0.042
TUR_Barcin_N 0.879±0.042
chisq 21.790
tail prob 0.00132149
Full output
TUR_Kumtepe_N_kum6
IRN_Seh_Gabi_C 0.283±0.059
TUR_Barcin_N 0.717±0.059
chisq 6.289
tail prob 0.391566
Full output
Indeed, kum4 and kum6 offer just ~10,000 and ~100,000 "valid SNPs", respectively (see
here). However, if nothing else, the results are clearly not random.
For one, because they fit the expected pattern, with the likely older individual lacking ancestry from the PC steppe (her model with RUS_Progress_En shows a weak statistical fit). Moreover, the qpAdm mixture ratios align almost perfectly with the results in my Principal Component Analysis (PCA) of ancient West Eurasian genetic variation. Coincidence?
See also...
Perhaps a hint of things to come
245 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 245 of 245Yes Corded ware cones from China lol
https://bellbeakerblogger.blogspot.com/2015/12/corded-ware-cultures-actually-related.html?m=1
I'm interpreting "surprises" in Single Grave culture as maybe haplogroups that we wouldn't expect in the area, such as G2 or E1b. Alternatively it could be fully formed SNPs under U106 or P312+ such as L48 or L21. That would certainly be a surprise. Most people are expecting groups like I1 or R1a1 along side R1b of course. I wouldn't consider those surprises.
Those Siberian island mtdna results are false.
@ Rob
"The earliest Bell beakers in Portugal aren’t before 2450 bc"
Very interesting.
@ Ric
Yep. Freely admit this goes against the grain, but it can be backed up...
AWood, I think it would be equally interesting in Single Grave SNPs M458 and CTS1211 under R1a, because many still think that at that time these mutations were only much further in the east.
David, can you say something more about that?
I don't know anything about R1a or I1 in Single Grave.
That's not what I was referring to.
David, I wonder what else can be interesting and surprising if not a haplogroups... For me it would be interesting if the Baltic HG component appeared in the Single Grave.
"I don't know anything about R1a or I1 in Single Grave.
That's not what I was referring to."
Lol look at me starting rumours. Doesn't the only published SGC individual have R1a?
RISE61 isn't Single Grave.
His isotopic signature is non-local and he was buried in a communal gallery grave.
https://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2019/08/isotopes-vs-ancient-dna-in-prehistoric.html
@Davidski
"Archi thinks that R1a and Corded Ware came from Siberia. But this is again nonsense."
You're confusing the times. Are you saying that the R1 line didn't come from Siberia? What about the Malta's boy (R*)? Are you claiming that the R1 line is from Anatolia? Corded ware is a Siberian male tradition, it has been there since ancient times, and the progress of the genome confirms this. I am not mistaken.
Palaeolithic Russia Mal'ta, Siberia [MA1] 22570-22140 calBCE (20240±60 BP, UCIAMS-79666) M R*
Russia Yuzhnyy Oleni Ostrov [UZOO 74] M 5500-5000 BC R1a1* C1g
Dnieper-Donets Ukraine Yasinovatka [Ya 45] M 5471 - 5223 BC C
Dnieper-Donets Ukraine Nikolskoye [Ni 58] M undated C
Dnieper-Donets Ukraine Yasinovatka [Ya 34] 5323 - 4941 BC C4a2
Catacomb Ukraine Odessa province [D1.8] 2435 В± 106 BC C4a3
Ukraine Odessa province [L8] 2512 В± 105 BC C4a6
Mnogovalikovaya (KMK), or Babino Ukraine Odessa province [L15] 2161 В± 107 BC C4a6
Potapovka Russia Utyevka VI, Samara_River, Samara 2469-1928 calBCE (AA12568) M P1 P284 C1
About the corded ware, I stated the following things: for the first time in Europe, it appeared in the North in the region of Karelia and began to move South, this tradition is associated with the spread of the patriarchate, it marked the masculine principle, it is associated with Siberia, that is, North-Eastern Europe and Siberia at that time were a single cultural area. On lake Baikal somewhere the same the corded ware there we have:
Neolithic Kitoi Russia Lokomotiv, Irkutsk [LOK_1980.006 and LOK_1981.024.01] 5500-4885 BC M R1a1-M17 2 samples
Baikal has nothing to with Hg R. It is full of N
Haplogroup R became extinct in Siberia; until it came back in the Bronze Age
Old news
@Archi
Neolithic Kitoi Russia Lokomotiv, Irkutsk [LOK_1980.006 and LOK_1981.024.01] 5500-4885 BC M R1a1-M17 2 samples
Modern contamination.
Unproved.
It’s not even carbon dated. Seems it was not replicated by any of the several recent studies on Siberia and the East
Err hello
The spread of Corded Ware also has nothing to do with Karelia
Hg R arrived long long before pottery
The Kitoi culture was radiocarbon date. Samples from the same burial ground of the same culture were dated with radiocarbon.
When the R1a from Siberia was published we assumed it was legit. I tend to agree it is probably modern contamination.
Back then, we had less ancient DNA. Thought the R1a in Siberia was from an ANE-rich pop, turns out they were actually almost 100% East Asian so unlikely to carry ANE Y DNA. And the ANE Y DNA which shows up in Siberia later is Q1a2.
R1a ultimately comes from North/Central Asia, but by 5000 BC it may have been exclusive to Eastern Europe. R1a is the odd one. R1b was common throughout Europe, R1a seems to have only existed in parts of Far East Europe, eventually became R1a M417 rest is history/
Archi is right it is unproved. Maybe...it is legit Siberian R1a. But, obviously R1a M417 can't be from Siberia. Which is all that matters when talking about Corded Ware origins.
There was no cultural barrier between Eastern Europe and Siberia. Corded ware is a sign of Patriarchy, and it began to spread in Patriarchal societies as a sign of the Patriarchal (masculine) revolution. Accordingly, in the non-Patriarchal societies of Eastern Europe and Siberia, if it was then it was practically not used.
The Kitoi culture differs sharply from subsequent cultures in that its anthropology has a certain mestizo origin with some archaic Europoids, this was noted immediately.
https://i.ibb.co/WVRj5MB/Neolithic-Anthropological-formation.png
New papers via r khan's Twitter;
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.07.02.184507v1 - Genetic ancestry changes in Stone to Bronze Age transition in the East European plain - Fatyanovo...
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.07.03.185884v1 - Peopling of Tibet Plateau and multiple waves of admixture of Tibetans inferred from both modern and ancient genome-wide data - no new ancient Tibetan DNA, analysis with China samples
Well; the R1a sample from Lokomotov is not, in fact, carbon dated
All samples are inferred dating from archaeological culture
https://bhaparchive.artsrn.ualberta.ca/images/uploads/pdfs/Moussa.et.al.JAS-R.Nov.2016.pdf
After the Late paleolithic; Europe and Siberia diverged significantly
I had this same debate a while ago with some clown called music lover
@Davidski
About the oldest R1a, which you usually say is on the Dnieper. Arkhangelsk is by the way the northernmost part of Russia and close to Siberia.
PES001 Peschanitsa Arkhangelsk, RUSWeRuHG 10785–10626 cal BC Male XY U4a1 R1a5
Robbish I write only scientific truth that has been proven by decades of research by many different scientists from different Sciences, but you write only your own personal fantasies of a cloned clown.
R1a2 is wrong name.
They are R1a Z93 read the supplementary info. Fatyanovo (2700-2500 BC) is ancestor of Andronovo (1800-1000 BC) aka the Indo-Iranians.
Paper seems to make sense to me; Western Russia HG are EHG autosomally (from 10000 BCE down to 4500 BCE), including y Q1 Volosovo sample. Fatyanovo CW Central Europe like (not CWC early or anything like this) and R1a.
They have no Z94, we need a more precise definition. They wrote that the use ISOGG 2019....
Even looking at mtDNA I can see links between Fatyanovo and Andronovo. Some of the specific lineages they share exist in Southcentral Asia today, pretty damning evidence for Kurgan hypothesis when you see specific mtDNA link between a Tajik and Fatyanovo in Northwest Russia in 2600 BC.
Andronovo had inbred mtDNA. They derived from a small founding population, who probably is Fatyanovo.
@Samuel Andrews
"Andronovo derived from a small founding population, who probably is Fatyanovo."
No, it's an unsubstantiated assumption. This is called searching under a streetlight. You can see the results of Fatyanovo and Andronovo, but you can't see the results of Abashevo, Middle Dniepr, and so on. The fact that Fatyanovo people and Sintashta of the Central European CWC, it does not mean that Sintashta evolved from the Fatyanovo. The Fatyanovo people have present R1a-Z645, Sintashta it is not.
R1a-Z645 (xZ283)
Archi they have R1a Z93. Stop spreading lies.
How accurate do you guys think the phenotypic assesments are? They just gave predictions in the tables but not the frequencies of the alleles.
Now it is proved that the Mesolithic Veretye culture was R1a, it is related to R1a from the Mesolithic Onega culture. In Veretye, the Indo-European burial rite with dogs was used and there were sledges drawn by dogs.
Thanks Matt
@Samuel Andrews
"Archi they have R1a Z93. Stop spreading lies."
Stop spreading lies.
I did not write that they do not have R1a-Z93, I wrote that they have R1a-Z645 which do not have Sintashta.
NIK002 Nikultsino 15 Yaroslavl Russian Federation 57,5293 39,6699 Fatyanovo Fatyanovo Bronze Age 4100±34 2865–2500 UBA-41626 This study LLP2 Male 40–50 Krainov & Gadzyatskaya 1987 25859009 49,06% 0,10 9,82 0,03 0,05 XY 7% 0,2% NA U5a1a1 R1a-Z645
NIK008A Nikultsino 7 Yaroslavl Russian Federation 57,5293 39,6699 Fatyanovo Fatyanovo Bronze Age 4039±33 2834–2472 UBA-41631 This study LRP2 Male 25–30 Krainov & Gadzyatskaya 1987 273110046 35,04% 1,09 109,10 0,32 0,56 XY 8% 0,2% 0,77% H5b R1a-Z645 (xZ283)
TIM008 Timofeyevka 13 Ivanovo Russian Federation 57,1345 39,9757 Fatyanovo Fatyanovo Bronze Age 4036±32 2832–2473 UBA-41637 This study LRP2 Male 50–60 (30–35) Krainov 1972 34697637 46,16% 0,10 7,21 0,03 0,05 XY 11% 0,7% NA K1c1 R1a-Z645
VOR003 Voronkovo 5 Yaroslavl Russian Federation 57,5345 39,5525 Fatyanovo Fatyanovo Bronze Age 3987±29 2573–2466 UBA-41639 This study LLP2 Male 20–30 Krainov 1972 93653859 14,30% 0,10 34,30 0,03 0,05 XY 13% 0,1% NA H6a1a R1a-Z645
I also wrote that they did not identify any Z94.
@Arhi
Peschanitsa is nowhere near Siberia you clown.
And of course there's Z645 in Sintashta, because there's Z93 in Sintashta.
By the way, how much do you want to bet that there's Z94 in Fatyanovo?
NIK008A, Fatyanovo, 2834–2472 BC, mtDNA H5b
SVP9, Srubnaya, 1850-1200 BCE, mtDNA H5b
BOL001, Fatyanovo, 2829–2460 BC, mtDNA H1b
I4783, Andronovo, 1610-1454 calBC, mtDNA H1b
HAN004, Fatyanovo, 2835–2471, mtDNA H6a1a
VOR003, Fatyanovo, 2573–2466, mtDNA H6a1a
I1065, Sintashta, 2050-1650 BC, mtDNA H6a1a
I1064, Sintashta, 1879-1694 calBC, mtDNA H6a1a
SVP6, Srubnaya, 1913-1629 calBC, mtDNA H6a1a
VOR005, Fatyanovo, 2840–2343 BC, mtDNA K2a5b
I7480, Sintashta, 2050-1650 BCE, mtDNA K2a5b
BOL002, Fatyanovo, 2468–2211 BC, mtDNA J1c1b1a
NIK005, Fatyanovo, 2881–2581 BC, mtDNA J1c1b1a
VOD001, Fatyanovo, 2570–2299 BC, mtDNA J1c1b1a
RISE391, Sintashta, 2298-2045 calBC, mtDNA J1c1b1a
I7670, SIntashta, 2200-1800 BCE, J1c1b1a
HAL001, Fatyanovo, 2832–2473 BC, N1a1a1a1
TIM002, Fatyanovo, ---, N1a1a1a1
RISE391, Sintashta, 2120-1887 BC, N1a1a1a1
I4265, Andronovo, 1600-1500 BC, N1a1a1a1
I4255, Andronovo, 1200-1000 BC, N1a1a1a1
MOT001, Fatyanovo, ---, U2e1b
SKO001, Fatyanovo, ---, U2e1b
I4780, Andronovo, 1754-1642 calBC, U2e1b
IVA001, Fatyanovo, 2864–2496 BC, U4a1b
RISE505, Andronovo, 1746-1626 calBC, U4a1b
NAU002, Fatyanovo, 2836–2469 BC, U5b2a1a2
I1082, Sintashta, 2050-1650 BC, U5b2a1a2
I1089, Sintashta, 2050-1650 BC, U5b2a1a2
I4776, ANdronovo, 1767-1658 calBC, U5b2a1a2
I3976, Andronovo, 1100-1000 BC, U5b2a1a2.
Any R-Y3/Y2/L657 in these new R1a's? Lol
Nice trolling dipshit.
What does Arkhangelsk have to do with anything? Its in Europe and closer to the Don region that it is to the New Siberian Islands or Baikal.
Also it makes sense the New Siberian Islands mtdna is not accurate. Im guessing it was contaminated like the Baikal R1a. There were no ANE/West Eurasian populations that Far East d between 6000 BC-4000 BC. I'm guessing that region was originally their domain but they were long gone probably having migrated west or been admixed with East Eurasian populations.
@ Archi
Didn't Eastern and Western Rs split around 17 000 years ago when looking at the ANE component ? The Urals being the Centreline between East and West.
What are the eastern Rs? R2 or some basal clades of R1a/R1b?
Post a Comment