The origin, development, and legacy of the enigmatic Etruscan civilization from the central region of the Italian peninsula known as Etruria have been debated for centuries. Here we report a genomic time transect of 82 individuals spanning almost two millennia (800 BCE to 1000 CE) across Etruria and southern Italy. During the Iron Age, we detect a component of Indo-European–associated steppe ancestry and the lack of recent Anatolian-related admixture among the putative non–Indo-European–speaking Etruscans. Despite comprising diverse individuals of central European, northern African, and Near Eastern ancestry, the local gene pool is largely maintained across the first millennium BCE. This drastically changes during the Roman Imperial period where we report an abrupt population-wide shift to ~50% admixture with eastern Mediterranean ancestry. Last, we identify northern European components appearing in central Italy during the Early Middle Ages, which thus formed the genetic landscape of present-day Italian populations.Citation: C. Posth, V. Zaro, M. A. Spyrou, S. Vai, G. A. Gnecchi-Ruscone, A. Modi, A. Peltzer, A. Mötsch, K. Nägele, &. J. Vågene, E. A. Nelson, R. Radzevičiūtė, C. Freund, L. M. Bondioli, L. Cappuccini, H. Frenzel, E. Pacciani, F. Boschin, G. Capecchi, I. Martini, A. Moroni, S. Ricci, A. Sperduti, M. A. Turchetti, A. Riga, M. Zavattaro, A. Zifferero, H. O. Heyne, E. Fernández-Domínguez, G. J. Kroonen, M. McCormick, W. Haak, M. Lari, G. Barbujani, L. Bondioli, K. I. Bos, D. Caramelli, J. Krause, The origin and legacy of the Etruscans through a 2000-year archeogenomic time transect. Sci. Adv. 7, eabi7673 (2021). See also... Etruscans, Latins, Romans and others
Monday, September 27, 2021
The genetic origin and legacy of the Etruscans (Posth et al. 2021)
Over at Science Advances at ths LINK. I'll take a closer look at this issue after I get the relevant genotype data. Anyone got the link? Here's the paper abstract:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
321 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 321 of 321@Simon Stevin
I didn't know there were Assyrians with D2, that's very interesting. Do you know how diverged they are from the other D2s? Also, D0 has been found in Saudis and a Syrian, along with several African Americans.
MH_82
Yea the tree you posted seems alright for andamanese. SEAsia written all over it.
However, Papuan closer to andamanese than Hoabinhian seems wrong.
Wrt the western route into south asia.
We have dzudzuana sample from 25kya georgia. Laziridis models it as 78% Villabruna cluster (west eurasian) and 22% 'basal eurasian'. This basal eurasian has already split from the east eurasian line as per their tree. Dzudzuana therefore is west eurasian and has nothing to do with eastern ancestry, and this is the ancestry that dominates the whole of west asia to south asia later on (CHG, anatolian and IranN).
So therefore, the hypothesis of andamanese/Onge got populated from the west > south asia is dead on arrival with the data so far.
@Tom - or Celtic Britons are just undersampled for that period, and later got assimilated. Could be they were practicing cremation still or they are just not buried with Anglo Saxons?
One possibility is he was part Greek. A few of the Kievan Rus samples in northern Russia had Greek admixture.
An especially Near Eastern admixed Greek, like from Crete could look like Jewish admixture.
The East Med "Imperial" shift is definitely Trojan, and hence was in the Italian Peninsula long before the Imperial era. We can see it in R850. It wasn't Greek or Slave or any other nonsense. It was exactly as the Romans themselves stated.
Romans = Latins + Trojans
Simple as that.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rXsNKNZtdM0&ab_channel=HHMI%27sJaneliaResearchCampus
At 16:37 Reich is saying that:
4500 BP 90% population replacement with steppe migraton.
2900 BP 50% population replacement in the late bronze age.
1600 BP 40% population replacement in saxon period.
It seems for Reich both Insular Celts and Anglo-Saxons had a huge replacement in Britain.
@ Vasistha
''Yea the tree you posted seems alright for andamanese. SEAsia written all over it.
However, Papuan closer to andamanese than Hoabinhian seems wrong.''
It did not claim to be the final say, it was an initial interrogation incorporating the new data from BK.
But the main point here is that 'Asian' populations are nested within western diversity. The exact route of how this unfolded remains to be determined. But it is significant that its earliest representative is in northern China
Clearly, there was an initial proto-Papuan wave which was largely replaced by a more 'Asian' met-population, aside from populations like Papuans and Australians. My new tree has it branching off a common 'ENA' group, although i would need to explore other options too
The other highly important thing is that the earliest homo sapien specimens in SEA and Australia only date to ~ 35/30,000 bp, although some scholars are eager to claim that humans arrived in SEA & Australia as early as 70,000 bp
Obviously, the idea that southeast Asia acted as secondary homeland for homo sapiens has little scientific merit. In fact, i would question much of the narrative surrounding the early southern coastal dispersal
''We have dzudzuana sample from 25kya georgia. Laziridis models it as 78% Villabruna cluster (west eurasian) and 22% 'basal eurasian'. This basal eurasian has already split from the east eurasian line as per their tree. Dzudzuana therefore is west eurasian and has nothing to do with eastern ancestry, and this is the ancestry that dominates the whole of west asia to south asia later on (CHG, anatolian and IranN).''
This hypothetical "BE" population doesn't constrain anything. In fact, 'basal Eurasian' is not an archaeological or anthropological reality, but a statistical construct
More likely due to inflows from north African groups e.g. Mushabian
Dudzuana is too late to be relevant for the question of early human dispersal.
My experience modelling modern British Isles with Bell Beaker.
Is that Celts are 70% derived from Bell Beaker Britain, 30% derived from France like Celts.
So when Reich says 50% replacement, I think he is basing it on a few samples who were recent descendants of the Celtic migration.
R1b L21 is still the most common y-hg in Celts in Britain & Ireland. So chances are they mostly descend from British Bell Beaker.
"But the main point here is that 'Asian' populations are nested within western diversity. The exact route of how this unfolded remains to be determined. But it is significant that its earliest representative is in northern China"
1. Thats because Tianyuan is the only old sample we have. More southern samples are harder to preserve due to heat and humidity.
2. Noone claimed that east asia was primary homeland. of course it is nested within the west eurasian 40kya samples. Davidskis claim is that Onge were populated from west eurasia, not where they are originally from. That way all populations are originally from Africa. There is 0 evidence in your tree to prove that Onge were populated from west asia or west europe.
Tianyuan itself is in central/east china, and its more eastern longitude than even vietnam and laos.
3. Karelia/EHG has 60% ANE/MA1/AG3. ANE is 20-40% ENA. Similarly, IranN & CHG have 30% (onge/Tianyuan + ANE combined).
So to say that modern populations in europe are wholly nested within western eurasian tree is false. EHG & CHG/IranN are the biggest components of europe today.
on another note, does anyone have the link to csv/excel file of the SNP list and mutations, position that yfull uses at https://www.yfull.com/snp-list/?
@Arza: "If we ignore Yemenite_Mahra in the results, he won't be much different from Ukrainian samples with a Balkan shift that we already have in G25."
I think you may be right here.
Here's how I'm currently thinking of it (assuming no processing issues causing anything strange):
Firstly, back to that cline extension I did of the differences between the Belarus_MED sample and present day Belarus average, and presenting this cline bare on teh PCA with no other added samples: https://imgur.com/a/3bJetVY
Secondly adding in some more modern European averages for context: https://imgur.com/a/SGANP62
If I extend both directions, arbitrarily choosing 2x extension away from the average between them, then the exaggerated Belarus_MED end is kind of French-like in West Eurasian PCA, and somewhat distinct from the present day Balkan cline, but has more East European affinity in the more Europe specific PCA which makes these SW European populations a bad fit.
(Then the position of the exaggerated Present Day Belarusian end is more like Medieval Estonians or Iron Age Ingrians or Northwest Russian; all compatible with geneflow from this source since the early Medieval).
To me that does speak of potentially something paleo-Balkan like, in terms of having a French like or North Italian like overall profile combined with sharing less drift with Western Europeans in Europe specific PCA.
I think that might be the driver of why it picks up the Yemenite like ancestry, some combination of how the PCA projection is placing it that ends up forcing our representative EEF sources away from it.
Might be worth checking it out in a formal stat framework to see if that's a G25 issue, whether there is anything that makes the sample behave distinctly from being on the same cline as present day Europeans.
(The way I'd do it is take qpWave with an outgroup set of African_outgroup, Barcin, Yamnaya, WHG, Near_Eastern_target, East_Asian_target, but keep it blind to Balto-Slavic drift by not including Baltic_BA, and then see if the Medieval sample can be fit with passing rank between various present day clinal points from Europe. I'd expect a genuine Levant_N like pulse of detectable size like 5% should have an effect on this).
BEL_024 was processed using most legit www.usegalaxy.org tools.
And from Wikipedia:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Jews_in_Belarus
As early as the 8th century Jews lived in parts of the lands of modern Belarus. Beginning with that period they conducted the trade between Ruthenia, Lithuania, and the Baltic, especially with Danzig, Julin (Vineta or Wollin, in Pomerania), and other cities on the Vistula, Oder, and Elbe.
And again his haplo:https://www.yfull.com/tree/J-Y22075/
It starts to be boring...
y haplogroup with a branch forming 4400 YBP which is found Bosnia, Serbia and the Balkans seems consistent with the sample.
@MAtt
I really wants him without this south shift. In G25 he would be in such case pure Balto-Slav which I would very like...
I thought IUP/BachoKiro/Oase/Ust-Ishim like population represented a Crown Eurasian population that is neither East or West Eurasian. Don't they cluster between Kosenteki and Tianyuan type populations and their excess affinity to East Eurasians is due to Basal Eurasian admixture depressing the affinity towards them in West Eurasians?
Tianyuan is clearly an East Eurasians and it doesn't seem like he derives the majority of this ancestry from IUP. If that was the case IUP would cluster with East Eurasians instead of between Paleolithic/Mesolithic West and East Eurasians.
K2a/K2b should all be connected to this crown Eurasian population. Not sure about K1. SE Asia is unlikely for the origin of these populations. The only question is whether Yana/MA1/AG3's Eastern ancestry stems from later admixture with East Eurasians or if it is due to their K2b/P lineages passing from Crown Eurasian into East Eurasians and then West Eurasians as opposed to going straight from Crown Eurasians/East Eurasians. If the former then I expect the western side of ANE would have originally been some sort of y C1a/C1b?
@Typologist
In wiki's data probably some error, as early as the 8th century? Can't be. Why not given a link about this data? I didn't find anything about presence of Jews in the Studenka necropolis.
Indeed the evidence for the St Brice massacre is scant. What we do find in Oxford is 30 norse vikings slaughtered by the general public. Go public.
All vikings were known as Danes including the northman. Confusing right. There is absolutely no evidence there was murder at hand in the Danelaw.
Danelaw and its first mention I believe was in the 12 century. Crazy.
Sven the 2 with his 200 hundred ships waiting to invade the now Norman land paid off sven And his 200 ships. The Danes stayed. As anyone can see when looking at the genetics.
@ Foxvillager
In that video David Reich again makes the claim that WHG, EHG, Levant farmers and Iran farmers were "each as different from each other as Europeans and East Asians". Then he shows a PCA chart in which they all cluster quite near to each other whilst East Asians are nowhere to be seen, and are in fact miles off the chart.
Is he being intentionally misleading, or else what is going on here?
RE: The latest Reich talk on Britain
It's really interesting that they have nailed down the arrival of the Celts to 900 BCE. That actually corresponds closely to the beginning of the Iron Age in the British Isles and the appearance of Urnfield type weapons there.
A typical variant for European swords is the leaf shaped blade, which was most common in North-West Europe at the end of the Bronze Age, on the British Isles in particular. The carp's tongue sword is a type of bronze sword that was common to Western Europe during ca. the 9th to 8th centuries BC. The blade of the carp's tongue sword was wide and parallel for most of its length but the final third narrowed into a thin tip intended for thrusting. The design was probably developed in north-western France, and combined the broad blade useful for slashing with a thinner, elongated tip suitable for thrusting. Its advantages saw its adoption across Atlantic Europe. In Britain, the metalwork in the south east derived its name from this sword: the Carp's Tongue complex. Notable examples of this type were part of the Isleham Hoard.
What Y-DNA haplogroups and what Autosomal DNA will the Celtic migrants bring? We apparently know that they have more farmer ancestry. We also have a variety of local British samples from the British Roman Gladiators paper whom overlap with Modern British Celtic Populations
https://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2016/01/ancient-genomes-from-iron-age-roman-and.html
I think the incoming Celtic Y DNA will look like that.
@ A
No idea,honestly.Reich and Lazaridis are both very mysterious guys.
@Genos
Its obvious that South English have a contiental 'Gaulish/Belgaue' like mix in their autosomal(might also be from Normans who knows. since they plot a little bit more southern compared to Northern English/Scottish and Irish who are pretty much 'Beaker' devired..with something 'Germanic' lets say(anglo-saxon,viking and so on).Its impossible they had a 50% replacement from mainland Celts.If thats the case,then they would plot like Belgians,Northern French,South Dutch,West Germans and they do not.Their genetics are very northern to be like that.On the other hand, i am not sure if the 40% anglo-saxon replacement made them plot so northern near to NorthSea Germanics and Scandinavians.But again,i really doubt about it.Ydna is indeed a mix of Beaker,Celtic,and Anglo-Saxon/Viking-Norse.
That's how history works. Initially you get complete population displacement, then over time the new population mixes with the surrounding natives.
Happened with HGs and Farmers, steppe and neolithic people, even conquistadors in south america with local natives.
2900 YBP - 50% Pop turn over in Britain
2900 YBP - Estimated common ancestor of extant Celtic languages according to
https://vieilleeurope.files.wordpress.com/2011/05/gray-and-atkinson.jpg
[Rexova, K., Frynta, D. & Zrzavy, J. “Cladistic analysis of languages: Indo-European classification based on lexicostatistical data.”Cladistics 19, 120–127 (2003)]
2900 YBP also where this study puts the common ancestor of Celtic
https://royalsocietypublishing.org/cms/asset/f9b7b497-15c2-4589-9db7-b0fb039ffe18/rstb20100378f01.jpg
@ A
''In that video David Reich again makes the claim that WHG, EHG, Levant farmers and Iran farmers were "each as different from each other as Europeans and East Asians". ''
That's his manner of speech, using his version of statistical jargon. It would be of benefit for him to bring that back to real life terms. Kind of like how in Elementary school when were being taught how to write essays - make it generalisable using regular language
@ Tigran
''I thought IUP/BachoKiro/Oase/Ust-Ishim like population represented a Crown Eurasian population that is neither East or West Eurasian. Don't they cluster between Kosenteki and Tianyuan type populations and their excess affinity to East Eurasians is due to Basal Eurasian admixture depressing the affinity towards them in West Eurasians?''
No
"Tianyuan is clearly an East Eurasians and it doesn't seem like he derives the majority of this ancestry from IUP. If that was the case IUP would cluster with East Eurasians instead of between Paleolithic/Mesolithic West and East Eurasians.'
There is nothing 'clearly' here. When we are analysing very early human populations, there's no point speaking of 'East Eurasians or west Euraisans' although many people like to use such terms.
The confusion lies, again, with the nomenclature of early studies which introduced the terms, and the often peculiar way some statisticians talk in their papers, conferences, YouTube videos. see above comment
@ Vasisthta
''1. Thats because Tianyuan is the only old sample we have. More southern samples are harder to preserve due to heat and humidity.''
That's a priori the case. Southern samples can come from a variety of ecotones, not just humid rainforest. And so we have human skeletons from Sri Lanka and Mungo Lake ~ 30,000 calBP.
2. ''There is 0 evidence in your tree to prove that Onge were populated from west asia or west europe.''
LOL who ever claimed Onge are from Western Europe ?
3. ''Karelia/EHG has 60% ANE/MA1/AG3. ANE is 20-40% ENA. Similarly, IranN & CHG have 30% (onge/Tianyuan + ANE combined).
So to say that modern populations in europe are wholly nested within western eurasian tree is false. EHG & CHG/IranN are the biggest components of europe today.''
We all know that EHG has ANE. But that ANE was acquired as a western population expanded toward south Siberia and Mongolia, and further developed contacts with NEA during the LGM. This is a very different thing to an expansion or 'replacement' from East Asia or SEA to Europe which you wish to promulgate by quoting some rather low-tier analysis
So you need to try to be more honest when discussing instead of constantly shifting (or forgetting) the original goal-posts
“ That's a priori the case. “”
^ That’s Not a prior the case
@MH82
"LOL who ever claimed Onge are from Western Europe ?"
Davidski said:
"No, Onge-like people actually moved from west to east.
https://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2021/04/the-bacho-kiro-surprise-hajdinjak-et-al.html"
Anyway, May preprint
Genetics and material culture support repeated expansions into Paleolithic Eurasia from a population hub out of Africa. https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.05.18.444621v1.full
"Our integrated approach i) maintains Zlatý Kůň genetically as the most basal out of Africa human lineage sequenced to date, also in comparison to Oceanians and putatively links it with non-Mousterian material cultures documented in Europe 48-43 kya; ii) infers the presence of an OoA population Hub from which a major wave broadly associated with Initial Upper Paleolithic lithic industries emanated to populate West and East Eurasia before or around 45 kya, and of which Ust’Ishim, Bacho Kiro and Tianyuan were unadmixed descendants; iii) proposes a parsimonious placement of Oase1 as an individual related to Bacho Kiro who experienced additional Neanderthal introgression; and iv) explains the East/West Eurasian population split as a longer permanence of the latter in the OoA Hub, followed by a second population expansion (before 37 kya), broadly associated with Upper Paleolithic industries, that largely replaced pre-existing humans in Europe, and admixed with the previous wave to form Yana and Mal’ta in Siberia and, to a greater extent, GoyetQ116-1 in Belgium."
Well, obviously, I wasn't using "west" as a stand in for "Western Europe" when I said that the origins of the Onge were in the west.
I actually meant West Eurasia.
Yea and I said west Asia or Western Europe. Same thing. Mh82 cretaing unnecessary drama. Anyway
@mh82
"This is a very different thing to an expansion or 'replacement' from East Asia or SEA"
The y haplogroups did get replaced. Doesn't require full replacement of autosomes. It is you who does not understand the basic premise of this debate.
East eurasian and west Eurasian are perfectly acceptable nomenclatures because the split is very neat on qpgraph.
@ Vasistha
''East eurasian and west Eurasian are perfectly acceptable nomenclatures because the split is very neat on qpgraph.''
No it's not, because the radiation of IUP was more complex than that. The most appropriate terms are based on techno-complex correlations
You shouldn't talk as if an authority about matters you haven't the remotest understanding of
''The y haplogroups did get replaced''
We all understand the dynamic nature of European prehistory, and feel enriched for the great diversity of its prehistoric past. But we don't need a peddlars & false prophets obfuscating the data just to sooth their own inadequacies.
This scenario which you are trying to concoct never happened. The major extant European Y-hg lineages are :
E-v13
R1b/ R1a
I2/ I1
J2a/ j2b2
G2a
And none of them came from SEA or the Far East. So please stop wasting our time
@ Romulus
Some people confuse that Beakers were 'Celtic' speakers but this is very wrong.They were 100% IE speaking there is not doubt about it.But 'Celtic'?Don't think so.Britain become 'Celtic' speaking prolly during the transition period of LBA/EIA period and ofc not completely the whole isles.My hypothesis for Picts and Pictish dialect is to be a Beaker remain dialect that affected much less from the Celtic immigrants.Ofc later received a Celtic influx.
@mh82
"And none of them came from SEA or the Far East. So please stop wasting our time."
Again you show poor comprehension by quoting GHIJK lineages. Read the threads to see what has been posted by me before. Read the arguments of P Hallast 2021.
R is present in MA1. R1b in Ag2. P1 in andamanese. R1axx and pre Ph155 R1b in Tarim. How the hell do you claim it to be west Eurasian?
"But we don't need a peddlars & false prophets obfuscating the data just to sooth their own inadequacies."
Wtf lol.
Regarding the nonsense that you claim about 'west' and 'east' Eurasian terminology. Read this preprint
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.05.18.444621v1.full
All of these claims are from recent papers and preprints, there is nothing I'm making up because of 'inadequecies'. I keep hearing this shit argument often from Europeans and the projection just makes me chuckle.
@Foxvillager
"Its impossible they had a 50% replacement from mainland Celts.If thats the case,then they would plot like Belgians,Northern French,South Dutch,West Germans and they do not."
This implies that Belgians, Northern French, South Dutch and West Germans are unadmixted Celts themselves. That is certainly not the case. In the south of the Netherlands (Kempen) there even is no settlement found yet that does NOT show a population hiatus slightly before the settlement of the Franks.
If there was a 'Celtic' migration to England, then it might have served as a source of secondary expansion to Ireland & Scotland. So we would need to look into that
@ Romulus
https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-uuWEsp0LNmU/Vp63QyalGzI/AAAAAAAAD6U/Bnd5tJRmTXQ/s1164/Martiniano_etal_Table_1.png
I can't wait to see more Celtic atDNA and yDNA. Rumours of a resurgence of Celtic Briton ancestry long after the initial Anglo-Saxon impact are absolutely riveting.
I'll attempt to repeat my arguments again, which are just based on these 2 papers that ill link. Because it seems you either have comprehension issues, or lack of concentration or laziness to read.
1. Regarding the west and east eurasian nomenclature.
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.05.18.444621v1.full
Do a ctrl + F for west/east eurasian in the above preprint and see how often the terminology has been used. iirc laziridis too uses it. Then check the trees in the 2 preprints and see the splits between west & east eurasian.
2. Regarding Onge
Do you agree that Onge is wholly nested inside E/SE asian tree with no pulse from a west eurasian population? Do you agree that the Y haplogroups of onge are east asian? If you still do not agree that E/SE asia peopled south asia and andaman then where in the west do you propose it peopled from and what is your evidence?
3. Regarding The Y Hg replacement in west eurasia through a backmigration.
Hallast paper 2021 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7864842/
Here is their reasoning regarding the basal lineages of C, D & FT
" Lineage C split into two, C1 and C2; C1 lineages are found today only in East, Southeast and South Asia plus Oceania, while C2 lineages are more widespread and are now found in East and South Asia and also North and Central/West Asia (Fig. 2, Supplementary Fig. 1). D lineages are entirely confined to East and Southeast Asia. FT lineages now have a worldwide distribution, but the earliest split was into F and GHIJK; F is known only from East and Southeast Asia (Fig. 1, Supplementary Fig. 1), while GHIJK and its descendants are found worldwide. These descendant lineages themselves often have more continent-specific distributions, but 14/15 GHIJK lineages originating before 50,000 (95% HPD, 43,700–63,300) years ago have distributions that include East, Southeast or South Asia, apart from a few that are specific to Oceania (Fig. 1). Only one (H2, represented by a single sample) is specific to Europe"
"Second, C lineages (both C1a and C1b), now confined to East, Southeast and South Asia plus Oceania, were more widespread 30,000–40,000 years ago, including in Europe where they persisted until after 8000 years ago (Mathieson et al. 2018), although they have now been replaced in Europe by other lineages."
There is no denying that these early lineages of C, D & FT have disappeared from west eurasia. The paper gives 3 possible reasons but considers the below most likely
"Further explanations should, therefore, also be considered; one such is that initial western Y chromosomes have been entirely replaced by lineages from further east (Fig. 3), perhaps on more than one occasion. This is supported by the observed patterns of early-diverging lineages of C, D and FT now being located in East and Southeast Asia, and, according to our present-day dataset of surviving lineages, the more likely origin of GHIJK in the east"
It is pertinent to note that the same pattern IS NOT seen with mtdna lineages.
"In addition, mtDNA N demonstrates the phylogeographic pattern expected from a simple expansion model, with its earliest divergence in the west."
@ Epoch
Well.They are mostly Frankicized Gauls/Belge.Ofc they don’t have the genetics of Austria,Bavaria or South France but they don’t coming like North Dutch/German or Scandinavians.We need more samples from Northern France and Belgium/West Germany to check the pre-Germanic people.It is very likely their genetics to had been more northern compared to the Celts of Central France or of those from the Alps.I am pretty sure not all of the Celtic tribes or western europe were homogenous genetically.
@ Vasistha
''Again you show poor comprehension by quoting GHIJK lineages. Read the threads to see what has been posted by me before. Read the arguments of P Hallast 2021.'
LOL , well as per your original quote of Hallast, you included it
according to our present-day dataset of surviving lineages, the more likely origin of GHIJK in the east
''R is present in MA1. R1b in Ag2. P1 in andamanese. R1axx and pre Ph155 R1b in Tarim. How the hell do you claim it to be west Eurasian?''
So now you shift your claim to R1 being East Eurasian by making a false projection that I have insisted it is 'western'
Ag2 has poor coverage and frankly I doubt it you'd be able to decipher it being R1b. but whatever the case, Yana with hg- P* is overwhelmingly derived from the same met-population as those related to Kostenki, Sungir and even AHG.
''Regarding the nonsense that you claim about 'west' and 'east' Eurasian terminology. Read this preprint
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.05.18.444621v1.full''
I suggest you read it:
an OoA population Hub from which a major wave broadly associated with Initial Upper Paleolithic lithic industries emanated to populate West and East Eurasia before or around 45 kya.
The structure of IUP groups is not binary.
Fake it to you make it won't fly here. As I said, you're a pedlar :)
@MH_82
That last graph you had was interesting. Do you think it's possible that the "East Eurasian" affinity in ANE (Yana, Malta, AG3, etc) is really the result of remnant IUP-descended populations in Central Asia/Siberia, whose IUP ancestors were the progenitors of East Eurasians like Tianyuan, but with the IUP-descended ANE developing its own parallel drift diverged from EE proper?
Actually, people with direct ancestry from south England today do plot with Belgians, south Dutch, and north French. My father is a case in point.
@
I don't think East-West distinction is as clear as it is implied in some of the replies here, not before the LGM anyways. Instead I would think it is better to say that East Eurasians seem to mostly (or exclusively?) descent from IUP-related groups such as Bacho Kiro, Tianyuan and Ustishim while West Eurasians are part IUP and part something Basal or tied to the Near East.
And I do not believe that Basal is connected to the Mushabian, because it's in Dudzuana and other Caucasus samples that are before 25kya. The component found in Natufians may be Mushabian-derived what Lazaridis claims to be "ANA". However it should be said that there all kinds of theories floating about "Basal" from "it doesn't exist because it's African to "it's actually East Asian in WHG/Paleo-Euros" to name the most often seen ones.
As for Onge, I don't see the claim they come from the west being wrong, in the sense that since they came from Africa, they most likely did come from the west at some point, and Bacho Kiro/Ustishim do have a relationship with them.
At the same time it seems pretty certain there is something East Asian-like in later "western" populations and usually goes hand in hand with ANE, although in some cases such as Loschbour and CHG/WHG it appears to have its own source, even though it's still the same thing ANE have most likely.
Or at least, given my interest in deep ancestry and hours spent on the topic, that's all I have gathered so far.
Re: Fst between Iran_N/Anatolia_N etc
I think Fst can often get inflated artificially due to drift/homozygosity etc. For example, some Native American groups have Fsts between each other larger than Europeans and East Asians but I very much doubt they are phylogenetically less related to each other than East Asians and Europeans: https://www.science.org/doi/abs/10.1126/science.1251688
On the UK topic, could Normans have increased the inferred Celtic ancestry in modern-day Britons?
Also @MH_82
You made a comment about Basal Eurasian earlier being a statistical construct - do you think it's really just some form of African admixture in ancient MENA?
I don't think it is a done deal that IUP were East Eurasian or K2b replaced some sort of C lineage. Or that K2b was East Eurasian as opposed to undifferentiated Eurasians. We'll see.
@ Awood
That is true.But we dont know yet if they coming close to them because of their Celtic admix or maybe from something very later(Normans)?.What yDNA your father has?South England shows a great ratio of 'Celtic' yDNA compared to other parts of Britain.
@MH_82
I don't think AG3 is significantly more east-shifted than MA1. I had come across some f4 stats somewhere and they seemed to have a more or less equal affinity to ENA. What they differ in apparently their relationship to populations like EHG for example of CHG where AG3 is preferred and Iran_N where MA1 is preferred IIRC. And if I remember Sikora correctly nobody so far prefers Yana.
@Vasistha
"Do you agree that Onge is wholly nested inside E/SE asian tree with no pulse from a west eurasian population... and what is your evidence?"
I intuitively would agree with all 3 points you are making here however out of curiosity, have you checked for west Eurasian affinity in Onge? I have over time come across some pretty wild claims about them, them being part west Eurasian being actually the least crazy one.
@ Cy _T
''You made a comment about Basal Eurasian earlier being a statistical construct - do you think it's really just some form of African admixture in ancient MENA?'
Well, there is no archaeological or anthropological basis for such an entity.
What we have is more basal forms of west Eurasian existing in wesern Asia, which becomes more apparent as we interpose the new data like BK and ZK. I think Pinarbasi & Dzudzuana fall into that basket
Then with the LGM or pre-Natufian era, we have some form of north African encroaching toward the Near East. hence it peaks in natufians and peters out further north. if some mysterious 'basal Eurasians' existed near the Gulf, then the pattern would be different.
This is how I see it, at least based on what ive looked at so far.
''Do you think it's possible that the "East Eurasian" affinity in ANE (Yana, Malta, AG3, etc) is really the result of remnant IUP-descended populations in Central Asia/Siberia, whose IUP ancestors were the progenitors of East Eurasians like Tianyuan, but with the IUP-descended ANE developing its own parallel drift diverged from EE proper?''
Yep, although I did not post the typology which has all 3 (yana, MA1, AG3) together, which shows their differences. I think Ust-Ishm might be a dead end lineage, so its truly an 'east Eurasian' affinitiy (given that it's post 35,000 bp, we can begin to use such terms)
I think the admixtures might subtely vary in their character, but the most east shifted is the youngest (Afontova Gora), and that historicaly aligns (microblades Siberia <-> Far East). The least East shifted is Yana, the oldest of the group. I think it derives from the the same or similar metpopulation as Sungir, Kostenki, and even AHGs
@ gamerz_J
“ And I do not believe that Basal is connected to the Mushabian, because it's in Dudzuana and other Caucasus samples that are before 25kya. ”
I’m sure we can all faithfully recite literature. But that doesn’t make their models correct or our comments contributory to a new path
The issue with the model that Dzudzuana= VB + basal
is that VB is a composite population. By treating it as an Ur-population; I suspect the need for coming with a “basal Eurasian” to compensate
@MH_82 “ The least East shifted is Yana, the oldest of the group. I think it derives from the the same or similar metpopulation as Sungir, Kostenki, and even AHGs”
You’re lumping Sunghir and Kostenki together like there’s an affinity between them; in fact, Kostenki14 is closer to West Eurasians while Sunghir is more East Eurasian shifted.
@gamerz
As far as I can tell onge is ENA/Tianyuan + possibly Mbuti like ancestry. There's no ANE in there for sure. I tried some qpAdm models yesterday. Best is just tianyuan or tianyuan + Mbuti however p values are below 0.01.
Blogger Andrzejewski said...
''You’re lumping Sunghir and Kostenki together like there’s an affinity between them; in fact, Kostenki14 is closer to West Eurasians while Sunghir is more East Eurasian shifted.''
I'm not sure why you're unaware of the affinity between Sungir & K14, although they are of course a few thousand years apart. I've not seen any need for an east Eurasian edge going into Sungir
@All
Please keep in mind that due to legal reasons I can no longer tolerate any potentially defamatory content, even if it's true and accurate.
@MH_82 “ I'm not sure why you're unaware of the affinity between Sungir & K14, although they are of course a few thousand years apart. I've not seen any need for an east Eurasian edge going into Sungir”
Because the former has affinity to Tianyuan whereas the latter has something closer to Augrinacians and Gravetians. It’s said that K14 is similar to modern Europeans - it has ghost pops of Yamnaya, UHG (Dzudzuana, Anatolian farmers) as well as something akin to Villabruna cluster.
QpAdm for MA1 showed best model as 20% kostenki + 80% Yana. P value .26
@MH_82
"I think the admixtures might subtely vary in their character, but the most east shifted is the youngest (Afontova Gora), and that historicaly aligns (microblades Siberia <-> Far East). The least East shifted is Yana, the oldest of the group. I think it derives from the the same or similar metpopulation as Sungir, Kostenki, and even AHGs"
I don't think Yana is less eastern-shifted than AG3, almost certainly more so.
See for example this: https://science.sciencemag.org/content/370/6516/579
As for Basal Eurasians, let's say VB is a composite, I have no qualms with this. How would that cause Dudzuana to appear Basal? Would it be ANE in Villabruna?
And btw some older Caucasus samples also show Basal-like ancestry. This is what makes me thing Basal is real, it might not be the same stuff that exist in Natufians which may very well be from North Africa, but it reflects something possibly not an ur-population but some sort of IUP-like ancestry in Paleolithic Europeans.
@Andrzejewski
Sunghir just has a bit of Ustishim ancestry which is what probably drives the Tianyuan affinity. See Vallini et al (2021)
@Vasistha
"As far as I can tell onge is ENA/Tianyuan + possibly Mbuti like ancestry"
Huh, that's an odd result, but I have heard of this before. Not exactly Mbuti like but something "basal". Not sure how realistic. Interesting they get no ANE btw.
If you have time could you try out Onge as Ustishim + Tianyuan or Bacho Kiro + Tianyuan?
@Cy Tollivor,
mtDNA, Y DNA give insights into what basal Eurasian might be.
There's no way it is African.
My theory, based on mtDNA and Y DNA, is Basal Eurasian didn't really exist.
Other than Y DNA E1b1b, there's no truly basal lineages in the Middle East that you'd expect to see if Basal Eurasian were a real thing.
There's a lot of mtDNA, Y DNA unique to SW Asia but it isn't basal.
To me what this suggests the answer is, is that Paleolithic SW Asia mostly descended from different Eurasian ancestors than Paleolithic Europe. And these ancestors of theirs for whatever reason were slightly less related to Eastern Asians.
Their distance from East Asia creates the statistical illusion of deeply divergent Basal Eurasian ancestry.
Like, looking at mtDNA there's no way Paleo SW Asia mostly descends from people like in Paleolithic Europe.
I think we have to start thinking of Stone age SW Asia as fundamentally different from Stone age Europe. Not basically the same thing with slight basal admixture.
It had mtDNA U, Y DNA J, but most of its Y DNA and mtDNA is different.
@Cy Toliver,
But I guess mtDNA M1, Y DNA E1b are confirmed to come from the envisioned super divergent type of Basal Eurasian.
You know because Iberomaurisan in North Africa looks like what we expected Basal Eurasian to look like. This is even though they also had mtDNA U6, so imagine what pure E1b1b, mtDNA M1 pop would be like.
Yet we can't say they are the source of Basal Eurasian for SW Asia. Iran didn't have any Y DNA E or mtDNA M1. So there's another explanation for their "Basal Eurasian"
@Genos The unadmixed EHG in Eastern Europe vanished without a trace. These are the Volosovo and the Combed Ware Ceramic,both of which had been driven away by Corded Ware Indo-European offshoots. There were no EHG for Uralic people to mix with. As for the Sami, their language constitutes up to 1/3 of their vocabulary of some non-IE non-Uralic substrate, which could be either EHG, WHG, SHG or some of the above.
@Genos Historia
Taforalt always gets significant f stats with Africans though, unlike say Iran_N or even Natufians. In fact, they are clearly admixed with West Eurasians and it may be only coincidental they appear close to the assumed "BE" component.
What Natufians possibly have is some Taforalt but it seems unlikely that this is what exists in Iran_N or Dudzuana or AHG.
I mean this whole discussion is off topic but "And these ancestors of theirs for whatever reason were slightly less related to Eastern Asians." perhaps this is the key to the BE question. And perhaps this can even be phrased as differential affinity to IUP-related populations (except for the actual East Asian-like that ANE related groups show)
There is also the reduced Neanderthal part, but Chen et al (2020) think this is an artifact of West Eurasian backflow to Africa. Petr et al (2019) make a similar argument.
Links for anyone interested:
https://www.cell.com/cell/fulltext/S0092-8674(20)30059-3
https://www.pnas.org/content/116/5/1639
PS: This just got published some days ago: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0002929721003426
@gamerz_J
While it is true that Ust-Ishim/BachoKiro/Oase and Tianyuan are all associated with the IUP are they genetically all the same? I thought Use-Ishim/BachoKiro/Oase plot somewhere between modern West Eurasians/Kosenteki and modern East Eurasians/TIanyuan. Seemed like it was close to halfway or maybe marginally closer to modern East Eurasians. Am I off on this?
@Genos
Do you not think E1b1b is ultimately African? How would you interpret the genetic profile of Iberomaurusian - they are supposed to be modeled as a nearly 50/50 split of something West Eurasian-like and "Ancestral North African." Or do you think this "ANA" component is some sort of statistical construct as well?
We have a serious gap in knowledge when it comes to understanding Southwest Asia. I am especially curious about understanding the history of the Arabian peninsula. Does anyone know anything about the archaeological record of it during the course of the Upper Paleolithic, pre-Holocene, was it only intermittently inhabited, and if so by whom? Were the people living there a highly isolated branch of the wider Eurasian family or was it mostly just an extension of the Horn of Africa? There seem to be some old branches of E and D0 that occur in modern people from there, but those could be relatively recent introgressions from Africa (Saudis are so densely sampled and Africans mostly not).
@ Gamerz_J
''I don't think Yana is less eastern-shifted than AG3, almost certainly more so.
See for example this: https://science.sciencemag.org/content/370/6516/579''
Perhaps you have not noticed that the Massilini is limited in Ref Pops. For ex, in their Sup. we see an eastern admixture going into Goyet-Q116, noted in old studies before we got Bacho Kiro. Now that model is no longer adequate, because the so-called eastern admixture is nothing but IUP ancestry.
Following on, the same Tree would not be able to properly differentiate the sources of admixture in other individuals like Yana or MA1. If, on the other hand, a more complete & up to date tree is constructed, the differences in western ('EUP') and eastern admixture follows what I have been saying:
~ 10-15% ENA in Yana
~ 20-30 in MA-1
up to 40% in AFG
And of course, I am reassured by the fact that is historically grounded with the increase in contacts between Siberia & East Asia during the Ice Age, as well as an expected rise in Y-hg Q1a and C1 frequency in Siberia during the epipaleolithic and mesolithic
hence I am not constrained by your views, reliant as they are on a rigid reliance of old studies & Vasistha's inadequate qpADM. I mean, if you're going to hold yourself in high regard, you need to offer something less vanilla
In light of this, I won't get into discussing BE with you
@ Andrzejewski
''Because the former has affinity to Tianyuan whereas the latter has something closer to Augrinacians and Gravetians. It’s said that K14 is similar to modern Europeans - it has ghost pops of Yamnaya, UHG (Dzudzuana, Anatolian farmers) as well as something akin to Villabruna cluster.''
I don't understand how you can continually interject with wholly wrong or misinterpreted statements with dead-pan confidence
@MH_82
Have you tried playing around with Iberomaurusians, does their African affinity seem to be due to African admixture in them or rather IBM ancestry in Africans?
@mh82
"10-15% ENA in Yana
~ 20-30 in MA-1"
Lol this is mathematically impossible since Ma1 is more west shifted than yana. You are typing out of your crack.
tgt: Russia_MA1_HG.SG
Russia_Yana_UP.SG - 0.782 +- 0.063
Russia_Kostenki14 - 0.218 +- 0.063
p-value 0.086
result file: https://pastebin.com/wXrHCs0g
Right pops
Mbuti.DG
ONG.SG
Italy_North_Villabruna_HG
Russia_Sunghir2.SG
Turkey_Epipaleolithic
Russia_Ust_Ishim.DG
Belgium_UP_GoyetQ116
Romania_Oase
Czech_Vestonice16
China_Tianyuan
@ Cy_T
Only beginning to look at it. The basic structure within Africa seems understandable, but adding in Iberomaurusians & AHG complicates things
Surprisingly, I got a good Z score with this tree
But IBMs might hold more surprises and complexity as more 'Eurasians' are added to the Tree. Might revisit during a more relevant Thread
does anyone have link for bacho kiro and zlaty kun .geno files?
@ Professor Vasistha
You have Kostenki in pLeft & Sungir in pRight ?
@mh82
dont know what your point is, because removing Sunghir from popRight doesnt change the pvalue. it rises a bit, insignificantly.
here ---> https://pastebin.com/LCiguTM6
@vAsiSTha
thank you
how would you model Yana?
@Romulus - Romans = Latins + Trojans That's very on brand but the study in question here explicitly rules that out. I'll go with this study.
Re: the Mbuti -> Onge thing... I think it was either here or on Razib's blog that showed something similar in Treemix runs. I wouldn't take it completely at face value though, but maybe just evidence of the Out-Of-Africa transition being more complex than a single, unstructured pulse.
@Tigran - If the former then I expect the western side of ANE would have originally been some sort of y C1a/C1b?
That's an interesting question. C1b, sure, but maybe any F(xK2) really?
@Genos Historia
"mtDNA, Y DNA give insights into what basal Eurasian might be.
There's no way it is African."
There is a user on AG who points out that the component "Basal Eurasian" is perhaps a fstats artifact. To be fair, what he says doesn't sound implausible.
Quote:
"The idea of a Basal Eurasian population which split off main OOA population before they admixed with Neanderthals has been a pretty popular explanation for the depleted Neanderthal alleles present in various ancient Near Eastern populations (Natufians, Iran_N etc). The existence of Basal Eurasian population was proposed in order to explain why the Natufians seemed to lack any affinity to SSA populations in the fstats despite having significantly lower Neanderthal admixture.
Here are some fstats demonstrating that lack of affinity using Yoruba...
At first glance these stats may seem to support the idea that the Natufians lack any affinity to Sub-saharan populations, however I had previously noted that African admixed populations give very strange Z-scores in simple 4 pop fstat tests due to a weird quirk wherein an aversion to African populations occurs that essentially causes the tested population to prefer Eurasians strongly. This effect is particularly strong on heavily admixed East Africans.
Knowing about that quirk led me to try out some of the East African samples using the same 4 pop test to verify if these results can be taken seriously. "
Looking at the results for the East Africans we see a similar lack of affinity to a SSA population. If we were to operate on the same assumptions that lead to the statement that the Natufians lacked any SSA affinity we would then have to say that these populations also lack SSA affinity, which is clearly nonsensical and is likely a result of the strange aversion to African populations I noticed earlier.
Without this lack of affinity to SSA populations is there actually any reason for us to assume the existence of some unsampled "Basal Eurasian" admixture in Ancient Near Easterners when admixture from a North and/or Northeast African population could account for the disparity in Neanderthal admixture in a more parsimonious manner.
……..The fstat ( Chimp African Eurasian Target ) is what was used to claim a lack of affinity between Natufians and SSA populations, due to the lack of a significant Z-score. I am demonstrating that the Z-score is insignificant even for East African populations with large amounts of SSA admixture... which means we cannot rule out similar admixture in the Natufians."
@old europe
i dont know, its quite hard to model these ancients lol. Not sure even MA1 model i did is correct. Adding bacho kiro,Zlaty Kun or any new IUP finds etc to right pops might change result.
i did run F4stats on ShumLaka Tianyuan Yana MA1
result:
W X Y Z F4 ZScore BABA ABBA SNPs
ShumLaka Tianyuan Yana MA1 -0.001465 -2.224 32980 33913 636944
Yana does seem to share more alleles with Tianyuan than MA1 does however Z score isnt below 3, so not significant.
On the other hand, MA1 seems to show significant allele sharing with Tianyuan over Kostenki14 with |Z score| > 3
result:
ShumLaka Tianyuan Kostenki14 MA1 0.0290 4.090 32226 30410 593820
@MH_82
"
hence I am not constrained by your views, reliant as they are on a rigid reliance of old studies & Vasistha's inadequate qpADM. I mean, if you're going to hold yourself in high regard, you need to offer something less vanilla"
What are you talking about? What does Vasistha has to do with this, I asked him about Onge not MA1. Look I don't know what's your problem, but I was discussing with you, instead you seem to just spout things with no evidence and get weirdly confrontational about it.
I was trying to understand why you disagree with the literature, you have offered no alternative evidence but just numbers out of nowhere. "40% ENA in AG3" Yeah, ok but show HOW you came into that conclusion.
@Tigran
Depends on the model, all IUP pops are related and in some papers they either admix with each other or form sister branches. Bacho Kiro or Oase are not halfway between Kostenki and Tianyuan in fact I'd argue any affinity with Kostenki is explained by IUP ancestry in Kostenki along with something basal (since Zlaty Kun was published) but that's my own theory and have no evidence for it atm.
@Ryan
There could have been multiple OOA waves but there does seem to be a shared bottleneck in non-Africans. A few people online do go for the model Onge=African+IUP but they really don't look that different from Tianyuan in that regard in studies I have read so far. Are there any stats with Onge relative to Mbuti? Are they closer than Kostenki or ancient West Eurasians? And if Onge are not good then are Hoabinhians closer?
@Wise dragon
What that person writes is not implausible but why is the theory of Eurasian ancestry in Africa not mentioned? I mean clearly just going by the haplogroup there is a perhaps deep connection Natufians-Africans. So, for Natufians the African-related may be true, I can't use ADMIXTOOLs so can't see for myself. Davidski had posted some Treemix outputs in an older post I found by searching, and it did show some low African in Natufians but not in other ancient Eurasians IIRC.
Btw, which East Africans don't show affinity to Yoruba?
As for the Neanderthal admixture, results like Oase and Bacho Kiro make it seem implausible to me there was only 1 event. So higher Neanderthal in some pops could reflect later events (but could be mistaken here obv)
@Vasistha
Lastly, (forgot to type earlier) could you please run:
ShumLaka Tianyuan Onge MA1 (or/and) Mbuti Tianyuan MA1 Onge?
I am rather puzzled by the relationship Onge Tianyuan and MA1. Would help clarify what type of ENA is in MA1 perhaps.
@Wise Dragon,
That is an interesting comment. I would like to see another look at the possibility of African admixture in Natufians, Iberomaursian. The fact iberomaursian has more of this than Natufian does indicate there somekind of prehistoric North African ancestry in both of them which might be a relative of Eurasians who stayed in Africa.
@Cy Tolliver,
About Y DNA E1b1b origins. I don't know. No one knows with confidence what exactly Y DNA E origins are.
It is a huge dent to a simple out of Africa migration narrative. Mainstream geneticists need to acknowledge that. It doesn't fit what we expect.
It is impossible to say E1b1a in Sub Saharan Africa is Eurasian with confidence, because no indigenous Eurasian mtDNA exists there.
It is impossible to say E1b1b in North Africa/West Asia is African with confidence, because no indigenous African mtDNA exists there.
It seems some people at Anthrogenica are suggesting Africans have legit Eurasian ancestry from Iberomaursian type people. mtDNA does not support this idea at all. Considering E1b1a is the most common haplogroup there, you'd expect to see some ancient M and N lineages in Africa if it came there from classic Eurasians.
If Nigerians for example had lots of Iberomaursian-like ancestry, we'd see lots of mtDNA M1 there. Or another type of mtDNA M lineage. But we don't.
I think a possibility is, Y DNA E1b1 originated before the Out of Africa event. Before humans went to Eurasia.
When the event happened, E1b1b was born in proto-Eurasians. E1b1a was born in a different population in Africa. This maybe can explain the lack of a common mtDNA clade in E1b1b, E1b1a.
@ gamerz _J
Of course I have evidence but your attitude doesn’t exactly invite help . I’m not here to solicit your opinion, as I don’t value it & you nothing too offer .
I’m here to offer mine to those that enough to heed it . I’ll leave you, Etrusco/ old Europe and any other sap to the studentship of the Prof
@ Vasistha
There’s a reason why publications dont usually do qpAdm for Upper Paleolithic individuals. qpGraph is the ultimate test; as you can test multiple samples concurrently which each constrain each other.
@Cy Tolliver,
mtDNA M1 supports the idea of an "Ancestral North African."
The combo of mtDNA U6, M1 in Iberomaurasian is exactly what you would expect if they were a mixture between prehistoric West Eurasians and North Africans.
M1 is the maternal counterpart to E1b1b.
Yeah, M1 and E1b1b probably come from a real Ancestral North African in my opinion. Basal Eurasians who stayed in Africa.
@gamerz_J
ShumLaka Tianyuan Onge MA1 -0.0238 -3.935 34357 36030 632593
Mbuti Tianyuan MA1 Onge 0.0219 3.697 35233 33724 621983
@Genos “ If Nigerians for example had lots of Iberomaursian-like ancestry, we'd see lots of mtDNA M1 there. Or another type of mtDNA M lineage. But we don't.”
Northern Nigeria is populated by inhabitants who speak Afro-Asiatic languages like Hausa.
@gamerz_J
"Btw, which East Africans don't show affinity to Yoruba?"
He refers to West-Eurasian admixed East Africans.
Quote:
"The fstat ( Chimp African Eurasian Target ) is what was used to claim a lack of affinity between Natufians and SSA populations, due to the lack of a significant Z-score. I am demonstrating that the Z-score is insignificant even for East African populations with large amounts of SSA admixture... which means we cannot rule out similar admixture in the Natufians."
@Genos Historia
"When the event happened, E1b1b was born in proto-Eurasians. E1b1a was born in a different population in Africa. This maybe can explain the lack of a common mtDNA clade in E1b1b, E1b1a."
The TMRCA is too recent for this, see Yfull. There is an African-Eurasian connection about 40kya going by E. And most likely more recent.
@Vasistha
Thanks! So different outgroup no real effect. I may be asking a lot, but just if you feel like it, do you think there is any way via f4 stats to figure out if Onge are more related to Mbuti or Kostenki than Tianyuan.
Perhaps, ShumLaka Kostenki Onge Tianyuann and ShumLaka Kostenki Tianyuan Onge (would that make sense?)
Basically, been thinking about the result you got with qpAdm, is Onge a IUP pop part of the same metapop as Tianyuan or does it have more recent ancestry from the west/Near East?
I would expect the first but would be nice to verify.
@MH_82
"Of course I have evidence but your attitude doesn’t exactly invite help . I’m not here to solicit your opinion, as I don’t value it & you nothing too offer .
I’m here to offer mine to those that enough to heed it . I’ll leave you, Etrusco/ old Europe and any other sap to the studentship of the Prof"
Who is Etrusco and Prof? What are you on about? I really don't understand where you are coming from, I posted what I have gathered by the lit so far, I never said "you are def wrong because this is written there" and without you posting any stats etc-your graphs are interesting but you didn't share one with Yana (or I missed it)- how is anyone supposed to understand your point?
And btw, I have seen qpGraphs where ANE are 40% ENA or more. I have seen others where they are 20%. Doesn't make a difference to me either way but a qpGraph on its own is not absolute evidence especially with so few UP samples from Central Asia.
@Wise Dragon
Is (Chimp Yoruba Eurasian Somali/Ethiopian) not significant? Did you see something like that? There was a paper from back in 2018 that claimed Natufians were something like 10% East African (I think it was this: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6062619/ but his method was kinda weird
@Genos
As gamerz_J said, the tmrca of E1b1b seems too recent to associate it with OOA. It's very tricky, because while based on its immediate relatives C, D, F, that E could just be a Eurasian lineage that somehow got separated from its kin and wandered into Africa, the deep divergences within E seem to strongly suggest that it's ultimately of African provenance.
Mbuti Kostenki14 Tianyuan Onge -0.0021 -0.388 42636 42818 803468
Mbuti Kostenki14 Onge Tianyuan 0.0021 0.388 42818 42636 803468
Onge Tianyuan Mbuti Kostenki14 0.0021 0.388 42818 42636 803468
Onge Ust_Ishim Mbuti Kostenki14 0.0105 1.776 57147 55957 1015727
Mbuti Onge Kolyma_M Tianyuan -0.0073 -1.442 46380 47062 863211
Mbuti Onge Yana Tianyuan 0.0277 5.732 48506 45891 863322
AOOs were running around as far as Europe etc. 200 000 years ago. Migrating in and out of Africa ever since or maybe even before. We will never know who were where when until we find the relevant Ancient Samples. Some Homo Naledi DNA samples would be interesting. Hordes of bones but no DNA ? Mmm...
@Vasistha
Many thanks, so it seems Tianyuan and Onge symmetrically related to pops to their west. And the stat with Kolyma indicates to me that whatever is in ANE is not really closer to Tianyuan than Onge, which considering their location is interesting.
@Ric Hern
If you are referring to Apidima, recent studies have indicated they most likely were not Homo Sapiens after all: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0003552119300974#!
Though going by the signals of H.Sapiens admixture in Neanderthals (the papers on Neanderthal uniparentals and all that) it's not implausible that H.Sapiens did leave Africa multiple times. It just seems that most of the migrations left no detectable trace to modern-day populations.
What else is going on?
Has that new paper about horse domestication finally been published?
@Davidski
There has a horse domestication paper published, but it was some weeks ago: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-021-03798-4
https://www.ebi.ac.uk/ena/browser/text-search?query=PRJEB44507
But this cannot be used to determine the autosomal profile?
This is from this article:
Hallstatt miners consumed blue cheese and beer during the Iron Age and retained a non-Westernized gut microbiome until the Baroque period
Im beginning to think Iberomaurusians are quite different to Near East contemporaries in their Eurasian component. Whatever contact they had might have skipped the Nile valley, but been largely limited to the Mediterranean littoral
@ Davidski
'Has that new paper about horse domestication finally been published?''
A lot of chatter about Celtic turnover in Britain. Need to see paper / samples/ data
@MH_82,
Can you elaborate, what about their Eurasian component is so different, and what about their African affinity?
Tracking the transformation of the domestic horse during the Bronze and the Iron Age
Liu Xuexue (1, 2), Librado Pablo (1), Loreleï Chauvey (1), Tonasso Laure (1), Schiavinato Stéphanie (1), Fages Antoine (1), Khan Naveed (1), Outram Alan (3), Orlando Ludovic (1)
1 - Centre for Anthropobiology and Genomics of Toulouse (CAGT), UMR5288 (France), 2 - Institute of Animal Science, Chinese Academy Agriculture Sciences (China), 3 - Department of Archaeology, University of Exeter (United Kingdom)
The horse represents one of the animals that most impacted human history. The characterization of extensive genome time-series for horses has started to rewrite current models of early domestication, revealing the existence of two mostly independent domestication centers. It also revealed considerable genomic changes during the last few centuries, in relation to the history of modern breed formation, and an increasing paternal influence of Oriental lineages. Except for the horses of Pazyryk Scythians, the Iron Age period has, however, received much less scholar attention. Yet, a number of key equestrian technologies have developed during the Iron Age, a time period that is also associated with the rise of cavalry. In this study, we have sequenced a total of 201 horse genomes spread across Eurasia and spanning both the Bronze and the Iron Age. Our data reveal important changes in the genetic population structure during the Iron Age, indicating increasing differentiation of two main areas in Asia and Europe. Our genomic time-series also provides new insights into the dynamics of local genomic introgression from wild progenitors and their extinction.
_______________
ISBA9 Abstract book:
https://isba9.sciencesconf.org/data/pages/Abstract_Book_ISBA9_2022.pdf
@ Ty
Well IBM could have some European HG in them be some (? Solutrean), of course early papers focussed on mtdna U6 rose that possibility
Whilst Pinarbasi has that ‘basal” sort of HG which might be post -Ahmarian
Still working on it; but it’s challenging due to the lack of properly old African DNA, as even South African HGs have some northern back flow
Check this out guys......
Ancient Y DNA database.
https://indo-european.eu/ancient-dna/
It includes unpublished Y DNA from Reich lab. The Khvalynsk R1b is all V1636. The rest is Q1.
Still this is typical IE patrilinalism in Khvalnsky. They just have an R1b lineage which basically went extinct. But we also see it in one Corded Ware samples which is crazy.
@ Genos
You mean all the Khvalynsk samples that are R1b are ALL R1b V636?
That would be the end of the story for the Khvalynsk/northern causasus genetic cline as the founding PIE population
@ Arza
Can you by chance prep the Tarim genomes ?
@Genos, correct me if I'm wrong but isn't that just Carlos copying down stuff from the presentation Anthony gave at Copenhagen University (since taken off the web) and sticking it in a spreadsheet? Also Anthony talked about a family cemetery at Khvalynsk, where they reconstructed relationships between the family members.
@Genos - Thanks for that! Super helpful.
If anyone's interested I've uploaded it to Google Sheets and then sorted first by ISOGG classification and then by Mean Date.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1ShnXemuNQXF9ZdhKotodYwalL1H08bO8/edit?usp=sharing&ouid=111010649969538125523&rtpof=true&sd=true
Makes it really easy to pick out the spread of whatever haplogroup you're interested in.
So for example if you search for L51, you'll find the oldest samples that haven't been flagged as questionable by the author (no idea how reliable their designations are) would be a Bavarian Beaker sample from Olalde 2018 or a HEAVILY (90%) steppe-admixed Chalcolithic sample from Spain (the date ranges overlap). The "questionable" samples are listed as Yamnaya from Slovakia.
@ MH_82
Instructions unclear.
These?
https://edmond.mpdl.mpg.de/imeji/collection/OMm2fpu0jR3jSqnY?q=
old europe “ That would be the end of the story for the Khvalynsk/northern causasus genetic cline as the founding PIE population”
What language affiliation do you think Khvalynsk spoke (if indeed they were a homogeneous population), if not anything similar and related to PIE?
@All if we agree that Corded Ware were identified with the speakers of what could be deemed “Late PIE”, then do we agree that the dialects spoken by Yamnaya, Khvalynsk, Afanasievo and speakers of the Anatolian branch could all be regarded and defined as “Para-PIE”?
@ Arza- thanks.
Lots of interesting abstracts from the ISBA pdf Arza linked, this caught my eye among them:
Genomic signals of continuity and admixture in the Caucasus
Ghalichy Ayshin et al.
"Situated between the Black and Caspian...A recent
archaeogenetic study has shown that the genetically diverse Eneolithic and Bronze
Age groups of the steppe and mountains correspond to eco-geographic zones in the
Caucasus... In this study we explore new genome-wide data of 68 individuals
from 20 archaeological cultures across the Caucasus mountains, the piedmont and
the steppe extending our temporal transect to 6000 years, doubling the number of
available genomes from the region.
We present the first genomic data from a
Mesolithic individual (6100 calBCE) from the Northwest Caucasus that shows
Eastern hunter-gatherer ancestry, Neolithic individuals from Georgia, as well as new
data from genetically unexplored regions/cultures in the northeastern highlands and
the dry steppe.
We observe a degree of genetic continuity through time within the
main mountain and steppe genetic groups, but also identify various episodes of gene
flow between these and the neighboring regions. In the Late Eneolithic period, we
find evidence of admixture from the south into the steppe groups, detectable through
the presence of Anatolian_Neolithic-like ancestry. During the Bronze Age, we found
in Steppe Maykop individuals a genetic link to West Siberian hunter-gatherers, a
component that is absent from Yamnaya, North Caucasus and Catacomb groups, but
reappears in Bronze Age individuals associated with the Lola culture."
More ancient spaghetti people DNA coming:
Unraveling the genetic history of Italians: a genome-wide study of Iron Age
Italic populations
Zaro Valentina (1), Vergata Chiara (1), Cannariato Costanza (1), Modi
Alessandra (1), Vai Stefania (1), Pilli Elena (1), Diroma Maria Angela (1),
Caramelli David (1), Lari Martina (1)
1 - Department of Biology, University of Florence, Florence, Italy (Italy)
The high genetic variability of present-day Italians reflects a complex scenario of past
population dynamics dating back not only to Late Paleolithic and Neolithic but also
Metal Ages. Although many archaeogenetic studies have been recently carried out to
investigate the peopling of Europe, only few genomic data have been reported from
Italic populations so far, especially the ones belonging to the last phase of Metal
Ages: the Iron Age. To outline a picture of Iron Age genetic variability within the
Italian context and infer potential gene flow patterns, we collected 78 human remains
from 8 Iron Age necropolises covering 5 different regions of Italy (Emilia-Romagna,
Umbria, Marche, Latium and Sicily). Double stranded half-UDG libraries were
produced and then shotgun sequenced on an Illumina NovaSeq6000 platform to
allow for an initial screening of the samples. Raw reads were processed using the
EAGER pipeline and then assessment of DNA authenticity and sex determination
were performed. Preliminary population genetics tests were run on genotyped data
by building a west Eurasian PCA including all the samples with at least 10.000 SNPs
covered on the Affymetrix Human Origins panel. The first results highlight an affinity
of the majority of the samples with previously reported Iron Age individuals from Italy,
while all samples from Sicily overlap with the genetic variability observed in this area
during the Bronze Age. Our aim is to deeper investigate these samples which can
significantly contribute to better understand past peopling dynamics of the Italian
peninsula and reconstruct modern Italians' genetic history.
@gamerz_J
So in your opinion Ust-Ishim/Oase/BachoKiro/IUP and ultimately K2b/P are from an East Eurasian population that originated to the west of East Eurasia?
Davidski, I wanted to ask you since you are usually involved with those ancient samples. Do you think you can ask the scientists for the BAM of Daunian samples? It would be great to see them in G25 since the official PCA is horrible.
@Romulus asked some questions about my views on IE
Here are my guesses as to the big picture for IE.
Sometimes these are highly informed guesses, sometimes we really don't know.
A. PIE location (ancestor of all IE languages including Hittite): Caucasus/Piedmont
B. IE (but not Hittite) ancestor location:
Pontic-Caspian Steppe
C. Language spoken by people bringing steppe genetics into Spain: (Proto)-Basque
D. Language of Northern Europe Bell Beakers: IE of a now extinct family
The Y-chromosome data is puzzling but doesn't help much. Where are Corded Ware type
R1a in 4000 BCE?
@Nick Patterson
Where are Corded Ware type R1a in 4000 BCE?
Must be somewhere on the steppe or in the nearby forest steppe. But it might be so rare at this time that we might never find it in ancient DNA until it starts expanding rapidly with the Corded Ware.
I think it's interesting, and probably relevant, that R1a (although not M417+), shows up in Steppe Maykop.
This hasn't been reported officially, but it's a legitimate result looking at the raw data.
Steppe_Maykop_outlier SA6013.B0101 Sharakhalsun 6 R1a
That's not to say that Corded Ware R1a is from Steppe Maykop. I think that it's from the steppe people who were highly mobile and in contact with Steppe Maykop and Maykop around 4000 BCE.
Thanks Nick!
The Y-chromosome data is puzzling but doesn't help much. Where are Corded Ware type
R1a in 4000 BCE?
I don't know about 4000 BCE but GLAV_14, a male from the Late Eneolithic site Glăvăneştii Vechi, classified as Romania Bronze Age (ca. 3500-3000 BC) belongs to R1a-M417->Z93+.
That Romanian sample is probably a wrongly dated Sarmatian or something.
If not GLAV14 then then I6561, Alexandria Ukraine, 3500 BC, you've even got a blog about it
https://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2018/03/was-ukraineeneolithic-i6561-proto-indo.html
That's also a wrongly dated sample.
I am curious whenever the R1b people came into Bronze Age Italy as fully "Steppe" admixed or were they somewhat different. As Etruscans and other mainland Italic people seem to be roughly 30% steppe on average and almost 80% R1b. The overall autosomal impact does not match the Y Dna even if steppe ancestry was 100% male driven. Maybe the Indo European migrants heavy in steppe ancestry contributed around 45%, mostly on the male side? What do you think Davidski?
They were like Bell Beakers.
Post a Comment