191 Nowe źródła i wiadomości językowe i genetyczne 04


Proponuję zapoznać się z tymi źródłami… żeby utrzymać rękę na pulsie… zmian… 🙂


Davidski said…

Milk drinking probably wasn’t very common in North-Central Europe until after the invasion from the steppe…


But as per the Mathieson review, that doesn’t necessarily mean the LP allele came from the steppe.
October 18, 2015 at 4:32 AM

Nirjhar007 said…

Somewhat Related-
October 18, 2015 at 4:34 AM

Davidski said…

Ah, I see, all roads lead to Kurdistan.

Except there’s a shitload of R1a-Z93 all over the Middle Bronze Age steppe, and now also the European LP allele.
October 18, 2015 at 4:51 AM

Nirjhar007 said…

also this is related in case of Pigmentation however, Between SC Asians and Europeans.
Anyway, just waiting for the aDNA, i hope it will be before this year ends…
October 18, 2015 at 4:57 AM

Lactase persistence and ancient DNA

Harvard’s Iain Mathieson is the lead author of a recent bioRxiv peprint on the history of natural selection in Europe. He also recently posted an online review on the origins and spread of lactase persistence (LP) in Europe. He ends the review with the following comment:

This is actually rather consistent with the Itan et al. result, and it seems plausible to me that the [European LP] allele first appeared in Central Europe, was spread around Europe by the LBK, before being introduced to the steppe later by migration from Europe.

I can imagine that this conclusion won’t be everyone’s cup of tea, but I’d say it’s a reasonable one for the time being.

Indeed, it’s interesting to note the presence of the European LP allele in the Srubnaya Culture remains from the Middle Bronze Age Caspian steppe.

We didn’t find any evidence for LP in early farming populations like the LBK, or in early Bronze age steppe populations like the Yamnaya. In as-yet unreported data, we find a few copies of the allele in the Srubnaya – a later steppe population who seem to have some European Farmer-like ancestry.

The same Srubnaya sample also shows a high ratio of Y-haplogroup R1a-Z93 (4/6), which is today one of the most common Y-haplogroups in South Asia.

Now, the LP allele in South Asia is the same one as in Europe. So what this suggests, of course, is that at some point, probably during the later stages of the Bronze Age, steppe nomads closely related to the Srubnaya people moved into South Asia, bringing with them both R1a-Z93 and the European LP allele.

I’m pretty sure we’ll be hearing more on that soon from the good people at Broad MIT/Harvard.

batman said…

Perhaps it’s time to check what the 7.500 year old R1a from Onega – at the crossroad between the Baltic and the Volga – has to do with the first farmers, carrying cattles and R1a into the lower realms of Volga.

Moreover, it’s time to check how the map of movements – describing the downstream mutations of R1a adn R1b – will look like, if their common origin and ‚bifurication-area’ should happen to be where the oldest traces of cattle-farming AND the oldest populations of milk-drinkers have been found.

Looking for the waterways through which the spread of R1a/b could reach the green-fields in the wider fields and river-valleys around Uralian, the Caucasian, the Carpathian and the Atapuerchan mountains – some 5.000 years ago – we may even find the SW Baltic as a very logical area-of-origin.

This clay-rich area of origin may even explain the common tradition of pottery – combining Pitted, Combed, Corded, Curved, Cardial and Linear decorations on beakers and sculptures. Thus we may connect it to how these various ‚stylistic dialects’ occured along the spread of the descendats of y-dna R and mt-dna H, to Norway and Carelia as well as to Baalberge, Euleu and Balaton.
The leap-frog migrations – from one suitable area to the other – seemed to have followed the old routes of the early trade if flint-tools and amber-art – introducing lactase persistance and IE language to Bactria, Balkan and Iberia, just about simultaniously.

Consequently – we’re back to the temperate area where the first indutries of flint-tools and amber-jewlery occured – after ice-time:

Click to access bt_334.pdf

October 18, 2015 at 8:34 AM


I won’t go into the linguistics arguments here why the Anatolian hypothesis is implausible. But it might be worth checking out a new book on the topic by linguists Asya Pereltsvaig and Martin W. Lewis: The Indo-European Controversy: Facts and Fallacies in Historical Linguistics. I haven’t read it yet, so I welcome the opinions here of those who have. I did, however, read a lot of the online articles on which the book is based.


You don’t need to be familiar with PCA methodology to be able to read the plot. Basically, it shows that the present-day European population structure is the result of two main events:

  • the arrival of early farmers from Anatolia during the Neolithic transition, which eventually caused the extinction of people like the Western Hunter-Gatherer, who is the most obvious outlier on the plot

  • the expansion of Kurgan groups such as the Yamnaya, which led to the formation of the Corded Ware horizon across much of Europe and shifted the genetic structure of almost all Europeans to the east, away from the Neolithic and Copper Age samples.

These were massive population turnovers, and, as a rule, massive population turnovers are accompanied by language change. So it’s highly unlikely that any Europeans today are speaking languages derived from those of the Western Hunter-Gatherers or early Neolithic farmers of Central Europe (ie. according to Renfrew the ancestors of Celts, Germanics and other Indo-Europeans). Moreover, consider this:

  • most present-day Indo-European speaking Europeans form an elongated cluster between the Neolithic farmers and the Corded Ware sample, pointing to the steppe-derived Corded Ware Culture as the proximate agent of the Indo-European expansion in much of Europe

  • the only present-day Europeans who closely resemble Neolithic farmers are some Sardinians (the small Romance cluster just above the two Neolithic samples), but Sardinians spoke Paleo-Sardinian or Nuragic languages until they adopted Indo-European speech, in the form of Latin, from the Romans (see page 118 here).

Also, this isn’t shown on the plot, but the dominant Y-chromosome haplogroup of early Neolithic farmers is G2a, which is a low frequency marker in Europe today. The two most common Y-chromosome haplogroups among present-day Europeans are R-M198 and R-M269, which are also typical of Corded Ware and Yamnaya males, respectively, and probably originally from the steppe.

Davidski said…

Afanasievo ins’t an ANE/ENF mixture. It’s EHG/ENF, same as Yamnaya.
So Afanasievo is from Europe. Again, you can see that on the global plots.
July 30, 2015 at 9:25 PM

Kristiina said…

„So Afanasievo is from Europe.”

Maybe from Eastern Europe, but Dave, in your own map, Afanasievo specimens (RISE509, RISE5011) do not cluster with Slavs such as Ukrainians or Czechs, but, instead, RISE509 cluster with Finns, Mordovians and Kargopol Russians and RISE5011 between the above and North Ossetians.

Nevertheless, according to the admixture chart K=20 of Allentoft et al paper (http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v522/n7555/extref/nature14507-s1.pdf)
– in addition to EHG (?) – Afanasievo specimens do not have the Sardinian component (=ENF?) but instead the Kalash/ Makrani/Pathan component (25-30%) + a small amount of Native American/Siberian stuff.
July 31, 2015 at 12:09 AM

Davidski said…

Kristiina, what’s above North Ossetia? Last time I looked it was the Pontic-Caspian Steppe.
And the reason Afanasievo don’t show any of the „Sardinian component” is because they don’t have any Early European/Anatolian Farmer ancestry.

So what can we make of these facts? Probably that Afanasievo came from the Pontic-Caspian Steppe, and didn’t have any ancestry from Anatolia, which is another nail in the coffin for the Anatolia hypothesis. Wouldn’t you agree?
July 31, 2015 at 12:28 AM

Kristiina said…

Yes, I agree on that. So, we should say that basically Afanasievo are EHG + Central Asia/Teal.

It is interesting to see that the core Uralic speakers cluster with Afanasievo and Yamnaya and speak languages that have close lexical and structural parallels with IE stuff. The biggest difference is the Siberian/Native American portion that is significant in some northern groups such as Ob-Ugrics and Saami.

July 31, 2015 at 1:01 AM

Mike Thomas said…

Yes. Maybe this all comes back to the substrate hypothesis, with the Central asian input acting on a uralic-type language to form PIE. But whatever the case, maybe a more neutral description like „Afanesievo were northwest Eurasians” would be better ?
July 31, 2015 at 1:08 AM

Kristiina said…

or Uralic languages are based on PIE + Siberian/Native American type substrates.
July 31, 2015 at 2:27 AM

Kristiina said…

Or perhaps more accurately Uralic languages are based on Indo-Uralic + Siberian/Native American type substrates and IE languages on Indo-Uralic + Caucasus/Teal stuff.

July 31, 2015 at 2:35 AM

PF said…

„So it’s highly unlikely that any Europeans today are speaking languages derived from those of the Western Hunter-Gatherers or early Neolithic farmers from Central Europe.”

I think you meant „the vast majority” instead of „any.” In fact this may be a good time to look at the surviving non-IE languages and see whether there are any clues to be gleaned from that info.

Besides Basque, there are the Kartvelian languages (Georgian, etc.) and some Northern Caucasian languages. I’ve for awhile been curious that these regions also show the highest concentrations of G2a anywhere, the dominant haplogroup of Neolithic Europe. The correlation is intriguing.

However, looking at G2a in more detail, one can see distinct clusters which separate the Caucuses from Sardinia/Oetzi/Europe. Perhaps, just before the advent and spread of agriculture in the area, some G2a men split off and settled in the Caucuses (e.g. G2a1), while others went on to figure out farming and colonize Europe (e.g. G2a2). To speculate further, this early Caucasian G2a might be related to the „Teal” we’re looking for, either as a drifted form of an original G2a population, or via admixture between another unique/ancient group local to the region.
July 31, 2015 at 8:18 AM

Davidski said…

Maybe, but all Caucasians show EEF-related ancestry, presumably from Anatolia, while Yamnaya lack it, and they also lack G2a.

So „teal” may have moved onto the steppe from the North Caucasus before both of these markers spread out across the Caucasus.
August 3, 2015 at 4:39 PM

Davidski said…

It makes no difference where the „oldest” subclades of R1a and R1b are found today if they weren’t found there 3,000 years ago.

Eastern European hunter-gatherers carried R1a and R1b, so let’s see if Central Asian hunter-gatherers did too. But I seriously doubt it. Also, 99% of the R1a in the world today is R1a-M417, which certainly expanded from Eastern Europe during the Copper Age with the Corded Ware and derived cultures. Almost all of Asian R1a is a subset of this R1a.
August 4, 2015 at 10:31 AM

Unknown said…

On what basis do you say those subclades weren’t originated in that region (Iran, Turkmenistan, Afghanistan and Northern India)?
Is there archaeogenetic evidence to prove it?

I would guess it’s also possible that R1a-M417 may have been originated somewhere between Eastern Europe and the region above mentioned.
August 4, 2015 at 3:39 PM

Davidski said…

Have a close look at the phylogenetic structure of R1a-M417. All of the main branches are found in Europe; R1a-CTS4385, R1a-Z282 and R1a-Z93. The first one is restricted to NW Europe.

On the other hand, 99% of the R1a in Asia is R1a-Z93, but the most basal subclades are found in Poland and Russia.

R1b is more complex. But we have genomes of Eastern European Hunter-Gatherers carrying R1a and R1b that don’t show any Near Eastern or South Asian admixture. They’re purely European/Siberian.

So it looks like R1 fanned out from Siberia into Europe during the Mesolithic, and then expanded from the Eastern European steppe to Western Europe and Asia during the Bronze Age. Rare subclades of R1a and R1b survived in the Near East because the steppe has been a major migration highway, but they’re not from the Near East.

The trail of R1a to India now matches linguistics and archaeology very well. Corded Ware R1a-M417 > Sintashta R1a-Z93 > Andronovo R1a-Z93 > Indo-Iranians R1a-Z93 > Indo-Aryans R1a-Z93.

The R1a-Z93 Sintashta and Andronovo genomes we have are northern European, with some Siberian admixture among the latter.
August 4, 2015 at 3:52 PM


Steppe-related admixture in Bronze Age northern Spain

An interesting detail missing from the recent Gunther et al. paper is that ATP9 very likely harbors Eastern European Hunter-Gatherer (EHG) ancestry. If true, and I’m fairly certain that it is, then what it means is that steppe-related admixture penetrated into northern Spain at the latest during the Middle Bronze Age, because ATP9 is dated to 3,700–3,568 C14 cal yBP.

Davidski said…

Indo-Iranians were an off shoot of Sintashta and Andronovo, who were uniformly R1a.

The fact that other haplogroups were picked up later in Asia and took part in expansions that formed modern Indo-Iranians doesn’t contradict this.

It seems like you’re focused on a big bang theory of Indo-Iranian origins from a single point and time. That’s highly unrealistic.

It was a step by step process which started with the homogeneous horse worshipping/sacrificing cultures of the Don and Trans-Ural steppe.
September 21, 2015 at 4:54 PM


The key question now is who brought the steppe-related ancestry to Basque country. Were they Indo-Europeans or speakers of Proto-Basque? Also, did they actually come from the steppe, or somewhere nearby, like the Carpathian Basin?

The reason I mention the Carpathian Basin is because, as per the PCA, Basques more or less cluster between Copper Age Iberians and some of the Bronze Age Hungarians (marked Hungary_BA). But this is just one possibility, and I’m not sure at this stage how plausible it looks with, say, formal statistics.


Nirjhar007 said…

I think its impossible that Z-94 Came from West, Its East.
October 11, 2015 at 5:21 AM

Davidski said…

Very funny. Now go and have a look where Z94 Poltavka outlier clusters.
October 11, 2015 at 5:23 AM

Davidski said…

That Scythian doesn’t look half West Asian. He looks Eastern European.

The reason he’s being pulled down is because of projection bias.
October 11, 2015 at 5:31 AM

Aram said…


My comment was a remark on the hot discussion on Eupedia. Actually I don’t think it can be used as an argument for the overall PIE umerheit question, because it is a very late sample ( 300BC), with very different social dynamics. I just wait some more southern aDNA to have an definitive opinion. Till now the Steppe theory is quite strong.

It was just amazing to see where was that Scythian. Btw Afanasiev claims that his Alanian samples also look very European. And this Alanians ( the ancestors of modern Ossetians who fled to mountains after the Mongolian invasion ) also could be somewhere near that Scythian.
October 11, 2015 at 5:55 AM

Nirjhar007 said…

I have said before, IE-Uralic connections exist but they are a bit exaggerated, than they what really are. OTOH IE with Sumerian,Hurro-Urartian and Semetic etc are mostly neglected or not studied with much effort…
October 11, 2015 at 10:27 AM

Nirjhar007 said…

one thing which is remarkable is that finding Z-94 from ~2600 BC (if i’m not mistaken), once it was concluded that its a post 1500 BC mutation, now we have its presence from over a thousand year old sample, i think this makes a reasonable possibility that Z-93 mutation is of ~3000 BC or even before!

It was suggested by me that there is good chance of Afanaseivo being R1a, David also agrees with that, i wonder if they come out as Z-93!!! (there is also an equal possibility that it will be just M-417 or even R1b), then what we have to see if CWC shows any R1a-Z93 or not, things will get very interesting if Afanaseivo turns out to be Z-93.
October 12, 2015 at 6:12 AM


10 thoughts on “191 Nowe źródła i wiadomości językowe i genetyczne 04

  1. http://eurogenes.blogspot.co.uk/2015/10/mobility-and-diet-in-west-eurasian.html

    Sunday, October 18, 2015

    Mobility and diet in the West Eurasian steppes 3500 to 300 BC

    Open access at de Gruyter:

    Questions concerning mobility and migration as well as subsistence strategies of past societies have always been of major importance in archaeological research. The West Eurasian steppes in the Eneolithic, the Early Bronze and the Iron Age were largely inhabited by cultural communities believed to show an elevated level of spatial mobility, often linked to their subsistence economy. In this volume, questions concerning the mobility and potential migration as well as the diet and economy of the West Eurasian steppes communities during the 4th, the 3rd and the 1st Millennia BC are approached by applying isotope analysis, specifically 87Sr/86Sr, δ18O, δ15N and δ13C analyses. Adapting a combination of different isotopic systems to a study area of vast spatial and chronological dimension allowed a wide variety of questions to be answered and establishes the beginning of a database of biogeochemical data for the West Eurasian steppes. Besides the characterisation of mobility and subsistence patterns of the archaeological communities under discussion, attempts to identify possible Early Bronze Age migrations from the steppes to the steppe-like plains in parts of Eastern Europe were made, alongside an evaluation of the applicability of isotope analysis to this context.

    Gerling, Claudia, Prehistoric Mobility and Diet in the West Eurasian Steppes 3500 to 300 BC – An Isotopic Approach, Series: Topoi – Berlin Studies of the Ancient World/Topoi – Berliner Studien der Alten Welt 25, de Gruyter, July 2015, ISBN: 978-3-11-031121-1


  2. http://dienekes.blogspot.co.uk/2015/10/bronze-age-plague.html

    This paper used the same data as the Allentoft et al. paper, but instead of focusing on the human DNA recovered from ancient Eurasians, it went looking for interesting stuff in the non-human DNA (the stuff that is usually thrown away).

    The result: 2,800-5,000 year old Yersinia pestis from Europe to the Altai. It will be cool to look at even older remains than the Bronze Age, but this already pushes the date for plague by a couple thousand years, and implicates steppe people in its earliest spread.


    Thursday, October 22, 2015

    Plague germs may have facilitated Bronze Age expansions from the steppe

    Open access at Cell:
    Summary: The bacteria Yersinia pestis is the etiological agent of plague and has caused human pandemics with millions of deaths in historic times. How and when it originated remains contentious. Here, we report the oldest direct evidence of Yersinia pestis identified by ancient DNA in human teeth from Asia and Europe dating from 2,800 to 5,000 years ago. By sequencing the genomes, we find that these ancient plague strains are basal to all known Yersinia pestis. We find the origins of the Yersinia pestis lineage to be at least two times older than previous estimates. We also identify a temporal sequence of genetic changes that lead to increased virulence and the emergence of the bubonic plague. Our results show that plague infection was endemic in the human populations of Eurasia at least 3,000 years before any historical recordings of pandemics.


  3. http://eurogenes.blogspot.co.uk/2015/10/significant-local-aurochs-admixture-in.html

    Monday, October 26, 2015

    Significant local aurochs admixture in modern British and Irish cattle

    Open access at Genome Biology:

    Background: Domestication of the now-extinct wild aurochs, Bos primigenius, gave rise to the two major domestic extant cattle taxa, B. taurus and B. indicus. While previous genetic studies have shed some light on the evolutionary relationships between European aurochs and modern cattle, important questions remain unanswered, including the phylogenetic status of aurochs, whether gene flow from aurochs into early domestic populations occurred, and which genomic regions were subject to selection processes during and after domestication. Here, we address these questions using whole-genome sequencing data generated from an approximately 6,750-year-old British aurochs bone and genome sequence data from 81 additional cattle plus genome-wide single nucleotide polymorphism data from a diverse panel of 1,225 modern animals.

    Results: Phylogenomic analyses place the aurochs as a distinct outgroup to the domestic B. taurus lineage, supporting the predominant Near Eastern origin of European cattle. Conversely, traditional British and Irish breeds share more genetic variants with this aurochs specimen than other European populations, supporting localized gene flow from aurochs into the ancestors of modern British and Irish cattle, perhaps through purposeful restocking by early herders in Britain. Finally, the functions of genes showing evidence for positive selection in B. taurus are enriched for neurobiology, growth, metabolism and immunobiology, suggesting that these biological processes have been important in the domestication of cattle.

    Conclusions: This work provides important new information regarding the origins and functional evolution of modern cattle, revealing that the interface between early European domestic populations and wild aurochs was significantly more complex than previously thought.

    Chris Davies said…

    Very interesting paper, thanks for sharing. The ancient British cattle breeds (Highland, Dexter, Kerry, Welsh Black, White Park) probably also share higher levels of Auroch admixture with ancient Iberian cattle breeds, which appear not to have been typed for this paper. Cattle were probably introduced to the British Isles with megalithic culture. Also interesting to note the Zebu admixture in the Italian breeds. I vaguely remember a similar claim about Jersey/Guernsey (Channel Islands) cattle but I can’t remember the souce. They look similar to Brown Swiss cattle.
    October 26, 2015 at 1:37 PM



    „The problem is that this isn’t yet supported by any direct evidence from ancient DNA. Thus far, we know that EHG carried Y-haplogroups J, R1a and R1b, but no N1c1. Later populations, with significant EHG ancestry, such as Corded Ware, Khvalynsk and Yamnaya, carried mostly R1a and R1b, as well as I2a and Q1a, but again, no N1c1.”


    Monday, October 19, 2015
    Reconstructing the genetic history of Siberia and Northeastern Europe

    A new preprint on the genetic history of North Eurasia has just appeared at bioRxiv. Here’s the abstract:

    Siberia and Western Russia are home to over 40 culturally and linguistically diverse indigenous ethnic groups. Yet, genetic variation of peoples from this region is largely uncharacterized. We present whole-genome sequencing data from 28 individuals belonging to 14 distinct indigenous populations from that region. We combine these datasets with additional 32 modern-day and 15 ancient human genomes to build and compare autosomal, Y-DNA and mtDNA trees. Our results provide new links between modern and ancient inhabitants of Eurasia. Siberians share 38% of ancestry with descendants of the 45,000-year-old Ust-Ishim people, who were previously believed to have no modern-day descendants. Western Siberians trace 57% of their ancestry to the Ancient North Eurasians, represented by the 24,000-year-old Siberian Malta boy. In addition, Siberians admixtures are present in lineages represented by Eastern European hunter-gatherers from Samara, Karelia, Hungary and Sweden (from 8,000-6,600 years ago), as well as Yamnaya culture people (5,300-4,700 years ago) and modern-day northeastern Europeans. These results provide new evidence of ancient gene flow from Siberia into Europe.
    Also, as far as I can see, the authors consider Y-haplogroup N1c1 as an EHG paternal marker, simply because they dated its main expansion to 7,100-4,900 BP based on present-day samples. Please note that Karelia_HG and Samara_HG are classified as EHG.

    The Western Siberian admixture into the Eastern Europeans likely began before the Yamnaya culture period (5.3-4.7 kya), since the admixtures with Mansi are also very strong among hunter gatherers from Northeastern Europe from 6.6-8 kya (Karelia HG, Samara HG and to lesser degree Motala HG and Hungary Gamba HG; Fig. S21f-q) that predated the Yamnaya people. Therefore Western Siberian admixtures into northeastern Europe likely began prior to 6,600 years ago, coinciding with the expansion of Y-DNA haplogroup N1c1 among Siberians and northeastern Europeans (7,100-4,900 years ago). Since haplogroup N likely originates in Asia or Siberia, its presence among eastern Europeans likely reflects ancient gene flows from Siberia into Eastern Europe.

    The problem is that this isn’t yet supported by any direct evidence from ancient DNA. Thus far, we know that EHG carried Y-haplogroups J, R1a and R1b, but no N1c1. Later populations, with significant EHG ancestry, such as Corded Ware, Khvalynsk and Yamnaya, carried mostly R1a and R1b, as well as I2a and Q1a, but again, no N1c1.

    That’s not to say that N1c1 won’t ever turn up in EHG remains. But in my opinion the major subclades of N1c1 can’t be associated with EHG, but rather with later populations of more complex origin, such as early Uralic-speakers with significant levels of East Eurasian admixture.


  5. http://eurogenes.blogspot.co.uk/2015/10/mitochondrial-dna-from-maykop-wolfgang.html

    Thursday, October 29, 2015
    Mitochondrial DNA from Maykop + Wolfgang Haak on Near Eastern-related ancestry in Yamnaya

    The presence of Indian-specific mtDNA haplogroup M52 is surprising. Maykop territory was located just south of the steppe, but M52 isn’t found in any of the Bronze and Iron Age samples from the steppe tested to date.

    Here’s the comment from Haak, from an abstract titled The role of the Caucasus in the formation of the Eurasia’s genetic makeup: Insights and questions from ancient DNA research.

    Recent genetic research on autosomal and uniparentally-inherited markers has shown a remarkable genetic uniformity of Caucasian populations despite the region’s notable linguistic and cultural diversity. When compared to neighbouring regions, the smooth genetic transition from the Near/Middle East to the Caucasus is in stark contrast to the marked differences to populations from the East European steppes. Flanked by the Black and the Caspian Seas, it remains unclear to what extent the Caucasus served as a corridor and whether and if so when ancient migrations had affected and shaped the region’s genetic profile. Ancient DNA research on Mesolithic, Neolithic and Bronze Age individuals from Western Eurasia have recently thrown fresh light on the Caucasus as region, which appears to have played a critical role in the formation of the genetic ancestry of the Yamnaya people, Bronze Age pastoralist of the east European steppes. The Yamnaya carry strong signals of eastern hunter-gatherer (EHG) ancestry and ancient Near Eastern ancestry that is different from the one that giving rise to early European farmers. While modern-day Armenians are the best proxy for the putative source population of the EHG dilution in the steppes, it is highly likely that prehistoric cultural groups from the Caucasus will provide a much better temporal and contextual fit.

    Davidski said…
    Yamnaya was a nomadic steppe pastoralist culture, like Khvalynsk. Maykop was not.

    Also, if more strange mtDNA HGs turn up in Maykop that aren’t found on the steppe, then this puts a big dent in the theory that Maykop contributed ancestry to Yamnaya.
    October 29, 2015 at 3:53 PM

    Davidski said…
    R1a isn’t from Maykop. It’s an EHG marker native to Eastern Europe.

    Why would you claim it arrived in Eastern Europe after the Mesolithic? That’s insane.

    And if more strange mtDNA HGs turn up in Maykop, then obviously the Georgian-like admixture arrived in the steppe from the Caucasus before Maykop, probably with farmers from the western Caucasus. Farming is documented in western Georgia around 6,000 BC.
    October 29, 2015 at 4:44 PM

    Chad Rohlfsen said…
    I think Varna will have an interesting role here. Supine, rich burials with copper axes is in Bulgaria before Maykop and Yamnaya.
    October 29, 2015 at 6:14 PM

    Rob said…
    Good point. But the current thinking is that Varna influenced Majkop, but Majkop was still on the whole original. Ie masters of their own, unique form of metallurgy which spread throughout Eurasia subsequently. It’s as if Caucasian- Majkop took over the north Balkan hegemony of metallurgy c. 4000 BC.
    October 29, 2015 at 6:31 PM

    Davidski said…
    The three Khvalynsk men carry the Y-haplogroups that we’d expect a population of largely ANE/EHG ancestry to carry; Q, R1a and R1b.

    This is obviously the gene pool of the North Eurasian population that moved both into the Americas and Eastern Europe from Siberia.

    There’s no need to bring South Asia into this from ~24,000 ago, when MA1 was alive, unless you’re also convinced that the ANE ancestry of Amerindians came from South Central Asia after the Ice Age.
    October 29, 2015 at 6:53 PM

    Davidski said…
    We know that there was continuity in North Eurasia because we have MA1, AG2, EHG, Khvalynsk, Yamnaya and Corded Ware.

    So I don’t see the point of forcing South Central Asia into the picture in this context.

    There were population movements from South Asia to the Near East, because South Asian mtDNA shows up in ancient Syria, Turkey and now the Caucasus. But this is another story, because these markers aren’t seen in any of the numerous steppe and steppe derived groups rich in Y-DNA R1.
    October 29, 2015 at 7:54 PM

    Davidski said…
    Interesting factoid: almost all of Western and Central Siberia was ice free even during the LGM.

    It’s more likely that this is where AG2’s ancestors came from. I don’t buy the continuous repopulation from South Central Asia scenario.

    South Central Asia is a sink, not a source. The fact that it’s a sink with a lot of modern diversity confuses a lot of people.
    October 29, 2015 at 11:02 PM

    epoch2013 said…
    Malt’ta is 24.000 years old, Afontova Gora 2 is 17.000 years old. Looks like continuity to me. Maximum ice cover in the LGM was around 26.000 years ago, according to Wiki.

    Another thing, the daub houses of Maykop are rather interesting as a number of Indo-European roots are supposed to be connected to building such houses by some. (The Greek word for city-wall, for instance, may point to it.)
    October 30, 2015 at 3:06 AM

    bellbeakerblogger said…
    One thing that I found interesting is how close Papuans plot to Yamnaya in this set:

    Kind of makes sense, a large chunk of Papuan ancestry is basically paternal cousins with Mal’ta type people. In fact R/Q were basically born somewhere close to Malaysia along with M/S (heuristic narrative)

    If you take an average, nominal Papuan and remove the Denisovian ancestry which came via admixture with the earliest modern Africans in the area (which I don’t know if there exists a suitable proxy, maybe Mbuti Pygmies?) But if you pare all that away, along with Asian admixture, isn’t what’s left something similar to ANE populations?
    October 30, 2015 at 8:26 AM

    Krefter said…
    „Ancient-DNA-wise nope.”

    Most of the world is undersmapled. 90%+ of ancient genomes are from Hungary, Germany, Spain, Sweden, and Samara Russia. Siberia is less sampled than Spain. Our only ancient Siberian genomes are MA1/AG2 and later Bronze age immigrants. We have nothing in-between 15000 BC and 2000 BC.

    I agree more is needed from the Atlantic or West Europe or whatever you want call it. I also think more is needed from Balkans, Italy, and all land surrounded the Baltic. It’ll take years before we see genomes from all those regions because researchers have gotten what they wanted out of Europe now they’ll be moving to other regions of the world.

    Once we do get lots of Atlantic genomes it won’t change much. If there was migration out of the Atlantic area it was EEF/WHG and EEF/WHG mixing with each other, something impossible to detect with any method. It is important if certain mtDNA or Y DNA lineages came out of there but that’s it.

    „quite arbitrary I must say.”

    Reich, Laz, etc. did a great job choosing which ancients to get genomes from. They trusted what archaeologist had been saying for decades: The Neolithic age was the largest migration event in European history. So they tested Mesolithic Luxemborug/Sweden and an early farmer from Germany to investigate whether the spread of farming is important to European origins. They found their answer.

    But after Laz 2013 there were still lots of questions that bugged them. They wanted to discover where MA1-related ancestry came from. So they sampled Yamnaya and Corded Ware and once again they found their answer.

    Next they wanted to investigate if the same Steppe people who moved into Europe moved and likely brought Indo European languages migrated into Asia like archaeology suggested, so they tested Afanasievo and Andronovo. And they found their answer again.
    October 30, 2015 at 10:49 AM


  6. Czyli tzw. chów wsobny nie popłaca, co udowodnił Neandertalczyk…


    November 04, 2015
    Selection against Neandertal deleterious alleles
    Sampled Neandertals (from Europe, the Caucasus, and Siberia) certainly had lower effective population size than living humans, but I wonder what the comparison would be between ancient tribes of modern humans and Neandertals in the Near East where admixture presumably took place.

    doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1101/030387

    The Genetic Cost of Neanderthal Introgression

    Kelley Harris, Rasmus Nielsen

    Approximately 2-4% of the human genome is in non-Africans comprised of DNA intro- gressed from Neanderthals. Recent studies have shown that there is a paucity of introgressed DNA around functional regions, presumably caused by selection after introgression. This observation has been suggested to be a possible consequence of the accumulation of a large amount of Dobzhansky-Muller incompatibilities, i.e. epistatic effects between human and Neanderthal specific mutations, since the divergence of humans and Neanderthals approx. 400-600 kya. However, using previously published estimates of inbreeding in Neanderthals, and of the distribution of fitness effects from human protein coding genes, we show that the average Neanderthal would have had at least 40% lower fitness than the average human due to higher levels of inbreeding and an increased mutational load, regardless of the dominance coefficients of new mutations.
    doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1101/030148

    The Strength of Selection Against Neanderthal Introgression

    Ivan Juric, Simon Aeschbacher, Graham Coop

    Hybridization between humans and Neanderthals has resulted in a low level of Neanderthal ancestry scattered across the genomes of many modern-day humans. After hybridization, on average, selection appears to have removed Neanderthal alleles from the human population. Quantifying the strength and causes of this selection against Neanderthal ancestry is key to understanding our relationship to Neanderthals and, more broadly, how populations remain distinct after secondary contact.


  7. A co z tego wynika? Odpowiedź na spodzie…


    2015-11-12, 20:11 #1

    Can we locate the proto-Uralic urheimat by N1c-L392 phylogeny?

    First of all, great Y-DNA map:

    And the topic question: do you think it’s possible to locate where proto-Uralic could have been spoken by looking at the modern distribution of N-M231+ / N1c-L392- clades? Also N1c-L392+ but VL29- and Z1936- markers should be very helpful in understanding where this took place. This is the distribution of N-M231:

    This is the distribution of Uralic languages:

    At this point, given N1c’s wide distribution among Finno-Ugric speakers, I’d say N1c is equivalent to R1a-M17+ in Indo-European. I also wouldn’t count N1b out, and its role in proto-Uralic is probably not that dissimilar to R1b’s status among Indo-European speakers (Finns do carry some minor N1b):

    So, N1c was in all likelihood present among the proto-Uralics. Ancient DNA will give us important clues to where proto-Uralic was spoken, once they find more ancient N1c bones, and given how well ancient skeletons preserve up there, it shouldn’t be too difficult to get such samples.

    Of course, N1c’s high frequency that far north in Russia, doesn’t mean that’s where N1c originated; N1c has a more southern origin, as does the proto-Uralic urheimat, but Y-DNA N became that common that far north in Russia because the region was sparsely population. In any case, I think population geneticists and linguists alike should be studying N1c more in depth to gain clues of the proto-Uralic urheimat. Am I right or wrong here?


    Gdzie N jest na SKauKaZie i okolicach? A jak tam jest z tymi tzw. Bałtami i ich językami, patrz mapka nachodzenia na siebie haplogrup…

    Oj szykuje sie kolejny wpis o Kaukazie i tzw. kaukazkiej ojczyźnie… Oj coś chyba muszę stwierdzić, że ten tzw. Proto-Indo-Uralik… czy nawet jakichś Proto-Proto-Pre-Kartwelian-Uralic-Indo… hujumuju, to niestety sa ZAPOŻYCZENIA OD-PRZED-SŁOWIAŃSKIE… BO NA TO WSKAZUJE ROZMIESZCZENIE POSZCZEGÓLNYCH HAPLOGRUP, patrz mapka nr.3!!! 🙂

    Będzie i o tym, niedługo…

    Myślę, że ten tzw. Proto-Indo-Uralik, to lekarstwo ma być, na uralskie kompleksy względem Słowian… patrz pług itd. Założę się, o to… ktoś ma ochotę?


  8. IUWAGA!
    Zwróćcie uwagę na ten wątek, bo jest tam kilka bardzo ciekawych spostrzeżeń. Pewno jak dyskusja rozwinie się, to zrobię o tym oddzielny wpis.


    Wednesday, December 9, 2015
    Mixed marriages on the early Eneolithic steppe

    It looks like Sredny Stog was the early vector for the spread of both Anatolian Neolithic and Caucasus hunter-gatherer (CHG) admixture onto the steppe, from the west and east, respectively:

    These data testify the assumption about the existence of mixed Tripolye-Sredniy Stog marriages, because Tripolye population represented the Mediterranean anthropological type according to the not numerous Tripolye burials (Потехина 1999, c.154). It is interesting, that the massive Protoeuropoid type was typical for the oldest and the most eastern monuments of Sredniy Stog, while mesomorphic Mediterranean type was typical for the Igren cemetery, which was one of the youngest monuments related to the second and third periods of the Sredniy Stog culture and synchronous to the Tripolye B I and B I-II.

    Appearance of pottery with pearls at the settlements of the third period of Sredniy Stog culture and glossy ceramics without ornamentation in the eastern variant sites, as well as the group of vessels with the steppe traces at the Svobodnoe settlement, allow me to assume the existence of mixed marriages between the Sredniy Stog and Northern Caucasus population.

    Source: Early Eneolithic in the Pontic Steppes, book by Nadezhda Sergeenva Kotova, available at Academia.edu

    See also…

    qpAdm tour of the Eneolithic/Bronze Age steppe


  9. http://eurogenes.blogspot.co.uk/2015/12/the-scythian.html

    Saturday, December 12, 2015
    The Scythian

    Time to have a look at the Scythian steppe warrior from the Mathieson et al. dataset. This is the first Scythian individual to be genotyped, and seems be a typical example of his kind.

    He comes from the Volga steppes of 380-200 cal BCE and belongs to Y-chromosome haplogroup R1a, which is the dominant Y-haplogroup in Scythian and related remains tested to date.

    His genome-wide data puts him closest to Northeast and Northwest Europeans from among present-day populations, rather than West and South Asians, who should, in theory, carry significant Scythian ancestry. We can probably put that down to the complex ancestry of West and South Asians.

    Moreover, he can be modeled as a mixture of Middle Bronze Age Potapovka people of the Volga steppes and present-day Nganasans of Siberia. This gels rather nicely with archaeological evidence, which suggests that Scythians were the descendants of Bronze Age Eastern European migrants to South Siberia, who expanded west across the Eurasian steppe during the Iron Age and eventually ended up back in Europe.




    Thursday, December 17, 2015
    At least three genetically distinct Indo-European migrations into South Asia

    First came the Indo-Aryans, probably in a couple of waves. Historical linguistics and archeology tell us that they originated on the Trans-Urals steppe in the Sintashta-Andronovo horizon, and pushed south around 2,000 BC to establish themselves as the ruling elite over Central Asian agriculturalists, who were probably in large part of West Asian origin.

    Davidski said…
    It looks like Sintashta has farmer ancestry from the Balkans without the extra WHG admixture that affects Potapovka, Srubnaya, and Corded Ware. Can’t think of anything else that would make a difference.

    Yamnaya_Samara 0.589
    Anatolia_Neolithic 0.411
    chisq 3.936 tail prob 0.414759

    Yamnaya_Samara 0.566
    Starcevo_EN 0.434
    chisq 3.939 tail prob 0.414306

    I’d say Andronovo would be even better than Sintashta if not for the minor East Eurasian admixture it has, which gets in the way here because of the Dai as one of the references.
    December 17, 2015 at 2:55 AM

    mickeydodds1 said…
    So, Sintashta originated deep in Europe – if they carried ‚Balkan farmer ancestry’.
    December 17, 2015 at 11:36 AM

    Davidski said…
    Yep, probably near the Carpathians, like the far western part of the steppe maybe.
    December 17, 2015 at 1:10 PM

    Davidski said…
    Cucuteni-Trypolye women certainly didn’t go all the way to Sintashta. What might have happened was that proto-Sintashta formed from a mixture of Eastern hunter-gatherer R1a men and Trypolye women in Sredny Stog, and then expanded east across the steppe and forest steppe to form Sintashta-Andronovo and the early Indo-Aryans/Iranians.

    By that time, Corded Ware and Yamnaya had already expanded west deep into Europe, taking other Indo-European languages with them.
    December 17, 2015 at 4:18 PM



Wprowadź swoje dane lub kliknij jedną z tych ikon, aby się zalogować:

Logo WordPress.com

Komentujesz korzystając z konta WordPress.com. Wyloguj /  Zmień )

Zdjęcie z Twittera

Komentujesz korzystając z konta Twitter. Wyloguj /  Zmień )

Zdjęcie na Facebooku

Komentujesz korzystając z konta Facebook. Wyloguj /  Zmień )

Połączenie z %s

Ta witryna wykorzystuje usługę Akismet aby zredukować ilość spamu. Dowiedz się w jaki sposób dane w twoich komentarzach są przetwarzane.