203 Umierania nieprawdy cd, czyli Kalasze, Irańczycy, Osetyńcy… i „irańska” haplogrupa G1 i jej mutacje

Ten artykuł jest poświęcony umieraniu tzw. Osetyńców, jako potomków tzw. Alanów, czyli Sarmatów, czyli Scytów itd, czyli tzw. PIE. Ktoś uważa, że było inaczej i podtrzymuje nieprawdziwe tezy o rzekomych od-osetyńskich, od-alańskich, od-irańskich itd. (jak zwał) zapożyczeniach językowych w języku słowiańskim? Ponownie proszę, o wskazanie jakichś powiązań genetycznych, potwierdzających tę przestarzałą, nieprawdziwą przeciw-słowiańską rasistowską germańską teoryjkę…

Tak jak to ktoś ujął wcześniej, (pewno Robert), pan dr Piotr Makuch, wykazał w swojej historycznej pracy co wykazał,.. tyle że z naukowego punktu widzenia, „wykazał” coś dokładnie odwrotnego, na co wskazuje nauka zwana genetyką… choć nie tylko ona…

Pan dr Piotr Makuch i jego nieprawdziwe przeciw-naukowe i przeciw-słowiańskie tezy, a za nim wszyscy inni allo-allo, jak pan Grzegorz Jagodziński itd, będą tu wkrótce ToPieNi w BaGNie itd, (no nie licząc tego kopa od KL”o”/u/vS+aKa, które już był zaliczył w poprzednim odcinku, wraz z jednym takim panem profesorem językoznawstwa i dokhtorem filozofii z Harwardu)…




The origin of Iranian speakers is a big puzzle as in ancient times there were two quite different groups of such speakers: nomadic steppe people such as Scythians and settled farmers such as Persians and Medes.

I am guessing that the story of Iranian origins will only be solved in correlation to their Indo-Aryan brethren and their more distant Indo-European relations.

Clearly, G1 cannot be Proto-Indo-European as it has a rather limited distribution in Eurasia, but it could very well have been a marker of a subset of Indo-Europeans. If it was present in ancestral Iranians, then this would geographically constrain the places where ancestral Iranians were formed.

Deep Phylogenetic Analysis of Haplogroup G1 Provides Estimates of SNP and STR Mutation Rates on the Human Y-Chromosome and Reveals Migrations of Iranic Speakers
Oleg Balanovsky et al.

Y-chromosomal haplogroup G1 is a minor component of the overall gene pool of South-West and Central Asia but reaches up to 80% frequency in some populations scattered within this area. We have genotyped the G1-defining marker M285 in 27 Eurasian populations (n= 5,346), analyzed 367 M285-positive samples using 17 Y-STRs, and sequenced ~11 Mb of the Y-chromosome in 20 of these samples to an average coverage of 67X. This allowed detailed phylogenetic reconstruction. We identified five branches, all with high geographical specificity: G1-L1323 in Kazakhs, the closely related G1-GG1 in Mongols, G1-GG265 in Armenians and its distant brother clade G1-GG162 in Bashkirs, and G1-GG362 in West Indians. The haplotype diversity, which decreased from West Iran to Central Asia, allows us to hypothesize that this rare haplogroup could have been carried by the expansion of Iranic speakers northwards to the Eurasian steppe and via founder effects became a predominant genetic component of some populations, including the Argyn tribe of the Kazakhs. The remarkable agreement between genetic and genealogical trees of Argyns allowed us to calibrate the molecular clock using a historical date (1405 AD) of the most recent common genealogical ancestor. The mutation rate for Y-chromosomal sequence data obtained was 0.78×10-9 per bp per year, falling within the range of published rates. The mutation rate for Y-chromosomal STRs was 0.0022 per locus per generation, very close to the so-called genealogical rate. The “clan-based” approach to estimating the mutation rate provides a third, middle way between direct farther-to-son comparisons and using archeologically known migrations, whose dates are subject to revision and of uncertain relationship to genetic events.

Deep Phylogenetic Analysis of Haplogroup G1 Provides Estimates of SNP and STR Mutation Rates on the Human Y-Chromosome and Reveals Migrations of Iranic Speakers

PLOS Published: April 7, 2015 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0122968

Coś dla lubiących drzewka:



Unknown said…
There is a remarkable film from 1925 called Grass. It follows the annual Bakhtiari migration in the southwest of modern Iran. Whatever its flaws, it does illustrate that „pastoralist” lifestyle could have developed in the Zagros mountains well before it moved to the steppes. One interesting part is the crossing of the Karun River by maybe a hundred thousand cattle. Another is the Anatolian hunter.

A shortened version of the film is here:

Tuesday, April 14, 2015 4:40:00 a.m.

eurologist said…
„The “clan-based” approach to estimating the mutation rate provides a third, middle way between direct farther-to-son comparisons and using archeologically known migrations, whose dates are subject to revision and of uncertain relationship to genetic events. ”

They conveniently forgot about the most reliable of all: ancient DNA. Also, as I have mentioned before, I strongly suspect mutation rates to „slow down” with age of method/ sample. And we are quite near experimental tests (planned or accidental) showing whether the effective mutation rate is time-dependent.
Tuesday, April 14, 2015 12:17:00 p.m.

Unknown said…
This is actually a remarkable piece of research. A key question is how the pastoralist economies got to the steppes. If it came along with domesticated animals, than it makes it possible that Indo-European languages also came along with it. This is the basic premise of any flavor of the Anatolian Theory of IE origin.

Steppe advocates of IE origins of course have worked hard to say that the Neolithic in Armenia, Anatolia and Iran did not include pastoralism. You can see some of the evidence evaluated in Daniel Potts’ „Nomadism in Iran: From Antiquity to the Modern Era.”

If there were herds of cattle, of course, one would think that pasture would dictate a transient steppes-style lifestyle right from the start. And since the archaeology as a whole is pretty light, the argument is about the lack of evidence more than the logic.

For a Russian sponsored project to essentially endorse the Anatolian theory appears to be pretty brave.

„Much higher STR variation in the west part of the Iranian-Armenian plateau makes the mountain homeland a more probable candidate. This conclusion fits the Anatolian theory of Indo-European origins, and the pattern of STR diversity (Fig 4) fits especially well.”
Monday, April 20, 2015 6:54:00 a.m.

Kurti said…
@Unknoen. Pastroalism started in what is nowadays known as Kurdistan. But most likely around the Zagros mountains there is no denying there. I have been advocating an Zagros/Albruz Mountain-North Mesopotamia origin of Indo European for a long time.
Tuesday, April 21, 2015 10:49:00 p.m.



April 30, 2015

Kalash origins

The Kalash Genetic Isolate: Ancient Divergence, Drift, and Selection
Qasim Ayub et al.

The Kalash represent an enigmatic isolated population of Indo-European speakers who have been living for centuries in the Hindu Kush mountain ranges of present-day Pakistan. Previous Y chromosome and mitochondrial DNA markers provided no support for their claimed Greek descent following Alexander III of Macedon’s invasion of this region, and analysis of autosomal loci provided evidence of a strong genetic bottleneck. To understand their origins and demography further, we genotyped 23 unrelated Kalash samples on the Illumina HumanOmni2.5M-8 BeadChip and sequenced one male individual at high coverage on an Illumina HiSeq 2000. Comparison with published data from ancient hunter-gatherers and European farmers showed that the Kalash share genetic drift with the Paleolithic Siberian hunter-gatherers and might represent an extremely drifted ancient northern Eurasian population that also contributed to European and Near Eastern ancestry. Since the split from other South Asian populations, the Kalash have maintained a low long-term effective population size (2,319–2,603) and experienced no detectable gene flow from their geographic neighbors in Pakistan or from other extant Eurasian populations. The mean time of divergence between the Kalash and other populations currently residing in this region was estimated to be 11,800 (95% confidence interval = 10,600−12,600) years ago, and thus they represent present-day descendants of some of the earliest migrants into the Indian sub-continent from West Asia.

bellbeakerblogger said…
Related topics out this week:

Strontium Isotope analysis of first generation Harappan and Farmana immigrants of the Indus Valley…

From two weeks ago:

Four Harappans excavated by a South Korean team to undergo full genomic sequence…
Thursday, April 30, 2015 9:51:00 p.m.

Kurti said…
I have been saying on Eupedia that Kalash are most likely the remnant of ancient Proto ANE people from South_Central Asia since more than a year. Kalash have significant frequncy of Haplogroups such as R*, R1*, R1a*, R2*. My hypothesis is that this „Siberian” individual original stems from a population which was inhabiting the regon between South_Central Asia, Iran , North Asia and Sibiria. However ultimately they stem from somewhere in between South_Central Asia and Iran. People seem to forget that beside Amerindians the South_Central Asians such as Kalash have the highest frequency of ANE. Imagine how strong this ANE component will be among ancient South_Central Asians if even modern once(who have been the target of many farmer/herder waves) are still that strong in this component.

To be honest I don’t even think this „ANE” is the „real deal”, simply because Mal’ta might himself had absorbed some „other” admixture. I am not denying that ANE is very ancient I am simply speculating that some ancient R* individuals in other parts of the world, as example in South_Central Asia, could be autosomally slightly different.
Friday, May 01, 2015 1:49:00 a.m.

sykes.1 said…
When did these people show up in the Hindu Kush? If they are Indo-European speakers, they can’t have arrived much before 4,000 BC.
Friday, May 01, 2015 3:32:00 p.m.

capra internetensis said…
Among Kalash male lineages, only H1a1-M82 (20%) is properly South Asian. Even their R1a is Z2125, the more Central Asian type.
That said you are surely right, people with a variety of G, H, J, L, and young R clades can hardly be the product of ancient isolation on the male side. ASI is not supposed to have been a homogeneous population. In fact Moorjani et al specifically note evidence for differences in ASI within different Indian populations – that for some Onge is more closely related than for others. That said, I agree with you that South Asia is unlikely to have been totally isolated from everyone for the whole of the Upper Paleolithic.
Saturday, May 02, 2015 10:03:00 p.m.

andrew said…
„When did these people show up in the Hindu Kush? If they are Indo-European speakers, they can’t have arrived much before 4,000 BC”

An Indo-European language means significant cultural contact in the last 6,000 years, but doesn’t say anything more about their ancestral genetics than, for example, that fact that many pure blooded Native Americans and indigenous Australians speak English or Spanish or Portuguese.
Sunday, May 03, 2015 1:32:00 a.m.

Unknown said…
The term Indo-European is so overplayed that it has outlived its usefullness. Its reality began as language influenced but in the same vein the NE Afghan Nuristanis (my favourite baseline group) do speak an Iranic languange (Dari and even Pashto) as inhabitants of a nation state but whose original ‚language’ gave way to numbers and culture of greater identity (demographics and location of the larger society). Kalash and bottleneck survival of an intitial origin group who ‚lost’ their way but whose greater elements are /have become the seed group of earlier out of Asia migration to the Fertile Crescent and even the forerunner of Eropean population dispersal!
Sunday, May 03, 2015 8:59:00 a.m.

terryt said…
@ aniasi:
„This surely throws out the idea of a 60,000 year old unrelated population, and forces a reconsideration of population flow into South Asia before the late neolithic?”

Have you seen this:

Many interesting ideas presented but I found this particularly so:

„More or less all South Asian populations are a fusion between a deeply indigenous strain which distant affinities to the peoples of eastern Eurasia (ASI), and a group very close to the ones typically found in Western Eurasia (ANI). There are no pure indigenes”.

There is very little evidence of any ‚deeply indigenous strain’. And the ASI element looks by no means indigenous to India. This would indicate the idea that South Asia provided a major route east during the early Paleolithic.
Tuesday, May 05, 2015 7:53:00 a.m.


3 thoughts on “203 Umierania nieprawdy cd, czyli Kalasze, Irańczycy, Osetyńcy… i „irańska” haplogrupa G1 i jej mutacje

  1. Dodatek o „irańskim” R1b:


    2015-10-27, 23:03 #3
    EliasAlucard Senior Moderator

    Quote Originally Posted by Padre Organtino View Post
    I believe it mostly comes from Kassites, Hurrians and similar people.

    This is not really possible to corroborate at this point though, especially not Kassites or Gutians. Hurrians maybe, but even then it’s difficult.

    Quote Originally Posted by Padre Organtino View Post
    Plus maybe some has been carried there by Phrygians.

    Even this is difficult to confirm. So then that begs the question how much of Iranian R1b can be linked to extant populations in the Near East carrying R1b. Any Iranian R1b subclade that happens to be downstream to common Greek R1b, for example? And perhaps the R1b in India can be derived from Greek R1b as well?

    2015-10-27, 23:05 #4
    Silesian Established Member

    Would you like to narrow/parse the data and be more specific? For example R1b-L23+Z2103+Z2106+Z2109+Z2110+ are around 6100B.P.+/- while R1b L51+ and R1b PF7562 around 5000-5600+/- B.P.

    Are you using modern day R1b frequencies in Iran? Or are you using ancient R1b-Steppe frequencies, where R1b-PII may have originated from??

    2015-10-27, 23:13 #5

    I really haven’t studied R1b much at all. All I know is that most of R1b frequency in Europe is L51+ and in Asia it’s mainly Z2103. What I’d like to know about Iranian R1b is its source and subclades. If Iranian R1b males spoke an Indo-Iranian language, which were these languages before they became assimilated into the Iranian languages? Clearly not all Middle Eastern R1b is from proto-Indo-European sources though, as some of it is L23-, which could still mean it came from a proto-PIE speaking steppe population originally, but if so, this happened before the Indo-European expansions (in the horse/wheel era).

    2015-10-27, 23:19 #6

    Do you agree/disagree with statement made at 47-49min about Indo-Iranians?

    2015-10-27, 23:25 #7

    Yes, I agree. What does that have to do with Iranian R1b? The Sintashta and Andronovo sites have only turned out as R1a.

    2015-10-27, 23:33 #8
    Padre Organtino

    I think R1b in Iranians has to do a lot with „teal” people who brough non-Yamnaya portion of ANE to West Asia. Kassites, Gutians, Hurrians and etc are very good candidates for that.

    We already have ancient R1b people from Armenia who basically were a mix of North Caucasians and EEFs. If we assume that EEF part was a remnant of people who left for Europe we get a teal population that has carried R1b and most likely was Hurrian.

    2015-10-27, 23:47 #9

    See the Yamnaya R1b-green dot. It predates the blue dots by 1000+/- years. It’s also related to R1b-Z2103 found in Poltavka- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poltavka_culture or the region in the center of the video you agree with.

    2015-10-27, 23:55 #10
    Sure, but the problem is, it can’t be confirmed today, since we have no Kassite/Gutian/Hurrian population to test with. The only proxy is Armenians who probably descend to a significant degree from Urartians (who were linguistically related to Hurrians), and even then it’s difficult to confirm because Armenian R1b might as well be from other Indo-European speaking sources.
    The point is, by the time the proto-Indo-Iranians kicked off and launched their movements into Asia (east and south), it was by fair mainly R1a-Z93+. Some R1b males may very well have followed along, but it can’t have been many.

    The R1b in Iran should come from other sources than the Indo-Iranians.

    What do you know about Iranian R1b? I haven’t read all of Grugni et al., just read the abstract a little, but I suspect it’s outdated by now anyway.


  2. 2015-10-29, 22:33 #15

    Quote Originally Posted by Arch Hades View Post
    Any idea what R1b clades modern Greeks carry? It’s not the same as Western Europeans is it?

    It looks like they have at least R1b-L584+ 6100B.P.+/- and R1b-7562+5000B.P.+/- Also by the looks of it may also have R1b-CTS7822[2110]6100B.P.+/-maybe connected with Albanians and 1 sample from Volga region? https://www.familytreedna.com/public/Greece/default.aspx?section=yresults

    R1b-9219+Ossetian-[Iranian branch] is a little different when compared to the R1b-L584 found among Georgians.

    2015-10-29, 22:42 #16

    I’m not disputing that Iranians carry R1b; I know they do. I’m saying it didn’t come from the proto-Indo-Iranians. That R1b has been found in Yamnaya (but not in Sintashta and Andronovo), doesn’t mean Iranian R1b is derived from the proto-Indo-Iranians. The R1b in Iranians, I personally believe came from non-Indo-Iranian (but arguably Indo-European) language groups. Alexander’s conquest of Persia may very well have left behind some R1b in the region.

    2015-10-29, 23:13 #17

    Remember R1bZ2103 kurgans predate by 1000 years in the regions you qualify as PII.

    Alexander did not pass by North Ossetia. He went south. The Ossetians are also considered Iranian speaking. Maybe even added loanwords to Proto-Slavic, how can this be if not for R1b-Iranian-Ossetians. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proto-Slavic_borrowings
    Two likely Iranian loanwords in Common Slavic are[1]

    PSl. *gōnjā, cloak, mantle (Russ. gúnja, Pol. gunia, Cr. gȗnj) < Iranian *gaunyā (Av.[1] gaona-, Ossetian γun);
    PSl. *rāji, heaven (OCS rajь, Pol. raj, Russ. raj) < Iranian *rāy- (Av. rāy).

    The Ossetians or Ossetes (Ossetian: ир, ирæттæ, ir, irættæ; дигорæ, дигорæнттæ, digoræ, digorænttæ) are an Iranian ethnic group of the Caucasus Mountains, indigenous to the region known as Ossetia.[12][13][14] They speak Ossetic, an Iranian language of the Eastern branch of the Indo-European languages family, w

    2015-11-02, 15:10 #18

    Quote Originally Posted by Silesian View Post
    Remember R1bZ2103 kurgans predate by 1000 years in the regions you qualify as PII.

    Doesn't matter, because the proto-Indo-Iranians were mainly lead by R1a-Z93+. Maybe they had a tiny minority of R1b males along with them, and if so, that's what I'm trying to figure out in this thread. It's no coincidence that Sintashta, Andronovo and so on, are all turning out as R1a-Z93+.

    Quote Originally Posted by Silesian View Post
    Alexander did not pass by North Ossetia. He went south. The Ossetians are also considered Iranian speaking. Maybe even added loanwords to Proto-Slavic, how can this be if not for R1b-Iranian-Ossetians.

    What type of R1b do Ossetians have, and is it of the same subclade(s) as Persian R1b?

    2015-11-03, 14:44 #20
    Padre Organtino

    R1B was found in clearly non-IE Hurrians from Armenia. I doubt it has much to do with IE. Anyone who has at least basic knowledge about Caucasus knows that Ossetians are relatively recent language shifters.


  3. Yesterday, 00:00 #22

    Quote Originally Posted by Silesian View Post
    R1b-CTS-7822+ Same as Pathan/Pashtun R1b.
    No not the same as Lurs as far as I know

    Okay. The same R1b clade has to be found in more or less all Indic and Iranic speaking populations, to count as a proto-Indo-Iranian marker. That’s the case with R1a-Z93+ and I don’t see why a genuinely proto-Indo-Iranian R1b marker shouldn’t fulfill the same criteria.

    I’m not disputing the presence of R1b in Yamaya/Samara, I’m saying that a couple of thousand years later, the proto-Indo-Iranian migrations from eastern Yamnaya, was led by an R1a-Z93+ tribe. Maybe they had a couple of R1blokes with them, and that’s what I’m trying to figure out here.

    Quote Originally Posted by Padre Organtino View Post
    R1B was found in clearly non-IE Hurrians from Armenia.

    Could you elaborate? Source? How is it known they spoke Hurrian?

    Yesterday, 10:52 #23
    Padre Organtino

    Quote Originally Posted by joseph capelli View Post
    If those metal age Armenian samples are native Hurrians and not steppe invaders, then Georgians and their genetic brothers Armenians are recent incomers from Iran/Iraq, considering where those two groups plot….

    Iron Age Armenians have a very large and recent admixture from some CW-like group. Rest is (probably) a not very successful attempt at trolling.

    Quote Originally Posted by EliasAlucard View Post
    Could you elaborate? Source? How is it known they spoke Hurrian?
    It is known that Hurrians and Urartians preceed Armenian language there.

    Then you have people who are a mixture of EEF and North Caucasians and have R1b.
    Plus their R1b is also very basal and separated from Yamnaya type a long time ago.
    Makes sense to consider it a part of „teal people” package.

    Yesterday, 14:20 #25
    Padre Organtino

    Quote Originally Posted by joseph capelli View Post
    Is it trolling to claim that modern Georgians/Armenians are genetically almost identical to Iraqis and Iranians and totally different from „their” Iron Age ancestors?
    I believe that you generally troll a lot recently. Georgians and Iraqis (excluding Assyrians) are considerably less similar than Ashkenazim and most Southern Italians. Yet you somehow go raging when anyone dares to mention that Haim and Luigi have a lot in common.

    The other issues with your assertion is that Iraqis and Iranians are not that similar to begin with so comparing Georgians to both of them is like saying South Italians are like Berbers and Lebanese.

    Thirdly the Iron Age guys in Armenia are representative of only elite of society that indeed had a large recent admixture from Northern Euros. Caucasus’s history is full of language replacements due to elite dominance. Nothing implies that it should be otherwise with Armenians (or Georgians for the record).

    Fourthly you haven’t even read the papers properly otherwise you would have known that Bronze Age Armenians actually do look pretty close to modern North Caucasians and to modern Georgians but have higher EEF ancestry. It’s the Iron Age elite burials (due to IE invasion from Balkans) that are clearly out of place.

    Finally it’s obvious that at some point in time at least a part of Georgian/Armenian/NC ancestry came from Iran/Central Asia cause the „teal” component could have formed only there. It is very unlikely though that it happened in recent times as Kura-Arax culture as its (possible) relative the Maykop are rather old.

    Today, 01:48 #31

    Quote Originally Posted by EliasAlucard View Post
    Okay. The same R1b clade has to be found in more or less all Indic and Iranic speaking populations, to count as a proto-Indo-Iranian marker. That’s the case with R1a-Z93+ and I don’t see why a genuinely proto-Indo-Iranian R1b marker shouldn’t fulfill the same criteria………..

    I speculate that both basal R1a/b and R2 & Q share common history along glacial line.
    The Caucasus were split by glacier North and South. Therefore the original proto- Iranians originate from around the region below the glacier line, or between the regions M-Ural on the posted/cited map.

    R* originated in far Siberia refuge and made it’s way West.

    Just for fun using Eurasia K14 Neolithic Admixture Proportions calculator.
    R* sample Siberia

    Yamnaya sample- speculate that original PII were much like this sample RISE548 Temrta IV, Russia.

    Today, 12:30 #33
    Padre Organtino

    This Georgian guy has obvious recent Armenian ancestry (there are many examples of Armenians who got „georganized” in the last two century). In the same way Georgians with recent Slavic ancestry plot almost near Balkans. Both types are not representative of general population. Meanwhile East Sicilians in the same plot you cite land with Ashkenazis.
    You’re correct about Ashkenazis scoring something like 5-8% less combined UHG than South Italians. However most Arabs score 8-12% less ANE than Georgians. So I don’t see how you can insist on one and deny the other.

    Furthermore returning back to the original question Georgians actually cluster very close to Bronze and Iron Age Armenians. The latter are somewhat between Georgians/Abkhazians and North Caucasians. Kurds cluster very close to Georgians on West Eurasia maps but when you take into account South Asians they get pulled away as Georgians have very low ASI (1% or less) while Kurds seem to harbour considerably more (at the same time they have genuine WHG from IEs).



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 )

Zdjęcie na Google+

Komentujesz korzystając z konta Google+. Wyloguj / Zmień )

Connecting to %s