PDA

View Full Version : Russian and Polish R1a-Z93*



lgmayka
03-28-2015, 09:15 PM
YFull's new haplotree (http://yfull.com/tree/R-Z93/) shows 3 examples of R1a-Z93* . Two of them are Russian, one Polish. Is it possible that Z93 was born in Eastern Europe?

newtoboard
03-29-2015, 01:32 PM
It almost certainly did. I wonder if some Z93+ started migrating east around 3500 BC though. There isn't really anything that would have prevented it from crossing the Urals. Maybe this explains the Z93* near the Altai while the the bulk of Z93+ migrated east later with Poltavka and maybe Abashevo.

Now the question is where did Z93+ ancestor Z645+ arise? The Don/Donets region sounds good to me.

Have you seen this map that David linked to?

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B9o3EYTdM8lQQlB1N3hZbFhfUVU/view

I wonder what those three arrows represent. One possibility is (from west to east) U106, CTS4385 and R1a-Z283. But given the age of Corded Ware, Z284, pre M458, and Z280+ makes sense too. (also does Afanasievo seems smaller than usual?

Michał
03-29-2015, 05:13 PM
Is it possible that Z93 was born in Eastern Europe?
I agree with newtoboard that this is definitely the most likely option (based on what we know about the modern and ancient distribution of different subclades of R1a), and this has been already discussed in at least two earlier threads (1 (http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?1026-what-is-the-latest-thinking-on-were-R1a-originated/page13&p=10378#post10378), 2 (http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?3882-R1b-and-its-sibling-R1a-possible-route%28s%29-into-Europe/page29&p=72725#post72725)). Also, the most likely homeland for the parental clades Z645 and M417 should also be placed somewhere in Eastern Europe (especially when taking into account the recent paper by Chekunova et al. about aDNA from Western Russia (http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?3905-Ancient-R1a1-and-N1c-from-western-Russia)), although I wouldn't dare to suggest an exact location.

parasar
03-29-2015, 06:46 PM
I have a feeling that by the M417 timeframe there already had been contact with South Asia. So I do not think based on the ancient dna finds we have had so far that M417, Z645, Z283 or Z93 were necessarily born in eastern Europe.

Essentially I do not think (below) this has been supported by Haak et al.

Soon we will learn from aDNA studies about Y-DNA on the steppe and around the steppe.
Here is my prediction:
http://s28.postimg.org/qbuc4iel9/R1a.png (http://postimage.org/)

newtoboard
03-29-2015, 09:26 PM
I have a feeling that by the M417 timeframe there already had been contact with South Asia. So I do not think based on the ancient dna finds we have had so far that M417, Z645, Z283 or Z93 were necessarily born in eastern Europe.

Essentially I do not think (below) this has been supported by Haak et al.

I think there is a pretty decent chance I0242, I0243, I0245, I0250 , and I0252 from the Haak study were R1a-Z93+. Unfortunately DNA wasn't able to be extracted. I hope another lab gives it another shot in the future.

Michał
03-29-2015, 09:56 PM
Essentially I do not think (below) this has been supported by Haak et al.
I agree with you that this hypothetical Yamna-related expansion of R1a from the steppe has not been supported by Haak et al. (nor definitely ruled out, as rightly pointed out by many forumers). However, we need to keep in mind that the Pontic-Caspian steppe is only a (smaller) part of Eastern Europe, and it was the forest zone (and not the steppe zone) where R1a was found by Chekunova et al. in samples dated to about 4000 BC, 2500 BC and 900-400 BC.

newtoboard
03-29-2015, 10:59 PM
I have a feeling that by the M417 timeframe there already had been contact with South Asia. So I do not think based on the ancient dna finds we have had so far that M417, Z645, Z283 or Z93 were necessarily born in eastern Europe.

Essentially I do not think (below) this has been supported by Haak et al.

What happened to the NW European origin of R1a? The fact of the matter is at the current time the majority of R1a is Z645. We should expect Z283+ clades in the forest steppe and forest zone and Z93+ clades in the forest steppe and steppe zone. So far nothing in aDNA has ruled out that hypothesis unless one goes down the path of extrapolating R1b all the way down the Volga and Ural river because R1b was found at Samara and Orenberg. We have y DNA from one small corner of Yamnaya so R1a and other R1b clades (and non R1 clades) will likely be found in the future.

newtoboard
03-29-2015, 11:03 PM
I agree with you that this hypothetical Yamna-related expansion of R1a from the steppe has not been supported by Haak et al. (nor definitely ruled out, as rightly pointed out by many forumers). However, we need to keep in mind that the Pontic-Caspian steppe is only a (smaller) part of Eastern Europe, and it was the forest zone (and not the steppe zone) where R1a was found by Chekunova et al. in samples dated to about 4000 BC, 2500 BC and 900-400 BC.

How should we interpret those R1a clades? Are they possibly ancestral to modern R1a? Which clades? Probably not Z645? There was N1c among them so does that rule out them being the R1a source population in most of Europe and all of Asia?

Also it looks like the Northern clades are older. Does that suggest the newer clades evolved in situ on a hypothetical migration of R1a from the north to the south? Or does that suggest there was continuous migration of R1a from the south to the north? So the older clades will be found in the north because they were traveling while newer clades were born to the south and migrated north.

parasar
03-30-2015, 02:34 AM
What happened to the NW European origin of R1a? The fact of the matter is at the current time the majority of R1a is Z645. We should expect Z283+ clades in the forest steppe and forest zone and Z93+ clades in the forest steppe and steppe zone. So far nothing in aDNA has ruled out that hypothesis unless one goes down the path of extrapolating R1b all the way down the Volga and Ural river because R1b was found at Samara and Orenberg. We have y DNA from one small corner of Yamnaya so R1a and other R1b clades (and non R1 clades) will likely be found in the future.

I had given up on that but R1a's presence in Upper Dvina tells me that we cannot be 100% certain.

Anyway, it appears that there was good mobility in Upper/Inner Eurasia and we need not put R1a types - M17, M417, Z645 etc together geographically, just M417 downstream, and especially Z645, Z283 and Z93. The Karelia R1a doesn't show much South Asian affinity, if any, but Corded Ware R1a does [ "This ancestry appears in Central Europe for the first time in our series with the Corded Ware around 2,500 BCE"].

To resolve this I think we need ancient DNA from the Oxus region.

Michał
03-30-2015, 09:20 AM
How should we interpret those R1a clades? Are they possibly ancestral to modern R1a? Which clades? Probably not Z645? There was N1c among them so does that rule out them being the R1a source population in most of Europe and all of Asia?
We don’t have enough data to ascribe those ancient R1a results to specific subclades under M459 (in the case of the Karelian sample) or under M17 (in the case of the Upper Dvina samples), although I would expect that the youngest of them (ie. those dated to 900-400 BC) were most likely M417+, and probably M417>Z645>Z283>Z282(>Z280?).



Also it looks like the Northern clades are older. Does that suggest the newer clades evolved in situ on a hypothetical migration of R1a from the north to the south? Or does that suggest there was continuous migration of R1a from the south to the north? So the older clades will be found in the north because they were traveling while newer clades were born to the south and migrated north.
Here is a scenario that (currently) seems most likely to me.

The fact that the hypothetical clade “R1a2” (R1a-S12874?) has been found (so far) only among the modern Middle Easterners (cluster 2b, named M420-B1 in our project) and among the Western Europeans (clusters 1 and 2a, or M420-A and M420-B2, respectively) but not in Eastern Europe (!) suggests that R1a* (R1a-M420*) was initially present somewhere on the southern edge of Eastern Europe, with R1a1 (R1a-M459) moving subsequently north towards the forest-steppe zone, and with R1a2 being left on the steppe and (much more recently) partially incorporated into the expanding R1b-rich population before ultimately migrating with those R1b-rich tribes either to Central/Western Europe (along with R1b-L51 and/or R1a-Z2103?) or to the Middle East (with R1b-Z2103?).

After dominating the forest-steppe zone, the R1a-M459 clade split in two major branches, with R1a1a (R1a-M17/M198) occupying the southern part of the “R1a-M459 territory”, and with R1a1b (R1a-YP1272 or rather its unknown parent clade) dominating the Northern R1a-M459 population (with some subclades migrating much further north, hence their presence in ancient Karelia, and this is also consistent with modern R1a-YP1272 being still found in Eastern Europe, including Russia and Belarus/Poland).

While R1a-M17/M198 became (at some point, about 7000-5000 BC?) a dominant R1a clade in the entire forest-steppe zone, some of its subclades were migrating north towards the forest zone (hence Chekunova was able to find R1a-M17 on the Upper Dvina as early as 4000 BC (6000 BP), while some other subclades (like YP1051) were much more likely to penetrate the steppe territory (where R1a2 was already present) and then merge with the incoming R1b-rich population, thus finally landing up in Western Europe, similarly to their above-mentioned distant relatives from clade “R1a2” (or rather from its Western European sublineages 1 and 2a).

In the next stage, the emerging M417 subclade under M17/M198 became a dominant R1a group in the forest-steppe zone (in a northern part of Dnieper-Donets II?), and it was probably at this very moment (around 5000-4500 BC) when the intensive contacts with the expanding R1b-L23 populations resulted in the IE-ization of R1a-M417 (which was also the fate of their nearly extinct southern relatives from R1a2 and R1a-YP1051). R1a-M417 became a leading Y-DNA haplogroup in the IE-speaking Dnieper-Donets III culture (located north of Sredny Stog) that was subsequently transformed into the Middle-Dnieper culture, likely encompassing both major subclades of R1a-M417 (ie. CTS4385 and Z645). The Middle Dnieper culture was a center of the subsequent R1a expansion towards west (CTS4385), north-west (Z283) and east or south-east (Z93 and Z282*-A), which was likely related to the expansion of Corded Ware (including Fatyanovo>Abashevo) and probably also to the expansion of the Catacomb culture that strongly influenced the Late Yamna populations.

Please keep in mind that all above is very speculative, so I can imagine many alternative scenarios that cannot be ruled out.

Michał
03-30-2015, 09:24 AM
I had given up on that but R1a's presence in Upper Dvina tells me that we cannot be 100% certain.

Anyway, it appears that there was good mobility in Upper/Inner Eurasia and we need not put R1a types - M17, M417, Z645 etc together geographically, just M417 downstream, and especially Z645, Z283 and Z93. The Karelia R1as does show much South Asian affinity, if any, but Corded Ware R1a does [ "This ancestry appears in Central Europe for the first time in our series with the Corded Ware around 2,500 BCE"].

To resolve this I think we need ancient DNA from the Oxus region.
If I understand your hypothesis correctly, you assume that M17 (or maybe even M417) was born in Eastern (or even North-Western?) Europe, but then its Z645 (or pre-Z645) subclade migrated east to the Altai where clade Z93 split off, while its sister clade Z283 left Altai soon thereafter and migrated back to Europe where it suddenly exploded shortly after arriving to Central Europe. Please let me know if this is indeed what you assume.

Also, what known archaeological cultures (and archaeologically attested population movements) would you ascribe to M17*, M417*, CTS4385*, Z645*, Z93* and Z283*?

parasar
03-30-2015, 07:51 PM
If I understand your hypothesis correctly, you assume that M17 (or maybe even M417) was born in Eastern (or even North-Western?) Europe, but then its Z645 (or pre-Z645) subclade migrated east to the Altai where clade Z93 split off, while its sister clade Z283 left Altai soon thereafter and migrated back to Europe where it suddenly exploded shortly after arriving to Central Europe. Please let me know if this is indeed what you assume.

Also, what known archaeological cultures (and archaeologically attested population movements) would you ascribe to M17*, M417*, CTS4385*, Z645*, Z93* and Z283*?

Yes your understanding of my thinking is mostly correct. M17's potential horizon is vast. Do we have any M417 without any of that South Asian like component? If not, then the contact with South Asian type population would be at the M417 level or prior.

I can think of population movement in the M417 time-frame entering South Asia - an intrusion is seen 6000-4500bc, but the intrusive element looks to have been absorbed into the local type, which predominates after the intrusion.
https://books.google.com/books?id=gSV-BwAAQBAJ&pg=PA231
https://books.google.com/books?id=OZ0gAAAAQBAJ&pg=PA49

For Europe, it is possibly the corded ware intrusion that brought Z283 and CTS4385 to Europe.

lgmayka
03-30-2015, 08:20 PM
I can think of population movement in the M417 time-frame entering South Asia - an intrusion is seen 6000-4500bc, but the intrusive element looks to have been absorbed into the local type, which predominates after the intrusion.
I have occasionally come across yDNA relationships between Eastern Europe and South Asia which are much older and geographically bizarre than the usual. Take a look at these examples from YFull:

C-Y11990 (http://yfull.com/tree/C-Y11990/) has two entries with a TMRCA of 9100 ybp. One is from Slovakia, the other India.
Q-Y6793 (http://yfull.com/tree/Q-Y6793/) has two entries with a TMRCA of 8300 ybp. One is (ethnically Croatian) from Bosnia-Herzegovina, the other Sri Lanka.

newtoboard
03-30-2015, 10:46 PM
We don’t have enough data to ascribe those ancient R1a results to specific subclades under M459 (in the case of the Karelian sample) or under M17 (in the case of the Upper Dvina samples), although I would expect that the youngest of them (ie. those dated to 900-400 BC) were most likely M417+, and probably M417>Z645>Z283>Z282(>Z280?).



Here is a scenario that (currently) seems most likely to me.

The fact that the hypothetical clade “R1a2” (R1a-S12874?) has been found (so far) only among the modern Middle Easterners (cluster 2b, named M420-B1 in our project) and among the Western Europeans (clusters 1 and 2a, or M420-A and M420-B2, respectively) but not in Eastern Europe (!) suggests that R1a* (R1a-M420*) was initially present somewhere on the southern edge of Eastern Europe, with R1a1 (R1a-M459) moving subsequently north towards the forest-steppe zone, and with R1a2 being left on the steppe and (much more recently) partially incorporated into the expanding R1b-rich population before ultimately migrating with those R1b-rich tribes either to Central/Western Europe (along with R1b-L51 and/or R1a-Z2103?) or to the Middle East (with R1b-Z2103?).

After dominating the forest-steppe zone, the R1a-M459 clade split in two major branches, with R1a1a (R1a-M17/M198) occupying the southern part of the “R1a-M459 territory”, and with R1a1b (R1a-YP1272 or rather its unknown parent clade) dominating the Northern R1a-M459 population (with some subclades migrating much further north, hence their presence in ancient Karelia, and this is also consistent with modern R1a-YP1272 being still found in Eastern Europe, including Russia and Belarus/Poland).

While R1a-M17/M198 became (at some point, about 7000-5000 BC?) a dominant R1a clade in the entire forest-steppe zone, some of its subclades were migrating north towards the forest zone (hence Chekunova was able to find R1a-M17 on the Upper Dvina as early as 4000 BC (6000 BP), while some other subclades (like YP1051) were much more likely to penetrate the steppe territory (where R1a2 was already present) and then merge with the incoming R1b-rich population, thus finally landing up in Western Europe, similarly to their above-mentioned distant relatives from clade “R1a2” (or rather from its Western European sublineages 1 and 2a).

In the next stage, the emerging M417 subclade under M17/M198 became a dominant R1a group in the forest-steppe zone (in a northern part of Dnieper-Donets II?), and it was probably at this very moment (around 5000-4500 BC) when the intensive contacts with the expanding R1b-L23 populations resulted in the IE-ization of R1a-M417 (which was also the fate of their nearly extinct southern relatives from R1a2 and R1a-YP1051). R1a-M417 became a leading Y-DNA haplogroup in the IE-speaking Dnieper-Donets III culture (located north of Sredny Stog) that was subsequently transformed into the Middle-Dnieper culture, likely encompassing both major subclades of R1a-M417 (ie. CTS4385 and Z645). The Middle Dnieper culture was a center of the subsequent R1a expansion towards west (CTS4385), north-west (Z283) and east or south-east (Z93 and Z282*-A), which was likely related to the expansion of Corded Ware (including Fatyanovo>Abashevo) and probably also to the expansion of the Catacomb culture that strongly influenced the Late Yamna populations.

Please keep in mind that all above is very speculative, so I can imagine many alternative scenarios that cannot be ruled out.

I can agree with a lot of this but I just can't buy the idea of the Middle Dnieper culture belonging to CTS4385, Z283 and Z93. That wouldn't produce the extremely clean split we have today. Nor can I really agree with discounting the Poltavka idea for Z93+. I don't know about Catacomb. But like I mentioned before Catacomb , Catacomb like fetures were evolving in situ in Yamnaya territory and the only discontinuity we have is of an increase in U4. So Catacomb doesn't have to have been formed by a migration from the North. I can easily see a scenario in which U4 wives from Abashevo married into Catacomb. I guess we will see eventually. Pigmentation SNP's from the forest steppe will help. Catacomb looks darker than Yamnaya doesn't it?

newtoboard
03-30-2015, 11:16 PM
As far as I know the Middle Dnieper culture is ancestral only to some sort of Balto-Slavic tongue. I would probably expect y I in Asia if Indo-Iranian languages could be traced to there. Also wasn't Sredny Stog itself formed by a mixture of Khvalynsk, Dnieper-Donets and Bug-Dniester?

newtoboard
03-30-2015, 11:22 PM
Found this online with regards to Middle Dnieper.

http://dienekes.blogspot.fr/2006/05/anthropological-types-of-corded-ware.html


The Yamna Culture and the Indo-European Homeland Problem

D. Ya. Telegin

Excavations between the rivers Orel' and Samara have uncovered burials of a syncretic nature that attest contacts between the spheres of the Corded Ware and Yamna cultures. It is suggested that these may indicate early contacts between proto-Indo-Iranians and the prehistoric ancestors of the Balts and Slavs.

Interesting theory. But I think Indo-Iranian and Balto-Slavic contacts were an one way thing (and responsible for the partial areal satemization of Balto-Slavic). And more likely the result of Catacomb and Poltavka moving north into Corded Ware territory. So much later on imo.

Mandelboy
03-31-2015, 08:38 AM
YFull's new haplotree (http://yfull.com/tree/R-Z93/) shows 3 examples of R1a-Z93* . Two of them are Russian, one Polish. Is it possible that Z93 was born in Eastern Europe?

How many private SNPs have been found for them?

lgmayka
03-31-2015, 09:25 AM
How many private SNPs have been found for them?
28 (20 best, 8 acceptable)
26 (13 best, 13 acceptable)
34 (15 best, 19 acceptable)

parasar
04-10-2015, 02:51 PM
...

Here is a scenario that (currently) seems most likely to me.

The fact that the hypothetical clade “R1a2” (R1a-S12874?) has been found (so far) only among the modern Middle Easterners (cluster 2b, named M420-B1 in our project) and among the Western Europeans (clusters 1 and 2a, or M420-A and M420-B2, respectively) but not in Eastern Europe (!) suggests that R1a* (R1a-M420*) was initially present somewhere on the southern edge of Eastern Europe ...

Why do you think the southern edge is more likely than eastern Europe's western edge?

ADW_1981
04-10-2015, 02:56 PM
YFull's new haplotree (http://yfull.com/tree/R-Z93/) shows 3 examples of R1a-Z93* . Two of them are Russian, one Polish. Is it possible that Z93 was born in Eastern Europe?

How many Z93+ including downstream branches in totality among Polish and Russians west of the Urals?

lgmayka
04-10-2015, 07:43 PM
How many Z93+ including downstream branches in totality among Polish and Russians west of the Urals?
Do you mean, known examples in FTDNA projects? Also keep in mind that if you include downstream branches, you might as well include the many Z93 examples found in the heavily sampled British Isles, who certainly came from someplace east of there (and who often have SNP-proven relationships to Eastern Europeans).

For example, R1a-S23592 (http://yfull.com/tree/R-S23592/) has a distribution that ranges from Kyrgyzstan to Poland to England.

newtoboard
04-10-2015, 10:58 PM
Do you mean, known examples in FTDNA projects? Also keep in mind that if you include downstream branches, you might as well include the many Z93 examples found in the heavily sampled British Isles, who certainly came from someplace east of there (and who often have SNP-proven relationships to Eastern Europeans).

For example, R1a-S23592 (http://yfull.com/tree/R-S23592/) has a distribution that ranges from Kyrgyzstan to Poland to England.

I suppose those are mostly Z2122, Z2123, Z2124 and Z2125 with Y40 and L657 absent?

On a related note what is your theory on the origin of R1a-Z93+ and other major R1a clades? I am asking because I respect your opinions and thoughts.

lgmayka
04-11-2015, 12:42 AM
I suppose those are mostly Z2122, Z2123, Z2124 and Z2125 with Y40 and L657 absent?
I do not know of any verified L657+ or Y40+ of European ancestry.

newtoboard
04-11-2015, 12:52 AM
I do not know of any verified L657+ or Y40+ of European ancestry.

Do you think that suggest some Z93+ had already crossed the Urals prior to the formation of Andronovo?

parasar
04-11-2015, 05:27 AM
I do not know of any verified L657+ or Y40+ of European ancestry.

There is an L657 sample from Crete (Underhill 2014), a sample (if I were a betting person) I would bet is of Roma ancestry.
Y40+ is in Italy (Z96) and in a sample of Turki (Z667) origin.

samk
04-27-2015, 05:31 AM
I recently got tested for R1a z93 . I was born in Western India .

paulgill
04-27-2015, 07:23 AM
There is an L657 sample from Crete (Underhill 2014), a sample (if I were a betting person) I would bet is of Roma ancestry.
Y40+ is in Italy (Z96) and in a sample of Turki (Z667) origin.Couldn't it be Mittani, Scythian etc. L657, aren't the Roma basically H1a?

lgmayka
04-27-2015, 10:04 AM
Couldn't it be Mittani, Scythian etc. L657, aren't the Roma basically H1a?
This paper says (http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/v23/n1/full/ejhg201450a.html):
---
Notably, R1a-M780 (Figure 3d) occurs at high frequency in South Asia: India, Pakistan, Afghanistan, and the Himalayas. The group also occurs at >3% in some Iranian populations and is present at >30% in Roma from Croatia and Hungary, consistent with previous studies reporting the presence of R1a-Z93 in Roma.
---

Michał
04-30-2015, 03:29 PM
Why do you think the southern edge is more likely than eastern Europe's western edge?
If by “eastern Europe's western edge” you mean a region encompassing the Eastern part of Poland, Belarus, Baltic states and Western Ukraine, I cannot rule this scenario out. However, in such case, I would expect finding some modern rare R1a* lineages either in this particular subregion or in any other part of Eastern Europe, especially when we know that R1a was quite common in Eastern Europe since at least 5500-4000 BC (and probably much earlier). Instead, what we see is that those rare R1a* lineages (or most likely just one very old clade R1a2 with two major subclades) are seen either in Western and Southern Europe or in West Asia. This is somehow reminiscent of the distribution of R1b (although on a much smaller scale), and thus consistent with the early presence of R1a* (R1a2) on the Southern Edge of Eastern Europe (which basically means the North Pontic-Caspian region) and the subsequent dispersal with the migrating steppe people (I would guess mostly with R1b-Z2103).

Also, when taking into account the fact that the bifurcation of R1a-M420 is estimated to have taken place during the Ice Age (and more precisely during the so-called Vistulan Glaciation, 25,000-13,000 BP), it seems unlikely that those early R1a people were present in the above-mentioned parts of Central-Eastern Europe at that very time.

Michał
04-30-2015, 03:58 PM
How many Z93+ including downstream branches in totality among Polish and Russians west of the Urals?

Among the members of the FTDNA R1a project, we have so far recognized 22 "independent" subgroupings/sublineages of Z93(xZ94), which includes 5 NGS-tested lineages (thus confirmed to be “non-related” to each other) and 17 potential lineages/subclades for which the STR results do not allow to predict any specific relationship. Of course, some of those groupings may turn out to belong to the same subclade under Z93, but currently they need to be considered as separate. Here is the geographical distribution of those lineages:

Europe – 8 independent lineages/clusters


Central Europe (Poland, Czech Republic) – 4
Eastern Europe (Russia, Tatarastan) – 2
Western Europe (England) – 1
Southern and Western Europe (Italy, France, Germany) – 1

Middle East and Arab countries – 6 independent lineages/clusters


Anatolia/Armenia -3
Arabia/Gulf region – 2
North Africa (Tunisia) – 1

Caucasus – 3 independent lineages/clusters


Georgia – 2
Ingushetia/Chechnya -1

East of Ural – 3 independent lineages/clusters


Kazakhstan – 2
Khakassia – 1

Distinct locations (Russia, Kuwait) – 1 (defined by 22270217 T>A, less reliable?)

Distinct locations (England, Iran) - 1 (defined by YP1451)


We need to keep in mind that the Asian lineages are of course more likely to be underrepresented in the FTDNA projects, which also applies to the Eastern European lineages (though in a slightly lesser extent).
The above list does not include multiple subclades of Z94 (present in both Asia and Europe).

parasar
06-17-2015, 07:02 PM
Couldn't it be Mittani, Scythian etc. L657, aren't the Roma basically H1a?

Ultimately, yes at the Z93 level a Scythian/Steppe origin is possible.
The Roma STR data shows a founder effect, and the Cretan L657 is exactly the Roma modal.
http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/v23/n1/extref/ejhg201450x5.xls

Cretan L657
15 12 13 18 25 11 11 13 10 10
Roma L657
15 12 13 18 25 11 11 13 10 10 11 14 14 11 20 15 16 23 13
15 12 13 18 25 11 11 13 10 10 11 14 14 11 20 15 16 23 13
15 12 13 18 25 11 11 13 10 10 11 14 14 11 20 15 16 23 13
15 12 13 19 25 11 11 13 10 10 11 14 14 11 20 15 16 23 13
15 12 13 19 25 11 11 13 10 10 11 14 14 11 20 15 16 23 13
15 12 13 18 25 11 11 13 10 10 11 14 14 11 20 15 16 23 13
15 12 13 18 25 11 11 13 10 10 11 14 14 11 20 15 16 23 13
15 12 13 18 25 10 11 13 10 10 11 14 14 11 20 15 15 23 12
15 12 13 18 25 11 11 13 10 10 11 14 14 11 20 15 16 23 13
15 12 13 18 25 11 11 13 10 10 11 14 14 11 20 15 16 23 13
15 12 13 17 25 10 11 13 10 10 11 14 14 11 20 15 16 23 13
15 11 13 18 25 11 11 13 10 10 11 14 14 11 20 15 16 23 12
15 12 13 18 25 10 11 13 10 10 11 11 14 11 20 15 16 23 13
15 12 13 18 25 11 11 13 10 10 11 14 14 11 20 15 16 23 13
15 12 13 18 24 11 11 13 10 10 11 14 14 11 20 15 16 23 13
15 12 13 18 25 11 11 13 10 10 11 14 14 11 20 15 16 23 13
15 12 13 18 25 11 11 13 10 10 11 14 14 11 20 15 16 24 13
15 12 13 18 25 10 11 13 10 10 11 14 14 11 20 15 16 23 13
ND 12 13 18 25 11 11 13 10 10 11 14 14 11 20 15 16 23 13
15 11 13 17 25 10 11 13 10 9 11 14 14 11 20 15 16 23 13
15 12 13 18 25 11 11 13 10 10 11 14 14 11 20 15 16 23 12
15 12 13 18 25 11 11 13 10 10 11 14 14 11 20 15 16 23 13
15 12 13 18 25 11 11 13 10 10 11 14 14 11 20 15 16 23 13
15 12 13 18 25 11 11 13 10 10 11 14 14 11 20 15 16 23 12
15 12 13 18 25 11 11 13 10 10 11 14 14 11 20 16 16 23 12
15 12 13 18 25 11 11 13 10 10 11 14 14 11 20 15 16 23 13
15 12 13 18 25 11 11 13 10 10 11 14 14 11 20 15 16 23 13
15 12 13 19 25 11 11 13 10 10 11 14 14 11 20 15 16 23 13
15 12 13 19 25 11 11 13 10 10 11 14 14 11 20 15 16 23 13
15 12 13 18 25 11 11 13 10 10 11 14 14 11 20 15 15 23 13
15 12 13 18 25 11 11 13 10 10 11 14 14 11 20 15 16 23 13

Artmar
06-18-2015, 02:41 PM
Sample from Karasuk Culture, Sabinka II, Russia, 1416 BC - 1268 BC was narrowed down to Z93>Z94>Z2124>Z2125>S23592 (YP349+, it's on the same level as S23592, consulted with Yfull haplotree)

lgmayka
06-19-2015, 12:09 AM
Sample from Karasuk Culture, Sabinka II, Russia, 1416 BC - 1268 BC was narrowed down to Z93>Z94>Z2124>Z2125>S23592 (YP349+, it's on the same level as S23592, consulted with Yfull haplotree)
Multiple clades of S23592+ have been found in Eastern Europe.

parasar
06-19-2015, 02:23 AM
Sample from Karasuk Culture, Sabinka II, Russia, 1416 BC - 1268 BC was narrowed down to Z93>Z94>Z2124>Z2125>S23592 (YP349+, it's on the same level as S23592, consulted with Yfull haplotree)

It appears that modern distribution has not changed much since the bronze age.

As at Sintashta, again in line with modern presence of Z93.
Currently extending to just above western Kazakhstan (Sintashta) and eastern Kazakhstan (Karasuk) respectively.

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-yo928Hon9Ww/UzN-U-aGWMI/AAAAAAAAJiM/3AE7m5bNwCY/s1600/ejhg201450f3.jpg


This now appears to be verified:

I think they are very likely all R1a1-Z93 of the modal type:
DYS19 DYS388 DYS385 DYS389I DYS389II DYS390 DYS391 DYS392 DYS393 DYS437 DYS438 DYS439 DYS448 DYS456 DYS458 DYS635 YGATA
16 12 11/14 14 32 25 11 11 13 14 11 10 20 16 15 23 12

They could be Z2124/Z2125, but are not L657.

...


Afanassievo culture
yDNA - no data

Andronovo culture
yDNA – R1a1
16-11,14-14-32-25-11-11-13-14-11-10
(DYS19-385a,b-389I-389II-390-391-392-393-437-438-439) - 2 sample...

Tagar culture
yDNA – R1a1
17-11,14-13-31-24-11-11-13-14-11-10
16-11,14-13-31-24-11-11-13-14-11-10
16-11,14-14-31-25-11-11-13-14-11-10
17-11,14-13-31-24-11-12-13-14-11-10
(DYS19-385a,b-389I-389II-390-391-392-393-437-438-439)

Tachtyk culture
yDNA – R1a1
17-11,14-13-31-24-11-11-13-14-11-10
(DYS19-385a,b-389I-389II-390-391-392-393-437-438-439)
...
Keyser published STR data in a following paper:
DYS19 DYS385 DYS389I DYS389II DYS390 DYS391 DYS392 DYS393 DYS437 DYS438 DYS439 DYS448 DYS456 DYS458 DYS635 YGATA
S07 15 12/13 14 30 22 9 12 14 14 10 11 19 15 16 22 11 C(xC3)
S10/S16 16 11/14 14 32 25 11 11 13 14 11 10 20 16 15 23 12 R1a1
S24/S34 17 11/14 13 31 24 11 11 13 14 11 10 20 16 15 23 13 R1a1
S25 – 11/14 13 31 24 11 11 13 14 11 10 20 16 15 23 – R1a1
S26 16 11/14 13 31 24 11 11 13 14 11 10 20 16 15 23 13 R1a1
S28 16 11/14 14 31 25 11 11 13 14 11 10 20 16 15 23 12 R1a1
S29 – 11/14 14 31 25 11 11 13 14 11 – – 16 15 23 12 R1a1
S32 17 11/14 13 31 24 11 12 13 14 11 10 20 16 15 23 13 R1a1
[32 ancient human specimens
from the Krasnoyarsk area in southern central Siberia
(along the Yenisey River; Fig. 1) was characterized at the
nuclear and mitochondrial DNA levels. Among these specimens,
10 were attributed to the Andronovo culture, 4 to the
Karasuk culture, 12 to the Tagar culture and 6 to the
Tachtyk one (Table 1).]
http://www.hamagmongol.narod.ru/library/keyser_2009_e.pdf

My guess is that the S. Siberian folk could be Z93+, but I doubt they are L657+.
All the ancient S. Siberians look to be derivatives of: 16, 11/14, 13, 31, 24, 11, 11, 13, 14, 11, 10, 20, 16, 15, 23, 12

Rearranging in FTDNA order we have (with a couple of interpolations for 388, 426):

393, 390, 19, 391, 385, 426, 388, 439, 389i, 392, 389ii, 458.437.448.GATA.456.438.635

13, 24, 16, 11, 11/14, 12, 12, 10, 13, 11, 31, 15...14...20...12...16...11...23

What we find for the most part from FTDNA R1a1 and Subclades project dataset:

For L657
DYS456=15
DYS458=16

But for Z93+, L657-
DYS456=16
DYS458=15

I therefore feel that the Krasnoyarsk samples are not L657+.

http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?1507-Some-provisional-calculations-for-haplogroup-R1a-based-on-the-first-FGC-result&p=26441&viewfull=1#post26441

paulgill
06-19-2015, 04:46 AM
Sample from Karasuk Culture, Sabinka II, Russia, 1416 BC - 1268 BC was narrowed down to Z93>Z94>Z2124>Z2125>S23592 (YP349+, it's on the same level as S23592, consulted with Yfull haplotree)

That then is Pashtun like R1a-Z2124+ and L657-, not the indo Aryan L657+.

parasar
11-06-2015, 02:59 AM
Z93 & Z2479

1. Z94 + Z95*

2. B110 (Altai + Kyrgyz)
8312442 unique 1 in in 5 0 R1a2a B110
17560160unique 1 in in 5 0 R1a2a B110_eq
21453767unique 1 in in 5 0 R1a2a B110_eq
28754329unique 0 in OUT 5 0 R1a2a B110_eq
28764404unique 1 in in 5 0 R1a2a B110_eq


3. B142 Iran
6730127unique 1 in in 1 0 R1a2-B142
50 Equivalents

4. YP1451 YF02655ENG
(14043092-14043193) YP1451

5. YP1506 HG03705PJL
(9792177-9792278)YP1506

6. Others:

id:YF01991RUS
id:YF02054RUS [RU-ALT]
id:YF03036POL [PL-MZ]
id:YF03234
id:YF03565

Germany 1
Estonia 4
Maris 1
Tatars 4
Hungary 1
Italy 1
Slovenia 2
Romania 2
Crete 5
Turkey 3
Druze 4
Qatar 1
Oman 2
Iran 29
Iran Azeri 5
Iran Kerman 9
Armenian 3
Karachays 3
Abazins 1
Balkars 1
Kabardin 3
Kumyks 4
Ingush 2
Nogays 1
Karanogays 2
Pakistan South 2
India North 1
India East 1
India Northeast 1
Afghanistan Pashtun 1
Afghanistan Tajiks 3
Afghanistan Turkmens 1
Turkmens, Tajiks 1
Kyrgyzstan 12
Altaians (Russia) 21
Tuvas (Russia) 2
Khakassians (Russia) 24

*Underhill: "Z95 ... falls just outside an inclusion boundary for the sequencing data"

parasar
11-06-2015, 05:05 PM
Samples' Ages:
Poltavka 4.9-4.7 kya

Per YFull:
Age of Z93: 5000 kya
Age of Z2124: 4800 kya
Age of Y40: 4800 kya
Age of M780: 4800 kya
...



I0432 SVP42 Non-petrous bone (Femur) Outlier N N Poltavka_outlier IGNORE IGNORE New 1240k data - 1 2925-2536 calBCE (AA12569) 4940 4551 Potapovka I, Sok River, Samara Russia 53.66 50.67 0.87 648,053 M Yes 10,867,614 U5a1c R1a1a1b2a Z94

Z93 age 17 R1a2 1.00 5,556 5,132 6,240 3,997 7,330

YFull Z93 age 5000
YFull Z94 age R-Z94Z94/F3105/S340 * Z95/F3568formed 4800 ybp, TMRCA 4800 ybp

Giving a +10% margin we have 5500 for Z93 and 5280 for Z94.

So this Poltavka sample (from Potapovka I, Sok River, Samara) was 729 years later to 340 years later from the birth of Z94 (assuming a 10% underestimate by YFull).

This sample as far as I could discern has no WHG but does have Anatolian EEF related element.
The sample looks closest to Andronovo and Sintashta who also lack WHG. I think this not a coincidence and indicates the structure of Z94 types on the steppe. This EEF related element is for the most part missing in Yamna, Samara, Poltavka, Afanasevo, etc.

Looking for other clues:

The sample's mtDNA is U5a1c.
"Potapovka I, kurgan 5, grave 6
Ÿ 10432 / SVP42
Potapovka I is an important cemetery of the late MBA or MBA2 Sintashta-culture era, but
this grave shows that an older MBA Poltavka cemetery was located in the same place on the
Sok River, in the transitional forest-steppe zone of Samara oblast. Grave 6 was dated 2925-
2536 calBCE (4180 ± 84 BP: AA12569), centuries older than the MBA2 grave pit that cut
through it, removing about 60% of the Grave 6 skeleton. Grave 6 was that of a male
(confirmed genetically) age 35-45 years, his foot bones stained with red ochre, buried with
the lower leg bones of a sheep or goat. His Y-chromosome haplotype was R1a1a1b2a, the
only R1a male in the EBA-MBA series and a signal of an emerging broader set of more
varied male haplogroups that would become better defined in the MBA2 and LBA. His
MtDNA haplotype was U5a1c. Another Poltavka grave under kurgan 3 was cut through in the
same way, so Potapovka 1 seems to have been established in the MBA2 directly on top of an
older Poltavka cemetery."


"Admixture into steppe populations continued with the Potapovka culture (~2,500-1,900BCE)
and the Srubnaya culture (~1,850-1,200 BCE). Admixture in these later steppe populations is
from a different source than in the earlier ones. For the Yamnaya/Afanasievo/Poltavka Steppe
group, the statistics f4(EHG, Steppe; Armenian, LBK_EN) are negative, and the statistics
f4(Steppe, Srubnaya; Armenian, LBK_EN) are positive, suggesting a different source of
population change during the EHG→Steppe transition and the later Steppe→Srubnaya
transition. The Steppe group had ancestry related to Armenians and the Srubnaya had an
additional source related to European farmers. This is also clear from the PCA where the
Srubnaya differ from the Steppe group in the direction of European farmers, and in the
ADMIXTURE analysis (Extended Data Fig. 2), which shows them to have an EEF/Anatolia
Neolithic-related component of ancestry not present in the Steppe group. Clearer evidence of
this discontinuity is seen when we model different steppe populations as mixtures of
Armenians and EHG (Extended Data Fig. 3A), and add Anatolia_Neolithic as a third
ancestral population: this has no effect in fit for the earlier populations, but significantly
improves fit for the Potapovka, Srubnaya, and eastern Sintashta and Andronovo populations.
A discontinuity between earlier and later steppe populations is also suggested by the shift
from an R1b Y-chromosome gene pool into an R1a-dominated one in the Srubnaya
(Supplementary Data Table 1). We caution that this does not mean that new populations
migrated into the steppe as R1a was also detected in Eneolithic Samara and an outlier
Poltavka individual (Supplementary Data Table 1); it is possible that R1a males continued to
abide in the Samara region but were not included in the rich burials associated with the
Yamnaya and Poltavka elites in the intervening period."

So the non-elite R1a-Z94 engineered some type of a revolt?

Where did they come from? Can't be just the steppes, due to the EEF-like element present in Poltavka 10432. Can't be W/C/E Europe since WHG is absent, plus Poltavka 10432 (unlike later Andronovo and Sintashta samples) is contemporaneous or earlier than many CW samples, so the descent from CW proposed by Allentoft has to be abandoned (it always looked doubtful due to the chariot element http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?3882-R1b-and-its-sibling-R1a-possible-route(s)-into-Europe&p=101599&viewfull=1#post101599 ). It is not likely to be Neolithic Anatolia which lacked ANE and Y-R.

This leaves us with the boundary regions of Anatolia - the western Khazar steppe, the Caucasus, or NW Iran/N Iraq/NE Syria. Lack of R1a1 in BA Armenians make the latter two unlikely. So we are left with the western Khazar steppe.

Krefter
11-06-2015, 08:27 PM
Sintashta had a lot of WHG, Modern Euros didn't score much WHG in Matthieson 2015 either. The results shouldn't be taken too literally. Most WHG is absorbed into Anatolia_Neolithic. R1a-Z94 certainly came from west of Samara because it marks the first appearance of WHG/EEF in Samara.

parasar
11-07-2015, 01:02 AM
Sintashta had a lot of WHG, Modern Euros didn't score much WHG in Matthieson 2015 either. The results shouldn't be taken too literally. Most WHG is absorbed into Anatolia_Neolithic. R1a-Z94 certainly came from west of Samara because it marks the first appearance of WHG/EEF in Samara.

For a line that is dated at 4800ybp (http://www.yfull.com/tree/R-Z94/), appearance at 4.9-4.7kya at the Samara bend, hardly gives us much time - it is within the margin of error of the datings.
Nevertheless as this was an immigrant/outlier, I do think that the EEF was picked up further SW - that is the reason I proposed the western Khazar steppe.


There is no WHG involved, only a type of component related to Anatolian EEF:
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-r_IWwcB7Djs/Vh6kOw3HCyI/AAAAAAAADN4/tH-mqUC98Dk/s1600/ADMIXTURE.png

Krefter
11-07-2015, 01:26 AM
For a line that is dated at 4800ybp (http://www.yfull.com/tree/R-Z94/), appearance at 4.9-4.7kya at the Samara bend, hardly gives us much time - it is within the margin of error of the datings.
Nevertheless as this was an immigrant/outlier, I do think that the EEF was picked up further SW - that is the reason I proposed the western Khazar steppe.


There is no WHG involved, only a type of component related to Anatolian EEF:
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-r_IWwcB7Djs/Vh6kOw3HCyI/AAAAAAAADN4/tH-mqUC98Dk/s1600/ADMIXTURE.png

The Poltvaka outlier score similar to Corded Ware. No one has a lot of WHG today. Looks like Poltvaka had as much WHG as Corded Ware.

Coldmountains
11-08-2015, 09:13 AM
That then is Pashtun like R1a-Z2124+ and L657-, not the indo Aryan L657+.

Many Pashtuns have L657+ . I would say around 10% of all Pashtuns or even a bit more belong to it. I and another member of this forum who is also of partial Pashtun origin(Mehrdad) are L657+ . Of tree forum members which have a pashtun line and which tested themselves for L657 two were positive for it (Me and Mehrdad) and one negative(Sein)

Coldmountains
11-08-2015, 09:22 AM
I0432 SVP42 Non-petrous bone (Femur) Outlier N N Poltavka_outlier IGNORE IGNORE New 1240k data - 1 2925-2536 calBCE (AA12569) 4940 4551 Potapovka I, Sok River, Samara Russia 53.66 50.67 0.87 648,053 M Yes 10,867,614 U5a1c R1a1a1b2a Z94

Z93 age 17 R1a2 1.00 5,556 5,132 6,240 3,997 7,330

YFull Z93 age 5000
YFull Z94 age R-Z94Z94/F3105/S340 * Z95/F3568formed 4800 ybp, TMRCA 4800 ybp

Giving a +10% margin we have 5500 for Z93 and 5280 for Z94.

So this Poltavka sample (from Potapovka I, Sok River, Samara) was 729 years later to 340 years later from the birth of Z94 (assuming a 10% underestimate by YFull).

This sample as far as I could discern has no WHG but does have Anatolian EEF related element.
The sample looks closest to Andronovo and Sintashta who also lack WHG. I think this not a coincidence and indicates the structure of Z94 types on the steppe. This EEF related element is for the most part missing in Yamna, Samara, Poltavka, Afanasevo, etc.

Looking for other clues:

The sample's mtDNA is U5a1c.
"Potapovka I, kurgan 5, grave 6
Ÿ 10432 / SVP42
Potapovka I is an important cemetery of the late MBA or MBA2 Sintashta-culture era, but
this grave shows that an older MBA Poltavka cemetery was located in the same place on the
Sok River, in the transitional forest-steppe zone of Samara oblast. Grave 6 was dated 2925-
2536 calBCE (4180 ± 84 BP: AA12569), centuries older than the MBA2 grave pit that cut
through it, removing about 60% of the Grave 6 skeleton. Grave 6 was that of a male
(confirmed genetically) age 35-45 years, his foot bones stained with red ochre, buried with
the lower leg bones of a sheep or goat. His Y-chromosome haplotype was R1a1a1b2a, the
only R1a male in the EBA-MBA series and a signal of an emerging broader set of more
varied male haplogroups that would become better defined in the MBA2 and LBA. His
MtDNA haplotype was U5a1c. Another Poltavka grave under kurgan 3 was cut through in the
same way, so Potapovka 1 seems to have been established in the MBA2 directly on top of an
older Poltavka cemetery."


"Admixture into steppe populations continued with the Potapovka culture (~2,500-1,900BCE)
and the Srubnaya culture (~1,850-1,200 BCE). Admixture in these later steppe populations is
from a different source than in the earlier ones. For the Yamnaya/Afanasievo/Poltavka Steppe
group, the statistics f4(EHG, Steppe; Armenian, LBK_EN) are negative, and the statistics
f4(Steppe, Srubnaya; Armenian, LBK_EN) are positive, suggesting a different source of
population change during the EHG→Steppe transition and the later Steppe→Srubnaya
transition. The Steppe group had ancestry related to Armenians and the Srubnaya had an
additional source related to European farmers. This is also clear from the PCA where the
Srubnaya differ from the Steppe group in the direction of European farmers, and in the
ADMIXTURE analysis (Extended Data Fig. 2), which shows them to have an EEF/Anatolia
Neolithic-related component of ancestry not present in the Steppe group. Clearer evidence of
this discontinuity is seen when we model different steppe populations as mixtures of
Armenians and EHG (Extended Data Fig. 3A), and add Anatolia_Neolithic as a third
ancestral population: this has no effect in fit for the earlier populations, but significantly
improves fit for the Potapovka, Srubnaya, and eastern Sintashta and Andronovo populations.
A discontinuity between earlier and later steppe populations is also suggested by the shift
from an R1b Y-chromosome gene pool into an R1a-dominated one in the Srubnaya
(Supplementary Data Table 1). We caution that this does not mean that new populations
migrated into the steppe as R1a was also detected in Eneolithic Samara and an outlier
Poltavka individual (Supplementary Data Table 1); it is possible that R1a males continued to
abide in the Samara region but were not included in the rich burials associated with the
Yamnaya and Poltavka elites in the intervening period."

So the non-elite R1a-Z94 engineered some type of a revolt?

Where did they come from? Can't be just the steppes, due to the EEF-like element present in Poltavka 10432. Can't be W/C/E Europe since WHG is absent, plus Poltavka 10432 (unlike later Andronovo and Sintashta samples) is contemporaneous or earlier than many CW samples, so the descent from CW proposed by Allentoft has to be abandoned (it always looked doubtful due to the chariot element http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?3882-R1b-and-its-sibling-R1a-possible-route(s)-into-Europe&p=101599&viewfull=1#post101599 ). It is not likely to be Neolithic Anatolia which lacked ANE and Y-R.

This leaves us with the boundary regions of Anatolia - the western Khazar steppe, the Caucasus, or NW Iran/N Iraq/NE Syria. Lack of R1a1 in BA Armenians make the latter two unlikely. So we are left with the western Khazar steppe.


They had a lot of WHG more than most modern Northern Europeans and were similar to NE Europeans. They clustered with Lithuanians and other NE Europeans who are also full of WHG so they were definitely extremely rich in WHG. Their EEF was from Central or East-Central Europe. They were admixed with people similar to EEFs in Hungary and Germany and I guess they got their EEF from Cucuteni or Cucuteni-like people. EEF was absent east of the Volga and south of it there were ANE-rich teal people and not EEFs (Caucasus). So just Europe makes sense as source for it.

Gravetto-Danubian
11-08-2015, 10:42 AM
We don’t have enough data to ascribe those ancient R1a results to specific subclades under M459 (in the case of the Karelian sample) or under M17 (in the case of the Upper Dvina samples), although I would expect that the youngest of them (ie. those dated to 900-400 BC) were most likely M417+, and probably M417>Z645>Z283>Z282(>Z280?).



Here is a scenario that (currently) seems most likely to me.

The fact that the hypothetical clade “R1a2” (R1a-S12874?) has been found (so far) only among the modern Middle Easterners (cluster 2b, named M420-B1 in our project) and among the Western Europeans (clusters 1 and 2a, or M420-A and M420-B2, respectively) but not in Eastern Europe (!) suggests that R1a* (R1a-M420*) was initially present somewhere on the southern edge of Eastern Europe, with R1a1 (R1a-M459) moving subsequently north towards the forest-steppe zone, and with R1a2 being left on the steppe and (much more recently) partially incorporated into the expanding R1b-rich population before ultimately migrating with those R1b-rich tribes either to Central/Western Europe (along with R1b-L51 and/or R1a-Z2103?) or to the Middle East (with R1b-Z2103?).

After dominating the forest-steppe zone, the R1a-M459 clade split in two major branches, with R1a1a (R1a-M17/M198) occupying the southern part of the “R1a-M459 territory”, and with R1a1b (R1a-YP1272 or rather its unknown parent clade) dominating the Northern R1a-M459 population (with some subclades migrating much further north, hence their presence in ancient Karelia, and this is also consistent with modern R1a-YP1272 being still found in Eastern Europe, including Russia and Belarus/Poland).

While R1a-M17/M198 became (at some point, about 7000-5000 BC?) a dominant R1a clade in the entire forest-steppe zone, some of its subclades were migrating north towards the forest zone (hence Chekunova was able to find R1a-M17 on the Upper Dvina as early as 4000 BC (6000 BP), while some other subclades (like YP1051) were much more likely to penetrate the steppe territory (where R1a2 was already present) and then merge with the incoming R1b-rich population, thus finally landing up in Western Europe, similarly to their above-mentioned distant relatives from clade “R1a2” (or rather from its Western European sublineages 1 and 2a).

In the next stage, the emerging M417 subclade under M17/M198 became a dominant R1a group in the forest-steppe zone (in a northern part of Dnieper-Donets II?), and it was probably at this very moment (around 5000-4500 BC) when the intensive contacts with the expanding R1b-L23 populations resulted in the IE-ization of R1a-M417 (which was also the fate of their nearly extinct southern relatives from R1a2 and R1a-YP1051). R1a-M417 became a leading Y-DNA haplogroup in the IE-speaking Dnieper-Donets III culture (located north of Sredny Stog) that was subsequently transformed into the Middle-Dnieper culture, likely encompassing both major subclades of R1a-M417 (ie. CTS4385 and Z645). The Middle Dnieper culture was a center of the subsequent R1a expansion towards west (CTS4385), north-west (Z283) and east or south-east (Z93 and Z282*-A), which was likely related to the expansion of Corded Ware (including Fatyanovo>Abashevo) and probably also to the expansion of the Catacomb culture that strongly influenced the Late Yamna populations.

Please keep in mind that all above is very speculative, so I can imagine many alternative scenarios that cannot be ruled out.

Thanks for a Great explanation Michal. When do you envisage the early migration of R1a2 occurring south and west ?

DMXX
11-08-2015, 12:57 PM
Very interesting. Scythian_IA actually looks very Yamnaya-Afanasievo-Poltavka-like instead of Sintashta-Andronovo (note the absent light blue component, which is EEF here).

We're probably looking at our first genetic evidence of acculturation on the steppes (i.e. an individual with "old" steppe ancestry being incorporated into the "new" Iranian steppe culture).

parasar
11-09-2015, 01:16 PM
They had a lot of WHG more than most modern Northern Europeans and were similar to NE Europeans. They clustered with Lithuanians and other NE Europeans who are also full of WHG so they were definitely extremely rich in WHG. Their EEF was from Central or East-Central Europe. They were admixed with people similar to EEFs in Hungary and Germany and I guess they got their EEF from Cucuteni or Cucuteni-like people. EEF was absent east of the Volga and south of it there were ANE-rich teal people and not EEFs (Caucasus). So just Europe makes sense as source for it.
As far as I can make out Poltavka 4900ybp R1a1 has 0 WHG. In this case admixture data may show WHG like.
I doubt treemix will show input from the Loschbour branch. Nor should there be any shared drift with European WHG.

Coldmountains
11-09-2015, 02:16 PM
As far as I can make out Poltavka 4900ybp R1a1 has 0 WHG. In this case admixture data may show WHG like.
I doubt treemix will show input from the Loschbour branch. Nor should there be any shared drift with European WHG.
They modeled them without extra WHG but both EEFs and Yamnaya had WHG so they also carried it when they were a mix of Yamnaya-like folks and EEFs. Maybe they had no direct WHG ancestry but certainly a lot of indirect through EHG and EEF ancestry.


That are the K7 results for one Sintashta sample

ANE K7 results
WHG: 68.27
ANE: 20.62
ENF: 7.46
East African: 3.23

In K8 they would likely have 40%+ WHG.

R1a Poltavka was just like Sintashta maybe even more EEF-shifted so it is certain that WHG was quite high among them. Nobody in Eastern Europe in the last 10000 years living north of the Caucasus had 0% WHG (But a lot of eastern European WHG is probably just EHG)

parasar
11-09-2015, 03:22 PM
They modeled them without extra WHG but both EEFs and Yamnaya had WHG so they also carried it when they were a mix of Yamnaya-like folks and EEFs. Maybe they had no direct WHG ancestry but certainly a lot of indirect through EHG and EEF ancestry.


That are the K7 results for one Sintashta sample

ANE K7 results
WHG: 68.27
ANE: 20.62
ENF: 7.46
East African: 3.23

In K8 they would likely have 40%+ WHG.

R1a Poltavka was just like Sintashta maybe even more EEF-shifted so it is certain that WHG was quite high among them. Nobody in Eastern Europe in the last 10000 years living north of the Caucasus had 0% WHG (But a lot of eastern European WHG is probably just EHG)

1. ANE K7, K8 are Admixture, and admixture cannot distinguish between input and shared ancestry.

2. EHG and WHG have shared ancestry no doubt, and Poltavka 4.9-4.7ky R1a1 has EHG but incorporates it from the Yamna type, ie, its WHG related ancestry is not from a Loschbour type population. On the other hand Lithuanians, who you have mentioned, did have ancestry (not just shared ancestry, but direct) from a Loschbour type population. Therefore Lithuanians have WHG ancestry (not just shared ancestry), but Poltavka 4.9-4.7ky does not.

3. Poltavka 4.9-4.7ky R1a1 has an EEF type of ancestry.

4. Poltavka 4.9-4.7ky R1a1 can be modeled as the above EEF type of ancestry + Yamna type, while a Lithuanian can't be modeled this way, and will show an additional Loschbour type WHG input.

So I think Sintashta, Andronovo, Poltavka 4.9-4.7ky R1a1 will have significantly negative Anatolian Neolithic + Yamna/Samara f3 stats, but non-significant or even positive Loschbour + Yamna/Samara. Lithuanians on the other hand should have significantly negative Loschbour + Yamna/Samara.

Coldmountains
11-09-2015, 03:33 PM
1. ANE K7, K8 are Admixture, and admixture cannot distinguish between input and shared ancestry.

2. EHG and WHG have shared ancestry no doubt, and Poltavka 4.9-4.7ky R1a1 has EHG but incorporates it from the Yamna type, ie, its WHG related ancestry is not from a Loschbour type population. On the other hand Lithuanians, who you have mentioned, did have ancestry (not just shared ancestry, but direct) from a Loschbour type population. Therefore Lithuanians have WHG ancestry (not just shared ancestry), but Poltavka 4.9-4.7ky does not.

3. Poltavka 4.9-4.7ky R1a1 has an EEF type of ancestry.

4. Poltavka 4.9-4.7ky R1a1 can be modeled as the above EEF type of ancestry + Yamna type, while a Lithuanian can't be modeled this way, and will show an additional Loschbour type WHG input.

So I think Sintashta, Andronovo, Poltavka 4.9-4.7ky R1a1 will have significantly negative Anatolian Neolithic + Yamna/Samara f3 stats, but non-significant or even positive Loschbour + Yamna/Samara. Lithuanians on the other hand should have significantly negative Loschbour + Yamna/Samara.

I think you over interpret their models. EEF had also WHG and not just EHG carried it. It is possible that they had no direct WHG ancestry but this models are too superficial to prove or disprove that. Let see what they get when their genomes are publicly available. I would not be surprised anymore if they had a bit direct WHG ancestry but yes most of their "WHG" is certainly from EHG and EEF. But a 60-50% Yamnaya 40-50% EEF mix would not get around 40% WHG on K8 and 70% on K7 without a bit additional WHG ancestry in my opinion. But this additional WHG could come from East European WHGs which had more WHG than other EEFs.

Coldmountains
11-10-2015, 06:00 AM
Yamnaya 40-50% EEF mix would not get around 40% WHG on K8 and 70% on K7 without a bit additional WHG ancestry in my opinion. But this additional WHG could come from East European "WHGs" which had more WHG than other EEFs
EEFs*

Generalissimo
11-10-2015, 07:11 AM
4. Poltavka 4.9-4.7ky R1a1 can be modeled as the above EEF type of ancestry + Yamna type, while a Lithuanian can't be modeled this way, and will show an additional Loschbour type WHG input.

Where are you seeing this?

The Poltavka_Outlier R1a-Z94 sample wasn't modeled as anything in the paper. But it clearly has as at least as much extra WHG ancestry as Srubnaya and probably as much as Lithuanians. You can see that in the PCA and Admixture analysis.

If not for the shrinkage in the PCA, this sample would cluster with Lithuanians, Estonians and Finns. There's no way around the fact that Poltavka_Outlier, Srubnaya and Potapovka are very Northeast European in the modern sense.

DMXX
11-10-2015, 08:30 AM
There's no way around the fact that Poltavka_Outlier, Srubnaya and Potapovka are very Northeast European in the modern sense.

Same applies to Andronovo, Corded Ware and Sintashta, as we've both commented on numerous times. I don't understand the objections to this inference (late Indo-European steppe groups are essentially Northeast Europeans).

The totality of the evidence (PCA's, IBD, GD etc.) speaks for itself.

parasar
11-10-2015, 01:24 PM
I think you over interpret their models. EEF had also WHG and not just EHG carried it. It is possible that they had no direct WHG ancestry but this models are too superficial to prove or disprove that. Let see what they get when their genomes are publicly available. I would not be surprised anymore if they had a bit direct WHG ancestry but yes most of their "WHG" is certainly from EHG and EEF. But a 60-50% Yamnaya 40-50% EEF mix would not get around 40% WHG on K8 and 70% on K7 without a bit additional WHG ancestry in my opinion. But this additional WHG could come from East European WHGs which had more WHG than other EEFs.

EEF had an WHG input. But once the component is formed it is treated as such.
When I speak of WHG it as a distinct component. Otherwise breakdowns in the WHG EEF ANE form would become meaningless.

parasar
11-10-2015, 01:31 PM
Where are you seeing this?

The Poltavka_Outlier R1a-Z94 sample wasn't modeled as anything in the paper. But it clearly has as at least as much extra WHG ancestry as Srubnaya and probably as much as Lithuanians. You can see that in the PCA and Admixture analysis.

If not for the shrinkage in the PCA, this sample would cluster with Lithuanians, Estonians and Finns. There's no way around the fact that Poltavka_Outlier, Srubnaya and Potapovka are very Northeast European in the modern sense.

Compare Sintashta and Andronovo to Poltavka outlier and you will see it. The three are similar. Andronovo and Sintashta both completely lack WHG. Srubnaya does have WHG.

Edit:
Andronovo's and Sintashta's lack of WHG can be seen here (WHG not including WHG through Yamna or Neolithic).
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-YmsvhDyWexo/Vh6f0Fv9ePI/AAAAAAAADNs/vtdZZNkdLdY/s1600/admixture-analysis.png

Michał
11-12-2015, 11:12 AM
When do you envisage the early migration of R1a2 occurring south and west ?
I would assume that it happened between 4000 and 2000 BC (although some later migrations of R1a2 in the 2000-600 BC period cannot be excluded), with the westward and southward movements not necessarily associated with each other. I wouldn't dare to suggest any more specific scenario before knowing when exactly the steppe-derived R1b-M269 people reached Central-Western Europe and the Middle East.

Generalissimo
11-12-2015, 11:38 AM
Compare Sintashta and Andronovo to Poltavka outlier and you will see it. The three are similar. Andronovo and Sintashta both completely lack WHG. Srubnaya does have WHG.

Poltavka outlier sits at the northwestern edge of the Srubnaya cluster, and thus well north of most of the Andronovo anf Sintashta samples. What this obviously means is that it has a lot of extra WHG, more than any of the Srubnaya samples.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B9o3EYTdM8lQS2xlMkVPU0k5Y2M/view?usp=sharing

You'll have to accept this fact at some point, especially after the genomes are released.

parasar
11-12-2015, 01:09 PM
Poltavka outlier sits at the northwestern edge of the Srubnaya cluster, and thus well north of most of the Andronovo anf Sintashta samples. What this obviously means is that it has a lot of extra WHG, more than any of the Srubnaya samples.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B9o3EYTdM8lQS2xlMkVPU0k5Y2M/view?usp=sharing

You'll have to accept this fact at some point, especially after the genomes are released.

The sourcing of its WHG related ancestry is not from WHG.
I'm not disputing the levels.

EDIT:
The reason given by Allentoft et al. for positing a Corded Ware -> Sintashta migration was not WHG but Neolithic farmer ancestry:
"Although we cannot formally test whether the Sintashta derives directly from an eastward migration of Corded Ware peoples or if they share common ancestry with an earlier steppe population, the presence of European Neolithic farmer ancestry in both the Corded Ware and the Sintashta, combined with the absence of Neolithic farmer ancestry in the earlier Yamnaya,would suggest the former being more probable(Fig.2band Extended Data Table 1)."

The Poltavka outlier shows that this Neolithic farmer ancestry was already present in the steppe 4.9-4.7kybp, a time-frame which if not earlier is at least contemporaneous with the earliest Corded Ware. Therefore, to me now the second option "share[d] common ancestry with an earlier steppe population" looks more probable.

Generalissimo
11-12-2015, 09:56 PM
The sourcing of its WHG related ancestry is not from WHG.
I'm not disputing the levels.

What you're seeing there is extra WHG, above the WHG that is found in western Anatolian farmers. In the Srubnaya and Poltavka outlier it comes from admixture from Middle Neolithic farmers of Northern/Eastern Europe via Corded Ware and/or western Yamnaya.

The reason Andronovo and Sintashta don't show any WHG in those models, is because the WHG in the western Anatolian farmers cancels it out.

But the standard errors in the models are big (personal communication with the authors), so we'll need more relevant samples to get better fits. One of the possible relevant samples for Andronovo and Sintashta might be Cucuteni-Trypillian farmers.

parasar
11-12-2015, 11:01 PM
What you're seeing there is extra WHG, above the WHG that is found in western Anatolian farmers. In the Srubnaya and Poltavka outlier it comes from admixture from Middle Neolithic farmers of Northern/Eastern Europe via Corded Ware and/or western Yamnaya.

The reason Andronovo and Sintashta don't show any WHG in those models, is because the WHG in the western Anatolian farmers cancels it out.

But the standard errors in the models are big (personal communication with the authors), so we'll need more relevant samples to get better fits. One of the possible relevant samples for Andronovo and Sintashta might be Cucuteni-Trypillian farmers.

If formal stats show that my analysis is wrong I will change mind. You can check once you have the Poltavka data.
"So I think Sintashta, Andronovo, Poltavka 4.9-4.7ky R1a1 will have significantly negative Anatolian Neolithic + Yamna/Samara f3 stats, but non-significant or even positive Loschbour + Yamna/Samara. Lithuanians on the other hand should have significantly negative Loschbour + Yamna/Samara."
http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?4211-Russian-and-Polish-R1a-Z93*&p=119619&viewfull=1#post119619

Melinoë
08-10-2018, 07:07 PM
I rhink R1a was born in Eastern Europe but Z93 is not Slavic clade.