PDA

View Full Version : the Samara hunter - is he confirmed M73?



alan
07-21-2015, 05:07 PM
I have seen this mentioned in passing but somehow I never saw threads on this myself and when I google it I dont get a lot of joy. Can anyone confirm if this was confirmed and by whom and when. A link would be appreciated.

R.Rocca
07-21-2015, 05:57 PM
I have seen this mentioned in passing but somehow I never saw threads on this myself and when I google it I dont get a lot of joy. Can anyone confirm if this was confirmed and by whom and when. A link would be appreciated.

First reported by smal here...
http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?4664-Request-Y-DNA-haplogroup-results-from-Allentoft-2015&p=91529&viewfull=1#post91529

And then elaborated by Jean here...
http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?4967-The-origin-of-the-Slavs&p=96946&viewfull=1#post96946

Huntergatherer1066
07-21-2015, 10:40 PM
In the Haak et al. paper they assume M478 and M73 are equivalent, which we know based on FTDNA kit 180669 is not the case. It would be nice to have some NGS tests on the M73+/M478- samples to learn more about them. Even some additional individual M478 tests on the western European cluster of M73 samples would be nice to investigate if they're M478- like 180669. I'm guessing the western European branch of M73 is much rarer than the eastern branches.

alan
07-21-2015, 10:44 PM
so not M73 but on a branch close to it rather than close to M269. I think that is interesting. We know M73 SNP is older than this so this is a parallel branch off. So it would appear to me that it is likely that there was Z2103, L23xZ2103xL51, some branch off close to M73, presumably M73 itself nearby. I would also presume M269xL23 lines were in the mix. It certainly supports the idea that P297 was a steppe thing when we have a hunter with a close parallel branch to M73 and we then in the copper age have all this Z2103 and apparently L23xZ2103xL51 too. Now really looks like P297 is a steppe lineage of pre-farming vintage.

What this now makes me wonder is if we have this P297 near-M73 guy in Samara in the late Mesolithic in Samara what is that telling us? We have various estimates for P297 centred around 9000BC plus/minus 1000ys. What is that telling us? What culture specifically was he found in and what are the deeper roots of that culture?

Given its later distribution and apparent inability to spread into non-steppe Europe or SW Asia a position for M73 and closely related P297 lines in the Volga-Ural-Samara sort of region among hunters makes sense. The fact it didnt experience the expansion of other clades suggests it missed the Yamnaya expansion boat.

I have a hunch that Z2103 may have arisen on the middle Don - mostly down to Z2103's links with Yamanaya, Yamnaya's roots in Repin (commences c. 4000bc) and Repin's apparent origin in the middle Don. It could then have spread east with Yamanaya to the Samara, middle Volga etc.

However, it looks like L51 was neither in the Samara or Don on present evidence. So in river terms that makes me look to the Dnieper for L51.

So what links all these places and river valleys? I think it is possible then that P297's first steppe location might have been around Samara/Volga and that M269 or its immediate ancestor spread west when burial traditions apparently ancestral to Sredny Stog burial did the same thing. M73 seems to have stayed at home around Samara. Srendy Stog c. 4500BC occupied the area between the Don and Dnieper with some influence to the Volga but its origins seem to have spread east to west. I can see a possibility that Sredny Stog left L23 on the Don and the Dnieper where it then gave birth to Z2103 and L51 respectively. Z2103 then spread with Repin and Yamnaya from the Don first east then west.

If this is correct - and its still guessology - then this implies a relatively late post-5000BC spread across the steppe from the Samara region for M269 and or L23. If this is true then it puts R1a in the frame for the pre-Sredny Stog cultures in the west of the Euro steppes.

Generalissimo
07-21-2015, 11:48 PM
I would've thought that the most obvious and logical implication of this result was that the Samara Yamnaya were migrants to the Samara region from somewhere in the south.

This actually fits with their genome-wide structure (Caucasus-like) and the results from Allentoft et al. (featuring a much more southerly set of Yamnaya samples that are basically identical to the Samara Yamnaya).

So it looks now as if the origins of the Yamnaya, or at least the samples we have, might have been very close to Maikop country. This makes Repin and all other pre-Yamnaya cultures around the Don unknown quantities at this stage.

You don't agree Alan?

newtoboard
07-22-2015, 12:32 AM
I would've thought that the most obvious and logical implication of this result was that the Samara Yamnaya were migrants to the Samara region from somewhere in the south.

This actually fits with their genome-wide structure (Caucasus-like) and the results from Allentoft et al. (featuring a much more southerly set of Yamnaya samples that are basically identical to the Samara Yamnaya).

So it looks now as if the origins of the Yamnaya, or at least the samples we have, might have been very close to Maikop country. This makes Repin and all other pre-Yamnaya cultures around the Don unknown quantities at this stage.

You don't agree Alan?

But logically whatever was Repin/Khvalynsk should dominate the Yamnaya horizon. But we have no idea if M73+ is just a small part of the Samara (culture?) or if it dominated it so I wouldn't ay they came from the south.

But M73 is intresting. I wonder where it was hiding until it expanded with Turks. It had to be someplace very remote imo. It is unheard of in an area from Kurdistan to Bangladesh. The PC Steppe/Kazakh steppe/West Siberia/Altai/Mongolia are out since those were important for movements to West Asia, Iran, Central and South Asia. Same goes for West Central Asia (Parthians), most of East Central Asia (Sakas, Pamiris, Tajiks, Pashtuns), the Tarim (Kushans), and South Central Asia (BMAC + Andronovo contact along the Syr Darya).

Also the possibility of Afonotova Gora/Okuneveo being R1b in additon to Afanasievo is interesting too.

Also the Sredny Stog you and Alan are talking about are very different. Who is right? Or was Sredny Stog bigger than thought?

Also I am curious on where the L657 is. I doubt it will show up in Sintashta or Andronovo based on the predictions of parsar and others. Could that BA Turkmenistan sample have been L657+? Did R1a and R1b extend into the Kazakh steppe/West Siberia during the Yamnaya period?

newtoboard
07-22-2015, 12:32 AM
Alan's Sredny Stog is very south of the image you posted David. I am confused on which is the real one.

Generalissimo
07-22-2015, 12:42 AM
Alan's Sredny Stog is very south of the image you posted David. I am confused on which is the real one.

I don't know. Maybe there's no precise classification of it.

I'm guessing you mean this map?

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B9o3EYTdM8lQYVlVc3dvVHM4N28/view?usp=sharing

I like it. I think it gels very well with the aDNA results we have.

Early Pit-Grave/Yamnaya are exactly where I'd expect them to be considering their genome-wide and mtDNA ancestry, while the cultures just to the west look ideal as the staging point for the Corded Ware expansion, with a proto-CWC population that was very Yamnaya-like but with more EHG, as described in Haak et al. It looks like they nailed that model.

parasar
07-22-2015, 01:40 AM
I would've thought that the most obvious and logical implication of this result was that the Samara Yamnaya were migrants to the Samara region from somewhere in the south.

This actually fits with their genome-wide structure (Caucasus-like) and the results from Allentoft et al. (featuring a much more southerly set of Yamnaya samples that are basically identical to the Samara Yamnaya).

So it looks now as if the origins of the Yamnaya, or at least the samples we have, might have been very close to Maikop country. This makes Repin and all other pre-Yamnaya cultures around the Don unknown quantities at this stage.

...

A southern connection is there no doubt, but a migration south to north from the Caucasus region looks unlikely due to the absence on xR Y types in Yamna.

Generalissimo
07-22-2015, 01:43 AM
A southern connection is there no doubt, but a migration south to north from the Caucasus region looks unlikely due to the absence on xR Y types in Yamna.

That's not a persuasive argument.

MT1976
07-22-2015, 03:02 AM
That's not a persuasive argument.


I agree. A founding population of
Mixed Y lineages with only R1b becoming fixed, or indeed, a "pure" R1b founder effect.

MT1976
07-22-2015, 12:49 PM
But anything is possible. M269 could be 'native' to the steppe. But i just can;t get past that mtDNA evidence..

Generalissimo
07-22-2015, 01:06 PM
But anything is possible. M269 could be 'native' to the steppe. But i just can;t get past that mtDNA evidence..

The mtDNA evidence favors a steppe origin, because Yamnaya don't have enough mtDNA U lineages to explain their high genome-wide EHG ancestry.

MT1976
07-22-2015, 01:10 PM
The mtDNA evidence favors a steppe origin, because Yamnaya don't have enough mtDNA U lineages to explain their high genome-wide EHG ancestry.

Good point. But they had 25% mtDNA H. Wasn;t mtDNA H found in Mesolithic Iberia and Baltic ?
Im not sure of the sub-clades though.

alan
07-22-2015, 03:04 PM
I would've thought that the most obvious and logical implication of this result was that the Samara Yamnaya were migrants to the Samara region from somewhere in the south.

This actually fits with their genome-wide structure (Caucasus-like) and the results from Allentoft et al. (featuring a much more southerly set of Yamnaya samples that are basically identical to the Samara Yamnaya).

So it looks now as if the origins of the Yamnaya, or at least the samples we have, might have been very close to Maikop country. This makes Repin and all other pre-Yamnaya cultures around the Don unknown quantities at this stage.

You don't agree Alan?

I do basically agree. It seems to me that Yamnaya is now considered to be from Repin which commenced on the middle Don c. 4000BC. What is then crucial is that the Konstantinovka offshoot of Maykop passed into the lower part of the Don c. 3500BC and bordered late pre-Yamnaya Repin just to the north which it seems to have influenced. Yamnaya seems to have emerged from that Repin-Konstantinovka contact on the middle Don c. 3500-3300BC. Yamnaya then seems to have expanded east to Samara etc and of course well beyond in the form of Afanasievo. Yamanaya also of course also expanded westwards, presumably also from the Don area. I am supposing that even in early Repin on the Don L23 was present and Z2103 emerged there. I am supposing that the Samara Yamnaya Z2103 guys are people who had only recently arrived there from the Don area albeit that the Samara area had other strands of P297 there already. That is how I read it at present although its complex so I may not be right.

alan
07-22-2015, 03:27 PM
Then without wanting to confuse or detract from that basic pen sketch of how I think it worked 4000BC-3000BC, there is of course the next question that is if L23 was present on the Don (not necessarily exclusively there) in early Repin 4000BC then how did it get there and what is its more distant connection with the other M73-like people in Samara in the late Neolithic. There has to be a more distant connection between Samara and the Don whereby P297 derived lines ended up in both area. In theory I suppose that any pre-Repin (pre-4000BC) culture or phenomenon that links the Samara and Don areas (and of course unsampled areas further west) could be responsible. As P297 might date as far back as the early Mesolithic c. 10000 years ago or so then any earlier common P297 thread could fall anywhere c. 8000BC to 4000BC.

Moving from what we know to what we dont know is best in a situation like this. The hunter is presumably from the Samara culture and from what I have read there are similarities between this and the Dnieper Donets culture c. 5500BC. Perhaps this could represent a common later P297 linkage stretching from the Samara to the Dnieper.

The latest link I can think of - and it is a very important steppe phase - is Sredny Stog which commenced before 4500BC. Although it was largely confined to the Dnieper to Don area, it is thought that the burial practices came from further east - I think around the Volga. So its possible that this could be responsible for deeper P297 links. However it is just as possible that the P297 links go back to the Neolithic or Mesolithic so need ancient DNA.

parasar
07-22-2015, 03:35 PM
"I0124, ‘Samara hunter-gatherer’, Lebyazhinka IV, 5640-5555 BC" on Sergey Malyshev's tree posted at Eurogenes blog:
https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/3tUPjiOeNHMvleYH0ohgx7lZzOWt89k8rMj91-8Nb0o=w300-h436-no
"Y haplogroup assignment of 16 aDNA R1b samples sequenced by Haak et al. 2015 and Allentoft et al. 2015"
http://www.kumbarov.com/ht35/aDNA_23.06.2015.pdf

Does not look like any kind of a recent founder effect.

alan
07-22-2015, 04:16 PM
As well as the archaeological evidence fo use of the Don for Maykop/Konstatinovka elements spreading along it, there is the simple geographical fact that the Maykop culture extended to the south-east shores of the Sea of Azov and the Don flows into the north-east corner of the same sea. So it appears far easier for Maykop elements to penetrate the Don than the Volga - the latter involving crossing some open arid lands.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/38/Maykop_culture-en.svg/2000px-Maykop_culture-en.svg.png

So for me archaeology and geography seem to make sense that the Caucasian and steppe groups blended especially around Azov and up the Don.

There was of course also north Caucasus pre-Maykop Neolithic cultures too which could have bled genes into the steppes nearby before Maykop.

newtoboard
07-23-2015, 12:35 AM
Then without wanting to confuse or detract from that basic pen sketch of how I think it worked 4000BC-3000BC, there is of course the next question that is if L23 was present on the Don (not necessarily exclusively there) in early Repin 4000BC then how did it get there and what is its more distant connection with the other M73-like people in Samara in the late Neolithic. There has to be a more distant connection between Samara and the Don whereby P297 derived lines ended up in both area. In theory I suppose that any pre-Repin (pre-4000BC) culture or phenomenon that links the Samara and Don areas (and of course unsampled areas further west) could be responsible. As P297 might date as far back as the early Mesolithic c. 10000 years ago or so then any earlier common P297 thread could fall anywhere c. 8000BC to 4000BC.

Moving from what we know to what we dont know is best in a situation like this. The hunter is presumably from the Samara culture and from what I have read there are similarities between this and the Dnieper Donets culture c. 5500BC. Perhaps this could represent a common later P297 linkage stretching from the Samara to the Dnieper.

The latest link I can think of - and it is a very important steppe phase - is Sredny Stog which commenced before 4500BC. Although it was largely confined to the Dnieper to Don area, it is thought that the burial practices came from further east - I think around the Volga. So its possible that this could be responsible for deeper P297 links. However it is just as possible that the P297 links go back to the Neolithic or Mesolithic so need ancient DNA.

I find it hard to believe that Dnieper Donets will be anything but predominantly R1a given it is the ancestral culture to CW in all likelihood and it dominating the forest steppe zone and forest zones of ukraine and Belarus in addition to the Ukranian and West Don steppe. You have any more info on them? Anything is possible though.

alan
07-23-2015, 09:04 AM
I find it hard to believe that Dnieper Donets will be anything but predominantly R1a given it is the ancestral culture to CW in all likelihood and it dominating the forest steppe zone and forest zones of ukraine and Belarus in addition to the Ukranian and West Don steppe. You have any more info on them? Anything is possible though.

Another thing I think we need to consider is whether the huge expansion of single lineages we see in the copper age is something that existed in the Neolithic or Mesolithic. It is possible that when we look before Yamnaya or before the copper age on the steppes we will see some mixed R1a and R1b populations.

I have for a while had a feeling that way back in time in the Mesolithic or perhaps the Neolithic that there may have been some sort of division between R1b groups who were more adapted to dry conditions and R1a groups in or closer to the forest steppe. Basically contrasting lifestyles and adaptations. There is a paper that shows that the variation in aridy over time meant the dry steppe, the forest steppe and the forest zone moved up and down river and cultures moved with these changes to follow their preferred habitats they were adapted to and that at times these populations on the move bumped into each other and mixed. So there might have been mixed groups too. This paper makes some interesting observations http://intranet.geoecomar.ro/rchm/wp-content/uploads/downloads/2014/11/1-s2.0-S1040618209003334-main.pdf

Another aridization about 4500–3800 BC with short humid
periods was weaker but longer...In the northern Pontic steppe, the dry climate first influenced the eastern variant of Sredny Stog culture located near the Don River, and this event played an important role in the cultural development in the Eneolithic Ukraine. Probably already at the beginning of this arid stage, a part of the population of the eastern variant of the Sredny Stog culture, formerly occupying small river valley habitats, was forced to move to the west, in the steppe middle Dnieper basin (Kotova, 2008). This migration initiated
formation of the western variant of the Sredny Stog culture about
4350 BC.In 4350–4200 BC, the settlements of the Sredny Stog culture were only known in valleys of the Don and Dnieper as well as in the forest–steppe border zone (the Severski Donets basin). These sites were absent from open steppes as a result of the increased aridity and deterioration of living conditions in the southern zone and in valleys with small rivers. A part of the Sredniy Stog population migrated from the southern steppes to the southern region of modern forest–steppe zone, where the migrants assimilated with the local Dnieper–Donets Neolithic population to form a new Eneolithic Dereivka culture (Kotova, 2008) chronologically correlated with the stage of climate aridity (4300–3800 BC). Most of the documented settlements and burials were found only in the northern present-day
steppe and the southern forest–steppe zone

The bit I have bolded is especially interesting. I wonder if this could be the event that explains the R1a Indo-Europeans?

alan
07-23-2015, 01:21 PM
The southern end of the early pit graves on your map looks about the location of Repin on the east bank of the middle don to middle Volga. What i have reads maykop elemets used the don to penetrate north and met Repin

edit
BUT see below - suggesting that the Volga was involved too.

alan
07-23-2015, 04:52 PM
You know digging into the Repin culture a bit, there really does seem to be contradictory ideas on its extent. I have read stuff emphasising the Don but I have to admit other stuff seems to point to a wider spread to much further east to the Volga. This paper is focused on the Volga-Ural area but it makes clear that Repin was known in those areas too https://journals.uair.arizona.edu/index.php/radiocarbon/article/viewFile/16087/pdf

I am struggling to get a definitive map of Repin/Repino. Anthony says Repin was in the middle Don to middle Volga area. So perhaps that is the best description.

He also links the emergence early Repin pottery to the Sredny Stog/Konstantinovka pottery on the Lower Don where Maykop influences took place. He also notes Maykop influences on Khyvalynsk on the lower Volga.

https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=0FDqf415wqgC&pg=PA319&lpg=PA319&dq=repin+culture+don+volga&source=bl&ots=2Z52tUHKSC&sig=tLtkQlsbdFULCAvdFqbXRYM0At0&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CCEQ6AEwAGoVChMIzePx-dvxxgIV9BfbCh1HLgrv#v=onepage&q=repin%20culture%20don%20volga&f=false

So is perhaps best to see a broad area where around Maykop influences penetrated up the Don and Volga with Repin being the biggie that led to Yamnaya. I am also wondering now that Repin has been pushed back to commencing c. 4000BC if that means that Maykop influences started earlier than sometimes quoted. After all Maykop also existed from that sort of date. I cant see otherwise how early repin pottery can be compared Sredny Stog/Konstantinovka (a Maykop influence culture) in the lower Don if the Maykop influence date is not also pushed back to 4000BC.

So perhaps the Maykop input first took place on the Lower Don in the Konstantinovka culture and spread from their to the middle Don and into the genesis of Repin

https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=fEK-BkqXfJAC&pg=PA94&lpg=PA94&dq=konstantinovka+culture+MAYKop&source=bl&ots=ugW6Obpgbt&sig=V8JWtpzdodTu4PH-3vA5KLxjo1c&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CCgQ6AEwAWoVChMI44nrgeTxxgIV5AjbCh0UcQpo#v=on epage&q=konstantinovka%20culture%20MAYKop&f=false

alan
07-23-2015, 05:25 PM
I don't know. Maybe there's no precise classification of it.

I'm guessing you mean this map?

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B9o3EYTdM8lQYVlVc3dvVHM4N28/view?usp=sharing

I like it. I think it gels very well with the aDNA results we have.

Early Pit-Grave/Yamnaya are exactly where I'd expect them to be considering their genome-wide and mtDNA ancestry, while the cultures just to the west look ideal as the staging point for the Corded Ware expansion, with a proto-CWC population that was very Yamnaya-like but with more EHG, as described in Haak et al. It looks like they nailed that model.

The more I look at your map (which I originally thought was some sort of chronological composite) the more I think it is a good one - perhaps a snapshot of the steppe hiatus period perhaps the centuries leading up 3500BC after Sredny Stog had shrunk to its late Sredny Stog much reduced territory. I am presuming the early pit graves is basically Repin/related groups.

In a map like that it would be tempting to see the R1a element speaking IE as having something to do with the interface between the late Sredny Stog group and Dnieper-Donets. However if that was the case we would expect a lot less Caucasian in CW unless of course more arrived then Yamnaya came to border the region a few centuries later. Is there less of the Caucasian element in CW?

alan
07-23-2015, 06:30 PM
One thing to bear in mind in case you havent noticed is that radiocarbon chronology of steppe cultures is in a huge state of flux and significant amendments seem to come out every couple of years. I think they are clearly getting closer to the reality but I wouldnt bet against a culture or two moving a century or two either way.

alan
07-23-2015, 06:50 PM
This is a useful summary by Rassamkin

The Repin culture, with pottery similar to that of Sredny Stog II, developed on the middle Don. The Konstantinovka culture, located along the lower Don and in the Azov steppes, and predominately known by its prestige kurgans, derived from the Maikop culture. Thus, the Middle Eneolithic is notable for the development of a number of independent cultures (Kvityana, Repin, Konstantinovka, and to some extent Dereivka, Cernavoda, and Lower Mikhailovka) in the area previously occupied by the Skelya horizon.

NB Skelya is his concept of a Sredny Stog elite group.

MT1976
07-23-2015, 10:56 PM
Alan

That date- climate paper was interesting.
Given that you're familiar with the works of Rassamakin, and ? perhaps Igor Mazura, Im not sure why you're not seeing the primary role of late Cucuteni_tripolye culture groups in colonizaing the north pontic steppe, & providing the main cultural and demographic impetus for Yamnaya. This is certainly obvious when one looks at the comparatively insignificant little groups like Repin, Khvalynsk, etc - which often show stratigraphic hiatuses c.f. Yamnaya, and otherwise were scantlily poipulated groups restricted to main river valleys and northern-most fringe of the steppe (although certainly also contributing).

Generalissimo
07-24-2015, 12:04 AM
Is there less of the Caucasian element in CW?

Yes, the proto-CWs are modeled as Yamnaya + extra EHG (thus, with less of the Caucasus/Armenian-related component). They may have also had some EEF, but it's more likely they acquired this in Central Europe.

All of this makes it very difficult to put the origins of CWC very far from the early Pit-graves zone on that map.


Given that you're familiar with the works of Rassamakin, and ? perhaps Igor Mazura, Im not sure why you're not seeing the primary role of late Cucuteni_tripolye culture groups in colonizaing the north pontic steppe, & providing the main cultural and demographic impetus for Yamnaya.

The problem is that all Yamnaya sampled to date don't carry any of the EEF component that is seen among all ancient samples from Hungary and the Balkans (including the Starcevo sample, and we know that Starcevo contributed to CT). Even some of the CWC samples barely have any EEF, despite living in Central Europe.

So obviously, whatever happened that caused the steppe groups to start expanding, it was initially well east of the CT. Only later does EEF turn up in steppe groups, namely Sintashta and Andronovo, who appear to be a back migration from the far western steppe.

Motzart
07-24-2015, 12:23 AM
I would've thought that the most obvious and logical implication of this result was that the Samara Yamnaya were migrants to the Samara region from somewhere in the south.

This actually fits with their genome-wide structure (Caucasus-like) and the results from Allentoft et al. (featuring a much more southerly set of Yamnaya samples that are basically identical to the Samara Yamnaya).

So it looks now as if the origins of the Yamnaya, or at least the samples we have, might have been very close to Maikop country. This makes Repin and all other pre-Yamnaya cultures around the Don unknown quantities at this stage.

You don't agree Alan?

I think this makes the most sense, obviously R1b was south of the Cauccasus prior to the time of the R1b1a Samara HG otherwise we could not have an R1b1c branch spreading into Africa and the Mediterranean.

newtoboard
07-24-2015, 12:37 AM
Another thing I think we need to consider is whether the huge expansion of single lineages we see in the copper age is something that existed in the Neolithic or Mesolithic. It is possible that when we look before Yamnaya or before the copper age on the steppes we will see some mixed R1a and R1b populations.

I have for a while had a feeling that way back in time in the Mesolithic or perhaps the Neolithic that there may have been some sort of division between R1b groups who were more adapted to dry conditions and R1a groups in or closer to the forest steppe. Basically contrasting lifestyles and adaptations. There is a paper that shows that the variation in aridy over time meant the dry steppe, the forest steppe and the forest zone moved up and down river and cultures moved with these changes to follow their preferred habitats they were adapted to and that at times these populations on the move bumped into each other and mixed. So there might have been mixed groups too. This paper makes some interesting observations http://intranet.geoecomar.ro/rchm/wp-content/uploads/downloads/2014/11/1-s2.0-S1040618209003334-main.pdf

Another aridization about 4500–3800 BC with short humid
periods was weaker but longer...In the northern Pontic steppe, the dry climate first influenced the eastern variant of Sredny Stog culture located near the Don River, and this event played an important role in the cultural development in the Eneolithic Ukraine. Probably already at the beginning of this arid stage, a part of the population of the eastern variant of the Sredny Stog culture, formerly occupying small river valley habitats, was forced to move to the west, in the steppe middle Dnieper basin (Kotova, 2008). This migration initiated
formation of the western variant of the Sredny Stog culture about
4350 BC.In 4350–4200 BC, the settlements of the Sredny Stog culture were only known in valleys of the Don and Dnieper as well as in the forest–steppe border zone (the Severski Donets basin). These sites were absent from open steppes as a result of the increased aridity and deterioration of living conditions in the southern zone and in valleys with small rivers. A part of the Sredniy Stog population migrated from the southern steppes to the southern region of modern forest–steppe zone, where the migrants assimilated with the local Dnieper–Donets Neolithic population to form a new Eneolithic Dereivka culture (Kotova, 2008) chronologically correlated with the stage of climate aridity (4300–3800 BC). Most of the documented settlements and burials were found only in the northern present-day
steppe and the southern forest–steppe zone

The bit I have bolded is especially interesting. I wonder if this could be the event that explains the R1a Indo-Europeans?

So what y dnas (or R1a clades) would you associate with cultures 4 and 10 in David's map? Or is this just a different version of nuadha's typical R1b indo-europeanized r1a with yamnaya and cw replaced by sredny and dnieper donets?

Also is cultures were mixed why didn't they expand that way later? Not sure I agree with ydnas being adapted to landscapes given how easily R1a was able to dominate the Kazakh steppe, Centrl Asian deserts, Iran, Afghanistan and South Asia. Looking at the distribution of Xiahoe and Andronovo vs Afanasievo the opposite looks true. Plus that map od Dnieper Donets is of DD III in its reduced state but Dnieper Donets occupied the steppe and much more land all the way to Rostov on Don.

Also not sure how much I can trust these articles to draw y dna conclusions. Pretty much everybody agreed that Poltavka (the sucessor to the lower Volga Yamanaya) contributed to Sintashta equally but everybody was wrong there including Anthony, Mallory and Kzumina and the guy who wrote the Indo-Aryan controversy in addition to numerous Finnish/Russian linguists/archealogists and boy were they wrong.

MT1976
07-24-2015, 01:45 AM
I think this makes the most sense, obviously R1b was south of the Cauccasus prior to the time of the R1b1a Samara HG otherwise we could not have an R1b1c branch spreading into Africa and the Mediterranean.

R1b1c is V88. Samara wasn't V88, was it ?

MT1976
07-24-2015, 02:01 AM
The problem is that all Yamnaya sampled to date don't carry any of the EEF component that is seen among all ancient samples from Hungary and the Balkans (including the Starcevo sample, and we know that Starcevo contributed to CT). Even some of the CWC samples barely have any EEF, despite living in Central Europe.

So obviously, whatever happened that caused the steppe groups to start expanding, it was initially well east of the CT. Only later does EEF turn up in steppe groups, namely Sintashta and Andronovo, who appear to be a back migration from the far western steppe.

True. But we have.t really got samples from CT, western Yamnaya, Cotofeni- Usatavo, etc, to confirm what they were really like

nuadha
07-24-2015, 02:07 AM
So it looks now as if the origins of the Yamnaya, or at least the samples we have, might have been very close to Maikop country. This makes Repin and all other pre-Yamnaya cultures around the Don unknown quantities at this stage.

You don't agree Alan?

They aren't exactly unknown quantities when we have p297 on the mesolithic steppe.

The southern steppe around the mesolithic is what is an unknown quantity. You think that because the yamnaya have more middle eastern (ME) than the samara hg implies that their ydna was replaced is akin to saying that r1b p297 and r1a m417 came from the middle east because there is an increase in ME in those areas. But thats non sensical and contrary to the evidence.

Since the CW and Yamnaya have about 50/50 EHG to ME neither ydna source is favored until you take into account the precedents in the area which is r1a in Karelia and r1b in Samara.

In the case of yamnaya dna all we know is that half their heritage is from samara hg types and the other half ME types and that they are a very homogenous population in both ydna and autosomal dna.

The more I think about what you have said the less it makes any sense. Why would the southern steppe be the favored starting point of yamnaya ydna over other steppe regions? We do know that around the time of the yamnaya the samara region went from 75/25 to 50/50 but so they had some admixture but would if the south also had admixture around that time as well? And why do you propose that this admixture event in the samara region totally replaced the ydna that was there? Again, its like saying m417 came from the middle east.

Without over analyzing things I would follow the archeological origins of the yamnaya to find the source of their type of r1b. I really can't favor a region at this point other than saying that samara is a possibility as alan says, but so is the rest of the pc steppe.

Generalissimo
07-24-2015, 02:15 AM
The more I think about what you have said the less it makes any sense.

Then you should read it again. More carefully this time.

MT1976
07-24-2015, 02:20 AM
Nuadha

"Why would the southern steppe be the favored starting point of yamnaya ydna over other steppe regions?"

Because of common sense, maybe ? Majkop is where all the big Chiefs were. Yamnaya was an egalitarian caste, who acted as mere intermediaries between the Caucasus and europe and the urals.

nuadha
07-24-2015, 02:31 AM
Nuadha

"Why would the southern steppe be the favored starting point of yamnaya ydna over other steppe regions?"

Because of common sense, maybe ? Majkop is where all the big Chiefs were. Yamnaya was an egalitarian caste, who acted as mere intermediaries between the Caucasus and europe and the urals.

Uhhhhh, ok. But I have never heard such positions until now.

Edit:

didn't notice the sarcasm the first time around ;) Im still not sure what you're actually trying to say though. We are debating where the yamnaya spread from, and davidski is saying that the yamnaya spread from the southern steppe and they replaced the ydna of the rest of the pc steppe.

I think that just a vivid imagination but if I had to wager a guess I would think that the yamnaya are the result of cultures on the pc steppe popping out of the river valleys and mixing with each other across the steppe. So there were sources but it was plural and was followed by mixing rather than replacement of ydna.

nuadha
07-24-2015, 02:48 AM
Then you should read it again. More carefully this time.

Yes, you have somehow concluded that the Majkop is more similar to the yamnaya than the samara people (75/25 EHG to ME) just before they became yamnaya.

But how on earth did you figure this? We don't know what the Majkop or the southern steppe had in terms of ydna and autosomal dna. Given the vacuum of data in the southern steppe I would say that the samara people just before the yamnaya were pretty similar to the later yamnaya in terms of ydna and aut dna which makes them a decent candidate for having contributed to the yamnaya.

As someone else has pointed out we don't need to envision some replacement happening on the steppe from a nuclease of early yamnaya but even if we did the unknown south is not the best candidate. Heck, id say the central area is the better candidate for replacement of ydna on the steppe if there was such a thing.

Generalissimo
07-24-2015, 03:40 AM
Yes, you have somehow concluded that the Majkop is more similar to the yamnaya than the samara people (75/25 EHG to ME) just before they became yamnaya.

But how on earth did you figure this? We don't know what the Majkop or the southern steppe had in terms of ydna and autosomal dna. Given the vacuum of data in the southern steppe I would say that the samara people just before the yamnaya were pretty similar to the later yamnaya in terms of ydna and aut dna which makes them a decent candidate for having contributed to the yamnaya.

As someone else has pointed out we don't need to envision some replacement happening on the steppe from a nuclease of early yamnaya but even if we did the unknown south is not the best candidate. Heck, id say the central area is the better candidate for replacement of ydna on the steppe if there was such a thing.

But I know something you don't.

MT1976
07-24-2015, 04:37 AM
Uhhhhh, ok. But I have never heard such positions until now.

Edit:

didn't notice the sarcasm the first time around ;) Im still not sure what you're actually trying to say though. We are debating where the yamnaya spread from, and davidski is saying that the yamnaya spread from the southern steppe and they replaced the ydna of the rest of the pc steppe.

I think that just a vivid imagination but if I had to wager a guess I would think that the yamnaya are the result of cultures on the pc steppe popping out of the river valleys and mixing with each other across the steppe. So there were sources but it was plural and was followed by mixing rather than replacement of ydna.

Yes. Majkop is the southernmost steppe, albeit on the caucasus foothills, right ?

As for your 'mixing' scenario - that's certainly plausible. But apparently, there are some 'in the know' that this might not be in the case (c.i.p, Mr Genaralissimo :) )
I'd always thought that some external impetus was required, becuase the settlement density in these river valleys was not dense.

nuadha
07-24-2015, 04:41 AM
But I know something you don't.

tease ;)

Is it based off something leaked from researchers or something you discovered yourself?

MT1976
07-24-2015, 12:13 PM
tease ;)

Is it based off something leaked from researchers or something you discovered yourself?

Im not sure what Generalissimo knows. But the rumour is they've already sampled southern Yamnaya and Majkop.
And apparently they've found even earlier presence of this "Teal' stuff in areas around southern steppe. (Not sure if my details are exactly correct)

parasar
07-24-2015, 01:58 PM
Im not sure what Generalissimo knows. But the rumour is they've already sampled southern Yamnaya and Majkop.
And apparently they've found even earlier presence of this "Teal' stuff in areas around southern steppe. (Not sure if my details are exactly correct)

Quite possible recalling the Harvard report from a while back regarding which Patterson corrected the date (3500ybp to 3500bc) but not the premise!

Genetic evidence ruled out one likely related group in the region, the Yamnaya, because their DNA showed the group had hunter-gatherer ancestry, which is inconsistent with the fact that two Indo-European groups, Armenians and Indians, don’t share it, Patterson said. That made Patterson look south, to the Maikop civilization, which likely had significant contact with the Yamnaya, as a plausible culture where Indo-European languages originated. Samples have been obtained from Maikop burial sites, but the DNA work to test that proposal is pending, Patterson said.

http://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2014/12/the-surprising-origins-of-europeans/

alan
07-24-2015, 03:06 PM
Alan

That date- climate paper was interesting.
Given that you're familiar with the works of Rassamakin, and ? perhaps Igor Mazura, Im not sure why you're not seeing the primary role of late Cucuteni_tripolye culture groups in colonizaing the north pontic steppe, & providing the main cultural and demographic impetus for Yamnaya. This is certainly obvious when one looks at the comparatively insignificant little groups like Repin, Khvalynsk, etc - which often show stratigraphic hiatuses c.f. Yamnaya, and otherwise were scantlily poipulated groups restricted to main river valleys and northern-most fringe of the steppe (although certainly also contributing).

I like Yuri's stuff and I think he has teased out some important overlooked farmer input and influences in the westernmost steppes and add balance but I think sometimes he takes it too far and seems like he is allergic to anything coming from Russia into the Ukraine and I cant help feel there is some subconscious bias there.

alan
07-24-2015, 03:14 PM
Yes, the proto-CWs are modeled as Yamnaya + extra EHG (thus, with less of the Caucasus/Armenian-related component). They may have also had some EEF, but it's more likely they acquired this in Central Europe.

All of this makes it very difficult to put the origins of CWC very far from the early Pit-graves zone on that map.



The problem is that all Yamnaya sampled to date don't carry any of the EEF component that is seen among all ancient samples from Hungary and the Balkans (including the Starcevo sample, and we know that Starcevo contributed to CT). Even some of the CWC samples barely have any EEF, despite living in Central Europe.

So obviously, whatever happened that caused the steppe groups to start expanding, it was initially well east of the CT. Only later does EEF turn up in steppe groups, namely Sintashta and Andronovo, who appear to be a back migration from the far western steppe.

The lesser Caucasian does make sense in the ancestors were on the northern edge and in cultures that show less Maykop and pre-Maykop influences. I am struggling somewhat to place exactly where CW ancestors lived but lower Caucasian tends to make me think they could be lurking at the north end of the steppes/forrest steppes somewhere other than the Don/Volga area where Repin was. Perhaps in the area between the middle Dnieper and middle Donets. Maybe even the later phases of the Dnieper-Donets culture. I have not read anything useful in terms of the origins of the middle Dneiper culture. There were some cultures close to the farmer zone who didnt much interact with them.

alan
07-24-2015, 03:23 PM
The degree of Caucasian influence may have been patchy. The Don seems to have had considerable and the middle Volga and perhaps also the southernmost parts of the west Ukraine steppe which were also within easy reach. Probably further upstream in the middle Dnieper and Donets there would have had less as I dont recall reading much about Maykop influences that far upstream in those rivers in pre-Yamnaya times.

alan
07-24-2015, 03:36 PM
So what y dnas (or R1a clades) would you associate with cultures 4 and 10 in David's map? Or is this just a different version of nuadha's typical R1b indo-europeanized r1a with yamnaya and cw replaced by sredny and dnieper donets?

Also is cultures were mixed why didn't they expand that way later? Not sure I agree with ydnas being adapted to landscapes given how easily R1a was able to dominate the Kazakh steppe, Centrl Asian deserts, Iran, Afghanistan and South Asia. Looking at the distribution of Xiahoe and Andronovo vs Afanasievo the opposite looks true. Plus that map od Dnieper Donets is of DD III in its reduced state but Dnieper Donets occupied the steppe and much more land all the way to Rostov on Don.

Also not sure how much I can trust these articles to draw y dna conclusions. Pretty much everybody agreed that Poltavka (the sucessor to the lower Volga Yamanaya) contributed to Sintashta equally but everybody was wrong there including Anthony, Mallory and Kzumina and the guy who wrote the Indo-Aryan controversy in addition to numerous Finnish/Russian linguists/archealogists and boy were they wrong.

I totally admit I am reading the tealeaves and I have no wish to say R1b IE-ised R1a. I had plenty of that in reverse and do not want to inflict that sort of possessives on the PIE question. It seems probably to me that its complex and some sort of para-pre-proto-IE was spread across several steppe and forest steppe cultures from an early date. Then you have powerful groups like Sredny stog controlling a network from the Dnieper to the Don - they may well have spread further covergence of those kind of para pre-proto IE dialects and they impacted to some degree on many cultures. Yamnaya may have been an important spread of people but it also may have aerially converged other dialects that were already close to PIE.

What I was also suggesting was there could have been mixed R1a and b populations due to the moving up and down rivers and to some extent longitudinally too during the intermittent arid phases which have been noted through the Mesolithic, Neolithic and Copper Ages. So what I was getting at is we cannot rule out that the elite driven domination of single lineages could be a thing mainly of the the later phases like Yamnaya and this effectively could have caused what looks like a sharp R1b-R1a division. I am asking the question as to whether this was true in earlier periods which were less hierachical and perhaps less dominated by single clans. Mobile pastoralism like Yamnaya may have particularly promoted this. However prior to Yamnaya this did not exist and living in river valleys was the main thing. With different groups moving up and down river valleys as aridity varied, its hard to believe there werent mixed group in the pre-Yamnaya phase.

alan
07-24-2015, 03:48 PM
Im not sure what Generalissimo knows. But the rumour is they've already sampled southern Yamnaya and Majkop.
And apparently they've found even earlier presence of this "Teal' stuff in areas around southern steppe. (Not sure if my details are exactly correct)

It would make some sense. Even before Yamanaya there was a fairly strong, rather unique, Neolithic in the north Caucasus-steppe interface. They dont really fit into any classic model as they are not exactly steppe but they are also nothing like SW Asia either in lifestyle. Trying to nail them down has defeated everyone. There is also a major difference between the north and south Caucasus. Geography and the routes used late by Maykop make me wonder if the north Caucasus pre-Maykop farmers could have come up from the south-west Caspian, bypassing the Great Caucasus barrier. Certainly Maykop used that route as later Maykop Kurgans are found in NW Iran. A German paper recently concluded the main influences on the creation of Maykop was contact with north Iran and even Turkmenistan. The rise of Kura-Araxes seems to have cut off this route between NW Iran and the north Caucasus.

alan
07-24-2015, 03:50 PM
But I know something you don't.
PM me - I wont spill the beans

alan
07-24-2015, 03:55 PM
There was a linguist who suggested that the Europe steppes were all basically Uralic and that PIE looks very like Uralic that has been structurally altered by some Caucasian language. Although this is not the most popular linguistic theory it would not be out of keeping with the DNA evidence that Yamanaya is basically as EHG-Caucasian hybrid.

Romilius
07-24-2015, 04:31 PM
Quote Originally Posted by Generalissimo View Post
But I know something you don't.

PM me - I wont spill the beans

I suppose that everyone couldn't resist the temptation to know...

ADW_1981
07-24-2015, 04:49 PM
Quite possible recalling the Harvard report from a while back regarding which Patterson corrected the date (3500ybp to 3500bc) but not the premise!

http://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2014/12/the-surprising-origins-of-europeans/

Unfortunately, hist statement that Armenians and Indians (at least in the north) don't have EHG (hunter-gatherer) ancestry is false.

parasar
07-24-2015, 05:10 PM
Unfortunately, hist statement that Armenians and Indians (at least in the north) don't have EHG (hunter-gatherer) ancestry is false.

I believe "hunter-gatherer ancestry" in the article refers to the WHG portion only.

Agamemnon
07-24-2015, 05:36 PM
There was a linguist who suggested that the Europe steppes were all basically Uralic and that PIE looks very like Uralic that has been structurally altered by some Caucasian language. Although this is not the most popular linguistic theory it would not be out of keeping with the DNA evidence that Yamanaya is basically as EHG-Caucasian hybrid.

Technically, both Allan Bomhard and Frederik Kortlandt have made such claims, I think you might be referring to Bomhard's "Caucasian Substrate Hypothesis (https://www.academia.edu/10261406/The_Origins_of_Proto-Indo-European_The_Caucasian_Substrate_Hypothesis_pre-publication_version_July_2015_)" in this case.

nuadha
07-24-2015, 07:06 PM
I suppose that everyone couldn't resist the temptation to know...

I doubt its that significant.

alan
07-25-2015, 12:47 AM
The fact M73 doesnt spread widely and apparently not with Yamnaya suggests to me that while M73 is a hunter lineage at Samara, Z2103 probably spread to Samara in the Yamnaya period from further west and south rather than the reverse. If the reverse had happened then M73 would have spread west - which apparently didnt happen. Yamnaya originated in Repin which seems to have arisen c. 4000BC or soon after. Yamnaya is basically a developed and expansive phase of Repin. If Z2103 has an expansion date of c. 6000ys ago then that makes sense if it related originally to Repin.

In contrast L51 is older but had a very moribund existence for 1000s of years until L11.

MT1976
07-25-2015, 12:49 AM
They aren't exactly unknown quantities when we have p297 on the mesolithic steppe.

The southern steppe around the mesolithic is what is an unknown quantity. You think that because the yamnaya have more middle eastern (ME) than the samara hg implies that their ydna was replaced is akin to saying that r1b p297 and r1a m417 came from the middle east because there is an increase in ME in those areas. But thats non sensical and contrary to the evidence.

Since the CW and Yamnaya have about 50/50 EHG to ME neither ydna source is favored until you take into account the precedents in the area which is r1a in Karelia and r1b in Samara.

In the case of yamnaya dna all we know is that half their heritage is from samara hg types and the other half ME types and that they are a very homogenous population in both ydna and autosomal dna.

The more I think about what you have said the less it makes any sense. Why would the southern steppe be the favored starting point of yamnaya ydna over other steppe regions? We do know that around the time of the yamnaya the samara region went from 75/25 to 50/50 but so they had some admixture but would if the south also had admixture around that time as well? And why do you propose that this admixture event in the samara region totally replaced the ydna that was there? Again, its like saying m417 came from the middle east.

Without over analyzing things I would follow the archeological origins of the yamnaya to find the source of their type of r1b. I really can't favor a region at this point other than saying that samara is a possibility as alan says, but so is the rest of the pc steppe.

What if Yamnaya wasnt a demographic phenomenon, but simply cultural horizon, - a homogenization of cultural features. A response to yet another arid phase in the steppe. Disparate groups from hungary to eastern Russia engaged extensive contacts, due to shift to more dispersed, mobile and pastoralist economy. This might explain the very modest "Yamnaya" impact in hungary.

Generalissimo
07-25-2015, 12:56 AM
I believe "hunter-gatherer ancestry" in the article refers to the WHG portion only.

He was referring to the lack of EHG in southern India and present-day Armenia.

But there are two problems with this:

- Southern Indians are Dravidians

- Bronze and Iron Age Armenians clearly do show EHG/steppe ancestry, even if modern Armenians don't

MT1976
07-25-2015, 12:59 AM
The fact M73 doesnt spread widely and apparently not with Yamnaya suggests to me that while M73 is a hunter lineage at Samara, Z2103 probably spread to Samara in the Yamnaya period from further west and south rather than the reverse. If the reverse had happened then M73 would have spread west - which apparently didnt happen. Yamnaya originated in Repin which seems to have arisen c. 4000BC or soon after. Yamnaya is basically a developed and expansive phase of Repin. If Z2103 has an expansion date of c. 6000ys ago then that makes sense if it related originally to Repin.

In contrast L51 is older but had a very moribund existence for 1000s of years until L11.

Yes I think that's a fair summary. Question is, from how far south ? Just the Caucasus or even further South?
Also, I'm somewhat uncomfortable with assuming that R1b-M269 being Pre-PIE. I know this might be unpalatable to most members here, but I think R1b originally spoke various Caucasian, para-Altaic and para-Uralic languages.

parasar
07-25-2015, 01:07 AM
He was referring to the lack of EHG in southern India and present-day Armenia.

But there are two problems with this:

- Southern Indians are Dravidians

- Bronze and Iron Age Armenians clearly do show EHG/steppe ancestry, even if modern Armenians don't

I doubt it. He was referring to it in context of IE spread. Dravidians are hardly relevant to IE spread.
"two Indo-European groups, Armenians and Indians, don’t share it"

Generalissimo
07-25-2015, 01:26 AM
I doubt it. He was referring to it in context of IE spread. Dravidians are hardly relevant to IE spread.
"two Indo-European groups, Armenians and Indians, don’t share it"

But the majority of Indo-European speaking Indians do share it. Those that don't are southern Indians who are either heavily admixed with Dravidians or recent language shifters to Dravidian.

You don't see this as a problem?

nuadha
07-25-2015, 01:37 AM
What if Yamnaya wasnt a demographic phenomenon, but simply cultural horizon, - a homogenization of cultural features. A response to yet another arid phase in the steppe. Disparate groups from hungary to eastern Russia engaged extensive contacts, due to shift to more dispersed, mobile and pastoralist economy. This might explain the very modest "Yamnaya" impact in hungary.

There is no doubt that the yamnaya spread was a demographic event, that's what the haak and allentoft paper are all about. What you are suggesting is that there wasn't much of a demographic event between the different regions of the yamnaya horizon or during the genesis of the yamnaya horizon.

I think its silly to think that the yamnaya would be highly migratory in terms of regions outside the yamnaya horizon but not within it. What we basically see is the yamnaya leaving the sheltered river valleys and entering the open steppe while a package VERY quickly spread across the horizon.

So during the yamnaya genesis the steppe people moved into the 'open' steppe, became very similar in a quick amount of time, and then started to migrate outside their native territory. It would take immense special pleading to think that the different regions of the yamnaya didn't mix. The only issue I take with others in this thread is that I believe they are over emphasizing the idea of one starting point.

But all that was just story telling. We have proof that samara yamnaya and south central yamnaya were pretty much the same. We also have that the afanasievo was similar to all the yamnaya individuals which implies some degree of homogeneity in yamnaya. You can rightfully say that the pre yamnaya steppe people were just as homogenous as the yamnaya but I'm pretty sure that can't be.

As for hungary, we have isotopic evidence that the yamnaya there came from the east (how far east was undetermined). We also have the oldest non steppe sample of p297 derived r1b in hungary in the vucedol culture, contemporary to the arrival of yamnaya in hungary.

the hungarian bell beakers do have significant yamnaya like heritage. so there isn't yet any issue about hungarian yamnaya being the source of r1b.

nuadha
07-25-2015, 01:43 AM
He was referring to the lack of EHG in southern India and present-day Armenia.

But there are two problems with this:

- Southern Indians are Dravidians

- Bronze and Iron Age Armenians clearly do show EHG/steppe ancestry, even if modern Armenians don't

He was talking about southern indians?!? Wtf... Is that an omission that he knew northern indians have EHG?

Also, good on you to point out the bronze age armenians having EHG. It means the steppe hypothesis can explain IE in the west asia even if we still don't have direct evidence of how the armenians got IE. But that could have happened later...

nuadha
07-25-2015, 01:49 AM
Yes I think that's a fair summary. Question is, from how far south ? Just the Caucasus or even further South?
Also, I'm somewhat uncomfortable with assuming that R1b-M269 being Pre-PIE. I know this might be unpalatable to most members here, but I think R1b originally spoke various Caucasian, para-Altaic and para-Uralic languages.

Pre PIE seems like a very flimsy idea. M269 was well before PIE in terms of linguistic evolution, so yes, m269 had spoken non indo european.

parasar
07-25-2015, 02:51 AM
But the majority of Indo-European speaking Indians do share it. Those that don't are southern Indians who are either heavily admixed with Dravidians or recent language shifters to Dravidian.

You don't see this as a problem?

I don't they do. What they do share is the ANE portion of EHG. You are trying to conflate EHG with ANE.

MT1976
07-25-2015, 03:12 AM
I don't they do. What they do share is the ANE portion of EHG. You are trying to conflate EHG with ANE.

Yep. Indians, Tajiks etc have ANE, but not EHG. ANE contributed to EHG, and also formed a major component of Central asian ancestry otherwise not EHG.

Generalissimo
07-25-2015, 03:26 AM
Tajiks most certainly have EHG, and so do many Indian populations.

This whole discussion is based on erroneousness premises that they don't and that all Indians are Indo-Europeans. You don't think that someone from Harvard can make such mistakes? Think again.

parasar
07-25-2015, 03:30 AM
Tajiks most certainly have EHG, and so do many Indian populations.

This whole discussion is based on erroneousness premises that they don't and that all Indians are Indo-Europeans. You don't think that someone from Harvard can make such mistakes? Think again.

Sure do. Rather than many if you had said some or few, I would agree as possible.

Generalissimo
07-25-2015, 03:37 AM
Sure do. Rather than many if you had said some or few, I would agree as possible.

Many Indian populations do have EHG. Not just some or a few, but many.

The problem is its low level in most of India and the complex ancestry of Indians, which is masking it.

parasar
07-25-2015, 03:46 AM
Many Indian populations do have EHG. Not just some or a few, but many.

The problem is its low level in most of India and the complex ancestry of Indians, which is masking it.

Once again you are saying EHG which has ANE. How about limiting this to WHG?

MT1976
07-25-2015, 03:52 AM
Well, I'm sure when we (soon) get some South Asian aDNA, and duly include EHG samples in analyses, we'll get a clearer picture.

Generalissimo
07-25-2015, 03:57 AM
Once again you are saying EHG which has ANE. How about limiting this to WHG?

EHG is not WHG nor ANE, nor a mixture of the two. It's an intermediate but distinct meta-population.

How do you expect to be able to accurately test for EHG if you conflate it with WHG and/or ANE?

Helgenes50
07-25-2015, 05:08 AM
EHG is not WHG nor ANE, nor a mixture of the two. It's an intermediate but distinct meta-population.

How do you expect to be able to accurately test for EHG if you conflate it with WHG and/or ANE?

SHG, them ! are not a distinct population, but a mixture of WHG and EHG ?

Generalissimo
07-25-2015, 05:34 AM
SHG, them ! are not a distinct population, but a mixture of WHG and EHG ?

Yes, SHG look like a recent mixture between WHG and EHG, and maybe also something East Eurasian.

alan
07-25-2015, 12:54 PM
Pre PIE seems like a very flimsy idea. M269 was well before PIE in terms of linguistic evolution, so yes, m269 had spoken non indo european.

I dont know about that. Pre-Germanic is supposed to have existed for 1000 years or so before proto-Germanic. IMO there is certainly stages before the proto moment where a language has already wholly or largely attained that form. Proto-reconstructions seem to me to depict the last moment before dispersal and divergence and tell us nothing about how long the proto form or a form 90 odd percent on the way to the proto form existed.

That said I also think the people who see a big structural but not vocab influence from Caucasian have a point if its looking like a huge amount of the woman and autosomal DNA were Caucasians. If this factor started around 4000BC - perhaps to a much lesser extend earlier than that - then we are not talking about complex societies who had mechanism could offset the linguistic influence of the Caucasian mothers by giving them tutors etc. I think there could be something in the linguistic theories that see PIE as an outcome of such hybriding. Its a classic situation where the structure but very little of the vocab could be deeply influenced. If that happened then perhaps what was spoken the steppes before the Caucasian influence was significantly different in structure if not vocab pre-4000BC.

Another question I would raise is if Caucasian women were flowing in numbers into parts of the steppes then why? Usually in a situation like that something flows the other way or at least there is an important alliance or trade relationship to maintain. I cannot really see what the far more backwards steppe tribes could offer the incredibly rich Maykop people. I can understand the steppe tribes wish to be in contact with Maykop as it was a hell of an impressive culture with its early arsenical copper, ultra-rich Kurgans, early use of the wheel and complex of contacts. But what did Maykop or even pre-Maykop Caucasus cultures get of this?

Later on there may have been some deal relating to Kargaly but currently that is dated only to the Yamnaya period and was a pure copper of an inferior type compared to what Maykop used. One odd thing is I dont believe there is any evidence of Maykop people mining their own copper and some have suggested they got it from the south. In the centuries after 3500BC the Kura-Araxes culture took control of NW Iran which previously was strongly connected to Maykop - there are Maykop Kurgans there. I wonder if this might have encouraged Maykop to look into the steppes for sources.

Metallic styles do suggest that Yamnaya was strongly influenced by Maykop albeit their main ore used was a pure copper one in Kargaly. I find it hard to believe the sudden knowledge of advanced metallurgy and mining just appeared in Yamnaya at Kargaly. There must have been a background process and some Caucasian knowledge behind it. Some Maykop men must have been involved IMO. Perhaps those J Yamnaya guys could be an echo of that.

alan
07-25-2015, 01:04 PM
Yes, SHG look like a recent mixture between WHG and EHG, and maybe also something East Eurasian.

Is SHG=Samara HG? If so I think there are archaeological problems in the concept of a WHG and EHG mix. If WHG is really linked to a post-Glacial spread of hunters from the west then the cultures of the western tradition do not appear to have spread into the steppes. The closest they came is NW Russia and the northernmost fringes of Ukraine. I suspect that WHG and EHG are really the same sort of thing - a common pre-Glacial Gravettian pan-European thing and that EHG is really just an additional mix with ANE from the east in the Mesolithic. WHG and ANE had tens of thousands of years to drift from their common ancestors or from samples like Mal'ta. There is no archaeological evidence of extra input in the areas where Mal'ta and the Afantova Gora guy lived so I guess he is an example of drift.

alan
07-25-2015, 01:11 PM
EHG is not WHG nor ANE, nor a mixture of the two. It's an intermediate but distinct meta-population.

How do you expect to be able to accurately test for EHG if you conflate it with WHG and/or ANE?

Is there not something a bit unlikely in getting a perfect max for ENG as a WHG and ANE mix when both had tens of thousand of years to drift. I still believe ENG is essentially a WHG/ANE mix albeit the mix didnt happen until after 9000BC after both groups had had the whole period from the start of the LGM to the end of the Younger Dryas to drift before mixing. I think expecting a mathematical perfect match based on a few snapshot ancient DNA individuals was never likely to give a perfect fit. As you posted recently, the EHG=WHG plus ANE not perfect but it was a near miss.

Generalissimo
07-25-2015, 01:16 PM
SHG = Scandinavian HG

parasar
07-25-2015, 02:37 PM
EHG is not WHG nor ANE, nor a mixture of the two. It's an intermediate but distinct meta-population.

How do you expect to be able to accurately test for EHG if you conflate it with WHG and/or ANE?

EHG is indeed a type of ANE (“Ancient North Eurasian”) + WHG. One branch of “Ancient North Eurasian” went into forming MA1 (the ANE proxy in Lazaridis) and another went into forming EHG.


The two EHG form a clade with respect to all other present-day and ancient populations (|Z|<1.9), and MA1 shares more alleles with them (|Z|>4.7) than with other ancient or modern populations, suggesting that they may be a source for the ANE ancestry in present Europeans ...
Modeling of the ancient samples shows that while Karelia is genetically intermediate between Loschbour and MA1, the topology that considers Karelia as a mixture of these two elements is not the only one that can fit the data...
"there is some common genetic drift shared by all “European hunter-gatherers” (both WHG and EHG) at the exclusion of MA1"
the ANE ancestry in Karelia_HG is derived from the branch of “Ancient_North_Eurasian” that goes into the Karitiana Native Americans, rather than the MA1 branch.

alan
07-25-2015, 02:49 PM
SHG = Scandinavian HG

A ok - well it seems Scandinavia is a mixture of post-Glacial groups from the western refugium and the microblade groups from the east. The western group arrived a earlier in that area but not the pressure microblade addition was fairly early too around 8000 or 7000BC. There appears to be no epi-Gravettian input from east or east Central Europe. So they are a straight western hunters and eastern mix. However it is possible some of that the eastern group could have mixed a little with the western derived group (Swiderian) in the Baltic and NW Russia area already before mixing further with other western groups in Scandinavia.

To prove that ANE is an addition in eastern and northern Europe c. 9500-7000BC (pressure microblades moved gradually east) we obviously need data that pre-dates that period to see if the ANE element is absent. Personally from archaeological evidence I think that is extremely likely.

By the way, my feeling is that the earliest Mesolithic hunters in the middle Urals will be something close to pure ANE - albeit drifted. It seems that the microblade groups didnt have competition there.

alan
07-25-2015, 02:52 PM
Anyway its good to see that the genetic evidence seems to match the archaeological evidence in eastern Europe. At one times interpretations of the genetic evidence and the archaeology were not tying in but IMO they are dovetailing very well now and its only really the detail that remains unknown.

Silesian
07-25-2015, 02:58 PM
The fact M73 doesnt spread widely and apparently not with Yamnaya suggests to me that while M73 is a hunter lineage at Samara, Z2103 probably spread to Samara in the Yamnaya period from further west and south rather than the reverse. If the reverse had happened then M73 would have spread west - which apparently didnt happen. Yamnaya originated in Repin which seems to have arisen c. 4000BC or soon after. Yamnaya is basically a developed and expansive phase of Repin. If Z2103 has an expansion date of c. 6000ys ago then that makes sense if it related originally to Repin.

In contrast L51 is older but had a very moribund existence for 1000s of years until L11.

If the co-ordinates are correct in spreadsheet:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1QPTmyarOBBEZfXnLI5L64ueJNG34jgy4QgQ_1nSYtnM/edit#gid=917906623

Sok river= one of the R1b autochthonous/ancient burial grounds.
You have [R1b-Z2105+Lopatino]/ [R1b-L23Lopatino] and[ R1b M478-H.G.- Lebyazhinka IV] all buried within 3km distance of each other on Sok river/region

The individual we refer to as
‘Samara hunter
-
gatherer’
x
I0124/SVP44 (5640-5555 calBCE, Beta-392490)
is an adult male from grave 1 in a Neolithic-Eneolithic settlement producing artifacts from the
Elshanka, Samara, and Repin cultures, spanning 2500+/-years.
http://biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/early/2015/02/10/013433.full.pdf page 25

Elshanka:
Time and palaeoenvironment in the Neolithisation
of the Povolzhye forest-steppe
http://revije.ff.uni-lj.si/DocumentaPraehistorica/article/view/38.21

5310

alan
07-25-2015, 03:01 PM
I have heard people wondering why there is a lot of ANE in Caucasian. I think the simple answer probably lies in the final Palaeolithic and early Mesolithic. These microblade groups I link to Siberians moving into eastern and north-east Europe around this time also moved into the Caucasus and indeed the Zagros. Personally I also think that this movement brought the P25xP297 lines into places like the Zagros albeit their numbers must have been small or they may have remained peripheral to the main farming developments somehow.

I predict some ANE will be found in SW Asia close to the Caspian in Neolithic times-perhaps showing up in the relatively late adopters of farming in the Caucasus and north-west Iran around 6000BC onwards and very likely including the pre-Maykop Neolithic groups in the north Caucasus. Clearly as Scandinavia shows, some ANE is much older than the arrival of copper age IE groups and I think the same is true on the north-eastern fringes of the early farming world in SW Asia.

alan
07-25-2015, 04:06 PM
If the co-ordinates are correct in spreadsheet:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1QPTmyarOBBEZfXnLI5L64ueJNG34jgy4QgQ_1nSYtnM/edit#gid=917906623

Sok river= one of the R1b autochthonous/ancient burial grounds.
You have [R1b-Z2105+Lopatino]/ [R1b-L23Lopatino] and[ R1b M478-H.G.- Lebyazhinka IV] all buried within 3km distance of each other on Sok river/region
, spanning 2500+/-years.
http://biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/early/2015/02/10/013433.full.pdf page 25

Elshanka:
Time and palaeoenvironment in the Neolithisation
of the Povolzhye forest-steppe
http://revije.ff.uni-lj.si/DocumentaPraehistorica/article/view/38.21

5310

Yes but we known Yamnaya comes from Repin which was located in the area between the middle Don and middle Volga. Yamnaya spread into areas beyond that bother east and west so dates after 3300BC post-date a period of substantial movement into those areas. To judge what was there pre-Yamnaya and its movement of people we can only go on pre-Yamnaya samples. Unfortunately there is only one sample.

We clearly have a guy on a brother branch closer to M73 in hunter-gatherer Samara which shows P297 was there in one form at an early stage c. 5600BC. However L23 didnt exist anywhere at that period and so we would be looking for some early form of M269 if indeed it existed at that period (some calculate that it did). So we are looking at a location where there was a group who went through existence for a long time as a M269xL23 phase then the L23 and then Z2103 stage prior to an expansion with Yamnaya. What we do know is that Yamnaya did not expand from Samara. It expanded from that zone between the middle Don and Volga and many emphasis that the Repin roots of Yamnaya originated on the middle Don - although I am not sure there is absolutely clinching radiocarbon evidence for this.

So, whatever the connection that put P297 derived people in Samara in 5600BC and L23/Z2103 in Repin by 4000BC seems to relate to a common link that pre-dates 4000BC. There are many commonalities across the steppe in the pre-4000BC era so its hard to say which one links those areas which had P297 derivatives pre-4000BC. P297 is so old that its spread could therefore date anytime between perhaps 11000BC and 4000BC in theory at least. Due to archaeological considerations I would shorten that to 8000BC to 4000BC - admittedly still a horribly wide span of time. But something in that span probably created a common P297 link between Samara and as far west as the Don at least in that span. The problem is not a lack of options but too many because there often seems to be broad similarity across large chunks of the European steppe.

alan
07-25-2015, 04:14 PM
All we seem to be able to deduce is that Z2103 spread in Yamnaya after a phase of mixing with Caucasians. We do not see this mix in the Samara hunter. Archaeologically and simple geography of the rivers etc suggests Caucasian probably passed up the Don and perhaps the Volga although it seems the evidence is strongest on the Don - where some archaeologists do see that Repin (which was essentially an early phase of the same culture as Yamnaya) originated. This signature of the EHG-Caucasian mix almost certainly largely reached Samara and adjacent only in the full Yamnaya period after 3300BC but probably was happening in Repin (and perhaps other groups with contact with the Caucasus like Khvalynsk ) for several centuries prior to Yamnaya.

I think we can conclude that P297 and the Caucasus half of Yamnaya are two different phenomenon of entirely different periods and that the mixing of the two was likely post-4000BC and at the extreme post-6000BC.

The most likely copper age culture that was responsible for the introduction of Caucasian into the steppes appears to be the Konstantinovka culture (a Sredny Stog type culture with strong early Maykop influences) of the Lower Don (which bordered Repin in the middle Don). Early Repin pottery (c. 4000BC or so) is considered very similar to Konstaninovka. There are some who think Maykop influence on the steppe is post-3500BC but the constant reviewing of steppe RC dating and the fact that it doesnt makes sense if early Repin (now re-dated to 4000bc) and Konstantinovka pottery is very similar suggests to me that this will also be revised.

Also worth noting that Anthony sees the baggy shaped Khvalynsk pottery type started on the Lower Volga and spread up to the middle Volga and again sees contact with Maykop related groups as influential.

Then consider that pottery is a largely female craft and we can probably deduce from the pottery that in the 4000-3300BC period there was a flow of females from the Lower Don and Lower Volga (areas close to the Maykop culture) into the Middle Don and Middle Volga. The pottery evidence is probably crucial when considering that the Caucasus input seems to be from the female side (there is too much non-steppe mtDNA in Yamnaya for the men to be non-steppe natives).

So, it seems that Caucasian contacts could have existed on both the lower Don and Lower Volga and spread from intermediary groups like the Konstaninovka on the lower Don into Repin and similarly from groups on the Lower Volga to the middle Volga in Khvalynsk. The way Anthony describes it makes it sound like he sees the Maykop derived contacts on the Don as somewhat earlier and more clearcut than on the Volga as he states that the Khvalynsk pottery dates parallel with the 2nd phase of Repin pottery which it replaces. So one would expect the Caucasian element to be at its maximum in Repin-Yamnaya but with some lesser input into Khvalynsk.

nuadha
07-25-2015, 04:33 PM
Many Indian populations do have EHG. Not just some or a few, but many.

The problem is its low level in most of India and the complex ancestry of Indians, which is masking it.

Do you think you can reliably estimate it?

Also, do you see patterns. Im sure there is more in the north, based on geography, but it would be awesome if there was some 'extra' correlation between EHG and Indic that was separate from geography.

I would like to tease out whatever can be. Which page has reliable estimates?

BTW, I don't think a lack of EHG in indians really posses that much of a problem to the kurgan hypothesis. The people making their way to india could have mixed with others high in ANE while still retaining IE r1a.

alan
07-25-2015, 04:47 PM
I have heard people wondering why there is a lot of ANE in Caucasian. I think the simple answer probably lies in the final Palaeolithic and early Mesolithic. These microblade groups I link to Siberians moving into eastern and north-east Europe around this time also moved into the Caucasus and indeed the Zagros. Personally I also think that this movement brought the P25xP297 lines into places like the Zagros albeit their numbers must have been small or they may have remained peripheral to the main farming developments somehow.

I predict some ANE will be found in SW Asia close to the Caspian in Neolithic times-perhaps showing up in the relatively late adopters of farming in the Caucasus and north-west Iran around 6000BC onwards and very likely including the pre-Maykop Neolithic groups in the north Caucasus. Clearly as Scandinavia shows, some ANE is much older than the arrival of copper age IE groups and I think the same is true on the north-eastern fringes of the early farming world in SW Asia.

Also note that the sort of dates argued for the P25/P297 seem to be placed in the 12000-8000BC sort of timeframe. This is very interesting as pressure microblades (known only in Siberia from the start of the LGM to 9500BC) simultaneously appear in easternmost Europe and SW Asia c. 9500BC. I think that is probably a great proxy for the P25/P297 split. It also coincides with the end of the Younger Dryas. Both that period and the changes as we moved into the less cold and dry next phase must have had a big impact on environments and habitat options. I find that all too much of a coincidence to not see some connection between a split with P25xP297 heading into northern SW Asia and P297 into easternmost Europe. If the microblade connection with P25 is correct then neither Europe or SW Asia had R1b prior to 9500BC and it was confined to Siberia/north central Asia before that. I do not know the exact paths taken but the Caspian provided the best north-south option to beat the barrier of the deserts of the Stans of north central Asia.

I dont have enough knowledge of the palae-environments to discuss in detail what the push-pull factors would be. Certainly in the Younger Dryas dry areas would have been ultra dry and unsupportive of human settlement except perhaps where there were large permanent rivers and large bodies of water. However, as far as I can make out the best chronological correlation with the sudden appearance of pressure microblades outside Siberia is the END of the Younger Dryas - which means the beginning of the pre-Boreal period (the early Boreal). So it is to push and pull factors relating to the start of the early Boreal I think it is most logical to look. There is thought to have been a rise of 7 degrees in 50 years which is huge and fast. The actual changes to a Boreal invironment obviously varies somewhat by latitude and longitude The Boreal of course led to the end of the Younger Dryas tundra belt with its large migrating herbivores due to the rapid foresting of much of Europe. My impression is that the microblade groups actually were avoiding the forests and chasing the last open grasslands and tundra to retain their traditional lifestyles. I suspect based on the timing and the location of the pressure microblades that these hunters tried to achieve this with some heading through north-eastern Europe towards the then-location of the ice sheets. Some headed towards the steppes (possibly a slightly later wave) and some headed into SW Asia.

can't_lurk_no_mo'
07-25-2015, 10:31 PM
Also note that the sort of dates argued for the P25/P297 seem to be placed in the 12000-8000BC sort of timeframe. This is very interesting as pressure microblades (known only in Siberia from the start of the LGM to 9500BC) simultaneously appear in easternmost Europe and SW Asia c. 9500BC. I think that is probably a great proxy for the P25/P297 split. It also coincides with the end of the Younger Dryas. Both that period and the changes as we moved into the less cold and dry next phase must have had a big impact on environments and habitat options. I find that all too much of a coincidence to not see some connection between a split with P25xP297 heading into northern SW Asia and P297 into easternmost Europe. If the microblade connection with P25 is correct then neither Europe or SW Asia had R1b prior to 9500BC and it was confined to Siberia/north central Asia before that. I do not know the exact paths taken but the Caspian provided the best north-south option to beat the barrier of the deserts of the Stans of north central Asia.

I dont have enough knowledge of the palae-environments to discuss in detail what the push-pull factors would be. Certainly in the Younger Dryas dry areas would have been ultra dry and unsupportive of human settlement except perhaps where there were large permanent rivers and large bodies of water. However, as far as I can make out the best chronological correlation with the sudden appearance of pressure microblades outside Siberia is the END of the Younger Dryas - which means the beginning of the pre-Boreal period (the early Boreal). So it is to push and pull factors relating to the start of the early Boreal I think it is most logical to look. There is thought to have been a rise of 7 degrees in 50 years which is huge and fast. The actual changes to a Boreal invironment obviously varies somewhat by latitude and longitude The Boreal of course led to the end of the Younger Dryas tundra belt with its large migrating herbivores due to the rapid foresting of much of Europe. My impression is that the microblade groups actually were avoiding the forests and chasing the last open grasslands and tundra to retain their traditional lifestyles. I suspect based on the timing and the location of the pressure microblades that these hunters tried to achieve this with some heading through north-eastern Europe towards the then-location of the ice sheets. Some headed towards the steppes (possibly a slightly later wave) and some headed into SW Asia.

What is the name of this pressure microblade industry?

MT1976
07-26-2015, 04:52 AM
I have heard people wondering why there is a lot of ANE in Caucasian. I think the simple answer probably lies in the final Palaeolithic and early Mesolithic. These microblade groups I link to Siberians moving into eastern and north-east Europe around this time also moved into the Caucasus and indeed the Zagros. Personally I also think that this movement brought the P25xP297 lines into places like the Zagros albeit their numbers must have been small or they may have remained peripheral to the main farming developments somehow.

I predict some ANE will be found in SW Asia close to the Caspian in Neolithic times-perhaps showing up in the relatively late adopters of farming in the Caucasus and north-west Iran around 6000BC onwards and very likely including the pre-Maykop Neolithic groups in the north Caucasus. Clearly as Scandinavia shows, some ANE is much older than the arrival of copper age IE groups and I think the same is true on the north-eastern fringes of the early farming world in SW Asia.

A tempting equation, but didn't microblades, like PNP, start far too east? Ie ENA territory ?
But I certainly agree on the whole !

MT1976
07-26-2015, 05:06 AM
Tajiks most certainly have EHG, and so do many Indian populations.

This whole discussion is based on erroneousness premises that they don't and that all Indians are Indo-Europeans. You don't think that someone from Harvard can make such mistakes? Think again.

Yes they do, but it's minimal , and far less than overall ANE. This means that the ANE in centeral-South asians isn't steppe derived, or least, minimally so

MT1976
07-26-2015, 05:11 AM
A ok - well it seems Scandinavia is a mixture of post-Glacial groups from the western refugium and the microblade groups from the east. The western group arrived a earlier in that area but not the pressure microblade addition was fairly early too around 8000 or 7000BC. There appears to be no epi-Gravettian input from east or east Central Europe. So they are a straight western hunters and eastern mix. However it is possible some of that the eastern group could have mixed a little with the western derived group (Swiderian) in the Baltic and NW Russia area already before mixing further with other western groups in Scandinavia.

To prove that ANE is an addition in eastern and northern Europe c. 9500-7000BC (pressure microblades moved gradually east) we obviously need data that pre-dates that period to see if the ANE element is absent. Personally from archaeological evidence I think that is extremely likely.

By the way, my feeling is that the earliest Mesolithic hunters in the middle Urals will be something close to pure ANE - albeit drifted. It seems that the microblade groups didnt have competition there.

I'm not so sure . There was an eastern post-Gravettian in Russia (or whatever we want term it). Id hazard that it contributed to the Swiderian colonizations of NE europe and sweden. Eg Y Hg I2c might have been in East euripean glacial refugia. From an mtDNA perspective, we have U5a in Sweden and Central Europe, which is otherwise absent in iberia. So this must have come from Eastern Europe. But there is no mtDNA Hg C- which would be from pressure blades.

Generalissimo
07-26-2015, 05:20 AM
Do you think you can reliably estimate it?

Also, do you see patterns. Im sure there is more in the north, based on geography, but it would be awesome if there was some 'extra' correlation between EHG and Indic that was separate from geography.

I would like to tease out whatever can be. Which page has reliable estimates?

BTW, I don't think a lack of EHG in indians really posses that much of a problem to the kurgan hypothesis. The people making their way to india could have mixed with others high in ANE while still retaining IE r1a.

I can't. There seems to be a problem with the really basal Near Eastern ancestry in India cancelling out the EHG/WHG signal.

What needs to be tried is a model like the TreeMix runs with the Kalash/Pathans but with Admixturegraph, so that it's more supervised.

Have a look at the new Skoglund Amerindian paper, and how they confirm the minor Paleo-Asian ancestry in South America using Admixturegraph.

nuadha
07-26-2015, 07:20 AM
I dont know about that. Pre-Germanic is supposed to have existed for 1000 years or so before proto-Germanic. IMO there is certainly stages before the proto moment where a language has already wholly or largely attained that form. Proto-reconstructions seem to me to depict the last moment before dispersal and divergence and tell us nothing about how long the proto form or a form 90 odd percent on the way to the proto form existed.

That said I also think the people who see a big structural but not vocab influence from Caucasian have a point if its looking like a huge amount of the woman and autosomal DNA were Caucasians. If this factor started around 4000BC - perhaps to a much lesser extend earlier than that - then we are not talking about complex societies who had mechanism could offset the linguistic influence of the Caucasian mothers by giving them tutors etc. I think there could be something in the linguistic theories that see PIE as an outcome of such hybriding. Its a classic situation where the structure but very little of the vocab could be deeply influenced. If that happened then perhaps what was spoken the steppes before the Caucasian influence was significantly different in structure if not vocab pre-4000BC.

Another question I would raise is if Caucasian women were flowing in numbers into parts of the steppes then why? Usually in a situation like that something flows the other way or at least there is an important alliance or trade relationship to maintain. I cannot really see what the far more backwards steppe tribes could offer the incredibly rich Maykop people. I can understand the steppe tribes wish to be in contact with Maykop as it was a hell of an impressive culture with its early arsenical copper, ultra-rich Kurgans, early use of the wheel and complex of contacts. But what did Maykop or even pre-Maykop Caucasus cultures get of this?

Later on there may have been some deal relating to Kargaly but currently that is dated only to the Yamnaya period and was a pure copper of an inferior type compared to what Maykop used. One odd thing is I dont believe there is any evidence of Maykop people mining their own copper and some have suggested they got it from the south. In the centuries after 3500BC the Kura-Araxes culture took control of NW Iran which previously was strongly connected to Maykop - there are Maykop Kurgans there. I wonder if this might have encouraged Maykop to look into the steppes for sources.

Metallic styles do suggest that Yamnaya was strongly influenced by Maykop albeit their main ore used was a pure copper one in Kargaly. I find it hard to believe the sudden knowledge of advanced metallurgy and mining just appeared in Yamnaya at Kargaly. There must have been a background process and some Caucasian knowledge behind it. Some Maykop men must have been involved IMO. Perhaps those J Yamnaya guys could be an echo of that.

Im not sure what you mean by pre germanic but the people who would influence 'pre germanic' would be other IEs so... it need not have changed that much.

The people who would influence pre PIE would have been very different. To me, PIE seems like it formed rather quickly given the way the yamnaya horizon formed and the uralic and caucasian influence in PIE.

Silesian
07-26-2015, 02:17 PM
All we seem to be able to deduce is that Z2103 spread in Yamnaya after a phase of mixing with Caucasians. We do not see this mix in the Samara hunter. Archaeologically and simple geography of the rivers etc suggests Caucasian probably passed up the Don and perhaps the Volga although it seems the evidence is strongest on the Don - where some archaeologists do see that Repin (which was essentially an early phase of the same culture as Yamnaya) originated. This signature of the EHG-Caucasian mix almost certainly largely reached Samara and adjacent only in the full Yamnaya period after 3300BC but probably was happening in Repin (and perhaps other groups with contact with the Caucasus like Khvalynsk ) for several centuries prior to Yamnaya...........

Eurogenes latest-PCA plots-Global PCA of selected Late Neolithic/Bronze Age Eurasians
Rise 548-Temrta IV [RISE548] M R1b R1b1a2a2 (Z2105, CTS9416) http://www.ancestraljourneys.org/ancientdna.shtml
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B9o3EYTdM8lQQko3Zk1oSzIzSmM/view?pli=1

Rise 552-I2a2a1b1b2 (S12195) http://www.ancestraljourneys.org/ancientdna.shtml
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B9o3EYTdM8lQSGlUbUZta0dFTnM/view?pli=1

close proxy Rise -548-I0429 900km distance & within 2km of adult male from grave 1 in a Neolithic-Eneolithic settlement producing artifacts from the
Elshanka, Samara, and Repin cultures. The specific site is Lebyazhinka IV http://biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/early/2015/02/10/013433.full.pdf
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B9o3EYTdM8lQSnowY29UU09HSmM/view?pli=1

Eurogenes K6 comparing Rise 548 & Rise 552 & I0429
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/17FnR-OeYN4m-XCzWxChiLPJR6QW_ehmR3I0Mrz6OjDI/edit?pli=1#gid=1930035171

https://farm1.staticflickr.com/359/18912028790_29cd1d6fcf_h.jpg

5316

alan
07-26-2015, 04:14 PM
A tempting equation, but didn't microblades, like PNP, start far too east? Ie ENA territory ?
But I certainly agree on the whole !

Many think they started around Altai in the LGM. The nearest refugium for people like Mal'ta Boy to flee to during the LGM and probably where Afantova Gora guy had lived during LGM. Probably strongly ANE associated. Microblades also track the Q movement to the Americas probably from Altai to east Asia where they mixed before going to the Americas

alan
07-26-2015, 04:15 PM
What is the name of this pressure microblade industry?
Well there is no one name but generally its known as the late upper palaeolithic of south-central Siberia. Not very catchy. See Ted Goebil etc for papers on this.

alan
07-26-2015, 04:24 PM
I'm not so sure . There was an eastern post-Gravettian in Russia (or whatever we want term it). Id hazard that it contributed to the Swiderian colonizations of NE europe and sweden. Eg Y Hg I2c might have been in East euripean glacial refugia. From an mtDNA perspective, we have U5a in Sweden and Central Europe, which is otherwise absent in iberia. So this must have come from Eastern Europe. But there is no mtDNA Hg C- which would be from pressure blades.

The current thinking is Swiderian is western (ultimately Magdallenian via intermediary cultures) derived not epi-Gravettian derived although I can see where you get that idea because it was once popular. The post-Swiderian/Kunda type cultures which are slightly later do have the eastern microblade component. It seems that the Gravettians really didnt expand in post-glacial times for some reason while a pincer movement leading from SW Europe in an arc to NE Europe happened , apparently followed up and overlapped with by the later pressure flaked microblade input which looks to be of Siberian origin (they are known in Siberia over 20000 years ago but not in Europe or SW Asia until after 9500BC). I think the match with ANE is remarkable - even with Q heading to the Americas in the other direction.

alan
07-26-2015, 04:48 PM
Eurogenes latest-PCA plots-Global PCA of selected Late Neolithic/Bronze Age Eurasians
Rise 548-Temrta IV [RISE548] M R1b R1b1a2a2 (Z2105, CTS9416) http://www.ancestraljourneys.org/ancientdna.shtml
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B9o3EYTdM8lQQko3Zk1oSzIzSmM/view?pli=1

Rise 552-I2a2a1b1b2 (S12195) http://www.ancestraljourneys.org/ancientdna.shtml
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B9o3EYTdM8lQSGlUbUZta0dFTnM/view?pli=1

close proxy Rise -548-I0429 900km distance & within 2km of adult male from grave 1 in a Neolithic-Eneolithic settlement producing artifacts from the
Elshanka, Samara, and Repin cultures. The specific site is Lebyazhinka IV http://biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/early/2015/02/10/013433.full.pdf
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B9o3EYTdM8lQSnowY29UU09HSmM/view?pli=1

Eurogenes K6 comparing Rise 548 & Rise 552 & I0429
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/17FnR-OeYN4m-XCzWxChiLPJR6QW_ehmR3I0Mrz6OjDI/edit?pli=1#gid=1930035171

https://farm1.staticflickr.com/359/18912028790_29cd1d6fcf_h.jpg

5316

Certainly the spread of microblades is not the only thing suggestive of connections with Siberia and north central Asia - the pre-farming pottery is another potential signal. It could be for example that the microblades c. 8000BC or so brought R1a and then around 6000BC the pottery brought R1b-P297 (both pre-farming) or it could be the other way round but I am grossly oversimplifying. The problem is really there are too many options to sort this out.

Are you saying the Samara hunter is likely Elshanka associated? His date of c. 5600BC seems to put him in that timeframe.

alan
07-26-2015, 05:39 PM
One paper http://www.academia.edu/9620082/CHRONOLOGY_OF_THE_URALIAN_NEOLITHIC_A.A._Vybornov_ V.S._Mosin_and_A.V._Epimakhov_

from last year concluded that the earliest type of Elshanka pottery apparently originated in the eastern Caspian and Aral region, attesting to the southeastern direction of ties. Around 6070–5840 BC,
flat-bottomed vessels appeared. These are decorated with lines of punched nodes below the rim and pricked designs, but are made of pelogenous silt Technologically speaking they are similar to Elshanka pottery and co-occur with diagnostic geometric microliths made of flint. The change was evidently caused by a migration from the Lower Volga, whereby the vector of ties became southwestern rather than southeastern as before.

So the Samara hunter lived in the 2nd phase. Complicates interpretation somewhat to have an earlier Aral Link then a suggested migration north from the Lower Volga, all before the Samara Hunter lived.

alan
07-26-2015, 06:32 PM
One paper http://www.academia.edu/9620082/CHRONOLOGY_OF_THE_URALIAN_NEOLITHIC_A.A._Vybornov_ V.S._Mosin_and_A.V._Epimakhov_

from last year concluded that the earliest type of Elshanka pottery apparently originated in the eastern Caspian and Aral region, attesting to the southeastern direction of ties. Around 6070–5840 BC,
at-bottomed vessels appeared. These are decorated with lines of punched nodes below the rim and pricked designs, but are made of pelogenous silt Technologically speaking they are similar to Elshanka pottery and co-occur with diagnostic geometric microliths made of flint. The change was evidently caused by a migration from the Lower Volga, whereby the vector of ties became southwestern rather than southeastern as before.

So the Samara hunter lived in the 2nd phase. Complicates interpretation somewhat have an earlier Aral Link then a suggested migration north from the Lower Volga, all before the Samara Hunter lived.

Time and palaeoenvironment in the Neolithisation of the Povolzhye forest-steppe by Aleksandr Vybornov (2011) also talks about east Caspian/Aral connections and migration north due to aridity but I find the way it is written a little confusing. It may also be arguing about a wave from the east Caspain and a second wave from the north Caspian northwards involved in Elshanka but its written or translated a little confusingly and it used what seems to be uncalibrated BP dates. Regardless the same basic connections seems to be point to in the genesis of Elshanka. I wish I could find something on the flint tool technology of the culture over and above some basic comments

Silesian
08-01-2015, 05:49 AM
...Are you saying the Samara hunter is likely Elshanka associated? His date of c. 5600BC seems to put him in that timeframe.
The location of Samara H.G. Lebyazhinka IV is certainly interesting. Some of the dates from Chekalino IV are quite old 8000+/-B.C.
Chekalino IV GIN-7084 Shells 7950 ± 130 7300–6450
Chekalino IV Le-4781 Shells 8990 ± 100 8450–7750
Chekalino IV GIN-7085 Shells 8680 ± 120 8250–7500
Chek
https://journals.uair.arizona.edu/index.php/radiocarbon/article/viewFile/3534/3049

“pure Yelshanian element” has been recognized only in 2 cases, the
lower strata of Chekalino IV and Lower Orlyanka II. (Figure 2, #9–14)

How it relates to Telegin's A1 and A2 stratified in Yamnaya [4000-3500B.C.] burials; I'm not exactly sure.


https://books.google.ca/books?id=0FDqf415wqgC&pg=PA319&lpg=PA319&dq=yamnaya+pottery&source=bl&ots=2Z53nNLMKB&sig=l5PdCNCwYOHX6sf2Vk2X2Aag81M&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CCwQ6AEwBWoVChMImtOk0rj7xgIVFhCSCh1UKgP7#v=on epage&q=yamnaya%20pottery&f=false