Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 31

Thread: "The genetic forge of Europe", by Carles Lalueza-Fox

  1. #1
    Registered Users
    Posts
    1,621
    Sex
    Location
    Virginia, USA
    Y-DNA
    DF27, FGC15733
    mtDNA
    T2f3

    "The genetic forge of Europe", by Carles Lalueza-Fox

    Yesterday JeanL posted a link to a review article of this book, scheduled to be published today in Spanish. I wanted to read the review, so I pasted it into Google Translate (in several tedious steps, it's too long to do all at once). Having gone to the trouble, I thought it might be useful to others. Of course one may always tidy up a Google translation, but it does a better job with Spanish-to-English than with most other combinations. Here is the link to the original: https://www.elperiodico.com/es/cienc...uropea-6623867


    SCIENCE ADVANCES
    Indo-European "globalization"
    Where did the Indo-Europeans come from? Why do half the humans speak languages of this strain?
    The biologist Carles Lalueza-Fox unravels the secrets of ancient human DNA in a book that comes out tomorrow translated into Spanish:

    “La forja genética de Europa”, de Carles Lalueza-Fox (Edicions de la Universitat de Barcelona, 2018)

    Excerpt from "The genetic forge of Europe", by Carles Lalueza-Fox (Editions of the University of Barcelona, 2018)

    Selection by Michele Catanzaro

    Currently about half of the world's population - including territories colonized by Europeans in the last few hundred years such as America and Australia - speaks Indo-European languages. It is a large linguistic family that encompasses more than four hundred languages and dialects that have a common origin; among them are practically all those spoken in Europe, with the notable exception of Euskera -an authentic pre-Indo-European linguistic fossil- and some others such as Hungarian, Estonian and Finnish, which are due to much more recent Asian influences. The different Indo-European branches include subfamilies such as Italic, Celtic, Germanic, Hellenic, Albanian, Baltic, Slavic, and Indo-Iranian (with Sanskrit to India and Sri Lanka). Extinct Indo-European languages are also known, such as Hittite (spoken during the Hittite empire, in present-day Anatolia, until it was destroyed by the Assyrians in 1180 BC) or the mysterious tocario (spoken in the Tarim basin, in western China, and which disappeared around the ninth century of our era). From the sixteenth century, various travelers and scholars found some similarities in words of very different languages, such as Sanskrit, Greek and Latin, which suggested a common origin for all of them. Thomas Young - a scholar who also intervened in the deciphering of Egyptian hieroglyphs competing with Champollion - was the first to use, in 1813, the term "Indo-European" to refer to such linguistic genealogy. Since then, a problem that has fascinated linguists, archaeologists and even geneticists alike, is: when did the expansion of Indo-European languages take place and what could catalyze it?

    It seems clear that this process, due to its magnitude, has to be associated with large-scale human migration. The subsequent fragmentation in many languages does not represent a conceptual problem, but the existence of an original nucleus, called Proto-Indo-European, is difficult to locate at present and has therefore become a very controversial topic. In essence there are two theories about the Indo-European expansion that differ both in the entry route in Europe and in the period in which it occurs. The first, formulated by the archaeologist of Lithuanian origin Marija Gimbutas (1921-1994) and known as the hypothesis of the Kurgans, argues that the Indo-European languages enter Europe in the final Neolithic, associated with the movement of pastoralist nomadic groups from the steppes pontics (the great Pontic region extends from the north of the Black Sea to the Caspian Sea). These populations have their original core in the so-called Yamnaya culture, which dates back to around 3000 BC and which is characterized from an archaeological point of view by the construction of large burial mounds known as kurgans, where a character is usually buried of relevance. The great extension of the steppes and the pastoralist economy dominated by the horse means that a succession of favorable climatic years with abundant grass generate a great demographic surplus, both of humans and animals. The same happened in historical times with the Mongol hordes and previously with the Huns.

    These Yamnaya pastoralists would move westward and come into contact with European farmers in the final Neolithic, generating a new Central European culture, called Ware (or cordate pottery), which replaces the LBK. The Corded Ware culture is characterized by ceramics with decorations made with knotted ropes on freshly made vessels (hence its name). These ceramics accompany individual burials where often a battle ax made with polished stone is also deposited. Due to the difficulties involved in its construction, it is believed that these are characters of certain social importance for the community that carries it out. The distribution of the Kurgans is very broad and encompasses a large area of central and eastern Europe, from Ukraine to Poland and Denmark. According to several researchers, the fact that the Indo-European languages share terms referring to grazing, metallurgy and horse-drawn carriages would also support their common origin in that period and not in the early Neolithic, where these technologies did not yet exist. Precisely the alternative hypothesis about the origin of the Indo-European languages places them much further back in time, some 6,500 years before Christ, in the very arrival of the Neolithic and of emigrants from the Near East (for that reason it is known as the hypothesis of « Neolithic Anatolia »). His greatest advocate for years has been Colin Renfrew (technically, Lord Renfrew), a British archaeologist and member of the House of Lords who was a professor at Cambridge. Apart from making the event coincide with an indisputable and massive migratory phenomenon (the arrival of agriculture), his hypothesis found unexpected support among the linguists themselves, where in principle it was not very popular. In 2012, linguists used phylogenetic methods to try to date the common antiquity of the Indo-European languages; the dates obtained (with logical margins of error) were more coincident with the old Neolithic than with the end. However, other linguists quickly criticized the assumptions made in mathematical models (it usually happens that with statistical models we must apply so many theoretical assumptions that in the end the uncertainty always plans on the results). Perhaps a point against the Gimbutas hypothesis is that the Kurgans are typical of the Central Asian steppes, but they are scarce in Central Europe and do not reach the western part of the continent. Would this culture have been reformulated and would it have continued to expand despite being transformed into something else? Successful languages tend to be associated with prestigious elements and undoubtedly burial mounds were (in fact, the magnificent Macedonian tomb of Amphipolis does not cease to be the heir of that tradition), but perhaps its distribution was not as extensive as it would be desirable for the Indo-European hypothesis. On the other hand, the genetic analyzes done with the current Europeans did not seem to detect a global signal pointing to the east. The classic studies carried out with markers such as blood groups did detect a clinal distribution of the current genetic diversity consistent with the entrance of the Neolithic through southeastern Europe. Because of this, for years, most of the geneticists - and I among them - aligned with Renfrew to defend an origin in the early Neolithic of the Indo-European languages. I met Renfrew, aged seventy-four and already retired, during a visit to Pompeu Fabra University in March 2012; I explained our preliminary results about La Braña - which were still unpublished - and he was delighted. He was a gentleman, with that point of eccentricity that the English love so much. For him, the fact that hunters and Neolithic people were so different supported the great migration that his hypothesis required: people changed, language changed. All this would be consistent with the consideration of Euskara as a European pre-Neolithic language -indeed, the only one preserved from that period- and, therefore, with the Basques as a population with a strong mesolithic component that would have preserved its original language against wind and tide. But when we analyzed the complete genome of La Braña, I already realized that something was wrong: the Mesolithic hunter was not especially related to the current Basques, as would have been expected. On the other hand, the analyzes made with the first farmers such as Stuttgart did show some affinity with the Basques (after the Sardinians); this fact, which suggested a late arrival of the Indo-Europeans, went unnoticed in most of the later publications. In this state of things, paleogenomics came to give a twist to the debate, corroborating the existence of a massive genetic influence in continental Europe, from the Russian steppes, in the final Neolithic. The work was led once again by the group of David Reich and began to sound in various congresses towards the end of 2014 (some bloggers go to the congresses and tweet novelties that escape to the lecturers). The work was published in Nature on March 2, 2015 and its first signer was Wolfgang Haak. An American media found the perfect headline: «A steppe forward »(a play on words with the typical phrase« A step forward »).
    This time also represented a change of technical approach: it was no longer intended to generate complete genomes. During our competition with La Braña, Reich realized how difficult it was to find well-preserved samples to sequence the entire genome. For him, who worked with the principles of population genetics, complete genomes were not necessary; he was interested in some hundreds of thousands of variable positions along the genome (known as SNP, or single nucleotide polymorphisms) to characterize individuals and populations with sufficient statistical power. He also discovered that these positions could be captured and sequenced by an array with thousands of DNA probes in samples that, on the other hand, were not good enough to be sequenced. He designed a genomic capture system with 390,000 informative positions and devoted himself to genotyping prehistoric samples from different periods and origins. In the end, it ended with data from no less than 65 prehistoric genomes. When compared with all previous genomes that had at least 5% of the genome sequenced and published since 2010, they only added 40.
    That is, in a single work multiplied by 1.5 all the previous genomes. Obviously, there are things that can not be done with SNP data only. For example, various screening analyzes or demographic studies require more extensive chromosomal sequences and not only variable positions of a single DNA nucleotide. Or maybe in the future there is an interesting variant that was not included in the original array and this could only be investigated in a complete genome. But Reich aimed to reconstruct the migratory processes of the past in Europe and for this purpose his data were more than enough. They had individuals ranging from the Mesolithic to the Bronze Age; the great majority came from Germany and Russia. Among the latter were six samples of the culture of the steppes, the Yamnaya, dating from the initial Bronze Age (between 3,500 and 2,700 years before the Christian era).
    Given the breadth of samples, Reich's results touched on several fronts on an unprecedented scale. To begin with, the researchers described a resurgence of the hunter-gatherer component about 1,000 or 2,000 years after the arrival of the first farmers' populations. This increase in mesolithic substrate was detected from Central Europe to the Iberian Peninsula; it could simply be due to the demographic collapse experienced by the first Neolithic people, associated with the deterioration of the climate and the exhaustion of the initial resources. Or maybe there were groups of hunters in some areas - presumably from northern Europe - that were gradually mixed with the farmers already settled in the continent. On the other hand, the hunters of Eastern Europe seemed to be different from those of the west (represented by La Braña and Loschbour) and also of those of Scandinavia; the first showed a population component more akin to the Mal'ta genome -and therefore to the basal population substrate in northern Eurasia, the ANE-. Reich called them EHG (Eastern huntergatherers).
    But the most interesting results came from the samples of the Copper and Bronze Age. The Yamnaya showed a genomic component with affinities in the Caucasus and Western Asia (in proportions close to 60% and 40%, respectively), which entered strongly into central Europe from the end of the Neolithic. Clearly, Reich's group had detected, in real time, the arrival of a great genetic influx from the Central Asian steppes, which had changed the genetic configuration of Europe at the time. In this sense, the archaeological horizon known as Corded Ware seemed to be made up of about 70% of the component coming from the Yamnaya. And it was a sudden change, not of progressive genetic contributions over a long period of time; the German populations prior to the Corded Ware did not present this component and, like all the Neolithic genomes, they grouped themselves calmly with the Sardinians (and with the LBK and the cardials). The Corded Ware, however, already grouped with the current populations of the north of Europe, like England and Germany. Although current populations have less Yamnaya component than Corded Ware, this grouping indicates some continuity from then to the present.
    The transformation of the European Y chromosome provided additional evidence: the most frequent male lineages among current Europeans are R1b and R1a and both are found in residual frequencies among the first farmers. In contrast, all Yamnaya men and other individuals from Russia show these lineages; among the subsequent Corded Ware they increase up to 50%. Its ancestral presence in the steppe was proven by the fact that it also appeared in two Mesolithic societies in Russia. In agreement with their antiquity, some of them presented, within both lineages, ancestral combinations of genetic markers that foreshadowed the later R1b and R1a typically European. The fact that all the Yamnaya had the same lineage also pointed to a patrilineal organization of these groups, united by strong ties of masculine descent. This could be related to the fact that its cultural equipment, based on chariots, horses and bronze weapons, points towards a sphere of violent expansion among the agricultural communities of Western Europe, which until then show few archaeological indicators of social hierarchy.
    On the other hand, mitochondrial lineages such as N1a and lineages of the Y chromosome such as G2a or T1a, which are very frequent among the first farmers, practically disappear in later periods. The same happens with the rare Y chromosome of La Braña and Kostenki 14: in this case it did not appear in any of the samples analyzed.
    With these results, the researchers had also located the entrance of the old ANE population component in Europe, whose arrival until then was a mystery, since despite its antiquity in Eurasia, its presence in the current Europeans was not associated neither with the hunters Mesolithic or the first farmers. The most striking inference from the work is that they had found the genetic trace of the first Indo-Europeans. This great transformation of the European genetic baggage coincided in time with the culture of the Kurgans and therefore the paleogenomic data reinforced, after more than half a century of debates, the hypothesis of Gimbutas. People changed, yes, but in the final Neolithic. The genomic baggage we saw in cardials and other ancient farmers was restricted to Sardinia, a current population with hardly any ANE component.

    A few weeks later, the group of Willerslev (headed by postdoctoral researcher Morten Allentoft, who had participated in the work of La Braña) published a new work with genomes of the Bronze Age with similar conclusions. Although the Danes made a mark of having included more than one hundred ancient genomes, in reality most corresponded to very limited fractions (close to 1% of the complete genome) and only 19 of them had coverage greater than 1x. However, it was true that they covered large areas of Central Asia and detailed the expansion of the steppes component not only to the west, to Europe, but also to the east. Among them included the oldest Neolithic culture of Siberia, the so-called Afanásievo, which appeared between 3,500 and 2,500 years before Christ.

    Eske's group also associated Central Asian migrations to Europe with the Indo-European languages. Allentoft's work had an extraordinary culmination: normally geneticists analyze the human sequences they generate, but nobody pays attention to those that are discarded, those that do not map in the human genome. Someone in Eske's group had the idea of looking at what was in these billions of non-human sequences and discovered that in at least seven individuals there was a significant number of sequences of the Yersinia pestis bacteria, the cause of the plague.

    There are three major European pandemics caused by the plague: the first, known as the plague of Justinian (between 541 and 544) led to the decline of a Byzantine Empire that had just inaugurated the majestic Hagia Sophia; the second, known as the black plague, ravaged Europe in a first wave between 1347 and 1351 and caused the death of between one-third and one-half of its population (it also had subsequent sprouts intermittently, such as the great London plague of 1665 ); the third emerged in China around the middle of the nineteenth century and spread throughout the world for almost a century. There are documented previous episodes, such as the plague of Athens (430 427 BC) or the plague Antonina (165-180 AD), which caused the decline of classical Greece and the beginning of the great crisis of the Roman Empire, respectively , but it is unknown if they were caused by the same pathogen. It is evident, however, that humans had been exposed to the epidemic long before there were written sources about it. The Danish researchers decided to thoroughly sequence the seven individuals discovered and ended up generating complete genomes of the pathogen in each of them, with coverage ranging from 0.12x to 50x. The carriers of the bacteria - and who may have died from it - included two individuals of the Afanásievo culture, dated around the year 2,800 before Christ, as well as a Corded Ware of Estonia and an individual of the Iron Age of Armenia, among others. With the genomes of Yersinia pestis, they were able to construct phylogenetic trees that placed the prehistoric lineages in a basal position, which was congruent with their greater antiquity. The data allowed us to calculate an origin of about 5,800 years for the current strain of the bacteria. However, they also discovered that prehistoric forms lacked some genes related to virulence, suggesting that they could not cause bubonic plague - that is, the type of plague that is transmitted by rodent flea bites - as was the case with three pandemics mentioned above. A fascinating idea that derived from this study, published in the magazine Cell in 2015, is that the genetic impact of the migration of the steppes, which took place on a continent already populated, could have been greater to have been accompanied by an epidemic mortal. The population decline and the crisis of the Neolithic final communities between the end of the fourth millennium and the beginning of the third year BC could be due to the introduction of a disease of Asian origin that was hitherto unknown by European farmers.

    For the authors of both studies, Renfrew would be wrong. But some commentators did not rush to liquidate the hypothesis of the Indo-European origin in Anatolia. After all, they argued, there is no way of knowing what languages these Yamnaya emigrants spoke. Most linguists agree that the most basal branches of the Indo-European family are those that include Mycenaean Greek and Hittite. The branches with the Sanskrit and the tocario would also be near these basal branches and then follow the other branches that would include all the rest of the European languages. An Anatolian origin of the Indo-Europeans would have no problem explaining this phylogeny based on expansions of the first farmers to the east (India and Central Asia) and to the west (Europe). On the other hand, a later origin in Central Asia or in the Caucasus zone with entry into Europe by the steppe had difficulties explaining the existence of the basal branches much lower, in the south-east of Europe. Obviously, neither the Reich group nor the Willerslev group had old samples from the critical area of Anatolia and the Balkans and did not know how the population substrate could have changed there, but it was certainly a drawback that anyone could glimpse. The first recognized it in one sentence: "Our data do not solve the final question of the area of origin of the Proto-Indo-Europeans." The authors even suggested an intermediate solution; perhaps the invaders of the steppes introduced only some of the Indo-European languages (such as Baltic-Slavic and Germanic) and perhaps the first farmers developed in situ the most basal branches of the family. Also, the genetic origin of the original Yamnaya populations was not clear and, towards the beginning of 2015, both the Reich and Willerslev groups set out to search for more samples throughout Central Asia.

  2. The Following 28 Users Say Thank You to razyn For This Useful Post:

     Agamemnon (02-22-2018),  Bas (02-17-2018),  Camulogène Rix (02-15-2018),  Dewsloth (02-15-2018),  ernekar (02-17-2018),  ffoucart (02-15-2018),  Heber (03-13-2018),  Helen (02-17-2018),  Isidro (02-15-2018),  jdean (02-15-2018),  Jean M (02-15-2018),  Jessie (02-16-2018),  JMcB (02-17-2018),  JohnHowellsTyrfro (02-18-2018),  Judith (02-16-2018),  Megalophias (02-15-2018),  MikeWhalen (02-15-2018),  Mikewww (03-16-2018),  Mis (02-15-2018),  MitchellSince1893 (02-15-2018),  msmarjoribanks (02-15-2018),  Power77 (02-17-2018),  Pribislav (02-15-2018),  rms2 (02-15-2018),  Robert1 (02-15-2018),  Saetro (02-17-2018),  sweuro (02-17-2018),  T101 (02-16-2018)

  3. #2
    Gold Member Class
    Posts
    10,644
    Sex
    Location
    Virginia, USA
    Ethnicity
    British and Irish
    Nationality
    USA
    Y-DNA
    R1b-FGC36981
    mtDNA
    U5a2c3a

    Wales Ireland Scotland France Bretagne England Switzerland
    Ai chihuahua! I wish I had seen that you had translated it into English! It would have saved me the trouble of doing just what you did with Google translate! I too did the tedious copy-and-paste routine.
     


    Hidden Content


    Y-DNA: R1b-FGC36981 (L21> DF13> Z39589> CTS2501> Z43690> Y8426> BY160> FGC36974>FGC36982 >FGC36981)

    Additional Data:
    Lactase Persistent:
    rs4988235 AA (13910 TT)
    rs182549 TT (22018 AA)

    Red Hair Carrier:
    Arg160Trp+ (rs1805008 T) aka R160W

    Dad's mtDNA: K1a1

  4. The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to rms2 For This Useful Post:

     Dewsloth (02-15-2018),  jdean (02-15-2018),  JMcB (02-17-2018),  Kopfjäger (02-17-2018),  MikeWhalen (02-15-2018),  Power77 (02-17-2018),  R.Rocca (02-15-2018),  razyn (02-15-2018)

  5. #3
    Registered Users
    Posts
    2,006
    Sex

    The Spanish version of the book is available for 16 euros at http://www.publicacions.ub.edu/ficha.aspx?cod=08804

    It includes a link to browse it before buying it. http://www.publicacions.ub.edu/hojea...hero=08804.pdf

  6. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to ArmandoR1b For This Useful Post:

     JMcB (02-17-2018),  Power77 (02-17-2018),  razyn (02-15-2018),  rms2 (02-15-2018)

  7. #4
    Registered Users
    Posts
    221
    Sex
    Location
    Papantla, Mexico

    Ireland Ireland England England Ireland Munster European Union
    Apparently Carles Lalueza-Fox as of last year was working with Harvard on a population history of the Iberian peninsula that's supposed to be out this year, so there's probably dna results we don't yet know about that back up what he's saying in this book.

  8. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Bas For This Useful Post:

     jdean (02-17-2018),  Jessie (02-17-2018),  JMcB (02-17-2018),  Power77 (02-17-2018),  rms2 (02-17-2018),  Saetro (02-17-2018)

  9. #5
    Gold Class Member
    Posts
    383
    Sex
    Location
    England
    Ethnicity
    Northern English
    Nationality
    British
    Y-DNA
    Brother I-M26, I2a1a
    mtDNA
    H4a1a1a

    Thank you for this translation and creating this string. It is a brave action writing a book at present since so much has been changing over the last 3 years.
    I wonder if he is writing this now because he believes that all the big questions have been answered now leaving only some small tidying from fresh to be published results.
    It would make more sense if that were the case since his book would stay current for longer. It must be difficult to spend so much time writing a book which is obsolete within the next year.
    Unless of course he has big theories to put forward and like Jean Manco finds a book the right format to table them!
    I look forward to an input to this forum by a Spanish speaker. Any takers?
    Out of 64 pre 1800 births 45% Cheshire, 1% Irish (or Scottish), 25% south Derbyshire, 13% Burton on Trent area (where 4 counties within 10 miles), 7% Shropshire, 1% Staffs, 8% Lancs. So far all British Isles despite what the testing companies say.

  10. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Judith For This Useful Post:

     jdean (02-17-2018),  Power77 (02-17-2018)

  11. #6
    Registered Users
    Posts
    2,740
    Sex

    Nothing new.

    And his arguments against the Steppe hypothesis at the end of the article are weak, and that's an understatement.

    Save your money. Don't buy the book.

  12. The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to Generalissimo For This Useful Post:

     Agamemnon (02-18-2018),  jdean (02-17-2018),  Jessie (02-18-2018),  Power77 (02-17-2018),  rms2 (02-17-2018),  Theconqueror (03-13-2018),  Tomenable (02-18-2018)

  13. #7
    Gold Class Member
    Posts
    383
    Sex
    Location
    England
    Ethnicity
    Northern English
    Nationality
    British
    Y-DNA
    Brother I-M26, I2a1a
    mtDNA
    H4a1a1a

    Read the excerpt properly guys!
    Quote Originally Posted by razyn View Post
    Yesterday JeanL posted a link to a review article of this book, scheduled to be published today in Spanish.

    "The first, formulated by the archaeologist of Lithuanian origin Marija Gimbutas (1921-1994) and known as the hypothesis of the Kurgans, argues that the Indo-European languages enter Europe in the final Neolithic, associated with the movement of pastoralist nomadic groups from the steppes pontics (the great Pontic region extends from the north of the Black Sea to the Caspian Sea). These populations have their original core in the so-called Yamnaya culture, which dates back to around 3000 BC and which is characterized from an archaeological point of view by the construction of large burial mounds known as kurgans, where a character is usually buried of relevance. The great extension of the steppes and the pastoralist economy dominated by the horse means that a succession of favorable climatic years with abundant grass generate a great demographic surplus, both of humans and animals. The same happened in historical times with the Mongol hordes and previously with the Huns.

    These Yamnaya pastoralists would move westward and come into contact with European farmers in the final Neolithic, generating a new Central European culture, called Ware (or cordate pottery), which replaces the LBK. The Corded Ware culture is characterized by ceramics with decorations made with knotted ropes on freshly made vessels (hence its name). These ceramics accompany individual burials where often a battle ax made with polished stone is also deposited. Due to the difficulties involved in its construction, it is believed that these are characters of certain social importance for the community that carries it out. The distribution of the Kurgans is very broad and encompasses a large area of central and eastern Europe, from Ukraine to Poland and Denmark. According to several researchers, the fact that the Indo-European languages share terms referring to grazing, metallurgy and horse-drawn carriages would also support their common origin in that period and not in the early Neolithic, where these technologies did not yet exist. Precisely the alternative hypothesis about the origin of the Indo-European languages places them much further back in time, some 6,500 years before Christ, in the very arrival of the Neolithic and of emigrants from the Near East (for that reason it is known as the hypothesis of « Neolithic Anatolia »). His greatest advocate for years has been Colin Renfrew (technically, Lord Renfrew), a British archaeologist and member of the House of Lords who was a professor at Cambridge. Apart from making the event coincide with an indisputable and massive migratory phenomenon (the arrival of agriculture), his hypothesis found unexpected support among the linguists themselves, where in principle it was not very popular. In 2012, linguists used phylogenetic methods to try to date the common antiquity of the Indo-European languages; the dates obtained (with logical margins of error) were more coincident with the old Neolithic than with the end. However, other linguists quickly criticized the assumptions made in mathematical models (it usually happens that with statistical models we must apply so many theoretical assumptions that in the end the uncertainty always plans on the results). Perhaps a point against the Gimbutas hypothesis is that the Kurgans are typical of the Central Asian steppes, but they are scarce in Central Europe and do not reach the western part of the continent. Would this culture have been reformulated and would it have continued to expand despite being transformed into something else? Successful languages tend to be associated with prestigious elements and undoubtedly burial mounds were (in fact, the magnificent Macedonian tomb of Amphipolis does not cease to be the heir of that tradition), but perhaps its distribution was not as extensive as it would be desirable for the Indo-European hypothesis. ..........I met Renfrew, aged seventy-four and already retired, during a visit to Pompeu Fabra University in March 2012; I explained our preliminary results about La Braña - which were still unpublished - and he was delighted. He was a horseman , with that point of eccentricity that the English love so much. For him, the fact that hunters and Neolithic people were so different supported the great migration that his hypothesis required: people changed, language changed. All this would be consistent with the consideration of Euskara as a European pre-Neolithic language -indeed, the only one preserved from that period- and, therefore, with the Basques as a population with a strong mesolithic component that would have preserved its original language against wind and tide. But when we analyzed the complete genome of La Braña, I already realized that something was wrong: the Mesolithic hunter was not especially related to the current Basques, as would have been expected. On the other hand, the analyzes made with the first farmers such as Stuttgart did show some affinity with the Basques (after the Sardinians); this fact, which suggested a late arrival of the Indo-Europeans, went unnoticed in most of the later publications. In this state of things, paleogenomics came to give a twist to the debate, corroborating the existence of a massive genetic influence in continental Europe, from the Russian steppes, in the final Neolithic. The work was led once again by the group of David Reich and began to sound in various congresses towards the end of 2014 (some bloggers go to the congresses and tweet novelties that escape to the lecturers). The work was published in Nature on March 2, 2015 and its first signer was Wolfgang Haak. An American media found the perfect headline: «A steppe forward »(a play on words with the typical phrase« A step forward »).
    This time also represented a change of technical approach: it was no longer intended to generate complete genomes. During our competition with La Braña, Reich realized how difficult it was to find well-preserved samples to sequence the entire genome. For him, who worked with the principles of population genetics, complete genomes were not necessary; he was interested in some hundreds of thousands of variable positions along the genome (known as SNP, or single nucleotide polymorphisms) to characterize individuals and populations with sufficient statistical power. He also discovered that these positions could be captured and sequenced by an array with thousands of DNA probes in samples that, on the other hand, were not good enough to be sequenced. He designed a genomic capture system with 390,000 informative positions and devoted himself to genotyping prehistoric samples from different periods and origins. In the end, it ended with data from no less than 65 prehistoric genomes. When compared with all previous genomes that had at least 5% of the genome sequenced and published since 2010, they only added 40.
    That is, in a single work multiplied by 1.5 all the previous genomes. Obviously, there are things that can not be done with SNP data only. For example, various screening analyzes or demographic studies require more extensive chromosomal sequences and not only variable positions of a single DNA nucleotide. Or maybe in the future there is an interesting variant that was not included in the original array and this could only be investigated in a complete genome. But Reich aimed to reconstruct the migratory processes of the past in Europe and for this purpose his data were more than enough. They had individuals ranging from the Mesolithic to the Bronze Age; the great majority came from Germany and Russia. Among the latter were six samples of the culture of the steppes, the Yamnaya, dating from the initial Bronze Age (between 3,500 and 2,700 years before the Christian era).
    Given the breadth of samples, Reich's results touched on several fronts on an unprecedented scale. To begin with, the researchers described a resurgence of the hunter-gatherer component about 1,000 or 2,000 years after the arrival of the first farmers' populations. This increase in mesolithic substrate was detected from Central Europe to the Iberian Peninsula; it could simply be due to the demographic collapse experienced by the first Neolithic people, associated with the deterioration of the climate and the exhaustion of the initial resources. Or maybe there were groups of hunters in some areas - presumably from northern Europe - that were gradually mixed with the farmers already settled in the continent. On the other hand, the hunters of Eastern Europe seemed to be different from those of the west (represented by La Braña and Loschbour) and also of those of Scandinavia; the first showed a population component more akin to the Mal'ta genome -and therefore to the basal population substrate in northern Eurasia, the ANE-. Reich called them EHG (Eastern huntergatherers).
    But the most interesting results came from the samples of the Copper and Bronze Age. The Yamnaya showed a genomic component with affinities in the Caucasus and Western Asia (in proportions close to 60% and 40%, respectively), which entered strongly into central Europe from the end of the Neolithic. Clearly, Reich's group had detected, in real time, the arrival of a great genetic influx from the Central Asian steppes, which had changed the genetic configuration of Europe at the time. In this sense, the archaeological horizon known as Corded Ware seemed to be made up of about 70% of the component coming from the Yamnaya. And it was a sudden change, not of progressive genetic contributions over a long period of time; the German populations prior to the Corded Ware did not present this component and, like all the Neolithic genomes, they grouped themselves calmly with the Sardinians (and with the LBK and the cardials). The Corded Ware, however, already grouped with the current populations of the north of Europe, like England and Germany. Although current populations have less Yamnaya component than Corded Ware, this grouping indicates some continuity from then to the present.
    The transformation of the European Y chromosome provided additional evidence: the most frequent male lineages among current Europeans are R1b and R1a and both are found in residual frequencies among the first farmers. In contrast, all Yamnaya men and other individuals from Russia show these lineages; among the subsequent Corded Ware they increase up to 50%. Its ancestral presence in the steppe was proven by the fact that it also appeared in two Mesolithic societies in Russia. In agreement with their antiquity, some of them presented, within both lineages, ancestral combinations of genetic markers that foreshadowed the later R1b and R1a typically European. The fact that all the Yamnaya had the same lineage also pointed to a patrilineal organization of these groups, united by strong ties of masculine descent. This could be related to the fact that its cultural equipment, based on chariots, horses and bronze weapons, points towards a sphere of violent expansion among the agricultural communities of Western Europe, which until then show few archaeological indicators of social hierarchy.
    On the other hand, mitochondrial lineages such as N1a and lineages of the Y chromosome such as G2a or T1a, which are very frequent among the first farmers, practically disappear in later periods. The same happens with the rare Y chromosome of La Braña and Kostenki 14: in this case it did not appear in any of the samples analyzed.
    With these results, the researchers had also located the entrance of the old ANE population component in Europe, whose arrival until then was a mystery, since despite its antiquity in Eurasia, its presence in the current Europeans was not associated neither with the hunters Mesolithic or the first farmers. The most striking inference from the work is that they had found the genetic trace of the first Indo-Europeans. This great transformation of the European genetic baggage coincided in time with the culture of the Kurgans and therefore the paleogenomic data reinforced, after more than half a century of debates, the hypothesis of Gimbutas. People changed, yes, but in the final Neolithic. The genomic baggage we saw in cardials and other ancient farmers was restricted to Sardinia, a current population with hardly any ANE component.

    A few weeks later, the group of Willerslev (headed by postdoctoral researcher Morten Allentoft, who had participated in the work of La Braña) published a new work with genomes of the Bronze Age with similar conclusions. Although the Danes made a mark of having included more than one hundred ancient genomes, in reality most corresponded to very limited fractions (close to 1% of the complete genome) and only 19 of them had coverage greater than 1x. However, it was true that they covered large areas of Central Asia and detailed the expansion of the steppes component not only to the west, to Europe, but also to the east. Among them included the oldest Neolithic culture of Siberia, the so-called Afanásievo, which appeared between 3,500 and 2,500 years before Christ

    For the authors of both studies, Renfrew would be wrong. But some commentators did not rush to liquidate the hypothesis of the Indo-European origin in Anatolia. After all, they argued, there is no way of knowing what languages these Yamnaya emigrants spoke. Most linguists agree that the most basal branches of the Indo-European family are those that include Mycenaean Greek and Hittite. The branches with the Sanskrit and the tocario would also be near these basal branches and then follow the other branches that would include all the rest of the European languages. An Anatolian origin of the Indo-Europeans would have no problem explaining this phylogeny based on expansions of the first farmers to the east (India and Central Asia) and to the west (Europe). On the other hand, a later origin in Central Asia or in the Caucasus zone with entry into Europe by the steppe had difficulties explaining the existence of the basal branches much lower, in the south-east of Europe. Obviously, neither the Reich group nor the Willerslev group had old samples from the critical area of Anatolia and the Balkans and did not know how the population substrate could have changed there, but it was certainly a drawback that anyone could glimpse. The first recognized it in one sentence: "Our data do not solve the final question of the area of origin of the Proto-Indo-Europeans." The authors even suggested an intermediate solution; perhaps the invaders of the steppes introduced only some of the Indo-European languages (such as Baltic-Slavic and Germanic) and perhaps the first farmers developed in situ the most basal branches of the family. Also, the genetic origin of the original Yamnaya populations was not clear and, towards the beginning of 2015, both the Reich and Willerslev groups set out to search for more samples throughout Central Asia.
    I believe that end paragraph to be balanced not weak at all. This is an extract and the next paragraphs could go in to say that the source of PIE is known except that we all here know that it isn’t exactly known yet.
    So for a Spanish speaker probably a good read.
    Out of 64 pre 1800 births 45% Cheshire, 1% Irish (or Scottish), 25% south Derbyshire, 13% Burton on Trent area (where 4 counties within 10 miles), 7% Shropshire, 1% Staffs, 8% Lancs. So far all British Isles despite what the testing companies say.

  14. The Following User Says Thank You to Judith For This Useful Post:

     jdean (02-17-2018)

  15. #8
    Registered Users
    Posts
    2,006
    Sex

    I had already purchased the book when I posted a link to it since I already understood that the article contained what was only an excerpt and that more will be said in the book. Another reason I purchased the book is because the PDF, with other excerpts, at http://www.publicacions.ub.edu/hojea...hero=08804.pdf contains information that I found interesting including the prologue. I am able to read Spanish without having to use a translator.

  16. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to ArmandoR1b For This Useful Post:

     jdean (02-18-2018),  Judith (02-22-2018),  rms2 (02-18-2018)

  17. #9
    Registered Users
    Posts
    1,621
    Sex
    Location
    Virginia, USA
    Y-DNA
    DF27, FGC15733
    mtDNA
    T2f3

    Quote Originally Posted by ArmandoR1b View Post
    I had already purchased the book when I posted a link to it... I am able to read Spanish without having to use a translator.
    So, when it arrives, tell us if it says something we ought to know. The chapter titles look interesting, but only chapter 15 is about the Bell Beakers. Since we currently are led to believe that's the migration of the major R1a and R1b branches that actually replaced older European male lineages (as distinguished from Villabruna R1b, and other old bones that didn't), that should be the most useful chapter in retrospect. DF27 discovers Iberia, L21 discovers Ireland, U152 discovers Italy, and that sort of thing. Also, Celtic from the East.

    He may not say those things, but if he does, it will carry more weight than the rantings of some septuagenarian Anglo hobbyist.

    Edit -- in other news, it seems the paper on that topic that we've been anticipating since last March should be available Wednesday: https://anthrogenica.com/showthread....l=1#post350974

    And coincidentally, Maciamo Hay has just updated his Eupedia map and entry discussing the Pontic Steppe migrations starting about 5,000 years ago: https://www.eupedia.com/history/5000...o_europe.shtml
    Last edited by razyn; 02-18-2018 at 04:05 PM.

  18. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to razyn For This Useful Post:

     jdean (02-18-2018),  Jessie (02-18-2018),  rms2 (02-18-2018)

  19. #10
    Gold Member Class
    Posts
    10,644
    Sex
    Location
    Virginia, USA
    Ethnicity
    British and Irish
    Nationality
    USA
    Y-DNA
    R1b-FGC36981
    mtDNA
    U5a2c3a

    Wales Ireland Scotland France Bretagne England Switzerland
    Quote Originally Posted by Generalissimo View Post
    Nothing new.

    And his arguments against the Steppe hypothesis at the end of the article are weak, and that's an understatement.

    Save your money. Don't buy the book.
    Honestly, I think he was simply reciting the objections to the steppe hypothesis rather than objecting to it himself. I've exchanged a few emails with Lalueza Fox, and it seems to me he is in the Kurgan camp.
     


    Hidden Content


    Y-DNA: R1b-FGC36981 (L21> DF13> Z39589> CTS2501> Z43690> Y8426> BY160> FGC36974>FGC36982 >FGC36981)

    Additional Data:
    Lactase Persistent:
    rs4988235 AA (13910 TT)
    rs182549 TT (22018 AA)

    Red Hair Carrier:
    Arg160Trp+ (rs1805008 T) aka R160W

    Dad's mtDNA: K1a1

  20. The Following User Says Thank You to rms2 For This Useful Post:

     JMcB (02-18-2018)

Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 15
    Last Post: 01-30-2017, 09:51 PM
  2. Replies: 27
    Last Post: 07-15-2015, 12:58 AM
  3. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 05-01-2015, 08:35 PM
  4. Replies: 25
    Last Post: 02-14-2015, 09:28 PM
  5. Replies: 27
    Last Post: 06-15-2014, 08:11 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •