Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 23

Thread: Just How WHG are modern Europeans?

  1. #1
    Registered Users
    Posts
    53
    Sex

    Just How WHG are modern Europeans?

    I admit, I am quite a noob when it comes to understanding more recent population genetics studies. I have not really been catching up due to University work load for the past two years. Last time I read into the Subject of Western Hunter gatherer Ancestry in modern European populations, I believe Baltic population have the highest Villabruna-cluster admixture (probably due to the presence of Narva Culture?) and Mediterranean islanders such as Cretans and other Aegean islanders having one of the lowest levels WHG proper ancestry and the highest Barcin_N/Anatolian farmer (86% Dzudzuana + 14% Natufians - the Natufians themselves were predominantly Dzudzuana + Taforalt/Ancestral North African). Basing off my previous knowledge, there was a core ("common") crown West Eurasian that contributed 35.711.3% to UP European hunter gatherers related to Sunghir (Vestonice cluster?) and 60.611.3% to Goyet Q116-1 (El Miron Cluster) and the bulk of WHG. But discussing with other forum members and outside anthrogenica, I received conflicting reports about the amount of WHG admixture (real admixture, not Villabruna 'related') in modern Europeans, particulary in the British Isles. I remember reading recently about how Bell Beakers and modern Brits are at minimum only 25-27% WHG rather rather than 45% WHG. I also read about how most the WHG ancestry in Northern Europe comes in mixed form from the GAC (Globular Amphora Culture) and the ANE-rich Eastern Hunter Gathers that formed around half of the ancestry of steppe populations (Steppe_eneolithic, Reptin, Yamanaya_Samara etc). So, just how WHG are modern Europeans? Are percentages the sames as the old days of Lazardis 2014, Haak 2015 and West_Eurasian K8 (Eurogenes) which stated that Lithuanians had around 53% WHG, the British had around 45% and greeks had around 24% WHG or is the data very different in 2019?

  2. The Following User Says Thank You to Diictodon For This Useful Post:

     palamede (05-24-2019)

  3. #2
    Registered Users
    Posts
    75
    Sex
    Location
    Finland
    Y-DNA (P)
    N1c1a1
    mtDNA (M)
    H3b

    I've even heard British only having 10% WHG but I guess that depends on how you calculate it.

  4. The Following User Says Thank You to homunculus For This Useful Post:

     Hando (05-24-2019)

  5. #3
    Registered Users
    Posts
    53
    Sex

    Quote Originally Posted by homunculus View Post
    I've even heard British only having 10% WHG but I guess that depends on how you calculate it.
    Subtracting WHG from GAC/EEF and EHG/Steppe_EMBA. Just total WHG ancestry.

  6. The Following User Says Thank You to Diictodon For This Useful Post:

     Hando (05-24-2019)

  7. #4
    Registered Users
    Posts
    1,170
    Sex
    Omitted

    Quote Originally Posted by Diictodon View Post
    I admit, I am quite a noob when it comes to understanding more recent population genetics studies. I have not really been catching up due to University work load for the past two years. Last time I read into the Subject of Western Hunter gatherer Ancestry in modern European populations, I believe Baltic population have the highest Villabruna-cluster admixture (probably due to the presence of Narva Culture?) and Mediterranean islanders such as Cretans and other Aegean islanders having one of the lowest levels WHG proper ancestry and the highest Barcin_N/Anatolian farmer (86% Dzudzuana + 14% Natufians - the Natufians themselves were predominantly Dzudzuana + Taforalt/Ancestral North African). Basing off my previous knowledge, there was a core ("common") crown West Eurasian that contributed 35.711.3% to UP European hunter gatherers related to Sunghir (Vestonice cluster?) and 60.611.3% to Goyet Q116-1 (El Miron Cluster) and the bulk of WHG. But discussing with other forum members and outside anthrogenica, I received conflicting reports about the amount of WHG admixture (real admixture, not Villabruna 'related') in modern Europeans, particulary in the British Isles. I remember reading recently about how Bell Beakers and modern Brits are at minimum only 25-27% WHG rather rather than 45% WHG. I also read about how most the WHG ancestry in Northern Europe comes in mixed form from the GAC (Globular Amphora Culture) and the ANE-rich Eastern Hunter Gathers that formed around half of the ancestry of steppe populations (Steppe_eneolithic, Reptin, Yamanaya_Samara etc). So, just how WHG are modern Europeans? Are percentages the sames as the old days of Lazardis 2014, Haak 2015 and West_Eurasian K8 (Eurogenes) which stated that Lithuanians had around 53% WHG, the British had around 45% and greeks had around 24% WHG or is the data very different in 2019?
    In some of these models the options a genome is modeled with are, for example, EEF + WHG + Yamnaya. But Yamnaya is modeled as EHG + CHG + a tad farmer. EHG itself is modeled as 1/3 WHG + 2/3 EHG, and the farmer bit adds some WHG as well.

  8. The Following User Says Thank You to epoch For This Useful Post:

     Hando (06-08-2019)

  9. #5
    Registered Users
    Posts
    53
    Sex

    Quote Originally Posted by epoch View Post
    In some of these models the options a genome is modeled with are, for example, EEF + WHG + Yamnaya. But Yamnaya is modeled as EHG + CHG + a tad farmer. EHG itself is modeled as 1/3 WHG + 2/3 EHG, and the farmer bit adds some WHG as well.
    So in total, how much WHG does (for example) the average north western European have

  10. The Following User Says Thank You to Diictodon For This Useful Post:

     Hando (06-08-2019)

  11. #6
    Registered Users
    Posts
    463
    Sex
    Ethnicity
    Celto-Germanic, Near East
    Nationality
    Murcan
    Y-DNA (P)
    R1b-U152 (Alsace)
    mtDNA (M)
    T2a1a

    United States of America Palestine Germany Ireland
    As epoch stated above, the discrepancy just stems from using "proximate" vs "distal" references. So the Corded Ware + Globular Amphora model, which works pretty well for most modern NW Euros, could actually be broken down into more distal components, namely: ANE (Afontova_Gora), WHG, ANF, and CHG. Corded Ware has all four of these components within it, while GAC is basically just ANF+WHG.

    The "fits" below are pretty shitty because these are not perfect stand-ins for the exact historical source populations, but the overall ancestry proportions will match fairly well with published ratios.


    "sample": "Test1: Corded_Ware_Baltic_early",
    "fit": 9.3032,
    "RUS_AfontovaGora3": 37.5,
    "GEO_CHG": 29.17,
    "WHG": 18.33,
    "Anatolia_Barcin_N": 15

    "sample": "Test1: POL_Globular_Amphora",
    "fit": 3.9366,
    "Anatolia_Barcin_N": 74.17,
    "WHG": 25.83,
    "GEO_CHG": 0,
    "RUS_AfontovaGora3": 0,


    Solid two-way model for Dutch (typical NW Euro population) using Bronze Age reference populations:

    "sample": "Test1: Dutch",
    "fit": 2.399,
    "Corded_Ware_Baltic_early": 52.5,
    "POL_Globular_Amphora": 47.5,

    If CW_Baltic_Early itself is (for example) 37.5% ANE, multiply that by 52.5% and you'd expect Dutch to be ~19.7% ANE in a more distal model. And this is pretty close to what we see below:

    Model for Dutch using Mesolithic/early Neolithic reference populations:

    "sample": "Test1: Dutch",
    "fit": 7.7538,
    "Anatolia_Barcin_N": 45.83,
    "RUS_AfontovaGora3": 20.83,
    "WHG": 20.83,
    "GEO_CHG": 12.5,

    For WHG do the same operation: Corded Ware proportion (18.33% x 52.5%) + GAC proportion (25.83% x 47.5%) = 21.5%, which is pretty close to the 20.83% above.

    You are also correct about Baltics, they have the highest WHG but also the highest ANE of all European IE speakers (Saami/Finns/Estonians probably have higher ANE than Lithuanians/Latvians):

    "sample": "Test1:Lithuanian",
    "fit": 10.9088,
    "Anatolia_Barcin_N": 35.83,
    "WHG": 29.17,
    "RUS_AfontovaGora3": 23.33,
    "GEO_CHG": 11.67,
    Last edited by K33; 05-23-2019 at 09:30 PM.

  12. The Following User Says Thank You to K33 For This Useful Post:

     Nibelung (05-23-2019)

  13. #7
    Registered Users
    Posts
    53
    Sex

    Quote Originally Posted by K33 View Post
    As epoch stated above, the discrepancy just stems from using "proximate" vs "distal" references. So the Corded Ware + Globular Amphora model, which works pretty well for most modern NW Euros, could actually be broken down into more distal components, namely: ANE (Afontova_Gora), WHG, ANF, and CHG. Corded Ware has all four of these components within it, while GAC is basically just ANF+WHG.

    The "fits" below are pretty shitty because these are not perfect stand-ins for the exact historical source populations, but the overall ancestry proportions will match fairly well with published ratios.


    "sample": "Test1: Corded_Ware_Baltic_early",
    "fit": 9.3032,
    "RUS_AfontovaGora3": 37.5,
    "GEO_CHG": 29.17,
    "WHG": 18.33,
    "Anatolia_Barcin_N": 15

    "sample": "Test1: POL_Globular_Amphora",
    "fit": 3.9366,
    "Anatolia_Barcin_N": 74.17,
    "WHG": 25.83,
    "GEO_CHG": 0,
    "RUS_AfontovaGora3": 0,


    Solid two-way model for Dutch (typical NW Euro population) using Bronze Age reference populations:

    "sample": "Test1: Dutch",
    "fit": 2.399,
    "Corded_Ware_Baltic_early": 52.5,
    "POL_Globular_Amphora": 47.5,

    If CW_Baltic_Early itself is (for example) 37.5% ANE, multiply that by 52.5% and you'd expect Dutch to be ~19.7% ANE in a more distal model. And this is pretty close to what we see below:

    Model for Dutch using Mesolithic/early Neolithic reference populations:

    "sample": "Test1: Dutch",
    "fit": 7.7538,
    "Anatolia_Barcin_N": 45.83,
    "RUS_AfontovaGora3": 20.83,
    "WHG": 20.83,
    "GEO_CHG": 12.5,

    For WHG do the same operation: Corded Ware proportion (18.33% x 52.5%) + GAC proportion (25.83% x 47.5%) = 21.5%, which is pretty close to the 20.83% above.

    You are also correct about Baltics, they have the highest WHG but also the highest ANE of all European IE speakers (Saami/Finns/Estonians probably have higher ANE than Lithuanians/Latvians):

    "sample": "Test1:Lithuanian",
    "fit": 10.9088,
    "Anatolia_Barcin_N": 35.83,
    "WHG": 29.17,
    "RUS_AfontovaGora3": 23.33,
    "GEO_CHG": 11.67,
    Woah. Northern Europeans seem to have way less WHG than I thought. I am shocked to modern Dutch have as much ANE as WHG.

  14. #8
    Registered Users
    Posts
    463
    Sex
    Ethnicity
    Celto-Germanic, Near East
    Nationality
    Murcan
    Y-DNA (P)
    R1b-U152 (Alsace)
    mtDNA (M)
    T2a1a

    United States of America Palestine Germany Ireland
    Quote Originally Posted by Diictodon View Post
    Woah. Northern Europeans seem to have way less WHG than I thought. I am shocked to modern Dutch have as much ANE as WHG.
    Remember, Barcin_N is only 14% - 44% Basal Eurasian (huge variance in the estimates, since we have no unadmixed BE).... much of the rest of Barcin's ancestry is deeply related to WHG. Most likely this WHG-like ancestry represented an Epigravettian or Aurignacian (or both) incursion into the Near East.

  15. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to K33 For This Useful Post:

     Bas (05-24-2019),  Drewcastle (05-24-2019),  etrusco (05-24-2019),  palamede (05-24-2019)

  16. #9
    Registered Users
    Posts
    1,170
    Sex
    Omitted

    -delete-

  17. #10
    Registered Users
    Posts
    1,170
    Sex
    Omitted

    Quote Originally Posted by K33 View Post
    Remember, Barcin_N is only 14% - 44% Basal Eurasian (huge variance in the estimates, since we have no unadmixed BE).... much of the rest of Barcin's ancestry is deeply related to WHG. Most likely this WHG-like ancestry represented an Epigravettian or Aurignacian (or both) incursion into the Near East.
    What if you'd use El_Miron + Villabruna? The Iberian Paleolithic survival paper stated that a few percentages of GoyetQ2 like ancestry survived in Polish GAC. WHG is Loschbour and La Brana, both have Magdalenian admixture.
    Last edited by epoch; 05-24-2019 at 09:16 AM.

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

     etrusco (05-24-2019),  palamede (05-24-2019),  Shadogowah (07-05-2019)

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Why Europeans are Almost 1/3 African
    By Brandon S. Pilcher in forum General
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 05-29-2019, 07:25 PM
  2. rs16891982(C;C) in Europeans?
    By Koppany in forum Autosomal (auDNA)
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 05-02-2018, 11:23 AM
  3. Hair and skin colour in Europeans (Modern and Ancient)
    By catman44 in forum Ancient (aDNA)
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 04-18-2018, 03:19 PM
  4. Paleolithic ancestry in modern Europeans.
    By sciencediver in forum Autosomal (auDNA)
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 03-30-2016, 03:17 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
  •