Lazaridis et al: The genetic structure of the world's first farmers (pre-print)

[Sangarius]

WOW!

Abstract

We report genome-wide ancient DNA from 44 ancient Near Easterners ranging in time between ~12,000-1,400 BCE, from Natufian hunter-gatherers to Bronze Age farmers. We show that the earliest populations of the Near East derived around half their ancestry from a 'Basal Eurasian' lineage that had little if any Neanderthal admixture and that separated from other non-African lineages prior to their separation from each other. The first farmers of the southern Levant (Israel and Jordan) and Zagros Mountains (Iran) were strongly genetically differentiated, and each descended from local hunter-gatherers. By the time of the Bronze Age, these two populations and Anatolian-related farmers had mixed with each other and with the hunter-gatherers of Europe to drastically reduce genetic differentiation. The impact of the Near Eastern farmers extended beyond the Near East: farmers related to those of Anatolia spread westward into Europe; farmers related to those of the Levant spread southward into East Africa; farmers related to those from Iran spread northward into the Eurasian steppe; and people related to both the early farmers of Iran and to the pastoralists of the Eurasian steppe spread eastward into South Asia.

http://biorxiv.org/content/early/2016/06/16/059311

Link to PDF: http://biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/e...59311.full.pdf

[Gravetto-Danubian]

Yes Epic !

OK So they've got more on Basal Eurasian:

‘Basal Eurasians’ are a lineage hypothesized13 to have split off prior to the differentiation of all other Eurasian lineages, including both eastern non-African populations like the Han Chinese, and even the early diverged lineage represented by the genome sequence of the ~45,000 year old Upper Paleolithic Siberian from Ust’-Ishim. To test for Basal Eurasian ancestry, we computed the statistic f4(Test, Han; Ust’-Ishim, Chimp) (Supplementary
159 Information, section 4), which measures the excess of allele sharing of Ust’-Ishim with a variety of Test populations compared to Han as a baseline. This statistic is significantly negative (Z<-3.7) for all ancient Near Easterners as well as Neolithic and later Europeans, consistent with their having ancestry from a deeply divergent Eurasian lineage that separated from the ancestors of most Eurasians prior to the separation of Han and Ust’-Ishim. We used
qpAdm7 to estimate Basal Eurasian ancestry in each Test population. We obtain the highest estimates in the earliest populations from both Iran (66±13% in the likely Mesolithic sample, 48±6% in Neolithic samples), and the Levant (44±8% in Epipaleolithic Natufians) (Fig. 2), showing that Basal Eurasian ancestry was widespread across the ancient Near East.

and

we infer that the Basal Eurasian population had lower Neanderthal ancestry than non-Basal Eurasian populations and possibly none
The finding of little if any Neanderthal ancestry in Basal Eurasians could be explained if the Neanderthal admixture into modern humans 50,000-60,000 years ago, largely occurred after the splitting of the Basal Eurasians from other non-Africans

They point out it is surprising that BE has no Neaderthal admixture, given that is where we are expected for Neaderthals and Humans to have first made contact.

They suggest :

A population without Neanderthal admixture, basal to other Eurasians, may have plausibly lived in Africa. Craniometric analyses have suggested that the Natufians may have migrated from north or sub-Saharan Africa
However, no affinity of Natufians to sub-Saharan Africans is evident in our genome-wide analysis, as present-day sub-Saharan Africans do not share more alleles with Natufians than with other ancient Eurasians (Extended Data Table 1). (We could not test for a link to present-day North Africans, who owe most of their ancestry to back-migration from Eurasia27,28.) The idea of Natufians as a vector for the movement of Basal Eurasian ancestry into the Near East is also not supported by our data, as the Basal Eurasian ancestry in the Natufians (44±8%) is consistent with stemming from the same population as that in the Neolithic and Mesolithic
197 populations of Iran, and is not greater than in those populations (Supplementary Information, section 4). Further insight into the origins and legacy of the Natufians could come from
199 comparison to Natufians from additional sites, and to ancient DNA from north Africa.

[Gravetto-Danubian]

Y haplogroups !!

image.jpeg

NB: haplogroup P* in Neolithic Iran

[Arame]

Wooow L1a from Armenia Chalcholitic.
Natufians are E haplogroup !!! Why I am not surprised

[pegasus]

WOW Ydna R1a in Iran in the Neolithic??

[MfA]

Looks like they didn't test R1a* but tested further down SNPs uence they ended up with P1*. I bet it's just R1a* found in Iran sporadically.

[Gravetto-Danubian]

So there was a movement from the Iran region during the Chalcolithic, west to Anatolia and north to the steppe.?

~33% of the ancestry of the Chalcolithic northwest Anatolians in the west.

population related to people of the Iran Chalcolithic contributed ~43% of the
267 ancestry of early Bronze Age populations of the steppe

[Generalissimo]

WOW Ydna R1a in Iran in the Neolithic??

Nope.

No R1a in the ancient Near East.

[Generalissimo]

Looks like there was a movement from the Iran region during the Chalcolithic, west to Anatolia and north to the steppe, as I had suggested.

No direct evidence of that in the paper.

All it shows is that similar populations made it onto the steppe, but they need not have been from Iran.

[Agamemnon]

The Natufians seem to be E-Z830, the most fascinating thing here is that E-M35.1 is also found in PPNB remains while J is absent, now that is quite unexpected. J seems to show up only during the Early Bronze Age, at this points it looks very intrusive.
Reading the study, I'll say something on the linguistic implications later.