The GenArchivist Forum

Bioarchaeology of Innovations – The 4th/3rd Millennium BC in the Caucasus and Beyond
Sabine Reinhold, Wolfgang Haak, Ayshin Ghalichi, and Christina Warinner:

https://www.transformeurope2budapest2024...-programme
https://www.youtube.com/@hunrenbolcsesze...ny/streams

New article in preparation, they also have samples from Nalchik. 

(04-24-2024, 05:19 PM)RCO Wrote: [ -> ]Bioarchaeology of Innovations – The 4th/3rd Millennium BC in the Caucasus and Beyond
Sabine Reinhold, Wolfgang Haak, Ayshin Ghalichi, and Christina Warinner:

https://www.transformeurope2budapest2024...-programme
https://www.youtube.com/@hunrenbolcsesze...ny/streams

New article in preparation, they also have samples from Nalchik. 

Holy smokes that is awesome!....Can't wait to see the Y-DNA results of samples from those sites.

Since Ayshin Ghalichi is one of the authors, I would have expected to finally have samples from Mesolithic Armenia and Azerbaijan but unfortunately it only covers later periods. Seems like academia has no interest in the pre-Neolithic of West Asia.

Yes, they need to investigate Mesolithic, Neolithic, Eneolithic, Bronze Age, Iron Age, Medes, Achaemenids, Parthians and NGS Modern samples from Iran, Azerbaijan, more Armenian, Eastern Anatolia, Mesopotamian to understand that central hub.

I don’t understand why they didn't post this right away; from these graphs and low-quality screenshots, little can be understood

That's the intention because they are waiting the final publication and they can only give a general impression, we have been waiting for the results for several years !

(04-25-2024, 01:32 AM)RCO Wrote: [ -> ]That's the intention because they are waiting the final publication and they can only give a general impression, we have been waiting for the results for several years !

Thank you for your post in any case, what we have should be grateful)

As I understand it, the Ginchi is indicated here, but I have a question about what age it is, is it the Eneolithic or the Bronze Age of the Ginchi?

https://www.youtube.com/live/P4S10jfPWoc...xaKooJq_9V

talk on Yamnaya

(04-25-2024, 07:50 AM)old europe Wrote: [ -> ]https://www.youtube.com/live/P4S10jfPWoc...xaKooJq_9V

talk on Yamnaya

Edit: for a while the morning session of today was gone, but now the whole presentation is back again, for those who want to watch it.

some points:
-Some of the earliest Baden had a lot of WHG, but it dissapeared later
-Hungarian Yamnaya looks identical to Samaria Yamnaya, many IBD with more eastern Yamnaya
-Hungarian Yamnaya dominated by R1b, but this haplogroup only appears sporadically in later Bronze age
-Hungarian Yamnaya was both male & female
-Vucedol has three groups: one looking like EEF, but with less WHG than Baden, one with high Steppe, and one in between.

The Transformation of Europe in the Third Millennium BC - Day 3

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q0CV0sh7wGQ

I noticed that this talk presents a few new individuals from the Eneolithic Steppe (4600-4300 BCE) which resemble the Remontnoye / CLV profiles from the Lazaridis paper. Namely, "Eneolithic intermediate" and "Late Steppe Eneolithic outlier", which they say model as 75% Caucasus_Eneolithic + 25% Karelia_EHG and 45% BPgroup-like + 55% Caucasus_Eneolithic, respectively.

From what Reinhold says, "Eneolithic intermediate" would appear to be the Nalchik population. Whereas "Late Steppe Eneolithic outlier" could be a representative of the southern-admixed Remontnoye-like people on the CLV cline, which Laz hypothesises as moving into the Don-Dnipro area to form the Serednii Stih.

Interestingly, Ghalichi and Reinhold's results do not actually model Yamnaya with either "Eneolithic intermediate" or "Late Steppe Eneolithic outlier" however, and Reinhold emphatically claims that South Caucasus Neolithic geneflow is not involved in the formation of the pre-Yamnaya profile. Rather they model Yamnaya_NorthCaucasus as "Steppe Eneolithic"  (~4500 BCE) + 15% Ukraine_N (~5400 BCE) + 15% Maykop (~3600 BCE). However, this is ahistorical on the face of it, as Maykop is postdates the SS formation around 4500-4000 BCE. And, as Remontnoye shows, the southern signal was clearly already present in parts of the CLV steppe during the 4000s and can be modelled as a source pop for Yamnaya.

It would be interesting to see how the new Krivyansky, Sredenii Stih, and Yamnaya samples from Lazaridis 2024 model using Ghalichi's new southern-admixed Steppe Eneolithics as sources.