See the table below for the admixing of PIE-related populations.
We can see that in Khvalynsk (where Anthony puts the PIE homeland) mtDNA is roughly 3:1 EHG:CHG vs. earlier Samara culture period clean EHG.
But the disturbing thing is the lack of M269 precursors in Khvalynsk (probably some unresolved would turn out to be?)
In case of various Yamnaya groups, the Don cluster stands out being heavy I2a2-L701 (nearly 2:1 vs. R1b), while it is absent from other groups. As I2a2 is heavy in Cernavoda and further around the Balkans, the Don river seems to be a kind of watershed between I2a2 and R1b, and I would still lean towards I2a2-L701 representing Proto-Anatolians, being heavy in EEF already and thus EHG evaporating on route to Western Anatolia.
The Caspian Inland Yamnaya and Afanasievo samples still have EHG-related mtDNA majority but very close to parity, while other groups already lean towards 1:2 in mtDNA but still dominated by R1b-L23 Y-DNA.
If Q subgroups were ever part of PIE gene pool, they seem to spread out to the extremes, Central Europe and Kazakhstan relatively early and thus not participating in Core Yamnaya movements.
These samples do not belong to Dnieper–Donets culture. This culture is Neolithic, and these samples are Mesolithic. This is directly written in the sources where these samples are given, so it’s not even clear where you got the idea that this is Dnieper–Donets culture. Dnieper–Donets culture will begin only hundreds of years after the last example and it is not a successor to the local Mesolithic. There is not a single R1a in Dnieper–Donets culture.
I have to admit that i’m not as convinced in interpreting spread of languages etc by autosomal dna as I am of y lines. I think often (though not always) language spread was tracked by y lines. In an agnatic clan based society the clan wouod often take on part of the autosomal signal of other groups it moves into contact with as it migrates. Mating networks etc. The language will likely be that of the male lineage regardless of the mating network. You can see the major and in some cases overwhelming dilution of the autosomal signals of male lineages but the language of the y line surviving - look at Armenia.
I very much doubt that L23 got its language by entering a non L23 proto yamnaya autosomal Sredny Stog area. That’s as good as saying the wives spread their languages to their intrusive husbands. I don’t think that often happens with agnatic clan societies. It’s much more likely that clans imposed their language. Of course, once in a new area they might have to expand their vocab to fit a new environment and new influences on stuff like subsistence strategy. They will
invent new words for new things (if they don’t borrow the words from other languages). So i’m
less than convinced by some of the attempts to bookend PIE geographical origins by vocab.
My own impression is this - the autosomal patterns are more geographically/network based but the linguistic correlations are likely more with yDNA. I get the impression from archaeology of a two way flow between the Volga and Don and I feel that a sequence of R1b lineages flowed from the Volga to the Don. R-V1636, despite Progress2 being fractionally earlier and geographical an outlier looks like a Volga clade to me, probably linked to the soread of ffs Volga burial rite that is later seen in Sredny Stog and Yamnaya. I actually am pretty taken by the idea that R-V1636 is Anatolian linked but that the language existed prior to the gaining of the Stedny Stog proto-Yamnaya autosomal cluster. Basically I think the yDNA was linked to the language while the autosomal signal is a separate thing based on mating and trade and geography If you consider yDNA as linked to languages then R-V1636 may have spoken the same language despite the fact that the variation in who they mixed with meant R-V1636 in the middle Volga had and R-V1636 at Progress2 had significabh different levels of CHG admixture.
So I personally suspect that Khvalynsk R-V1636 may have spoken the same language as R-V1636 much further south in the steppe. And that surely had to be related to Anatolian. In my y-dna-centric idea of genes and languages that naturally follows. The TMRCA is dated by FTDNA discover to 5100BC. That is only 250 years older than the earliest samples of it at Khvalynsk and Progress. Not long enough to imagine much language difference and the y lines had a common ancestor that wasn’t very distant at all. So imo if you believe in y lines being the best correlate of languages then some kind of ancestor of Anatolian was likely spoken by those rich dudes buried at Khvalynsk. I’m not going to speculate where this y line was prior to Khvalynsk because the TMRCA of the y line is about the same age as that culture so it likely didn’t exist much before that culture.
Just a random thought but could R1a-M417 have simply stepped into the void in west Ukraine left by L151 (or its very immediate final P310 ancestor) heading north-west into Poland and Czech area c.3000-2900BC? Then literally followed its footsteps north/west a few generations later? Geography tends to point to the L151 migration to form CW as using the Dniester. So who might have been further downstream kn on the Dniester around 3000BC? It is found in Usatovo which slpans c. 3400-2900BC (and the M417 TMRCA is also 3400BC) and their territory included the Lower Dniester. Did they just fill a void left by L151 further upstream on the Dniester? Maybe under pressure from the big Yamnays wave c.3000-2900BC) which coincides with the end of Usatovo? The main stumbling block is autosomal DNA as Usatovo seemed to have big admixture with C-T farmers. But maybe that was washed out after?
These samples do not belong to Dnieper–Donets culture. This culture is Neolithic, and these samples are Mesolithic. This is directly written in the sources where these samples are given, so it’s not even clear where you got the idea that this is Dnieper–Donets culture. Dnieper–Donets culture will begin only hundreds of years after the last example and it is not a successor to the local Mesolithic. There is not a single R1a in Dnieper–Donets culture.
06-18-2024, 03:53 AM (This post was last modified: 06-18-2024, 04:13 AM by VladMC.)
If CHG first appears in the steppes only with Nalchik, then yes. He brings the PIA. If CHG has been in the steppes since the Mesolithic, then no. In this case, the contribution of Aknashen is about 15%, and even more so without the introduction of the Y-line. Thus, the date of the appearance of CHG in the steppe is of fundamental importance. The abundance of CHG in Golubaya Krenitsa samples aged 5,300 BC apparently confirms the theory that CHG was in the steppe before Nalchik.
The only doubt that keeps from an accurate conclusion is that the dating of these samples does not fully take into account the reservoir effect and they are actually younger and their CHG is from Nalchik. If everything is fine with the dating, then CHG got into the Kuban steppes in the Mesolithic (Razdorskaya II). Then it mixed with the Mesolithic of Ukraine, then with the Lower Volga (Orlovka culture), from where ceramics came.
06-18-2024, 03:59 AM (This post was last modified: 06-18-2024, 04:00 AM by targaryen.)
(06-17-2024, 10:18 PM)alanarchae Wrote: I have to admit that i’m not as convinced in interpreting spread of languages etc by autosomal dna as I am of y lines. I think often (though not always) language spread was tracked by y lines.
According to this R1bs would speak one language, R1as another, J2B2-L283s another, I1s another and I2s another. Yet, IE languages were highly associated with the "steppe" component.
All of these factors have to be taken together. There is no one size fits all when it comes to language. You have to look at uniparentals, autosomal, IBD, language, archeology, etc... There is correlation with all these factors, not just Y-DNA.
(06-17-2024, 10:18 PM)alanarchae Wrote: I have to admit that i’m not as convinced in interpreting spread of languages etc by autosomal dna as I am of y lines. I think often (though not always) language spread was tracked by y lines.
According to this R1bs would speak one language, R1as another, J2B2-L283s another, I1s another and I2s another. Yet, IE languages were highly associated with the "steppe" component.
All of these factors have to be taken together. There is no one size fits all when it comes to language. You have to look at uniparentals, autosomal, IBD, language, archeology, etc... There is correlation with all these factors, not just Y-DNA.
Indeed, but the spread of the early IE tradition is associated with the leading role of exactly R1a and R1b.
06-18-2024, 05:44 AM (This post was last modified: 06-18-2024, 05:45 AM by Jafety.)
While I agree with everything Alan says about the Y-based spread, the question for me is if R1b-V1636 was PIE or not. I think it is still 50-50. What bothers me is the disapperance of not only V1636 but practically all other Khvalynsk Y-DNA (esp. Q1a2-M25) the same way R1b-M73 disappeared from the Baltics.
As V1636 is 15 kya detached from R1b-L23, it might have been simply another extinct EHG language like Zvejneki R1b-M73 guys.
We really need to find the L23 bone which is negative for both Z2103 and L51, that could be the only solution.
Proto-Anatolian entering from the East with V1636 still does not makes too much sense for me.
Even assuming Khvalynsk culture and V1636 was PIE, I would rather go for I2a2-L699 assimilated on the Lower Dniper-Don area and spreading Anatolian westwards around the Black Sea with heavy EEF admixture already. Imagine that PIE guys push west and meet Sredni Stog I2a2 guys and various girls. Some I2a2 guys join the new warlike setup and take over the language. This would also mean that Anatolian has a rather strong substrate effect, and thus the "earliest divergence" from PIE might simply reflect that it was not spread by genetic PIE guys but those who adopted it. Like Latin language was spread to South America not by original Italic-speakers but Spanish and Portuguese where Latin/Italian went under pre-Roman substratum and post-Roman adstratum (Germanic, some Arabic) effects. Conquistadores would have rather limited Italian autosomal or Y-DNA ancestry in South America, and that is what we are looking for in Bronze Age Anatolia.
Y-DNA: R1b-U152>Z36>BY1328>L671 (Late Roman North Italy to Pannonia)
mtDNA: U4c1 (Proto-IE > Germanic/Scandinavian branch?)
maternal grandpa Y: G2a-L13>L1263>Z38846 (Saxons to Hungary)
maternal grandpa mtDNA: B4c1a (Hungarian conquerors)
maternal grandma's Y: R1b-U106>S5520>BY33291 (Saxons to Hungary)
paternal grandpa's mtDNA: HV0
paternal grandma's mtDNA: H5a (Slavic)
06-18-2024, 06:08 AM (This post was last modified: 06-18-2024, 06:10 AM by Jafety.)
(06-18-2024, 05:25 AM)Gabru77 Wrote: Indeed all these overhyped R1b-M269 and R1a-M417 comes from Sredny Stog Mairupol, but in Sredny Stog majority of CLV and Pure CLV Suvorovo/Novodanilovka original lines disappeared(R1b-L754/R1b-V1636, Q1 subclades) and only I2-L699 survived. It's very likely R1b-M269 and R1a-M417 overglorified haplogroups do come from Dnieper-Donets "Ukraine_N" Foragers and Fishers who became Pastoralists later then gave these 2 haplogroups to Sredny Stog
This is what I thought but I just realized that practically we have no R1 in Sredni Stog, only I2-L699. Dnieper-Donets Neolithic and earlier Mesolithic R1b is actually V88, not leading to M269 (the same way V1636 is not). So they have to be somewhere else and Repin / Middle Don might be a good candidate.
I even wrote a paper on the Dnieper-Don homeland but everybody has to admit when he is wrong. Now I see that new results do not support a PIE homeland West of the Don but rather around the Don or East of it (and the Repin area where the Don and Volga flow the closest is a particularly good candidate)
CLV is not IE. CLV is Caucasian-speaker by all likelyhood (Maykop-Remontnoye) and gradually assimilated by PIE speakers from the Middle Volga. I agree with those who say CLV is Shulaveri Shomu related but that means they are Proto-Northeast Caucasians, not Proto-IE. NWC was likely brought only by Kura-Araxes later, separating Dagestan from Hurro-Urartians in the South.
You can also see this from the Lazaridis graph PCA on page 11.
Maykop samples are actually farther from Core Yamnaya than pure CHG and Iran Neolithic. Due to the Anatolian/Near Eastern farmer ancestry added from the South.
Remontnoye is half-way between BP-PV group and Maykop. But as I showed also with mTDNA, this means BP-PV males taking Maykop wives.
Actually I think one problem with the Lazaridis paper is the separation of the EHG, Volga and CLV clines, I dont see how that was done.
In the Nikitin version this extra component is not visible in "natural K4" grouping, and there is only EHG, CHG, EEF, BHG (Iron Gates). See Fig 2 on page 5.
BP and PV are pure and near-equal mix of EHG and CHG. Remontnoye also has significant farmer ancestry but from the South /Aknashen, while Sredni Stog has farmer ancestry from Trypillya.
Also in mtDNA or Y-DNA this 3-step difference from pure EHG through a Volga EHG-CHG mix down to CHG-heavy CLV is not really visible. It is only one cline from pure EHG (Karelia - Ekaterinovka) to no EHG (Aknashen) with different amount of CHG.
So the pure BP-PV autosomal is only an "invention" the same way as WSH is an invention, not coming from unsupervised admix processes.
(06-18-2024, 05:25 AM)Gabru77 Wrote: Indeed all these overhyped R1b-M269 and R1a-M417 comes from Sredny Stog Mairupol, but in Sredny Stog majority of CLV and Pure CLV Suvorovo/Novodanilovka original lines disappeared(R1b-L754/R1b-V1636, Q1 subclades) and only I2-L699 survived. It's very likely R1b-M269 and R1a-M417 overglorified haplogroups do come from Dnieper-Donets "Ukraine_N" Foragers and Fishers who became Pastoralists later then gave these 2 haplogroups to Sredny Stog
This is what I thought but I just realized that practically we have no R1 in Sredni Stog, only I2-L699. Dnieper-Donets Neolithic and earlier Mesolithic R1b is actually V88, not leading to M269 (the same way V1636 is not). So they have to be somewhere else and Repin / Middle Don might be a good candidate.
I even wrote a paper on the Dnieper-Don homeland but everybody has to admit when he is wrong. Now I see that new results do not support a PIE homeland West of the Don but rather around the Don or East of it (and the Repin area where the Don and Volga flow the closest is a particularly good candidate)
CLV is not IE. CLV is Caucasian-speaker by all likelyhood (Maykop-Remontnoye) and gradually assimilated by PIE speakers from the Middle Volga. I agree with those who say CLV is Shulaveri Shomu related but that means they are Proto-Northeast Caucasians, not Proto-IE. NWC was likely brought only by Kura-Araxes later, separating Dagestan from Hurro-Urartians in the South.
You can also see this from the Lazaridis graph PCA on page 11.
Maykop samples are actually farther from Core Yamnaya than pure CHG and Iran Neolithic. Due to the Anatolian/Near Eastern farmer ancestry added from the South.
Remontnoye is half-way between BP-PV group and Maykop. But as I showed also with mTDNA, this means BP-PV males taking Maykop wives.
Actually I think one problem with the Lazaridis paper is the separation of the EHG, Volga and CLV clines, I dont see how that was done.
In the Nikitin version this extra component is not visible in "natural K4" grouping, and there is only EHG, CHG, EEF, BHG (Iron Gates). See Fig 2 on page 5.
BP and PV are pure and near-equal mix of EHG and CHG. Remontnoye also has significant farmer ancestry but from the South /Aknashen, while Sredni Stog has farmer ancestry from Trypillya.
Also in mtDNA or Y-DNA this 3-step difference from pure EHG through a Volga EHG-CHG mix down to CHG-heavy CLV is not really visible. It is only one cline from pure EHG (Karelia - Ekaterinovka) to no EHG (Aknashen) with different amount of CHG.
So the pure BP-PV autosomal is only an "invention" the same way as WSH is an invention, not coming from unsupervised admix processes.
the middle don allentoft thesis seems the most likely explanation for both the PIA and PIE issue. But in itself is not in contradiction with the Don Dneper one. Both Dneper Donets and middle Don save for the CHG component are rooted in the Ukraine mesolithic/ Ukraine HG that lived in the area for millennia without external mixing. Lazaridis and Harward do agree with Allentoft but they decided to move the PIA/PIE zone in a no man's land between the Don, the Volga and the northern Caucasus.
Although the broader effects of the steppe migrations around 5,000 cal. bp are well known, the origin of this ancestry has remained a mystery. Here we show that the steppe ancestry composition (Steppe_5000BP_4300BP) can be modelled as a mixture of around 65% ancestry related to herein-reported HG genomes from the Middle Don River region (MiddleDon_7500BP) and around 35% ancestry related to HGs from Caucasus (Caucasus_13000BP_10000BP) (Extended Data Fig. 6 and Supplementary Data 9). Thus, Middle Don HGs, who already carried ancestry related to Caucasus HGs (Extended Data Fig. 4a), serve as a hitherto-unknown proximal source for the majority ancestry contribution into Yamnaya-related genomes. The individuals in question derive from the burial ground Golubaya Krinitsa (Supplementary Note 3). Material culture and burial practices at this site are similar to the Mariupol-type graves, which are widely found in neighbouring regions of Ukraine; for instance, along the Dnepr River. They belong to the group of complex pottery-using HGs mentioned above, but the genetic composition at Golubaya Krinitsa is different from that in the remaining Ukrainian sites (Fig. 2a and Extended Data Fig. 5). A previous study30 suggested a model for the formation of Yamnaya ancestry that includes a ‘northern’ steppe source (EHG + CHG ancestry) and a ‘southern’ Caucasus Chalcolithic source (CHG ancestry), but did not identify the exact origin of these sources. The Middle Don genomes analysed here show the appropriate balance of EHG and CHG ancestry, suggesting that they are candidates for the missing northern proximate source for Yamnaya ancestry.
(06-18-2024, 05:25 AM)Gabru77 Wrote: Indeed all these overhyped R1b-M269 and R1a-M417 comes from Sredny Stog Mairupol, but in Sredny Stog majority of CLV and Pure CLV Suvorovo/Novodanilovka original lines disappeared(R1b-L754/R1b-V1636, Q1 subclades) and only I2-L699 survived. It's very likely R1b-M269 and R1a-M417 overglorified haplogroups do come from Dnieper-Donets "Ukraine_N" Foragers and Fishers who became Pastoralists later then gave these 2 haplogroups to Sredny Stog
This is what I thought but I just realized that practically we have no R1 in Sredni Stog, only I2-L699. Dnieper-Donets Neolithic and earlier Mesolithic R1b is actually V88, not leading to M269 (the same way V1636 is not). So they have to be somewhere else and Repin / Middle Don might be a good candidate.
I even wrote a paper on the Dnieper-Don homeland but everybody has to admit when he is wrong. Now I see that new results do not support a PIE homeland West of the Don but rather around the Don or East of it (and the Repin area where the Don and Volga flow the closest is a particularly good candidate)
CLV is not IE. CLV is Caucasian-speaker by all likelyhood (Maykop-Remontnoye) and gradually assimilated by PIE speakers from the Middle Volga. I agree with those who say CLV is Shulaveri Shomu related but that means they are Proto-Northeast Caucasians, not Proto-IE. NWC was likely brought only by Kura-Araxes later, separating Dagestan from Hurro-Urartians in the South.
You can also see this from the Lazaridis graph PCA on page 11.
Maykop samples are actually farther from Core Yamnaya than pure CHG and Iran Neolithic. Due to the Anatolian/Near Eastern farmer ancestry added from the South.
Remontnoye is half-way between BP-PV group and Maykop. But as I showed also with mTDNA, this means BP-PV males taking Maykop wives.
Actually I think one problem with the Lazaridis paper is the separation of the EHG, Volga and CLV clines, I dont see how that was done.
In the Nikitin version this extra component is not visible in "natural K4" grouping, and there is only EHG, CHG, EEF, BHG (Iron Gates). See Fig 2 on page 5.
BP and PV are pure and near-equal mix of EHG and CHG. Remontnoye also has significant farmer ancestry but from the South /Aknashen, while Sredni Stog has farmer ancestry from Trypillya.
Also in mtDNA or Y-DNA this 3-step difference from pure EHG through a Volga EHG-CHG mix down to CHG-heavy CLV is not really visible. It is only one cline from pure EHG (Karelia - Ekaterinovka) to no EHG (Aknashen) with different amount of CHG.
So the pure BP-PV autosomal is only an "invention" the same way as WSH is an invention, not coming from unsupervised admix processes.
In the middle and upper Don, the ceramics of the late Srednly Stog and Repino are indistinguishable and actually merge into one type of ceramics and then this population migrates to the west - to Ukraine and Belarus
Early Bronze Age 3100-2800 BCE: 8 sample, 8 x mtDNA Near East-Caucasus; 3 x Y-DNA J1a2b - seems very much Northeast Caucasian-like
Middle Bronze Age 14 samples 1800-1400 BCE: 3 x U2, 1 x U4 (4/14 EHG-related), others Near-East Caucasus;
Y-DNA: 5 x G2a2b2a, 1 x R1b-M269 (unresolved), 2 x I2a2-M223, 1 x J1a2b, 1 x J2a1a (3/10 Yamnaya-related)
seems that they got the NWC speakers from the South-Southwestern direction (G2a2) and some IE-related I2a2 and R1b from the North (as well as women), interestingly Yamnaya-related migration seems to be relatively balanced on Y and mtDNA
Late Bronze Age-Early Iron Age (pre-classic) 1200-700 BCE:
mtDNA (n=42): 4 x U5, others not related to EHG/WHG
Y-DNA: 2 x G2a1 (i.e. there is an MBA-LBA change in the G pop. as well, from NWC-related to Georgian/Svan-Ossetian); 10 x I2a2b (L223) ! ; 3 x J2a1a ; 6 x R1b-M269 (2 positive for L584 under Z2103, others no sub-SNPs); 1 x T1a (this is 16/22 Y-DNA PIE-related!)
I wonder if the data is correct. Where were those I2a2-L701 people gone?
There are still 2 x I2a2b samples reported around 400 CE, but nothing afterwards. There are zero Georgians under M223 at YFull, and only 3 Armenians. I wonder if that I2a2 reported is a typo for I2c-L596 (https://www.yfull.com/tree/I-Y16419/)
Anyway it seems we have no Steppe-related mtDNA or Y-DNA around 3100-2800 BCE at least in Georgia. I know Lazaridis argues for a movement of V1636 around 4000 BCE, but still strange that they would leave no trace. And they fully fit a Shulaveri Shomu-Darkveti Meshoko/Early Maykop-Northeast Caucasian continuity.
The Armenian migrations are already shown in the MBA samples as expected.
likes this post
Y-DNA: R1b-U152>Z36>BY1328>L671 (Late Roman North Italy to Pannonia)
mtDNA: U4c1 (Proto-IE > Germanic/Scandinavian branch?)
maternal grandpa Y: G2a-L13>L1263>Z38846 (Saxons to Hungary)
maternal grandpa mtDNA: B4c1a (Hungarian conquerors)
maternal grandma's Y: R1b-U106>S5520>BY33291 (Saxons to Hungary)
paternal grandpa's mtDNA: HV0
paternal grandma's mtDNA: H5a (Slavic)
Early Bronze Age 3100-2800 BCE: 8 sample, 8 x mtDNA Near East-Caucasus; 3 x Y-DNA J1a2b - seems very much Northeast Caucasian-like
Middle Bronze Age 14 samples 1800-1400 BCE: 3 x U2, 1 x U4 (4/14 EHG-related), others Near-East Caucasus;
Y-DNA: 5 x G2a2b2a, 1 x R1b-M269 (unresolved), 2 x I2a2-M223, 1 x J1a2b, 1 x J2a1a (3/10 Yamnaya-related)
seems that they got the NWC speakers from the South-Southwestern direction (G2a2) and some IE-related I2a2 and R1b from the North (as well as women), interestingly Yamnaya-related migration seems to be relatively balanced on Y and mtDNA
Late Bronze Age-Early Iron Age (pre-classic) 1200-700 BCE:
mtDNA (n=42): 4 x U5, others not related to EHG/WHG
Y-DNA: 2 x G2a1 (i.e. there is an MBA-LBA change in the G pop. as well, from NWC-related to Georgian/Svan-Ossetian); 10 x I2a2b (L223) ! ; 3 x J2a1a ; 6 x R1b-M269 (2 positive for L584 under Z2103, others no sub-SNPs); 1 x T1a (this is 16/22 Y-DNA PIE-related!)
I wonder if the data is correct. Where were those I2a2-L701 people gone?
There are still 2 x I2a2b samples reported around 400 CE, but nothing afterwards. There are zero Georgians under M223 at YFull, and only 3 Armenians. I wonder if that I2a2 reported is a typo for I2c-L596 (https://www.yfull.com/tree/I-Y16419/)
Anyway it seems we have no Steppe-related mtDNA or Y-DNA around 3100-2800 BCE at least in Georgia. I know Lazaridis argues for a movement of V1636 around 4000 BCE, but still strange that they would leave no trace. And they fully fit a Shulaveri Shomu-Darkveti Meshoko/Early Maykop-Northeast Caucasian continuity.
The Armenian migrations are already shown in the MBA samples as expected.
I2a2 is the old I2c, so those samples are L596, not M223.
G2001