The Genetic Origin of the Indo-Europeans

[Light]

New low coverage Sredny Stog genome from v62 AADR:-

Code:

right = c('Cameroon_ShumLaka_SMA', 'Italy_Gravettian', 'Russia_YuzhniyOleniyOstrov_Mesolithic', 'England_Mesolithic.SG', 'Georgia_Kotias_UP.SG', 'Turkey_Pinarbasi_Epipaleolithic', 'Iran_GanjDareh_N', 'Israel_Natufian', 'Israel_PPNB', 'Russia_Yana_UP.SG', 'Russia_MA1_UP.SG', 'Georgia_Satsurblia_LateUP.SG', 'Turkey_Central_Boncuklu_PPN', 'Vanuatu_150BP', 'Russia_UstIshim_IUP.DG')

   

I7585, KST07 (Kopachіv), long bone, 2023, NikitinPLoSOne2023, Direct: IntCal20, 4049-3820 calBCE (5170±30 BP, Beta-523816), Kopachіv (Kyiv Oblast, Obukhiv District, Obukhiv municipality), Ukraine, 50.125243 30.494319, Native Pulldown on 3.2M snpset, AG, 1240K, 80636 SNPs, F

[Арсен]

New low coverage Sredny Stog genome from v62 AADR:-

Code:

right = c('Cameroon_ShumLaka_SMA', 'Italy_Gravettian', 'Russia_YuzhniyOleniyOstrov_Mesolithic', 'England_Mesolithic.SG', 'Georgia_Kotias_UP.SG', 'Turkey_Pinarbasi_Epipaleolithic', 'Iran_GanjDareh_N', 'Israel_Natufian', 'Israel_PPNB', 'Russia_Yana_UP.SG', 'Russia_MA1_UP.SG', 'Georgia_Satsurblia_LateUP.SG', 'Turkey_Central_Boncuklu_PPN', 'Vanuatu_150BP', 'Russia_UstIshim_IUP.DG')

I7585, KST07 (Kopachіv), long bone, 2023, NikitinPLoSOne2023, Direct: IntCal20, 4049-3820 calBCE (5170±30 BP, Beta-523816), Kopachіv (Kyiv Oblast, Obukhiv District, Obukhiv municipality), Ukraine, 50.125243 30.494319, Native Pulldown on 3.2M snpset, AG, 1240K, 80636 SNPs, F

They can't have that much tutkaul. Your model is wrong.

[Арсен]

I just want to remind you that Tutkaul is the south of Central Asia on the border with Iran - these are mountains. In such large quantities, under 50%, it could not have gotten to Ukraine in any way, in free access, it could have gotten either in a mixture with something, or through the northern Caspian region, but it seems to me that the northern Caspian region was a mixture of West Siberian hunters and Tutkaul. Try to convert this. Eneolithic of Ukraine to g25

[Арсен]

maybe it's Afontova Gora, why is there no EHG in your model, many questions.

[Desdonas]

@alanarchae

OK. I now don't consider a direct steppe-Dnieper route feasible. I also remember that CM once supported that the GAC/EEF admixture for Fatyanovo and other CW groups were from Podolia/Volyn regions, just like the arrow in this paper. (Though through Middle Dnieper, the root is more western/southwestern.)

https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.abd6535

Then Z645's absence in western CW and the satemization of Balto-Slavic/Indo-Iranian are also important factors, and there may be some (linguistic) issues.

1. Would you put II/BS also into the "NWIE" category? Or allow them to have some bidirectional linguistic transitions with Catacomb/Poltavka groups? Since clean branches exist only when losing contact with other groups.

2. If CW R1a-M417s were part of earlier Usatovo, should they adapt the L151 language or keep the original Usatovo dialect to some extent?

3. Daughter marrying for these CW clans is a really parsimoious explanation. It allows the autosomal similarity and ydna difference of CW subgroups. If linguistics go with the paternal side, it will be easier to explain facts like Indo-Iranian shares little common innovation with Italo-Celtic beyond LPIE.

[Арсен]

80636 SNPs? Well then it's clear)

[Konieczny]

Yes we get it - the wagon is closely correlated with R1b-M269 -rich Yamnaya groups. Anything else ?

More like the ancient R1a- proto-Corded ware like populations found around  Dnieper River -Deriivka   didn't fare to well in terms of expansion in the 1100 year Yamnaya-Catacomb period in the presence of P310. Same story goes with Afanasievo and Bell Beakers, even though we are being reassured by some posters that R1a will soon turn up  in higher numbers than what we currently have, in the wagon building related P310 groups like-- Yamnaya, Afanasievo, and Bell Beakers.

There were some R1a in the Dnieper during the Mesolithic, but their 'disapperance' was due to the '8.2 ky event' and/or an expansion of the proto-Mariupol I2a-L699 groups in 5000 BC, 2000+ years before Wagons, Afansievo and Bell Beaker 

Unless i've missed some Neolithic era R1a in the Dnieper ? A single R1a-M17 appears in e.g. Usatovo, but their relevance is not known. In fact, Im not sure its even C14 dated. 

Anyhow, I very early on proposed that the core region of R1a-M17 might be further up in the forest-steppe. But at that time most people were engrossed with the Khvalynsk finds, which although fascinating turned out to be genealogical dead-ends. Then the predictions shifted to Lower Don.
Now it  seems that even R1b-M269 might be from the forest-steppe, although some unsampled steppe region might show up both.

 Indeed R1a has ancient roots in the Dnieper.  Even though it had many thousands of years advantage in time, it was not able to achieve any notable numbers in growth in the region, even if you take into account the possible alliance of similar proto-Indo-European-proto Corded ware like cultures involving bridal exchange with groups like I2a-L699; by the time L51- P310 speaking tribes came rolling into the region with their wagons and Dom2 language in Yamnaya - Catacomb and their 4 wagon wheel language R1a virtually stopped in its Dnieper expansion. I don't like  conflating ydna past cultural achievements under one umbrella of various groups, that is why I was interested in not just shared pottery but wagon building techniques. Like Fatyanovo, there are not many examples of wagons or Dom2 horse burials in the R1a populations of   Corded ware to compare, with groups whom they may have shared brides with.

[alanarchae]

@alanarchae

OK. I now don't consider a direct steppe-Dnieper route feasible. I also remember that CM once supported that the GAC/EEF admixture for Fatyanovo and other CW groups were from Podolia/Volyn regions, just like the arrow in this paper. (Though through Middle Dnieper, the root is more western/southwestern.)

https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.abd6535

Then Z645's absence in western CW and the satemization of Balto-Slavic/Indo-Iranian are also important factors, and there may be some (linguistic) issues.

1. Would you put II/BS also into the "NWIE" category? Or allow them to have some bidirectional linguistic transitions with Catacomb/Poltavka groups? Since clean branches exist only when losing contact with other groups.

2. If CW R1a-M417s were part of earlier Usatovo, should they adapt the L151 language or keep the original Usatovo dialect to some extent?

3. Daughter marrying for these CW clans is a really parsimoious explanation. It allows the autosomal similarity and ydna difference of CW subgroups. If linguistics go with the paternal side, it will be easier to explain facts like Indo-Iranian shares little common innovation with Italo-Celtic beyond LPIE.

1. Probably bidirectional but unsure
2. I tend to think that R1a in CW must have either never been in Usatovo or had broken away from it and spent enough generations more in the same network at L151 to lose an Usatovo type autosomal signal and gain a CW type (Yamanya+GAC) type one.  The autosomal signal of a small male clan could totally transform beyond recognition of its origins in a century.  So, its hard to answer that. I tend to think of the branch of R1a leading to CW R1a as being solidly a Ukraine line from very remote times. Its hard to place it exactly though. One hint is the branch was barely surviving according to FTDNA branching and dating  suggests it was barely surviving up to 3300BC and not much better until after 3000BC.  That kind of reminds me the moribund state that M269 was in until 4400-4000BC - which tends (probably correctly) to be explained by it not really being more than a hunter-fisher society until after 4500BC.  So, it is possible that R1a was basically a pretty primitive group in terms of subsistence until as later as the 3300BC or so.  That might hint at some group who had a very nice rich hunter-fisher locality and werent particularly keen on going into farming until events pushed them. On the other hand it is possiible the relevant branch of R1a simply suffered a nasty near-death event before 3300BC and had to grow again.  But either way I think this suggests it was small and didnt have the subsistence model for more than bare-survival growth.  


3. I was only suggesting intermarriage could be a very likely way pottery ideas spread, women generally being the potters.  Considering pottery is such a big deal in terms of what archaeologists use to date and pigeonhole cultures, I think its significant contributor.  However, I am not suggesting that wives spread languages. I've never believed that at all likely in a patriarchal clan society.  Though the other big institution of (temporary unless they die) movement in such societies in fostering from infancy to age about 16.  That certainly could promote bilingualism.  The fosterlings would not be able to function unless they could speak the dialects of both their biological and temporary foster tribe. Pretty certain examples of fostering have been noted in EBA Europe in ancient DNA so its not just theoretical.  Its well attested in historical records of IE societies too.

[Арсен]

Looks like data for "The rise and transformation of Bronze Age pastoralists in the Caucasus" has started to become available.
https://www.ebi.ac.uk/ena/browser/view/PRJEB73987

[HurrianFam]

A few of the samples from The rise and transformation of Bronze Age pastoralists in the Caucasus posted on ENA
Eastern Hunter Gatherer
Satanaj Grotto - SJG001 (male) is SAMEA115993850

Eneolithic Intermediate
Nalchik - NCK001 (male) is SAMEA115993844, NCK002 (female) is SAMEA115993845

Steppe Eneolithic
KT6001 (Male) SAMEA115993823
SH3001 (Female) SAMEA115993849
SNG001 (Male) SAMEA115993851
KUG007 (Male) SAMEA115993830
BMT001 (Female) SAMEA115993761

Steppe Eneolithic Outlier West
KHB003 (Female) SAMEA115993800

Late Steppe Eneolithic
KST001 (Male) SAMEA115993822
NV30003 (Male) SAMEA115993847

[Арсен]

Which one is Ginchi?

[Арсен]

it seems it's them, I wonder if there is any data on dates? Or will I have to wait for the work itself?

[targaryen]

Would you also count Greek and Armenian under old Balkans IE? I'm wondering as to whether Armenian and those languages had already been separate for a long time or whether they all split from each around Moldova and then quickly went to where they would end up in the future (Aegean, Caucasus, etc.) while the languages were only diverged enough to be called dialects.

Armenian has nothing to do with Balkan anything. Greek and Armenian were remnants of non-CW steppe tribes that remained behind up until the MBA when they were pushed south by CW tribes like pre-Indo-Iranians.

Isn't that the case for all Paleo-Balkan languages?

No. Yamnaya tribes clearly moved into the Balkans as early as 3000 BC to form Illyrians, Thracians, Dacians, etc... But these are not Greek ancestors.

Greeks are from a later wave.

[targaryen]

Armenian has nothing to do with Balkan anything. Greek and Armenian were remnants of non-CW steppe tribes that remained behind up until the MBA when they were pushed south by CW tribes like pre-Indo-Iranians.

What data are you looking at ? The MBA steppe impact was limited to a few KMK individuals in Bulgaria. These people belonged to R1a-Z93, whilst proto-Greeks had R1b-PF7562 and I2a-L699.
Everything (perhaps aside from Thracians) seems to have entered the Balkans during the Yamnaya period and earlier

The likely chronological layering is
1. Hittite-Luwians (exit 3330)
2. proto- Greek (enter Balkans between 3800 and 2600)
3. proto-Illyrian (3200-2500)
4. Thracian (??)
 

For good measure, the closest link to the I2c found in Armenians is from Potocani, in Croatia. Maybe the ancient Greek historians were half right (as a joke).

You got this all wrong, mate. Ancient Greeks were a perfect mix of unadmixed Yamnaya and Minoans. There were no northern Balkan intermediaries. Steppe tribes migrated directly into Greece, and Greece was all EEF up until MBA.

This is why we see some similarities between Indo-Iranian and Greco-Armenian. CW-related groups migrated back and had contacts with Pre-Greeks in the steppe. But this similarity doesn't exist with Albanian for example.

[HurrianFam]

A few of the samples from The rise and transformation of Bronze Age pastoralists in the Caucasus posted on ENA
Eastern Hunter Gatherer
Satanaj Grotto - SJG001 (male) is SAMEA115993850

Eneolithic Intermediate
Nalchik - NCK001 (male) is SAMEA115993844, NCK002 (female) is SAMEA115993845

Steppe Eneolithic
KT6001 (Male) SAMEA115993823
SH3001 (Female) SAMEA115993849
SNG001 (Male) SAMEA115993851
KUG007 (Male) SAMEA115993830
BMT001 (Female) SAMEA115993761

Steppe Eneolithic Outlier West
KHB003 (Female) SAMEA115993800

Late Steppe Eneolithic
KST001 (Male) SAMEA115993822
NV30003 (Male) SAMEA115993847

Is anyone able to do some preliminary Y-DNA calls on these while we wait for the paper to appear? I'm also curious to see how NL122 compares to NCK001 and NCK002