I2 in Yamnaya

[Moeca]

we can safely say with this report is that I2a ydna is not a Slavic marker

[elflock]

we can safely say with this report is that I2a ydna is not a Slavic marker

I2a is a macrohaplogroup designation. It depends on what haplogroup under it you mean. I2a-Y3120 for instance is a major Slavic Y-DNA.

[Kaltmeister]

If the Polar Coast north of Karelia was the original IE homeland and ANE/EHG the original component - as we have seen there are several good arguments pointing in this direction -  what can we say about Y-haplogroups? Are there any samples that encourage us to follow this idea? A general problem is: We have hardly any samples from the area in question. There are the early SHGs from adjacent Scandinavia (like Hummervikholmen, Steigen, Motala etc.) that need to be evaluated, of course. And in general I would say that all early displaced EHG finds are of special interest, and displaced means here: Samples that were not found in the vicinity of Karelia, but contain an autosomal ANE/EHG component. I remember that the finds from the Iron Gates mentioned by Pribislav contained some EHG, a fact that generated some confusion. How did it get there? It can only have arrived from the original habitat - no, not in the east - in the north.

But actually I would like to point to another case: The sample CHV002 from Chalmny Varre. This Saami settlement in the center of the Kola peninsula was founded 1917 and was later, in the 1960s, given up again by its inhabitants. In 1973 Russian archaeologists discovered some petroglyphs there and dated the oldest of them to the Neolithic. They mainly show reindeer, but also human depictions.

   

The Russians also found a burial and recovered the bones. They were later dated to 1800 AD and can be assigned to the Saami population of the area. A genetic examination revealed a high level of EHG - in fact the highest of all I2 samples ; that can easily be explained by the local genepool, in the PCA it fits well with the typical Saami population. But the Y-haplogroup is very special: It is I2-S19848, just under I2-L621. And I2-L621 leads directly to the characteristic Slavic I2 branches. But this one is a fossil: It branches off from the main line about 3800 (+/- 800) years BCE and builds its own, individual line for the next 5600 years.

   

What does this tell us? I suggest that the ancestors of I2-L621 lived in this area about 5800 years ago and left it, moving south - where else should they have gone? One man (or some men) stayed on the Kola peninsula, building his own L621 line that was integrated into the Lappish population later. And here we find his descendant, buried about 220 years ago. About the same time (5800 years BP) and not too far away, a man in Steigen at the Norwegian coast carried I2-M423. This is a much older mutation, but it is located on the same line upstream of L621. We shall conclude that the "Slavic" L621 clade was present at the Polar Coast and left the area at some time after 3800 BCE - not much later. This probably means that this line, among others, is originally Indoeuropean. To confirm this and to draw further conclusions, we need more samples from this area, of course.

   

http://wikimapia.org/8786538/Saami-settl...e-Ivanovka
https://www.ipgbook.com/the-petroglyphs-...920865.php

[Jafety]

I think CHV002 is too recent to say it has been there for 6000 years.

The more direct ancestors of S20602/Y3120 matter if we want to see the moves of pre-proto-Slavic clades.
And it is Bronze Age Romania and living Rhinelanders (Y81696). Between 1500 BCE and 300 BCE, Y3120 could have been anywhere.
But one likely scenario would be that it moved East with Hallstatt-La Tene era migrations towards the Dniester-Dnieper area and there it became part of the proto-Slavic gene pool.

R1a subgroups are more likely EHG-related components of Balto-Slavs. I2 originally was WHG (even in Dnieper-Donets Neolithic Ukraine, where it mixed with ancestral R1a and R1b EHGs to form proto-Indo-Europeans)

The Karelia issue is something also I was thinking a lot about, but I think we only have PES001 (R1a-YP1306) from Arkhangelsk 11-10 kyBCE.
It might be an offshoot moving up from the Volga Basin on the Northern Dvina, not an ancestor to the later groups.
R1b is not really found North of the Volga basin, and both R1a and R1b had to come from Lake Baykal area after LGM. Kola might have been very icy that period still, so a more southern route (the usual Nomadic one) Southern Urals - Volga-Kama confluence and then up and down the river seems more likely for me.

[Quint]

I looked at some I2 phylogenies, and it indeed looks like some of these could have spread from the upper Volga Region, via the Baltic and Scandinavia, to Central Europe , e. g. I-Z161 which appears in "Sakhtish 188".
It at least shows that such a route was possible during the late Mesolithic.

It's very important though that all Mesolithic EHG and WHG populations in Europe have Villabruna/Bichon ancestry. Northern Europeans and Western Steppe Herders have very little, if any, of that ancestry, which makes a homeland for WSH anywhere west of the Urals unlikely.

[pelop]

I looked at some I2 phylogenies, and it indeed looks like some of these could have spread from the upper Volga Region, via the Baltic and Scandinavia, to Central Europe , e. g. I-Z161 which appears in "Sakhtish 188".
It at least shows that such a route was possible during the late Mesolithic.

The Volga? Most likely came from the Balkans. In fact, all of I2 and the core "WHG"/Villabruna ancestry spread from the Balkans and Italy to the rest of Europe.

[Quint]

I looked at some I2 phylogenies, and it indeed looks like some of these could have spread from the upper Volga Region, via the Baltic and Scandinavia, to Central Europe , e. g. I-Z161 which appears in "Sakhtish 188".
It at least shows that such a route was possible during the late Mesolithic.

The Volga? Most likely came from the Balkans. In fact, all of I2 and the core "WHG"/Villabruna ancestry spread from the Balkans and Italy to the rest of Europe.

Yes, the earliest I2 so far has been found in Italy, and the earliest pre-I1 in Spain (BAL051). But placing the origins of the majority of modern I1 and I2 in these southern refugia has been rightfully questioned for a variety of reasons. I2 in WHG is accompanied by R1b - which, as you know, is an ANE lineage.

Its subbranch, V88 is more common now in North Africa than in Europe, similar to the subbranch of Grotta Continenza, which so far has only been found in two Jordanians. 

The I2 found in modern northern and western Europeans had to have come from a different source than Villabruna WHG.

[Pribislav]

The I2 found in modern northern and western Europeans had to have come from a different source than Villabruna WHG.

That doesn't make any sense. Most of I2-M436 clades spread to the rest of Europe from the Balkans.

[Kaltmeister]

I think CHV002 is too recent to say it has been there for 6000 years.

The more direct ancestors of S20602/Y3120 matter if we want to see the moves of pre-proto-Slavic clades.
And it is Bronze Age Romania and living Rhinelanders (Y81696). Between 1500 BCE and 300 BCE, Y3120 could have been anywhere.
But one likely scenario would be that it moved East with Hallstatt-La Tene era migrations towards the Dniester-Dnieper area and there it became part of the proto-Slavic gene pool.

R1a subgroups are more likely EHG-related components of Balto-Slavs. I2 originally was WHG (even in Dnieper-Donets Neolithic Ukraine, where it mixed with ancestral R1a and R1b EHGs to form proto-Indo-Europeans)

The Karelia issue is something also I was thinking a lot about, but I think we only have PES001 (R1a-YP1306) from Arkhangelsk 11-10 kyBCE.
It might be an offshoot moving up from the Volga Basin on the Northern Dvina, not an ancestor to the later groups.
R1b is not really found North of the Volga basin, and both R1a and R1b had to come from Lake Baykal area after LGM. Kola might have been very icy that period still, so a more southern route (the usual Nomadic one) Southern Urals - Volga-Kama confluence and then up and down the river seems more likely for me.

Thanks for your reply and sorry for the late answer. You may have noticed that I gave some of your and qijia's postings in the thread on the genetic origin of the Indoeuropeans "likes" (for example 06-08-2024, 11:04 AM), for you share my opinion in two aspects: 1. EHG (or ANE) is the crucial component in the search on the origin of Indoeuropeans; and 2. Lazaridis interpretation is biased and for that wrong - but his data is very valuable and can be used for reinterpretation to answer the open questions.
The find of CHV002 is significant and important for several reasons, and it tells us where the I2-L621 line has been before they came to Romania - or the Rhineland and elsewhere. But it is only a piece of the puzzle that I am putting together in this thread, and not the most important one. In fact, many of the arguments to answer your remark have been posted already, so I will just summarise briefly. For further understanding you need to read or reread the thread:

The origin of ANE is not, as you or qijia assume, the Baikal or Altai area. We can easily find this out, following the "Volga cline", leading to Veretye, the oldest and most original EHG find. This tells us that the general direction of spread is north to south - not east to west. The Indoeuropean mythology, as quoted here before in selection ( 05-06-2024, 12:03 AM ), indicates an origin north of the Polar Circle. This tells us that the original ANE habitat was the Eurasian north coast. Just like the origin of the Malta Boy line lies in the area of the Yana delta, the origin of Yamnaya and Corded Ware lies north of Karelia. Also the Seima-Turbino people came from there. The great Eurasian rivers that flow into the Polar Sea were their passage when they headed south in a wide area between Karelia and Mongolia. Realising this we understand that several Y-haplogroups are involved in the described process at that early point in prehistory.
It is a crucial error to assign I2 schematically always to WHG, hindering a clear view on things. The I2 lines that lived in the north must have carried ANE/EHG, and it is in my opinion an open question if they are even more original than the southern/western WHG lines. We cannot answer this yet because we lack northern samples. Future will tell us.

[Urnfielder]

All I2 is originally WHG and was born in Balkans around 30,000 years ago. WHGs spread across Europe and wiped out C1 people (C1 people were similar to native Americans). The WHG I2's had blue eyes and are the reason why blue eyes are only found in Europeans today or people with European ancestry. WHGs did not go to China, Africa, Saudi Arabia etc - that is why those people do not have blue eyes. This also happened though I'm not sure how much taller exactly as diet plays a big part in height - 

"European hunter-gatherers were much taller than EEFs, and the replacement of European hunter-gatherers by EEFs resulted in a dramatic decrease in genetic height throughout Europe. During the later phases of the Neolithic, height increased among European farmers, probably due to increasing admixture with hunter-gatherers.

[Kaltmeister]

There are two important new samples from Lepenski Vir, the oldest I2-L701 and I2-Y6098 thus far, and at the same time the first cases of these clades from the Iron Gates.:

LEPE18; 6200-5950 BC; Lepenski Vir, Serbia; Iron Gates_Neolithic; I2a2a1b1-L701 (xP78,Y5606)

LEPE45; 6588-6395 BC; Lepenski Vir, Serbia; Iron Gates_Mesolithic; I2a1b1b1-Y6099>pre-Y6099

Now we have almost all major I2a2-M436 clades in the Iron Gates Mesolithic/Early Neolithic, from where they radially dispersed to the other parts of Europe (L701 to the east, Z161 and Y3670 to the north, Y6098 to the west, and S2555 in all directions). Only pre-M284 is still missing, which also went to the west.

S2555: Hajdučka Vodenica and Schela Cladovei

Y6098: Lepenski Vir

Z161: Hajdučka Vodenica and Vlasac

L701: Lepenski Vir

Y3670: Vlasac

and

That doesn't make any sense. Most of I2-M436 clades spread to the rest of Europe from the Balkans.

The paper "Between fishing and farming: palaeogenomic analyses reveal cross-cultural interactions triggered by the arrival of the Neolithic in the Danube Gorges", Hofmanova et al. 2022, examines besides other things the admixture of early hunters in the Iron Gates region. I mentioned their EHG share that caused some confusion, before. Here are more details:

High genetic diversity in Danube Gorges foragers

[...]
As attested by a projection-free PCA (Figure 2B), the Meso European-like individuals from the Danube Gorges are most similar to those from Western Europe, albeit slightly shifted towards individuals from North-Eastern Europe, in line with previous reports (Mathieson et al., 2018). In contrast to the Western European individuals, their cluster appears rather diverse (Figure 2B), which likely reflects a locally large population, elevated gene flow from neighboring populations, or both. This interpretation, consistent with the idea of a partially sedentary and prosperous fishing society of the Transformation period, is corroborated by Danube Gorges individuals generally having the highest genome-wide heterozygosity levels and shortest total lengths of runs of homozygosity (ROH) among all post-LGM Meso European-like individuals (Figure 3A, B, E), albeit some individual variation.
A similarly diverse cluster is observed for the individuals of the site of Zvejnieki, with the two older samples ZVEJ25 (grave 93, 5,738 ± 102 cal BC) and ZVEJ162 (grave ZV162, 4,470 ± 72 cal BC) clustering with Meso European-like samples from Western Europe, while the youngest sample ZVEJ317 (grave ZV317, 3,890 ± 67 cal BC) does not (Figure 2B). The influx of a rather distinct ancestry into Zvejnieki during the Neolithic has been previously reported. As our data shows, the source of the influx was genetically very close to samples from Minino.

  Abbildung 2B.png (Size: 52.73 KB / Downloads: 149)

   

On a projection-free PCA, Meso European-like individuals from the Danube Gorges spanning more than 1,500 years are well differentiated from other Meso European-like individuals, including those from Central Europe, North-Eastern Europe and the Black Sea region. This differentiation was initially hypothesized to be the result of admixture with more eastern hunter-gatherers.

So what do we learn here? The Balkan hunters from the Danube Gorge/Iron Gates in the 8th and 7th millenium BCE were genetically shifted to northeastern hunter populations, which means they had an additional ANE/EHG component. Their composition is similar to finds from Zvejnieki in Latvia, from which we know that they have their EHG genetical component from Minino; and Minino is located on Lake Kubenskoye in Vologda oblast, in direct vicinity to Popovo and - Petschanitsa near Veretye, Karelia. Here the circle closes.

So I ask you: What do you think is the reason for that EHG admixture in the Balkan? In my opinion we observe here the echo of an immigration from the north - from the area of Karelia and the upper Volga, the place of the oldest EHG find and also the source of the Volga cline.

https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/...512v1.full

[Kaltmeister]

An additional information: *néh₂us (Latin: Navis; Greek: Naus. The corresponding English loanword is "nautic") is a reconstructed proto-Indoeuropean word for boat. (Quite strange, by the way, for a people of steppe herders - isn't it?). A boat people from the Polar Coast can easily reach out to Minino, Popovo and Veretye on Lake Kubenskoye. There is a direct waterway, following the Dwina that flows into the White Sea. And from Kubenskoye it is also not far to the upper Volga.

[edit] There is also a direct connection from the White Sea to the Baltic Sea, entering the Vyg River. And from there another direct waterway leads to the Black Sea. It has frequently been used by the Vikings. I editet this in case somebody wondered how it was possible to get from Minino to the Balkan/Iron Gates.

   

[xdleer]

An additional information: *néh₂us is a reconstructed proto-Indoeuropean word for boat. (Quite strange, by the way, for a people of steppe herders). A boat people from the Polar Coast can easily reach out to Minino, Popovo and Veretye on Lake Kubenskoye. There is a direct waterway, following the Dwina that flows into the White Sea. And from here it is also not far to the upper Volga.

[quote pid="24277" dateline="1719749892"]
Unironically very sane  take I had thoughts like this but my model included pie being significantly older from the north  as I-l699 is a relatively recent haplogroup  and has precursor lineages in   dogger land 

[/quote]

[nomad01]

There are two important new samples from Lepenski Vir, the oldest I2-L701 and I2-Y6098 thus far, and at the same time the first cases of these clades from the Iron Gates.:

LEPE18; 6200-5950 BC; Lepenski Vir, Serbia; Iron Gates_Neolithic; I2a2a1b1-L701 (xP78,Y5606)

LEPE45; 6588-6395 BC; Lepenski Vir, Serbia; Iron Gates_Mesolithic; I2a1b1b1-Y6099>pre-Y6099

Now we have almost all major I2a2-M436 clades in the Iron Gates Mesolithic/Early Neolithic, from where they radially dispersed to the other parts of Europe (L701 to the east, Z161 and Y3670 to the north, Y6098 to the west, and S2555 in all directions). Only pre-M284 is still missing, which also went to the west.

S2555: Hajdučka Vodenica and Schela Cladovei

Y6098: Lepenski Vir

Z161: Hajdučka Vodenica and Vlasac

L701: Lepenski Vir

Y3670: Vlasac

and

That doesn't make any sense. Most of I2-M436 clades spread to the rest of Europe from the Balkans.

The paper "Between fishing and farming: palaeogenomic analyses reveal cross-cultural interactions triggered by the arrival of the Neolithic in the Danube Gorges", Hofmanova et al. 2022, examines besides other things the admixture of early hunters in the Iron Gates region. I mentioned their EHG share that caused some confusion, before. Here are more details:

High genetic diversity in Danube Gorges foragers

[...]
As attested by a projection-free PCA (Figure 2B), the Meso European-like individuals from the Danube Gorges are most similar to those from Western Europe, albeit slightly shifted towards individuals from North-Eastern Europe, in line with previous reports (Mathieson et al., 2018). In contrast to the Western European individuals, their cluster appears rather diverse (Figure 2B), which likely reflects a locally large population, elevated gene flow from neighboring populations, or both. This interpretation, consistent with the idea of a partially sedentary and prosperous fishing society of the Transformation period, is corroborated by Danube Gorges individuals generally having the highest genome-wide heterozygosity levels and shortest total lengths of runs of homozygosity (ROH) among all post-LGM Meso European-like individuals (Figure 3A, B, E), albeit some individual variation.
A similarly diverse cluster is observed for the individuals of the site of Zvejnieki, with the two older samples ZVEJ25 (grave 93, 5,738 ± 102 cal BC) and ZVEJ162 (grave ZV162, 4,470 ± 72 cal BC) clustering with Meso European-like samples from Western Europe, while the youngest sample ZVEJ317 (grave ZV317, 3,890 ± 67 cal BC) does not (Figure 2B). The influx of a rather distinct ancestry into Zvejnieki during the Neolithic has been previously reported. As our data shows, the source of the influx was genetically very close to samples from Minino.

On a projection-free PCA, Meso European-like individuals from the Danube Gorges spanning more than 1,500 years are well differentiated from other Meso European-like individuals, including those from Central Europe, North-Eastern Europe and the Black Sea region. This differentiation was initially hypothesized to be the result of admixture with more eastern hunter-gatherers.

So what do we learn here? The Balkan hunters from the Danube Gorge/Iron Gates in the 8th and 7th millenium BCE were genetically shifted to northeastern hunter populations, which means they had an additional ANE/EHG component. Their composition is similar to finds from Zvejnieki in Latvia, from which we know that they have their EHG genetical component from Minino; and Minino is located on Lake Kubenskoye in Vologda oblast, in direct vicinity to Popovo and - Petschanitsa near Veretye, Karelia. Here the circle closes.

So I ask you: What do you think is the reason for that EHG admixture in the Balkan? In my opinion we observe here the echo of an immigration from the north - from the area of Karelia and the upper Volga, the place of the oldest EHG find and also the source of the Volga cline.

https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/...512v1.full

I think it dates earlier, from the LGM, and moved through the pontic-caspian steppe, while northern Europe was still under ice. It might not be real EHG yet, but some ANE-ish sort of population. And it's clearly linked to haplogroup https://www.yfull.com/tree/R-V2219/

[Kaltmeister]

I think it dates earlier, from the LGM, and moved through the pontic-caspian steppe, while northern Europe was still under ice. It might not be real EHG yet, but some ANE-ish sort of population. And it's clearly linked to haplogroup https://www.yfull.com/tree/R-V2219/

Not impossible, but unlikely - because Hofmanova refers explicitely to the similarity of the Iron Gates and Zvejnieki/Minino samples. This indicates a close temporal connection between both populations.