# Population Genetics > Autosomal Genetics >  Autosomal results of Neolithic genome from Iberia

## Alan

*So here it is, the results of the R1b1 sample from 5100 BC late neolithic Spain.*

Globe 13

78.11% Mediterranean12.01% North_European9.78% Southwest_Asian0.09% Australasian0.01% West_Asian0.00% Amerindian0.00% Arctic0.00% East_African0.00% East_Asian0.00% Palaeo_African0.00% Siberian0.00% South_Asian0.00% West_African 

K12b

74.26% Atlantic_Med18.37% Caucasus3.70% Southwest_Asian3.67% Northwest_African0.00% East_African0.00% East_Asian0.00% Gedrosia0.00% North_European0.00% Siberian0.00% South_Asian0.00% Southeast_Asian0.00% Sub_Saharan 
dv3

67.94% Mediterranean22.30% West_European4.09% West_Asian4.07% Northwest_African1.60% Southwest_Asian0.00% East_African0.00% East_European0.00% Neo_African0.00% Northeast_Asian0.00% Palaeo_African0.00% South_Asian0.00% Southeast_Asian 



MDLP K=7

75.11% Paleo-Mediterranean24.87% Caucasian0.02% South-Central-Asian0.00% Altaic-Turkic0.00% Paleo-Scandinavian0.00% Volga-Uralic0.00% West-Eurasian 



Typical European farmer with the typical Mediterranean/Southwest Asian/Caucasus DNA + some North European from admixing with WHG (also typical for European farmers). 
This is quite irritating. We have Samara H&G with not much sign of ENF but yet we have another R1b with typical farmer DNA.

The only portion of the two genomes I see which might have a connection is the Gedrosia/West Asian in Karelian/Samara H&G, Yamna and Caucasus/West Asian portion in the Farmer.

I think this is another indication that R1b migrated into the Steppes with the "Near Eastern ANE rich pastoralists". And to Neolithic Europe with farmers.

But than another possibility is , R might have spred around the globe even before the ANE/ENF/WHG split.

----------


## LeBrok

> *So here it is, the results of the R1b1 sample from 5100 BC late neolithic Spain.*
> 
> Globe 13
> 
> 78.11% Mediterranean12.01% North_European9.78% Southwest_Asian0.09% Australasian0.01% West_Asian0.00% Amerindian0.00% Arctic0.00% East_African0.00% East_Asian0.00% Palaeo_African0.00% Siberian0.00% South_Asian0.00% West_African
> 
> K12b
> 
> 74.26% Atlantic_Med18.37% Caucasus3.70% Southwest_Asian3.67% Northwest_African0.00% East_African0.00% East_Asian0.00% Gedrosia0.00% North_European0.00% Siberian0.00% South_Asian0.00% Southeast_Asian0.00% Sub_Saharan
> ...


It does look like this R1b came with farmers from Near East. However it says 0% Gedrosia, but still rich in Caucasus and some South-West Asian. How can we explain it? 
This is Late Neolithic genome who came from Near East recently or some time ago with farmers, so where is Gedrosia?
Sorry for continually "grinding this stone of Gedrosia", but this is how we can figure out things. :)

----------


## Alan

> It does look like this R1b came with farmers from Near East. However it says 0% Gedrosia, but still rich in Caucasus and some South-West Asian. How can we explain it? 
> This is Late Neolithic genome who came from Near East recently or some time ago with farmers, so where is Gedrosia?
> Sorry for continually "grinding this stone of Gedrosia", but this is how we can figure out things. :)


This R1b sample is roughly the same age as R1b in Samara H&G. Even with the only difference that the farmer R1b is rather basal to the Samara R1b. Even the R1a samples from Samara, CW, Unetic are more Gedrosia.

Gedrosia is definitely connected to Indo Europeans. Yamna, Corded Ware, Andronovo, Unetic etc. have all allot more of this Gedrosia component. 

But this R1b results from Neolithic Europe proof it is not exclusively connected to Gedrosia. *But it's ancestors must have come from a region close to Gedrosia and where Caucasus is significant.* And where might this place be if not Western Asia, where farmers and pastoralists started their journey. Remember there is also R1b V88 in Africa. Which was definitely brought there by farmers too.

This is why I mentioned the only thing both the neolithic Iberian and Samara H&G have in common is the wider "West Asian" (Caucasus_Gedrosia) component.

*I don't think this whole R* mystery can be solved simply by ANE/ENF/WHG. This might be one of the major reasons why the HAAK and Reich papers did use new components instead of the WHG/ANE/ENF system.*

----------


## LeBrok

> This R1b sample is roughly the same age as R1b in Samara H&G. Even with the only difference that the farmer R1b is rather basal to the Samara R1b. Even the R1a samples from Samara, CW, Unetic are more Gedrosia.
> 
> Gedrosia is definitely connected to Indo Europeans. Yamna, Corded Ware, Andronovo, Unetic etc. have all allot more of this Gedrosia component. 
> 
> But this R1b results from Neolithic Europe proof it is not exclusively connected to Gedrosia. *But it's ancestors must have come from a region close to Gedrosia and where Caucasus is significant.* And where might this place be if not Western Asia, where farmers and pastoralists started their journey. Remember there is also R1b V88 in Africa. Which was definitely brought there by farmers too.
> 
> This is why I mentioned the only thing both the neolithic Iberian and Samara H&G have in common is the wider "West Asian" (Caucasus_Gedrosia) component.


Gedrosia must have been quite to the East in Asia. First farmers didn't meet Gedrosia for first few thousand years they lived in Middle East. And we know farmers spread, traded and moved around a lot. They've surely met people with Caucasus admixture and mixed heavily with them, but they didn't even get a smidge of Gedrosia. It means that Gedrosia was far enough not to manage to spread by bride exchange, invasions, or slow radiation from the center of it, or however genes manage to spread.

----------


## Aberdeen

It should be interesting when we finally get to see some Iberian Bell Beaker Y DNA results - I think they will be R1b but that will be only part of the story. The autosomal analysis will also be interesting.

----------


## Alan

> Gedrosia must have been quite to the East in Asia. First farmers didn't meet Gedrosia for first few thousand years they lived in Middle East. And we know farmers spread, traded and moved around a lot. They've surely met people with Caucasus admixture and mixed heavily with them, but they didn't even get a smidge of Gedrosia. It means that Gedrosia was far enough not to manage to spread by bride exchange, invasions, or slow radiation from the center of it, or however genes manage to spread.


EHG had also this Gedrosia component. So bride exchange theory is finito, out and destroyed. 

The only explanation where R1b could have spred from is Taurus_Zagros/Elbruz mountains or a region nearby, both EHG and farmer have only these components in common. 

As I have explained in the past Gedrosia is 92% West Asian + 8% ANI thats what we see from the component break up.The reason why we see no Gedrosia in R1b the farmer is because this particular R1b sample belonged to a wave which had not yet diverged into Gedrosia (pastoralist).

Overall R1bs connection to Gedrosia can't be denied. Populations with the most basal clades of R1b, such as M343, m269 etc have all high frequency of Gedrosia. Gedrosia didn't come from the East. Gedrosia evolved somewhere probably in Western Asia.
Gedrosia peaks in Balochis who live in Southeastern Iran/West Pakistan which is situated in the Southeastern corner of West Aisa but they have settled there a few thousand years ago from Kurdistan. Thats what their oral traditions say and thats what their Northwest Iranian tongue indiciates (because Northwest Iranian tongue evolved in Kurdistan). So they might indiciate the ancient population of Kurdistan. I n every other direction from the Balochi tribes this component drops.


The whole point is R1b must have come from a place where ENF must have existed and been relatively dominant and at the same time had genes which were ancestral to Gedrosia and Caucasus, because that is exactly what all the R1b samples have in common.And in that case I see Kurdistan/Caucasus/Mesopotamia/Iran as most likely place. This is were Gedrosia meets Caucasus and at the same time the place were basal R1b m343 and R1a m420 is found.

----------


## Alan

> It should be interesting when we finally get to see some Iberian Bell Beaker Y DNA results - I think they will be R1b but that will be only part of the story. The autosomal analysis will also be interesting.


We already have the autosomal DNA of the Bell Beaker R1b1a2a1a2-P312 results. Keep in mind this sample is 3000 years younger than the sample from Iberia and belongs to a completely different sub clade.

Looking at the Bell Beaker genome and the timeframe most likely scenario is that Beall Beaker R1b came from Yamna or maybe from a similar wave of pastoralists who also moved into Yamna.


globe13

57.84% North_European27.43% Mediterranean6.17% West_Asian4.16% Arctic2.77% Southwest_Asian0.86% West_African0.55% Siberian0.18% Australasian0.03% South_Asian0.00% Amerindian0.00% East_African0.00% East_Asian0.00% Palaeo_African 

K12b

46.80% North_European34.63% Atlantic_Med9.62% Gedrosia3.28% Southwest_Asian2.71% Caucasus2.13% Siberian0.83% Sub_Saharan0.00% East_African0.00% East_Asian0.00% Northwest_African0.00% South_Asian0.00% Southeast_Asian 


37.95% West-European35.25% East-European15.27% Caucasian7.76% Volga-Finnic3.76% Paleo-Mediterranean0.00% Altaic-Turkic0.00% Paleo-Scandinavian0.00% South-Central-Asian 


Bell Beaker from Germany was already typically Central_North European. Makes me wonder if not all Central and Skando Europeans are descend of them for most part.

----------


## Aberdeen

> We already have the autosomal DNA of the Bell Beaker R1b1a2a1a2-P312 results. Keep in mind this sample is 3000 years younger than the sample from Iberia and belongs to a completely different sub clade.
> 
> Looking at the Bell Beaker genome and the timeframe most likely scenario is that Beall Beaker R1b came from Yamna or maybe from a similar wave of pastoralists who also moved into Yamna.
> 
> 
> globe13
> 
> 57.84% North_European27.43% Mediterranean6.17% West_Asian4.16% Arctic2.77% Southwest_Asian0.86% West_African0.55% Siberian0.18% Australasian0.03% South_Asian0.00% Amerindian0.00% East_African0.00% East_Asian0.00% Palaeo_African
> 
> ...


I don't think you can necessarily assume that German BB was the same autosomally as Iberian BB. I suspect there was quite a difference, although we won't really know until we have some data. A lot of people were saying for a long time that it was definite that R1b wasn't in Iberia during the Neolithic because we had four samples from one Epicardial Ware site and none were R1b, but all it took was a second Iberian Neolithic site to turn up an R1b sample. If people were that wrong about Iberia during the Neolithic, perhaps we shouldn't be too quick to assume we know what to expect from Iberian BB when we have zero data for it.

----------


## LeBrok

> We already have the autosomal DNA of the Bell Beaker R1b1a2a1a2-P312 results. Keep in mind this sample is 3000 years younger than the sample from Iberia and belongs to a completely different sub clade.
> 
> Looking at the Bell Beaker genome and the timeframe most likely scenario is that Beall Beaker R1b came from Yamna or maybe from a similar wave of pastoralists who also moved into Yamna.
> 
> 
> globe13
> 
> 57.84% North_European27.43% Mediterranean6.17% West_Asian4.16% Arctic2.77% Southwest_Asian0.86% West_African0.55% Siberian0.18% Australasian0.03% South_Asian0.00% Amerindian0.00% East_African0.00% East_Asian0.00% Palaeo_African
> 
> ...


Thanks Alan, very interesting K12b. There is a big shift from farmer genome to this (IE?) bronze age one. Atlantic Med shrunk to half of its size, but more interestingly Caucasus collapsed from 18 to 3 percent. 
What do they include in North European here WHG and ANE?

Do we have full K12b for Yamnaya and Corded, Maciamo posted only Gedrosia component?

----------


## Alan

> Thanks Alan, very interesting K12b. There is a big shift from farmer genome to this (IE?) bronze age one. Atlantic Med shrunk to half of its size, but more interestingly Caucasus collapsed from 18 to 3 percent. 
> What do they include in North European here WHG and ANE?
> 
> Do we have full K12b for Yamnaya and Corded, Maciamo posted only Gedrosia component?


"North European" in this case is pred. WHG with a quarter of ANE and even some ENF. Gedrosia here is like 1/2 ANE and 1/2 ENF. Atlantic Med is like 4/5 ENF and 1/5WHG. These are just rough estimations.

The decrease of Gedrosia from Yamna (26%) to Bell Beaker(10%) is relatively linear and goes well with the hypothesis that BB is 25% Yamna.

But I see an untypical decrease of Caucasus at neolithic farmers from ~20% to 2-3% at BB. This is not systematic/linear decrease to Gedrosia. 

*I sam speculating that with the introduction of Yamna admixture. Caucasus somehow merges and gets eaten up by North European and Atlantic_Med.*


Here are the Corded Ware and Yamna genomes for comparison.

*Yamna*

globe13

62.21% North_European24.62% West_Asian5.57% Arctic3.18% Amerindian3.01% South_Asian1.42% Mediterranean0.00% Australasian0.00% East_African0.00% East_Asian0.00% Palaeo_African0.00% Siberian0.00% Southwest_Asian0.00% West_African 

K7b

60.23% Atlantic_Baltic29.33% West_Asian5.24% South_Asian5.19% Siberian0.00% African0.00% East_Asian0.00% Southern 

K12b

60.18% North_European26.29% Gedrosia4.89% Atlantic_Med4.50% Siberian2.12% Caucasus2.02% South_Asian0.00% East_African0.00% East_Asian0.00% Northwest_African0.00% Southeast_Asian0.00% Southwest_Asian0.00% Sub_Saharan

*Corded Ware*

globe13

59.64% North_European20.19% West_Asian16.85% Mediterranean2.40% South_Asian0.62% Southwest_Asian0.24% Australasian0.05% Amerindian0.00% Arctic0.00% East_African0.00% East_Asian0.00% Palaeo_African0.00% Siberian0.00% West_African


K7b

66.02% Atlantic_Baltic27.10% West_Asian3.73% South_Asian3.13% Southern0.02% Siberian0.00% African0.00% East_Asian

K12b

50.54% North_European21.94% Gedrosia20.47% Atlantic_Med6.82% Caucasus0.22% South_Asian0.02% Southwest_Asian0.00% East_African0.00% East_Asian0.00% Northwest_African0.00% Siberian0.00% Southeast_Asian0.00% Sub_Saharan

----------


## LeBrok

> "North European" in this case is pred. WHG with a quarter of ANE and even some ENF. Gedrosia here is like 1/2 ANE and 1/2 ENF. Atlantic Med is like 4/5 ENF and 1/5WHG. These are just rough estimations.
> 
> The decrease of Gedrosia from Yamna (26%) to Bell Beaker(10%) is relatively linear and goes well with the hypothesis that BB is 25% Yamna.
> 
> But I see an untypical decrease of Caucasus at neolithic farmers from ~20% to 2-3% at BB. This is not systematic/linear decrease to Gedrosia. 
> 
> *I sam speculating that with the introduction of Yamna admixture. Caucasus somehow merges and gets eaten up by North European and Atlantic_Med.*


Yep, there is something unclear with Caucasus and Gedrosia falling surprisingly quickly, Caucasus in West Europeans and Gedrosia in East Europeans. Perhaps there is substantial amount of Gedrosia in modern East Europeans but it is eaten up by other admixtures, as you mentioned. Could modern East Euro contain 10% Gedrosia? 

Wherever East Euro dominates Gedrosia falls below 1%.




And wherever West Euro dominates Caucasus falls below 1%:

----------


## Alan

> Yep, there is something unclear with Caucasus and Gedrosia falling surprisingly quickly, Caucasus in West Europeans and Gedrosia in East Europeans. Perhaps there is substantial amount of Gedrosia in modern East Europeans but it is eaten up other admixtures. Could modern East Euro contain 10% Gedrosia?



Thank you for opening the way for this. I posted it already yesterday in the other thread but edited it later.


Years ago I had this theory, that the reason we don't find Gedrosia in modern East Europe is, that it is ancestral to some of the Northeast European and with time passing it "shifted" into Northeast European. And the reason why Caucasus is so rare in West Europe is, that Caucasus is ancestral and shifted mostly to "West European" with time passing. Later Dienekes came with the womb of nations theory and this inspired me even more into believing this.

When I presented this theory in the comment section of Dienekes Blogspot. Most people disagreed so that I threw this theory away.

----------


## LeBrok

> Thank you for opening the way for my old theory. I posted it already yesterday in the other thread but edited it later.
> 
> 
> In the past I had this theory, that the reason we don't find Gedrosia in modern East Europe is, that it is ancestral to some of the Northeast European and with time passing it "shifted" into Northeast European. And the reason why Caucasus is so rare in West Europe is, that Caucasus is ancestral and shifted mostly to "West European" with time passing. Later Dienekes came with the womb of nations theory and this inspired me even more into believing this.
> 
> When I presented this theory in the comment section of Dienekes Blogspot. Most people disagreed so that I threw this theory away.


You could be right on the money. So far I don't see alternative explanation without invoking population replacement in Europe since Bronze Age. Neither PCA distances, nor haplogroups, nor other admixtures point to total replacement. Also I don't believe admixtures can just evaporate with time. The only solution, as you presented, and supported by admixture maps above, is that calculators mix West and East Euro of modern populations with Caucasus and Gedrosia. 
I'm not sure if it is fault of calculator itself, or accumulation of mutated alleles, that makes parts of genome no longer recognizable as these two admixtures?

----------


## LeBrok

Well, so East Europeans, the Poles, Belorussians and Lithuanians might as well still contain 20% of Gedrosia.

I hope some geneticists can clean up this issue for us, or provide believable alternative.

----------


## Maciamo

Thanks for posting these admixtures, Alan.

I think it confirms what I wrote last month just after we got the Haak 2015 paper. This R1b1* is in all likelihood R1b-V88 (a SNP which was not tested) that can through North Africa with Neolithic cattle herders. The admixtures speak for themselves:

- About 10% of Southwest Asian => point of origin of R1b-V88 in the southern Levant

- 3-4% of Northwest African => Where would they have picked it up if those Neolithic farmers had come through Anatolia, Greece and Italy to Catalonia ? They must have come though North Africa.

- Very high Mediterranean component associated mostly with G2a and E-M78 and as common in North Africa and South Europe today.


NB : I am not surprised that there is no Gedrosia left in this 7000 year-old R1b-V88 sample. R1b would have mixed with G2a people in the Levant, then E1b1b people in North Africa, and probably also J1 and T1a people along the way. Since R1b-V88 only represents a small minority of lineages both in Southwest Asia and North Africa today, their autosomal genes must have got diluted pretty quickly, and after mixing with I2 and other people in Spain, how could anyone expect to find any significant trace of R1b's original admixture ?

----------


## Maciamo

> We already have the autosomal DNA of the Bell Beaker R1b1a2a1a2-P312 results. Keep in mind this sample is 3000 years younger than the sample from Iberia and belongs to a completely different sub clade.
> 
> Looking at the Bell Beaker genome and the timeframe most likely scenario is that Beall Beaker R1b came from Yamna or maybe from a similar wave of pastoralists who also moved into Yamna.
> 
> ...
> 
> Bell Beaker from Germany was already typically Central_North European. Makes me wonder if not all Central and Skando Europeans are descend of them for most part.


If you have followed my arguments about the spread of R1b, there is doubt that modern West and North Europeans descend from those R1b-P312 people from Germany 4500 years ago. Ever since 2009 I have argued that it is these R1b men descended from Yamna who _invaded_ the Bell Beaker culture. I keep repeating that those R1b samples aren't descended from Iberian Bell Beakers, but are foreigners who migrated there. It's frustrating how nobody seems to understand that. This map hasn't been edited since 2010.

----------


## Alan

> Thanks for posting these admixtures, Alan.
> 
> I think it confirms what I wrote last month just after we got the Haak 2015 paper. This R1b1* is in all likelihood R1b-V88 (a SNP which was not tested) that can through North Africa with Neolithic cattle herders. The admixtures speak for themselves:
> 
> - About 10% of Southwest Asian => point of origin of R1b-V88 in the southern Levant
> 
> - 3-4% of Northwest African => Where would they have picked it up if those Neolithic farmers had come through Anatolia, Greece and Italy to Catalonia ? They must have come though North Africa.
> 
> - Very high Mediterranean component associated mostly with G2a and E-M78 and as common in North Africa and South Europe today.
> ...


What do you think of this theory.

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads...l=1#post451377

----------


## ElHorsto

To me it rather looks like a ~50% population change happened in NE europe since Corded Ware, not only because Gedrosia disappeared, but also the 27% Eurogenes15 'Atlantic' dropped to about 12%, and 'Baltic' increased from 13% to >21%. Finally also R1b lineages are very sparse in NE Europe compared to the rest.
One reason is probably the migration of mesolithic scandinavian hunter-gathers who increased I2a and WHG (~'Baltic') in NE europe. I also wonder how densely populated this region was. If sparse, then populations can be altered more easily.
Why Gedrosia disappeared completely though, is not completely explained yet.

----------


## LeBrok

> To me it rather looks like a ~50% population change happened in NE europe since Corded Ware, not only because Gedrosia disappeared, but also the 27% Eurogenes15 'Atlantic' dropped to about 12%, and 'Baltic' increased from 13% to >21%. Finally also R1b lineages are very sparse in NE Europe compared to the rest.
> One reason is probably the migration of mesolithic scandinavian hunter-gathers who increased I2a and WHG (~'Baltic') in NE europe. I also wonder how densely populated this region was. If sparse, then populations can be altered more easily.
> Why Gedrosia disappeared completely though, is not completely explained yet.


This is what I think too, Northern Europe got population replacement up to 50%, or even higher in some locations, from the IE invaders. For some reason the farther South we go the less replacement there was. I guess, it would be due to higher population density of farmers in the south.
When we look at Corded Ware samples from Germany with 20% of Gedrosia, and compare it to 26 Gedrosia of Yamnaya, it would suggest that 4 in 5 farmers/locals were replaced in Germany. We can assume it was a similar case throughout of most CW territory. Whatever it really was, the rate of replacement was rather high. Since then the location of Bronze Age samples are very close to Modern Ones on PCA plot. Meaning that there was not much of replacement or a mixing since. That's why it is more perplexing to see Gedrosia evaporate completely from today's Eastern Europe, since Bronze Age. There is a similar story with Caucasian admixture in West Europe. All these clues together give an impression that there is something amiss with calculators of Gedrosia and Caucasus admixtures.

----------


## khufu

> Thanks for posting these admixtures, Alan.
> 
> I think it confirms what I wrote last month just after we got the Haak 2015 paper. This R1b1* is in all likelihood R1b-V88 (a SNP which was not tested) that can through North Africa with Neolithic cattle herders. The admixtures speak for themselves:
> 
> - About 10% of Southwest Asian => point of origin of R1b-V88 in the southern Levant
> 
> - 3-4% of Northwest African => Where would they have picked it up if those Neolithic farmers had come through Anatolia, Greece and Italy to Catalonia ? They must have come though North Africa.
> 
> - Very high Mediterranean component associated mostly with G2a and E-M78 and as common in North Africa and South Europe today.
> ...


should be V88/PF6279 or Direct ancestor V88/PF6279 

south american people close to near east people

in african Y7771 under V88*/PF6279*

in saudi V69 under V88*/PF6279*

The common denominator is _Levant_ V88*/PF6279*

But disagree with you on some points

And you have to know something important btween thise branch and germans branch not less than 10.000 years 

Do not fall into the same mistakes that have fallen

There is no relationship between the germans p297+/v88- and near east v88+/p297- less than 10.000 years

----------


## Angela

> To me it rather looks like a ~50% population change happened in NE europe since Corded Ware, not only because Gedrosia disappeared, but also the 27% Eurogenes15 'Atlantic' dropped to about 12%, and 'Baltic' increased from 13% to >21%. Finally also R1b lineages are very sparse in NE Europe compared to the rest.
> One reason is probably the migration of mesolithic scandinavian hunter-gathers who increased I2a and WHG (~'Baltic') in NE europe. I also wonder how densely populated this region was. If sparse, then populations can be altered more easily.
> Why Gedrosia disappeared completely though, is not completely explained yet.


That theory makes some sense to me as well, as I've been saying for a long time. I think there was probably migration from the north post Yamnaya, but I also think it needs to be remembered that Corded Ware moved northwest off the more southern regions. It was only later that it moved east and incorporated what I think will turn out to be more EHG like people who were living in the forest steppe, EHG like people who probably had next to no Gedrosia. (I think it has to be kept in mind that the populations in eastern Europe were probably on a cline from north to south. Here we're talking about Yamna, which was to the south and a population-Corded Ware-related to Yamnaya.)While I know that some people will find it disappointing, it may be that Corded Ware really doesn't equal modern northeast European or even eastern European. It just isn't a very good match for those populations.

(The recent paper on these forest steppe populations, which discusses this movement east by Corded Ware is discussed here:
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads...213#post451213)

Since we've been talking about K12b, here are the K12b figures for Corded Ware, Lithuanians and Russians. In both of the modern populations, North Euro increased by 20 points and Gedrosia dropped by 20 points. Atlantic Med dropped by 7 points in both, and in Lithuanians, Caucasus stayed about the same, but in Russians, it increased. 
Corded Ware:

50.54% North_European21.94% Gedrosia20.47% Atlantic_Med6.82% Caucasus0.22% South_Asian0.02% Southwest_Asian0.00% East_African0.00% East_Asian0.00% Northwest_African0.00% Siberian0.00% Southeast_Asian0.00% Sub_Saharan 

Lithuanians:
77.1 North European
0 Gedrosia
13.7 Atlantic Med
8 Caucasus
1 S.W.Asian
.1 S Asian

Russians:
66.5 North Euro
.2 Gedrosia
13.1 Atlantic Med
14.3 Caucasus 
.8 South Asian
.6 SW Asian
0 E.African
1.2 E.Asian
.1 Northwest African
2.7 Siberian
.4S.E.Asian
0 SSA

The Germans actually seem like a better fit with Corded Ware:
48.2 North Euro
7.3 Gedrosia
33 Atlantic Med
9.8 Caucasus
1.7 S.W.Asian

In their case it seems like the rise in Atlantic Med and S.W. Asian cut into the Gedrosia.

I think those more central European populations were formed by different migrations, which may have started off from the steppe at an earlier time, and they also probably experienced more admixture from the prior Neolithic farming communities.

----------


## Alan

> This is what I think too, Northern Europe got population replacement up to 50%, or even higher in some locations, from the IE invaders. For some reason the farther South we go the less replacement there was. I guess, it would be due to higher population density of farmers in the south.
> When we look at Corded Ware samples from Germany with 20% of Gedrosia, and compare it to 26 Gedrosia of Yamnaya, it would suggest that 4 in 5 farmers/locals were replaced in Germany. We can assume it was a similar case throughout of most CW territory. Whatever it really was, the rate of replacement was rather high. Since then the location of Bronze Age samples are very close to Modern Ones on PCA plot. Meaning that there was not much of replacement or a mixing since. That's why it is more perplexing to see Gedrosia evaporate completely from today's Eastern Europe, since Bronze Age. There is a similar story with Caucasian admixture in West Europe. All these clues together give an impression that there is something amiss with calculators of Gedrosia and Caucasus admixtures.


You have started to convince me that some of the Gedrosia might really get eaten up by Northeast European, the same with Caucasus in Northwest European.

Remember Northeast Europeans have equally as much ANE as Northwest Europeans (if not even slightly more). We know ANE is allot more prevelant in Gedrosia (~50%) than Caucasus(~20%).

As we know Gedrosia peaks in Northwest Europeans with up to 12%. If we know take into account that most of Northwest European ANE is connected to Gedrosia and some of it to Northwest European there. 

Than we must come to the conclusion that most ANE in Northeast Europe is connected to the Northeast European and just some to the Caucasus component.

So what do Gedrosia and Northeast European have in common? High ANE!

So is it really falce to assume that Gedrosia merged in East Europe with Northeast European component and therefore "dissapeared". While Caucasus, which pre Bronze Age was heavy in West Europe merged with Northwest European component and therefore "dissapeared".

I mean look at it, today it is completely the opposite how it was in ancient times. fomer Caucasus rich West Europe becomes Gedrosia rich and former Gedrosia rich East Europe becomes Caucasus rich.

----------


## LeBrok

> So is it really falce to assume that Gedrosia merged in East Europe with Northeast European component and therefore "dissapeared". While Caucasus, which pre Bronze Age was heavy in West Europe merged with Northwest European component and therefore "dissapeared".
> 
> I mean look at it, today it is completely the opposite how it was in ancient times. fomer Caucasus rich West Europe becomes Gedrosia rich and former Gedrosia rich East Europe becomes Caucasus rich.


This is exactly why we should stick to ancient basal admixtures in discription of composition of today's societies. To invent modern admixtures or invent ancient admixture based on modern (mixed) populations muds the water a lot.

I think at the end of the day we will find few very defined basal ones, like ENF (Natufian?), WHG, Caucasus (Kostenki HG/pastoralist?), Gedrosia (Central Asian HG?), EHG (East European HG), and of course few others from Asia and Africa that we don't know yet.
I think some of the basal once were trapped in separate areas during LGM for 10 ky or so developing unique genomes. When Ice Age ended they started building in numbers, expanding and mixing. It will be important to get a snapshot of these genomes as they were about 10 kya, before mixing started.

----------


## MOESAN

> Gedrosia must have been quite to the East in Asia. First farmers didn't meet Gedrosia for first few thousand years they lived in Middle East. And we know farmers spread, traded and moved around a lot. They've surely met people with Caucasus admixture and mixed heavily with them, but they didn't even get a smidge of Gedrosia. It means that Gedrosia was far enough not to manage to spread by bride exchange, invasions, or slow radiation from the center of it, or however genes manage to spread.


_I'm tempted to agree with you, on this question_

----------


## MOESAN

> That theory makes some sense to me as well, as I've been saying for a long time. I think there was probably migration from the north post Yamnaya, but I also think it needs to be remembered that Corded Ware moved northwest off the more southern regions. It was only later that it moved east and incorporated what I think will turn out to be more EHG like people who were living in the forest steppe, EHG like people who probably had next to no Gedrosia. (I think it has to be kept in mind that the populations in eastern Europe were probably on a cline from north to south. Here we're talking about Yamna, which was to the south and a population-Corded Ware-related to Yamnaya.)While I know that some people will find it disappointing, it may be that Corded Ware really doesn't equal modern northeast European or even eastern European. It just isn't a very good match for those populations.
> 
> (The recent paper on these forest steppe populations, which discusses this movement east by Corded Ware is discussed here:
> http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads...213#post451213)
> 
> Since we've been talking about K12b, here are the K12b figures for Corded Ware, Lithuanians and Russians. In both of the modern populations, North Euro increased by 20 points and Gedrosia dropped by 20 points. Atlantic Med dropped by 7 points in both, and in Lithuanians, Caucasus stayed about the same, but in Russians, it increased. 
> Corded Ware:
> 
> 50.54% North_European21.94% Gedrosia20.47% Atlantic_Med6.82% Caucasus0.22% South_Asian0.02% Southwest_Asian0.00% East_African0.00% East_Asian0.00% Northwest_African0.00% Siberian0.00% Southeast_Asian0.00% Sub_Saharan
> ...


_the 'gedrosia' question is not a light one - the drop down of 'gedrosia' in N-E Europe can be linked to maybe not emigrations from North but rather an osmosis: maybe the Y-R1a of proto-Balto-Slavic tribes created the Baltic culture by incorporating previous WHG-EHG (already partly ANE?) populations: here persons with a good knowledge of mt-DNA could confirm or infirm this "theory" - the Battle Axes cultures of N-E Europe seems a "pupil" of the Corded culture, a mix - true Corded were previously more southern, along an axis NW-SE - yet, later proto-Slavs had incorporated some WHG of Carpathians, surely without 'gedrosia' - physically true 'Corded' men were distinct for the most (spite a bit of 'brünn') from the WHG populations more present among NE inhabitants ('brünnoid'+'cro-magnoid' plus some WHG without 'gedrosia' nor ANE) - Corded were a specific population, from Steppes (but not the WHOLE steppes)_

----------


## Maciamo

> To me it rather looks like a ~50% population change happened in NE europe since Corded Ware, not only because Gedrosia disappeared, but also the 27% Eurogenes15 'Atlantic' dropped to about 12%, and 'Baltic' increased from 13% to >21%. Finally also R1b lineages are very sparse in NE Europe compared to the rest.
> One reason is probably the migration of mesolithic scandinavian hunter-gathers who increased I2a and WHG (~'Baltic') in NE europe. I also wonder how densely populated this region was. If sparse, then populations can be altered more easily.
> Why Gedrosia disappeared completely though, is not completely explained yet.


I am not so sure that the whole population of NE Europe changed so dramatically since the Mesolithic. What we know is that the population of the Pontic-Caspian Steppe and Karelia changed a lot, but I already knew that many years ago since R1b left the steppe, and N1c1 moved into the Volga-Ural, Karelia and Finland.

However central western European Russia and Belarus probably didn't change so radically. Obviously they inherited some Near Eastern genes from Neolithic farmers (Cucuteni-Trypillian expansion ?) and some gene flow from the Yamna R1b. But apart from that they remained fairly unmixed, and they re-exported their admixtures high in Baltic and East_Euro to the old Yamna territory and Karelia.

----------


## MOESAN

> EHG had also this Gedrosia component. So bride exchange theory is finito, out and destroyed. 
> 
> The only explanation where R1b could have spred from is Taurus_Zagros/Elbruz mountains or a region nearby, both EHG and farmer have only these components in common. 
> 
> As I have explained in the past Gedrosia is 92% West Asian + 8% ANI thats what we see from the component break up.The reason why we see no Gedrosia in R1b the farmer is because this particular R1b sample belonged to a wave which had not yet diverged into Gedrosia (pastoralist).
> 
> Overall R1bs connection to Gedrosia can't be denied. Populations with the most basal clades of R1b, such as M343, m269 etc have all high frequency of Gedrosia. Gedrosia didn't come from the East. Gedrosia evolved somewhere probably in Western Asia.
> Gedrosia peaks in Balochis who live in Southeastern Iran/West Pakistan which is situated in the Southeastern corner of West Aisa but they have settled there a few thousand years ago from Kurdistan. Thats what their oral traditions say and thats what their Northwest Iranian tongue indiciates (because Northwest Iranian tongue evolved in Kurdistan). So they might indiciate the ancient population of Kurdistan. I n every other direction from the Balochi tribes this component drops.
> 
> ...


_I'm ready to accept your explanations but somethings stay unclear to me:
'gedrosia' seems OLD and very largely spred in Central Asia for a very long time - not WestAsian (geographically speaking) at all...
it 's a problem concerning the place of origin -
Y-R1b, even if well present today around Kurdistan/Armenia and among some Caucasus small ethnies (drift?) would have been the standard haplo of a very racist clannic tribe having spred all around to very far places in Europe, Asia, Africa, almost without mixing with other male lignages (Y-G, Y-R1a, Y-J2...) on the road to vaste region of Europe (N-W by instance) - here I don't link by force Y-R1b to 'gedrosia', but I think what we know for now (it could change) tells us Y-R1b of Western Europe (the ones passed by land, the most numerous) travelled across East Eurasian regions where they had or picked 'gedrosia' bearers, and I don't see that near the Zagros, where apparently 'gedrosia' was absent in old times, before steppic invasions or penetrations of later periods, whatever these last bearers: Iranian I-Eans, Turkmens, even Mongols...
I've apriori no problem with our first Y-R1v being come from SOuth Caucasus, but for now it doesn't check the data: it could seem absurd, but simetimes I think seeing the contrary, Y-R1b intruding from North or South-East in South-Caucasus regions (but not native, again, to Zagros) - 
It's a "reflex" answer, I'll try to look again at my notes (by example about Kostenki, Mal'ta, Ust'Ishim friends) -





_

----------


## LeBrok

Found Kostenki genome, interestingly no Caucasus but already some Gedrosia.
K12b

26.45% North_European19.54% Atlantic_Med15.98% South_Asian11.83% Gedrosia6.59% Southeast_Asian4.92% East_African4.58% Southwest_Asian4.39% Sub_Saharan3.28% Siberian2.00% Northwest_African0.45% East_Asian0.00% Caucasus
PS. He was partially lactose tolerant.
https://genetiker.wordpress.com/2014/11/14/analyses-of-the-kostenki-14-genome/

His location was in European Russia, halfway between Moscow and Black Sea. The genome is very old, 40 ky, and possibly is not fully comparable with all admixtures. Some of them needed much longer to show up, to come to be fully formed. However, 0 Caucasus probably means that Caucasus was on the other side of Caucasus Mountains in Middle East, and probably not fully formed yet. Heavy mixture of ENF with Caucasus in early farmers alludes to closeness of these two on South Side of Caucasus Mountains, and lack of contact to HGs from the North.

Gedrosia is rather high in Kostenki (though probably also not fully formed yet), and it is at similar level as Gedrosia in Samara samples. As we know it is completely missing from first farmers from Near East. For these reasons, I'm going to move epicenter of Gedrosia from SE off Caspian to NE off Caspian, Kazakhstan. Knowing that Mal'ta genome contained some Gedrosia too, and Gedrosia containing ANE, it places both in Central Asia contact area. It doesn't seem there was a contact between them and area where ENF and Caucasus were formed in Near East.


His all Atlantic Med, might mean WHG component.

----------


## LeBrok

Here is KO1, the hunter gatherer from Hungary, Early Neolithic. Thanks to Genetiker again:
https://genetiker.wordpress.com/2014...garian-genome/
K12b

70.14% North_European27.50% Atlantic_Med1.72% Sub_Saharan0.40% Siberian0.21% Southeast_Asian0.02% East_Asian0.01% East_African0.00% Caucasus0.00% Gedrosia0.00% Northwest_African0.00% South_Asian0.00% Southwest_Asian
Looks like there is a big portion of hunter gatherer in Atlantic Med admixture. Again some history of Sub Saharan Africa is showing in this hunter, WHG. Neither Caucasus (nor ENF) nor Gedrosia was reaching to Europe Center at this time, well, before Neolithic farmers showed up.

----------


## LeBrok

Then the Farmers came, KO2 from Hungary:
https://genetiker.wordpress.com/2014...garian-genome/
K12b

47.77% Atlantic_Med27.46% Caucasus13.95% Southwest_Asian10.17% Northwest_African0.60% East_Asian0.05% Southeast_Asian0.00% East_African0.00% Gedrosia0.00% North_European0.00% Siberian0.00% South_Asian0.00% Sub_Saharan
Half of Atlantic med, all Caucasus, Southwest Asian and Northwest Africa belongs to ENF admixture. Is Southwest Asian a Bedouin signal? This farmer might have up to 25% WHG admixture.


Stuttgart is very similar:
K12b

53.68% Atlantic_Med29.29% Caucasus10.54% Southwest_Asian5.23% Northwest_African0.51% Southeast_Asian0.47% North_European0.27% Sub_Saharan0.00% East_African0.00% East_Asian0.00% Gedrosia0.00% Siberian0.00% South_Asian

----------


## LeBrok

Samara HG:
https://genetiker.wordpress.com/2015...e-from-samara/
K12b

73.86% North_European12.98% Gedrosia10.00% Siberian2.59% South_Asian0.56% East_African0.01% Southeast_Asian0.00% Atlantic_Med0.00% Caucasus0.00% East_Asian0.00% Northwest_African0.00% Southwest_Asian0.00% Sub_Saharan


Karelia:
https://genetiker.wordpress.com/2015...-from-karelia/
K12b

80.67% North_European12.06% Siberian6.05% Gedrosia1.21% South_Asian0.00% Atlantic_Med0.00% Caucasus0.00% East_African0.00% East_Asian0.00% Northwest_African0.00% Southeast_Asian0.00% Southwest_Asian0.00% Sub_Saharan
Gedrosia is falling in Karelia HG, farther from Epicenter.

----------


## LeBrok

Yamna:
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads...m-Iberia/page2
K12b

60.18% North_European26.29% Gedrosia4.89% Atlantic_Med4.50% Siberian2.12% Caucasus2.02% South_Asian0.00% East_African0.00% East_Asian0.00% Northwest_African0.00% Southeast_Asian0.00% Southwest_Asian0.00% Sub_Saharan
Atlantic med is very low. It is hard to find any farmer genes in this genome. To bad there is only one Yamna sample tested for K12b, perhaps this individual didn't mix well yet. 
Seams like the main genetic influence came from Gedrosia territory. I'm picturing Kazakhstan area.

----------


## LeBrok

Corded Ware:
https://genetiker.wordpress.com/2015...d-ware-genome/
K12b

50.54% North_European21.94% Gedrosia20.47% Atlantic_Med6.82% Caucasus0.22% South_Asian0.02% Southwest_Asian0.00% East_African0.00% East_Asian0.00% Northwest_African0.00% Siberian0.00% Southeast_Asian0.00% Sub_Saharan
Now we see Atlantic Med and Caucasus rising, both indicating ENF farmer's influence. I'm almost sure the Cucuteni farmers are mixing in. This is the major difference between Yamna pastoralists and Corded farmers.

----------


## LeBrok

Unetic:
https://genetiker.wordpress.com/2015...netice-genome/

K12b

43.87% North_European34.36% Atlantic_Med11.94% Gedrosia5.24% Caucasus3.68% Southwest_Asian0.60% Northwest_African0.21% East_African0.06% South_Asian0.05% Siberian0.00% East_Asian0.00% Southeast_Asian0.00% Sub_Saharan
Progressively more farmer admixtures than in Corded Ware.

----------


## LeBrok

Bell Beaker:
https://genetiker.wordpress.com/2015...beaker-genome/
K12b

46.80% North_European34.63% Atlantic_Med9.62% Gedrosia3.28% Southwest_Asian2.71% Caucasus2.13% Siberian0.83% Sub_Saharan0.00% East_African0.00% East_Asian0.00% Northwest_African0.00% South_Asian0.00% Southeast_Asian
Very similar to Unetic.

----------


## LeBrok

Hungarian BR2, late bronze age, ~1,200 BC
https://genetiker.wordpress.com/2014...garian-genome/
K12b

41.61% North_European35.99% Atlantic_Med16.30% Caucasus3.51% Southwest_Asian1.34% Sub_Saharan1.12% Gedrosia0.10% Northwest_African0.03% South_Asian0.01% Southeast_Asian0.00% East_African0.00% East_Asian0.00% Siberian

----------


## LeBrok

Iron Age Anglo Saxon:
https://genetiker.wordpress.com/2014...nglish-genome/

K12b

49.89% North_European30.08% Atlantic_Med9.78% Caucasus3.63% East_Asian3.19% Sub_Saharan1.31% Northwest_African1.16% Siberian0.79% East_African0.08% Gedrosia0.07% South_Asian0.00% Southeast_Asian0.00% Southwest_Asian
Low Gedrosia and high Caucasus admixture. Was he modern East European?

----------


## LeBrok

Iron Age Hungarian IR1
https://genetiker.wordpress.com/2014...garian-genome/
K12b

34.63% North_European19.54% Atlantic_Med16.66% Caucasus15.22% Gedrosia4.90% Siberian3.30% East_Asian2.38% Southwest_Asian1.53% Northwest_African1.08% Sub_Saharan0.77% South_Asian0.01% Southeast_Asian0.00% East_African

----------


## LeBrok

Modern genome 12b, placeholder:

----------


## mihaitzateo

So this means that Neolithic people brought Mediterranean admixture?
Was wondering,is it possible that Roman Empire was the result of the evolution of a Neolithic society that reached it peak of development when Roman Empire started to expand?
Since I think if some ancients Romans bones would be examined,they will be quite closed to these Neolithic people,as genetics.

----------


## Finalise

Anglo-Saxon has no Gedrosia just like Old Europe samples, and IE tribes are heavily Gedrosianised. Something is not adding up here. IE migrations might not as straightforward as Yamna -> CW as we thought.

----------


## Alan

> _I'm ready to accept your explanations but somethings stay unclear to me:
> 'gedrosia' seems OLD and very largely spred in Central Asia for a very long time - not WestAsian (geographically speaking) at all..._


_

I think you overread what I wrote. Gedrosia peaks in Balochistan which is located in Western Asian. 
So no it does not peak in Central Asia.
_


> _ Major ethnic groups of Pakistan in 1980. The pink color represents the Baloch ethnic group. Balochistan or Baluchistan[1] (Balochi: بلوچستان, lit. Land of the Baloch) is an arid desert and mountainous region on the Iranian plateau in south-western Asia, northwest of the Arabian Sea._


_

Balochis are a Northwest Iranic tribes originaly stamming from Kurdistan. Balochi ancestry is very strong in all of Pakistan to India. Many Balochis have been assimilated into the Punjabi population.
So the fact that they come from Kurdistan can indiciate that Gedrosia was once much stronger here. And it might have been deluted by other components. You know where a component is stronger doesn't automatically mean it was so in pre historic times. 

Another argument for this is the R1b in Iberian Neolithic which was much more Caucasus and had no Gedrosia. This kind of ancestry can only stem from Western Asia. 

I think R1b spred around when the "West Asian" component hadn't yet diverged into Gedrosia and Caucasus. Remember Caucasus and Gedrosia only appear in the higher K's. That means it must have been once the same. Gedrosia is 92% West Asian and ~8% ANI (which in itself is actually atpyical to other South Asian components in clusterin right next to West Asian, therefore must have the same origin)

See here => http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-v80ztSRUM9...8/s1600/_7.png

Thats the reason I think betwen Taurus_Zagros mountains is a good guess. But of course this doesn't rule out Central Asia as long as we don't have actual data.




_


> _travelled across East Eurasian regions where they had or picked 'gedrosia' bearers, and I don't see that near the Zagros, where apparently 'gedrosia' was absent in old times, before steppic invasions or penetrations of later periods, whatever these last bearers: Iranian I-Eans, Turkmens, even Mongols..._


Are you aware that Gedrosia frequency in Zagros is higher as in Yamna and nearby Balochistan has twice as much. How does this bring us to the conclusion that Gedrosia originated in North Eurasia? 

Nothing personal here, But I think you might be missing some basic knowledge about the genetic landscape of Western Asia and therefore come to wrong conclusions.




> _I_ don't see that near the Zagros, where apparently 'gedrosia' was absent in old times


How do you know that Gedrosia was absent in the Zagros in old times? It goes against my understanding, how you can come to this conclusion as if it is the most logical thing in the world while it is actually quite the opposite.

I am not going to argue about the origin of Gedrosia. That is clear as water I think. And it honestly can't believe that all the Gedrosia was brought to Western Asia by Yamna. If it is actually more frequent here.

The opposite is the case imo. If anything Yamna migration might halfed the Gedrosia in the region.




> _I've apriori no problem with our first Y-R1v being come from SOuth Caucasus, but for now it doesn't check the data: it could seem absurd, but simetimes I think seeing the contrary, Y-R1b intruding from North or South-East in South-Caucasus regions (but not native, again, to Zagros) - 
> It's a "reflex" answer, I'll try to look again at my notes (by example about Kostenki, Mal'ta, Ust'Ishim friends) -
> _


Moesan you are often reprsenting theories without actual strong argument for it. It might be because your knowledge of the genetic make up of Western Asia is not as good. I understand that. My knowledge of European DNA Is also not that good. But I get quite tired explain things over and over again seeing it go against deaf ears. So don't take it personal if I don't answer that much anymore.


Now to the reasons why your theory has not many valid reasons.
Gedrosia is stronger in the Zagros mountains than South Caucasus. 1:0 for Zagros. R1b in South Caucasus or anywhere else North of it is founder effect, almost always the same subclade(l23). Doesn't speak for an origin in that place. R1b in Zagros is *allot* more diverse. It has R1b m343, R1b l23, R1b m269 and heck even R1b l11! That is allot of diversity
http://corduene.blogspot.de/2014/04/...ogroups_1.html

2:0 for the Zagros_Taurus theory.

----------


## Alan

> Found Kostenki genome, interestingly no Caucasus but already some Gedrosia.
> K12b
> 
> 26.45% North_European19.54% Atlantic_Med15.98% South_Asian11.83% Gedrosia6.59% Southeast_Asian4.92% East_African4.58% Southwest_Asian4.39% Sub_Saharan3.28% Siberian2.00% Northwest_African0.45% East_Asian0.00% Caucasus 
> PS. He was partially lactose tolerant.
> https://genetiker.wordpress.com/2014/11/14/analyses-of-the-kostenki-14-genome/
> 
> His location was in European Russia, halfway between Moscow and Black Sea. The genome is very old, 40 ky, and possibly is not fully comparable with all admixtures. Some of them needed much longer to show up, to come to be fully formed. However, 0 Caucasus probably means that Caucasus was on the other side of Caucasus Mountains in Middle East, and probably not fully formed yet. Heavy mixture of ENF with Caucasus in early farmers alludes to closeness of these two on South Side of Caucasus Mountains, and lack of contact to HGs from the North.
> 
> ...



Atlantic is by majority ENF with some WHG admixture. And going by the other components (SOuthwest Asian he has it) I am pretty convinced this is ENF.

Don't forget Kostenki already had Basal Eurasian.

----------


## Alan

> Here is KO1, the hunter gatherer from Hungary, Early Neolithic. Thanks to Genetiker again:
> https://genetiker.wordpress.com/2014...garian-genome/
> K12b
> 
> 70.14% North_European27.50% Atlantic_Med1.72% Sub_Saharan0.40% Siberian0.21% Southeast_Asian0.02% East_Asian0.01% East_African0.00% Caucasus0.00% Gedrosia0.00% Northwest_African0.00% South_Asian0.00% Southwest_Asian 
> Looks like there is a big portion of hunter gatherer in Atlantic Med admixture. Again some history of Sub Saharan Africa is showing in this hunter, WHG. Neither Caucasus (nor ENF) nor Gedrosia was reaching to Europe Center at this time, well, before Neolithic farmers showed up.




We know form the actual paper that KO1 was compared to his mesolithic H&G cousins bit Farmer admixed. Farmer DNA is not Caucasus alone. Caucasus is actually some of the less "typical" to ENF part of the farmer DNA.

All the farmers had more of Atlantic_Med than Caucasian. If you also look at the distribution and frequency of Atlantic Med, Southwest Asian, Caucasus in Britain for example, you will see that it is quite similar.

So Atlantic_Med is probably 2/3 ENF and 1/3 WHG. Interesting and fitting if we consider that both West Asian which is supposedly 2/3 ENF and 1/3 ANE and Atlantic Med have the same distance from North European component.

Speaks for a similar mixture. Just that it is ANE in West Asian and WHG in Atlantic_Med.

----------


## LeBrok

> Atlantic is by majority ENF with some WHG admixture. And going by the other components (SOuthwest Asian he has it) I am pretty convinced this is ENF.
> 
> Don't forget Kostenki already had Basal Eurasian.


He is a weird dude and very old. He shows some relation with ENF, from way back. Things must have changed there during LGM. When we look at Samars, almost from same area as Kostenki, the genome is quite different. Kostenki like population could have died out or were pushed back into Caucasus Mountains by northern HGs. He does plot extremely close to modern guys from Caucasus. 
As I mentioned before, he is so old, that the admixtures as we know them were not fully developed yet, and his admixtures might not be very accurate I'm afraid.

----------


## Alan

> He is a weird dude and very old. He shows some relation with ENF, from way back. Things must have changed there during LGM. When we look at Samars, almost from same area as Kostenki, the genome is quite different. Kostenki like population could have died out or were pushed back into Caucasus Mountains by northern HGs. He does plot extremely close to modern guys from Caucasus. 
> As I mentioned before, he is so old, that the admixtures as we know them were not fully developed yet, and his admixtures might not be very accurate I'm afraid.



This and the fact that Kostenki had already "Basal Eurasian" like DNA makes me doubt that ANE/WHG diverged from Basal Eurasian before it diverged from East Eurasian, because Kostenki obviously shows typical modern "West Eurasian" genetic structure (with East Eurasian admixture). 

If Proto ANE/WHG really diverged from Basal Eurasian earlier as from East Eurasian, we would see a genetic structure in which ANE/WHG and East Eurasian were stronger and ENF instead of East Eurasian showing as admixture.


Therefore I think Basal Eurasian/Proto ANE/WHG and East Eurasian diverged first OR all roughly at the same time.

----------


## LeBrok

> Yamna:
> http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads...m-Iberia/page2
> K12b
> 
> 60.18% North_European26.29% Gedrosia4.89% Atlantic_Med4.50% Siberian2.12% Caucasus2.02% South_Asian0.00% East_African0.00% East_Asian0.00% Northwest_African0.00% Southeast_Asian0.00% Southwest_Asian0.00% Sub_Saharan
> Atlantic med is very low. It is hard to find any farmer genes in this genome. To bad there is only one Yamna sample tested for K12b, perhaps this individual didn't mix well yet. 
> Seams like the main genetic influence came from Gedrosia territory. I'm picturing Kazakhstan area.


I think if Gedrosia was a farmer marker from Near East we should be getting at least some Southeast Asian signal. The K17 confirms lack of farmer ENF/EEF admixture:

MDLP Ancient Roots K17

46.02% Ancestral_East_European_ANE14.40% Caucasian-Basal9.65% Ancestral_North_Indian8.93% Uralic7.46% West_European_HG4.49% Ancestral_West_Siberian4.46% Amerindian1.43% Circumpolar1.41% Ancestral_Sami-Finnic1.10% Ancestral_South_Indian0.30% Melano-Austronesian0.18% Ancestral_East_Siberian*0.08% Ancestral_Mediterranean_EEF*0.03% African_Sub_Saharian0.03% South_East_Asian0.01% Archaic_African0.01% Near-East-Basal
https://genetiker.wordpress.com/2015...-yamna-genome/
That's why I'm suspecting that Gedrosia came from around Kazakhstan as HG or Pastoralist admixture. Anything from other side of Caucasus should have farmer heavy genome at this late neolithic time.

----------


## Sile

> I think if Gedrosia was a farmer marker from Near East we should be getting at least some Southeast Asian signal. The K17 confirms lack of farmer ENF/EEF admixture:
> 
> MDLP Ancient Roots K17
> 
> 46.02% Ancestral_East_European_ANE14.40% Caucasian-Basal9.65% Ancestral_North_Indian8.93% Uralic7.46% West_European_HG4.49% Ancestral_West_Siberian4.46% Amerindian1.43% Circumpolar1.41% Ancestral_Sami-Finnic1.10% Ancestral_South_Indian0.30% Melano-Austronesian0.18% Ancestral_East_Siberian*0.08% Ancestral_Mediterranean_EEF*0.03% African_Sub_Saharian0.03% South_East_Asian0.01% Archaic_African0.01% Near-East-Basal 
> https://genetiker.wordpress.com/2015...-yamna-genome/
> That's why I'm suspecting that Gedrosia came from around Kazakhstan as HG or Pastoralist admixture. Anything from other side of Caucasus should have farmer heavy genome at this late neolithic time.


I believe the Gedrosian that Alan supports ( i.e the balochi ) , is the one that stays on the northtern side of the Zargos mountains heading to the caucasus

----------


## Alan

> I think if Gedrosia was a farmer marker from Near East we should be getting at least some Southeast Asian signal. The K17 confirms lack of farmer ENF/EEF admixture:
> 
> MDLP Ancient Roots K17
> 
> 46.02% Ancestral_East_European_ANE14.40% Caucasian-Basal9.65% Ancestral_North_Indian8.93% Uralic7.46% West_European_HG4.49% Ancestral_West_Siberian4.46% Amerindian1.43% Circumpolar1.41% Ancestral_Sami-Finnic1.10% Ancestral_South_Indian0.30% Melano-Austronesian0.18% Ancestral_East_Siberian*0.08% Ancestral_Mediterranean_EEF*0.03% African_Sub_Saharian0.03% South_East_Asian0.01% Archaic_African0.01% Near-East-Basal 
> https://genetiker.wordpress.com/2015...-yamna-genome/
> That's why I'm suspecting that Gedrosia came from around Kazakhstan as HG or Pastoralist admixture. Anything from other side of Caucasus should have farmer heavy genome at this late neolithic time.


Gedrosia just like many other components is a mix of two or many components.

That Gedrosia is at least 50% farmer admixed is not much of doubt. If it wasn't than I would have 30% of ANE because I have 26.5% Gedrosia + 6.5% North European. But I "only" have 19% of ANE.

Also compare the ENF scores in South_ Central Asia with their Southwest Asian, Mediterranean and Caucasus scores.

It doesn't fit.

----------


## Alan

Let's take Tajiks as example.

They have ~45% ENF. => https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets...t#gid=74932529

But they have ~25% Atlantic_Med/Caucasus/Southwest Asian => https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/...DcTZEYlE#gid=0

20% ENF remain.

So which of these remaining components are the most likely source for the rest of the ENF. We have to chose between North European, Gedrosia, South Asian or Siberian.

I bet my money on Gedrosia. And we shouldn't forget the relation between Gedrosia and Caucasus is like the relation between Northwest European and Northeast European. So if Caucasus is predominantly ENF, so Gedrosia must have allot of ENF itself.

And we also had already this discussion about low EEF. It isn't something new. 

The reason why the EEF is so low is because Yamna does not have the European farmer type ancestry. Their ENF ancestry is directly the highland pastoralist type. So EEF is unlikely to show up.

----------


## LeBrok

> Let's take Tajiks as example.
> 
> They have ~45% ENF. => https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets...t#gid=74932529
> 
> But they have ~25% Atlantic_Med/Caucasus/Southwest Asian => https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/...DcTZEYlE#gid=0
> 
> 20% ENF remain.
> 
> So which of these remaining components are the most likely source for the rest of the ENF. We have to chose between North European, Gedrosia, South Asian or Siberian.
> ...


There is at least 75% ENF in EEF. So if EEF doesn't show in Yamna it is very unlikely that there is substantial ENF in Yamna. I would be surprised if other components have more than 10% of ENF. If we find Gedrosia in Neolithic in Near East I will agree with you that it contained ENF. ;)

----------


## Alan

> There is at least 75% ENF in EEF. So if EEF doesn't show in Yamna it is very unlikely that there is substantial ENF in Yamna. I would be surprised if other components have more than 10% of ENF. If we find Gedrosia in Neolithic in Near East I will agree with you that it contained ENF. ;)


Bedouins are 85%. Going by that, we need to assume Bedoins beeing ~40% Atlanto_Med. That is impossible.

You see what I mean? Atlanto_Med came to existence with ENF(2/3) mixing with some WHG(1/3). But that doesn't mean every ENF group needs to have some Atlanto_Med, because this component is a specific type *which was probably born* in Europe because of additional WHG admixture. 

West Asian highlanders also score only half that much EEF as they score ENF, simply because they do not have this WHG admixed type of farmer ancestry. This is why you will not find any EEF in Yamna. 

Imagine if we had a population with 50% Northwest European component. And I would tell you they are not "North European" admixed because look here they show no Northeast European ancestry :)

Thats exactly the problem here. Just because someone has no EEF('Northeast European') doesn't mean he has no ENF('North European'), because his ENF is possibly the highlander type('West Asian').


LeBrock we know that Yamna is ~25% ENF but Yamna has only 7% Caucasus/Atlanto_Med. The rest* must* come from Gedrosia. Just like in my example with Tajiks there is no other way or component it could have come from. There is no denying there. 
And Even Reich said the ENF ancestry in Yamna is typical Near Eastern and came directly from the highlands and not of the type found in Europe(EEF). 

So everything adds up :)

Believe me Gedrosia is *roughly* 60% ENF.

----------


## MOESAN

Gedrosia of today in Near East and Pakistan and surroundings is not by force exactly the Gedrosia we find elsewhere more northern or we FOUND before - 
and even this southern Gedrosia we constate nowaday is not by force from a Near Eastern unique source - ANE seems new in Near Eastern (differences between sub-populations of ancient endogamy and the remnant) as Gedrosia is, even if Gedrosia is not equal ANE - a population showing ANE shew also Gedrosia (whatever a tiny link between both, uniquely statistical in some population, but this "cocktail" for me evocates a Central or South-Central Asian population, not a genuine old Near-Eastern one - just my point, trying to find my way in darkness (here I leave a tear dropping down from my eye)

----------


## gervais

> *So here it is, the results of the R1b1 sample from 5100 BC late neolithic Spain.*
> 
> K12b
> 
> 74.26% Atlantic_Med18.37% Caucasus3.70% Southwest_Asian3.67% Northwest_African0.00% East_African0.00% East_Asian0.00% Gedrosia0.00% North_European0.00% Siberian0.00% South_Asian0.00% Southeast_Asian0.00% Sub_Saharan
> 
> 
> Typical European farmer with the typical Mediterranean/Southwest Asian/Caucasus DNA + some North European from admixing with WHG (also typical for European farmers). 
> This is quite irritating. We have Samara H&G with not much sign of ENF but yet we have another R1b with typical farmer DNA.
> ...


I do not agree!
The Spanish neolithic is different from the Neolithic of Europe central as LBK.
See the difference:

LBK (F999916)
*#**Population**Percent
*1Atlantic_Med 54.922
Caucasus30.33
Southwest_Asian10.784
Northwest_African3.795
North_European0.146
Southeast_Asian0.06

The Spanish Neolithic have more Atlantic_Med and less of caucasus and SW_Asian.

I do not know why everyone thinks Atlantic-Med comes from near-east!


Only SW_Asian and caucasus were probably brought by farmers of Near-East

----------


## Greying Wanderer

> I do not agree!
> The Spanish neolithic is different from the Neolithic of Europe central as LBK.
> See the difference:
> 
> LBK (F999916)
> *#**Population**Percent
> *1Atlantic_Med 54.922
> Caucasus30.33
> Southwest_Asian10.784
> ...


Quite. The Atlantic coast had a different climate and that led to a different story.

----------


## Angela

> I do not agree!
> The Spanish neolithic is different from the Neolithic of Europe central as LBK.
> See the difference:
> 
> LBK (F999916)
> *#**Population**Percent
> *1Atlantic_Med 54.922
> Caucasus30.33
> Southwest_Asian10.784
> ...


Atlantic Med is probably best described as a combination of Neolithic farmer alleles from the Near East and a minority WHG component. The creator of the calculator being used by you as well as by the poster Alan explained the relationship of these components here: 
http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2012/08...-k12b-and.html
http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2012/09...decad-k7b.html

The graphs are particularly interesting. Note that S.W. Asian is just a "specialized" form of "Caucasus", and "Caucasus" goes into "Atlantic Med". 

I wouldn't quarrel with Alan's estimate of about a 25% or so WHG percentage in Atlantic Med.

It's important to realize that these calculators, while they were useful in their day, produce components which represent much more recent geographical "poolings" which are the result of many layers of migration. Formal stats are much more informative. For that, you have to read Lazaridis et al, and Haak et al.
http://biorxiv.org/content/early/2013/12/23/001552
http://biorxiv.org/content/early/2015/02/10/013433

In Haak et al, the resnorm stats are particularly interesting. As you can see, the French are 69% Early Neolithic. (Of course, these numbers are the result not only of Neolithic migrations, but also of those of Bronze Age "Indo-Europeans".) It would be impossible to reach numbers like this if only S.W.Asian and Caucasus represented migration of peoples with ancestry from the Near East. 


Attachment 7147

----------


## gervais

> Atlantic Med is probably best described as a combination of Neolithic farmer alleles from the Near East and a minority WHG component. The creator of the calculator being used by you as well as by the poster Alan explained the relationship of these components here: 
> http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2012/08...-k12b-and.html
> http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2012/09...decad-k7b.html
> 
> The graphs are particularly interesting. Note that S.W. Asian is just a "specialized" form of "Caucasus", and "Caucasus" goes into "Atlantic Med". 
> 
> I wouldn't quarrel with Alan's estimate of about a 25% or so WHG percentage in Atlantic Med.
> 
> It's important to realize that these calculators, while they were useful in their day, produce components which represent much more recent geographical "poolings" which are the result of many layers of migration. Formal stats are much more informative. For that, you have to read Lazaridis et al, and Haak et al.
> ...


Yes, the component closest to Atlantic-Med is Caucasus, but the closest component of North-European is Atlantic-med.
How the Basques have 0% Caucasus (the only of Europe!!) and Kostenki14 a russian Palaeolithic (- 35,000) has 21.46% of Atlantic-Med!


It is as if we were dealing with two migrations: Atlantic-Med and then caucasus.
The question is: the two were farmers or only one of the two?

Basque:
Atlantic-Med: 73,1
North-European: 17,1
Gedrosia 9,8
Caucasus: 0

Kostenki14
*#**Population**Percent
*1North_European28.8
2Atlantic_Med21.46
3South_Asian15.7
4Gedrosia12.38
5Southeast_Asian6.12
6Southwest_Asian4.95
7East_African3.87
8Siberian3.78
9Northwest_African1.65
10Sub_Saharan1.15
11East_Asian0.15

----------


## Armoricain

> Atlantic Med is probably best described as a combination of Neolithic farmer alleles from the Near East and a minority WHG component. The creator of the calculator being used by you as well as by the poster Alan explained the relationship of these components here: 
> http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2012/08...-k12b-and.html
> http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2012/09...decad-k7b.html
> 
> The graphs are particularly interesting. Note that S.W. Asian is just a "specialized" form of "Caucasus", and "Caucasus" goes into "Atlantic Med". 
> 
> I wouldn't quarrel with Alan's estimate of about a 25% or so WHG percentage in Atlantic Med.
> 
> It's important to realize that these calculators, while they were useful in their day, produce components which represent much more recent geographical "poolings" which are the result of many layers of migration. Formal stats are much more informative. For that, you have to read Lazaridis et al, and Haak et al.
> ...


In the last paper of Haak, french are 43 % EN ( not 69%) 57 % WHG
(figure S9.24 p.120)


That is maybe different in the paper of 2013 ?


But I agree with Gervais, there is a difference between the Atlantic Neolithics and those of the Bassin Danunian, the Caucasian component is higher in the LBKs

----------


## Angela

> In the last paper of Haak, french are 43 % EN ( not 69%) 57 % WHG
> (figure S9.24 p.120)
> 
> 
> That is maybe different in the paper of 2013 ?
> 
> 
> But I agree with Gervais, there is a difference between the Atlantic Neolithics and those of the Bassin Danunian, the Caucasian component is higher in the LBKs


I'm aware of the figure to which you referred. Haak et al did exhaustive modeling. With each successive model they tried to reduce the residuals (or improve the fit) more and more. The model to which you referred only used EN and WHG. In the subsequent model (page 121), they added the Yamnaya, and the result for EN in the French was 51.2, with lower residuals. In the next model, the figure was 64.3. In the figure to which I linked but which did not post, Figure S9.27 on page 124 of the Haak et al 2015 supplement, the figure for EN is indeed 69%. I'm going to try to post it again. 

Lazaridis and Haak resnorm table.JPG

Whatever the figure you want to use, whether it's the one on page 121 of 51.2 percent, or even the 43% EN from a model with high residuals (i.e. not a good fit), it doesn't change the fact that based on Dodecad K12b, the total of S.W.Asian and Caucasus in the French is 11%. Obviously, there is EN in "Atlantic Med" as well, and as Dienekes pointed out about his own calculator, in North European.

As to your last statement, I personally don't think it is very helpful to rely on the once useful but obviously flawed admixture calculators based on modern populations and relatively modern geographical groupings or components, when the formal stats based on actual ancient genomes give far more accurate results. (I concede you don't get the tightest possible fit using only ancient genomes, as the authors realized, which is why they added the Nganasan and the Bedouin to the graphic I posted.)

In so far as I can tell, PCA's and formal stats and sophisticated Admixture programs indicate that the early EEF samples are all pretty much alike, which is exactly what this Lab has said numerous times. They certainly cluser closely together on PCA's, and there is no marked "eastward" shift in LBK samples:

See Gamba et al:
http://www.nature.com/ncomms/2014/14...comms6257.html


It's true that the LBK did not at first mix very much. As time passed, there was more admixture, but in terms of the initial farmers, whether they were "Cardial" or "LBK", I haven't seen anything which would indicate _major_ differences. If you have data to that effect which is persuasive, i.e. formal stats from academics, not Blogger calculators, I would of course change my opinion. It's true, of course that the EN which fed into Europe through Yamnaya is more "Caucasus" like.

You might also want to take a look at Paschou et al and the thread here discussing it. 

http://www.pnas.org/content/111/25/9211.abstract

http://www.pnas.org/content/suppl/20...11111.sapp.pdf

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads...hlight=Paschou

----------


## Greying Wanderer

> in terms of the initial farmers, whether they were "Cardial" or "LBK", I haven't seen anything which would indicate _major differences._


I don't think there's going to be major differences because they're all mixed to a large extent but the *small* differences will be what provides the clues to the detailed history imo.

----------


## Armoricain

> I'm aware of the figure to which you referred. Haak et al did exhaustive modeling. With each successive model they tried to reduce the residuals (or improve the fit) more and more. The model to which you referred only used EN and WHG. In the subsequent model (page 121), they added the Yamnaya, and the result for EN in the French was 51.2, with lower residuals. In the next model, the figure was 64.3. In the figure to which I linked but which did not post, Figure S9.27 on page 124 of the Haak et al 2015 supplement, the figure for EN is indeed 69%. I'm going to try to post it again. 
> 
> Lazaridis and Haak resnorm table.JPG
> 
> Whatever the figure you want to use, whether it's the one on page 121 of 51.2 percent, or even the 43% EN from a model with high residuals (i.e. not a good fit), it doesn't change the fact that based on Dodecad K12b, the total of S.W.Asian and Caucasus in the French is 11%. Obviously, there is EN in "Atlantic Med" as well, and as Dienekes pointed out about his own calculator, in North European.
> 
> As to your last statement, I personally don't think it is very helpful to rely on the once useful but obviously flawed admixture calculators based on modern populations and relatively modern geographical groupings or components, when the formal stats based on actual ancient genomes give far more accurate results. (I concede you don't get the tightest possible fit using only ancient genomes, as the authors realized, which is why they added the Nganasan and the Bedouin to the graphic I posted.)
> 
> In so far as I can tell, PCA's and formal stats and sophisticated Admixture programs indicate that the early EEF samples are all pretty much alike, which is exactly what this Lab has said numerous times. They certainly cluser closely together on PCA's, and there is no marked "eastward" shift in LBK samples:
> ...


Thank you for all your explanations , I will consult your links with great interest.

----------

