@BoNe > dices:
1- El Yamnaya Z2103 tenía un 40% de estepa, el CW R1a un 35-40%, los ibéricos un 25% en el norte y un 20% en el sur en la zona de Argar, el PF7562 y el Z2103 de los Balcanes un 20-25%.
2- Los Campaniformes Alemanes son el resultado de la migración hacia el norte de los Campaniformes del sur, quienes se mezclaron con mujeres de la cultura CW y terminaron con un 30% de población esteparia. Todos estos clanes practicaban el intercambio de mujeres, y con el tiempo sabremos con mayor precisión qué grupos se mezclaban con cuáles.
3- De ninguna manera es confiable hacer especulaciones con mezclas autosómicas sin verificar los haplogrupos Y de las poblaciones actuales.
mi respuesta:
1- La CWC alemana tenía mucho más del 40% de 'estepa' (más bien el 70% en la mayoría de sus viviendas), incluso la CWC suiza tenía más del 40%, incluso mixta, y las BB del norte eran al principio alrededor del 50% de 'estepa' o un poco más, a pesar de que estaban allí completamente YR-P312 - para el norte, ¿no confundiste con 'estepa' la mezcla interna de EHG y caucásica/iraní?
2- ¿Intercambios entre hembras? De acuerdo. El hecho es que, al quedarse mayoritariamente con el genotipo R-P312, perdieron parte de su herencia esteparia. No es que con todas estas mezclas adquirieran más herencia esteparia, incluso si ya la tenían o si habían adquirido/transmitido mutaciones de la herencia esteparia.
3- Toda herramienta puede ser útil, aunque en lo que respecta a la importancia de los haplotipos uniparentales, los haplotipos Y aún más.
The percentages of “steppe” are, in most cases, misinterpreted; it’s a very archaic and broad term, nothing precise.
That modeling was created in reference to the L51* specimen from 2800 BC in Samara from the 2018 Bell Beakers article.
There are no populations with more than 40% “steppe”; the 70% that many repeat is over that 40%, a lot of people distort that data due to lack of real knowledge of the context or because of biased narratives.
Autosomal modeling is useless on a large scale in almost all academic articles; if a sample has 15% base coverage and the modeling only reads 70% of that 15%, at the end of the day, what the **** have we been doing? Exactly, mental masturbation; you take a known percentage and maximize it over the 90% you don’t know, and space Yamnayas appear.
All articles should have an extra with several different modelings, not one based on the previous 5 paywalled articles.
Modelings based on only 200 samples in a very short time become outdated; 10 years after their creation, they only lead to a distorted understanding of a past reality.
Year 2025 and we still don’t know what an Iron Age Greek is, but those who have worked on compiling the unpublished samples… neither do they, because they’re useless who don’t know how to refine BAM files; basically, they prevent mortals who do know how to look at it from doing so for 5-10 years, that’s why nothing ever leaks in this field.
People call leaks when they make BAM files public that maybe have been public for many years before but no one had paid attention.
The biggest problem in this field is always the methodology up to the formation of the file (way of collecting and processing the sample), and then on top of that, they always use outdated family trees, which makes it even worse; I think I read that this same article presented in 2025 uses a 2018 ISOGG tree, that’s the level in more or less all of them.
About 2800 BC, the date of the Samara they used to model the “steppe people” back then, it could already have P312** alive in parallel for 200 years and even could have 50 branches in operation.
I place the birth of P312** in the Iberian Peninsula because otherwise the phylogenetic tree of R1b-P312 doesn’t make sense, but here no one is a fortune teller; for those who argue that L151* was present in the CW… it’s a dead line, none of them have the P312* mutation, in one there’s U106 and we’re equally in dates where P312** had already been born and was already diversified. There’s a parallel branch still alive P310* in the Balkans; I’ve also seen articles where in southern Italy they marked some rates of P310* when P312 and U106 were being analyzed.
By 2600 BC, there were easily 400 P312* branches.
What sense does it make to model an L51* plagued with accumulated endogamy from R1A and Z2103 with Iberian populations?
I’ve modeled and experimented a lot back in the day with admixture, qpadm, etc.; it’s a toy tool because we don’t have a way to feed the machine correctly; it’s forcing a puzzle where pieces are missing, and only the Y chromosome points the way; I myself could sell any bullshit (slip in lies) to any academic who signs archaeogenetics papers because their level of knowledge in bioinformatics is null; in this same forum, I’ve read people who seem to have learned on their own to refine BAM files and with practically no experience are better than the “bioinformaticians” who work for Olalde; I don’t know if he does that part himself, if he does, his refinement is very bad.
The programs they use for modeling aren’t bad because of the biological engineering that processes the program; they are programs that read genealogical circuits; the one handling it must have solid knowledge in the base of allelic crossings, not just “button mashing” until an average fits; all these modelings are bad because of the number of samples they use to model with; modeling a Hispanic P312, like the case of EHU002 from Hundido de Burgos (the empirical specimen with the P312* ZZ11* mutation and (ZZ12_1 with confusing signals)) with a Samara L51* from 2800 BC is like modeling an ancient Jew using a current Moor.
That would be an “practical” approximate comparison of the stupidity they did.
The P312* had absolutely nothing to do with the Z2103* and will never have anything to do with them except that both descend from L23, and that’s a story 1000 years before the Yamnaya and the Bell Beakers. Even the horses were from totally different haplogroups; the eastern battle ponies were from Y P*, D*, DA1*, Db* haplogroups; the horses that replaced the rest with 1.60 cm at the withers in the Iron Age of Iberia from Y Po*, DA1_U* and DAC haplogroups.
P312* are only 3 main ethnic branches despite there being 9 large P312* branches.
Of the 3 big ones, no matter how many twists they give to the matter, DF27** is notably the oldest and the largest.
DF27 alone is as big as U152 and L21 combined worldwide. DF27: 120 million L21: 60 million U152: 50 million
I saw in another forum an Englishman claiming that L21* was the one with the most SNPs and therefore thought it was the one with the most reproductive success of all P312 clades, but that’s not the case; that only refers to the fact that people with L21 are the ones who have done the most modern DNA tests and therefore it’s the one with the most documented SNPs.
If the southern part of Europe had the same number of samples in proportion, you could see it more clearly.
Peer-reviewed studies have only analyzed Z195* of all P312 and just with that branch it already comes out that the Iberians are the oldest Z195* in all of Europe.
The next oldest P312 branches will be the Italic U152; the bottleneck of L21 is below DF13, a clade 100 years on average younger than DF27>Z195, DF27>ZZ12_1 or U152>L2. Each of those are very different paths.
ZZ12_1* is probably older than Z195*; it’s still not very known due to the lack of specific data from the west of Spain but it has more than 30 documented branches in DNA houses and all 30 are present in the Iberian Peninsula; the illiterate Olalde and his oligophrenic buddies used a fucking outdated ISOGG tree on purpose for Basque and Catalan independence issues. In 2022, everyone already knew about the ZZ12_1 branch but in the 2022 reviewed article it doesn’t appear; it’s lamentable; if they did it for political reasons it’s bad, but if they did it out of ignorance, even much worse.
Back to the article presented in the thread, I’d give it a 2 out of 10 for what a DNA paper should be. They should be talking about what type of Z198 branch was found in those sites, if Z198>M167>CTS4299 which is 30% of current Catalans or the more archaic Z198>CTS4118 or Z198>ZS312, but no; instead, they mention that imaginary steppe R1a or Z2103 are yet to arrive, since the steppe P312 never existed.
That they don’t address these topics can only indicate that current academics are illiterate in the subject for which they get paid from public subsidies and are 10 years behind reality; this field doesn’t look like it’s going to change in its woke methodology based on autosomal mixtures that are easily biasable at will.
I really can’t wrap my head around how the Anglo-Saxon current thinks that the Bell Beakers were born in Germany when they are culturally 400 years older in the Iberian Peninsula and the oldest P312* has been the EHU002 sample from Burgos since 2015, which was when the original BAM files of the first Bell Beaker article presented in 2018 were created, and since then no more basal P312* has appeared.
On the topic of females… Realize how long the DNA houses are taking to classify them; the mt part is an infinite chaos, but many apparently Iberian-origin mt clades moved in parallel as the Bell Beaker culture expanded.
With the Y chromosome, you could know down to the millimeter even where the historical Jesus took a shit; with mt, totally impossible to track anything.
In practical life, the mother’s thing is science and the father’s belief; everyone knows with a greater degree of certainty that they came out of their mother’s pussy but it’s hard to prove that you came out of your father’s dick.
In archaeogenetics, it’s the opposite; the Y chromosome is God and mt speculative; autosomal mixtures directly are schizophrenia.
Autosomal mixtures are references in which you have to have a clear context of the entire current reality, not preach 4 specific papers as if they were the bible.
P312 has an INHUMAN pedigree collapse; from being 1 single specimen in 3000 BC to more than 200 million today… that equals a collapse of a number with more than 50 zeros. (Focus on the fact that 1 million has 9 zeros)
Technical explanation:
The P312 pedigree collapse can be expressed like this: • 200 generations × 25 years = 5,000 years (≈3000 BC → present) • Theoretical growth: 2^{200} ≈ 1.6 × 10^{60} possible ancestors • Current effective population: 2 × 10⁸
Therefore: \frac{2^{200}}{2 × 10^8} ≈ 8 × 10^{51}
This implies a pedigree collapse of an order of 10⁵² (a 1 followed by ~52 zeros). In practical terms, ancestral redundancy is almost total: each current individual descends thousands of trillions of times from the same original founders, which explains the reproductive success and massive persistence of the P312 lineage.
It’s funny when someone drops the prefabricated phrase that the Y chromosome only contributes 2% of the total… What happens when a specimen repeats in the family tree trillions of times?
I’ve seen dogs in exhibitions that were children of their grandmother (crossing a world champion with his mother) with less degree of endogamy than Bronze Age humans.
The bottleneck didn’t happen randomly; it would be like saying that Anglo-Americans invented the iPhone by chance.
Something that people have trouble assimilating is that all Bell Beaker descendants understood genealogies horizontally, not vertically like today.
In the Bronze Age, the higher degree of endogamy you had without side effects, the purer and more related to your Gods you were. The child who came out a bit crooked was thrown off a cliff like the Spartans did, and if you didn’t do it, you were simply a bad person; let’s say it was the equivalent of aborting a Down syndrome in the present (as cruel as it may sound).
Everyone who thinks that endogamy is always bad simply doesn’t understand absolutely anything about genetics; only with extreme endogamy can specimens superior to others be created.
P.S. with some little-known random data that should be discussed in these studies since it’s totally in line with the haplogroups of the area:
There’s a lot of outdated technicality regarding bronze, but eastern bronzes until 2000 BC were arsenical copper; mixing it with tin was something much more exclusive to the Atlantic.
The oldest empirical evidences of steel in Europe are in El Argar in two different versions. A sword pommel ornament with gold and meteoric steel. A bracelet of low-nickel steel (not meteoric steel) but without signs of carburization.
Date 1900-1800 BC, most probable responsible haplogroup Z198.
The next ones in the Lusitanian west in a chisel in this case carburized dated to 950 BC, most probable responsible haplogroup ZZ12_1, 150 years before the arrival of the Phoenicians.
The Iberians knew steel 1200 years before what popular academia estimated.
In addition, in El Argar and Motillas del Azuer are the first evidences of lime mortar. 2000 years before the arrival of the Romans.
.