The Eneolithic cemetery at Khvalynsk on the Volga River

Well, we knew this day would come. That phonebook of incorrect predictions is getting bigger and bigger.

Yep, he was wrong even though he gets leaked information from different sources and labs.

do you also have links to maps for other Y-DNA clades?

No, i do not. I agree, Repin is the last major steppe culture left, so we might find R1b-M269 and R1a-M417 there.

Another Y-Haplogroup of interest is R1b-V1636. It was found in the Single Grave Culture, a variant of the Corded ware culture, on the North European Plain and in Arslantepe(Turkey). Arslantepe didn´t had steppe ancestry, though.

Even if Khvalynsk wasn't ancestral to Yamnaya, two of its Y-Haplogroups(J1-CTS1026 and R1b-V1636) were found in Yamnaya-related cultures outside of the Steppe.
 
Yep, he was wrong even though he gets leaked information from different sources and labs.



No, i do not. I agree, Repin is the last major steppe culture left, so we might find R1b-M269 and R1a-M417 there.

Another Y-Haplogroup of interest is R1b-V1636. It was found in the Single Grave Culture, a variant of the Corded ware culture, on the North European Plain and in Arslantepe(Turkey). Arslantepe didn´t had steppe ancestry, though.

Even if Khvalynsk wasn't ancestral to Yamnaya, two of its Y-Haplogroups(J1-CTS1026 and R1b-V1636) were found in Yamnaya-related cultures outside of the Steppe.

Italian-L754+ R1b Villabruna is related to Steppe R1b K754+.
Ripari Villabruna is a small rock shelter in northern Italy with mesolithic burial remains. It contains several Cro-Magnon burials, with bodies and grave goods dated to 14,000 years BP. The site has added greatly to the understanding of the neolithic development of medical[1] and religious practises in early human communities

Villabruna 1 is significant in terms of the history of population genetics: the remains were found to carry Y-DNA haplogroupR1b1a-L754* (xL389,V88). This is the oldest documented example of haplogroup R1b found anywhere.[8]

Middle Eatsern ydna -J1 speaking proto Afro-Asiatic had no words for wheel, there were no Khvalynsk burials with wheels, unlike the earliest Yamnaya R1b-Z2108+.
Haplogroup_J_%28Y-DNA%29.PNG
 
Italian-L754+ R1b Villabruna is related to Steppe R1b K754+.


Villabruna 1 is significant in terms of the history of population genetics: the remains were found to carry Y-DNA haplogroupR1b1a-L754* (xL389,V88). This is the oldest documented example of haplogroup R1b found anywhere.[8]

Middle Eatsern ydna -J1 speaking proto Afro-Asiatic had no words for wheel, there were no Khvalynsk burials with wheels, unlike the earliest Yamnaya R1b-Z2108+.
Haplogroup_J_%28Y-DNA%29.PNG

Villabrunna and other WHGs can´t be the source because neither Yamnaya nor Steppe_Eneolithic have barely if any WHG. R1b and R1a are originally ANE derived haplogroups. When WHGs turn out to be R1b it's likely coming from the minor ANE signal we see in WHGs.

Concerning J1, you have to focus on the precise subclade. J1-CTS1026 distribution doesn't look Afro-Asiatic at all, it looks more IE.
 
Villabrunna and other WHGs can´t be the source because neither Yamnaya nor Steppe_Eneolithic have barely if any WHG. R1b and R1a are originally ANE derived haplogroups. When WHGs turn out to be R1b it's likely coming from the minor ANE signal we see in WHGs.
Yamnaya Ukraine and Yamnaya Samara I0443 L23+ still have WHG, though I0222 is a different branch.
Sample ID / genetic sex (M/F): I5884 / M
Find location: Dereivka
Country: Ukraine
Associated label in publication: Ukraine_Eneolithic
Date: 2890-2696 calBCE (4195±20BP, PSUAMS-2828)
MtDNA haplogroup (mother): U5a2b
Y-DNA haplogroup (father): R1b1a1a2a2 (Z2103)
Reference: Mathieson et al. 2018
Colour group: Steppe (R1b)
Comments: A mixture of western hunter-gatherer, Steppe, and Anatolian farmer ancestry
Other references: null
wang-eneolithic-steppe-caucasus-yamnaya.png


Sample ID / genetic sex (M/F): I0122 / M
Find location: Khvalynsk, Volga River, Samara
Country: Russia
Associated label in publication: Steppe_Eneolithic
Date: 5200-4000 BCE
MtDNA haplogroup (mother): H2a1
Y-DNA haplogroup (father): R1b1a (L754)
Reference: MathiesonNature2015
Colour group: Steppe (R1b)
Comments: The steppe ancestry profile is a mix between EHG and c. 20% Iranian/CHG which seems to begin with Khvalynsk and is carried with all the Yamnaya-related migrations (Narasimhan2018 sup info p. 144-148)
Other references: Narasimhan et al. 2018 (preprint supplementary information p. 142-148)

Concerning J1, you have to focus on the precise subclade. J1-CTS1026 distribution doesn't look Afro-Asiatic at all, it looks more IE.

What about J1-CTS1026 looks IE?
 
Yep, he was wrong even though he gets leaked information from different sources and labs.



No, i do not. I agree, Repin is the last major steppe culture left, so we might find R1b-M269 and R1a-M417 there.

Another Y-Haplogroup of interest is R1b-V1636. It was found in the Single Grave Culture, a variant of the Corded ware culture, on the North European Plain and in Arslantepe(Turkey). Arslantepe didn´t had steppe ancestry, though.

Even if Khvalynsk wasn't ancestral to Yamnaya, two of its Y-Haplogroups(J1-CTS1026 and R1b-V1636) were found in Yamnaya-related cultures outside of the Steppe.

R1b-V1636 may be the one who crossed the Caucasus and founded the Anatolian Indo-European branch.
It was spotted in steppe Maykop and in Kura Araxes Transcaucasia.

Could there also have been a backmigration of J1-CTS1026?

This migration accross the Cauacasus must have happend prior to Maykop.

I believe Ripin came from the north some 5,9 ka. It must have been a fast growing tribe which was Indo-Europeanised the moment they arrived on the steppe.
Ripin was ancestral to all branches of R1b-M269, inclusiv the Yamnaya.
The Yamnaya are not ancestral to the European R1b-L51 branch, but they were 'brothers'.
 
Yamnaya Ukraine and Yamnaya Samara I0443 L23+ still have WHG, though I0222 is a different branch.

wang-eneolithic-steppe-caucasus-yamnaya.png






What about J1-CTS1026 looks IE?

There is a very little (1-2%) WHG in some Yamnaya samples but many had none. It´s likely from Tripolye. If WHGs were the source for Steppe,there would be much more. Also, there is no WHG in Eneolithic_Steppe.


Check the countries on Yfull:

J1-CTS1026:

https://www.yfull.com/tree/J-CTS1026/

Keep in mind that there is also a sample from Afanasievo with J1-CTS1026, a culture identical to Yamnayas Autosomal DNA.
 
R1b-V1636 may be the one who crossed the Caucasus and founded the Anatolian Indo-European branch.
It was spotted in steppe Maykop and in Kura Araxes Transcaucasia.

Yes, that´s possible but must have come with no Autosomal DNA from Steppe cultures. Can you show me those samples i want to check them for steppe ancestry.
 
R1b-V1636 may be the one who crossed the Caucasus and founded the Anatolian Indo-European branch.
It was spotted in steppe Maykop and in Kura Araxes Transcaucasia.

Could there also have been a backmigration of J1-CTS1026?

This migration accross the Cauacasus must have happend prior to Maykop.

I believe Ripin came from the north some 5,9 ka. It must have been a fast growing tribe which was Indo-Europeanised the moment they arrived on the steppe.
Ripin was ancestral to all branches of R1b-M269, inclusiv the Yamnaya.
The Yamnaya are not ancestral to the European R1b-L51 branch, but they were 'brothers'.
In the paper there is no mention of R1b-L23+ or older R1b-M269+. There is also no mention of the Yamnaya conical pottery also found in forest R1b in Baltic M73+.

Yamna01.jpg


https://www.researchgate.net/figure...culture-from-Universitetskoe-3_fig5_301230048



In the Late Eneolithic the steppe territory and the southern part of the forested steppe between the Dnieper and Don was inhabited by the population of the Repin culture and the people who created the Mykhajlivka Middle layer. The first group was a continuation of the Serednij Stig-Chvalynsk culture and other local Neolithic traditions, which consi...


of Upper Volga culture, and also, probably, in thematerials from the Middle Volga River, north-eastern Lake Onega and the Dnepr-Dvina region. Vessels with a conical base spread later and were typical of the forest zone, but much less of forest-steppe andsteppe zones. This testifies to the existence of vari-ous types of vessels among hunter-gatherer groupsin Eastern Europe in the first stages. While richly decorated conical vessels, which are believed to accom-pany hunter-gatherer communities, were not predominant, they appeared much later in Eastern Europe(see for example,Budja 2013; Piezonka 2014.272).The oldest vessels were usually made from a clay paste without temper or from sandy paste withoutorganic temper, which has also been described for some hunter-gatherers of other areas (Skiboet al.1989.140). On the other hand, conical vessels thatappeared in different parts of Europe are often supposed to be of Eastern European origin, such as inthe formation of the Ertebølle complex in NorthernEurope (Gronenborn 2009.541). However, basedon our own observations of the earliest Eastern Euro-pean pottery and the Ertebølle complex, and alsobased on publications (i.e. Jennbert 2011; Glykou 2011), we conclude that these complexes are not di-rectly related, since there are great differences inpottery technologies and forms of the vessels fromboth these complexes. Conical bases were highly varied in terms of technology and morphology, andthe problem of their appearance and development
needs to be investigated
 
Y-DNA Update:

Man some prominent members of the community must be seething, given some of their contrarian theories that IE moved Steppe to Caucasus/Zargos rather than what is kind of obvious.

Now, it seems obvious to me, and a bit vindicating that my understanding turned out right. You can not speak of IE without CHG. For one if you could IE would have developed much earlier with EHG, but no until the specific time EHG CHG mixed we can't speak of IE, proto-IE, or pre-proto-IE...
It grinds my gear when people make it a foregone conclusion that EHG was IE and CHG merely an admixture event. Or likewise when they equate EHG with Yamnaya which later got admixture from CHG.
Not sure I got my sentiment across, but more frequent members of the forum who have followed the discussion over the years know exactly what I am talking about.

Now, as for my own hypothesis, yet again missing evidence to support it. J2b missing yet again from the CHG component of early IE/Yamnaya peoples. This dissuades my confidence in such hypotheses, maybe Sredni Stog as Trojet or Polska (not sure which of the two made the connection) was indeed the location of L283 in the Neolithic.
 
R1b-V1636 may be the one who crossed the Caucasus and founded the Anatolian Indo-European branch.
It was spotted in steppe Maykop and in Kura Araxes Transcaucasia.

Could there also have been a backmigration of J1-CTS1026?

This migration accross the Cauacasus must have happend prior to Maykop.

I believe Ripin came from the north some 5,9 ka. It must have been a fast growing tribe which was Indo-Europeanised the moment they arrived on the steppe.
Ripin was ancestral to all branches of R1b-M269, inclusiv the Yamnaya.
The Yamnaya are not ancestral to the European R1b-L51 branch, but they were 'brothers'.

Yamnaya must have had a vocabulary different from R1b-V1636.

Domesticated horses-signs of milk consumption(R1b-Z2103)- Sintashta and the much older Khvalysnk culture, nothing so far .

Dom2(horse) found in R1b-Z2103-Kurganik predate Potopovka-Sintashta-Corded Ware R1b-Z2103 samples.

Yamnaya Kurgans -Afanasievo-Catacombe(R1b-Z2103)--predate Corded Ware, and Sintashta wheeled vehicle kurgan burials and Anatolian wheel and or wagon burials also not found in Khvalinsk.

Yamnaya-Afanasievo-Catacombe(R1b-Z2103-Z2108) culture with iron tools, weapons, not found in Khvalynsk, predate Anatiolian, Sintashta Corded Ware.

http://www.topoi.org/project/a-5-6/

The oldest eastern European iron objects from the third millennium BC belong to the Yamnaya culture and Catacombnaya culture. Due to their age, these early and middle Bronze Age objects are discussed in more detail......This result is remarkable because Eastern Europe, especially the Cis-Ural region, shows the highest concentration of early and middle Bronze Age “iron objects” in western Eurasia. If these eastern European artifacts actually consist of metallic iron and their dating is correct, we have to rethink the innovation process and the development of iron production.

Iron objects, whose raw material was made from smelted iron ores in bloomery furnaces, occur more frequently in the North Pontic steppe and forest steppe in the context of Late Bronze Age cultures such as Belozerka, Bondarikha and Srubnaya. In the Carpathian-Dniester region as well, a stable presence of iron processing is documented since the end of 11th century BC.
 
From RCO, a member on anthro. Not sure, but I am guessing its part of the paper I do not have access to:

"In the aDNA literature, “steppe ancestry” is a phrase used since Allentoft et al.147 and Haak et al.148 to refer to the typical Yamnaya pattern of genetic ancestry. The principal components of steppe ancestry were EHG & CHG, each in robust proportions, like Khvalynsk, although often with more CHG than in the Khvalynsk/Progress-2 population, with an added component of Anatolian Farmer (AF) ancestry (5–15 %) that was absent from the Khvalynsk/ Progress-2 populations149. Also, the Khvalynsk/Progress-2 mating network has not yet yielded the Y-haplogroup mutations that were directly ancestral to the typical Yamnaya form of R1b (R-Z2103). The R-V1636 form of R1b, found in males at Khvalynsk, Ekaterinovka Mys, Berezhnovka II, and Progress-2, identifies a branch that split from the Yamnaya branch defined by R-P297 > R-M269 > R-L23 > R-Z2103 (yfull.com). This entire branch is absent from the sampled Eneolithic males from the steppes, appearing for the first time in Yamnaya males. The evolution of Yamnaya Y-haplogroup ancestry occurred in a still-unsampled Eneolithic population. The Eneolithic populations around the Dnieper Rapids150 were even more different from Yamnaya. All those sampled were admixtures of EHG (primarily) and Western European Hunter-Gatherers (WHG) similar to the Iron Gates Mesolithic populations151. Among 30 published individuals from three Neolithic and Eneolithic cemeteries (Dereivka-1, Vil’nyaka, and Vovnigi) in the Dnieper River valley dated 5200–4400 BC, assigned to the Dnieper-Donets culture, there were a few individuals with minor (<10 %) CHG ancestry, but most had none152. The Khvalynsk/Progress-2 populations had substantial CHG ancestry but no WHG ancestry, ubiquitous in Dnieper-valley populations. This indicates that the Dnieper-Donets mating network did not extend eastward to the Volga, nor westward to the Criş and early Tripol’ye farmers, whose ancestry was typical of European farmers (AF or EEF)153. The Dnieper-Donets people seem to have been an endogamous population focused on the rich resources of the Dnieper Rapids. Their substantial WHG ancestry, nearly absent in Yamnaya individuals, rules them out from being a major source for the Yamnaya. The Sredni Stog culture succeeded and replaced the Dnieper-Donets culture in the strategic Dnieper Rapids and throughout the steppes of Ukraine beginning around 4500–4300 BCE and ending in the late fourth millennium BCE with the appearance of Yamnaya. Unpublished Sredni Stog male genomes exhibit admixture ‘cocktails’ with the same basic elements as Yamnaya (EHG & CHG & AF). The CHG & EHG component was like Khvalynsk/ Progress-2, suggesting an eastern origin for at least part of the Sredni Stog population, and the AF component could have come from either the early Maikop or Tripol’ye populations. Sredni Stog introduced into the Ukrainian steppes new funeral customs (the Khvalynsk or ‘Yamnaya’ position), ceramic types (shell-tempered like Khvalynsk), and economies (large numbers of horse bones) that had appeared earlier on the Volga. Sredni Stog has for decades been recognized154 as an Eneolithic ancestor of Yamnaya influenced by late Khvalynsk, early Maikop, and the Tripol’ye and Varna cultures. But neither R1b Z-2108 nor its immediate ancestral forms are found among sampled Sredni Stog males, most of whom belonged to the R1a or I haplogroups, unlike Volga males. The sampled Sredni Stog populations included individuals who autosomally resembled Yamnaya a millennium before the Yamnaya culture appeared. But within that population the Yamnaya Y-haplogroup patriline evolved in a region that has not been sampled"



Now I am convinced that each time I mention unpublished samples, I delay them by a month, so won't mention unpublished samples. Just hope all these and further rumored ones see the light of day.
 
Cranio-facial groups and genetic mating networks in the steppes

The cranio-facial types of Khvalynsk and neighboring Eneolithic sites were studied by A. A. Khokhlov in Samara as part of a quantitative metric analysis of 549 skulls from the Volga-Ural region138. Cranio-facial metrics showed that the Khvalynsk population was an admixture of two major components, one (robust, broad-faced) derived from the northern forest zone and the other (more gracile, nar- row-faced) from the southern steppes, a conclusion borne out by aDNA data that came to the same conclusion (see below). Khokhlov further divided each major regional type into two sub-types, so two northern sub-types (Lapp-like and Uralic) and two southern (perhaps lower Don and Caucasus steppe). Khokhlov was uncertain about the exact metric source of the southern component at Khvalynsk, which is also true of the geneticists’ uncertainty about the exact source of the southern genetic component (CHG). His metrics also identified the cranio-facial similarities between most of the first-order relatives discussed above: 12 & 13 brothers, noted as very similar by Khokhlov139; 29 & 30 father-son140; 24 & 25 brother-sister141; and 18 & 33 brothers, noted as similar in Khokhlov142. Also Khokhlov felt that the Khvalynsk II burial plot was designated for the burial of some special group of males who died young, compared to the males in Khvalynsk I. In many ways, cranio-facial metrics, traditional demographic research, and aDNA findings confirmed each other at Khvalynsk.

EHGs skulls resembled Sami and Uralic peoples and CHGs had more gracile southern types but uncertain origin. I always assumed that EHGs weren't Nordic-like but "Amerindian"-like.

Highly likely candidate for a southern population rich in CHG ancestry is the Lower Don culture, like I´ve been saying for a while.
The "Near Eastern" Neolithic Package with domesticated animals spread there very early (7/6th millennium BC), so a migration coming from south of the caucasus is possible.
See here:https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1040618219300126
 
Blogger on iron,

https://musaeumscythia.blogspot.com/2021/10/new-evidence-for-meteoric-iron-objects.html


The oldest known iron smiths of Europe - New evidence for meteoric iron objects belonging the Yamnaya culture



A while ago I stumbled upon a Russian scientific article by N.L Morgunova, M. A. Kulkova and A. M. Kulkov which discussed new findings related to the Yamnaya culture. The researchers analyzed some earlier discovered metal artefacts from the Boldyrevo I Kurgan in the Orenburg region of Russia, and the results confirmed the long-held suspicions of archaeologists that these objects were made of meteoric iron. If the name of that burial sounds familiar it might be because one of the more famous reconstructions of a Yamnaya male was based on the same individual buried in this grave:
This grave was roughly dated to 2873-2471 b.c, making these finds the oldest examples of meteoric iron found in both Europe and Asia, only beaten in antiquity by meteoric iron objects from Egypt which date to about 3200 b.c.
In total there were six iron objects found in the Boldyrevo I grave. One of these artefacts was an iron knife, with a blade of roughly 14 centimeters long, another was an adze and another was a chisel-like object. The other three objects were not able to be properly identified.
According to David W. Anthony in 'The Horse, The Wheel and Language' there was an particular iron dagger attributed to the Catacomb culture, uncovered at a site in eastern Ukraine. But unlike these meteoric iron objects, this one was a bit different:
"A Catacomb-period grave at Gerasimovka on the Donets, probably dated around 2500 BCE, contained a knife with a handle made of arsenical bronze and a blade made of iron. The iron did not contain magnetite or nickel, as would be expected in meteoric iron, so it is thought to have been forged. Iron objects were rare, but they were part of the experiments conducted by steppe metalsmiths during the Early and Middle Bronze Ages, long before iron began to be used in Hittite Anatolia or the Near East."
If this is true, that would be interesting because I know that the Kaman-Kalehöyük site in Anatolia around 2200-1900 b.c also had early signs of iron smelting. The oldest known evidence for steel also comes from this site. The Hittites were of course famous for their early development of iron smelting, and this site has been linked to early Hittites.
Some of the samples from this sites showed up with a degree of ancestry hailing from the Pontic-Caspian steppes from what I have seen. But you do not have to take my word for it. You can read more about the steppe ancestry in this post from the blog Eurogenes:
Hittite era Anatolians in qpAdm

new-evidence-for-meteoric-iron-objects.html



new-evidence-for-meteoric-iron-objects.html





new-evidence-for-meteoric-iron-objects.html
 
Man some prominent members of the community must be seething, given some of their contrarian theories that IE moved Steppe to Caucasus/Zargos rather than what is kind of obvious.

Now, it seems obvious to me, and a bit vindicating that my understanding turned out right. You can not speak of IE without CHG. For one if you could IE would have developed much earlier with EHG, but no until the specific time EHG CHG mixed we can't speak of IE, proto-IE, or pre-proto-IE...
It grinds my gear when people make it a foregone conclusion that EHG was IE and CHG merely an admixture event. Or likewise when they equate EHG with Yamnaya which later got admixture from CHG.
Not sure I got my sentiment across, but more frequent members of the forum who have followed the discussion over the years know exactly what I am talking about.

Now, as for my own hypothesis, yet again missing evidence to support it. J2b missing yet again from the CHG component of early IE/Yamnaya peoples. This dissuades my confidence in such hypotheses, maybe Sredni Stog as Trojet or Polska (not sure which of the two made the connection) was indeed the location of L283 in the Neolithic.

I think you’ll see L283 pop up in early IE people who predated the Yamnaya by about 700-800 years. At least this is my best guess at this time. There is a Suvorovo burial from Giurgiulesti, Moldova that dates back to about 4100 BC. It’s located right on the border with Ukraine and Moldova. I know for a fact that samples from this precise location were sent to the Reich Lab in 2019/2020. Henry Shephard, one of the authors along with Reich and Lazaridis, of the Southern Arc paper, even mentions this location in one of his research articles from 2019/2020. Early on, it was rumored that this eneolithic L283 sample comes from the border of Moldova and Ukraine. This Giurgiulesti Suvorovo site is the best fit so far. If this proves to be the case, then this would tie L283 to the Suvorovo Novodanilovka complex, which comes from Sredny Stog. There was a branch of these Suvorovo chieftains who migrated to eastern Hungary around 4000-3900 BC. They were called the Csongrad Suvorovo. A very small group. They moved through Romania to Hungary via the Mures River. This river is also known as the Maros River in Hungary. Sound familiar? L283 was already found in Mokrin, Serbia as part of that Maros Culture find and there also another ancient L283 in the pipeline (2000 BC) from around Szeged, Hungary. Szeged also sits on the Maros River near where the Csongrad Suvorovo settled.

Remember, Davidski over at Eurogenes took down his old blog post about L283 arriving to the Balkans via Mediterranean traders. I suspect he may have some inside info re: ancient L283 samples from the areas mentioned above. He has even alluded to ancient L283 popping up in an area where people would least expect it. To me, that’s a pretty big clue.
 
I think you’ll see L283 pop up in early IE people who predated the Yamnaya by about 700-800 years. At least this is my best guess at this time. There is a Suvorovo burial from Giurgiulesti, Moldova that dates back to about 4100 BC. It’s located right on the border with Ukraine and Moldova. I know for a fact that samples from this precise location were sent to the Reich Lab in 2019/2020. Henry Shephard, one of the authors along with Reich and Lazaridis, of the Southern Arc paper, even mentions this location in one of his research articles from 2019/2020. Early on, it was rumored that this eneolithic L283 sample comes from the border of Moldova and Ukraine. This Giurgiulesti Suvorovo site is the best fit so far. If this proves to be the case, then this would tie L283 to the Suvorovo Novodanilovka complex, which comes from Sredny Stog. There was a branch of these Suvorovo chieftains who migrated to eastern Hungary around 4000-3900 BC. They were called the Csongrad Suvorovo. A very small group. They moved through Romania to Hungary via the Mures River. This river is also known as the Maros River in Hungary. Sound familiar? L283 was already found in Mokrin, Serbia as part of that Maros Culture find and there also another ancient L283 in the pipeline (2000 BC) from around Szeged, Hungary. Szeged also sits on the Maros River near where the Csongrad Suvorovo settled.

Remember, Davidski over at Eurogenes took down his old blog post about L283 arriving to the Balkans via Mediterranean traders. I suspect he may have some inside info re: ancient L283 samples from the areas mentioned above. He has even alluded to ancient L283 popping up in an area where people would least expect it. To me, that’s a pretty big clue.

Thanks a lot Polska. As always it is a pleasure to read your detailed posts.
A lot to unpack with this one, but too many dots connect for it to be mere coincidence, can't wait to find out one way or the other.
 
Thanks a lot Polska. As always it is a pleasure to read your detailed posts.
A lot to unpack with this one, but too many dots connect for it to be mere coincidence, can't wait to find out one way or the other.

The wait for these samples is ridiculous. I noticed user “CopperAxe” over at Eurogenes had been in contact with Nadezhda Kotova. She is a Ukrainian researcher who specializes in Sredny Stog. She confirmed that a number of SS ancient samples had been sent to Harvard’s Reich Lab for sequencing. Also, I noticed that Henry Shephard has updated his online resume. One slight change that I noticed is that the Southern Arc paper we’ve been waiting on has switched publishers. It was originally supposed to be in the journal Science, but now it shows Nature as the prospective publisher. Maybe it was supposed to be Nature all along and he was correcting a mistake?
 
The wait for these samples is ridiculous. I noticed user “CopperAxe” over at Eurogenes had been in contact with Nadezhda Kotova. She is a Ukrainian researcher who specializes in Sredny Stog. She confirmed that a number of SS ancient samples had been sent to Harvard’s Reich Lab for sequencing. Also, I noticed that Henry Shephard has updated his online resume. One slight change that I noticed is that the Southern Arc paper we’ve been waiting on has switched publishers. It was originally supposed to be in the journal Science, but now it shows Nature as the prospective publisher. Maybe it was supposed to be Nature all along and he was correcting a mistake?

Nice catch. Given that from what I heard the peer review process is supposed to take two to four weeks and its been 4 months, I suspect there is a lot going on behind the scenes.

Would not be surprising if they had to rewrite huge parts of the paper, redo the statistical analysis / qualitative analysis, or even change their very hypotheses. This is just my suspicion since already having the data, and these many brains/CVs on it, four months to get through peer review is major red flag, but then again the paper itself will be groundbreaking and possibly in books for decades to come so maybe the due diligence is warranted. The two to four weeks for peer review process I think someone mentioned at Anthrogenica regarding Science journal reviews, don't quote me on it.
 
The wait for these samples is ridiculous. I noticed user “CopperAxe” over at Eurogenes had been in contact with Nadezhda Kotova. She is a Ukrainian researcher who specializes in Sredny Stog. She confirmed that a number of SS ancient samples had been sent to Harvard’s Reich Lab for sequencing. Also, I noticed that Henry Shephard has updated his online resume. One slight change that I noticed is that the Southern Arc paper we’ve been waiting on has switched publishers. It was originally supposed to be in the journal Science, but now it shows Nature as the prospective publisher. Maybe it was supposed to be Nature all along and he was correcting a mistake?

Interesting. Perhaps that is the case but then I wonder why some folks were saying it got through the first peer review round on Science journal. I honestly like to forget about the existence of these unpublished papers, makes the wait feel much shorter.
 
What about J1-CTS1026 looks IE?

Well, we can't be sure, but the country distribution (Balkans, Anatolia, Caucasus) looks similar to the modern distribution of R-Z2103 and I-L699, which are the Yamnaya clades. Yfull is also missing a lot of data we know, for example I-L699 in Dodecanesian Greeks (could be of Greek or Anatolian origin). R-PF7562 is like that as well.
 

This thread has been viewed 11847 times.

Back
Top