Joł, joł, joł!!! I co a nie mówiłem, czyli pisałem?!! Piję tu do tego, co napisałem Robertowi, o tym, że nad tymi danymi zapadnie dumna i błogosławiona cisza… Łatwowiernym ludkom wydaje się, że jak odbezpieczony granat wpadł w szambo, to nie wybuchnie, bo go gówno zakręconych pomówień zalepi, jak zalepia usta, uszy i mózgi, tym, którzy w tym szambie pływają, jak ryby w mętnej wodzie… To se ne wrati pane Majdanek… Granat, albo raczej ich wiązka nieubłaganie wybuchnie jeden po drugim, a to co do tej pory usłyszeliście, to był TYLKO JEGO PLUSK… 🙂
Z dobrego serca radzę… czytać źródła… myśleć samodzielnie i błagać o zmiłowanie… Z tym zmiłowaniem to żartowałem…
Jeśli kogoś coś ochlapało, no to pomyślcie co upowszechnię pod koniec tygodnia… Na razie też dumnie będę siedział cicho… aczkolwiek… powrzucam trochę kamyków, popuszczam sobie trochę bączków… jak ten poniżej…
Zakładam, że i z tych danych też wolne umysły niewiele zrozumio, no ale znajcie pańską łaskę, bo co nieco podpowiem… Spójrzcie jakie R1a jest odkryte i gdzie, itd,.. Ma to związek z powstaniem języków bałtyjskich…
Czy ktoś rozumie już,.. CZEGO TAM NIE MA?!! 🙂
Kurcze!!! Ludzie to jest kolejny materiał na obrazoburczy wpis!!! Upowszechniam tu nie tylko to, co dotyczy północy i Bałtów, bo także to, co dotyczy Scytów, jak i dwóch różnych zestawów mtDNA odnajdywanych w Europie!!!
Łapacze ruskich trolli, czy innych szpionów Putina, wiecie już, że macie przechlapane? Myślę, że Świadomość Nieskończona „trochę” sobie z was i waszych mondrości zażartowała… 🙂 LOL 🙂
Ludzie… to KONIEC bredzeń o „starożytności” języka litweskiego i innych bałtyjskich… Tak, tak Sławomirze… Za prawdę powiadam Ci, poszukuj podkładu językowego w j. polskim… 🙂
Po ….. zamieszczam resztę ciekawostek o Scytach, Afanasiewo, Andronowo i Sintashta… hehehe
Friday, March 3, 2017
The genetic history of Northern Europe (or rather the South Baltic)
A second preprint in only a few days on the Neolithic transition in the Baltic region has just appeared at bioRxiv: Mittnik et al. 2017. You can read about the first one here. Keep in mind also that we recently saw a paper on the same topic at Current Biology.
Can’t these labs coordinate things a little better and perhaps focus on different parts of Europe? Wouldn’t that be the sensible thing to do considering the limited funding for ancient DNA research?
Nevertheless, Mittnik et al. is an important addition to what we’ve already seen, for me mainly because it shows that largely unadmixed Western Hunter-Gatherers (WHG) lived in the South Baltic region at least as late as ~4,450 calBCE, which is the date assigned to the four Narva samples in the preprint. So now we have a plausible explanation for the inflated WHG-related ancestry in modern-day Balts and Northern Slavs.
Despite its geographically vicinity to EHG [Eastern Hunter-Gatherers], the eastern Baltic individual associated with the Mesolithic Kunda culture shows a very close affinity to WHG in all our analyses, with a small but significant contribution from EHG or SHG [Scandinavian Hunter-Gatherer], as revealed by significant D-statistics of the form D(Kunda, WHG; EHG/SHG, Mbuti) (Z>3; Supplementary Information Table S2).
The results for the Kunda individual are mirrored in the four later eastern Baltic Neolithic hunter-gatherers of the Narva culture (Fig. 2) and further supported by the lack of significantly positive results for the D-statistic D(Narva, Kunda; X, Mbuti) (Supplementary Information Table S2) demonstrating population continuity at the transition from Mesolithic to Neolithic, which in the eastern Baltic region is signified by a change in networks of contacts and the use of pottery rather than a stark shift in economy as seen in Central and Southern Europe .
Furthermore, the individual Spiginas2, which is dated to the very end of the Late Neolithic, has a higher proportion of the hunter-gatherer ancestry, as seen in ADMIXTURE (darker blue component in Fig. 2b), and is estimated to be admixed between 78±4% Central European CWC and 22±4% Narva (Supplementary Information Table S6). A reliance on marine resources persisted especially in the north-eastern Baltic region until the end of the Late Neolithic  and in combination with the proposed large population size for Baltic hunter-gatherers a ‘resurgence’ of hunter-gatherer ancestry in the local population through admixture between foraging and farming groups is likely, and has been described for the European Middle Neolithic [2,30].
The only gripe I have with this manuscript are the Principal Component Analyses (PCA). They just look messy and appear to suffer from projection bias, so they’re hard to read and probably confusing for a lot of people.
Projection bias is also known as shrinkage. Basically it’s when the PCA space shrinks for the projected samples compared to the reference samples. It happens a lot in ancient DNA papers. I find it irritating. But whenever I bring up this issue with authors of these papers, I’m basically told that their PCA look like other PCA from similar papers, so there’s no problem. So, essentially, since everybody’s doing it wrong, then it’s the right way to do it. Awesome logic there.
Posted by Davidski
Very satisfying to see one issue resolved, both of the Narva folk are I2a1. If I remember one of the early R1a’s in the last paper seemed to be placed between Kunda and the Early Ceramic and I thought it was a little too close to the ceramic (I can’t remember but I thought it was labelled Narva. Seems like that line is clarified a little. Still think ceramics came from East to West primarily through Baikal, despite whatever happened in Mali or whatever.
March 3, 2017 at 9:27 PM
@ Bell Beaker
However, Narva has ceramics and their Eastern admixture is minimal. So I think the story is a lot more complex than a simple diffusion ex Siberia
March 3, 2017 at 9:58 PM
I think we might be saying the same thing. Narva is almost fully WHG, but the transition from Narva to what they call the EN is pretty drastic. My thought was that the transition to the ceramic was brought by immigrants up the Volga and that’s when you start to see lineages like Karelia man and all the mtdna alphabet.
Wow, that’s a stark picture of some drum-beating, canoe-paddling hunters. Almost uniformly U. Roy posted the link of the Mesolithic Sardinians. That’s some weird stuff too.
March 3, 2017 at 10:15 PM
Blogger Davidski said…
I think we might be saying the same thing. Narva is almost fully WHG, but the transition from Narva to what they call the EN is pretty drastic. I’m guessing you mean north of Lithuania? In Lithuania, and presumably Belarus, it looks like Corded Ware ran into very WHG-like Narva. By the way, I finally had a look at the Y-HG results in this paper. Not even I expected as much R1a as we’re seeing in Corded Ware. It’s almost weird.
March 3, 2017 at 10:21 PM
The Narva individual Spiginas1 (dated to ca. 4440–4240 cal BCE) belongs to a mitochondrial haplogroup of the H branch providing the first direct evidence that this branch was present among European foragers without gene-flow from farmers (Extended Data Table 1)
March 3, 2017 at 10:46 PM
Blogger bellbeakerblogger said…
Yes, once again, I think we are saying the same thing. (It must be me). I am also surprised at the uniformity in these Hg’s. It must be the social structure of the Volga region cultures that cause y-chromosome frequencies to nearly fixate.
March 3, 2017 at 10:50 PM
2x I2a1 in Narva. So the Slavic I2a1 has hunter gatherer origin or farmer?
March 3, 2017 at 11:37 PM
Two CWC samples Gyvakarai1 and Plinkaigalis242 lack the early farmer component also missing in EMBA Steppe samples. Gyvakarai1 is R1a-M417
“The presence of ancestry from the Pontic Steppe among Baltic CWC individuals without the Anatolian farming component must be due to a direct migration of steppe pastoralists that did not pick up this ancestry in Central Europe. This could lend support to a linguistic model that sees a branching of Balto-Slavic from a Proto-IndoEuropean homeland in the west Eurasian steppe”
So M417 is probably Baltoslavic from the steppe.
CWC from Olsund in Sweden has Balto-Slavic R1a-Z645 and is genetically more similar to Baltic CWC than to German CWC.
“This could indicate that the route of CWC expansion into Northern Sweden might have not been northward from Southern Scandinavia but instead westward across the Baltic Sea either by boat or over the frozen sea during winter”
March 4, 2017 at 12:24 AM
Those Baltic_BA samples have a lot of hunter-gatherer ancestry, more than modern-day Lithuanians. That’s what those D-stats are showing. The East Asian signal in Estonians isn’t surprising. They probably got it from the same place as their N1c.
March 4, 2017 at 12:43 AM
Volodymyr Lutsyk said…
„So the Slavic I2a1 has hunter gatherer origin or farmer?”
Hunter-gatherer. The highest numbers of I2a1 are to be seen in western and central Polesie from where it spread in all directions together with early Slavic migrations. There was one I2a in Dnieper-Donets culture, in which there are clear connections with late Mesolithic Ertebelle culture
March 4, 2017 at 1:26 AM
Olympus Mons said…
Its becoming pure madness to state that r1b in western Europe came from a steppe migration and not showing up by 2500BC as bell beakers considerably mixed with R1a and even a fair amount of Q1a. Pure madness. For those who post about confirmation bias and motivational reasoning…food for thought.
March 4, 2017 at 2:11 AM
„2x I2a1 in Narva So the Slavic I2a1 has hunter gatherer origin or farmer?”
There is no doubt that the ancient paternal „Slavic” marker is of hunter gatherer origin. Currently, however, we have no certainty as to its exact whereabouts in the Neolithic and Bronze ages. None of the discovered ancient DNA (so far) is „Slavic” I2a (=CTS 10228 and subclades). Which is not too surprising since the formation time acc. to Y full is 3.300 BCE followed by a very lengthy 3,000 year „survival period”. And none of the specific aDNA markers post M-423 which „lead up” to the Slavic I2a have been found either. Only side branches, quite removed, thereof. Dnipro-Donets, Motala, Narva (here discussed) are just that. We would need an L-621 to see some possibility of ancient movement. So at the moment, the best guess is that the ancestors of the I2a Slavs were hiding just about anywhere they could not easily thrive. In „hunter-gatherer rich” areas of the north…
March 4, 2017 at 8:47 AM
Are we now saying that Narva culture is no longer Finnic in origin and ancestors of the ancient Balts?
March 4, 2017 at 9:48 AM
Volodymyr Lutsyk said…
„In „hunter-gatherer rich” areas of the north…”
Agreed. Vadim Verenich published a very extensive article on this topic. His main findings are consistent with the Doggerland theory and the movement of huge numbers of Western hunter-gatherers to the East in the 7th millenium BC (6500-6200BC). Doggerland submersion obviously played a great role in the spread of I2a in the Baltic and Eastern Europe. Though we should not rule out a much earlier presence of I2a in Eastern Europe (Swiderian culture (11000-8000BC)). But the post-6000BC movement is clearly obvious in the forest and forest-steppe zone cultures of Eastern Europe. There was a growing presence of warfare and violent deaths in that period. Its impulses even reached Volga and Ural. https://verenich.wordpress.com/2013/12/27/происхождение-гаплогруппы-i2a-и-путь-миг/
March 4, 2017 at 10:06 AM
Indeed. I read Verenich’s great study a while back. I’m not a linguist, but I found one of his later points intriguing: the notion that Slavic speech was basically formed via a „deflection” of R1a „Baltic” by the lost language of I2a HG’s. Do you happen to know the source of this idea? He has a bibliography but does not refer this point specifically.
March 4, 2017 at 10:56 AM
UWAGA!!! BARDZO WAŻNE!!!
OT: For the other paper we haven’t talked about much here, anyone have any thoughts about the two Mesolithic, pre-Neolithic Sardinian mtdna sequences? http://www.nature.com/articles/srep42869. I3 and J2b1, not U, suggesting the pre-Neolithic may not have been WHG / Villabruna, in which case lower degree of WHG incorporation in Sardinia compared to the rest of Europe may make sense.
Of course, there is some increased WHG compared to Anatolian, so incorporated groups must have either been richer in WHG than Anatolian, or substantial population replacement happened after the Early Neolithic (both seem likely).
They run models supporting total replacement over any admixture, but unsure how strong this modeling is, and how much it squares (or does not) with previous work earlier this year on Sardinian specific mtdna haplogroups, and with effects of culture and natural selection.
Remaining question is also how typical WHG-atypical mtdna was for South Europe below the 43rd parallel before the Neolithic. Is this general or specific only to Sardinia? Continenza (central Italy 11200 BP – 10510 BP) suggests WHG-typical mtdna was typical.
March 4, 2017 at 12:19 PM
Ted Kandell con Roy King e Oleg Balanovsky a Scythia.
A new ancient DNA paper came out today that sequenced ancient Scythians. We now have 5 sequences from ancient Scythians.
Notice the R1b1a2a2-CTS1078 (R1b-Z2105).
They were at the minimum:
Interestingly both Afontova Gora 2 (AG2) and Saqqaq Man from Greenland were Q1a-F903. It looks like the Scythians mixed with Yeniseian language speakers like the Kets and with Paleosiberians like the Koryaks.
Supplementary Table 22. Y-chromosome haplogroups
ID Y-haplogroup Polymorphisms
I0563 R1a1a1b2 Z93:7552356G->A
I0575 R1b1a2a2 CTS1078:7186135G->C, S20902:18383837C->T
I0577 R1a1a1b S441:7683058G->A
IS2 Q1a F903:7014317G->C, M1168:22155597G->A
I0247 R1a1a1b2a2a Z2123:16453077C->T
Supplementary Table 20.
Harvard ID Mainz ID Site Culture/Label Date # SNPs Sex
I0563 Be11 Berel’, Kazakhstan Pazyryk_IA 4th–3rd c. BC 420749 M
I0575 PR3 Pokrovka, Russia EarlySarmatian_IA 5th–2nd c. BC 306498 M
I0577 A10 Arzhan, Russia AldyBel_IA 7th–6th c. BC 427557 M
IS2 IS2 Ismailovo, Kazakhstan ZevakinoChilikta_IA 9th–7th c. BC 74469 M
I0247 SVP56 Nadezhdinka, Volga Steppes, Samara Scythian IA 380-200 calBCE 951,695 M
BTW, autosomally, those most descended from the Western Scythians are the Persians from Eastern Iran and the Azeris from Azerbaijan, and those most descended from the Eastern Scythians are the Tuvans from the Altai.
Unterländer et al. (2017) samples I0563, I0575, I0577, IS2:
Ancestry and demography and descendants of Iron Age nomads of the Eurasian Steppe
Gioiello Tognoni Sample: #YF02873 (R-Z2110) ChrY position: 8446627 (+strand) Reads: 13 Position data: 13A Weight for A: 1.0 Probability of error: 0.0 (01) Sample allele: A Reference (hg19) allele: A Known SNPs at this position: Y21707 (A->G)
Reference sequence (100bp): CTCCATGGGACCTGATTCTTGCACACAGCCTCTTTCGGGAATGAAGTCAG
Sample ID HG 8446627
ERR1347675 R-Y21707 G
YF05663 R-Y21707 G
YF02873 R-Z2110* A [Gioiello Tognoni]
R-Z2108 Z2109/CTS1843 * Z21085300 ybp, TMRCA CI 95% 69005300 ybp” class=”age”formed 6100 ybp, TMRCA 6100 ybp
⦁ id:NA20866 – GIH
R-Y20993 Y20993 * KMS88 * KMS62+5 SNPs5300 ybp, TMRCA CI 95% 58003700 ybp” class=”age”formed 6100 ybp, TMRCA 4700 ybp
⦁ id:YF03134 –
R-Y21707 A12360 * A12369 * A12364+8 SNPs3700 ybp, TMRCA CI 95% 38001950 ybp” class=”age”formed 4700 ybp, TMRCA 2800 ybp
⦁ id:ERR1347675 + ДагестанреспубликаRUS [RU-DA]
⦁ id:YF05663 + IRQ [IQ-DQ]
Of course all that demonstrates all what I am saying from ten years, i.e. that the sample of R1b from Samara belonged to a tiny subclade of R-L23 comes very liukely from West (but we’ll see next data) and above all that my R-Z2110 is the ancestor of CTS7556>Y5572 >CTS9219….
March 3, 2017 at 11:18 PM
Blogger Krefter said…
New post at my blog….
David 47% H in the Bronze age looks like the work of natural selection or massive female migration to me.
March 3, 2017 at 11:36 PM
Krefter „” or massive female migration to me. „”
Or massive female founder effects. Females can also have founder effects alongside their successful husbands. They just need to have 1.2 surviving daughters per each generation.
Do You have Y DNA spreadsheets for Bronze Age? Please post it if yes.
March 3, 2017 at 11:55 PM
Blogger Aram said…
Iosif Lazaridis has tweets on Scythians „”Tweet from Iosif Lazaridis:
„The Scythians of the eastern steppe were seemingly derived from Yamnaya and East Eurasian ancestors And not from temporally closer Sintashta/Andronovo populations that carried EEF ancestry Similar to present-day South Asians who are best modelled with Early/Middle Bronze Age steppe not Andronovo/Sintashta.”””
March 4, 2017 at 12:00 AM
Blogger Davidski said…
eah, maybe, strange though that these eastern Scythians share Y-DNA with Sintashta, not Yamnaya.
March 4, 2017 at 12:06 AM
Blogger Aram said…
Imho this increases the chances that we will see a lot off R1as in Yamna.
March 4, 2017 at 12:08 AM
So who wants to bet that one of the western Yamnaya groups will be identical to Gyvakarai1, Plinkaigalis242 and Ardu2, including a shitload of Z645?
Place your bets.
March 4, 2017 at 3:12 AM
If so, they should be autosomally identical to Yamnaya (based on the ADMIXTURE – the different Baltic_LN are actually labelled, in white on a white background), with maybe a small offset of less CHG>more HG. No Anatolian.
In the PCA, the 6 Baltic_LN aren’t labelled. Some overlap Steppe_MLBA and presumably these are the relatively Anatolia heavy samples with typical HG component – Plinkaigalis241, Kunila2 and some RISE samples I can’t make out on the legend.
Then there are two clear outliers. One overlaps the Baltic_BA and this is presumably Spiginas2, a sample about 25% richer in HG ancestry than the other Baltic_LN which is very similar to Baltic_BA in ADMIXTURE. The other is at the very edge of the Yamnaya/Steppe EMBA cluster – so either Plinkaigalis242 / Gyvakarai1, mirroring their „No Anatolia; typical HG” status in the ADMIXTURE.
March 4, 2017 at 3:33 AM
Blogger Gioiello said…
TED KANDELL oder THE EVIDENCE
Evidence? Everyone has understood that Samara was composed of hg. R1a and a little of R1b-L23. That they migrated to Baltic carrying the Balto-Slav languages (no R1b has been found amongst them) and migrated to Andronovo and Sintashta as Indo-Iranian and gave birth to Scythians of Iranian languages. The tiny R1b subclade, only belonging to the R-L23-Z2105 subclade with perhaps some extinct line, was in those migrations (above all carrying hg. R1a) till Mongol/Chinese/Turk people and after also to the Indian subcontinent where a few of those haplotypes may have survived. But from these samples survived in Eastern Europe, Caucasus, Middle East only a few subclades different from the Western European ones which anyway didn’t derive from them. I have explained in my previous letters which subclades may have been derived from these haplotypes there and which not.
Evidence? You lack:
R-V88 and all subclades (not older in Africa and Middle East than 5000 years)
R-L389+ (except the haplotype with YCAII=23-23 found in Armenia, wherea Italy has all the 4 hts known so far)
R-Z2109-Y4512 only in Western Europe
R-Z2110 and subclades found in Western Europe and back migrated Eastward as CTS9219
R-P312 and all the Western European subclades…
March 4, 2017 at 4:00 AM