All the relevant populations from the early neolithic to chalcolithic are represented here. Most up to date map of population movements in the neolithic age, including the latest neolithic samples from Lazaridis et al 2022. All results have been arrived at using rigorous qpAdm rotating models.
If alternate model exists, I have noted them and will be visible once you hover on a label.
To pan the map, click the play button on the map and then and select the + button or Cross which enables the Pan cursor. Map can then be panned in all 4 directions. Pinch in/out to zoom. There is also a date filter.
Latitude/longitude of some labels might not be accurate. Co-ordinates of some labels have been shifted a bit so that there is less overlap between labels close to each other in location (eg. Seh_Gabi_LN, Seh_Gabi_C, Ganj_Dareh, Hajji_Firuz cluster; Arm_Masis_N, Arm_Aknashen, Aze_Lowlands cluster; Geoksyur & Gonur cluster; Boncuklu & Pinarbasi)
10 comments:
Is it possible for steppe dna to be in India before 2000 bce
In the paper they say that Ganj Dareh N and CHG were interchangeable as source for many later populations, only a few chose one and not the other. It will be fascinating as the relations between all these Neolithic populations get unraveled, and maybe some more deep surprises await.
"Is it possible for steppe dna to be in India before 2000 bce"
There may be some uniparental markers. But autosomal ancestry only took hold post 1600bce, starting with Swat.
"In the paper they say that Ganj Dareh N and CHG were interchangeable as source for many later populations, only a few chose one and not the other. It will be fascinating as the relations between all these Neolithic populations get unraveled, and maybe some more deep surprises await."
The Lazaridis paper did distal modeling, and as such is not very reliable when it comes to choosing between CHG and IranN, especially in bronze age pops and later.
No offense bro but this is really dumb.
You have tarim, Pinarbasi, Iran_N who are geographically on the periphery as non-mixed pops and then the whole thing in the middle is a mixture of this.
So you just have everything back to front, where the middle pops came from the geographically distant ones.
This is all wrong because Sarazm is genetically closer to ancient pops like Kostenki14 compared to Anatolian, Iran_N, CHG and Tarim. All you have done is model things in completely the wrong way.
But I dont blame you cos it is just the blind leading the blind and this entire field is wrong about the directionality.
I just dont have any respect for anyone in this field given how incredibly wrong ppl are.
I looked at Sarazm recently and it looks like the closest pop to the ancestral population that existed before CHG, Iran_N, Anatolian, and the various steppe groups separated from each other.
Sarazm is closest to Kostenki compared to all its 'ancestors' in your modelling.
Why dont you model Kostenki14 in the same way, I am sure the result will look a lot like sarazm then you can say Kostenki14 was a product of these 'ancestors'.
Sorry mate I cant help it but I just find it so sad and strange that this whole field is such a shit show and so completely wrong about everything it is absolute shambles probably the worst 'scientific' or 'academic' thing I have ever witness.
Once older samples from SC Asia and India come our way, models can be refined.
However, how do you explain 10-20% anatolian/ppn affinity in sarazm?
I don't care to model older populations with newer populations, unless there's clearly a reason to do so.
For example, tarim_emba is clearly relic east shifted ANE population.
Sarazm can appear closer to Kostenki14 or Sunghir or Yana, due to the excess ANE in that label. Sarazm has the highest ANE among all the populations analysed in this article.
Vashistha, just curious: what will your position be if Y3 is found in the Steppes much earlier, say before 3700BP? Seeing that you now seem to discount the role of Y-haplogroups, is this now less significant for you? Or do you still think that R1a-Y3 is native to India and India_N ancestry spread PIE with potentially male sex-biased admixture?
@Ryukendo
"Or do you still think that R1a-Y3 is native to India and India_N ancestry spread PIE with potentially male sex-biased admixture?"
These are 2 separate questions. R-Y3 has nothing to do with PIE, PIE is older than Y3 by 2000 yrs or more.
I think R1a-Y3 (formation date 2600bce) formed from Fatyanovo related R-Z94 near India. But there is a small chance it did form in steppe itself. However, its subclades R-Y27 and L657 (formation date 2200bce) have a 99.9% chance of having formed near indian subcontinent, given their absence in aDna and in modern steppes/europeans. This is only relevant in providing evidence against a mass male mediated steppe invasion of L657 males. After all, 80% or more of R1a in India is L657+. So if L657 was born in India in 2200bce in a single man, it completely negates Narasimhan 2019 claim of male biased steppe admixture in modern Indians (they didnt bother to differentiate subclades of Z94). Only the R1a-Z2124+ variants are definitely related to steppe autosomal ancestry.
"....India_N ancestry spread PIE with potentially male sex-biased admixture?"
Who contributed to PIE depends on locating the exact southern source in steppe. As you can see here, I model Khvalynsk with 18% Seh_Gabi_C, and Steppe_En with additional 25% Sarazm ancestry (best model so far even though p-value is weak).
Sarazm, Geoksyur, Shahr-Sokhta and IVCp are deeply related, exactly how is difficult to answer without more samples, but my best understanding has been shown in this map via qpAdm. Older HG samples from this region will help.
As for male biased spread, I don't think its a necessary condition of IE spread. Autosomal ancestry % seems to be much more important. But Lazaridis notes that CHG admixture into steppe was male biased, and those lineages got replaced between 5000-3500bce by R1b. I have no opinion on this matter.
"Vashistha, just curious: what will your position be if Y3 is found in the Steppes much earlier, say before 3700BP?"
I believe Z94 is from the steppe. Z94>Y3 is not as important as L657. If L657 is found in steppe before 1800bce without any southern autosomal admixture or archaeological context, it would mean that L657 was born in steppe. And that a lot of L657 R1a men indeed migrated to India. And it would make the case for steppe origin of I-Ir stronger, although it would still need to explain absence of sintashta ancestry at hasanlu and dinkha tepe iron age where consensus states that by 1000bce, Iranians had already entered.
Post a Comment