GENETICS Natufian Ancestry Map

[The alchemist]

@Reformed J

Up to quite recently, there was speculation and association between the first Indo-European speakers and horse riding, but there was never conclusive proof. A recent study proved it by examining skeletal morphology characteristics and other pathologies indicating typically known features that resolutely demonstrated indirect effects that Yamnaya indeed were horse riders at the start of the Bronze Age:

https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.ade2451

 

[BetterDaysAhead]

I think for the most part the qpAdm equates the later Levantine values to statistical artifacts in our DNA. It is very old.

I don't believe we have Bronze Age DNA unless it is in a negligible form through minor Arabian, not a sub-component or anything like that. That is if Somalis do have Arabian at all.

I have a big suspicion about what the thing is. The age is so deep with the southwest Asian migrated DNA that it bleeds into qualities in later-time leaps, without it being admixture but reflecting something deeply ancestral -- covering more ground of way later structured DNA. It's not the same thing. The boundaries get a bit blurry when you measure things of that age. So crudely, modeling older somewhat drifted signatures in discrete form means forcing the model to conform to later genetic standards, consuming later Levantine DNA profiles that are in fact nothing but far downstream.

This does not mean that there is no correlation, just different interpretation, which has vastly different implications.

We're dealing with similar composites of the Natufians. I don't think G25 overinflates IBM -- it needs some ANA-related DNA. It got to get it somewhere. And we share the Eurasian between Natufian and Iberomarusians. That's why the Taforalt genome is convenient, even more so Naufian which is a mix of sibling lineages of ours. I've even said that Natufian might be a re-out of Africa from northeast Africa. Like how much of Natufian is from Africa? We know IBM part ~30% is no doubt introduced from there. I suspect a lot more of Natufian is from northeast Africa. IBM did not come cleanly into the Levant, I think it carried with it considerable of that southwest Asian+northeast African ancestry. Natufians did not pop up until 15kya -- that type of DNA is older in Africa.

In a weird way, Natufian is from northeast Africa, how Holocene (preAE) Egyptians are a Lower Nubian off-shoot.

That's why claiming a defined package is a big problem. I am more comfortable in deconstructing the components.

Dzudzuana-like DNA (the deep shit that came from southwest Asia (and likely stretched its origin in Northeast Africa as well) gives off minor food-producing residue when it is deep paleolithic), some northeast African ANA, and maybe or maybe not some minor IBM. But the first two would read as IBM to some degree with high deep southwest Asian -- thus Natufian is conveniently packaged that contains what we need as we are half that only (if we were not half AEA, you would see how the differences would show, as I doubt our non-AEA is exactly proportional to Natufian, but can't be too different). All in all, we lack the resolution complete resolution. Even still, we're familiar with things broadly.

I wrote this with quickness, so ignore the funny structure of the text. There is a method to the madness, kk. Ask q if anything reads as convoluted.

Very informative analysis sxb thank you. Are you on anthrogenica by any chance? I’m not that well versed on this matter and I get a lot of my info from reading posts on that forum so I’d love to see if you could post about this on there if you’d like so that we could get a second opinion from other users that know a lot regarding this topic

 

[The alchemist]

Very informative analysis sxb thank you. Are you on anthrogenica by any chance? I’m not that well versed on this matter and I get a lot of my info from reading posts on that forum so I’d love to see if you could post about this on there if you’d like so that we could get a second opinion from other users that know a lot regarding this topic

"Trust me bro"

No, but seriously. Trust me. I just broke down things to the basics from what we know and can expect. There are no crazy leaps, nor is it unreasonable. If I posted that it would not get any attraction since there is nothing to bite on and it is pushing at the frontier. Some people will have a different model but I think my take is kind of solid. There are individuals here that are a couple of individuals here that are veterans in this scene. A lot of people on Anthrogenica (I am there, post sometimes rarely) are frankly incompetent and carry strong ideological biases, while some are knowledgeable in their own respect. It has brought me a lot of value, no doubt.

I have held this view for a while and I will post something based on a study maybe tomorrow that will further substantiate my claims, which falls in line with what should be a general narrative at this point.

To give you a perspective, the greater difference in time between samples, the bigger will the drift influence the statistical probabilistic assortment strategies. It's pretty standard if you build insight for it through some experience. My point is that the residue of Levantine minor values is just far removed structural signatures that absorb some values but that does not mean it is admixture -- it speaks to the basal nature of our DNA, which is deeply related to those Levantine agricultural sources.

You have to remember that statistical tools have limits. It's not perfect and we should always be aware of those. If so, those errors can provide us with good insight into newer theoretical trajectories.

There is a reason I want to post here. It's a proposition for a good forum and I want you guys to read it before it becomes standard. It's a take it how you want it deal. I would prefer if someone did engage and add to their thing as well, but it's alright either way.

I wrote something lengthy to the Taiwanese fella. I think it delved into the same thing with some other additions regarding the broader MENA, but with likely slight variation had a model about the Natufian genetics and the paleolithic ancestral Southwest Asian nucleus DNA. The last thing is the Dzudzuana-like thing. I don't like to call it that because it is clearly not from Gerogria but a genesis from somewhere in Southwest Asia and with conceivable reach into the northern edge of northeast Africa, Sinai too. Calling it a name from a Georgian cave sets a monopoly and wrong geographic assumptions. Dzudzuana is merely a northernmost peripheral people of an ancestral group that found its center in Southwest Asia, not the Caucasus.

 

[BetterDaysAhead]

"Trust me bro"

No, but seriously. Trust me. I just broke down things to the basics from what we know and can expect. There are no crazy leaps, nor is it unreasonable. If I posted that it would not get any attraction since there is nothing to bite on and it is pushing at the frontier. Some people will have a different model but I think my take is kind of solid. There are individuals here that are a couple of individuals here that are veterans in this scene. A lot of people on Anthrogenica (I am there, post sometimes rarely) are frankly incompetent and carry strong ideological biases, while some are knowledgeable in their own respect. It has brought me a lot of value, no doubt.

I have held this view for a while and I will post something based on a study maybe tomorrow that will further substantiate my claims, which falls in line with what should be a general narrative at this point.

To give you a perspective, the greater difference in time between samples, the bigger will the drift influence the statistical probabilistic assortment strategies. It's pretty standard if you build insight for it through some experience. My point is that the residue of Levantine minor values is just far removed structural signatures that absorb some values but that does not mean it is admixture -- it speaks to the basal nature of our DNA, which is deeply related to those Levantine agricultural sources.

You have to remember that statistical tools have limits. It's not perfect and we should always be aware of those. If so, those errors can provide us with good insight into newer theoretical trajectories.

There is a reason I want to post here. It's a proposition for a good forum and I want you guys to read it before it becomes standard. It's a take it how you want it deal. I would prefer if someone did engage and add to their thing as well, but it's alright either way.

I wrote something lengthy to the Taiwanese fella. I think it delved into the same thing with some other additions regarding the broader MENA, but with likely slight variation had a model about the Natufian genetics and the paleolithic ancestral Southwest Asian nucleus DNA. The last thing is the Dzudzuana-like thing. I don't like to call it that because it is clearly not from Gerogria but a genesis from somewhere in Southwest Asia and with conceivable reach into the northern edge of northeast Africa, Sinai too. Calling it a name from a Georgian cave sets a monopoly and wrong geographic assumptions. Dzudzuana is merely a northernmost peripheral people of an ancestral group that found its center in Southwest Asia, not the Caucasus.

If you had to breakdown our ancestral makeup by percentages using AEA, ANA and west eurasian how would you break it down?

 

[The alchemist]

If you had to breakdown our ancestral makeup by percentages using AEA, ANA and west eurasian how would you break it down?

I don't think there is much room for us to differ that much on that end. Tell me, what do you think the percentages are? You will find that I agree with you only that I think composite arrangement can make the picture a bit differently ascertained in how it came about maybe.

 

[Step a side]

Those Yamnaya niggas were barbarians. They must have slaughtered them very quickly and thoroughly by the way the Y-DNA disappeared and mtDNA stayed behind upon contact. Even more brutal if EEF women ran toward the horse-riding men with open arms, willing to risk everything. They came with the equivalent of a Bugatti.

It's so strange. They came to places, massacred the men, and started to settle down with their pastoralist lifestyle with the EEF females. Peculiar people.

There are 4 good reasons;

- Great land for herding

- Hotter women

- EEF had very weak men (inferior sedentary physique)

- Expansionary warrior culture (out for glory & riches)

What if the EEF men were used as slaves but not allowed to procreate? Yo, whatever happened to those miskeens, they had it brutal.

Nomads are usually bigger because of higher protein and calcium in take. The EEF were shorter in stature according to a study published.

 

[Scipio Africanus]

Nomads are usually bigger because of higher protein and calcium in take. The EEF were shorter in stature according to a study published.

In the British Isles [Ireland & the UK], there was 90% replacement of the population when the Bell Beakers entered the British Isles and pretty much slaughtered nearly all the EEF folks. Similarly, Iberia also had Bell Beakers dominating the Early European Farmers by eliminating EEF Men from the gene pool and gained exclusive access with EEF women for mating.

Brutal times to be a EEF dude.

 

[BetterDaysAhead]

I don't think there is much room for us to differ that much on that end. Tell me, what do you think the percentages are? You will find that I agree with you only that I think composite arrangement can make the picture a bit differently ascertained in how it came about maybe.

Hard to answer tbh I’ve heard that nilo-saharans (who are used as a proxy for our AEA ancestry) along with niger-congo groups have some iberomaurusian related admixture with nilo-saharans having up to 20% so if this is true then possibly 45% AEA 40% west eurasian and 15% ANA?

 

[The alchemist]

In the British Isles [Ireland & the UK], there was 90% replacement of the population when the Bell Beakers entered the British Isles and pretty much slaughtered nearly all the EEF folks. Similarly, Iberia also had Bell Beakers dominating the Early European Farmers by eliminating EEF Men from the gene pool and gained exclusive access with EEF women for mating.

Brutal times to be a EEF dude.

And technically, EEF were our deeply removed Near Eastern-derived cousins. Is this partly our L or do we disassociate ourselves with them? I find that once they entered Europe, they were no Anatolian anymore. That European metamorphosis was strong.

 

[Step a side]

And technically, EEF were our deeply removed Near Eastern-derived cousins. Is this partly our L or do we disassociate ourselves with them? I find that once they entered Europe, they were no Anatolian anymore. That European metamorphosis was strong.

Weren’t the Yamnaya that killed off these EEF closer to them than us Natufian derived Cushites? I thought the Yamnaya were a bunch of WHG, Caucasus, Iran like and Anatolian like farmers?

 

[The alchemist]

Weren’t the Yamnaya that killed off these EEF closer to them than us Natufian derived Cushites? I thought the Yamnaya were a bunch of WHG, Caucasus, Iran like and Anatolian like farmers?

The Yamnaya were around half Eastern Hunter-Gatherer and half Caucasus hunter-gatherer.

EEF was Anatolian Neolithic Famer+ minor Western Hunter Gatherer.

Technically they are very deeply removed from the majority non-ANA aspect of the Natufian-like DNA. It's not really that close. You could say the same for half of the Iranian Neolithic ancestry, which is half Ancient North Eurasian and the other half very deeply related to that ancestral southwest Asian DNA that we have too. So it is not closely related but very deeply associated. And that is just looking at it from a point of low resolution.

I was kind of exaggerating for writing's sake. We belong to a distinct cluster of northeast Africa.

I still find that Iranian Neolithic DNA being half ANE pretty weird. And them mixing with very ancient stuff from West of it. I wonder how that mixing came about.

 

[Step a side]

The Yamnaya were around half Eastern Hunter-Gatherer and half Caucasus hunter-gatherer.

EEF was Anatolian Neolithic Famer+ minor Western Hunter Gatherer.

Technically they are very deeply removed from the majority non-ANA aspect of the Natufian-like DNA. It's not really that close. You could say the same for half of the Iranian Neolithic ancestry, which is half Ancient North Eurasian and the other half very deeply related to that ancestral southwest Asian DNA that we have too. So it is not closely related but very deeply associated. And that is just looking at it from a point of low resolution.

I was kind of exaggerating for writing's sake. We belong to a distinct cluster of northeast Africa.

I still find that Iranian Neolithic DNA being half ANE pretty weird. And them mixing with very ancient stuff from West of it. I wonder how that mixing came about.

It’s an honour to have you here bro. Let me digest this stuff

 

[The alchemist]

It’s an honour to have you here bro. Let me digest this stuff

You as well, brother.

 

[Step a side]

The Yamnaya were around half Eastern Hunter-Gatherer and half Caucasus hunter-gatherer.

EEF was Anatolian Neolithic Famer+ minor Western Hunter Gatherer.

Technically they are very deeply removed from the majority non-ANA aspect of the Natufian-like DNA. It's not really that close. You could say the same for half of the Iranian Neolithic ancestry, which is half Ancient North Eurasian and the other half very deeply related to that ancestral southwest Asian DNA that we have too. So it is not closely related but very deeply associated. And that is just looking at it from a point of low resolution.

I was kind of exaggerating for writing's sake. We belong to a distinct cluster of northeast Africa.

I still find that Iranian Neolithic DNA being half ANE pretty weird. And them mixing with very ancient stuff from West of it. I wonder how that mixing came about.

Hey wait, the Iranian Neolithic farmers having half of their ancestry anciently related to the Natufians could be the reason why modern Arabians get so high Natufian. J1, T1 came from these Iranian farmers that went to mix with the Levant Neolithics E1b1b tribes to create groups like the Mehri. Obviously this doesn’t negate the already existing Natufian like hunter gathers of Arabia that they went on to mix with further.

 

[The alchemist]

Hey wait, the Iranian Neolithic farmers having half of their ancestry anciently related to the Natufians could be the reason why modern Arabians get so high Natufian. J1, T1 came from these Iranian farmers that went to mix with the Levant Neolithics E1b1b tribes to create groups like the Mehri. Obviously this doesn’t negate the already existing Natufian like hunter gathers of Arabia that they went on to mix with further.

Think of that DNA as Natufian minus the IBM (though related lineage to the non-ANA in Taforalt) including any minor East African. How deeply that DNA is formed is very hard to say. But it has to go very deep. Might be like a 30kya type thing.

 

[Step a side]

Think of that DNA as Natufian minus the IBM (though related lineage to the non-ANA in Taforalt) including any minor East African. How deeply that DNA is formed is very hard to say. But it has to go very deep. Might be like a 30kya type thing.

Must have come with the U6, M etc lineages found in all the AA speaking groups. This admixture is so old that it became our base ancestry.

 

[The alchemist]

Must have come with the U6, M etc lineages found in all the AA speaking groups. This admixture is so old that it became our base ancestry.

Yaheye. I had planned to post something about that within two days. Stay tuned.

 

[NidarNidar]

I heard that our Eurasian ancestry is not entirely Natufian, they say this other Eurasian component resided in the Nile valley & were more related to Iberomarusians.

in Somalis it seems to be 20% natufians and some iberomaurusian(15%), whom themselves where heavily mixed with proto Natufians whom probably originate in or around North East Africa or the levant.

 

[Scipio Africanus]

in Somalis it seems to be 20% natufians and some iberomaurusian(15%), whom themselves where heavily mixed with proto Natufians whom probably originate in or around North East Africa or the levant.

What % of Iberomarusian dna was Natufian-like? I've heard the Iberomarusians were not completely West Eurasian & had some highly ancient Sub-Saharan African admixture.

 

[Step a side]

What % of Iberomarusian dna was Natufian-like? I've heard the Iberomarusians were not completely West Eurasian & had some highly ancient Sub-Saharan African admixture.

IBM and Natufian are similar. They both sourced from the original stock of Mesolithic huntergathers of North Africa.

The IBM they sampled had 1/3 ssa in them but that was just exclusive to those specific individuals. It is alien to North Africa because it was absent among the Natufians.