Ancient North Eurasian

[de Burgh II]

Ancient North Eurasian is an ancestral component now somewhat common in population genetics... It was originally discovered through the genome of a Siberian boy who died over 20,000 years ago referred to as either Mal'ta boy or MA-1 and was backed up as being a real entity in pre-historic Eurasia through other ancient genomes like that of Afontova Gora-2. [1]
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-JfsaZ0Arig0/VIwqnsNURuI/AAAAAAAABzA/XqR_3Y4l3y0/s400/2kjz7p.jpg

It's discovery really shook up a lot of things like our understanding of the origins of Europeans, Native Americans and even groups such as Central Asians, South Asians and various West Asians who seem to carry either Ancient North Eurasian or Ancient North Eurasian-related ancestry.

Lazaridis et al. 2013-2014 seemed to suggest that Europeans were basally a three-way mixture between Ancient North Eurasians / MA-1 related peoples, what they dubbed Western European Hunter-Gatherers based on the ancient genomes of various Mesolithic Hunter-Gatherers from Europe like Loschbour and then finally Early European Farmers who began entering Europe around the Neolithic from West Asia.

Since then that model's become rather obsolete and has been replaced by one where all of the supposed Ancient North Eurasian ancestry in Europe is owed to the spread of the Indo-European languages by pastoralist peoples from the Pontic-Caspian Steppe.

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-R-j1EE3RkRU/VVCU6zRqwSI/AAAAAAAACj8/yEeCngMDerg/s1600/Pontic-Caspian%2Bsteppe.jpg

These pastoralists were carrying with them a foray of different ancestries from what looks to be Caucasian-like ancestry rich in what looks to be Ancient North Eurasian-related & West Asian ancestry and what is for now referred to by chaps like Wolfgang Haak of Haak et al. 2015 as "Eastern European Hunter-Gatherers (EHGs)". [2]

EHGs almost fit as a mixture between Ancient North Eurasians & Western European Hunter-Gatherers but instead don't entirely look to be the result of such a mixture. Though as David Wesolowski who runs the Eurogenes genome blog and ancestry project once remarked in the quote below- :

"It depends how you define EHG, ANE and WHG, and the concept of pure components.
They can all be distinct pops, or EHG can be a mix of ANE and WHG, or even WHG can be a mix of EHG and something as yet unsampled."

-it's honestly rather iffy and tricky modeling these pre-historic groups with wildly different time stamps on them (Mesolithic for WHGs and EHGs and Paleolithic for ANEs) as mixtures of one another.

But David seems to assume groups like EHGs and WHGs are likely a mixture between groups that preceded them perhaps like Ancient North Eurasians and some other groups as yet unsampled. The cold hard truth of the matter is that we require more samples of pre-historic Hunter-Gatherer groups across West Eurasia to really understand what EHG and WHG are and how exactly they're connected to ANE because the current models seem inadequate.

It could just be that Eastern European Hunter-Gatherers are somehow extra related to Ancient North Eurasians or somehow partially descended from them and something Western European Hunter-Gatherer related. We'd need more ancient genomes across time and space in Europe and other parts of Eurasia to truly grasp this with any kind of conclusive detail.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-h2ktbF4-z7o/VZNUAIL72iI/AAAAAAAAC48/CWB4aR8R57Q/s1600/Untitled3.png

Although one thing is resolved for now... A group of "pure" Ancient North Eurasians didn't come and contribute Ancient North Eurasian ancestry to the ancestors of modern Europeans; this Ancient North Eurasian-related ancestry is ultimately owed to expansions from the Steppe. Whether EHGs are "WHG + ANE" or related to MA-1 in some other way or not.

Though it is worth-noting that the non-EHG and "Caucasian-like" ancestry in Pontic Caspian Steppe pastoralists like the Yamnaya did also carry Ancient North Eurasian-related ancestry and in this case; not seemingly owed to Eastern European Hunter-Gatherer ancestry.

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-tKgMr5w_FIs/VfWL_Dk0d0I/AAAAAAAADb4/x67i8I5mWNw/s1600/ANE_K8.png
The redder a place or its "outline" is; the richer in ANE-related ancestry it is

In the end though what looks to be Ancient North Eurasian ancestry or Ancient North Eurasian-related like EHG ancestry is found all over Eurasia from Siberia to South Asia or Western Europe to Central Asia. In a modern context it tends to peak in Siberian groups like Kets [3] or various modern South Asians and in West Eurasia peaks in the Caucasus region.

It also really helped redefine our understanding of the origins of Native Americans who like many populations on this planet are now understood not to be some "pure" separate branch of the Homo Sapien Sapien family tree but a mixture of sorts like Europeans. In their case the mixture seems to be between Ancient North Eurasians and East Asian-related ancestry. [4]

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-R73Lf_vCVME/VJQv1T_yUoI/AAAAAAAAB2M/Opr2K6gJ714/s1600/pca.png

If I had to quickly dive into where the component stands in Eurasia; it's essentially closest to Eastern & Western European Hunter-Gatherer and seems to share as geneticists suggest; a sort of earlier root with these components like it does with Western European Hunter-Gatherer in that Lazaridis et al. 2013 diagram I shared.

Though as I said; we really need more samples from across Eurasia (West Eurasia, Siberia, Central Asia, South Asia etc.) from various time periods to really understand the true nature of groups like Ancient North Eurasians, Western European Hunter-Gatherers and Eastern European Hunter-Gatherers because as it stands; things stand on somewhat unsure and confused ground.

For all we know; what looks to be non-Steppe derived "ANE" ancestry in groups like South Asians, Central Asians and West Asians may not be owed to some sort of "pure" Ancient North Eurasian group like we once thought was the case for Europeans...

It could instead mean that these groups owe their Ancient North Eurasian-related ancestry to Eurasian Hunter-Gatherer groups somehow related to Ancient North Eurasians or who carry ANE ancestry themselves in some way or other; more ancient DNA analysis is needed... I say this a lot and before this blog post is over will say it again because it can't be emphasized enough.

This uncertainty I highlighted above is essentially why I insist on sometimes writing "Ancient North Eurasian-related ancestry" rather than undoubtedly assuming some of these non-European populations have direct ANE ancestry.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-4sII9HRRj6U/VfaSMsrz2mI/AAAAAAAADcI/gFzGWSEmZCM/s1600/Eurasia_%2528orthographic_projection%2529.svg.png

Eurasia

Nevertheless, for the time being what we dub "Ancient North Eurasian" is highly divergent from Western European Hunter-Gatherers despite the seemingly closer relations between ANEs and European Hunter-Gatherers when compared to Eastern Non-African groups, to a point where Native Americans will often seem more similar or closer to Mal'ta boy than Europeans are like in analyses such as IBS:


MA-1 IBS (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1y-MIPZJ0-4tyEp6OxIJ-2MJJJUcDY8RjoU8IS_Vke4k/edit#gid=1764828950)

This being the case despite the fact that the East Asian-related ancestry that makes up the rest of Native Americans' ancestry is less related to Ancient North Eurasians like Mal'ta boy / MA-1 than the European Hunter-Gatherer ancestry in Europeans is, though Europeans might be shifted away a bit by the highly divergent Basal Eurasian component in their West Asian / Near Eastern-related ancestry.


Eurogenes K=8 is a good representation of the levels of Ancient North Eurasian-related ancestry found across various global populations (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1x8pm8sVcHqceiNFJMO082kxaBF5ePr4__bAK05VQRFw/edit#gid=1681484272)

Nevertheless, ANE is a pretty distinct ancestral cluster of its own with what seems to be a very large spread across Eurasia of either ANE or ANE-related ancestry showing up in small amounts even in some East Asian populations as well as somewhat in Egyptians, a Northeast African population.



http://anthromadness.blogspot.com/2015/09/ancient-north-eurasian.html

[Pahli]

Isn't ANE a bit similar to EHG but with some Amerindian admixture that pulls it away from Europe?

[Porn Master]

Isn't ANE a bit similar to EHG but with some Amerindian admixture that pulls it away from Europe?



i think you're right


http://ehl.santafe.edu/maps/Dene-Caucasian.gif


i see their connections, yeniseans with muricans

[Kelmendasi]

https://youtu.be/Imj0_UhfMLs

[RN97]

Isn't ANE a bit similar to EHG but with some Amerindian admixture that pulls it away from Europe?

EHG is theorized as I believe 2/3 WHG + 1/3 ANE or the other way around (don't fully remember), but you're a shitton more ANE than me so ANE isn't really European, it's more steppe or indo-European in caucasoids I guess. However due to the fact that Amerindians, Selkups, kets etc. have it it and much more than caucasoids, it must also originally be similar to mongoloids.

[Pahli]

i think you're right


http://ehl.santafe.edu/maps/Dene-Caucasian.gif


i see their connections, yeniseans with muricans

Could be, I'm not sure if this dene-caucasian theory is widely accepted as legit tho, but I'll post Mal'ta here, it has Australoid admixture which probably is the component that makes them part Amerindian:


Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 Eastern_Hunter_Gatherer 73.62
2 Ancestral_South_Indian 15.92
3 Siberian_E_Asian 7.67
4 Caucausus_Hunter_Gatherer 2.18
5 WHG 0.42
6 W_African 0.18

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 MA1 5.53
2 Karelia_HG 32.83
3 Samara_HG 32.83
4 RISE_baAndrov 47.66
5 RISE_baMezh 47.7

So basically its kinda like EHG + Amerindian.


EHG is theorized as I believe 2/3 WHG + 1/3 ANE or the other way around (don't fully remember), but you're a shitton more ANE than me so ANE isn't really European, it's more steppe or indo-European in caucasoids I guess. However due to the fact that Amerindians, Selkups, kets etc. have it it and much more than caucasoids, it must also originally be similar to mongoloids.

Look at the results above, I think its EHG + some Amerindian, so mostly Caucasoid with part Mongoloid admixture. You should watch the video Kelmendasi posted, it makes sense.

[RN97]

https://youtu.be/Imj0_UhfMLs

That guy is a nordicists that talks out his ass. He claims that indo-Europeans looks most like NW Europeans for example. He basically mostly uses sources of old nordicists mixed a smidgen with modern and valid science.

[Kelmendasi]

That guy is a nordicists that talks out his ass. He claims that indo-Europeans looks most like NW Europeans for example. He basically mostly uses sources of old nordicists mixed a smidgen with modern and valid science.
Really? I thought he was alright. It does explain why he sorta neglects south Euros and why he has a bias towards north Euros

[Porn Master]

EHG is theorized as I believe 2/3 WHG + 1/3 ANE or the other way around (don't fully remember), but you're a shitton more ANE than me so ANE isn't really European, it's more steppe or indo-European in caucasoids I guess. However due to the fact that Amerindians, Selkups, kets etc. have it it and much more than caucasoids, it must also originally be similar to mongoloids.




Uralic, northCaucasus and Pamir peoples have significant this component

[Babak]

We just have more Indo-iranian ancestry

[RN97]

Really? I thought he was alright. It does explain why he sorta neglects south Euros and why he has a bias towards north Euros

He gives the science, but adds idiotic things to it. For example likely ANE didn't look northern European nor were they blonde, but the video seems to suggest so.

[Pahli]

That guy is a nordicists that talks out his ass. He claims that indo-Europeans looks most like NW Europeans for example. He basically mostly uses sources of old nordicists mixed a smidgen with modern and valid science.

We can hardly say what they were, but I think he is kinda right here, they probably resembled Eastern Europeans to some extent, some darker some lighter.

[Kelmendasi]

He gives the science, but adds idiotic things to it. For example likely ANE didn't look northern European nor were they blonde, but the video seems to suggest so.
Oh yh true lol xD they were Mongoloid probably.

[Pahli]

Iran_Mesolithic, it has more EHG than any modern Iranian (not sure if its legit with those 25% EHG tho), it seems to be very ANE shifted;

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 Caucausus_Hunter_Gatherer 53.36
2 Eastern_Hunter_Gatherer 26.25
3 Early_Neolithic_Farmers 11.16
4 SW_Asian 4.03
5 Ancestral_South_Indian 3.2
6 W_African 2.01

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 KOTIAS 13.92
2 Kurd_SE 16.6
3 Kalash 18.69
4 Pashtun_Afghan 18.82
5 Tajik_Pomiri 20.82

Mixed Mode Population Sharing:

# Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
1 83.8% KOTIAS + 16.2% MA1 @ 1.26
2 86.8% KOTIAS + 13.2% Samara_HG @ 3.98
3 86.8% KOTIAS + 13.2% Karelia_HG @ 3.98
4 82.9% KOTIAS + 17.1% RISE_baAndrov @ 8.47
5 83.2% KOTIAS + 16.8% RISE_baMezh @ 8.77

In another calculator Iran_Mesolithic gets more ANE than Satsurblia:


Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 Ancestral_North_Eurasian 53.44
2 Natufian 35.58
3 West_European_Hunter_Gartherer 6.78
4 Ancestral_South_Eurasian 2.8
5 Sub_Saharan 1.4

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 CHG 11.88
2 Kurd_SE 15.84
3 Baloch_Iranian 16.03
4 Brahui 16.03
5 Balochi 16.03

Mixed Mode Population Sharing:

# Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
16 74.4% Iran_ChL + 25.6% AG2 @ 2.52
17 74.4% Iran_ChL + 25.6% AG3 @ 2.52
18 74.4% Iran_ChL + 25.6% MA1 @ 2.52
19 77.6% Iran_N + 22.4% AG2 @ 2.61
20 77.6% Iran_N + 22.4% AG3 @ 2.61

[de Burgh II]

Isn't ANE a bit similar to EHG but with some Amerindian admixture that pulls it away from Europe?

It would seem ANE is a peculiar case; being highly Central Asian and Steppic (Steppe) in nature. That is surprisingly divergent from East-Eurasian like ancestry and Hunter Gatherer-Eurasian populations. In the case of West Asians specifically Iranic populations are a mish-mash of CHG (Caucasus Hunter Gatherers), ANE and indigenous farmers/BMAC peoples commonest during ancient West Asia. Whereas Gulf Arabs such as Saudis are pretty much highly Basal Eurasian (>90%). South Asians are a mix between the highly divergent "Eastern Non-African/onge-like population/Ancestral South Eurasian (ASE)" and a Steppic West Asian derivative mix/Ancestral North Indian (ANI) (i.e. "Indo-Aryans") commonest in North Indians.

East Asians; highly isolated population derived through their own natural selection in their own evolution; Eastern Non-African that is simply Eastern Eurasian in nature.

[Dick]

This is all speculation on how they looked. No specific group is uniform in looks. Ethnic groups can have the same autosmal make up but different features and hair/eye color. It's about sexual selection.

[Pahli]

This is all speculation on how they looked. No specific group is uniform in looks. Ethnic groups can have the same autosmal make up but different features and hair/eye color. It's about sexual selection.

I know, but autosomal make up can at least point us toward some specific direction, its quite clear that they weren't fully Mongoloid like some people claim them to be.

[Demon Revival]

I know, but autosomal make up can at least point us toward some specific direction, its quite clear that they weren't fully Mongoloid like some people claim them to be.

They weren't. Just compare the furthest away continental reaches (or even islands):

Japan: 1-2% ANE
British isles: 12-15% ANE

The only truly eastern shifted populations that have considerable ANE are those who are in the steppes and urals + Native Americans, Kets. All of those close to West Eurasia (or even possessing recent mix) or with origins geographically close to it.

[Dick]

I know, but autosomal make up can at least point us toward some specific direction, its quite clear that they weren't fully Mongoloid like some people claim them to be.

Obviously not. i've never seen Mal'ta boy's gedmatch. Even Otzi the "neolithic farmer" had some WHG

[Pahli]

Obviously not. i've never seen Malta boy's gedmatch. Even Otzi the "neolithic farmer" had some WHG

I posted Mal'tas gedmatch in the first page. If anyone else want to play around with it, go ahead: F999914

Also, EHG Samara:

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 Ancestral_North_Eurasian 71.22
2 West_European_Hunter_Gartherer 28.78

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 EHG 11.09
2 Steppe_Eneolithic 36.9
3 Steppe_EMBA 38.1
4 MA1 40.47
5 AG3 40.47
6 AG2 40.47
7 Steppe_IA 47.98
8 Kalash 52.85
9 Pathan 53.22
10 Punjabi 53.29

And EHG Khvalynsk, it already has some little CHG admixture:

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 West_European_Hunter_Gartherer 47.06
2 Ancestral_North_Eurasian 39.19
3 Natufian 7.02
4 Ancestral_South_Eurasian 6.73

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 Steppe_Eneolithic 3.14
2 Steppe_EMBA 19.92
3 Steppe_MLBA 25.12
4 Steppe_IA 27.75
5 Finnish 30.14

[de Burgh II]

Mal'ta is essentially a Proto-Siberian that evolved an Ice Age during the Last Glacial Maximum that was essentially a hostile, arctic environment. So it would make sense that this population would adapt phenotypical traits is quite similar to East-Asian appearances/cold adaptations. Convergently evolving these traits in isolation, but on a genetic level; even this sample is highly divergent from Eastern Eurasians due to their own isolation in the Central Steppes.

Like someone said before, Native Americans are essentially 2/3 East Eurasians and 1/3 North Eurasian. They probably intermingled with East Eurasians when they crossed the Bering Strait into the Americas.

Nevertheless, they look similar on the surface, but their genetics are divergent in the sense due to each of their own genetic isolation. Their descendants probably intermingled on the Steppes that gives a more mixed indication of different populations interacting with different territories.

[de Burgh II]

Its probably wise to point out that with pastoral cultures; they are always mobile and encroaching on new lands. So depending on where the pastoral culture is located, it will reflect the person's own mixed/peculiar genetic makeup. Which the Scythians are a good example; confederation of Iranic nomads that covered both the western and eastern parts of the Steppes. Intermingling with different populations; bonded singularly/culturally in ways of life, but genetically diverse in influences.

[Kouros]

That guy is a nordicists that talks out his ass. He claims that indo-Europeans looks most like NW Europeans for example. He basically mostly uses sources of old nordicists mixed a smidgen with modern and valid science.

That's the first video I watched of him and your description is 100% accurate. I like the not-so-flashy editing and presentation but I couldn't finish the video because he says super fucking retarded things. At 6:46 he says all blondism originates from Ancient North Eurasians and then LESS THAN 2 SECONDS LATER says that there is no evidence for such a phenomenom, and just 5 seconds after THAT he injects some pseudo-scientific theory that the Ancient North Eurasians accumulated blonde hair from 'breeding bias events' (whatever that means). There's some very clear evidence that they were mongoloid at least in appearance and he himself provides the majority of that evidence.

66766

[Demon Revival]

That's the first video I watched of him and your description is 100% accurate. I like the not-so-flashy editing and presentation but I couldn't finish the video because he says super fucking retarded things. At 6:46 he says all blondism originates from Ancient North Eurasians and then LESS THAN 2 SECONDS LATER says that there is no evidence for such a phenomenom, and just 5 seconds after THAT he injects some pseudo-scientific theory that the Ancient North Eurasians accumulated blonde hair from 'breeding bias events' (whatever that means). There's some very clear evidence that they were mongoloid at least in appearance and he himself provides the majority of that evidence.

66766

This contradiction is real though. Modern Europeans and Middle Easterners (Finns, Balts, some Slavs, Udmurts, Scandinavians) and (North Caucasians) respectively, with the highest ANE show the highest amount of blondism today in respect to their actual regions.

This is not the case for Pashtuns, Native Americans, Kets and others though. I personally think the WHG component can be the explanation for the Europeans, but not for the Caucasus people. Nganasan people also show some blondism, in spite of their 60% EAST Asian admix.

[Kouros]

So does ANE come from EHG or does EHG come from ANE? Seems they are very closely related.

[Joso]

Isn't ANE a bit similar to EHG but with some Amerindian admixture that pulls it away from Europe?

What you think about that:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bjk9GoQ8EvI

[Pahli]

What you think about that:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bjk9GoQ8EvI

That channel is just some random pan-turanist cunt spreading propaganda

[Petalpusher]

So does ANE come from EHG or does EHG come from ANE? Seems they are very closely related.

ANE is a lot older than what we call EHG, which is AG2-3 with more or less a WHG grandparent.

[Pahli]

ANE is a lot older than what we call EHG, which is AG2-3 with more or less a WHG grandparent.

So EHG is 3/4 ANE + 1/4 WHG?

[Petalpusher]

So EHG is 3/4 ANE + 1/4 WHG?

Many papers succesfully model it like that yes but rather with Afontova gora (younger), even in f3 tests. Mal'ta + SHG could work as well, just less sense in the timescale:

https://i.imgur.com/iNBte5H.png

[Zanzibar]

Hmm I thought Native Americans were on average more like 55 to 60% ENA and 40 to 45% ANE which makes them having at least 30%+ or more Western Eurasian related affinity as ANE have at least 30% ENA admix that is South Asian/ASE related rather than Han/Eastern Asian related.

[Proto-Shaman]

Sooooooo interesting :)

[Roy]

Isn't ANE a bit similar to EHG but with some Amerindian admixture that pulls it away from Europe?

Not quite so. It is older than Amerindian.