Davidski said that today should be official publication of Furtwängler et al. 2020 study!
Printable View
Davidski said that today should be official publication of Furtwängler et al. 2020 study!
Place your bets, I think it's safe to say Celts should be somewhere between 35% and 45% Steppe and between 15% and 20% WHG, I'd be surprised it it was different.
The paper has been released.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-020-15560-x
Meh only 5 samples younger than 2000 BCE and only 1 is from the iron age I believe, all 5 samples are between 34-47% Steppe and the iron age one is kinda East-European in G25(10% Eastern HG) and has R1a.
https://static-content.springer.com/...MOESM1_ESM.pdf
Edit:Actually there is another iron age sample from 200-0 BCE. It's SX18. It's about 30% Steppe and 15% WHG.
Who thought we needed more bronze age samples from central Europe, get working on the iron age people lol
so what was the carbon dating of the samples in the op?Quote:
Originally Posted by SharpFork
MX188 Spreitenbach CWC (CH) 2495-2399BC M423 I2a1a2Quote:
Originally Posted by Raizen
MX190 Spreitenbach CWC (CH) 2860-2460BC M423 I2a1a2
MX192 Spreitenbach CWC (CH) 2571-2513BC M423 I2a1a2
MX195 Spreitenbach CWC (CH) 2470-2050BC M423 I2a1a2
swiss-italians are the least native swiss people as expected.Quote:
We compared present-day Swiss people to regional Final Neolithic populations (Spreitenbach, Bad Zurzach, Wartau) to test whether there are additional ancestry components in present-day Swiss people. For that analysis, we made use of information available in the present-day dataset (POPRES) about the self-reported language group and split the individuals into three linguistic regions, as they were shown to be distinguishable genetically in previous studies27: German-speaking, French-speaking, and Italian-speaking Switzerland. To test for continuity between the ancient and present-day population we used the method qpWave from the ADMIXTOOLS package19 and found that a simple continuity can be rejected (p = 0.0003) for all three linguistic regions separately and the entire present-day Swiss population combined, consistent also with the PCA (Fig. 1c).
To assess whether ancient Swiss individuals from the Final Neolithic are symmetrically related to different linguistic present-day groups, or share an excess of alleles with any of them, we calculated D-statistics of the form D(Mbuti, Test, Swiss–French, Swiss–Italian), D(Mbuti, Test, Swiss–German, Swiss–Italian), and D(Mbuti, Test, Swiss–French, Swiss–German) where “Test” are the different Neolithic groups. The first two D-statistics were, with few exceptions, all negative with a |Z| ≥ 1.099 (maximum values to be found in D(Mbuti, Test, Swiss–French, Swiss–Italian) for Singen with −3.431 and Bad Zurzach −3.068) indicating the least genetic affinity of the Final Neolithic and Early Bronze Age individuals of this study to the Italian-speaking group in our present-day Swiss dataset. For D(Mbuti, Test, Swiss–French, Swiss–German) some variation between the sites can be found (Fig. 5) with the older sites sharing more alleles with the French-speaking group, and the younger sites being more similar with the German-speaking group.
ok, makes more sense. i think it is now safe to assume central european celts were quite southern european then.Quote:
Originally Posted by Vid Flumina
Yep, not surprising. Can't blame Token of course, Davidski or whoever uploaded the samples rushed to judgement.Quote:
Originally Posted by Vid Flumina
I believe these guys are older than any other samples with a Bell Beaker genetic profile(whilist the typical CWC profile is already found in Ukraine before 4000 BC), and of course they're archaeologically CWC, which does confirm BBs were just another group of CWC like Davidski has been theorizing, not a different southern movement through Hungary from contemporary with CWC Yamnaya. Aesch25 from 2864-2501 is also the oldest R1b-L51, unsure of his autosomal profile. Unsurprisingly the neolithic farmers all G2a/I2, not a J/E to be found in sight.