Maratha & Chitpavans

Marathas seem to have a lot of variation in their Andronovo and AASI ranges. Perhaps this is a confirmation of the fact the modern Maratha caste assimilated many Kunbi tillers and Dhangars (Holkars). Maratha castes like the Jadhavs (maternal lineage of Chattrapati Shivaji) claimed descent from the old Kshatriya families like the Devagiri Yadavs, makes sense to assume they'd be different to Kunbis. Chitpavans seem identical to most Dravidian Brahmins. This means their stereotypical lighter skin and colored eyes are not a consequence of some exotic admixture but just a result of sexual selection plus endogamy bolstered by cousin marriages. 

We can somewhat confirm the MT-10 sample isn't a mislabeled Brahmin because it doesn't plot next to Brahmins on G25, but to an assortment of North Indian like castes. All Brahmins cluster next to Brahmins. 

 

Ancient genomes from northern China suggest links between subsistence changes and human migration

 

Abstract

Northern China harbored the world’s earliest complex societies based on millet farming, in two major centers in the Yellow (YR) and West Liao (WLR) River basins. Until now, their genetic histories have remained largely unknown. Here we present 55 ancient genomes dating to 7500-1700 BP from the YR, WLR, and Amur River (AR) regions. Contrary to the genetic stability in the AR, the YR and WLR genetic profiles substantially changed over time. The YR populations show a monotonic increase over time in their genetic affinity with present-day southern Chinese and Southeast Asians. In the WLR, intensification of farming in the Late Neolithic is correlated with increased YR affinity while the inclusion of a pastoral economy in the Bronze Age was correlated with increased AR affinity. Our results suggest a link between changes in subsistence strategy and human migration, and fuel the debate about archaeolinguistic signatures of past human migration.

On Haplogroup Q

Native American Branch

Q-M3 > Q-M848 are the main native american lineages. TMRCA of Q-M3 is 12600 YBP. However a parallel but upstream lineage Q-M1107 TMRCA 15400 YBP is also found in natives. Both Q-M3 and Q-M1107 come from Q-L54 ultimately. Q-M3 comes from Q-M930 but the latter has some European exclusive lineages too. Q-M3 is also known as Q1a2a1a1. 

Indian Branches

1. Q-L275 or Q3 is found in India. Oldest sample with it is an Afanasievo Altai one C2034 ~ 2500 BCE from Kumar et al 2022. Subclade is Q-NGQ1. Then a few ones from Xinjiang, one Chemurchek and the Sappali Tepe outlier that is Indian like in admixture I7493 context dated 2000-1600 BCE is also Q3 (Q-Z19128 / TMRCA 3699 BCE). Then we get 2 people from Loebanr who carry it (I13228, I5400) dated to approx 1000-800 BCE. They are on the a clade downstream from Q-Z19128. Abusanteer 7 from Kumar et al or C4272 also carries Q-Y2265 (the sample is dated to 700-200 BCE). One of the historical Saidu Sharif samples I7718 also carries Q-L275, subclade is Q-Z19128 same as the Sappali Tepe outlier. Finally, Roopkund 53 or I6939 also carries Q-L275 > Q-L245. 

Now, looking at the modern data for Q-L275 at Y-full and FT-DNA. Q-Z19128 is only shared between Turkics and South Asians. Probably a non-WSH/Afanasievo derived line? Otoh, Q-NGQ1 > Q-M378 is found in Europeans as well as South-Central Asians. It's also found in one Afanasievo sample, and one Xinjiang EBA steppe sample. The Abusanteer 7 clade Q-Y2265 is found in a shit load of South Asians and one Turk, one Chinese Tajik on Y-full.

On Y-full, Q-Y2200 2500ybp formed, TMRCA 1500 ybp seems to be a uniquely Balto-Slavic clade, found in some Israeli Yiddish speakers too. This is the only European exclusive branch of Q-L275 I've found there.

2. The main East Asian Q-clade is Q-Y647 (Q > Q-L472 > Q-Y570 > Q-M120 > Q-Y647) and it has a TMRCA of 4000 BCE. 

relevant papers

1. Q3-L275 phylogeography

2. Q-M848 phylogeography

New insights into the Epipaleolithic of western Central Asia: The Tutkaulian complex

ABSTRACT 

Bracketed by the Zagros, Hindukush, Altai, and Himalaya Mountains, Central Asia was a likely a migration route for early people moving into North and East Asia. Because of its central geographic setting, the area also channeled cultural and technological influences and exchange between adjoining regions in early prehistory. In this paper we analyze techno-typological characteristics of stone tool assemblages assigned to Early and Late Epipaleolithic industries from two key archaeological sites in Tajikistan – Tutkaul and Obi-Kiik. We compare –these industries with preceding Upper Paleolithic assemblages from the same region, as well as with cultural entities from the Levant and Zagros which share technological traits. Our study reveals key similarities, suggesting that the Tutkaul and Obi-Kiik techno-complexes belong to a single Epipaleolithic culture – which we refer to as the Tutkaulian – split into a three-stage developmental sequence. We argue that the Tutkaulian, defined by bladelet-based primary reduction and an abundance of geometric microliths, with a chronological progression from trapeze-rectangle to lunate forms, has its origins in the local Upper Paleolithic culture (Kulbulakian) emerging through repeated episodes of cultural exchange with earlier or synchronous Levantine and Zagros industries.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S104061821830199X 

F3 allele sharing to Sidon MBA

F3 allele sharing of modern and ancient Levantine populations with Bronze Age Levant (Sidon MBA - likely same genetics as the Ancient Israelites). Higher the f3 estimate, the genetically "closer" the population. F3 is far superior than FST for small population sizes and for taking highly drifted groups like Samaritans into account.

You can see Iron Age & Hellenistic-Roman Era Lebanese are closest. What's surprising is how close Cypriots are. Let's see how much Sidon MBA ancestry they have.

Target: Cypriot Distance: 1.1574% / 0.01157384
52.2	Levant_Sidon_MBA
34.0	GRC_Minoan_Lassithi
13.8	Yamnaya_RUS_Samara

52.2% Sidon MBA! Now it makes a bit of sense. Phoenican ancestry likely? Lines up with their haplogroups as well, and with recorded history (Cyprus is right off Lebanon in a map). I don't think this is an overfitted model either, the f3 stats are quite clear on it. 

Indian simulations.

How would Indians look like without one of their three major ancestral components: Iranian Farmer, Steppe MLBA and AASI?

Let's see by artifically subtracting them one by one from the G25 coordinates Bhumihar Brahmin from North India.

1) Bhumihar minus AASI

0% AASI makes the Bhumihar closest to Pamiri Tajiks and some North East Caucasians who have high proportions of Iranian Farmer plus Steppe ancestry. Here's how the DNA looks like.

PCA position. 

Lies outside the South Asian cluster and instead clusters with Pamiri Tajiks, close to North East Caucasians.

2) Bhumihar without Iranian Farmer

This individual is not close to any modern Indian and lies outside the Indian cline completely. 

3) Bhumihar without Steppe MLBA

Wow, this individual literally still lies on the Indian cline even after artifically subtracting 26% Steppe ancestry from his genome. In fact, he now resembles a normal South Indian mid caste. This is further confirmed by the fact that the Bhumihar-NoSteppe simulation is the only one that still lies in the modern Indian cline on a South Asian PCA.

Distances to Ancients.

We get the same results. The no-Steppe simulation is the only one that has low enough genetic distances to some kind of Ancient Indian populations, namely the IVC and Swat samples. The no-AASI simulation is closest to Iron Age Tajikistan and Kazakasthan. The no-Iranian sim is not close to anything.

Y-DNA of the Khatri

 Y-DNA chart of Punjabi Khatris based on 60 samples from 4 studies plus about 4 private samples.

Studies used:

1) Underhill et al 2010 (15 samples)

2) Sahoo et al 2006 (7 samples)

3) GenomeAsia100K Project 2019 (5 samples)

4) Mascarenhas et al 2015 (29 samples)

Indian DNA in Roman Era Levant

 A Genetic History of the Near East from an aDNA Time Course Sampling Eight Points in the Past 4,000 Years

The Iron and Classical Ages in the Near East were marked by population expansions carrying cultural transformations that shaped human history, but the genetic impact of these events on the people who lived through them is little-known. Here, we sequenced the whole genomes of 19 individuals who each lived during one of four time periods between 800 BCE and 200 CE in Beirut on the Eastern Mediterranean coast at the center of the ancient world’s great civilizations. We combined these data with published data to traverse eight archaeological periods and observed any genetic changes as they arose. During the Iron Age (∼1000 BCE), people with Anatolian and South-East European ancestry admixed with people in the Near East. The region was then conquered by the Persians (539 BCE), who facilitated movement exemplified in Beirut by an ancient family with Egyptian-Lebanese admixed members. But the genetic impact at a population level does not appear until the time of Alexander the Great (beginning 330 BCE), when a fusion of Asian and Near Easterner ancestry can be seen, paralleling the cultural fusion that appears in the archaeological records from this period. The Romans then conquered the region (31 BCE) but had little genetic impact over their 600 years of rule. Finally, during the Ottoman rule (beginning 1516 CE), Caucasus-related ancestry penetrated the Near East. Thus, in the past 4,000 years, three limited admixture events detectably impacted the population, complementing the historical records of this culturally complex region dominated by the elite with genetic insights from the general population.

Hellenistic and Early Roman Period Levantines carried about 7-8% Iron Age South Asian ancestry. This is confirmed by the haplogroups found in these Roman era Levantines. 

 The relationship of ancient Lebanon with Central and South Asia also manifests in the presence of haplogroup L1a1-M27 among the modern Lebanese Y chromosome lineages (Figure S10). Haplogroup L1a1-M27 is common today in Central and South Asia but rare elsewhere.  We tested46 (see Supplemental Methods) the coalescence of the five L1a1-M27 Lebanese chromosomes and found that they all derived from a man who lived around 450 BCE–50 CE, a time interval overlapping with the Hellenistic period

The resuslts are further confirmed by haplotype segment sharing.

We then analyzed haplotype segments shared between the ancient Lebanese and modern populations in set 2 by using ChromoPainter44 on 2.5 million imputed SNPs and found that two Hellenistic individuals (SFI-5 and SFI-12) and one early Roman individual (SFI-11) had excess haplotype sharing with Central and South Asians (Figures 2E and S9), thus confirming the qpAdm results.

So some Indian men carrying L1a1-M27 migrated to the Levant around the Hellenistic Period, the time when and their haplogroup exist till date in the modern Lebanese, along with trace Indian admix.