RESUMO
The Yamnaya archaeological complex appeared around 3300BCE across the steppes north of the Black and Caspian Seas, and by 3000BCE reached its maximal extent from Hungary in the west to Kazakhstan in the east. To localize the ancestral and geographical origins of the Yamnaya among the diverse Eneolithic people that preceded them, we studied ancient DNA data from 428 individuals of which 299 are reported for the first time, demonstrating three previously unknown Eneolithic genetic clines. First, a "Caucasus-Lower Volga" (CLV) Cline suffused with Caucasus hunter-gatherer (CHG) ancestry extended between a Caucasus Neolithic southern end in Neolithic Armenia, and a steppe northern end in Berezhnovka in the Lower Volga. Bidirectional gene flow across the CLV cline created admixed intermediate populations in both the north Caucasus, such as the Maikop people, and on the steppe, such as those at the site of Remontnoye north of the Manych depression. CLV people also helped form two major riverine clines by admixing with distinct groups of European hunter-gatherers. A "Volga Cline" was formed as Lower Volga people mixed with upriver populations that had more Eastern hunter-gatherer (EHG) ancestry, creating genetically hyper-variable populations as at Khvalynsk in the Middle Volga. A "Dnipro Cline" was formed as CLV people bearing both Caucasus Neolithic and Lower Volga ancestry moved west and acquired Ukraine Neolithic hunter-gatherer (UNHG) ancestry to establish the population of the Serednii Stih culture from which the direct ancestors of the Yamnaya themselves were formed around 4000BCE. This population grew rapidly after 3750-3350BCE, precipitating the expansion of people of the Yamnaya culture who totally displaced previous groups on the Volga and further east, while admixing with more sedentary groups in the west. CLV cline people with Lower Volga ancestry contributed four fifths of the ancestry of the Yamnaya, but also, entering Anatolia from the east, contributed at least a tenth of the ancestry of Bronze Age Central Anatolians, where the Hittite language, related to the Indo-European languages spread by the Yamnaya, was spoken. We thus propose that the final unity of the speakers of the "Proto-Indo-Anatolian" ancestral language of both Anatolian and Indo-European languages can be traced to CLV cline people sometime between 4400-4000 BCE.
RESUMO
Although a broad range of methods exists for reconstructing population history from genome-wide single nucleotide polymorphism data, just a few methods gained popularity in archaeogenetics: principal component analysis (PCA); ADMIXTURE, an algorithm that models individuals as mixtures of multiple ancestral sources represented by actual or inferred populations; formal tests for admixture such as f3-statistics and D/f4-statistics; and qpAdm, a tool for fitting two-component and more complex admixture models to groups or individuals. Despite their popularity in archaeogenetics, which is explained by modest computational requirements and ability to analyze data of various types and qualities, protocols relying on qpAdm that screen numerous alternative models of varying complexity and find "fitting" models (often considering both estimated admixture proportions and p-values as a composite criterion of model fit) remain untested on complex simulated population histories in the form of admixture graphs of random topology. We analyzed genotype data extracted from such simulations and tested various types of high-throughput qpAdm protocols ("rotating" and "non-rotating", with or without temporal stratification of target groups and proxy ancestry sources, and with or without a "model competition" step). We caution that high-throughput qpAdm protocols may be inappropriate for exploratory analyses in poorly studied regions/periods since their false discovery rates varied between 12% and 68% depending on the details of the protocol and on the amount and quality of simulated data (i.e., >12% of fitting two-way admixture models imply gene flows that were not simulated). We demonstrate that for reducing false discovery rates of qpAdm protocols to nearly 0% it is advisable to use large SNP sets with low missing data rates, the rotating qpAdm protocol with a strictly enforced rule that target groups do not pre-date their proxy sources, and an unsupervised ADMIXTURE analysis as a way to verify feasible qpAdm models. Our study has a number of limitations: for instance, these recommendations depend on the assumption that the underlying genetic history is a complex admixture graph and not a stepping-stone model.
