Ancient DNA indicates 3,000 years of genetic continuity in the Northern Iranian Plate

[Granary]

The claim that most steppe ancestry in Iranians past and present is from the north-western route strikes me as premature, am I missing some definitive piece of evidence?

[parasar]

Looks like the Greek scenario for the Persian and Parthian Empire samples. No R1 and minor steppe ancestry.

Is the data available?

I mean not really, there is plenty of foreign ancestry in Myceneans if you don't assume the donor population is 100% Yamnaya-like

The same is true for Iranians, the donor population probably looked like the Iron Age Turkmenistan sample referred to in the paper, which is essentially a Yaz-culture sample. The original steppe ancestry was diluted however. 

I expected a lot of R1a at least from the Achaemenid period and higher steppe ancestry than modern Iranians. This seems to not be the case as it stands now. The expectations looked like the Greek scenario before the first ancient DNA was published. I do however expect R1a in future sampling from the Iranian plateau. It would be miracle if there wasn’t any.

Perhaps R1a was missing in the Persians and Medes.
The Zoroastrians in India and Iran also seem to have little or no R1a, especially their preists.
Table S9. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/in...n/mmc4.pdf

So it looks very likely that R1a was a major line only among the eastern (Sistan, Ariana, Aria - we still need DNA evidence) and steppe Iranians (this looks confirmed).

[Granary]

I mean not really, there is plenty of foreign ancestry in Myceneans if you don't assume the donor population is 100% Yamnaya-like

The same is true for Iranians, the donor population probably looked like the Iron Age Turkmenistan sample referred to in the paper, which is essentially a Yaz-culture sample. The original steppe ancestry was diluted however. 

I expected a lot of R1a at least from the Achaemenid period and higher steppe ancestry than modern Iranians. This seems to not be the case as it stands now. The expectations looked like the Greek scenario before the first ancient DNA was published. I do however expect R1a in future sampling from the Iranian plateau. It would be miracle if there wasn’t any.

Perhaps R1a was missing in the Persians and Medes.
The Zoroastrians in India and Iran also seem to have little or no R1a, especially their preists.
Table S9. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/in...n/mmc4.pdf

So it looks very likely that R1a was a major line only among the eastern (Sistan, Ariana, Aria - we still need DNA evidence) and steppe Iranians (this looks confirmed).

Doesn't that follow autosomal patterns? My understanding is NE Iranians + Afghani + Tajik have far higher steppe than Western Iranians. My understanding/assumption was that the drastic shift in ancestry basically is where the 2 large uninhabited desert cut the main population centers(Media, Persis, Tabaristan) in the West of Iran today and Khorasan and Sistan to the East

[Арсен]

and how did it get to Portugal/Brazil? if it was carried by steppe ancestors, it would probably be more common among other Indo-Europeans with greater steppe ancestry, but it is mainly found among the Portuguese

I have the hypothesis of the Iranic Alans in NW Portugal because the time and location do fit well together. I have a dataset of samples in our Portuguese and Brazilian J1-FGC6035 clade modal STRs and a few Big Y. The clade was one historical lineage from the Entre-Douro-e-Minho, close to the space of the documented Alans in Western Lusitania and the formation of the Suebi Kingdom with the capital in Braga, Southern Gallaecia, after the "Barbarian invasions" in the fall of the Roman Empire. The J1-FGC6035 definitely had local Warlords to have had a good expansion and local phylogenetic ramifications in the first centuries of the Portuguese Reconquista, Northern Portugal was a fierce warzone space against the Caliphate and the creation of the Portuguese frontier in Iberia and the Conquest of the Brazilian wilderness, as a high status Brazilian Portuguese mainstream lineage.

interesting

[billh]

I mean not really, there is plenty of foreign ancestry in Myceneans if you don't assume the donor population is 100% Yamnaya-like

The same is true for Iranians, the donor population probably looked like the Iron Age Turkmenistan sample referred to in the paper, which is essentially a Yaz-culture sample. The original steppe ancestry was diluted however. 

I expected a lot of R1a at least from the Achaemenid period and higher steppe ancestry than modern Iranians. This seems to not be the case as it stands now. The expectations looked like the Greek scenario before the first ancient DNA was published. I do however expect R1a in future sampling from the Iranian plateau. It would be miracle if there wasn’t any.

Perhaps R1a was missing in the Persians and Medes.
The Zoroastrians in India and Iran also seem to have little or no R1a, especially their preists.
Table S9. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/in...n/mmc4.pdf

So it looks very likely that R1a was a major line only among the eastern (Sistan, Ariana, Aria - we still need DNA evidence) and steppe Iranians (this looks confirmed).

The sample size is barely large enough to even be sure that more than half of ancient Iranians (in that region) were non-R1

[Joey37]

As for R1a, the area of Iran was more heavily populated than Central Asia and had a more pronounced indigenous component somewhat like the condition with Greece, which is majority J2 and has a minority of R1b; the proto-Persians are from the BMAC, where the steppe lineages were somewhat diluted; and R1a is higher in the east of Iran, closer to the expansion point.

[billh]

Modern Mazandaranis have among the lowest Steppe ancestry in Iran

[RCO]

The most important breakthrough in genetic genealogy in the last ten years. O mais importante avanço na genealogia genética nos últimos dez anos: "Ancient DNA indicates 3,000 years of genetic continuity in the Northern Iranian Plateau, from the Copper Age to the Sassanid Empire"+
Y-chr and mitochondrial haplogroups that evolved around the ancient Persian Plateau, and which are still rare in ancient genome databases. We compared these with the available ancient and modern data and showed the long-term continuity in the uniparental ancestries in the region+
Liarsangbon, Amlash, Gilan Iran_North. Three Parthian samples:
IRN23 and IRN25, a pair of genetically identical/twin individuals 200BCE to 100AD - J1-FGC6141 J1-FGC6069
IRN31 also from Liarsangbon 50BCE to 65 AD - J1-FGC61423 +
"the majority of the ancient Iranian gene pool remained stable over the centuries, with minor changes observed in the contemporary Iranian population.
Bronze Age Steppe ancestry remained relatively minor during the historical period in northern Iran". +
The genetic continuum between Central Asia, BMAC and Northern Iran. "Missing Links in Paternal Haplogroup J1-M267. Filling in the J1-M267 Phylogenetic Gap. Two Mesolithic Clades of Human Y chromosome haplogroup J1-M267: J1-FGC6064 and J1-ZS6599"- Ricardo + https://zenodo.org/records/5528265
"The residents of Liār-Sang Bon and, consequently, the Deylaman area in the historical period, especially the Parthians, had close relations with cultures outside the region, including the northern regions of the Caspian Sea (Such as the Sarmatian graves around the Volga-Don+
I discovered the lineage - J1-FGC6064 - More than 200 SNPs (2014) https://academia.edu/5889836/Western_Eur...netic_tree
"Nós Somos Alanos" (2015) https://www.academia.edu/13589202/_Nós_s...te_Ibérico +
Warning: The Iranian language was spoken long before Fatyanovo, Sintashta or Andronovo, a scientific mistake related to R1a in Northern/Western Iran. R1a was originally a EHG, Uralic, Hunnic, Turkic, Mongolic, even Indic or Semitic small fragmented clades in NW Iran -Be careful +
Escrevi em inglês para ver se alguns cientistas e interessados percebam que um brasileiro e iranianos conseguem mostrar a proposta científica sobre a origem das línguas indo-europeias e quem também fazia parte dos J1 Proto-Indo-Europeus, uma comunidade "guerreira e democrática" +

More here:
https://x.com/Ricardo_Cd_Oliv/status/188...3763362110

[Tomenable]

Modern Mazandaranis have among the lowest Steppe ancestry in Iran

Who made this map and based on which samples? That's a lot of regional Iranian samples.

[blazing_sun]

And does it represent EMBA steppe ancestry in that age itself, or in the modern population?

[parasar]

The same is true for Iranians, the donor population probably looked like the Iron Age Turkmenistan sample referred to in the paper, which is essentially a Yaz-culture sample. The original steppe ancestry was diluted however. 

I expected a lot of R1a at least from the Achaemenid period and higher steppe ancestry than modern Iranians. This seems to not be the case as it stands now. The expectations looked like the Greek scenario before the first ancient DNA was published. I do however expect R1a in future sampling from the Iranian plateau. It would be miracle if there wasn’t any.

Perhaps R1a was missing in the Persians and Medes.
The Zoroastrians in India and Iran also seem to have little or no R1a, especially their preists.
Table S9. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/in...n/mmc4.pdf

So it looks very likely that R1a was a major line only among the eastern (Sistan, Ariana, Aria - we still need DNA evidence) and steppe Iranians (this looks confirmed).

The sample size is barely large enough to even be sure that more than half of ancient Iranians (in that region) were non-R1

I would agree.
The Narasimhan/Reich Iran/Turan dataset also had no R1a.

[Jaska]

The most important breakthrough in genetic genealogy in the last ten years. 
- -
Warning: The Iranian language was spoken long before Fatyanovo, Sintashta or Andronovo, a scientific mistake related to R1a in Northern/Western Iran. R1a was originally a EHG, Uralic, Hunnic, Turkic, Mongolic, even Indic or 

How is it so important? Continuity is evident everywhere. 

Genetic or archaeological continuity can never prove linguistic continuity, although such unscientific views are still common among non-scholars. We know that there was no Iranian language until after Proto-Indo-Iranian ca. 2000 BCE. Before that, the populations in later Iranian regions spoke some other languages.

[RCO]

The most important breakthrough in genetic genealogy in the last ten years. 
- -
Warning: The Iranian language was spoken long before Fatyanovo, Sintashta or Andronovo, a scientific mistake related to R1a in Northern/Western Iran. R1a was originally a EHG, Uralic, Hunnic, Turkic, Mongolic, even Indic or 

How is it so important? Continuity is evident everywhere. 

Genetic or archaeological continuity can never prove linguistic continuity, although such unscientific views are still common among non-scholars. We know that there was no Iranian language until after Proto-Indo-Iranian ca. 2000 BCE. Before that, the populations in later Iranian regions spoke some other languages.

"We know" - not, that's your subjective opinion without any attested ancient DNA before the arrival of the new data from core Iranian ancient DNA from core regions like Gilan and the Southern Caspian Sea, as I always wrote here and in other fora.
The hard core scientific facts are here: 
Continuity of major Iranian haplogroups/clades in NW Iran, including the other remote mountains and plateaus in Eastern Anatolia and Northern Mesopotamia.
Continuity of major Iranian/Caucasus HG autosomal components as seen in any plot. 
Continuity of the local language and the history of the local/native Proto-Indo-Europeans around the Caspian-Northern Iran-Caucasus region.

Many authors in every scientific field always related Proto-Indo-Europeans languages with the Caspian/Northern Iran/Caucasus/Anatolia/Mesopotamia CIHG continuum and now ancient DNA is also confirming with new data.

[Granary]

The most important breakthrough in genetic genealogy in the last ten years. 
- -
Warning: The Iranian language was spoken long before Fatyanovo, Sintashta or Andronovo, a scientific mistake related to R1a in Northern/Western Iran. R1a was originally a EHG, Uralic, Hunnic, Turkic, Mongolic, even Indic or 

How is it so important? Continuity is evident everywhere. 

Genetic or archaeological continuity can never prove linguistic continuity, although such unscientific views are still common among non-scholars. We know that there was no Iranian language until after Proto-Indo-Iranian ca. 2000 BCE. Before that, the populations in later Iranian regions spoke some other languages.

"We know" - not, that's your subjective opinion without any attested ancient DNA before the arrival of the new data from core Iranian ancient DNA from core regions like Gilan and the Southern Caspian Sea, as I always wrote here and in other fora.
The hard core scientific facts are here: 
Continuity of major Iranian haplogroups/clades in NW Iran, including the other remote mountains and plateaus in Eastern Anatolia and Northern Mesopotamia.
Continuity of major Iranian/Caucasus HG autosomal components as seen in any plot. 
Continuity of the local language and the history of the local/native Proto-Indo-Europeans around the Caspian-Northern Iran-Caucasus region.

Many authors in every scientific field always related Proto-Indo-Europeans languages with the Caspian/Northern Iran/Caucasus/Anatolia/Mesopotamia CIHG continuum and now ancient DNA is also confirming with new data.

Genetic continuity proves linguistic continuity... this is why Hungarians speak West Slavic, right?

[RCO]

Yes, we have several articles about the Hungarian Conquistadores, Hungarians commoners were a conquered people and changed tha language as we can observe in several Asiatic haplogroups/components there.