Ponownie niby najnowsze dane, ale ani satem Mittani i Pali nie są uwzględnione. Ok niby są, ale są niewymienione. Ok. Wszystko jest przemieszane ze sobą, satem i kentum… Ale jak się zobaczy podobieństwa między pali a polskim, to jednak coś tu nie tak jest z tym schematem…

http://johnhawks.net/weblog/reviews/archaeology/recent/indo-european-anatolia-bouckaert-2012.html
(…)
Despite support for an Anatolian Indo-European origin, we think it unlikely that agriculture serves as the sole driver of language expansion on the continent. The five major Indo-European subfamiliesCeltic, Germanic, Italic, Balto-Slavic, and Indo-Iranianall emerged as distinct lineages between 4000 and 6000 years ago (Fig. 2 and fig. S1), contemporaneous with a number of later cultural expansions evident in the archaeological record, including the Kurgan expansion (57). Our inferred tree also shows that within each subfamily, the languages we sampled began to diversify between 2000 and 4500 years ago, well after the agricultural expansion had run its course.

I think this is the most important passage of the paper. Reading between the lines, it says that the origination point for Indo-European languages simply may not address the archaeological record. What if Indo-European got its start in Anatolia 10,000 years ago, but many of the modern branches of Indo-European within Europe — Celtic, Italic, Germanic — all moved into Europe in several separate waves, starting less than 6000 years ago from the Pontic Steppe? We have pretty good genetic evidence now that the first farmers in Europe were not very much like recent Europeans. We need later migrations into Europe from elsewhere to explain the genetic record, and the archaeology (and later, history) provides plenty of reasons to think that later migrations were important.
(…)

http://www.jolr.ru/files/%28104%29jlr2013-9%281-21%29.pdf
Two IE phylogenies, three PIE migrations, and four kinds of steppe
pastoralism

http://evolvingthoughts.net/2012/08/phylogeny-and-the-history-of-language-and-culture/

gerdie September 7, 2012 at 12:08 pm

There are several weaknesses in the article by Bouckaert et al that together might very well invalidate their conclusion.

One weakness seems to make a rather common reasoning error: equating a basal branch with origin. Basal branching does not directly translate into origin, as any biologist should know – the platypus is not the origin of the placentals. Moreover, the point about basal and origin can be seen in Bouckaert et al’s supplementary information that gives the large phylogenetic tree. We know Latin is the origin of the Romance languages, and Latin clusters basal to Romance languages – OK. But Gothic is not the origin of the other Germanic languages, just clusters basal. And Romani, the Gypsy language, clusters basal to all other extant Indian languages; it won’t be the origin of those languages. The phylogenetic tree is fully compatible with Hittite the earliest to branch out from PIE (Aaron Clausen said above), rather than Hittite representing the origin of PIE.

Moreover, the shape of the phylogenetic tree in fig 2 of the article makes no sense if one considers an Anatolian homeland. Apart from a few non-significant early branches with the known problem languages, the main split in Bouckaert et al is between Indo-Iranian and a Western group. Look at the map in fig 2. That map presents two possibilities: Indo-Iranian departed first from Anatolia, or the Western branch departed first from Anatolia. In both cases the branch that first departed should cluster more basal, and the branch that left last should cluster with Anatolian! The phylogenetic tree (as presented fig 2) says IE should depart from Anatolia and after that split (where? Kurgan area?) into Indo-Iranian and Western language group.

Another weakness is the reliance on written languages. We know the historic Skythians spoke an IE language (of the Iranian branch it is thought), but as we only know Skythian from a few words recorded by Greek authors, Skythian is absent in Bouckaert’s database. The area of Skythian is represented in Bouckaert’s figure S4 only by the late invasion of Slavonic languages. Given that Skythian is in the Kurgan area, the absence of early IE branches in the Kurgan area in Bouckaert’s modeling is not a result but a clear artifact.

http://www.sciencemag.org/content/337/6097/957.abstract?sid=192102e8-a5bc-4744-ac5a-5500338ab381
Mapping the Origins and Expansion of the Indo-European Language Family – Remco Bouckaert

There are two competing hypotheses for the origin of the Indo-European language family. The conventional view places the homeland in the Pontic steppes about 6000 years ago. An alternative hypothesis claims that the languages spread from Anatolia with the expansion of farming 8000 to 9500 years ago. We used Bayesian phylogeographic approaches, together with basic vocabulary data from 103 ancient and contemporary Indo-European languages, to explicitly model the expansion of the family and test these hypotheses. We found decisive support for an Anatolian origin over a steppe origin. Both the inferred timing and root location of the Indo-European language trees fit with an agricultural expansion from Anatolia beginning 8000 to 9500 years ago. These results highlight the critical role that phylogeographic inference can play in resolving debates about human prehistory.

http://www.elisanet.fi/alkupera/Problems_of_phylogenetics.pdf

Problems in the method and interpretations of the computational phylogenetics based on linguistic data. An example of wishful thinking: Bouckaert et al. 2012
Jaakko Häkkinen, 23rd September 2012

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d864bwyCAoA#t=2499
David Anthony, Early Indo-European migrations, economies, and phylogenies

Od ok 44 min przykład jak D. Anthony opisuje powstanie języków kentum Pre-Celtik i Pre-Italik przez pojawienie się ludzi z kultury Yamnaya/jamowej w dolinie Dunaju… ok tzw. 3000r pne
Potem ok, 45 min opisuje połączenie się kultury trypolskiej z kulturą jamową, a potem ok. 46 min opisuje jak ta kultura podzieliła się na dwie grupy… jedna satem Pre Slavic a druga…kentum Pre Germanic i ta poszła sobie na tereny Polski!!! HAHAHAHAHA!!!

Jak dla mnie to lingwistyczne mistrzostwo manipulacji jest!!! Ktoś z was umie to logicznie wytłumaczyć, jak ci biedni rozpadający się właśnie trypolianie tak się nagle rozróżnili językowo…hm? Co to sprawiło?

https://sites.google.com/site/awesomesneakpeekers/reference

Polecam dużo map, zdjęć, wykresów itp, wszystko ze strony zalinkowanej powyżej, z tylko jednego z wielu, zamieszczonego tam zbiorowego linka…

http://www.scribd.com/fullscreen/49586195?access_key=key-2l2x2tsy0y3btrfm6u5q
© UNESCO 1998 Archaeology and ethnic politics: the discovery of Arkaim
V. A. Shnirelman (od strony 33 do 39)

http://perm-asha.chat.ru/arkaim_e.html
A R K A I M monument of protocities civilization

For more than one hundred years, historians and linguists have searched for the Motherland of the founders of the bright and original Indo-European culture. Indo-Iranians were considered the „alive bridge” between the Easten and Western cultures – their genius are connecting many modern nations of both Asia and Europe.

When that small Indo-Iranians tribes lived toghether on large territory and named themselves „ar’ya”. From this name the term „Aryan Tribes” became known in modern history. Aryans were the creators of famous religion of fire-worshipper and have leave after themselves the prominent monuments of literature – „Rigveda” and „Avesta”.

One of the fascinating hypothesises (Mary Boyce) are placed the Motherland of ancient Indo-Iranians in area of the Asian steppes to east of Volga. Geography of deep layers of „Rigveda” and „Avesta” is compatible with historical geography of South Ural in XVII-XVI centuries B.C. (…)

http://users.hartwick.edu/anthonyd/harnessing%20horsepower.html

David W. Anthony and Dorcas R. Brown
RESEARCH HARNESSING HORSEPOWER

http://users.hartwick.edu/anthonyd/Anthony&Brown-%202ndary%20products%20&%20Horse-%20Jrl%20World%20Prehistory%202011.pdf

„The Secondary Products Revolution, Horse-Riding, and Mounted Warfare”
Journal of World Prehistory (2011) 24:131-160.

Polecam tę stronę, ma bardzo dużo zalinkowanych danych:

https://sites.google.com/site/awesomesneakpeekers/reference

Indo European (IE) Topics

Cognates in various IE languages: Contains some commonly used words in Proto Indo European (PIE), Proto Indo Iranian (PII), Sanskrit, Avestan, Persian, Greek, Latin, German and English
Indo European Proper Names: Some Rig Vedic male, female and place names with their probable Proto Indo European (PIE), Proto Indo Iranian (PII) and Avestan forms
Selected reads on Indo European history
Selected reads on Indo European Linguistics

Rig Vedic Topics

List of some prominent Rig Vedic composers and Kings
Selected reads on Rig Veda
Selected compilations of Rig Vedic topics
Selected Verses from Rig Veda (The 10 books arranged chronologically)
Selected Verses from Rig Veda (Topic wise)

Vedas – Original and Translation

Rig Veda
Devanagari Book 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
English Translation
Shukla (White) Yajur Veda: Devanagari English Translation
Krishna (Black) Yajur Veda
Taitiriya Samhita: Devanagari English Translation
Sama Veda: Devanagari English Translation
Atharva Veda: Devanagari English Translation

Arkaim

Kalash Topics

General reads on Kalash
Selected Kalash words and the corresponding Persian & Sanskrit forms

Indian History

https://sites.google.com/a/sudiptodas.com/www/thearyantrail

Pit Grave Culture or Kurgan Culture (3500 – 2800 BC): The Pit Grave Culture extends over the entire Pontic Steppe. This is the late PIE (Proto Indo European) phase of Indo European unity where the PIE peoples stayed together prior to their disintegration and movement towards various destinations.

Catacomb, Hut Grave Culture (2800 – 2000 BC): This is the Proto Indo Iranian (PII) Bronze Age culture that existed in the Ukrainian Steppes. Relics of the culture are widespread in the region along the Dnieper River, the coastal region the Sea of Azov, Crimea and along the Don River.

Timber Grave Culture (2000 – 800 BC): Around Samara on the Volga Basin, this is the Proto Iranian Culture. The Proto Indo Iranian peoples arrived here from Azov Sea. The Iranians stayed back and the Indo Aryans proceeded further east to Arkaim-Sintashta.

Andronovo Culture, Arkaim-Sintashta (1800 – 900 BC): South of the Ural Mountains this is an Indo Aryan Culture. The Indo-Aryans, the eastern branch of the Indo-Iranians eventually reached Northern Iran, Afghanistan and Indian subcontinent in the next few centuries.

Bactria-Margiana Archaeological Complex, BMAC Culture (2200 – 1700 BC): This is an Indo Aryan Culture in Central Asia. It’s contemporary to the northern Andronovo Culture (1800 – 900 BC). From here the Indo-Aryans moved to northern Iran, Afghanistan and India.

Vakhsh – Biskent Culture: Contemporary to BMAC & Andronovo, it’s an Indo Aryan Culture. The last segment of the Aryan trail to India may be through through Vakhsh, via Vakshu or Oxus/Vakhsh, Kabul, Swat rivers.

Kalash Culture (1600 BC till date): A very unique group of Indo-Aryans in Hindukush have preserved many of the Rig Vedic and early Indo-Aryan features including language and culture. Kalash is the last place in the Aryan trail before entering into the final destination of Punjab.

Gandhara Grave Culture (1700 – 1400 BC): Rig Vedic Culture in Punjab in Pakistan & India

1. Kurgan Culture: 3500 – 2800 BC

This is the beginning of the Aryan Trail. This can be treated as one of the original homelands, Urheimat, of the Indo European peoples. The Anatolian and the Tocharian branches of the Indo European peoples had already separated by this time. This culture is characterized by kurgan or burial mounds near rivers. Burial mounds may not be a unique thing but burial near rivers is something that perhaps has reference only in the Vedic texts. Though burial is not common among the Hindus but in early Rig Vedic days burial was a common thing. In one Rig Vedic hymn there’s a reference to going to the house of clay, mrinmayam griham.

In the kurgans the corpses were covered with red ocher and laid either in supine position or on their sides with flexed legs. The excavated grave goods provide important information about the socio-economic structures of the culture. Their major economic occupation was animal husbandry. Agriculture, hunting and fishing were of secondary importance. They usually lived in surface dwellings, often on high hills, in fortified settlements. Oval houses were secured with walls and moats. Fortification may imply conflicts. The houses were constructed with clay and reeds. Extensive copper items were found in the settlements. Excavations at kurgans revealed primitive carts pulled by oxen. Incidentally the area north of Azov Sea in Ukraine is the site where horse was first domesticated during the Srendy Stog Culture between 4500 and 3500 BC. As horses are the trademarks of the Aryans and the Indo Europeans many scholars espouse to the Kurgan Theory of identifying the Kurgan Culture with the proto Indo Europeans.

An interesting linguistic observation is that all Indo European languages have cognates for various parts of a solid wheel like the wheel itself, the axle and the nave, center of the wheel. But there’s no cognate for chariot and spoked wheel. This may imply that when all the Indo European peoples stayed together a chariot and a spoked wheel was unknown. All they knew was the ancient cart with solid wheel and accordingly they had words only for that.

The Latin colus, Greek kuklos, Persian charkh, Sanskrit chakra all come from the Indo European keklo, meaning wheel. The cognate of the Sanskrit ratha, meaning chariot, is Latin rota, which comes from the Indo European roto meaning wheel and not chariot. The cognates for axle are aksha in Sanskrit, axis in Latin, akson in Greek, all coming from Indo European aks. Similarly nave, the center of the wheel, comes from Indo European nebh and has Sanskrit nabhi, Avestan naba, Persian naf, Latin umbilicus, Greek omphalos and German nabel as cognates.

But on the other hand the Sanskrit ratha for chariot doesn’t have any cognate in any other IE languages with the same meaning. Interesting is also the word ara in Sanskrit, meaning spoke. It comes from the IE root ero, meaning to move. Incidentally the Sanskrit root ri comes from the same root and has the same meaning, to move. It’s very likely that both ratha and ara for chariot and spoke are later creations of the Aryans after the chariot and spoked wheels were discovered later. Interestingly the first remains of chariot and spoked wheel appear much later around 2000 BC near Arkaim-Sintashta, mentioned below.

Storozhova Mohyla, a place in Dnepropetrovsk, is one of the sites for kurgan or burial mounds. It dates back to 3000 BC.

http://s155239215.onlinehome.us/turkic/btn_Archeology/Mallory/JMalloryEneolothBronzeAgeEn.htm

The Prehistory of the Silk Road
By Elena Efimovna Kuzʹmina
http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=5FzANyya1BEC&pg=PA24&lpg=PA24&dq=Sredny+Stog+II&source=bl&ots=s19EHJA95r&sig=Y5npQUlrMHVqbTgzy3vqLiYTGjw&hl=en&sa=X&ei=Q8G9Uu7HLcyThgeCzIDIAg&ved=0CHQQ6AEwCw#v=onepage&q=Sredny%20Stog%20II&f=false

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khvalynsk_culture
The culture also is termed the Middle Eneolithic or Developed Eneolithic or Proto-kurgan. It was preceded by the Early Eneolithic or Samara culture, from which it came, and succeeded by the Late Eneolithic, or Early Yamna culture, to which it descended.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dnieper-Donets_culture
The Dnieper–Donets culture (ca. 5th—4th millennium BC) was a Neolithic (New Stone Age) culture in the area north of the Black Sea/Sea of Azov between the Dnieper and Donets River.

There are parallels with the contemporaneous Samara culture. The Dnieper–Donets culture was succeeded by the Yamna culture.(…)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yamna
The Yamna culture (Ukrainian: Ямна культура, Russian: Ямная культура, „Pit [Grave] Culture”, from Russian/Ukrainian яма, „pit”) is a late copper age/early Bronze Age culture of the Southern Bug/Dniester/Ural region (the Pontic steppe), dating to the 36th–23rd centuries BC. The name also appears in English as Pit Grave Culture or Ochre Grave Culture.

The culture was predominantly nomadic, with some agriculture practiced near rivers and a few hillforts.

The Yamna culture was preceded by the Sredny Stog culture, Khvalynsk culture and Dnieper-Donets culture, while succeeded by the Catacomb culture and the Srubna culture.
(…)
Characteristic for the culture are the inhumations in kurgans (tumuli) in pit graves with the dead body placed in a supine position with bent knees. The bodies were covered in ochre. Multiple graves have been found in these kurgans, often as later insertions.[citation needed]

Significantly, animal grave offerings were made (cattle, sheep, goats and horse), a feature associated with Proto-Indo-Europeans (including Proto-Indo-Iranians).[2]

The earliest remains in Eastern Europe of a wheeled cart were found in the „Storozhova mohyla” kurgan (Dnipropetrovsk, Ukraine, excavated by Trenozhkin A.I.) associated with the Yamna culture.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samara_culture
The Samara culture is considered the eneolithic culture of the region, along with the subsequent Khvalynsk culture and the still later early Yamna culture.
(…)
The range of the Samara culture is the forest-steppe terrain of the middle Volga, but the North Caspian culture of the lower Volga is early Eneolithic as well. In the context of the Kurgan hypothesis, this range is regarded as a convenient place for speakers of the Proto-Indo-European language to have exchanged some lexical items with Uralic-language-speakers. As a cross-roads between east and west, north and south, it must have received influences and stimulation from many peoples. Moreover, such a location would require a value orientation toward war and defense, which we know the Indo-Europeans had. They were a warrior culture. They invaded cultures that Gimbutas claims were not bellicose in nature, despite non-hunting weapons found in graves.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sredny_Stog_culture
The Sredny Stog culture is a pre-kurgan archaeological culture, named after the Dnieper river islet of Seredny Stih where it was first located, dating from the 5th millennium BC. It was situated across the Dnieper river on both its shores, with sporadic settlements to the west and east.[1] One of the best known sites associated with this culture is Dereivka, located on the right bank of the Omelnik, a tributary of the Dnieper, and is the most impressive site within the Sredny Stog culture complex, being about 2,000 square meters in area.

The Sredny Stog culture seems to have had contact with the agricultural Cucuteni-Trypillian culture in the west and was a contemporary of the Khvalynsk culture.
(…)
The expert Dmytro Telegin has divided the chronology of Sredny Stog into two distinct phases. Phase II (ca. 4000–3500 BC) used corded ware pottery which may have originated there, and stone battle-axes of the type later associated with expanding Indo-European cultures to the West. Most notably, it has perhaps the earliest evidence of horse domestication (in phase II), with finds suggestive of cheek-pieces (psalia).

In the context of the modified Kurgan hypothesis of Marija Gimbutas, this pre-kurgan archaeological culture could represent the Urheimat (homeland) of the Proto-Indo-European language. The culture ended at around 3500 BC, when Yamna culture expanded westward replacing Sredny Stog, and coming into direct contact with the Cucuteni-Trypillian culture in the western Ukraine.
(…)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cucuteni-Trypillian_culture

Przepraszam, zapomniałem dołączyć link:
http://eurogenes.blogspot.com.au/2010/02/major-eurasian-admix-in-north-indian.html

I znów R1a panoszy się tym razem wśród kapłanów w Indiach…

Saturday, February 13, 2010
„Major Eurasian” admix in North Indian upper castes

According to some people (usually some Indians), the Indo-European invasion of South Asia never happened. But the data I’m seeing says otherwise (see also here).

The dopamine D2 receptor (DRD2) gene, with its known human-specific derived alleles that can facilitate haplotype reconstruction, presents an important locus for anthropological studies. The three sites (TaqIA, TaqIB, and TaqID) of the DRD2 gene are widely studied in various world populations. However, no work has been previously published on DRD2 gene polymorphisms among North Indian populations. Thus, the present study attempts to understand the genetic structure of North Indian upper caste populations using the allele and haplotype frequencies and distribution patterns of the three TaqI sites of the DRD2 gene. Two hundred forty-six blood samples were collected from five upper caste populations of Himachal Pradesh (Brahmin, Rajput and Jat) and Delhi (Aggarwal and Sindhi), and analysis was performed using standard protocols. All three sites were found to be polymorphic in all five of the studied populations. Uniform allele frequency distribution patterns, low heterozygosity values, the sharing of five common haplotypes, and the absence of two of the eight possible haplotypes observed in this study suggest a genetic proximity among the selected populations. The results also indicate a major genetic contribution from Eurasia to North Indian upper castes, apart from the common genetic unity of Indian populations. The study also demonstrates a greater genetic inflow among North Indian caste populations than is observed among South Indian caste and tribal populations.

Kallur N. Saraswathy et al., Brief communication: Allelic and haplotypic structure at the DRD2 locus among five North Indian caste populations, Received: 28 May 2009; Accepted: 3 November 2009, doi: 10.1002/ajpa.21246

I jeszcze raz R1a, ale teraz w Mongolii u elity Xiongnu!

http://eurogenes.blogspot.com.au/2010/01/2000-year-old-r1a1-west-eurasian-dug-up.html

Thursday, January 21, 2010
2,000-year-old R1a1 West Eurasian dug up in Mongolia

The authors identify this guy as someone of Indo-European origin who joined the elite ranks of the Xiongnu. You can see a picture of his skull in the supporting info. Also, for some more reading on ancient European-like skeletons and R1a1 deep in Asia, see my earlier blog entry here.

We analyzed mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA), Y-chromosome single nucleotide polymorphisms (Y-SNP), and autosomal short tandem repeats (STR) of three skeletons found in a 2,000-year-old Xiongnu elite cemetery in Duurlig Nars of Northeast Mongolia. This study is one of the first reports of the detailed genetic analysis of ancient human remains using the three types of genetic markers. The DNA analyses revealed that one subject was an ancient male skeleton with maternal U2e1 and paternal R1a1 haplogroups. This is the first genetic evidence that a male of distinctive Indo-European lineages (R1a1) was present in the Xiongnu of Mongolia. This might indicate an Indo-European migration into Northeast Asia 2,000 years ago. Other specimens are a female with mtDNA haplogroup D4 and a male with Y-SNP haplogroup C3 and mtDNA haplogroup D4. Those haplogroups are common in Northeast Asia. There was no close kinship among them. The genetic evidence of U2e1 and R1a1 may help to clarify the migration patterns of Indo-Europeans and ancient East-West contacts of the Xiongnu Empire. Artifacts in the tombs suggested that the Xiongnu had a system of the social stratification. The West Eurasian male might show the racial tolerance of the Xiongnu Empire and some insight into the Xiongnu society.

Kijeong Kim et al., A western Eurasian male is found in 2000-year-old elite Xiongnu cemetery in Northeast Mongolia, American Journal of Physical Anthropology, Published Online: 20 Jan 2010, doi: 10.1002/ajpa.21242

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ajpa.21242/abstract

Znów o R1a na Syberii i dość dalekim wschodzie tym razem w kulturze Xiaohe.

http://eurogenes.blogspot.com.au/2010/02/bronze-age-tarim-basin-caucasoids.html

Thursday, February 25, 2010
Bronze Age Tarim Basin „Caucasoids” carried R1a1a (and European mtDNA lineages too)

Ancient genetic evidence of major migrations from West Eurasia all the way to China during the Chalcolithic and Bronze Age is really piling up now (see also here). This article is open access (ie. free), and focuses on a 4,000-year-old burial site in the Taklamakan desert. Here are a couple of interesting tit-bits…

Besides the East Eurasian lineage, two West Eurasian mtDNA haplogroups H and K were found among the Xiaohe people. H lineage is the most common mtDNAhaplogroup in West Eurasia [20], but haplogroup H with a 16260T was shared by only nine modern people in Genbank, including one Italian, one German, one Hungarian,one Portuguese, one Icelander and four English people. Haplogroup K, a western Eurasian–specific haplogroup, is mainly distributed in Europe, central Asia, and Iran [20, 21]. However, haplogroup K with 16134T, found in the Xiaohe people, has not been found in modern people to our knowledge.
…
Regarding the Y chromosomal DNA analyses, the seven males identified all belonged to haplogroup R1a1a. It is most frequently found in Eastern Europe, South Asia and Siberia. In contrast, it is relatively uncommon in Middle Easterners and rare in East Asian [22-24]. It is thought to be a trace of the migration events of early Indo-European [38-39]. The presence of haplogroup R1a1a in the ancient Xiaohe people implies that the parental ancestry of the Xiaohe people originated from somewhere in Siberia or Europe, which is consistent with the origin of maternal ancestry.

http://www.biomedcentral.com/1741-7007/8/15/abstract

The Tarim Basin, located on the ancient Silk Road, played a very important role in the history of human migration and cultural communications between the West and the East. However, both the exact period at which the relevant events occurred and the origins of the people in the area remain very obscure. In this paper, we present data from the analyses of both Y chromosomal and mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) derived from human remains excavated from the Xiaohe cemetery, the oldest archeological site with human remains discovered in the Tarim Basin thus far.
Results

Mitochondrial DNA analysis showed that the Xiaohe people carried both the East Eurasian haplogroup (C) and the West Eurasian haplogroups (H and K), whereas Y chromosomal DNA analysis revealed only the West Eurasian haplogroup R1a1a in the male individuals.
Conclusion

Our results demonstrated that the Xiaohe people were an admixture from populations originating from both the West and the East, implying that the Tarim Basin had been occupied by an admixed population since the early Bronze Age. To our knowledge, this is the earliest genetic evidence of an admixed population settled in the Tarim Basin.