Yamnaya: home-grown

I have some interesting news. It looks like Khvalynsk_Eneolithic I0434 can be used as essentially a perfect proxy for the Eneolithic steppe trio from Wang et al. 2018 when modeling the ancestry of the Yamnaya people of what is now the Samara region of Russia. Consider the qpAdm mixture models below, sorted by taildiff.
One of the best fitting models that also fairly closely matches archeological data, which suggest that Yamnaya was an amalgamation of the Khvalynsk, Repin and Sredny Stog cultures, is in bold. The worst fitting, and basically failed, models are listed below the dotted line. Note that almost all of these models feature reference populations from West and Central Asia.

Khvalynsk_I0434 + Iberia_ChL 0.681534184 > full output
Khvalynsk_I0434 + Globular_Amphora 0.525961242 > full output
Khvalynsk_I0434 + Iberia_Central_CA 0.515960444 > full output
Khvalynsk_I0434 + Sredny_Stog_I6561 0.485311962 > full output
Khvalynsk_I0434 + Varna 0.430411416 > full output
Khvalynsk_I0434 + Blatterhole_MN 0.328782809 > full output
Khvalynsk_I0434 + Baden_LCA 0.234307235 > full output
Khvalynsk_I0434 + Protoboleraz_LCA 0.231310724 > full output
Khvalynsk_I0434 + ALPc_MN 0.200002422 > full output
Khvalynsk_I0434 + Trypillia 0.193900977 > full output
Khvalynsk_I0434 + Balaton_Lasinja_CA 0.187031564 > full output
Khvalynsk_I0434 + Tiszapolgar_ECA 0.153940224 > full output
Khvalynsk_I0434 + Tisza_LN 0.145465993 > full output
Khvalynsk_I0434 + Balkans_ChL 0.111720163 > full output
…
Khvalynsk_I0434 + Armenia_EBA 0.0108890099 > full output
Khvalynsk_I0434 + Armenia_ChL 0.00882375703 > full output
Khvalynsk_I0434 + Levant_BA_North 0.0078751978 > full output
Khvalynsk_I0434 + Minoan_Lasithi 0.0675240088 > full output
Khvalynsk_I0434 + Peloponnese_N 0.046998906 > full output
Khvalynsk_I0434 + Hajji_Firuz_ChL 0.00269860335 > full output
Khvalynsk_I0434 + Shahr_I_Sokhta_BA1 0.00261908387 > full output
Khvalynsk_I0434 + Sarazm_Eneolithic 0.00120345503 > full output
Khvalynsk_I0434 + Seh_Gabi_ChL 0.00111898703 > full output
Khvalynsk_I0434 + Geoksiur_Eneolithic 0.000178295163 > full output
Khvalynsk_I0434 + Tepe_Hissar_ChL 0.000163698274 > full output
Khvalynsk_I0434 + Bustan_BA 0.000151088148 > full output

Why is this potentially important? Because unless Khvalynsk_Eneolithic I0434 was a recent migrant from the North Caucasus piedmont steppe, which is where the remains of the Eneolithic steppe trio were excavated, then Yamnaya’s ethnogenesis might not have anything at all to do with Asia or even the Caucasus region. At least not within any reasonable time frame anyway. Here’s a map showing the geographic locations of all of the populations relevant to the bolded mixture model above.

I won’t be fussed if it turns out that the majority of the ancestry of the Yamnaya, Corded Ware and other closely related ancient peoples was sourced from the Eneolithic populations of the North Caucasus piedmont steppe. But I think it’s useful to make the point that there are still very few ancient samples available from the steppes between the Black and Caspian seas, so we don’t yet have much of a clue how the groups living throughout this region during the Eneolithic and earlier fit into the grand scheme of things.
See also…
Big deal of 2018: Yamnaya not related to Maykop
“The Homeland: In the footprints of the early Indo-Europeans” time map
Late PIE ground zero now obvious; location of PIE homeland still uncertain, but…

Source