A new dataset has appeared online from a yet to be published paper titled
Cosmopolitanism in the depths of Barbaricum evidenced by archaeogenomic data from the Late Iron Age Goth community of the Masłomęcz group [Update: the paper is now available at this
Link].
Most of these Gothic samples are clearly of Scandinavian origin, and very similar to present-day Swedes. Overall, however, they create a somewhat heterogeneous cluster that also overlaps with present-day Poles thanks to the presence of a few Balto-Slavic-related and possibly Roman-related individuals.
The Principal Component Analysis (PCA) plots below were produced with the excellent
Vahaduo G25 Global Views tool using the data
here.
Their Y-haplogroups more or less reflect the PCA results:
PL046 R-YP6228
PL048 I-PH833
PL049 I-A11537
PL052 R-Y48961
PL059 I-PH833
PL062 I-S15301
PL065 I-Y294193
PL066 R-FGC2555
PL067 R-S7759
PL070 I-CTS10028
PL071 I-BY316
PL076 I-S9318
PL082 I-Z2041
PL085 J-Z38241
PL086 I-FT29339
See also...
Early Slavs from Tribal Period Poland
Wielbark Goths were overwhelmingly of Scandinavian origin
High-resolution stuff
1,302 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 1201 – 1302 of 1302@Shomu
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1bzrSF5LOI9ekFZKiTn8JH-eKfKH1ltPa/view?usp=sharing
Looking at the division of the IBD segments of medieval Poles, it is probably time to reject the idea of an early medieval exchange of the Polish population:
https://polandmaibd.netlify.app/
@ambron
Interesting maps, but they don't show what you're claiming.
The Medieval Polish samples only share significant IBD with each other. They also share some IBD with preceding populations, suggesting that they have ancestry from Wielbark Goths and so on, which is something we already knew.
In regard to the Polish Corded Ware samples sharing IBD across much of Eurasia, again this is expected, because Corded Ware and their immediate descendants ranged all the way from Western Europe to Mongolia and India.
Also, Yamnaya and Afanasievo share a lot of IBD with Corded Ware, so their descendants can look like they're closely related to Corded Ware.
Thank you, Davidski, for converting these files; they are very useful to me.
@Mr Shomu Tepe
Would you or crashdoc be able to get the coverage for the samples David just converted to G25 for you, so I can integrate them into the comprehensive list of G25 ancients listed here:
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/0q39lrsynq7prjc7mm8gq/G25-Ancients.txt?rlkey=33i5tycf3nd6glv1w7z6dleco&e=4&dl=0
While we may already have samples of these individuals, I usually cross reference them to make sure we have the highest quality versions at all times.
While I could simply copy the coverage listed in the AADR this won't be exact as the way people process samples often differs (usually only slightly, but I prefer to have the most accurate information).
A perfect metaphor of the origin and destiny of Y hg. R1b1:
"Despite their similar orthography and meaning, "isle" and "island" are completely unrelated. The word "island" was inherited from Proto-Germanic *awjōlandą, itself from *awjō, (island), and *landą (land), while "isle" was borrowed from Old French "isle" (cf Modern French "île"), itself from Latin "insula". While the Germanic word was still spelled "iland" in Middle English, an -s- was inserted around the 16th century due to a false association with "isle".
Additional remarks:
-Dutch also inherited "eiland" from *awjōlandą, but didn't alter its orthography.
-In common usage, German replaced its inherited word "Eiland" with the Latin loanword "Insel", from the same source as "isle".
-The first element of *awjōlandą, *awjō, also yielded Danish "ø", Swedish "ö", Norwegian "øy" and Icelandic "ey".
-The Germanic root *awjō is ultimately related to Latin "aqua" through Indo-European."
And also in French "aqua" souds similar as to Germanic languages,
@MiroCyo
😀I simply inserted these updated coordinates into the existing ones from the G25 Ajeje Brazorf list; since I don't know about the coverage, I removed that parameter from the sample index.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1ROZtd8QA5li6a0H7zpwmITehDTHXbWkn/view?usp=drivesdk
let me know if the link doesn't open.
David
If medieval Poles share the most common ancestors amongst themselves, and secondly with all medieval Slavs (Czech, Slovak, Pannonian, Croatian, Ukrainian and Russian), this implies that the Slavic migration did not come to Poland, but originated from Poland. If a mass migration from the east had arrived in Poland in the early Middle Ages, medieval Poles would share more common ancestors with medieval Ukrainians and Russians than they do amongst themselves, just as Germans do with Poles in the studies by Ralph and Coop.
As for CWC, the most important point is that medieval Poles share IBD with the Polish CWC, which indicates the biological continuity of the Polish population since the late Neolithic.
@ambron
It's obvious on that map that the immediate ancestors of the Medieval Poles and other early Slavs have not been sampled, in Poland or elsewhere.
During the 551BC-52BC and 51BC-449AD timeframes there's no population that can be reasonably said to be proto-Slavic based on the IBD results.
There is some noticeable IBD sharing with the Germanic populations of Poland, like in southeastern Poland, and also in Slovakia and Serbia, but these hits can be explained by foreign admixture and outliers that we see in the Medieval Polish sample set.
The 450AD - 949AD timeframe in largely during and after the main Slavic expansion, so there's no way to tell from that where the Slavic homeland was. But interestingly, Poland is poorly represented at this critical time.
@Davidski
Hi, i created a program to make heatmaps based on g25 distances.
https://genarchivist.net/showthread.php?tid=2589
While I was looking for g25 averages to use as a reference, I came across this old dataset derived from the eurogenes k13 calculator: https://binshare.net/aBOIBs3oUblNb2mwJIFs
This means that someone at the time had access to their genetic data.
There are very detailed regions for which it would be wonderful to have g25 coordinates. Unfortunately, there is no trace of this in the g25 dataset.
Would you be able to recover some of them by any chance?
Also having PLINK and Eigenstrat dataset would be great.
It's a shame, with all the new ancient specimens we have publicly available today, that the modern ones are less than ten years ago.
Thank you.
David
"But interestingly, Poland is poorly represented at this critical time."
In Poland, this was still the cremation period, so samples are scarce. However, as I said, if there had been a mass migration from the east to Poland at that time, medieval Poles would have shared more IBD with medieval Ukrainians and Russians than with each other.
@ambron
There are hardly any medieval samples from Ukraine there, and we know that those that we have are irrelevant even based on basic genetic structure.
So clearly something is missing, but there's no evidence on that map that this something was located in Poland.
@Stefano
Those modern samples in the K13 and K36 are people who donated their results (not data) to the datasheets.
There's no way to get most of these people into the G25 without getting in touch with them personally and asking for their raw data files.
@Davidski
I see. That was a really good dataset. Thank you anyway. If someone wants to contribute with his own G25 coordinates or has G25 averages not publicly available, please contact me via PM on Genarchivist Forum.
David
The cremation period is, of course, a problem. Nevertheless, medieval Poles in the pre-cremation period share the greatest IBD with the Bronze Age populations of Polish lands:
Poland MA
Poland BA 170.08 cM
Balkan BA 96.19 cM
Baltic BA 84.90 cM
We can, of course, assume that Poles went on vacation to the middle Dnieper during the cremation period and returned from vacation to Poland in the early Middle Ages, but this is highly unlikely. However, regardless of the interpretation, the fact remains that the main source of medieval Poles ancestors was the population of Polish lands during the Bronze Age.
@Mr Shomu Tepe
I assumed crashdoc has the coverage? Do you know where I might find him, though if it's easier to reach him yourself I'd appreciate if you could ask him to pull the coverage from what he processed.
I've taken over the G25 ancients list and have been integrating everything (including Akbari), updating metadata, removing duplicates, etc to make it as accurate and informative as possible
"For the others you can find the stats in that file:
https://dataverse.harvard.edu/file.xhtml?fileId=13663706&version=10.0
In the column "SNPs hit on autosomal targets (Computed using easystats on 1240k snpset)" you'll find the # of autosomal snps and to get a % you need to divide the number of snps by 1200343 then multiply by 100."
There are about 3x as many Trzciniec samples as there are total Baltic BA samples, so obviously the cumulative IBD sharing would be higher.
The average IBD sharing is higher with Baltic BA (and is highest with Baltic IA/Marvele, as has previously been discussed).
@Mr Shomu Tepe
A question for you. You said: I simply inserted these updated coordinates into the existing ones from the G25 Ajeje Brazorf list
Are you saying you have edit access to the G25 ancients list here: https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/0q39lrsynq7prjc7mm8gq/G25-Ancients.txt?rlkey=33i5tycf3nd6glv1w7z6dleco&e=5&dl=0
I ask because I don't see that anyone has edit access except myself.
🐏 🐐 ⛰️
https://x.com/caucasusvisuals/status/2065036601172861338
@MiroCyo
No, I just periodically download the “G25 Ancients” files from his profile on the Genarchivist website, and I copied the coordinates of those converted AADRv66 samples that Davidski kindly shared, then pasted them into the ones from the “G25 Ancients” list. Nothing complicated — I did it on my phone. I do not have access to editing the Ajeje Brazorf file; I can only access them if I download them to my phone.
@Mr Shomu Tepe
Thanks, it does seem we already had these samples, but one from this recent conversion is of higher quality so I'll update it and use the AADR coverage for it since it seems crahsdoc thinks its a perfect proxy for his processing attempt
EthanR
"The average IBD sharing is higher with Baltic BA (and is highest with Baltic IA/Marvele, as has previously been discussed)."
Because Poland MA and Lithuania IA share the same ancestors source in Poland BA (Trzciniec/Strzyżów):
https://trzciniecstrzyzow.netlify.app/
Offspring always share more IBD segments with each other than with their distant ancestors. All medieval Slavs also share an ancestors source in Poland BA.
And medieval slavs share more ibd with Estonia BA than Polish TCC because..?
EthanR
Most likely for the same reason, as Estonia BA is on average at least 500 years younger than Poland BA and also has an ancestral source in Poland BA.
Tragic news today from Poland: at approximately 10:00 a.m. local time, the well-known russian opposition blogger and artist known by the pseudonym Semyon Skrepetskiy was murdered. He became famous for his paintings in the genre of grotesque primitivism, through which he harshly, scathingly, and unapologetically mocked the russian authorities, state propaganda, supporters of the war, and the absurdity of modern russian reality.
For a long time, Semyon lived in Russia (in the Altai Krai). However, due to constant threats and the risk of criminal prosecution for his anti-war stance, he was forced to flee the country. In recent years, he had been living in Europe with refugee status.
His works provoked intense hatred among supporters of the current regime in the russian federation. Therefore, retaliation for his opposition and anti-war activities is the primary motive currently being considered by the public.
Here is his last performance in Germany in front of the russian embassy, literally a couple of days ago.
https://x.com/SSkrepetsk39163/status/2065834736329576655?s=20
I really hope this isn't true, that it's a staged event, and that the Polish special services acted preemptively. I used to participate in his streams all the time and was an active follower.
Just finished listening to a podcast with Georgi Starostin, one of the top macro-comparative linguists.
The linguistic similarities between Proto-Indo-European and Proto-Uralic are striking, and evidence of their genetic kinship keeps growing.
Starostin is releasing a quadrupled Swadesh list next year — this will make comparative linguistics much more powerful and accessible. It’s a clear reminder that we need linguistics + archaeology + aDNA working together. "Discipline hubris" is still holding too many experts back.
Russian-speaking followers might appreciate this talk published on Youtube by "Proshloe исторический журнал"
One of the proposed phylogenies for an extremely debated linguistic theory - Nostratic languages
https://x.com/kvali_app/status/2066157203698933822
Rob, it's your turn!😄
And here is a map of the IBD centroids above 10.5 cM of all medieval Slavic groups, on the eve of the Slavic expansion:
https://ibb.co/WvBF3gXS
Interestingly, they are concentrated in the area of the Slavic homeland, indicated by linguists based on water names.
I don't think samples 1000km from your alleged homeland should have significantly stronger ibd sharing with slavs simply because they are a couple hundred years younger.
EthanR
If my uncle moved to Estonia, I still share more IBD with him than with my great-grandfather, who lived in Poland.
But I'm not convinced that medieval Slavs share more IBD with Estonia BA than with Poland BA. It doesn't seem to show:
https://trzciniecstrzyzow.netlify.app/
https://estoniaba.netlify.app/
Regarding medieval Poles, this applies only to northern Masovia, which geographically lies close to the eastern Baltic and is historically connected to it culturally and demographically.
Despite there being nearly ~6x as many Polish TCC samples, the cumulative IBD sharing between medieval slavs and Estonia BA is almost just as high, viewable using those same maps.
@ Shomu
“https://x.com/kvali_app/status/2066157203698933822
Rob, it's your turn!😄”
There is no “turn”, because there is no equivalency between me & “Kvali”. In this case we have “Kvali” (? some Georgian version of Gabru) discussing matters he has no understanding of. suffice to say his posts serve as an inverse -sanity check.
Intellectually, this is an extremely primitive theory which reduces the complex & diverse ethnolinguistic history of Eurasia to a single source.
The rest of us know that PIE & Uralic came from polar opposite sides of Eurasia, with completely different genetic & cultural spheres, the first European, the second with a prominent northeast Asian adstrate. We’ve discussed this before here.
The true cognates between Uralic & IE are limited to some babbling words, which at best might represent a common “north Eurasian” substrate, very archaic Paeleo level.
Politically, the nostratic theory has been prominent in Russia to serve as an “ideology of empire”. The irony of shomu posting this nonsense, as he incessantly complains about “muh Ruzzian oppression”, is I’m sure lost on him.
Outside Russia, indo-Uralic was supported by winners like Carlos Quilles, Jaako Haaknin, and anybody else melting down about the fact that PIE is very European (Shomu & Co, OIT Gen. 2, the cockroaches from GeneArchiver).
@ Rob
I don't understand which would be the problem if IE were linked to these other linguistic families thousands of years ago as genetics is too. From Y K2 derived both P, thus Q and R, and NO. Beyond that, languages and DNA migrated always and everywhere. Among the Caucasian languages only Kartvelian is believed to belong to Nostratic, and we know that Basque and Sardinian were linked to the Caucasian languages and not IE. Others were intermediate.
When I consulted the Dolgopols'kij's works I didn't accept that Afro-Asiatic was linked to Nostratic, and not only because he's a Jew.
You know that I reproach the imperial ideology of Russians that don't permit them to understand which are mortal enemies inside the Empire and not only out.
Tom will have to change his old catchphrase to just "Very European" per Rob's suggestion.
@Rob
Languages in the Middle East and Caucasus before 2500 BCE
https://x.com/Malak356775433/status/2066932063937155547?s=20
I say in advance, I absolutely disagree with this post.
@ Gio
Language doesn’t work like that, it’s not Y-DNA. Recall the diversity of American languages, despite a fairly recent colonisation , mostly single sweep.
And I’m just objectively stating: the idea of nostratic was popular in Soviet period because the view that “all or many languages come from 1” goes well with a “universal proletariat”. That doesn’t make me support the green goblin & his rainbow warriors 🤣
But I think Starostins views are not mainstream even in Russia
@ Shomu
There will thousands of people putting up theories on the internet now. That map looks all a bit too early , but it probably took some effort.
I’ve also seen people doing qpAdm of modern Europeans with the Yamnaya / WHG/ farmer Set up. So I’m only thinking – what exactly are you showing here that we didn’t already know 10 years ago? What are you bringing to the table?
EthanR
A small population has a much ROH, so it retains seemingly more IBD.
@ Rob
Of course, but this should be demonstrated or falsified just through "linguistic" reasons, and not with politics, even though politics is always at work, and you know what I think about Jews and their genetics. I formed myself on the theory of the monogenesis of languages of Alfredo Trombetti, not considered in Italy, but Italian linguistics is out of everything now. The same IE linguistics developed elsewhere.
The linguistics of the Native Americans presupposes only a few families, and one is the Basque-Caucasian-Na Dené, just because the migrations to America from Siberia were only a few.
Don't forget that I was invited by German Dziebel to collaborate in his blog, just in the time when Davidski banned both us, what I didn't follow because I did others in my life.
JUST IN: Poland detains suspected killer of Russian artist Skrepetsky
The suspect was carrying a Georgian passport, Prime Minister Donald Tusk said.
The operation was carried out by police officers from Lublin together with agents of Poland’s Internal Security Agency (ABW).
The key question now is who ordered the brazen murder. According to Tusk, security services are already working to identify the mastermind behind the crime.
https://x.com/nexta_tv/status/2067518491599442367?s=20
@ Gio
“ Of course, but this should be demonstrated or falsified just through "linguistic" reasons, and not with politics”
Linguistics cannot even accurately determine the sub-groupings within language families let alone tenuous distant connections between distinctive language families . Of course the dweebs at Reich Lab , Copenhagen & all their internet sheep aren’t doing much better, but when properly executed, it’s the most reliable approach.
All those “linguists” trying to sexyfy their discipline by throwing computational statistics in are just committing pseudoscience.
If they really want to be useful, they should get a shovel and go start digging for ancient inscriptions.
@ Rob
When I was in my twenties, I wrote an essay in which I hypothesized that there was a connection between the number "6" in Indo-European and Sino-Tibetan, two different families ab antiquo, that is, between the reconstructed "swekj-s and *druk through a presupposed *dHLVkL-, not necessarily as a kinship between the families but as an introgression into Sibo-Tibetan from the numerous migrations from west to east, including the most ancient specimens of haplogroup R1b. Now I see on the web a reconstructed "6" of Sino-Tibetan as *d-k-ruk and not "druk as it was in an essay of the time. This might lead me to hypothesize that the *-k- could be a development of the supposed laryngeal... It's clear that we always work on hypotheses, as when I supposed that R1b1 existed ab antiquo in the Italian Refuge, and I now see in my old letters that the Villabruna discovery occurred in 2016, therefore 10 years ago, while my theories dated back 20 years. Thinking of resolving the question with written documents is not easy, unless someone can make sense of the supposed Vinca inscriptions.
@ambron
"Estonia BA has an ancestral source in Poland BA"
Can you document this claim?
Satsurblia branch: a Georgian, a Dagestani (sharing a common ancestor 7,000 years ago), and two Turks—likely of Armenian origin. https://discover.familytreedna.com/y-dna/J-FT34521/tree
How much of the CHG in these so-called “Caucasian” populations is actually the real thing as opposed to a Zagros-related signal from Mesopotamian migrant populations that came during the Neolithic and Chalcolithic?
Most of the ethnic groups in this region are highly suspicious, I must say. I do not believe in the idea of ancient continuity that they like to peddle on Western social media platforms. Something is especially “southern” about the Azerbaijanis, Armenians, Chechens and Dagestanis.
@Tom
First of all, Azerbaijanis have nothing to do with the Caucasus. They are basically the same Kurds, Talysh, and Persians who adopted the language of the Tatar-Mongols.
Second, no one says that the modern peoples of Armenia, Georgia, and the North Caucasus have direct continuity from the so-called CHG.
I will not speak for the other peoples, but here is what can be said about the “Dagestani core”:
First of all, it is local hunter-gatherer ancestry, related to the Georgians CHG and separated from them during the Ice Age.
Depending on the village and the population, this component in Dagestanis is probably around 30%, and up to 50% at most in highland isolates.
Then comes the Khvalynsk or Eneolithic steppe component, about 5–10%.
The Shulaveri-Shomu component is about 30–40%.
And later admixture, such as Yamnaya / Catacomb / Scythian / Sarmatian, further diluted the steppe component.
And no additional southern “Iranian” admixture is needed either. Everything that was connected with Iran came through Shulaveri-Shomu-related groups / populations such as Seh Gabi and Kura-Araxes.
@ Shomu
“First of all, Azerbaijanis have nothing to do with the Caucasus. They are basically the same Kurds, Talysh, and Persians who adopted the language of the Tatar-Mongols.”
How are you defining who is and who is not someone of the Caucasus, then? The people in the region have different genetics, languages, and cultures but share commonalities, which includes a self-perception and identifying as “Caucasian”.
“Second, no one says that the modern peoples of Armenia, Georgia, and the North Caucasus have direct continuity from the so-called CHG.”
There are lots of Georgians, Chechens, Dagestanis etc. in this online space who claim all the time that they are CHG descendants and that this component is unique and makes them special in a variety of ways. This is the reason I began investigating their claims of continuity to begin with.
“First of all, it is local hunter-gatherer ancestry, related to the Georgians CHG and separated from them during the Ice Age.”
Evidence?
“The Shulaveri-Shomu component is about 30–40%. Everything that was connected with Iran came through Shulaveri-Shomu-related groups / populations such as Seh Gabi and Kura-Araxes. ”
Hence why I believe there is a good chance that the bulk of what is considered CHG in the North Caucasus is just an Iran / Zagros HG signal introduced by populations from much further south during the Neolithic-Chalcolithic. Most of the groups in the region look like mixtures of steppe, Mesopotamian, and later Central Asian populations. Perhaps the Eneolithic Steppe and Catacomb components obfuscate things, because they have a Kotias-like CHG proper ancestry like Europeans.
Either way, Georgians and Abkhazians seem to be the only legitimate remnants of any sort.
What do you think?
> results$weights
# A tibble: 3 × 5
target left weight se z
1 Poland_wielbark_IA.SG Denmark_Jutland_IA.SG 0.842 0.0208 40.5
2 Poland_wielbark_IA.SG Austria_IA_LaTene.AG 0.0773 0.0127 6.11
3 Poland_wielbark_IA.SG Lithuania_IA.SG 0.0806 0.0171 4.71
> results$popdrop
# A tibble: 7 × 14
pat wt dof chisq p f4rank Denmark_Jutland_IA.SG
1 000 0 8 0.687 1.000e+ 0 2 0.8
@Tom
"Hence why I believe there is a good chance that the bulk of what is considered CHG in the North Caucasus is just an Iran / Zagros HG signal introduced by populations from much further south during the Neolithic-Chalcolithic. Most of the groups in the region look like mixtures of steppe, Mesopotamian, and later Central Asian populations. Perhaps the Eneolithic Steppe and Catacomb components obfuscate things, because they have a Kotias-like CHG proper ancestry like Europeans. "
On the one hand, you may be right. For example, a Dargin friend of mine has only 8% Caucasus hunter-gatherer (Satsurblia) ancestry when modeled using Chalcolithic populations. The majority of his ancestry is 46% Shulaveri-Shomu and 43% Progress-Berezhnovka.
https://x.com/chokhhg/status/2066496415858049313?s=20
On the other hand, saying that Dargins or other peoples of the northeastern Caucasus have only 8% Caucasian ancestry is also not quite correct. There is direct archaeological evidence of continuity from Chokh to Ginchi to Kura-Araxes culture (at least in Dagestan, all of this had its own local form), so saying that Dargins have only 8% Caucasian ancestry is a mistake.
And the fact that this is what the model produced only confirms my theory that CHG in Dagestan had its own specific character. It was precisely the East Caucasian hunter-gatherers who took part in the ethnogenesis of Shulaveri-Shomu, the Steppe Eneolithic, and the Kura-Araxes culture, which is why the model gave such a result. Not because he is half Steppe and half South Caucasian.
Shomu, there is a difference between deep ancestry and proximate origins.
There was an article published recently claiming ''Our analyses place the Kartvelian Urheimat in an area that largely intersects the Colchis glacial''
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-023-45500-w
Poor archegenomic analysis, Bayesian linguistics, Nonsense conclusion. This typifies the school of thought.
Your view that Dagestani’s derive from a ghost Mesolithic population in the Northeast Caucasus is also problematic, even though your J1-sublineage is probably CHG derived
That would be like saying Scandinavians or Balkan Slavs speak Paleolithic languages just because they have high levels of I1 and I2, respectively.
Radiosource
https://estoniaba.netlify.app/
“ For example, a Dargin friend of mine has only 8% Caucasus hunter-gatherer (Satsurblia) ancestry when modeled using Chalcolithic populations. The majority of his ancestry is 46% Shulaveri-Shomu and 43% Progress-Berezhnovka.
https://x.com/chokhhg/status/2066496415858049313?s=20”
I doubt these models are remotely accurate, as they try to shoe-horn modern ancestry on idealised “ancient we wazzian CHG” groups.
North caucasians have significant Russian ancestry due to social dominance , it’s obvious in ydna too
https://x.com/TweeetyJezusa/status/2068451906200961219
@ Rob
"That would be like saying Scandinavians or Balkan Slavs speak Paleolithic languages just because they have high levels of I1 and I2, respectively."
True and good, but they are less absurd than many other usurpations, like Anatolian Turks or all the European Jews, because they got their Palaeolithic component just from the oldest Palaeolithic people of Europe, whereas the Others have a genetic European origin but Language and culture completely far.
@ Gio
Thats true. In fact, I pioneered the idea that Anatolian Farmers have European UP ancestry. Even Dzudzuana might be European, at least in part.
The Caspian Sea has lost an area nearly the size of Sicily
https://theconversation.com/the-caspian-sea-has-lost-an-area-nearly-the-size-of-sicily-human-activities-are-a-major-reason-why-285517
@Rob
What about this model?
https://x.com/chokhhg/status/2070205743576260806
At least , this once again confirms that the West Caucasian CHG's were different from the East Caucasian ones .
@ Shomu
''What about this model?
https://x.com/chokhhg/status/2070205743576260806''
I dont think we can make judgement about mesolithic from a middle bronze age specimen. Legae includes Alborz-HG, but we don't see the alternative (incl 2-way) tail probs or medels.
That said, if you mean 'eastern CHG' by Gobustan, then sure they might be different., perhaps more ANE
@ Ethan, Norfern, etc
Have you been aware of the contexts/ dates of the Akbari samples as yet ?
@Rob
https://x.com/chokhhg/status/2070206613558903207?s=20
Populations like Geoksyur (proto-BMAC) are a much better fit(p~1);
that means Chokh was something like CHG/TTK/Iran_N + Steppe ancestry—though I wrote about this a long time ago.
Alborz/Hotu_Mes is low coverage, but this makes sense
left pops:
Iran_HotuCave_Mesolithic.AG
Iran_GanjDareh_N.AG
Tajikistan_Mesolithic.AG
best coefficients: 0.761 0.239
tail prob 0.49898
right pops: Mbuti.DG Russia_Kostenki14_UP.SG China_Tianyuan.AG.BY.AA
Mongolia_North_N.AG Turkey_Central_Pinarbasi_Epipaleolithic.AG Russia_AfontovaGora3_UP.AG Serbia_IronGates_Mesolithic.AG Turkey_Marmara_Barcin_N.AG Georgia_Kotias_Mesolithic.SG
Russia_Mesolithic_Veretye.AG Italy_Epigravettian.AG.BY.AA
Israel_Natufian_d.AG
@Rob
We don't, aside from a few samples in which we have the IDs/Archeological context from preprints (e.g. the Bulgarian Goths).
We have the dates and broad locations for all of them, in the spreadsheet supplement to the Akbari published paper. Between those and the aDNA results you can narrow down what a lot of them probably are.
@Rob
👍
@ Shome tepe
Thanks for the link to this paper (https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0350298)
Not only the mt K1c1 is the haplogroup of my wife from Sicily and children (but tested until K1c1f3), but also the Y is linked to mine. Unfortunately it is tested only until Z2106 (negative only for the subclade CTS9219). Of course many are speculating about the origin of this people, but R-Z2106 expanded not only to the Caucasus, Middle East, Asia, but also to Europe as I think not only the persons who carried the Euphratic to Mesopotania, but also Latin/Sicel to Italy through the Balkans and the Adriatic. I supposed that to Sicily it was brought by the Sicels like Emanuele Infantino who is R-Z2110-CTS699. Hope that someone could test further this Y, and also the mt, or at least to publish its FASTA.
If David doesn't mind, all IBD interactive maps are available at this address:
https://slawomirambroziak.pl/forum/index.php?topic=5958.0
My final comment on these maps was as follows:
Based on these data, it is clear that the primary source of Poles' ancestry is the Polish GAC and Polish CWC. This should essentially end the discussion about the autochonus nature of the Polish population.
I don't recall sharing anything like that.🤔
"I don't recall sharing anything like that".
Someone posted the link of this paper here, but I didn't find the link. I am Gioiello Tognoni, I never will hint to you in the future, because you are nothing to me, like your similar people, and I hope that Russia will find in the future a chief more similar to an ossetian like in the past, for many reasons.
@Gioiello Tognoni
I don't know why you want a Stalin in Russia. Stalin destroyed a huge part of the population within Russia, many indigenous peoples suffered, and he also deported many to Siberia and Central Asia — many peoples still haven't recovered from his actions. He was no different from Hitler.
Here's a bunch of Yakut samples.
https://www.mediafire.com/file/thlcx22c3rneym4/Crub%25C3%25A9zy_2026.zip/file
@Norfern
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1DBjo8tmbaMGMm0DJovnvBEqC92GfidaQ/view?usp=sharing
@Davidski
thanks!
New ancient individual master sheet had to be regenerated. Here is the new link: https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/jcg8qw7w8h37acm6z7v0m/G25-Ancients.txt?rlkey=bu28pasrwlsd9ajca14g2dxfk&st=x0qymb2n&dl=0
Samples yet to be integrated (lack of metadata and dating) are still here: https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/gyeqmlps14bk1w2uz1tdc/G25-Ancients-Undated.txt?rlkey=lycfukqvaodlqta02wivxmt3g&st=wb5cl8va&dl=0
Comprehensive listing of all ancient DNA samples and their coordinates, organized by date, with the exception of some very poor quality samples (~12% coverage and below) which have not been included. Much more comprehensive than the AADR, again with the exception of samples below a ~12% cut-off (some below this are included).
Some Neanderthal genotypes from Belgium
https://edmond.mpg.de/dataset.xhtml?persistentId=doi:10.17617/3.F9N73O
Dzień dobry
Czy w zbiorze G25 jest próbka
https://www.theytree.com/tree/R-FT410399 oznaczony
AU89867TAV007 MongoliaMT:D4j-T16311C!1050-1350
Pozdrawiam.
@Polak_X
that sample is contaminated and was excluded from the study
@Norfern-Ostrobothnian dziękuje
@Norfern
The G25 isn't designed for Neanderthal ancestry.
But anyway, do you have a direct link to a Plink file with all of the genotypes?
@Davidski
You actually already processed those Norfern sent, which is greatly appreciated. We now have all Neanderthals and Denisovans that pass your filter in the master sheet I linked above.
At this point the master sheet is also becoming a nice database of convenience, where you can find every simple that exists, except those that don't pass your filter (which really only filters out garbage so it's fine). So it's nice to have everything there
Thank you.
Also, the G25's ability in this space is vastly understated. Well curated proximal models on G25 surpass any other tool's ability to discern fine scale sources of ancestry, especially when those sources of ancestry are
a. very closely related
b. a significant number (of sources)
Of course, with enough sources G25 will no longer be able to stop these populations from borrowing from each other, but no tool is perfect.
Even though G25 isn't designed for Upper Paleolithic, Epipaleolithic/Mesolithic, and Neolithic populations, a well-curated highly proximal model works wonders, and usually beats out qpadm. Certainly there are minor exceptions, but they don't disprove the general rule. I've talked about this for years online
Due risposte criptiche, ma solo perché manca il contesto, perché la loro comprensione e verità non è difficile. La prima è la mia conclusione di una lunga analisi su qualcuno che ha chiesto il mio parere su un suo esame genetico, ciò che faccio, gratis, da vent'anni, sempre seguendo il metodo scientifico, che è l'unico modo per migliorare le nostre capacità di indagine; l'altro è uno che scrive su "Eurogenes blog", e non so chi sia oltre il suo nickname, e vi invito a notare: "Of course, with enough sources G25 will no longer be able to stop these populations from borrowing from each other, but no tool is perfect". La scala verso la verità è comunque, per forza di cose, una scala iniziatica
Ho provato a girare 10 di questi SNPs, ma poi su solo 5 ho avuto risposta, seppure con difficoltà. Comunque ho constatato che gli SNPs del tuo Big Y, seppure trasmesso a YFull in vcf, sono altamente attendibili, quindi starei con i risultati della FTDNA. YFull può avere difficoltà perché ha meno esemplari da comparare. Quindi aspetterei che si pronuncino definitivamente sia la FTDNA che YFull. Certo, 5600 anni fa per il MRCA sono preferibili ai 4100 di YFull. Vediamo. Ora ritorno al caso Garlasco, perché c'è una bella differenza fra chi usa il metodo scientifico come il genetista di Over the Night e tutte le analisi psicologiche che, come la potta della troia, ognuno le può tirare quanto vuole. Ora è apparso all'improvviso anche questo Borile, con studi tardivi. Ho l'impressione che facciano tutti parte del gioco, come i grandi Giarda primi difensori di Stasi, e ora forse anche lo stesso Napoleone e combriccola. La realtà deve continuare a essere nascosta. Sempio c'era, ma la causa non è quella che si vuol far credere. C'è del marcio in Lomellina e in tutta Italia. Continuano a fare schifo. E anche la 'ndrangheta certamente c'era e c'è.
MiroCyo has left a new comment on the post "New Iron Age samples from southeastern Poland":
@Davidski
You actually already processed those Norfern sent, which is greatly appreciated. We now have all Neanderthals and Denisovans that pass your filter in the master sheet I linked above.
At this point the master sheet is also becoming a nice database of convenience, where you can find every sample that exists, except those that don't pass your filter (which really only filters out garbage so it's fine). So it's nice to have everything there.
Thank you.
Also, the G25's ability in this space is vastly understated. Well curated proximal models on G25 surpass any other tool's ability to discern fine scale sources of ancestry, especially when those sources of ancestry are
a. very closely related
b. a significant number (of sources)
Of course, with enough sources G25 will no longer be able to stop these populations from borrowing from each other, but no tool is perfect.
Even though G25 isn't designed for Upper Paleolithic, Epipaleolithic/Mesolithic, and Neolithic populations, a well-curated highly proximal model works wonders, and usually beats out qpadm. Certainly there are minor exceptions, but they don't disprove the general rule. I've talked about this for years online.
@ Davidski
Would it be possible to upload these individual French samples into G25 coords ? That would be really appreciated. Since Moroopulous he only wants to publish averages, but not the individuals :
https://figshare.com/articles/dataset/France_Dataset/10008689?file=18051473
Thanks,
Yep...
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1-XTiqElife-KMUZjWN_K_Ej9hhB5PMuO/view?usp=sharing
Employees of the Institute of History, Archaeology and Ethnography of the Peoples of the Far East, Far Eastern Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences, have made a breakthrough discovery in the archaeology of the region. For the first time in Russia’s Far East, the bone remains of an ancient human, about 12,000 years old, have been discovered.
Until now, the oldest anthropological finds in the region had been considered to be materials from the Cave of the Devil’s Gates, dated to 6,500 years ago. Thus, the new remains push back the history of human settlement in Primorye by almost 5,500 years into the past.
https://new.ras.ru/press-center/drevneyshie-ostanki-cheloveka-vozrastom-12-000-let-naydeny-na-dalnem-vostoke-rossii/
Time for a new post , but haven’t seen anything interesting recently
@Davidski
I think it's about you
https://x.com/SamAndrews1017/status/2076506738178539552?s=20
@Davidski
What do you think about the so-called "Roman Jewish" samples in this dataset? They seem extremely heterogeneous, which I find quite puzzling.
Maybe the new Altai samples would be worth looking over?
Yeah, I'll come up with something this week.
@ Norfern
''Maybe the new Altai samples would be worth looking over?''
the additional Altai (so-called) ''Scythians'' ?
Nothing new or surprising globally, but the elites had higher IBD & ROH amongst each other, but this doesn't appear to have been either matriocal nor patrifocal
"I really need to finish those blog posts I've been planning.
To that end, I have two questions:
What are all the recent papers/datasets with ancient samples from the PC steppe and Caucasus? I pretty much know what they are, but I just want to make sure I don't miss anything."
Anything on this front or will this have to wait for the Yediay samples?
@Norfern-Ostrobothnian
A new paper about Altai? Do you mean the Altai Scythians? If you're interested in the Scythians and Sarmatians, here is a fascinating new study on these nomadic peoples:
Sarmatians Were Not Descendants of Scythians: DNA Reveals a Shift of Populations Near the Black Sea
Scientists analyzed hundreds of genetic markers to reconstruct the migration history of the Northern Black Sea region.
Researchers from the Sirius University of Science and Technology, the Vavilov Institute of General Genetics of the Russian Academy of Sciences (RAS), and Lomonosov Moscow State University conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of published whole-genome sequencing data from 48 ancient samples from the Northern Black Sea region dating to the 1st millennium AD. The results were published in the Vavilov Journal of Genetics and Breeding (No. 4, 2026).
The researchers systematized and analyzed the published whole-genome sequencing results of 48 ancient samples belonging to various archaeological cultures of the region:
* Late Scythian (3rd century BC – 3rd century AD)
* Sarmatian (1st–4th centuries AD)
* Alanic (2nd–7th centuries)
* Bulgar (4th–8th centuries AD)
* Saltovo-Mayaki (mid-8th–10th centuries AD)
* Chernyakhov (late 2nd–early 5th centuries AD)
Additionally, to identify probable migration routes of the ancient population of the Northern Black Sea region across different chronological periods, the researchers gathered all available mitochondrial DNA and Y-chromosome data to analyze maternal and paternal lineages. In total, the analysis included data from 324 individuals from the Northern Black Sea region across various chronological periods.
https://vavilovj-icg.ru/download/13_Aituganova.pdf
@ Rob
Which is the question? It is all what we did know. European Y and mt migrated eastward and came back, mixed with a few east Asian hgs. R1a and R1b are Palaeolithic in Europe, and even E-V13 is in Europe at least for 10000 years.
Mitochondrial DNA and Y-chromosome Analysis.
Additionally, to identify probable migration routes of the ancient population of the Northern Black Sea region, belonging to different chronological periods, we collected all available mitochondrial DNA and Y-chromosome data for analysis of male and female lineages. In total, the analyses included data from 324 individuals from the Northern Black Sea region across different chronological periods (Fig. 3, see Appendix)1.
Among the late Scythians, West Eurasian mitochondrial lineages predominate (Juras et al., 2017); among the Sarmatians, the eastern haplogroup F is added, potentially indicating a Central Asian maternal contribution (Comas et al., 2004). Significant genetic diversity is observed among the Alans and Bulgars, including Figure 3. Distribution of mitochondrial (a) and Y-chromosomal haplogroups (b) in the Northern Black Sea region (NP).
* The haplogroups shown in the figure are abbreviated for optimal visualization.
The presence of East Eurasian mitochondrial haplogroups (Comas et al., 2004; Derenko et al., 2010, 2012): subclades A and F in the Alans and B and D in the Bulgars. This confirms the contribution of Central and East Asian components to their genetic profile. Representatives of the Chernyakhov culture are dominated by haplogroups H, K, T2, HV, and U4, characteristic of West Eurasian populations.
It should be noted that, in contrast to data on autosomal markers and mitochondrial haplogroups, the amount of data available for Y-chromosome analysis for individuals from the Northern Black Sea region and adjacent regions remains limited. Beginning in the Bronze Age, a sharp increase in the proportion of haplogroups R1a and R1b was observed in the Black Sea region, which presumably correlates with Indo-European expansion and the formation of the main branches of the Indo-European languages (Allentoft et al., 2015; Haak et al., 2015). Of particular interest is a late Scythian sample from Crimea with the Y-chromosomal haplogroup N1a1a1a1a2a (N-Z1934) – a lineage absent from earlier complexes in the Northern Black Sea region and widespread among modern Finno-Ugric populations (Post et al., 2019). This Y-chromosomal lineage is currently found only among Russians of the Central and Volga-Permian regions (YTree, 2025). The Alans are characterized by a more heterogeneous Y-chromosome composition. Along with the haplotypes R1b-Z2106, R1b-L23, R1b-M269, and R1b-Z2105, identified among the Early Iron Age Scythian groups of the Northern Black Sea region, they also possess the haplotypes Q1b-BZ5214, found among modern Chechens, and C2a-Y11606, found among modern populations of Mongolia and China, as well as among ancient elite groups of the Xiongnu and Avars (YTree, 2025) (see Appendix).
The Bulgars and the Saltovo-Mayaki culture are represented by the haplogroup R1a-M417, which was previously recorded in the Northern Black Sea region. One individual from the Saltovo-Mayaki culture was found to have a complete match for the R1b-M269 subclade with an Alanian sample and several individuals from the Bronze Age of Moldova and the North Caucasus, as well as with early and late Scythians. Another individual was found to have the G2a-Z6653 lineage, which matches a late antique sample from Georgia. (YTree, 2025) The Chernyakhov culture is represented by haplogroups
R1a-Z93, R1a-Z645, and E1b-V13, previously identified among Scythian groups of the Northern Black Sea region, the Late Bronze Age population of Moldova, as well as among Thracian
and, probably, some ancient Greek groups (Saag et al., 2025; YTree, 2025).
@Rob
I was talking about this study
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.03.24.713889v1
@ Gio
''Which is the question? It is all what we did know. European Y and mt migrated eastward and came back, mixed with a few east Asian hgs. R1a and R1b are Palaeolithic in Europe, and even E-V13 is in Europe at least for 10000 years.''
Which question was that ? Anyway, that's esentially true. As we know, ANE is Kostenki-like + Tianyuan like, it appears Y-hg P* is deeply linked to the Tianyuan component, however this mix could have occurred in Siberia rather than East Asia. In turn, R1 extended between Siberia & East Europe between 35 & 15000bp. After 15,000 Bp, R1 was almost entirely replaced in Siberia by more east-Asian hunter-gatherers (pred. Y-hg C & Q). Most then (incl those relevant from Steppe Eneolithic, Yamnaya, etc) expanded from East Europe, with the exception of groups ancestral to the PH155 line surviving somewhere in Central Asia ? or western Siberia.
E-V13 (or its M78) predecessor arrived later than 10000bp, more like 8000bp with Neolithic. Deeply linked to a Natufian group (via E-Z1919), yet strangely absent in Anatolian Farmers. Early E- L618 --> V13 are found exclusively in European Farmers, with a Carpatho-Danube core (Lengyel, Varna, Tisza, etc), followed by hibernation and a LBA-IA "Thracian-oid'' expansion.
@ Norfern
''I was talking about this study
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.03.24.713889v1''
Ok. The writing is very dense, I think it would benefit from editing by an native English-speaker . Pazyryk has been done to death, BK is interesting. Anything relevant for the claimed linked to Samoyeds ?
Kultepe DNA project is accessible:
https://search.trdizin.gov.tr/tr/yayin/detay/1259979/kultepe-kanis-toplulugunun-biyolojik-ve-sosyal-yapisinin-multidisipliner-bir-yaklasimla-analizi
No clear smoking gun, although it looks like there is a lot of H2a2a1 mtdna which appears to be steppe-related.
They didn't do much analysis, but I found this PCA interesting:
https://i.gyazo.com/b7ae6fbdec2a049275839de4f264793d.png
My assumption based on looking at the other PCAs is that the far right dots are Israel/Jordan samples with European ancestry (I know of the one Ashkelon_IA sample that is basically Mycenaean, but I am not sure what the others would be?)
The Kultepe samples seem to pull toward that direct, although slightly southern (i.e. Yassitepe or, perhaps, Kulluoba).
I did once try to approximate the Yediay samples in G25, and it did seem like the Kulluoba samples were of that sort (more ANF-rich than most other Anatolia ChL/BA samples).
After digging into the mdtdna more, I realize that the h2a2a1 is probably not the branch ftdna uses, and is instead probably local.
But there are two U2e samples, one of which is U2e1a1. That's a pretty unambiguous connection to volga-don populations, including Khvalynsk:
https://discover.familytreedna.com/mtdna/U2e1a1/ancient
@ Dave - Post Idea : CW is not “from Yamnaya”, and how Ringbauer, Reich et al misinterpreted their IBD.
Would be very interesting topic
The lamentations of their sheepgroid fanboys, would be the icing on the cake :)
@Rob
Odintsovo and Upper Ob culture have a lot of WSHG, and Srostki is heterogeneous mix of BK, Odintsovo and Turkic related East Asian akin to Slab Grave.
@ Norfern
Odintsovo doesn't seem very 'Uralic', full of R1a; ANE/ WSHG + cis-Baikal BA + minor Turkic, supporting my criticism of the ''Samoyeds from the South theory''
Post a Comment