PDA

View Full Version : Genetic comparison between ethnic Turks in Anatolia&Balkans and the natives



Leper
05-14-2017, 06:33 PM
Hi everyone, I'd like to share these data I have gathered and prepared from several sources/places inorder to give you a clearer insight about the subject.

The purpose of this thread is to make a comparison between Greeks/Armenians/Bulgarians and Turks from the same provinces/regions and examine the genetic impact of the Turkic migration. The general assumption is (or was) that the Turks brought only the East Eurasian component. There are also those who think that the Oghuz Turks (later became known as Turkmens) who migrated to Anatolia between the 11th and 14th centuries were genetically Eurasians, the latter opinion seems to be more plausible for the following reasons:

• The Proto-Turkic language might have evolved among a population that was already mixed (East Eurasian + West Eurasian)
• Rise504 (from Kytmanovo/Altai, 721-889 AD, Eastern Turkic Khaganate) has the haplogroup J2a and is genetically Eurasian, which also supports the theory above
• Oghuz Turks who had inhabited the region east of the Caspian Sea for centuries must have become less proto-Turkic-like (genetically) by intermarriage with local populations. The gradual Turkification of Khwarezm (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khwarezm) and Sogd (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sogdia) are well known examples. "By settlement and intermarriage the older Iranian population was eventually diluted; already in the 5th/11th century the physical approximation of the Khwarazmian people to the Turkish type was noted." (See the spoiler)
https://i.hizliresim.com/m3nZPV.png (https://hizliresim.com/m3nZPV)

https://i.hizliresim.com/NpmbBO.png (https://hizliresim.com/NpmbBO)

I will use the individual results with relatively high East Eurasian admixture for comparisons in order to see the correlations between East Eurasian and other components, then I will post averages.

(x) stands for sample size.

Table 1: 1 Turk from Kayseri, 1 Greek from Kayseri, 2 Armenians from Kayseri

I think the Greek sample represents pre-Turkic Kayseri population more accurately because Kayseri was mostly populated by Greeks (Rums) at the beginning of the 11th century even though the Byzantine Emperor had resettled thousands of Armenians from a region near the Lake Van to Cappadocia and Cilicia.

If we take the Greek sample from Kayseri as a reference for pre-Turkic Kayseri population then the Turkish newcomers:
• had more East_Eurasian (Siberian, East Asian, Southeast Asian)
• had more North_European
• had more Gedrosia
• had less SW Asian
• had less Caucasus
• had less Atlantic_Med


Component/Population

Turk_Kayseri(1)

Greek_Kayseri(1)

Armenian_Kayseri(2)


Gedrosia

15.92

13

16.06


Siberian

6.54

0.21

0.26


Northwest_African

0.71

0.32

0.32


Southeast_Asian

0

0

0


Atlantic_Med

11.7

16.99

10.33


North_European

11.32

6.1

1.97


South_Asian

1.38

0

0.79


East_African

0.24

0

0.13


Southwest_Asian

11.2

14.23

14.19


East_Asian

6.83

0

0


Caucasus

34.16

49.04

55.96


Sub_Saharan

0

0.11

0


https://i.hizliresim.com/yEXvRM.png (https://hizliresim.com/yEXvRM)

----------------------------



Table 2: 2 Turk from Niğde, 1 Greek from Niğde.

The Turkic migration seems to have made these changes in Niğde:
• East Eurasian increased
• Gedrosia increased
• North_European increased
• Atlantic_Med decreased
• Caucasus decreased
• Southwest_Asian decreased


Component/Population

Turk_Niğde(2)

Greek_Niğde(1)


Gedrosia

12.7

10.21


Siberian

5.06

0.36


Northwest_African

1.25

0.43


Southeast_Asian

0

0


Atlantic_Med

13.25

20.11


North_European

12.1

8.73


South_Asian

1.28

0


East_African

0

0


Southwest_Asian

11.55

13.59


East_Asian

5.04

0


Caucasus

37.6

46.58


Sub_Saharan

0.19

0


https://i.hizliresim.com/ZZ0a3G.png (https://hizliresim.com/ZZ0a3G)


---------------------------------------


Table 3: 1 Greek from Eskişehir-Konya-Kayseri, 4 Turks from Eskişehir-Konya-Kayseri (2 from Kayseri, 1 from Konya, 1 from Eskişehir)

The Greek's ancestry is: 1/4 Eskişehir, 1/4 Konya and 1/2 Kayseri.

• East Eurasian increased
• Gedrosia increased
• North_European increased
• Atlantic_Med decreased
• Caucasus decreased
• Southwest_Asian decreased


Component/Population

Turk_Eskişehir-Konya-Kayseri(5)

Greek_Eskişehir-Konya-Kayseri(1)


Gedrosia

15.33

12.59


Siberian

5.40

0.98


Northwest_African

0.50

0.98


Southeast_Asian

0.71

0


Atlantic_Med

13.20

17.98


North_European

11.38

8.28


South_Asian

1.03

0.18


East_African

0.18

0


Southwest_Asian

11.38

12.93


East_Asian

5.42

0


Caucasus

35.48

46.08


Sub_Saharan

0

0


https://i.hizliresim.com/z3b1d6.png (https://hizliresim.com/z3b1d6)

-------------------------------------------



Table 4: Bulgarian Turk from Kardzhali (Kırcaali), Bulgarian average (dod k12b spreadsheet), Greek average (dod k12b spreadsheet)

Pre-Turkic Kardzhali was Bulgarian, therefore Bulgarian average is a better reference for pre-Turkic Kardzhali:
• East Eurasian increased
• Gedrosia increased
• SW_Asian increased
• North_European decreased
• Atlantic_Med decreased


Component/Population

Turk_Bulgaria(1)

Bulgarian k12b average(10)

Greek k12b average(15)


Gedrosia

9.92

1.5

3.3


Siberian

5.77

0.9

0.3


Northwest_African

0

0.3

0.6


Southeast_Asian

0.74

0

0


Atlantic_Med

17.33

25.03

28


North_European

24.74

34.93

20.02


South_Asian

1.69

0.3

0.1


East_African

0.1

0

0


Southwest_Asian

7.88

5.71

10.1


East_Asian

3.58

0.6

0


Caucasus

28.23

30.73

37.4


Sub_Saharan

0

0

0


https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/79/Kardzhali_in_Bulgaria.svg/600px-Kardzhali_in_Bulgaria.svg.png

Leper
05-14-2017, 06:34 PM
West Eurasian components of Turks are also shared by their neighbours (in various levels), so the best way to see the impact of the Turkic migration on West Eurasian components is to focus on the correlation between East Eurasian and other components. As can be observed in the post above; in Asia Minor, East Eurasian components have a positive correlation with North_European and Gedrosia whereas the correlation with Caucasus, Southwest_Asian and Atlantic_Med is negative.

We can easily assume that the Turkic newcomers were far from being 100% East Eurasian judging from the dramatic changes in West Eurasian components levels, which cannot be explained with East Eurasian input alone. The Turks had more North European and Gedrosian admixture than Greek-speakers (Rums) in Anatolia; their Caucasian, Southwest_Asian and Atlantic_Med admixture were less than that of Greek-speakers.

Now with averages included.

Table 5: Turk_Kayseri(1), Kayseri_Greek(1) and Kayseri_Turk_average(6)

• The more East Eurasian; the more North_European and Gedrosia
• The less East Eurasian; the more Caucasus, Atlantic_Med and Southwest_Asian



Component/Population

Kayseri_Turk(1)

Kayseri_Greek(1)

Kayseri_Turk average(6)


Gedrosia

15.92

13

14.32


Siberian

6.54

0.21

3.87


Northwest_African

0.71

0.32

0.91


Southeast_Asian

0

0

0.35


Atlantic_Med

11.7

16.99

13.02


North_European

11.32

6.1

9.68


South_Asian

1.38

0

1.20


East_African

0.24

0

0.12


Southwest_Asian

11.2

14.23

12.21


East_Asian

6.83

0

4.62


Caucasus

34.16

49.04

39.72


Sub_Saharan

0

0.11

0


https://i.hizliresim.com/yEXvRM.png (https://hizliresim.com/yEXvRM)

--------------------------------------


Table 6: Turk_Giresun(2), Greek_Trabzon(5) and Turk_Trabzon(22)

Turks and Greeks from Trabzon look almost identical, both seem to be native Eastern Black Sea populations. Trabzon's western neighbour, Giresun is a different case though. Both provinces were inhabited by Pontic Greeks prior to the Turkic migration. But the genetic difference between the modern populations of Giresun and Trabzon is huge due to several historical reasons.

Look at the difference, these provinces are next to each other, the genetic impact of the Turkic migration can be observed in this comparison alone.
• East Eurasian increases
• Ancestral_Altaic increases
• South_Central_Asian increases
• European_Hunters_Gatherers increases

• Caucasian decreases
• Near_East decreases
• European_Early_Farmers decreases


Component/Population
Turk_Giresun(2)
Greek_Trabzon(5)
Turk_Trabzon(22)


Amerindian

0.52

0

0.16


Ancestral_Altaic

4.37

1.18

1.59


South_Central_Asian

17.37

15.84

16.25


Arctic

0.85

0.47

0.2


South_Indian

0.16

0.22

0.77


Australoid

0.7

0.66

0.44


Austronesian

0.73

0.07

0.16


Caucasian

36.4

52.19

52.95


Archaic_Human

0.46

0.06

0.05


East_African

0

0.06

0.06


East_Siberian

6.23

0

0.04


European_Early_Farmers

7.86

10.3

9.45


Khoisan

0

0

0.04


Melano_Polynesian

0

0

0.52


Archaic_African

0

0

0.04


Near_East

7.08

11.55

11.33


North_African

1.44

3.11

2.77


Paleo_Siberian

0.2

0.22

0.17


African_Pygmy

0.06

0.03

0.13


South_East_Asian

1.03

0.23

0.11


Subsaharian

0

0

0.01


Tungus-Altaic

8.49

0.07

0.5


European_Hunters_Gatherers

6.08

3.23

2.27


https://i.hizliresim.com/1LXbkN.png (https://hizliresim.com/1LXbkN)

--------------------------------------------




Table 7: 1 Turk from Manisa, 1 Turk from Denizli and Greek_Smyrna average from MDLP k23b spreadsheeT

• East Eurasian increases
• Ancestral_Altaic increases
• South_Central_Asian increases
• European_Hunters_Gatherers increases

• Caucasian decreases
• Near_East decreases
• European_Early_Farmers decreases



Component/Population
Turk_Aegea(2)
Greek_Smyrna(k23b spreadsheet)


Amerindian

0.24

0.06


Ancestral_Altaic

3.65

0.96


South_Central_Asian

14.18

9.04


Arctic

0.32

0.03


South_Indian

1.45

0.54


Australoid

0.7

0.17


Austronesian

0.51

0.21


Caucasian

36.98

43.04


Archaic_Human

0

0.04


East_African

0.75

0.13


East_Siberian

2.56

0.3


European_Early_Farmers

9.97

22.02


Khoisan

0

0.11


Melano_Polynesian

0.76

0.21


Archaic_African

0.08

0.06


Near_East

8.73

12.16


North_African

2.72

2.74


Paleo_Siberian

1.03

0.22


African_Pygmy

0

0.08


South_East_Asian

1.4

0.12


Subsaharian

0.04

0.05


Tungus-Altaic

4.29

0.10


European_Hunters_Gatherers

10.32

7.61


https://i.hizliresim.com/r3nLlM.png (https://hizliresim.com/r3nLlM)

------------------

What I've noticed with West Anatolian Turks (Turkish_Aydin and Turkish_Balikesir) is that they form a cluster near the Caucasus on all the PCAs, one would expect them to cluster near South Europeans (or in between West Asia and South Europe) because pre-Turkic West Anatolia was closer to South Europe, but something pulls West Anatolian Turks towards the Caucasus, which can be explained with Central Asian admixture that also include various West Eurasian components.
https://i.hizliresim.com/GBab53.png (https://hizliresim.com/GBab53)





I will post the oracle results of some Anatolian Greeks to show you what pre-Turkic Central Anatolia was like genetically.

• Greek from Niğde (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/30/Ni%C4%9Fde_in_Turkey.svg/580px-Ni%C4%9Fde_in_Turkey.svg.png), Central Anatolia (I believe these results are belong to a member on here but I don't remember his/her username right now)

# Population Percent
1 Caucasian 43.19
2 European_Early_Farmers 17.39
3 Near_East 13.63
4 South_Central_Asian 11.23
5 European_Hunters_Gatherers 6.68
6 North_African 4.52
7 South_East_Asian 1.02
8 Ancestral_Altaic 0.79
9 South_Indian 0.72
10 East_Siberian 0.5
11 Paleo_Siberian 0.33

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 Cretan ( ) 5.93
2 Greek_Smyrna ( ) 5.99
3 Cypriot ( ) 6.49
4 Azov_Greek ( ) 7.15
5 Syrian_Jew ( ) 8.03
6 Greek_Islands ( ) 8.05
7 Greek ( ) 8.41
8 Greek_Macedonia ( ) 8.43
9 Greek_Athens ( ) 9.11
10 Italian_South ( ) 9.46
11 Turk_Kayseri ( ) 9.78
12 Turk_Istanbul ( ) 9.81
13 Assyrian_Iraqi ( ) 10.19
14 Lebanese_Muslim ( ) 10.42
15 Greek_Phokaia ( ) 10.53
16 Turk ( ) 10.54
17 Romanian_Jew ( ) 10.56
18 Turk_Balikesir ( ) 11.14
19 Crimean_Tatar_Coast ( ) 11.3
20 Central_Greek ( ) 11.54

Mixed Mode Population Sharing:

# Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
1 73.1% Greek_Smyrna ( ) + 26.9% Iranian_Jew ( ) @ 1.7
2 51.9% Italian_South ( ) + 48.1% Assyrian_Iraqi ( ) @ 1.77
3 73.9% Greek_Smyrna ( ) + 26.1% Kurd_Jew ( ) @ 1.83
4 55.7% Assyrian_Iraqi ( ) + 44.3% Sicilian_Center ( ) @ 1.84
5 67.3% Greek_Smyrna ( ) + 32.7% Georgian_Jew ( ) @ 1.85
6 73.5% Greek_Smyrna ( ) + 26.5% Iraqi_Mandean ( ) @ 1.86
7 67% Greek_Islands ( ) + 33% Iraqi_Mandean ( ) @ 1.95
8 73% Cretan ( ) + 27% Jew_Tat ( ) @ 1.95
9 51.6% Assyrian_Arzni ( ) + 48.4% Italian_Abruzzo ( ) @ 1.99
10 59.9% Greek_Islands ( ) + 40.1% Iraqi_Chaldean ( ) @ 2
11 77.8% Cretan ( ) + 22.2% Assyrian_Arzni ( ) @ 2.04
12 55.8% Italian_South ( ) + 44.2% Iraqi_Chaldean ( ) @ 2.04
13 57.1% Sicilian_Siracusa ( ) + 42.9% Assyrian_Arzni ( ) @ 2.07
14 52.9% Greek_Athens ( ) + 47.1% Assyrian_Iraqi ( ) @ 2.09
15 78.9% Cretan ( ) + 21.1% Armenian_Yerevan ( ) @ 2.12
16 51.5% Sicilian_Trapani ( ) + 48.5% Assyrian_Arzni ( ) @ 2.16
17 67.5% Greek_Smyrna ( ) + 32.5% Iraqi_Chaldean ( ) @ 2.16
18 78.1% Cretan ( ) + 21.9% Armenian ( ) @ 2.2
19 64.1% Greek_Smyrna ( ) + 35.9% Assyrian_Iraqi ( ) @ 2.21
20 55.3% Sicilian_Agrigento ( ) + 44.7% Armenian_Yerevan ( ) @ 2.22



• Greek from Kayseri (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/49/Kayseri_in_Turkey.svg/580px-Kayseri_in_Turkey.svg.png), Central Anatolia
# Population Percent
1 Caucasian 48.6
2 European_Early_Farmers 16.45
3 South_Central_Asian 15.63
4 Near_East 11.88
5 North_African 3.5
6 European_Hunters_Gatherers 2.14
7 East_Siberian 0.88
8 Archaic_Human 0.28
9 Tungus-Altaic 0.27
10 Ancestral_Altaic 0.21
11 Melano_Polynesian 0.17

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 Cypriot ( ) 10.64
2 Azov_Greek ( ) 10.67
3 Crimean_Tatar_Coast ( ) 11.1
4 Assyrian_Iraqi ( ) 11.15
5 Armenian ( ) 11.28
6 Jew_Tat ( ) 11.87
7 Turk_Kayseri ( ) 11.88
8 Lebanese_Druze ( ) 12.06
9 Georgian_Jew ( ) 12.59
10 Assyrian_Arzni ( ) 12.69
11 Greek_Smyrna ( ) 12.97
12 Armenian_Yerevan ( ) 13.01
13 Iraqi_Jew ( ) 13.01
14 Greek_Islands ( ) 13.26
15 Turk ( ) 13.57
16 Lebanese_Christian ( ) 14.03
17 Turk_Istanbul ( ) 14.14
18 Druze ( ) 14.32
19 Christian_Arabs_Israel ( ) 14.47
20 Iraqi_Chaldean ( ) 15.06

Mixed Mode Population Sharing:

# Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
1 87.4% Armenian ( ) + 12.6% Sardinian ( ) @ 2.29
2 85.8% Armenian_Yerevan ( ) + 14.2% Sardinian ( ) @ 3.08
3 53.7% Armenian ( ) + 46.3% Greek_Smyrna ( ) @ 3.17
4 73.1% Armenian ( ) + 26.9% Italian_Abruzzo ( ) @ 3.58
5 63.9% Greek_Smyrna ( ) + 36.1% Kakheti ( ) @ 3.66
6 75.9% Armenian ( ) + 24.1% Italian_Tuscan ( ) @ 3.75
7 77.4% Armenian ( ) + 22.6% Italian_Piedmont ( ) @ 3.8
8 54.5% Armenian ( ) + 45.5% Greek_Islands ( ) @ 3.89
9 50.1% Greek_Smyrna ( ) + 49.9% Armenian_Yerevan ( ) @ 3.92
10 80.5% Armenian ( ) + 19.5% Italian_Bergamo ( ) @ 3.93
11 86.4% Assyrian_Arzni ( ) + 13.6% Sardinian ( ) @ 4.05
12 67% Armenian ( ) + 33% Sicilian_East ( ) @ 4.09
13 69.9% Greek_Smyrna ( ) + 30.1% Georgian ( ) @ 4.12
14 90.3% Armenian ( ) + 9.7% Basque_Spanish ( ) @ 4.2
15 90.5% Armenian ( ) + 9.5% Basque_French ( ) @ 4.27
16 69.4% Armenian ( ) + 30.6% Sicilian_Siracusa ( ) @ 4.28
17 65.7% Armenian ( ) + 34.3% Sicilian_Center ( ) @ 4.31
18 68.6% Armenian ( ) + 31.4% French_Jew ( ) @ 4.32
19 83.5% Armenian ( ) + 16.5% Spanish_Baleares_IBS ( ) @ 4.32
20 86.3% Armenian ( ) + 13.7% Spanish_Valencia_IBS ( ) @ 4.33




• Greek from Eskişehir-Konya-Kayseri (https://i.hizliresim.com/P0mvVO.png), Central Anatolia (1/4 Eskişehir, 1/4 Konya, 1/2 Kayseri)
Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 Caucasian 46.18
2 European_Early_Farmers 15.02
3 Near_East 14.13
4 South_Central_Asian 10.57
5 European_Hunters_Gatherers 6.37
6 North_African 3.51
7 Ancestral_Altaic 1.39
8 East_Siberian 0.82
9 Arctic 0.59
10 Australoid 0.56
11 Amerindian 0.3
12 Paleo_Siberian 0.2
13 African_Pygmy 0.19
14 Subsaharian 0.15
15 Melano_Polynesian 0.02

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 Cypriot ( ) 5.69
2 Azov_Greek ( ) 7.14
3 Lebanese_Druze ( ) 7.98
4 Crimean_Tatar_Coast ( ) 8.4
5 Assyrian_Iraqi ( ) 9.39
6 Greek_Islands ( ) 9.66
7 Lebanese_Christian ( ) 9.68
8 Greek_Smyrna ( ) 9.72
9 Turk_Kayseri ( ) 10.08
10 Iraqi_Jew ( ) 10.57
11 Georgian_Jew ( ) 10.63
12 Greek_Macedonia ( ) 10.71
13 Cretan ( ) 10.8
14 Turk_Istanbul ( ) 11.06
15 Turk ( ) 11.09
16 Lebanese_Muslim ( ) 11.31
17 Greek ( ) 11.55
18 Christian_Arabs_Israel ( ) 11.6
19 Jew_Tat ( ) 11.73
20 Druze ( ) 11.89

Mixed Mode Population Sharing:

# Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
1 55% Greek_Islands ( ) + 45% Jew_Tat ( ) @ 1.76
2 79% Cypriot ( ) + 21% Kabardin ( ) @ 1.83
3 80.7% Cypriot ( ) + 19.3% Chechen ( ) @ 1.87
4 78.4% Cypriot ( ) + 21.6% Kumyk ( ) @ 1.91
5 76.3% Cypriot ( ) + 23.7% Cirkassian ( ) @ 2.18
6 80.6% Cypriot ( ) + 19.4% Adygei ( ) @ 2.2
7 52.3% Assyrian_Arzni ( ) + 47.7% Sicilian_Center ( ) @ 2.25
8 56.3% Greek ( ) + 43.7% Assyrian_Arzni ( ) @ 2.29
9 52.8% Greek_Phokaia ( ) + 47.2% Assyrian_Arzni ( ) @ 2.33
10 60.7% Greek_Smyrna ( ) + 39.3% Assyrian_Arzni ( ) @ 2.39
11 81.8% Cypriot ( ) + 18.2% Azeri_Dagestan ( ) @ 2.41
12 81.1% Cypriot ( ) + 18.9% Balkar ( ) @ 2.42
13 83.5% Cypriot ( ) + 16.5% Lezgin ( ) @ 2.43
14 59.9% Cretan ( ) + 40.1% Armenian_Yerevan ( ) @ 2.43
15 84% Cypriot ( ) + 16% Avar ( ) @ 2.47
16 58.1% Cretan ( ) + 41.9% Assyrian_Arzni ( ) @ 2.49
17 81.8% Cypriot ( ) + 18.2% North_Ossetian ( ) @ 2.49
18 82.7% Cypriot ( ) + 17.3% Ossetian ( ) @ 2.52
19 50.5% Armenian_Yerevan ( ) + 49.5% Sicilian_Center ( ) @ 2.56
20 55.3% Greek_Athens ( ) + 44.7% Assyrian_Arzni ( ) @ 2.56






Table 8: Turk from Kardzhali/Bulgaria(1), Turk_Bulgaria_average(11) and Bulgarian_average(MDLP K23b spreadsheet)
• Turk from Kardzhali has 11% East Eurasian admixture whereas Turk_Bulgaria_average has 6% East Eurasian. I've included them both to see the correlation between East Eurasian and other components.
• East Eurasian increases
• Ancestral_Altaic increases (on average)
• South_Central_Asian increases
• Near_East increases

• European_Early_Farmers decreases
• European_Hunter_Gatherers decreases
• Caucasian remains more or less stable

The situtation of Bulgaria is different than that of Asia Minor, the Turks who migrated to Bulgaria starting from the late 14th century (see the population transfers in the Ottoman Empire (https://i.hizliresim.com/GBa1v2.png) 1356-1635) had more East Eurasian, Ancestral_Altaic, South_Central_Asian and Near_East than local Bulgarians and had less European_Early_Farmers, European_Hunter_Gatherers. The Caucasian component remains stable, which means the Turks and local Bulgarians had similar levels of Caucasian component.

The Turkish newcomers in Bulgaria probably had some local Anatolian admixture too considering the increase in Near East component.



Component/Population
Turk_Bulgaria(1)
Turk_Bulgaria_average
Bulgarian average


Amerindian

0.61

0.25

0.29


Ancestral_Altaic

0.97

2.21

1.35


South_Central_Asian

9.36

6.68

1.35


Arctic

1.35

0.33

0.25


South_Indian

1.64

0.75

0.61


Australoid

0.78

0.3

0.33


Austronesian

0.26

0.59

0.10


Caucasian

35.67

34.31

35.47


Archaic_Human

0.25

0.1

0.06


East_African

0.06

0.04

0.11


East_Siberian

4.28

0.93

0.33


European_Early_Farmers

9.31

16.24

19.31


Khoisan

0

0.09

0.05


Melano_Polynesian

1.06

0.24

0.23


Archaic_African

0

0.06

0.05


Near_East

5.85

6.18

4.26


North_African

0.78

2.78

2.50


Paleo_Siberian

0

0.76

0.23


African_Pygmy

0

0.1

0.11


South_East_Asian

2.14

0.87

0.16


Subsaharian

0

0

0.02


Tungus-Altaic

2.64

2.48

0.14


European_Hunters_Gatherers

22.99

23.71

29.89

Leper
05-15-2017, 12:41 PM
To sum up: In all these cases we see the Turkic genetic input in these regions was not limited to only East Eurasian admixture, the Turkish newcomers were genetically Eurasian. The proportion of the Oghuz Turkic genetic input in Anatolia and the Balkans is still a matter of debate as we don't have any Seljuk-period Turkish DNA, but the impact that they have had upon the overall genetic structure of Anatolia allows us to conclude that the elite dominance theories that used to be popular in the past are completely discredited today. Although we can agree that assimilation of the native populations of Anatolia had occurred to a certain degree, we cannot estimate the exact number/proportion of it. Given the new genetic studies and individual data we have received so far, this assimilation was more like a partial process rather than a full-scale language shift.

rafael
05-15-2017, 02:06 PM
Finally! This is what it was mostly about. Early Turks were a mix of different people both genetically and physically. Just like the proto Iranic speakers. Central Asia was a melting pot of different haplogroups long before the proto Turkic culture.

Afshar
05-15-2017, 06:52 PM
Nice comparison!
Can you also make assumptions with these data on the genetic contribution of the newcomers to the Anatolian genepool?

Kanenas
05-15-2017, 08:05 PM
Finally! This is what it was mostly about. Early Turks were a mix of different people both genetically and physically. Just like the proto Iranic speakers. Central Asia was a melting pot of different haplogroups long before the proto Turkic culture.

That's more about Oghuz Turks. Concerning Early Turks, I don't know, but it depends on where their homeland was.
Personally, I think early Turks were Iron Age Scythian like and more Western Eurasian than what people usually think.
I also think though that Oghuz Turk migrations made more significant impact than what is thought.

basmaci
05-16-2017, 06:20 AM
Thanks you for opening this thread.

When the Greek historian Nicephorus Gregoras passed through Bithynia (Northwest Anatolia) en route to Niceaea in the middle of the 14th century, just one generation after the conquest of Niceaea by Turks, he observed that the population consisted of Turks, mixovarvaroi and Greeks. "Mixovarvaroi" (meaning mixed barbarians, children of Turkish fathers and Greek mothers) was a Byzantine term used to define the new generation of mixed parentage.

I'm from Bithynia too, I think pre-Turkic inhabitants of Bithynia were similar to other West Anatolian Greeks who are somewhere in between Cypriots and Greek islanders genetically.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C4ifqttXAAAjhYd.jpg

I've replaced the Aegean Turks' results in your table with my results.


Component/Population
Basmaci
Greek_Smyrna(k23b spreadsheet)


Amerindian

0.34

0.06


Ancestral_Altaic

2.70

0.96


South_Central_Asian

13.04

9.04


Arctic

1.51

0.03


South_Indian

1.00

0.54


Australoid

1.06

0.17


Austronesian

1.80

0.21


Caucasian

34.74

43.04


Archaic_Human

0

0.04


East_African

1.40

0.13


East_Siberian

1.88

0.3


European_Early_Farmers

11.97

22.02


Khoisan

0

0.11


Melano_Polynesian

0

0.21


Archaic_African

0.12

0.06


Near_East

9.80

12.16


North_African

0.24

2.74


Paleo_Siberian

0

0.22


African_Pygmy

0

0.08


South_East_Asian

2.83

0.12


Subsaharian

0

0.05


Tungus-Altaic

4.38

0.10


European_Hunters_Gatherers

11.19

7.61

Leper
05-16-2017, 06:58 AM
Nice comparison!
Can you also make assumptions with these data on the genetic contribution of the newcomers to the Anatolian genepool?

Judging from the changes in the overall genetic structure of the peninsula, the contribution of the newcomers to the Anatolian gene pool must be around 25-35% (on average). But, as the word itself implies, this is just an assumption.

I don't think there is any modern population that we can use as a reference for the medieval Oghuz Turks. Modern Oghuz-speakers in Central Asia (Turkmens) are not really a good reference either, even though they usually appear on our oracle results (Nogais also appear frequently), we know from the records of various travellers that Turkmens took Kazakh and Iranian female captives as their wives, this practice even gave rise to "half-castes" among Turkmen tribes of Central Asia.

"On the Yamud and Goklan Tribes of Turkomania"
BARON CLEMENT AUGUSTUS DE BODE, 1844
https://i.hizliresim.com/P0mBGO.png

vettor
05-16-2017, 07:07 AM
Thanks you for opening this thread.

When the Greek historian Nicephorus Gregoras passed through Bithynia (Northwest Anatolia) en route to Niceaea in the middle of the 14th century, just one generation after the conquest of Niceaea by Turks, he observed that the population consisted of Turks, mixovarvaroi and Greeks. "Mixovarvaroi" (meaning mixed barbarians, children of Turkish fathers and Greek mothers) was a Byzantine term used to define the new generation of mixed parentage.

I'm from Bithynia too, I think pre-Turkic inhabitants of Bithynia were similar to other West Anatolian Greeks who are somewhere in between Cypriots and Greek islanders genetically.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C4ifqttXAAAjhYd.jpg

I've replaced the Aegean Turks' results in your table with my results.


Component/Population
Basmaci
Greek_Smyrna(k23b spreadsheet)


Amerindian

0.34

0.06


Ancestral_Altaic

2.70

0.96


South_Central_Asian

13.04

9.04


Arctic

1.51

0.03


South_Indian

1.00

0.54


Australoid

1.06

0.17


Austronesian

1.80

0.21


Caucasian

34.74

43.04


Archaic_Human

0

0.04


East_African

1.40

0.13


East_Siberian

1.88

0.3


European_Early_Farmers

11.97

22.02


Khoisan

0

0.11


Melano_Polynesian

0

0.21


Archaic_African

0.12

0.06


Near_East

9.80

12.16


North_African

0.24

2.74


Paleo_Siberian

0

0.22


African_Pygmy

0

0.08


South_East_Asian

2.83

0.12


Subsaharian

0

0.05


Tungus-Altaic

4.38

0.10


European_Hunters_Gatherers

11.19

7.61



Iron-age bithnyia was always thracian mixed with phygian until conquered by the various "persian empires"

basmaci
05-16-2017, 11:20 AM
Iron-age bithnyia was always thracian mixed with phygian until conquered by the various "persian empires"
long long time ago before Roman and Byzantium era. and those "conquerors" hadn't settled here

Leper
05-16-2017, 06:56 PM
By the way, the South Central Asian percentage of Bulgarian_average in the second post is miscopy-pasted, it should have been 4.15, not 1.35. I can't edit the post anymore for some reason.


Table 9: Turk_Central(26), Turk_West(14), Turk_Northwest(6), Turk_South(10), Turk_East(4)

The correlation of East Eurasian with other components that we have observed in previous tables (Turks vs non-Turkic Anatolians from same provinces/regions) cannot be observed in this table. The heteregenous genetic structure of pre-Turkic Anatolia is the only reason.
For example, Turk_West have slightly more European_Early_Farmer than Turk_East despite having more East Eurasian admixture. The reason is obvious, pre-Turkic West Anatolia had much higher Early_European_Farmer admixture than East Anatolia. The relatively higher Turkic genetic contribution in West Anatolia actually has decreased the difference between the west and the east, the difference was much bigger back then (see the spoiler).



Component/Population
Greek_Smyrna
Greek_Kayseri
Armenian_EastAnatolia


European_Early_Farmers

22.02

16.45

10.96



Another example, Turk_Northwest have less South_Central_Asian than Turk_Central and Turk_East despite having more East Eurasian than both of them, again the heteregenous genetic structure of pre-Turkic Anatolia plays a role in this case.

This confirms the idea that the best way to see the correlation between East Eurasian and other components is to make a comparison between Turks and non-Turkic Anatolians from same provinces/regions.




Component/Population
Turk_Central(26)
Turk_West(14)
Turk_Northwest(6)
Turk_South(10)
Turk_East(4)


Amerindian

0.61

0.49

0.15

0.28

0.17


Ancestral_Altaic

2.55

3.2

2.89

3.29

3.3


South_Central_Asian

14.23

13.09

12.81

13.97

18.19


Arctic

0.75

0.54

1.39

0.39

0.97


South_Indian

1.08

1.36

1.07

1.72

1.14


Australoid

0.38

0.13

0.42

0.44

0.37


Austronesian

0.54

0.72

0.83

0.39

0.76


Caucasian

38.83

35.67

36.47

36.51

39.13


Archaic_Human

0.08

0.06

0

0.09

0.03


East_African

0.48

0.34

0.44

0.61

0.58


East_Siberian

2.41

2.85

3.02

3.03

0.63


European_Early_Farmers

11.21

12.17

11.1

10.33

9.48


Khoisan

0.11

0.03

0.01

0.1

0.15


Melano_Polynesian

0.37

0.49

0.44

0.2

0.15


Archaic_African

0.07

0.06

0.2

0.2

0.01


Near_East

10.33

8.76

8.52

10.06

11.68


North_African

2.88

2.97

1.9

3.33

3.06


Paleo_Siberian

0.26

0.79

0.18

0.73

0.21


African_Pygmy

0.09

0.2

0.18

0.12

0.04


South_East_Asian

1.46

1.48

2.12

1.79

1.36


Subsaharian

0.04

0.16

0

0.24

0.18


Tungus-Altaic

4.05

5.58

4.69

5.25

2.79


European_Hunters_Gatherers

7.17

8.85

11.15

6.91

5.61


https://i.hizliresim.com/j8md4W.png (https://hizliresim.com/j8md4W)
https://i.hizliresim.com/gqEQk0.png (https://hizliresim.com/gqEQk0)
https://i.hizliresim.com/vbr3gr.png (https://hizliresim.com/vbr3gr)
https://i.hizliresim.com/EgkjYB.png (https://hizliresim.com/EgkjYB)
https://i.hizliresim.com/0193kL.png (https://hizliresim.com/0193kL)

Sangarius
05-16-2017, 07:47 PM
What does your sample constitute of? Do you have gedmatch IDs or only the results?

If you have calculator results of multiple people with different levels of admixture from the same (divergent) source, it is actually possible to ascertain what that source looked liked in terms of admixture.
In the case of Turkic admixture in Anatolia, the East-Eurasian admixture is the obvious signal. A regression analysis would show which other admixture components positively correlate with it and it should be possible to estimate the proportions. But this would assume that the Turkic admixture was homogenous in its nature, that it came all from the same source population.

Leper
05-16-2017, 08:59 PM
What does your sample constitute of? Do you have gedmatch IDs or only the results?

If you have calculator results of multiple people with different levels of admixture from the same (divergent) source, it is actually possible to ascertain what that source looked liked in terms of admixture.


Yes, the anlysis I made above based on Gedmatch IDs I've found so far and they've been randomly picked. In case you're asking whether they come from a single source/place or not.


In the case of Turkic admixture in Anatolia, the East-Eurasian admixture is the obvious signal. A regression analysis would show which other admixture components positively correlate with it and it should be possible to estimate the proportions. But this would assume that the Turkic admixture was homogenous in its nature, that it came all from the same source population.

Yes, the East-Eurasian admixture is the obvious signal of Turkic admixture in Anatolia but there is simply no reason to call it "the only" component that Oghuz Turks brought with. This was the point of this thread. Judging from the admixture comparisons, we can conclude that they had an impact on several other components (e.g North European admix.) too. But keep in mind that all of these are just logical assumptions as we don't have any mediveal Oghuz samples yet.

Sangarius
05-16-2017, 09:16 PM
Yes, the anlysis I have made above based on Gedmatch IDs I've found so far and they were randomly picked. In case you're asking whether they come from a single source/place or not.


Yes, the East-Eurasian admixture is the obvious signal of Turkic admixture in Anatolia but there is simply no reason to call it "the only" component that Oghuz Turks brought with. This was the point of this thread. Judging from the admixture comparisons, we can conclude that they had an impact on several other compenents (e.g North European admix.) too. But keep in mind that all of these are just logical assumptions as we don't have any mediveal Oghuz samples yet.

I think there is a misunderstanding. I'm proposing that we could do a regression analysis to gauge what other admixture the Turkic migrations brought with them to basically reconstruct their admixture results. But this would require that the Turkic tribes that settled in Anatolia all had the same genetic makeup (same proportions of admixture components).

Leper
05-16-2017, 09:23 PM
I think there is a misunderstanding. I'm proposing that we could do a regression analysis to gauge what other admixture the Turkic migrations brought with them to basically reconstruct their admixture results. But this would require that the Turkic tribes that settled in Anatolia all had the same genetic makeup (same proportions of admixture components).

Sorry my bad then. Yeah, you're right. We're going after an assumption that they had the more or less same genetic makeup but this is what we have now. And it seems like the best way to come up with healthiest conclusions for now.

eolien
05-18-2017, 09:41 AM
I appreciate your efforts Leper. But what is your question that you want to find an answer for? If you want to do it at a scientific level, I think the methology is very important. Especially the samples, the sample size etc. to draw a reliable conclusion. And the issue of uniparental markers and its importance. I would try to collect also the uniparental results for these samples to correlate with a possible eastern migration. Finally your main assumption is wrong, namely that the Turkic tribes that settled in Anatolia all had the same genetic makeup. This is simply wrong. When the mongols pushed the central asian people ahead of them, it is naive to assume that the migration only included turkic speakers and not iranic ones. besides what you call tribes are political organisations and not single lineage clans.

Afshar
05-18-2017, 09:47 AM
I appreciate your efforts Leper. But what is your question that you want to find an answer for?

Yes, the East-Eurasian admixture is the obvious signal of Turkic admixture in Anatolia but there is simply no reason to call it "the only" component that Oghuz Turks brought with. This was the point of this thread.
Here you go

eolien
05-18-2017, 12:13 PM
I wonder what you guys think about the Yunusbayev el al. paper and its conclusions about Azeris and Turks. Perhaps we could run more Turkish samples using their methods?

Leper
05-18-2017, 12:41 PM
I appreciate your efforts Leper. But what is your question that you want to find an answer for? If you want to do it at a scientific level, I think the methology is very important. Especially the samples, the sample size etc. to draw a reliable conclusion. And the issue of uniparental markers and its importance. I would try to collect also the uniparental results for these samples to correlate with a possible eastern migration. Finally your main assumption is wrong, namely that the Turkic tribes that settled in Anatolia all had the same genetic makeup. This is simply wrong. When the mongols pushed the central asian people ahead of them, it is naive to assume that the migration only included turkic speakers and not iranic ones. besides what you call tribes are political organisations and not single lineage clans.

There are too many variables that we can't include in this anlysis due to lack of proper samples and I mentioned this problem above, if you don't mind the read. The purpose of this thread is not estimating the exact genetic impact of Turkic new comers to Anatolia. We can't be sure of it until we have some mediveal Oghuz samples. But we can draw a rough conclusion by comparing the tested individuals' samples that the East-Eurasian admixture was not the only admixture that Oghuz Turks carried into Anatolia, despite the popular belief of some.

basmaci
07-10-2017, 04:02 PM
https://i.hizliresim.com/bGLGr8.png (https://hizliresim.com/bGLGr8)


A Yoruk from Antalya. His gedmatch results are interesting, his Central Asian ancestry appears as Turkmen/Uzbek/Hazara whereas his native ancestry appears as Cypriot/Sicilian/Maltese. Yoruk literally means walker and is used to refer to nomadic or recently settled Turks.

"Turkmen" here should not be confused with Yunusbayev's Turkmen samples, I think these "Turkmen" represent the Turkmen average better than Yunusbayev's Turkmens (dodecad, eurogenes etc spreadsheets) and are closer to medieval Oghuz Turks.

Population
CHG 28.76
Amerindian -
W_African -
Papuan 0.57
SW_Asian 12.98
S_Indian 5.52
E_Asian 16.15
WHG 13.44
Anatolian_Farmers 17.08
EHG 5.49

# Population (source) Distance
1 Turkish 13.24
2 Turkmen 15.81
3 Turkmen_Afghan 17.41
4 Uzbek_Afghan 18.55
5 Tajik 18.6
6 Azeri 19.11
7 Kumyk 20.34
8 Tajik_Afghan 20.38
9 Sicilian 21.16
10 Maltese 21.26
11 Greek 22.1
12 Hazara_Afghan 22.36
13 Adygei 22.38
14 Lebanese 22.5
15 Cypriot 22.78
16 Iranian 23.03
17 Albanian 23.18
18 Syrian 23.38
19 Uzbek 23.54
20 Chechen 23.83

Mixed Mode Population Sharing:

# Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
1 57.5% Turkmen + 42.5% Maltese @ 2.55
2 57.4% Turkmen + 42.6% Sicilian @ 2.86
3 51.3% Maltese + 48.7% Hazara_Afghan @ 3.95
4 55.2% Turkmen_Afghan + 44.8% Maltese @ 4.15
5 50.9% Cypriot + 49.1% Uzbek @ 4.19
6 52.6% Maltese + 47.4% Uzbek @ 4.26
7 57% Turkmen_Afghan + 43% Cypriot @ 4.3
8 51.4% Sicilian + 48.6% Hazara_Afghan @ 4.44
9 58.9% Turkmen + 41.1% Greek @ 4.7
10 61.3% Maltese + 38.7% Hazara @ 4.71


Same person, MDLP k23b results

In MDLP k23b's oracle his Central Asian ancestry appears as Turkmen_Afghan/Turkmen_Uzbekistan/Uzbek/Karakalpak whereas his native ancestry appears as Greek_Smyrna/Greek_Islands/Cretan/South_Italian and other Greek populations

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 Caucasian 32.88
2 European_Early_Farmers 13.78
3 South_Central_Asian 11.77
4 Tungus-Altaic 9.43
5 Near_East 8.82
6 European_Hunters_Gatherers 5.69
7 East_Siberian 4.57
8 Ancestral_Altaic 4.33
9 North_African 2.54
10 South_East_Asian 2.36
11 Austronesian 1.01
12 Paleo_Siberian 0.95
13 South_Indian 0.84
14 Melano_Polynesian 0.53
15 African_Pygmy 0.33
16 Australoid 0.16

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 Turk_Aydin @ 9.963532
2 Turk_Balikesir @ 10.322422
3 Turk @ 13.053263
4 Turk_Adana @ 13.368528
5 Turk_Istanbul @ 13.685670
6 Turk_Kayseri @ 13.972665
7 Nogai @ 16.335566
8 Crimean_Tatar_Mountain @ 16.375002
9 Syrian_Jew @ 16.763538
10 Cretan @ 17.159893
11 Azov_Greek @ 17.361341
12 Sicilian_West @ 17.540180
13 Greek_Smyrna @ 17.791405
14 Ashkenazi_Jew @ 17.803604
15 Turkmen_Uzbekistan @ 17.917810
16 Sephardic_Jew @ 18.271072
17 Romanian_Jew @ 18.460768
18 Georgian_Jew @ 18.496830
19 French_Jew @ 18.577831
20 Turk_Jew @ 18.588034

Mixed Mode Population Sharing:

# Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
1 58.6% Greek_Smyrna ( ) + 41.4% Turkmen_Afghan ( ) @ 2.09
2 55.7% Greek_Islands ( ) + 44.3% Turkmen_Afghan ( ) @ 2.52
3 62% Cretan ( ) + 38% Turkmen_Afghan ( ) @ 2.94
4 62.2% Greek_Smyrna ( ) + 37.8% Karakalpak ( ) @ 3.05
5 51.3% Turkmen_Uzbekistan ( ) + 48.7% Greek_Islands ( ) @ 3.08
6 59.5% Greek_Smyrna ( ) + 40.5% Uzbek ( ) @ 3.27
7 50.5% Italian_South ( ) + 49.5% Turkmen_Uzbekistan ( ) @ 3.62
8 53.2% Greek ( ) + 46.8% Turkmen_Uzbekistan ( ) @ 3.7
9 51.7% Greek_Athens ( ) + 48.3% Turkmen_Uzbekistan ( ) @ 3.71
10 56.7% Greek_Islands ( ) + 43.3% Uzbek ( )




puntDNAL K15 Oracle results:

This one is less accurate IMO. Sardinians representing native ancestry does not make sense. Pre-Turkic Antalya was probably similar to Cretans/Greek islanders genetically.

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 Caucasian 29.3
2 Mediterranean 27.06
3 NE_European 15.34
4 E_Asian 10.55
5 Siberian 6.93
6 SW_Asian 5.4
7 S_Indian 3.29
8 Horn_Of_Africa 1.24
9 Omo_River 0.47
10 Beringian 0.27
11 Wht_Nile_River 0.14
12 Amerindian 0.02

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 Nogai 13.11
2 Turk_Kayseri 15.28
3 Turkmen 15.52
4 Turk_Istanbul 19.03
5 Ashkenazy_Jew 19.69
6 Lebanese 19.71
7 Kurdish 19.73
8 Sephardic_Jew 19.76
9 Azerbaijani 20.05
10 Kumyk 20.44
11 Greek_Central 20.45
12 Sicilian 20.47
13 Balkar 21
14 Palestinian 21.36
15 Tadjik 21.6
16 Chechen 21.81
17 Iraqi_Jew 21.98
18 Greek_Thessaly 22.08
19 Cypriot 22.21
20 Assyrian 22.25

Mixed Mode Population Sharing:

# Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
1 73.6% Turkmen + 26.4% Sardinian @ 4.04
2 77.5% Nogai + 22.5% Sardinian @ 5.02
3 57.5% Turkmen + 42.5% Sicilian @ 5.03
4 61.4% Nogai + 38.6% Sephardic_Jew @ 5.36
5 56.5% Turkmen + 43.5% Ashkenazy_Jew @ 5.39
6 56.6% Turkmen + 43.4% Sephardic_Jew @ 5.4
7 61.5% Nogai + 38.5% Ashkenazy_Jew @ 5.64
8 62.5% Nogai + 37.5% Sicilian @ 5.73
9 62% Sephardic_Jew + 38% Hazara @ 5.85
10 60.8% Sephardic_Jew + 39.2% Uyghur @ 6.11

Kqokanm
11-22-2017, 02:14 AM
Do you have any Greek/Armenian results from Southeastern Anatolia? I have 2 samples, first one is from Southeastern Anatolia second one is from Central Anatolia (Kırşehir)