PDA

View Full Version : Y-STR Haplotypes of T1-R1 and Ancient Eurasian Dna Studies



isbara
01-20-2015, 10:36 PM
1.
I recently read about the research tool 23andme is offering. Is it possible that i can request the statistics(percentages of T in all countries) of Y-DNA haplogroup T and R1a? Does anyone know how to reach 23andme helpdesk, because i could not reach them.

2.
Does the database of 23andme also have ancient dna results?

3.
At another forum professor Anatole Klyosov(http://www.rodstvo.ru/forum/lofiversion/index.php?t1892.html), wrote about the unusual phenomenon of the similarity of two basal haplotypes of Y-DNA haplogroups R1a and T1a. There is a match of 15/22 Y-STR markers between the following values:


12 12 13 - 11 11 - 11 - 11 8 16 16 8 10 8 12 10 12 12 8 12 11 11 12 (R1a)
11 12 13 - 11 13 - 9 - 11 8 17 17 8 10 8 12 10 12 12 8 11 12 11 12 (T1a)

About this subject it is written by a user in this link: http://www.eupedia.com/forum/archive/index.php/t-28633.html


“The feeling that T - is an early R1a1, which mutated DYS426 12 -> 11, but DYS392 = 13 survived from ancient R1a1 (by the way, is the same and R1b). Haplogroup T definitely does not fit into an existing tree haplogroups after a series of 2009-2011, side moves.”

I know the Y-SNP is different, but Haplogroup T(or K2) has now moved from places 2-3 times in the Y-tree, so is there a possibility there could be a connection between T and R? What if new SNP's would be found to proof this? Would this not clear the fact that haplogroup T is found rarely in all studies done till now?

What do you think about the Y-STR similarity between the basal haplotypes of R1a and T1a? Did anyone see same kind of results in other databases, when you compare R1a and T1 haplotypes?

4.
Except the known Ftdna project databases, which databases can i publicly use or make a request to research the statistics of the haplogroup results for haplotypes with 23-23 values for Y-STR markers YCAII-a-b?

5.
There is a company called interpretome, which can generate graphics of 23andme results i think, because i saw a graphic posted on an another forum page about this. Do you know what the relations between these two companies are?

6.
-At the “The Y-chromosome tree bursts into leaf: 13,000 high-confidence SNPs covering the majority of known clades” study, the most basal branch of haplogroup T is of a Bhutanese person with ID Bhu-1892. Bhutan is a country within the borders of China and India. What do you guys think about this, what does this mean for the origin of haplogroup T?

-Also it is a known fact that Dravidians had more than 50%(“High Resolution Phylogeographic Map of Y-Chromosomes Reveal the Genetic Signatures of Pleistocene Origin of Indian Populations”) of haplogroup T.

-Also at the study “A Western Eurasian Male Is Found in 2000-Year-Old Elite Xiongnu Cemetery in Northeast Mongolia” this is written:


“Calculation by DNA#VIEW shows that the autosomal profile of Xiongnu Cemetery with ID MNX3(mt: U2e1, Y: R1a1) West Eurasian male is 14 times more probable from a Brahmin Indian than from a modern Caucasian (Table 6).”
-Also there was a study about Xiaohe graves(3500-4000 YBP), http://eurogenes.blogspot.nl/2013/01/lots-of-ancient-y-dna-from-china.html. There was 11x R1a1a and 1x K*-M9. We know from older studies that marker M70 was the most closest SNP child existing from M9 marker, thats why it was called earlier K2. Is it possible that R1a and T1 could have a connection because of this situation in which 1 K-M9 is associated with a group of 11x R1a? Maybe some groups of M9 marker stayed together in Central/East Asian regions before and after the mutations of some haplogroups occured?

-What do you think about all these points?

7.
At the study “Haplotype Diversity in mtDNA and Y-Chromosome in Populations of Altai–Sayan Region” Haplogroup K-M9(xL, N, O, P) is found with 38.8%. In an earlier study Haplogroup T was found within Altaian Kazakhs(Y-Chromosome Variation in Altaian Kazakhs Reveals a Common Paternal Gene Pool for Kazakhs and the Influence of Mongolian Expansions) again after a situation of K-M9(N, O, P) i think. Do you think that the 38.8% of K-M9(xL, N, O, P) could belong to Haplogroup T? I asked professor Gubina about this, and she told me marker of T was not typed, and she has no plans for this in the future. Is there someone that could try to test these K-M9(xL, N, O, P) samples further to see if T is found among them?

8.
In an Y-STR only study of 2003 of professor Keyser-Tracqui about Xiongnu graves of 2000 years ago in Mongolia, there is a there is a grave with number 76. The haplotype of this sample has 5 Y-STR markers tested, in which these results were found: DYS392:13, DYS393:13, DYS19=14, YCAIIa-b:23-23.

The YCAIIa-b value of 23-23 is very unique, together with DYS14(14), DYS392(13), DYS393(13) it is found in only specificly haplogroups T-M70 and R1b. I have searched and analyzed all T-M70 and R1b haplotypes at Familytreedna.com, and found that 27/649 T-M70 haplotypes were a match(4,16%) and 21/5650 R1b haplotypes(0,37%) were a match. Looking at the YCAIIa-b values of the T-M70 and R1b haplotypes at Familytreedna.com, i saw that R1b haplotypes had mostly the following structure YCAIIa-b(19-...). T-M70 haplotypes had mostly the following structure YCAIIa-b(23-...). Also the fact that the haplotype prediction of grave number 84bis(and maybe also the haplotype of grave number 95) is specificly unique for haplogroup L-M20, do you think the outcome of grave number 76 has higher probabilities for T-M70 than R1b? Is there someone, maybe from the Ftdna T groups that can maybe test the Y-SNP haplogroup of this ancient grave number 76?

Also professor Keyser-Tracqui said that she was busy with a new project about Xiongnu graves in a cemetery with a new location in Mongolia. Does someone know what the status of this study is? Are there other new ancient dna projects going on about this subject?

9.
In the study of David K. Faux in 2007, “The Genetic Link of the Viking – Era Norse to Central Asia:An Assessment of the Y Chromosome DNA, Archaeological,Historical and Linguistic Evidence”, he said he found in Shetland project, haplogroups K2-M70, R1a and Q, and he also makes a connection between T and R1a and says these came together from Central Asia to Eurasian regions.

10.
At this page http://221.145.178.204/nrichdata/etc/book/file/KBJ16_01.pdf there is a wide ancient dna study performed, with 1462 ancient samples in 2007 by professor Kijeong Kim from South Korean Chung-Ang University. 8 years have been passed, and the results are still not published. In 2010 there was only the result of a single sample of these 1462 ancient samples published within a paper named “A western Eurasian male is found in 2000-year-old elite Xiongnu cemetery in Northeast Mongolia.”, which showed the first occurence of R1a among Xiongnu grave samples. There are thousands of other Scythian(11th BC - 2th centuries AD), Xiongnu(3th-3th centuries BC), Hun(3th-6th centuries) and Turk(6th-8th centuries) graves in Eurasian regions. What if they all got tested and showed interesting results that could change all the conclusions made by scientists about dna migration routes?
I have contacted Kijeong Kim about this situation, and he persists on not sharing the Y-SNP haplogroup results. As a reason he says they have not performed repeat analysis. But even if a part of the results could be wrong, for example maybe 0 - 5% of the 1462 ancient samples, isnt it really useful to have at least a good preview picture what can let other dna project investors to invest in reanalyses of parts of these samples? Why should such a massive pre study be kept private? Do you think there could be a political pressure to not publish these results? I dont understand what they could loose if they publish results of such an important study? Who does agree with me on this subject? Are there academics on this forum that could convince professor Kijeong Kim to publish these pre results?

dp
01-20-2015, 10:42 PM
Dear isbara,
Welcome to Anthrogenica.
dp :-)

isbara
01-21-2015, 12:05 AM
Dear isbara,
Welcome to Anthrogenica.
dp :-)

Thanks man.

lgmayka
01-21-2015, 12:06 AM
At this page http://221.145.178.204/nrichdata/etc/book/file/KBJ16_01.pdf there is a wide ancient dna study performed, with 1462 ancient samples in 2007 by professor Kijeong Kim from South Korean Chung-Ang University.
---
Molecular phylogenetic results demonstrated that ancient Korea, Shilla and ancient Mongolian, Scythian had very similar constitution of Y haplogroups whereas Korean and Mongolian of other historical periods showed no similarity each other. Except of similarity between Shilla and Scythian, Korean, Mongolian and Uzbek were quite different each other in the constitution of Y haplogroups irrespectively of historical period. mtDNA results also demonstrated that there was close relationship between Shilla and Scythian in constitution of mtDNA haplogroups, and the other group including Mongolian Bronze, modern, ancient Uzbek, Nukdo Korean, Baekjae and Chosun showed the similar pattern in constitution of mtDNA haplogroups. However, Xiongnu showed no similarity with all populations of different historical periods and regions.
---

If I understand this correctly, the Korean Shilla/Silla dynasty (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silla) had Y-DNA and mtDNA similar to those of Mongolian Scythians. I can easily imagine that such a topic might be politically sensitive. :)

vettor
01-21-2015, 12:52 AM
1.
I recently read about the research tool 23andme is offering. Is it possible that i can request the statistics(percentages of T in all countries) of Y-DNA haplogroup T and R1a? Does anyone know how to reach 23andme helpdesk, because i could not reach them.

2.
Does the database of 23andme also have ancient dna results?

3.
At another forum professor Anatole Klyosov(http://www.rodstvo.ru/forum/lofiversion/index.php?t1892.html), wrote about the unusual phenomenon of the similarity of two basal haplotypes of Y-DNA haplogroups R1a and T1a. There is a match of 15/22 Y-STR markers between the following values:



About this subject it is written by a user in this link: http://www.eupedia.com/forum/archive/index.php/t-28633.html



I know the Y-SNP is different, but Haplogroup T(or K2) has now moved from places 2-3 times in the Y-tree, so is there a possibility there could be a connection between T and R? What if new SNP's would be found to proof this? Would this not clear the fact that haplogroup T is found rarely in all studies done till now?

What do you think about the Y-STR similarity between the basal haplotypes of R1a and T1a? Did anyone see same kind of results in other databases, when you compare R1a and T1 haplotypes?

4.
Except the known Ftdna project databases, which databases can i publicly use or make a request to research the statistics of the haplogroup results for haplotypes with 23-23 values for Y-STR markers YCAII-a-b?

5.
There is a company called interpretome, which can generate graphics of 23andme results i think, because i saw a graphic posted on an another forum page about this. Do you know what the relations between these two companies are?

6.
-At the “The Y-chromosome tree bursts into leaf: 13,000 high-confidence SNPs covering the majority of known clades” study, the most basal branch of haplogroup T is of a Bhutanese person with ID Bhu-1892. Bhutan is a country within the borders of China and India. What do you guys think about this, what does this mean for the origin of haplogroup T?

-Also it is a known fact that Dravidians had more than 50%(“High Resolution Phylogeographic Map of Y-Chromosomes Reveal the Genetic Signatures of Pleistocene Origin of Indian Populations”) of haplogroup T.

-Also at the study “A Western Eurasian Male Is Found in 2000-Year-Old Elite Xiongnu Cemetery in Northeast Mongolia” this is written:


-Also there was a study about Xiaohe graves(3500-4000 YBP), http://eurogenes.blogspot.nl/2013/01/lots-of-ancient-y-dna-from-china.html. There was 11x R1a1a and 1x K*-M9. We know from older studies that marker M70 was the most closest SNP child existing from M9 marker, thats why it was called earlier K2. Is it possible that R1a and T1 could have a connection because of this situation in which 1 K-M9 is associated with a group of 11x R1a? Maybe some groups of M9 marker stayed together in Central/East Asian regions before and after the mutations of some haplogroups occured?

-What do you think about all these points?

7.
At the study “Haplotype Diversity in mtDNA and Y-Chromosome in Populations of Altai–Sayan Region” Haplogroup K-M9(xL, N, O, P) is found with 38.8%. In an earlier study Haplogroup T was found within Altaian Kazakhs(Y-Chromosome Variation in Altaian Kazakhs Reveals a Common Paternal Gene Pool for Kazakhs and the Influence of Mongolian Expansions) again after a situation of K-M9(N, O, P) i think. Do you think that the 38.8% of K-M9(xL, N, O, P) could belong to Haplogroup T? I asked professor Gubina about this, and she told me marker of T was not typed, and she has no plans for this in the future. Is there someone that could try to test these K-M9(xL, N, O, P) samples further to see if T is found among them?

8.
In an Y-STR only study of 2003 of professor Keyser-Tracqui about Xiongnu graves of 2000 years ago in Mongolia, there is a there is a grave with number 76. The haplotype of this sample has 5 Y-STR markers tested, in which these results were found: DYS392:13, DYS393:13, DYS19=14, YCAIIa-b:23-23.

The YCAIIa-b value of 23-23 is very unique, together with DYS14(14), DYS392(13), DYS393(13) it is found in only specificly haplogroups T-M70 and R1b. I have searched and analyzed all T-M70 and R1b haplotypes at Familytreedna.com, and found that 27/649 T-M70 haplotypes were a match(4,16%) and 21/5650 R1b haplotypes(0,37%) were a match. Looking at the YCAIIa-b values of the T-M70 and R1b haplotypes at Familytreedna.com, i saw that R1b haplotypes had mostly the following structure YCAIIa-b(19-...). T-M70 haplotypes had mostly the following structure YCAIIa-b(23-...). Also the fact that the haplotype prediction of grave number 84bis(and maybe also the haplotype of grave number 95) is specificly unique for haplogroup L-M20, do you think the outcome of grave number 76 has higher probabilities for T-M70 than R1b? Is there someone, maybe from the Ftdna T groups that can maybe test the Y-SNP haplogroup of this ancient grave number 76?

Also professor Keyser-Tracqui said that she was busy with a new project about Xiongnu graves in a cemetery with a new location in Mongolia. Does someone know what the status of this study is? Are there other new ancient dna projects going on about this subject?

9.
In the study of David K. Faux in 2007, “The Genetic Link of the Viking – Era Norse to Central Asia:An Assessment of the Y Chromosome DNA, Archaeological,Historical and Linguistic Evidence”, he said he found in Shetland project, haplogroups K2-M70, R1a and Q, and he also makes a connection between T and R1a and says these came together from Central Asia to Eurasian regions.

10.
At this page http://221.145.178.204/nrichdata/etc/book/file/KBJ16_01.pdf there is a wide ancient dna study performed, with 1462 ancient samples in 2007 by professor Kijeong Kim from South Korean Chung-Ang University. 8 years have been passed, and the results are still not published. In 2010 there was only the result of a single sample of these 1462 ancient samples published within a paper named “A western Eurasian male is found in 2000-year-old elite Xiongnu cemetery in Northeast Mongolia.”, which showed the first occurence of R1a among Xiongnu grave samples. There are thousands of other Scythian(11th BC - 2th centuries AD), Xiongnu(3th-3th centuries BC), Hun(3th-6th centuries) and Turk(6th-8th centuries) graves in Eurasian regions. What if they all got tested and showed interesting results that could change all the conclusions made by scientists about dna migration routes?
I have contacted Kijeong Kim about this situation, and he persists on not sharing the Y-SNP haplogroup results. As a reason he says they have not performed repeat analysis. But even if a part of the results could be wrong, for example maybe 0 - 5% of the 1462 ancient samples, isnt it really useful to have at least a good preview picture what can let other dna project investors to invest in reanalyses of parts of these samples? Why should such a massive pre study be kept private? Do you think there could be a political pressure to not publish these results? I dont understand what they could loose if they publish results of such an important study? Who does agree with me on this subject? Are there academics on this forum that could convince professor Kijeong Kim to publish these pre results?


what is this research tool in 23andme?

ADW_1981
01-21-2015, 01:35 AM
The K-M9 result in Xiaohe seems more likely to be L-M20 of some sort if we evaluate modern distributions. (L-M20 correlates well with R1a in Central Asia, Iran, South Asia) LT probably has a central asian origin similar to R1 but both descendants have far weaker distribution when compared to the R1 super breeder. Arguably T-M70 is more closely linked distribution wise with R1b, even though it's pretty scarce just about everywhere in Europe, but tends to be higher the closer you get to the Middle-East. We can pretty much "vanquish" any Viking connection as even within Britain and Ireland there are only handfuls of haplotypes. When you get to Scandinavia, there are even fewer than the traditional "neolithic" groups. (i.e.: E-V13, G-P15..etc)

isbara
01-21-2015, 02:05 PM
what is this research tool in 23andme?

http://mediacenter.23andme.com/blog/2014/07/29/nih_grant_2014/

http://www.cnbc.com/id/102231015#.

isbara
01-21-2015, 02:12 PM
---
Molecular phylogenetic results demonstrated that ancient Korea, Shilla and ancient Mongolian, Scythian had very similar constitution of Y haplogroups whereas Korean and Mongolian of other historical periods showed no similarity each other. Except of similarity between Shilla and Scythian, Korean, Mongolian and Uzbek were quite different each other in the constitution of Y haplogroups irrespectively of historical period. mtDNA results also demonstrated that there was close relationship between Shilla and Scythian in constitution of mtDNA haplogroups, and the other group including Mongolian Bronze, modern, ancient Uzbek, Nukdo Korean, Baekjae and Chosun showed the similar pattern in constitution of mtDNA haplogroups. However, Xiongnu showed no similarity with all populations of different historical periods and regions.
---

If I understand this correctly, the Korean Shilla/Silla dynasty (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silla) had Y-DNA and mtDNA similar to those of Mongolian Scythians. I can easily imagine that such a topic might be politically sensitive. :)

Yes, and the Y-dna and MT-dna of Xiongnu is completely different from all other populations. We already know there was found haplogroups C, Q, N, R in Xiongnu. What if in the future we find out that many more haplogroups are found within the Xiongnu graves? This would mean that the Xiongnu could have their roots in the Sumerians, whom are the root of human civilization.

isbara
01-21-2015, 03:38 PM
The K-M9 result in Xiaohe seems more likely to be L-M20 of some sort if we evaluate modern distributions. (L-M20 correlates well with R1a in Central Asia, Iran, South Asia) LT probably has a central asian origin similar to R1 but both descendants have far weaker distribution when compared to the R1 super breeder. Arguably T-M70 is more closely linked distribution wise with R1b, even though it's pretty scarce just about everywhere in Europe, but tends to be higher the closer you get to the Middle-East. We can pretty much "vanquish" any Viking connection as even within Britain and Ireland there are only handfuls of haplotypes. When you get to Scandinavia, there are even fewer than the traditional "neolithic" groups. (i.e.: E-V13, G-P15..etc)

Until now, i find that the level of sample count is very low and unreliable. In time when more seriously projects are being performed, we will see different results.

For example, a couple of years ago who would have thought that Y-haplogroup G would be found in Kazakhs with such high frequency? For example there is found 87% of haplogroup G in Bíró et. al. 2009 and in some other studies haplogroup C is found with 40-60%. In the newest study "Y-chromosome descent clusters and male differential reproductive success: young lineage expansions dominate Asian pastoral nomadic populations" there was found 26% of G in Karakalpaks. There are other studies that show similar results. And about haplogroup T, there are tons of studies with high frequncy K* that were not taken serious enough to test more markers. I keep reading articles and posts about T being found with high frequencies in the Middle-East, what do we mean by high actually? T results are showed in really few studies, and does not go higher than 0-15%. For example i find the conclusions made in the following study "Increased Resolution of Y Chromosome Haplogroup T Defines Relationships among Populations of the Near East, Europe, and Africa" very funny and not deserved to be called academic. The highest frequency in table 1 is only 12,5%, based upon this they declare the origin of T Jewish. This is not scientific, because 12,5% of haplogroup T is also found in the Xibe population of Xinjiang. Also the Phoenician connection of Genographics, on which facts do you base this on? This is not scientific, and these are the methods of non scientific companies that earn money out of these lies. For example, how can someone make a Phoenician connection with Thomas jefferson(ancient dna, born 1743)?

And also, i really doubt the reliability and seriousness of the majority of dna studies. Tell me something, how many academic Y-dna studies are there, whom have researched carefully and very strict the historical documents of the participants of their projects? What if in the majority of the dna studies, the samples that are collected belong to people from one village, or yet even belong to people from the same villages that belong to only a couple of families that are relatives to each other in the close history? Is this enough to make a valid generalization of the haplogroups found in specific countries? The solution is to conduct Y-DNA studies in which the paternal historical documents of each participant is recorded very carefully, so that the studies may be counted as scientific to assign general haplogroups to specific groups of populations.

Ancient dna projects are the most important piece of the puzzle that needs to solved right now. Think of it like this, what if in between 1200 and 1300 AD, specific groups of people migrated completely from Mongolia to Iran? What if ancient dna will proof this? And for example did you know that the population number in modern Mongolia is less than 3 million. Do you think that it is scientific and also true to assign a haplogroup to the ancient Mongol tribes based on the Y-DNA tests done on nowadays Mongolian population with less than 3 million inhabitants? Did you know that in the begin of 1300's there was a massive migration from Mongolia to China, Afghanistan, Iran and Türkiye. Do you know of the existance of the Ilkhanid Mongol state in Iran and Türkiye?

Another mistake i saw recently in an academic paper("Title:Present Y chromosomes support the Persian ancestry of Sayyid Ajjal Shams al-Din Omar and Eminent Navigator Zheng He"), in which the ancient dna of Sayyid Ajjal Shams al-Din Omar was found to belong to haplogroup L-M20. In the paper it is written that he is of Khwarezmian tribe, and they conclude he is of Persian origin(with the doubts they write). This is totally not scientific and not true. Every historian that is associated with medieval history knows that the dynasty of Khwarazm Shahs and their state is of Turkish origin(Mamlukids, Kipchaks, etc...), and we also know that the borders of Khwarezmia lies within Central Asia, the land of the Turks(6th-8th centuries). We also know that in the Gokcumen 2008 study, there was found 57% of L-M20 in Afshar Turks in Türkiye. But still, Sayyid Ajjal Shams al-Din Omar is concidered to be of Persian origin, is this scientific? No. What if an important group of ancient Turks with L-M20 migrated between 1200 and 1500 AD from Mongolia, China and Central Asia to Iran and Türkiye countries? Do the academicians bother to think about this?

Also, the same situation with haplogroup T, the haplotypes of T and R1a-R1b really look similar. If you look at the Y-STR markers one by one, you will see what i mean, so what does this point out? Could it be possible that T is defined not correctly in the Y-tree? Can you guys also answer the questions i asked in the first post? We know of the sudden new discoveries of markers like M184 that changed the position of older K2-M70 fundamentally. What if the reason of the rare low frequencies of T in whole world is because there are still undiscovered SNP's that cause for the wrong classification of it in the Y-Tree?

vettor
01-21-2015, 05:00 PM
The K-M9 result in Xiaohe seems more likely to be L-M20 of some sort if we evaluate modern distributions. (L-M20 correlates well with R1a in Central Asia, Iran, South Asia) LT probably has a central asian origin similar to R1 but both descendants have far weaker distribution when compared to the R1 super breeder. Arguably T-M70 is more closely linked distribution wise with R1b, even though it's pretty scarce just about everywhere in Europe, but tends to be higher the closer you get to the Middle-East. We can pretty much "vanquish" any Viking connection as even within Britain and Ireland there are only handfuls of haplotypes. When you get to Scandinavia, there are even fewer than the traditional "neolithic" groups. (i.e.: E-V13, G-P15..etc)

curious, which K-M9 in Xiaohe

the Tarim basin lone K9 with the other 11 x R1a1 was found to be T1a2

vettor
01-21-2015, 05:08 PM
Until now, i find that the level of sample count is very low and unreliable. In time when more seriously projects are being performed, we will see different results.

For example, a couple of years ago who would have thought that Y-haplogroup G would be found in Kazakhs with such high frequency? For example there is found 87% of haplogroup G in Bíró et. al. 2009 and in some other studies haplogroup C is found with 40-60%. In the newest study "Y-chromosome descent clusters and male differential reproductive success: young lineage expansions dominate Asian pastoral nomadic populations" there was found 26% of G in Karakalpaks. There are other studies that show similar results. And about haplogroup T, there are tons of studies with high frequncy K* that were not taken serious enough to test more markers. I keep reading articles and posts about T being found with high frequencies in the Middle-East, what do we mean by high actually? T results are showed in really few studies, and does not go higher than 0-15%. For example i find the conclusions made in the following study "Increased Resolution of Y Chromosome Haplogroup T Defines Relationships among Populations of the Near East, Europe, and Africa" very funny and not deserved to be called academic. The highest frequency in table 1 is only 12,5%, based upon this they declare the origin of T Jewish. This is not scientific, because 12,5% of haplogroup T is also found in the Xibe population of Xinjiang. Also the Phoenician connection of Genographics, on which facts do you base this on? This is not scientific, and these are the methods of non scientific companies that earn money out of these lies. For example, how can someone make a Phoenician connection with Thomas jefferson(ancient dna, born 1743)?

And also, i really doubt the reliability and seriousness of the majority of dna studies. Tell me something, how many academic Y-dna studies are there, whom have researched carefully and very strict the historical documents of the participants of their projects? What if in the majority of the dna studies, the samples that are collected belong to people from one village, or yet even belong to people from the same villages that belong to only a couple of families that are relatives to each other in the close history? Is this enough to make a valid generalization of the haplogroups found in specific countries? The solution is to conduct Y-DNA studies in which the paternal historical documents of each participant is recorded very carefully, so that the studies may be counted as scientific to assign general haplogroups to specific groups of populations.

Ancient dna projects are the most important piece of the puzzle that needs to solved right now. Think of it like this, what if in between 1200 and 1300 AD, specific groups of people migrated completely from Mongolia to Iran? What if ancient dna will proof this? And for example did you know that the population number in modern Mongolia is less than 3 million. Do you think that it is scientific and also true to assign a haplogroup to the ancient Mongol tribes based on the Y-DNA tests done on nowadays Mongolian population with less than 3 million inhabitants? Did you know that in the begin of 1300's there was a massive migration from Mongolia to China, Afghanistan, Iran and Türkiye. Do you know of the existance of the Ilkhanid Mongol state in Iran and Türkiye?

Another mistake i saw recently in an academic paper("Title:Present Y chromosomes support the Persian ancestry of Sayyid Ajjal Shams al-Din Omar and Eminent Navigator Zheng He"), in which the ancient dna of Sayyid Ajjal Shams al-Din Omar was found to belong to haplogroup L-M20. In the paper it is written that he is of Khwarezmian tribe, and they conclude he is of Persian origin(with the doubts they write). This is totally not scientific and not true. Every historian that is associated with medieval history knows that the dynasty of Khwarazm Shahs and their state is of Turkish origin(Mamlukids, Kipchaks, etc...), and we also know that the borders of Khwarezmia lies within Central Asia, the land of the Turks(6th-8th centuries). We also know that in the Gokcumen 2008 study, there was found 57% of L-M20 in Afshar Turks in Türkiye. But still, Sayyid Ajjal Shams al-Din Omar is concidered to be of Persian origin, is this scientific? No. What if an important group of ancient Turks with L-M20 migrated between 1200 and 1500 AD from Mongolia, China and Central Asia to Iran and Türkiye countries? Do the academicians bother to think about this?

Also, the same situation with haplogroup T, the haplotypes of T and R1a-R1b really look similar. If you look at the Y-STR markers one by one, you will see what i mean, so what does this point out? Could it be possible that T is defined not correctly in the Y-tree? Can you guys also answer the questions i asked in the first post? We know of the sudden new discoveries of markers like M184 that changed the position of older K2-M70 fundamentally. What if the reason of the rare low frequencies of T in whole world is because there are still undiscovered SNP's that cause for the wrong classification of it in the Y-Tree?

I agree with what you state with the added issue of all the K2 in the past might be confused with the new K2 ( from June 2014 ) representing the P branch which leads to R and Q haplogroups.

The K2 which was T , now has been rebranded as K1 ..................this was due to the findings that L and T where once a union with an SNP of P326.
This LT-P326 seems to have 2 areas of origins ..........indus valley or northern Syria,


Funny how ftdna lags behind and still has a K2 ftdna project which equals T...............when will they rename it to K1 ??

parasar
01-21-2015, 06:00 PM
curious, which K-M9 in Xiaohe

the Tarim basin lone K9 with the other 11 x R1a1 was found to be T1a2

I believe the Jilin study is from the same site but with few extra samples
Xiaohe, Xinjiang, 3500-4000 YBP, 11 R1a1a, 1 K*
http://cdmd.cnki.com.cn/Article/CDMD-10183-1012365432.htm

"The Y chromosome haplogroup of the seven males were all assigned to haplogroup R1a1a"
http://www.biomedcentral.com/content/pdf/1741-7007-8-15.pdf

parasar
01-21-2015, 06:11 PM
I believe the Jilin study is from the same site but with few extra samples
Xiaohe, Xinjiang, 3500-4000 YBP, 11 R1a1a, 1 K*
http://cdmd.cnki.com.cn/Article/CDMD-10183-1012365432.htm

"The Y chromosome haplogroup of the seven males were all assigned to haplogroup R1a1a"
http://www.biomedcentral.com/content/pdf/1741-7007-8-15.pdf

Jilin Univ. also noted an apparent European origin (connection perhaps is more correct) as they tested for Z93 and found all the samples to be Z93-. These samples are different from the ones in the South Siberia paper (the one with CxC3).

http://www.biomedcentral.com/1741-7007/8/15/comments#2168698

The origin of Xiaohe Bronze Age mummy
Hui Zhou (2014-07-18 16:14) Jilin University

Archaeological and anthropological investigations have helped to formulate two main theories to account for the origin of the populations in the Tarim Basin. The first, so-called “steppe hypothesis”, maintains that the earliest settlers may have been nomadic herders of the Afanasievo culture (ca. 3300-2000 B.C.), a primarily pastoralist culture distributed in the Eastern Kazakhstan, Altai, and Minusinsk regions of the steppe north of the Tarim Basin. The second model, known as the “Bactrian oasis hypothesis”, it maintains that the first settlers were farmers of the Oxus civilization (ca. 2200-1500 B.C.) west of Xinjiang in Uzbekistan, Afghanistan, and Turkmenistan. These contrasting models can be tested using DNA recovered from archaeological bones. Xiaohe cemetery contains the oldest and best-preserved mummies so far discovered in the Tarim Basin, possible those of the earliest people to settle the region. Genetic analysis of these mummies can provide data to elucidate the affinities of the earliest inhabitants.

Our results show that Xiaohe settlers carried HgR1a1in paternal lineages, and Hgs H, K, C4, M*in maternal lineages. Though Hg R1a1a is found at highest frequency in both Europe and South Asia, Xiaohe R1a1a more likely originate from Europe because of it not belong to R1a1a-Z93 branch(our recently unpublished data) which mainly found in Asians. mtDNA Hgs H, K, C4 primarily distributed in northern Eurasians. Though H, K, C4 also presence in modern south Asian, they immigrated into South Asian recently from nearby populations, such as Near East , East Asia and Central Asia, and the frequency is obviously lower than that of northern Eurasian. Furthermore, all of the shared sequences of the Xiaohe haplotypes H and C4 were distributed in northern Eurasians. Haplotype 223-304 in Xiaohe people was shared by Indian. However, these sequences were attributed to HgM25 in India, and in our study it was not HgM25 by scanning the mtDNA code region. Therefore, our DNA results didn't supported Clyde Winters’s opinion but supported the “steppe hypothesis”. Moreover, the culture of Xiaohe is similar with the Afanasievo culture. Afanasievo culture was mainly distributed in the Eastern Kazakhstan, Altai, and Minusinsk regions, and didn’t spread into India. This further maintains the “steppe hypothesis”.

In addition, our data was misunderstand by Clyde Winters. Firstly, the human remains of the Xiaohe site have no relation with the Loulan mummy. The Xiaohe site and Loulan site are two different archaeological sites with 175km distances. Xiaohe site, radiocarbon dated ranging from 4000 to 3500 years before present, was a Bronze Age site, and Loulan site, dated to about 2000 years before present. Secondly, Hgs H and K are the mtDNA haplogroups not the Y chromosome haplogroups in our study. Thirdly, the origin of Xiaohe people in here means tracing the most recently common ancestor, and Africans were remote ancestor of modern people.

Competing interests
I certify that there is no competing interest in this paper

vettor
01-21-2015, 06:44 PM
Jilin Univ. also noted an apparent European origin (connection perhaps is more correct) as they tested for Z93 and found all the samples to be Z93-. These samples are different from the ones in the South Siberia paper (the one with CxC3).

http://www.biomedcentral.com/1741-7007/8/15/comments#2168698

Unsure , altough the paper states it is K-M9G ...............but IIRC , someone asked for a test on this K and it was stated as T1a2

but, this paper places K-M9G earlier than K-M70C

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1046/j.1469-1809.2003.00045.x/pdf

but, then again M70 does not make one a T1 anymore , but makes one a T1a

vettor
01-21-2015, 06:51 PM
Haplogroup K2-M70
Haplogroup K2 occurs on a M9G background
and is reported to occur in populations of Near
East and Europe (Underhill et al. 2000). In our
study, it was found only in the eastern and
southern regions of the country, adding to an
overall frequency of 3.1%. Although it was present
in the three major linguistic families, the statistical
difference in its distribution was insignificant.
However, its distribution depicted an inverse
relation as one moved up the social ladder, with
the upper caste populations completely lacking
the M70 lineage in their Y-chromosomes (Table
2a). This lineage was predominant amongst the
lower caste groups of east (Bauri) and tribal
groups of south, particularly Yerukula, contri-
buting approx. 60% of the total K2 chromosomes.
Within the lineage, 36 distinct Y-STR haplotypes,
with a very high mean pairwise difference (14.18)
between them, depicted the absence of population
structure due to language, geography or ethnity

http://www.krepublishers.com/02-Journals/IJHG/IJHG-08-0-000-000-2008-Web/IJHG-08-1-2-001-256-2007-Abst-PDF/IJHG-08-1-2-097-08-349-Trivedi-R/IJHG-08-1&2-097-08-349-Trivedi-R-Tt.pdf



We will concentrate on haplogroup F-R, M89T from C, whic
h originated from the Levant to colonize the Middle East to
Anatolia & the Balkans. Another mutation form the haplogroup K-R, M9G from C. It begins in
South Central Asia around the plains of Iran or Southern Central
Asia. There were migrations to Central Asia and the Caucasus.

Jean M
01-21-2015, 08:27 PM
10.
At this page http://221.145.178.204/nrichdata/etc/book/file/KBJ16_01.pdf there is a wide ancient dna study performed, with 1462 ancient samples in 2007 by professor Kijeong Kim from South Korean Chung-Ang University. 8 years have been passed, and the results are still not published. In 2010 there was only the result of a single sample of these 1462 ancient samples published within a paper named “A western Eurasian male is found in 2000-year-old elite Xiongnu cemetery in Northeast Mongolia.”, which showed the first occurence of R1a among Xiongnu grave samples. There are thousands of other Scythian(11th BC - 2th centuries AD), Xiongnu(3th-3th centuries BC), Hun(3th-6th centuries) and Turk(6th-8th centuries) graves in Eurasian regions. What if they all got tested and showed interesting results that could change all the conclusions made by scientists about dna migration routes?
I have contacted Kijeong Kim about this situation, and he persists on not sharing the Y-SNP haplogroup results. As a reason he says they have not performed repeat analysis. But even if a part of the results could be wrong, for example maybe 0 - 5% of the 1462 ancient samples, isnt it really useful to have at least a good preview picture what can let other dna project investors to invest in reanalyses of parts of these samples? Why should such a massive pre study be kept private? Do you think there could be a political pressure to not publish these results? I dont understand what they could loose if they publish results of such an important study? Who does agree with me on this subject? Are there academics on this forum that could convince professor Kijeong Kim to publish these pre results?

I wouldn't urge any academic to publish results that he or she is not satisfied are reliable. What use would they be? The results of ancient DNA studies were frequently worthless in the early days, because of contamination. A study done in 2007 would not necessarily have used all the precautions against contamination that are used now. Do you want a load of results of the DNA of the archaeologists or museum staff who handled the bones?

It is only in the last few years that next generation technologies have made it possible to extract Y-DNA at all. We should be grateful (I certainly am) that Kim's team was able to publish in 2010 “A western Eurasian male is found in 2000-year-old elite Xiongnu cemetery in Northeast Mongolia.” That publication makes complete and utter nonsense of the idea that results are being hidden for political reasons. They found R1a1a, knew it would be of interest for studies of Scythian migration and went right ahead and published it.

All the Xiongnu/Hun results I know of are listed here: http://www.ancestraljourneys.org/hunsdna.shtml

isbara
01-21-2015, 08:39 PM
curious, which K-M9 in Xiaohe

the Tarim basin lone K9 with the other 11 x R1a1 was found to be T1a2

What i know is that the Xiaohe K* is M9 marker, not T. Whas it found te be T1a2? What is the source of this?

parasar
01-21-2015, 08:53 PM
What i know is that the Xiaohe K* is M9 marker, not T. Whas it found te be T1a2?

I have only seen speculation by Eurogenes/Davidski, no actual report, but you could check with Hui Zhou [email protected]

isbara
01-21-2015, 09:02 PM
I wouldn't urge any academic to publish results that he or she is not satisfied are reliable. What use would they be? The results of ancient DNA studies were frequently worthless in the early days, because of contamination. A study done in 2007 would not necessarily have used all the precautions against contamination that are used now. Do you want a load of results of the DNA of the archaeologists or museum staff who handled the bones?

It is only in the last few years that next generation technologies have made it possible to extract Y-DNA at all. We should be grateful (I certainly am) that Kim's team was able to publish in 2010 “A western Eurasian male is found in 2000-year-old elite Xiongnu cemetery in Northeast Mongolia.” That publication makes complete and utter nonsense of the idea that results are being hidden for political reasons. They found R1a1a, knew it would be of interest for studies of Scythian migration and went right ahead and published it.

All the Xiongnu/Hun results I know of are listed here: http://www.ancestraljourneys.org/hunsdna.shtml

What i am thinking is, why even test 1462 ancient samples if you will not publish it all? There is a contradiction in this situation. Y-SNP testing of 1462 ancient samples is not an easy task, and only 1 out of the 1462 ancient samples is being published. Does this look like a normal event to you? Contamination ok i understand, but you can publish the results, and you say that the results could contain wrong information because of the old technology that is used, and you publish the paper as a beta version. And then after the publishing of these results, genetic researchers and new sponsors that find some of the results interesting for their study subject they could make a second test on a specificly chosen group of samples.

dp
01-21-2015, 09:22 PM
Since this thread title includes "Eurasian DNA studies" I'd like to mention that I like the following paper on some Xiaohe people:
http://www.biomedcentral.com/content/pdf/1741-7007-8-15.pdf
dp :-)

Jean M
01-21-2015, 09:25 PM
and only 1 out of the 1462 ancient samples is being published.

If you looked at the page I linked to, you would see that Kim 2010 published more than one result. There were three samples reported in that paper, two with Y-DNA.

What is the point of publishing unreliable results? How would it be interesting to anyone to be given a load of results which could be completely and utterly wrong in every way? Do you really want to be told that they found 500 identical results which just happened to be the DNA of the tester? What use is this? Ancient DNA results should not be published without all proper precautions including replication.

Unreliable results are worse than no results, because they are misleading. I'm seriously annoyed that in AJ I cited a couple of mtDNA results from a publication of 2008 from a PhD study of the same era as the one you are complaining about, which turned out to be totally wrong and were corrected by a publication in 2014.

vettor
01-21-2015, 09:44 PM
The K-M9G seems to be in majority an Indian marker of origin

http://evolutsioon.ut.ee/publications/Kivisild2003a.pdf

isbara
01-21-2015, 09:49 PM
If you looked at the page I linked to, you would see that Kim 2010 published more than one result. There were three samples reported in that paper, two with Y-DNA.

What is the point of publishing unreliable results? How would it be interesting to anyone to be given a load of results which could be completely and utterly wrong in every way? Do you really want to be told that they found 500 identical results which just happened to be the DNA of the tester? What use is this? Ancient DNA results should not be published without all proper precautions including replication.

Unreliable results are worse than no results, because they are misleading. I'm seriously annoyed that in AJ I cited a couple of mtDNA results from a publication of 2008 from a PhD study of the same era as the one you are complaining about, which turned out to be totally wrong and were corrected by a publication in 2014.

I already read that article dozens of time. 1 or 3, there is no big difference.

So according to you, all ancient dna studies done until now are not reliable because the new technology with no contamination risk was not used? Why are all these studies published then, or allowed to be published? Why did all the media elements, and the scientific journals allow these study papers to be published? Then could we say that we are being manipulated with unreliable results and the conclusions made based on those results which could include risk of contamination? Do you know how many discussions, books and conclusions were made because of these studies?

I think that the 2007 study of professor Kim is as worthy as the other ancient dna studies done. So, if we give value to all these other studies, then we should do the same to this study of Kim. And like i said, beta information could be an indication for researchers to deepen the study with new technology studies. Also, professor Kim told that the scientific journals did not accept their study paper, so they tried to publish it, but did get denied. But still they can publish the results on their own university journals, it doesnt have to be an international journal. This way they can attract attention, could let to new investors/sponsors, which could let to a succesful end of this project with reliable results...

Jean M
01-21-2015, 09:56 PM
I already read that article dozens of time.

That is not an article. It is one of my ancient DNA tables, but I'm delighted to know that it is useful to somebody.

Jean M
01-21-2015, 10:05 PM
So according to you, all ancient dna studies done until now are not reliable because the new technology with no contamination risk was not used? Why are all these studies published then, or allowed to be published?

It took time for scienticists to realise the problems, which I outline here: http://www.ancestraljourneys.org/adnaintro.shtml

One geneticist (with his own ancient DNA lab) told me that anything published before about 2007 had to be regarded as unreliable. Another geneticist (an expert in ancient DNA) condemned early studies in even more sweeping terms.

Ancient DNA testing is now really booming, as the contamination issue has been overcome, the cost has come down and far more DNA can now be extracted. We can expect a lot of results to be published this year and in coming years. Believe me, geneticists are keen to publish. Some teams are racing each other to be the first get exciting results out!

isbara
01-21-2015, 10:17 PM
It took time for scienticists to realise the problems, which I outline here: http://www.ancestraljourneys.org/adnaintro.shtml

One geneticist (with his own ancient DNA lab) told me that anything published before about 2007 had to be regarded as unreliable. Another geneticist (an expert in ancient DNA) condemned early studies in even more sweeping terms.

Ancient DNA testing is now really booming, as the contamination issue has been overcome, the cost has come down and far more DNA can now be extracted. We can expect a lot of results to be published this year and in coming years. Believe me, geneticists are keen to publish. Some teams are racing each other to be the first get exciting results out!

Are there projects going on about ancient Scythian(11th BC - 2th centuries AD), Xiongnu(3th-3th centuries BC), Hun(3th-6th centuries) and Turk(6th-8th centuries) graves in Eurasian countries? I know one about the project of Keyser Traqcui.

parasar
01-21-2015, 10:24 PM
Since this thread title includes "Eurasian DNA studies" I'd like to mention that I like the following paper on some Xiaohe people:
http://www.biomedcentral.com/content/pdf/1741-7007-8-15.pdf
dp :-)

That is the one I referred to in post 13 above in relation to the Z93- status of their R1a1 samples.

jesus
01-21-2015, 11:01 PM
Another mistake i saw recently in an academic paper("Title:Present Y chromosomes support the Persian ancestry of Sayyid Ajjal Shams al-Din Omar and Eminent Navigator Zheng He"), in which the ancient dna of Sayyid Ajjal Shams al-Din Omar was found to belong to haplogroup L-M20. In the paper it is written that he is of Khwarezmian tribe, and they conclude he is of Persian origin(with the doubts they write). This is totally not scientific and not true. Every historian that is associated with medieval history knows that the dynasty of Khwarazm Shahs and their state is of Turkish origin(Mamlukids, Kipchaks, etc...), and we also know that the borders of Khwarezmia lies within Central Asia, the land of the Turks(6th-8th centuries). We also know that in the Gokcumen 2008 study, there was found 57% of L-M20 in Afshar Turks in Türkiye. But still, Sayyid Ajjal Shams al-Din Omar is concidered to be of Persian origin, is this scientific? No. What if an important group of ancient Turks with L-M20 migrated between 1200 and 1500 AD from Mongolia, China and Central Asia to Iran and Türkiye countries? Do the academicians bother to think about this?



The subclade sayed Ajjal belongs to (
L1a-M76) is not common in Turkic speaking groups. He was of Bukharan origin, a city that still has a large number of Persian speakers AKA Tajiks. The Khawarzmians were an Iranic people before the Turkic Migrations/Mongol Invasions.

About his Persian Origin:

http://i57.tinypic.com/2im53tl.png

http://books.google.com/books?id=jFIORCFTA78C&pg=PA252&lpg=PA252&dq=yunnan+sayyid+mongols+prince&source=bl&ots=ScXC1w1mgx&sig=s4dvVWsiKCe49N64l3z6NmbX6O8&hl=en&sa=X&ei=bIC5UJLXDqjn0QHd7IHYBQ&ved=0CEAQ6AEwBDgU#v=onepage&q=yunnan%20sayyid%20mongols%20prince&f=false

Jean M
01-21-2015, 11:19 PM
Are there projects going on about ancient Scythian (11th BC - 2th centuries AD), Xiongnu (3th-3th centuries BC), Hun (3th-6th centuries) and Turk (6th-8th centuries) graves in Eurasian countries?

Results from all the published studies on western Eurasian DNA that I know of (in which I include those of western Eurasian origin in East Asia and those of East Asian origin whose descendants eventually arrived in Western Eurasia) are listed in my online tables. http://www.ancestraljourneys.org/adnaintro.shtml (see menu on left).

Academic studies in progress including ancient DNA that I know about are listed on this page: http://www.ancestraljourneys.org/migrationprojects.shtml

isbara
01-21-2015, 11:58 PM
The subclade sayed Ajjal belongs to (
L1a-M76) is not common in Turkic speaking groups. He was of Bukharan origin, a city that still has a large number of Persian speakers AKA Tajiks. The Khawarzmians were an Iranic people before the Turkic Migrations/Mongol Invasions.

About his Persian Origin:

http://i57.tinypic.com/2im53tl.png

http://books.google.com/books?id=jFIORCFTA78C&pg=PA252&lpg=PA252&dq=yunnan+sayyid+mongols+prince&source=bl&ots=ScXC1w1mgx&sig=s4dvVWsiKCe49N64l3z6NmbX6O8&hl=en&sa=X&ei=bIC5UJLXDqjn0QHd7IHYBQ&ved=0CEAQ6AEwBDgU#v=onepage&q=yunnan%20sayyid%20mongols%20prince&f=false

First read the texts written at the paper of the ancient dna study at http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1310/1310.5466.pdf:


Some other genealogies even pointed to that the ancestors of Sayyid Ajjal had already arrived in China in the Song Dynasty. Therefore, whether Sayyid Ajjal has a Persian ancestry or not is yet to be validated.

Then read this:


Foremost amongst these soldier-administrators was Sayyid al-Ajall Shams al-Din Umar al-Bukhari (Ch. Sai-tien-ch'ih shan-ssu-ting). a court official and general of Turkic origin who participated in the Mongol invasion of Szechwan. Source: Institute of Muslim Minority Affairs, Jāmiʻat al-Malik ʻAbd al-ʻAzīz. Maʻhad Shuʻūn al Aqallīyat al-Muslimah (1986)

Then this:


The Khwarazmian dynasty, also known as the Khwarezmid dynasty, dynasty of Khwarazm Shahs, was a Persianate Sunni Muslim dynasty of Turkic mamluk origin.
The dynasty ruled large parts of Greater Iran during the High Middle Ages, in the approximate period of 1077 to 1231, first as vassals of the Seljuqs and Kara-Khitan, and later as independent rulers, up until the Mongol invasion of Khwarezmia in the 13th century.


And then this:


The Mamluk Sultanate was an Arabized Turkic state in medieval Egypt, the Levant, and Hejaz.
Mamluk Dynasty (Delhi) (1206–1290)
Mamluk Sultanate (Cairo) (1250–1517)



Finally, his life was from 1211 until 1279, this is the period that the Turks ruled and Turkish people filled the population of the Khwarezmid regions, Iran, Afghanistan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, etc.

vettor
01-22-2015, 01:44 AM
I have only seen speculation by Eurogenes/Davidski, no actual report, but you could check with Hui Zhou [email protected]

Ok, so you saying this is most likely an error?

parasar
01-22-2015, 03:10 AM
Ok, so you saying this is most likely an error?

I don't know, as I have not seen the STRs.
K-M9 xM214 xM45 could be some kind of an L, T, LT, M526xM45

isbara
01-23-2015, 03:34 PM
Do other people have ideas about the other points i described?