PDA

View Full Version : A new paper on the Y dna N



Arame
07-19-2016, 12:49 PM
A new paper on the Y dna N
Behind pay wall
http://www.cell.com/ajhg/abstract/S0002-9297(16)30160-4

lgmayka
07-19-2016, 01:10 PM
We have discussed this paper elsewhere in the forum. For me, a small victory is that the paper officially publishes a mysterious clade they call N5, which is actually the well-known N-P189 (https://yfull.com/tree/N-P189.2/) that I discovered several years ago. :)

gravetti
07-20-2016, 12:21 PM
We have discussed this paper elsewhere in the forum. For me, a small victory is that the paper officially publishes a mysterious clade they call N5, which is actually the well-known N-P189 (https://yfull.com/tree/N-P189.2/) that I discovered several years ago. :)
Where can we find the results of the study?

parastais
07-20-2016, 01:14 PM
Some new info
1) Finns vs Estonians. Finns have N3a4, when Estonians have N3a3 which is shared with other Baltic nations.
2) Basal N3a3'6 is quite high in Latvians compared to other folk (8%). Eskimos and Karakalpaks are our bros with even higher rate (25%). Could be sample size.
3) N3a4 seems to be no doubt Finno-ugric.

Pity they did not go deeper than VL29, but even now there are some new stuff for me. So, good job!

parastais
07-20-2016, 01:23 PM
From article:
The most striking aspect of the phylogeography of hg N
is the spread of the N3a3’6-CTS6967 lineages (Figure 3).
Considering the three geographically most distant populations
in our study—Chukchi, Buryats, and Lithuanians—it
is remarkable to find that about half of the Y chromosome
pool of each consists of hg N3 and that they share the same
sub-clade N3a3’6. The fractionation of N3a3’6 into the
four sub-clades that cover such an extraordinarily wide
area occurred in the mid-Holocene, about 5.0 kya (95%
CI Ľ 4.4–5.7 kya). It is hard to pinpoint the precise region
where the split of these lineages occurred. It could have
happened somewhere in the middle of their geographic
spread around the Urals or further east in West Siberia,
where current regional diversity of hg N sub-lineages is
the highest (Figure 1B). Yet, it is evident that the spread
of the newly arisen sub-clades of N3a3’6 in opposing
directions happened very quickly. Today, it unites the
East Baltic, East Fennoscandia, Buryatia, Mongolia, and
Chukotka-Kamchatka (Beringian) Eurasian regions, which
are separated from each other by approximately 5,000–
6,700 km by air. N3a3’6 has high frequencies in the patrilineal
pools of populations belonging to the Altaic, Uralic,
several Indo-European, and Chukotko-Kamchatkan language
families.

gravetti
07-20-2016, 02:20 PM
Some new info
1) Finns vs Estonians. Finns have N3a4, when Estonians have N3a3 which is shared with other Baltic nations.
2) Basal N3a3'6 is quite high in Latvians compared to other folk (8%). Eskimos and Karakalpaks are our bros with even higher rate (25%). Could be sample size.
3) N3a4 seems to be no doubt Finno-ugric.

Pity they did not go deeper than VL29, but even now there are some new stuff for me. So, good job!
3)" N3a4 seems to be no doubt Finno-ugric."

What makes you believe that N3a4 is Finno-Ugric?

http://estonia.eu/about-estonia/society/finno-ugric-peoples.html

Kristiina
07-20-2016, 02:29 PM
I do not think that you can say that Estonians have N3a3 and Finns N3a4. If you look at yfull, you see that VL29 is very frequent in Finland: https://www.yfull.com/tree/N/

Also this yDNA tree shows that VL29 is typical for Finns: http://www.kolumbus.fi/geodun/YDNA/SNP-N-TREE-FIN.jpg

Also the snips below show that both N3a3 and N3a4 are found in Estonians. Also Saamis have both N3a3 and N3a4.
10521
10522

Here is a snip from the new paper:


You see that the typical Finnish N3a4 is VL62 which is shared with Bashkirs and Estonians.

Kristiina
07-20-2016, 02:41 PM
I failed to upload the snip, so I try a new post:
10523

This is from the paper:
Even though our sample of the north Scandinavian (Swedish)
Saami is of limited size, the nearly equal presence of both
N3a3 and N3a4 Y chromosomes in their hg N3 pool (Table
S2) suggests that the frequency pattern of the two lineages
has been shaped by random genetic drift in historically
small populations dispersed across a wide area.

Shaikorth
07-20-2016, 02:43 PM
Some new info
1) Finns vs Estonians. Finns have N3a4, when Estonians have N3a3 which is shared with other Baltic nations.
2) Basal N3a3'6 is quite high in Latvians compared to other folk (8%). Eskimos and Karakalpaks are our bros with even higher rate (25%). Could be sample size.
3) N3a4 seems to be no doubt Finno-ugric.

Pity they did not go deeper than VL29, but even now there are some new stuff for me. So, good job!


N3a3 is VL29, because of low resolution we know Balts have more specifically M2783 while Estonians have L1022 and various L550's, and also N3a4 (Z1936).

Finland's high N3a4 is mostly, according to Yfull's tree, the result of a 2000 years old founder effect, more recent than that of M2783 (look up Z1933). They did not link many N3a3'6 subclades to languages for a reason, N3a4 for example is absent from both Udmurts and Mari, though Maris have N3a3.

But N3a3'6 itself is young enough that perhaps it could have been carried by speakers of some extant language family.

parastais
07-20-2016, 03:28 PM
3)" N3a4 seems to be no doubt Finno-ugric."

What makes you believe that N3a4 is Finno-Ugric?

http://estonia.eu/about-estonia/society/finno-ugric-peoples.html
Modern frequencies :D I know stupid answer, but I would be extremely surprised if it arose in some other population not Uralic.


I do not think that you can say that Estonians have N3a3 and Finns N3a4.
Well, made such statement just based on frequencies. Estonian N is 80% or so N3a3 and 20% or so N3a4. For Finns it is vice versa (25/75 or so, as per study).
But it could be because of founder effect in Finns as per Shaikorth:
"Finland's high N3a4 is mostly, according to Yfull's tree, the result of a 2000 years old founder effect, more recent than that of M2783 (look up Z1933)."

parastais
07-20-2016, 03:35 PM
N3a3 is VL29, because of low resolution we know Balts have more specifically M2783 while Estonians have L1022 and various L550's, and also N3a4 (Z1936).

Finland's high N3a4 is mostly, according to Yfull's tree, the result of a 2000 years old founder effect, more recent than that of M2783 (look up Z1933). They did not link many N3a3'6 subclades to languages for a reason, N3a4 for example is absent from both Udmurts and Mari, though Maris have N3a3.

But N3a3'6 itself is young enough that perhaps it could have been carried by speakers of some extant language family.
That N3a4 is absent from Mari and Udmurts does not make it less Finno-Ugric. If we had another non-FU ethnicity rich in N3a4, then that would be argument against FU-ness of N3a4.

Thanks for Finland info. Did not know of the founder effect. Will check on Z1933.

Shaikorth
07-20-2016, 03:39 PM
Modern frequencies :D I know stupid answer, but I would be extremely surprised if it arose in some other population not Uralic.



It's likely that the paper's authors didn't link the clades with languages because N3a3'6's clades split almost simultaneously - so all of the clades come from a single population, that probably spoke a single language. But afterwards it's different. Some of the eastern clades aside the subclades no more follow a language group pattern. N3a4 for example is absent from Maris and Udmurts which are early Finno-Ugric splits linguistically. Thats' why they're being cautious with language links.

Shaikorth
07-20-2016, 03:48 PM
That N3a4 is absent from Mari and Udmurts does not make it less Finno-Ugric. If we had another non-FU ethnicity rich in N3a4, then that would be argument against FU-ness of N3a4.

It very well could. R1a-Z93 is linked with Indo-Iranians because it's everywhere Indo-Iranians are. Meanwhile various Turkic groups like Bashkirs can have extreme frequencies of R1a but that doesn't mean it's not IE.

parastais
07-20-2016, 04:07 PM
"The fractionation of N3a3’6 into the four sub-clades that cover such an extraordinarily wide area occurred in the mid-Holocene, about 5.0 kya (95% CI Ľ 4.4–5.7 kya)." - that is from paper. So, 3,000 BCE.
Linguists now date proto-Uralic at around 2,000 BCE.

So, apparently N3a3'6 as a whole did not speak Uralic (but could have spoken para-Uralic or pre-Uralic, or whatever). And then some mix of its children with perhaps some other haplos became proto-Uralic speakers ~1,000 years after split. N3a4 and N3a3 then most likely were present in that proto-Uralic tribe.

parastais
07-20-2016, 04:24 PM
This is taken from user EastPole which he took from paper:
http://s32.postimg.org/ehfxxkkud/image.png

N3a5 and N3a6 seem largely missing from Uralic folks, but is there in Altaics and Chukchas.

N3a3'6 which actually seems the father clade is present in both Uralic and Altaic populations. Strangely enough it is also present in Balts (Lithuanians 2% and more so Latvians 8% of N, which would mean ~3% of total modern Y in Latvians). No idea why. Sample size or some early Combed Ware recruits in Balts.

Shaikorth
07-20-2016, 04:27 PM
"The fractionation of N3a3’6 into the four sub-clades that cover such an extraordinarily wide area occurred in the mid-Holocene, about 5.0 kya (95% CI Ľ 4.4–5.7 kya)." - that is from paper. So, 3,000 BCE.
Linguists now date proto-Uralic at around 2,000 BCE.

So, apparently N3a3'6 as a whole did not speak Uralic (but could have spoken para-Uralic or pre-Uralic, or whatever). And then some mix of its children with perhaps some other haplos became proto-Uralic speakers ~1,000 years after split. N3a4 and N3a3 then most likely were present in that proto-Uralic tribe.

N3a3 and N3a4 were almost certainly present during the Proto-Uralic split, but the Proto-Uralic stage itself extends further back (the split is dated to 2,000 BCE).

Hopefully someone will do a better sequence of the Serteya sample or some contemporary N in West Russia. If it's N3a3'6 it means that we can locate its split relatively well.

N3a3'6 in moderns is probably pre-stages to the derived clades, like CTS10760. So not really N3a3'6 but downstream along the known paths.

parastais
07-20-2016, 04:52 PM
N3a5 and N3a6 are interesting. From modern frequencies they do not appear to descend from Uralic speakers.

They are in following populations:
N3a5-B202 - Chukotko-Kamchatkan and Eskimo-Aleut.
N3a5-F4205 - only Altaic (1% of Ukrainian N too, but could well be Crimean Tatar), so Mongolic and Turkic
N3a6 - Tungusic (Altaic)

Shaikorth
07-20-2016, 05:02 PM
N3a5 and N3a6 are interesting. From modern frequencies they do not appear to descend from Uralic speakers.

They are in following populations:
N3a5-B202 - Chukotko-Kamchatkan and Eskimo-Aleut.
N3a5-F4205 - only Altaic (1% of Ukrainian N too, but could well be Crimean Tatar), so Mongolic and Turkic
N3a6 - Tungusic (Altaic)

N3a6 is probably some kind of intrusion since northern Siberian Tungusics don't have it. Or Nanai are assimilated Paleosiberians (they didn't test Nivkhs).

parastais
07-20-2016, 10:24 PM
Perhaps unrelated, but will put here anyway:
Diving Bird Myth after 20 years 2012 by Vladimir Napolskikh
https://www.academia.edu/4918926/Diving_Bird_Myth_after_20_years_2012

If only because of these quotes:
Such an opposition between a duck and a loon may be explained by the roles these birds played in the cosmology formed apparently more than 6 thousands years ago among the inhabitants of the southern part of Western and Middle Siberia, first of all – among the ancestors of Uralic-speaking peoples and their closest linguistic relatives, the Yukagirs, and to some extend among their neighbors, the ancestors of the Tungus-Manchurians (the probability of belonging of some part of the ancestors of Turks andsome American Indian groups to this unity, called North-Asiatic Mythological Union, NAMU(Napol’skix 1991: 119-122) was also discussed as possible). Living on the banks of the big Siberianrivers flowing from the South to the North, these people associated the South, the upper streams of the rivers with the Upper World, the world of celestial gods, and the North, the lower streams of therivers – with the Lower World, the world of death and evil spirits. In this system the migratorywater bird (ducks, swans, geese) were considered to migrate to the Upper World and therefore to beable to mediate between the mankind and the gods, whereas the loons living at the lower streamsand mouths of the big rivers, on the Icy Sea shores and migrating to the South invisibly, in pairs or alone, were considered to be the birds of the Lower World, having no celestial supernatural power
and
DBM2 and this, connected with it world-view system was suggested to have been presentin the culture of the Proto-Uralic speakers living till the 6th -4th mil. BC in the taiga forests of Western Siberia and the Urals. Later it was supposed to spread together with the Uralic populationas well as partly with Tungus-Manchurian and Turkic groups in Eastern Europe and in Siberia.

parastais
07-20-2016, 10:49 PM
Ok, there are more from same article (including some 2012 genetics too, apparently he noticed before me this possible correlation):
"Distributions of three of these haplogroups reveal a correlation with the one of Earth-Diver myths. First, this is N1c (N3) haplogroup, which, after the geneticists’ suppositions appearedabout 14 thousands years ago in Siberia or in the north-western China, and is represented amongYakuts, Balts, Finno-Ugrians and Russians (pic. 5). Even more interesting is haplogroup related tothe first one, N1b (N2), which is dated 8-6 thousands years ago and located in Siberia and EasternEurope among Samoyeds, Finno-Ugrians, Siberian Eskimo, Turks, Mongols and Tungus (a shortreference on these haplogroups may be found in wikipedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_N_(Y-DNA), see also pic. 6). The distribution of thesehaplogroups, their age and probable place of origin in principle coincide with what was suggestedfor the most ancient DBM in Eurasia (N1c) and in peculiar for the Proto-Uralic (and Tungus) DBM2 (N1b). Some exceptions (as, e. g. the Eskimo, who do not know DBM) are inevitable, but no notseriously corrupt the picture.As for the American (and probably South Asian) Earth-Diver, there is another striking parallel from genetic side – the haplogroup C3, which is dated 11,9 ± 4,8 thousands years ago and isrepresented among Tungus-Manchu, Mongolian, Turkic peoples, Nivkhs and Yukagirs, and inAmerica – among Na-Dene, Cheyenne, and Siouan groups – actually, this is the only Eurasianhaplogroup in the Americas, where the typical Amerindian haplogroup Q dominates(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_C3_(Y-DNA); pic. 7). This haplogroup is interesting also because its origin is connected with other variants of the ancient haplogroup C having most probably Southern and South-Eastern Asia.Thus, it is possible to suppose, that the Earth-Diver existed in final palaeolithicum amongthe population, whose male descendants belong to N1b, N1c and C3 Y-chromosome haplogroups.The first two could originate from Northern Asia, and with them the development of DBM2 in Proto-Yukagir-Uralic and Proto-Tungus-Manchu traditions may be connected. The bearers of C3 should have known more archaic Earth-Divers versions, and its dissemination in America and, probably, in Southern Asia may be ascribed to them."

Shaikorth
07-20-2016, 11:01 PM
The Earth-Diver myth is so widespread (from Balkan Slavs to Native Americans to some SEA groups) that if it has a common origin it goes back to Paleolithic. Certainly way older than N3a3'6 or extant language families' spread in Eastern Europe. I also wonder whether it's actually plausible so many Slavs could have adopted it from Avars or Bulgars given how late these arrived...

One interesting thing is that Saami consider themselves "sons of the Sun" which is unlike their neighbours and unlike linguistic relatives too IIRC. That motif is more like yet another groups of Native Americans or even the Japanese.

Arame
07-21-2016, 04:36 AM
Chukchi B202 is a founder effect. This means that it is most probably the Proto Chukchi lineage. No other group is present there. And if that is correct this means that Proto chukchi came from West thus explaining some of it's affinities with PIE

rincewind
07-21-2016, 05:19 AM
I'm confused, when did n1c become n3 again, and is n3a3 the same as L550?

Kristiina
07-21-2016, 05:43 AM
The proposed link with the diving bird myth and N1c is probably more popular fantasy than reality. I agree with Shaikorth that the diving bird myth goes back to the Paleolithic and it is something that modern language families have inherited from the past. In the expansion of N3a3’6, there is nothing palaeolithic, it is a Bronze Age expansion:

From the new paper: “The most striking aspect of the phylogeography of hg N is the spread of the N3a3’6-CTS6967 lineages. Considering the three geographically most distant populations in our study - Chukchi, Buryats and Lithuanians - it is remarkable to find that about half of the Y chromosome pool of each consists of hg N3 and that they share the same sub-clade N3a3’6. The fractionation of N3a3’6 into the four sub-clades that cover such an extraordinarily wide area occurred in the mid-Holocene, about 5.0 kya.”

“The split [of Altaic, Uralic, Indo-European and Chukotko-Kamchatkan languages] is almost certainly at least several millennia older than the rather recent expansion signal of the N3a3’6 sub-clade, suggesting that its spread had little to do with linguistic affinities of men carrying the N3a3’6’ lineages.”

In general, this could be taken as an indication that it is not wise to tie the ORIGIN of a language with a certain male haplogroup. However, I agree that languages probably SPREAD with certain yDNAs and they are useful in determining the language of an archaeological culture.

Kristiina
07-21-2016, 06:10 AM
To me the snip below:

10527

suggests that the expansion of N3a3'6 started in Western Russia and the Volga forest area c. 3000 BC. The expansion in Nanai started earlier than in other Eastern groups but for linguistic and cultural reasons I would not suggest that N3a3'6 started its spectacular expansion from Amur.

The recent paper on Nanai Samar clan found that "Members of the Nanai clan Samar reside in the Gorin area of the Khabarovsk Territory. Their gene pool was studied using the SNP markers of the Y-chromosome. The major haplogroup, occurring in more than 83% of clansmen, is the northern Eurasian haplogroup N1c1-M178. Four other haplogroups are С*-М130, I*-M170, J2a1а-M47, and O2-P31." (http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1563011015001294)

Arame
07-21-2016, 07:25 AM
Nobody expects from y dna genetic study to resolve linguistics.

But common sense should be applied
+ No need to bring whole IE family into N story. It is relevant only to Balto Slavs. And they are younger than 5000 years
+ Mongols and Buryats are majority C . N is not relevant to them
+ Altaic family is a disputed theory. No consensus and most probably never existed. So no Y dna will corelate with Altaic.
+ Proto Turkic is younger than 5000 years. Perhaps the youngest one thst why it has poor correlation with Y dna. But N is important for them especially the Kipchak and Siberian branch.
+ Uralic. What is the age of proto Uralic
+ Tungusic mostly C people as far as I know
+ Proto Chukchi almost certainly relates to N. But they have their own unique branch.

Kristiina
07-21-2016, 08:55 AM
Chukchi language is part of the Chukchi–Kamchatkan language family, and maybe your idea is that the separation of proto-Chukchi is somehow related to the introduction of N3a into Chukchis. However, N is present in all Chukchi–Kamchatkan groups, but Itelmen and Koryaks are majority C and all groups have also Q and R. YDNA of Chukchis, Koryaks and Itelmen is the following:
Chukchi: C 4.2%, N 58.3%, P 20.8% (Q?), Q 15.5 (M3?), R1a 1.5%
Itelmen: C 67%, N 11%, R1a 22%
Koryak: C 59.2%, N 22.2%, P (Q?) 18.5%
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Y-DNA_haplogroups_in_Central_and_North_Asian_populat ions)

I would not say that the relation of N3a with the Chukchi is more genealogical than with other groups.

parastais
07-21-2016, 08:57 AM
The Earth-Diver myth is so widespread (from Balkan Slavs to Native Americans to some SEA groups) that if it has a common origin it goes back to Paleolithic. Certainly way older than N3a3'6 or extant language families' spread in Eastern Europe. I also wonder whether it's actually plausible so many Slavs could have adopted it from Avars or Bulgars given how late these arrived...

One interesting thing is that Saami consider themselves "sons of the Sun" which is unlike their neighbours and unlike linguistic relatives too IIRC. That motif is more like yet another groups of Native Americans or even the Japanese.
If you read article you would have noticed that actually author explains Balkan version by Avars or Bulgars :)
It looked like Uralo-Altaic myth in North-Eurasia. Or perhaps coming from common Syberian substrate.

Also he discuss possible chronology of this myth, and in my quote you can see haplo groups he links to that myth expansion. N1c, N1b and NatAm version of C.

Shaikorth
07-21-2016, 09:11 AM
If you read article you would have noticed that actually author explains Balkan version by Avars or Bulgars :)
It looked like Uralo-Altaic myth in North-Eurasia. Or perhaps coming from common Syberian substrate.

Also he discuss possible chronology of this myth, and in my quote you can see haplo groups he links to that myth expansion. N1c, N1b and NatAm version of C.

Yeah the Avars and Bulgars are, I think, a doubtful explanation. They were quite recent and Slavs had relatively well developed mythology by then. It's not just the Balkan Slavs that have the myth either. The problem with those haplogroup expansions is that they happened in vastly different periods (the myth's presence in Southeast Asia would warrant more haplogroups added too). So if they represent a common origin, it's a Paleolithic one and beyond the scope of linguistic tracking as modern languages over Northern Eurasia spread over Bronze Age.

parastais
07-21-2016, 10:03 AM
You still did not read the article :)
South and East Slavs have anthro version of myth, which most likely was created in Balkans from sources brought in by Avar federation and back migrated to Russia to meet in Russian North with "local" version which still preserved the older ornito version.

As to N3a3*6, I argue since all its sons have attested versions of this myth, then also the "mother tribe", the one where split happened, had this myth.

Kristiina
07-21-2016, 10:06 AM
+ No need to bring whole IE family into N story. It is relevant only to Balto Slavs. And they are younger than 5000 years


But on the other hand, Uralic languages and yDNA N seem to have expanded very close to the area which some people consider the origin of IE languages, i.e. Samara Yamnaya Culture, dated 3500-2900 BC. (http://www.nbuv.gov.ua/old_jrn/Soc_Gum/Archeology/2011_1/Atr_1.pdf).

Moreover, we know that Yamnaya people are genetically very close to Uralic people (https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B9o3EYTdM8lQdFcwcFAzbXpOTkE/view?pref=2&pli=1).

On top of this, proto-Uralic contains words that belong to proto-IE level: IE *doh3 and U *toxi, to bring, IE *bheh1 and U *peša, to cook; and the structural affinities, including shared morphemes e.g. accusative *-m/-m, ablative *-od/*-ta , are such that many linguists argue for proto-Indo-Uralic (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indo-Uralic_languages).

Shaikorth
07-21-2016, 10:25 AM
You still did not read the article :)
South and East Slavs have anthro version of myth, which most likely was created in Balkans from sources brought in by Avar federation and back migrated to Russia to meet in Russian North with "local" version which still preserved the older ornito version.

As to N3a3*6, I argue since all its sons have attested versions of this myth, then also the "mother tribe", the one where split happened, had this myth.

I did read it, found the Avars to Balkan Slavs to Northern Slavs route implausible. Slavs had a mythological tradition of their own, the author at one point proposes a strong paternal connection in the tradition's passing (which South Slavs seemingly don't have with Avars or Bulgars) etc...

Furthermore not just Eskimos but according to the chart Saamis, Chukotko-Kamchatkans and Nivkhs all have no diver myth, but all those except Nivhks (which haven't been tested) definitely have N3a3'6. Meanwhile far more distant Native Americans do have the myth, as do some SEA folks, and none of these have N3a3'6. If there is a common origin, a Paleolithic one is way more likely IMO than anything to do with Bronze Age or later phenomena or modern language families dating to that period. Since this is a 2012 paper, maybe he would have revised the paper if he knew the haplogroup datings like we do now.

parastais
07-21-2016, 05:10 PM
I read in the article itself that Nivhks actually had two versions of story.
According to wiki it is also known to Chukcha people:
"Earth-diver myths are common in Native American folklore but can be found among the Chukchi and Yukaghir, the Tatars and many Finno-Ugrian traditions. "
Sami may indeed lack the myth itself, but they do have a river bw this and that World that only water diving Birds can cross. So it is more likely they lost the myth than all other n3a3'6 people learned it.

And I do not say it originated with n3a3'6. But unlike PIE people who either did not know or could care less of the myth, the n3a3'6 clan or tribe most likely knew it and preserved ideas.
N1b and some C clans knew it as well.

Shaikorth
07-21-2016, 05:26 PM
I read in the article itself that Nivhks actually had two versions of story.
According to wiki it is also known to Chukcha people:
"Earth-diver myths are common in Native American folklore but can be found among the Chukchi and Yukaghir, the Tatars and many Finno-Ugrian traditions. "
Sami may indeed lack the myth itself, but they do have a river bw this and that World that only water diving Birds can cross. So it is more likely they lost the myth than all other n3a3'6 people learned it.

And I do not say it originated with n3a3'6. But unlike PIE people who either did not know or could care less of the myth, the n3a3'6 clan or tribe most likely knew it and preserved ideas.
N1b and some C clans knew it as well.

The paper says Nivkh myth lacks even diving which is a crucial part of it. Earth gathering or fishing are different myths. The Chukotko-Kamchatkan myth I haven't heard of, and they aren't marked on the myth map in the paper like Nivkhs. It's probably something different too.

The Bulgar/Avar influence to South Slavs is another unlikely point. Latvians and Lithuanians have the myth with the bird included, which is supposed to be more archaic, so spread from Balts to Slavs and southwards would seem more sensible.

Now I also noticed that Mongolic speakers sans Buryats, who are Turkic-influenced, also lack the myth as per the study's map, and they again have their own N3a3'6 clade.

Kristiina
07-21-2016, 06:45 PM
Nivkhs do not even have yDNA N. According to Lell 2001, their yDNA is the following:
P 35.3%, O1 5.9%, K-M9 11.8%, C3 11.8%, C3c 35.3%
Tat-C is 0% and 7C (N1b) is also 0%.

I am not against Uralic groups having maintained the Earth-diver myth from the past but I still think that maintaining the old Siberian cosmologies was probably not the main focus of men carrying yDNA N3a3’6. They might have been more involved in the creation of the Sampo myth of the magical artifact producing endless wealth and similar more up to date creations of that time.

Passa
07-21-2016, 07:11 PM
Does anyone have access to frequency data? I'd like to make maps for N sub-clades.

Shaikorth
07-21-2016, 07:30 PM
Does anyone have access to frequency data? I'd like to make maps for N sub-clades.

Might be easiest to overlay figure 3 and s3 somehow.

http://www.cell.com/cms/attachment/2061648621/2063161142/mmc5.pdf

If you want to go more into detail and use Yfull nomenclature, Balt N3a3 is M2783, Estonian (and Finnish?) is L1022, L550 and M2783, according to Megalophias Tatar N3a4 is Y13850 and most of the Bashkir N3a4 is L1034 (same Hungarians and Mansi occasionally have). Rest of N3a4 is various Z1934. N3a1 is Y9022, N3a2 is M2019.

parastais
07-21-2016, 08:34 PM
I am not against Uralic groups having maintained the Earth-diver myth from the past but I still think that maintaining the old Siberian cosmologies was probably not the main focus of men carrying yDNA N3a3’6. They might have been more involved in the creation of the Sampo myth of the magical artifact producing endless wealth and similar more up to date creations of that time.
Do you know if Sampo myth is shared by Uralic groups outside Baltic Finns (like having different name for that magical artifact perhaps, my guess is Mordvins had 0 idea of what is Sampo)? If not, then it is way younger (at least in Uralic peoples) than N3a3'6 split, which itself was some 1000+ years before Uralic split.
On other hand the diving bird motive was there when proto-Uralic split. I am now actually about to read another work of Napolskikh on subject
Древнейшие_этапы_происхождения_народов_уральской_я зыковой_семьи_данные_мифологической_реконструкции_ прауральский_космогонический_миф
The oldest phases of coming of peoples of Uralic linguistic family. Data of mythological reconstruction. Pra-Uralic cosmogenic myth.
It is dated 1991. I guess Sampo will not be there. Diving birds will be.

Shaikorth
07-21-2016, 09:25 PM
Some folks including Napolskikh have suggested the earth-diver is a Mal'ta cultural feature, so originally Ancient North Eurasian mythology and definitely Paleolithic. Given the myth's range and separation times of the populations involved this is probably the most likely theory. Dziebel has an article about this, mostly free of "Out Of America" stuff.

http://anthropogenesis.kinshipstudies.org/2013/10/genes-and-myths-ancient-malta-dna-and-the-earth-diver-mythological-motif/

Btw, the "sampo" type myth (a mill that makes stuff and is occasionally responsible for saltiness of seas) is widespread and probably quite old too, found from Germanic myths in the west and from Japanese in the east.

Kristiina
07-21-2016, 10:05 PM
Sorry, I cannot answer your question. According to Wikipedia, similar mythical devices are for example the Cornucopia of Greek mythology, the Mill Grótti of the Grottasöngr and Japanese folktale Shiofuki usu.

You can go on searching for the Mesolithic roots of Uralic groups, and the Earth-diver myth was surely there where most of these languages developed, but the Uralic languages started spreading in the Bronze Age and Iron Age Cultures that were developing new myths and cosmologies. It is not necessary to view the Uralic language group only through their Mesolithic history.

DBM is very widespread in Eurasia and America, and I still doubt that you can scientifically delimit it to yDNA C and N and exclude the oldest yDNA in Siberia, yDNA Q.
10545
10546

parastais
07-21-2016, 11:01 PM
@Shaikorth, I have no reasons to dispute ANE or Malta origin of diving birds. I am just trying to guess culture of N3a3'6 people. And it appears diving birds was part of their world view. Even if originally paleolithic.
@Kristina. I am not searching Mesolithic roots of Uralic people. I am just trying to guess culture of N3a3'6 people before its split (which was 3000 or so before current era). And it appears diving birds was part of their world view. Sampo was not.

Very interesting the article I am reading there.
So far. Basically there are two main motives in Uralic cosmogenic myths. The world egg (a bird flies over world ocean, lays an egg, due to some accident egg(s) split and either celestial bodies or earth and sky is created) and the diving birds.
The world egg is shared only in Euro Uralics and Balto-Slavs. And has some intriguing paralels with pre-Greek civs. Like some other Saami, Baltic-Finnic mythological features. Apparently paleo-Euro substrate in NE-Europe was deemed responsible. I wonder if Napolskikh still believes so, but so far intriguing.

The diving birds apparently is pan-Uralic, but in Euro Uralics World Egg came to prominence. In Saami completely replaced, in Baltic Finns now World Egg is the main and Diving Birds secondary.

Shaikorth
07-21-2016, 11:22 PM
"World Egg" is also found in some Sino-Tibetan and Austronesian myths. Now mythology may correlate with genes way less than language does, but in a genetic sense pre-IE or pre-Uralic East European groups probably were closer to the Siberians and Native Americans with the diver myths.

Kristiina
07-22-2016, 06:23 AM
According to Napolskikh’s map (excluding y DNA frequency data)

All North American tribes: majority Q (including Algonquian-Ritwan, Na-Dene, Iroquoian, Siouan, Uto-Aztecan): DBM
Kets (Yeniseian): majority Q - DBM
Northern Selkups (Uralic): majority Q - DBM
Yukaghir (Isolate): equally Q, C and N - DBM

Chukchi (Chukotko-Kamchatkan): majority N and Q - no DBM
American Eskimos (Eskimo-Aleut): majority Q - no DBM
Siberian Yupiks (Eskimo-Aleut): majority N - no DBM

Koryaks and Itelmen (Chukchi-Kamchatkan): majority C - no DBM
Nivkhs (Isolate): majority C - no DBM
Mongols (Mongolic): majority C - no DBM

Upriver Negidals (Tungusic): majority C - DBM
Udege (Tungusic): majority C - DBM
Evenki (Tungusic): majority C - DBM
Evens (Tungusic): majority C - DBM
Buryats (Tungusic): majority C - DBM

Other Samoyeds (Uralic): majority N - DBM
Khanty, Mansi (Uralic): majority N - DBM
Western Uralics (Uralic): majority N - DBM
Saami (Uralic): mixed N and I - no DBM
Yakuts (Turkic): majority N - DBM
Khakas (Turkic): majority N - DBM
Tatars (Turkic): mixed - DBM

Shors (Turkic): majority R1a1 - DBM
Altai-Kizhi (Turkic): majority R1a1 - DBM
Bashkirs (Turkic): mixed, including R1b - DBM
Latvians and Lithuanians (Indo-European): N and R1a1 - DBM
Russians, Belorussians and Ukrainians (Indo-European): majority R1a1 - DBM
Serbs and Montenegrins, Slovenians (Indo-European): majority R and I - DBM

To sum up, you can find N majority groups with DBM and without DBM, C majority groups with DBM and without DBM, Q majority groups with DBM and without DBM and majority R groups with DBM and without DBM.

Kale
07-22-2016, 06:56 AM
I wouldn't place anything like world egg on too high a pedestal. Life begins with egg, the universe must have begun at some point, logical conclusion: egg? Just because two cultures have that idea, doesn't mean they are related. If two cultures featured "He who is hit by deer lungs" however, then you might be on to something.

Volat
07-22-2016, 07:49 AM
+ No need to bring whole IE family into N story. It is relevant only to Balto Slavs. And they are younger than 5000 years
It's also relevant to Swedes. According to information on wepage of N1c1 project at FTDNA Swedes have their own clade of N1c1 which is Scandinavian II (L550+,L1025-) https://www.familytreedna.com/groups/n-1c-1/about/background

Tuuli Lappalainen et al "Migration Waves to the Baltic Sea Region. "The Swedish samples in this study were derived only from ethnic Swedes. 307 Swedish mtDNA samples and 160 Swedish Y-DNA samples were obtained."

The Swedes' Y-chromosomal haplogroup frequencies are listed in Table 1 as follows:
DE: 1.3%
F* (xI,J,K): 4.4%
I1a: 35.6%
I1c: 1.9%
K* (xN,P): 0.6%
N3: 14.4%
P* (xQ,R): 4.4%
R1a1: 24.4%
R1b: 13.1%

parastais
07-22-2016, 08:02 AM
"World Egg" is also found in some Sino-Tibetan and Austronesian myths. Now mythology may correlate with genes way less than language does, but in a genetic sense pre-IE or pre-Uralic East European groups probably were closer to the Siberians and Native Americans with the diver myths.
Current Balts when compared to Yamna/CW has excess of EEF+WHG. Estonians are basically Balts + little Siberian. Finns are bit more distant (a bit more Siberian). Saami are strange.
EEF+WHG is not closer to Siberians and Native Americans...

parastais
07-22-2016, 08:09 AM
I wouldn't place anything like world egg on too high a pedestal. Life begins with egg, the universe must have begun at some point, logical conclusion: egg? Just because two cultures have that idea, doesn't mean they are related. If two cultures featured "He who is hit by deer lungs" however, then you might be on to something.
Therefore you have coded localized variants. If "He who is hit by deer lungs" lays an egg.. :)
And then you can track innovations. At least hypothetically.

Shaikorth
07-22-2016, 09:08 AM
Current Balts when compared to Yamna/CW has excess of EEF+WHG. Estonians are basically Balts + little Siberian. Finns are bit more distant (a bit more Siberian). Saami are strange.
EEF+WHG is not closer to Siberians and Native Americans...

I'm not talking about Balts or any modern East Europeans. The pre-Uralic pre-IE East (or Northeast to be more precise, EEF might have shown up near the Black Sea) Europeans weren't EEF+WHG, as far as we know they had EHG and that is much closer to Siberians and Native Americans, Bolshoy Oleni Ostrov people might have been even closer than Mesolithic EHG types considering their mtDNA. So, in fact are WHG and EEF if we compare to Austronesians and Sino-Tibetans with the egg myth.

parastais
07-22-2016, 12:14 PM
I'm not talking about Balts or any modern East Europeans. The pre-Uralic pre-IE East (or Northeast to be more precise, EEF might have shown up near the Black Sea) Europeans weren't EEF+WHG, as far as we know they had EHG and that is much closer to Siberians and Native Americans, Bolshoy Oleni Ostrov people might have been even closer than Mesolithic EHG types considering their mtDNA. So, in fact are WHG and EEF if we compare to Austronesians and Sino-Tibetans with the egg myth.
Ok, groups that actually contributed genes (and beliefs?) to Balto-Slavs (in excess to Yamna) and Baltic Finns were not Bolshoy Oleni Ostrov EHGs. Where and how EEF+WHG folk wandered before it got into Balts and then Baltic-Finns I dont know.

Gravetto-Danubian
07-22-2016, 12:39 PM
Ok, groups that actually contributed genes (and beliefs?) to Balto-Slavs (in excess to Yamna) and Baltic Finns were not Bolshoy Oleni Ostrov EHGs. Where and how EEF+WHG folk wandered before it got into Balts and then Baltic-Finns I dont know.

What are you trying to ask ?
Why modern Slavs and Balts have EEF & WHG ?

Shaikorth
07-22-2016, 12:47 PM
Ok, groups that actually contributed genes (and beliefs?) to Balto-Slavs (in excess to Yamna) and Baltic Finns were not Bolshoy Oleni Ostrov EHGs. Where and how EEF+WHG folk wandered before it got into Balts and then Baltic-Finns I dont know.

We don't have autosomal DNA from Bolshoy Oleni Ostrov (Karelia HG is Yuzhny OO) so we don't have any idea if and to whom they contributed genes. Probably not relevant to Balts, but could be to more northern populations.

Modern Estonians actually look WHG-shifted compared to Estonian Corded Ware in D-stats IIRC - so the WHG shift is more recent than IE if we assume like most linguists do that Corded Ware is IE. My point was about about pre-IE NE Europeans and how they (like Karelia/Samara HG's) are genetically more similar to Native Americans and Siberians with the diving myths (or those that don't) than to Austronesians or Sino-Tibetans including those with the egg myths. Even if they were WHG and not EHG they'd be more distant to the egg myth groups in East Asia and Polynesia.

Gravetto-Danubian
07-22-2016, 01:09 PM
We don't have autosomal DNA from Bolshoy Oleni Ostrov (Karelia HG is Yuzhny OO) so we don't have any idea if and to whom they contributed genes. Probably not relevant to Balts, but could be to more northern populations.

Modern Estonians actually look WHG-shifted compared to Estonian Corded Ware in D-stats IIRC - so the WHG shift is more recent than IE if we assume like most linguists do that Corded Ware is IE. My point was about about pre-IE NE Europeans and how they (like Karelia/Samara HG's) are genetically more similar to Native Americans and Siberians with the diving myths (or those that don't) than to Austronesians or Sino-Tibetans including those with the egg myths. Even if they were WHG and not EHG they'd be more distant to the egg myth groups in East Asia and Polynesia.

Obviously modern Balts or Slavs don't descend directly from early CWC communities

parastais
07-22-2016, 01:24 PM
The egg myth groups that are similar to Balto -Slavic and Baltic Finnic according to Napolskikh's article that I am reading were not East Asian or Polynesian. Instead he speculated of similarities to pre-Greek (pre-IE) folk traditions and quoted some Gimbutas ideas on pre-IE Euro beliefs.
Although then the direction would be pre-IE (EEF+WHG) -> BaltoSlavs -> Baltic Finns (and same or similar route for Saami, who have even more strange mythological paralels to pre-Greeks)

Gravetto-Danubian
07-22-2016, 01:52 PM
The egg myth groups that are similar to Balto -Slavic and Baltic Finnic according to Napolskikh's article that I am reading were not East Asian or Polynesian. Instead he speculated of similarities to pre-Greek (pre-IE) folk traditions and quoted some Gimbutas ideas on pre-IE Euro beliefs.
Although then the direction would be pre-IE (EEF+WHG) -> BaltoSlavs -> Baltic Finns (and same or similar route for Saami, who have even more strange mythological paralels to pre-Greeks)

I think we might be reading too deeply into what is ultimately a flakey strand of evidence

Shaikorth
07-22-2016, 02:26 PM
I think we might be reading too deeply into what is ultimately a flakey strand of evidence

Agree. The egg myth is one of the most generic and archetypical myths around, found not just in Polynesia and East Asia but also in Africa. It's natural some will speculate, but linking Saami to pre-Greeks based on some mythological similarities is kind of like linking them to Berbers based on mtDNA U5b1b (which scientists actually did back in the day).

Captain Nordic
07-26-2016, 01:55 PM
Current Balts when compared to Yamna/CW has excess of EEF+WHG. Estonians are basically Balts + little Siberian. Finns are bit more distant (a bit more Siberian). Saami are strange.
EEF+WHG is not closer to Siberians and Native Americans...

Estonians are not Balts...
Where does this myth come from?!

Gravetto-Danubian
07-26-2016, 02:03 PM
Estonians are not Balts...
Where does this myth come from?!

No one said Estonians are Balts, although the term "Baltic Finns" might have been used

Captain Nordic
07-26-2016, 02:27 PM
No one said Estonians are Balts, although the term "Baltic Finns" might have been used


Estonians are basically Balts + little Siberian.

Estonians are basically Baltic Finns + some Balto-slavic admixture, really.

Captain Nordic
07-26-2016, 02:50 PM
So i guess N3a3 is supposed to be Vl29 (or CTS2929) while N3a4 is Z1936 (or CTS10082)?
Gotcha :beerchug:

This makes sense as i've read that Estonian N1c is different from the Balts, consisting mostly of L1022 and some Z1936 while Balts have (mostly) L1025:
http://i1303.photobucket.com/albums/ag150/Alex_Chartorisky/SNP-N-TREE3_zps61598525.jpg

Shaikorth
07-26-2016, 03:07 PM
So i guess N3a3 is supposed to be Vl29 (or CTS2929) while N3a4 is Z1936 (or CTS10082)?
Gotcha :beerchug:

This makes sense as i've read that Estonian N1c is different from the Balts, consisting mostly of L1022 and some Z1936 while Balts have (mostly) L1025:


Balts are mainly M2783, many other L1025 clades have since turned out to have a different distribution.

http://oi67.tinypic.com/5vsk0z.jpg

Volat
07-26-2016, 03:12 PM
We speak of N1c1 clades which Estonians share with Balts, western Finns and eastern Finns. But we forget to mention that Estonians have R1a1 ~35% which Finns have in small amounts ~5%-7%.

Captain Nordic
07-26-2016, 03:23 PM
Balts are mainly M2783, many other L1025 clades have since turned out to have a different distribution.

http://oi67.tinypic.com/5vsk0z.jpg

Looking at the tree again, i realize that i should have written M2783 and not L1025.

Although M2783 does seem to have split off from L1025 at least :)

Captain Nordic
07-26-2016, 03:28 PM
We speak of N1c1 clades which Estonians share with Balts, western Finns and eastern Finns.

The only thing that Estonian N1c and Baltic N1c shares with each other is the fact that their respective subclades all descend from N3a3/Vl29.


But we forget to mention that Estonians have R1a1 ~35% which Finns have in small amounts ~5%-7%


And? Your point is...?R1a also occurs frequently among other Finnic peoples like Vepsians or Komi Permyaks:
(R1a-M558)
http://s22.postimg.org/do3uxxrkh/image.png

Volat
07-26-2016, 03:40 PM
The only thing that Estonian N1c and Baltic N1c shares with each other is the fact that their respective subclades all descend from N3a3/Vl29.

And? Your point is...?R1a also occurs frequently among other Finnic peoples like Vepsians or Komi Permyaks:
(R1a-M558)


Likely, Vepsians got R1a1 when Slavic guys kissed Finnic girls. Komi Permiaks are not Baltic Finns living a fair distance from Baltic Finns. Komi Permiaks are also mixed with the Russians. There's analysis on Estonians' N1c1 beyond VL29. In short, there were 12 Estonians tested. 4 Estonians had a subclade found among Karelians; 4 Estonians had a sublcade commonly found among western Finns, and 4 Estonians had a subclade of N1c1 commonly found among Latvians and Lithuanians.

Shaikorth
07-26-2016, 03:50 PM
Likely, Vepsians got R1a1 when Slavic guys kissed Finnic girls. Komi Permiaks are not Baltic Finns living a fair distance from Baltic Finns. Komi Permiaks are also mixed with the Russians. There's analysis on Estonians' N1c1 beyond VL29. In short, there were 12 Estonians tested. 4 Estonians had a subclade found among Karelians; 4 Estonians had a sublcade commonly found among western Finns, and 4 Estonians had a subclade of N1c1 commonly found among Latvians and Lithuanians.

Karelian, Estonian and Vepsian R1a clades on PCA (Underhill et al). They're quite different from each other, and their closest neighbours are not East Slavs.

http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/v23/n1/images/ejhg201450f4.jpg

This will require ancient DNA to resolve, but it's quite possible that Estonian/Karelian/Vepsian R1a is the "normal" of these populations, and instead Finnish - in particular East Finnish - N1c frequency is the recent anomaly caused by a founder effect of Z1933 2000 years ago.

Captain Nordic
07-26-2016, 03:52 PM
Likely, Vepsians got R1a1 when Slavic guys kissed Finnic girls. Komi Permiaks are not Baltic Finns living a fair distance from Baltic Finns. Komi Permiaks are also mixed with the Russians. There's analysis on Estonians' N1c1 beyond VL29. In short, there were 12 Estonians tested. 4 Estonians had a subclade found among Karelians; 4 Estonians had a sublcade commonly found among western Finns, and 4 Estonians had a subclade of N1c1 commonly found among Latvians and Lithuanians.

Vepsians have nothing to do with Slavs autosomally:
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-7yZjbuVUWVg/VOsYKYn7xwI/AAAAAAAAAhU/vNjPAESCuDM/s1600/plot12.gif
What you're proposing is absolutely insane as only 1/3 of Russians are M558. Vepsians are half genetically Russian now?

I know Komis are not Baltic finns but they are Finno-permic. And once again, Komis have nothing to do with Slavs autosomally.

Baltic N1c has practically nothing to do with Estonian N1c:

To determine if this haplotype is specific for
Lithuanians, we searched the Ystr database for European
populations (http://ystr.charite.de). Surprisingly, only 9
matches among the sample of 13986 European minimal
haplotypes were found: 2 in Lithuania (Vilnius), 2 in
Latvia (Riga), 4 in Germany and 1 in Norway. Even
though the Ystr database does not contain information
about binary markers, so that matches might be due to
homoplastic mutations on different SNP backgrounds,
finding no matches among 399 individuals from Finland
and 133 from Estonia (Tallinn) in the database suggests
that Lithuanian HgN3 chromosomes might be different
from those in Finno-Ugric populations. To further investigate
this, we typed 91 Estonian and 46 Latvian males
for the Tat marker (which delineates HgN3), and subsequently
typed those Y-chromosomes with the TatC
alleles for the STR loci. We found 30 (33.3%) and 17
(39.5%) HgN3 Y chromosomes in Estonians and Latvians
respectively. One Lithuanian, one Latvian and two
Estonian HgN3 Y chromosomes with a duplication of DYS385II were detected, but excluded from phylogenetic
analysis since it was impossible to determine which
allele is ancestral and corresponds to DYS385II of other
Y chromosomes. The most frequent Lithuanian haplotype
(25% HgN3 chromosomes) was detected in only
2 Estonians (6.7%) and not in any Latvian. Lithuanians
and Latvians also differed from Estonians for DYS19 alleles:
15 repeats at DYS19 were found in the majority of
Lithuanians (94.4% HgN3 chromosomes) and Latvians
(88.2%), but only in 40% of Estonians, where the 14
repeat allele was more common (60%), consistent with
previous results (Zerjal et al. 2001).

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1046/j.1529-8817.2003.00119.x/pdf

Captain Nordic
07-26-2016, 03:55 PM
Karelian, Estonian and Vepsian R1a clades on PCA (Underhill et al). They're quite different from each other, and their closest neighbours are not East Slavs.

http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/v23/n1/images/ejhg201450f4.jpg

This will require ancient DNA to resolve, but it's quite possible that Estonian/Karelian/Vepsian R1a is the "normal" of these populations, and instead Finnish - in particular East Finnish - N1c frequency is the recent anomaly caused by a founder effect of Z1933 2000 years ago.

R1a in eastern europe doesn't necessarily have to be of recent Indo-european origin as we have samples that predate IEs there.

Interesting Plot! Looks like everyone are all kinda spread out :)

Volat
07-26-2016, 04:07 PM
Karelian, Estonian and Vepsian R1a clades on PCA (Underhill et al). They're quite different from each other, and their closest neighbours are not East Slavs.

This will require ancient DNA to resolve, but it's quite possible that Estonian/Karelian/Vepsian R1a is the "normal" of these populations, and instead Finnish - in particular East Finnish - N1c frequency is the recent anomaly caused by a founder effect of Z1933 2000 years ago.

You disappointing me with low quality of information today. Take a look at the table s4 from the aforementioned study : http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/v23/n1/extref/ejhg201450x5.xls


Vepsas

R1a1 35.9%
Z282 - 5.1%
M458 - 15.4%
M558 (Z280) - 15.4


Karelians

R1a1 - 40.7%
Z282 - 16.4%
M458 - 13.6
M558 (Z280) - 10%
Z95 - 0.7%


These are pretty much Slavic clades.

Volat
07-26-2016, 04:10 PM
Vepsians have nothing to do with Slavs autosomally:
What you're proposing is absolutely insane as only 1/3 of Russians are M558. Vepsians are half genetically Russian now?

I know Komis are not Baltic finns but they are Finno-permic. And once again, Komis have nothing to do with Slavs autosomally.

Baltic N1c has practically nothing to do with Estonian N1c:



PCA is misleading more often than not. 1/3 of N1c1 clade found in Estonian population is also commonly among Balts and Slavs. Estonians also share a lot of R1a1 they don't share with Finns. parasais was right. Genetically, Estonians are Balts . In terms Y-DNA structure and genome-wide comparison.

Captain Nordic
07-26-2016, 04:13 PM
You disappointing me with low quality of information today. Take a look at the table s4 from the aforementioned study : http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/v23/n1/extref/ejhg201450x5.xls


Vepsas

R1a1 35.9%
Z282 - 5.1%
M458 - 15.4%
M558 (Z280) - 15.4


Karelians

R1a1 - 40.7%
Z282 - 16.4%
M458 - 13.6
M558 (Z280) - 10%
Z95 - 0.7%


These are pretty much Slavic clades.

But once again, autosomally, Vepsians and Karelians have nothing to do with Slavs!
If they were Slavic clades, then Vepsians and Karelians would drift significantly towards Slavic speakers...

Volat
07-26-2016, 04:18 PM
But once again, autosomally, Vepsians and Karelians have nothing to do with Slavs!
If they were Slavic clades, then Vepsians and Karelians would drift significantly towards Slavic speakers...

Slavs are a diverse group. Karelians and Vepsas are more similar to northern Slavs than to Finns at genome-wide level. The PCA you posted is misleading.

Captain Nordic
07-26-2016, 04:19 PM
PCA is misleading more often than not. 1/3 of N1c1 clade found in Estonian population is also commonly among Balts and Slavs. Estonians also share a lot of R1a1 they don't share with Finns. parasais was right. Genetically, Estonians are Balts .

Well, give me the proof then that Vepsians are significantly Slavic influenced.

Estonian R1a1 is completely average for Baltic finns, as your source shows:
http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/v23/n1/extref/ejhg201450x5.xls

And i have already shown you that Estonian N1c does not match the South baltic M2783 clade(s?)...

Captain Nordic
07-26-2016, 04:19 PM
Slavs are a diverse group. Karelians and Vepsas are more similar to northern Slavs than to Finns at genome-wide level. The PCA you posted is misleading.

And who are those Northern Slavs? Northern Russians? :rofl:

Volat
07-26-2016, 04:20 PM
Slavic Pomors closely related to Karelians. They look as regular Slavs.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-mI0rFqTsMo

Gravetto-Danubian
07-26-2016, 04:20 PM
But once again, autosomally, Vepsians and Karelians have nothing to do with Slavs!
If they were Slavic clades, then Vepsians and Karelians would drift significantly towards Slavic speakers...

The presence of M458 and other young clades under M558 tells us that they certainly do
The abovementioned "young clades" expanded with the Slavs, more or less.

Aggregately, M458 is older than Slavic expansion, but it has to be as it wasn't born "on the road". However, specific subclades within M458 have "expansion time" coincident c. 500 AD.


So they might not cluster with Slavs, but certainly do have some Slavic admixture

Shaikorth
07-26-2016, 04:21 PM
You disappointing me with low quality of information today. Take a look at the table s4 from the aforementioned study : http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/v23/n1/extref/ejhg201450x5.xls


Vepsas

R1a1 35.9%
Z282 - 5.1%
M458 - 15.4%
M558 (Z280) - 15.4


Karelians

R1a1 - 40.7%
Z282 - 16.4%
M458 - 13.6
M558 (Z280) - 10%
Z95 - 0.7%


These are pretty much Slavic clades.

There's no need for snide remarks just because. Neither in IBD issue or this am I uninformed.

Z282 - MRCA > 4000 bp, way predating the Slavic expansion and the separation of Baltic Finns, probably even Finno-Saami-Mordvinic.
M458 - MRCA > 4000 bp, way predating the Slavic expansion and the separation of Baltic Finns, probably even Finno-Saami-Mordvinic.
M558 - MRCA > 4000 bp... you get the picture

Volat
07-26-2016, 04:21 PM
And who are those Northern Slavs? Northern Russians? :rofl:

Northern Slavs are most Poles, Belarusians, most Russians, most Ukrainians.

Volat
07-26-2016, 04:25 PM
There's no need for snide remarks just because. Neither in IBD issue or this am I uninformed.

Z282 - MRCA > 4000 bp, way predating the Slavic expansion and the separation of Baltic Finns, probably even Finno-Saami-Mordvinic.
M458 - MRCA > 4000 bp, way predating the Slavic expansion and the separation of Baltic Finns, probably even Finno-Saami-Mordvinic.
M558 - MRCA > 4000 bp... you get the picture

Ask yourself a question why neighbouring Finns lacking R1a1 in significant amount (5%), while Karelians living few hundred kilometers away from the Finns speaking similar language have R1a1 around ~40% with clades commonly found among Slavs. Karelians also happened to be Orthodox living next to Slavs.

Shaikorth
07-26-2016, 04:32 PM
Ask yourself a question why neighbouring Finns lacking R1a1 in significant amount, while Karelian living few hundred kilometers away from the Finns speaking similar language have R1a1 around ~40% with clades commonly found among Slavs. Karelians also happened to be Orthodox living next to Slavs.

This could easily be caused by heavy founder effects in Finns, detectable autosomally or by looking at the deep structure of Finnish N1c1-Z1936. Similar to how Siwa Berbers have 1.1% E-M81 but some other Berbers have 100%.

To be certain ancient DNA is needed.

Or perhaps not, only better resolution of Karelian and Vepsian Y-DNA. If it is from Slavs, it should show founder effects less than 2000 years old.

Volat
07-26-2016, 04:38 PM
This could easily be caused by heavy founder effects in Finns, detectable autosomally or by looking at the deep structure of Finnish N1c1-Z1936. Similar to how Siwa Berbers have 1.1% E-M81 but some other Berbers have 100%.

To be certain ancient DNA is needed.

It could be, but it was not a founder effect. We have historic records of Novgorodians migrating north-east marrying local women. Men needed wives marrying local Finnic women.

Shaikorth
07-26-2016, 04:42 PM
It could be, but it was not a founder effect. We have historic records of Novgorodians migrating north-east marrying local women. Men needed wives marrying local Finnic women.

See my updated post about the detection of Slavic admixture in Karelians and Vepsians. That would solve if the R1a is from Pomors who actually adopted Karelian identity.
Finnish autosomal and N1c founder effect is however a fact.

Captain Nordic
07-26-2016, 04:46 PM
The presence of M458 and other young clades under M558 tells us that they certainly do
The abovementioned "young clades" expanded with the Slavs, more or less.

Aggregately, M458 is older than Slavic expansion, but it has to be as it wasn't born "on the road". However, specific subclades within M458 have "expansion time" coincident c. 500 AD.


So they might not cluster with Slavs, but certainly do have some Slavic admixture

Sure, they might be partially Slavic. I think i exaggerated when i said they have nothing to do with Slavs.
But it is, at most, a very small influence in their genome.
I don't see how they can have such a high % of those young clades and not be significantly Slavic though...
That is what i meant in the first place.

Captain Nordic
07-26-2016, 04:48 PM
Northern Slavs are most Poles, Belarusians, most Russians, most Ukrainians.

And Karelians/Veps do not cluster with either of them (except some Northern Russian groups)

Volat
07-26-2016, 04:57 PM
See my updated post about the detection of Slavic admixture in Karelians and Vepsians. That would solve if the R1a is from Pomors who actually adopted Karelian identity.
Finnish autosomal and N1c founder effect is however a fact.

One can manipulate results of the studies. It's well known Slavic men migrated into Finnic settlements beginning from the time Novgorodian republic was around. In the16th century Archangel was the only port city Moscow principality had which prompted more migrations in the north. There were migration of Orthodox priests and ordinary folks into Karelia, who were responsible for baptising Karelians. We can track continuous migrations of Slavic men in the north in the last 600 years at least. I believe Slavic settlements is the main source of R1a1 among Karelians. If not for the Slavs Y-DNA structure of eastern Karelians would be similar to that of western Karelians and Finns.

Captain Nordic
07-26-2016, 05:00 PM
One can manipulate results of the studies. It's well known Slavic men migrated into Finnic settlements beginning from the time Novgorodian republic was around. In the16th century Archangel was the only port city Moscow principality had which prompted more migrations in the north. There were migration of Orthodox priests and ordinary folks into Karelia, who were responsible for baptising Karelians. We can track continuous migrations of Slavic men in the north in the last 600 years at least. I believe Slavic settlements is the main source of R1a1 among Karelians. If not for the Slavs Y-DNA structure of eastern Karelians would be similar to that of western Karelians and Finns.

For R1a1 in Karelians to be of Slavic origin, there has to have been a founder effect(s) as Slavic admixture in Karelians is negligible.

Btw, Karelians do tend to be quite similar to Eastern Finns actually.

Volat
07-26-2016, 05:01 PM
And Karelians/Veps do not cluster with either of them (except some Northern Russian groups)

How do you know? Karelians and Finns cluster with me than most Slavs as per panDNAl k15.





puntDNAL K15 Oracle

Admix Results (sorted):
#
Population
Percent
1 NE_European 69.67
2 Mediterranean 16.76
3 Caucasian 5.66
4 SW_Asian 2.73
5 Horn_Of_Africa 1.43
6 Siberian 1.31


Finished reading population data. 157 populations found.
15 components mode.

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

Least-squares method.

Using 1 population approximation:
1 Belarusian @ 0.881657
2 Lithuanian @ 4.974840
3 Russian @ 5.126591
4 Karelian @ 5.812642
5 Mordovian @ 5.866503
6 Finnish @ 6.155827
7 Polish @ 7.188420
8 Swedish @ 11.053193
9 Norwegian @ 13.855208
10 North_German @ 14.856416
11 Slovenian @ 16.155766
12 Scottish @ 16.271177
13 Austrian @ 16.613396
14 Orcadian @ 16.843699
15 Hungarian @ 17.449308
16 Irish @ 17.495632
17 English @ 17.913601
18 Croatian @ 19.711803
19 Utahn_White @ 21.630121
20 South_German @ 22.333591

Using 2 populations approximation:
1 50% Belarusian +50% Belarusian @ 0.881657


Using 3 populations approximation:
1 50% Belarusian +25% Belarusian +25% Belarusian @ 0.881657


Using 4 populations approximation:
1 Belarusian + Belarusian + Belarusian + Belarusian @ 0.881657
2 Lithuanian + Belarusian + Belarusian + Polish @ 1.238188
3 Lithuanian + Belarusian + Russian + Polish @ 1.252220
4 Lithuanian + Lithuanian + Russian + Polish @ 1.260075
5 Lithuanian + Belarusian + Karelian + Polish @ 1.341792
6 Lithuanian + Belarusian + Finnish + Polish @ 1.379382
7 Lithuanian + Lithuanian + Mordovian + Polish @ 1.431350
8 Lithuanian + Lithuanian + Karelian + Polish @ 1.438587
9 Lithuanian + Lithuanian + Russian + Swedish @ 1.465049
10 Belarusian + Belarusian + Belarusian + Russian @ 1.482653
11 Lithuanian + Belarusian + Mordovian + Polish @ 1.493993
12 Lithuanian + Lithuanian + Karelian + Swedish @ 1.523342
13 Lithuanian + Belarusian + Belarusian + Russian @ 1.600703
14 Lithuanian + Belarusian + Belarusian + Belarusian @ 1.601675
15 Lithuanian + Lithuanian + Mordovian + Swedish @ 1.603176
16 Lithuanian + Lithuanian + Finnish + Swedish @ 1.642313
17 Belarusian + Belarusian + Belarusian + Karelian @ 1.652039
18 Belarusian + Belarusian + Belarusian + Polish @ 1.673459
19 Lithuanian + Lithuanian + Belarusian + Swedish @ 1.689729
20 Belarusian + Belarusian + Belarusian + Mordovian @ 1.705929

Kristiina
07-26-2016, 05:02 PM
For me it is okay that Volga forest area and the Finnish Gulf area were a yDNA N world until the Balts and Slavs came!

However, we know that in the Zhizhitskaya culture c. 3000-2000 BC in the Belarus area N1c and R1a1 were living together, so R1a1 in Finnic groups could be in small part derived from the Zhizhitskaya culture and similar pre-IE cultures.

Captain Nordic
07-26-2016, 05:09 PM
How do you know? Karelians and Finns cluster with me than most Slavs as per panDNAl k15.





puntDNAL K15 Oracle

Admix Results (sorted):
#
Population
Percent
1 NE_European 69.67
2 Mediterranean 16.76
3 Caucasian 5.66
4 SW_Asian 2.73
5 Horn_Of_Africa 1.43
6 Siberian 1.31


Finished reading population data. 157 populations found.
15 components mode.

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

Least-squares method.

Using 1 population approximation:
1 Belarusian @ 0.881657
2 Lithuanian @ 4.974840
3 Russian @ 5.126591
4 Karelian @ 5.812642
5 Mordovian @ 5.866503
6 Finnish @ 6.155827
7 Polish @ 7.188420
8 Swedish @ 11.053193
9 Norwegian @ 13.855208
10 North_German @ 14.856416
11 Slovenian @ 16.155766
12 Scottish @ 16.271177
13 Austrian @ 16.613396
14 Orcadian @ 16.843699
15 Hungarian @ 17.449308
16 Irish @ 17.495632
17 English @ 17.913601
18 Croatian @ 19.711803
19 Utahn_White @ 21.630121
20 South_German @ 22.333591

Using 2 populations approximation:
1 50% Belarusian +50% Belarusian @ 0.881657


Using 3 populations approximation:
1 50% Belarusian +25% Belarusian +25% Belarusian @ 0.881657


Using 4 populations approximation:
1 Belarusian + Belarusian + Belarusian + Belarusian @ 0.881657
2 Lithuanian + Belarusian + Belarusian + Polish @ 1.238188
3 Lithuanian + Belarusian + Russian + Polish @ 1.252220
4 Lithuanian + Lithuanian + Russian + Polish @ 1.260075
5 Lithuanian + Belarusian + Karelian + Polish @ 1.341792
6 Lithuanian + Belarusian + Finnish + Polish @ 1.379382
7 Lithuanian + Lithuanian + Mordovian + Polish @ 1.431350
8 Lithuanian + Lithuanian + Karelian + Polish @ 1.438587
9 Lithuanian + Lithuanian + Russian + Swedish @ 1.465049
10 Belarusian + Belarusian + Belarusian + Russian @ 1.482653
11 Lithuanian + Belarusian + Mordovian + Polish @ 1.493993
12 Lithuanian + Lithuanian + Karelian + Swedish @ 1.523342
13 Lithuanian + Belarusian + Belarusian + Russian @ 1.600703
14 Lithuanian + Belarusian + Belarusian + Belarusian @ 1.601675
15 Lithuanian + Lithuanian + Mordovian + Swedish @ 1.603176
16 Lithuanian + Lithuanian + Finnish + Swedish @ 1.642313
17 Belarusian + Belarusian + Belarusian + Karelian @ 1.652039
18 Belarusian + Belarusian + Belarusian + Polish @ 1.673459
19 Lithuanian + Lithuanian + Belarusian + Swedish @ 1.689729
20 Belarusian + Belarusian + Belarusian + Mordovian @ 1.705929



1. What is your ethnicity? (if you don't mind me asking) :)
2. It probably just means you share the same types of components with them, not necessarily due to Slavic admixture as even Lithuanians are your second match.

Shaikorth
07-26-2016, 05:09 PM
One can manipulate results of the studies. It's well known Slavic men migrated into Finnic settlements beginning from the time Novgorodian republic was around. In the16th century Archangel was the only port city Moscow principality had which prompted more migrations in the north. There were migration of Orthodox priests and ordinary folks into Karelia, who were responsible for baptising Karelians. We can track continuous migrations of Slavic men in the north in the last 600 years at least. I believe Slavic settlements is the main source of R1a1 among Karelians. If not for the Slavs Y-DNA structure of eastern Karelians would be similar to that of western Karelians and Finns.

You don't dismiss a study just because it doesn't agree with your beliefs, if it can't be debunked with data that's it. However if a study finds Karelian and Vepsian R1a MRCA's are older than the Slavic expansion and didn't originate from it but from older events, it doesn't debunk the history books about Slavic settlement of the Russian North, it would tell that descendants of Slavic settlers did not become Karelianized but retained their Slavic identity. Which makes sense since Novgorod was a Slavic-ruled state. Even now Russians don't become assimilated to Orthodox Christian minorities but rather the opposite.

Volat
07-26-2016, 05:17 PM
You don't dismiss a study just because it doesn't agree with your beliefs, if it can't be debunked with data that's it. However if a study finds Karelian and Vepsian R1a MRCA's are older than the Slavic expansion and didn't originate from it but from older events, it doesn't debunk the history books about Slavic settlement of the Russian North, it would tell that descendants of Slavic settlers did not become Karelianized but retained their Slavic identity. Which makes sense since Novgorod was a Slavic-ruled state. Even now Russians don't become assimilated to Orthodox Christian minorities but rather the opposite.
The age of most haplogroups predate modern day ethnicities. From historic records we know plenty about cultural assimilation and linguistic shifts, as well as how different peoples come into contacts mixing with each other. Tell those Mestizo men of south America carrying R1b that the age of mutation of R1b is older than their tribal names. If South American mestizos are not similar to Spaniards and Portuguese at genome-wide level, then their R1b is the result of founder effect. That's your logic.

Shaikorth
07-26-2016, 05:22 PM
Most haplogroups predate modern day ethnicities. From historic records we know plenty about cultural assimilation and linguistic shifts, as well as how different people come into contacts mixing with each other. Tell those American Indian men carrying R1b that the age of mutation of R1b is older than their tribal names.

In their case it wouldn't be about R1b in general but their subclades and if those aren't detectable as very recent West European in next-gen sequencing that would be a massive story. Same for Mestizos btw.

parastais
07-26-2016, 05:50 PM
Estonians are basically Baltic Finns + some Balto-slavic admixture, really.
And who are Baltic Finns? :)


And Karelians/Veps do not cluster with either of them (except some Northern Russian groups)
And what about Estonians? Do they cluster with Belorussians/Balts or rather with Karelians/Veps? :)

Shaikorth
07-26-2016, 06:00 PM
And who are Baltic Finns? :)


And what about Estonians? Do they cluster with Belorussians/Balts or rather with Karelians/Veps? :)

How about intermediate? Sorry about the low resolution, Verenich didn't post a larger pic.

http://blog.23andme.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/Genes-mirror-geography-for-Europeans.jpg

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-jX7nQfm27DA/UGYhYtbR_KI/AAAAAAAAD38/4G_-vD8BQxs/s1600/MDLPmap.png

Volat
07-26-2016, 06:09 PM
How about intermediate? Sorry about the low resolution, Verenich didn't post a larger pic.

http://blog.23andme.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/Genes-mirror-geography-for-Europeans.jpg

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-jX7nQfm27DA/UGYhYtbR_KI/AAAAAAAAD38/4G_-vD8BQxs/s1600/MDLPmap.png
The more subjects are plotted, the less information is preserved on PCA plots. These PCA plots are clattered.

Volat
07-26-2016, 06:10 PM
And what about Estonians? Do they cluster with Belorussians/Balts or rather with Karelians/Veps? :)

Estonians are cousins of Latvians speaking a wicked language. :) I don't think this is disputed except on forums by certain people.

Shaikorth
07-26-2016, 06:29 PM
The more subjects are plotted, the less information is preserved on PCA plots. These PCA plots are clattered.

Captain N posted an earlier Europe + Volga-Ural PCA with less people, but that didn't separate Central Europeans from NW Europeans. It's more about who you put on the plot (https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-ywv7g3A0n_U/VR2MHoaJMdI/AAAAAAAAAeo/fXiifYUNJh4/w1060-h574-no/Global%2BSimilarity%2Bmap.JPG). The Verenich pic is not a PCA but rather a Spatial Ancestry plot.

parastais
07-26-2016, 06:37 PM
How about intermediate? Sorry about the low resolution, Verenich didn't post a larger pic.

http://blog.23andme.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/Genes-mirror-geography-for-Europeans.jpg

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-jX7nQfm27DA/UGYhYtbR_KI/AAAAAAAAD38/4G_-vD8BQxs/s1600/MDLPmap.png

Here
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0005472
If you found a population with such closest Fst distances
Latvians, Lithuanians, Poles, Russians - 0.001
Czech - 0.002
North/South Germans, Hungarians(?), Swedes - 0.003
Finland (Helsinki) - 0.004

Would you classify that folk as "more or less Balts with some Syberian"? I would :)
Latvians have higher distance to Poles/Russians and Czechs than that mysterious population... Although perhaps it depends on study. Need to look for another Fst distance study to double check.

Shaikorth
07-26-2016, 06:43 PM
Here
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0005472
If you found a population with such closest Fst distances
Latvians, Lithuanians, Poles, Russians - 0.001
Czech - 0.002
North/South Germans, Hungarians(?), Swedes - 0.003
Finland (Helsinki) - 0.004

Would you classify that folk as "more or less Balts with some Syberian"? I would :)
Latvians have higher distance to Poles/Russians and Czechs than that mysterious population... Although perhaps it depends on study. Need to look for another Fst distance study to double check.

You know, those distances are caused by drift of modern populations. Finnish fst to everyone is elevated due to drift. Estonian or Lithuanian fst-distance to Kargopol Russians or Mordvins is very low.

But what happens if we compare fst-distances to ancient populations instead, lessening the effects of recent drift (thanks to regular Eurogenes commenter Matt)?

http://i.imgur.com/xBV90aP.png

parastais
07-26-2016, 07:13 PM
You know, those distances are caused by drift of modern populations. Finnish fst to everyone is elevated due to drift. Estonian or Lithuanian fst-distance to Kargopol Russians or Mordvins is very low.
Are Estonians closer to Lithuanians or to Mordvins/Kargopols?



But what happens if we compare fst-distances to ancient populations instead, lessening the effects of recent drift (thanks to regular Eurogenes commenter Matt)?

Both moderns and ancients in your graphs cluster together Estonians, Finns, Russians and Lithuanians.

Interesting how he did the distance between clusters. This is something new for me. Even with modern folk he put Lithuanians in cluster with Estonians, Finns, Russians. Instead of Poles and Belorussians that are theoretically closer.

Shaikorth
07-26-2016, 07:23 PM
Are Estonians closer to Lithuanians or to Mordvins/Kargopols?



Fst-wise? About equal. Using formal tests like D (Chimp Estonian Lithuanian KargopolRussian)? Lithuanians. However, so are Karelians and Vepsians.



Both moderns and ancients in your graphs cluster together Estonians, Finns, Russians and Lithuanians.

Interesting how he did the distance between clusters. This is something new for me. Even with modern folk he put Lithuanians in cluster with Estonians, Finns, Russians. Instead of Poles and Belorussians that are theoretically closer.


The clustering is based on the fst-distances vs. most Europeans in the Human Origins dataset. If it was just Balts and Slavs it would look different.

parastais
07-26-2016, 07:45 PM
Fst-wise? About equal. Using formal tests like D (Chimp Estonian Lithuanian KargopolRussian)? Lithuanians. However, so are Karelians and Vepsians.
I did not understand this. Are Estonians as close with D to Lithuanians as with Karelians or Vepsians? Or are Karelians and Vepsians closer to Lithuanians than to Mordvins/Kargopol Russians?




The clustering is based on the fst-distances vs. most Europeans in the Human Origins dataset. If it was just Balts and Slavs it would look different.
Ok, now I get it. So it is not based on their own distances, but whether their distances to other populations are similar?

This is quite interesting. It means Balts (Lithuanians) react to other Euro folk similar to Baltic Finns (Estonians, Finns) and Russians who are basically mix of different people including Finno-Ugric and probably Balts too. I wonder how Mordvins, Karelians and Vepsans would act if added.

Shaikorth
07-26-2016, 07:54 PM
I did not understand this. Are Estonians as close with D to Lithuanians as with Karelians or Vepsians? Or are Karelians and Vepsians closer to Lithuanians than to Mordvins/Kargopol Russians?

The latter.






Ok, now I get it. So it is not based on their own distances, but whether their distances to other populations are similar?

This is quite interesting. It means Balts (Lithuanians) react to other Euro folk similar to Baltic Finns (Estonians, Finns) and Russians who are basically mix of different people including Finno-Ugric and probably Balts too. I wonder how Mordvins, Karelians and Vepsans would act if added.

Indeed. Those Russians are the Kargopol ones for the record.

parastais
07-26-2016, 09:24 PM
This all however still shows that Balts and Baltic Finns are very close populations. So, that my statement - "Estonians are more or less Balts with additional Syberian" still holds.
Except of course this study perhaps changes focus to "Balts are more or less Estonians without additional Syberian".

Shaikorth
07-26-2016, 09:28 PM
This all however still shows that Balts and Baltic Finns are very close populations. So, that my statement - "Estonians are more or less Balts with additional Syberian" still holds.
Except of course this study perhaps changes focus to "Balts are more or less Estonians without additional Syberian".

The data is less disputing that, it's more about how populations such as Kargopol Russians don't actually look like the closest relatives of even the easternmost Baltic Finns.

parastais
07-26-2016, 09:48 PM
The data is less disputing that, it's more about how populations such as Kargopol Russians don't actually look like the closest relatives of even the easternmost Baltic Finns.
Now I am confused. You present a data that shows that Russians of Kargopol cluster together with Finns, Lithuanians and Estonians in one cluster in two different approaches and then you say they don't look like closest relatives....

Shaikorth
07-26-2016, 09:52 PM
Now I am confused. You present a data that shows that Russians of Kargopol cluster together with Finns, Lithuanians and Estonians in one cluster in two different approaches and then you say they don't look like closest relatives....

Look at the joining order.
Same data but with neighbour joining instead of classical clustering.
http://i.imgur.com/h2WzutX.png

Volat
07-26-2016, 11:10 PM
Both moderns and ancients in your graphs cluster together Estonians, Finns, Russians and Lithuanians.

Interesting how he did the distance between clusters. This is something new for me. Even with modern folk he put Lithuanians in cluster with Estonians, Finns, Russians. Instead of Poles and Belorussians that are theoretically closer.

Clusters in dendropgrams posted above will vary depending on the type of linkage is used. It can be single, average, complete, median linkage. Phylogenetic network based on distances will reveal different picture. A more accurate plot maybe shown if MDS is generated based on Fst distances. It's always better to look at the table of values. Often people present different diagrams showing various representations depending on methodology used that suits them most for some or other reasons. :)

Captain Nordic
07-26-2016, 11:28 PM
And who are Baltic Finns? :)
Descendants of FU speakers from the upper volga region...



And what about Estonians? Do they cluster with Belorussians/Balts or rather with Karelians/Veps? :)
Estonians are southern Finnic so they should cluster quite close to Livs and Votes (as they are also anthropolgically similar). Unfortunately, both of these ethnic groups are near extinct and have not been genetically studied.
SW Finns (+ Western and Southern Finns in general) tend to be close to Estonians as well. Karelians/Veps are closer to eastern finns, really.

Captain Nordic
07-26-2016, 11:39 PM
Here
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0005472
If you found a population with such closest Fst distances
Latvians, Lithuanians, Poles, Russians - 0.001
Czech - 0.002
North/South Germans, Hungarians(?), Swedes - 0.003
Finland (Helsinki) - 0.004

Would you classify that folk as "more or less Balts with some Syberian"? I would :)
Latvians have higher distance to Poles/Russians and Czechs than that mysterious population... Although perhaps it depends on study. Need to look for another Fst distance study to double check.

Finns are genetic outliners in europe because of all sorts of genetic drifts and bottlenecks.
That is why Estonians are closer to their neighbors than to Finns!
What is very interesting is that (East, mainly) Finns, Veps and Karelians all tend to form a genetic cluster, drifted away from Europe. Maybe this can be due to Proto-Saami speakers (who used to live in all of these areas but not in, suprise suprise, Estonia) who were assimilated by Finnics?

Unfortunately, we do not have any genetic studies on Livs or Votes (or at least not one i can find) but Livonians were carefully examined anthropologically by professor Carleton Coon who noted that "Livs and Estonians were metrically very close, distinct from Finns".
SW Finns also seem to be genetic cousins with the Estonians based on this PCA plot from eurogenes:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B9o3EYTdM8lQb2I1X2t0TDZtMXM/edit?pref=2&pli=1

Captain Nordic
07-26-2016, 11:45 PM
This all however still shows that Balts and Baltic Finns are very close populations. So, that my statement - "Estonians are more or less Balts with additional Syberian" still holds.
Except of course this study perhaps changes focus to "Balts are more or less Estonians without additional Syberian".

It simply means that Baltic finns and Balts largely share the same components with each other (NE european, NW european, minimal West asian etc), not that Balts are Finnic or Finnics are balts.

Shaikorth
07-27-2016, 05:51 AM
Clusters in dendropgrams posted above will vary depending on the type of linkage is used. It can be single, average, complete, median linkage. Phylogenetic network based on distances will reveal different picture. A more accurate plot maybe shown if MDS is generated based on Fst distances. It's always better to look at the table of values. Often people present different diagrams showing various representations depending on methodology used that suits them most for some or other reasons. :)

Graphic of the same data, didn't post before because it didn't add anything new to the info from different dendograms.

http://i.imgur.com/51DIFBC.png

Volat
07-27-2016, 06:08 AM
Graphic of the same data, didn't post before because it didn't add anything new to the info from different dendograms.

http://i.imgur.com/51DIFBC.png





Looking at these plots based on Fst distance for modern European, don't you find it a bit unusual with Spaniards next to Bulgarians, Basque not far from Balkars, Icelanders near Lusatian Sorbs, Irish not far from eastern SLavs, Croats are are not far from French and English?

Shaikorth
07-27-2016, 06:32 AM
Looking at these plots based on Fst distance for modern European, don't you find it a bit unusual with Spaniards next to Bulgarians, Basque not far from Balkars, Icelanders near Lusatian Sorbs, Irish not far from eastern SLavs, Croats are are not far from French and English?

There's only so much information you can put on a two-dimensional plot. The drift of modern populations (Sardinians and Finland+Baltic states) takes over the primary dimensions - the difference between Czech and English is quite insignificant compared to that. The ancients plot is more informative because Sardinians aren't outliers because of just drift, but being close descendants of Neolithic farmers, and Balkars and Cypriots are rather Caucasus or Levantine.

Sorbs and Icelandic are close to each other because they have similar fst to many populations on the modern plot (0.013 to Balkars for both, 0.014 and 0.015 to Cypriots etc).

Kristiina
07-27-2016, 07:57 AM
I have noticed that IE speakers often want to separate Estonians and Finns and argue that Estonians are mixed with Balts/ Germans etc. and are closer to IEs and belong to their folks. It is probably due to the fact that they are tall, blue-eyed and blond to a bigger extent than Finns. My impression also is that you think that Finns are a better proxy for Uralic-speaking Finnics who cannot be originally tall, blue-eyed and blond because they are East Asian.

However, from the linguistic point of view, the Finnish language is very close to Estonian and it is argued that the Finnish language came from Estonia. This should mean that the difference between Finns and Estonians is not due to Finns being more Finnic but instead the opposite, i.e. that Finns contain substrates that Estonians lack or are minor in them. It is often argued that for example lakeland Saami was spoken in inland Finland before the Finnish language arrived. In any case, Finns share some ancestry with ancient inland Saamis, Arctic Bronze Age inhabitants of the far north and previous Finnish Comb-Ceramic inhabitants that make them different from Estonians.

Volat
07-27-2016, 08:03 AM
There's only so much information you can put on a two-dimensional plot. The drift of modern populations (Sardinians and Finland+Baltic states) takes over the primary dimensions - the difference between Czech and English is quite insignificant compared to that. The ancients plot is more informative because Sardinians aren't outliers because of just drift, but being close descendants of Neolithic farmers, and Balkars and Cypriots are rather Caucasus or Levantine.

Sorbs and Icelandic are close to each other because they have similar fst to many populations on the modern plot (0.013 to Balkars for both, 0.014 and 0.015 to Cypriots etc).

I don't think the problem is with the two dimensions here as such. 3 and 4 dimensions will provide marginal bit of information. Check the cumulative effect each dimension adds beginning from the 3rd dimension. Screeplots may help you.

Volat
07-27-2016, 08:21 AM
I have noticed that IE speakers usually want to separate Estonians and Finns and argue that Estonians are mixed with Balts/ Germans etc. and are closer to IEs and belong to their folks. It is probably due to the fact that they are tall, blue-eyed and blond to a bigger extent than Finns. My impression also is that you think that Finns are a better proxy for Uralic-speaking Finnics who cannot be originally tall, blue-eyed and blond because they are East Asian.

However, from the linguistic point of view, the Finnish language is very close to Estonian and it is argued that the Finnish language came from Estonia. This should mean that the difference between Finns and Estonians is not due to Finns being more Finnic but instead the opposite, i.e. that Finns contain substrates that Estonians lack or are minor in them. It is often argued that for example lakeland Saami was spoken in inland Finland before the Finnish language arrived. In any case, Finns share some ancestry with inland Saamis, Arctic Bronze Age inhabitants of the far north and previous Finnish Comb-Ceramic inhabitants that make them different from Estonians.
I don't think many people want to separate Estonians from the Finns. Estonians scholars wrote about demographic problems Estonia experienced several times in the past with many immigrants coming from neighbouring Latvia and Russia to solve the demographic problems in Estonia. There were immigrants from Finland too. Later, physical anthropologists studied Estonians, Latvians, Lithuanians, Swedes and south-western Finns showing that people of the Baltic states are forming their own anthropological cluster. Several years ago Estonian scholar Tőnu Esko wrote a dissertation concluding that Estonians show more genetic proximity to Latvians and north-western Russians than to Finns. There are published studies showing Estonian genetic profiles. Estonians are linguistically and culturally similar to Finns, while showing genetic similarities to other ethnicities is not unique to Finns and Estonians. This exists among Germanic, Romance, Slavic, Turkic and other peoples.

Captain Nordic
07-27-2016, 09:18 AM
I have noticed that IE speakers often want to separate Estonians and Finns and argue that Estonians are mixed with Balts/ Germans etc. and are closer to IEs and belong to their folks. It is probably due to the fact that they are tall, blue-eyed and blond to a bigger extent than Finns. My impression also is that you think that Finns are a better proxy for Uralic-speaking Finnics who cannot be originally tall, blue-eyed and blond because they are East Asian.

However, from the linguistic point of view, the Finnish language is very close to Estonian and it is argued that the Finnish language came from Estonia. This should mean that the difference between Finns and Estonians is not due to Finns being more Finnic but instead the opposite, i.e. that Finns contain substrates that Estonians lack or are minor in them. It is often argued that for example lakeland Saami was spoken in inland Finland before the Finnish language arrived. In any case, Finns share some ancestry with ancient inland Saamis, Arctic Bronze Age inhabitants of the far north and previous Finnish Comb-Ceramic inhabitants that make them different from Estonians.

This is out of topic, but Finns are taller, blonder and more blue eyed than Estonians though...
Way more "Nordic" looking.

Shaikorth
07-27-2016, 09:30 AM
I don't think the problem is with the two dimensions here as such. 3 and 4 dimensions will provide marginal bit of information. Check the cumulative effect each dimension adds beginning from the 3rd dimension. Screeplots may help you.

Those dimensions are 1 and 2, the most significant. The clustering diagrams should be more informative in any case.

Captain Nordic
07-27-2016, 09:35 AM
I don't think many people want to separate Estonians from the Finns. Estonians scholars wrote about demographic problems Estonia experienced several times in the past with many immigrants coming from neighbouring Latvia and Russia to solve the demographic problems in Estonia. There were immigrants from Finland too. Later, physical anthropologists studied Estonians, Latvians, Lithuanians, Swedes and south-western Finns showing that people of the Baltic states are forming their own anthropological cluster. Several years ago Estonian scholar Tőnu Esko wrote a dissertation concluding that Estonians show more genetic proximity to Latvians and north-western Russians than to Finns. There are published studies showing Estonian genetic profiles. Estonians are linguistically and culturally similar to Finns, while showing genetic similarities to other ethnicities is not unique to Finns and Estonians. This exists among Germanic, Romance, Slavic, Turkic and other peoples.

Volat, how many times do we have to tell you?

1. There was never any significant amount of immigration to Estonia. That's a lie and you know it. There were some people migrating there in the 1600's from mostly Finland and Latvia, but they made up less than 20% of the total population and were completely assimilated.
Source: http://www.estonica.org/en/History/1558-1710_Estonia_under_Swedish_rule/

This idea that significant migration to Estonia during the last centuries have impacted the country so much that now Estonians cluster with their neighbours, is madness as even the FST distance between different Estonians are low which suggest that the area has not experienced significant amount of migration.

2. I wonder why you do not mention Professor Carleton Coon's "Races of europe" where he confirmed that Livonians and Estonians are metrically very close to each other?
http://www.theapricity.com/snpa/chapter-IX10.htm
From my own experiences, Lithuanians look different from both Estonians and Latvians many times.

3. All of this is absolutely useless as Finns are a genetically drifted population, far from everyone!
NW Russians seem to be of largely native Finnic extraction, at least according to the expertise of the Estonian university of Tartu.
All geographic neighbours in europe tend to show genetic similarities with each other, whatever their meta ethnicity might be.
This is most likely due to pre-IE/Pre-Uralic ancestry. In the case of the genetic similarity between Estonians and Letts, it can also be due to Livonian influence in the Latvian genepool.

Kristiina
07-27-2016, 09:46 AM
This is out of topic, but Finns are taller, blonder and more blue eyed than Estonians though...
Way more "Nordic" looking.

Yes, what I said about Estonian and Finnish looks is true only for height as according to the new paper on hight, Estonians are taller than Finns, but, in fact, blonds and light-eyed people are more frequent in Finland.

10660

I checked on Internet that the percentage of light eyes is the following: Finns 89%, Swedes and Norwegians 88%, Estonians and Danes 85%, Latvians 78%.
And it is true that I was talking from the point of view of certain stereotypes that often are real and influence our comments.

Volat
07-27-2016, 10:03 AM
Volat, how many times do we have to tell you?

1. There was never any significant amount of immigration to Estonia. That's a lie and you know it. There were some people migrating there in the 1600's from mostly Finland and Latvia, but they made up less than 20% of the total population and were completely assimilated.
Source: http://www.estonica.org/en/History/1558-1710_Estonia_under_Swedish_rule/

This idea that significant migration to Estonia during the last centuries have impacted the country so much that now Estonians cluster with their neighbours, is madness as even the FST distance between different Estonians are low which suggest that the area has not experienced significant amount of migration.

2. I wonder why you do not mention Professor Carleton Coon's "Races of europe" where he confirmed that Livonians and Estonians are metrically very close to each other?
http://www.theapricity.com/snpa/chapter-IX10.htm
From my own experiences, Lithuanians look different from both Estonians and Latvians many times.

3. All of this is absolutely useless as Finns are a genetically drifted population, far from everyone!
NW Russians seem to be of largely native Finnic extraction, at least according to the expertise of the Estonian university of Tartu.
All geographic neighbours in europe tend to show genetic similarities with each other, whatever their meta ethnicity might be.
This is most likely due to pre-IE/Pre-Uralic ancestry. In the case of the genetic similarity between Estonians and Letts, it can also be due to Livonian influence in the Latvian genepool.

Demographic problems existed in Estonia during the wars which is not a lie. The demographic problems are discussed by Estonian scholars in literature mentioning a large increase in population after immigration Coon never visited the Baltic states. Physical anthropology was well studied during Soviet era by scholars. During that time anthropologists had many anthropological expeditions collecting data drawing their conclusions based on data they collected. Anthropologists who collected data in Baltic states were Estonian Karin Marks, Latvian (Russian by descent) Raisa Denisova, Volkov and others who spent over 40 years researching and publishing. NW Russians (Pskov, Tver, region of St-Petersburg) do not have a large Finnic extraction. The only Russians who have a significant Finnic ancestry are Pomors living in Mezen or Penega, which is known as northern Russia.
Recent published studies on population genetics are not useless.

PS If you want to have a meaningful discussion keep your tone down, present your arguments clearly and speak on your behalf without making appeals such as 'how many times do we have.."

Volat
07-27-2016, 10:08 AM
Those dimensions are 1 and 2, the most significant. The clustering diagrams should be more informative in any case.

Yes! That's the reason first two components are chosen. Often, Fst distances are rounded to 3 signficant figures which reflects on the accuracy of the MDS. It's not just about precision of the results. I often found MDS plots based on Fst distances are not as accurate.

Captain Nordic
07-27-2016, 11:37 AM
Demographic problems existed in Estonia during the wars which is not a lie. The demographic problems are discussed by Estonian scholars in literature mentioning a large increase in population after immigration Coon never visited the Baltic states. Physical anthropology was well studied during Soviet era by scholars. During that time anthropologists had many anthropological expeditions collecting data drawing their conclusions based on data they collected. Anthropologists who collected data in Baltic states were Estonian Karin Marks, Latvian (Russian by descent) Raisa Denisova, Volkov and others who spent over 40 years researching and publishing. NW Russians (Pskov, Tver, region of St-Petersburg) do not have a large Finnic extraction. The only Russians who have a significant Finnic ancestry are Pomors living in Mezen or Penega, which is known as northern Russia.
Recent published studies on population genetics are not useless.

PS If you want to have a meaningful discussion keep your tone down, present your arguments clearly and speak on your behalf without making appeals such as 'how many times do we have.."
Read the Estonica source i gave you. I never denied migration to Estonia, but it's pseudo science to claim that there has been mass migration to the Estonian nation and that is why Estonians are close to their neighbours genetically as the FST distance between Estonians is low, suggesting that the population has not experienced a significant genetic inflow during the last centuries.

Carleton Coon was one of the worlds best, if not the best, anthropologist of his time. His "Races of europe" work is amazing.
Read this first and then talk: http://www.theapricity.com/snpa/chapter-IX10.htm
He (and other anthropologists) studied plenty of Livonians. How else did they obtain all that data?

Uhm, are you really going to ignore the expertise of one of europes most highly ranked universities?
Ok :rofl:
Before the Slavic tribes migrated to Russia, the area was occupied by Finnic folks. They didn't just disappear under the ground.
Anyways, finnic or not, populations can be genetically related but not necessarily meta ethnically related.

Volat, i did "keep my tone down" and i do not see anything wrong with my previous post.
I am simply tired responding to you about these matters as you seem to not be willing to let go of your "Balto-slavic estonians" idea.

The fact is:
Not a single part of Estonia has ever been occupied by Balto-slavs during the course of their history and genetic inflow from their neighbours has been minimal.
And until you have Livonian and Votic samples, you can not make the assumption that Estonians are Balts.

Volat
07-27-2016, 11:51 AM
Read the Estonica source i gave you. I never denied migration to Estonia, but it's pseudo science to claim that there has been mass migration to the Estonian nation and that is why Estonians are close to their neighbours genetically as the FST distance between Estonians is low, suggesting that the population has not experienced a significant genetic inflow during the last centuries.

Carleton Coon was one of the worlds best, if not the best, anthropologist of his time. His "Races of europe" work is amazing.
Read this first and then talk: http://www.theapricity.com/snpa/chapter-IX10.htm
He (and other anthropologists) studied plenty of Livonians. How else did they obtain all that data?

Uhm, are you really going to ignore the expertise of one of europes most highly ranked universities?
Ok :rofl:
Before the Slavic tribes migrated to Russia, the area was occupied by Finnic folks. They didn't just disappear under the ground.
Anyways, finnic or not, populations can be genetically related but not necessarily meta ethnically related.

Volat, i did "keep my tone down" and i do not see anything wrong with my previous post.
I am simply tired responding to you about these matters as you seem to not be willing to let go of your "Balto-slavic estonians" idea.

The fact is:
Not a single part of Estonia has ever been occupied by Balto-slavs during the course of their history and genetic inflow from their neighbours has been minimal.
And until you have Livonian and Votic samples, you can not make the assumption that Estonians are Balts.

Do I need to write something here? :)

Kristiina
07-27-2016, 12:16 PM
Let's make peace and agree that we all share genes from North European hunters, Mediterranean farmers, Nostratic East Europeans and a small amount of Arctic and a variable amount of local drift with peaceful interaction with neighbours. :angel:

Volat
07-27-2016, 12:48 PM
Let's make peace and agree that we all share genes from North European hunters, Mediterranean farmers, Nostratic East Europeans and a small amount of Arctic and a variable amount of local drift with peaceful interaction with neighbours. :angel:

Today, we are peaceful in NE Europe knowing about each other more than anyone despite politics. :)

parastais
07-27-2016, 03:16 PM
The fact is:
Not a single part of Estonia has ever been occupied by Balto-slavs during the course of their history and genetic inflow from their neighbours has been minimal.

Yep, Fatyanovo genes arrived together with Baltic Finns.
Do you think Fatyanovo was Uralic speakers?

Kristiina
07-27-2016, 05:43 PM
I hope so. :)

At least the expansion time of N3a3'6 coincides with Fatyanovo as it happened c. 3000 BC. Also the Finnish Corded way starts at the same time as Fatyanovo, i.e. 3200 BC, which is earlier than the Western Corded Ware.

Gravetto-Danubian
07-27-2016, 05:50 PM
I hope so. :)

At least the expansion time of N3a3'6 coincides with Fatyanovo as it happened c. 3000 BC. Also the Finnish Corded way starts at the same time as Fatyanovo, i.e. 3200 BC, which is earlier than the Western Corded Ware.

Yes I remember reading a paper on that early dating of Finnish CWC
I'm not sure about fatyanovo though
The carbon datings have generated some controversies, some labs get very high dates


In this year's SMBE there was a poster suggesting that some Swedish Bronze Age groups were due to significant migration from pitted ware areas. But this was based on mtDNA only

Shaikorth
07-27-2016, 05:57 PM
Yes I remember reading a paper on that early dating of Finnish CWC
I'm not sure about fatyanovo though
The carbon datings have generated some controversies, some labs get very high dates


In this year's SMBE there was a poster suggesting that some Swedish Bronze Age groups were due to significant migration from pitted ware areas. But this was based on mtDNA only

The papers by Kallio and Parpola linked somewhere in this thread regarding archaeology and historical linguistics suggested Fatyanovo was assimilated by P-U that developed from Volosovo. IIRC just about everyone considers it originally I-E like other Corded Ware derivations though.

Gravetto-Danubian
07-27-2016, 06:09 PM
The papers by Kallio and Parpola linked somewhere in this thread regarding archaeology and historical linguistics suggested Fatyanovo was assimilated by P-U that developed from Volosovo. IIRC just about everyone considers it originally I-E like other Corded Ware derivations though.


My present opinion is that CWC is a southern &/or eastern Baltic (geographically) phenomenon, acquiring certain Balkan- Carpathian & Black Sea traits by exchange and exogamy. The "Epi-Corded" cultures of the Volga forests etc are probably later/ back migrations

Let's see what part 2 of Allentoft et al will show ....

Megalophias
09-13-2016, 07:57 PM
Minor update: Y-Full has added some samples from the Ilumae paper to its tree (https://yfull.com/tree/N/). The TMRCA of the Polish and Chinese L732 clade (now Y15972) is 6300 (4600-8200) years. The South Siberian B187 and Japanese B496 (as Y23747) are now included. B496 proves to be F3331+, maybe the same as the Chinese F3331+ branch. There is also F3331- in China, so there is more upstream N1c1 there still. (There is also Tat+ M178- in some older studies as well which has not yet been confirmed by full sequences.)

Ebizur
10-26-2016, 01:52 PM
Minor update: Y-Full has added some samples from the Ilumae paper to its tree (https://yfull.com/tree/N/). The TMRCA of the Polish and Chinese L732 clade (now Y15972) is 6300 (4600-8200) years. The South Siberian B187 and Japanese B496 (as Y23747) are now included. B496 proves to be F3331+, maybe the same as the Chinese F3331+ branch. There is also F3331- in China, so there is more upstream N1c1 there still. (There is also Tat+ M178- in some older studies as well which has not yet been confirmed by full sequences.)How many examples of any subclade of N-F2905 have been found in Europeans? The only one of which I have knowledge at present is YF03641, an N-L731 individual from Pomerania Province of Poland. YFull has estimated a rather ancient MRCA for extant members of N-F2905 (16100 [95% CI 13500 <-> 18800] ybp), and, as far as I know, every one but the aforementioned YF03641 from Pomerania has been sampled from a population inhabiting greater East Asia (East Asia or a peripheral area that currently is or historically has been associated with East Asia at some time, such as Japan, Vietnam, etc.), so I think that this is an important question for anyone who is curious about the early origin of extant haplogroup N.

N-P189.2's presence in southeastern Europe is intriguing, but its TMRCA is not so great (4100 [3100 <-> 5200] ybp), and the oldest known example of it has been found in an Iron Age male who belongs to a typically East/Central Asian mtDNA haplogroup (G2a if I remember correctly), so it is not such strong evidence for an origin of haplogroup N in Europe as the presence of N-F2905 almost exclusively in East Asia with a TMRCA of approximately 16,100 years is evidence for an origin of haplogroup N in East Asia.

MikkaK
10-28-2016, 04:18 AM
How many examples of any subclade of N-F2905 have been found in Europeans? The only one of which I have knowledge at present is YF03641, an N-L731 individual from Pomerania Province of Poland. YFull has estimated a rather ancient MRCA for extant members of N-F2905 (16100 [95% CI 13500 <-> 18800] ybp), and, as far as I know, every one but the aforementioned YF03641 from Pomerania has been sampled from a population inhabiting greater East Asia (East Asia or a peripheral area that currently is or historically has been associated with East Asia at some time, such as Japan, Vietnam, etc.), so I think that this is an important question for anyone who is curious about the early origin of extant haplogroup N.

N-P189.2's presence in southeastern Europe is intriguing, but its TMRCA is not so great (4100 [3100 <-> 5200] ybp), and the oldest known example of it has been found in an Iron Age male who belongs to a typically East/Central Asian mtDNA haplogroup (G2a if I remember correctly), so it is not such strong evidence for an origin of haplogroup N in Europe as the presence of N-F2905 almost exclusively in East Asia with a TMRCA of approximately 16,100 years is evidence for an origin of haplogroup N in East Asia.

There also seems to be a L731 individual from Belarus on FtDNA.

I still believe the origin of N is debatable although I don't think anyone believes it originated in Europe, I still have my doubts about a South East Asian origin. As it has been discussed already I would say that North West China or south central Siberia seems likely as N's place of origin. Despite having a younger TMRCA P189.2 and its predecessor Y6503 have still only been found in Europe and remain the first known branching line from N*.

Ebizur
10-30-2016, 09:41 AM
There also seems to be a L731 individual from Belarus on FtDNA.I wonder how closely related in the paternal line he might be to YF03641. YFull has estimated a TMRCA of 850 [95% CI 475 <-> 1500] ybp between YF03641 and YF02093 (both belonging to N-L731) and a TMRCA of 6300 [95% CI 4600 <-> 8200] ybp between those two N-L731 individuals and GRC13227636, an N-Y15972*(xL731) individual from China. That L731+ individual from Belarus on FTDNA may in fact be YF02093 for all I know.


I still believe the origin of N is debatable although I don't think anyone believes it originated in Europe, I still have my doubts about a South East Asian origin. As it has been discussed already I would say that North West China or south central Siberia seems likely as N's place of origin. Despite having a younger TMRCA P189.2 and its predecessor Y6503 have still only been found in Europe and remain the first known branching line from N*.Where has an example of N-Y6503*(xP189.2) been found?

In the Far East, Zhong et al. ("Extended Y Chromosome Investigation Suggests Postglacial Migrations of Modern Humans into East Asia via the Northern Route," Molecular Biology and Evolution 2011) have not found any latitudinal cline (59/876 = 6.7% N-M231 Southern Han, 58/853 = 6.8% N-M231 Northern Han) in the frequency of N-M231 among mainstream Chinese, though the frequency does tend to be somewhat higher among historically northern-dwelling ethnic minorities, such as Xibe (approx. 11% higher), Mongol (approx. 4% higher), and Manchu (approx. 3% higher). This contrasts with the appearance of clines positively correlated with latitude for the frequencies of C2-M217, Q-M242, and R-M207 among mainstream Chinese (62/876 = 7.1% C2-M217 Southern Han vs. 125/853 = 14.7% C2-M217 Northern Han, 15/876 = 1.7% Q-M242 Southern Han vs. 34/853 = 4.0% Q-M242 Northern Han, 1/876 = 0.1% R-M207 Southern Han vs. 25/853 = 2.9% R-M207 Northern Han). These patterns seem to be an internal feature of the Chinese people, however, and do not extend to ethnic groups outside of China (e.g. the frequency of C2-M217 among Vietnamese seems to be no lower than the frequency of that haplogroup among Southern Han, but the frequency of N-M231 among Vietnamese seems to be about half that of Southern Han).

I think some members of N-M231 (especially those in N-M231(xF2905)) and Q-M242 (especially those in Q-M242(xM120)) may have (back-)migrated to China from the northwest, but N-F2905 and Q-M120 probably have experienced their most significant expansions within China.

12383

MikkaK
10-30-2016, 10:33 PM
Where has an example of N-Y6503*(xP189.2) been found?

In the Far East, Zhong et al. ("Extended Y Chromosome Investigation Suggests Postglacial Migrations of Modern Humans into East Asia via the Northern Route," Molecular Biology and Evolution 2011) have not found any latitudinal cline (59/876 = 6.7% N-M231 Southern Han, 58/853 = 6.8% N-M231 Northern Han) in the frequency of N-M231 among mainstream Chinese, though the frequency does tend to be somewhat higher among historically northern-dwelling ethnic minorities, such as Xibe (approx. 11% higher), Mongol (approx. 4% higher), and Manchu (approx. 3% higher). This contrasts with the appearance of clines positively correlated with latitude for the frequencies of C2-M217, Q-M242, and R-M207 among mainstream Chinese (62/876 = 7.1% C2-M217 Southern Han vs. 125/853 = 14.7% C2-M217 Northern Han, 15/876 = 1.7% Q-M242 Southern Han vs. 34/853 = 4.0% Q-M242 Northern Han, 1/876 = 0.1% R-M207 Southern Han vs. 25/853 = 2.9% R-M207 Northern Han). These patterns seem to be an internal feature of the Chinese people, however, and do not extend to ethnic groups outside of China (e.g. the frequency of C2-M217 among Vietnamese seems to be no lower than the frequency of that haplogroup among Southern Han, but the frequency of N-M231 among Vietnamese seems to be about half that of Southern Han).

I think some members of N-M231 (especially those in N-M231(xF2905)) and Q-M242 (especially those in Q-M242(xM120)) may have (back-)migrated to China from the northwest, but N-F2905 and Q-M120 probably have experienced their most significant expansions within China.

12383

I believe the Iron Age Hungairan IR1 was thought to belong to Y6503, however I'm not sure if this conclusion has changed. As you mentioned before he does belong to a East Asian mtDNA haplogroup but autosomaly he is very Eurapean with minimal Siberian ancestry. On Eutest V2 K15 he shows up as autosomaly fully West Eurasian. This is odd for an Iron Age invader, compared to other samples which posses almost exclusively west Eurasian mtDNA and have somewhat substantial eastern autosomal influences.

What you said about N-F2905 is possible but you have to remember that it's ancient TMRCA is possibly a result of an early split between European F2905+ and Asian F2905+ not necessarily early splitting of East Asian branches themselves. However I do believe that F2905 branches aswell as certain N-Tat branches experienced rapid diversification and growth in Neolithic North China spreading agriculture to the region before being replaced by O-M175. This could explain low levels of F2905 throughout East Asia, with its highest percentage being in the north.

Megalophias
10-30-2016, 10:37 PM
I believe the Iron Age Hungairan IR1 was thought to belong to Y6503, however I'm not sure if this conclusion has changed. As you mentioned before he does belong to a East Asian mtDNA haplogroup but autosomaly he is very Eurapean with minimal Siberian ancestry. On Eutest V2 K15 he shows up as autosomaly fully West Eurasian. This is odd for an Iron Age invader, compared to other samples which posses almost exclusively west Eurasian mtDNA and have somewhat substantial eastern autosomal influences.
Depends on the calculator. The analysis from the original paper assigned him a minor Siberian component.


What you said about N-F2905 is possible but you have to remember that it's ancient TMRCA is possibly a result of an early split between European F2905+ and Asian F2905+ not necessarily early splitting of East Asian branches themselves.
No, all known European examples belong to one branch three levels deep in Chinese F2905, and that branch has East Asian members too.

MikkaK
10-31-2016, 12:54 AM
Depends on the calculator. The analysis from the original paper assigned him a minor Siberian component.

This is what I said above.



No, all known European examples belong to one branch three levels deep in Chinese F2905, and that branch has East Asian members too.

Sorry, I was thinking of L732 not F2905. It seems like F2905 diversified rapidly in around 13000 ybp in China, with one of these branches ending up in Europe and East Asia at the same time.

Also I don't think L731 has any East Asian known members although you may be talking about L732.

Megalophias
10-31-2016, 01:00 AM
Also I don't think L731 has any East Asian known members although you may be talking about L732.
Yeah, L732, because it includes the Belarusian guy as well as L731. As far as I know L731 is very young so it wouldn't have any Asians in it, but there is the Chinese guy more closely related to L731 than the Belarusian guy is.

MikkaK
10-31-2016, 02:19 AM
Yeah, L732, because it includes the Belarusian guy as well as L731. As far as I know L731 is very young so it wouldn't have any Asians in it, but there is the Chinese guy more closely related to L731 than the Belarusian guy is.

Interesting, I was unaware there was a Chinese man closely related to L731.

On another note, I seem to remember a F2905 man being found in south India. Although at the time there was speculation that it was a lab error.

Megalophias
10-31-2016, 02:37 AM
Interesting, I was unaware there was a Chinese man closely related to L731.

On another note, I seem to remember a F2905 man being found in south India. Although at the time there was speculation that it was a lab error.
The Chinese guy is not closely related at all - like 6000 years apart - just closer than the Belarusian.

One of the Telugu from the 1000 Genomes project - HG04015 on the Y-Full tree - is N-F2905. Stray bit of East Asian ancestry I guess.

Ebizur
11-03-2016, 03:25 AM
I have inferred from the conversation between MikkaK and Megalophias that the individual from Belarus on FTDNA previously mentioned by MikkaK ("There also seems to be a L731 individual from Belarus on FtDNA") actually belongs to N-L732(xY15972) rather than N-L731, and is therefore more likely to be identical to YF03169 on the YFull tree. Does anyone know where the other N-L731 individual (besides the previously mentioned YF03641 from Pomerania Province), i.e. YF02093, is from?

As for the Telugu individual, I have assumed that his lineage reflects a minor influence from East Asia because Y-DNA haplogroup N of any sort has been found so rarely in South Asia, even among the kind of people who might be expected to exhibit a close genetic relationship with East Asians (e.g. Tibeto-Burman tribes in Northeast India and Nepal or Hazaras in Afghanistan and Pakistan). However, Hallast et al. (2014) have found haplogroup N in three Bhutanese individuals: bhu-1142 (N-F830≈N-CTS12473), bhu-1586 (N-F830≈N-CTS12473), and bhu-1582 (N-M2028≈N-M2019). N-CTS12473, to which the first two Bhutanese belong, is the same primary subclade of N-F2905 that contains HG04015 (a Telugu in the UK). The Pomeranian and (apparently) Belarusian guys in N-L732 are part of N-Z4784, the other primary subclade of N-F2905. The TMRCA of (N-CTS12473 + N-Z4784) is approximately 16100 [95% CI 13500 <-> 18800] ybp according to YFull. The paternal lineages of bhu-1142 and bhu-1586 are not very closely related to each other; the relationship between those two appears to be about the same distance as (or even slightly more distant than) the relationship between the most distant members of R1a1a1-M417 or R1b1a1a2a1a-L11. It is impossible to judge when their patrilineal ancestors might have migrated to Bhutan (and whether that migration might somehow be connected to the patrilineal ancestry of the aforementioned Telugu individual) without knowing how they relate to other N-CTS12473 individuals from China, Vietnam, Japan, etc.

If I am not mistaken, N-M2028, to which bhu-1582 belongs, is a subclade of N-M2126 (and ultimately of N-Tat) that is spread at least from Estonia to China (and, obviously, Bhutan) and often has been found in Turkic peoples (e.g. Yakuts). It shares a MRCA with N-L1026 (which contains all the frequently occurring European branches of N) approximately 6100 [95% CI 5200 <-> 7100] ybp. (One might note that N-L1026, like R-M417 or R-L23, exhibits signs of major star-like expansion that date to roughly the Copper Age or the Bronze Age in Eastern Europe/Western Asia.) Bhu-1582 shares a common ancestor with tur-15 (a Turk in Turkey who is likewise a member of N-M2028) about 3,000 to 4,000 years before present.

By the way, I have thought that IR1 (Iron Age, Pre-Scythian Mezőcsát Culture, Ludas-Varjú-dűlő, 830–980 cal BC, male, mtDNA haplogroup G2a1, Y haplogroup N) from Gamba et al. 2014 is identical to YF01795, the sole example of N-P189.2(xY7310) on the current YFull tree, who shares a MRCA with N-Y7310 approximately 4100 [95% CI 3100 <-> 5200] ybp. Have I made an error in this?

MikkaK
11-03-2016, 07:03 PM
I have inferred from the conversation between MikkaK and Megalophias that the individual from Belarus on FTDNA previously mentioned by MikkaK ("There also seems to be a L731 individual from Belarus on FtDNA") actually belongs to N-L732(xY15972) rather than N-L731, and is therefore more likely to be identical to YF03169 on the YFull tree. Does anyone know where the other N-L731 individual (besides the previously mentioned YF03641 from Pomerania Province), i.e. YF02093, is from?

As for the Telugu individual, I have assumed that his lineage reflects a minor influence from East Asia because Y-DNA haplogroup N of any sort has been found so rarely in South Asia, even among the kind of people who might be expected to exhibit a close genetic relationship with East Asians (e.g. Tibeto-Burman tribes in Northeast India and Nepal or Hazaras in Afghanistan and Pakistan). However, Hallast et al. (2014) have found haplogroup N in three Bhutanese individuals: bhu-1142 (N-F830≈N-CTS12473), bhu-1586 (N-F830≈N-CTS12473), and bhu-1582 (N-M2028≈N-M2019). N-CTS12473, to which the first two Bhutanese belong, is the same primary subclade of N-F2905 that contains HG04015 (a Telugu in the UK). The Pomeranian and (apparently) Belarusian guys in N-L732 are part of N-Z4784, the other primary subclade of N-F2905. The TMRCA of (N-CTS12473 + N-Z4784) is approximately 16100 [95% CI 13500 <-> 18800] ybp according to YFull. The paternal lineages of bhu-1142 and bhu-1586 are not very closely related to each other; the relationship between those two appears to be about the same distance as (or even slightly more distant than) the relationship between the most distant members of R1a1a1-M417 or R1b1a1a2a1a-L11. It is impossible to judge when their patrilineal ancestors might have migrated to Bhutan (and whether that migration might somehow be connected to the patrilineal ancestry of the aforementioned Telugu individual) without knowing how they relate to other N-CTS12473 individuals from China, Vietnam, Japan, etc.

If I am not mistaken, N-M2028, to which bhu-1582 belongs, is a subclade of N-M2126 (and ultimately of N-Tat) that is spread at least from Estonia to China (and, obviously, Bhutan) and often has been found in Turkic peoples (e.g. Yakuts). It shares a MRCA with N-L1026 (which contains all the frequently occurring European branches of N) approximately 6100 [95% CI 5200 <-> 7100] ybp. (One might note that N-L1026, like R-M417 or R-L23, exhibits signs of major star-like expansion that date to roughly the Copper Age or the Bronze Age in Eastern Europe/Western Asia.) Bhu-1582 shares a common ancestor with tur-15 (a Turk in Turkey who is likewise a member of N-M2028) about 3,000 to 4,000 years before present.

By the way, I have thought that IR1 (Iron Age, Pre-Scythian Mezőcsát Culture, Ludas-Varjú-dűlő, 830–980 cal BC, male, mtDNA haplogroup G2a1, Y haplogroup N) from Gamba et al. 2014 is identical to YF01795, the sole example of N-P189.2(xY7310) on the current YFull tree, who shares a MRCA with N-Y7310 approximately 4100 [95% CI 3100 <-> 5200] ybp. Have I made an error in this?

Unfortunately I cannot give any confirmed information about where YF02093 is from, Yfulls naming system seems to put YF before every European sample on this particular branch so that may be a clue. Also after double checking you are correct about the Belarusian (YF03169).

The Hungarian IR1 is also something I'm unsure about, I believe it was Genetiker who said IR1 was Y6503 in 2015.

Arame
11-10-2016, 08:21 AM
In the recent report (http://www.ras.ru/news/news_release.aspx?ID=aad006e1-b91e-4135-bc0d-c066c108a7f6&print=1) made by Anna Dibo in Russian Academy, the age of divergence/expansion of Finno-Ugric was somewhere between 3000-2000 BC which nicely corresponds to the star like expansion of this SNP.
https://yfull.com/tree/N-L1026/

She also added that exact location of PFU homeland is difficult, but somewhere from West Siberia to Ural is safe.
Maybe PFU contacted Afanasevo culture from which they got the Yamnaya like component and started to expand. That is why many Uralic people have affinity to Yamna.

lgmayka
11-11-2016, 03:43 PM
Unfortunately I cannot give any confirmed information about where YF02093 is from, Yfulls naming system seems to put YF before every European sample on this particular branch so that may be a clue. Also after double checking you are correct about the Belarusian (YF03169).

The Hungarian IR1 is also something I'm unsure about, I believe it was Genetiker who said IR1 was Y6503 in 2015.
Take a look at the Y-SNP page of the Polish Project (https://www.familytreedna.com/public/polish?iframe=ysnp). It lists the following. Note that L733 is at the same phylogenetic level as L731 (so far).
217892 Johann Groening, c1800, Krzewiny (Horsterbusch),PL N-L731
224763 Rostislav Voron, b.1930 and d. 2002 N-L732
25315 Stanley Drozdowski, Poland N-L733

In late 2014, I asked Vladimir Tagankin of YFull about the distinction between Y6503 and P189--in other words, who belonged to N-Y6503(xP189.2) ? He answered:
---
http://www.nature.com/ncomms/2014/141021/ncomms6257/fig_tab/ncomms6257_T1.html
Sample: IR1
Hungary, Ludas-Varjú-dűlő (Iron Age, Pre-Scythian Mezőcsát Culture)
Age: 830-980 BC
---

lgmayka
11-11-2016, 03:58 PM
By the way, I have thought that IR1 (Iron Age, Pre-Scythian Mezőcsát Culture, Ludas-Varjú-dűlő, 830–980 cal BC, male, mtDNA haplogroup G2a1, Y haplogroup N) from Gamba et al. 2014 is identical to YF01795, the sole example of N-P189.2(xY7310) on the current YFull tree, who shares a MRCA with N-Y7310 approximately 4100 [95% CI 3100 <-> 5200] ybp. Have I made an error in this?
YF01795 is this member of the Polish Project (https://www.familytreedna.com/public/polish?iframe=ysnp). His ancestry is unknown (although almost certainly European).
N15634 William REACE, b. 1863 Indiana or NY, USA N-P189

That same project has this member, who belongs to N-P189 but with a significantly distant Y-STR haplotype:
N14100 Frank DiCesare, 1884-1975, Teora, Italy N-P189

Ebizur
11-11-2016, 03:58 PM
In late 2014, I asked Vladimir Tagankin of YFull about the distinction between Y6503 and P189--in other words, who belonged to N-Y6503(xP189.2) ? He answered:
---
http://www.nature.com/ncomms/2014/141021/ncomms6257/fig_tab/ncomms6257_T1.html
Sample: IR1
Hungary, Ludas-Varjú-dűlő (Iron Age, Pre-Scythian Mezőcsát Culture)
Age: 830-980 BC
---Thanks, lgmayka. If IR1 belongs to N-Y6503(xP189.2) and has a TMRCA with N-P189.2 that is not significantly more recent than the TMRCA of N-Y6503 and N-Z4762, then the significance of the Eastern connection apparent in that specimen's mtDNA is greatly reduced.

In that case, does anyone know the country of origin of YF01795, the only example of N-P189.2(xY7310) listed on the current version of the YFull tree?

Ebizur
11-11-2016, 03:59 PM
You must have read my mind, lgmayka. :) Thanks again!

MikkaK
11-14-2016, 01:23 AM
I know it is somewhat off topic, but what has been the oldest example of N found in ancient DNA? The oldest I can find came from Neolithic North China, 4500BC is the oldest it could possibly be. This seems recent compared to other "North Eurasian" haplogroups like the 24,000 year old R Malta Boy or the 12,600 year old Q Anzick-1.

Gravetto-Danubian
11-14-2016, 02:48 AM
I know it is somewhat off topic, but what has been the oldest example of N found in ancient DNA? The oldest I can find came from Neolithic North China, 4500BC is the oldest it could possibly be. This seems recent compared to other "North Eurasian" haplogroups like the 24,000 year old R Malta Boy or the 12,600 year old Q Anzick-1.

Does Ust'_Ishm: 42 ky BP, NO * count ?
(Not really N, I know).

Gravetto-Danubian
11-14-2016, 03:11 AM
Thanks, lgmayka. If IR1 belongs to N-Y6503(xP189.2) and has a TMRCA with N-P189.2 that is not significantly more recent than the TMRCA of N-Y6503 and N-Z4762, then the significance of the Eastern connection apparent in that specimen's mtDNA is greatly reduced.

In that case, does anyone know the country of origin of YF01795, the only example of N-P189.2(xY7310) listed on the current version of the YFull tree?

If I following you & Larry, and the data from YFull & the Illumae paper, it points to a very early, perhaps pre-LGM branching of the' European' branch of N from the rest.
On the other hand, IR1's autosomal make-up points to recent admixture, or perhaps arrival from, beyond the Urals.


"LBK_EN:I0056" 32.85
"Samara_Eneolithic:I0433" 18.1
"Karasuk:RISE494" 17.6
"Altai_IA:RISE492" 11.2
"Satsurblia:SATP" 5.6
"AfontovaGora3:I9050.damage" 5.1

Whilst new aDNA can change this, it looks like there might have been at least a couple of movements of haplogroup N west, but they don;t appear to have been much earlier than the mid Bronze Age: one from a divergent branch (perhaps in western Siberia), and another, perhaps later one, bringing a package of haplogroup Ns (with local founder effects), and Uralic languages.

Ebizur
11-14-2016, 11:00 AM
If I following you & Larry, and the data from YFull & the Illumae paper, it points to a very early, perhaps pre-LGM branching of the' European' branch of N from the rest.
On the other hand, IR1's autosomal make-up points to recent admixture, or perhaps arrival from, beyond the Urals.IR1's mtDNA, which belongs to haplogroup G2a1 according to Cristina Gamba et al. (2014), also may point to a recent arrival from eastern Asia. (G2a occurs quite frequently among modern Turkic and Mongolic peoples, and also among Tharus in southern Nepal. It has been found throughout East Asia with somewhat lower frequency.)

However, it may be inferred from the presence of N-Z4784 almost exclusively in East Asia with a great TMRCA (approx. 13,000 ybp according to YFull, with many subclades of great time depth present in China) that at least some members of Y-DNA haplogroup N had proliferated in East Asia at an early date (although the presence of N-L732, one subclade of N-Z4784, in at least Belarus, China, and Poland with a TMRCA of approx. 7,800 ybp further complicates the picture). N-Z4784's sister clade, N-CTS12473, also has been found almost exclusively in East Asia, Southeast Asia, and the Himalayas, but it has a less impressive TMRCA (approx. 6,600 ybp according to YFull), and one example also is known from a Telugu in the UK (HG04015; TMRCA with Chinese & Vietnamese N-M1812 approx. 5,100 ybp). If the entire N-F2905 clade, which subsumes N-Z4784 and N-CTS12473, is assumed to have originated and expanded in East Asia, then at least one member of N-Z4762(xL729) must have lived somewhere in East Asia approx. 16,000 years ago. The estimated TMRCA of European N-P189.2 and the IR1 specimen's N-Y6503(xP189.2) Y-DNA is approx. 21,800 ybp, which predates the MRCA of N-F2905 (who has already been assumed to have lived in East Asia at approx. 16,000 ybp). It is even possible (though not very parsimonious) that IR1's Y-DNA might represent a now extinct (or at least not yet observed) East Asian branch of N-Y6503, parallel to a N-P189.2 lineage of more ancient residence in Europe, and a member of this hypothetical East Asian branch of N-Y6503 has happened to migrate (back?) into Europe to be detected as IR1. The spread of Haplogroup N would become extremely difficult to interpret if deep branches of the N-Z4784(xL732) and N-CTS12473 lineages happened to turn up in Europe in additional samples of modern or, especially, ancient DNA.

Despite the ambiguity of evidence regarding the origin and dispersal of haplogroup N, I would say that even the MRCA of N-Z4762 and N-Y6503 (i.e. the MRCA of all currently known examples of Y-DNA haplogroup N) is post-LGM in age (TMRCA approx. 22,100 [95% CI 19,900 <-> 24,400] ybp). The burning question about Haplogroup N is where its post-LGM spread has begun: near the western end, near the center, or near the eastern end of Eurasia. For now, I tentatively guess that it might have originated near the center of Eurasia. However, it is plausible that the ancestors of haplogroup N and haplogroup O (TMRCA 36,800 [95% CI 34,300 <-> 39,300] ybp) might have shared a homeland in North Asia (cf. Ust'-Ishim K2a*/pre-X'NO in southwestern Siberia approx. 45,000 ybp) before being separated by deteriorating climatic conditions leading up to the LGM. (In that connection, note that haplogroup O retains the most ancient diversity of any of the mainland Eurasian subclades of haplogroup K2, so it seems likely that it may have been the first to move south(east)ward to escape the deteriorating climate of the north, assuming an earlier homeland in Siberia for every one of those subclades. The ancestors of N, Q, and R might have lingered around the northern habitable extremes of Eurasia for somewhat longer.)

Kristiina
11-14-2016, 08:54 PM
G2a seems to be old in the Baikal area, as it has been detected already in the Baikal Neolithic. It is also found on the steppe area from Northern China to Eastern Europe in particular during the Iron Age. I have taken note of the following ancient G2 samples:

Neolithic Baikal Lokomotiv Kitoi G2a, Neolithic Baikal Shamanka G2ax3, Bronze Age Baikal Ust’Ida G2a x4, Bronze Age Tianshan Beilu Xinjiang G2a (223-227-278-362),

LBA Mezhovskaya Kapova Cave Russia M12'G (G2a?) (223 278 362 519),

Late Xiaohe Xinjiang G2a (223-278-293-297-362), Tagar Iron Age Oust-Abakansty Khakassia G2a (93 223 234 288 298 327), G2a Egyin Gol, G2a1 (223 278 362 519),

Iron Age Inner Mongolia Jinggouzi G2a1 (223-227-278-293-362), Iron Age Inner Mongolia Jinggouzi G2a1 (93 223-227-234-278-309-362), Iron Age Inner Mongolia Jinggouzi G2a (93 223-227-278-362), Iron Age Inner Mongolia Jinggouzi G2a (93 223-278-362), Iron Age Inner Mongolia Jinggouzi G2a1 (223-278-293-362),

Mezocsat Ludas-Varju-dulo Hungary (IR1) G2a1 (223 278 362 519),

Scytho-Siberian Pazyryk Tsengel Khairkhan Mongolia G2, Scythian IA Nadezhdinka Samara G2a4,
Hun Conq Hungary G2a, Hun Conq Hungary G2a (227G)

Its origin does not seem very southern, and in any case it was typical of later Eurasian Nomads, such as Scythians, Turks and Mongols.

MikkaK
11-15-2016, 01:30 AM
Does Ust'_Ishm: 42 ky BP, NO * count ?
(Not really N, I know).

I don't think so :)

Isn't the Oase man suppose to be
NO* or a closely related branch as well? Either way it seem odd that N (not NO) hasn't been found in anyone who lived before the middle to late Neolithic.

Gravetto-Danubian
11-15-2016, 01:35 AM
I don't think so :)
Ok !


Isn't the Oase man suppose to be NO*
Formally reported as F*, but could be IJK. I've not seen anyone claim NO.


Either way it seem odd that N (not NO) hasn't been found in anyone who lived before the middle to late Neolithic.probably not odd given that we have no Mesolithic samples from Siberia / trans Urals.
Botai might be interesting.

Megalophias
11-15-2016, 02:02 AM
Oase1 was confirmed to be NO* in Poznick et al (2016) "Punctuated bursts..." paper.

Right now we don't actually have very much pre-Neolithic DNA from Asia, so it's not surprising that we don't have old N.

MikkaK
11-15-2016, 02:37 AM
Right now we don't actually have very much pre-Neolithic DNA from Asia, so it's not surprising that we don't have old N.

This is true, but I am more so comparing other haplogroups found in North Eurasia like R and Q which have been found in multiple ancient Pre Neolithic samples located in North Eurasia, somwhere N should be found too.

Gravetto-Danubian
11-15-2016, 02:51 AM
Oase1 was confirmed to be NO* in Poznick et al (2016) "Punctuated bursts..." paper.

Right now we don't actually have very much pre-Neolithic DNA from Asia, so it's not surprising that we don't have old N.

Thanks MegaloP. Big find