What happened to the Artvin and Ardahan Turkish samples of Turkish DNA Project?

[Onur Dincer]

I have noticed recently that the Turkish samples from the northeastern Anatolian province of Artvin were all removed from all the public autosomal result pages of Turkish DNA Project. Here are the pages they were removed from:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets...pbY/edit#gid=0

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets...ryQ/edit#gid=0

https://turkishdnaproject.com/

From the page in the first link above, the one Ardahan Turkish sample was removed as well.

These removals occurred not long after I pointed to the very little Central Asian Turkic ancestry found in the Turks of Artvin and Ardahan and their quite similar genetics to Georgians and Laz in my comments in one of the threads of a blog followed by the owners of Turkish DNA Project and gave the first link above (which then included Artvin and Ardahan Turks as well) as a proof.

Bear in mind that Artvin and Ardahan Turks are natives of their respective provinces, they do not have any genealogically traceable ancestry from any other province. Since the 1960s, some people (e.g., Fahrettin Kırzıoğlu) incorrectly labeled Artvin and Ardahan Turks as "Ahıska Turks", but in truth they have no genealogically traceable ancestry from Akhaltsikhe (Ahıska), Georgia, they are as native as it gets. For info on the matter (in Turkish):

https://tr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ah%C4%...k%C3%BC_terimi

Besides, even if they were really immigrants from Akhaltsikhe, Georgia, that would not be enough of a justification for their removal from the autosomal result pages of Turkish DNA Project as that project still retains the Iğdır and Kars Turks of genealogically traceable Azerbaijani background from outside the territories of Turkey in its autosomal result pages.

In my comments in the blog thread I linked to, I specifically stated that I acknowledge the Turkish identity of people who regard themselves Turkish irrespective of their origins and that what I share about genetics is only about origins and has no bearing on people's current identities, which should be enough to clarify my position. So when some Turks with no or tiny amounts Central Asian Turkic ancestry are removed from the Turkish autosomal result pages of Turkish DNA Project, I cannot take it lightly. It sets a bad example for the treatment of people in Turkey. During my military service in Turkey I saw one Trabzon Turk (who usually have no Central Asian Turkic ancestry) being mistreated and labeled "non-Turk" by a Pan-Turkist Turkish guy just because of being from Trabzon.

I want to add that I am just curious about the reasons behind those removals and hope that I am wrong in my guesses.

[Alkaevli]

I want to add that I am just curious about the reasons behind those removals and hope that I am wrong in my guesses.

Yes, you are totally wrong. You could have tried contacting any of us before posting a thread full of assumptions, implications and accusations. It's easy to discredit a group of people, but it's not easy to undo it.

These removals occurred not long after I pointed to the very little Central Asian Turkic ancestry found in the Turks of Artvin and Ardahan and their quite similar genetics to Georgians and Laz in my comments in one of the threads of a blog followed by the owners of Turkish DNA Project and gave the first link above (which then included Artvin and Ardahan Turks as well) as a proof.

The second spreadsheet
The samples from Artvin and Ardahan were not removed from the second spreadsheet, they were never there to begin with. The spreadsheet is managed by Jiji, he can also confirm it.

Edit history:

March 24 (a day before that blog post):

 

March 28:

 

March 30:

 

April 1:

 

April 2:

 

April 12:

 

April 19:

 

The website
The website is managed by Leper. The sample from Artvin was never there. It makes absolutely no sense to remove Artvin and leave Trabzon, Rize, Erzurum and Ardahan (which is genetically identical to Artvin).


The first spreadsheet
I updated the first spreadsheet with the new results provided by Crimean on May 14. He manages the transferring of public individual results from GEDmatch. The Artvin kit was removed from GEDmatch by its owner.

 

1. Can you do me a favor and check the updated gedmatch spreadsheets on vahaduo? Do you see the averages of Meskhetian, East Anatolian, East Black Sea and Cypriot Turks? You do, right? Many of them have little-to-no Central Asian ancestry. They are not academic samples, so where do you think those samples come from? Let me enlighten you, the data are provided by our project.

2. There was simply no academic data from East Anatolia (which includes the Turkish-inhabited parts of Artvin and Ardahan) and Meskhetia. Turkish DNA project have collected samples from these regions/provinces and shared their results. We even sponsored an individual from Erzurum (where the level of Central Asian ancestry is very low) because the province was underrepresented.

3. Soon we will provide new samples to Davidski. East Anatolian Turks (who have lower levels of Central Asian ancestry) will also be represented on G25. Turkish_North will be updated because Giresun with relatively high level of Central Asian ancestry is currently overrepresented, we will balance it with new individuals from Kastamonu (who have lower levels of Central Asian ancestry).

4. Turks with little-to-no Central Asian ancestry (East Black Sea Turks, Meskhetian Turks etc.) are always labeled as Turks by our project.

5. The spreadsheets and the map contain East Black Sea and East Anatolian Turks with no Central Asian ancestry, we could have "removed" them too, aaright? We have simply no reason to remove any of our samples, we have no intention to hide anything. On the contrary, the genetic profiles of many non-sampled or undersampled provinces and regions were revealed by our project. There is always a solid reason if some samples are missing on the updated spreadsheets.

6. There are indeed people who think Turks from Trabzon are anything but Turkish. Some of them may even be very close to you. We are not part of those people.

Bear in mind that Artvin and Ardahan Turks are natives of their respective provinces, they do not have any genealogically traceable ancestry from any other province. Since the 1960s, some people (e.g., Fahrettin Kırzıoğlu) incorrectly labeled Artvin and Ardahan Turks as "Ahıska Turks", but in truth they have no genealogically traceable ancestry from Akhaltsikhe (Ahıska), Georgia, they are as native as it gets. For info on the matter (in Turkish):

https://tr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ah%C4%...k%C3%BC_terimi

Yes, they are natives of their respective provinces. Artvin-Ardahan Turks and Ahıska Turks was seperated by the border, the former did not migrate. They are now collectively referred to as Ahıska Turks because they are culturally (and genetically) identical to each other.

During my military service in Turkey I saw one Trabzon Turk (who usually have no Central Asian Turkic ancestry) being mistreated and labeled "non-Turk" by a Pan-Turkist Turkish guy just because of being from Trabzon.

That's very unfortunate, I doubt that most people in Turkey are aware of Trabzon's genetic profile though.

What do you think the air quotes (“Ahıska Türkleri”) on that blog post mean by the way? The owner of the blog (Sevan Nişanyan) clearly implies that Meskhetian Turks are not Turks but I can't see any comment of yours rejecting the implication.

Gürcülerden bahis açmışken “Ahıska Türklerini” de es geçmeyelim. Türk milletinin oluşum öyküsü açısından ilginç bir konudur.
1992-93’ten sonra resmileşen öğretiye göre Artvin merkez ilçe ile Yusufeli, Ardanuç ve (Meydancık hariç) Şavşat ilçeleri ve Ardahan Posof halkı “Ahıska Türkü” sayılıyor. Adı geçen beş ilçenin özelliği, bu yerlerdeki “eski” yer adlarının yüzde 90 ila 92’sinin Gürcüce olması. Kalanlar Ermenice. Türkçe yer adı, son yüz yılda ihdas edilenler dışında, iki üç tane. Yüzde birden az.

Such labels are directed not only at Trabzon Turks, the Turkish ethnicity as a whole has been dealing with such implications and labels for years.

[Onur Dincer]

Yes, you are totally wrong. You could have tried contacting any of us before posting a thread full of assumptions, implications and accusations. It's easy to discredit a group of people, but it's not easy to undo it.


The second spreadsheet
The samples from Artvin and Ardahan were not removed from the second spreadsheet, they were never there to begin with. The spreadsheet is managed by Jiji, he can also confirm it.

Edit history:

March 24 (a day before that blog post):

 

March 28:

 

March 30:

 

April 1:

 

April 2:

 

April 12:

 

April 19:

 

The website
The website is managed by Leper. The sample from Artvin was never there. It makes absolutely no sense to remove Artvin and leave Trabzon, Rize, Erzurum and Ardahan (which is genetically identical to Artvin).


The first spreadsheet
I updated the first spreadsheet with the new results provided by Crimean on May 14. He manages the transferring of public individual results from GEDmatch. The Artvin kit was removed from GEDmatch by its owner.

 

1. Can you do me a favor and check the updated gedmatch spreadsheets on vahaduo? Do you see the averages of Meskhetian, East Anatolian, East Black Sea and Cypriot Turks? You do, right? Many of them have little-to-no Central Asian ancestry. They are not academic samples, so where do you think those samples come from? Let me enlighten you, the data are provided by our project.

2. There was simply no academic data from East Anatolia (which includes the Turkish-inhabited parts of Artvin and Ardahan) and Meskhetia. Turkish DNA project have collected samples from these regions/provinces and shared their results. We even sponsored an individual from Erzurum (where the level of Central Asian ancestry is very low) because the province was underrepresented.

3. Soon we will provide new samples to Davidski. East Anatolian Turks (who have lower levels of Central Asian ancestry) will also be represented on G25. Turkish_North will be updated because Giresun with relatively high level of Central Asian ancestry is currently overrepresented, we will balance it with new individuals from Kastamonu (who have lower levels of Central Asian ancestry).

4. Turks with little-to-no Central Asian ancestry (East Black Sea Turks, Meskhetian Turks etc.) are always labeled as Turks by our project.

5. The spreadsheets and the map contain East Black Sea and East Anatolian Turks with no Central Asian ancestry, we could have "removed" them too, aaright? We have simply no reason to remove any of our samples, we have no intention to hide anything. On the contrary, the genetic profiles of many non-sampled or undersampled provinces and regions were revealed by our project. There is always a solid reason if some samples are missing on the updated spreadsheets.

Thanks for the clarification about the second spreadsheet and the website, I was unsure about the second spreadsheet, but for the website my memory should have misled me, sorry for the confusion. As for the first spreadsheet, the removals happened not much after my blog comments I mentioned above in which I linked to it while explaining the very little Central Asian Turkic genetic influence in Artvin and Ardahan Turks (in a blog that I know you follow), that is what made me suspicious, especially since not just the Artvin Turkish samples but also the Ardahan Turkish sample were removed from it whereas the Ardahan Turkish sample remains in the other spreadsheet and the website. Also, as I recall, there were multiple Artvin Turkish samples in the first spreadsheet, not just one, were they all removed from GEDmatch?

6. There are indeed people who think Turks from Trabzon are anything but Turkish. Some of them may even be very close to you. We are not part of those people.

If some of them say that they are not Turkish, then I cannot enforce them to say that they are Turks. But saying that Trabzon Turks are not Turks and then using this as a justification for their mistreatment (I am not talking about you of course) is something different.

Yes, they are natives of their respective provinces. Artvin-Ardahan Turks and Ahıska Turks was seperated by the border, the former did not migrate. They are now collectively referred to as Ahıska Turks because they are culturally (and genetically) identical to each other.

Yes, I am aware of the similar culture and genetics of Artvin and Ardahan Turks to Ahıska Turks, but labeling all those Turkish groups as Ahıska Turks is no different from, say, labeling Niğde, Aksaray, Kayseri and Nevşehir Turks as Nevşehir Turks. Also, like I said, that Ahıska Turkish collective label does not go back to times before Kırzıoğlu's writings.

That's very unfortunate, I doubt that most people in Turkey are aware of Trabzon's genetic profile though.

That Pan-Turkist guy was an active Internet user in civilian life based on what he told me, so I would not be surprised if he knew about Trabzon genetics.

What do you think the air quotes (“Ahıska Türkleri”) on that blog post mean by the way? The owner of the blog (Sevan Nişanyan) clearly implies that Meskhetian Turks are not Turks but I can't see any comment of yours rejecting the implication.

Gürcülerden bahis açmışken “Ahıska Türklerini” de es geçmeyelim. Türk milletinin oluşum öyküsü açısından ilginç bir konudur.
1992-93’ten sonra resmileşen öğretiye göre Artvin merkez ilçe ile Yusufeli, Ardanuç ve (Meydancık hariç) Şavşat ilçeleri ve Ardahan Posof halkı “Ahıska Türkü” sayılıyor. Adı geçen beş ilçenin özelliği, bu yerlerdeki “eski” yer adlarının yüzde 90 ila 92’sinin Gürcüce olması. Kalanlar Ermenice. Türkçe yer adı, son yüz yılda ihdas edilenler dışında, iki üç tane. Yüzde birden az.

Like me, Nişanyan is criticizing the Ahıska Turkish collective labeling of Artvin and Ardahan Turks and the Kipchak origin stories about them, not the Turkish labeling of them. He is also talking about their origins and place names, which are in line with their genetic results, so I do not think you would object to them.

Such labels are directed not only at Trabzon Turks, the Turkish ethnicity as a whole has been dealing with such implications and labels for years.

That is another issue, but at least Nişanyan does not call Turks non-Turk, irrespective of their origins.

[Buxoro]

“During my military service in Turkey I saw one Trabzon Turk (who usually have no Central Asian Turkic ancestry) being mistreated and labeled "non-Turk" by a Pan-Turkist Turkish guy just because of being from Trabzon”
To be fair sometimes opposite happens to Uzbek migrants in Turkey due to our racial differences

[Onur Dincer]

“During my military service in Turkey I saw one Trabzon Turk (who usually have no Central Asian Turkic ancestry) being mistreated and labeled "non-Turk" by a Pan-Turkist Turkish guy just because of being from Trabzon”
To be fair sometimes opposite happens to Uzbek migrants in Turkey due to our racial differences

Do not know the situation with the Uzbek immigrants in Turkey (have not seen many), but at least I can confirm you about the treatment of an Uyghur immigrant girl I know from Turkey. She was being mocked by a Turkish boy due to her different looks. He was calling her "China" all the time. So yes, mistreatments can go both ways.

[Buxoro]

Do not know the situation with the Uzbek immigrants in Turkey (have not seen many), but at least I can confirm you about the treatment of an Uyghur immigrant girl I know from Turkey. She was being mocked by a Turkish boy due to her different looks. He was calling her "China" all the time. So yes, mistreatments can go both ways.

What an evil irony mocking Uygur using word China considering current difficult situation of Uygur people in China
BTW Uygurs don’t look chinese and lot of their women are beautiful.

[DMXX]

Agree as we may, let's please avoid politicising the discussion.

[Jammies]

Removed post.

[Leper]

@Onur

1-) You are mixing things up with Artvin. Couple years ago we only had 1 sample from there and that person has deleted his kit long time ago. We don't have his results saved either. So Artvin was never there to begin with.

2-) That fact you glanced at a single spreadsheet, you couldn't see Ardahan there and decided to come up with such a post full of assumptions is disappointing. You should have at least asked us first.

3-) The story you mentioned about so called discrimination against Turks from Trabzon was totally out of place as well. As you know, most people here are not accustomed to stuff in Turkey and telling such individual vivid stories can only mislead people from the reality.

[Onur Dincer]

@Onur

1-) You are mixing things up with Artvin. Couple years ago we only had 1 sample from there and that person has deleted his kit long time ago. We don't have his results saved either. So Artvin was never there to begin with.

2-) That fact you glanced at a single spreadsheet, you couldn't see Ardahan there and decided to come up with such a post full of assumptions is disappointing. You should have at least asked us first.

I wrote my relevant comments in Nişanyan's blog in April this year, not years ago. Back then there were several Artvin Turkish results and one Ardahan Turkish result in your first spreadsheet I linked to, but sometime after my comments they were all removed.

3-) The story you mentioned about so called discrimination against Turks from Trabzon was totally out of place as well. As you know, most people here are not accustomed to stuff in Turkey and telling such individual vivid stories can only mislead people from the reality.

Such kinds of discriminations happen in every country and I did not generalize my experience. I mentioned it because, like Trabzon Turks, Artvin and Ardahan Turks lack or have very little ancestry from Central Asia and removal of such Turks from genetic databases or their non-inclusion in them can be misused by groups that define Turkishness based on genetic or racial considerations.