Page 9 of 24 FirstFirst ... 789101119 ... LastLast
Results 81 to 90 of 240

Thread: Why is E-V13 so confusing?

  1. #81
    Registered Users
    Posts
    1,006
    Sex

    Quote Originally Posted by Aspar View Post
    It's funny when people are using such a generic term as South Slavs. The best is to pinpoint exactly which South Slavic speakers you have in mind because there is such a big difference even among neighbor groups. If G25 is anything to go with (bear in mind I trust the competence of Davidski) then all Serbs are more distant to me than all Albanians and mainland Greeks except maybe some isolated groups such as Maniots.

    As for E-V13 I highly doubt that the proto-Slavs had any if at all. It's clear because most South Slavic E-V13's are yet to find a northern Slavic brother clade that dates from the end of before the common era such are some clades of I2a and R1a.
    Probably most of E-V13 in Slavs are post proto-Slavic period or the period after migration from their initial homeland and are results of assimilation. Because there is not a single shared E-V13 clade among all Slavs which dates from the end of before common era and on, except maybe E-L540 for which I've read here that it was found in a Serb, then it's obvious to me that most E-V13 clades we're absorbed in various Slavic people in their post proto-Slavic homelands.

    As to why E-V13 is that much present in South Slavs than other haplogroups that are presumed native Balkan first I believe E-V13 is not very significant in Slovenes while in Croats I believe is around 8-10% which is not that significant at all. If we speak about Bulgarians, keep in mind that G25 models some Bulgarians up to 25% Slavic only which is significantly less than Slovenes or Croats. Second it's obvious that some haplogroups such as J-L283 which was already found in BA Dalmatia didn't survived much outside some northern Albanians. It's less than ten percent among the south Albanians while it's insignificant among Greeks whose J2 is mostly J2a. Therefore there is no reason why this haplogroup would be as significant as E-V13 among south Slavs. R1b on other hand is significant among Slovenes and some Croats however the substructure would probably show that most R1b among Slovenes and Croats is of Germanic, Celtic and other non Balkan origin.
    From the paper quoted above, about the distribution of E in Poland:


    I thought its interesting that there is no negative correlation with R1a, actually rather the contrary. Would be interesting if these, presumably mostly E-V13 clades could be assigned to the various subclades.

  2. #82
    Registered Users
    Posts
    330
    Ethnicity
    Macedonian
    Y-DNA (P)
    E-Y16729
    mtDNA (M)
    H

    North Macedonia United Kingdom England Bulgaria
    Quote Originally Posted by Riverman View Post
    From the paper quoted above, about the distribution of E in Poland:


    I thought its interesting that there is no negative correlation with R1a, actually rather the contrary. Would be interesting if these, presumably mostly E-V13 clades could be assigned to the various subclades.
    It's interesting because both E and J have a hotspot in South Eastern Poland or the Carpathian region. I say it's interesting because from little I know about Poland this particular region is the most influenced by Vlach groups but also because this is a mountainous region which was probably inhabited by proto-Thracian people of Gava-Holigrady culture since BA times. I suspect that E-V13 is largely connected with the Carpathian mountains where it was able to survive.

  3. The Following User Says Thank You to Aspar For This Useful Post:

     DgidguBidgu (10-24-2020)

  4. #83
    Registered Users
    Posts
    1,006
    Sex

    Quote Originally Posted by Aspar View Post
    It's interesting because both E and J have a hotspot in South Eastern Poland or the Carpathian region. I say it's interesting because from little I know about Poland this particular region is the most influenced by Vlach groups but also because this is a mountainous region which was probably inhabited by proto-Thracian people of Gava-Holigrady culture since BA times. I suspect that E-V13 is largely connected with the Carpathian mountains where it was able to survive.
    Yes indeed, that's my opinion as well and that they might have spread in more Northern areas during Urnfield already, but in small numbers. However, after the Germanic and Slavic expansions, one could have assumed that their numbers would have decreased even more, yet there are parts of Central and Northern Poland with a frequency as high as in the mountainous South. I think that too needs an explanation. I would have expected a stronger concentration in the South, actually, than there is. Some Northern and Central samples had the same amount.

    Many studies produce conflicting results, an older one showed a clear cline:
    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/art...6/figure/fig4/

    Central Russia had back then more E than either the North or the South, comparable to these Polish results or slightly higher, compare table 2:
    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2253976/
    Last edited by Riverman; 10-23-2020 at 11:23 PM.

  5. #84
    Registered Users
    Posts
    1,682
    Sex
    Location
    Warsaw, Poland
    Y-DNA (P)
    R1a-L1280>FGC41205
    mtDNA (M)
    H2a2(b)
    Y-DNA (M)
    R1a-L1029>YP517
    mtDNA (P)
    H5a2

    Poland European Union
    Quote Originally Posted by Riverman View Post
    However, after the Germanic and Slavic expansions, one could have assumed that their numbers would have decreased even more, yet there are parts of Central and Northern Poland with a frequency as high as in the mountainous South. I think that too needs an explanation. I would have expected a stronger concentration in the South, actually, than there is. Some Northern and Central samples had the same amount.
    After the WW2, the Ukrainian (and Lemko) minority was forcefully resettled to the so-called Recovered Territories in today's Northern and Western Poland, so this may provide some explanation for what we see today regarding the frequency of haplogroup E. Actually, I'm afraid that most of those differences reported by Grochowalski et al. are not statistically significant (maybe except the exceptionally high frequency of haplogroup N in NE Poland), so we need much larger samples from all those subregions to get a better picture. Also, we should keep in mind that many modern Poles (especially in Western and Northern Poland) descend from people coming from former Eastern Poland (annexed by the Soviet Union), so some of the earlier inter-regional differences have been erased or significantly modified during the post-war period, and one won't be able to reconstruct the previous picture without focusing on people whose pre-war ancestors were of local origin.

    https://www.techpedia.pl/app/public/files/28738.jpg


    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...ine_en.svg.png
    Last edited by Michał; 10-24-2020 at 08:30 PM.

  6. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Michał For This Useful Post:

     Alain (10-24-2020),  Pribislav (10-24-2020),  Riverman (10-24-2020)

  7. #85
    Registered Users
    Posts
    300
    Sex

    Quote Originally Posted by Aspar View Post
    It's funny when people are using such a generic term as South Slavs. The best is to pinpoint exactly which South Slavic speakers you have in mind because there is such a big difference even among neighbor groups. If G25 is anything to go with (bear in mind I trust the competence of Davidski) then all Serbs are more distant to me than all Albanians and mainland Greeks except maybe some isolated groups such as Maniots.
    There was no need to specify, I said South Slavs because even in the least Slavic admixed south Slavs the proportion of E-V13 is around 20-25% while their non Slavic admixture around 50-60%, which to me is weird given other examples where that kind of autosomal replacement implied an almost complete replacement on the male line.

    Generally G25 says that Macedonians are closer to its northern neighbours, even Bosnians or Moldovans before any Albanians and Greeks, especially considering that that Greek samples they are closer to are in northern Greece and are clearly strongly Slavic admixed, in fact Macedonians appear closer to even non-Slavic admixed Northern Italians or Central European before insular Greeks.

    Probably most of E-V13 in Slavs are post proto-Slavic period or the period after migration from their initial homeland and are results of assimilation. Because there is not a single shared E-V13 clade among all Slavs which dates from the end of before common era and on, except maybe E-L540 for which I've read here that it was found in a Serb, then it's obvious to me that most E-V13 clades we're absorbed in various Slavic people in their post proto-Slavic homelands.
    Which is what I find weird, how can E-V13 alone compromise 20-25% of male lines in the least Slavic South Slavs when their autosomal admixture is still so Slavic? Especially considering all the other non Slavic y-dna lineages.

    As to why E-V13 is that much present in South Slavs than other haplogroups that are presumed native Balkan first I believe E-V13 is not very significant in Slovenes while in Croats I believe is around 8-10% which is not that significant at all. If we speak about Bulgarians, keep in mind that G25 models some Bulgarians up to 25% Slavic only which is significantly less than Slovenes or Croats.
    ??? Even if you give G25 plenty Balkan or NW European references you cannot get to 25% Slavic admixture, that's too low. What kind of models are you using?
    Last edited by Granary; 10-24-2020 at 07:55 AM.

  8. The Following User Says Thank You to Granary For This Useful Post:

     Michał (10-24-2020)

  9. #86
    Registered Users
    Posts
    1,682
    Sex
    Location
    Warsaw, Poland
    Y-DNA (P)
    R1a-L1280>FGC41205
    mtDNA (M)
    H2a2(b)
    Y-DNA (M)
    R1a-L1029>YP517
    mtDNA (P)
    H5a2

    Poland European Union
    Quote Originally Posted by Granary View Post
    I said South Slavs because even in the least Slavic admixed south Slavs the proportion of E-V13 is around 20-25% while their non Slavic admixture around 50-60%, which to me is weird given other examples where that kind of autosomal replacement implied an almost complete replacement on the male line.
    I am not sure if I understand your point, but it seems that for some reasons that remain unknown to me you find it very "weired" that about the half of genetic ancestry of all modern Southern Slavs (or, more precisely, from about 55-65% in the East Balkan region to about 40-50% in the West Balkans) comes from some non-Slavic people assimilated by the Slavs (mostly from a local pre-Slavic substratum). Why do you find it so unexpected when knowing that the Balkan region was one of the most populous parts of Europe in those days, and even after the substantial depopulation caused by wars and plagues the local non-Slavic people could not have been eliminated completely (just take a look at how easily the Germanic newcomers were "diluted" among the local people in Lombardy, Iberia or France)?

    Those numbers you provide indicate very clearly that E1b (mostly E-V13) constituted nearly 50% of the local pre-Slavic population in the Balkans, and there is nothing "weired" about it. Most importantly, this is perfectly consistent with the preliminary aDNA data from some Roman sites in Serbia (Viminacium, Timacum Minus and Lepenski Vir) where about 44% (or 17/39) of all male samples were members of haplogroup E.
    Last edited by Michał; 10-24-2020 at 09:22 AM.

  10. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Michał For This Useful Post:

     Alain (10-24-2020),  broder (10-24-2020),  Musashi (10-24-2020),  Pribislav (10-24-2020),  Riverman (10-24-2020),  Tomenable (11-23-2020)

  11. #87
    Registered Users
    Posts
    300
    Sex

    Quote Originally Posted by Michał View Post
    I am not sure if I understand your point, but it seems that for some reasons that remain unknown to me you find it very "weired" that about the half of genetic ancestry of all modern Southern Slavs (or, more precisely, from about 55-65% in the East Balkan region to about 40-50% in the West Balkans) comes from some non-Slavic people assimilated by the Slavs (mostly from a local pre-Slavic substratum).
    The autosomal part is not odd to me, what is odd is that there is still so much apparently pre-Slavic Y-DNA around despite that autosomal shift. Maybe I'm expecting the migration to have been more male biased than it was.

    Why do you find it so unexpected when knowing that the Balkan region was one of the most populous parts of Europe in those days, and even after the substantial depopulation caused by wars and plagues the local non-Slavic people could not have been eliminated completely (just take a look at how easily the Germanic newcomers were "diluted" among the local people in Lombardy, Iberia or France)?
    In fact I think the exact opposite for the autosomal shift, if I didn't know anything about genetics I wouldn't have expected Slavs to have had such an impact not only among Eastern South Slavs but also among Albanians, Vlachs-Romanians and European Greeks, compared to the weaker effect Germanic people appear to have add in the West outside the limes and Britain. My comment was specifically about the ratio between non-Slavic Y-DNA and non-Slavic admixture.

  12. The Following User Says Thank You to Granary For This Useful Post:

     Michał (10-24-2020)

  13. #88
    Registered Users
    Posts
    1,006
    Sex

    Quote Originally Posted by Granary View Post
    The autosomal part is not odd to me, what is odd is that there is still so much apparently pre-Slavic Y-DNA around despite that autosomal shift. Maybe I'm expecting the migration to have been more male biased than it was.
    I think you are right in finding it weird, but its easy to explain. In the Balkans the numbers of the locals were not just higher, but they were in some regions, especially the more mountainous ones, even fairly strong and able to resist. So the complete replacements happen, most of the time, if the conquerors make an "easy sweep" of a country, so especially where the land is flat and open, like on the steppe in particular. There you can have an almost complete "tabula rasa" with near complete paternal replacement rates. However, the situation is different if the locals have good strongholds and well-defended or even just hard to find places of retreat. Not just because they can endure the attack, but because, usually, after the initial onslaught, the incoming people settle down and soon afterwards the quarrels among themselves begin. So the new clans and local tribes search for allies and better relations with the local population, to gain the upper hand in their, let's say inner-Germanic or inner-Slavic fights. And that's the chance when especially the Vlach clans jumped in and became partners and allies on eye level. The same happened in Romania, where the Vlach clans, even though the Slavic influence was truly huge both genetically and culturally, took over as the leading element. That's why Romanians, Vlachs and Albanians survived, in the midst of Slavic, Magyar, Bulgar and German settlements. They just had a good position, especially in the mountainous and hilly regions.

    Its even possible that E-V13 was in parts of Pannonia at the same or higher level, but there they got replaced early on, to a much higher degree than in the more protected places.

    @Michal: You are right, its hard to extrapolate from the current data to the past. It might be more local continuity or not, we simply can't know without ancient DNA. Actually even early Medieval Polish might help a lot and look quite different, who knows until there are larger samples out.

  14. The Following User Says Thank You to Riverman For This Useful Post:

     Michał (10-24-2020)

  15. #89
    Registered Users
    Posts
    519
    Sex
    Ethnicity
    Albanian
    Y-DNA (P)
    E-V13

    Albania
    There is a possibility that during Early Bronze Age E-V13 was a Southern Balkan which only few lineages survived and went into exile where they thrived in Urnfield complex during MBA/LBA.

    Or, Cetina makes sense, some Cetinas went into Italy, some way down to Greece and some of the Cetina became part of Urnfield complex.

    North Carpathians is not convinceable IMO.

  16. #90
    Registered Users
    Posts
    330
    Ethnicity
    Macedonian
    Y-DNA (P)
    E-Y16729
    mtDNA (M)
    H

    North Macedonia United Kingdom England Bulgaria
    Quote Originally Posted by Granary View Post
    There was no need to specify, I said South Slavs because even in the least Slavic admixed south Slavs the proportion of E-V13 is around 20-25% while their non Slavic admixture around 50-60%, which to me is weird given other examples where that kind of autosomal replacement implied an almost complete replacement on the male line.

    Generally G25 says that Macedonians are closer to its northern neighbours, even Bosnians or Moldovans before any Albanians and Greeks, especially considering that that Greek samples they are closer to are in northern Greece and are clearly strongly Slavic admixed, in fact Macedonians appear closer to even non-Slavic admixed Northern Italians or Central European before insular Greeks.
    Ok, this is a simple model I've made with G25 for the Bulgarian average, the individual Bulgarian samples and me included:



    I've tried the model to be late antiquity or early medieval focused so to depict the most reasonable modeling however we are lacking early medieval Balkan samples so I've used BGR_IA here. HUN_Avar_Szolad should represent early Slavs, HUN_MA_Szolad should represent mixed Germanic and Pannonian ancestry while RUS_MA_Nomad should represent proto-Bulgar ancestry.
    The results are in line with "Garrett Hellenthal et al",
    In the publication by Hellenthal et al., based on a database of 94 modern populations, the authors inferred over 40% of the total autosomal make-up of the Bulgarians to a legacy of the "Slavic (500-900CE)" expansion.
    I will not discuss the ethnic Macedonian's average in G25 because there are samples outliers included in the average which are Macedonians by nationality but are NOT ethnic Macedonians, more specifically the sample 'Macedonian3' that appears to be member of the Bosniak or Serbian minority in North Macedonia. This sample is on dictance with me at 0.06431678 and is further away from me than all Serb samples in the spreadsheet and even further away than some Ashkenazi Jews. Laughable to say the least...
    Here are my coordinates, you can check for yourself:
    Aspar_scaled,0.121791,0.144205,0.026398,-0.012597,0.024928,-0.005578,0.00094,-0.001846,0.001636,0.006925,-0.002923,-0.002997,-0.000595,0.011423,-0.014794,0.010607,0.013299,0.000127,0.010182,-0.006753,-0.006239,0.006677,0.007641,0.002169,-0.000958
    So if we take the argument that on average the Bulgarians are 40% Slavic, this goes hand in hand with their combined I2a + R1a results from "Karacanak 2013" plus a small percentage of other lineages considering that proto-Slavs were most probably not only I2a + R1a but had a small percentage of something else as well:



    E among Bulgarians is at 22.1% while E-V13 alone is at 18.1%. This puts the E lineages comfortably in the zone of what might have to be considered 'native Balkan lineages'. Plus there is no discrepancy in the correlation between the auDNA and yDNA but pure linearity and proportionality.

    Quote Originally Posted by Granary View Post
    Which is what I find weird, how can E-V13 alone compromise 20-25% of male lines in the least Slavic South Slavs when their autosomal admixture is still so Slavic? Especially considering all the other non Slavic y-dna lineages.
    Refer to what I've said above about Bulgarians, the autosomal dna correlated with the Slavs is around 40% which is in line with their I2a + R1a percentages plus few percentages of something else...

    Quote Originally Posted by Granary View Post
    ??? Even if you give G25 plenty Balkan or NW European references you cannot get to 25% Slavic admixture, that's too low. What kind of models are you using?
    The model above has one Bulgarian at 34% Slavic ancestry however the G25 spreadsheets don't include all the differentiality among the Bulgarians. Especially are lacking results of most south eastern Bulgarians whose results I've seen on Eurogenes K13 and I still have them on my computer. One of them is my 4000 years distant y-dna bulgarian match. This Thracian Bulgarians can be modeled up to around 25% Slavic admixture with K13. Their K13 values:
    Bulgarian:Bulgarian_Burgas,17.87,17.95,17.56,13.49 ,22.08,3.01,3.93,2.18,1.07,0,0.86,0,0
    Bulgarian:Bulgarian_Burgas2,16.58,21.19,20.72,12.1 4,25.80,1.49,1.54,0,0.53,0,0,0,0
    Bulgarian:Bulgarian_Burgas3,16.82,20.54,20.60,11.9 9,26.09,1.53,1.78,0,0.66,0,0,0,0

  17. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Aspar For This Useful Post:

     CyrylBojarski (10-25-2020),  Michał (10-24-2020)

Page 9 of 24 FirstFirst ... 789101119 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Confusing DNA result
    By aminapamina in forum Eastern
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02-14-2020, 10:34 AM
  2. results are confusing
    By annalubov in forum FTDNA
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 01-01-2018, 01:00 PM
  3. Some confusing results from E-V68 SNP Pack
    By lgmayka in forum E1b-M215
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 04-17-2016, 08:58 AM
  4. DNA results, confusing heritage
    By Chukchi in forum Other
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 11-01-2014, 04:36 AM
  5. Confusing Y-DNA resuts
    By migoblu in forum FTDNA
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 10-19-2013, 01:23 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •