Page 20 of 77 FirstFirst ... 1018192021223070 ... LastLast
Results 191 to 200 of 768

Thread: Slavic Chronology

  1. #191
    Suspended Account
    Posts
    7,208
    Sex
    Location
    Poznan, Poland
    Ethnicity
    Polish (Wielkopolans)
    Nationality
    Polish
    Y-DNA (P)
    R1b-L617 Kapuscinski
    mtDNA (M)
    W6a
    Y-DNA (M)
    R1a-L1029 Meller

    Poland Poland Pomerania European Union Polish–LithuanianCommonwealth
    I noticed that on Anthrogenica many people are modelling Lithuanians with Av2 - but nobody asked where it came from.
    And it could be from Proto-East Balts of hillfort-building cultures, who could be similar autosomally to Szolad Av2 sample.

    Perhaps something intermediate between Av2 and Moksha.

  2. #192
    Registered Users
    Posts
    979
    Sex

    Quote Originally Posted by Tomenable View Post
    Nope, they are too early for East Baltic. East Balts came later and introduced N1c haplogroup in my opinion.

    Those Proto-East Balts of hillfort-building cultures could actually be autosomally similar to modern Moksha.
    I meant it was some early form of East Baltic, which split off from the proto-Lithuanian/Latvian branch before they acquired n1c or some additional autosomal influences.

    LVA/EST_BA were also hillfort builders and also came from the Russsian forest zone. proto-Lithuanian/Latvians were the second wave of migration from the same region.

  3. #193
    Suspended Account
    Posts
    7,208
    Sex
    Location
    Poznan, Poland
    Ethnicity
    Polish (Wielkopolans)
    Nationality
    Polish
    Y-DNA (P)
    R1b-L617 Kapuscinski
    mtDNA (M)
    W6a
    Y-DNA (M)
    R1a-L1029 Meller

    Poland Poland Pomerania European Union Polish–LithuanianCommonwealth
    Quote Originally Posted by Standardized Ape View Post
    Moksha are not a very old people in terms of genetic structure.
    I used Moksha just as a proxy for a population from which we have no samples so far.

    Moksha are autosomally a Baltic-Uralic mix, and in terms of Y-DNA they are R1a + N1c mix.

    Therefore they can be a good proxy for a Proto-East Baltic population with R1a + N1c.

  4. #194
    Registered Users
    Posts
    979
    Sex

    Quote Originally Posted by Tomenable View Post
    But it makes no sense to claim that modern Lithuanians are Ukrainians/Slavs who came and replaced the previous Baltic_BA population.

    Can you try the same also with Latvians (who have probably less of recent Slavic admixture than Lithuanians)?
    I just tried it because it works well in g25. I think the "Ukrainian" represents the proto-Lithuanians. if proto-Lithuanians were from Dnieper-Dvina or thereabouts, it's possible they were south-shifted and similar to Ukrainians.

    Latvians aren't in the human origins dataset, I'll try to merge them later.

  5. #195
    Suspended Account
    Posts
    7,208
    Sex
    Location
    Poznan, Poland
    Ethnicity
    Polish (Wielkopolans)
    Nationality
    Polish
    Y-DNA (P)
    R1b-L617 Kapuscinski
    mtDNA (M)
    W6a
    Y-DNA (M)
    R1a-L1029 Meller

    Poland Poland Pomerania European Union Polish–LithuanianCommonwealth
    Quote Originally Posted by bce View Post
    I think the "Ukrainian" represents the proto-Lithuanians.
    Makes no sense. Use a population rich in N1c to represent proto-Lithuanians, and also proto-Latvians.

    Also can you show us what kind of Ukrainian average did you use (paste here their G25 coordinates)?

    Quote Originally Posted by bce View Post
    Latvians aren't in the human origins dataset, I'll try to merge them later.
    Okay.

    Quote Originally Posted by bce View Post
    if proto-Lithuanians were from Dnieper-Dvina or thereabouts, it's possible they were south-shifted and similar to Ukrainians.
    Also similar to Av2, but with a high percentage of N1c haplogroup.
    Last edited by Tomenable; 05-16-2022 at 10:45 AM.

  6. #196
    Registered Users
    Posts
    1,510
    Sex
    Omitted
    Y-DNA (P)
    N - Z16980

    Quote Originally Posted by Tomenable View Post
    I used Moksha just as a proxy for a population from which we have no samples so far.

    Moksha are autosomally a Baltic-Uralic mix, and in terms of Y-DNA they are R1a + N1c mix.

    Therefore they can be a good proxy for a Proto-East Baltic population with R1a + N1c.
    Not really I used all Lithuanians, Ukrainians, Poles and Latvians for Moksha:
    Baltic Uralic mix.png

    edit: I also had LVA_BA there, but Mokshas were unimpressed.
    Removing Ukrainians with same source populations gave Moksha as 80% Belarus, 20% Poles. Now if I removed Belarus too, to keep just Balts and Poles, then Moksha becomes 55% Polish 45% of Lithuanian_PA (which is the most Slavic of Lithuanian regions, South Lithuania).
    Last edited by parastais; 05-16-2022 at 10:50 AM.

  7. #197
    Registered Users
    Posts
    594
    Sex

    Quote Originally Posted by Tomenable View Post
    I used Moksha just as a proxy for a population from which we have no samples so far.

    Moksha are autosomally a Baltic-Uralic mix, and in terms of Y-DNA they are R1a + N1c mix.

    Therefore they can be a good proxy for a Proto-East Baltic population with R1a + N1c.
    And what if this population is already represented by samples from Estonia? I just think it's too contrived to have to imagine hypothetical populations.

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

     CopperAxe (05-16-2022)

  9. #198
    Registered Users
    Posts
    979
    Sex

    Quote Originally Posted by Tomenable View Post
    Also can you show us what kind of Ukrainian average did you use (paste here their G25 coordinates)?
    I didn't do that g25 model, parastais did.

    for qpadm I used the Human origins Ukrainians (they include Belgorod, Lviv, etc)

  10. The Following User Says Thank You to bce For This Useful Post:

     Tomenable (05-16-2022)

  11. #199
    Registered Users
    Posts
    1,510
    Sex
    Omitted
    Y-DNA (P)
    N - Z16980

    G25 for Ukrainians I think we made as average of different Ukrainian regions at Balto-Slavica. Or I took from earlier Davidsky, I dont remember, I have it in Word Doc. This is sample:
    Ukrainian,0.1309273,0.1240867,0.0683506,0.0575551, 0.0376867,0.0212936,0.0087651,0.0113072,-0.002891,-0.0210999,-0.0016327,-0.0076594,0.0153563,0.0216328,-0.0112354,-0.0010965,0.0046903,-0.0006985,0.0025989,0.0017002,-0.0044989,-0.003479,0.0067387,-0.0040578,0.0007217

    I just remember that in Balto-Slavica it was proved that best for Moksha was a model of 90% Ukraine and 10% Komi. Or something similar.

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

     Tomenable (05-16-2022)

  13. #200
    Banned
    Posts
    342
    Sex

    Quote Originally Posted by Bane View Post
    I understand all that, no need to explain Hungarians to me.
    I just wanted to dispute Uka's argument that R-M458 can't represent a Slavic/Venedic component compared to R-CTS1211 for which it seems to make sense to connect it to Ancient Balts.

    In other words R-CTS1211 is primarily Slavic today and was Baltic 2500 years ago, the same way R-CTS1211 in Hungarians is Hungarian today as it was Slavic 1200 years ago.
    You completely misunderstood me then, because you were disputing something that I never argued. I disputed the claim M458 couldn't be Venedic as he was claiming it was Balti-Slavic which has zero evidence. R-Z280 is Balto-Slavic however, and had diversity in Balts AND Slavs stretching back between the Iron Age and Bronze Age. Unlike M458 which has zero diversity in Balts(all of which comes from the Slavic expansion), and only has a diversity in Slavs mostly from late antiquity to the early medieval(with exception of the Poles), which supports the idea that Proto-Slavic/Pre-Slavic developed pretty late from a Southern Baltic/Balto-Slavic dialect. Otherwise, if one is to argue Proto-Slavic diverged 1500BCE, well then, Z280>CTS1211 has diversity in Slavs going back that far so it likely was Proto-Slavic. Unless one is willing to accept the late divergence of Proto-Slavic from Balto-Slavic which is supported by the diversity of M458 and Y3120 in the Slavic population.

    As Ph2ter showed, most diversity of both branches in Slavs doesnt stretch further than 300BCE.
    Last edited by Uka; 05-16-2022 at 10:58 AM.

  14. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Uka For This Useful Post:

     Bane (05-16-2022),  JoeyP37 (05-16-2022),  leonardo (05-16-2022)

Page 20 of 77 FirstFirst ... 1018192021223070 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 14
    Last Post: 09-20-2020, 08:12 AM
  2. Replies: 7
    Last Post: 09-06-2019, 10:00 PM
  3. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 12-05-2017, 01:42 PM
  4. Poll: Pan-Slavic or individual Slavic language sections?
    By Administrator in forum Forum Support
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 09-25-2015, 04:07 PM
  5. Chronology of European mtDNA
    By Fire Haired in forum Other
    Replies: 94
    Last Post: 10-16-2013, 03:03 PM

Posting Permissions

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