Ust'-Ishim and Oase1 belong to Haplogroup NO* according to a Chinese team

This was already determined by amateurs, then published in a proper paper by Poznik et al, "Punctuated bursts in human male demography".

So we don't need to rely on this highly dubious preprint for that information, thankfully.
 
Ancient Siberian and European remains, Ust'-Ishim and Oase1, belongs to haplogroup NO* according to a this new paper:

http://biorxiv.org/content/early/2017/01/18/101410

Would be interesting to see if there are more people who match with Ust-Ushim (Gedmatch Ancient DNA).
My aDNA match is 6 cM.
How did it spread form Siberia to the North Sea?
The guess is that in the Iron Age (early middle ages) trough the Finno-Ugric (high in N) from the East Sea to the North Sea. The Frisians were (6/7/8 th century AD) well known (slave-)traders in the Balticum.
Beter guesses are welcome!
 
Would be interesting to see if there are more people who match with Ust-Ushim (Gedmatch Ancient DNA).
My aDNA match is 6 cM.
How did it spread form Siberia to the North Sea?
The guess is that in the Iron Age (early middle ages) trough the Finno-Ugric (high in N) from the East Sea to the North Sea. The Frisians were (6/7/8 th century AD) well known (slave-)traders in the Balticum.
Beter guesses are welcome!

he's gone extinct
apart from being K, he has only 2 SNP's in common with NO
 
he's gone extinct
apart from being K, he has only 2 SNP's in common with NO

a year ago he was called ydna X .......above NO but X is now

Haplogroup K2e (K-M147) was previously known as "Haplogroup X" and "K2a" (but is a sibling subclade of the present K2a).
 
he's gone extinct
apart from being K, he has only 2 SNP's in common with NO
a year ago he was called ydna X .......above NO but X is now

Haplogroup K2e (K-M147) was previously known as "Haplogroup X" and "K2a" (but is a sibling subclade of the present K2a).


Thank you both.....mmmm label...relabel.....

Than is this the right picture (would make sense in my 'case')? PS I guess not because this is MtDNA....there is/was a mtDNA K2a and a yDNA K2a....(to make it all simple ;)

291m1ib.png
 
Thank you both.....mmmm label...relabel.....

Than is this the right picture (would make sense in my 'case')? PS I guess not because this is MtDNA....there is/was a mtDNA K2a and a yDNA K2a....(to make it all simple ;)

291m1ib.png

I was not talking about K2a for mtdna
 

This thread has been viewed 8775 times.

Back
Top