PDA

View Full Version : Early Medieval Slavic DNA (years 600-900 AD)



Tomenable
20-05-17, 10:58
From Eurogenes:

http://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2017/05/two-early-slavs-from-bohemia.html

"Two Bohemian Bell Beaker genomes from Allentoft et al. 2015 - RISE568 and RISE569 - are labeled as early Czech Slavs in the new Mathieson et al. 2017 preprint (see rows 148 and 149 in the spreadsheet here (http://biorxiv.org/highwire/filestream/40047/field_highwire_adjunct_files/1/135616-2.xlsx)).

Obviously these samples were initially wrongly dated to the Bronze Age and misidentified. They really date to 600-900 CE and 660-770 calCE, respectively. It's an unfortunate mistake, but also an interesting situation, because they've been analyzed in great detail in several papers and on this blog, and no one suspected that anything was wrong.

So the fact that these two Medieval Slavs from East Central Europe passed so convincingly for eastern Bell Beakers is a hint of very strong genetic continuity in the region since the Bronze Age. Indeed, they're very similar to present-day Czechs, western Poles (from Poznan), and eastern Germans, except perhaps with lower excess Western Hunter-Gatherer (WHG) ancestry and higher Yamnaya-related ancestry.

This is where RISE569, the higher coverage of the two genomes, clusters in my Principal Component Analysis (PCA) of West Eurasian populations:

https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-AdFUYPgz2PI/WR6HBhQS-UI/AAAAAAAAFoA/U0RImDPLtC8iu8qBHd3BKFk1s3mxAWYEACLcB/s1600/Czech_early_Slav_RISE569.png

Unfortunately, both are females, so there's no Y-DNA data. But I suspect that if there was, we'd probably know something was wrong, because their Y-chromosome haplogroups may have turned out to be relatively young Slavic-specific subclades of R1a-M548 and/or R1a-Z280."

LeBrok
20-05-17, 17:23
Great find. What are their GedMatch kit numbers?

LeBrok
20-05-17, 17:28
So the fact that these two Medieval Slavs from East Central Europe passed so convincingly for eastern Bell Beakers is a hint of very strong genetic continuity in the region since the Bronze Age. Indeed, they're very similar to present-day Czechs, western Poles (from Poznan), and eastern Germans, except perhaps with lower excess Western Hunter-Gatherer (WHG) ancestry and higher Yamnaya-related ancestry.
."Half a Europe passed convincingly as Bell Beakers, because it was a cultural phenomenon over huge area, and not one genetically coherent group. Having said that, these showen BB are mostly from Northern Europe (Not Spain) and are already mixed with EEF farmers the most of all the Steppe invaders. As much as today's Northern Europeans or Medieval Slavs for that matter. On other hand CW and Unetice cultures were different from Medieval Slavs, or today's Poles and Czechs, who have more EEF, Hungarian BA and Caucasian.

Sile
20-05-17, 20:22
From Eurogenes:

http://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2017/05/two-early-slavs-from-bohemia.html

"Two Bohemian Bell Beaker genomes from Allentoft et al. 2015 - RISE568 and RISE569 - are labeled as early Czech Slavs in the new Mathieson et al. 2017 preprint (see rows 148 and 149 in the spreadsheet here (http://biorxiv.org/highwire/filestream/40047/field_highwire_adjunct_files/1/135616-2.xlsx)).

Obviously these samples were initially wrongly dated to the Bronze Age and misidentified. They really date to 600-900 CE and 660-770 calCE, respectively. It's an unfortunate mistake, but also an interesting situation, because they've been analyzed in great detail in several papers and on this blog, and no one suspected that anything was wrong.

So the fact that these two Medieval Slavs from East Central Europe passed so convincingly for eastern Bell Beakers is a hint of very strong genetic continuity in the region since the Bronze Age. Indeed, they're very similar to present-day Czechs, western Poles (from Poznan), and eastern Germans, except perhaps with lower excess Western Hunter-Gatherer (WHG) ancestry and higher Yamnaya-related ancestry.

This is where RISE569, the higher coverage of the two genomes, clusters in my Principal Component Analysis (PCA) of West Eurasian populations:

https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-AdFUYPgz2PI/WR6HBhQS-UI/AAAAAAAAFoA/U0RImDPLtC8iu8qBHd3BKFk1s3mxAWYEACLcB/s1600/Czech_early_Slav_RISE569.png

Unfortunately, both are females, so there's no Y-DNA data. But I suspect that if there was, we'd probably know something was wrong, because their Y-chromosome haplogroups may have turned out to be relatively young Slavic-specific subclades of R1a-M548 and/or R1a-Z280."

And what he admitted is that he cannot separate a person that became a slav via learning the slav language or an ethnic slav , clearly these czechs cannot be ethnic slavs in this point in history.

LeBrok
20-05-17, 20:43
https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-AdFUYPgz2PI/WR6HBhQS-UI/AAAAAAAAFoA/U0RImDPLtC8iu8qBHd3BKFk1s3mxAWYEACLcB/s1600/Czech_early_Slav_RISE569.png
"Interesting how progressively, with every new culture and few hundred years passing by, Yamnaya genome moves constantly and unidirectionally South, towards European Late Neolithic Farmers, and a little bit towards WHG. Yamnaya->CW->Unetice->BB (I'm sure, only Northern BB). I think in case of NW Europe there were enough local farmers to do instant trick turning CW into BB. However in case of Eastern Europe (like Poland and Czechs) I'm expecting some farmer migration from BA Hungary (or alike) pulling genetics towards EEF and BA Hungary.

Hungarian Bronze is very interesting, and too bad bronze and iron age of South Europe is missing. This is where we start seeing the Caucasian/Anatolian Chalcolithic coming in effect. Hungarian BA is stretched toward today's Near East, and Anatolia, but also BA Jordan, but not as much yet as today's Balkans. The right time and the confirmation, as some of us could see the Caucasian influence over SE Europe in BA samples.
It is also stretched towards WHG, on the other end. What was the fresh source of it?

LeBrok
22-05-17, 05:51
I found those Czechs, Rise577 (F999951) looks exactly like Nordic/German Late Neolithic - Rise71. When farmers where already heavily mixed with first wave from Steppe. I don't think it is Slavic, more like Slavicized local, if anything.
Rise569 (F999954) is very close to my genome, Polish genome. I wish I had modern Czech gedmatch run to compare. This could be Slavic.

Tomenable
22-05-17, 15:57
RISE569 is kit F999954. RISE568 is not on GEDmatch yet, but I will upload it.

Tomenable
22-05-17, 16:24
RISE569, Early Czech Slav (660-700 AD). Eurogenes K13:

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 Baltic 41.29
2 North_Atlantic 38.59
3 West_Med 16.76
4 West_Asian 3.36

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 East_German 10.43
2 South_Polish 10.59
3 Southwest_Finnish 10.64
4 Polish 10.66
5 North_Swedish 11.56
6 Ukrainian 12.01
7 Ukrainian_Lviv 12.35
8 Austrian 13.07
9 Estonian 13.82
10 Russian_Smolensk 13.97
11 Estonian_Polish 14.31
12 Hungarian 14.37
13 Belorussian 14.39
14 Croatian 14.39
15 Swedish 14.45
16 Finnish 14.84
17 Southwest_Russian 15.87
18 Ukrainian_Belgorod 16.25
19 North_German 16.36
20 Lithuanian 16.62

Mixed Mode Population Sharing:

# Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
1 69.9% Lithuanian + 30.1% French_Basque @ 3.68
2 74.3% Estonian + 25.7% French_Basque @ 4.62
3 69.2% Estonian + 30.8% Southwest_French @ 5.77
4 80.8% Polish + 19.2% French_Basque @ 5.93
5 74.1% Belorussian + 25.9% French_Basque @ 5.99
6 64.6% Lithuanian + 35.4% Southwest_French @ 6.13
7 74.9% Russian_Smolensk + 25.1% French_Basque @ 6.2
8 56.4% Lithuanian + 43.6% Southwest_English @ 6.2
9 74.3% Estonian_Polish + 25.7% French_Basque @ 6.25
10 70.7% Estonian + 29.3% Spanish_Cantabria @ 6.29
11 73% Estonian + 27% Spanish_Aragon @ 6.51
12 70.1% Polish + 29.9% Southwest_English @ 6.52
13 66% Lithuanian + 34% Spanish_Cantabria @ 6.78
14 55% Lithuanian + 45% Southeast_English @ 6.79
15 61% Estonian_Polish + 39% Southwest_English @ 6.81
16 68.6% Polish + 31.4% Orcadian @ 6.82
17 72.4% Estonian + 27.6% Spanish_Castilla_La_Mancha @ 6.85
18 68.5% Lithuanian + 31.5% Spanish_Aragon @ 6.85
19 70.8% Polish + 29.2% West_Scottish @ 6.86
20 69.7% Polish + 30.3% Irish @ 6.86

Tomenable
22-05-17, 16:27
It still has more of "Baltic" than of "North_Atlantic", so this sample doesn't really look Celtic.

I think that Davidski is wrong when claiming that it shows continuity since the Bronze Age.

Tomenable
22-05-17, 16:36
Here is the other individual (RISE568), also from Brandysek.

RISE568 Early Czech Slav (600-900 AD). Eurogenes K13:

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 Baltic 53.69
2 North_Atlantic 31.67
3 West_Med 11.82
4 East_Med 2.82

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 Lithuanian 6.33
2 Belorussian 7.23
3 Estonian_Polish 7.33
4 Estonian 7.39
5 Russian_Smolensk 8.34
6 Polish 9.03
7 Southwest_Russian 10.88
8 Ukrainian 11.41
9 Finnish 11.51
10 Ukrainian_Belgorod 11.71
11 East_Finnish 12.13
12 South_Polish 12.26
13 Kargopol_Russian 12.32
14 Southwest_Finnish 13
15 Ukrainian_Lviv 13.17
16 Erzya 14.78
17 Croatian 18.6
18 La_Brana-1 19.4
19 North_Swedish 20.01
20 East_German 20.81

Mixed Mode Population Sharing:

# Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
1 93.7% Lithuanian + 6.3% French_Basque @ 5.36
2 92.7% Lithuanian + 7.3% Southwest_French @ 5.46
3 95.2% Lithuanian + 4.8% Sardinian @ 5.53
4 93.8% Lithuanian + 6.2% Spanish_Aragon @ 5.58
5 93.3% Lithuanian + 6.7% Spanish_Cantabria @ 5.58
6 93.7% Lithuanian + 6.3% Spanish_Valencia @ 5.65
7 94% Lithuanian + 6% Spanish_Castilla_La_Mancha @ 5.69
8 93.6% Lithuanian + 6.4% Spanish_Cataluna @ 5.7
9 93.8% Lithuanian + 6.2% Spanish_Castilla_Y_Leon @ 5.7
10 93.8% Lithuanian + 6.2% Spanish_Galicia @ 5.75
11 94.4% Lithuanian + 5.6% Spanish_Andalucia @ 5.75
12 94.2% Lithuanian + 5.8% Spanish_Murcia @ 5.75
13 94% Lithuanian + 6% Portuguese @ 5.78
14 94.4% Lithuanian + 5.6% Spanish_Extremadura @ 5.8
15 93.3% Lithuanian + 6.7% Southwest_English @ 5.87
16 93% Lithuanian + 7% Southeast_English @ 5.87
17 93.6% Lithuanian + 6.4% French @ 5.87
18 90% Lithuanian + 10% East_German @ 5.93
19 93.3% Lithuanian + 6.7% South_Dutch @ 5.94
20 93.4% Lithuanian + 6.6% Orcadian @ 5.95

Tomenable
22-05-17, 16:59
In case if you have doubts - this is how these samples are described:

See rows 148 and 149: http://biorxiv.org/highwire/filestream/40047/field_highwire_adjunct_files/1/135616-2.xlsx

http://i.imgur.com/STnF3Zk.png

http://i.imgur.com/STnF3Zk.png

They are listed here as well: http://www.ancestraljourneys.org/medievaldna.shtml

And you can download their genomes on your own if you want, here:

RISE569:

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/0B4Ph8NJKscV6fmE2ZHgtNDE4QUZmYndWM3RxOU1kUU9TdUJ6Y kdNRXZuZWY2YURRQmtVcjQ

RISE568:

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/0B4Ph8NJKscV6fnkwRzVhNzRVYU1TODFkYm9TTHFDUjNCTVhDc S03WllzVzdnWkZqY3Y5UUE

Tomenable
22-05-17, 20:55
From the Comments section:


http://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2017/05/two-early-slavs-from-bohemia.html



Szkx said...
Here is a PCA based on Eurogenes K15 results with merged northeastern and northwestern components with my 28 Czech samples from GEDMatch plus some Slovaks and Rusyns. Not very scientific, but informative enough. Note RISE577, Czech sample from Unetice culture and RISE569, Czech Slav.
http://jpeg.cz/images/2017/05/19/NPeg5.png


RISE577 = Unetice culture Czech Rep.
RISE569 = Early Slavic Czech Rep.


http://i.imgur.com/xasWt29.png


http://i.imgur.com/xasWt29.png

srdceleva
24-05-17, 21:37
From the Comments section:


http://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2017/05/two-early-slavs-from-bohemia.html





RISE577 = Unetice culture Czech Rep.
RISE569 = Early Slavic Czech Rep.


http://i.imgur.com/xasWt29.png


http://i.imgur.com/xasWt29.png
His results resemble mine and it's why we cluster together ( me as the Slovak American) I am most definitely a mixed Slav and I guess he is too, that's what it most likely seems like any ways. He's far too Baltic to be Celtic and saying he is Germanic.. I don't know, he looks like a slav mix, his Baltic is quite high.

Tomenable
02-06-17, 16:01
K36 genetic similarity of RISE568 to modern populations:

http://gen3553.pagesperso-orange.fr/ADN/similitude.htm

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

Tomenable
02-06-17, 16:03
K36 genetic similarity of RISE569 to modern populations:

http://i.imgur.com/N0hI0dw.png

RISE569 according to DNA.Land:

50% North Slavic
41% Northwest Euro
3.6% Balkan
1.9% South/Central Euro
2.4% Sardinian
1% Ambiguous

http://i.imgur.com/yxqTtx7.png

Sile
05-06-17, 07:57
K36 genetic similarity of RISE568 to modern populations:

http://gen3553.pagesperso-orange.fr/ADN/similitude.htm

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

Map of archaeological cultures of Barbaricum in 415 AD:

https://s15.postimg.org/qsu3ojrl7/415_AD_short.jpg

Both maps mentioned above merged:

https://s16.postimg.org/95vozh1pv/i_DZwu_UX.png

you claiming west-balts as slavs? ...............west-balts are a mix of finns and swedes

east-balts are a mix of estonians and finns

slavs are a mix or north-ukraines and belarus

Syky
09-06-17, 19:20
It still has more of "Baltic" than of "North_Atlantic", so this sample doesn't really look Celtic.

I think that Davidski is wrong when claiming that it shows continuity since the Bronze Age.

I think he is closer to Swedes, so in fact is more Germanic than Celtic. This would be more consistent with historical facts that there were Celts (Boii and others), than mixed with or replaced by Germanics (Marcomanni, Lombards, Thuringii, Vandals and others) and then West Slavs, who probably mixed with local peoples.

Tomenable
09-06-17, 20:01
I think he is closer to Swedes

But Northern Swedes? They have higher "Baltic" due to being mixed with Finns / Saami.


I think he is closer to Swedes, so in fact is more Germanic than Celtic. This would be more consistent with historical facts that there were Celts (Boii and others), than mixed with or replaced by Germanics (Marcomanni, Lombards, Thuringii, Vandals and others) and then West Slavs, who probably mixed with local peoples.

I did K36 nMonte for RISE569, with ancient and modern samples. Here are the results:

1) With modern populations (322 populations included):

RISE569

Poland_North 47.55
Dutch_Frisian 35.50
GR_Thrace 6.55
Albania_South 6.35
South_Holland 2.50
Poland_Sudovia 0.70
Kosovo 0.60
Holland 0.20
IT_Marche 0.05
(...)

2) With ancient samples (23 ancient samples included):

RISE569

RISE586 (Czech Unetice) 39.30
PLN17 (Iwno or Trzciniec) 29.40
RISE568 (Early Slavic Czech) 12.85
BR1 (Bronze Age Hungary) 8.85
RISE374 (Bronze Age Hungary) 7.85
IR1 (Iron Age Hungary) 1.75
RISE598 0.00
RISE150 0.00
RISE577 0.00
RISE154 0.00
RISE174 0.00
RISE276 0.00
I0803 0.00
I0099 0.00
I0247 0.00
I1955 0.00
BR2 0.00
RISE373 0.00
RISE397 0.00
RISE412 0.00
I0047 0.00
I0116 0.00
I0164 0.00

So RISE569 seems like a mix between Celto-Germanic and Balto-Slavic. Bronze Age (BR1 & BR2) / Iron Age (IR1) Hungary was likely something ancestral to Slavs. For example here is what modern Polish regional averages get in this ancient nMonte (the same samples included in comparison, except for RISE568):

RISE598 = Late Bronze Age Sudovia
BR2 = Bronze Age Hungary
IR1 = Iron Age Hungary
RISE150 = Polish Unetice
I0116 = East German Unetice
RISE174 = Iron Age Sweden
PLN17 = Iwno or Trzciniec
I0247 = Iron Age Scythian

http://i.imgur.com/MDmd9Cf.png

Syky
28-06-17, 14:57
But Northern Swedes? They have higher "Baltic" due to being mixed with Finns / Saami.



I did K36 nMonte for RISE569, with ancient and modern samples. Here are the results:

1) With modern populations (322 populations included):

RISE569

Poland_North 47.55
Dutch_Frisian 35.50
GR_Thrace 6.55
Albania_South 6.35
South_Holland 2.50
Poland_Sudovia 0.70
Kosovo 0.60
Holland 0.20
IT_Marche 0.05
(...)

2) With ancient samples (23 ancient samples included):

RISE569

RISE586 (Czech Unetice) 39.30
PLN17 (Iwno or Trzciniec) 29.40
RISE568 (Early Slavic Czech) 12.85
BR1 (Bronze Age Hungary) 8.85
RISE374 (Bronze Age Hungary) 7.85
IR1 (Iron Age Hungary) 1.75
RISE598 0.00
RISE150 0.00
RISE577 0.00
RISE154 0.00
RISE174 0.00
RISE276 0.00
I0803 0.00
I0099 0.00
I0247 0.00
I1955 0.00
BR2 0.00
RISE373 0.00
RISE397 0.00
RISE412 0.00
I0047 0.00
I0116 0.00
I0164 0.00

So RISE569 seems like a mix between Celto-Germanic and Balto-Slavic. Bronze Age (BR1 & BR2) / Iron Age (IR1) Hungary was likely something ancestral to Slavs. For example here is what modern Polish regional averages get in this ancient nMonte (the same samples included in comparison, except for RISE568):

RISE598 = Late Bronze Age Sudovia
BR2 = Bronze Age Hungary
IR1 = Iron Age Hungary
RISE150 = Polish Unetice
I0116 = East German Unetice
RISE174 = Iron Age Sweden
PLN17 = Iwno or Trzciniec
I0247 = Iron Age Scythian

http://i.imgur.com/MDmd9Cf.png

Wow, very good work. Here is K13 PCA with new Slovak and Hungarian samples, only Northern Europeans. I think it is better than K15.
http://jpeg.cz/images/2017/06/28/lsaCU.png

Tomenable
28-06-17, 15:01
Ancient Polish samples are already published as well !!!

Analysis of Iron Age and Medieval Polish genomes:

http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?6522-Early-Medieval-aDNA-from-Poland-coming-soon&p=252846&viewfull=1#post252846

PCA with two Iron Age and one Medieval samples:

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

I would like to see RISE568 & Niemcza in one PCA graph:

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

Tomenable
28-06-17, 15:12
Polish Niemcza sample is very similar to Czech RISE568, I think:

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/34258-Iron-Age-and-Early-Medieval-Polish-DNA?p=512978#post512978

Syky
28-06-17, 15:17
Cool!! Watch that and inform us, I have not enough time.

Tomenable
13-07-17, 03:06
"Archaeology of Early Medieval Poland" by Andrzej Buko (English edition):

https://brego-weard.com/lib/ns/The_Archaeology_of_Early_Medieval_Poland_Discov.pd f

https://books.google.pl/books?id=i6A3Q1WQIroC&pg=PA195&lpg=PA195&dq=Vladimir+went+to+Lachs+981&source=bl&ots=yLsVDe3ADn&sig=UcFvganPG-vlrKDE0FeCA2ECakw&hl=pl&sa=X&ei=G1KkU9epGe-h7AaA7IH4Dw&ved=0CCEQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=Vladimir%20went%20to%20Lachs%20981&f=false

Odysseus
22-08-17, 02:03
interesting

Bosnian Boss
01-09-17, 01:26
His results resemble mine and it's why we cluster together ( me as the Slovak American) I am most definitely a mixed Slav and I guess he is too, that's what it most likely seems like any ways. He's far too Baltic to be Celtic and saying he is Germanic.. I don't know, he looks like a slav mix, his Baltic is quite high.

How does one add themselves to this map?

Tomenable
09-10-17, 19:01
We have another Early Medieval Slavic sample:

Sunghir6 (1040-1220 AD) - GEDmatch kit T005824

This one is from the Grand Duchy of Vladimir.

His Y-DNA haplogroup was I2a1b2a1a1a1a3-A16681.

Eurogenes K36:

Population
Amerindian -
Arabian -
Armenian -
Basque 1.69
Central_African -
Central_Euro 8.12
East_African -
East_Asian -
East_Balkan 7.02
East_Central_Asian -
East_Central_Euro 23.49
East_Med -
Eastern_Euro 22.27
Fennoscandian 6.56
French 8.82
Iberian 0.91
Indo-Chinese -
Italian -
Malayan -
Near_Eastern -
North_African -
North_Atlantic 7.48
North_Caucasian 0.49
North_Sea 9.40
Northeast_African -
Oceanian -
Omotic -
Pygmy -
Siberian -
South_Asian -
South_Central_Asian -
South_Chinese -
Volga-Ural 0.86
West_African -
West_Caucasian -
West_Med 2.89

Eurogenes K13:

Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 Baltic 46.99
2 North_Atlantic 27.29
3 West_Med 12.79
4 East_Med 5.08
5 West_Asian 4.98
6 Siberian 1.22
7 Amerindian 1.17
8 Oceanian 0.46
9 Red_Sea 0.01
10 Northeast_African 0.01

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 Ukrainian 3.62
2 Polish 4.33
3 Estonian_Polish 4.6
4 Russian_Smolensk 4.72
5 Southwest_Russian 4.9
6 Ukrainian_Lviv 5.39
7 Belorussian 5.9
8 Ukrainian_Belgorod 5.92
9 South_Polish 5.99
10 Kargopol_Russian 8.67
11 Lithuanian 8.82
12 Estonian 9.47
13 Croatian 10.93
14 Erzya 11.03
15 Finnish 12.01
16 East_Finnish 12.5
17 Southwest_Finnish 12.82
18 Moldavian 13.9
19 Hungarian 15.11
20 East_German 16.04

Mixed Mode Population Sharing:

# Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
1 86.7% Lithuanian + 13.3% Sardinian @ 2.34
2 76.5% Ukrainian + 23.5% Lithuanian @ 2.53
3 93.6% Estonian_Polish + 6.4% Sardinian @ 2.58
4 60.3% Ukrainian + 39.7% Estonian_Polish @ 2.64
5 93.7% Russian_Smolensk + 6.3% Sardinian @ 2.89
6 63.6% Ukrainian + 36.4% Russian_Smolensk @ 2.94
7 71.1% Ukrainian + 28.9% Belorussian @ 2.97
8 55.9% Lithuanian + 44.1% Croatian @ 3
9 82.9% Ukrainian + 17.1% Estonian @ 3.11
10 75.7% Estonian_Polish + 24.3% Croatian @ 3.14
11 62.2% Lithuanian + 37.8% Moldavian @ 3.18
12 56.7% Estonian_Polish + 43.3% Ukrainian_Lviv @ 3.2
13 80.6% Estonian_Polish + 19.4% Moldavian @ 3.24
14 70.5% Ukrainian + 29.5% Southwest_Russian @ 3.29
15 81.3% Lithuanian + 18.7% North_Italian @ 3.32
16 65.9% Ukrainian_Lviv + 34.1% Lithuanian @ 3.32
17 91.8% Estonian_Polish + 8.2% North_Italian @ 3.33
18 75.7% Lithuanian + 24.3% Bulgarian @ 3.34
19 88.3% Ukrainian + 11.7% Erzya @ 3.34
20 67% Ukrainian + 33% Polish @ 3.36

Tomenable
09-10-17, 19:11
More about Sunghir6:

http://forum.molgen.org/index.php/topic,10....html#msg393890 (http://forum.molgen.org/index.php/topic,10359.msg393890.html#msg393890)

http://s019.radikal.ru/i635/1710/02/5bcbe7e6ee21.png

Fire Haired14
09-10-17, 20:16
How many SNPs does Sunghir have?

Tomenable
09-10-17, 23:25
Sungir6's K36 similarity map:

https://s6.postimg.org/5f9yexzjj/Sungir6_K36.png

https://s6.postimg.org/5f9yexzjj/Sungir6_K36.png


How many SNPs does Sunghir have?

I don't have this raw data file, but according to GEDmatch Diagnostic Utility - 828,818 SNPs.

So it is a high coverage, good quality sample.

Tomenable
10-10-17, 16:51
https://s1.postimg.org/3tj8tymf33/Screen_Hunter_2032_Oct._10_11.03.jpg

http://science.sciencemag.org/content/sci/suppl/2017/10/04/science.aao1807.DC1/aao1807_Sikora_SM.pdf

People from FTDNA with I2a1b2a1a1a1a3-A16681:

https://s1.postimg.org/1tf9eyws67/Screen_Hunter_2029_Oct._09_10.14.jpg

LeBrok
11-10-17, 05:39
Wow, this is the closest ancient genome to mine I've ever seen. I'm guessing we are at least 95% similar genetically. This is pretty good quality genome this Sunghir6. Our biggest difference is in uniparental DNA, but the rest is of wow similarity.



LeBrok


T005824
Sunghir6


Mine


Russia, 200 km NE from Moscow
1040-1220 AD


Run time
20.50

Run time
13.62


S-Indian
0.62

S-Indian
-


Baloch
7.47

Baloch
7.45


Caucasian
10.05

Caucasian
11.05


NE-Euro
57.28

NE-Euro
56.68


SE-Asian
0.54

SE-Asian
-


Siberian
1.22

Siberian
0.91


NE-Asian
0.35

NE-Asian
-


Papuan
-

Papuan
-


American
-

American
0.09


Beringian
0.07

Beringian
1.76


Mediterranean
21.53

Mediterranean
21.55


SW-Asian
0.86

SW-Asian
-


San
-

San
-


E-African
-

E-African
-


Pygmy
-

Pygmy
-


W-African
-

W-African
0.47

davef
11-10-17, 05:43
Sungir6's K36 similarity map:

https://s6.postimg.org/5f9yexzjj/Sungir6_K36.png

https://s6.postimg.org/5f9yexzjj/Sungir6_K36.png



I don't have this raw data file, but according to GEDmatch Diagnostic Utility - 828,818 SNPs.

So it is a high coverage, good quality sample.



Sungir6 is quite the Polish fella

davef
11-10-17, 08:58
Wow, this is the closest ancient genome to mine I've ever seen. I'm guessing we are at least 95% similar genetically. This is pretty good quality genome this Sunghir6. Our biggest difference is in uniparental DNA, but the rest is of wow similarity.


LeBrok


T005824
Sunghir6


Mine


Russia, 200 km NE from Moscow
1040-1220 AD


Run time
20.50

Run time
13.62


S-Indian
0.62

S-Indian
-


Baloch
7.47

Baloch
7.45


Caucasian
10.05

Caucasian
11.05


NE-Euro
57.28

NE-Euro
56.68


SE-Asian
0.54

SE-Asian
-


Siberian
1.22

Siberian
0.91


NE-Asian
0.35

NE-Asian
-


Papuan
-

Papuan
-


American
-

American
0.09


Beringian
0.07

Beringian
1.76


Mediterranean
21.53

Mediterranean
21.55


SW-Asian
0.86

SW-Asian
-


San
-

San
-


E-African
-

E-African
-


Pygmy
-

Pygmy
-


W-African
-

W-African
0.47


LeBrok, are you a medieval Pole who stumbled into a time machine set course for the 21st century? ;)
Seriously, you fit Sunghir6 almost perfectly.

srdceleva
15-10-17, 18:23
His MDLP K23b results place him closest to West Ukrainians, supporting the theory that slavs originated there. He's Y haplogroup I2a is also common there. A coincidence?

1European_Hunters_Gatherers49.742Caucasian29.573Eu ropean_Early_Farmers12.564Ancestral_Altaic3.865Arc tic1.306Amerindian1.05

Finished reading population data. 620 populations found.
23 components mode.

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

Least-squares method.

Using 1 population approximation:
1 Ukrainian_West_ @ 4.266315
2 Kashub_ @ 4.837808
3 Slovak_ @ 5.131750
4 Sorb_ @ 5.636687
5 Ukrainian_Center_ @ 5.777774
6 Belarusian-East_ @ 6.334647
7 Belarusian_West_ @ 6.471552
8 Ukrainian_East_ @ 6.737667
9 Russian-West_ @ 6.972755
10 Russian_South_ @ 6.995791
11 Russian_North_ @ 7.049220
12 German_ @ 7.641067
13 Czech_ @ 7.650525
14 Russian_Meshtchyora_ @ 7.810094
15 Russian-North-West_ @ 8.031343
16 Ukrainian_ @ 8.295169
17 Don_cossack_ @ 8.441618
18 Russian-Upper-Volga_ @ 8.585110
19 Slovenian_ @ 9.493657
20 Hungarian_ @ 9.671993




Sent from my KIW-L21 using Tapatalk

Tomenable
24-10-17, 19:27
For these who claim that modern Polish R1b was brought by the German Ostsiedlung after 1250-1300 AD, rather than being indigenous to Poland, here is a surprise. Sample from Early Medieval Gniezno (the first capital city of Poland), dated to 1000-1200 AD, has positive calls for R1b:

https://www.ebi.ac.uk/ena/data/view/PRJNA354503

Gniezno (1000AD-1200AD):

Gnie1 http://www.ebi.ac.uk/ena/data/view/SAMN06046900
Gnie2 http://www.ebi.ac.uk/ena/data/view/SAMN06046901

Y-DNA calls for one of these Gniezno samples:

L150.1/PF6274.1/S351.1 = R1b1a2
PF6274.1/L150.1/S351.1 = R1b1a2
S351.1/L150.1/PF6274.1 = R1b1a2

So we have R1b in Poland long before any German settlements.

========================

Summary of Y-DNA from Early Medieval Polish samples (tested so far):

ME_7, Markowice (1000-1200 AD), I1a2a2a5-Y5384
GO_1, Gniezno (1000-1200 AD), R1b1a2-L150.1
NA_13, Niemcza, (900-1000 AD), I2a1b2-L621
NA_18, Niemcza, (900-1000 AD), J2a1a-L26

I'm surprised by lack of R1a. But these are only 4 samples, only the beginning:

https://www.ncn.gov.pl/finansowanie-nauki/przyklady-projektow/figlerowicz?language=en

https://s4.postimg.org/3n9kl6d5p/mapa.jpg

LeBrok
25-10-17, 03:14
Well, it still could be mostly germanic haplogroups from mixing with leftovers of germanic tribes during slavic expansion. But I don't care either way. ;)

Tomenable
25-10-17, 03:35
LeBrok, what do you think about Slavic results from Bronze Age Tollense?:

https://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/34751-More-on-the-Tollensee-Valley-battle-site-inc-genetics?p=522308&viewfull=1#post522308

I mean, the average looks Slavic-German. But they were from 2 armies. And some look 100% Danish (like WEZ83), some look 100% Slavic. Makes sense because it was probably a battle between 2 different ethnic groups, not a "civil war".