New dedicated page for Y-haplogroup N1c

[Nobody1]

apparently amateurs are not the only ones who caught onto that. A study published in Russian Journal of Genetic Genealogy (in Russian, "Внутренняя структура якутской ветви гаплогруппы N1c1 Y-хромосомы", Adamov 2014) found what seems to be a defining SNP (M2019) for Yakut branch that separates it from others. Fitting known history, in light of that and other differences the Yakut branch is not ancestral to more widespread clades but an end to one migratory path like Sub-Saharan R1b-V88.

Not exactly;
The R1b scenario was a split [P25(M415)] into two diff. migratory routes; The N1c1 scenario is the same migratory route with diff. out branches from it; And the Yakut branch (as such) is of course not ancestral to the others but what created the Yakut branch upstream is equally ancestral to the other branches;

[Salbrox]

Not exactly;
The R1b scenario was a split [P25(M415)] into two diff. migratory routes; The N1c1 scenario is the same migratory route with diff. out branches from it; And the Yakut branch (as such) is of course not ancestral to the others but what created the Yakut branch upstream is equally ancestral to the other branches;

Genetically that situation is similar to how R1b (M415) is equally ancestral to V88 and P297. The geographical differences in migration routes are relative in comparison, the main difference between the splits of R1b(V88) and N1c1 (M2019) from others is that the men carrying the former travelled a longer distance before settling down.

[Salbrox]

why should they change language while fleeing ?

actualy the whole tribe didn't flee, the tribe got killed and just a few survivors escaped
so a founder effect may have created N1c1

The fleeing people didn't change language, but the local siberians they mingled with did. Modern Yakuts would be the result of this merger.

[bicicleur]

The fleeing people didn't change language, but the local siberians they mingled with did. Modern Yakuts would be the result of this merger.

'In Siberia, haplogroup N-M46 reaches a maximum frequency of approximately 90% among the Yakuts, a Turkic people who live mainly in the Sakha (Yakutia) Republic. However, it is practically non-existent among many of the Yakuts' neighboring ethnic groups, such as Tungusic speakers.'

is what wikipeadia says
if that is correct, I wonder how much intermingling could have happened

[Salbrox]

'In Siberia, haplogroup N-M46 reaches a maximum frequency of approximately 90% among the Yakuts, a Turkic people who live mainly in the Sakha (Yakutia) Republic. However, it is practically non-existent among many of the Yakuts' neighboring ethnic groups, such as Tungusic speakers.'

is what wikipeadia says
if that is correct, I wonder how much intermingling could have happened

Quite a lot obviously. N1c frequency contrast there suggests that the incoming turkics imposed both their language and Y-DNA, but also that N1c1 came recently to that part of Siberia and did not have time to spread. Autosomally Yakuts are similar to neighbouring Siberians rather than Turkics of Mongolia and Altai (who are East-Central Asian rather than North Siberian), which is easiest to explain with an elite dominance model. The populations involved must have also been small, because Yakuts have extremely low Y-STR diversity.

It would probably be prudent to some day revise that Hong Shi et al map in a way that moves the main migration route to South Siberia/Central Asia, with diverging arrows moving to North Siberia and ending there. The model they present was more acceptable at the time of publication last year, because most significant Yakut-specific SNP's were not publicized then and they seemed ancestral to many more N1c1 clades in that regard - and only in that regard, not in light of their known population history and Y-STR's.

Y-STR diversity within a haplogroup is greatest in ancestral regions, and in N1c's case that's Southwestern China's Tibeto-Burman population (shown in Hong Shi et al). Second comes Europe, and only then Siberia - and that's all Siberian N1c put together, not just Yakuts. If the bulk of N1c was ever in North Siberia before getting to Europe, there should be higher STR diversity and perhaps also ancestral subclades. Last year it seemed that the former didn't exist there, but also that the latter could have, in Yakutia. But science marches on and now it looks like there's neither.

[gyms]

More recently, the conventional framework of Uralic studies has been challenged
from two points of view. On the one hand, the so-called Roots Group,
led by Kalevi Wiik (e.g. 2004) and anticipated by János Pusztay (1996), has
proposed that the Uralic comparative corpus, or at least a considerable part of
it, should be explained as the result of areal convergence, rather than genetic divergence.
If this were the case, there would have been no single coherent Proto-
Uralic language, but, rather, two or more regional proto languages and centres
of expansion. In this context, Proto-Uralic has also been described as having
been formed as a regional lingua franca (for a critical review of the issue, cf.,
e.g., Jaakko Häkkinen 2006). On the other hand, it has been claimed, notably by
Angela Marcantonio (2002), that the entire Uralic comparative corpus is simply
not valid and thus requires neither a divergence nor a convergence explanation.
According to this view, the conventional Uralic comparisons and reconstructions
are statistically unlikely to be true. This would be especially so since the
comparative corpus shared by Finno-Ugric and Samoyedic is very small, comprising
hardly more than 200 lexical items.
http://www.sgr.fi/sust/sust258/sust258_janhunen.pdf

[Grubbe]

To complete the series of pages about major haplogroup in Europe, here is Haplogroup N1c.

Thank you! I have been looking for info on N1c. I have a few Finnish lines among my ancestors (Forest Finns immigrating to Norway via Sweden about 1650), and some of them were probably N1c.

[Petter]

To complete the series of pages about major haplogroup in Europe, here is Haplogroup N1c.

Very good IMO. I have one comment - the Swedish N is too old to have been caused by population exchange with Finland during the last 800 years, and in any case it is different from Finnish N (as has been made famous by the Rurikids, who carry the Sweden-specific N). It is not impossible that it is linked to the Saami expansion, but I think it is more plausible that it is simply a very old Mesolithic marker in Scandinavia, along with I. (N is in some cases a Siberian and in some cases a Mesolithic marker).

When you say that "Modern Baltic people have a roughly equal proportion of haplogroup N1c1 and R1a, resulting from this merger of Uralic and Slavic cultures.", I'm guessing that you mean "Uralic and Indo-European".

[gyms]

http://www.sarks.fi/fa/PDF/FA14_23.pdf

http://www.sarks.fi/fa/PDF/FA6_85.pdf


Nunez bases his model on the assumption that
the zone bordering the ice sheet in eastern Europe
was inhabited in the first place by ProtoUralian
populations. After 10 000 bc, they had
started to spread on the eastern side of the Urals
on the one hand (forefathers of the Samoyeds
and Ob-Ugrians), and north and west across the
Russian Plain on the other hand (other Finnougrians).
The whole of the area between the
Urals and Finland was occupied as early as c.
6000 bc by a population speaking mainly ProtoFinnougrian.

[Jaska]

1.There is no evidence that N1c is the "original" Finno-Ugric haplogroup.
2.There is no evidence for Siberian homeland of Finno-Ugric peoples/languages.
3.I-haplogroup (and)subclades are the best candidates for the original Finno-Ugric people.

Accordingly, in the year 8,000 BC, Europe had at least three large linguistic areas: the comparatively unified area of Uralic languages (U), the western area of Basque languages (B) and, in the centre and south of the continent, an area of many unknown small languages (X).

My most decisive claim is that the Germanic, Baltic and Slavic languages were born under the influence of the Finno-Ugrian languages in the context of a shift in language from Finno-Ugrian to Indo-European.
http://www.finlit.fi/booksfromfinland/bff/399/wiik.htm

HOW FAR TO THE SOUTH IN EASTERN EUROPE DID THE FINNO-UGRIANS
LIVE?
http://www.sarks.fi/fa/PDF/FA14_23.pdf

Uralic substrate in Germanic has been totally disproved; unfortunately the debate was mainly in Finnish.
Besides, we know that:
1. There is a substratum in Germanic, and it has nothing in common with the Uralic languages;
2. The Uralic language only spread from the Volga-Kama region around 2000 BC.

Therefore it is impossible that there could be a Uralic substratum in Germanic.

[Jaska]

1.There is no evidence that N1c is the "original" Finno-Ugric haplogroup.
2.There is no evidence for Siberian homeland of Finno-Ugric peoples/languages.
3.I-haplogroup (and)subclades are the best candidates for the original Finno-Ugric people.

Accordingly, in the year 8,000 BC, Europe had at least three large linguistic areas: the comparatively unified area of Uralic languages (U), the western area of Basque languages (B) and, in the centre and south of the continent, an area of many unknown small languages (X).

My most decisive claim is that the Germanic, Baltic and Slavic languages were born under the influence of the Finno-Ugrian languages in the context of a shift in language from Finno-Ugrian to Indo-European.
http://www.finlit.fi/booksfromfinland/bff/399/wiik.htm

HOW FAR TO THE SOUTH IN EASTERN EUROPE DID THE FINNO-UGRIANS
LIVE?
http://www.sarks.fi/fa/PDF/FA14_23.pdf

Wiik’s Uralic substrate in Germanic has been disproved already at the 90’s. Besides, we know that:
1. there is a substrate in Germanic, but it has nothing in common with the Uralic languages – neither on the level of words nor phonotactics
2. Proto-Uralic only spread from the Volga-Kama region around 2000 BC

[Tomenable]

N1c haplogroup tree (dates according to YFull: formation time / TMRCA):



Map 1 (clade L708):



Map 2 (clade L1026):



Map 3 (clade L1034):



Map 4 (clade VL29):



Map 5 (clade L1022):



Map 6 (clade L550 - some of them can be lower in the tree but haven't tested downstream):



Map 7 (clade L1025 - some of them can be M2783 or Y4706 but haven't tested downstream):



Map 8 (clade Y4706):



Here typically Baltic clades start (branch M2783):

Map 9 (clade CTS8173):



Map 10 (clade BY158):



Map 11 (clade Z16975):



Map 12 (clade L551):



Source of maps:

https://www.familytreedna.com/groups/n-1c-1/dna-results

Tree based on:

http://www.yfull.com/tree/N-TAT/

[arvistro]

To complete the series of pages about major haplogroup in Europe, here is Haplogroup N1c.

This paragraph is absolutely unprofessional. Especially the bolded part seems to come from Anatoly Klyosov and similar freaks...
"The Bronze Age Indo-European Fatyanovo–Balanovo culture (3200-2300 BCE) progressively took over the Baltic region and southern Finland from 2,500 BCE (see History of haplogroup R1a). The merger of the two groups, Indo-European R1a and Uralic N1c1, gave rise to the hybrid Kiukainen culture (2300-1500 BCE). Modern Baltic people have a roughly equal proportion of haplogroup N1c1 and R1a, resulting from this merger of Uralic and Slavic cultures."

[Rethel]

This paragraph is absolutely unprofessional. Especially the bolded part seems to come from Anatoly Klyosov and similar freaks...
"The Bronze Age Indo-European Fatyanovo–Balanovo culture (3200-2300 BCE) progressively took over the Baltic region and southern Finland from 2,500 BCE (see History of haplogroup R1a). The merger of the two groups, Indo-European R1a and Uralic N1c1, gave rise to the hybrid Kiukainen culture (2300-1500 BCE). Modern Baltic people have a roughly equal proportion of haplogroup N1c1 and R1a, resulting from this merger of Uralic and Slavic cultures."

So what you propose insted?

[arvistro]

I do not know, but these are some of mistakes or possible misinterpretations noticed:
*Fatyanovo culture never reached Baltic coasts or Finland
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fatyan...lanovo_culture

*"the merger of the two groups, Indo-European R1a and Uralic N1c1, gave rise to the hybrid Kiukainen culture (2300-1500 BCE)." and then "Modern Baltic people have a roughly equal proportion of haplogroup N1c1 and R1a, resulting from this merger"
This implies that Baltic proportions of N1c1 and R1a has something to do with Kiukainen culture. Which is very wrong. There is nothing Baltic about Kiukainen, they could however be North-West IE speakers and probably became a substrate for later Baltic Finns, who formed later with Net Ware culture (http://www.sarks.fi/fa/PDF/FA13_51.pdf) which own origins were most likely from Upper Volga region.
Also the Baltic N1c patriarch Mr M2783+ was born only 600 BCE. A thousand years after Kiukainen...

*Slavic cultures as participating into creation of Kiukainen :))))) This is absurd in many levels.
I hope Maciamo simply misused Slavic instead of Balto-Slavic because to imagine Slavic (pre-Slavic, proto-Slavic) in Finland 1500 BCE is wow :) That is like saying Romance cultures merged with local tribes in Italia to give rise to Oscan and Umbrian.

As to whether those were proto-Balto-Slavic.. Is a good question. Acceptable as version, although after reading bunch of works on subject, it seems they were North-West IE speakers, not really Baltic or Balto-Slavic.

About Fatyanovo and Baltic, there are many versions. I suppose new mainstream is that Fatyanovo did not really participate in modern Balts ethnogenesys (maybe via being substrate of Baltic Finns -> Livonians -> Latvians). But like I said there are versions and Balticism of Fatyanovo version is not dead yet.

As to Uralic (if we are strict in our terminology - Uralic are those surviving languages derived from proto-Uralic), then it must have been formed near Proto-Indo-Iranians. Baltic loanwords (Balto-Slavic) then those are only in Baltic Finns branch and some rare in Mordvins. PII loanwords are numerous and in every survived Uralic branch and language. So, Comb Ceramic could not be Uralic by definition, but para-Uralic, pre-Uralic or something is possible.

Also Comb Ceramic could not be a direct source for Baltic N, because Baltic N man was born 600 BCE to "parents" that today reside in East Sweden/West Finland.

So, I would just delete that fragment altogether.

[Kristiina]

That Hong Shi map is rubbish. I am pretty sure it will be refuted when we get ancient yDNA from the relevant areas as their map goes against all subgroup information and ancient yDNA evidence we have.

Bicicleur, “that means Yakuts probably never made it as far west as Europe”
Read this PDF “The European Relatives of the Yakuts” (http://rjgg.molgen.org/index.php/RJG...iewArticle/157)
They identified three N-M2019 lines: B182 branch, “Eur1” branch and Yakut branch, so Yakut branch is in no way ancestral to European N-M2019. Apart from Yakut branch, other N-M2019 lines are not Arctic and Yakut branch is not only Arctic.

Many of you are confident that N1c is Comb Ceramic, although we lack all ancient Comb Ceramic yDNA. I would expect a bit more hard evidence in support of the yDNA theories.

[arvistro]

For some reason my post is not showing up. Basically I just offered to delete that paragraph altogether.

[Kristiina]

That Hong Shi map is rubbish. :) I am pretty sure it will be refuted when we get ancient yDNA from the relevant areas as their map goes against all subgroup information and ancient yDNA evidence we have.

Bicicleur, “that means Yakuts probably never made it as far west as Europe”
Read the PDF “The European Relatives of the Yakuts”. It is freely available on Internet.
They identified three N-M2019 lines: B182 branch, “Eur1” branch and Yakut branch, so Yakut branch is in no way ancestral to European N-M2019. Apart from Yakut branch, other N-M2019 lines are not arctic, and Yakut branch is not only arctic.

Many of you are confident that N1c is Comb Ceramic, although we lack all ancient Comb Ceramic yDNA. I would expect a bit more hard evidence. However, this map on the spread of pottery is interesting:

PreNeolithic pottery dispersal.jpg

I am wondering where you would like to place yDNA N with respect to pottery. Comb Ceramic started in Finland c. 4200 BC and N-Z1925 which is frequent in Eastern Finland formed c. 2500 BC and N-CTS10760 which developed into VL29 formed c. 2500 BC.

[arvistro]

Yay, my rant post appeared.
As to N, I believe they did arrive with Comb Ceramic and probably spoke some Uralic related language (but only in very limited area it they spoke direct ancestor to all survived Uralic languages, that limited area must have developed close to PII, all other dialects and related Ys went extinct).
Net Ware expansion I believe was responsible for modern VL29 spread and also for spread of Baltic Finnic languages (either it was already Baltic Finnic or part of it became Baltic Finnic, part Mordvinic later, I am not sure yet). Probably later, since Baltic Finnic languages are as close to each other as Slavic languages are, so it is relatively modern phenomenon.

Baltic (Balto - Slavic) N patriarch was born 600 bce in population that seems to be founded in West Finland/ East Sweden (future Kwens?) and it seems arrived directly into Lithuania from where it spread around (Latvian 80% N is just one subbranch of Baltic N; Lithuanians have all of them).

[Kristiina]

Sure, N1c in Finland (c. 2500 BC) is too young to be Corded Ware (3200 - 2500 BC) but not too young to be Combed Ware (5000–2000 BC).

[Rethel]

Sure, N1c in Finland (c. 2500 BC) is too young to be Corded Ware (3200 - 2500 BC) but not too young to be Combed Ware (5000–2000 BC).

Could be, but is doubtfull.

Guy could be yet born on Syberia. And there had to be
some group of 100% mongoloid people who settled in
Österland in ~1/10 proportion to local people or 50%
momngoloid in ~1/5 propotion. So, it need some time.
2500BC originated, and create some small tribe... 500
years seems to be enaugh and is a good reason to change
the culture of region after arriving. IT could be the reason,
of the end of Combed Ware.

[arvistro]

Sure, N1c in Finland (c. 2500 BC) is too young to be Corded Ware (3200 - 2500 BC) but not too young to be Combed Ware (5000–2000 BC).

I am not sure I follow.

[Kristiina]

It was irony.

According to yfull, none of the Finnish N lines is old enough for Comb Ceramic. N-Z1934 has a TMRCA of 4500 years, so it could only go back to Corded Ware. N-VL29 is even younger. The TMRCA of the oldest existing N-P43 line everywhere is only 4100 years. Even if it is older, I would not think that it could be that much older to have existed in the Finnish Comb Ceramic.

However, it is possible that (one of) the Finnish Comb Ceramic yDNAs is an extinct branch of the Volgaic N-Y9022 which formed 7200 years before present or an extinct branch of N-P43 which formed 7600 years before present.

The oldest branches of TAT are in Volga-Ural, Altai and North China, so the oldest TAT lines should be found in the area between Volga Ural and North China. The midpoint is in Kazakhstan.

[Rethel]

.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pit%E2...b_Ware_culture


Previously, the dominant view was that the spread of the Comb Ware people was correlated with the diffusion of the Uralic languages, and thus an early Uralic language must have been spoken throughout this culture. However, another more recent view is that the Comb Ware people may have spoken a Paleo-European (pre-Uralic) language, as some toponyms and hydronyms also indicate a non-Uralic, non-Indo-European language at work in some areas.<sup>[4]


It perfectly has sense.</sup>

[arvistro]

It was irony.

According to yfull, none of the Finnish N lines is old enough for Comb Ceramic. N-Z1934 has a TMRCA of 4500 years, so it could only go back to Corded Ware. N-VL29 is even younger. The TMRCA of the oldest existing N-P43 line everywhere is only 4100 years. Even if it is older, I would not think that it could be that much older to have existed in the Finnish Comb Ceramic.

However, it is possible that (one of) the Finnish Comb Ceramic yDNAs is an extinct branch of the Volgaic N-Y9022 which formed 7200 years before present or an extinct branch of N-P43 which formed 7600 years before present.

The oldest branches of TAT are in Volga-Ural, Altai and North China, so the oldest TAT lines should be found in the area between Volga Ural and North China. The midpoint is in Kazakhstan.

OK, that I agree. I think Comb Ware brought now extinct N lines to East Baltics, those lines that survived probably arrived to Finland later. Net Ware or post Net Ware.