As I say, this is pretty much meaningless until you identify which subclades of R1a and R1b you are talking about.It seems both R1a and R1b came to Iran from the Europe, adopted an Indo-European culture and came back to Europe.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
As I say, this is pretty much meaningless until you identify which subclades of R1a and R1b you are talking about.It seems both R1a and R1b came to Iran from the Europe, adopted an Indo-European culture and came back to Europe.
As I say, this is pretty much meaningless until you identify which subclades of R1a and R1b you are talking about.
OK, so both had already returned from Iran long before the Iranians or even the Indo-Aryans had arrived on the scene - surely too ancient to be directly connected to Zoroastrianism?R1a-M17 & R1b-L23
Absence means the lack of any R1a in the sampled Tehran Zoroastrians, which is the subject of this thread. Yes, there is R1a in Yazd Zoroastrians.
As is the case with most academic papers, I would advise approaching this one with caution:
1. It finds no R1a1a1 in 938 samples across the whole of Iran - highly unlikely, considering that nearly all R1a samples everywhere are R1a1a1, and that R1a1a* is virtually non-existent (with only a handful of known samples in far NW Europe). Indeed, it is not even clear what R1a1a* means, as it is not defined.
2. The R-L23* readings are not very useful either, as they are probably not what we would now refer to as L23*, but Z2103, of which there are many different subclades spread widely across the whole area between Western Europe and China.
If accurate, however, the more striking results from the paper are:
E-M35 Zoroastrian (all) 19%, Iran (other) 8%
G Zoroastrian (all) 4%, Iran (other) 12%
J-M530 Zoroastrian (all) 17%, Iran (other) 5%
J-page55 Zoroastrian (all) 32%, Iran (other) 12%
This is why Zoroastrians as a distinctive group appear to pre-date Iranian speakers. They seem more heavily drawn from older mixed immigrant populations like Nerkin Getashen, which had both E1b and Middle-Eastern aDNA from the South and Steppic/Caucasian aDNA from the North.
Yes, and these provide data of little useful value - especially for R1a and R1b.This paper listed the SNPs they tested for
Don't ignore the Yazd Zoroastrians, which increase the Zoroastrian sample size substantially. Indeed, it was you who brought up these people in the first place. My point was that the Zoroastrian yDNA in total is clearly different to general Iranian - it has over double the E-M35 and over triple the J-M530.and again we must consider the small sample size of the Tehran Zoroastrians, we can't make any real solid conclusions based off a sample size of n=13
Yes, and these provide data of little useful value - especially for R1a and R1b.
Don't ignore the Yazd Zoroastrians, which increase the Zoroastrian sample size substantially. Indeed, it was you who brought up these people in the first place. My point was that the Zoroastrian yDNA in total is clearly different to general Iranian - it has over double the E-M35 and over triple the J-M530.
Yes, agreed.I'm not, however it seems the OP has ignored the Yazd Zoroastrians samples in favour of the "no R1a" Tehran Zoroastrians for some reason. That was merely my reasoning for mentioning them earlier. Secondly, I'm not arguing that their Y-DNA is not different from "general Iranian", just felt it was worth pointing out that the Tehran sample does not speak for all Zoroastrians.
Z93 is a subclade of M17. I can't see that the study tested for Z93. It would be unbelievable if none of the 130 R1a samples in the study were M417/Z93, and all were from M17xM417, which barely exists anywhere. A sizeable proportion of these 130 people were certainly Z93 and descend paternally from Eastern Europe at some point.R1a subclade among Zoroastrians of Yazd is M17, not Z93, it dates back to 14,000 years ago, geneticists believe Iran was the original land of R1a, look at Underhill et al. 2015, so it couldn't be related to an Indo-European migration to Iran too.
R1a subclade among Zoroastrians of Yazd is M17, not Z93, it dates back to 14,000 years ago, geneticists believe Iran was the original land of R1a, look at Underhill et al. 2015, so it couldn't be related to an Indo-European migration to Iran too.
Z93 is a subclade of M17. I can't see that the study tested for Z93. It would be unbelievable if none of the 130 R1a samples in the study were M417/Z93, and all were from M17xM417, which barely exists anywhere. A sizeable proportion of these 130 people were certainly Z93 and descend paternally from Eastern Europe at some point.
Z93 is a subclade of M17. I can't see that the study tested for Z93. It would be unbelievable if none of the 130 R1a samples in the study were M417/Z93, and all were from M17xM417, which barely exists anywhere. A sizeable proportion of these 130 people were certainly Z93 and descend paternally from Eastern Europe at some point.
In the complementary R1a-Z93 haplogroup, the paragroup R1a-Z93* (Figure 3b) is most common (>30%) in the South Siberian Altai region of Russia, but it also occurs in Kyrgyzstan (6%) and in all Iranian populations (1–8%). R1a-Z2125 (Figure 3c) occurs at highest frequencies in Kyrgyzstan and in Afghan Pashtuns (>40%). We also observed it at greater than 10% frequency in other Afghan ethnic groups and in some populations in the Caucasus and Iran. Notably, R1a-M780 (Figure 3d) occurs at high frequency in South Asia: India, Pakistan, Afghanistan, and the Himalayas. The group also occurs at >3% in some Iranian populations and is present at >30% in Roma from Croatia and Hungary, consistent with previous studies reporting the presence of R1a-Z93 in Roma.31, 51 Finally, the rare R1a-M560 was only observed in four samples: two Burushaski speakers from north Pakistan, one Hazara from Afghanistan, and one Iranian Azeri.
This thread has been viewed 39997 times.