Genetic study Ancient genomes from a rural site in Imperial Rome (1st–3rd cent. CE): a genetic jun

[kingjohn]

It came from the steppe present in both Italics and Etruscans.

Nothing at all to do with Slavs.

ok ,
thats what i thought
the most logical explanation

 

[Dushman]

Baltic is already present in Etruscans and Latins. Were the Etruscans and Latins also descended from Slavic migrations that are later than them? It seems clear to me that the Baltic = Slavic equation is wrong.


R1015_Lazio_Rome_Iron_Age_Villanovan,34.16,9.13,33.08,0.00,20.98,1.79,0.00,0.27,0.00,0.59,0.00,0.00,0.00
R473_Civitavecchia_Etruscan._Iron_Age,33.38,12.03,31.63,0.41,18.38,3.34,0.34,0.42,0.06,0.00,0.00,0.00,0.00
R474b_Civitavecchia_Etruscan._Iron_Age,35.67,12.22,25.57,5.16,17.48,1.51,0.00,0.00,1.10,0.59,0.00,0.71,0.00
R1016_Lazio_Rome_Iron_Age_Latini,35.91,7.69,33.00,1.06,20.82,0.00,0.00,0.00,0.00,1.52,0.00,0.00,0.00
R1021_Lazio_Frosinone_Iron_Age_Latini,37.21,9.04,30.58,2.18,18.82,1.44,0.00,0.04,0.00,0.00,0.70,0.00,0.00
R851_Lazio_Rome_Iron_Age_Latini,34.22,14.60,34.26,1.01,15.44,0.30,0.00,0.00,0.18,0.00,0.00,0.00,0.00




Someone is there with possible haplogroups associated with Slavs but it is a small minority, nothing that can justify a mass replacement.

Thank you for getting involved, Pax! Really useful information.

It seems my skepticism is proving to be useful (to myself) as of now. The authors of such papers don?t really seem to bother differentiating between Slavic and Baltic, yet proceed on calling it Slavic input.

It?s thanks to the similarities between Italy and Balkans/Greece that can we narrow down our options and come to better conclusions as to what happened during and after the fall of Rome.

 

[Archetype0ne]

Target: CZE_Early_Slav Distance: 2.7478% / 0.02747845 | ADC: 0.25x RC
46.0	HUN_MA_Szolad
40.2	HUN_Avar_Szolad
13.8	Baltic_EST_BA

First I tried to see how Early CZE Slav can be modeled.

Using these on source:
Baltic_LVA_HG,0.1292603,0.1004104,0.1802636,0.1972329,0.1064236,0.0560919,0.0083574,0.0207106,0.0524476,-0.0261394,-0.0046788,-0.0181151,0.0281434,-0.0053759,0.0355759,0.0480141,0.003072,0.0040856,-0.0059236,0.042325,0.0613526,0.0130531,-0.0262979,-0.1110549,0.0095949
DEU_Tollense_BA,0.1249778,0.137198,0.0769703,0.0599811,0.0502246,0.0175142,0.0094946,0.0060229,0.0126395,0.0009478,-0.0061708,-0.0025478,-0.0009811,0.0016239,-0.0020766,0.0029303,0.0019687,0.0030659,0.002803,0.0091044,0.0006239,0.0012861,-0.0034632,-0.0148455,0.0015568
HUN_Avar_Szolad,0.133742,0.12948,0.073727,0.057494,0.0373915,0.029144,0.0094,0.007269,0.004295,-0.018224,-0.001543,-0.006369,0.0102575,0.017753,-0.0138435,0.0007295,0.0002605,0.0034205,0.0055305,0.001313,0,-0.002782,0.010846,-0.0069285,0.001736
HUN_MA_Szolad,0.1268314,0.1386923,0.0474633,0.0296237,0.0347316,0.0087153,0.0026858,0.0034531,0.0025492,0.0060333,-0.0043729,0.0041963,-0.0096947,-0.0066944,0.009859,0.0043755,-0.0015227,0.0006923,0.0054185,0.0022109,0.0027452,0.0040408,0.0003433,0.0085467,-0.0012231
Baltic_EST_BA,0.1321485,0.1213556,0.0992205,0.111662,0.051671,0.040746,0.0158398,0.0204684,-0.0029042,-0.050607,0.0009094,-0.0182389,0.0359462,0.0400344,-0.0180239,0.0018297,0.0103654,-0.000684,-0.0013952,0.0046272,-0.0024957,-0.0062692,0.0106487,-0.017388,0.002359

After that, I added Early Slavic CZE on the Source as well to model modern populations. From reading some of the experts in modeling Slavs, Avar is very important sample. Meanwhile from reading the fora I know tollense like populations + yamnaya is how some ancient Balkans populations can be modeled. Mokrin etc...

Here are the results after adding early Slavic CZE as a component.

Target: Belarusian Distance: 1.3935% / 0.01393459 | ADC: 0.25x RC
63.2	HUN_Avar_Szolad
24.6	Baltic_EST_BA
12.2	CZE_Early_Slav

Target: Serbian Distance: 3.7958% / 0.03795817 | ADC: 0.25x RC
66.2	HUN_MA_Szolad
33.8	CZE_Early_Slav

Target: Italian_Lombardy Distance: 6.1244% / 0.06124430 | ADC: 0.25x RC
100.0	HUN_MA_Szolad

Target: Italian_Tuscany Distance: 6.9928% / 0.06992756 | ADC: 0.25x RC
100.0	HUN_MA_Szolad

Target: Greek_Central_Macedonia Distance: 7.0482% / 0.07048239 | ADC: 0.25x RC
100.0	HUN_MA_Szolad

Target: Albanian Distance: 7.1215% / 0.07121452 | ADC: 0.25x RC
100.0	HUN_MA_Szolad

Target: CZE_Early_Slav Distance: 2.7478% / 0.02747845 | ADC: 0.25x RC
46.0	HUN_MA_Szolad
40.2	HUN_Avar_Szolad
13.8	Baltic_EST_BA

Target: Belarusian Distance: 1.3935% / 0.01393459 | ADC: 0.25x RC
63.2	HUN_Avar_Szolad
24.6	Baltic_EST_BA
12.2	CZE_Early_Slav

If I in 5 minutes can come up with a better model than the published Danubian limes paper... what does that say? Either mediocrity, or agendas at work.

Target: Belarusian Distance: 1.3935% / 0.01393459 | ADC: 0.25x RC
63.2	HUN_Avar_Szolad
24.6	Baltic_EST_BA
12.2	CZE_Early_Slav

Edit: Now of course this model is not optimized for best fit, just to see relationships, and to point out how the Danubian limes paper is decieving.

Further adding BGR_IA or Log02 to the source, improves both the comparative power and fit of the model.

If anyone wants to play with it:

https://g25vahaduo.genetics.ovh/G25ancient-averages-scaled.htm
Source:Baltic_LVA_HG,0.1292603,0.1004104,0.1802636,0.1972329,0.1064236,0.0560919,0.0083574,0.0207106,0.0524476,-0.0261394,-0.0046788,-0.0181151,0.0281434,-0.0053759,0.0355759,0.0480141,0.003072,0.0040856,-0.0059236,0.042325,0.0613526,0.0130531,-0.0262979,-0.1110549,0.0095949
DEU_Tollense_BA,0.1249778,0.137198,0.0769703,0.0599811,0.0502246,0.0175142,0.0094946,0.0060229,0.0126395,0.0009478,-0.0061708,-0.0025478,-0.0009811,0.0016239,-0.0020766,0.0029303,0.0019687,0.0030659,0.002803,0.0091044,0.0006239,0.0012861,-0.0034632,-0.0148455,0.0015568
HUN_Avar_Szolad,0.133742,0.12948,0.073727,0.057494,0.0373915,0.029144,0.0094,0.007269,0.004295,-0.018224,-0.001543,-0.006369,0.0102575,0.017753,-0.0138435,0.0007295,0.0002605,0.0034205,0.0055305,0.001313,0,-0.002782,0.010846,-0.0069285,0.001736
HUN_MA_Szolad,0.1268314,0.1386923,0.0474633,0.0296237,0.0347316,0.0087153,0.0026858,0.0034531,0.0025492,0.0060333,-0.0043729,0.0041963,-0.0096947,-0.0066944,0.009859,0.0043755,-0.0015227,0.0006923,0.0054185,0.0022109,0.0027452,0.0040408,0.0003433,0.0085467,-0.0012231
Baltic_EST_BA,0.1321485,0.1213556,0.0992205,0.111662,0.051671,0.040746,0.0158398,0.0204684,-0.0029042,-0.050607,0.0009094,-0.0182389,0.0359462,0.0400344,-0.0180239,0.0018297,0.0103654,-0.000684,-0.0013952,0.0046272,-0.0024957,-0.0062692,0.0106487,-0.017388,0.002359
CZE_Early_Slav,0.12862,0.129988,0.068259,0.046835,0.02739,0.013387,0.007285,0.014076,-0.001841,-0.018406,-0.000812,-0.004346,0.003717,0.007156,-0.010993,-0.003182,0.011604,-0.002027,-0.002388,-0.004752,0.005615,0.000618,0.001725,-0.000964,-0.006706
BGR_IA,0.126344,0.157407,0.007165,-0.051034,0.029852,-0.02259,0.00423,-0.001385,0.007772,0.032074,-0.001461,0.005695,-0.013974,-0.003028,-0.015065,-0.001458,0.01369,0.006968,0.006285,-0.014757,-0.006239,0.004699,-0.007888,0.003494,-0.008861



Target:

Any modern populations you like which can be lifted from the source tab of this https://g25vahaduo.genetics.ovh/G25modern-scaled-averages.htm :

In my models I used these pops as target.


Albanian,0.1181863,0.1417511,0.0155562,-0.0158808,0.0251586,-0.0074138,0.0033683,0.0018077,0.0006648,0.0161279,0.0011097,0.0015486,-0.0070986,0.0066059,-0.019295,-0.0041544,0.0081273,0.0014992,0.0082962,-0.0059402,-0.0055629,0.0007212,0.0024238,0.0021991,-0.0025248
Greek_Central_Macedonia,0.1194473,0.142473,0.0157725,-0.016492,0.0213432,-0.0035601,0.0020321,1e-07,0.0008782,0.0120812,0.0009934,0.0018424,-0.0014429,0.0070025,-0.016957,-0.0005459,0.0098095,8.94e-05,0.0050649,-0.0035531,-0.0078319,0.0015057,0.0032408,0.0005529,-0.0007256
Italian_Tuscany,0.1186036,0.1487413,0.0136014,-0.0204997,0.0261587,-0.0090546,-0.00047,-0.0013845,0.0074991,0.0238972,-0.0002273,0.0054552,-0.0118631,-0.0045965,-0.0023797,-0.0002917,0.0040332,0.0004815,0.0038463,-0.0023929,-0.0012063,0.0024647,-0.0010436,0.00388,-0.0015885
Italian_Lombardy,0.1245224,0.147861,0.0279822,-0.0137598,0.0327446,-0.007753,0.000658,0,0.0103898,0.0299232,-0.0025008,0.008932,-0.0143606,-0.0047066,-0.0008686,-0.0078758,-0.0083448,0.0017738,0.0034442,-0.004102,-0.002246,0.0012366,-0.0006656,0.0030602,0.0008382
Serbian,0.1273334,0.137229,0.040024,0.0148299,0.0314974,0.0045957,0.0048738,0.006672,-0.0011737,-7.9e-06,-0.0022946,-0.001251,0.0034128,0.012434,-0.0128875,-0.0008358,0.0040476,0.0005894,0.0043011,-0.0024468,-0.0083168,-0.0017151,0.0048925,0.000372,-0.0020097
Czech,0.1311592,0.1318625,0.0604843,0.0472574,0.038658,0.0189217,0.0063451,0.0086623,0.0046724,-0.0088874,-0.0016862,-0.0038965,0.0060493,0.011772,0.0017435,0.0009995,-0.0006419,-0.0001462,0.0035679,0.0028956,-0.001267,-0.0001617,0.0065132,0.0039302,0.0015935
Belarusian,0.1322625,0.1236239,0.0750219,0.0695957,0.0402331,0.0265691,0.0107321,0.0133226,-0.0002727,-0.0246017,-0.0026957,-0.0092119,0.0193259,0.0272309,-0.0112647,-0.0038009,-0.0009647,0.0003717,0.0041397,-0.0010504,-0.0042342,-0.0046081,0.0077235,-0.0068601,0.0006946

 

[Vallicanus]

It came from the steppe present in both Italics and Etruscans.

Nothing at all to do with Slavs.

Precisely.

 

[torzio]

so is it a native elment to north east italy ?
or it arrived with germanic tribes ?
or others ?

comparing only slavic to baltic for ............
North East Italians association is minimal slavic ......the baltic mix is due to the bronze-age amber road connection from baltic states ( usually west-baltic peoples )

about Germanic ( usually east germanic ) is minimal presence in BC times and but more in AD times ( with eastern germanics, ( ostrogoths ) ) and also it is swabian ( or southern german ) of the german group

 

[torzio]

@kingjohn

check the admixture of the lombards

you will find they are more associated with east-germanic then with west-germanic


slavic is only linked directly with the border area of Ukraine and Belarus .................all other slavic is linked with lingustic association and not genetic association

 

[kingjohn]

@kingjohn

check the admixture of the lombards

you will find they are more associated with east-germanic then with west-germanic

thats why i think they probably also increased the baltic in the north of italy
afcorse it was minimal compare to the steppe movement
i understand from angela that there( LOMBARDS) y haplogroup was r-u106
but here i speak about autosomal influence not y haplogroup influence


p.s
by the way in northwest italy the baltic component is also between 10-16%

 

[torzio]

thats why i think they probably also increased the baltic in the north of italy
afcorse it was minimal compare to the steppe movement
i understand from angela that there( LOMBARDS) y haplogroup was r-u106
but here i speak about autosomal influence not y haplogroup influence


p.s
by the way in northwest italy the baltic component is also between 10-16%

slavic is only linked directly with the border area of Ukraine and Belarus .................all other slavic is linked with linguistic association and not genetic association

Slavic and Baltic have association via language and that is only AD times

 

[Dushman]

I wonder if the French will come out as 40% Early Slav too according to their ?scientific? methods and calculators.

In my humble/amateur opinion, their so-called Slavic input in the Balkans = Steppe/Indo-European + Baltic + Gava/Hallstatt + Getae/Dacian/Free Dacian + East Germanic + Scythian/Sarmatian + Slavic. The first 3 probably constitute more than half of that component which increase with wave after wave of natural human migrations (war included).

 

[Angela]

Mass migrations bring their y along with them. If the y is under 5%, how much autosomal influence can there be?

The only way to pinpoint how much of X ancestry came to Y place in Z time is to use, for comparison, an ancient sample from Y place and Z time, and have some freaking context for the burial from archaeology and history, and then add a big dollop of COMMON SENSE.

It's not to use some calculator by Eurogenes based on modern people which he gerrymandered so that Poles would get a lot of whatever it was...

Any analysis based on his freaking calculator components is a joke and a complete waste of everybody's time, including that of the person playing with it.

I'll agree that Mordovians may not seem like the perfect sample to use for the "Slavs" who actually got to the Balkans, but then again, the Reich Lab has thousands of samples which are as of yet unpublished. I see that the "leaked" page from the Lazaridis paper also seems to use the Mordovians. Maybe it will turn out that those people aren't that far from what those farmers who arrived in the Balkans were like...

To refresh everyone's recollection, please take a look at the maps here and tell me how much Langobard influence there is in Italy, keeping in mind that every male sample found so far is U-106. You could also take a freebie and add I1 for other stray Germanics.

​ Introduction The maps on this page represents the distribution of Human Y-chromosomal DNA (Y-DNA) haplogroups. A Y-DNA haplogroup is a group of men sharing the same series of mutations on their Y chromosome, which they inherited from a long line of common paternal ancestors. A few new mutations, known as SNP's, happen every generation. This allows to retrace the genealogical tree of humanity with great accuracy and see patterns in the distribution of shared historical lineages. Most major haplogroups are many thousands of years old, typically going back to the Bronze Age, Neolithic, Mesolithic or even Paleolithic. The deeper the subclade the more recent the shared ancestor. Classifying SNP's into a genealogical order is known as phylogenentics. Phylogenetic trees of European haplogroups are available here. The following maps were compiled with all the latest available Y-DNA data for each country. The maps are frequently updated when new data becomes available. Disclaimer: The accuracy of the regional data for France is particularly problematic due to the fact that France is the only country in the world where DNA tests are prohibited by law and punishable by heavy fines (more information). Haplogroup I (Y-DNA) Distribution map of haplogroup I in Europe Haplogroup I1 (Y-DNA) Distribution map of haplogroup I1 in Europe Haplogroup I2a1 (Y-DNA) Distribution map of haplogroup I2a1 in Europe Haplogroup I2a2 (Y-DNA) Distribution map of haplogroup I2a2 in Europe Haplogroup R1 (Y-DNA) Distribution map of haplogroup R1 in Europe Haplogroup R1a (Y-DNA) Distribution map of haplogroup R1a in Europe, the Middle East & North Africa Distribution map of haplogroup R1a-M458 in Europe Distribution map of haplogroup R1a-M558 (CTS1211) in Europe Distribution map of haplogroup R1a-Z93 in Eurasia Haplogroup R1b (Y-DNA) Distribution map of haplogroup R1b in Europe, the Middle East & North Africa Distribution map of haplogroup R1b-S21 (U106) in Europe

 

[Vallicanus]

@kingjohn

check the admixture of the lombards

you will find they are more associated with east-germanic then with west-germanic


slavic is only linked directly with the border area of Ukraine and Belarus .................all other slavic is linked with lingustic association and not genetic association

Linguistically, the Lombards/Langobards may have started off North Germanic (Scandinavian) in speech but were West Germanic like Alemans and Bavarians when they reached Italy.

 

[Archetype0ne]

Very good point Angela. Did not know of the Lazaridis leak. Would love to see that page.

The thing is, that Mordovians were/are not Slavic... And as you say given the historical context nowhere near Western Slavic region from where south Slavs descended on the Balkans.

This might all be just the tip of the iceberg. Who knows what the other samples hold.

I personally already had distaste for the model the first time I saw it, but then I saw a Mordovian member on another forum and his critique of the model. This guy is one of the more active members on the Slavic thread, from Russia. And his critique was in line with mine. So even accounting for any bias I might hold, my point is not stemming out of that bias.

Alas, you can try it with K13 as well, the results are similar. When you force a two pop model on a population, the calculator will do the best it can. When the two populations are not enough to account for the nuances, you get nonsensical answers such as some French being >50% early Slavic.

Target: French_Seine-Maritime Distance: 4.5734% / 0.04573431 | ADC: 0.25x RC
73.8	CZE_Early_Slav
26.2	BGR_IA

---

Target: French_Provence Distance: 3.7593% / 0.03759307 | ADC: 0.25x RC
50.0	BGR_IA
50.0	CZE_Early_Slav

---

Target: French_Pas-de-Calais Distance: 4.9056% / 0.04905648 | ADC: 0.25x RC
72.2	CZE_Early_Slav
27.8	BGR_IA

---

Target: French_Paris Distance: 4.9416% / 0.04941613 | ADC: 0.25x RC
65.8	CZE_Early_Slav
34.2	BGR_IA

---

Target: French_Occitanie Distance: 4.9053% / 0.04905323 | ADC: 0.25x RC
59.2	CZE_Early_Slav
40.8	BGR_IA

---

Target: French_Nord Distance: 4.3426% / 0.04342611 | ADC: 0.25x RC
69.4	CZE_Early_Slav
30.6	BGR_IA

I hope and know that Lazaridis paper will be per usual of high standard, and his f-stats usually don't suffer from PCA weaknessess. Do you know when the paper comes out?

 

[Archetype0ne]

As you can see below the K13 results are very consistent with G25(from my previous post).

K13 with Mordovins in place of Early Slavs from Moravia.

 

[torzio]

Linguistically, the Lombards/Langobards may have started off North Germanic (Scandinavian) in speech but were West Germanic like Alemans and Bavarians when they reached Italy.

Longobards after moving from scania sweden where part of the vindili confederation

 

[bigsnake49]

No matter how you look at it... the Danubian lime paper methodology is trash, what I said by taking one look at it. And I believe Pax also had some similar feelings without further specifying what at the time.

https://imgur.com/a/jbYPD4H

Very, very interesting since Calabria has plenty of Arbereshe which should have bumped its Savic component a bit. I totally agree with you that this methodology has something seriously wrong with it.

 

[kingjohn]

No matter how you look at it... the Danubian lime paper methodology is trash, what I said by taking one look at it. And I believe Pax also had some similar feelings without further specifying what at the time.
https://imgur.com/a/jbYPD4H

Interesting:cool-v:
Can you try to model aschenazi jews( moldovan jews) and cretans
With this combination of
iron age bulgaria+ early slav CZE ?

 

[Archetype0ne]

Interesting:cool-v:
Can you try to model aschenazi jews( moldovan jews) and cretans
With this combination of
iron age bulgaria+ early slav CZE ?

Sadly couldn't find the coordinates for Moldovan Jew.


But for your enjoyment :cool-v:

https://imgur.com/a/8SGIygh


You could probably guess my train of thought (algorithm) slide to slide.

This is after cleaning up the model, removing the marginally improving populations and also removing any modern populations.
I can explain the alorithm I used to come to this final table but doubt anyone much cares.

 

[bigsnake49]

Sadly couldn't find the coordinates for Moldovan Jew.


But for your enjoyment :cool-v:

https://imgur.com/a/8SGIygh


You could probably guess my train of thought (algorithm) slide to slide.

This is after cleaning up the model, removing the marginally improving populations and also removing any modern populations.
I can explain the alorithm I used to come to this final table but doubt anyone much cares.

Basically you can mix and match any nationality as the source combination.

 

[Angela]

Thank-you. Couldn't have said it better.

 

[kingjohn]

Sadly couldn't find the coordinates for Moldovan Jew.


But for your enjoyment :cool-v:

https://imgur.com/a/8SGIygh


You could probably guess my train of thought (algorithm) slide to slide.

This is after cleaning up the model, removing the marginally improving populations and also removing any modern populations.
I can explain the alorithm I used to come to this final table but doubt anyone much cares.

Thanks kudos