Stable population structure in Europe since the Iron Age

[torzio]

16 May 2022

https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1...973v1.full.pdf


Ancient DNA research in the past decade has revealed that European population
structure changed dramatically in the prehistoric period (14,000-3,000 years before
present, YBP), reflecting the widespread introduction of Neolithic farmer and Bronze
Age Steppe ancestries. However, little is known about how population structure
changed in the historical period onward (3,000 YBP - present). To address this, we
collected whole genomes from 204 individuals from Europe and the Mediterranean,
many of which are the first historical period genomes from their region (e.g. Armenia,
France). We found that most regions show remarkable inter-individual heterogeneity.
Around 8% of historical individuals carry ancestry uncommon in the region where they
were sampled, some indicating cross-Mediterranean contacts. Despite this high level of
mobility, overall population structure across western Eurasia is relatively stable through
the historical period up to the present, mirroring the geographic map. We show that,
under standard population genetics models with local panmixia, the observed level of
dispersal would lead to a collapse of population structure. Persistent population
structure thus suggests a lower effective migration rate than indicated by the observed
dispersal. We hypothesize that this phenomenon can be explained by extensive
transient dispersal arising from drastically improved transportation networks and the
Roman Empire’s mobilization of people for trade, labor, and military. This work highlights
the utility of ancient DNA in elucidating finer scale human population dynamics in recent History.

[Maciamo]

Interesting study led by Stanford geneticists and covering 204 genomes mostly from Iron Age Europe (+ Armenia, Syria, Lebanon and the Maghreb).

Here is the supplementary material.

[bigsnake49]

Are these brand new samples?

[enter_tain]

Are these brand new samples?

[Excine]

[Archetype0ne]

Very undersamples timeframe for the Balkans, will shed some light into it. No samples from Albania/Greece is a bit disappointing.

[enter_tain]

Very undersamples timeframe for the Balkans, will shed some light into it. No samples from Albania/Greece is a bit disappointing.

There is a sample on the Albanian/Montenegrin border. Hence the "Southern Balkans". If it's dated to pre-Slavic invasions, it might be a good proxy. We just need the data.

[Archetype0ne]

There is a sample on the Albanian/Montenegrin border. Hence the "Southern Balkans". If it's dated to pre-Slavic invasions, it might be a good proxy. We just need the data.

Six of them it seems.

From Doclea_Bjelovine.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doclea_(Illyria)

[Archetype0ne]

Samples from Montenegro
SAMPLE DATE COVERAGE LATITUDE LONGITUDE LOCALITY COUNTRY
R3481 266 56,57% 42,466869 19,266164 Doclea_Bjelovine Montenegro
R3478 795 62,04% 42,466869 19,266164 Doclea_Bjelovine Montenegro
R9919 963 65,82% 42,466869 19,266164 Doclea_Bjelovine Montenegro
R9918 1074 56,83% 42,466869 19,266164 Doclea_Bjelovine Montenegro
R3482 1089 68,12% 42,466869 19,266164 Doclea_Bjelovine Montenegro
R9920 1102 53,04% 42,466869 19,266164 Doclea_Bjelovine Montenegro
Courtesy of Ajeje Brazof from the other forum.

266 CE and 996 CE seem to be male.

[enter_tain]

Samples from Montenegro
SAMPLE DATE COVERAGE LATITUDE LONGITUDE LOCALITY COUNTRY
R3481 266 56,57% 42,466869 19,266164 Doclea_Bjelovine Montenegro
R3478 795 62,04% 42,466869 19,266164 Doclea_Bjelovine Montenegro
R9919 963 65,82% 42,466869 19,266164 Doclea_Bjelovine Montenegro
R9918 1074 56,83% 42,466869 19,266164 Doclea_Bjelovine Montenegro
R3482 1089 68,12% 42,466869 19,266164 Doclea_Bjelovine Montenegro
R9920 1102 53,04% 42,466869 19,266164 Doclea_Bjelovine Montenegro
Courtesy of Ajeje Brazof from the other forum.

So dates range from 266 to 1102. This might clear some things up.

Yeah hopefully these are local. I remember some samples from Late Iron Age Croatia that were clearly Iranic (Sarmatian, Central Asian).

[enter_tain]

In the 4th and the 5th centuries, it was taken by the barbarian tribes and went into decline. At the beginning of the 5th century, it was attacked by the Germanic Visigoths. A severe earthquake destroyed it in 518. The South Slavs migrated into the land and proceeded to rebuild the settlement in the 7th century. The historical ruins of the town can be seen today.

Looks like only the 266 AD one might be useful.

[Archetype0ne]

All the samples at this point are useful datapoints to get a clearer picture about demographic shifts. Comparing the 266 CE with the 996 CE samples will be very interesting.

[Archetype0ne]

Will also be interesting to see how the Naissus samples turn out. Given how much that area has been discussed by fellow members.
I am not entirely sure if the Viminacium samples are the already published ones, or rather new ones?

Samples from Serbia

SAMPLE	DATE	COVERAGE	LATITUDE	LONGITUDE	LOCALITY	COUNTRY
R6769	76	55,44%	43,326684	21,896187	Naissus	Serbia
R9674	134	66,67%	44,7167	21,1667	Viminacium	Serbia
R9673	146	67,16%	44,7167	21,1667	Viminacium	Serbia
R6750	148	64,83%	44,7167	21,1667	Viminacium	Serbia
R6759	150	62,53%	44,7167	21,1667	Viminacium	Serbia
R3931	180	66,31%	44,7167	21,1667	Viminacium	Serbia
R6756	180	53,79%	44,7167	21,1667	Viminacium	Serbia
R9669	220	47,26%	44,7167	21,1667	Viminacium	Serbia
R6693	284	40,96%	45,912477	19,174329	Svilos_Krusevlje	Serbia
R6701	284	62,20%	45,912477	19,174329	Svilos_Krusevlje	Serbia
R6764	330	63,28%	43,326684	21,896187	Naissus	Serbia
R6681	331	63,93%	45,129863	20,069845	Beska	Serbia
R6688	331	50,63%	45,129863	20,069845	Beska	Serbia
R6730	348	65,22%	44,966801	19,609892	Sirmium	Serbia
R3918	1071	46,81%	44,966801	19,609892	Sirmium	Serbia
R9662	1546	46,50%	44,966801	19,609892	Sirmium	Serbia
R3906	1557	46,81%	44,966801	19,609892	Sirmium	Serbia
R6737	1558	60,56%	44,966801	19,609892	Sirmium	Serbia

[mount123]

Will also be interesting to see how the Naissus samples turn out. Given how much that area has been discussed by fellow members.
I am not entirely sure if the Viminacium samples are the already published ones, or rather new ones?

Samples from Serbia

SAMPLE	DATE	COVERAGE	LATITUDE	LONGITUDE	LOCALITY	COUNTRY
R6769	76	55,44%	43,326684	21,896187	Naissus	Serbia
R9674	134	66,67%	44,7167	21,1667	Viminacium	Serbia
R9673	146	67,16%	44,7167	21,1667	Viminacium	Serbia
R6750	148	64,83%	44,7167	21,1667	Viminacium	Serbia
R6759	150	62,53%	44,7167	21,1667	Viminacium	Serbia
R3931	180	66,31%	44,7167	21,1667	Viminacium	Serbia
R6756	180	53,79%	44,7167	21,1667	Viminacium	Serbia
R9669	220	47,26%	44,7167	21,1667	Viminacium	Serbia
R6693	284	40,96%	45,912477	19,174329	Svilos_Krusevlje	Serbia
R6701	284	62,20%	45,912477	19,174329	Svilos_Krusevlje	Serbia
R6764	330	63,28%	43,326684	21,896187	Naissus	Serbia
R6681	331	63,93%	45,129863	20,069845	Beska	Serbia
R6688	331	50,63%	45,129863	20,069845	Beska	Serbia
R6730	348	65,22%	44,966801	19,609892	Sirmium	Serbia
R3918	1071	46,81%	44,966801	19,609892	Sirmium	Serbia
R9662	1546	46,50%	44,966801	19,609892	Sirmium	Serbia
R3906	1557	46,81%	44,966801	19,609892	Sirmium	Serbia
R6737	1558	60,56%	44,966801	19,609892	Sirmium	Serbia

The paper claims to focus on population movements specifically during the Imperial Roman period yet has no samples from Greece, Anatolia and the Southern Balkans. A good portion of the samples from what the authors weirdly call S.E.C Europe are late Antiquity/early medieval Slavic settlers, some of them would already have formed the "South"-Slavic genetic profile e. g. Early Slav with some admixed Non-Slavic ancestry. The authors make the impression they have absolutely no clue about what happened in late antiquity/early medieval in the Balkans when they fallaciously claim genetic continuity in those areas.

Also, there is zero Iron Age samples from the Western, Central or Eastern Balkans and there are already outliers pointed out. Also cosmopolitan ports during the Imperial Roman era will most likely be multiethnic as we have seen with the Kerkouane samples.

Not really excited about this one.


As for the Viminacium samples I am not sure, I actually thought the other ones that I too heard of were just preprint results? Unless they are the same.

[Archetype0ne]

The paper claims to focus on population movements specifically during the Imperial Roman period yet has no samples from Greece, Anatolia and the Southern Balkans. A good portion of the samples from what the authors weirdly call S.E.C Europe are late Antiquity/early medieval Slavic settlers, some of them would already have formed the "South"-Slavic genetic profile e. g. Early Slav with some admixed Non-Slavic ancestry. The authors make the impression they have absolutely no clue about what happened in late antiquity/early medieval in the Balkans when they fallaciously claim genetic continuity in those areas.

Also, there is zero Iron Age samples from the Western, Central or Eastern Balkans and there are already outliers pointed out. Also cosmopolitan ports during the Imperial Roman era will most likely be multiethnic as we have seen with the Kerkouane samples.

Not really excited about this one.


As for the Viminacium samples I am not sure, I actually thought the other ones that I too heard of were just preprint results? Unless they are the same.

I mean that is one way to look at it. On the other hand having even early Balkan Slav profiles is super important to the history of the Balkans as that is more data points to make a clearer picture. I have seldom followed the Early Slav thread at the other forum and right now we really lack good proxy for early Slavs let alone early Balkan Slav populations. We have one medieval Czech, one Avar Szolad and I think that's about it. I for one welcome any data points we can get.

But yeah, I am also disappointed at the lack of Greek and Albania/Kosovë samples on this one, for a paper focusing on the Roman Era movements it sure is a detriment. But I am hoping that is because the samples for these regions will be among the Southern Arch papers.

[mount123]

I mean that is one way to look at it. On the other hand having even early Balkan Slav profiles is super important to the history of the Balkans as that is more data points to make a clearer picture. I have seldom followed the Early Slav thread at the other forum and right now we really lack good proxy for early Slavs let alone early Balkan Slav populations. We have one medieval Czech, one Avar Szolad and I think that's about it. I for one welcome any data points we can get.

But yeah, I am also disappointed at the lack of Greek and Albania/Kosovë samples on this one, for a paper focusing on the Roman Era movements it sure is a detriment. But I am hoping that is because the samples for these regions will be among the Southern Arch papers.

I remember watching a news report about Iron Age settlements in Kosovo. There is so much to be discovered but unfortunately there is not the funds and archaeogenetics is neither an inland pioneer discipline nor do international institutes really care about collaborating with the local archeologists who are by the way doing the best they can.

I agree but the problem is that there is a huge gap in the Central/Eastern Balkans and the Carpathian Basin whose pre-Slavic populations would be more than necessary when comparing the clearly very Slavic genetic profile in early Slavic settlers from the Balkans and the Non-Slavic ancestry.

[Excine]

Seems quite promising, gotta wait for the coords and Y-dna

[kingjohn]

Seems quite promising, gotta wait for the coords and Y-dna

the raw data bam files should be here soon

https://www.ebi.ac.uk/ena/browser/view/PRJEB52852


p.s
if it would be possible to anlayse the y haplogroup of those samples that would be cool

[Hawk]

Sirmium looks like it was a mixed Illyrian/Celtic settlement.

A silent witness of this war is a rooftile, dated to 582, with a prayer inscribed on it.

Christ, our Lord,
help our city halt the Avars.
Protect the Roman Empire,
and he who was written this.
Amen.

It did not help: after a siege of three years, the city was captured. Many inhabitants left for Salona. Soon after, the city burned down. Yet, it survived, and there was still a military district called "Sirmion" in the tenth-century Byzantine Empire.

After Avar conquest the inhabitants left for Dalmatia. Only one sample there is of particular interest, the one dated before the great migrations of Middle Ages.

[mount123]

Sirmium looks like it was a mixed Illyrian/Celtic settlement.



After Avar conquest the inhabitants left for Dalmatia. Only one sample there is of particular interest, the one dated before the great migrations of Middle Ages.

I doubt that after christianization there would have been any Celts, Illyrians left there. I think the biggest question regarding the replacement process of Illyrians is wether the Romans next to obviously Slavs also contributed largely to it or only partly. I would not expect minor Illyrian remnant groups to have survived in an area that is the Central Balkans also because Sirmium in itself was already a hybrid settlement. Sirmium would also fall into the category of Illyrian expansion settlements and with expansions there is quite a variety of examples that do not necessarily show a long lasting genetic impact too.

[mount123]

Sirmium looks like it was a mixed Illyrian/Celtic settlement.



After Avar conquest the inhabitants left for Dalmatia. Only one sample there is of particular interest, the one dated before the great migrations of Middle Ages.

R3918 (Sirmium, 878.75bp): J-CTS6190 https://www.yfull.com/tree/J-CTS6190/

[mount123]

All of the J2b-L283s from the paper:

R9918 Doclea_Bjelovine, Mod. d. Montenegro : J-CTS6190 https://www.yfull.com/tree/J-CTS6190/
R3481 Doclea_Bjelovine, Mod. d. Montenegro: J-Z1043 https://www.yfull.com/tree/J-Z1043/
R3918 Sirmium: J-CTS6190 https://www.yfull.com/tree/J-CTS6190/
R6693 Svilos_Krusevlje: J-Z600 https://www.yfull.com/tree/J-Z600/
R9669 Viminacium: J-Z1295 https://www.yfull.com/tree/J-Z1295/

[enter_tain]

All of the J2b-L283s from the paper:

R9918 Doclea_Bjelovine, Mod. d. Montenegro : J-CTS6190 https://www.yfull.com/tree/J-CTS6190/
R3481 Doclea_Bjelovine, Mod. d. Montenegro: J-Z1043 https://www.yfull.com/tree/J-Z1043/
R3918 Sirmium: J-CTS6190 https://www.yfull.com/tree/J-CTS6190/
R6693 Svilos_Krusevlje: J-Z600 https://www.yfull.com/tree/J-Z600/
R9669 Viminacium: J-Z1295 https://www.yfull.com/tree/J-Z1295/

Only 2 have Z638. Even Montenegro has 1 "northern Illyrian" upstream version.

[torzio]

Only 2 have Z638. Even Montenegro has 1 "northern Illyrian" upstream version.

of course ...............as I have been stating for many years...Illyrian migrated from north to south in the western balkans

[Polska]

All of the J2b-L283s from the paper:

R9918 Doclea_Bjelovine, Mod. d. Montenegro : J-CTS6190 https://www.yfull.com/tree/J-CTS6190/
R3481 Doclea_Bjelovine, Mod. d. Montenegro: J-Z1043 https://www.yfull.com/tree/J-Z1043/
R3918 Sirmium: J-CTS6190 https://www.yfull.com/tree/J-CTS6190/
R6693 Svilos_Krusevlje: J-Z600 https://www.yfull.com/tree/J-Z600/
R9669 Viminacium: J-Z1295 https://www.yfull.com/tree/J-Z1295/

Thanks for the update and the compressed list.

Do you know, by chance, if the Z600 assignment for the Serbian is his final placement? That would be a big deal to find a “pure” Z600 there.

Interesting to see CTS6190 down there in Montenegro, although this was a very young sample. The Z1043 is not surprising and I would expect more ancient samples from underneath Z638 as they sample more southern locations in the western Balkans. There has been a bias so far towards Z38240 lineages in the Balkans because researchers from the NW Balkans (where Z38240 may have been more numerous) are aggressively getting samples tested from a wide variety of sites. I wonder what the root causes are for the lack of sampling further south?

Lastly, have all the BAMs from this study been analyzed? Seems like there might be some stragglers out there. I’m curious if any L283 will pop up outside the Balkans.