Europe, West- and South_Central Asia and the unnatural gap..

[Alan]

Recently I had some thoughts about this matter. I asked myself how can despite the thousand years of contact and migration be a genetic gap between West Asians, Europeans and South Asians.

It wasn't really the genetic distance, since North Caucasians are as distant to Russians or Finns as non slavic speaking South Europeans. The difference was however that there was an absence of population which fill the gap between North Caucasians and Russians while there are populations like French, German and other Central and North Europeans who do it for their South European neighbors. There must have been in the past, populatians who filled the gap between East Europeans and North Caucasians as we have seen on samples from as early as Iron Age (IR1) from Hungary. But it wasn't only between North Caucasus and East Europe. There was an also smaller but yet visible gap between Anatolia and Southeast Europe.

Exactly the same observation I made when I looked at South Asian populations. I realized that Iranians and North Caucasians were not much more distant from some South Asians like Pashtuns as they were from Greeks/Russians or even each other. But again the only difference here was, there are populations which fill the gap between Iranians and North Caucasians while there were no Populations which would do the same with them and South Asians.

When I was looking at those PCA plots of West Eurasians suddenly I came to an idea. And the more I thought about it, the more sense it made.

Let's take a look at these PCA plots of West Eurasians.

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/files/2011/01/MDS1600.png
http://img5.fotos-hochladen.net/uploads/eumescalabeled9z7rwthsmc.jpg
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/files/2010/06/jewsnat1.png
http://oi52.tinypic.com/2cfaao3.jpg


Now lets ask ourselves which groups could have existed back than who now disappeard or were driven out/absorbed by newcowmers, and could have filled the gab. Initially I thought about the East Iranian tribes who once lived on the Pontic and Asiatic Steppes. Since they settled various land they must have also been the genetic gap fillers between East Europe, West Asia and South Asia. And than I asked myself who might have replaced them. And Turkic tribes came to my mind.

The more I thought about it the more obvious it became that first the Mongol and lather but more decisive the Turkic expansion, was not only the reason for the gap between West- South,- Central Asia and East Europe but also the reason for the gap between West Asia and the Balkans.

It makes completely, sense. Before the Turkic tribes appeared there was a group of ethnically related people, populating a vast land between East Europe, West Asia and South-Central Asia.
For example, if it wasn't for the East Asian admixture Turkmens and Tajiks would exactly plot between Afghans, Iranians and North Caucasians. The same with Anatolian Turks, if it wasn't for the up to 15%, East Asian admixture Western Anatolian Turks would cluster more in between Greeks and Armenians/Kurds/Georgians. Additional to that the Ottomans brought strong additional iranic admixture, into Central and West Anatolia while driving out a large part of Anatolian Greeks. I imagine Anatolian Greeks to have been geneticall exactly in between European Greeks and Armenians/Kurds/Georgians.

Than we have in the Eurasian Steppes the Turkic tribes, totally mixing with the East Iranic tribes in Asian Steppes and later replacing/driving out most of the Iranic tribes in the Pontic Steppes. This Strong Asian admixture created a gap. Later the Russians expanded into South Russia and Ukraine and drove out most of the Turkic speakers from the Pontic steppes. Which had the effect that a vast land once populated by ethnically related tribes (Iranic) was now seperated into a totally Russian (European) and Turkic (mostly East Eurasian) parts. If it wasn't for war, forced migration and total population replacement, there wouldn't have been this gap. A similar thing in same extent never happened inside Europe (expect Jews who however were not a major population in one, but big minority in many countries), West Asia or South-Central Asia. Sure we had the Arabic expansion but they mostly brought related Caucasian admixture but also only a few percentage. They never replaced the population in the same scale as Turkic speakers did in Central Asia for example.

Imagine a total population replacement in the Middle of Europe on vast land as it happened in the Eurasian Steppes during the middle ages. For example between South and North/Northeast Europeans. There would be a huge genetic gap in middle of Europe.

This is how most probably the genetic landscape of West Eurasia have looked like if it wasn't for total population replacements. So the gap between the West Eurasians is rather unnatural, than natural.

 

[joeyc]

Simple answer: you are quoting Eurogenes, which has no credibility outside of some internet forum.

North Caucasians are worlds apart from any European population.

From Lazaridis et al. 2013.

Caucasians are Middle Eastern neolitich farmers (rich in E-V13 and G2a) from the Levant who mixed with ANE like people from the Caucasus (rich in J1 and J2).

North Caucasians have some WHG (10%) and some East Asian (5-10%) admixture compared to Georgians/Armenians.

 

[Aberdeen]

I think that, in general, what Alan is saying makes a lot of sense, regardless of where he got the idea from and regardless of whether you can find some exceptions.

 

[Alan]

I think that, in general, what Alan is saying makes a lot of sense, regardless of where he got the idea from and regardless of whether you can find some exceptions.

Aberdeen I didn't got the Idea from anywhere. If he does have the proof, he should provide it.


@Joey look you have been trol l ing my post for quite some time now. If you have no interest or clue of genetics and don't understand a word of what I wrote than ignore threads about it and go for other hobbies. There are enough taxonomy related Threads around.

Instead you comment with something which has nothing to do with my theory additionally you claim something which is also not true.

You claim I got my idea from Eurogenes (proof it) and than you show a map of Lazaridis paper? If you have nothing more to do than bragging about who is "white, European", than you should rather join Forumbiodiversity or the kind.

Don't even try to provoke me because at the end of the day it will not end well.


Now go seach for a differen't thread where you can try to make the people believe that Germanic people build Rome and as result of that how Uber Nordic your genes are.

 

[LeBrok]

I'm not sure what to think about this. I can see that Greeks, Cypriots, Turks and Sicilians are the bridge to Near East. I didn't have much time to think about this issue tonight. Obviously it is intriguing.

 

[joeyc]

ROFL

Butthurt Arab open a thread to prove the existence of a link between Arabs and Europeans, and accuses me of Nordicims. LOL

The maps you have posted are from Eurogenes. Fact it.

 

[Alan]

So you want it the hard way.

First you were racist not only towards two entire ethnic groups, but also towards all the People of the Middle East. But I ignored it

Please don't compare Italy who was the center of the European civilization, always part of the Germanic/Western/European sphere with backward middle eastern countries like Georgia or Ossetia.

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/thread...ass-as-natives?p=445255&viewfull=1#post445255

Thats the first breach of Forum rules.

2. You admitted the use of tro lling towards two long time users (Kardu and me) on this Forum and not only that you also, used a whole ethnicity again as an insult ( "bunch of light skinned Iraqi's"). But I ignored it again, since I really don't care what some tro lls thing of me or people from my region.

Anyway I was just trol.ling these bunch of light skinned Iraqis... ops Georgians... because one of these genius said that Georgians look Eastern European or something like that.

Consider my trol.ling here ended.

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/thread...ass-as-natives?p=445262&viewfull=1#post445262

Second rule violation.

And now once again you started to tro ll my new thread, which took me quite some time to build up. And not only that you started attacking a member by using an entire ethnic group (Arab) as insult once again. I can live with ignorant people who think they are superior. But if someone simply without any reason starts to tro ll the work that took me some time, than is the time where "enough is enough".

ROFL

Butthurt Arab open a thread to prove the existence of a link between Arabs and Europeans, and accuses me of Nordicims. LOL

Third time of rule violation.

And not only that a big delusional liar are you also

ROFL

Butthurt Arab open a thread to prove the existence of a link between Arabs and Europeans, and accuses me of Nordicims. LOL

Sista I don't want to go off topic, but it was the Germanic Barbarians who defended and ruled the Roman Empire in its final stage. Later on the Germanic Barbarians built the Holy Roman Empire which included Italy.

For someone who denies any Near Eastern influence on the creation of the Roman Empire you are very keen to mention how Germanic tribes build up your Rome.
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/thread...ass-as-natives?p=445255&viewfull=1#post445255

No you are not a bit Nordicist (Irony)

http://img5.fotos-hochladen.net/uploads/mds1600fcpt4eo1s3.png
The maps you have posted are from Eurogenes. Fact it.

Lie number two. It is a relatively old map of Dienekes based on Xing et al. 2010. But than you claimed I got my theory (not the map) from Eurogenes. Neither Eurogenes nor Dienekes have ever written this theory on their blog. I used the map but I didn't got the theory from him.

You actually failed the whole concept and point of this thread. It wasn't about bringing "Arabs and Europeans" close but finding the missing link between South_Central Asia, West Asia and Europe but of course in your little racist mind everything is about Europe and Nordic genes.

There is a saying in our culture, "if someone is itching for trouble than itch him. " And you definitely are itching for it with your big mouth.

 

[joeyc]

You speak a very good English for being an Arab living in Germany...

Anyway the Holy Roman Empire was founded by the Franks, who had defeated the Lombards and annexed the Italian peninsula to their domains.

Most of the late Roman Emperors and Generals were of partial or full Barbarians origins, like Flavius Aetius (half Scythian) or Romulus Augustus (for three quarters Germanic).

Open a history book and learn some stuff, before annoying me with you extreme ignorance.

 

[Aberdeen]

You speak a very good English for being an Arab living in Germany...

Anyway the Holy Roman Empire was founded by the Franks, who had defeated the Lombards and annexed the Italian peninsula to their domains.

Most of the late Roman Emperors and Generals were of partial or full Barbarians origins, like Flavius Aetius (half Scythian) or Romulus Augustus (for three quarters Germanic).

Open a history book and learn some stuff, before annoying me with you extreme ignorance.

Firstly, you're being extremely rude. Secondly, the founding of the "Holy Roman Empire", the supposed successor to the western half of the actual Roman empire, happened after the Migration Period, so had little effect on European genetics. Thirdly, if you don't understand the genetic connections Europe has with the Middle East and Western Asia, and if you don't understand the difference between an Arab and a Kurd, you probably shouldn't call other people ignorant.

I don't agree with all of Alan's ideas, and I do think his Kurdish background sometimes influences his conclusions. However, he really understands the issues and does try to be objective.

 

[Sile]

You speak a very good English for being an Arab living in Germany...

Anyway the Holy Roman Empire was founded by the Franks, who had defeated the Lombards and annexed the Italian peninsula to their domains.

Most of the late Roman Emperors and Generals were of partial or full Barbarians origins, like Flavius Aetius (half Scythian) or Romulus Augustus (for three quarters Germanic).

Open a history book and learn some stuff, before annoying me with you extreme ignorance.

I do not recall that the Holy Roman Empire ever held all of Italy............the papal states and not even the venetian republic where ever part of the HRE.

 

[Sile]

Simple answer: you are quoting Eurogenes, which has no credibility outside of some internet forum.

North Caucasians are worlds apart from any European population.

From Lazaridis et al. 2013.

Caucasians are Middle Eastern neolitich farmers (rich in E-V13 and G2a) from the Levant who mixed with ANE like people from the Caucasus (rich in J1 and J2).

North Caucasians have some WHG (10%) and some East Asian (5-10%) admixture compared to Georgians/Armenians.

If we go back far enough then you will find the only Europeans are the neanderthals.

As for the Arabs , they are late intruders into areas mesopotamia, levant and north-africa, phoenicians, kurds, numidians, armenians, sumerians, elamites etc etc ........they are never mentioned in the western roman empire

 

[Angela]

Alan, I've given this some thought as well. I believe your thesis has merit for some areas like Turkey, in particular. Do you think it's as true for areas like "old" Mesopotamia as well, however? Even if it were true there, what about the Levant?

Do you think increased SSA after the advent of the Muslim Slave Trade had any impact in places like the Levant, especially towards the southern areas, in making the "gap" larger?

Even before the Mongol and Turkic movements, it seems to me that it looks as if the movement of large amounts of ANE into the Near East may post date the movement of Neolithic farmers into Europe. The fact that some ANE moved into Europe during the Metal Ages doesn't totally equalize it, especially in southeastern Europe, and may have contributed to the "gap". The upcoming papers may clarify things a bit, since they have not only new but also multiple ancient samples.

Oh, and for the record, I never judge an ethnicity by the comments of some of its members on anthroboards, in particular, and I sincerely hope that people don't judge Italians on that basis either.

 

[Fire Haired14]

I agree, South-central Asia, West Asia, North Africa, and Europe are genetically defined regions. The genetic difference between Greeks and Turks, Iranians and south-central Asians, Russians and Caucasians, is shocking and shows those areas are kind of genetic border lines.

 

[Alan]

Alan, I've given this some thought as well. I believe your thesis has merit for some areas like Turkey, in particular. Do you think it's as true for areas like "old" Mesopotamia as well, however? Even if it were true there, what about the Levant?

Well considering Mesopotamia and the Levant, as I wrote in my opening Post. It never was subject to that kind of drastic genetic replacement as the corridor between South_Central Asia, West Asian and Europe. the Middle East, usually you had additional genetic influex from other West Eurasian like people. Even if there was some time a total genetic replacement, it was at least 3000 years ago and it was mostly West Eurasians replacing West Eurasians. 3000 years is enough time for a new genetic population to totally interpolate in the surrounding native groups and to build a new genetic bridge between them.

But what we have here between Balkans/Anatolia and in a much more drastic way in the Eurasian Steppes, is two genetically almost totally opposing populations replacing an ethnically related people. And this replacing had not ended yet until decades. With Stalin replacing populations in the Steppes with ethnic Russians.

Now you have two genetically very opposing populations living as neighbors in the Steppes. On one hand the East Eurasian/West Eurasian mixed Turkic speakers and on the other hand the West Eurasian Russians.

And in my opinion the most decisive fatctor here is, that this event was very recent, and there was not enough time to close this genetic gap.

You see in ancient Europe two genetically opposing populations (farmers and H&G), not so extreme opposing as West and East Eurasian but still. It also took some thousands of years for these people to grow together. And it will probably take some time (far less than 1000 years because of the globalization) till the gaps in the Eurasian Steppes and Anatolia/Balkan is closed again. You can compare the gaps there to very fresh wounds which yet had not enough time to heal together again.

Do you think increased SSA after the advent of the Muslim Slave Trade had any impact in places like the Levant, especially towards the southern areas, in making the "gap" larger?

yes it had some inpact, but as I said no comparison to what happened in the Eurasian Steppes.

Even before the Mongol and Turkic movements, it seems to me that it looks as if the movement of large amounts of ANE into the Near East may post date the movement of Neolithic farmers into Europe.

This is very likely, but as I wrote above. It was not that drastic because, 1. ANE ancestry can be considered as mostly West Eurasian.
2. It was additional genetic admixture not almost total replacement as we see on the West Asian "component" which is still 2/3 Early Neolithic farmer like.
3. There was more than enough time that this new genetic influx could grow into a smooth transition
And 4. ANE was universally spred in almost all of West Eurasia while Turkic expansion had only very recent impact on West Asia, South- Central Asia and the Eurasian Steppes.

The fact that some ANE moved into Europe during the Metal Ages doesn't totally equalize it, especially in southeastern Europe, and may have contributed to the "gap". The upcoming papers may clarify things a bit, since they have not only new but also multiple ancient samples.

I would agree with that, but since ANE movement into West Asia was as strong as in the Balkans and since I assume that most of it was brought by the same waves of immigration. I doubt that ANE contributed to the gap.

But you have to agree that considering the Eurasian Steppes the Iranic tribes are the most likely groups to have been one filling this gap.

Oh, and for the record, I never judge an ethnicity by the comments of some of its members on anthroboards, in particular, and I sincerely hope that people don't judge Italians on that basis either.

It needs more than one Individual to change my opinion on a entire population :wink:

 

[LeBrok]

This could be right. We can suppose that after the great migration of 500s Ukrainian steppes were repopulated by Slavs, pulling the Ukrainian dimension to the West, creating the gap. It will be very interesting in the future when we have more DNA from villages and small communities. I'm sure there will be some anomalies, some enclaves of older genetic material found.

 

[LumiBardha]

[h=1]Genetic history of the Turkish people[/h]From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search
Further information: Genetic history of Europe and Archaeogenetics of the Near East
In population genetics the question has been debated whether the modern Turkish population is significantly related to other Turkic peoples, or whether they are rather derived from indigenous populations of Anatolia which were culturally assimilated during the Middle Ages. The contribution of the Central Asian genetics to the modern Turkish people has been debated and become the subject of several studies. As a result, several studies have concluded that the indigenous peoples of Anatolia are the primary source of the present-day Turkish population,^{[1][2][3][4][5][6][7]} in addition to contributions from neighboring peoples,^[2] from the Caucasus, Balkans, and the Near East,^[8] with a small contribution from Central Asia and East Asia.^[2]
[h=2]Contents[/h] [hide]

• 1 Central Asian and Uralic connection
• 2 Haplogroup distributions in Turkish people
  • 2.1 Further research on Turkish Y-DNA groups
• 3 Other studies
• 4 See also
• 5 References and notes

[h=2]Central Asian and Uralic connection[edit][/h]
Neighbour-joining tree of European, Turkic central Asian and Turkish (Anatolian) populations constructed from HVS I sequences.^[9]


The question to what extent a gene flow from Central Asia to Anatolia has contributed to the current gene pool of the Turkish people, and what the role is in this of the 11th century settlement by Oghuz Turks, has been the subject of several studies. A factor that makes it difficult to give reliable estimates, is the problem of distinguishing between the effects of different migratory episodes. Several studies have concluded that the historical and indigenous Anatolian groups are the primary source of the present-day Turkish population.^{[1][2][3][4][5][6][7]} Thus, although the Turks settled in Anatolia (peacefully or after war events) with cultural significance, including the introduction of the Turkish language and Islam, the genetic significance from Central Asia might have been slight.^[3][9][10]
Some of the Turkic peoples originated from Central Asia and therefore are possibly related with Xiongnu.^[11] A majority (89%) of the Xiongnu sequences can be classified as belonging to Asian haplogroups and nearly 11% belong to European haplogroups.^[11] This finding indicates that the contacts between European and Asian populations were anterior to the Xiongnu culture,^[11] and it confirms results reported for two samples from an early 3rd century B.C. Scytho-Siberian population.^[12]
According to another archeological and genetic study in 2010, the paternal Y-chromosome R1a, which is considered as an Indo-European marker, was found in three skeletons in 2000-year-old elite Xiongnu cemetery in Northeast Asia, which would support Kurgan expansion hypothesis for the Indo-European expansion from the Volga steppe region,^[13] even though, genealogical DNA analysis indicates a migration of R1a peoples eastward from Europe to the Russian Plain between 4800 and 4600 years before present, a direction opposite to that suggested by the Kurgan theory. As the R1a was found in Xiongnu people^[14] and the present-day people of Central Asia^[15] Analysis of skeletal remains from sites attributed to the Xiongnu provides an identification of dolichocephalic Mongoloid, ethnically distinct from neighboring populations in present-day Mongolia.^[16]
According to a different genetic research on 75 individuals from various parts of Turkey, Mergen et al. revealed that genetic structure of the mtDNAs in the Turkish population bears similarities to Turkic Central Asian populations. The neighbour-joining tree built from segment I sequences for Turkish and the other populations (French, Bulgarian, British, Finnish, Greek, German, Kazakhs, Uighurs and Kirghiz) indicated two poles. Turkic Central Asian populations, Turkish population and British population formed one pole, and European populations formed the other, which revealed Turkish population bears more similarities to Turkic Central Asian population and British people.^[17]
Overall, modern Turks are most related to neighbouring West Asian populations. A study looking into allele frequencies suggested that there was a lack of genetic relationship between contemporary Mongols and Turks, despite their linguistic and cultural relationship.^[18] In addition, another study looking into HLA genes allele distributions indicated that Anatolians did not significantly differ from other Mediterranean populations.^[10] Multiple studies suggested an elite dominance-driven linguistic replacement model to explain the adoption of Turkish language by Anatolian indigenous inhabitants.^[1][7]
[h=2]Haplogroup distributions in Turkish people[edit][/h]
Y chromosome Haplogroup distribution of Turkish people.^[5]


According to Cinnioglu et al., (2004)^[19] there are many Y-DNA haplogroups present in Turkey. The majority haplogroups are shared with their "West Asian" and "Caucasian' neighbours. By contrast, "Central Asian" haplogroups are rarer, N and Q)- 5.7% (but it rises to 36% if K, R1a, R1b and L- which infrequently occur in Central Asia, but are notable in many other Western Turkic groups), India H, R2 - 1.5% and Africa A, E3*, E3a - 1%.
Some of the percentages identified were:^[5]

• J2=24% - J2 (M172)^[5] Typical of Mediterranean, Caucasian, Western and Central Asian populations.^[20]
• R1b=14.7%^[5] Widespread in western Eurasia, with distinct 'west Asian' and 'west European' lineages. The predominant haplogroup among Armenians.
• G=10.9%^[5] - Typical of people from the Caucasus and to a lesser extent the Middle East.
• E3b-M35=10.7%^[5] (E3b1-M78 and E3b3-M123 accounting for all E representatives in the sample, besides a single E3b2-M81 chromosome). E-M78 occurs commonly, and is found in northern and eastern Africa, western Asia^[21] Haplogroup E-M123 is found in both Africa and Eurasia.
• J1=9%^[5] - Typical amongst people from the Arabian Peninsula and Dagestan (ranging from 3% from Turks around Konya to 12% in Kurds).
• R1a=6.9%^[5] - Common in various Central Asian, Indian, and Eastern European populations.
• I=5.3%^[5] - Common in Balkans and eastern Europe, possibly representing a back-migration to Anatolia.
• K=4.5%^[5] - Typical of Asian populations and Caucasian populations.
• L=4.2%^[5] - Typical of Indian Subcontinent and Khorasan populations. Found sporadically in the Middle East and the Caucasus.
• N=3.8%^[5] - Typical of Uralic, Siberian and Altaic populations.
• T=2.5%^[5] - Typical of Mediterranean, Middle Eastern, Northeast African and South Asian populations
• Q=1.9%^[5] - Typical of Northern Altaic populations.

[h=3]Further research on Turkish Y-DNA groups[edit][/h]A study from Turkey by Gokcumen (2008)^[22][23] took into account oral histories and historical records. They went to four settlements in Central Anatolia and did not do a random selection from a group of university students like many other studies. Accordingly here are the results:
1) At an Afshar village whose oral stories tell they come from Central Asia they found that 57% come from haplogroup L, 13% from haplogroup Q, 3% from haplogroup N thus indicating that the L haplogroups in Turkey are of Central Asian heritage rather than Indian, although these Central Asians would have gotten the L markers from the Indians from the beginning. These Asian groups add up to 73% in this village. Furthermore 10% of these Afshars were E3a and E3b. Only 13% were J2a, the most common haplogroup in Turkey.
2) An older Turkish village center that did not receive much migration was about 25% N and 25% J2a with 3% G and close to 30% of some sort of R1 but mostly R1b.
[h=2]Other studies[edit][/h]
Genetic affinities among Southeastern European and Central Asian populations.^[24]


In 2001, Benedetto et al. revealed that Central Asian genetic contribution to the current Anatolian mtDNA gene pool was estimated as roughly 30%, by comparing the populations of Mediterranean Europe, and Turkic-speaking people of Central Asia.^[25] In 2003, Cinnioğlu et al. made a research of Y-DNA including the samples from eight regions of Turkey, without classifying the ethnicity of the people, which indicated that high resolution SNP analysis totally provides evidence of a detectable weak signal (<9%) of gene flow from Central Asia.^[5] It was observed that the male contribution from Central Asia to Turkish population with reference to the Balkans was 13%.^[26] In 2006, Berkman concluded that the true Central Asian contribution to Anatolia for both males and females were assumed to be 22%, with respect to the Balkans.^[27]
In 2011 Aram Yardumian and Theodore G. Schurr published their study "Who Are the Anatolian Turks? A Reappraisal of the Anthropological Genetic Evidence." They revealed the impossibility of long-term, and continuing genetic contacts between Anatolia and Siberia, and confirmed the presence of significant mitochondrial DNA and Y-chromosome divergence between these regions, with minimal admixture. The research confirms also the lack of mass migration and suggested that it was irregular punctuated migration events that engendered large-scale shifts in language and culture among Anatolia's diverse autochthonous inhabitants.^[1]
According to a 2012 study on ethnic Turkish people, "Turkish population has a close genetic similarity to Middle Eastern and European populations and some degree of similarity to South Asian and Central Asian populations."^[2] At K = 3 level, using individuals from the Middle East (Druze and Palestinian), Europe (French, Italian, Tuscan and Sardinian) and Central Asia (Uygur, Hazara and Kyrgyz), clustering results indicated that the contributions were 45%, 40% and 15% for the Middle Eastern, European and Central Asian populations, respectively. For K = 4 level, results were 38% European, 35% Middle Eastern, 18% South Asian and 9% Central Asian. However, Hodoglugil et al. caution that results may indicate previous population movements (e.g. migration, admixture) or genetic drift, given Europe and South Asia have some genetic relatedness.^[2] The study indicated that the Turkish genetic structure is unique, and admixture of Turkish people reflects the population migration patterns.^[2] Among all sampled groups, the Adygei population from the Caucasus was closest to the Turkish samples.^[2]
A group of Armenian scientists conducted a study about the origins of the Turkish people in relation to Armenians. Savak Avagian; director of Armenia's bone marrow bank found that “Turks and Armenians were the two societies throughout the world that were genetically close to each other. Kurds are also in same genetic pool”.^[28]
Another studies found the Peoples of the Caucasus (Georgians, Circassians, Armenians) are closest to the Turkish population among sampled European (French, Italian), Middle Eastern (Druze, Palestinian), and Central (Kyrgyz, Hazara, Uygur), South (Pakistani), and East Asian (Mongolian, Han) populations

 

[LumiBardha]

This is basically what happened ...east meets west and turkey, Caucasus and Kurdistan are in between. It also depends which turks were tested as east and west change genetically for obvious reasons.

 

[Moor]

Interesting, but I don't believe that old before people where more related to each other than today.

 

[IronSide]

Do you think increased SSA after the advent of the Muslim Slave Trade had any impact in places like the Levant, especially towards the southern areas, in making the "gap" larger?

on the usual 2 dimensional PCA of west Eurasian populations, you can't assess how much African admixture affected certain groups because it's not intended to show that, it's not one of the two variables represented by the horizontal or vertical axes.

on a global PCA, one axis separates Africans from non-Africans and the other East Eurasians from West Eurasians. In the Middle East, there is a clear, strong shift towards Africa from the core Eurasian group, its higher in North Africa, while East African populations form in the middle.

another one

 

[Angela]

on the usual 2 dimensional PCA of west Eurasian populations, you can't assess how much African admixture affected certain groups because it's not intended to show that, it's not one of the two variables represented by the horizontal or vertical axes.

on a global PCA, one axis separates Africans from non-Africans and the other East Eurasians from West Eurasians. In the Middle East, there is a clear, strong shift towards Africa from the core Eurasian group, its higher in North Africa, while East African populations form in the middle.

another one

Well, now we have samples from the Levant Bronze Age, for example, so by comparing them to modern Levantines we might be able to get a better fix on the answer to my question specifically about the Arab slave trade, yes?