Genetics of Cretan population

[Kari]

This is a thread about the ancestry of cretans.We can easily detect the slavic ancestry by seeing the 9,5% of baltic admixture in modern cretans.Yamnaya's had 0% of baltic admixture so we are like 85% sure that ancient greeks had not baltic admixture.We can detect some asian ancestry(2-7%) because they have higher West_Asian admixture than the rest greek population.Source:https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1-CqRbvWntX1Xgz4fRkDIng7r6-hOxA2PbmL4gDJHfgg/edit#gid=0
Now we will see the k12b averages of 2 ancient greek samples and modern cretans.
Gedrosia:6.88}{8.02
Siberian:0.00}{0.02
NW_African:3.78}{2.63
SE_Asian:0.50}{0.20
Atlantic_Med:27.23}{23.40
North_European:11.24}{12.24
South_Asian:0.00}{0.17
East_African:0.22}{0.23
SW_Asian:13.20}{14.43
East_Asian:0.00}{0.17
Caucasus:36.92}{38.45
SSA:0.01}{0.04
As we can see modern cretans are very close to ancient greeks.
Left:Ancient Greek samples.source:https://www.eupedia.com/genetics/ancient_italy.shtml
Right:modern cretans.source:https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet...CEMESjkJpG78ARtrxwwtbt52c/edit#gid=1797482804
Its safe to say that modern cretans have something like 60-75% greek dna

Source about the yamnaya's zero baltic admixture:

 

[Kuivamaa]

What exactly is this “Baltic” modern Cretans have? Why does it equate “Slavic” when of all the countries around the Baltic only Poland and a tiny bit of Kaliningrad/Russia are Slavic and otherwise the place is full of Germanics, actual Baltics (Latvians, Lithuanians) and Uralics (Finns, Estonians, aka Finnics)? And historically speaking, Russia had no exit in the gulf of Finland until 17th century, plus Kaliningrad and most of currently Baltic shore of Poland was Germanic too.

 

[Kari]

What exactly is this “Baltic” modern Cretans have? Why does it equate “Slavic” when of all the countries around the Baltic only Poland and a tiny bit of Kaliningrad/Russia are Slavic and otherwise the place is full of Germanics, actual Baltics (Latvians, Lithuanians) and Uralics (Finns, Estonians, aka Finnics)? And historically speaking, Russia had no exit in the gulf of Finland until 17th century, plus Kaliningrad and most of currently Baltic shore of Poland was Germanic too.

Its mostly slavic in balkans.In balkans,baltic is higher in croatians,slovenians and bosnians,three populations that have mixed with slavs.Here you can see a balkan K13 averages detailed spreadsheet.https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1-CqRbvWntX1Xgz4fRkDIng7r6-hOxA2PbmL4gDJHfgg/edit#gid=0

 

[Kari]

What exactly is this “Baltic” modern Cretans have? Why does it equate “Slavic” when of all the countries around the Baltic only Poland and a tiny bit of Kaliningrad/Russia are Slavic and otherwise the place is full of Germanics, actual Baltics (Latvians, Lithuanians) and Uralics (Finns, Estonians, aka Finnics)? And historically speaking, Russia had no exit in the gulf of Finland until 17th century, plus Kaliningrad and most of currently Baltic shore of Poland was Germanic too.

Here is a k13 spreadsheet.https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1dCZldTIfd-EPjDlpQiFNcHwOtZus9Qdll3pB48zdQG0/edit#gid=0

 

[Kuivamaa]

Here is a k13 spreadsheet.https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1dCZldTIfd-EPjDlpQiFNcHwOtZus9Qdll3pB48zdQG0/edit#gid=0

That really doesn’t answer my question. How is it slavic if it is highest in Lithuanians (Balts) and Estonians (Finnic)? Even if we explain this by saying those somehow absorbed so much slavic dna that they are more Slavs than any of the actual slavic nations (they are probably not, Estonians in particular were colonized by Swedes and Germans) how is it that the Dutch score higher Baltic than the Greeks (I am Greek btw)? Am I to believe that Greece that received slavic settlements in the Middle Ages is less slavic shifted than the Dutch who have no known slavic migrations in their lands? The only explanation I have is that this Baltic basic population K13 uses, is some mix that isn’t just slavic and all their base populations are trying to show general directions (eg “Baltic in Greeks must be slavic because what else could have come from that direction”) but this seems very speculative at best and not that scientific to me.

 

[Kari]

That really doesn’t answer my question. How is it slavic if it is highest in Lithuanians (Balts) and Estonians (Finnic)? Even if we explain this by saying those somehow absorbed so much slavic dna that they are more Slavs than any of the actual slavic nations (they are probably not, Estonians in particular where colonized by Swedes and Germans) how is it that the Dutch score higher Baltic than the Greeks (I am Greek btw)? Am I to believe that Greece that received slavic settlements in the Middle Ages is less slavic shifted than the Dutch who have no known slavic migrations in their lands? The only explanation I have is that this Baltic basic population K13 uses, is some mix that isn’t just slavic and all their base populations are trying to show general directions (eg “Baltic in Greeks must be slavic because what else could have come from that direction”) but this seems very speculative at best and not that scientific to me.

in balkans its mostly slavic.In latvia its not only slavic.Belarussians have a high baltic percentage tho.So its slavic-baltic

 

[Kuivamaa]

in balkans its mostly slavic.In latvia its not only slavic.Belarussians have a high baltic percentage tho.So its slavic-baltic

How do you know? You assume? Still the Dutch have no real slavic or Baltic input so it seems to me there is a lot of Germanic in this “Baltic” component and there might be even unexpected Celtic in there too, since according to that spreadsheet even Irish are more Baltic shifted than the Greeks and as much as the Bulgarians (both Dutch and Irish have Celtic roots).
I mean if Dutch and Irish can’t have all that much of what we perceive as “Baltic” components yet they are shifted towards it,it has to be the other way around- their own basic components must be in that Baltic mix.
This all looks very speculative to me without knowing what this “Baltic” actually, truly is. What if Greeks are more Slavic than the Dutch but appear less Baltic shifted because Baltic itself is not slavic, all I am saying? What if Baltic hides paleobalkan and Greeks are even less slavic than we think? Unless we get info of what “Baltic” is we can’t possibly know and this whole exercise isn’t particularly useful besides giving you a very rough general idea.

 

[Kari]

How do you know? You assume? Still the Dutch have no real slavic or Baltic input so it seems to me there is a lot of Germanic in this “Baltic” component and there might be even unexpected Celtic in there too, since according to that spreadsheet even Irish are more Baltic shifted than the Greeks and as much as the Bulgarians (both Dutch and Irish have Celtic roots).
I mean if Dutch and Irish can’t have all that much of what we perceive as “Baltic” components yet they are shifted towards it,it has to be the other way around- their own basic components must be in that Baltic mix.
This all looks very speculative to me without knowing what this “Baltic” actually, truly is. What if Greeks are more Slavic than the Dutch but appear less Baltic shifted because Baltic itself is not slavic, all I am saying? What if Baltic hides paleobalkan and Greeks are even less slavic than we think? Unless we get info of what “Baltic” is we can’t possibly know and this whole exercise isn’t particularly useful besides giving you a very rough general idea.

You are right.Dutch people have high baltic.So yes,baltic is not only slavic.But there is not german or celtic dna in crete,so its accurate.

 

[Angela]

That really doesn’t answer my question. How is it slavic if it is highest in Lithuanians (Balts) and Estonians (Finnic)? Even if we explain this by saying those somehow absorbed so much slavic dna that they are more Slavs than any of the actual slavic nations (they are probably not, Estonians in particular were colonized by Swedes and Germans) how is it that the Dutch score higher Baltic than the Greeks (I am Greek btw)? Am I to believe that Greece that received slavic settlements in the Middle Ages is less slavic shifted than the Dutch who have no known slavic migrations in their lands? The only explanation I have is that this Baltic basic population K13 uses, is some mix that isn’t just slavic and all their base populations are trying to show general directions (eg “Baltic in Greeks must be slavic because what else could have come from that direction”) but this seems very speculative at best and not that scientific to me.

Wasn't that answered in the Danubian Limes paper? The "purest" Slavic group, the one which spread southward was in the Baltic, west of the Finns. That was the population they used to measure "actual" Slavic ancestry in the Balkans, so Kari is correct in that it's the closest K13 component.

 

[Kuivamaa]

Wasn't that answered in the Danubian Limes paper? The "purest" Slavic group, the one which spread southward was in the Baltic, west of the Finns. That was the population they used to measure "actual" Slavic ancestry in the Balkans, so Kari is correct in that it's the closest K13 component.

I think I have some recollection of that. Are we talking about the study that used Uralic Mordvins as old slavic proxy? I am specifically talking about Baltic model in K13, is that directly related to that study? If we assume that K13 is using that population for Baltic too, it could sort of explain why Estonians (who are their distant linguistic relatives) score so close. I don’t recall where the graves of those samples where (just a map that positioning NE related ancestry from Ukraine all the way to Estonia) but the whole discussion about Uralics used as slavic source creates more questions to me. Or do I misremember? This topic is particularly interesting to me cause I live in Finland.

 

[Angela]

I think I have some recollection of that. Are we talking about the study that used Uralic Mordvins as old slavic proxy? I am specifically talking about Baltic model in K13, is that directly related to that study? If we assume that K13 is using that population for Baltic too, it could sort of explain why Estonians (who are their distant linguistic relatives) score so close. I don’t recall where the graves of those samples where (just a map that positioning NE related ancestry from Ukraine all the way to Estonia) but the whole discussion about Uralics used as slavic source creates more questions to me. Or do I misremember? This topic is particularly interesting to me cause I live in Finland.

That's the paper.

This is what it says:

"
The Kuline individuals are more shifted towards present-day Slavicspeaking populations as compared to individuals in the Central/Northern European cluster, agreeing with the presence of Y-chromosome lineage I2-L621 in Kuline, which is common in present-day Slavic-speaking groups and absent in earlier periods. In light of these results, we modeled the ancestry of the Kuline individuals as a mixture of 56% deriving from the local Balkan Iron Age substratum and 44% deriving from Northeastern European Iron Age groups, and obtained a good statistical fit (Figure 2; Supplementary section 12.8). "

From that Supplementary Section:
"A model having Balkans Iron Age cluster (as the local source) and Russian_Ingria_IA (as the Northeastern European-related source) fitted for three present-day Balkan populations, Hungary, Croatian and Serbian with P-value>0.01 (Table ST9), as well as for the Kuline 10th c. CE with almost identical mixture proportions as in the 1240k dataset (supplementary section 12.1).

However, this model did not fit the ancestry of the remaining more southern (except Romanian) populations, who instead required a more local source represented by Greek_Empuries, and present-day Mordovian or Russian as proxy for Northeastern European-related ancestry. These models fit the ancestry for the remaining Balkans populations (Table ST10; Table ST11), with ~30-55% Northeastern European-related ancestry."

These remaining groups are Greece, Albania, Bulgaria and Romania.

So, yes, for Crete they did one analysis with Russians and one with Mordvins, but for Croatia, Serbia and Hungary they used Ingria Iron Age.


There may be more; I just quickly skimmed it again.

Russia Ingria Iron Age:

"In the Viking era (late Iron Age), from the 750s onwards, Ladoga served as a bridgehead on the Varangian trade route to Eastern Europe. A Varangian aristocracy developed that would ultimately rule over Novgorod and Kievan Rus'. In the 860s, the warring Finnic and Slavic tribes rebelled under Vadim the Bold, but later asked the Varangians under Rurik to return and to put an end to the recurring conflicts between them.^[3]"


The Mordvins are an interesting group. Although Uralic speakers, if I remember correctly they cluster with Latvians, Lithuanians, Russians and Estonians, not with Finns or Maris, Kets etc..

Uralic-speaking Estonians form a cluster with Baltic-speaking Latvians and Lithuanians (‘Europe 1’ in Additional file 3: Figure S5), which also includes Mordovians and Russians.

 

[Kuivamaa]

That's the paper.

This is what it says:

"
The Kuline individuals are more shifted towards present-day Slavicspeaking populations as compared to individuals in the Central/Northern European cluster, agreeing with the presence of Y-chromosome lineage I2-L621 in Kuline, which is common in present-day Slavic-speaking groups and absent in earlier periods. In light of these results, we modeled the ancestry of the Kuline individuals as a mixture of 56% deriving from the local Balkan Iron Age substratum and 44% deriving from Northeastern European Iron Age groups, and obtained a good statistical fit (Figure 2; Supplementary section 12.8). "

From that Supplementary Section:
"A model having Balkans Iron Age cluster (as the local source) and Russian_Ingria_IA (as the Northeastern European-related source) fitted for three present-day Balkan populations, Hungary, Croatian and Serbian with P-value>0.01 (Table ST9), as well as for the Kuline 10th c. CE with almost identical mixture proportions as in the 1240k dataset (supplementary section 12.1).

However, this model did not fit the ancestry of the remaining more southern (except Romanian) populations, who instead required a more local source represented by Greek_Empuries, and present-day Mordovian or Russian as proxy for Northeastern European-related ancestry. These models fit the ancestry for the remaining Balkans populations (Table ST10; Table ST11), with ~30-55% Northeastern European-related ancestry."

These remaining groups are Greece, Albania, Bulgaria and Romania.

So, yes, for Crete they did one analysis with Russians and one with Mordvins, but for Croatia, Serbia and Hungary they used Ingria Iron Age.


There may be more; I just quickly skimmed it again.

Russia Ingria Iron Age:

"In the Viking era (late Iron Age), from the 750s onwards, Ladoga served as a bridgehead on the Varangian trade route to Eastern Europe. A Varangian aristocracy developed that would ultimately rule over Novgorod and Kievan Rus'. In the 860s, the warring Finnic and Slavic tribes rebelled under Vadim the Bold, but later asked the Varangians under Rurik to return and to put an end to the recurring conflicts between them.^[3]"


The Mordvins are an interesting group. Although Uralic speakers, if I remember correctly they cluster with Latvians, Lithuanians, Russians and Estonians, not with Finns or Maris, Kets etc..

Uralic-speaking Estonians form a cluster with Baltic-speaking Latvians and Lithuanians (‘Europe 1’ in Additional file 3: Figure S5), which also includes Mordovians and Russians.

Yeah all around odd choice of a target population when it comes to slavs at least. The land bridge in question (Karelian isthmus plus Ingria) has predominantly been core Finnic territory (Finns, Estonians, Karelians, Livonians,Veps) from Neolithic up until all these got replaced by Russians and other Europeans (architects, technicians etc) when Peter in the 18th center chose that area to create the city now known as St.Petersburg. It did become contested between Vikings/Swedes and Muscovy/Russia earlier but still quite a bit after slavic migration occurred.
While all this sounds counter intuitive to my preconceptions (years of reading on slavic migration to Balkans plus my own background of having a Finnic SO), perhaps the researchers know something we don’t. After all in my paternal area of origin (messinia, southwestern Greece) while mostly a sea of med looking people, does have the odd very northern looking phenotype popping here and there. A Greek third cousin of mine looks spectacularly similar (given the distance) to an old Finnish colleague of mine, you could believe they are sisters.

 

[Angela]

Yeah all around odd choice of a target population when it comes to slavs at least. The land bridge in question (Karelian isthmus plus Ingria) has predominantly been core Finnic territory (Finns, Estonians, Karelians, Livonians,Veps) from Neolithic up until all these got replaced by Russians and other Europeans (architects, technicians etc) when Peter in the 18th center chose that area to create the city now known as St.Petersburg. It did become contested between Vikings/Swedes and Muscovy/Russia earlier but still quite a bit after slavic migration occurred.
While all this sounds counter intuitive to my preconceptions (years of reading on slavic migration to Balkans plus my own background of having a Finnic SO), perhaps the researchers know something we don’t. After all in my paternal area of origin (messinia, southwestern Greece) while mostly a sea of med looking people, does have the odd very northern looking phenotype popping here and there. A Greek third cousin of mine looks spectacularly similar (given the distance) to an old Finnish colleague of mine, you could believe they are sisters.

The point is, I would submit, that in the Iron Age there were Slavic tribes living there alongside other groups, and the authors have access to the ancient dna of samples from those Slavic tribes. The early age and unadmixed nature of the samples seem to be what inclined the authors to use them.

They work very well for the more northern and western Balkan areas and Hungary. For the more southern ones, Mycenaeans had to be added, and also more "admixed" Northeast European sources like Northern Russians or Mordvins. That would indicate to me that there was more than one source for the Slavs who moved south, and that one of them had some degree of admixture with Estonian like groups and perhaps a bit of Siberian like admixture.

Imo, people on the dedicated thread got distracted by and upset over the fact that the Mordvins speak a Uralic language. What they fail to realize, and in fact is anathema to some of them is that language is not always an accurate predictor of autosomal make-up. As I said above, the Mordvins cluster with Russians, Estonians, Latvians, and Lithuanians, not with most speakers of Uralic languages.

As for the bit of Siberian, I've seen it in some analyses of Balkan populations, although whether it came with Slavs or Sarmatians, Huns etc. or both I have no idea. It even shows up in Ashkenazi Jews, picked up, no doubt, in Lithuania or Russia.

 

[Poxy]

To be honest, I'm not sure if there was a mixture with the Slavs in Greece. Wouldn't it be more likely to mix with northern Balkan natives? What do you think?

 

[Kari]

Greeks have mixed with slavs,who came in greece.In places like Epirus,Macedonia and Thrace,the people have mixed not only with slavs,but with Albanians and Bulgarians too.