Iron Age and Early Medieval Polish DNA

T

Tomenable

Well-known member
Messages
5,496
Reaction score
1,400
Points
113
Location
Poland
Ethnic group
Polish
Y-DNA haplogroup
R1b-L617
mtDNA haplogroup
W6a
Analysis of Iron Age and Early Medieval Polish genomes:

http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthr...nd-coming-soon&p=252846&viewfull=1#post252846

PCA with two Iron Age and one Early Medieval samples:

Kwmjsds.png
 
So the Wielbark culture was really Germanic, Swedish-like.
 
Syky said:
So the Wielbark culture was really Germanic, Swedish-like.
Click to expand...

Kow_25 looks Germano-Celtic. But Kow_55 seems more mixed (at least in other analyses, I'm not sure why this cannot be seen in PCA, probably because PCA is only two-dimensional):

http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthr...nd-coming-soon&p=252881&viewfull=1#post252881

Kow_25 in MDLP K11 Oracle:

Using 1 population approximation:
1 British_IronAge @ 7.434154
2 Nordic_BA @ 9.274955
3 British_Celtic @ 10.62579
4 British_AngloSaxon @ 10.796147
5 Bell_Beaker_Germany @ 11.44074
6 Hungary_BA @ 11.495719
7 Nordic_LBA @ 11.755705
8 Alberstedt_LN @ 12.342703
9 Halberstadt_LBA @ 12.429883
10 Nordic_IA @ 12.46921

http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthr...nd-coming-soon&p=252862&viewfull=1#post252862

Kow_55 in nMonte restricted:

Welsh 44.80
Ukrainian_West 41.45
Pl_north 8.30
(...)
 
Niem_34 (Early Medieval Poland) compared to RISE568 (Early Medieval Czechia):

RISE569 (the other Early Medieval Czech) plots close to Polish Wielbark samples.

http://i.imgur.com/r4mVqTN.png

r4mVqTN.png
 
Syky said:
So the Wielbark culture was really Germanic, Swedish-like.
Click to expand...

agree, if we think that gothic was only Germanic and swedish at that time or could it have some west-baltic element as well
 
Well that's annoying. I was told Weilbark was rich in Y DNA G2/I2 and was really similar to HungaryBA. I guess you can never trust leaks. Like the leak which said Baltic HGs were basically WHG only referred to Lithuanian HGs. All other Baltic HGs, including the ones with R1b, had a huge chunk of ANE/EHG.
 
Since the samples for which results have been posted were I1, I2, and G2a2, the "leak" would seem to have been accurate. These people were Germanic in ancestry, not Slavic.

What the other samples will show we don't know.
 
K36 nMonte with use of the following ancient samples gives me ~13% of Wielbark:

IA = Iron Age
BA = Bronze Age
MA = Middle Ages

[1] "1. CLOSEST SINGLE ITEM DISTANCES"
IA_Wielbark_Kow55 IA_Sweden_RISE174 IA_Hungary_IR1
21.94205 24.22627 25.08156
IA_Gladiator_6DRIF22 MA_Slavic_RISE568 MA_Slavic_Niem34
26.65775 27.15263 29.48630
IA_Scythian_I0247 IA_British_6DRIF18
30.46349 30.81313

Tomenable

IA_Hungary_IR1 31.50
BA_Sudovia_RISE598 29.55
MA_Slavic_Niem34 13.80
IA_Wielbark_Kow55 13.15
IA_Gladiator_6DRIF22 6.20
MA_Slavic_RISE568 5.10
BA_Armenia_RISE412 0.65
HG_Ethiopia_Mota 0.05
IA_Sarmatian_I0575 0.00
IA_Gladiator_3DRIF26 0.00
IA_British_6DRIF18 0.00
IA_British_6DRIF23 0.00
IA_CelticBriton_HI1 0.00
IA_CelticBriton_HI4 0.00
IA_Wielbark_Kow25 0.00
IA_Wielbark_Mas5 0.00
MA_AngloSaxon_HS3 0.00
HG_Australia_Abo 0.00
BA_Armenia_RISE397 0.00
IA_Scythian_I0247 0.00
IA_Sweden_RISE174 0.00
MA_Iran_I1955 0.00

When I include more of Bronze Age European samples, my Wielbark share drops to ~6%, but the problem here is that we are mixing Bronze Age "ancestors" with their Iron Age "descendants" in the same comparison:

[1] "1. CLOSEST SINGLE ITEM DISTANCES"
BA_Cuiavia_PLN17 BA_Hungary_BR1 IA_Wielbark_Kow55
16.19202 17.58834 21.94205
BA_Denmark_RISE276 BA_Hungary_BR2 BA_EastGermany_I0116
21.99232 23.60180 23.68750
IA_Sweden_RISE174 IA_Hungary_IR1
24.22627 25.08156

Tomenable

BA_Sudovia_RISE598 22.10
BA_Hungary_BR2 21.00
IA_Hungary_IR1 19.20
BA_Cuiavia_PLN17 11.15
MA_Slavic_RISE568 11.00
MA_Slavic_Niem34 10.00
IA_Wielbark_Kow55 5.55
IA_Sarmatian_I0575 0.00
IA_Gladiator_3DRIF26 0.00
IA_British_6DRIF18 0.00
IA_British_6DRIF23 0.00
IA_Gladiator_6DRIF22 0.00
IA_CelticBriton_HI1 0.00
IA_CelticBriton_HI4 0.00
IA_Wielbark_Kow25 0.00
IA_Wielbark_Mas5 0.00
MA_AngloSaxon_HS3 0.00
HG_Ethiopia_Mota 0.00
HG_Australia_Abo 0.00
BB_Czechia_RISE566 0.00
BA_Silesia_RISE150 0.00
BA_Silesia_RISE154 0.00
BA_Czechia_RISE577 0.00
BA_Czechia_RISE586 0.00
BA_EastGermany_I0803 0.00
BA_EastGermany_I0099 0.00
BA_EastGermany_I0047 0.00
BA_EastGermany_I0116 0.00
BA_EastGermany_I0164 0.00
BA_Hungary_BR1 0.00
BA_Hungary_RISE373 0.00
BA_Hungary_RISE374 0.00
BA_Denmark_RISE276 0.00
BA_Armenia_RISE397 0.00
BA_Armenia_RISE412 0.00
IA_Scythian_I0247 0.00
IA_Sweden_RISE174 0.00
MA_Iran_I1955 0.00

========================

BR2 is a curious case because it always shows up for Poles in nMonte runs (as long as it is included in these runs). The original study also showed that it has the highest genetic affinity with modern Poles:

http://www.pnas.org/content/113/2/368.full

BR2.png


But a BR2-like population does not explain the majority of ancestry of modern Poles.

Only something between less than 1/5 and ca. 1/3 (depending on region of Poland).
 
Syky said:
So the Wielbark culture was really Germanic, Swedish-like.
Click to expand...
Not exactly, these are samples taken from inhumation found surrounded by wielbark stuff. Due to custom of cremation of dead among Wilebark people these are unusual cases, but the easiest to be sampled. Probably they have been immigrants.
 
The Wielbark I1 is I1a3-Z63, the I1 clade Maciamo calls continental. A Serbian member here belongs to it.

@Tomenable,

How many SNPs do the Weilbark and Medival genomes have? If they have only like 2,000 we can't be too confident about their results. Can you run them through Dodecade K12b so we can get an idea what their EEF, WHG, Steppe numbers are?
 
matbir said:
Actually it is I1a2a1a1d1a1a1b1 which according to yfull.com is found in Sweden only.
Click to expand...

Yfull only lists the countries for one or a few samples for each clade. It is not representative of where the clades are found, which is why I created my own (hopefully more legible) phylogenetic trees where I added as many countries as possible for each clade. For I1 clades I have made the depth of the tree to represent a chronological timeline, so that people have a better idea of when a mutation appeared and how long it took for the next mutation to develop. Branches with lots of successive mutations represent larger populations (i.e. fast expanding lineages, often linked with ruling classes in the case of ancient paternal lineages).

Here is the tree for I1-Z63

I1-Z63-tree.png



However, if that sample belongs to I1a2a1a1d1a1a1b1 and it uses the ISOGG nomenclature, it is I1-S14669 downstream of Z60, Z73, L1302 and Y5448. That would be a Scandinavian lineage that expanded during the Late Iron Age, and therefore could be Gothic, Vandal or a closely related tribe.

I1-Z60-tree.png
 
Fire Haired14 said:
@Tomenable,

How many SNPs do the Weilbark and Medival genomes have? If they have only like 2,000 we can't be too confident about their results.
Click to expand...

Yeah they don't have many SNPs. These are only "screening results", they were published as part of a study on microbes associated with ancient human DNA. So they are not final results, we still need to wait for the actual study.

I think they have only 2000 ancestry-informative markers (according to Vadim Verenich).
 
Tomenable said:
Yeah they don't have many SNPs. These are only "screening results", they were published as part of a study on microbes associated with ancient human DNA. So they are not final results, we still need to wait for the actual study.

I think they have only 2000 ancestry-informative markers (according to Vadim Verenich).
Click to expand...

Bullshit. In Gedmatch those genomes have about 15 000 SNP. And Markowice_7 even 26 0000 SNP...
 
My K36 nMonte after adding Mar7:

1) With Bronze Age samples:

BA_Cuiavia_PLN17 22.05
LBA_Sudovia_RISE598 16.50
BA_Hungary_BR2 12.45
MA_Slavic_Niem34 10.75
IA_Wielbark_Kow55 10.30
MA_Slavic_Mar7 10.00
IA_Hungary_IR1 8.15
MA_Slavic_RISE568 8.05
BA_Hungary_RISE374 1.40
IA_Wielbark_Mas5 0.35
IA_Sarmatian_I0575 0.00
IA_Gladiator_3DRIF26 0.00
IA_British_6DRIF18 0.00
IA_British_6DRIF23 0.00
IA_Gladiator_6DRIF22 0.00
IA_CelticBriton_HI1 0.00
IA_CelticBriton_HI4 0.00
IA_Wielbark_Kow25 0.00
IA_Wielbark_Kow22 0.00
IA_Wielbark_Kow45 0.00
MA_AngloSaxon_HS3 0.00
HG_Ethiopia_Mota 0.00
HG_Australia_Abo 0.00
BB_Czechia_RISE566 0.00
BA_Silesia_RISE150 0.00
BA_Silesia_RISE154 0.00
BA_Czechia_RISE577 0.00
BA_Czechia_RISE586 0.00
BA_EastGermany_I0803 0.00
BA_EastGermany_I0099 0.00
BA_EastGermany_I0047 0.00
BA_EastGermany_I0116 0.00
BA_EastGermany_I0164 0.00
BA_Hungary_BR1 0.00
BA_Hungary_RISE373 0.00
BA_Denmark_RISE276 0.00
BA_Armenia_RISE397 0.00
BA_Armenia_RISE412 0.00
IA_Scythian_I0247 0.00
IA_Sweden_RISE174 0.00
MA_Iran_I1955 0.00

2) Without Bronze Age samples:

LBA_Sudovia_RISE598 26.35
IA_Hungary_IR1 23.55
IA_Wielbark_Kow55 19.65
MA_Slavic_Niem34 14.95
MA_Slavic_Mar7 11.65
IA_Gladiator_6DRIF22 2.00
IA_Wielbark_Mas5 1.85
IA_Sarmatian_I0575 0.00
IA_Gladiator_3DRIF26 0.00
IA_British_6DRIF18 0.00
IA_British_6DRIF23 0.00
IA_CelticBriton_HI1 0.00
IA_CelticBriton_HI4 0.00
IA_Wielbark_Kow25 0.00
IA_Wielbark_Kow45 0.00
IA_Wielbark_Kow22 0.00
MA_AngloSaxon_HS3 0.00
HG_Ethiopia_Mota 0.00
HG_Australia_Abo 0.00
BA_Armenia_RISE397 0.00
BA_Armenia_RISE412 0.00
IA_Scythian_I0247 0.00
IA_Sweden_RISE174 0.00
MA_Iran_I1955 0.00
MA_Slavic_RISE568 0.00

Maybe I will add some Iberian samples.
 
Wielbark Culture was always suspected to belong to Goths, on their way to Black Sea.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wielbark_culture

However it was said by archeologists that Wielbark contained two separate ethnicities living side by side.  It makes sense as Goths didn't have time to mix with local population on their fast pace to the Black Sea.  IIRC, they marched from Baltic to Black Sea in about 150 years.  I wonder who was the second ethnicity of Wielbark Culture.  Germanic, Baltic or Slavic?
 
Tomenable said:
K36 nMonte with use of the following ancient samples gives me ~13% of Wielbark:




========================

BR2 is a curious case because it always shows up for Poles in nMonte runs (as long as it is included in these runs). The original study also showed that it has the highest genetic affinity with modern Poles:

http://www.pnas.org/content/113/2/368.full

BR2.png


But a BR2-like population does not explain the majority of ancestry of modern Poles.

Only something between less than 1/5 and ca. 1/3 (depending on region of Poland).
Click to expand...
It has to be more. I'm achieving the best modeled modern polish genome when using 70% BR2 and 30% Samara HG. I'm not saying this is exactly what happened, but it means major role of Hungarian Bronze, or Hungarian Bronze like population, in polish genome.
 
Tomenable said:
Niem_34 (Early Medieval Poland) compared to RISE568 (Early Medieval Czechia):

RISE569 (the other Early Medieval Czech) plots close to Polish Wielbark samples.

http://i.imgur.com/r4mVqTN.png

r4mVqTN.png
Click to expand...
I could see from admixtures that the Chechia sample looked slavic, close to my genome. Interesting is that these two samples are shifted more "east" on this chart than modern Slavs. Do you know who plots "South-East" from them? Hungarians, Bulgarians, BR2, or nobody? Looks like modern Slavs mixed with Central Asians and Germans and got shifted "west" on this chart.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top