I think we already have enough DNA to evit a too big distorsion in respective proportions; that said individuals in Tollense show great differences within the sample. A part could be put on the account of poor DNA sample, but that said, as a whole, even arbitrary (or not) grouped together, the mean group show even in Genetiker higher %s of WHG AND EEF than preceding CHL and BA cultures of the area, the ones with apparently high level of Steppics. So the lower level or absence of CHGlike is not a too big surprise and is surely not only a statistical accident. Genetiker founds more EHGlike (dark blue) than the survey; I have no element nor knowledge to discuss it. What pop could explain this: a less steppic one, more "autochtonous", with an EEF pop lixed with HG's; the possible excess of EHGlike could be, exageration or not of Genetiker, due to a rather Northern HG's pop, kind of SHG, maybe rich in Y-I2a2 and Y-I1. Y haplos could help here, for sure. I suppose the pre-IE or at least pre-Steppics pops of Central Europe at these times had seen a continual increase in HG's auDNA at the cost of Farmers DNA, but here we maybe have a more southern one (more Y-I2a2 + Y-?) but also more EEF, more WHG, kind of proto-Lusacian input, and a more northern one, more SHGlike, (more Y-I1 + Y-?) with less EEF; all the way, these two pops could have been close enough in means, and not descendants of Steppics nomads? spite it seems weird at those times. The more northern one could be the remnants of East TRBK people??? and incorporated, later, in the Germanics genesis. Their apparent lack of CHG seem discarding direct demic link with post-Unetice.
All that is very fragile, it's true. Guessing and no more to date.
