Thread: E-V13 Frequency Maps and Data

Interesting, sample I8252 is of low coverage but he does seem to be positive for the L618 node.

He has one good read at CTS6598
 
Last edited:
thats the y calls according to theytree
riverman i think he is real
there is a chance both theytree and ftdna discover team are wrong but it is small
1713845662495.png
 
I don't doubt that he belongs to E-L618, the question is whether this haplogroup comes from the actual burial, or from another person which DNA contaminated the sample. That's the critical question, not the assignment of the available SNP's.
 
I don't doubt that he belongs to E-L618, the question is whether this haplogroup comes from the actual burial, or from another person which DNA contaminated the sample. That's the critical question, not the assignment of the available SNP's.

i understand
do you think it could be a european researcher who belonged to e-v13
who contaminated this remain?

bummer :(
( i always look for ancient e-m78 and generally speaking E1b1b1 ancient samples)
 
i understand
do you think it could be a european researcher who belonged to e-v13
who contaminated this remain?

bummer :(
( i always look for ancient e-m78 and generally speaking E1b1b1 ancient samples)

What I can say is that all the samples from the site have a pretty specific profile with Iran + Yamna only. Yet this sample looks like a modern Southern European or Iranian-like person, rather. So its possible that e.g. a local digger or scientist might have contaminated the sample and he's even E-V13. Or probably its another sort of contamination, I can't tell, the only thing I'm sure about is that he doesn't into the other samples autosomal profile and is defintiely an outlier, which is a bad sign if contamination being suspected.
 
The raw data for the Carpathian post-Roman paper is out, posted by Radko in genarchivist:


There are about 10-16 E-V13s, depending on deeper clades read.
One one sample is a preserved south Thracian in profile and it is labeled as E-L241, sample RFK137.
 
A few months back someone posted a abstract of a study about the modern populations of Bukovina(raw data not yet published). I am curious of the sampling as recently I became aware of the Hustuls and the last Dacian archeological culture.

The Hustuls do not look like other Slavs, they are the only possible candidate to being a remnant of the Dacians, despite their assimilation into Slavs linguistically. They seem like a possible E-V13 enclave.
 
This sample is an older one:

From
Network of large pedigrees reveals social practices of Avar communities
A few months back someone posted a abstract of a study about the modern populations of Bukovina(raw data not yet published). I am curious of the sampling as recently I became aware of the Hustuls and the last Dacian archeological culture.

The Hustuls do not look like other Slavs, they are the only possible candidate to being a remnant of the Dacians, despite their assimilation into Slavs linguistically. They seem like a possible E-V13 enclave.

I have posted something about Transcarpathian samples too. The Ruthenians or Rusyn have some of the higher frequences of E-V13 within the Slavic world. However, the results I saw so far indicate strong founder events and significant differences in frequency between various subgroups of Rusyns. Generally speaking however, the diversity and frequency of E-V13 in Eastern Slovakia and Transcarpathia seem to be relatively high.
It would be great to get high resolution samples, best some which would be included in the various trees.

The Carpathian tumulus culture should be largely an equivalent to remains of the North Dacians, Carpi tribes IMHO. I think some of those were assimilated both by Germanics and Slavs respectively, after their final dissolution. I even wondered about some Gothic E-V13 lineages in Iberia coming from that source, too (among others).
 
This sample is an older one:

From
Network of large pedigrees reveals social practices of Avar communities


I have posted something about Transcarpathian samples too. The Ruthenians or Rusyn have some of the higher frequences of E-V13 within the Slavic world. However, the results I saw so far indicate strong founder events and significant differences in frequency between various subgroups of Rusyns. Generally speaking however, the diversity and frequency of E-V13 in Eastern Slovakia and Transcarpathia seem to be relatively high.
It would be great to get high resolution samples, best some which would be included in the various trees.

The Carpathian tumulus culture should be largely an equivalent to remains of the North Dacians, Carpi tribes IMHO. I think some of those were assimilated both by Germanics and Slavs respectively, after their final dissolution. I even wondered about some Gothic E-V13 lineages in Iberia coming from that source, too (among others).

The Rusyn project shows 14% E-V13.

However the Hutsul stick out, because their men do not look Slavic, and I doubt their aDNA is different. They must have very different Y-DNA portfolio. A really strange group, living in a Slavic environment, yet visually clearly different.

Their location is right on Carpathian Tumuli culture, these people had nowhere else to go, they were trapped. And their land is least desirable in the area, it's looking like they are simply the remnants of north Dacians(Costoboci). These people could be a E-V13 enclave.
Map-of-the-area-The-dotted-line-shows-the-general-location-of-Hutsulshchyna.png
 
The Rusyn project shows 14% E-V13.

However the Hutsul stick out, because their men do not look Slavic, and I doubt their aDNA is different. They must have very different Y-DNA portfolio. A really strange group, living in a Slavic environment, yet visually clearly different.

Their location is right on Carpathian Tumuli culture, these people had nowhere else to go, they were trapped. And their land is least desirable in the area, it's looking like they are simply the remnants of north Dacians(Costoboci). These people could be a E-V13 enclave.
Map-of-the-area-The-dotted-line-shows-the-general-location-of-Hutsulshchyna.png

I don't see why you think they don't look Slavic or at least south Slavic
 
I don't see why you think they don't look Slavic or at least south Slavic

Let's say they look basically generic Central European, definitely not typically Slavic, but with clear Slavic heritage as well. Definitely not less Slavic looking than say some groups of the South Slavs. But in that region that means more than in Montenegro.
However, one theory says they are largely derived from Vlachs, which brings up the Vlach origin problem.

What speaks against that later Southern origin though, is the pretty low frequency of haplogroups under J if I'm not mistaken.
 
Let's say they look basically generic Central European, definitely not typically Slavic, but with clear Slavic heritage as well. Definitely not less Slavic looking than say some groups of the South Slavs. But in that region that means more than in Montenegro.
However, one theory says they are largely derived from Vlachs, which brings up the Vlach origin problem.

What speaks against that later Southern origin though, is the pretty low frequency of haplogroups under J if I'm not mistaken.

I think you are lumping the other groups the Lemkos, Rusyns, and Boykos all as one and the same with the Hutsuls. Those groups look like Slavs with some deviation. I found the study that will be released and sadly no sample from Hustul territory, all samples are from further west which are just Slavic groups with some E-V13 substratum.
 
What does RK, KFJ, KUP, HNJ mean?

i think it is a shortcuts to the name of the 4 avar period cemeteries from which
the samples of this study were taken ( but i might be wrong here)
1714050207710.png
 
E-V13 is the only haplogroup which pops up in all 3 sites with European lineages. J is clearly concentrated in one site only.
 

This thread has been viewed 41362 times.

Back
Top