Swedish queen who was buried in Finland

 Karin Månsdotter (->link) is the only Swedish royal buried in Finland. Karin was born into a lower estate, but became Queen of Sweden as the wife of Erik XIV in 1568. Karin was by no means the only member of the house-born estate to end up in the Swedish royal family. Erik, however, was unpopular and was deposed by his brother, and his reign was short-lived. Erik and Karin were imprisoned, Karin was later sent to Finland, and Erik, who had been in captivity, was probably murdered. Karin lived for decades in Finland and was buried as a noble in Turku Cathedral after her death. The grave has now been opened and new research (->link) is unraveling Karin's story using archaeological and ancient genetic methods.

Women's epigenetic aging depends on the reproductive history

According to the research (->link) at the University of Helsinki (2026), a woman’s reproductive history affects biological aging and lifespan. The study showed that both infertility, a large number of children (more than 4) and early first birth are associated with faster epigenetic (->link) aging, which supports the life cycle theory of the division of resources between offspring production and body maintenance.

CHALLENGES OF ANCIENT DNA PRESERVATION IN FINLAND

 New research highlights the challenges of DNA sampling from specimens found in Finland's acidic soil. The study can be found here.

Why do ethnic tests often fail?

 People often wonder why different genetic tests give them completely different ethnic profiles. Finns sometimes get either a completely or almost completely Finnish profile, sometimes, for example, a profile that is only 60% Finnish and 40% northwestern European, such as Scandinavia and Britain. This is where many people's faith in these tests falters. Then the know-it-alls raise their own profile and competence by defending the results with their ideas. However, it is clear that the same person cannot get such different results as we see. The thing is that the results depend solely on the method used. Which method the test developer has used depends solely on the intended purpose of the test and the preferences of the developer. I will now go through the test methods categorically, not the purposes, because few test developers reveal them. The methods are mainly divided into three groups:

1 Tests based on allele distribution. In these, a Finnish test taker often gets a very wide geographical distribution, which can vary depending on the test references. For example, I can get 60% Karelia + 40% Germany or 60% Estonia and 40% Sweden or an additional 5% Greece or Southern Italy.

2 Tests based on allele distribution profiles. In these, a Finnish test taker can get up to 100% Finnish results, but only when the test distribution exactly matches the allele distribution of the ethnic samples used in the reference. Usually, the results of Finns include some minority ethnicity, which is typically 10-20%.

3 Tests based on allele or haplotype distribution weights. In this way, you can almost always achieve 100% ethnic identification, but as in point 2, only for part of the ethnic profile. The allele or haplotype distribution can be optimized to maximize ethnicity readings. On the other hand, weighting the data can also lead to incorrect results, where some minority ethnicity is dropped from the results. In these tests, I usually get a result of 95% Finland + 5% Sweden.

Talk about "Junk Dna"

 An interesting article discusses the inheritance of higher intellectual characteristics. It was previously believed that the genome is divided into the protein-coding region and the rest of the genome is "Junk DNA" unnecessary for inherited characteristics. The article tackles the problem of why, for example, measured intelligence cannot be derived solely from the coding DNA region. The conclusion is that the inheritance of intelligence is not due to genes at all, but is culturally inherited from parents to children, or that the inheritance of higher intellectual functions is complex, related also to the "Junk DNA". Sociological or racial concepts have been often associated with intelligence. The dilemma arises whether to accept purely genetic differences among individuals or whether to accept individual differences as a social hierarchy. Neither option seems like a "good" explanation, not even a combination of the two. The last word has not been given in this assessment either.

Link

Scientific exercise on the ethnicity of the Late Iron Age Finns

I was hoping that finally Middle Iron Age samples would have been presented, but it wasn't the case.

Link

Ancient Siberian N-men tested

 I analyzed six Siberian ancient samples belonging to the N-haplogroup for the study "Ancient DNA reveals the prehistory of the Uralic and Yeniseian peoples" and collected location and age data from them.

I12488 - N1a1a1a1a Russia Fofonovo (Baikal) ? BCE)

I1961 - N1a1a1a1a Russia Ust Ilimsk (Irkutsk Oblast) 4239-4002 calBCE

I20305 - N1a1a1a1a (possibly N-CTS6967) Russia Krasnoyarsk Krai (Sharypovskiy District) 2288-2058 calBCE

I32545 N1a1a1a1a (possibly N1a1a1a1a2, N-Z1936, clade age 2600 BCE) Russia Rostovka (Omsk Oblast) 2021-1884 calBCE

N4a1 N1a1a1a1a Russia Kyordyughen (Sakha Republic) (possibly N1a1a1a1a4, N-M2118, ISOGG dating 2500 BCE) announced dating "Late Neolithic", but the haplogroup age reveals 3100 BCE for N1a1a1a1a

N4b2 N1a1a1a1a Russia Kyordyughen (Sakha Republic) (possibly N1a1a1a1a1a2a N-L1022, clade age 1900 BCE, seems to be a Baltic branch)

My test gives results with ISOGG classification, but I have added mutations according to Yfull or some other source. ISOGG gives a large number of mutations, which also appear in my test, but not included.

Unfortunately, all classifications are made according to modern populations, and ancient dead branches of the haplotree cannot be found this way. Because of this, most classifications end in the category N1a1a1a1a. You may have wondered why so many results end up in this category. This also leaves the sample history, datings by the y-tree and historical linkage between ancient samples incomplete. It is likely that ancient male lineages show more historical information over a wide area, and there is no way we can know which ancient specimens are more closely related based on classifications made based on living men if we have an unknown time period of 4,000 years from the ancient specimen to the present.

Please feel free to speculate.