Wednesday, October 5, 2022

Exciting East Hunter-Gatherer ancestry

East Hunter-Gatherer ancestry breaks common logic.  While it was in Europe highest in ancient Steppe population, Yamnaya and Afanasievo and next highest in Cored Ware populations, it seems to fade out in modern Baltic populations, although those modern populations have highest Steppe ancestry.  Instead of East HG the Balts have highest West HG among all European populations.  This made me wonder whether the Dstat, and other tests basing on genetic drift, works correctly.   I made a Dstat-run 

Dstat(EHG,WHG,<test pop>,Mbuti)

and the results is




Sunday, August 28, 2022

Common ancestry using heterozygous data

 I got an idea to extract heterozygotes from the source population data to see recent admixtures without interference of homozygous inheritance.  The goal was to remove local genetic drift and see the recent admixture between population pairs.  Several studies have shown that heterozygotes imply recent admixture.  It is easy to see that mixing of two or more populations lead to increasing heterozygosity, even homozygous and drifted populations create heterozygosity in mixing process.  I removed all homozygotes only from source populations, leaving other populations original to give a chance to homozygous mixtures to lead to heterozygous offsprings.  Test samples are  from 1000 Genomes- and SGDP-projects modified to fit to the HO-data space published by Reich Lab and in the final stage pruned to include 180000 heterozygous locations, which are then compared to unpruned samples (it is essential to standardize samples in using Admixtools/qp-softwares).  Outside listed result I tested also Basque samples.  Basque results showed only distant admixture and surprisingly (at least to me) the closest admixture was with British samples, not with IBS and French samples. Again I noticed that Swedish SGDP-samples are useless, which annoy me especially because Sweden belongs to root populations around the Baltic Sea. I would be grateful if someone of my readers has an idea where to download decent Swedish samples fitting with the Human Origin project.  I need the HO-space or more to get reasonable amount of heterozygotes.

Mauri11m is me and I was born on the western seaside. 

These tests lack of many populations, are not perfect and can only prove the applicability of this method reducing the impact of local genetic drifts.









 

   

 

Tuesday, May 24, 2022

European admixtures by qpAdm

 What I have seen we have no standards in reporting ancient admixtures of recent populations. Commercial services give sometimes 70% Western Hunter Gatherer, sometimes 15%.  Methods are poorly described, if at all.  Obviously there are admixture overlaps and the results depend on how admixture tools identify them.  For instance Yamnaya Samara overlaps with several hunter gatherer groups.  I am sure that also European early farmers (LBK_EN) overlap with later Near East admixture in Europe and later Near Eastern admixture exists in Mediterranean.  In other words admixture runs without Near Eastern samples assume EEF, but it doesn't give best fit.  My test uses following qpAdm files:

Right file:

Mbuti
Levant_Neolithic (sample I0867)
Onge
Iran_N
Villabruna
Mixe
Ami
Krasnoyarsk_Siberian
Itelmen


Left file:

source
Yamnaya_Samara
LBK_EN
WHG
Nganasan
BedouinB (selected most distant samples from Europeans)

The results looks reasonable and qpAdm gave positive best coefficients without errors with only one exception, Swedes.  I don't know why modern Swedes failed, because ancient Gotlanders made a perfect fit.





Tuesday, May 17, 2022

New Finnish Iron Age study on the way

 Here the link of preprint.  It looks like an arrival of a new male group from Estonia representing Baltic Finns mixed with older more Swedish-like population.  Obviously those western females represented older local population, which at the end of the Viking Era became isolated from Sweden.  Hard to believe that Swedish females migrated to Finland without men.

Wednesday, April 13, 2022

New blog

 Unfortunately it looks like Finnish genetic research has been paused so far due to disappointing results.  Hopefully Finnish researchers make necessary reappraisals, because we need objective knowledge about our prehistory.  Today the gap between linguistics, genetics and archaeology is too big to support objectives of Finnish genetic research.  I am afraid it takes years to turn the ship into a correct lane and I probably never will see rational Finnish genetic research.  My pessimism is based on that fact that I have over 10 years experience about this matter.   

Meanwhile I can do nothing with this matter I decided to open a new blog dealing with Finnish history and prehistory.  Topics will mainly cover  observations mirroring the Western Finnish history, facts, myths and visions.  Unfortunately I have not time and resources to give inclusive reference lists and readers have to make some efforts for it. Language is often Finnish, but translators are today reasonable good to give you points.

Link


Monday, January 10, 2022

Kazakh ancient N-haplogroups were N1a1a1a1a

 Several samples from the time around 300 BC in Kazakhstan belong to the same haplogroup level than Kola Peninsula samples from 1500 BC, reported by mutations L1026 or L392.  I was not able to find any RECENT ISOGG downstream mutations, which makes me think if all European side N can be derived from these Kazakh Iron Age men.  If this is true we have a problem with the home land of Finnic speakers, considering that they belonged to N and home  land of them was not near Kazakhstan.   At 500 BC we should find downstream mutation taking into account datings of the first Finnic speakers in the Baltic area and believing in the incidence of N1a1a1a1a at 500 BC in Europe and in Central Asia simultaneously.  TMRCA of the N1a1a1a1a is according to Yfull 3000 years (1000 BC).  The mystery of the origin of European N remains.   Everything proves about a rapid expansion to the Baltic area and to North Russia.  What ever caused this, what language they spoke and adapted remains without answer and makes the mystery even deeper after these finds from Kazakhstan.  Another explanation is that there was still unknown brance of N1a1a1a1a somewhere in West Siberia or Northern Russia around 1000-500 BC, but we have not evidence of it.

SMV001 N1a1a1a1a Sargat_300BCE

BIY001 N1a* Sargat_300BCE

BIY002 N1a1a1a1a Sargat_300BCE

BIY005 N1a1a1a1a Sargat_300BCE

BIY007 N1a1a1a1a Sargat_300BCE

BIY009 N1a1a1a1a Sargat_300BCE

BIY012 N* Sargat_300BCE

KOK001 N1a* (likely N1a1a1a1a) Kokonovka_200BCE

KOK002 N1a1a1a1a Kokonovka_200BCE

BGD004 N1* (likely N1a1a1a1a) Bogdanovka_150BCE

https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.abe4414

N1a1a1a1a L392 L1026