Yakutian LNBA, the urheimat of Uralic languages?

 While reading the study "Ancient DNA reveals the prehistory of the Uralic and Yeniseian peoples"  I noticed that according to the presented f4 analysis, the distance of Yakutia LNBA (LNBA - Late Neolithic and Bronze Age) from the Tatars is smaller than the distance of Cis-Baikal LNBA from Tatars. I found it strange, because the Tatars are significantly closer to the Baikal region. My second observation was related to the connection between languages and genetics. The study proves that the genetic distance between the Yakutia LNBA and the speakers of the Uralic languages proves that the Yakutia LNBA is the original population of the Uralic languages. However, the study does not make a comparison between all language groups in relation to the Yakutia LNBA samples, but uses as evidence the occurrence of a single Yakutia LNBA-type sample in the assumed area of occurrence of the Uralic language group. The emphasis is placed on the Seima Turbino phenomenon. 

Seima Turbino was a Bronze Age multi-ethnic trade channel extending from northwestern China to the regions of Finland and Estonia, and Seima Turbino has been thought to be connected to the westward spread of the Uralic languages. However, linguistic theory does not define the eastern home of the Uralic languages on the basis of Seima Turbino. The evidence for the presence of Seima Turbino is purely archaeological. Whether this unity of the Uralic languages is true or not, Seima Turbino was a multi-ethnic commercial and cultural phenomenon in which the Uralic languages may have been involved, but the evidence of a few ancient genomes cannot be significant.

I decided to perform a similar F4 test to see the distances of the Yakutia and Cisbaikal LNBA samples to the present-day samples of the different language groups. All the samples used in that test are available on the Reichlab website. The only exception compared to the Yakutia LNBA samples from the study is that I did not include one sample classified as Yakutia LNBA in the study, supposed to have a Seima Turbino origin and in this respect I only kept to the local Yakutia LNBA samples. This sample is presumably not relevant to the F4 results.

The study has been presented in Nature magazine in its final form, but is unfortunately behind a paywall there. The preprint from 2023 can be found at https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2023.10.01.560332v2.full#ref-89.

All Yakutia LNBA and Cisbaikal LNBA samples are ready-made genotype files from public samples shared by Reichlab. There may be more samples from these two LNBA-era populations in the study. I have downloaded the bam-format samples used in the study, but I will leave them for later use for now.

Southern Uralic Mordovian and Mishar Tatars seem to be more like Cisbaikal LNBA than like Yakutia LNBA.  I don't know why my results using Reichlab genotypes and Reichlab program qpDstat gives different results. Maybe my readers can run tests to confirm which one is correct.

My results:

Study results:

Yakutia LNBA samples:
N4a1
N4b2
YAK021
YAK022

YAK024

Cisbaikal LNBA samples:
irk022
irk025
irk036
irk057
irk033
irk034
irk040
DA358
DA360
irk071
irk075
irk008
irk061
irk068
irk017
mak026
DA334
DA336
DA337
DA339
KAG002 
KPT001
KPT002
KPT003
KPT004
KPT006
STB001
ZPL001
ZPL002
I1526
I7335
I7759
I7779
I7780
I7782
I8296
DA343
DA353
DA356
DA361

Update 17.8.25 09.30. Used samples are listed in the study, in  "supplementary data 3"