New Russian study is worth reading

 A new Russian study (-> link ) describes the history, genetics and migrations of the Baltic-Finnic groups around the Baltic, Ladoga and White Sea. Overall, I think the description is accurate. The usual conceptual blunders of non-Finns and non-Estonians regarding the words Finnic and Finno-Ugric are also largely avoided, but not completely. The research is groundbreaking in a way, because nothing similar has been done by Finns and Estonians. This does not mean that Finns and Estonians do not know the same things. However, this study provides a lot of new information for those less familiar with the subject.

Seen through the eyes of a Finn, the history of the eastern Baltic-Finnic groups gets a special mention, which I think is broadly correct. The division into Karelian language and Karelian dialect will not be made. I would have liked clarifications on other language issues as well. The timings of the migrations of the eastern Baltic-Finnic groups give special reason for thanks. I also found new information from these, and I strongly believe in the Russians' know-how. A small minus is that first the birth of these groups is described correctly as a result of the west-east migrations of the first millennium, which surprised me, because in Russian studies, Baltic-Finnic migrations to the Baltic Sea are usually described only in the opposite order, and then in the genetics part of the study, the grouping is done on the basis of eastern groups.

Seen on the basis of old information, the Tarand burial method is somewhat illogically connected to the easternmost branch of the N-haplogroup.  The branch Z1927 is characteristic for the eastern Baltic-Finnic groups and the Tarand graves are part of the western Baltic-Finnic culture. Although this contradiction is noticed, there is no explanation. The significance of the Tarand graves in the investigation of the origin of the Baltic-Finnic populations is seen as essential. However, it must be reminded that the presence of Z1927 in Karelia alone does not necessarily prove the direction of migration. Very often mixing of different populations and population bottlenecks cause local changes in both culture and inheritance, and it cannot be assumed that Z1927 was involved in the migration that led to the spread of the Tarand burial.

I don't comment on the genetic results because I don't have the necessary material to make comparisons.

Edit 21.12.24 12:30-13:30

I found those popular Eutogenes G25 coordinates for the study samples. Eurogenes G25 is a axmixture in good and bad.  Using ancient samples there is certain value, but using modern populations you can't make decisions about the origin or ancestry. 

Here three results of Finns, first my own result.  

Target: maurim1_scaled Distance: 0.6842% / 0.00684208
26.2	Shetlandic
22.8	Ingrians
18.6	Pskov_(Porkhov)
8.4	Ingrian_Finns
5.0	Votes
4.8	Veps
4.4	Karelians_(North)
3.6	Karelians_(SW_Karelians_(SW_Livvi)
3.2	Lithuanian_VZ
1.2	Lithuanian_PZ
0.8	Dusun
0.8	Shor_Khakassia
0.2	Karitiana

Target: Finnish_Southwest Distance: 0.7902% / 0.00790222
26.2	Karelians_(Tver)
23.0	Icelandic
17.8	Ingrians
14.4	Veps
9.8	Ingrian_Finns
7.6	Karelians_(SE_Karelians_(SE_Ludic)
1.2	Shetlandic

Target: Finnish_East Distance: 0.6825% / 0.00682458
45.8	Ingrians
41.0	Ingrian_Finns
7.4	Karelians_(North)
2.8	Saami
1.2	Veps
0.8	Norwegian
0.6	Mari
0.4	Ethiopian_Anuak

Here results for the study sample averages. I used dist col 0.5 to avoid excessive columns. The last column is Russian Ryazan

N haplogroup in FamilytreeDna

All YDNA haplogroups can be found in FamilytreeDna's distribution maps. The results are based on the results of their customers and the ancestry information they provide. The global coverage of the samples is affected by customer activity in different regions and countries, where there is great variation. In Western Europe, the coverage is good, but e.g. finding out the prehistoric origin of Finnish samples belonging to the N group is hampered by the lack of samples from Eastern Europe and Asia on FamilytreeDna's maps. In addition, it would seem that FamilytreeDna's knowledge of the historical structure of the N-haplogroup is incomplete, which fact is reflected in the classification of the samples into different levels of the haplotree. Due to these shortcomings and illogicalities I don't see it as possible to draw similar conclusions about the course of prehistory as I did with Finnish haplogroup I.  Please give feedback directly to FamilytreeDna, as these maps, if logical, would be very useful.

Y5005

CTS6496

Z1941

VL62

CTS8565

Z1936

VL29

CTS9976

L1025

L550

CTS6496+CTS7189

FamilytreeDna's new reports give comparisons to ancient DNA

 FamilytreeDna has increased its YDNA-based reporting since last seen and is now state of the art in YDNA science. Below is a comparison based on my own SNP mutations to ancient samples. Ancient samples are now new in FamiliyreeDna's YDNA reporting. The two samples closest to me that have been successfully classified are Ladogan Viking sample VK220 and Viking Age Sigtuna sample 84005/nuf005. Interestingly, I have previously tested the latter sample with the Eurogenes G25 test and it was found to be partly Finnish. I have personally tested both samples for the CTS2208 group. FamilytreeDna can reach the slightly more accurate classification Z26344, which is a new classification found after my own test. I'm going to try repeating the test at a lower quality level to see if the test shows any new results.  Additional mutations between 800 BCE - 1200 CE are likely, but the result depends on the sample quality.  

Anyway, I'm happy with the results. When the TMRCA to me is 800 BCE (age of CTS2208/Z26344) for these two and the  oldest Finnish I-branch with certainty is 2200 years old (FtDna), then only 600 years of unexplained time remain in between. The next major upstream from the Finnish clade is CTS7676 and isn't identified by Finnish samples. CTS7676's TMRCA in Sweden is 2600 years (FtDna). With it the difference  shrinks to 400 years. This is amazing. By modern samples CTS 7676 is purely Swedish (Yfull 24 samples, of which 22 are from western Sweden, can also be read as Norwegian in that period) and its closest branch to the downstream is Finnish  L287/L258 as mentioned above.  So the transition time from Sweden to Finland has been 400 years (look the picture below, made by FamilytreeDna),  which dates to the very end of the Bronze Age and to the pre-Roman Iron Age.

During that time, cattle breeding and farming became a new way of life on the west coast of Finland. There was small-scale farming in Finland before, but livestock farming in this area was a typically Scandinavian way. Burials became barrow grave burials and stone cist burials. Connections with Scandinavia became more common. It is estimated that the Finnish language came to Finland 600-1000 years later. According to the estimate, the Sámi arrived in 500 BCE, that is exactly that period, but they came from the east. The economy based on agriculture and cattle breeding has not been connected to the Sami people (need to be checked). The Sami language is dated to be older than this period and the origin in the Urals.  They have preserved their language to the present day. The Germanic loanwords of the Sámi language date to this period.

This was an exceptionally long text from me. Thank you for your time and reading.    This subject is important to understand later Finnish history.

______________________________________________

Z26344 is an immediately downstream mutation for CTS2208.  FamilytreeDna dates both to 800 BCE.  It is safe to say that both seem to have a Swedish origin (see my previous post and older posts -> link).  FamilytreeDna really puts things into perspective.

Sample location | sample dated | mutation  | TMRCA with me

Salme 700-800 CE Z2338 1800BCE

 Hundstrup  670-830 CE Z2338 1800BCE

 Koksijde 667-820 CE Z2338 1800BCE

 Hundstrup 670-820 CE Z2338 1800BCE

 Wolverton 600-671 CE Z2338 1800BCE

 Szolad  412-604 CE Z2338 1800BCE

 Sandby Borg 450-500 CE Z2338 1800BCE

 Czulice 395-418 CE Z2338 1800BCE

 Pruszcz Gnanski 100-300 CE Z2338 1800BCE

 Sweden Skara 900-1200 CE CTS6868 1700 BCE

 Salme 700-800 CE CTS6868 1700 BCE

 Denmark historical 1650-1850 CE Z74 1450 BCE

 St Johns 1294-1511 CE Z74 1450 BCE

 Ahlgade 1000-1550 CE Z74 1450 BCE

 Västerhus 1016-1262 CE Z74 1450 BCE

 Hofstadir 900-1300 CE Z74 1450 BCE

 Ladoga 900-1200 CE Z74 1450 BCE

 Silastadir 980-1020 CE Z74 1450 BCE

 Hrolfsstadir 870-1000 CE Z74 1450 BCE

 Silastadir 850-1000 CE Z74 1450 BCE

 Nordland 790-1100 CE Z74 1450 BCE

 Bodkerkarden 800-900 CE Z74 1450 BCE

 Nordland 700-900 CE Z74 1450 BCE

 Öland 700-800 CE Z74 1450 BCE

 Salme 700-800 CE Z74 1450 BCE

 Rombäck 450-500 CE Z74 1450 BCE

 Rombäck 450-500 CE Z74 1450 BCE

 Nunnan (nuf005 or 84005) 900-1200 CE Z26344 800 BCE

 Ladoga (VK220) 900-1200 CE Z26344 800 BCE

Edit 12.11.24 20:40 

After more intensive searching at FamilytreeDna I found a picture showing that 84005 and VK220 diverged from the ancestral lines of Finnish L287/L258 soon after the CTS2208 (it will say around 700-800 BCE. 

Edit 12.11. 24 23:20 - 13.11.24 23:20

I corrected some TMRCA-values and for consistency with datings I ended up to use only FamilytreeDna's datings.  FamilytreeDna has much more samples for TMRCA calculations, but their data confidentiality rules prevent me use their sample data.  Yfull reports sample ids and ISOGG classifications.  Sorry about inaccuracy in my original text.  It happens when you try to combine information from multiple sources, plus building logical and coherent texts in foreign language isn't as simply as using your mother language.  I hope that now datings and text logic are fine. 

Additional information about the Finnish Z133 clade

FamilytreeDna provides additional information on Finnish subgroups of the YDNA I1 haplogroup. FamilytreeDna certainly has the widest selection of YDNA samples, so you can trust the results with great certainty. What makes the results interesting is that FamilytreeDna reports the map locations of the samples based on the ancestral information of the sample owner. This information is mainly based on church records or population register data of ancestors. In the results, based on the TMRCA values mentioned in my previous update, you can see the places of residence of the ancestors of the young Z133 group. It is particularly interesting to note that, based on the ancestral data, the historical starting point of the group Z133 can be found, not only in South Ostrobothnia, but also in Karelia, which was handed over to Russia after WWII. It is natural to assume that a large part of the Eastern Finnish Z133 samples have come from the ceded Karelia during the last 500 years of the historical time period. Migration from the Karelia can extend even more to the past, but the Finnish census and church registers are not available from the time before the 16th century.  

This example proves that interpreting the present requires knowledge of history. How Z133 ended up in Karelia, I don't dare to present my interpretation, although according to known prehistoric information I see a coherent explanation.

Each dot corresponds a group if samples, but FamilytreeDna doesn't tell the logic and how the maps are scaled.

Z133:

In addition, the Finnish L258:

And only CTS2208, whose downstream branch the L258 is:

New Finnish study sheds light on YDNA

The research (link) shows that haplogroup N1 is divided into two groups, eastern and southern. This has been known to hobbyists for more than 10 years, but the matter has not been observed by researchers before now. It's already been 16 years since the last Finnish ydna study, so it's good that this issue has now been updated.

The study also provides additional information about the I1 haplogroup, which interests me more.

For a comparison, in Yfull, 244 specimens belong to L258, which is the biggest Finnish I1 group.

CTS2242, the largest I1 group of the study, mainly from South Ostrobothnia and Eastern Finland, covers about 35% of L258 in Yfull. The largest subgroup of CTS2242, Z133 (Z2043 in the study), has been identified with good accuracy.  In Eastern Finland the Z133 is probably from Karelia and from the exchange of population between South Ostrobothnia and Central Finland. Most of its samples have TMRCA values ​​less than 500 years. In Yfull, CTS2242 covers 85 samples, of which 12 are in places other than South Ostrobothnia and Eastern Finland. Big value for this particular group must have come from the regionally uneven weighting of the data. The groups Y13391, Z2046, BY510 and Y107833 in the haplotree at the same level with CTS2242 are missing from the material. Some of the assignments lack the ISOGG classification, even though it should be known. The main branch Y13391, larger in diversity than CTS2242, is missing. It is perhaps 20% of the sample size under  L258, covering 50 samples in Yfull, of which 27 are outside South Ostrobothnia and Eastern Finland

The data is very uneven in its geographical distribution, which is why I also doubt the relative distributions of the downstream  haplogroups of N1.

Swedish study: Scandinavian wolves are genetically pure

 Research (link)  shows that Scandinavian wolves are racially pure and have not mixed with dogs. According to the study, canine hydridism is a problem elsewhere in Europe. A Swedish study states that the Scandinavian wolves are of eastern origin and that the origin of the migration was Finland and Karelia in Russia. Wolves clearly more eastern than this belong to a different stock and the Chinese wolf turns out to be a hybrid. Pure wolf populations can also be found in North America.

The research is methodologically convincing. The selection of material for individual tests has been successful, considering the small size of wolf populations in Fennoscandinavia. Among other things, efforts have been made to eliminate the influence of close relatives on the results.  The effect of small populations is still clear in the PCA plots,  it would have been impossible to avoid totally.  It would have been good to eliminate relatives also in research when searching for the origin of Finnish Homo Sapiens. Of course, the scientific objective attitude is probably easier to follow in the case of wolves than in the case of linguistic and state institutions.

New Russian study about the Finnish ancestry in Russia

 Research (link) shows that Finnish heritage (IBD based) is common among Russians. Unfortunately other Finno-Ugric-speaking peoples, such as Komi and Volga Uralics, have not been included in the study. By adding these, we would get a better picture of the origin of this gene. Now the gradient indicates a Finnish origin, which is unlikely. It is also noteworthy that the IBD distribution shows that Finns have more West and Central European heritage than Russians.

The second figure describes the population bottleneck effect (effective population as a function of time). These tests are, in my experience, very unreliable, as are all tests of drift in supposed historical populations. Based on the current population structure, it is not possible to say what the population structures were like in prehistoric times. The drifts and their areas of influence have been different in different times.  This way, there could have been several regional subpopulations, bottlenecks and expansion times  at different times. This method is not suitable for historical research. Now only averages and evaluations are obtained in the test.  I was hoping for a larger number of populations in this case as well.