That's what I am talking about. A useful autosomal method of determining admixture instead of unreliable hla mtdna/y stuff

PS. Notice how Russians aren't as Mongoloid as you claim. Victory!

First of all, I've never claimed that Russians are x% Mongoloid. Second, Y chromosome/mtDNA studies are not inherently "unreliable" if interpreted properly.

It's funny how this very study has been used to support comments that Russians and East Europeans have sginificant East Asian admixture. I've always said that there is nothing in this study to support such a view. The data is obvious. You have to be a complete moron to infer otherwise.

Dienekes claimed that East Asian blood made its way to Eastern Europe, but was undetectable, because it came from Central Asian males, where the population was, he claimed, Caucasoid paternaly and Mongoloid maternaly. LOL

He failed to see that there was no evidence of any sizeable amount of East Asian autosomal DNA in Eastern Europe.

He also failed to see that Central Asian populations certainly do carry East Asian Y-chromosome markers, and these markers would've shown up if they had mixed with East Europeans.

Instead he posted certain parts of a report that claimed a blood marker seen in Poland WAS of Turko-Mongol origin. He changed the title of the report to something like "Mongolian admixture in Poland", which was a pretty mazing move considering that the report had little to do with that.

But he failed to post the bit of the report that said the Turko-Mongol theory was just that, a theory. It wasn't a fact, which is clearly stated in the report.

He also failed to point to other studies, which have contradicted this report by showing that this blood marker is actually more common in Germany than it is in Poland.

Ahh, Dienekes, what will he surprise us with next. Personally, I can't wait. :)

>> where the population was, he claimed, Caucasoid paternaly and Mongoloid maternaly. LOL

My claim was in fact correct.

000210.html

>> He also failed to see that Central Asian populations certainly do carry East Asian Y-chromosome markers, and these markers would've shown up if they had mixed with East Europeans.

Central Asian populations carry East Asian markers today because of the East->West migrations of Altaic people (Turks/Mongols) in the late historical period. Before that period, the region was dominated by Iranic tribes, with a patrilineal organization.

The fact that ancient Central Asian Iranic speakers intermarried with Mongoloid women has also been proven by archaeogenetic research, showing Mongoloid mtDNA in two ancient Scytho-Siberian skeletons:

000317.html

It is also well-known that the modern Slavs have an Iranic substratum. Hence, it is likely that they will have a small corresponding Mongoloid fraction.

000205.html

"common mtDNA types in the gene pools of Russians and Iranians suggests an ancient connection between Slavs and Scythian populations of the steppe zone of Eastern Europe"

PS: Make sure to review the Blog Rules before posting again:

000367.html

Haha...well, I'm not surprised. Here we go again.

Ok, let me point out a few things...

"The fact that ancient Central Asian Iranic speakers intermarried with Mongoloid women has also been proven by archaeogenetic research, showing Mongoloid mtDNA in two ancient Scytho-Siberian skeletons"

So what? Scythians were not Slavs. And the Scythians in Siberia, who intermarried with East Asians, certainly had nothing to do with Slavs.

"It is also well-known that the modern Slavs have an Iranic substratum. Hence, it is likely that they will have a small corresponding Mongoloid fraction."

Not true. There is no evidence that when the Slavic and Iranic tribes were splitting, and then associating again, in eastern Europe, there was any presence of East Asian dna.

The steppe people were West Eurasian until well after the formation of the Indo-European divisons. That's what studies are proving.

http://eebweb.arizona.edu/PostDocs/Gilbert/tom_web/papers/L-Fox2004.pdf

""common mtDNA types in the gene pools of Russians and Iranians suggests an ancient connection between Slavs and Scythian populations of the steppe zone of Eastern Europe"

Now prove to me that this has any connection to East Asian genes. Scythians were not East Asians, they just mixed with East Asians...well after the formation of the Slavs. Do you understand that conecpt? I think it's a pretty simple one to grasp.

Iranic peoples already had Mongoloid admixture in the 1st millennium BC, long before the appearance of the Slavs in the 6th c. AD. The Slavs absorbed the Iranic speakers of eastern Europe during the historic age, in addition to Iranic elements accompanying the great invasions led by Mongoloid and mixed-Mongoloid peoples such as the Avars, Bolgars, Magyars, Huns and Mongols. The multitude of pre-Slavic Iranic peoples of eastern Europe of classical times did not disappear, but were absorbed into the Later Slavonic ethnê.

"Iranic peoples already had Mongoloid admixture in the 1st millennium BC, long before the appearance of the Slavs in the 6th c. AD."

Prove it.

And also prove that this "admixture" is present in Slavs today.

Well, the above study shows that Russians, the only Slavic population examined, have a 4% membership coefficient in the Mongoloid clusters. More studies with other Slavic populations and (more importantly) including Siberian/Central Asian Mongoloid and Uralic groups will elucidate these issues further.

PS: It was already shown above that ancient Scythians of the 1st millennium BC had Mongoloid mtDNA.

Correction...

The study does not show Mongoloid admixture in Russians. The missing 0.06 in Russians may or may not be Mongoloid.

Also, it was Scythian skeletons in Siberia that showed Mongoloid admixture. This does not mean these people were representative of Slavs and Iranians of eastern Europe.

You're implying that all steppe Iranians had some Mongoloid influence from the 1st millenium BC.

My link to a report on the ancient steppe people argues that they had no East Asian dna until much later. In other words, there was no East Asian lineages involved in the ethnogenesis of the eastern IE people, the Slavs and Iranians. Only did the Iranians expanding east mix with Mongols.

This theory of yours is at best highly speculative.

But for entertainmen'st sake, try and prove to everyone the following points:

Ancient Iranians in eastern Europe were part East Asian from the 1st Millenium BC.

Early Slavs were part East Asian genetically or anthropologically.

Current Slavs have much more, or even any more, East Asian DNA than other Europeans.

East Asian mtDNA in Slavs (about 1%) is a result of Turko-Mongols mixing with Scythians (LOL) and not the result of Slavs mixing with Finno-Ugrians.

>> The study does not show Mongoloid admixture in Russians. The missing 0.06 in Russians may or may not be Mongoloid.

I said that Russians have a 0.04 membership coefficient in the Mongoloid clusters. If you bother to read the supplemental data, you will see that there is a 0.03 membership coefficient in the cluster of East Asians and a 0.01 membership coefficient in the cluster of Amerindians in the case of Russians.

>> You're implying that all steppe Iranians had some Mongoloid influence from the 1st millenium BC.

Statements about all Iranians cannot be demonstrated in the positive. The presence of these markers in some Iranians establishes a mode for their transmission to Europe.

"Statements about all Iranians cannot be demonstrated in the positive. The presence of these markers in some Iranians establishes a mode for their transmission to Europe."

It doesn't.

Just as the mixing of Scots settlers with American Indians in America does not prove that the Scots in Scotland were part Ameridian.

The Scythians in Siberia did not have anything to do with Slavs and I challenge you to prove otherwise.

000399.html

"In any case, the region west of the Yenisey had long been the scene of intermingling between Europeoid and Mongoloid types. The latter penetrated far into Eastern Europe."

Mongoloid mtDNA has been detected in Russians (1.49%), Poles (1.83%), Bosnians (1.3%) [1]

[1] Annals of Human Genetics. Volume 67 Issue 5 Page 412 - September 2003

[personal insult deleted]

Mongoloid mtDNA has been detected in Russians (1.49%), Poles (1.83%), Bosnians (1.3%) [1]

[1] Annals of Human Genetics. Volume 67 Issue 5 Page 412 - September 2003
====================================

Incidentally, according to published data Russians of "Iranian" origin* (Southern Russians of the "Irano-Nordic" type) have no Mongoloid mtDNA at all.

Take a look at the map: from Ryazan to Krasnodar - 0% of Mongoloid mtDNA. I believe it's the largest area in Europe free from Mongoloid mtDNA :-)

*I'm not saying that Southern Russians (that's the absolute majority of Russians) are descendants of Slavicized Iranians, as the most early Slavs in the region of Slavic ethnogenesis (SE Poland, NE and NE Ukraine) were of the same Irano-Nordic type as early European Iranians (such as Alans).

The Pontic type predominates in Southern Russians.

000414.html

PS: Take some time to review the blog rules

000367.html

Traces of Mongoloid mtDNA have been found in Slavs, and all over Europe. So what's your point?

But as ERG has shown, the most likely candidates for Slavo-Iranians, the southern Russians, have 0% Mongol mtDNA.

So Dienekes, where do you think this Mongol mtDNA comes from?

Certainly not from the ancient Iranians.

>> But as ERG has shown, the most likely candidates for Slavo-Iranians, the southern Russians, have 0% Mongol mtDNA.

It's not the European Iranic tribes that lived in the north of the Black Sea (who were later Slavicized, becoming South Russians) that are responsible for the Mongoloid element, but rather the Iranic tribes of Asia who accompanied the various Uralic/Turanian/Mongol-led invasions of Europe. These tribes picked up Mongoloid elements in their prehistoric eastward expansion, and returned westward in the historical period accompanying Huns, Mongols, Bolgars, Magyars, Avars etc.

"It's not the European Iranic tribes that lived in the north of the Black Sea (who were later Slavicized, becoming South Russians) that are responsible for the Mongoloid element, but rather the Iranic tribes of Asia who accompanied the various Uralic/Turanian/Mongol-led invasions of Europe. These tribes picked up Mongoloid elements in their prehistoric eastward expansion, and returned westward in the historical period accompanying Huns, Mongols, Bolgars, Magyars, Avars etc."

Oh, so the Slavo/Iranians or eastern Europe are no longer part Mongol in your view?

But didn't you say they were part Mongol from the 1st Millenium BC?

I swear that's what you said.

So what's your point anyway?

Y-chromosome markers, mtDNA, autosomal DNA and HLAs all show very low non-Caucasoid adixture in all Slavs.

The most "mixed" are the Bulgars as I've found, and that may have something to do with the fact that many of them do come from Central Asia.

There is no solid evidence of any significant East Asian DNA flow to Slavs as a result of Tatar, Hun and Mongol invasions of Europe.

I haven't seen any. Have you?

If you have, please post it.

Polak, take the time to review the info posted above. In short, the ancient prehistoric movements of Iranic tribes into Asia (eastwards) brought them into contact with Mongoloids. Later, in historical times, the movements of Uralic and Altaic peoples in the opposite direction obliterated the Iranian speakers (linguistically), although genetically their legacy persists, and modern Central Asians are to a great degree Caucasoid paternally (with varying Mongoloid paternal elements) and Mongoloid maternally.

It is primarily these elements that were carried into Europe by males in the historical period. These were primarily Caucasoid paternally (being descended from the male Iranians), and Mongoloid/Caucasoid maternally. Due to this assymetry, uniparentally transmitted markers are not suited to quantify the extent of Mongoloid admixture in this case, but they do nonetheless show some Mongoloid elements in mtDNA. We will also have to wait for large samples of Y chromosome studies with the relevant markers typed, to assess the corresponding male contributions.

This autosomal DNA study showed that Russians are approximately 94% Caucasoid in contrast to more western Europeans (who range from 98%-100%). Newer studies with more populations, including non-Caucasoid Uralic and Central Asian Altaic Mongoloid and Turanoid populations will elucidate the extent of Mongoloid admixture in the various groups of modern Slavs.

Anthropology and early results indicate that this is mostly quite low, but appreciably higher than more western groups, as can be expected from geography and plain common sense.

Dienekes wrote:

The Pontic type predominates in Southern Russians.

000414.html
=====================

The Pontic type DOES NOT predominate in Southern Russians.

Avoiding unnecessary interpretation of the quotes (given by you) I'd like simply to post conclusions made by V.V. Bunak and T.I. Alexeeva regarding racial composition of Southern Russians:

"Changing in the light of new data our position, stated in previous works, we conclude, that in the formation of the anthropological type of the Southern Russian population a dark-haired type, similar to types of the Pontic groups of Northern Caucasus, took part".

T.I. Alexeeva, V.V. Bunak. Istoria... P. 172

And don't get it wrong, they're talking about Pontic INFLUENCE on the ancient Russian type, they specifically say that they abandonded the Pontic theory (that Russians were formed on the basis of the Mediterranean type). Ibid. 173

We can discuss Pontic influence in Southern Russian groups, but to state that Southern Russians are Mediterranian is absurd. As T.I. Alexeeva and V.V. Bunak say, only individuals of the Pontic type can be met. Ibid. P. 172

Anthropology and early results indicate that this is mostly quite low, but appreciably higher than more western groups, as can be expected from geography and plain common sense.
=================================

This your statement is FALSE.

>> And don't get it wrong, they're talking about Pontic INFLUENCE on the ancient Russian type,

That is my understanding as well.

>> they specifically say that they abandonded the Pontic theory (that Russians were formed on the basis of the Mediterranean type). Ibid. 173

Bunak clearly stated that the Pontic type is most clearly represented in the Balkans and North Caucasus, and I have reiterated countless times in the past that this means that in Russia it is mixed with other elements. No one has ever claimed that "Southern Russians are Mediterranean", and I'm glad to see that you now acknowledge the presence of the Mediterranean racial element in Russia.

000186.html

>> This your statement is FALSE.

Alekseeva

000360.html

and Debets

000209.html

accept the absorption of Mongoloid elements by Russians. To deny the obvious, that Russians have absorbed more Mongoloid elements than western Europeans, is silly. Why don't you focus on the positive, i.e., that Russians are primarily Caucasoid, and focus on the negative, i.e., that they might have a few % points more Mongoloid influence than western Europeans?