Explain this: Kyrgyz 70-80% Mongoloid autosomal DNA, Y-DNA ( 25.5% C3, O3 8.5%, 55.3% R1a )

[ButlerKing]

How was Kyrgyz DNA formed? Every other Turkic group's autosomal DNA ( overall DNA ) makes sense except for Kyrgyz.



Only Kyrgyz DNA defy normal logic

Y-DNA mongoloid 38.2%
mtDNA mongoloid 48 - 64%

Autosomal 70-80% Mongoloid ( when in reality it should be between roughly 45-50% )


How to explain that ? ( any theories, scenario ? )







https://www.stihi.ru/2016/02/27/11713

>Киргизы: / Kyrgyz

> R1a - 55.3%,
> С3 - 25.5%,
> O - 8.5%,
> N1 - 4.2%,
> R1b - 4.2%,
> J2 - 2.1%.




I understand Y-DNA makes up only 0.1% of your DNA but neither do Kyrgyz mtDNA makes sense.


Y-DNA

C3 25.5 + O 8.5 + N1 4.2 = 38.2% Mongoloid <---- and in some studies was only 26% and other 41% )
R1a 55.3 + R1b 4.2 + 2.1 = 61.9% Caucasian


mtDNA

27 - 42.6% Caucasian
48 - 64% Mongoloid
5 - 9% South Asian


http://mbe.oxfordjournals.org/conten...expansion.html
" West Eurasian mtDNA ranges from 27% to 42.6% in the Kyrgyz[37] with Haplogroup mtDNA H being the most predominant marker at 21.3% among the Kyrgyz.[37] "

[Rethel]

Founder effect in small population.

20-30% of not autosomal means, that 30% of non mongolic
hgs during last 1000 years with stable autosomal propotions,
growed in number doubled their male lines.


If you have mix population with 10 guys - 7 is C1 but 3 is R1,
and they allready have the same aDNA 30:70, then if this 7
guys have 6 sons and 4 grandsons from verious reasons, and
three R1 have 4 sons and 6 grandsons, then third generation
will be 60% R1, but aDNA will be the same. No problem. During
1000 years (or maybe even more) it is piece of cake.

Btw Kyrgyz were a very small tribe in the past. tens of thousand
of people, at not so far past hundrets of thousands... it is nothing.

Yet in 1920s there was something 600.000 Kyrgyzes.

[johen]

B/C r1a1 came from early neolithic lake baikal area:

Maternal and Paternal Polymorphisms in Prehistoric Siberian Populations of Lake Baikal
https://era.library.ualberta.ca/file...m#.V8oGHE0rLIV

[ButlerKing]

Founder effect in small population.

20-30% of not autosomal means, that 30% of non mongolic
hgs during last 1000 years with stable autosomal propotions,
growed in number doubled their male lines.


If you have mix population with 10 guys - 7 is C1 but 3 is R1,
and they allready have the same aDNA 30:70, then if this 7
guys have 6 sons and 4 grandsons from verious reasons, and
three R1 have 4 sons and 6 grandsons, then third generation
will be 60% R1, but aDNA will be the same. No problem. During
1000 years (or maybe even more) it is piece of cake.

Btw Kyrgyz were a very small tribe in the past. tens of thousand
of people, at not so far past hundrets of thousands... it is nothing.

Yet in 1920s there was something 600.000 Kyrgyzes.

Your scenario makes sense but how can we prove it? it also says on wikipedia " Because of the processes of migration, conquest, intermarriage, and assimilation, many of the Kyrgyz peoples who now inhabit Central and Southwest Asia are of mixed origins, often stemming from fragments of many different tribe "


This means they also mixed with Mongols so at least a portion of it's Mongoloid admixture must have come from the Mongol invasion. But before Mongols were they were pure or predominately Caucasian ( with high R1a and high Caucasian mtDNA ) or were they already a 50/50 hybrid group with high caucasian and caucasian mtDNA ?

Kyrgyz with pre-Mongol admixture were only 50/50 Mongoloid-Caucasian ? Or maybe the R1a in Kyrgyz were already mongoloid to begin?

[ButlerKing]

B/C r1a1 came from early neolithic lake baikal area:

Maternal and Paternal Polymorphisms in Prehistoric Siberian Populations of Lake Baikal
https://era.library.ualberta.ca/file...m#.V8oGHE0rLIV

About maternal and paternal caucasian dna of Kyrgyz. Do you think it's possibly that modern Kyrgyz DNA was formed from mongoloid males with R1a and Caucasoid females ? assuming the invaders Turkic were predominant Mongoloid males with caucasian admixture that means we can't treat them a simply C3, O3, N1, Q, D pure mongoloid invaders. They could a mix of C3, Q, N or maybe R1a, R1b, or maybe mostly R1 with some C3, Q

Because you see it's not uncommon for predominant Mongoloid males like Kyrgyz to marry Caucasoid or predominant Caucasoid Tajik females which makes me think maybe Kyrgyz was 90% Mongoloid but with R1a but later became more Caucasoid by acquiring 20% more Caucasoid DNA by intermarriage with other Caucasoid groups.

[Rethel]

This means they also mixed with Mongols. But before Mongols were they were pure or predominately Caucasian ( with high R1a and high Caucasian mtDNA ) or were they already a 50/50 hybrid group with high caucasian and caucasian mtDNA?

Now I remind myself.

If I remember correctly Kyrgyzes were at some point of time whites. Some 2200 years ago.

But according to aDNA, they had to absorbed 70% of mongols.
And becasue they were so numerous, they obviously changed their language.

Look at the Bulgars - they were slavisied, similarly Kyrgyzes could be turkified.

30% on average of Turks is of IE provenance anyway.
First Turkic state was created by IEs and even very name of Turks is probably of IE origin.
Coincidently, first rulers from some reasons chose turkic language as main tounge for their Kaganate.
Nothing strange also, if we consider such example as Persian Empire, where main language was aramaic.

[Rethel]

About maternal and paternal caucasian dna of Kyrgyz. Do you it's possibly that Kyrgyz was formed from mongoloid males with R1a and Caucasoid females ? assuming the invaders Turkic were predominant Mongoloid males with caucasian admixture that means we can't treat them as simply C3, O3, N1, Q, D mongoloid invaders. They could a mix of C3, Q, N or maybe R1a, R1b, or maybe mostly R1 with some C3, Q

It had to be a complecate process, on which many levels of new people were contributed.
It have to be rememberd also, that on the steppe constantly some horda conquered another,
they were also making changeable confederations, and finally, many R1a already lived in
present day Kirgizia before Kyrgyzes arrived - the same as some mongoloids.

[ButlerKing]

Now I remind myself.

If I remember correctly Kyrgyzes were at some point of time whites. Some 1500 years ago.

But according to aDNA, they had to absorbed 70% of mongols.
And becasue they were so numerous, they obviously changed their language.

Look at the Bulgars - they were slavisied, similarly Kyrgyzes could be turkified.

30% on average of Turks is of IE provenance anyway.
First Turkic state was created by IEs and even very name of Turks is probably of IE origin.
Coincidently, first rulers from some reasons chose turkic language as main tounge for their Kaganate.
Nothing strange also, if we consider such example as Persian Empire, where main language was aramaic.

I seriously doubt the first Turkic state was created by IE's but even if that was the case. Maybe Turkic was originally Siberian Mongoloid with paternal IE' ancestry. The Pazyryk culture is a Iranic but the males were part Mongoloid and females were Europoid.


SO LONG BEFORE ANY TURKIC R1a......... there was already part Mongoloid ( R1a ) IE people.



Pazyryk culture dating 600BC this is before the formation of Turkic ethnicity.

" Craniological studies of samples from the Pazyryk burials revealed the presence of both Mongoloid and Caucasoid components in this population.[6] quoting G. F. Debets on the physical characteristics of the population in the Pazyryk kurgans, records a mixed population. The men would seem to be part Mongoloid and the women Europoid.[7] "

Another cultures also show the same type of burials


Anayino culture

Sculptural reconstruction of men Lugovskyi burial
Ananyino culture. Gypsum. MMGerasimov work.


" Reconstruction of the mounds number 5, 6 show burial Stone Barn in racial make women Ural Europoid mixed type men - striking features of Central Asian Mongoloid."

[Rethel]

The early Kyrgyz people, known as Yenisei Kyrgyz, have their origins in the western parts of modern-day Mongolia and first appear in written records in the Chinese annals of the Sima Qian's Records of the Grand Historian (compiled 109 BC to 91 BC), as Gekun (鬲昆, 隔昆) or Jiankun (堅昆). They were described in Tang Dynasty texts as having "red hair and green eyes", while those with dark hair and eyes were said to be descendants of a Chinese general Li Ling.[18] In Chinese sources, these Kyrgyz tribes were described as fair-skinned, green- or blue-eyed and red-haired people with a mixture of European and Mongol features.[19][20][21][22] The Middle Age Chinese composition Tanghuiyao of the 8–10th century transcribed the name "Kyrgyz" as Tsze-gu (Kirgut), and their tamga was depicted as identical to the tamga of present-day Kyrgyz tribes Azyk, Bugu, Cherik, Sary Bagysh and few others.[23]

So they were mixed allready 2200 years ago.

The name Kyrgyz means 40 tribes - so obviously they are a mix of everything during this hundrets of years.

[ButlerKing]

It had to be a complecate process, on which many levels of new people were contributed.
It have to be rememberd also, that on the steppe constantly some horda conquered another,
they were also making changeable confederations, and finally, many R1a already lived in
present day Kirgizia before Kyrgyzes arrived - the same as some mongoloids.

Yes sure but how do we know if those R1a were already tainted by heavy Mongoloid admixture.

I wish I could find reconstruction of Kyrgyz 50 years before the Mongol invasion of Central Asia.

Because even around the year 1124 - 1218 , Central Asia was already ruled by a Mongolic tribe called Khitan who came from Manchuria/East Mongolia for 100 years so they must have mixed to a great degree too.

The early Kyrgyz people, known as Yenisei Kyrgyz, have their origins in the western parts of modern-day Mongolia and first appear in written records in the Chinese annals of the Sima Qian's Records of the Grand Historian (compiled 109 BC to 91 BC), as Gekun (鬲昆, 隔昆) or Jiankun (堅昆). They were described in Tang Dynasty texts as having "red hair and green eyes", while those with dark hair and eyes were said to be descendants of a Chinese general Li Ling.[18] In Chinese sources, these Kyrgyz tribes were described as fair-skinned, green- or blue-eyed and red-haired people with a mixture of European and Mongol features.[19][20][21][22] The Middle Age Chinese composition Tanghuiyao of the 8–10th century transcribed the name "Kyrgyz" as Tsze-gu (Kirgut), and their tamga was depicted as identical to the tamga of present-day Kyrgyz tribes Azyk, Bugu, Cherik, Sary Bagysh and few others.[23]

So they were mixed allready 2200 years ago.

The name Kyrgyz means 40 tribes - so obviously they are a mix of everything during this hundrets of years.

According to Chinese record they claim the Kyrgyz leaders were black hair, black eyes and looked different from the rest but I really don't know the proportion of their admixture

it says

" The dominant type of the Yenesy Kyrgyz was Mongoloid, but there is an indisputable admixture of Europoid elements in their composition. The specific position of this admixture is approximately the same as with the modern Kirgiz.[18] "