Y-chromosome haplogroups from Hun, Avar and conquering Hungarian

[bained]

Just copy-paste from another forum:

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-019-53105-5

Data available:

https://www.ebi.ac.uk/ena/data/view/PRJEB31764

If someone knows how to use the files and plot them on the fancy PCAs? Especially the chieftain.

[Leto]

Interesting.

Phenotypes and genetic origin of Conqueror period individuals. mtDNA Hg-s were taken from10, all markings are identical to that of Fig. 3.
https://media.springernature.com/full/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1038%2Fs41598-019-53105-5/MediaObjects/41598_2019_53105_Fig4_HTML.png?as=webp

[Leto]

Discussion

The origin and composition of the Conqueror paternal lineages fairly mirrors that of their maternal ones10; 20,7% of the Y-Hg-s originated from East Eurasia, this value is 30,4% for mtDNA; proportion of west Eurasian paternal lineages is 69% compared to 58,8% for mtDNA; while proportion of lineages with north-western European and Caucasus-Middle East origin are nearly the same affirming that both males and females of similar origin migrated together. Both MDS analysis of the entire Conqueror Y chromosome pool and PCA of their N1a lineages indicates that their admixture sources are found among Central Asians and eastern European Pontic Steppe groups, a finding comparable to what had been described for maternal lineages10. Composition of the Conqueror paternal lineages is very similar to that of Baskhirs, while their maternal composition was found most similar to Volga Tatars10. These modern populations are located next to each other, have similar prehistory32 and genetic structure derived from the same admixture sources detected in the Conquerors. Moreover it must be noted that Bashkirs were not represented in the mitogenome database while Volga Tatars are missing from our Y-chromosome database due to lack of data, but their N1a distribution is quite similar (Fig. 7), thus mtDNA results are in accord with Y-chromosomal ones.

The Conqueror-Bashkir relations are also supported by historical sources, as early Hungarians of the Carpathian Basin were reported to be identical to Baskhirs by Arabic historians like al-Masudi, al-Qazwini, al-Balhi, al-Istahri and Abu Hamid al-Garnati33, latter visited both groups at the same time around 1150 AD and used the term Bashgird to refer to the Hungarians in the Carpathian Basin. In addition parallels were found between several Conqueror and Bashkir tribe names and Bashkiria has been identified with Magna Hungaria, the motherland of Conquerors34.

We identified potential relatives within Conqueror cemeteries but not between them. The uniform paternal lineages of the small Karos3 (19 graves) and Magyarhomorog (17 graves) cemeteries approve patrilineal organization of these communities. The identical I2a1a2b Hg-s of Magyarhomorog individuals appears to be frequent among high-ranking Conquerors, as the most distinguished graves in the Karos2 and 3 cemeteries also belong to this lineage. The Karos2 and Karos3 leaders were brothers with identical mitogenomes10 and Y-chromosomal STR profiles (Fóthi unpublished). The Sárrétudvari commoner cemetery seems distinct from the others, containing other sorts of European Hg-s. Available Y-chromosomal and mtDNA data10 from this cemetery suggest that common people of the 10th century rather represented resident population than newcomers. The great diversity of Y Hg-s, mtDNA Hg-s, phenotypes and predicted biogeographic classifications of the Conquerors indicate that they were relatively recently associated from very diverse populations.

In contrast the studied Avar military leader group had a much more uniform origin. The Avar group carried predominantly East Eurasian lineages in accordance with their known Inner Asian origin inferred from archaeological and anthropological parallels as well as historical sources. However the unanticipated prevalence of their Siberian N1a Hg-s, sheds new light on their prehistory. Accepting their presumed Rouran origin would implicate a ruling class with Siberian ancestry in Inner Asia before Turkic take-over. The surprisingly high frequency of N1a1a1a1a3 Hg reveals that ancestors of contemporary eastern Siberians and Buryats could give a considerable part the Rouran and Avar elite, nevertheless a larger sample size from more Avar cemeteries are needed to clarify their exact composition.

The genetic profile of the Avar and Conqueror leader groups seems considerably different, as latter group is distinguished by the significant presence of European Hg-s; I2a1a2b-L621, R1b1a1b1a1a1-U106 and the Finno-Permic N1a1a1a1a2-Z1936 branch. Their Siberian N1a1a1a1a4 subclade also points at different source populations among ancestors of Yakuts, Evenks and Evens. Nevertheless the east Eurasian R1a subclade, R1a1a1b2a-Z94 seems to be a common element of the Hun, Avar and Conqueror elite. In contrast to Avars, all three Hun lineages have parallels among the Conquerors, but strong inferences cannot be drawn due to small sample size.

It is generally accepted that the Hungarian language was brought to the Carpathian Basin by the Conquerors. Uralic speaking populations are characterized by a high frequency of Y-Hg N, which have often been interpreted as a genetic signal of shared ancestry. Indeed, recently a distinct shared ancestry component of likely Siberian origin was identified at the genomic level in these populations, modern Hungarians being a puzzling exception35. The Conqueror elite had a significant proportion of N Hgs, 7% of them carrying N1a1a1a1a4-M2118 and 10% N1a1a1a1a2-Z1936, both of which are present in Ugric speaking Khantys and Mansis22. At the same time none of the examined Conquerors belonged to the L1034 subclade of Z1936, while all of the Khanty Z1936 lineages reported in36 proved to be L1034 which has not been tested in the22 study. Population genetic data rather position the Conqueror elite among Turkic groups, Bashkirs and Volga Tatars, in agreement with contemporary historical accounts which denominated the Conquerors as “Turks”37. This does not exclude the possibility that the Hungarian language could also have been present in the obviously very heterogeneous, probably multiethnic Conqueror tribal alliance.
Interestingly there is a strong Bashkir connection. Modern Hungarians are nothing like them autosomally.

[vbnetkhio]

Just copy-paste from another forum:

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-019-53105-5

Data available:

https://www.ebi.ac.uk/ena/data/view/PRJEB31764

If someone knows how to use the files and plot them on the fancy PCAs? Especially the chieftain.

for PCAs autosomal dna is needed. here they tested just the haplogroups

[bained]

Oh shit, that sucks.