KAZ_Kipchak genetic difference

[Dr_Maul]

Why the big difference between DA179 and DA23?
DA23 is like 70% Mongoloid, so it is extremely atypical. Where is it from really?

[Leto]

Fuck knows, man...

[Bender1999]

Why the big difference between DA179 and DA23?
DA23 is like 70% Mongoloid, so it is extremely atypical. Where is it from really?

And what is DA179?

[Dr_Maul]

And what is DA179?

“Normal” Proto-Turkic. Balanced mix between Euro, Mongoloid, Neolithic

[Bender1999]

“Normal” Proto-Turkic. Balanced mix between Euro, Mongoloid, Neolithic

I would say just outliner, not a Turkic at least. We simply don’t know what peoples lived in Eurasian steppes too, besides of Iranics, Turkics and Mongols. I doubt that a real early Turkic was above 50% east eurasian.

[Ion Basescul]

I don't know why you're surprised. The steppe was a highway for migration throughout the history. Full East Asians and Europeans lived and raided together. That's why Central Asians are so mixed genetically.

[Dr_Maul]

I would say just outliner, not a Turkic at least. We simply don’t know what peoples lived in Eurasian steppes too, besides of Iranics, Turkics and Mongols. I doubt that a real early Turkic was above 50% east eurasian.

Yeah that’s why I’m surprised they are both simply called Kipchak. How a 30% mongoloid person and a 70% mongoloid can be considered the same race is beyond me lol. I think it may represent an Altaian/Tuvan type before mongol invasions, but I’m not sure. It could also be a half Turk half Mongol

[Bender1999]

Yeah that’s why I’m surprised they are both simply called Kipchak. How a 30% mongoloid person and a 70% mongoloid can be considered the same race is beyond me lol. I think it may represent an Altaian/Tuvan type before mongol invasions, but I’m not sure. It could also be a half Turk half Mongol

I can’t really say whether it could be a Mongolian mic or not. This sample still could be a Turkic but very atypical. My thoughts are just based on Xiognu and Göktürk results, do old Mongolian results exist?

[Leto]

Yeah that’s why I’m surprised they are both simply called Kipchak. How a 30% mongoloid person and a 70% mongoloid can be considered the same race is beyond me lol. I think it may represent an Altaian/Tuvan type before mongol invasions, but I’m not sure. It could also be a half Turk half Mongol
Why do some people think Altaians are part Mongol? They are more Northern and very R1a people.

[Fedora]

There are Golden Horde samples who plot with Lithuanians and show 0% asian in Kazakhstan..

[Dr_Maul]

Why do some people think Altaians are part Mongol? They are more Northern and very R1a people.

Because they are closer to Mongolia :D

[Bender1999]

Because they are closer to Mongolia :D

What i have seen they are mire Siberian shifted, aren’t they? More like a Turkic/Siberian mix.

[andre]

Yeah that’s why I’m surprised they are both simply called Kipchak. How a 30% mongoloid person and a 70% mongoloid can be considered the same race is beyond me lol. I think it may represent an Altaian/Tuvan type before mongol invasions, but I’m not sure. It could also be a half Turk half Mongol

You shouldn't consider they as a "race" or "ethnicity", they were a confederation, like the great majority of the steppe people at that time.

[Dr_Maul]

What i have seen they are mire Siberian shifted, aren’t they? More like a Turkic/Siberian mix.

Altaian:

Target: Altaian
Distance: 1.6498% / 0.01649776
77.6 Siberian
7.0 East_Central_Asian
5.2 South_Central_Asian
3.4 Volga-Ural
2.6 North_Caucasian
2.2 North_Atlantic
1.0 Amerindian
0.8 North_SeaEnglish
0.2 French


DA23

Target: KAZ_Kipchak:DA23
Distance: 2.1537% / 0.02153731
67.0 Siberian
14.0 East_Central_European
11.4 South_Central_Asian
5.2 Volga-Ural
1.4 North_Caucasian
1.0 Amerindian


DA179

Target: KAZ_Kipchak:DA179
Distance: 2.4741% / 0.02474084
23.4 South_Central_Asian
15.4 North_Caucasian
14.0 East_Balkan
11.0 East_Asian
10.6 Siberian
8.4 Arabian
6.6 East_Mediterranean
4.0 East_Central_European
2.8 East_Central_Asian
2.0 Central_African
1.2 South_Chinese
0.6 Near_Eastern

[Dr_Maul]

You shouldn't consider they as a "race" or "ethnicity", they were a confederation, like the great majority of the steppe people at that time.

Yes, thats true as well. I guess the question is, which of them would represent the 'original' or leader caste, and which of them is assimilated. I think the super eastern one has to be mixed or something, just going by Xiongnu samples

[Bender1999]

Altaian:

Target: Altaian
Distance: 1.6498% / 0.01649776
77.6 Siberian
7.0 East_Central_Asian
5.2 South_Central_Asian
3.4 Volga-Ural
2.6 North_Caucasian
2.2 North_Atlantic
1.0 Amerindian
0.8 North_SeaEnglish
0.2 French


DA23

Target: KAZ_Kipchak:DA23
Distance: 2.1537% / 0.02153731
67.0 Siberian
14.0 East_Central_European
11.4 South_Central_Asian
5.2 Volga-Ural
1.4 North_Caucasian
1.0 Amerindian


DA179

Target: KAZ_Kipchak:DA179
Distance: 2.4741% / 0.02474084
23.4 South_Central_Asian
15.4 North_Caucasian
14.0 East_Balkan
11.0 East_Asian
10.6 Siberian
8.4 Arabian
6.6 East_Mediterranean
4.0 East_Central_European
2.8 East_Central_Asian
2.0 Central_African
1.2 South_Chinese
0.6 Near_Eastern


I think the last one is a bit atypical too.

[Dr_Maul]

I think the last one is a bit atypical too.

How so? Because of the Arab/SSA?

[Kaspias]

DA23 is Kirgiz, DA179 is mixed Kipchak.

So neither of the samples can represent early Kipchaks.

[Bender1999]

How so? Because of the Arab/SSA?

Especially the Arab, a bit SSA is in a curious way normal sometimes among early Turkics. But is this sample really above 30% eurasian? Less than 30% east eurasian is not typical for early Turkic too.

[Dr_Maul]

DA23 is Kirgiz, DA179 is mixed Kipchak.

So neither of the samples can represent early Kipchaks.

Interesting, thanks

[Dr_Maul]

Especially the Arab, a bit SSA is in a curious way normal sometimes among early Turkics. But is this sample really above 30% eurasian? Less than 30% east eurasian is not typical for early Turkic too.

20-30 usually, mostly 25ish. I don't think its that atypical to be honest. 20-40 should be normal

[Leto]

Because they are closer to Mongolia :D
Well, even though I don't deny the early Turkics were already mixed (East + West) but I sense there is an agenda going on. Now some people are trying to say the Turkics might have been even much less than 50% East Eurasian. I think they're doing so in order to raise the estimated Turkic ancestry in Turks of Turkey. The lower Mong they had, the more Turkic the Turks of Turkey could be.

[Bender1999]

DA23 is Kirgiz, DA179 is mixed Kipchak.

So neither of the samples can represent early Kipchaks.

Modern Kirgiz?


20-30 usually, mostly 25ish. I don't think its that atypical to be honest. 20-40 should be normal

20% would be low imo, at least for unmixed samples. I think the image of early Turkics as predominantly east eurasians is exaggerated but that they were at least 1/3 east eurasian is a plausible theory.

[Kaspias]

Modern Kirgiz?



No. He is in the same line with medieval Kirgiz and dates shortly after the great Kirgiz migration. But there is a chance for being half Mongol as well, despite his clade(He has C) seems to be pan-Eurasian rather than Mongolic.

[Dr_Maul]

Well, even though I don't deny the early Turkics were already mixed (East + West) but I sense there is an agenda going on. Now some people are trying to say the Turkics might have been even much less than 50% East Eurasian. I think they're doing so in order to raise the estimated Turkic ancestry in Turks of Turkey. The lower Mong they had, the more Turkic the Turks of Turkey could be.

I don't think so to be honest. And its not like Proto-Turks colonized Anatolia, so it would not make sense anyway. The current one I see being used (Turkmen_Uzbekistan) gives the same result anyways

Target: Turkish_Istanbul
Distance: 0.9633% / 0.00963336
36.0 Greek_Thessaly
21.0 Kurdish
20.8 KAZ_Kipchak
11.4 Georgian_Imer
6.2 Greek_Peloponnese
4.6 Greek_Trabzon


Target: Turkish_Istanbul
Distance: 0.6626% / 0.00662572
21.6 Greek_Thessaly
20.6 Turkmen_Uzbekistan
18.2 Kurdish
14.4 Greek_Izmir
12.6 Georgian_Imer
11.8 Greek_Peloponnese
0.8 Syrian

[Dr_Maul]

@leto you should have posted your reputation comment here, it would have led to interesting conversation :D ;) :rolleyes:

[Leto]

@leto you should have posted your reputation comment here, it would have led to interesting conversation :D ;) :rolleyes:
Lol, why cause an unnecessary controversy? Like I said 20-25% early Turkic is plausible for Turkey but 40-50% sounds very exaggerated.

[Bender1999]

Lol, why cause an unnecessary controversy? Like I said 20-25% early Turkic is plausible for Turkey but 40-50% sounds very exaggerated.

20-25% for Turkic invaders? So you mean they were something like 50-70% Turkic and 30-50% Iranic?

[Leto]

20-25% for Turkic invaders? So you mean they were something like 50-70% Turkic and 30-50% Iranic?
No, modern Turks are 20-25% Turkic (something like the Kara-Khanids).

[Bender1999]

No, modern Turks are 20-25% Turkic (something like the Kara-Khanids).

Ah ok i thought you meant east eurasian. Yes at average, extreme samples can be low like 10% and some can reach 40/50%. But i still miss early Oghuz results and we need some of them for a clear image.

[Leto]

Ah ok i thought you meant east eurasian. Yes at average, extreme samples can be low like 10% and some can reach 40/50%. But i still miss early Oghuz results and we need some of them for a clear image.
This is probably the "most Oghuz" person I've seen. 41% mong and also relatively high European.

Turkmen from Northern Turkmenistan (originally posted a couple of years ago by Kaspias)


Y-DNA: Q-L53
mt-DNA: U2c1

Gedrosia 14.13
Siberian 18.60
Northwest_African -
Southeast_Asian -
Atlantic_Med 5.17
North_European 15.33
South_Asian 2.82
East_African -
Southwest_Asian 2.37
East_Asian 22.83
Caucasus 18.74
Sub_Saharan -

Target: TM
Distance: 2.7315% / 2.73149393 | ADC: 0.25x
45.6 Karakalpak
21.0 Nogais
19.2 Turkmen_Uzbekistan
11.6 Hazara
2.6 Mongol