Hungarian leader autosomal

[Lemgrant]

MJ6711604

3405 SNPs used in this evaluation

lol



Admix Results (sorted):

# Population Percent
1 West_Asian 33.52
2 Baltic 27.39
3 North_Atlantic 13.61
4 East_Med 12.46
5 West_Med 5.01
6 East_Asian 4.63
7 Sub-Saharan 2.18
8 Oceanian 1.21

Single Population Sharing:

# Population (source) Distance
1 Chechen 16.79
2 Tabassaran 17.3
3 Lezgin 17.41
4 Kumyk 17.89
5 Kabardin 18.42
6 Balkar 20.42
7 Adygei 20.5
8 North_Ossetian 21.13
9 Nogay 21.32
10 Ossetian 23.93
11 Bulgarian 24.72
12 Tadjik 24.76
13 Romanian 25.19
14 Moldavian 25.45
15 Turkmen 25.71
16 Serbian 26.5
17 Azeri 27.05
18 Tatar 27.29
19 Turkish 27.54
20 Afghan_Tadjik 27.67

Mixed Mode Population Sharing:

# Primary Population (source) Secondary Population (source) Distance
1 65.7% Chechen + 34.3% Ukrainian_Belgorod @ 5.96
2 66.7% Chechen + 33.3% Southwest_Russian @ 6.17
3 59.8% North_Ossetian + 40.2% Ukrainian_Belgorod @ 6.2
4 69.5% Chechen + 30.5% Belorussian @ 6.34
5 64.9% Lezgin + 35.1% Ukrainian_Belgorod @ 6.37
6 71.1% Chechen + 28.9% Lithuanian @ 6.37
7 55.8% Abhkasian + 44.2% Lithuanian @ 6.37
8 69.3% Chechen + 30.7% Estonian_Polish @ 6.41
9 60.6% Adygei + 39.4% Ukrainian_Belgorod @ 6.43
10 65.5% North_Ossetian + 34.5% Lithuanian @ 6.44
11 68.5% Chechen + 31.5% Russian_Smolensk @ 6.47
12 66.2% Adygei + 33.8% Lithuanian @ 6.49
13 50.2% Ukrainian_Belgorod + 49.8% Abhkasian @ 6.53
14 66% Lezgin + 34% Southwest_Russian @ 6.56
15 63.8% North_Ossetian + 36.2% Belorussian @ 6.59
16 60.9% North_Ossetian + 39.1% Southwest_Russian @ 6.65
17 66.9% Chechen + 33.1% Ukrainian @ 6.72
18 62.7% North_Ossetian + 37.3% Russian_Smolensk @ 6.74
19 68.5% Lezgin + 31.5% Estonian_Polish @ 6.76
20 66% Lezgin + 34% Ukrainian @ 6.77

[Mr.G]

3405 SNPs used in this evaluation

lol

With that low an SNP count, are the results completely worthless?

[Lemgrant]

With that low an SNP count, are the results completely worthless?

probably...this is very low number

[Lucas]

Dude, we should ask you. Sample is in your K13 ancient ffs.

Oh But I don't rememebr all few hundred samples

[Crimson Winds]

I always thought of some connections between Kabar tribe and Kabardians, seems I have a point.

[oszkar07]

Looks like he is around 2/3 thirds Caucasian and 1/3 third Slavic based on the K13.

Has any Avar dna samples shown significant caucasian components ?

[Fiko0]

Looks like he is around 2/3 thirds Caucasian and 1/3 third Slavic based on the K13.

Has any Avar dna samples shown significant caucasian components ?

Western Huns were also north caucasian

[bained]

"Nearest genetic relation, region color coded: Azeri, Bronze Age Armanian (Iran, Druze)."

That's from their study, pretty close.

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ar...0205920#sec019

[oszkar07]

MITOMIX indicates that if all modern and ancient populations are considered as potential source, the Conquerors are best admixed from 26–38% modern Belarusians, 19–34% Tuvans, 18% ancient Baltic Late Bronze Age and 13% Srubnaya populations (S5A Table). Other possible admix components may include 9–26% Volga Tatars, Poltavka-Potapovka, Sintastha and Combed Ware populations

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ar...0205920#sec019

Main admixture components of Volga Tatars are 24–46% Conquerors, 20–50% Russians, 16–30% Mansis+Khantys (Yug) and 9–18% Norvegians (S5F Table)

.
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ar...0205920#sec019

1). Belarusians come to play just because of their similar European and Lipka Tatar components, while Volga Tatars still harbor a salient Conqueror like subpopulation consisting of both eastern and western lineages (S5F Table, Table 1). Thus MITOMIX confirms the direct genetic relation to Volga Tatars, detected by both Fst and SHD, and this relation must be

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ar...0205920#sec019

[oszkar07]

The information below seems to lean towards the "dual conquest theory " ... which I have reffered to many times regarding Hungarian speakers presence in the Karpat medence ... this study seems to suggest the language was already present when the conquerors arrived.

The large genetic diversity of the Conquerors which seemingly assembled from multiple ethnic sources and their relative low proportion, having no lasting effect on Hungarian ethnogenesis, raises doubts about the Conqueror origin of the Hungarian language. Even if our samples represent mainly the Conqueror elite, the “elite dominance” linguistic hypothesis seems inconsistent when it presumes that the same Turkic elite was first readily assimilated linguistically by Finno-Ugric groups, and then it assimilated locals of the Carpathian Basin. Turkic character of the Conquerors is indicated by their “Turk” denomination in contemporary sources as well as Turkic tribal names and person names of tribe leaders of the conquest-period [98]. Above data infer that preconquest presence of the language in the Carpathian Basin, is an equally grounded hypothesis, as had been proposed by several scientists (a summary in English is given in [99]).

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ar...0205920#sec019