"Altaic" people originate in modern-day East China - new groundbreaking study

[luc2112]

Altaics are mongolian with light features no protruding apples with approximately 20% of ANE R-R1(?),is a small genetic group. Were the first to immigrate to the americas (in Brazil they are known as amazon amerindians):



Are obviously modern race:







Another group that immigrated to America is C3 Haplogroup Mongolian/australoid.



Mongolians N2/N3 Haplogroup, only in part of north america (north of US and Canada, have more slanted eyes)

Altaics they are of short stature and the largest genetic group is in Southeast Asia (Vietnam, Cambodia, Philippines) mixed with other groups in the region. Japanese, Koreans and Chinese are from other Mongolian genetic groups

[Kaspias]

I'm barely having some time to log in to TA lately, sorry if I miss your comments.

What neolithic R1b samples are those?
Like specific kit names of the R1b ones?

Altai_LN:Bol11 -> R1b-P297 -> Bol'shemysskaya -> from Hollard, 2014.
Botai_EN:Bot14 -> R1b-Y13202 -> Kazakhstan_Botai_Eneolithic -> from JeongPNAS, 2018.

The rest are Afanesievo culture from NarasimhanPattersonScience, 2019. Clades are under R-M12149, R-L23, R-BY159318.

I wanted to approach with suspicion until Kaspias comment, since i dont have enough knowledge my self. As he said study is fair, theres no problem anymore bro.

At first it was suprising also for me. But thinking deeper, i see possible scenarios.

>>> Farmers moved westwards, to an area which is extremely cold and unsuitable for farming. (Kaspias comments)
>>> Farmers came into contact with proto-Aryan nomadic pastoralists.
>>> How and why eastern language became lingua-franca? Perhaps relations with east was denser than to west and eastern language was more useful?
>>> There more important question, what religion farmers brough into area? Nomads came with shamism which was originated in modern Czechia and we see only this in Turkic people.


R1, J, religion and lifestyle from west
Q, N and language from east

Melted around west of Baikal, this is best conclusion now, right?

I honestly do not know about religion, do Tungus people had got Shamans? Shamanism is actually common Paganism, can co-appear in both West and East simultaneously, not necessarily should have been carried from the West. Besides, Q-L54 was present in today's Western Russia during the Neolithic, it might be carried there from the East as well so not enough clues here as far as I see. Lifestyle is also debatable, IE people were using Western(CA) horses whilst Turks used Mongolian horses until the medieval. Considering they have migrated to the place which are far away from their home, why would they leave their horses behind? I'm not sure though, just speculating.

It doesn't make sense for the J to be assimilated Iranics. If anything, the R1 in Medieval Turkics are assimilated Iranics because 1/3 of them are under 30% Mongoloid (some basically 0%) whereas all the J2 samples are 45-75% Asian (except 1 which belongs to an unrelated clade of J2 to the others and is probably Sogdian, TSB001). Not to mention the Turkics J2a belong to clear cut clades and Y Match with Early Xiongnu J2a, whereas some of the R1s are clearly not related (DA126 despite being 45% Mongoloid belongs to Irano-Jewish clade of R1a CTS6). Not to mention the R1b Z2103 are matching with mf Armenians and Iranic iron age IRN_Hajj_Firuz_IA, albeit these samples are all under 20% Mongoloid to begin with. Only R1b M73 makes sense in this situation but I doubt Botai is Proto Turkic because that would make more Mongolians descended from it than any modern Turk population. R1b Ph155 is also a contender for the same reasons but again, extremely rare.

Assuming C/Q/N is proto that would make Proto Turks 100% Mongoloid population which doesn't make sense but I guess its somehow theoretically possible, and these clades are basically 0-10% in a lot of modern Turkics so I doubt.

Btw, the 1 J you are referring to in Altai MLBA is J1-P58, complete outlier when it comes to J in that region (J1a* and J2s)

You miss a point, R1 being the founder of Turkicness doesn't change the fact that the percentage of R1 is boosted during Xiongnu and afterward due to assimilation of Iranics; so not all R1's present in Medieval belonged to the founder crew. However, the presence of R1 during the Bronze Age Altai(and a very wide around) remains as a fact, and autosomal DNA and the continuity between the samples of Altai MLBA, Pazyryk(both Southwest and Northeast), Chandman, and Sagly suggest that Baikal N-like admixture were melted in the same pot as these R1b's at the first stage, then literally surrounded by the R1a invasion which made R1a probably the most prominent Turkic HG for that time of period. Besides, the Turkic ethnogenesis literally re-shaped after Xiongnu. The Asian scores of Turks(except for Oghurs, perhaps) were like 60-80% during and later radically(~50%) decreased due to the mixing with Western subjects of the confederation which are Uralic and Iranic speakers. Going with this, Eastern Eurasian scores in terms of autosomal DNA may not mean anything while debating Proto Turkicness. I feel a need to sum my thoughts up here so as not to confuse; Transeurasian was a full Asian, Altaic was like 80-85% Asian and the rest are ANE, Proto Turkic was like 40-50% Asian, Xiongnu Turkic was like 60-80% Asian, Early Medieval Turkic was like 30-50% Asian and the late Medieval led some groups to decrease and some others such as Kazakh and Kirgiz to increase due to Mongol invasion.

In addition, the presence of R1b clades in Western regions such as Armenia or let's say France doesn't mean anything at all. Afanasievo probably has got common root as Yamnaya which has a Western Eurasian origin for sure, some of the clades went to the West whilst only a branch of it was migrated to the East that created a distant-relatedness, however having no contact in a period of 2000-3000 ybp.

J also might be included in these "founder crew" but their number must be very limited compared to the rest, solely because autosomal DNA of BA samples suggest around 10% BMAC input while models like 40% Western Eurasian and 50% Baikal. However, some clades, show a continuity in the Turkic gene pool being inherited by almost 4000 years. A final note here is it is hard to compare the situation with R1a because its clades were present in the West and the East simultaneously due to spreading from a common origin but to the different routes. That's why, if an R1a is present in Altai during MLBA and Arabia or Ukraine, it doesn't mean they have migrated to the West from the East or vice-versa but more like a spread from a common point. That's why it is not really possible to detect which clades of R1a are inherited through Proto Turkic ancestor or which ones are inherited during the assimilation period in Xiongnu and Medieval. This separation is rather more clear in J2, due to the clades that are specific to deep Central Asia remaining rather isolated. But this doesn't change the conclusion that the percentage of founder J must be lower compared to the R1.

In fact, we are very close to a situation where we can test the hypothesis of the East Asian origin of the Turks.
The only archaeological culture in Asia that can claim to be proto-Turkic is the culture of Slab graves: mongoloid, nomadic in the Iron Age. The right time,place,race, economy and partly genes.
She is genetically related to both the Mongols and the Turks.
But it cannot be both Turkic and Mongolian (proto-Turkic-Mongolian) at the same time, even according to the Altai hypothesis (it is anachronical). The culture of Slab graves is either the proto-Turks or the proto-Mongols (one of two).
The haplogroup Q talk in favor of the Turkic version. Autosomes talk in favor of the Mongolian version. The Huns had 0-30% of the ancestry of Slab graves, while the Mongols have 50-60% of the ancestry associated with this culture. If the Culture of Slab Graves turns out to be Mongol in the end, then for the Proto-Turks there will be no suitable archaeological culture in Asia in Iron Age.

Slab-Grave is not Turkic almost for sure, Turkic is their Western neighbors who are Chandman, Sagly, Pazyryk. Another article investigating Slab-Grave culture was pointing out that they have got a more "Southeastern" Asian origin compared to the cultures that lie in their West. When you look at it from that perspective actually both the current and the previous article claims the same thing. Mongols expanded later and acquired more Yellow River admixture; Turks left earlier and mongrelized their Asian admixture with Siberians that ended up with Baikal N.

So the proto-Turkics basically moved westwards from the Far East to the Altai mountains and Northern Mongolia and then mixed with Indo-Europeans from Western Eurasia? Otherwise I don't know how to explain the hapa-like Göktürks from 500 AD.

Western Liao(rather Amur, for Turks) -> Baikal-Altai(mixing with Ust Ida-like admixture) -> Pazyryk culture(Southern parts of Altai, mixing with Western Eurasian Steppe) -> Then again the R1a invasion during/just before Xiongnu which led radical decrease in the East Asian scores.

[Chelubey]

Slab-Grave is not Turkic almost for sure, Turkic is their Western neighbors who are Chandman, Sagly, Pazyryk. Another article investigating Slab-Grave culture was pointing out that they have got a more "Southeastern" Asian origin compared to the cultures that lie in their West. When you look at it from that perspective actually both the current and the previous article claims the same thing. Mongols expanded later and acquired more Yellow River admixture; Turks left earlier and mongrelized their Asian admixture with Siberians that ended up with Baikal N.

Possibly Uyuk and Pazyryk were Turkic, but your scenario looks complicated and difficult to prove to me. Can we talk about classical expansion of these cultures to the west? For me it looks like this: the descendants of the Pazyryk Turkic people continue to be in the same place since the Iron Age and are the ancestors of the Altai Turks, Kirghiz and part of the Kazakhs.

[Pater Patota]

Nice thread.

[Kaspias]

Possibly Uyuk and Pazyryk were Turkic, but your scenario looks complicated and difficult to prove to me. Can we talk about classical expansion of these cultures to the west? For me it looks like this: the descendants of the Pazyryk Turkic people continue to be in the same place since the Iron Age and are the ancestors of the Altai Turks, Kirghiz and part of the Kazakhs.

This is not the scenario that I myself created in my mind but this is the most updated scenario accepted in the literature. Slab Grave extended to the West towards the IA and followed with further Mongol expansion during Xianbei. When Slab Grave appeared in Eastern Mongolia Turks were settled in the Central parts, however, were having totally different HGs due to the region being already melted with Western Eurasians. In addition, the Asian ancestor of Turks were already had a different ethnogenesis(recall that Proto-Mongolic speakers were mongrelized with Yellow River while Proto-Altaic with Ust-Ida-like admixture, two groups have no overlap at all until the IA)

Visualization:

Spoiler!

Slab grave is not a counterpart of Baikal samples, however, these two are picked for comparison because Turks left earlier and Mongols towards IA. Both groups represent the stages when the Transeurasian speaker left the region.

These are HGs found in Slab Grave culture:
https://www.yfull.com/tree/Q-M120/
https://www.yfull.com/arch-7.08/tree/Q-Y515/ (the usual link is broken)
https://www.yfull.com/tree/Q-Y1150/

Show a Chinese-Mongolian characteristic.

And these are the ones found in Sagly Uyuk, Chandman, Pazyryk: (80% of the samples are under Q-L54/L330 and R-Z2124/Z2125)

https://www.yfull.com/tree/Q-L330/
https://www.yfull.com/tree/C-F1699/
https://www.yfull.com/tree/R-Z2124/
https://www.yfull.com/tree/Q-M25/
https://www.yfull.com/tree/N-Y3037/
https://www.yfull.com/tree/N-TAT/

All have at least one Turkic clade.

Besides, all descendants of Pazyryk culture cannot be only the Altai Turks, Khakassians, etc. Pazyryk was literally a spawning point due to the combining with newly comer Western Eurasians. The region worked in a mechanism in a way steadily sending migration waves to the West for centuries as well as being primary manpower of the Xiongnu later. Accordingly, all Turks should have originated from the region despite the ones who were migrated to the West later mixed with other populations. Moreover, Mongols literally raped those Turks still staying around Altais who already had been greatly reduced in terms of population, and this development caused to have a continuity between East of Kazakhstan and West of Mongolia which was not present before.

[Hektor12]

IE people were using Western(CA) horses whilst Turks used Mongolian horses until the medieval. Considering they have migrated to the place which are far away from their home, why would they leave their horses behind? I'm not sure though, just speculating.

Theres an easy answer for this= Mongolian horses are smaller than western horses, they eat less, drink less and work more. In the place which have limited resources, mongolian horses outclass any western horse. (Still today)

Dont forget main power of Turkic armies was high mobility, due to use of this horses instead of western horses.

[Chelubey]

And these are the ones found in Sagly Uyuk, Chandman, Pazyryk: (80% of the samples are under Q-L54/L330 and R-Z2124/Z2125)

https://www.yfull.com/tree/Q-L330/
https://www.yfull.com/tree/C-F1699/
https://www.yfull.com/tree/R-Z2124/
https://www.yfull.com/tree/Q-M25/
https://www.yfull.com/tree/N-Y3037/
https://www.yfull.com/tree/N-TAT/

Good samples.
To Dr_Maul
You can see that the various Turkic subclades of R1a are located compactly and, according to Kaspias, come from the same source.

[Chelubey]

R-Z2124 - Z2121/S3410 * Z2124 formed 4600 ybp, TMRCA 4400 ybp

[Dr_Maul]

Good samples.
To Dr_Maul
You can see that the various Turkic subclades of R1a are located compactly and, according to Kaspias, come from the same source.

Man, this is literally my point. You have pointed out R1a Z2124 as if it is some specific branch, but it is really not that different from just saying "R1a Z93" or just R1a at this point. Z2124 is one of 3 principle branches of Z94, the first being an uncommon R-Y40 (rare but both South Asian and Iranic) the second being R-Y3 (the most standard Indo-Aryan lineage and 95% in south asia). R1a Z2124 is the principle branch in Iranians and other Iranic (afghan kurd etc..) of course that is not counting specific branches. But Z2124 is just typical Andronovo-Sintashta (proto Aryan but more specifically proto iranic probably).

[Leto]

Western Liao(rather Amur, for Turks) -> Baikal-Altai(mixing with Ust Ida-like admixture) -> Pazyryk culture(Southern parts of Altai, mixing with Western Eurasian Steppe) -> Then again the R1a invasion during/just before Xiongnu which led radical decrease in the East Asian scores.

The Tasmola culture of Central Kazakhstan is significantly older than Xiongnu but some of the samples are ca. 50% EE. I wonder if they still spoke an Iranic language.