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

[Chelubey]

But which clades are you talking about specifically? As I said before most of the Turkic sample R1a belong to unrelated branches, unlike Q or J2a.

Why "unrelated"? Do you want to say that each ethnic group must constantly go through a bottleneck and have a common ancestor who lived no more than 500-600 years ago?

[Dr_Maul]

Why "unrelated"? Do you want to say that each ethnic group must constantly go through a bottleneck and have a common ancestor who lived no more than 500-600 years ago?

No, not that much. But some clades are less complicated than you might think. Its foolish to think that simply being Z93 can mean anything, considering it is a haplogroup which is widespread and has been in certain areas for thousands of years. And indeed, some of the Medieval Turkic clades of z93 are anything but, well, Turkic really. And their Iron / bronze age clade-cousins reflect that, as well as the modern distribution

[Chelubey]

No, not that much. But some clades are less complicated than you might think. Its foolish to think that simply being Z93 can mean anything, considering it is a haplogroup which is widespread and has been in certain areas for thousands of years. And indeed, some of the Medieval Turkic clades of z93 are anything but, well, Turkic really. And their Iron / bronze age clade-cousins reflect that, as well as the modern distribution

Proofs?

[Chelubey]

I just haven't followed genetics for a long time and I don't know the modern nomenclature of subclades, but why are you confused by the "big" distance between the Turkic subclades? Does'nt it bother you that R1b and R1a diverged more than 20,000 years ago?

[Dr_Maul]

Proofs?

Well, thats why I am asking what clades you mean in the first place.. but sure I will go ahead. How about DA89, which is R1a-Y40. He matches with Western Scythians and Ancient India. Lets take a look at his Y Tree. https://www.yfull.com/tree/R-Y40*/
Surely you won't claim this lineage is among your "Volga Z93's", I assume. How about DA126, which is R1a-CTS6, Irano-Jewish. So I ask again, which specific clades are you referring to.

[Leto]

Are you guys now debating whether R1a-Z93 is Indo-European or not? Weren't the Andronovo folks living around the Altai mts in 1500 BC? Yes, we all know they were. To me it's pretty obvious that those early IEs got "Mongoloidized" with time. So basically those lineages have not left Southwestern Siberia since then because modern Altaians are still heavily R1a.

[Chelubey]

You can see the main lines of the Balkars, Bashkirs and Kirgizes, but I don't remember the exact subclades. I'm talking about major lines, not exotic Arabic or Hebrew or minor lines such as typical indo-iranian subclades among Uyghurs.

Well, thats why I am asking what clades you mean in the first place.. but sure I will go ahead. How about DA89, which is R1a-Y40. He matches with Western Scythians and Ancient India. Lets take a look at his Y Tree. https://www.yfull.com/tree/R-Y40*/
Surely you won't claim this lineage is among your "Volga Z93's", I assume. How about DA126, which is R1a-CTS6, Irano-Jewish. So I ask again, which specific clades are you referring to.

I dont understand you. You're talking about Scythians,who amigrated to India or you mean Indians who emigrated to Scythia or you mean that subclade exists only among Scythians and Indians? So what?

[Dr_Maul]

You can see the main lines of the Balkars, Bashkirs and Kirgizes, but I don't remember the exact subclades. I'm talking about major lines, not exotic Arabic or Hebrew or minor lines such as typical indo-iranian subclades among Uyghurs.

I dont understand you. You're talking about Scythians,who amigrated to India or you mean Indians who emigrated to Scythia or you mean that subclade exists only among Scythians and Indians? So what?

No, I mean that the specific y DNA is found in those 2 ancient samples. My point is that nowadays subclade is in fact important, because "R1a Z93" means nothing, really. No difference between that and simply saying "R1a" making Europeans and Indians the same people or related like that. Thats why I want to know the specific subclade of those samples which you think might be original Volga Z93's or whatever it was exactly

[Zoro]

Turkic vs Iranic is more of a linguistic than genetic thing. There’s no pure Turkic or Iranic in Central and West Asia. People who speak Turkic languages whether Turkmen, Turks, or Uzbeks also have Iranic ancestry and visa versa people who speak Iranic languages such as Tajiks, Persians, Kurds and Pashtuns also have Turkic ancestry. There’s no way to stay pure Iranic or Turkic over thousands of years of mixing in a mixing bowl such as Central and West Asia.

Certain haplogroups maybe more prevalent among Iranics vs Turkics because of founder effects and such. For ex R1 Z93 predominant among Iranics or my haplo Q-M25 among Turkics, but Turkics also have R1a Z93 and conversly Iranics such as Afghans, Persians and Kurds can have Q-M25. Haplogroups shouldn’t be mixed with autosomal DNA

[Chelubey]

No, I mean that the specific y DNA is found in those 2 ancient samples. My point is that nowadays subclade is in fact important, because "R1a Z93" means nothing, really. No difference between that and simply saying "R1a" making Europeans and Indians the same people or related like that. Thats why I want to know the specific subclade of those samples which you think might be original Volga Z93's or whatever it was exactly

I know it. There was thread about ancient Dna . There was the subclades of the Volga Scythians which was very close to the Balkarian one and perhaps they are ancestral to them. I cannot find this thread.