11-09-2023, 08:50 PM
(This post was last modified: 11-09-2023, 08:51 PM by PopGenist82.)
(11-09-2023, 08:46 PM)leonardo Wrote:(11-09-2023, 08:30 PM)PopGenist82 Wrote:(11-09-2023, 08:05 PM)leonardo Wrote: Who said Wielbark? I believe M458 grew in the Zarubinsty Culture. I posted that M458 migrated around 400 BCE, long before the Wielbark. I did mention that a remnant remained, just like when the Slavs came to what is now NW Poland and eastern Germany, a Germanic remnant remained, despite the "Great Migration." Earlier in this thread it was established that anywhere from 8-10% of the Wielbark samples are M458 or a branch of it. That's a sizable minority, not an outlier. Even Davidski is raising a question about the Pruszcz Gdanski sample. He says on his blog, "The Pruszcz Gdanski sample as I remember it was similar to Przeworsk with Celtic input." Recall that MX265, I25524 and I13780 all have an association with the Hallstatt or LaTene Culture. I'm not saying M458 was Celtic, but as I and others have posted here, in its harboring or survival stage, it could have been cross cultural, as were many others. Then when M458 expanded in the Zarubinsty Culture after it migrated is when it may have come completely into the Proto Slavic sphere, as there was no Slavic in 100 BCE or 200CE. As a comparison, what culture did I2a-CTS10228 dwell within? I think that M458 and I2a CTS-10228 were near and possibly sharing by the start of the Common Era, or shortly thereafter. By the way, do you have the reference data for those "M458 being concentrated in some isolated + low population area like Pripyat marshes especially likely. And it is likely no coincidence that later Proto-Slavs expanding from that region were so M458-rich" samples you posted about? I'd like to take a look.
I had a closer look and none of the Wielbark-related M458 in Stolarek study is valid .
I posted this on Eurogenes
PCA0002: undated. mt Contam rate 0.12 (high). 0.20 x coverage
PCA0038: undated contam rate 0.01 (low). 2K SNP. 0.006x low coverage
PCA0040: C14 85-235 AD (95.4%). contam 0.01 (low). 0.25 x . Is actually G2a
PCA0457: undated. 0.22 contamination rate (high). 0.008 x under R-L1029 in ftDNA
The only properly dated, uncontaminated, decent coverage sample is not R1a-M458.
FTDNA has them listed.
PCA 0040 is not there
PCA0457 is in ftDNA, as I wrote. But this sample is contaminated, as noted in the primary data set itself,.
But as you wish, I will in future write ftDNA and tell them to remove the sample, or change its label