Stolarek et al: Genetic history of East-Central Europe...

[Dewsloth]

"High X-chromosome-based and mtDNA-based contamination was detected in 2 and 15 samples, respectively (Additional file 2: Table S1), which were excluded from further analysis."

Here's a list of contaminated samples:
PCA0050
PCA0117
PCA0122
PCA0143
PCA0150
PCA0191
PCA0324
PCA0332
PCA0333
PCA0390
PCA0403
PCA0406
PCA0496
PCA0497
PCA0506
PCA0554
PCA0572

Source: "Genetic history of East-Central Europe in the first millennium CE"

Do you know why these samples were uploaded to FTDNA if they are contaminated?

oh snap! this deals with four L1029s

incl the sofar only ancient YP444 Lad 191 aswell as YP619 Srodka 554 and also Wielbarks Pruszcz Gdanski 496; so that leaves Balczewo 551 as the only legit ancient YP619 sofar and Kowalewko 38 and Czarnowko 547 as the two legit Wielbarks L1029s; on the otherhand FTDNA does not seem to have incl Lad 213 who is R1a1a1b1a1a1c1 L1029+ in Table S3

how many 'Piast State Slavs' does FTDNA have in its database from the Stolarek paper in total/altogether ?

Well at least the sole Polish DF19 in the study survived that purge, even though he's terrible quality and FTDNA only calls DF19>DF88 (pre-Beaker):

Groszowice 299 was a man who lived between 1000 - 1200 CE during the Late Medieval Age and was found in the region now known as Groszowice, Opole, Poland.

He was associated with the Piast State Slavs cultural group.

His direct maternal line belonged to mtDNA haplogroup K1a.

Reference: PCA0299 from Stolarek et al. 2023

Note:  IIRC, He looks more like a Swede than a Slav autosomally.

[YP4648]

"High X-chromosome-based and mtDNA-based contamination was detected in 2 and 15 samples, respectively (Additional file 2: Table S1), which were excluded from further analysis."

Here's a list of contaminated samples:
PCA0050
PCA0117
PCA0122
PCA0143
PCA0150
PCA0191
PCA0324
PCA0332
PCA0333
PCA0390
PCA0403
PCA0406
PCA0496
PCA0497
PCA0506
PCA0554
PCA0572



Source: "Genetic history of East-Central Europe in the first millennium CE"

Do you know why these samples were uploaded to FTDNA if they are contaminated?

So Kowalewko 38 and Czarnowko 547 appear not to be contaminated?

[Radko]

So Kowalewko 38 and Czarnowko 547 appear not to be contaminated?

I suspect that all R-YP6048 samples from Stolarek et al. are contaminated (including Kowalewko 38) by someone who was in contact with the genetic material.

Out of 17 officially contaminated samples, 4 (!) belong to R-YP6048:
PCA0332 (BTW, labelled incorrectly as Ostrow Lednicki 322 by FTDNA)
PCA0333
PCA0403
PCA0496

[leonardo]

So Kowalewko 38 and Czarnowko 547 appear not to be contaminated?

I suspect that all R-YP6048 samples from Stolarek et al. are contaminated (including Kowalewko 38) by someone who was in contact with the genetic material.

Out of 17 officially contaminated samples, 4 (!) belong to R-YP6048:
PCA0332 (BTW, labelled incorrectly as Ostrow Lednicki 322 by FTDNA)
PCA0333
PCA0403
PCA0496

But you have no evidence, just your suspicions. Yet, FTDNA has them listed as legit samples. So, you know more than them?

[alexfritz]

so in total there are now only 16 legit L1029s from the Piast State compared to a prev 21
9 from Table S3 + add 7 from Table S1 at FTDNA

Show Content

Spoiler
Table S3
Balczewo PCA0550 PCA0551 Santok PCA0399 PCA0394 PCA0383 Ostrów Lednicki PCA0336 Łęgowo PCA0165 Ląd PCA0181 PCA0213

add Table S1 at FTDNA
Śródka 240 Płońsk 317 Ostrów Lednicki 337 Dziekanowice 359 366 Santok 386 Łęgowo 169

and 1 most def legit L1029 from Wielbark
Czarnowko PCA0457 from Table S3

as for Kowalewko 38, nonetheless he is not labeled as contaminated per the paper so if it is a wrong assignment it shouldnt be due to contamination; though maybe in the end its best to just go along and trust Table S3 from Stolarek et al as there might be a reason or another why many samples from Table S1 do not feat there

[FR9CZ6]

" A previous study could not reject continuity in ancestry from the Wielbark-associated individuals to later medieval individuals. With Twigstats’ improved power, models of continuity are strongly rejected, with no 1-source model of any preceding Iron Age or Bronze Age group providing a reasonable fit (p << 1e-33). Instead, individuals from medieval Poland can only be modelled as a mixture of majority Lithuanian Roman Iron Age ancestry, which is similar to ancestries of individuals from middle to late Bronze Age Poland, and a minority (95% CI: 18.9%-26.0%) ancestry component related to individuals from Roman Italy (p = 0.015) (Figure 3b). These medieval individuals from Poland thus carry no detectable Scandinavian-related ancestry, unlike the earlier Wielbark-associated  individuals. Instead, present-day people from Poland are similar in ancestry to these medieval individuals (Figure 3c). The presence of a southern European-like ancestry component (represented by Roman Italy), which is not present in the Lithuanian Roman Iron Age, could be consistent with models of admixture taken place further south and arriving in Poland through north-westerly Slavic expansions."

https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/...1.full.pdf

Since the neither the slavs nor any other iron age group which immigrated to Poland most likely wasn't a 100% "Roman Italy-like" the results suggest significant migration events to Poland since the Bronze Age which left a strong genetic footprint.

I think it might also support models which place the Slavic homeland to the southeast near the Carpathians, but without more samples from Ukraine, Belarus and Iron Age Poland we can't really know.

[Tomenable]

What about PCA0002 outlier from Kowalewko, where was this guy originally from?:

Code:

Wielbark_culture_Kowalewko_o:PCA0002,0.122929,0.126941,0.07731,0.055233,0.041546,0.017012,0.00517,0.001615,-0.009408,-0.010752,-0.002598,-0.005695,0.021407,0.037296,-0.007193,-0.008618,-0.01356,0.00266,-0.005279,-0.016008,-0.006364,-0.010881,0.001725,-0.014942,0.008622

[Tomenable]

These medieval individuals from Poland thus carry no detectable Scandinavian-related ancestry

In my G25 model they got ca. 11% Wielbark: https://genarchivist.com/showthread.php?tid=594

And in Rothaer's model even ca. 18% - https://genarchivist.com/showthread.php?...0#pid12050

[FR9CZ6]

What about PCA0002 outlier from Kowalewko, where was this guy originally from?:

Code:

Wielbark_culture_Kowalewko_o:PCA0002,0.122929,0.126941,0.07731,0.055233,0.041546,0.017012,0.00517,0.001615,-0.009408,-0.010752,-0.002598,-0.005695,0.021407,0.037296,-0.007193,-0.008618,-0.01356,0.00266,-0.005279,-0.016008,-0.006364,-0.010881,0.001725,-0.014942,0.008622

It's an outlier sample and I doubt anyone can tell you where he or his parents were "originally from". 

Regarding the Scandinavian admixture in medieval poles, you can check in the supplementary materials which samples they've used for the analyses. Try to check those specific samples to see if there's still any discrepancy.

[Radko]

It seems that we will have 3 new Slavic samples from Medieval Denmark in addition to VK139, VK287 and VK340:
CGG106789 (female)
CGG106791 (I-S17250)
CGG106780 (female)



Distance to: Denmark_Viking.SG:VK139_noUDG.SG
0.03080088 Belarusian
0.03123367 Lithuanian_PA
0.03334473 Ukrainian_Rivne
0.03356200 Russian_Smolensk
0.03367830 Lithuanian_VA
0.03494667 Russian_Voronez
0.03501061 Ukrainian_Chernihiv
0.03513890 Ukrainian_Sumy
0.03553377 Polish
0.03563522 Lithuanian_VZ
0.03563664 Russian_Kaluga
0.03565831 Russian_Pskov
0.03584918 Ukrainian_Zhytomyr
0.03668871 Polish_Kashubian
0.03720904 Lithuanian_RA
0.03774245 Russian_Kursk
0.03800756 Estonian
0.03803566 Russian_Orel
0.03906138 Sorb_Niederlausitz
0.03955264 Ukrainian_Dnipro
0.04100788 Cossack_Ukrainian
0.04125486 Russian_Ryazan
0.04126530 Russian_Tver
0.04150481 Russian_Belgorod
0.04177888 Lithuanian_PZ


Distance to: Denmark_Viking.SG:VK287_noUDG.SG
0.02889403 Russian_Smolensk
0.02936406 Russian_Voronez
0.03002392 Ukrainian_Sumy
0.03035110 Polish
0.03050294 Polish_Kashubian
0.03110072 Ukrainian_Zhytomyr
0.03177348 Russian_Orel
0.03235245 Ukrainian_Chernihiv
0.03249503 Russian_Belgorod
0.03263643 Belarusian
0.03307782 Ukrainian_Dnipro
0.03371833 Russian_Kaluga
0.03394002 Ukrainian_Rivne
0.03430641 Russian_Kursk
0.03447091 Ukrainian_Lviv
0.03569549 Cossack_Ukrainian
0.03809397 Lithuanian_VA
0.03838483 Russian_Pskov
0.03874512 Lithuanian_PA
0.03955162 Sorb_Niederlausitz
0.04033383 Russian_Ryazan
0.04166341 Russian_Tver
0.04200163 Lithuanian_VZ
0.04295424 Polish_Silesian
0.04298265 Ukrainian_Zakarpattia


Distance to: Denmark_Viking.SG:VK340_noUDG.SG
0.02361211 Ukrainian_Zhytomyr
0.02501809 Ukrainian_Rivne
0.02630286 Polish
0.02742081 Russian_Smolensk
0.02767453 Ukrainian_Chernihiv
0.02794543 Russian_Voronez
0.02851740 Ukrainian_Sumy
0.02866083 Belarusian
0.02901471 Russian_Belgorod
0.02925713 Ukrainian_Dnipro
0.02946307 Cossack_Ukrainian
0.02983540 Russian_Orel
0.03056498 Russian_Kursk
0.03153271 Lithuanian_PA
0.03176161 Ukrainian_Lviv
0.03198493 Russian_Pskov
0.03203255 Russian_Ryazan
0.03304371 Russian_Kaluga
0.03311919 Sorb_Niederlausitz
0.03348724 Lithuanian_VA
0.03373853 Polish_Kashubian
0.03465668 Polish_Silesian
0.03553055 Slovakian
0.03578544 Moldovan_o
0.03589206 Russian_Tver

"The population in southern Scandinavia after 1200 BP shows hitherto unknown changes compared with the situation in the same areas before 1600 BP. Our results demonstrate the arrival of a strong component of North German IA ancestry, in combination with a series of ancestries previously associated with Celtic-speaking groups and populations carrying European Farmer (in addition to GAC) ancestry from north-western Europe. In the Danish islands, the shift amounts to a virtually complete population replacement. Subsequently these changes are supplemented by a modest arrival of eastern ancestry associated with Slavic populations, who migrated into areas south of the Baltic Sea formerly settled by East Germanic speakers, and noted as a component in Scandinavian samples after 1200 BP."

[Mik]

It seems that we will have 3 new Slavic samples from Medieval Denmark in addition to VK139, VK287 and VK340:
CGG106789 (female)
CGG106791 (I-S17250)
CGG106780 (female)



Distance to: Denmark_Viking.SG:VK139_noUDG.SG
0.03080088 Belarusian
0.03123367 Lithuanian_PA
0.03334473 Ukrainian_Rivne
0.03356200 Russian_Smolensk
0.03367830 Lithuanian_VA
0.03494667 Russian_Voronez
0.03501061 Ukrainian_Chernihiv
0.03513890 Ukrainian_Sumy
0.03553377 Polish
0.03563522 Lithuanian_VZ
0.03563664 Russian_Kaluga
0.03565831 Russian_Pskov
0.03584918 Ukrainian_Zhytomyr
0.03668871 Polish_Kashubian
0.03720904 Lithuanian_RA
0.03774245 Russian_Kursk
0.03800756 Estonian
0.03803566 Russian_Orel
0.03906138 Sorb_Niederlausitz
0.03955264 Ukrainian_Dnipro
0.04100788 Cossack_Ukrainian
0.04125486 Russian_Ryazan
0.04126530 Russian_Tver
0.04150481 Russian_Belgorod
0.04177888 Lithuanian_PZ


Distance to: Denmark_Viking.SG:VK287_noUDG.SG
0.02889403 Russian_Smolensk
0.02936406 Russian_Voronez
0.03002392 Ukrainian_Sumy
0.03035110 Polish
0.03050294 Polish_Kashubian
0.03110072 Ukrainian_Zhytomyr
0.03177348 Russian_Orel
0.03235245 Ukrainian_Chernihiv
0.03249503 Russian_Belgorod
0.03263643 Belarusian
0.03307782 Ukrainian_Dnipro
0.03371833 Russian_Kaluga
0.03394002 Ukrainian_Rivne
0.03430641 Russian_Kursk
0.03447091 Ukrainian_Lviv
0.03569549 Cossack_Ukrainian
0.03809397 Lithuanian_VA
0.03838483 Russian_Pskov
0.03874512 Lithuanian_PA
0.03955162 Sorb_Niederlausitz
0.04033383 Russian_Ryazan
0.04166341 Russian_Tver
0.04200163 Lithuanian_VZ
0.04295424 Polish_Silesian
0.04298265 Ukrainian_Zakarpattia


Distance to: Denmark_Viking.SG:VK340_noUDG.SG
0.02361211 Ukrainian_Zhytomyr
0.02501809 Ukrainian_Rivne
0.02630286 Polish
0.02742081 Russian_Smolensk
0.02767453 Ukrainian_Chernihiv
0.02794543 Russian_Voronez
0.02851740 Ukrainian_Sumy
0.02866083 Belarusian
0.02901471 Russian_Belgorod
0.02925713 Ukrainian_Dnipro
0.02946307 Cossack_Ukrainian
0.02983540 Russian_Orel
0.03056498 Russian_Kursk
0.03153271 Lithuanian_PA
0.03176161 Ukrainian_Lviv
0.03198493 Russian_Pskov
0.03203255 Russian_Ryazan
0.03304371 Russian_Kaluga
0.03311919 Sorb_Niederlausitz
0.03348724 Lithuanian_VA
0.03373853 Polish_Kashubian
0.03465668 Polish_Silesian
0.03553055 Slovakian
0.03578544 Moldovan_o
0.03589206 Russian_Tver

"The population in southern Scandinavia after 1200 BP shows hitherto unknown changes compared with the situation in the same areas before 1600 BP. Our results demonstrate the arrival of a strong component of North German IA ancestry, in combination with a series of ancestries previously associated with Celtic-speaking groups and populations carrying European Farmer (in addition to GAC) ancestry from north-western Europe. In the Danish islands, the shift amounts to a virtually complete population replacement. Subsequently these changes are supplemented by a modest arrival of eastern ancestry associated with Slavic populations, who migrated into areas south of the Baltic Sea formerly settled by East Germanic speakers, and noted as a component in Scandinavian samples after 1200 BP."

Isn´t that Kaargarden cemetary the same were sample VK274 were found, also with a Slavic autosomal profile?
https://www.yfull.com/tree/R-PH3519/

[Bukva_]

Did anyone send samples to Davidski from the new study "Network of large pedigrees reveals social practices of Avar communities"?

https://www.ebi.ac.uk/ena/browser/view/PRJEB72021

[okshtunas]

" A previous study could not reject continuity in ancestry from the Wielbark-associated individuals to later medieval individuals. With Twigstats’ improved power, models of continuity are strongly rejected, with no 1-source model of any preceding Iron Age or Bronze Age group providing a reasonable fit (p << 1e-33). Instead, individuals from medieval Poland can only be modelled as a mixture of majority Lithuanian Roman Iron Age ancestry, which is similar to ancestries of individuals from middle to late Bronze Age Poland, and a minority (95% CI: 18.9%-26.0%) ancestry component related to individuals from Roman Italy (p = 0.015) (Figure 3b). These medieval individuals from Poland thus carry no detectable Scandinavian-related ancestry, unlike the earlier Wielbark-associated  individuals. Instead, present-day people from Poland are similar in ancestry to these medieval individuals (Figure 3c). The presence of a southern European-like ancestry component (represented by Roman Italy), which is not present in the Lithuanian Roman Iron Age, could be consistent with models of admixture taken place further south and arriving in Poland through north-westerly Slavic expansions."

https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/...1.full.pdf

Since the neither the slavs nor any other iron age group which immigrated to Poland most likely wasn't a 100% "Roman Italy-like" the results suggest significant migration events to Poland since the Bronze Age which left a strong genetic footprint.

I think it might also support models which place the Slavic homeland to the southeast near the Carpathians, but without more samples from Ukraine, Belarus and Iron Age Poland we can't really know.

Interesting. So South-East of Poland is far more likely than North-East of it (given available data). Of course as you mentioned, we don't know how samples from IA Ukraine or Belarus will affect it.

I propose a possibility that Belarus/Ukraine samples will not differ at all/significantly from the the Lithuanian-Like samples. So, possibly a convergence of IA Balto-Slavic ancestry from Ukraine/Belarus and a South-European profile (maybe from Dacia/Thrace??), resulting in the Slavic admixture we see in Medieval Poland.

[Radko]

So Kowalewko 38 and Czarnowko 547 appear not to be contaminated?

I suspect that all R-YP6048 samples from Stolarek et al. are contaminated (including Kowalewko 38) by someone who was in contact with the genetic material.

Out of 17 officially contaminated samples, 4 (!) belong to R-YP6048:
PCA0332 (BTW, labelled incorrectly as Ostrow Lednicki 322 by FTDNA)
PCA0333
PCA0403
PCA0496

PCA0038 (Kowalewko 38) has no Y-DNA calls in the .bam file - https://www.ebi.ac.uk/ena/browser/view/S...show=reads

[leonardo]

So Kowalewko 38 and Czarnowko 547 appear not to be contaminated?

I suspect that all R-YP6048 samples from Stolarek et al. are contaminated (including Kowalewko 38) by someone who was in contact with the genetic material.

Out of 17 officially contaminated samples, 4 (!) belong to R-YP6048:
PCA0332 (BTW, labelled incorrectly as Ostrow Lednicki 322 by FTDNA)
PCA0333
PCA0403
PCA0496

PCA0038 (Kowalewko 38) has no Y-DNA calls in the .bam file - https://www.ebi.ac.uk/ena/browser/view/S...show=reads

@Radko, don't you think that you should note that you have edited FTDNA's site, that is, added the words in red as your commentary? Your post could be misleading. I don't want anybody to think that this is how FTDNA's site ACTUALLY looks. Here's what I see when I go to their site.