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

[dancingfragments]

Because Lithuanians and Belarusians are Polish plus Baltic BA. Just guide the cline...

However, it is impossible

[ph2ter]

Orentil

These people certainly did not migrate west because:

"During the Iron Age, around 2,400 cal BP, tree pollen even reached its highest values of the entire record (96%), whereas cultural pollen indicators and Poaceae markedly declined, indicating local land abandonment and closed, dense forests around the site, possibly in response to a short-lived cool and humid period (Haas et al. 1998; Büntgen et al. 2011). Later on, still during the Iron Age, there is again evidence for small-scale forest openings and agricultural activity around Lake Svityaz, as documented by a decline in tree abundance of P. sylvestris or C. betulus, and an increase in cultural pollen indicators, the occurrence of Secale and other cereal pollen (Fig. 3) and evidence for local fires. Increasing human impact at ca. 2,000 cal BP coincides with the southward expansion of Gothic tribes in the first and second century AD (Stolarek et al. 2019). During the subsequent migration period, land use pressure declined and forests quickly became closed again. Large-scale forest clearing and the establishment of the present-day cultural landscape only occurred during the last 500 years."

https://link.springer.com/article/10.100...21-00844-z

These localities are not very representative:

There are 'proto-Korchak' sites further southwest, in the middle & upper Dniester valley (as per Volodymyr Baran, Boris Magademov), and other sites dating to mid-late 5th century in the east Carpathian littoral. 
The issue remains that the (3 or 4!) proto-Prague sites of the Polesie region are poorly defined and lack certifiable dating. There are papers (some featuring Vyazov) suggesting that Penkova culture collapsed in the wake of 'Bulgar' invasions, and East Slav territory was colonized by a slightly different set of peoples from the west of the Dnieper after 600 AD. 

Overall, I'd aliken the issue of Balto-Slavic ancestry as the CLV links with Yamnaya, difference between 'predominant autosomal ancestry' and fine-grained ethnogenesis. I currently guesstimate that the proto-Slav in fact expanded from Podolia-Galicia-northern Moldovia; whilst Kiev culture and Kolochin might have been pre-Slavs

What we know is that in the first half of the 6th century the Slavs occupied the area from the mouth of the Danube along the eastern slopes of Carpathians up to the Vistula. This area is west and southwest from the Proto-Prague-Korchak. West and southwest of Slavs were Gepids, Longobards and Goths. This is the first expansion from the Proto Prague-Korchak and that expansion obviously happened in the 5th century. The next phase of migration from there to Poland, Slovakia and Romania happened after the Germanics (Langobards, Gepids, Ostrogoths) left the area and that happened in the second half of the 6th century.

[ambron]

ph2ter

However, most archaeologists outside the school of Godłowski and Parczewski see the spread of the Slavs similarly to Sedov:

"The Slavs in the beginning of the Middle ages settled in the extended territories of Central and Eastern Europe from the Elbe in the west up to the Don in the east and from the coast of the Baltic sea in the north up to Peloponnessos in the south and were differentiated in several dialect-tribal formations.
One of those large formations was Prague-Korchak culture (p. 7) formed on the basis of late Pszeworsk antiquities (Southern Poland, Western Ukraine and north-eastern Slovakia).
Another dialect-tribal formation of the Slavs is represented by Sukow-Dziedzice culture (p. 40), which have been formed also on the basis of late Pszeworsk culture in Central Poland. (…) On the territory of Sukow-Dziedzice culture the tribal groups of the Obodrits, the Velets, the Pomoryans and the Polyans have been formed.
In the North Pontic Area Pen'kovka culture has been formed on the basis of Cherniakhov culture. The bearers of Pen'kovka culture were the Ants, fixed by historical sources of the 6th-7th centuries. (…)The Ants together with the tribes of Prague- Korchak group and romanized autochthons became the creators of Ipotesti-Cindesti culture (p. 95) of the Danube and Prut basins.
In the first half of the 6th century the Avars (p. 109) came to the Pontic territories. In 557 they attacked the Ants and defeated them. Soon after that a powerful migration wave under the leadership of the Avars spread westwards and in 578 reached the Middle Danube area.
The capture of Danube lands by the Avars has become an impulse for movements of separate Slavic groups in Central Europe. In the 7th century the Slavic Tornow culture (p. 138) spread in the Middle Oder and in the Hawel basins. These were the Luzhichans (Lausitz Sorben) ancestors.
The Poles (p. 341) as separate Slavic ethnos were generated in the conditions of state formation on the basis of tribes of three groups - Sukow-Dziedzice, Prague-Korchak and Tornow."

https://www.rastko.rs/arheologija/vsedov-slavs_2.html

[leonardo]

I can see Southern Poland, Western Ukraine and north-eastern Slovakia as the place of growth and expansion for M458.

[Radko]

We will have about 40 Przeworsk culture samples (mainly from Kuyavia, but also a few from Silesia) analysed by Chylenski et al., over a dozen from Lesser Poland analysed by Gretzinger et al. and another few dozens analysed by Golubinski et al.

We will see if Przeworsk culture population was Slavic-like.

[Pribislav]

We will have about 40 Przeworsk culture samples (mainly from Kuyavia, but also a few from Silesia) analysed by Chylenski et al., over a dozen from Lesser Poland analysed by Gretzinger et al. and another few dozens analysed by Golubinski et al.

We will see if Przeworsk culture population was Slavic-like.

Even if all Przeworsk samples turn out to be R1b and/or I1, we know there will be clowns who will claim those are native Polish lines.

[ambron]

Radko

It is very well known from archeology that the few Przeworsk skeletal burials are Celtic, and the occasional princely burials are Germanic. So nothing more than genetically Celtic and Germanic individuals should be expected.

However, we will still not know what the genetic makeup of 99% of the Przeworsk population who practiced the cremation ritual looked like.

[okshtunas]

We will have about 40 Przeworsk culture samples (mainly from Kuyavia, but also a few from Silesia) analysed by Chylenski et al., over a dozen from Lesser Poland analysed by Gretzinger et al. and another few dozens analysed by Golubinski et al.

We will see if Przeworsk culture population was Slavic-like.

Even if all Przeworsk samples turn out to be R1b and/or I1, we know there will be clowns who will claim those are native Polish lines.

I don't think Y-DNA is so important unless it's clear their autosomal package is consistent with the Y-DNA that is later associated with Slavs.

Even if they are R1a, it means nothing if their autosomal package is primarily Germanic. Even if there's a whif of Slavic autosomes. In other words, an R1b/I1 on the Slavic cline says more than an R1a not on the Slavic cline.

[Vinitharya]

It's starting to get weird over here in the Ancient area of the site...R1a can't be found anywhere in the Indo-European urheimat and then, suddenly, emerges explosively in Indo-European cultures...go down to my personal subclade and, well, apparently we were dragon riders because there isn't a trace from the putative proto-Slavic homeland of Kiev until you get to Katowice and then boom! Huge diversification and large population growth, especially into Central Germany. Look, I'm not saying the autochthonists are all right, but as we say in my country, a blind squirrel finds a nut every once in a while.

[Lucas Westerwelle]

We will have about 40 Przeworsk culture samples (mainly from Kuyavia, but also a few from Silesia) analysed by Chylenski et al., over a dozen from Lesser Poland analysed by Gretzinger et al. and another few dozens analysed by Golubinski et al.

We will see if Przeworsk culture population was Slavic-like.

Even if all Przeworsk samples turn out to be R1b and/or I1, we know there will be clowns who will claim those are native Polish lines.

I don't think Y-DNA is so important unless it's clear their autosomal package is consistent with the Y-DNA that is later associated with Slavs.

Even if they are R1a, it means nothing if their autosomal package is primarily Germanic. Even if there's a whif of Slavic autosomes. In other words, an R1b/I1 on the Slavic cline says more than an R1a not on the Slavic cline.

Agree and autosomal Slavic is also not definitive.

[Radko]

Even if all Przeworsk samples turn out to be R1b and/or I1, we know there will be clowns who will claim those are native Polish lines.

I don't think Y-DNA is so important unless it's clear their autosomal package is consistent with the Y-DNA that is later associated with Slavs.

Even if they are R1a, it means nothing if their autosomal package is primarily Germanic. Even if there's a whif of Slavic autosomes. In other words, an R1b/I1 on the Slavic cline says more than an R1a not on the Slavic cline.

Agree and autosomal Slavic is also not definitive.

We need a combination of Slavic-like auDNA, young "Slavic" Y-DNA lineages under R-Z280, I-Y3120 and R-M458 and strong IBD connections, i.e. >2 segments above 12 cM with later Medieval Slavs to confirm biological relatedness.

[Bukva_]

I don't think Y-DNA is so important unless it's clear their autosomal package is consistent with the Y-DNA that is later associated with Slavs.

Even if they are R1a, it means nothing if their autosomal package is primarily Germanic. Even if there's a whif of Slavic autosomes. In other words, an R1b/I1 on the Slavic cline says more than an R1a not on the Slavic cline.

Agree and autosomal Slavic is also not definitive.

We need a combination of Slavic-like auDNA, young "Slavic" Y-DNA lineages under R-Z280, I-Y3120 and R-M458 and strong IBD connections, i.e. >2 segments above 12 cM with later Medieval Slavs to confirm biological relatedness.

They should also do strontium analysis with such samples that are unmixed and found in post migration area. Compare it with hypothesised areas of Slavic origin.

[ambron]

Radko

Knowing the limitations of archaeogenomics, multiplying criteria in this way, we will never explain the origin of the Slavs. And maybe that's the point...

For me, what we already know about Przeworsk genetics under the Wielbark occupation is enough. First of all, that Przeworsk individuals share Y chromosome haplotypes with early Avar Slavs and medieval Poles. Personally, I have no doubt that the Slavs come from the Przeworsk culture, as archaeologists outside the Godłowski and Parczewski schools prove.

[Radko]

These criteria work perfectly fine for the Early Avar period Slavic-like samples, so Przeworsk culture samples should also meet all of them if they are indeed related to the Slavs.

And of course, Przeworsk culture origin of the Slavs is supported by a very small group of archaeologists (associated mostly with the so-called "Poznan school"). It's definitely not a mainstream as ambron is trying hardly to imply.

Przeworsk culture aDNA results will confirm or debunk this relationship.

[CowboyHG]

These localities are not very representative:

There are 'proto-Korchak' sites further southwest, in the middle & upper Dniester valley (as per Volodymyr Baran, Boris Magademov), and other sites dating to mid-late 5th century in the east Carpathian littoral. 
The issue remains that the (3 or 4!) proto-Prague sites of the Polesie region are poorly defined and lack certifiable dating. There are papers (some featuring Vyazov) suggesting that Penkova culture collapsed in the wake of 'Bulgar' invasions, and East Slav territory was colonized by a slightly different set of peoples from the west of the Dnieper after 600 AD. 

Overall, I'd aliken the issue of Balto-Slavic ancestry as the CLV links with Yamnaya, difference between 'predominant autosomal ancestry' and fine-grained ethnogenesis. I currently guesstimate that the proto-Slav in fact expanded from Podolia-Galicia-northern Moldovia; whilst Kiev culture and Kolochin might have been pre-Slavs

What we know is that in the first half of the 6th century the Slavs occupied the area from the mouth of the Danube along the eastern slopes of Carpathians up to the Vistula. This area is west and southwest from the Proto-Prague-Korchak. West and southwest of Slavs were Gepids, Longobards and Goths. This is the first expansion from the Proto Prague-Korchak and that expansion obviously happened in the 5th century. The next phase of migration from there to Poland, Slovakia and Romania happened after the Germanics (Langobards, Gepids, Ostrogoths) left the area and that happened in the second half of the 6th century.

We don't really ''know'' anything here for sure, because of the poor state of archaeology in East Slav lands (very few modern-level studies, instead the major focus has been on steppe lands or Volga-Kama, rather than Slavs & medieval).
However, according to the above mentioned archaeologists, proto-Korchak type materials are found in the western post-Chernyakov area, near the Carpathian bend & upper Dniester material. So the Prague-Korchak culture in fact emerged here, although some contribution from the Kiev zone is not excluded. 
The Kiev culture transformed into Kolochin and contributed to Penkovka. These groups were in turn superceded by the 'Real Slavs'.