N in Ancient DNA

[Zelto]

This thread is to keep track of and discuss newly published samples with N-M231.

From "The Genetic Origins of the Indo-Europeans":

I20089 Russia_Afanasievo_oOkunevo Beltyry 2872-2584 calBCE N-Y6503 (N-B482) H6a1b

I10632_d Russia_N_BA_possible Shatrovo-1 6000-800 BCE (archaeological context) N-Z4762 (N-L735) I4a

[kolompar]

For everything we have FTDNA is probably the best:
https://discover.familytreedna.com/y-dna/N-M231/tree

Quite a lot of the tree is covered, you have all those Baikal/Yakutia samples leading to the Uralic N, but also some to N-P43 (B523 on FTDNA), and even the earliest Botai related branch has a Shamanka individual.

[ronin92]

The majority of males living today bearing hgN are in East Asia.

Many ancient DNA samples, particularly those in the East, are marked in this tree.

[Ebizur]

The majority of males living today bearing hgN are in East Asia.

That is trivially true; there should be about 52,000,000 males who belong to Y-DNA haplogroup N-M231 in present-day East Asia (China, Korea, Japan, and Mongolia, in order of estimated number of males who belong to haplogroup N-M231) and about 13,000,000 males who belong to Y-DNA haplogroup N-M231 in present-day Europe (mainly Russia, Finland, Ukraine, Poland, Lithuania, Belarus, Sweden, Latvia, and Estonia, in order of estimated number of males who belong to haplogroup N-M231).

However, the subclades of haplogroup N-M231 found among present-day East Asians are almost entirely distinct and deeply divergent from the subclades of haplogroup N-M231 found among present-day Europeans. (One might make an exception for Mongolia, where most members of haplogroup N-M231 are actually more closely related to those found among present-day Europeans than to those found among present-day Chinese, Koreans, and Japanese, but the population of haplogroup N in Mongolia accounts for only about 0.37% of all haplogroup N in present-day East Asia.) It is striking that typically European and/or North Asian subclades of haplogroup N are less common in present-day East Asia than typically European and/or North Asian subclades of haplogroup R are common in present-day East Asia. There must have been almost zero "backflow" of haplogroup N-bearing males from North Asia and Europe to East Asia (assuming that the origin of haplogroup N should be placed in East Asia) since the dispersal of haplogroup N across North Asia and Europe.

[Ebizur]

I suppose I should clarify my previous post (to explain why I have written "almost" in the phrase "almost entirely distinct and deeply divergent") by mentioning that there is one clade found among present-day East Asians that is relatively closely related to some European and North Asian members of Y-DNA haplogroup N.

This clade is N-A9408:

N-M2058 (TMRCA 4160 ybp; 490 members; accounts for approximately 0.21% of all Y-DNA in present-day China, distributed with a concentration in Hebei, Shaanxi, Gansu, and other northern provinces)
*N-MF36044 (TMRCA 4140 ybp; 3 members; found in two individuals from Changchun, Jilin who share a MRCA approximately 2420 ybp and in one individual from Qingyang, Gansu)
*N-M2016 (TMRCA 3410 ybp; 24 members; subsumes the predominant lineage[s] among present-day Yakuts)
*N-A9408 (TMRCA 3510 ybp; 426 members)
**N-PH1612 (TMRCA 2280 ybp; 26 members; accounts for approximately 0.02% of all Y-DNA in present-day China, with a distribution in Shaanxi, etc.)
**N-Y77895 (TMRCA 3290 ybp; 349 members)
***N-Y70200 (TMRCA 2810 ybp; 344 members; accounts for approximately 0.16% of all Y-DNA in present-day China, distributed with a concentration in Shaanxi, Shanxi, Henan, Hebei, etc.)
****N-MF94610 (TMRCA 1820 ybp; 9 members; found in a few persons surnamed He [贺], Feng [冯], or Ji [季] in Xi'an, Taiyuan, Anyang, Heze, etc.; the surname He [贺], which appears to be the oldest traceable surname among the members of this clade, may point to some sort of Northern Barbarian e.g. Alat or Xianbei paternal ancestry)
****N-Y60223 (TMRCA 2680 ybp; 248 members; accounts for approximately 0.11% of all Y-DNA in present-day China, distributed in Hebei, Shandong, Jiangsu, etc.)

Outside East Asia, N-A9408 has been found mainly among Turkic speakers and Hungarians. N-M2016, which is the predominant clade of Y-DNA among the Turkic-speaking Yakuts of present-day Yakutia, is a sister clade of N-A9408. 23mofang estimates the MRCA of N-A9408 and N-M2016 in N-M2058 to have lived approximately 4160 ybp.

So, there is a certain lineage of probable Turko-Ugric steppe nomad background belonging to Y-DNA haplogroup N that has spread around China proper and Korea during historical times. This is an unusual case, however, and it pales in comparison to the influx of e.g. haplogroup R1a-M417 (accounts for approximately 1.15% of all Y-DNA in present-day China).

N-A9408 is the only subclade of typically European and/or North Asian haplogroup N (i.e. either N-CTS6128 or N-P43) that has a (somewhat) notable presence among East Asians proper. In addition to N-A9408, there are two other clades, N-F4205 ("Buryat N-Tat") and N-VL67 ("Asian N2/N1b-P43") that some people might claim are also present in East Asia, but such a claim would be rather misleading. N-F4205 and N-VL67 are not really found among East Asians proper, but they are found to some extent among individuals of very likely recent North Asian or Central Asian ancestry who belong to certain ethnic minority populations and currently live in certain peripheral parts of (northern) China, such as Bargas/Buryats in Hulunbuir (N-F4205) and a certain Uriankhai clan (note that this "Uriankhai" appellation, which has been a common exonym for Siberian Turkic-speaking peoples during the Qing era, is the source of the Korean word 오랑캐 orangkae "a savage, a barbarian") in Liaoning, Jilin, and Inner Mongolia (N-VL67 > N-VL64/N-B478). This ties in with the fact that a great deal of haplogroup N among present-day people in Mongolia is actually more closely related to European/North Asian lineages than it is related to (typical) East Asian lineages within haplogroup N. It might be more sensible to exclude Mongolia (at least Mongolia north of the Gobi, including the independent state of Mongolia) from "East Asia" and group it together with North Asia and/or Central Asia.

The MRCA between typically East Asian N-F4063 and typically North Asian/European N-CTS6128 is N-M46/N-Tat (TMRCA 12520 ybp). The MRCA between typically East Asian N-F1101 and typically North Asian/European N-P43 is N-L666 (TMRCA 10120 ybp).

[Zelto]

My intention with this thread wasn't to compile a list of all available aDNA samples with N; FTDNA discover has become a good resource for that endeavour. However, there are pre-prints and redacted papers with unreleased data and their samples are thus missing from commercial testing sites.

For instance, this redacted doctoral thesis from last year which I haven't seen mentioned anywhere.

"The Palaeogenomics of Arctic and Sub-Arctic Peoples: A Study of Population Genetics, Adaptations, and Pathogen Incidence"

011319 Nunalleq, Alaska, Yupik culture 650calBP (site date) N1a-L392 A2a

011874 Zhokhov, New Siberian Islands, Sumnagin Cultural Complex 9634 calBP N2a-Y6514 D4h3

024117 Ust-Beleya Cemetary, Southeastern Chukotka, Ust-Beleya culture 3302calBP N1a-M46 D4b1a2a1

024120 Ushki-I, layer II, Central Kamchatka, Tarya culture 3078 calBP N1a-L392 D4b1a2a1

024251 Lopatka-I, South Kamchatka, Old Itelmen culture 2757 calBP N1 C4b

024257 Sed’moi Prichal, Southeastern Chukotka, Kanchalan culture 701 calBP N1 D4b1a2a1

024259 Sed’moi Prichal, Southeastern Chukotka, Kanchalan culture 849 calBP N1a-P298 G1b

024760 Nunalleq, Alaska, Yupik culture 650calBP (site date) N1a-L392 A2a

024763 Nunalleq, Alaska, Yupik culture 650calBP (site date) N1a-L392 A2a

024767 Nunalleq, Alaska, Yupik culture 650calBP (site date) N1a-L392 A2a

011874 is the second earliest N sample on record behind Bianbian, although they're close in age. The other Zhokhov samples belong to Q1b-YP4010 and all cluster with Kolyma_M. N2a-Y6514 is perhaps the most unique subclade of N in terms of its early westward distribution and presence in populations on the WSHG cline. However, 011874 alongside N2a-MF52704 from Neolithic Baikal now ground N2a in Eastern Siberia. Although, the expansion of N2a-Y6514 in particular remains quite enigmatic. In my opinion, there was a migration to East Siberia from somewhere in north East Asia during the Greenlandian age, pertinent for both N2a-B482 and N1a-L729.

[Ebizur]

011874 is the second earliest N sample on record behind Bianbian, although they're close in age. The other Zhokhov samples belong to Q1b-YP4010 and all cluster with Kolyma_M. N2a-Y6514 is perhaps the most unique subclade of N in terms of its early westward distribution and presence in populations on the WSHG cline. However, 011874 alongside N2a-MF52704 from Neolithic Baikal now ground N2a in Eastern Siberia. Although, the expansion of N2a-Y6514 in particular remains quite enigmatic. In my opinion, there was a migration to East Siberia from somewhere in north East Asia during the Greenlandian age, pertinent for both N2a-B482 and N1a-L729.

Haplogroup N2a-Y6514 is mostly attested by members of a certain rather young subclade (N-Y6467, TMRCA 4700 [95% CI 5600 <-> 3900] ybp according to YFull) who now live in Europe and Turkey and especially by members of the very young N-Y6467 > N-FT182494 (TMRCA 750 [95% CI 950 <-> 600] ybp) subclade that seems to be essentially limited to the territory of the former Yugoslavia. According to FTDNA and YFull, a basal N2a-Y6514(xY6467) branch is attested by the BOT15 specimen (3345 - 3025 BCE) attributed to the Botai culture in North Kazakhstan Region, just across the international border from Kurgan, Tyumen, and Omsk oblasts of Russia i.e. southwestern Siberia. The estimated date of deposition of the BOT15 specimen is just slightly earlier than YFull's estimated TMRCA of N-Y6467, so it is possible that all extant members of haplogroup N2a might be direct patrilineal descendants of a single migrant male originating from the Botai culture. (On the other hand, FTDNA currently estimates the TMRCA of N-Y6467 to be 5,861 [95% CI 7,034 - 4,877] ybp, which would make it most likely that the earliest split downstream of N-Y6467, currently presented by FTDNA as a trifurcation among N-FT197515, N-FT171690, and the now numerically predominant N-FGC28460, should have occurred several centuries before the time of deposition of the BOT15 specimen.) However, if the results reported for specimen 011874 from Zhokhov Island in the East Siberian Sea off the arctic coast of Siberia are correct, then N2a-Y6514 might have originated anywhere in North Asia and not necessarily in or even near the territory occupied by the Botai culture.

[CLTVTE]

In “Bronze and Iron Age population movements underlie Xinjiang population history”, three cases of yDNA N2-Y6503 from ancient Xinjiang appeared (HRR579045, HRR579051, HRR579041), being related to the Shamanka_EN’s branch of yDNA N2-Y6503 (DA247). In another work, co-authored by researchers from the Chinese Academy of Sciences, one case of yDNA N* of an Uyghur from the China Altay clustered as a divergent side branch in the network of cases of basal yDNA N* from Southern China. Indeed, in “The deep population history of northern East Asia from the Late Pleistocene to the Holocene”, the Shamanka_EN’s yDNA N2-Y6503 DA247 specimen participated in a cline on the PCA, which included the ancient female sample from Thailand (Ban Chiang). In the less known article from year 2001 ("Genetic study of the Paleolithic and Neolithic Southeast Asians" (H Oota 1, K Kurosaki, S Pookajorn, T Ishida, S Ueda DOI: 10.1353/hub.2001.0023)), the ancient sample from the Moh Khiew Cave (MKC-1) of the Crabi Province of Thailand, dated to 25800 years ago, produced the DNA sequence, observed in mtDNA of the Papuans. In “Human genetic history on the Tibetan Plateau in the past 5100 years”, the East Asian ancestry of the Shamanka_EN’s yDNA N2-Y6503 DA247 specimen contributed to the appearance of a small amount of the Papuan component in this DA247 specimen at a certain value of K, but not in other specimens. In principle, the smaller river systems of Thailand are adjacent to the Mekong (Lancang) river basin, whose Lancang part originates in China not too far from the origin of the Yangtze River, that is, not too far from the Upper Yangtze river basin. It should be noted that the Shamanka_EN’s yDNA N2-Y6503 DA247 specimen participated in the cline on the PCA, which included the ancient female sample from Thailand (Ban Chiang) in the article of “The deep population history of northern East Asia from the Late Pleistocene to the Holocene”, where the ancient mtDNA M Longlin specimen, some of whose ancestors diverged from ancient East Asians just prior to 38000 years ago, did not participate.

[Zelto]

The estimated date of deposition of the BOT15 specimen is just slightly earlier than YFull's estimated TMRCA of N-Y6467, so it is possible that all extant members of haplogroup N2a might be direct patrilineal descendants of a single migrant male originating from the Botai culture. (On the other hand, FTDNA currently estimates the TMRCA of N-Y6467 to be 5,861 [95% CI 7,034 - 4,877] ybp, which would make it most likely that the earliest split downstream of N-Y6467, currently presented by FTDNA as a trifurcation among N-FT197515, N-FT171690, and the now numerically predominant N-FGC28460, should have occurred several centuries before the time of deposition of the BOT15 specimen.) However, if the results reported for specimen 011874 from Zhokhov Island in the East Siberian Sea off the arctic coast of Siberia are correct, then N2a-Y6514 might have originated anywhere in North Asia and not necessarily in or even near the territory occupied by the Botai culture.

There are a few N2a samples in Zeng et al. from the Baikal region (probably N2a-MF52704). However, I'm more interested in how I12695 relates to BOT15; that should be quite illuminating. Assuming I12695 actually is N2a, this branch spread to West Siberia far earlier than BOT15. Although, I'm not discounting the possibility that Botai had an important role in the diffusion of N2a-FT324.

I12695 Razdum'ye-1, Upper-Ob Neolithic, 6571-6424 calBCE N D4j

[Ebizur]

The estimated date of deposition of the BOT15 specimen is just slightly earlier than YFull's estimated TMRCA of N-Y6467, so it is possible that all extant members of haplogroup N2a might be direct patrilineal descendants of a single migrant male originating from the Botai culture. (On the other hand, FTDNA currently estimates the TMRCA of N-Y6467 to be 5,861 [95% CI 7,034 - 4,877] ybp, which would make it most likely that the earliest split downstream of N-Y6467, currently presented by FTDNA as a trifurcation among N-FT197515, N-FT171690, and the now numerically predominant N-FGC28460, should have occurred several centuries before the time of deposition of the BOT15 specimen.) However, if the results reported for specimen 011874 from Zhokhov Island in the East Siberian Sea off the arctic coast of Siberia are correct, then N2a-Y6514 might have originated anywhere in North Asia and not necessarily in or even near the territory occupied by the Botai culture.

There are a few N2a samples in Zeng et al. from the Baikal region (probably N2a-MF52704). However, I'm more interested in how I12695 relates to BOT15; that should be quite illuminating. Assuming I12695 actually is N2a, this branch spread to West Siberia far earlier than BOT15. Although, I'm not discounting the possibility that Botai had an important role in the diffusion of N2a-FT324.
I12695 Razdum'ye-1, Upper-Ob Neolithic, 6571-6424 calBCE N D4j

Specimen I12695 does look interesting.

From the supplementary material for the preprint of Tian Chen Zeng et al., "Postglacial genomes from foragers across Northern Eurasia reveal prehistoric mobility associated with the spread of the Uralic and Yeniseian languages":

II.C.ii.a) Kuznetsk-Altai Neolithic / Upper Ob Neolithic / Bolshoy Mys Eneolithic sites (Russia_KuznetskAltai)
(1) Razdum'ye-1 site Razdum'ye-1 is a Medieval hillfort located on an elevated promontory on the right bank of the Ob River. The site was extensively investigated and excavated by Alexei Umansky between 1960 and 1966. The archaeological exploration revealed a complex and multi-phased assemblage spanning from the Neolithic to the late Middle Ages. In 1965, two Neolithic/Eneolithic burials were excavated at the site (Umansky, 1987).
(a) Early Neolithic burial 1(6) (individual ID I12695) Burial 6 (individual ID I12695), designated firstly as burial 1, and this code is still in use in the Tomsk anthropological collection, but the burial is recorded as grave 6 in a publication by Umansky in 1987) was excavated in 1965. The grave pit had an oval shape with dimensions of approximately 1.2x0.75 meters. Its depth reached 1.3 meters from the present-day surface. The southwestern part of the grave had collapsed into the river. The deceased individual, identified as a male aged 50-60 years, was found in a supine position with the head oriented to the north. The arms were extended, while the leg bones were missing. The bones exhibited slight traces of ochre staining. Small fragments of charcoal and sheep's astragalus were discovered in the grave fill. Traces of wood ashes indicated the presence of grave siding and a vertical post positioned behind the skull of the deceased. No grave goods were present in the burial (Umanskiy 1987). It is dated to 6571–6424 calBCE (7635В±35 BP, PSUAMS-9117).

Autosomally, I12695 seems to exhibit affinity for specimens from some (Late) Neolithic/Early Bronze Age South Siberian sites (e.g. I0991 and I0992 from the Korchugan-1 site, I6847 and I6964 from the Okunevo site, I6829 from the Borovyanka-17 site, although I6829 exhibits a relatively great deal of some Western tendency that is even stronger in the Botai specimens) judging from the ADMIXTURE(-like) autosomal component analysis. The date provided for I12695 is older (by a rather large margin of 1600+ years) than the date provided for any of those autosomally similar specimens, however.

From Table S2:
I0991 (Korchugan-1, burial 3) 5206-4799 calBCE (6060±50 BP, Poz-83427) Korchugan-1 (Novosibirsk Oblast, Kyshtovskiy District), Russia Q-L56 Z1

I0992 (Korchugan-1, burial 7) 5002-4727 calBCE (5990±50 BP, Poz-83428) Korchugan-1 (Novosibirsk Oblast, Kyshtovskiy District), Russia n/a (female) U4a

I6847 TYUMEN29 (IPOS_RAS_18-18, Okunevo, N-EBA burials (Okunevo-3,-5,-7), 1988, burial 62) 3082-2910 calBCE (4370±25 BP, PSUAMS-3923) Okunevo, N-EBA burials (Okunevo-3,-5,-7) (Omsk Oblast, Muromtsevskiy District, Okunevo), Russia n/a (female) D4j

I6964 TYUMEN48 (IPOS_RAS_18-38, Okunevo, N-EBA burials (Okunevo-3,-5,-7), 1989, burial 172) 3013-2902 calBCE (4340±20 BP, PSUAMS-4850) Okunevo, N-EBA burials (Okunevo-3,-5,-7) (Omsk Oblast, Muromtsevskiy District, Okunevo), Russia Q-L940 U5a2

I6829 TYUMEN10 (IPOS_RAS_78-19, Borovyanka-17, 1999-2000, burial 83, ind. 2, skull F) 4214-3958 calBCE (5210±30 BP, PSUAMS-3920) Borovyanka-17 (Omsk Oblast, Bol'sherechenskiy District, Borovyanka), Russia n/a (female) C5b

RISE554.SG (CGG_2_011884, Afontova-Gora) AllentoftNature2015 1009-835 calBCE (2782±30 BP, OxA-31141) Afontova-Gora (Krasnoyarsk Krai, Krasnoyarsk City), Russia N-Y6503 F1b1b

I13768_d 818 (NBP27.11, Grave-1) 1213-1048 calBCE (2925±20 BP, PSUAMS-7115) Bayankhongor aimag, Ulziit sum, Muunit uul, Mongolia N-Y6503 D4j1

BOT15.SG Botai Excavation 15 3345-3025 calBCE (4474±37 BP, UBA-32663) Botai, Kazakhstan N-Y6503 R1b1

DA247.SG (Shamanka-2, burial 51) 5837-5660 calBCE (6856±40 BP, OxA-21526) Shamanka-2 (Irkutsk Oblast, Slyudyanskiy District, Shamanka cape), Russia N-Y6503 C4

I11107 (TSU_1736, Sosnovy-Mys, 1974)  Archaeological context range:6000-4000 BCE Sosnovy-Mys (Irkutsk Oblast, Ust'-Ilimskiy District, Kata, Sosnovy Island), Russia N-Y6503 A+152+16362+16189

DA247 from the Shamanka-2 site at the southwestern end of Lake Baikal is also quite ancient, but the bearers of the Early Neolithic Kitoi culture to which this specimen has been assigned may have gone extinct (cf. the lack of representatives of N-FT210118 anywhere but among Early Neolithic Kitoi people around the southwestern end of Lake Baikal). FTDNA has assigned DA247 (= Shamanka 247) more precisely to N-Y6503 > N-MF52704, which is also the more nearly extinct of the two known primary subclades of N-Y6503, and FTDNA estimates the TMRCA of N-Y6503 to be 12,934 (95% CI 15,217 - 10,987) ybp.

[CLTVTE]

Regarding other specimens of Shamanka_EN, “The deep population history of northern East Asia from the Late Pleistocene to the Holocene” observed that only one ancient specimen of Shamanka_EN, unrelated to yDNA N-M231, but belonging to mtDNA G2a1, was characterized by the additional amount of the northern (possibly Northern Siberia’s ANE-like) ancestry relative to the average regional local ANE ancestry, which may point to the arrival of the individual to Shamanka_EN via such a “Yakutia_pre-LNBA” location, as Yakutia’s Khatyrstyr Cave, which would explain the appearance of the additional female-mediated Yakutia ANE ancestry in Transbaikal_EMN_9-8K, which is closer to Yakutia’s eastern locations. However, all other Shamanka_EN’s mtDNA G2a1 specimens did not show any “additional pulse” of the northern Northern Siberia’s ANE-like ancestry in “The deep population history of northern East Asia from the Late Pleistocene to the Holocene”. Moreover, Northeast China’s ancient individuals, for example, AR14K, AR3.4K_outlier, AR7.3K_outlier, did not show the “additional pulse” of the northern Northern Siberia’s ANE-like ancestry as well in “The deep population history of northern East Asia from the Late Pleistocene to the Holocene”.

The Early Neolithic period’s Bianbian site from the Shandong Province of China yielded an ancient DNA specimen, belonging to yDNA N1-CTS582*, and yielded a pottery cauldron with peculiarities, which have been sometimes observed in the cauldrons of the Hemudu culture of the Lower Yangtze River basin of China. Which differing types of pottery the earlier yDNA O-M122 neighbors of the Bianbian site had produced? The distribution of such pottery types testifies the directions of different human migrations via the territory of Shandong to the territory of Northeast China.

Prior to the appearance of “The deep population history of northern East Asia from the Late Pleistocene to the Holocene”, the Western article “Genetic insights into the social organisation of the Avar period elite in the 7th century AD Carpathian Basin”, co-authored by Anna Szécsényi-Nagy, appeared in January, 2020.

Apparently, basing on some criteria, members of the Avar population’s elite were selected in “Genetic insights into the social organisation of the Avar period elite in the 7th century AD Carpathian Basin”. Their list can be seen at the end of this post.

It is striking that, for each member of the Avar elite, the mtDNA mutation T16311C! was reported in that article. The mtDNA mutation T16311C! is extremely widely distributed in Eurasia, but it is sometimes observed in mtDNA L2 in Africa. However, "Human population history at the crossroads of East and Southeast Asia since 11,000 years ago" presented the information against some attempts and dissociated the Eurasian carriers of the mtDNA mutation T16311C! from the population, participating in the formation of the West Africans. Moreover, in “Insights into human history from the first decade of ancient human genomics”, it was shown that West African ghost populations were of the initially African origin.

In “The deep population history of northern East Asia from the Late Pleistocene to the Holocene” and some other IVPP articles, it was inferred that the population, having carriers of the T16311C! mutation and contributing to the female part of the Avar elite, had the 3400-year-old AR3.4K_outlier as its member, while the 7300-year-old AR7.3K_outlier clustered very closely to AR3.4K_outlier in “The deep population history of northern East Asia from the Late Pleistocene to the Holocene”.

AR3.4K_outlier and AR7.3K_outlier were found in the Middle Songhua River basin in Northeast China, while the Jilin Province’s Zuojiashan site of the Zuojiashan culture, which interacted with the Zhaobaogou culture and later with the Hongshan culture of the West Liao River basin, was located only slightly farther to the south on the small Di’er Songhua tributary of the Songhua River. In “The deep population history of northern East Asia from the Late Pleistocene to the Holocene”, the “neighbouring” yDNA P/Q-F1096-related AR9.2K_outlier clustered differently on the PCA among even slightly more southern populations, but AR3.4K_outlier and AR7.3K_outlier could be modeled using even a much more southern Shandong Xiaojingshan specimen (the Shandong Bianbian’s neighbor), whereas yDNA P/Q-F1096-related AR9.2K_outlier could not be modeled in that way.

AR3.4K_outlier belonged to the China-specific branch of mtDNA D4b1a2a, which can have the T16311C! mutation in China. However, the IVPP articles suggest that mtDNA D4-related population may not be the ultimate source for the described population, whose members were carriers of the T16311C! mutation in China.

During the later period, the newer population have been contributing to the discussed area, and the Kingdom of Puyo formed after 3400 years ago from about the 2 century before Christ on the territory of the Jilin Province, including the mentioned Zuojiashan area. The modern yDNA N-F4205 (yDNA N1a1a1a1a3a) representative from China autosomally clustered among slightly more southern individuals, than the 3400-year-old AR3.4K_outlier did (in “The deep population history of northern East Asia from the Late Pleistocene to the Holocene”).

The careful analysis of Mark Hudson’s “The Linguistic Prehistory of Japan: Some Archaeological Speculations” from year 1994 should explain that the territory of the Kingdom of Puyo, adjacent to modern North Korea, should be crucial for the Western views on the beginning of the formation of a West Eurasia-derived Tungusic-Korean-Japanese branch of Altaic since the Palaeolithic period, including several possible incursions of bearers of such languages to Japan starting from the Early Jomon period and ending by the Yayoi expansion and early medieval expansions, whereas the Yayoi’s southern cultural element from China, arriving to South Korea, was alledgedly dominated by these Altaic-speaking populations, according to the Western views.

However, in “The deep population history of northern East Asia from the Late Pleistocene to the Holocene”, the 7300-year-old AR7.3K_outlier specimen, who also lived on the territory of the future Kingdom of Puyo, where AR3.4K_outlier was later born, participated in the genetic cline, which started from the Yangtze River basin’s individual and included an individual, whose ancestors were likely related to the population of the rice-farming Liangzhu culture. It points to the previously single (though quite ancient) shared origin of two populations: [1] one of populations of the future Kingdom of Puyo, dated to as early as 7300 years ago, which is comparable to the timing of continental influences on the Early Jomon; and [2] one of the populations, contributing to the formation of the Yayoi’s southern element from China. The absence of obvious Puyo-related male lineages (at least according to the yFull data) should point to the much more modest contribution of the Puyo-related component.

The western vector is another important vector for the distribution of individuals, distantly related to the AR3.4K_outlier. In “The deep population history of northern East Asia from the Late Pleistocene to the Holocene”, the AR3.4K_outlier’s connections revealed that the AR3.4K_outlier-related population may have had crucial interactions, leading to the formation of the now-rare mtDNA F1b1f lineage, one of cases of which is observed in the nearby Liaoning Province of China, where the Hongshan culture developed. “Ancient Mitogenomes Reveal the Origins and Genetic Structure of the Neolithic Shimao Population in Northern China” pointed that the mtDNA F1b1f lineage was also observed in the Stony Tunguska Evenks, whose modern male yDNA has non-typical yDNA frequencies for a Tungusic population, which points to founder effects and replacement of earlier yDNA lineages, while the remaining maternal gene pool of the Stony Tunguska Evenks combines mtDNA F1b1f and “Northeast China-related” mtDNA A12 (which was observed in a deeply diverged yDNA N-Z1979* individual) with mtDNA C4b and C4b1. mtDNA F1b1f became relatively widely distributed in Mongolia-related populations, but not in European populations, while some groups of Mongolia-related Kalmyks were also characterized by a small presence of the deeply diverged yDNA N-CTS6967*. Similarly, as early as reported Early Bronze Age Shamanka_EBA’s mtDNA F1b1b case (that is, older than 4000 years ago), the western “Baikalian” branch of mtDNA F1b1b already seems to be accompanied by yDNA Q-M242 individuals, whereas the appearance of yDNA N-F1419 in Khakassia, ancestral to modern yDNA N-F1419-related individuals in Khakassia, should have been accompanied by another clade of mtDNA F1b1 (among their other mtDNA lineages), according to the IVPP materials.

As for the linguistic affiliation of the mentioned Avar elite’s population, the medieval Szarvas inscription from the Late Avar period may provide some coordinates. One known translator of the Szarvas inscription, Gabor Vekony, offered the hypothetical reading of the Szarvas inscription and its translation as an inscription in Old Hungarian language, which is a Uralic language. Gabor Vekony’s critic and another known translator of the Szarvas inscription, Andras Rona-Tas pointed that the sound values of the Szarvas alphabet were unknown and offered a different reading and hypothetical translation as an inscription in a Turkic language, which is an Altaic language family. Since both readings of the same inscription were said to produce phonetically different results, it can be said that the language of the Szarvas inscription could contain a few words, which would be recognizable as the words of the Old Hungarian language, that is, one of Uralic languages, but alternatively the inscription could be read differently and thus contain differing words, which would be recognizable as the words of a Turkic language. Additionally, it was pointed that the too early age of the medieval Szarvas inscription is not compatible with the idea that this inscription could have been written in the Old Hungarian language.

Below are the lineages of the Avar elite from “Genetic insights into the social organisation of the Avar period elite in the 7th century AD Carpathian Basin”. As for the mtDNA R2+13500, the representative of an mtDNA R2+13500 was inferred to possess a Neolithic Iran affinity in “Bronze and Iron Age population movements underlie Xinjiang population history”, which may tentatively point to a Dravidian-related or Elamite-related affinity. As for the mtDNA T1a1, most cases were observed in the Indo-European-related populations, including the Xinjiang Tajik.

Sample Name AV1 Cemetery Csepel middle third of 7th century male mtDNA C4b6+T16311C! yDNA N1a1-M46 (N-Tat) probability 100,00% Y haplogroup by SNP data N1a1a1a ISOGG 1st January 2019 (combined yleafv1&v2): N1a1a1a:L708:7629512C→A; N~:Z4891:13646463G→A

Sample Name AV2 Cemetery Kunbábony middle third of 7th century male mtDNA D4j5a+T16311C! yDNA N1a1-M46 (N-Tat) probability 99,00% Y haplogroup by SNP data N* ISOGG 1st January 2019 (combined yleafv1&v2): N:CTS9920:19146735G→T

Sample Name AV3 Cemetery Békésszentandrás middle third of 7th century ? mtDNA D4j12+T16311C! yDNA - Y haplogroup by SNP data - ISOGG 1st January 2019 (combined yleafv1&v2):

Sample Name AV4 Cemetery Szarvas-Kovácshalom second half of 7th century male mtDNA D5b1+T16311C! yDNA Q1a F1096 probability 100,00% Y haplogroup by SNP data Q1a2a1a4a~ ISOGG 1st January 2019 (combined yleafv1&v2): Q1a2a1a4a~:YP791:8378658T→A; Q1a2a~:F4948:14366831C→T; Q1:M1155:21254696G→A

Sample Name AV5 Cemetery Szarvas-Kovácshalom second half of 7th century female mtDNA H5a2+T16311C! yDNA - Y haplogroup by SNP data - ISOGG 1st January 2019 (combined yleafv1&v2):

Sample Name AV6 Cemetery Szarvas-Kovácshalom 7th century female mtDNA D4i2+T16311C! yDNA - Y haplogroup by SNP data - ISOGG 1st January 2019 (combined yleafv1&v2):

Sample Name AV7 Cemetery Szarvas-Kovácshalom 7th century male mtDNA C4a1a4a+T16311C! yDNA Q1b1a3 M346>> L330 probability 100,00% Y haplogroup by SNP data Q1b1a3b1a~ ISOGG 1st January 2019 (combined yleafv1&v2): Q1b1a3b1a~:Z35973:17798122G→T; Q1b1a3:SK1943:8548403C→A; Q1b1a3:L330:17766807T→C; Q1b1:L213:8235033C→G; Q1b1:L55:19413335G→A; Q1b:CTS2450:14310345G→A

Sample Name AV8 Cemetery Szalkszentmárton first half of 7th century male mtDNA J1b1a1+146+T16311C! yDNA N1a1-M46 (N-Tat) probability 97,53% Y haplogroup by SNP data N* ISOGG 1st January 2019 (combined yleafv1&v2): N:F2968:19182708C→T

Sample Name AV10 Cemetery Kunszállás 7th-8th century female mtDNA U5b1b+T16311C! yDNA - Y haplogroup by SNP data - ISOGG 1st January 2019 (combined yleafv1&v2):

Sample Name AV13 Cemetery Kunszállás 7th-8th century male mtDNA C4a1a4+T16311C! yDNA N1a1-M46 (N-Tat) probability 100,00% Y haplogroup by SNP data N1a1a1a1a ISOGG 1st January 2019 (combined yleafv1&v2): N1a1a1a1a:Z4893:13678272A→T; N1a1a1a1:M2096:21495976G→A; NO1:K452^^:21447936T→C

Sample Name AV11 Cemetery Kunszállás 7th-8th century female mtDNA F1b1f+T16311C! yDNA - Y haplogroup by SNP data - ISOGG 1st January 2019 (combined yleafv1&v2):

Sample Name AV12 Cemetery Kunszállás second half of 7th century male mtDNA F1b1f+T16311C! yDNA N1a1-M46 (N-Tat) probability 100,00% Y haplogroup by SNP data N1a1a1a1a3a (N-F4205) ISOGG 1st January 2019 (combined yleafv1&v2): N1a1a1a1a3a:FGC29201:18236584A→C; N1a1a1a1a:L392:6753265A→C; N1a1a1a1a:CTS5679:16427700A→G; N~:M2274:22168522G→A; N:CTS5912:16549877G→A; NO:E482:21797754T→C

Sample Name KSZ37 Cemetery Kunszállás 7th-8th century male mtDNA - yDNA N1a1-M46 (N-Tat) probability 100,00% Y haplogroup by SNP data no analysis performed ISOGG 1st January 2019 (combined yleafv1&v2): -

Sample Name AV9 Cemetery Kunszállás 7th-8th century female mtDNA T1a1+@152+T16311C! yDNA - Y haplogroup by SNP data - ISOGG 1st January 2019 (combined yleafv1&v2):

Sample Name AV15 Cemetery Kunszállás 8th century male mtDNA C4a1a4+T16311C! yDNA N1a1-M46 (N-Tat) probability 100,00% Y haplogroup by SNP data N1a1a1a1a ISOGG 1st January 2019 (combined yleafv1&v2): N1a1a1a1a:L392:6753265A→C; N~:FGC10745:9995652A→G; NO1:CTS9775:19065445A→G

Sample Name AV14 Cemetery Kunszállás second half of 8th century male mtDNA T1a1+@152+T16311C! yDNA N1a1-M46 (N-Tat) probability 100,00% Y haplogroup by SNP data N1a1a1a1a ISOGG 1st January 2019 (combined yleafv1&v2): N1a1a1a1a:CTS439:6751777G→C; N1a1a1a1a:M1996:6630658C→T; N1a:Z4880:10000477G→T; N~:M2143:7631033A→G; N~:L393:6753459G→T; N~:CTS7891:17726918C→A; N:M231:15469724G→A

Sample Name AV21 Cemetery Kunpeszér middle third of 7th century male mtDNA F1b1b+T16311C! yDNA N1a1-M46 (N-Tat) probability 100,00% Y haplogroup by SNP data N1a1a1~ (N-F1419) ISOGG 1st January 2019 (combined yleafv1&v2): N1a1a1~:CTS7728:17632471:G→C; NO1:Z4896:13850201G→A

Sample Name AV17 Cemetery Kunpeszér 7th century male mtDNA H8a1+T16311C! yDNA N1a1-M46 (N-Tat) probability 100,00% Y haplogroup by SNP data N1a1a1a1a ISOGG 1st January 2019 (combined yleafv1&v2): N1a1a1a1a:Z4893:13678272A→T; N~:M2272:21807381A→G; N~:M2271:21788031G→T

Sample Name AV16 Cemetery Kunpeszér 7th century female mtDNA U5a1+@16192+T16311C! yDNA - Y haplogroup by SNP data - ISOGG 1st January 2019 (combined yleafv1&v2):

Sample Name AV22 Cemetery Kunpeszér middle third of 7th century male mtDNA M7c1b2b+T16311C! yDNA N1a1-M46 (N-Tat) 100,00% Y haplogroup by SNP data N1a1a1a1a3a ISOGG 1st January 2019 (combined yleafv1&v2): N1a1a1a1a3a:Y16310:2889504T→G; N1a1a1a1a:CTS10570:19550228C→A; N~:M2271:21788031G→T; N:F2783:18592273G→C; N:CTS4082:15382221A→C; N:CTS3982:15309390C→T

Sample Name AV20 Cemetery Kunpeszér middle third of 7th century ? mtDNA (M7c1b2b)* yDNA - Y haplogroup by SNP data - ISOGG 1st January 2019 (combined yleafv1&v2):

Sample Name AV18 Cemetery Kunpeszér middle third of 7th century female mtDNA R2+13500+T16311C! yDNA - Y haplogroup by SNP data - ISOGG 1st January 2019 (combined yleafv1&v2):

Sample Name RC26 Cemetery Kunpeszér 7th century male mtDNA D4j+(16286)+T16311C! yDNA N1a1-M46 (N-Tat) probability 100,00% Y haplogroup by SNP data ambiguous result ISOGG 1st January 2019 (combined yleafv1&v2):

Sample Name AV19 Cemetery Petőfiszállás middle third of 7th century male mtDNA Z1a1+T16311C! yDNA N1a1-M46 (N-Tat) probability 100,00% Y haplogroup by SNP data N1a1a1a1a3a (N-F4205) ISOGG 1st January 2019 (combined yleafv1&v2): N1a1a1a1a3a:Y16327:18592814T→A; N1:CTS11448:23115653G→A; N:CTS6183:16714685G→A; N:M231:15469724G→A

Sample Name HC9 Cemetery Székkutas-Kápolna dűlő end of 7- early 8th century male mtDNA T1a1b+T16311C! yDNA R1a probability 63,02% Y haplogroup by SNP data P1 ISOGG 1st January 2019 (combined yleafv1&v2): P1: P281:18964263A→G

Sample Name AV23 Cemetery Kecskemét-Sallai út middle third of 7th century male mtDNA Y1a1+T16311C! yDNA N1a1-M46 (N-Tat) probability 100,00% Y haplogroup by SNP data N1a1a1a1a ISOGG 1st January 2019 (combined yleafv1&v2): N1a1a1a1a:Z4893:13678272A→T; N1:M2153:8312279T→A; N~:F6765:13805486C→T; N:M231:15469724G→A

[Zelto]

Unveiling Hunnic legacy: Decoding elite presence in Poland through a unique child’s burial with modified cranium 
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/ar...9X24001913

The article is behind a paywall, but individual II with skull deformation; and interred with gold/silver objects was Y-hg N. The 'East Eurasian' Y-haplogroups associated with Hunnic burials so far, have been predominantly R1a-Z93 and Q. He clusters closely with other Hunnic/Nomad samples from Kazakhstan in the PCA (predominantly 'East Euraisan'; ~25% 'West Eurasian').

Individual I was entirely 'West Euraisan' and belonged to I1.

[Vinitharya]

It seems like N1 made the same trek from Northeast Asia through Siberia and into Eastern Europe that R1 made, though many millennia later.