Genetic Genealogy & Ancient DNA (DISCUSSION ONLY)

[Antoni123]

Where can I find information about MoedlingAdGS_AvarPeriod:MGS017.A0101

[pegasus]

The Abashevo paper from the title page but its in Russian , I tried translating but its so messy.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication...revnej_DNK

[Riverman]

New (?) samples from Late Antiquity Dalmatia:
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/...94056v1?ct

Bioarchaeological Perspectives on Late Antiquity in Dalmatia: Paleogenetic, Dietary, and Population Studies of the Hvar Radošević burial site
Abstract
Late Antiquity Dalmatia was a time and place of political unrest in the Roman Empire that influenced the lives of the people living in that region. The Late Antique burial site of Hvar – Radošević, spanning the 3rd to 5th centuries, is located on the Croatian Dalmatian island of Hvar. Given the time frame and its location on a busy marine trade route, study of this burial site offers us a glimpse into the lives of the Late Antique population living on this island. It comprises 33 individuals, with 17 buried within a confined grave tomb, and the remaining individuals buried in separate locations in the tomb's proximity. Our objective was to provide new perspectives on the lives of people on the island during those times by studying ancestry, population structure, possible differences within the buried population, dietary habits, and general health. Analysis of the ancestral origins of the individuals buried at Hvar – Radošević revealed a diverse population reflective of the era's genetic variability. The identification of genetic outliers suggests affiliations with distinct regions of the Roman Empire, possibly linked to trade routes associated with the Late Antique port in ancient Hvar. Stable isotope ratio analysis (δ13C and δ15N) indicated a diet mainly consisting of C3 plants, with minimal consumption of marine foods. High childhood mortality rates, physiological stress markers, and dental diseases suggest a low quality of life in the population. Assessment of kinship and dietary patterns revealed no discernible distinctions between individuals buried within the tomb and those buried outside, indicative of an absence of differential burial practices based on social status and familial ties.
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/...94056v1?ct=

https://genarchivist.com/showthread.php?...8#pid19068

I'm particularly interested in those two:
I35009 G1 HR_G1_s male 9m-1y infant Not related cribra orbitalia -16,2 12,7 No genetic data E1b1b1a1b1
I34296 G14 HR_G14_a male 30-40 middle adult Not related trauma -18,7 7,7 HV11 E1b1b1a1b1

They have good coverage, which means it should be possible to determine their haplogroup more downstream I guess. Probably one of the capable guys can take a look? Would be great.

Other haplogroups:
E1b1b1a1b1
J2a1a1a2b2a3b1a1b1a2~
E1b1b1a1b1
J2b2a1a1a1a1a1a
J1a2a1a1~
J2a1a1b2a1b1b2c~
J2a1a4b
E1b1a1a1a1c1b2a2 (West African E-Z6025?)
J2a1a1a2b1b
G2a2b2a1a1b2

[alexfritz]

pretty much the usual

Show Content

SpoilerMost of the individuals from Hvar (20 out of 33) were successfully modelled with combinations of proximal
populations in Model 3. Here, we observe continued patterns from the Croatian Iron Age and Albanian Bronze
and  Iron  Age,  however  we  also  observe  the  influx  of  Roman Byzantine  ancestry (WestAnatolia_Roman_Byzantine and SoutheastTurkey_Byzantine). The nonadult individuals from Family B
(I33809 -Grave 12-S1 and I33893 -Grave 12-S2), could only be modelled with East Mediterranean ancestry (Figure 2; Supplementary Table S8), pointing towards being genetic outliers in Hvar.

except for G12_A1 who gets a 100% Albania BA/IA (J1a2a1a1~) and G12_S2 who gets 100% wAnatolia Rom/Byz whereas the model for _S3 (J2a1a1a2b1b) as 100% seTurkey Byz actually fails as such (p 0,01); but all others fall into that cline incl both wAnataolia Rom/Byz or seTurkey Byz as source ancestries; other than that G19 has a pull towards Africa/nAfrica (>60% Morocco_LN) and is not incl in the proximal models

at this point in the data i think it is def not possible to get a Roman pop whether in Italy or the Balkan without a major wAnatolia/seTurkey influx and that as early as 0-200 CE (cf Naissus R6769 26-126 calCE)

[Riverman]

pretty much the usual

Show Content

SpoilerMost of the individuals from Hvar (20 out of 33) were successfully modelled with combinations of proximal
populations in Model 3. Here, we observe continued patterns from the Croatian Iron Age and Albanian Bronze
and  Iron  Age,  however  we  also  observe  the  influx  of  Roman Byzantine  ancestry (WestAnatolia_Roman_Byzantine and SoutheastTurkey_Byzantine). The nonadult individuals from Family B
(I33809 -Grave 12-S1 and I33893 -Grave 12-S2), could only be modelled with East Mediterranean ancestry (Figure 2; Supplementary Table S8), pointing towards being genetic outliers in Hvar.

except for G12_A1 who gets a 100% Albania BA/IA (J1a2a1a1~) and G12_S2 who gets 100% wAnatolia Rom/Byz whereas the model for _S3 (J2a1a1a2b1b) as 100% seTurkey Byz actually fails as such (p 0,01); but all others fall into that cline incl both wAnataolia Rom/Byz or seTurkey Byz as source ancestries; other than that G19 has a pull towards Africa/nAfrica (>60% Morocco_LN) and is not incl in the proximal models

at this point in the data i think it is def not possible to get a Roman pop whether in Italy or the Balkan without a major wAnatolia/seTurkey influx and that as early as 0-200 CE (cf Naissus R6769 26-126 calCE)

I agree, but this local population seems to be particularly Aegeo-Anatolian/East Balkan to East Mediterranean, with little local West Balkan ancestry. I doubt that all of mainland Dalmatia would be the same, especially if looking at the yDNA.

[RCO]

teepeanBioarchaeological Perspectives on Late Antiquity in Dalmatia: Paleogenetic, Dietary, and Population Studies of the Hvar Radošević burial site

Abstract

Late Antiquity Dalmatia was a time and place of political unrest in the Roman Empire that influenced the lives of the people living in that region. The Late Antique burial site of Hvar – Radošević, spanning the 3rd to 5th centuries, is located on the Croatian Dalmatian island of Hvar. Given the time frame and its location on a busy marine trade route, study of this burial site offers us a glimpse into the lives of the Late Antique population living on this island. It comprises 33 individuals, with 17 buried within a confined grave tomb, and the remaining individuals buried in separate locations in the tomb's proximity. Our objective was to provide new perspectives on the lives of people on the island during those times by studying ancestry, population structure, possible differences within the buried population, dietary habits, and general health. Analysis of the ancestral origins of the individuals buried at Hvar – Radošević revealed a diverse population reflective of the era's genetic variability. The identification of genetic outliers suggests affiliations with distinct regions of the Roman Empire, possibly linked to trade routes associated with the Late Antique port in ancient Hvar. Stable isotope ratio analysis (δ13C and δ15N) indicated a diet mainly consisting of C3 plants, with minimal consumption of marine foods. High childhood mortality rates, physiological stress markers, and dental diseases suggest a low quality of life in the population. Assessment of kinship and dietary patterns revealed no discernible distinctions between individuals buried within the tomb and those buried outside, indicative of an absence of differential burial practices based on social status and familial ties.

https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/...94056v1?ct=


Identifiers Haplogroups
Genetic ID Grave Isotope ID mt haplogroup Y chromosome haplogroup
I35009 G1 HR_G1_s No genetic data E1b1b1a1b1
I34297 G10 HR_G10_s U5b1b J2a1a1a2b2a3b1a1b1a2~
I34292 G11 HR_G11_s U5b1b
failed G13 HR_G13_s No genetic data
I34296 G14 HR_G14_a HV11 E1b1b1a1b1
I34301 G15 HR_G15_s No genetic data
I34298 G16 HR_G16_a No genetic data
failed G17 HR_G17_a No genetic data
I34982 G18 HR_G18_s No genetic data
I34981 G19 HR_G19_s No genetic data
I34299 G2 HR_G2_a No genetic data
I34294 G20 HR_G20_s W3a1 J2b2a1a1a1a1a1a
I33811 G3 HR_G3_a U5b1b
failed G6 HR_G6_s No genetic data
I33812 G7 HR_G7_a U1a3
I35082 G11b / No genetic data
I34287 G12 nonadult p 5 / No genetic data
I33889 G12-A1 / H35 J1a2a1a1~
failed G12-A10 / No genetic data
I34291 G12-A12 / No genetic data
I34290 G12-A13 / U8b1a1
I33885 G12-A2 / H3k
I33808 G12-A3 / H3k J2a1a1b2a1b1b2c~
failed G12-A4 / No genetic data
failed G12-A5 / No genetic data
I33888 G12-A6 / H9a J2a1a4b
I33886 G12-A7 / HV E1b1a1a1a1c1b2a2
failed G12-A9 / No genetic data
I33809 G12-S1 / HV12b1 J2a1a1a2b1b
I33893 G12-S2 / H5a3a2
I33890 G12-S3 / R0a G2a2b2a1a1b2
I33891 G12-S4 / K1c1
failed G12, A8 / No genetic data

[ChrisR]

New (?) samples from Late Antiquity Dalmatia:

Bioarchaeological Perspectives on Late Antiquity in Dalmatia: Paleogenetic, Dietary, and Population Studies of the Hvar Radošević burial site
Abstract
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/...94056v1?ct=

https://genarchivist.com/showthread.php?...8#pid19068

I'm particularly interested in those two:
I35009 G1 HR_G1_s male 9m-1y infant Not related cribra orbitalia -16,2 12,7 No genetic data E1b1b1a1b1
I34296 G14 HR_G14_a male 30-40 middle adult Not related trauma -18,7 7,7 HV11 E1b1b1a1b1

They have good coverage, which means it should be possible to determine their haplogroup more downstream I guess. Probably one of the capable guys can take a look? Would be great.

Other haplogroups:
E1b1b1a1b1
J2a1a1a2b2a3b1a1b1a2~
E1b1b1a1b1
J2b2a1a1a1a1a1a
J1a2a1a1~
J2a1a1b2a1b1b2c~
J2a1a4b
E1b1a1a1a1c1b2a2 (West African E-Z6025?)
J2a1a1a2b1b
G2a2b2a1a1b2

I'm irritated that ancient DNA studies continue to use the hierarchical HG name format and do not add a defining SNP of the terminally found Hg. With a quick search I did not find the reference used. Assuming ISOGG is the reference I asked a LLM to pull and add the defining SNPs. This was the (wrong?) response:

Show Content

Spoiler
I33886 E1b1a1a1a1c1b2a2-V65
I35009 E1b1b1a1b1-PF1942
I34296 E1b1b1a1b1-PF1942
I33890 G2a2b2a1a1b2-M340
I33889 J1a2a1a1~-L621
I33809 J2a1a1a2b1b-L27
I34297 J2a1a1a2b2a3b1a1b1a2~-L106
I33808 J2a1a1b2a1b1b2c~-Z2446
I33888 J2a1a4b-L199
I34294 J2b2a1a1a1a1a1a-M368

I checked it for J in https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1...1603190133 and the LLM (and paper?) seems to not use the 2019-2020 def:
I33889 J1a2a1a1~-PF7264, ZS4393
I33809 J2a1a1a2b1b-M319, FGC17665/Y5011/Z17189, S15367/Z17186, S17661/V5821/Z17188, ...
I34297 J2a1a1a2b2a3b1a1b1a2~-Y23162 (under M67>Z7671>Y11200>Z30677)
I33808 J2a1a1b2a1b1b2c~-PH185 (under L24>L70>M137)
I33888 J2a1a4b- ?
I34294 J2b2a1a1a1a1a1a-Z631, Z639 (under L283>Z1297, Z1298)

Since J2a1a4b does not exist in the 2019-2020 def: has anyone figured out if this is a name error and the rest of the defining SNPs should be correct?

[jfdelajara]

New (?) samples from Late Antiquity Dalmatia:

Bioarchaeological Perspectives on Late Antiquity in Dalmatia: Paleogenetic, Dietary, and Population Studies of the Hvar Radošević burial site
Abstract
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/...94056v1?ct=

https://genarchivist.com/showthread.php?...8#pid19068

I'm particularly interested in those two:
I35009 G1 HR_G1_s male 9m-1y infant Not related cribra orbitalia -16,2 12,7 No genetic data E1b1b1a1b1
I34296 G14 HR_G14_a male 30-40 middle adult Not related trauma -18,7 7,7 HV11 E1b1b1a1b1

They have good coverage, which means it should be possible to determine their haplogroup more downstream I guess. Probably one of the capable guys can take a look? Would be great.

Other haplogroups:
E1b1b1a1b1
J2a1a1a2b2a3b1a1b1a2~
E1b1b1a1b1
J2b2a1a1a1a1a1a
J1a2a1a1~
J2a1a1b2a1b1b2c~
J2a1a4b
E1b1a1a1a1c1b2a2 (West African E-Z6025?)
J2a1a1a2b1b
G2a2b2a1a1b2

I'm irritated that ancient DNA studies continue to use the hierarchical HG name format and do not add a defining SNP of the terminally found Hg. With a quick search I did not find the reference used. Assuming ISOGG is the reference I asked a LLM to pull and add the defining SNPs. This was the (wrong?) response:

Show Content

Spoiler
I33886 E1b1a1a1a1c1b2a2-V65
I35009 E1b1b1a1b1-PF1942
I34296 E1b1b1a1b1-PF1942
I33890 G2a2b2a1a1b2-M340
I33889 J1a2a1a1~-L621
I33809 J2a1a1a2b1b-L27
I34297 J2a1a1a2b2a3b1a1b1a2~-L106
I33808 J2a1a1b2a1b1b2c~-Z2446
I33888 J2a1a4b-L199
I34294 J2b2a1a1a1a1a1a-M368

I checked it for J in https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1...1603190133 and the LLM (and paper?) seems to not use the 2019-2020 def:
I33889 J1a2a1a1~-PF7264, ZS4393
I33809 J2a1a1a2b1b-M319, FGC17665/Y5011/Z17189, S15367/Z17186, S17661/V5821/Z17188, ...
I34297 J2a1a1a2b2a3b1a1b1a2~-Y23162 (under M67>Z7671>Y11200>Z30677)
I33808 J2a1a1b2a1b1b2c~-PH185 (under L24>L70>M137)
I33888 J2a1a4b- ?
I34294 J2b2a1a1a1a1a1a-Z631, Z639 (under L283>Z1297, Z1298)

Since J2a1a4b does not exist in the 2019-2020 def: has anyone figured out if this is a name error and the rest of the defining SNPs should be correct?

Nice to see another J2L70 on Late Antiquity Southern Europe. Is interesting to notice that under this Specific clade, J2 PH185, today there is a relevant presence on the Adriatic shores of Marche and Abruzzo, in Central Italy (Ancona and Chieti provinces) . https://www.yfull.com/tree/J-Y163297/

[elflock]

Riverman

pretty much the usual

Show Content

SpoilerMost of the individuals from Hvar (20 out of 33) were successfully modelled with combinations of proximal
populations in Model 3. Here, we observe continued patterns from the Croatian Iron Age and Albanian Bronze
and  Iron  Age,  however  we  also  observe  the  influx  of  Roman Byzantine  ancestry (WestAnatolia_Roman_Byzantine and SoutheastTurkey_Byzantine). The nonadult individuals from Family B
(I33809 -Grave 12-S1 and I33893 -Grave 12-S2), could only be modelled with East Mediterranean ancestry (Figure 2; Supplementary Table S8), pointing towards being genetic outliers in Hvar.

except for G12_A1 who gets a 100% Albania BA/IA (J1a2a1a1~) and G12_S2 who gets 100% wAnatolia Rom/Byz whereas the model for _S3 (J2a1a1a2b1b) as 100% seTurkey Byz actually fails as such (p 0,01); but all others fall into that cline incl both wAnataolia Rom/Byz or seTurkey Byz as source ancestries; other than that G19 has a pull towards Africa/nAfrica (>60% Morocco_LN) and is not incl in the proximal models

at this point in the data i think it is def not possible to get a Roman pop whether in Italy or the Balkan without a major wAnatolia/seTurkey influx and that as early as 0-200 CE (cf Naissus R6769 26-126 calCE)

I agree, but this local population seems to be particularly Aegeo-Anatolian/East Balkan to East Mediterranean, with little local West Balkan ancestry. I doubt that all of mainland Dalmatia would be the same, especially if looking at the yDNA.

They're Middleeastern. There's nothing about these J2a-M410+ and J1a clades suggesting a Greek/Aegean connection. The same pattern is observable in all of the Roman era Balkans and other parts of the Roman Empire. As is the Roman mediated increase of E1b (including "European" clade V13) in the Western Balkans.

[jfdelajara]

Riverman

pretty much the usual

Show Content

SpoilerMost of the individuals from Hvar (20 out of 33) were successfully modelled with combinations of proximal
populations in Model 3. Here, we observe continued patterns from the Croatian Iron Age and Albanian Bronze
and  Iron  Age,  however  we  also  observe  the  influx  of  Roman Byzantine  ancestry (WestAnatolia_Roman_Byzantine and SoutheastTurkey_Byzantine). The nonadult individuals from Family B
(I33809 -Grave 12-S1 and I33893 -Grave 12-S2), could only be modelled with East Mediterranean ancestry (Figure 2; Supplementary Table S8), pointing towards being genetic outliers in Hvar.

except for G12_A1 who gets a 100% Albania BA/IA (J1a2a1a1~) and G12_S2 who gets 100% wAnatolia Rom/Byz whereas the model for _S3 (J2a1a1a2b1b) as 100% seTurkey Byz actually fails as such (p 0,01); but all others fall into that cline incl both wAnataolia Rom/Byz or seTurkey Byz as source ancestries; other than that G19 has a pull towards Africa/nAfrica (>60% Morocco_LN) and is not incl in the proximal models

at this point in the data i think it is def not possible to get a Roman pop whether in Italy or the Balkan without a major wAnatolia/seTurkey influx and that as early as 0-200 CE (cf Naissus R6769 26-126 calCE)

I agree, but this local population seems to be particularly Aegeo-Anatolian/East Balkan to East Mediterranean, with little local West Balkan ancestry. I doubt that all of mainland Dalmatia would be the same, especially if looking at the yDNA.

They're Middleeastern. There's nothing about these J2a-M410+ and J1a clades suggesting a Greek/Aegean connection. The same pattern is observable in all of the Roman era Balkans and other parts of the Roman Empire. As is the Roman mediated increase of E1b (including "European" clade V13) in the Western Grave 12 as A3, from the paper: " Furthermore, individuals from Grave 15, Grave 16, and specific individuals from Gra

Regarding specifically the J2L70 , Genetic ID I33808, identify in Grave 12 as A3, from the paper: " Furthermore, individuals from Grave 15, Grave 16, and specific individuals from Grave12 (notably, A3 and S4) were primarily or entirely modelled with an Aegean ancestry". Considering this statement,  a Greek/Aegean ancient path for this individual should be consider.

[corrigendum]

Riverman

I agree, but this local population seems to be particularly Aegeo-Anatolian/East Balkan to East Mediterranean, with little local West Balkan ancestry. I doubt that all of mainland Dalmatia would be the same, especially if looking at the yDNA.

They're Middleeastern. There's nothing about these J2a-M410+ and J1a clades suggesting a Greek/Aegean connection. The same pattern is observable in all of the Roman era Balkans and other parts of the Roman Empire. As is the Roman mediated increase of E1b (including "European" clade V13) in the Western Grave 12 as A3, from the paper: " Furthermore, individuals from Grave 15, Grave 16, and specific individuals from Gra

Regarding specifically the J2L70 , Genetic ID I33808, identify in Grave 12 as A3, from the paper: " Furthermore, individuals from Grave 15, Grave 16, and specific individuals from Grave12 (notably, A3 and S4) were primarily or entirely modelled with an Aegean ancestry". Considering this statement,  a Greek/Aegean ancient path for this individual should be consider.

According to the paper he can be modeled as 100% WestAnatolia_Roman_Byzantine, but their models are confusing and most of them are failing models, hence it's better to check them via G25 or via our own qpADM models when the samples get published.

Hvar is a peculiar site. It was an ancient Greek colony and later a Roman colony, so it makes sense that we'll get high diversity in the settlement.

I don't think that there's much evidence about J-L70 overall, but it seems to have closer a connection to Anatolian and Levantine populations (perhaps Hebrews?).

[jfdelajara]

They're Middleeastern. There's nothing about these J2a-M410+ and J1a clades suggesting a Greek/Aegean connection. The same pattern is observable in all of the Roman era Balkans and other parts of the Roman Empire. As is the Roman mediated increase of E1b (including "European" clade V13) in the Western Grave 12 as A3, from the paper: " Furthermore, individuals from Grave 15, Grave 16, and specific individuals from Gra

Regarding specifically the J2L70 , Genetic ID I33808, identify in Grave 12 as A3, from the paper: " Furthermore, individuals from Grave 15, Grave 16, and specific individuals from Grave12 (notably, A3 and S4) were primarily or entirely modelled with an Aegean ancestry". Considering this statement,  a Greek/Aegean ancient path for this individual should be consider.

According to the paper he can be modeled as 100% WestAnatolia_Roman_Byzantine, but their models are confusing and most of them are failing models, hence it's better to check them via G25 or via our own qpADM models when the samples get published.

Hvar is a peculiar site. It was an ancient Greek colony and later a Roman colony, so it makes sense that we'll get high diversity in the settlement.

I don't think that there's much evidence about J-L70 overall, but it seems to have closer a connection to Anatolian and Levantine populations (perhaps Hebrews?).

Anatolian perhaps, but not levantine. Paleo-Genetics shows almost all ancient samples of J2L70 were found in Roman or Byzantine contexts (Italy, Byzantine Anatolia, Serbia and now Croatia). The others were Avars in hungary ( with local autosomal), a Viking in Sweden and a Visigothic in northern Spain. Modern Middle Eastern have in most cases a late antiquity/middle ages MRCA, so is difficult to make conclusions from that fact. Let's wait for further ancient samples, to help us to have a clearer picture.

[alexfritz]

Riverman

pretty much the usual

Show Content

SpoilerMost of the individuals from Hvar (20 out of 33) were successfully modelled with combinations of proximal
populations in Model 3. Here, we observe continued patterns from the Croatian Iron Age and Albanian Bronze
and  Iron  Age,  however  we  also  observe  the  influx  of  Roman Byzantine  ancestry (WestAnatolia_Roman_Byzantine and SoutheastTurkey_Byzantine). The nonadult individuals from Family B
(I33809 -Grave 12-S1 and I33893 -Grave 12-S2), could only be modelled with East Mediterranean ancestry (Figure 2; Supplementary Table S8), pointing towards being genetic outliers in Hvar.

except for G12_A1 who gets a 100% Albania BA/IA (J1a2a1a1~) and G12_S2 who gets 100% wAnatolia Rom/Byz whereas the model for _S3 (J2a1a1a2b1b) as 100% seTurkey Byz actually fails as such (p 0,01); but all others fall into that cline incl both wAnataolia Rom/Byz or seTurkey Byz as source ancestries; other than that G19 has a pull towards Africa/nAfrica (>60% Morocco_LN) and is not incl in the proximal models

at this point in the data i think it is def not possible to get a Roman pop whether in Italy or the Balkan without a major wAnatolia/seTurkey influx and that as early as 0-200 CE (cf Naissus R6769 26-126 calCE)

I agree, but this local population seems to be particularly Aegeo-Anatolian/East Balkan to East Mediterranean, with little local West Balkan ancestry. I doubt that all of mainland Dalmatia would be the same, especially if looking at the yDNA.

They're Middleeastern. There's nothing about these J2a-M410+ and J1a clades suggesting a Greek/Aegean connection. The same pattern is observable in all of the Roman era Balkans and other parts of the Roman Empire. As is the Roman mediated increase of E1b (including "European" clade V13) in the Western Balkans.

the J1a clade in specifics belongs to G12_A1 who gets in both proximals a one-way fit with Albania BA/IA or in the distal a 62 ANF + 38 YAM fit, thus neither a sign of the Near East; the Aegean BA/IA ref does feature as a source in the proximal Model 2 but the paper also mentions that 'these individuals could also be modelled without the Aegean ancestry component' so that does remain a bit flimsy; nonetheless the influx of a wAnatolian source seems to be a now stable theme

Show Content

SpoilerThe Roman Empire did, however, stimulate demographic change in the Balkans. In this early period, ~1/3 of the individuals (15 of the 45) fall beyond the Balkan clines in PCA (Figures 1C and S4) but close to Near Easterners and can be modeled as deriving their ancestry predominantly from Roman/Byzantine populations from western Anatolia and, in one case, from Northern Levantine groups (Figure 2A;Data S2, Table 6).

Most of these individuals were excavated at four different Viminacium necropolises, but we also found them at other urban centers such as Tragurium (Trogir) and Iader (Zadar). A very strong demographic shift toward Anatolia is also evident in Rome and central Italy during the same period15,25
Paper

in Fig1 they mention that Hvar-Radosevic dates to the mid 4th - early 6th c. based on Viskovic 2021, but that seems to be revised in Viskovic 2023 to the 'Late antique graves from the end of 4th and beginning of the 5th century' with the oldest layer of Roman town being radiocarbon dated to ~150-250 calCE - paper; overall its a real good site as it reflects the common pop of the time with simple graves and typical grave goods 'ceramic jugs and lamps, glass bottles and vessels, money and other small utensils'

[elflock]

@alexfritz I was talking about uniparentals in the data set. And they are definitely Middleeastern. Their first attestation in the Balkans is in the Imperial Roman era and coupled with MENA auDNA. J1a-PF7264 is not Paleo-Balkan, neither by phylogeny nor aDNA coverage.    

[pelop]

They're Middleeastern. There's nothing about these J2a-M410+ and J1a clades suggesting a Greek/Aegean connection. The same pattern is observable in all of the Roman era Balkans and other parts of the Roman Empire. As is the Roman mediated increase of E1b (including "European" clade V13) in the Western Balkans.

The branches are of Middle Eastern origin but there's no indication that the inhabitants of Hvar were recent migrants from the Middle East or that they would identify (and be identified) as anything other than Romans. Dalmatian Romance speakers most likely descended from populations like this one.

J1a-PF7264 is not Paleo-Balkan, neither by phylogeny nor aDNA coverage.

It's not paleo-Balkan and yet it has a Balkan-like autosomal profile. And the individual with central European G2a has an Eastern Mediterranean-like autosomal profile. We've seen similar cases of "mismatching" Y DNA and autosomal profiles in Olalde et al 2023 and elsewhere.