# Population Genetics > mtDNA Haplogroups >  Full mtDNA sequences of the Poles, Czechs and Ukrainians

## Maciamo

Here is a very interesting study of Slavic mtDNA using complete mitochondrial genomes : The History of Slavs Inferred from Complete Mitochondrial Genome Sequences, Marta Mielnik-Sikorska et al.

It had been a long time since we hadn't seen mtDNA studies worth mentioning. 




> Detailed analysis of complete mtDNAs allowed us to identify a number of lineages that seem specific for Central and Eastern Europe (H5a1f, H5a2, H5a1r, H5a1s, H5b4, H5e1a, H5u1, some subbranches of H5a1a and H6a1a9). Some of them could possibly be traced back to at least ~4 kya, which indicates that some of the ancestors of today's Slavs (Poles, Czechs, Slovaks, Ukrainians and Russians) inhabited areas of Central and Eastern Europe much earlier than it was estimated on the basis of archaeological and historical data.


The Slavic invasions would not have taken place 4000 years ago, but very similar R1a populations inhabited Eastern and Central Europe since the Corded Ware Culture, which started expanding nearly 5000 years ago. Therefore it would be more appropriate to refer to these H5 and H6 lineages as Corded Ware, or Proto-Balto-Slavic, rather than Slavic.




> We also sequenced entire mitochondrial genomes of several non-European lineages (A, C, D, G, L) found in contemporary populations of Poland and Ukraine. The analysis of these haplogroups confirms the presence of Siberian (C5c1, A8a1) and Ashkenazi-specific (L2a1l2a) mtDNA lineages in Slavic populations. Moreover, we were able to pinpoint some lineages which could possibly reflect the relatively recent contacts of Slavs with nomadic Altaic peoples (C4a1a, G2a, D5a2a1a1).


The authors mention the Huns, Avars, and Mongols as potential Altaic tribes who mixed with the Slavs, and I agree with that. In total, Altaic mtDNA represents only 0.6% of the 646 samples tested. That's considerably less than the percentage of Y-haplogroups C and Q combined. This is to be expected since the ruling Hunnic or Mongolian class would have procreated more with local women than with "imported" ones from Asia. The same scenario happened with the Indo-Europeans. Men migrate to conquer new lands and take wives and concubines among the defeated populations; women mostly stay where they are.

----------


## LeBrok

Great find, and your comments make sense, thanks.

----------


## dodona

the east Asian mitochondrial DNA lineages in slavonics doesn't make me wonder. Slavs all are significantly mixed with east Asians.

----------


## MOESAN

> the east Asian mitochondrial DNA lineages in slavonics doesn't make me wonder. Slavs all are significantly mixed with east Asians.


I agree but only partially with you: or I prefer to precise:
some today (current) Slavic populations show some east asian genetic component: but as a whole, this presence is very very light, and it depends on places (N-E Russian compared to W Poles, by instance.
that said, I appalud at the Maciamo 's reading of the survey in cause

----------


## zanipolo

> I agree but only partially with you: or I prefer to precise:
> some today (current) Slavic populations show some east asian genetic component: but as a whole, this presence is very very light, and it depends on places (N-E Russian compared to W Poles, by instance.
> that said, I appalud at the Maciamo 's reading of the survey in cause


err...Russians are not ethnic Slavs they are linguistic Slavs ....Russians have N ( and other markers) as part of their populace, ethnic Slavs have no N ( y-dna )

----------


## LeBrok

> err...Russians are not ethnic Slavs they are linguistic Slavs ....Russians have N ( and other markers) as part of their populace, ethnic Slavs have no N ( y-dna )


 That depends what Russians you mean, West Russians, Asia Russians, Siberia Russians? It's a huge country now after last Slavic expansion. I'm pretty sure old Kiev Russians were in majority Slavic.

----------


## zanipolo

> That depends what Russians you mean, West Russians, Asia Russians, Siberia Russians? It's a huge country now after last Slavic expansion. I'm pretty sure old Kiev Russians were in majority Slavic.


kiev russians? ...no such thing in genetics.

*ethnic* slavs have no N Y-Dna, even the 6% of N1 found in bosnian serbs where attributed to mongolian/hun peoples.

your confusing history by using linguistic terms such as slavic. imagine if we say french celtic, spanish celtic, italian celtic etc...the western europe linguistic is centrum and origin is celtic

----------


## LeBrok

> kiev russians? ...no such thing in genetics.
> 
> *ethnic* slavs have no N Y-Dna, even the 6% of N1 found in bosnian serbs where attributed to mongolian/hun peoples.
> 
> your confusing history by using linguistic terms such as slavic. imagine if we say french celtic, spanish celtic, italian celtic etc...the western europe linguistic is centrum and origin is celtic


Who are the ethnic Slavs then, and how do you recognize them genetically?




> .the western europe linguistic is centrum


 What does that mean?






> and origin is celtic


 Did you find Celtic DNA, or your're talking about language?

----------


## zanipolo

> Who are the ethnic Slaves then, and how do you recognize them genetically?
> 
> What does that mean?
> 
> 
> 
> Did you find Celtic DNA, or your're talking about language?


slavic, celtic etc
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centum-satem_isogloss


I do not know about slaves, but slavs are somewhere between southwest poland, slovakia and kiev , the slavs claim some genetic markers , like M458, Z280 etc ( ?, which is impossible IMO ), but clearly there is no N marker for slavs.

I am asking a lot of people and no one can say what the original slavs where, recently the bastarnae seems a mix of ethnic people, germanic, celts, sarmatians and including slavs


even the title of this thread and the paper exclude russians, because they are not slavs

----------


## LeBrok

> the slavs claim some genetic markers , like M458, Z280 etc ( ?, which is impossible IMO ), but clearly there is no N marker for slavs.
> 
> I am asking a lot of people and no one can say what the original slavs where, recently the bastarnae seems a mix of ethnic people, germanic, celts, sarmatians and including slavs


What are you saying? There are no Slavs because you can't figure it out?

You should get of your black and white horse, and understand that there is no pure genetic material of any ethnic group. It was even changing in the past as well. According to your criteria there were never Slavs or Celts or Germans. People always aquired new mutation and mixing with other groups, changing their base DNA from century to century. If today's Russians are still predominantly slavic at (let's say) 60%, it is not enough for you, and you'll take the name way. What if Polish are 80% Slavic, not enough? There are no pure breeds, and never were. So by your standard of purity, there are no Slavs today, no Celts, no real Germans or Greeks.

Are you sure you are Venet? We all know, you are not not pure descendant of Venets from 2000 years ago, but you still want to keep the name. Maybe you should measure others with same measure that you use for yourself.





> but clearly there is no N marker for slavs.


Clearly there is for East Slavs.

----------


## zanipolo

> What are you saying? There are no Slavs because you can't figure it out?
> 
> You should get of your black and white horse, and understand that there is no pure genetic material of any ethnic group. It was even changing in the past as well. According to your criteria there were never Slavs or Celts or Germans. People always aquired new mutation and mixing with other groups, changing their base DNA from century to century. If today's Russians are still predominantly slavic at (let's say) 60%, it is not enough for you, and you'll take the name way. What if Polish are 80% Slavic, not enough? There are no pure breeds, and never were. So by your standard of purity, there are no Slavs today, no Celts, no real Germans or Greeks.
> 
> Are you sure you are Venet? We all know, you are not not pure descendant of Venets from 2000 years ago, but you still want to keep the name. Maybe you should measure others with same measure that you use for yourself. 
> 
> 
> 
> Clearly there is for East Slavs.



firstly, do I agree with who they choose, well no, I would replace czechs with the slovaks.

now - The paper was done by slavs for slavs ONLY, thats why there are no russians, croats, serbians etc etc........Its only for ethnic slavs *as slavs see it*.

Yes there are slavs, germans, celts, russians etc.....but you are using a linguistic terminology to indicate that slavic is slav. you are making slavs far greater in number and distorting results than what is true.
If you where to speak and know slavic would you with integrity represent a slav for this test? .....no you would not. 
I state again , it was a test for ethnic slavs 

Its like a bulgarian is ethnically turkic but slavic linguistically , I am talking ancient times as per the paper.

I am venet for a few centuries, prior to that in the tyrol, prior to that bavaria ( middleages ) but I am not venet in ancient times, I already had 3 tests by different individuals....I am north caucasus, most likely abkhazian or ossetian as was stated............I have the integrity to not have a venet test for pre-roman times if it ever came about
-the tyrol and bavarian parts is done via records via my surname.

This has nothing to do about racism, its about getting supposedly accurate data

----------


## LeBrok

> now - The paper was done by slavs for slavs ONLY, thats why there are no russians, croats, serbians etc etc........Its only for ethnic slavs *as slavs see it*.


What!? What kind of new conspiracy is that? You're assuming to much!




> Yes there are slavs, germans, celts, russians etc.....but you are using a linguistic terminology to indicate that slavic is slav. you are making slavs far greater in number and distorting results than what is true.
> If you where to speak and know slavic would you with integrity represent a slav for this test? .....no you would not. 
> I state again , it was a test for ethnic slavs


Tell me finely, how do you recognize an ethnic Slav? Obviously not by language. 




> Its like a bulgarian is ethnically turkic but slavic linguistically , I am talking ancient times as per the paper.


How would you recognize an ethnic Turk, when you see one?




> I am venet for a few centuries, prior to that in the tyrol, prior to that bavaria ( middleages ) but I am not venet in ancient times, I already had 3 tests by different individuals....I am north caucasus, most likely abkhazian or ossetian as was stated............I have the integrity to not have a venet test for pre-roman times if it ever came about
> -the tyrol and bavarian parts is done via records via my surname.


I see, you (and Venet region in Italy) use the name very liberally without any linguistic, cultural or genetic connection.

----------


## zanipolo

> What!? What kind of new conspiracy is that? You're assuming to much!
> 
> 
> Tell me finely, how do you recognize an ethnic Slav? Obviously not by language. 
> 
> 
> How would you recognize an ethnic Turk, when you see one?
> 
> 
> I see, you (and Venet region in Italy) use the name very liberally without any linguistic, cultural or genetic connection.


ask the slavs to recognise what is a ethnic slav, all I now is that west-slavic are said to be the only slavs, the others ( east and south ) do not seem to argue the point in other sites............see other net sites
If you expect this survey to have included all slavs and be a slavic identity of mtDna then the survey will show nothing, might as well have a survey on all eastern Europe for what good the data shows.

A real survey on ethnic is the one I placed in this forum on pre-roman peoples of italy, that took 8 years. this slavic mtdna test is worthless, see other sites for comments, like forwhattheywhere


you must not have read what I said, my line left south-tyrol in 1690 for veneto and have been there ever since, language, culture , customs etc etc are venet. 
If they want a modern idea of venet then I can apply, if they want an ancient one, then I cannot.

You do not really expect that your line was born and still resides in its place of origin do you?

----------


## LeBrok

> ask the slavs to recognise what is a ethnic slav, all I now is that west-slavic are said to be the only slavs, the others ( east and south ) do not seem to argue the point in other sites............see other net sites


 So you believe other sites blindly, even though you didn't read their points to cite it here. You might as well believe this site, where I'm telling you that ethnically west, east and south Slavs are Slavs for at least 1,500 years.
They also are according to fairly simple definition from Wiki:



> *Ethnicity or ethnic group is a socially defined category based on common culture or nationality.[1][2] Ethnicity can, but does not have to, include common ancestry, appearance, cuisine, dressing style,heritage, history, language or dialect, religion, symbols, traditions, or other cultural factor. Ethnic identity is constantly reinforced through common characteristics which set the group apart from other groups*


Go back 1500 years to first records and you will find that all of them felt Slavic and spoke Slavic language and you will find same pagan believes. Through 1,500 years they had spread and lived in different areas of Europe and evolved in distinctive, west, east, south groups, but they are all Slavs. Well, except few minority groups, of the areas, who still retain language and custom, like Vlachs/Romas, Jews, and few others.




> If you expect this survey to have included all slavs and be a slavic identity of mtDna then the survey will show nothing,


 No, it will always show something. It will be wilder and more inclusive. 
What you probably want is to figure out the more narrow genetics of Slavs that showed on European scenes 1,500 years ago. For this we would need to check Slavic graves from that period. It would be very interesting I must say, showing how much original slavic "blood" still exists. You could call it DNA of Slavic Founders, that would be not far away from and part of protoslavic ethnicity.






> you must not have read what I said, my line left south tyrol in 1690 for veneto and have been there ever since, language, culture , customs etc etc are venet. 
> If they want a modern idea of venet then I can apply, if they want an ancient one, then I cannot.


 My point was that today's name Venet is misleading. It's nothing more than name of geographical location, having very little to do with ancient Venets. 
The confusing part for me was that you accepted lack of your connection with ancient venets, but still heaving much interest in any thread about any Veneti tribes of ancient times.

----------


## Yetos

the case of nation - ethnic in big groups loses its meaning,

the term Slavs Germans Celts etc we mainly mainly use it to express relative cultures and languages, 

by say German i mean Norwegian and Austrian also, is that ethnic term?
same with Slavs, is Fyrom same ethnic with Moscowians?

the term Slav express a family of nations-cultures and linguistic connectivity, not a nation,
the term German also 
the term Celt also
the term Greek also

German does mean Deutsch, Slav does mean Slovak or Russian, Celt does mean Gaul, Greek does not mean Mycanean,

so indeed Le brok I don't find a meaning in term ethnic Slav, but I do find a meaning as a general description, historical continue, linguistic and cultural relation. 

for example can you tell me what is ethnic German or Ethnic Celt?

----------


## LeBrok

> the case of nation - ethnic in big groups loses its meaning,


 Yes and no, depending on a nation. It is rather accurate for Poles and Germans, but not accurate for Swiss and Russians.




> the term Slavs Germans Celts etc we mainly mainly use it to express relative cultures and languages,


Roughly, yes.




> by say German i mean Norwegian and Austrian also, is that ethnic term?
> same with Slavs, is Fyrom same ethnic with Moscowians?
> 
> the term Slav express a family of nations-cultures and linguistic connectivity, not a nation,
> the term German also 
> the term Celt also
> the term Greek also
> 
> German does mean Deutsch, Slav does mean Slovak or Russian, Celt does mean Gaul, Greek does not mean Mycanean,


Generally yes. You have to look at it as groups and subgroups, in terms of general classification.

Ethnic European ->East European->Slav->West Slav-> Polish. They are all valid ethnic cathergorizations, based on culture and ancestry.




> so indeed Le brok I don't find a meaning in term ethnic Slav, but I do find a meaning as a general description, historical continue, linguistic and cultural relation.


Exactly what it is, a description of group of people of same culture and ancestry.

Zanipolo was arguing that today's Slavs are not Slavs because they are different from original Slavs, before they've expended.

I was arguing that Slavs are still Slavs, based on common definitions of ethnicity. I agree that they are culturally and genetically different from before the expansion. My point is that these changes are not that great, and continuity is well documented, to keep the same label: Slavs.
The rest is just a matter of precise labeling in time. Proto-Slavs (pre-expansion)-> Old Slavs (After expansion to fully mixed with locals)->New Slavs (last 1,000 years?)

----------

