Modern methods used in molecular genetic research allow the study of not only the gene pool of contemporary populations but also that of ancient populations.
By extracting DNA from the remains of individuals belonging to ancient archaeological cultures and comparing it with the DNA of modern humans, it is possible, with a high degree of accuracy, to determine which peoples are descendants of ancient cultures and to trace the migration routes of ancient populations (Keyser-Tracqui C. et al., 2003; Schilz, 2006; Chikisheva et al., 2007; Gao et al., 2008; Krause et al., 2009; Zhao et al., 2010).
Particular importance in these methods is given to the study of non-recombining regions of the Y-chromosome. The Y-chromosome is passed down exclusively through the male line, and its non-recombining regions are unaffected by other hereditary factors. This makes it possible to compare different male lineages and establish degrees of kinship between them.
In 2009, the results of studies on the ancient DNA of individuals from the Andronovo, Tagar, and Tashtyk cultures were published (Keyser et al., 2009).
Samples from the following Andronovo culture burial sites were analyzed:
1. Sharypovsky District, Krasnoyarsk Krai – Andronovo culture, 1800–1400 BCE (S07).
2. Krasnoyarsk Krai – Andronovo culture, 1800–1400 BCE (S10).
3. Khakassia – Andronovo culture, 1800–1400 BCE (S16).
The Y-haplogroups and Y-STR haplotypes of the individuals buried in these sites were identified.
The first Andronovo haplotype, labeled as S07, belongs to haplogroup C.
ANDRON S07: 14-22-15-9-12-13-11-11-12-16-16-14-10-15-19-11-22
[Marker order: DYS393, DYS390, DYS19, DYS391, DYS385a, DYS385b, DYS439, DYS389I, DYS392, DYS389II, DYS458, DYS437, DYS438, DYS456, DYS448, DYSH4, DYS635]
This haplogroup is primarily found in East and Southeast Asia. Therefore, the carrier of this haplotype is not genetically related to the main Andronovo group but is instead a descendant of the indigenous population.
The closest match, with five mutations across ten markers, was found in an Evenk individual (Malyarchuk, 2010):
230-C3c: 13-24-16-9-12-13-11-11-11-16-17-14-10-15-20-10-23
This haplotype is also closely related to those of Tuvans, Mongols, and Kalmyks. However, it cannot be considered ancestral to these groups and instead reflects distant genetic relations. It is hypothesized that the ancestors of this haplotype’s carrier migrated from Manchuria through the Baikal region or Mongolia to the Yenisei and Chulym Rivers.
The Andronovo haplotypes S10 and S16 are identical and belong to haplogroup R1a1a, identified by the SNP markers M17 and M198. It is widely accepted that this haplogroup signifies the participation of ancient Europoids in the genetic formation of the Altai-Sayan population (Derenko et al., 2006; Kharkov, 2007).
This haplogroup has been identified in:
• The ancient population of the Tarim Basin (ca. 1,900 years ago) (Li et al., 2010).
• The Pazyryk culture in the Altai (450 BCE) (Ricaut et al., 2004; Keyser et al., 2009).
• The Xiongnu of Mongolia (300–100 BCE) (Kim et al., 2010).
These findings suggest genetic connections between ancient populations of these regions. Unfortunately, Y-STR genotyping has not been conducted for Tarim Basin samples, which would enable comparisons between samples within the same haplogroup.
However, samples from the Andronovo, Tagar, and Tashtyk cultures were analyzed for Y-STR markers, allowing for comparisons with ancient and modern populations.
Andronovo haplotype S10, S16:
13-25-16-11-11-14-10-14-11-18-15-14-11-16-20-12-23
When comparing ten Y-STR markers, the Andronovo haplotypes fully matched those of individuals from the following populations:
• Southern Altaians (Todosh, Kergil, Tonjoan, Chapty, Mundus clans) (17).
• Altaians (2), Kyrgyz (65), Tuvans (4), Mongols (1), Teleuts (1), Iranians (1), Indians (3), Turks (1), Russians (3), Poles (4), Romanians (1), Ruthenians (1), Slovaks (2), and English (1).
[Databases used for comparison include: Laboratory of Evolutionary Genetics of the Research Institute of Medical Genetics of TSC RAMS (TL), Family Tree DNA (FTDNA), Sorensen Molecular Genetic Foundation (SMGF), Y Chromosome Haplotype Reference Database (YHRD), and data from Derenko et al., 2006; Roewer et al., 2008; Haber et al., 2010; Järve et al., 2009; Balanovsky et al., 2011.]
Among the 13,000 R1a1a haplotypes compared, only 97 matched the Andronovo haplotypes. The highest number of matches was observed among Tianshan Kyrgyz and Southern Altaians. Complete haplotype matches between geographically and historically connected populations strongly indicate genetic kinship, with random coincidences being unlikely.
Thus, Southern Altaians and Tianshan Kyrgyz are descendants of close relatives of the Yenisei Andronovans, most likely Altai Andronovans. Linguists and ethnographers have long recognized the close linguistic and ethnic ties between Kyrgyz and Southern Altaians (Baskakov, 1966: 15–16).
Both groups share numerous clan names (e.g., Mundus, Telos–Doolos, Kipchak, Naiman, Merkit, etc.). Kyrgyz oral traditions identify the Altai as their ancestral homeland. Some historians believe that the Kyrgyz and Southern Altaians once formed a single community, with the Kyrgyz migrating from the Altai to the Tianshan relatively recently (Abramzon, 1959: 34; Abdumanapov, 2007: 95, 114).
Modal 15-marker haplotype of one Southern Altai group (R1a1a):
13-25-16-11-10-11-11-18-15-8-11-16-21-12-23
[Marker order: DYS393, DYS390, DYS19, DYS391, DYS439, DYS389I, DYS392, DYS389II, DYS458, DYS437, DYS438, DYS456, DYS448, DYSH4, DYS635]
The DYS448 marker value of 21 is particularly significant. It is the key distinguishing feature of the Altai-Kyrgyz R1a1a cluster, as most carriers of this haplogroup have a value of 20.
The SMGF database includes numerous Kyrgyz R1a1a haplotypes, with DYS448 values of 21 and 22 significantly outnumbering those with a value of 20. All haplotypes matching the Andronovo haplotypes on 12 markers belong to the Altai-Kyrgyz cluster of R1a1a.
Preliminary findings: The geographic range of the SNP marker L342.2, found in the Altai-Kyrgyz cluster of R1a1a, remains largely confined to Asia. It is rare in Europe except among populations of clear Asian origin, such as Ashkenazi Jews and Lithuanian or Volga Tatars.
The exact origin of the R-L342.2 subclade remains unclear. However, the significant diversity within this subclade suggests an age of approximately 4,500–5,000 years (3,000–2,500 BCE).
The phylogenetic tree (Fig. 2) identifies the most probable homeland of the R-L342.2 subclade as the border region between Iran and Afghanistan, i.e., the eastern part of Western Asia. This homeland may also have included the southern part of Turkmenistan.
The distribution of the R-L342.2 subclade in its southern range (Turkey, Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan, India) aligns too closely with the current range of Indo-Iranian languages to overlook its significance.
It is highly probable that the spread of Indo-Iranian languages in this region is associated with the R-L342.2 subclade. There is little doubt that the bearers of this subclade formed the core of the Indo-Aryans who “invaded” India about 3,500 years ago (Bongard-Levin, Grantovsky, 1983: 122–123).
A significant portion of Arabs belonging to this subclade originate from the Tamim tribe, which migrated to Arabia from Iraq and practiced Zoroastrianism before converting to Islam (Foltz, 2007: 95; Lecker, 2005: 71–75). This suggests an Iranian origin for the tribe.
Thus, there is an undeniable genetic link between the population of the eastern area of the Andronovo culture (Sayan-Altai, Semirechye) and the territories of Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, and India. From this perspective, the migration of the male ancestors of Yeniseian and Altai Andronovans from southern Central Asia appears to be the most plausible explanation. (Later migrations of Andronovan descendants in the reverse direction likely occurred, as evidenced by many sources, but they did not leave significant genetic traces.)
Studies of the odontological traits of Altai Andronovans yield similar results. “Altai Andronovans exhibit clear traits of southern origin in terms of dental anthropology. The dental complex of the Altai Andronovo population shows no influence from Mongoloid populations and instead resembles southern European odontotypes.
Based on Smith’s distance metrics, the paleopopulations of Turkmenistan (Gonur) and the Andronovo culture of the Altai are closely related to modern groups of southern Europeans. Summarizing the findings of the dental analysis, it can be concluded that the Andronovo population of the Altai has southern origins.
The study of dental traits, which are inherited independently of cranial measurements, also indicates that the Andronovo population of the Altai was genetically connected to southern European populations” (Tur, 2009: 233–235).
A significant link is observed with the population of Gonur-Depe. The Bactria-Margiana Archaeological Complex (BMAC), to which Gonur-Depe belongs, holds an important place in the history of the spread of Indo-Iranian languages. According to the “Bactria-Margiana” hypothesis, the initial area of Indo-Iranian language dispersion was in the BMAC region of southern Central Asia and Afghanistan at the end of the 3rd to the beginning of the 2nd millennium BCE (Sarianidi, 1977, 1993).
The cultural chronologies align well with the age of the R-L342.2 subclade. The BMAC (Gonur-Depe) dates to the 3rd millennium BCE (5,000–4,000 years ago). The Andronovo sites of the Minusinsk Basin are dated to 1800–1400 BCE (3,800–3,400 years ago).
The Andronovo culture is generally attributed to the Indo-Iranians (Denisov, 2001: 4–21). E.A. Khelimskiy argues that the Andronovans are not the direct ancestors of the Indians and Iranians but are linguistically equally related to the Nuristani, Indian, and Iranian groups.
He considers the Andronovans as carriers of a fourth, extinct branch of the Indo-Iranian languages. Khelimskiy also supports the hypothesis of a shared Indo-Iranian and Andronovan homeland in the Khorezm region (Merv, Herat).
Despite the clear proximity of the Andronovans to the Indo-Iranians, the Andronovo culture is younger than the ancient Indo-Iranian cultures (Mitanni, Khorezm). According to Khelimskiy, this data, along with other evidence, points to the migration of the Andronovans from the south (Khelimskiy, 1998: 503–505). This largely agrees with genetic data.
Calculations based on mutations in 12-marker and 67-marker haplotypes provide the following picture: the closest to the R-L342.2 subclade are Kazakh haplotypes and those belonging to the southern Russian cluster of R1a1, which also includes several Kazakh and Bashkir haplotypes.
The southern Russian cluster representatives mainly reside in southern Russia (from Oryol in the north to the North Caucasus in the south), with some found in Poland. The southern Russian cluster lacks the L342.2 SNP marker, and Kazakhs have not yet been tested for this marker.
Thus, a sufficiently extensive area emerges, whose various populations—both ancient and modern—are genetically related. Most male genetic lines in this region belonged to haplogroup R1a1a.
However, this area does not include Central Europe, Ukraine, and Belarus, despite the fact that representatives of this haplogroup have historically and currently formed the majority of the male population in these regions. The R1a1 clusters in these territories are more distant from the R-L342.2 subclade than the southern Russian cluster.
The Yamnaya, Catacomb, and Srubnaya cultures, located in southern Russia, the Volga region, and the Urals, show much greater similarity to the Andronovo culture in its Alakul variant than to the more western Corded Ware culture, among others.
This fact is generally uncontested by archaeologists and anthropologists (Ginzburg, 1959, 1962; Trofimova, 1961; Alekseev, 1964, 1967). The Yamnaya culture is even considered ancestral to both the Srubnaya and Andronovo cultures. It is no coincidence that the Scytho-Siberian world, formed based on the Yamnaya, Catacomb, Srubnaya, and Andronovo cultures, is identified as a distinct cultural entity (Martynov, 2000).
Fig. 3. The Scytho-Siberian World (Martynov, 2000)
The dominance of a gracile odontological type is observed among the eastern Yamnaya population. A.V. Zubova notes that the morphological features of this gracile substratum have their origins among the populations of Asia Minor, the Near East, and Central Asia.
The clustering results of odontological trait frequencies presented in her study convincingly show that even the Ukrainian Yamnaya populations exhibit the greatest similarities with the cultures of Turkmenistan (Altyn-Depe, Sapalli-Tepe) and Asia Minor (Çatalhöyük) (Zubova, 2010).
According to most researchers specializing in Aryan studies, the semi-nomadic pastoralist tribes of the Srubnaya and Andronovo cultural-historical communities represent the Indo-Iranian group of the Indo-European language family. These tribes are possibly the legendary Aryans who, in the middle of the 2nd millennium BCE, entered ancient Iran, crossed the Hindu Kush mountains in Afghanistan, and invaded the Indus Valley.
The Abashevo tribes are also considered representatives of the Indo-Iranian linguistic community (Kuzmina, 1994, 2008; Kuzmina, 1995; Bongard-Levin, Grantovsky, 1974). According to A.Kh. Khalikov, the numerous Indo-Iranian lexical borrowings found among the Finno-Ugric peoples of Eurasia, especially the eastern Volgaic, Permic, and Ugric groups, emerged due to contacts between the Indo-Iranian Abashevo, Srubnaya, and Andronovo cultures and the tribes of the forest-steppe zone of Eastern Europe and Western Siberia (Khalikov, 1990: 53).
However, a significant issue lies in determining the direction of ancient migrations. Proponents of the Western European or southern Russian homelands of the Indo-European languages argue that the Andronovo culture undoubtedly belongs to the Indo-European cultural circle and thus propose that the ancestors of the Andronovans came from the west, specifically the southern Russian steppes.
This theory is supported by some anthropologists (Kozintsev, 2008, 2010). However, the genetic data discussed earlier suggest the opposite, indicating a migration of the ancestors of the Andronovans from a region near southwestern Turkmenistan. At this stage of research, it remains unclear where the ancestors of the Andronovans and Indo-Iranians of the R-L342.2 cluster migrated to their shared homeland. Both northern and southern migration routes remain plausible.
The resolution of this question may depend on identifying the homeland of the entire R1a1a haplogroup. Some researchers locate this homeland in the Balkans, others in southern Russia, while others suggest the Near East or even northwestern India.
Unfortunately, this issue remains unresolved, as does the question of the primary homeland of the Indo-Iranians and the origins of the Andronovo culture. However, genetics, unlike archaeology, anthropology, and linguistics, has far greater potential to resolve this question. The identification of new SNP markers and the analysis of ancient DNA in the near future will likely provide answers to many of these unresolved questions.
Regions with elevated frequencies of this haplogroup are marked in dark purple.
There are two possible scenarios: the migration of the ancestors of the R-L342.2 subclade from Eastern Europe, or migration from Western Asia, the region where ancestral R1a1 haplogroups are found. However, the origin of this subclade must still be linked to the border region of Iran, Afghanistan, and Central Asia.
It can also be hypothesized that the spread of Indo-Iranian languages, including into Eastern Europe, originated from this or a nearby region.
BMAC – The Area of the Bactria-Margiana Archaeological Complex.
The study by Kaiser also includes haplogroups and haplotypes of individuals from the Tagar and Tashtyk cultures, buried in the following locations:
•No. 7. S24 – Khakassia – Tagar Culture – 800 BCE–100 CE
•No. 9. S25 – Khakassia – Tagar Culture – 800 BCE–100 CE
•No. 10. S26 – Beysky District, Khakassia – Tagar Culture – 800 BCE–100 CE
•No. 11. S28 and S29 – Bogradsky District, Khakassia – Tagar Culture – 800 BCE–100 CE
•No. 5. S32 and S34 – Bogradsky District, Khakassia – Tagar Culture – 800 BCE–100 CE
The haplotype of a representative of the Tagar culture, identified as S28, belongs to haplogroup R1a1a and has the following structure:
TAGAR S28: 13-25-16-11-11-14-10-14-11-17-15-14-11-16-20-12-23
This haplotype is closer to the ancestral haplotype of all R1a1a and, as a result, shows a higher frequency of matches across various databases.
The closest matches include: southern Altaians (Chapty, Tonjoan, Mundus) (3), Teleuts (Totosh clan) (3), Kyrgyz (8), Mongols (2), Hungarians (5), Lebanese (1), and a significant number of representatives of the southern Russian cluster of R1a1a.
Drawing conclusions about the origins of the ancestors of these haplotypes is challenging due to their widespread occurrence.
On 16 markers, a complete match is observed only with the haplotypes of a Hungarian, a Pole, and a Slovak. All three haplotypes belong to the southern Russian cluster.
It is possible that this indicates a connection to the southern Russian steppes. These Hungarians and Slovaks may be descendants of the Magyars—relatively recent westward migrants—and represent the eastern branch of the southern Russian cluster, while the southern Russian cluster itself could be descended from the population of the Srubnaya culture.
TAGAR S29:
Another representative of the Tagar culture has the following haplotype:
13-25-x-11-11-14-x-14-11-17-15-14-11-16-x-12-23
This haplotype has an insufficient number of markers for detailed analysis, but its 14-marker format is identical to the previous one.
Other Haplotypes of the Tagar and Tashtyk Cultures
TAGAR S26:
13-24-16-11-11-14-10-13-11-18-15-14-11-16-20-13-23
This haplotype shows complete matches on 10 markers with representatives of the following populations:
Tuvans (10), Kyrgyz (5), Khakassians (2), Soyots (1), Todzhinians (1), Indians (1), Turks (1), Iranians (1), Ukrainians (1), Poles (1), Slovaks (1), and Swedes (1).
The total number of matches is relatively low—only 26 out of 13,000 haplotypes.
TAGAR S25:
13-24-x-11-11-14-10-13-11-18-15-14-11-16-20-x-23
This haplotype also has an insufficient number of markers for detailed analysis, but its 15-marker format is identical to the previous one.
The Haplotypes of Tagar (TAGAR S24) and Tashtyk (TASTYK S34) Individuals
The haplotypes of the Tagar individual (S24) and the Tashtyk individual (S34) are completely identical. They differ from the Tagar haplotype S26 by only one mutation:
13-24-17-11-11-14-10-13-11-18-15-8-11-16-20-13-23.
The haplotypes S24 and S34 are derivatives of the haplotype S26. A full match is observed only with the haplotype of one Kyrgyz individual. Close matches are found with the haplotypes of one Indian and one Turkmen individual.
It is clear that the Tashtyk individual S34 is closely related to the Tagar individual S24. The emergence of the Tashtyk culture is associated with the migration of people with a different anthropological appearance into the Minusinsk Basin.
However, this particular Tashtyk representative is not a descendant of the migrants, as one might expect, but rather a direct descendant of the Tagar population, who continued to exist despite the cultural transition.
At the same time, it is possible that studying the remains of other Tashtyk culture bearers would reveal different haplogroups.
TAGAR S32
The haplotype of another representative of the Tagar culture has the following structure:
TAGAR S32: 13-24-17-11-11-14-10-13-12-18-15-8-11-16-20-13-23
This haplotype is clearly a derivative of the previous ones (S24, S34), but no exact matches were found.
Genetic Overlaps
The haplotypes of Kyrgyz individuals, belonging to various clusters, match not only with the haplotypes of Andronovans but also with those of the Tagar and Tashtyk populations, unequivocally indicating the existence of a shared ancestral population.
Interestingly, we do not find clear descendants of Yenisei Andronovans and Tagar individuals among the modern population of Khakassia. More often, there is a closer genetic affinity with Tuvans, and even more so with the Tian Shan Kyrgyz and southern Altaians. Further research is required to explain this phenomenon.
Comparison with Andronovo Haplotypes
A comparison of Tagar haplotypes with Andronovo haplotypes shows the following:
•Tagar haplotypes S28 and S29 are frequently found in different populations and may either be ancestral to or derived from Andronovo haplotypes.
•The haplotypes of Andronovans (S10, S16) and Tagar individuals (S24, S25, S26, S34, S32) are all derivatives of the ancestral haplotype:
13-25-16-11-11-14-10-13-11-18-15-14-11-16-20-12-23.
This ancestral haplotype serves as the common origin for both Andronovo and Tagar/Tashtyk haplotypes.
Cultural and Genetic Implications
This evidence suggests that the Tagar people were not direct descendants of Yenisei Andronovans. Instead, it indicates that the origins of these two cultures are tied to a shared ancestral population located further southwest.
The Tagar haplotypes also show similarities with the haplotypes of several tribal groups within the Bashkir ethnos, specifically the Tabyn and Unlar clans.
Legendary traditions of these clans trace their origins to the Altai region, specifically the border areas of Altai, Tuva, and Mongolia (Kuzeev, 1974: 254).
There is an even greater similarity with another cluster within the R-L342.2 subclade, which is closely related to the Bashkir cluster and represented by Hungarians from the specific ethnic group Szekely and Tatars (both Volga and Lithuanian Tatars) (see Fig. 2).
The modal haplotype of this cluster, 13-24-17-11-11-14-12-12-11-14-11-18, differs from the Tagar haplotype (S24, S34) by only one mutation. Similar haplotypes are also found among southern Altaians:
13-24-17-10-11-13-12-12-10-12-11-18.
The Closest Genetic Affinities of the Tatar-Hungarian and Bashkir Clusters within the R-L342.2 Subclade
The closest genetic affinities of the Tatar-Hungarian and Bashkir clusters within the R-L342.2 subclade are observed with the Altai-Kyrgyz cluster and haplotypes of a Volga Tatar and a Turk (see Fig. 2).
The Altai-Kyrgyz cluster mainly includes members of the right and left wings of Kyrgyz tribes, who are considered descendants of Dolon-Biy and are, according to genealogies, migrants from the Altai region.
Thus, a northern branch of the R-L342.2 subclade can be identified, which is associated with the Andronovans and the Tagar population. This also helps pinpoint the divergence point between the Tagar branch and the main Andronovo lineage. A combination of various data points suggests the Mountain Altai region as the area of divergence.
Diversity of Haplogroups in Ancient Populations
Ancient populations, even when dominated by a single haplogroup, were unlikely to be entirely monohaplogroup. They likely included representatives of different paternal haplogroups, which naturally migrated together. Among the Kyrgyz and Altaians, haplogroups with origins in the Near East are also found without doubt.
Near Eastern haplogroups J, E1b1b1, and G appear in small frequencies across the Altai region, generally not exceeding 2%, except for haplogroup G, which shows a higher frequency in certain Kazakh groups in Central Asia (Balaganskaia, 2011: 17). It is possible that migrations of these haplogroups into the Altai also occurred during the Andronovo period.
There are constant parallels in the distribution of subclade R-L342.2 and haplogroup R1b1b1 (M73). The latter is commonly found among Altaians (Teleuts, Kumandins), Shors, Tuvans, Kazakhs (Kipchak tribe), eastern Bashkirs, as well as Volga Tatars, Kyrgyz, and Uyghurs (FTDNA; SMGF; Balaganskaia, 2001: 10; Myres, 2010: 97).
Primary migrations of this haplogroup are connected to the southern regions of Central Asia. Haplogroup Q1a3 also originated in a region near Iran and Afghanistan. It is the ancestral haplogroup of Q1a3a, which is widespread among Native American populations.
This haplogroup (Q1a3) was likely one of the first paternal haplogroups to appear in Siberia. It is found at significant frequencies among the Ket, Selkup, Tuvan, Altaian, and Kyrgyz populations. One subclade of this haplogroup is even present in Scandinavia (TL, FTDNA, SMGF).
Migration Patterns
A significant number of male haplogroup migrations, including Q1a3 and R1b1a1, were present in southern Siberia in ancient times. These migrations likely followed the path:
Iran, Afghanistan → Central Asia → Southern Siberia.
Undoubtedly, representatives of all these haplogroups contributed to the genetic pool of the Andronovo and Tagar populations. Additionally, male haplogroups of East Eurasian origin (C and N) likely influenced the anthropological characteristics, genetic makeup, and culture of the Andronovo and Tagar people. One of these haplogroups was even identified in an Andronovo individual.
The Role of Maternal Haplogroups
It is important to note that the discussion above focuses exclusively on male genetic lineages. Female haplogroups also had an undeniable influence on the genetic pool of the Andronovo and Tagar populations. Some maternal haplogroups had been present in southern Siberia since ancient times, while others migrated alongside the male ancestors of the Andronovans.
The maternal haplogroups identified in the Tagar and Tashtyk populations (e.g., U5a1, U4a, I4, C, H5a, HV) indicate the inclusion of both East Eurasian and West Eurasian female lineages in the Tagar population.
The genetic pool of modern Turkic peoples in southern Siberia includes numerous female haplogroups and specific subclades whose origins are tied to the regions of Western Asia and the Indian subcontinent (Derenko, 2009: 26).
A Complex Picture of Genetic Formation
All these factors create a rather complex picture of the formation of the genetic pool and culture of the Andronovo and Tagar populations.
Conclusions
The haplotypes of Andronovo and Tagar culture representatives show the greatest genetic similarity to the haplotypes of southern Altaians and Tian Shan Kyrgyz.
A close genetic connection exists between representatives of haplogroup R1a1a inhabiting Central, Southern, and Western Asia. This connection is linked to their shared origin in the R-L342.2 subclade.
The R-L342.2 subclade is a common component present in modern Turkic and Indo-Iranian populations.
Based on genetic data, it can be concluded that representatives of the Andronovo and Tagar cultures belonged to the R-L342.2 subclade.
Genetic data support evidence from other sciences, indicating that the Andronovo and Tagar cultures have a close genetic relationship with the ancestors of Indo-Iranian peoples.
The most likely origin of the Andronovo and Tagar populations is the border region of Iran, Afghanistan, and Central Asia.
Unfortunately, research on ancient DNA is still limited, and SNP markers necessary for a more detailed analysis of different subclades of haplogroup R1a1 have not yet been identified.
Identifying the SNP marker L342.2 in the Andronovo and Tagar populations could fully confirm the hypothesis of their southern origin, clarify their relationship with Indo-Aryans and other ancient Indo-Iranian peoples, and identify the true genetic descendants of these cultures.
Mass genotyping for this SNP marker in scientific laboratories, involving representatives of both modern and ancient populations, will help answer many questions about the ancient history of southern Siberia and Central Asia.
Authors
Vladimir Gennadievich Volkov
Head of the Exhibition Department, Museum of Tomsk History
Vladimir Nikolaevich Kharkov
PhD in Biological Sciences, Senior Researcher, Laboratory of Evolutionary Genetics, Research Institute of Medical Genetics, Tomsk Scientific Center, Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Medical Sciences
Vadim Anatolyevich Stepanov
Doctor of Biological Sciences, Professor, Deputy Director for Scientific Work, Head of the Laboratory of Evolutionary Genetics, Research Institute of Medical Genetics, Tomsk Scientific Center, Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Medical Sciences
Y-STR haplotype database::
Family Tree DNA (FTDNA) Электронный ресурс. Доступ: http://www.familytreedna.com,
Sorensen Molecular Genetic Foundation (SMGF) Электронный ресурс. Доступ: http://www.smgf.org
Y Chromosome Haplotype Reference Database (YHRD) Электронный ресурс. Доступ: http://www.yhrd.org
Literature:
Balanovsky O., Dibirova K., Dybo A. et al. Parallel Evolution of Genes and Languages in the Caucasus Region // Molecular Biology and Evolution, 2011: 1 – 49. Приложения: Электронный ресурс. Доступ:http://mbe.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2011/05/13/molbev.msr126/suppl/DC1
Chikisheva T.A., Gubina M.A., Romaschenko A.G., Karafet T.M. et al.//Archaeology, Ethnology and Anthropology of Eurasia, 2007, 4 (32): 130-142.
Derenko M., Malyarchuk B., Denisova G. et al. «Contrasting patterns of Y-chromosome variation in South Siberian populations from Baikal and Altai-Sayan regions»//Human Genetics, 2006. 118: 591-604.
Gao S, Cui Y, Yang Y et al.Mitochondrial DNA analysis of human remains from the Yuansha site in Xinjiang, China.// Sci China C Life Sci., 2008 Mar. 51(3):205-13.
Foltz R. L'Iran, creuset de religions: de la préhistoire à la République islamique.- Laval, 2007.- 170 p.
Haber M., Platt D.E., Badro D.A. et al. Influences of history, geography, and religion on genetic structure: the Maronites in Lebanon.//European Journal of Human Genetics, 2011, 114 (2): 334-40.
Järve M., L.A. Zhivotovsky, S. Rootsi et al. Decreased Rate of Evolution in Y Chromosome STR Loci of Increased Size of the Repeat Unit.// PLoS ONE 2009; 4: e7276 (open access).
Приложения: Электронный ресурс.
Kim K., Brenner C.H., Mair V.H., et al. A Western Eurasian Male Is Found in 2000-Year-Old Elite Xiongnu Cemetery in Northeast Mongolia.//American Journal of Physical Anthropology, vol. 142, no. 3 (July 2010), pp. 429–440.
Keyser C. et all. Ancient DNA provides new insights into the history of south Siberian Kurgan people.//Human Genetics, 2009. Vol.126, Num. 3, 395-410
Keyser-Tracqui C., Crubezy E., Ludes B. Nuclear and Mitochondrial DNA Analysis of a 2,000-Year-Old Necropolis in the Egyin Gol Valley of Mongolia.// Am.J.Hum.Genet, 2003, 73: 247-260.
Krause J, Briggs AW, Kircher M, Maricic T, Zwyns N, et al. Complete mtDNA genome of an early modern human from Kostenki, Russia.//Current Biology, 2009, Volume 20, Issue 3, 231-236.
Lecker, Michael. People, tribes, and society in Arabia around the time of Muḥammad. - Burlington.- 2005.- 350 p.
Li C., Li H., Cui Y. et al. Evidence that a West-East admixed population lived in the Tarim Basin as early as the early Bronze Age.//BMC Biology 2010, 8:15:1-12.
Malyarchuk B., Derenko M., Denisova G., et al. Phylogeography of the Y-chromosome haplogroup C in northern Eurasia // Annals of Human Genetics. 2010. 74(6): 539-46.
Приложения: Электронный ресурс. Доступ: http://malyarchuk-bor.narod.ru/Table_S1.xls
Myres et al. A Major Y-chromosome Haplogroup R1b Holocene Era Founder Effect in Central and Western Europe // European Journal of Human Genetics (2011) 19, 95–101.
Ricaut F.X., Keyser-Tracqui C., Cammaert L. et al. Genetic analysis and ethnic affinities from two Scytho-Siberian skeletons.//American Journal of Physical Anthropology, vol. 123, no. 4 (Apr 2004), pp. 351-60.
Roewer L. et all. (2008). Analysis of Y chromosome STR haplotypes in the European part of Russia reveals high diversities but non-significant genetic distances between populations. Int. J. Legal Medicine 122 (3), 219 – 223.
Приложения: Электронный ресурс. Доступ: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2755792/bin/414_2007_222_MOESM1_ESM.xls
Schilz F. Molekulargenetische Verwandtschaftsanalysen am prähistorischen Skelettkollektiv der Lichtensteinhöhle, Dissertation, Göttingen 2006, 252 s.
Underhill P., Myres N.M., Rootsi S. et all. Separating the post-Glacial coancestry of European and Asian Y chromosomes within haplogroup R1a // European Journal of Human Genetics, 2009. 18(4): 479.
Zhao YB, Li HJ, Cai DW et al. Ancient DNA from nomads in 2500-year-old archeological sites of Pengyang, China.// Journal of Human Genetics 55, April 2010, 215-218.
Абдуманапов Р.А. Кипчакский компонент в этногенезе киргизов. Диссертация на соискание ученой степени кандидата исторических наук.- Томск – 2007: 183 с.
Абрамзон С.М. Вопросы этногенеза киргизов по данным этнографии // Труды Киргизской археолого-этнографической экспедиции. – Фрунзе: Издательство Академии наук Киргизской ССР, 1959. – Т. 3. – С. 31-44.
Алексеев В.П. Антропологический тип населения западных районов распространения андроновской культуры.- В кн.: Проблемы этнической антропологии Средней Азии.- Ташкент, 1964.- С.19 – 28.
Алексеев В.П. Антропология андроновской культуры.- Советская Археология.- М.,1967.- №1.- С.22-26.
Балаганская О.А. Полиморфизм y хромосомы у тюркоязычного населения Алтая, Саян, Тянь-Шаня и Памира в контексте взаимодействия генофондов Западной и Восточной Евразии. Автореферат диссертации на соискание ученой степени кандидата биологических наук.- Москва, 2011.- 26 с.
Баскаков Н.А. Тюркские языки (общие сведения и типологическая характеристика) // Языки народов СССР. – М.: Наука, 1966. – Т. 2. – С. 15-16.
Бонгард-Левин Г. М., Грантовский Э. А. От Скифии до Индии. Древние арии: мифы и история.— М.: Мысль, 1974. — 206 с.
Волков В.Г., Харьков В.Н., Штыгашева О.В., Степанов В.А. Генетическое исследование хакасских и телеутских сеоков. Сравнительная характеристика по данным маркеров Y-хромосомы.// Культура как система в историческом контекте: опыт западно-сибирских археолого-этнографических совещаний.- Томск, 2010.- С.403 – 405.
Гинзбург В.В.Материалы к антропологии населения Западного Казахстана в эпоху бронзы.//Материалы и исследования по археологии СССР.- М.Л.,1962.- №120.- С.186 – 198;
Денисов И. В. Некоторые проблемы археологии бронзового века Волго-Уралья и Ведийско-Авестийские сказания // В центре Евразии: Сборник научных трудов. — Стерлитамак, 2001.- С. 4-21.
Деренко М.В. Молекулярная филогеография коренного населения Северной Азии по данным об изменчивости митохондриальной ДНК. Автореферат диссертации на соискание ученой степени доктора биологических наук.- М., 2009.- 49 c.
Зубова А.В. Население ямной культурно-исторической общности в свете одонтологических данных.// Вестник археологии, антропологии и этнографии. 2010. № 2 (13).- С.85 -95.
Козинцев, А.Г. Так называемые средиземноморцы Южной Сибири и Казахстана, индоевропейские миграции и происхождение скифов.//Археология, этнография и антропология Евразии.- 2008.- №6.- С.140 – 144.
Козинцев А.Г. Ранние индоевропейцы Сибири и Центральной Азии по данным антропологии.//Культура как система в историческом контекте: опыт западно-сибирских археолого-этнографических совещаний.- Томск, 2010.- С.419 – 421.
Кузеев Р. Г. Происхождение башкирского народа. Этнический состав, история расселения. М.: Наука, 1974. 570 с.
Кузьмина Е. Е. Арии — путь на юг. — М.: Летний сад, 2008. — 560 с.:
Кузьмина, Е. Е. Откуда пришли индоарии? : материальная культура племен андроновской общности и происхождение индоиранцев.- М., 1994. — 464 с.
Кузьмина О. В. Соотношение абашевской и покровской культур // Конвергенция и дивергенция в развитии культур эпохи энеолита-бронзы Средней и Восточной Европы. — СПб, 1995. — Ч. 2. — С. 27-51.
Мартынов А.И. Археология: Учебник для студентов, обучающихся по специальности «История». Изд. 4. – Москва: Высшая школа, 2000. – 439 с.
Сарианиди В.И. Древние земледельцы Афганистана.- М.,1977.- 172 с.
Сарианиди В.И. В поисках страны Маргуш.- М., 1993.- 362 с.
Трофимова Т.А. Черепа из могильника тазабагъябской культуры Кокча III.- В кн.: Материалы Хорезмской экспедиции.- М., 1961.- вып.5.- С.97 – 146.;
Тур, С. С. Одонтологическая характеристика населения андроновской культуры Алтая .// Известия Алтайского государственного университета. Серия: История. Политология. - 2009. - № 4/2. - C. 228-236.
Халиков А.Х. основные этапы урало-индоевропейских связей в Среднем Поволжье и Приуралье // URALO-INDOGERMANICA.- Ч.2, М., 1990.- С.53 – 59.
Харьков В.Н., Степанов В.А., Медведева О.Ф. и др. Различия структуры генофондов северных и южных алтайцев по гаплогруппам Y-хромосомы // Генетика. - 2007. - Т. 43. - № 5. - С. 675–687.
Хелимский Е.А. Южные соседи финно-угров: иранцы или исчезнувшая ветвь Ариев (арии-андроновцы)? - К 70-летию В.Н. Топорова,- М., 1998.- С.503 – 505.
#history #historyfacts #historynerd #scythians #huns #kyrgyz #turks #nomads #empires #sarmatians #история #археология #цивилизации #скифы #сарматы #тюрки #киргизы #гунны #pasyryk #kazakh
Comments