In various kinds of pseudo-historical reasoning concerning the historical origin of Russians exclusively from the Slavs, it is now fashionable to weave in “haplogroups”. WITH light hand a certain “scientist” (not a biologist at all) Klesov, who lives (like “academician” Levashov) in the USA (hence the ridiculously familiar trick - an appeal to authority " Western science" - "American scientists have proven that Russians are 4500 years old!") this completely scientific method of determining paternity and dynasticity began to be used for constructions for which it was not intended at all. As a result, many posts contain monstrously distorted results of its use. The purpose of this post was to clarify obvious points, so that the numerous references to what “haplogroups have proven”, cited by the authors in place and out of place, are not perceived uncritically when reading some texts.
Let me clear some things up common places in the form of popularly given answers to questions.
Question 1 Can a specific haplogroup indicate a specific nationality? In other words, is there a Russian or German (without quotes) haplogroup?
Answer: No. Why? Because any currently existing ethnic group consists of people with at least two or three Y-chromosomal haplogroups. In other words, you can be Russian with haplogroup I1, R1a1, R1b, N3, I2, J2 and even E. The same applies to other peoples. for example, among Ashkenazi Jews - about 12% are carriers of the supposedly "marker" haplogroup R1a1 for Russians - and it is emphasized that not among "half-breeds" and "goyim", but among the most real, typical representatives of their ethnic group. And so on.
Thus, the correlation of a certain haplogroup with modern nationalities and individual representatives of ethnic groups can only be of a statistical, relative nature. “Measuring skulls” by haplogroups won’t work - it’s quite likely that you’ll classify a Jew as a Russian, and a Russian as a Jew. The presence of R1a among Poles - 56.4%, and... Kyrgyz - as much as 63.5% speaks about whether peoples can be defined as “Aryans” by only one criterion - the presence of a statistical marker haplogroup. And the Volga Tatars are no different from the Russians in terms of the set of haplogroups. I hope that conclusions have been drawn? In other words, no ethnic community
, uniting people from the conditionally “Aryan” haplogroup R1a1, will not work. At the same time, there is no objective difference between the classical Russians living in the same region, but with the conditionally “Finnish” haplogroup N, and the same classical Russians, carriers of the “Aryan” haplogroup R1a. The entire rest of the gene pool (and in many ways more significant than the haplomarker) of the descendants of the “ancestral Finnish men” and the “ancestral Aryan men” was mixed a long time ago.
Question 2. What do haplogroups actually talk about and what can’t they talk about? Answer: As follows from answer 1 and as the author of another detailed post on haplogroups correctly noted: “Those sections of the Y chromosome that serve as markers for identifying haplogroups themselves do not code anything and have no biological meaning. These are markers in pure form
. They can be compared to the orange and green LEDs in the film “Kin-dza-dza”, which were used to identify chatlans and patsaks, and there was no other difference between these “races” except the color of the light bulb." By haplogroup - one can judge statistically (!!! this is important - precisely statistically, i.e. with inevitable errors, but still possible) about the difference, dissimilarity in the origin of certain large ethnolinguistic massifs and the degree of proximity of their contacts (sexual ones). For example, everyone Turkic peoples are carriers of specific haplogroups. Even if some of the Turks do not have or have very few of their “markers” and C, O and Q, which are absent among the Slavs, then D, R1b1b1 or N1b, which are less common among the Turks, are still statistically absent among Russians, Ukrainians and Belarusians. We can conclude, therefore, that contacts with the Turks throughout history have- are statistically insignificant, and the statement that “we are Asians” is incorrect. Such conclusions are quite scientific. It can also be argued that the typical “Mongoloid” haplogroups C and Q are not found among Russians at all, and if so, the contacts of the population of Rus' with the Mongols during the period of the yoke were minimal. This, however, is clearly evidenced by all historical sources - 20 years after 1240, all Mongol military formations were withdrawn from the territory of Rus' and the Russian princes carried the tribute collected in Rus' to the Horde themselves. Thus, most likely the average Russian peasant of the late 13th and 14th-15th centuries never saw a single living “Mongol” (Horde) in his life. And this is not a “discovery” at all - haplogroups only confirm what we already know (another thing is that in “popular” ahistorical literature, including in textbooks, the content of which is now practically not controlled by scientists, about little is written about this).
Further, from answer 1 it is clear that if representatives of a certain ethnic group belong to several haplogroups, then this DOES NOT MEAN that this ethnic group represents a kind of mechanical connection of populations with different gene pools. The rest of the gene pool, except for the Y chromosomes, will be mixed without practical possibility differences. 16% of haplogroup N among Russians in the regions north of Moscow does not mean that 16% of them are supposedly “more Finns than Slavs” - both for the reason stated above (mixing the rest of the, much more important, gene pool to the point of unrecognizability) and for reasons statistical - because Among the population of Finland, only 60% of the population have this haplogroup, and among Estonians in general there are 40%.
I will quote again - “The peculiarity of the Y chromosome is that it is passed from father to son almost unchanged and does not experience “mixing” or “dilution” by maternal heredity. This allows it to be used as a mathematically accurate tool for determining paternal origin. If the term “dynasty” has any biological meaning, then it is the inheritance of the Y chromosome that determines the collection of men united by the presence of such a marker, i.e., descended from a common patriarchal ancestor many thousands of years ago. a specific mutation has occurred on the Y chromosome."
Modern science is inclined to believe that these mutations could have occurred between 50 and 10 thousand years ago, and the creationist version, which seems more truthful to me, speaks of the complete uncertainty of the results of using the “biological clock” methods (they give absolutely different meanings) and speaks of the probable practical simultaneity of the appearance of these mutations associated with the legend of Tower of Babel and the dispersion of nations. Whether one or the other is right is, in principle, not very important for us living today.
What matters is that Y - chromosome does not determine the gene pool. It is not a carrier of some “ethnically specific” information in the genome. From more than 20,000 genes human genome, the Y chromosome contains only about 100 pieces. They encode mainly the structure and functioning of the male genital organs. There is no other information there. Facial features, skin color, mental and thinking characteristics are spelled out on other chromosomes which, during inheritance, go through recombination (the paternal and maternal sections of the chromosomes are randomly mixed). The carrier of the “Aryan chromosome” after hundreds of generations can be a typical black man (if, say, his black mother got pregnant in the 16th century from a Portuguese father). And vice versa.
Thus. people who talk about “Aryan”, “Semitic”, “Russian”, “Finnish”, “Celtic” haplogroups not in their conventional marker meaning tied to MODERNITY, but in a literally understood one, and even transfer these definitions to the distant past - are mistaken and confuse others. The phrase “4500 years ago in the Voronezh region they found a skeleton identified by haplogroup as Russian, Russians began to exist 4500 years ago” does not make any sense. Russians have several haplogroups,- once . The skeleton does not represent a statistically significant sample - that's two (maybe this is the same Ashkenazi Jew from the 12% of carriers of the “Aryan” haplogroup R1a1? Or Kyrgyz?). Three:
Why on earth was it concluded that the mutation arose (and continued) exactly 4500 years ago? Were the skeletons of his father and grandfather, as well as the skeletons of his offspring, examined? Why didn't it arise 10 thousand years ago? And so on.
Answer: No. And it's not true. The stability of Russians as a people, their ethnic uniqueness is not determined by haplogroups, and neither is haplogroup R1a1.
Let's look at the data: if we take an average sample from several different studies with a 100% fit. then (remember that haplogroups are named according to MODERN distribution among peoples): 47% of Russians have the “Aryan” haplogroup R1a1
, which they inherited from the Proto-Slavs and other autochthons of Eastern Europe. 16% of Russians
- conditionally “Finnish” haplogroup N3. 7% of Russians - conditionally “Celtic” haplogroup R1b, which dominates among many peoples Western Europe
. This is a legacy of the presence of the Proto-Slavs in Central Europe. 5% of Russians
– “Northern European” haplogroup I1 (I1a according to the old classification), common in Scandinavia and Northern Europe. Apparently, these are the descendants of the notorious “Varangians”. 15% of Russians
– “Balkan” haplogroup I2 (formerly I1b), characteristic of the peoples of the Balkan Peninsula. This is an indirect consequence of Slavic expansion in the Balkans in the 6th-9th centuries, when Slavic newcomers actively mixed with the local autochthonous population. Some of the Slavs subsequently left the Balkans to the north and northeast (see “The Tale of Bygone Years”). 4% - “Eastern Mediterranean” haplogroup J2, typical of the ancient Greeks and even more ancient representatives of the Minoan civilization. For Russians this is most likely component
“Balkan heritage”, and maybe even earlier Hellenic colonization of the Northern Black Sea region. 6%
Russians are represented by the “Afrasian” haplogroup E, the frequency of which among Jews, Greeks, Balkan Slavs and southern Italians reaches 20% or more. This is the “Balkan trace” again. In total, the descendants of “Byzantine refugees” (settlers from the Balkans and the Black Sea region) make up more than 25% of Russians. We see, therefore (as expected from the answer to the second question) that haplogroups DO NOT determine “Russianness”
Answer: No. There are several problems here.
One can perceive with great skepticism and rather negatively the reports about the “correspondence of the distribution of haplogroups to historical migrations,” and all “haplogroup” conclusions about the time of the emergence of a particular people are likely to be considered at least unverifiable and strained.
Why? Because you need to not uncritically quote the “Klesovs” (“a scientist wrote!”) but THINK. First of all, with your own head, using logic and the education you have received. Firstly , the historical migrations of certain peoples in preliterate times are not an axiom. but the subject of scientific debate and discussion - both in terms of whether the bearers of a particular archaeological culture were representatives of a certain ethno-linguistic unity (we will never be able to say this with accuracy - pots and axes do not speak), and in terms of accuracy of correspondence of archaeological culture to a specific ethnic group or ethnocultural unity . Archaeological cultures are a complex of objects of material culture, things, their remains, or rather. From the point of view of an archaeologist of the 30th century, throughout Russia and Europe. In the United States in the 21st century, there will be a single, with local variations, archaeological culture of “tires, plastic bags, bottles, cans and computers”, in which the differences between nations in their material culture will not be visible. Although there is little reason to imply such globalization in antiquity, it is worth remembering. that the older the archaeological culture, the more blurred its ethnicity. Thus, the thesis “such and such a skeleton is undoubtedly Indo-European... has such and such a haplogroup” is immediately called into question. The fact that he is “undoubtedly” Indo-European, and not a foreigner who slipped in here and adopted the way of life of this tribe, still needs to be proven.
And with an extremely unrepresentative sample(agree, a dozen or a hundred burials over a huge area is not a sample, or at least a sample incomparable in terms of representativeness with a modern sample among living people) this is made almost equally probable, that is, uncertain. Secondly , tracing such migrations by haplogroups is extremely problematic due to the fact that (in the case of Indo-Europeans, for example) among the many archaeological cultures Bronze Age corpse burning in its various variations, the same in some territories in the Iron Age. The DNA material of the carriers of these cultures is irretrievably lost and we can say absolutely nothing about their haplogroups.
Thus, the “haplogroup” approach does not work here - vast territories and entire millennia fall out of its scope completely, depriving us of the opportunity to build any kind of succession chain of already extremely scarce and essentially unrepresentative material. Third , mutations occur on the Y chromosome randomly and can both increase and “decrease” (or return to the original, source code). This indicates that you cannot determine the time and place of the emergence of this or that “group”
due to constant migrations, which could be by land or sea, and mutations that occur throughout the life of a particular historical human community. Fourthly, theoretically, the very accuracy of the study of the modern distribution of haplogroups can be questioned - i.e. that initial material extrapolated to the past (difficulty in determining ethnic background
persons taking the test - who is stopping you from calling yourself Russian or Belarusian?). With relatively small samples and controversial issues like “Russian-Ukrainian” (in fact, a free question of self-designation), this is extremely important and can decide everything.
In other words, transferring the modern distribution of sets of haplogroups into the past is unjustified, and if so, then it is impossible to draw conclusions about the ethnicity of certain human remains, passing them off as someone’s ancestors only on this basis. It's forced and superficial.
To summarize everything described.
References to haplogroups as an “unconditional indicator of ethnicity” are untenable. - Haplogroups are research tools, statistically significant markers. Real, objectively observed Y chromosomes do not carry any significant ethnic information
in the gene code.
- Russians (like Germans, Finns and Turks, etc.) exist and are unique not due to haplogroups.
- Any nation has not one, but two, three or more haplogroups in its set, and there is no reason to make some “less pure” and others “more pure”, for the reason described in the thesis above.
- We a priori cannot reconstruct reliable migrations based on haplogroups. and even more so - the date of origin (emergence) of this or that modern ethnic group.
The scientific data below is a terrible secret. Formally, this data is not classified, since it was obtained by American scientists outside the field of defense research, and was even published in some places, but the conspiracy of silence organized around it is unprecedented. The atomic project at its initial stage cannot even be compared: then some things still leaked into print, and in in this case- nothing at all.
What is this terrible secret, the mention of which is a worldwide taboo? This is the secret of origin and historical path Russian people.
Agnation.
Why information is hidden - more on that later. First, briefly about the essence of the discovery of American geneticists.
There are 46 chromosomes in human DNA, half of which he inherits from his father, half from his mother. Of the 23 chromosomes received from the father, only one - the male Y chromosome - contains a set of nucleotides that is passed on from generation to generation without any changes for thousands of years. Geneticists call this set a haplogroup. Every man living now has in his DNA exactly the same haplogroup as his father, grandfather, great-grandfather, great-great-grandfather, etc. for many generations.
The haplogroup, due to its hereditary immutability, is the same for all people of the same biological origin, that is, for men of the same nation. Everyone has a biological original people has its own haplogroup, different from similar sets of nucleotides in other peoples, which is its genetic marker, a kind of ethnic mark. In the biblical system of concepts, one can imagine the matter in such a way that the Lord God, when He divided humanity into different peoples
, each marked with a unique set of nucleotides in the Y chromosome of DNA. (Women also have such marks, only in a different coordinate system - in the mitochondrial DNA rings.)
(Of course, there is nothing absolutely unchangeable in nature, for movement is a form of existence of matter. Haplogroups also change (in biology such changes are called mutations), but very rarely, at intervals of millennia, and geneticists have learned to very accurately determine their time and place. Thus, American scientists found that one such mutation occurred 4,500 years ago on the Central Russian Plain. A boy was born with a slightly different haplogroup than his father, to which they assigned the genetic classification R1a1. The paternal R1a mutated and a new R1a1 arose admin.- about the boy and dating - you shouldn’t take it so literally, this is just one of the hypotheses, but there is also).
The mutation turned out to be very viable. The R1a1 genus, which was started by this same boy, survived, unlike millions of other genera that disappeared when their genealogical lines were cut off, and multiplied over a vast area. Currently, holders of haplogroup R1a1 make up 70% of the total male population of Russia, Ukraine and Belarus, and in ancient Russian cities and villages - up to 80%. R1a1 is a biological marker of the Russian ethnic group. This set of nucleotides is “Russianness” from a genetic point of view.
“For some reason, it seems to me that you are looking for this item,” the stranger took a flash drive from his pocket and shook it in the air.
“I think we’ve made your search easier,” the stranger grinned and immediately introduced himself: “And I’m FSB Colonel Kuzmin from the Internal Security Service.” And this,” he turned to the tall elderly man, “is Colonel Kryachko from the Ministry of Internal Affairs.” And we, gentlemen, have serious questions for both of you, which we will ask, although within completely different walls.
The next moment, armed submachine gunners in black uniforms began to enter the office, with “FSB Special Forces” written on their backs. When the handcuffs snapped onto Vikulov’s wrists, Kuzmin approached him and stated:
- And it’s beautiful, Edik, you talked about state interests. I like it. And if there had been some less seasoned cop in Lev Ivanovich’s place, he would have bought it too. Only Gurov, for his service, sent more than one businessman in uniform like you to jail.
- Listen, Kuzmin, do you even understand that all this is useless? – Vikulov asked with a tired smile on his lips. “There,” he nodded at the ceiling, “up there, everything will be decided not in your favor.”
“We’ll see,” Kuzmin shrugged. – If anything, we’re not used to it.
He took his mobile phone out of his pocket and, making a call, told someone:
And at that moment, Gurov watched at the window as several cars stopped on the street near the van where he was sitting, and the machine gunners who ran out of them burst inside. A few seconds later they were already leading Vikulov’s handcuffed assistants out, and a minute later Gurov himself came out of the car, stepping carefully.
“Yes,” Kryachko drawled, “they patted Levka, it seems.”
“But it was his decision,” Kuzmin, who was standing next to him at the window, answered him. - Gurov is a strong man. I promised to take him fishing. Let's heal his nerves there...
Gurov slowly sat down on the sofa in Smirnov’s office, wincing from the pain in his back. He continued to feel weak and dizzy. Mechanically, he reached for the package of medicine.
- How are you feeling? – Stas asked him, who, as usual, settled down at the banker’s desk.
“They gave me a good time, the bastards.” They didn't spare the charge.
- Eh, Leva! – still cheerful, exclaimed Kuzmin with a smile, who, standing at the window, watched as the special forces “packed” Poroshin and Vikulov into the car. - Considering the group we contacted, we can say that you got off with a slight fright. To be honest,” Kuzmin turned away from the window and looked at Gurov, “your chances of surviving were fifty-fifty.” Even after we got involved in the matter.
“Thank you, friend,” Gurov grinned. “Thank you for telling me about this now and not before.”
– No, you just don’t understand what the MKK company is! During his service, General Pivovarov, who heads it, took over several semi-criminal and even criminal companies that supplied him with cash. And then, when he went into reserve, they simply came under his command. Gambling networks, illegal transportation of goods - all this brought good income. The company laundered and transferred huge amounts of cash abroad, buying assets there. Gradually they expanded their illegal business, becoming stronger. In some ways, they even crossed the path of the banking mafia, beginning to compete with them in the field of money laundering. This was precisely the interest of Shulman, who wanted to spoil MKK with your help. I am sure that he largely supplied information to the late Smirnov.
– What about Smirnov? Was he in on it too? – asked Kryachko.
- No. Smirnov is a truly honest banker who received carte blanche from the government elite to restore order in the banking sector. Being an uncompromising person, he actively took up this matter, confident that those at the top would insure him and cover him.
- It turns out that the higher-ups ditched him?
Kuzmin hesitated to answer, choosing his words. Then, shrugging his shoulders, he said:
– It turns out that this is so... Tell me, Leva, how did you find out that Poroshin and Vikulov work for MKK?
– As for Vikulov, I have long suspected. By the way information about the investigation was leaking, by how quickly we were moving along the wrong trail, someone must have been working within our brigade. For example, the gun was clearly planted on this fake gang of killers. And the way Vikulov drove slowly with his brother on the day of Alekseev’s arrest, allowing the killers to get there before him, also suggested something. A lot became clear to me when I received this flash drive. I realized that the MKK company decided to transfer huge amounts of money. These transactions did not go unnoticed by competitors and Smirnov. And he clung to them with a death grip, thus sealing his fate. The owners of MKK had no other choice. The banker's activities threatened with huge losses, and therefore they decided to take an extreme measure - murder. But they are experienced people, and they decided to do it carefully. They invited an experienced, proven specialist - Georgy Tregubov, I believe that too former employee General Pivovarov. And I also realized that it was impossible to launder such money without the knowledge of someone from the Central Bank. And on the flash drive, Smirnov apparently pointed this out on the last day, mentioning the name Poroshina. Perhaps he did not fully believe in his guilt and just wanted to talk to him in order to clarify some sensitive points.
– It was after you caught Tregubov in a trap that this plan came into your head involving involving our service in the case and setting up yourself as bait? – Kuzmin asked, grinning.
- Yes. The calculation was that after the arrest of Tregubov, with whom we were largely lucky, they would act hastily, take risks and make mistakes. As you can see, that's exactly what happened.
“You took the risk yourself, Leva,” Kuzmin grinned. – What if I, too, turned out to be a werewolf in uniform? Or my boss?
“I’m still taking risks,” Gurov grumbled. – In fact, it is not completely clear how those whom you call “the top” will behave in this story. In the case of Smirnov, everything turned out tragically.
A new book on DNA genealogy shows the pattern of mutations on the Y chromosome of ancient human ancestors over hundreds of thousands of years, and shows how this pattern of mutations relates to human history. It is shown how these mutation patterns can be converted into chronological indicators, and dating ancient and relatively recent historical events in years, centuries, millennia. At the same time, the chronometer that allows dating is not “external”; it is built into our DNA. Therefore, calculations in DNA genealogy are fundamentally protected from manipulation “from the outside,” just as, for example, the half-transformation times of radioactive elements in physics and chemistry are protected. No matter what you do, radioactive decay “ticks” in time, as it should according to physical laws. It’s the same in DNA genealogy – mutations “tick” according to the same laws, the fundamental patterns are the same. These are the laws - methodological basis DNA genealogy, and it, this basis, allows us to build the history of human development on all continents. So, the book shows DNA genealogy in haplogroups from A to T. In other words, the DNA genealogy of every male reader, without exception, is described, some almost literally, some from a bird’s eye view, and so that it turns out to be literal - you just need to do a test for haplogroups-subclades and haplotypes. Who is this book for? For those who want to understand their history and their ancestors, and how this personal story built into the history of its ethnic group, country, and all of humanity.
A series: DNA genealogy
* * *
The given introductory fragment of the book DNA genealogy from A to T (A. A. Klyosov, 2016) provided by our book partner - the company liters.
What does the tree of haplogroups of humanity indicate in its early stage (haplogroups A00 to BT)?
The haplogroup tree is a series of four forks, that is, divergences of the evolutionary tree of humanity, from the “parallel” haplogroups A00 and A0-T (first fork) to the “parallel” A1b1 and BT (fourth fork). Between them are forks into “parallel” haplogroups A0 and A1, and into A1a and A1b. Each fork represents a divergence into African (A00, A0, A1a, A1b1) and non-African (A0-T, A1, A1b, BT) branches - each modern place residence of the main part of the haplogroup.
If we translate the dating discussed above into a hypothesis, this may mean that in the time interval between 130 and 64 thousand years ago, carriers of haplogroup A1b1 went to Africa, where their descendants continue to live now, and carriers of haplogroup BT remained where the population bottleneck passed, and over thousands of years they gave rise to a variety of non-African descendants who diverged into different haplogroups, from B to T.
Tree of 12-marker haplotypes of carriers of haplogroup A1 (103 people) according to the African project of the FTDNA company. Branch A – Scotland and Ireland; branch B – Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Egypt, branch C – Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Qatar, Egypt; branch D – most unknown (apparently African), interspersed with England, Switzerland, Cape Verde; branch E – all unknown (apparently African); branch F – exclusively Europe (Finland, England, Norway); branch G – all unknown (apparently Africa); branch N - Algeria, Chad, Italy, Tunisia, Egypt, Saudi Arabia; branch I – Kuwait, Türkiye; branch K – England, Ireland, Scotland.
Let us dwell briefly on haplogroup A1, since it plays special role in the evolution of humanity. It includes two forks - the divergence of A1 into Aga and A1b approximately 160 thousand years ago, when the male part of humanity diverged into African and non-African branches, and the divergence of A1b into A1b1 and BT, which was interfered with by the passage of the bottleneck of non-African and African populations. It should be clarified that the concept of “fork” should not be taken literally; divergent haplogroups could have formed tens of thousands of years apart. The important thing is that they do not come from each other.
The haplotype tree shows that carriers of haplogroup A1 diverge into two main branches - A1a-M31 and AL-M13. The former occupy the lower part of the tree, and their origin in the database is usually listed as “unknown”. These are most likely haplotypes of African origin. The top part of the tree is occupied by A1b-M13, mostly of European and Middle Eastern origin. The common ancestor of the predominantly African A1a-M31 lived 7400 ± 900 years ago, the common ancestor of the predominantly non-African A1b-M13 lived 3400 ± 400 years ago. Both haplogroups are dominated by relatively young branches (flat on the haplotype tree), which formed only a few hundred years ago. So if African lines are ancient, if we measure their antiquity by snips, then modern Africans have the common ancestors of their lines relatively recently. As mentioned above, many non-Africans have moved to Africa over the past few millennia - these include numerous carriers of haplogroups E1b, J2, R1b, and others. Among them are millions of modern residents West Africa(Berbers, inhabitants of Cameroon and Chad), Egyptians, descendants of the Boers in South Africa, and so on. There are few “indigenous” Africans left in Africa, often at the level of a few percent or even less. I repeat that we don’t have “African” A0 snips, you don’t have to look for them, there aren’t any of its 901 snips. Our ancestors did not leave Africa, or, in any case, are not descendants of either A00 or A0.
It must be said that the databases contain only the haplotypes of people who paid money for DNA analysis, or for whom volunteer donors paid. Therefore, it is impossible to take haplotype abundance ratios from commercial databases without cross-comparisons with “academic” samples. But even according to “academic” data, few carriers of haplogroups A00 and A0 have been found in Africa. The researchers pointed out that only after a long search they found three (!) carriers of haplogroup A0, all in Cameroon, and noted that this haplogroup has a very low frequency occurrence. The same applies to haplogroup A1a - researchers managed to find only two (!) carriers of A1-A1a-M31 in Africa for genomic research.
But with A1 and the subsequent A1b-P108/V221 it is much easier; billions of men on the planet have them, including the author of this book. Of the 62 SNPs of haplogroup A1, I have L986, L989, L1002, L1009, L1112, V238, V241, V250. The rest are missing because not all snips are identified for everyone. The same is with the lower subclade A1b, 44 of which are found in almost all non-Africans, including me - for example, L989, L1009, L1013, L1053, P108, V221.
Regarding the fourth fork - the divergence of haplogroup A1b into A1b1 and BT, it should be noted that the following subclades from A1b1 are found in only a few Africans, but from A1b1 and BT there are billions of inhabitants of the planet. So consider who came from whom. The answer is clear - Africans from non-Africans. Our ancestors did not leave Africa.
So, the descendants of A1b1 now live in minimum quantity in Africa, and the descendants of the BT haplogroup are all non-African haplogroups from B to T. According to YFull, only 34 snips lead to A1b1, only 2 snips lead to the A1b1a-V50 subclade, 11 snips lead to A1b1a1-M23, none of them we do not have. There are no dates for any of the subclades descending from A1b1 in the YFull list, and it is clear why - their carriers are extremely rare, and there is no data. All of us, the readers of this book, and billions of others have VT snips. I have, for example, L418, L604, L962, L970, L977, PF1408 and others.
We see that the “African DNA lines” are not at all older than those of non-Africans. If we trace “antiquity” from common ancestors with ancient primates, then African lines are no different from non-African ones and have the same depth. If we count from the time of life of the common ancestors of modern male populations - by tribes or by territories, then African DNA lines are very small, much smaller than non-African ones. If we count from the formation of haplogroups, then no one knows in which territories or continents they were formed, so assigning them the name “African” is incorrect. Moreover, there are very few carriers of these haplogroups, category A, in Africa. There may be various reasons for this - populations have passed through bottlenecks, become extinct, or arrived in Africa relatively recently - of great importance no, they are not “ancient” in the sense that population geneticists mean.
But there is such a thing as cumulative DNA lines. This is when the DNA lines themselves are small, but they are scraps of ancient spreading trees of haplogroups and subclades. We only see the tops, but extrapolating the tops, in this case the haplotypes of these “scraps,” allows us to see when the common ancestors of these scattered haplotypes lived. We have already seen this above - a comparison of the haplotypes of the “small” populations of haplogroups A00 and A0 shows that they diverge over astronomical distances. The "scraps" themselves share common ancestors just a few hundred years ago, but they are separated by half a million years, which means that their common ancestors lived about 250 thousand years ago. The situation is the same with haplogroups A0 and B; they diverge by 270 thousand years. It is clear that at such distances the second could not have formed from the first during the entire period of existence Homo sapiens . In this respect, African DNA lineages differ from non-African ones. Below we will look at this in more detail; this is one of the main mysteries of humanity.
Haplogroup A0, which is far removed from haplogroup B, is no exception here. Such huge distances separate haplogroup B from any haplotypes in subclades of category A, for example, 250 thousand years from Aoa-L981, 280 thousand years from Aib-M32, 310 thousand years from the European cluster of haplogroup A1a-M31, 360 thousand years from another cluster of that same haplogroup, 320 thousand years from the Arab cluster of the same haplogroup, 350 thousand years from Aoa-V150, 356 thousand years from Aoa-L979, 346 thousand years from A0a1a-V151, and so on. The greatest distance separates haplogroup B from A00 - 450 thousand years, that is, their common ancestor lived approximately 225 thousand years ago, at dawn Homo sapiens.
The same picture is observed for haplotypes of all haplogroups from B to T. For example, the distance from haplogroup C to A0 is 357 thousand years, to A0a1 – 300 thousand years, and so on. But the distance from B to C is only 120 thousand years, that is, their common ancestor lived about 60 thousand years ago. This is in full agreement with the picture that haplogroup B forms a single cluster with haplogroups B to T, and is not an “African” haplogroup in origin.
Apparently, it is already clear to everyone that haplogroup B was not formed from any haplogroup of category A (there is no haplogroup A as such, there are A00, A0-T, A0, A1, A1a, A1b, and so on), and they all originate from a common ancestor. This common ancestor lived approximately 160 thousand years ago, as mentioned above. Haplogroup A00 has remained, in a sense, a dead end; subclades and other DNA lines descending from it are unknown. A0-T passed its snips to both Africans and non-Africans, as shown above, since it was formed even before the division into African and non-African branches. The division into these branches corresponds to the times immediately before the formation of haplogroups A0 and A1, with A0 going to Africa and A1 remaining outside Africa. Subsequently, carriers of many haplogroups migrated to Africa, for example, A1a and lower subclades, A1b1 and lower subclades, so we do not have their SNPs, as described above.
All this is described in an article published back in 2012, and which, by the way, gained record number views (more than 99 thousand) and downloads (more than 22 thousand). The nomenclature in this illustration is somewhat outdated and does not include haplogroup A00, which was unknown in 2012, but the gist of it is still correct. Haplogroup alpha is a conditional haplogroup from which the division of the evolutionary Y-chromosomal tree of humanity into African (left) and non-African lines came. Currently, all haplogroups from B to T, that is, haplogroups of non-African origin, converge on the conditional beta haplogroup, which in fact is the consolidated haplogroup VT. Riddle - where did the connection between the alpha and beta haplogroups, which stretches for one hundred thousand years, go? And by the way, where did the African DNA lineages go, which on the left side of the diagram are completely extrapolated, from common ancestors just a thousand to several thousand years ago, back in time?
Several years have passed since the publication of that article; since then, many haplotypes have accumulated in databases and in Projects, including extended, 111-marker ones, and it became possible to check the quantitative conclusions of the article. We have already verified that the divergence of African and non-African DNA lines occurred approximately 160 thousand years ago. Let's move on to the lifetime of the common ancestor of all non-African haplogroups from B to T. The figure shows a tree of haplotypes of these haplogroups. It is built according to 111 marker haplotypes, and the haplogroups themselves are shown along the circumference of the tree. For each of the 18 haplogroups, 10–25 haplotypes were used, taken randomly from the sample, for a total of 403 haplotypes in a 111-marker format. Haplogroups of category A were not left on the tree, since they clearly “climbed out” of the circular tree, since, as we have already shown, they are removed by mutations from all other haplogroups.
Y chromosome tree of humanity. The tree is constructed from 403 haplotypes in 111-marker format, containing a total of 44,733 characteristic numbers (alleles). These 403 haplotypes were distributed by a calculation program (PHYLIP) according to the principle of similarity and genealogical correspondence, and formed a series of branches, which, as it turned out, correspond to the most numerous haplogroups of humanity, from B to T, indicated under the branches. A calculation based on the number of mutations showed that the common ancestor of haplogroups B to T lived approximately 63 thousand years ago. This almost exactly coincides with the previously calculated value of 64 ± 6 thousand years.
It can be seen that all haplogroups from B to T form quite unified system DNA lines (expressed here through 111-marker haplotypes), so there is no need to talk about a certain “African haplogroup B”.
403 haplotypes in 111 marker format, that is, almost 45 thousand alleles - this is a tough nut to crack if you count manually. Moreover, over tens of thousands of years, tens of thousands of mutations accumulate in them, in addition, great amount recurrent mutations, which makes the 111-marker system of such antiquity unstable and unacceptable for calculations, since dating is significantly underestimated. Therefore, for these cases, a 22-marker panel of the “slowest” markers was developed. They are so stable over time that for all 403 haplotypes over tens of thousands of years, the marker DYS472 has not mutated even once, DYS436 - only 30 times, DYS590 - 42 times, and so on. Compare: the DYS390 marker should mutate 2270 times during the same time, that is, an average of 5.6 times per haplotype. At such mutation frequencies, calculating the contribution of reverse mutations is practically impossible; the system is unstable.
But the “slow” 22-marker panel with low mutation rates makes it possible to carry out calculations tens and hundreds of thousands of years in depth, and even millions of years, as was shown above in the example of calculating the lifespan of the common ancestors of humans and chimpanzees. Moreover, the developed Kilin-Klyosov calculator carries out calculations for each marker separately and does not require corrections for recurrent mutations. As a result, DNA genealogy has received an indispensable method for calculating massive series of haplotypes in any format and any antiquity of a common ancestor. Calculation of the tree of 403 haplotypes given above showed that the common ancestor of haplogroups B to T lived approximately 63 thousand years ago (the result without rounding is 63036 years, which, of course, is completely unnecessary with such precision). This almost exactly coincides with the previously calculated value of 64 ± 6 thousand years.
Now it remains to approach the solution to the riddle formulated in that article - let’s repeat it again: where did the ancestors of the Y-chromosomal lines in Africa go earlier 5-10 thousand years ago, and among non-Africans earlier 64 ± 6 thousand years ago? Moreover, in African lines of group A it is possible indirectly, namely by comparing extended haplotypes with “shallow” common ancestors, to reach the lifetime of common ancestors 130 thousand years ago, and in non-Africans, no matter how their haplotypes are combined or compared, deeper 64 ± 6 It’s impossible to leave for thousands of years. More ancient common ancestors, like a cow licked its tongue. What kind of cow was this?
Some assumptions were made in the cited article - mentioned possible consequence eruption of Mount Toba in Indonesia, about 70 thousand years ago. A sharp cooling could not be ruled out, perhaps as a result of the eruption of the same volcano, and, according to experts, the catastrophic rank of global cooling is much higher than volcanic eruptions, but this all remained rather abstract assumptions. And in general - for a volcanic eruption in Indonesia to lead to the death of almost all people on the planet - it seems unlikely, this is all “in theory”. A specialist’s opinion was needed, even if the opinion was controversial and ambiguous, but most importantly, it was confirmed by specific data. And there is such an expert on this problem - Valery Pavlovich Yurkovets, a professional geophysicist, paleoclimatologist, specialist in the field of the influence of climate disasters, including those of an impact nature. Here I will briefly outline his concept, and let’s see how well it can be combined with DNA genealogy data.
V.P. Yurkovets provides convincing evidence that between 57 and 71 thousand years ago a large cosmic body fell into Pacific Ocean, which in turn caused a megatsunami, the so-called cosmogenic megatsunami. The size of this body was probably comparable to the Ladoga impact - the fall of a massive asteroid about kilometers across to the north of the Russian Plain, but in terms of catastrophic consequences it was orders of magnitude greater. As V.P. writes Yurkovets, stone meteorite with a diameter of 10 m causes destruction on land within a radius of a little more than a kilometer, which instantly leads to the emergence of a very strong tsunami of seismic origin. But when a large cosmic body falls into the ocean, the destructive consequences are immeasurably greater. In this case, several giant waves appear one after another. With a meteor diameter of n km, it exceeds the depth of the ocean in size almost anywhere, reaches ocean floor at the moment of impact, and can easily break through the thin (average thickness of 7 km) oceanic crust, which will lead to an eruption and the generation of an additional tsunami wave. In the open ocean, tsunamis travel at speeds reaching 700 km/h, that is, the speed of an airplane. Cosmogenic megatsunamis form giant waves that roll across continents. According to the conclusion of V.P. Yurkovets, megatsunami - this is what humanity “licked like a cow with its tongue” in the middle of the 70th millennium BC, 64 ± 6 thousand years ago, as DNA genealogy shows, which coincides with the 4th marine isotope stage, or MIS 4 ( 71–57 thousand years ago), identified by paleoclimatologists based on the sharp deterioration of climatic conditions on the planet.
But there was not only sharp deterioration climatic conditions, deterioration may be due to various reasons. And the eruption of the Toba volcano about 70 thousand years ago may by chance (or not by chance) coincide in time with the disappearance of almost all of humanity. The fact that it was at that time on the paleoclimatic curves given in the article by V.P. Yurkovets, there is a sharp increase in dust in the atmosphere, a decrease in temperature, an increase in the mass of glaciers - this, of course, is not a gift to humanity, but it does not yet speak of a megatsunami. But the fact that, in addition to all this, paleoclimate curves indicate a sharp salinization of the entire Antarctica, that is, the overflow of the entire continent with sea water, is already an anomaly of a global nature. Moreover, ice cores on both hemispheres show a sharp increase in sodium in the ice, which could only come from seawater. This more than extraordinary event occurred approximately 68 thousand years ago. Thus, as emphasized by V.P. Yurkovets, all the catastrophic events of that time were connected into a single knot.
The data given in the article by V.P. Yurkovets in the Bulletin of the Academy of DNA Genealogy, convincingly indicate the scale of the cosmogenic catastrophe that occurred on Earth 57–71 thousand years ago. She couldn’t leave anything alive on the planet, but it turns out that she did. Animals and birds have survived, although it is known that after 50 thousand years ago (rough estimate) most animals disappeared from the face of the Earth. There are no explanations, except perhaps “in terms of concepts”, for example, that they were destroyed by a person. But after the cosmogenic catastrophe, man himself survived in such small quantities that his survival literally hung by a thread.
Let's look at non-Africans first. A minimal number of them survived, which led to the “population bottleneck” effect 64 ± 6 thousand years ago. In fact, in those days, a certain father and mother had at least two surviving sons, who also gave birth to surviving offspring, and they gradually began to grow in numbers. All the other people who survived the disaster could also give birth to offspring, but they were cut short and did not survive. As a result, almost all modern men on the planet, at least those hundreds of thousands of people who have passed the test for haplotypes-haplogroups of the Y-chromosome, formally converge in mutations in haplotypes to one common ancestor, the same patriarch from whom at least two survived sons who gave birth to surviving male offspring in the middle of the 70th millennium ago.
It should be emphasized that that patriarch had in his Y-chromosome, of course, the entire chain of hundreds of thousands of SNPs leading from common ancestors with other hominids, and further up the chain of Y-chromosome SNPs, through A0-T, A1, A1b, BT , as described above. The carriers of these SNPs as terminal ones died in a catastrophe, but the survivor, who became the patriarch of non-African humanity, preserved them, and he had the VT haplogroup. Surely hundreds of thousands and millions of people who died in the catastrophe had many other haplogroups and subclades formed before the time of the catastrophe, but they died, and those haplogroups and subclades were not inherited. Therefore, the countdown of surviving generations began precisely from the VT haplogroup, and not from the time of its formation, but from the time of the bottleneck caused by the disaster. This haplogroup was called the beta haplogroup, due to the fact of survival, and not the fact of formation, perhaps millennia before the disaster.
It is still unknown about women; perhaps, for some reason, there were many more of them left after the disaster, but there was little sense in that for future generations if almost all the men died. But it is possible that men with the same Y chromosome, that is, from the same father, were born from many different mothers, just like their daughters who do not have a Y chromosome. In this case, the common mtDNA ancestor, that is, the foremother, may turn out to be much older than 64 ± 6 thousand years ago. But such calculations are unknown, and the methods of calculations based on mtDNA are not so perfect, and continue to be debated. However, a recent paper reports that all mtDNA of modern non-Africans converges on a common ancestor who lived (or rather lived) between 60 and 79 thousand years ago. This is haplogroup L3. The figure shows that the oldest haplogroup is Lo, which is considered "African", and which represents a large series of fifty "African" haplogroups found mainly in sub-Saharan Africa - among the Khoisan population of South Africa, as well as in Ethiopia, Tanzania, Mozambique and among pygmies - is not ancestral in relation to all other mtDNA haplogroups. Moreover, the lifetime of the common ancestor of mtDNA practically coincides with the lifetime of the Y-haplogroup BT and with the time of the cosmogenic catastrophe described here.
Finally, Neanderthal fossils in Asia and the Middle East also date back no earlier than 50,000 to 70,000 years ago, with all those for whom DNA has been tested reported to have a common ancestor in the same time frame. In other words, their “diversity” was minimal; they were all fairly close relatives.
Picture of mtDNA SNPs on initial stage their education. It can be seen that the oldest haplogroup is L0, which is considered “African”, and which represents a large series of fifty “African” haplogroups found mainly in sub-Saharan Africa - among the Khoisan population of South Africa, as well as in Ethiopia, Tanzania, Mozambique and among the Pygmies – is not ancestral to all other mtDNA haplogroups. Non-African mtDNAs are thought to converge on a common ancestor, haplogroup L3.
According to.
Let us now move on to the African part of humanity. However, everything that was said above about civilizations in the times before the cosmogenic catastrophe also applies to Africans, if they lived there up to 60 thousand years ago. We don’t know that either. The times of the common ancestors of modern “autochthonous” Africans do not exceed 5-10 thousand years ago (see above), and the chains of their snips, going back hundreds of thousands of years, are not tied to Africa. However, we will proceed from the fact that people lived in Africa in the period before the disaster, because ancient skeletal remains of people dating back up to 200 thousand years ago are found there. We, I repeat, do not know if they were our ancestors, and we will not know until their bones are tested for DNA. So, the vast majority of those people also died in a cosmogenic catastrophe, but unlike non-Africans, people survived, perhaps only a few people, but from different DNA lines. The non-African patriarch, I remind you, was of the BT haplogroup. The African patriarchs were of several lines, but we do not know what they were, where those lines/haplogroups were formed, perhaps outside of Africa, and their carriers came there later, but before the catastrophe. Or maybe after the disaster.
If a large cosmic body really fell into the Pacific Ocean, and both Americas, Asia and Australia were subjected to the strongest wave impacts, then Africa turned out to be somewhat to the side and at a greater distance. The destruction there was gigantic, too, but a certain number of carriers of these haplogroups still unknown to us survived, along with women, carriers of hereditary mtDNA. Therefore, men began their revival not from one haplogroup, but from several. Thus, they received some “diversity”, which subsequently multiplied many times due to numerous migrations to Africa - especially the arriving haplogroups B, E1b, R1b (in Cameroon-Chad and South Africa, descendants of the Boers), JT and J2 (including the Lemba tribe in South Africa). Africa and the like), and so on. This is how “ genetic diversity”, which practically does not apply to “autochthonous” Africans. Africa is an open system, and the concept of “diversity” open systems not applicable.
