42 U7 mtDNA, czyli wielki kłopot dla tych, co jeszcze ciągle marzą, o „południowej drodze R1a”, i o tym, że Scyci (a także Sarmaci) i Słowianie to jedno i to samo…

Davidski said…
Who brought U7 to Siberia??? Probably Scythians or a similar Iron Age group.
April 10, 2017 at 6:38 AM

Davidski said…
Hopefully the upcoming papers will clear away the smoke and we’ll see blue sky. Not sure that they will. We might have to wait longer for a definitive answer. But it won’t matter much, if, for instance, we see more samples from Maykop, Kura-Araxes and Chalcolithic Iran and surrounds, and the uniparental markers still look wrong, with all sorts of weird stuff, like M and U7, that is found in the ancient Caucasians and Iranians, but missing in Yamnaya and close relatives. At the same time, if Mesolithic, Neolithic and Eneolithic steppe samples show R1b-M269, R1b-L51 and R1b-Z2103, then it’ll be practically over, without it being said outright.
April 10, 2017 at 8:35 PM

Karl_K said…
„On a lighter note: R and R1 is rooted in South Asia” There is literally an ancient genome sequence with a pre-split R* haplotyoe from a location far from South Asia >20,000 years ago.
April 12, 2017 at 8:56 AM

Dane same przychodzą, jak nie z męskiego, to z żeńskiego DNA,.. ale trzeba je chcieć znaleźć i zrozumieć…  Tłumaczę:

Haplogrupy mtDNA U7 NIE MA WŚRÓD SŁOWIAN, itp, patrz mapka…

Gdyby R1a szła „południową drogą”, jak to utrzymują „łowcy ruskich trolli” i im podobni, no to gdzie w takim razie podziała się mtDNA U7, skoro co najmniej 12,500 lat temu była obecna na południe od Skałkazu,..hm?!! R1a nie gustowali w kobietach z U7,.. bo były brzydkie, czy może tych R1a tam zwyczajnie nie było, hm? 😉

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_U_(mtDNA)

(…) Haplogroup U7

Haplogroup U7 is considered a West Eurasian-specific mtDNA haplogroup, believed to have originated in the Black Sea area approximately 30,000-years-ago.[84][85][86] In modern populations, U7 occurs at low frequency in the Caucasus,[86] the western Siberian tribes,[87] West Asia (about 4% in the Near East, while peaking with 10% in Iranians),[84] South Asia (about 12% in Gujarat, the westernmost state of India, while for the whole of India its frequency stays around 2%, and 5% in Pakistan),[84] and the Vedda people of Sri Lanka where it reaches it highest frequency of 13.33% (subclade U7a).[88] One third of the West Eurasian-specific mtDNAs found in India are in haplogroups U7, R2 and W. It is speculated that large-scale immigration carried these mitochondrial haplogroups into India.[84]

The U7 subclades are: U7a (with deep-subclades U7a1, U7a2, U7a2a, U7a2b)[89] and U7b.[89]

Genetic analysis of individuals associated with the Late Hallstatt culture from Baden-Württemberg Germany considered to be examples of Iron Age „princely burials” included haplogroup U7.[90] Haplogroup U7 was reported to have been found in 1200-year-old human remains (dating to around 834), in a woman believed to be from a royal clan who was buried with the Viking Oseberg Ship in Norway.[91] Haplogroup U7 was found in 1000-year-old human remains (dating to around AD 1000-1250) in a Christian cemetery is Kongemarken Denmark. However, U7 is rare among present-day ethnic Scandinavians.[87]

The U7a subclade is especially common among Saudis, constituting around 30% of maternal lineages in the Eastern Province.[92] (…)

Wyznawcy „południowej drogi R1a”, czy rozumiecie co tu jest napisane, czy jakiś profesor musi to wam jeszcze raz napisać? 🙂

http://eurogenes.blogspot.co.uk/2017/04/the-story-of-mtdna-haplogroup-u7.html

Friday, April 7, 2017

The story of mtDNA haplogroup U7

A very useful new paper on the origin and spread of mitochondrial (mtDNA) haplogroup U7 has just appeared at Scientific Reports.

It re-iterates some key points that I’ve made about this haplogroup; that it’s a South Caspian-specific lineage and conspicuous by its absence from all Yamnaya samples sequenced to date. In fact, along with other South Caspian-specific lineages, such as U1, U3a, HV2 and HV0, it’s missing from all Early Bronze Age steppe samples sequenced to date (see here).

This is surely a major problem for those positing that ancient populations from the South Caspian, in other words what is now mostly Iran, made a significant contribution to the formation of Early Bronze Age steppe pastoralist groups, including Yamnaya.

However, I’d say the paper’s conclusion that U7 probably spread into Europe before the Early Bronze Age is a bit iffy. Based on the available ancient European mtDNA, it looks to me as if it mostly spread into Europe after the Early Bronze Age. So why are there European-specific U7 lineages, such as U7a19, seemingly with coalescent times dating to the Neolithic in Europe? Well, perhaps because after these lineages moved to Europe, they went extinct in the Near East? From the paper, emphasis is mine:

Abstract: Human mitochondrial DNA haplogroup U is among the initial maternal founders in Southwest Asia and Europe and one that best indicates matrilineal genetic continuity between late Pleistocene hunter-gatherer groups and present-day populations of Europe. While most haplogroup U subclades are older than 30 thousand years, the comparatively recent coalescence time of the extant variation of haplogroup U7 (~16–19 thousand years ago) suggests that its current distribution is the consequence of more recent dispersal events, despite its wide geographical range across Europe, the Near East and South Asia. Here we report 267 new U7 mitogenomes that – analysed alongside 100 published ones – enable us to discern at least two distinct temporal phases of dispersal, both of which most likely emanated from the Near East. The earlier one began prior to the Holocene (~11.5 thousand years ago) towards South Asia, while the later dispersal took place more recently towards Mediterranean Europe during the Neolithic (~8 thousand years ago). These findings imply that the carriers of haplogroup U7 spread to South Asia and Europe before the suggested Bronze Age expansion of Indo-European languages from the Pontic-Caspian Steppe region.

Compared to other subclades of hg U, both the phylogenetic structure and the ancestral origin of hg U7 are rather obscure. This haplogroup is characterized by generally low population frequencies and limited sequence diversity, despite a geographic distribution ranging from Europe to India [14,16,25,27,30,31,32,33]. Recently, it has been detected in skeletal remains from Southwest Iran [my note: that was U7a] dated ~six thousand years ago (kya) [34] as well as in remains from the Tarim Basin in Northwest China (3.5–4.0 kya) [35].

Another major episode of gene flow affecting the European gene pool appears to have occurred during the Late Neolithic and Early Bronze Age, from a source in the Pontic-Caspian Steppe region north of the Caucasus [3,54,66,72]. It has been suggested that this migration resulted in a further substantial shift in the genetic profile of Europeans and was a major vehicle for the movement of Indo-European languages to Europe [3,72], and likely also to South Asia54. Interestingly, the autosomal genetic component in Europeans considered to derive from the Steppe is almost fixed in two pre-Neolithic ancient genomes from the South Caucasus. This component is distributed eastwards towards South Asia as well54, where it mimics the distribution of U7 (Pearson’s r = 0.65, p = 0.01). Our time estimates for the expansion and differentiation of hg U7 in the Near East, Central Asia, South Asia, and Europe, however, predate these putative late Neolithic-early Bronze Age migrations and thereby rule them out as a major vehicle for the spread of U7 to Europe and South Asia. In this respect, it is also noteworthy that Yamnaya herders of the Steppe so far analysed (n = 43) show no traces of U7 [3,55,72,73] – and U7 is rarely found in this region today (Fig. 2).

The expansion time of hg U7 in the Near East, Central Asia and South Asia is more consistent with autosomal multi-locus estimates for the genetic separation of these regions during the Terminal Pleistocene74, suggesting a common demographic process, whose origin was unclear previously. Here, we show that the frequency and distribution of U7b lineages indicate an origin of this clade in the Near East, whilst for U7a these statistics cannot differentiate between South Asia and the Near East (including the Caucasus) as a possible homeland.

 

Sahakyan et al., Origin and spread of human mitochondrial DNA haplogroup U7, Scientific Reports 7, Article number: 46044 (2017), doi:10.1038/srep46044

See also…

Mitogenomes reveal post-Neolithic gene flow from the Near East to Tuscany

Big deal of 2016: the territory of present-day Iran cannot be the Indo-European homeland

Posted by Davidski at 7:47:00 PM 120 comments:

wagg said…
Aram: ” in one paper U7 was linked with Etruscans.”

Etruscans? Well, besides a mtDN U7 in Rostov Scythians (der Sarkissian et al, 2012 (IIRC)), U7 is also found in an old Norwegian Viking Burial (Holck, 2006), in a middle adges (Early christian period) Danish graves and in western Siberian peoples near the Urals (the Mansi IIRC) (for the two latter: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15838837, I think), so… Norway, Denmark, Urals… I’m definitely not looking in the Etruscan direction.
April 8, 2017 at 1:16 AM

Davidski said…
They mean Yamnaya is up to 50% CHG. They just didn’t express this too well, since CHG is not the autosomal genetic component in Europeans considered to derive from the Steppe; Yamnaya is actually that autosomal component, also known as Yamnaya-related or Steppe_EMBA.
April 8, 2017 at 2:12 AM

Davidski said…
Etruscans? Well, besides a mtDN U7 in Rostov Scythians (der Sarkissian et al, 2012 (IIRC)), U7 is also found in an old Norwegian Viking Burial (Holck, 2006), in a middle adges (Early christian period) Danish graves and in western Siberian peoples near the Urals (the Mansi IIRC) (for the two latter: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15838837, I think), so… Norway, Denmark, Urals… I’m definitely not looking in the Etruscan direction.

None of this contradicts the claim that U7 may have arrived in Italy with the Etruscans. I proposed this myself a couple of years ago…

http://eurogenes.blogspot.com.au/2015/03/mitogenomes-reveal-post-neolithic-gene.html
April 8, 2017 at 2:15 AM

wagg said…
Davidski: „None of this contradicts the claim that U7 may have arrived in Italy with the Etruscans. I proposed this myself a couple of years ago…” Well, it seems very unlikely to me. Scandinavians’ aDNA, Uralic peoples… I find it hard to believe. but who knows…
April 8, 2017 at 2:49 AM

Davidski said…
So you reckon the West Asian-specific U7a in Tuscany dated to after the Neolithic is more likely to be from Vikings or migrants from the Urals rather than the proto-Etruscans from, say, West Asia?
April 8, 2017 at 2:52 AM

Roy King said…
Could U7 be the mtDNA analogue of Y chromosomal haplogroup J2? Both spread through the Mediterranean from a presumptive S Caucasus/West Iranian source and, likely, post-date the Neolithic yet predate the end of the EBA in Europe.
April 8, 2017 at 4:51 AM

batman said…
„”Etruscans? Well, besides a mtDN U7 in Rostov Scythians (der Sarkissian et al, 2012 (IIRC)), U7 is also found in an old Norwegian Viking Burial (Holck, 2006), in a middle adges (Early christian period) Danish graves and in western Siberian peoples near the Urals (the Mansi IIRC) (for the two latter: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15838837”

None of this contradicts the claim that U7 may have arrived in Italy with the Etruscans. I proposed this myself a couple of years ago…”

Agree. Moreover – it reactulizes what some etymologer proposed decades ago – about a connection between the etno-nymes of the aet-nic groups known as (a)Et-Ros-ki and Rhos/Rus-ki.

With the U7 there’s yet again a possible connection between the Vendic/Russian area with the Vendic/Etruscan area.

The first one is already famous – as well as very well documented. Between the Venetic Bay at the top of the Adriatic Sea the first, venetian traders to be established were the Vendic traders that established the Venetian Bay as a harbour for export/import between the NE Europena mainland and the Mediterranean trading-circles.

Thus we re-actulize the connection between the Vindelici/Vennones/Wendi/Vends of the Amber-route with the Venedae/Veneje of NW Russia and Belo-Rus. The famous amber-route between the Venetian Bay and the Vistulan Veneti was well established no less than 6.000 years ago. As a highway for 5.000 years this Amber-route seem to have served as Europes major network for travel and trade throughout three successive periods – known as the Neolithic, the BA and the IA.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vistula_Veneti

April 8, 2017 at 4:52 PM

Davidski said…
I can think of at least three CHG/Iran_N-related admixture pulses into Italy.
– EBA expansions from the steppes
– LBA expansions from the East Med
– Contacts with the Balkans and West Asia during the Roman period
April 8, 2017 at 7:02 PM

Kristiina said…
When I look at the distribution of U7, the concentration of U7 in Western Siberia is of particular interest for me. I remember that Mansis carry a smaller amount of Yamna-related R1b-L23 and my first idea was to link both R1b-L23 and U7 in Mansis to Yamnaya influence. Then I checked the Excel file to get more detailed sub-clade information, and I see that Mansi U7 is U7a2b which is none of the deep India- or Iran-specific lineages. Instead, U7a2b is a smaller lineage with four branches: a Kurdish branch U7a2a, Mansi-Burusho branch U7a2b, Indian branch U7a2c and unnamed Burusho branch. It is significant that there is an old U7 branch stemming from West Asia and ending up in non-IE speaking Burusho and West Siberian Mansis.

As for Central Asian U7, I take note that Kirgiz U7 is U7a1a2 and closely related to a small Indian subclade with an older branch also present in Iran. Mongolian U7a3a1a1a1a and Bargut U7a3a1e are related to Iran NW branches. Kalmyk U7a3a1a1a2 is found in Jordania. Buryat U7 is U7a4c and the same haplotype is found in Turkish-speaking KaraNogays. U7a4 is distributed in Bedouins, Turkish and in an Iran Arabian.

Tajik and Afghan U7 haplotypes fall into U7a3b subclade, and they are relatively deep subclades with their own identity in a West Asian „family”. Uzbek U7 is U7a10a and has a sister subclade in India. Also Tajik U7a11 has a sister subclade in India, but Tajiks also have a deep haplotype in this same broadly West Asian U7 cluster. It is important that Central Asians (Afghans, Tajiks, Uzbeks, Kazakhs) also have their own very deep U7 subclades that are unique to them and not found elsewhere! These include U7a12, U7a13, U7a14, U7a15. This means that they have their own identity outside of Iran and India.

There is also an interesting early Chinese branch of U7, i.e. U7a3a1. This subclade is outside of any modern West Asian population so it probably goes back to the first Bronze Age contacts between Western China and West Asia.
April 8, 2017 at 11:07 PM

Davidski said…
Your claim is only based on R1a-Z93 turning up in aDNA from the steppe but unless we have aDNA from India or Pakistan, to argue that steppe is the source of South Asian R1a-Z93 is just prejudice. My claim is based on R1a-Z93 on the ancient European steppe, R1a-Z645 in Corded Ware, and both R1a and R1b in Northern European foragers. It’s all over. There’s nothing to debate on the topic.
April 9, 2017 at 1:19 PM

batman said…
Kristina, Great compilation. The skeleton from western Iran (Seb Gabi) is no more than 5.000 yrs old. Though, both this and the 4.000 years old U7 from the Tarim Basin are MINIMI-dates, rather than maximi. Which means U7 is still older in both Iran and Tarim. How much we still don’t know…

The spread of U7 across ancient Eurasia had that obviously reached both western Russia and Scandianvia no later than BA/IA. Considering that the same spread have reached tropical areas we may have to presume that the daugthers of Ursula 7 was pretty popular, active and adaptive during the late Eurasian Mesolithic, already.

Thus we may compare the U7-distribution as a west-to-east paralell of the SE Asian mt-dna C, that voyaged west to reach Carelia and Oleni Ostrov, no later than 7.500 BP, some 4.000 years after the Younger Dryas mass-extinction. Which means that, teoretically, some early spin-offs of U7 could have reached China some 7.500 years ago, already. Perhaps along y-dna O. Alternatively Q.

You’re obviously right about the close, continous connections between the dynasties of the Celtic and the Chineese Bronze Age. These connections are obviously far older though, spreading pottery no later than 9.000 yrs ago and agriculture no later than 7.500 yrs ago – between Uralia, Carelia (Sperring) and the old Bulgaria (Yamna). Which connects U7 to the early distribution of R1a/R1b, too, explaining its appearance in ancient DNA from western Russia and Scandinavia.

It seems obvious that the old, central waterway of central Eurasia – from Baltia to Uralia – have carried both men and women both ways since Early Neolithic.

It might be that the U7-spread confirms what the early distribution mt-dna C and Russian archaeology already have stated; An active and continous network of travel and trade along the Volga-Ural route were starting no later than 8.000 years ago – when the mesolithic pottery of Volga-Ural starts appearing along the rivers around the Baltic Ocean and the northern rivers of the Black Sea. As well as the rivers reaching the Persian bay and the Mediterranean Ocean.

The early ceramics of Iran shows the same basic motives as we find in the mesolithic idol from Shigir – as well as the first ceramics, whether CCC, PCW, TBK/LBK, CWC or BB. The same pits, fens, triangles, squares, zig-zags, fishbones, pillars, bows and arches seem to be the basic elements used on all of them, to express esthetic as well as symbolic qualities.

The descendants of U7 did obviously reach the eastern shores of the Atlantic as well as the rivers reaching the Pacific no later than EBA. Besides the potmaking cultures between the Black Sea/Caspian Sea and the Persian bay – no less than 5.000 years ago.

Which may indicate that the roots of the Scandianvian as well as the Chinese circles of U7 are of similar age. Seems that the alledged ‚first wave’ of U7 was splitting in a set of western versus eastern clads already some 11.000 years ago, before a ‚second wave’ made them multiply across large areas, as the mesolithic pottery became traditional craftsmanship and household items during both eastern and western neolithics.

http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/ceramics-iv
April 9, 2017 at 3:42 PM

Davidski said…

@batman Which connects U7 to the early distribution of R1a/R1b, too, explaining its appearance in ancient DNA from western Russia and Scandinavia. Total bullshit. There is no U7 in indigenous European forager groups carrying R1a/R1b. In fact, there’s not a single instance of U7 in any ancient European DNA until the Iron Age (Rostov Scythians).

April 9, 2017 at 7:29 PM

batman said…
@ Davidski „”Which connects U7 to the early distribution of R1a/R1b, too, explaining its appearance in ancient DNA from western Russia and Scandinavia.” Total bullshit. There is no U7 in indigenous European forager groups carrying R1a/R1b. In fact, there’s not a single instance of U7 in any ancient European DNA until the Iron Age (Rostov Scythians).”

The Scytian U7 from Rostov belongs to the cathegory „ancient DNA”.

I never claimed U7 to have spread among foragers. I just claimed that it could have. What’s clear is that there actually exists one, from Rostov-on-Don, that belongs to an area and a time when R1a/R1b completely dominated the Scytian-Sarmatian areas.

Likewise, the U7 from Xiaohe (ca. 4.000 BP), had company of some R1a1a-highlanders, too. When the same signatories – U7 and R1a1a – are found together in IA Scandianvia we have to suspect that they both were involved in the spread of the slash-and-burn-agriculture, able to utilize an agricultural production in the boreal woodlands, the northern steppelands and the higher elevations of Eurasia.

Which, in turn, connects to the early pottery of the Volga-Kunda-Don-Bug-Ertebolle-cultures – from which the GA/TBK/BB-technocomplexes arise and thus the EBK/LBK/BB/COW/PWC/CWC/CCC/PW-cultures.

Since the 6.000 yrs old U7 from Iran also connects to a well-known culture pioneering agriculture and pottery in Mesopotamia, we might suspect that the U7 was part of that effort – both south and north of the Caucasian mountain-range. Horsemaneure or not.
April 10, 2017 at 7:01 AM

Davidski said…

@batman I never claimed U7 to have spread among foragers. I just claimed that it could have. What’s clear is that there actually exists one, from Rostov-on-Don, that belongs to an area and a time when R1a/R1b completely dominated the Scytian-Sarmatian areas. Scythians also show other South Caspian mtDNA HGs, like HV2 and U1, which suggests that unlike East Euro foragers, Yamnaya, Srubnaya, and other older steppe groups, the Scythians actually had some maternal ancestry from Iran and surrounds. They were highly mobile and their presence south of the Caspian is documented in historical literature, so I’m not surprised they carried U7, HV2, U1 and so on.

April 10, 2017 at 7:07 AM

batman said…

Just note that the populations of western Russia, Estonia and Fenno-Scandia have old roots – as there were only two, known immigrations/spreads to these areas – unto modern time. The first known as „the pioneer-phase” when these areas were first populated after YD, the other as a consequence of the Holocene optimum (8.000-4.000 BP), when even higher elevations grew green, lush and tall – making slash-burn-agriculture possible across extraordinarily wide areas.

The spread of R1a is clearly connected to this quantum leap in population-growth across norther Eurasia. Just as the R1b-dynasty seems to be responsible for a similar and pretty contemporary growth in the lower, larger and milder plains of Eurasia, able to provide year-around grasslands for the larger bullhorns.

When we find Iron Age-samples from western Russia AND Scandinavia there is a certain possibility that also this clad have a pre-neolithic origin. The populations known to be „indigenous” to the mentioned areas where pretty ‚completed’ no later than LNE/BA.

Which is why one may suspect that U7, perhaps together with U5 and H/V, actually had something to do with the spread of agriculture OR pottery. Or both.

The 4.900 year old U7 from Iran may be of the same age and origin as the 4.000 yr old U7 from China. Moreover – the 2.500 yrs old sample from Rostov-on-Don and a 1.300 yrs old farming-woman from the Bay of Oslo may have a similar age, as independant clads.

Let’s hope they find some more U7 – both extant and ancient. The few samples so far mapped are definitly hinting at some very intresting trends. „At least tentatively”, to quote professor Kristiansen…

April 10, 2017 at 7:48 AM

ak2014b said…
@Kristiina Did you also look at that Palanichami et al 2015 paper that Davidski once blogged about, which has modern mtDNA samples from India and Bangladesh? And Derenko et al 2013, which had modern mtDNA samples from Iran? I’m looking at the data in both the papers when going through your comment, and am adding in references to any pertinent samples.

„I see that Mansi U7 is U7a2b which is none of the deep India- or Iran-specific lineages. Instead, U7a2b is a smaller lineage with four branches: a Kurdish branch U7a2a, Mansi-Burusho branch U7a2b, Indian branch U7a2c and unnamed Burusho branch.”

There’s two U7a2 samples and one U7a2b from south and central India.
There’s a U7a2a1 in a Kurd from Kermanshah in West Iran.

„As for Central Asian U7, I take note that Kirgiz U7 is U7a1a2 and closely related to a small Indian subclade with an older branch also present in Iran.”

There’s a U7a1* in a Persian from Fars Province in south Iran.
There’s several instances of U7a1a in north and east India and Bangladesh.

„Buryat U7 is U7a4c and the same haplotype is found in Turkish-speaking KaraNogays. U7a4 is distributed in Bedouins, Turkish and in an Iran Arabian.”

There’s one modern sample of U7a4 and 2 of U7a4a from India.
There’s one U7a4a sample in Iran, a Turkic speaking Qashqai from Fars in Iran’s south. There’s also one sample of U7a4a1 and 2 of U7a4a1a in Iran.

„There is also an interesting early Chinese branch of U7, i.e. U7a3a1. This subclade is outside of any modern West Asian population so it probably goes back to the first Bronze Age contacts between Western China and West Asia.

Tajik and Afghan U7 haplotypes fall into U7a3b subclade, and they are relatively deep subclades with their own identity in a West Asian „family”.’

Mongolian U7a3a1a1a1a and Bargut U7a3a1e are related to Iran NW branches. Kalmyk U7a3a1a1a2 is found in Jordania.”

The Chinese U7a3a1 could be from Iran, where it occurs. U7a3a1 doesn’t occur in Indian and Bangladeshi samples, however U7a3a occurs in India, whereas it was not found among the Iranian samples.

In India, there’s 3 instances of U7a3a, besides a handful of U7a3a3 samples, and quite a few of U7a3a2 and U7a3b1. In Bangladesh, there’s further 2 samples of U7a3b1. There’s a few U7a3b1a in Punjab in west India, as well as 1 sample of U7a3b1a in Gujarat and one in Uttar Pradesh in west and north India, respectively.

There’s 2 x U7a3a1, 1 x U7a3a2 and 3 x U7a3b1 all in Kerman and Fars provinces in southeast and south Iran respectively. It may be connected or coincidence, but the only M5 subclades found by Derenko et al 2013 in modern Iran were from the same two regions, Kerman and Fars, and were comprised solely of M5a2a4 or downstream and one instance of M5a2a1a. So there is the possibility that the M5 subclades and U7a3a subclades were introduced into Iran together from further to its east.
April 10, 2017 at 10:50 AM

 

Reklamy

Skomentuj

Wprowadź swoje dane lub kliknij jedną z tych ikon, aby się zalogować:

Logo WordPress.com

Komentujesz korzystając z konta WordPress.com. Wyloguj / Zmień )

Zdjęcie z Twittera

Komentujesz korzystając z konta Twitter. Wyloguj / Zmień )

Facebook photo

Komentujesz korzystając z konta Facebook. Wyloguj / Zmień )

Google+ photo

Komentujesz korzystając z konta Google+. Wyloguj / Zmień )

Connecting to %s