Results were used to determine biogeographical ancestry:
View Genome mapping of Kurds by Palisto in a larger map
To see it in direct comparison McDonald's maps, click here.
Color coding for all relevant components of Dodecad K12b:
Zaza1 from Turkey (KD001):
Zaza2 from Dersim/Turkey (KD024):
Alevi Kurmanji1 from Dersim/Turkey (KD002):
Alevi Kurmanji2 from Turkey (KD005):
Kurmanji from Turkey (KD006):
Kurmanji from Zakho/Iraq (KD007):
Kurmanji from Dohuk/Iraq (KD023):
Sorani1 from Sulaymaniyah/Iraq (KD009):
Sorani2 from Sulaymaniyah/Iraq (KD010):
Sorani3 from Sulaymaniyah/Iraq (KD011):
Sorani4 from Sulaymaniyah and Darband/Iraq (KD012):
Sorani5 from Koysinjaq/Iraq (KD013):
Sorani6 from Sulaymaniyah/Iraq (KD014):
Feyli (KD025):
Feyli (KD026):
Feyli (KD027):
Sorani from Sulaymaniyah/Iraq (KD032):
Sorani from Sulaymaniyah/Iraq (KD033):
Sorani from Sulaymaniyah/Iraq (KD034):
1/2Alevi Kurmanji-1/2Sunni Kurmanji from Bingöl (Zazaki: Çolig, Kurmanji: Çewlîg), Kighi, Turkey (KD036):
Any comments as to the origin of the consistent presence of an East African component throughout this sample and the small SSA component in "Sorani2"?
ReplyDeleteWhat I find particulary strange about that one is the low score for East African since I would expect a correlation between that component and SSA.
Very interesting! I'm a Yezidi Kurd from Georgia whom native langauge is Kurdish Kurmanji dialect. But I'm closer to Sorani speaking Kurds than Kurmanji speaking Kurds. That's a big surprise!
ReplyDeleteIdiot!
DeleteThere is nothing called "Yezidi Kurd"! Either you are Yezidi or you are kurd. Like I don't understand! It's not like the kurds are forcing you to name yourself as kurd. You know that Yezidi existed long before kurds and that Yezidis are the decendants of the kurds that speak (kurmanji).
I am ashamed that you as a fellow Yezidi are betraying us and erasing our more that 6700 years old history by calling yourself a "kurd Yezidi". Shame on you and let people like you vanish in your own betrayal.
Everybody who speaks Kurdish is a Kurd. Yezidis speak Kurdish, and genetically speaking they fall within the Kurdish cluster. They main difference between Yezidi Kurds and other Kurds is the religion, that's all.
DeleteThose recent Y-DNA tests show the genetic roots in more detail:
ReplyDeletehttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5669434/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5669434/table/pone.0187408.t004/?report=objectonly
Instead of doubtful artificial "Caucasian" (native G or invasive J ???), "Gedrosia" (native Indo-European and South Asian or invasive Semitic and Turko-Mongol ???), "South Asia" (Indo-European and Dravidian or Dravidian only ???) or "Siberia" (Indo-European K, P, Q, R, Turkic N or Mongolic C ???, or maybe also D and O ???) designations those present clearly defined haplogroups, e.g.:
C - Mongolic
D - Birmo-Tibetan (also East-Asian/Japanese Ainu)
E - African (mostly East-African/Ethiopian seen here - culturally related to Indo-European LT, L, T parts of which back migrated to Africa ca 16 000 BCE)
G - Caucasian (culturally related to Indo-European)
H - South Asian (Dravidian, also present in Europe as Hindi, Sindi, Sinti and Roma)
I, J - Semitic (Arab, Jewish, Philistine, Androphagi, Germanic - societies based on despotism and slavery, hence high amount of indoctrinated Indo-European neighbours among them, e.g. up to 30% among "Arabs" and 70% among "Germans")
K, M, N, O - East-Asian (East-Asian, Turkic, Oceanian, Australian, all descending from South-East-Asian branch of haplogroup K)
K, LT, L, T, P, Q, R, R1a, R1b - Indo-European (paleo-European, Aryan, Slavic, Celtic, Siberian, proto-American, all descending from Indo-European branch of haplogroup K)
According to this recent research among refugees of Upper Mesopotamia:
"Arabs" - 53.46 Semites, 33.66 Indo-Europeans, 7.92 Africans, 4.96 other
"Kurds" - 47.47 Semites, 28.28 Indo-Europeans, 15.15 Africans, 9.1 other
"Syrians" - 38.38 Semites, 59.30 Indo-Europeans, 2.33 Africans
"Turkmen" - 36.07 Semites, 34.02 Indo-Europeans, 18.56 Africans, 11.35 other
"Yazidi" - 29.70 Semites, 48.51 Indo-Europeans, 10.89 Africans, 10.90 Caucasians
Combined average - 41.12 Semites, 40.29 Indo-Europeans, 11.16 Africans, 7.43 other
Other were mainly Caucasians (haplogroup G, e.g. Kartvelians/Georgians) and South Asians (haplogroup H).
No Turkmen (haplogroup N) were found among the tested refuges.
The genetic heritage of Upper Mesopotamia clearly reveals its originally Indo-European/Caucasian roots and steadily increasing Semitic input. Absence of the Turkic (N) and Mongol (C) invaders among the refugees and their presence among Turkic (post-Ottoman) administration reveals the politic reality.
The relatively high amount of R1b (30.23%) and Germanic I1 (2.33%) among "Syrians" is due to bastardisation by "Christian" terrorists (e.g. Crusaders). The amount of Germanic haplogroup I1 is relatively small among the refugees but still high among the "upper class" of Syria. The still present R1a dates back to 2nd millennium BCE (Aryan Suryavansha. e.g. aristocracy of Luwians, Hittites, Mitanni…) and Slavic slaves captured in Central and Eastern Europe by Turkic (N, Siberian) and Germanic (I, Nordic-Semitic) invaders.
For further clues please study:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/x9ijarfv1fq4m5o/Zend_Avesta_ou_plut%C3%B4t_Zen_Daschta_expli.pdf?dl=0
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Iazyges&diff=843854899&oldid=843822400
http://sbb-music.jimdo.com/background
Sorry but your comment is not correct.
ReplyDelete1. The paper you mentioned here does not have the conclusions you are claiming. So, your sentence "According to this recent research ..." is wrong.
2. Your personal annotation of Y chromosomes towards certain populations is full of nonsense, e.g. calling Germans as "Nordic-Semitic" just because they have high levels of haplogroup I shows a high level of ignorance regarding genetics and linguistics.
2. The paper you are referring to is weak and the authors know it:
"However, it must be noted that without proper haplogroup assignments by Y-SNP typing, such in silico haplogroup assignments should be treated solely as preliminary findings since being based on Y-STR data alone, they may not always be accurate [34]. In other words, caution should always be exercised when making relevant conclusions based on such in silico produced data alone."
3. Your other links are not worth discussing it.