A Hidden Gem in Central Asia: Previously Unknown Y-DNA R1b Haplotype [Original Work]

1. Introduction

Central Asian Y-DNA diversity has been an area of constant intrigue in the genetics community. Wells et
al.'s The Eurasian Heartland: A continental perspective on Y-chromosome diversity paved the way, with several others following in their regard. Members of the same team (including Dr. Wells) produced another paper - A Genetic Landscape Reshaped by Recent Events: Y-Chromosomal Insights into Central Asia - on the same topic in the following year, this time headed by Dr. Tatania Zerjal. I noted a greater emphasis on East-Central Asian populations as well as a mentioning of Y-STR analysis in the study itself. However, none of this data was supplied, with only Y-SNP information included (shown sporadically in this entry). The age of this paper is apparent through the nomenclature used (see Method section).

Several months ago, I made a request to obtain the Y-STR data from this study to one of the co-authors, Dr. Tyler-Smith, who kindly replied with the results of all sampled populations (Data Sink > Zerjal et al. Raw Data).

In this blog entry, the Y-STR data is showcased with a special emphasis on the Y-DNA R1b-M269 which was discovered.


2. Method

Y-SNP Phylogeny in original paper (Zerjal et al.) [1]

The maximum number of compatible Y-STR's were utilised for processing in Urasin's YPredictor for easier haplogroup identification (14 of a possible 16, DYS434 and 435 were excluded). All data was run through YPredictor. Only samples with ≥70% probability were included in the final results (Data Sink > Processed Data). As discussed below, relevant findings are compared with the basic Y-SNP haplogroups shown in the original study (on right).

One point which needs to be addressed immediately is the high frequency of "_DE-M1" and "P-M45". It appears that the STR selection has led to a phantom result, rendering many of the samples useless. For instance, the original study shows the Kazakhs belong overwhelmingly to C3c-M48, [1] although the probable results shown here are mostly "_DE-M1".  The exclusion of DYS434 and 435 from my level of processing likely contributed to this; if one assigns equal weight to the statistical strength of a prediction, removal of two STR's from a panel numbering 16, accuracy is reduced by 12.5%. Additionally, some conversion error seems to have applied with DYS437 (i.e. a value <12 is unusual). Therefore, "_DE-M1" and "P-M45" results were dismissed on account of the mismatch between predicted and likely confirmed haplogroups probably due to a compatibility issue between the study's STR panel and YPredictor..


3. Results

As the majority of samples were removed owing to the caveat described above, this entry will take a qualitative rather than quantitative approach to analysis on the general picture formed. Much of the remaining results are congruent with findings in other papers. Populations around the Caucasus are signified by plenty of R1b-M269, J2a-M410 and G2a-P15. Tajiks and the Kyrgyz were predominantly R1a1a-M17. Mongolians and other East-Central Asian ethnic groups yielded the most O3-M122 and "NO-M14" (likely to be Y-DNA N or O suffering from the STR restrictions described in the Method section).

Y-SNP distribution in Central Asia (Zerjal et al.) [1]

3i. The R1b Signal 

R1b-M269 was found across Central Asia and not only in the Caucasus (Armenians, Azeris, Georgians, Ossetians). It was mostly detected among the Turkmen (trk1, trk2, trk4, trk6, trk7, trk22, T29, T32) with a single sample among the Uzbek (uz-s110). [1]

Analysis of the haplotypes (including DYS434 and DYS435) revealed the nine Central Asian R1b samples belonged to a secure haplotype (Data Sink > R1b Results). trk6 diverged greatest, albeit with two 1-step mutations on DYS393 and DYS434. The rest match this haplotype exactly or have single 1-step mutations. [1] When this Central Asian R1b haplotype is compared with the other Caucasian samples, a mixed picture emerges, with the poorest being an Armenian (arm47) at 8/16, whereas the best are another Armenian (arm12) and Azeri (az48), both at 15/16. [1]
One interesting point is the Kurds sampled in this study (some of whom also belong to R1b-M269) are actually the displaced population positioned on the Iranian-Turkmenistani border. All of whom match the Central Asian R1b haplotype with a similar value (12-13/16). This definitively rules out the Kurds as a source for the haplotype, particularly as better matches can be found further to the west. It should be noted the Kurds themselves formed their own R1b haplotype (defined here by DYS389II=27, DYS391=10). [1]

In summary, the data reveals that the Turkmen are particularly abundant in R1b-M269 and all belong to the same haplotype as one of the Uzbek samples. This haplotype matched some Caucasians very well, but others not so well. The Kurds living in Turkmenistan belonged to their own haplotype.


3ii. Is This Actually R1b-M269?

Attention must first be shown to the original paper again; any potential R1b-M269 here will be present as P(xR1a)-92R7 (shown in the paper as "Haplogroup 1"). [1] Evidently, this makes up approximately half of the Turkmen lines and a quarter of Uzbek ones. Other haplogroups (such as other forms of R1b, R2a-M124, various Q subclades) presumably make up the rest of "Haplogroup 1" shown.

The next step is to verify whether or not this Central Asian R1b haplotype matches other R1b haplotypes online. As Y-DNA R1b-M269 is fortunately well-represented in the world of genetic genealogy, searching for the haplotype's matches on ySearch is a reasonable enterprise. DYS437 had to be excluded here due to a conversion issue, leaving the haplotype at 15 STR's. A genetic distance (GD) of 3 was allowed on these 15 markers. Results are shown on the right.

ySearch results for Central Asian R1b haplotype

With some confidence, the search has demonstrated that the Central Asian R1b haplotype does indeed belong to R1b-M269, as all the seven matches shown (one of whom is Armenian) belong to it.

Expanding the line of inquiry one further step came through comparing this haplotype with Iranian haplotypes [2] which were readily available. Due to differences in STR panels (an overlap of only 11) this proved to be inconclusive, aside from the observation that DYS389i+ii was completely different between the Central Asian modal (10-26) and the Iranian values. At this point I suspect that, much like DYS437, there is a conversion issue with DYS389 also.

Finally, a comparison was made with the R1b found in Afghanistan last year [3]. Interestingly, if DYS389i+ii and DYS437 are excluded, the two Uzbeks (samples 35 and 181) match the Central Asian R1b haplotype almost exactly based on the remaining 11 STR's. The one Tajik (sample 32) is less likely to be related due to two 1-step mutations on different STR's.


4. Conclusion

The inferences made from the data hang by a metaphorical thread due to the persistent STR issue; different labs have used different panels in the past decade, making it excruciatingly difficult to use materials from older papers. Fortunately, the presence of a specific strain of R1b-M269 in Central Asian (in Turkmen and Uzbeks) has successfully been demonstrated after select exclusions and no modifications to the data.

However, some larger questions remain. If STR limitations were not an issue, how would the Iranians from Haber et al. have compared? Would the Tajik from the other Haber et al. paper have belonged to the same haplotype in the end?

The origin of this Central Asian R1b haplotype will, I anticipate, also be a point discussed heavily among interested parties. At this point in time, I must stress that none of the evidence thus far points to anything in particular without ruling other theories out, although it leaves the door for interpretation wide open.

Having given this cautionary statement, the main thrust of this entry should be emphasised; R1b-M269 in Central Asia is a confirmed reality and here to stay. I will defer any subsequent analyses to the experts on Y-DNA R1b which grace several genetic genealogy boards for their take on the flavour of this haplotype.


5. Acknowledgement

I publicly extend my gratitude to Dr. Tyler-Smith for being so kind in sending me the raw STR's from this important paper for my research, as well as co-authoring the other two excellent studies I have cited here and in the past.


6. References

1. Zerjal T, Wells RS, Yuldasheva N, Ruzibakiev R, Tyler-Smith C. A genetic landscape reshaped by recent events: Y-chromosomal insights into central Asia. Am J Hum Genet. 2002 Sep;71(3):466-82. Epub 2002 Jul 17.

2. Haber M, Platt DE, Badro DA, Xue Y, El-Sibai M, Bonab MA. Influences of history, geography, and religion on genetic structure: the Maronites in Lebanon. Eur J Hum Genet. 2011 Mar;19(3):334-40. doi: 10.1038/ejhg.2010.177. Epub 2010 Dec 1.

3. Haber M, Platt DE, Ashrafian Bonab M, Youhanna SC, Soria-Hernanz DF, Martínez-Cruz B. Afghanistan's ethnic groups share a Y-chromosomal heritage structured by historical events. PLoS One. 2012;7(3):e34288. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0034288. Epub 2012 Mar 28.

Yaghnobi Tajiks: Preliminary Results May Reveal Iranian Plateau Affinity [Original Work]

Slipping under the radar of the genetic genealogy world is this paper by Elisabetta Cilli and her colleagues, which investigated the mitochondrial data of 62 individuals from Tajikistan's Yaghnobi population. [1]

The Yaghnobis are of interest given their geographical isolation and the East Iranic nature of their language. Living just northeast of the predominantly Persian (Dari) speaking capital, Dushanbe, Yaghnobi is a continuation of a fully agglutinative Soghdian dialect representing the sole survivor of this language following the Persianization of Central Asia in Medieval times [2]. Despite its' East Iranic vocabulary, Yaghnobi demonstrates several linguistic features (i.e. gender loss, past imperfective preservation from present stem of a verb) which separates it from those modern East Iranic languages immediately surrounding it. Furthering the uniqueness of the Yaghnobi language in this context is the unity it forms through these features with languages mostly spoken further west in the Iranian plateau (e.g. Persian, Gilaki, Kurdish dialects). [2]

Although the results are preliminary and lack any empirical data, Cilli et al. have discovered some interesting connections between the Yaghnobi and relevant populations. In summary, they found the following:

MDS Plot of Results

• 42 individuals used for the preliminary work belonged to only 19 distinct mtDNA haplotypes. Of these, 11 were distinct among the Yaghnobi.
• The Yaghnobi have less mtDNA genetic diversity than other Central Asian populations (0.930) and this is attributed to their geographical isolation and recent history of displacement by the U.S.S.R. in the 1970's for agricultural purposes, where a small group (300) returned and repopulated their original homelands.
• Intriguingly, the Yaghnobi shared all of the mutual haplotypes (8/19) with populations from Iran (e.g. Gilakis, Mazandaranis and Iranians from Tehran and Esfahan) instead of other Central Asian groups, including their Tajik compatriots.
• The Yaghnobi shared most of these mutual haplotypes with Gilakis, Kurmanji Kurds and Avars from the Caucasus (4 each).
• However, owing to their predominantly distinct mtDNA character, the Yaghnobi are clear outliers from the general zone occupied by the reference groups. 

My critique and interpretation of these results are as follows:

• At least two instances of genetic drift occurring (founder effect via geographic isolation, bottleneck due to Soviet relocation) is likely responsible for the decreased mtDNA diversity. Thus, it is clearly simply a reflection of their environment.
• As a result of the Soviet relocation, it may be useful to determine whether results from the displaced parent population match what has been stated here. This is quite possible given the relocations occurred just over one generation ago (~40 years).
• It is difficult to criticise the decision to test 62 individuals and the utilisation of 42 haplotypes, given the Yaghnobi population in their homeland between 2007-9 only numbered approximately 500. Approximately 8% of the entire Yaghnobi population was therefore analysed here, which is a generous frequency given the amount of attention the region has received.
• The MDS plot would have benefited from the inclusion of populations in Europe, Southwest Asia and South Asia to comprehensively flesh out the position of Yaghnobis in Eurasia.
• Accepting that this is a preliminary investigation, it would still have been pleasing to see some raw data published. Aside from confirming that some/one Yaghnobi matched the Cambridge Reference Sequence (CRS, thus Haplogroup H2a2a which happened to be found in all the populations tested), there is no indication as to what the other mutations looked like. Or, for that matter, what mtDNA haplogroups were even present!

Correlation with Y-Chromosomal Data?

The Yaghnobi have been studied at least one other time through their inclusion in Dr. Spencer Wells et al.'s seminal piece The Eurasian heartland: a continental perspective on Y-chromosome diversity. The breakdown of their Y-Chromosomal SNP data (n=31) is as follows: [3]

3% C-M130(xC3a3-M48)

32% J2-M172

Y-SNP clustering reveals Yaghnobis sit near SE Europe and the Near-East

3% K-M9(xO-M175, O3-M122, O1a-M119, O2a1-M95, N1c1-M46) (possibly parahaplogroup such as K*-M9)
10% L-M20
3% P-M45 (xQ1a1-M120, Q1a3a1-M3, R2a-M124)
32% R1-M173 (likely R1b1a1-M73 or R1b1a2-M269)
16% R1a1a-M17(xR1a-M87, private marker)

Despite the double genetic drift undoubtedly affecting the frequencies, it is worth pointing out that the Yaghnobi presented with a broadly similar Y-DNA spectrum as Iran, where J2-M172, L-M20, R1-M173 and R1a1a-M17 (including subclades) comprise approximately 53% of the national average (refer to Grugni et al. analysis). 

This comparison should be taken with a grain of salt given the Iranian national average also comprises non-Iranic-speaking ethnic groups, the Wells Yaghnobi data does not present with thorough downstream Y-SNP evidence, the sample size is contentious and at least two contributors of a founder effect exist. However, that the Yaghnobi appear rich in J2, L and R is certainly reminiscent of Iranic-speaking populations in the region.


Conclusions

The Yaghnobi are an exceedingly interesting population whose overall parental markers seem to support a connection with populations further west than one would anticipate.

Despite the misgivings of all the data concerning them to date, the mtDNA similarity does corroborate specific linguistic features between the Yaghnobi language with those in the Iranian plateau, such as Kurdish or Persian.

If the data holds up in future investigations, it certainly calls to question whether the proposed model of linguistic inheritance exclusively down the parental line (as represented by Y-DNA data) is entirely correct given this connection.

How the Yaghnobi came to display the markers within them whilst speaking an East Iranic dialect with traits akin to those found in West Iranic languages is an intriguing question. One possible scenario is that the Yaghnobi are partly descended from ancient Iranians from the Iranian plateau during the Achaemanid era. This would also account for the linguistic commonalities noted in current literature.

Time (with the assistance of more mtDNA, Y-DNA and auDNA) will help us understand what happened in Central Asia during the formative period that was the Indo-Iranian migrations.



Reference

1. Cilli E, Delaini P, Costazza B, Giacomello L, Panaino A, Gruppioni G. Ethno-anthropological and genetic study of the Yaghnobis;an isolated community in Central Asia. A preliminary study. J Anthropol Sci. 2011;89:189-94.

2. Windfuhr, G. The Iranian Languages. 1st ed. Routledge Language Family Series. 2009.

3. Wells RS, Yuldasheva N, Ruzibakiev R, Underhill PA, Evseeva I, Blue-Smith J. The Eurasian heartland: a continental perspective on Y-chromosome diversity. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 28;98:10244-9. 2001.