Analysis of information sources in references of the Wikipedia article "Genetic studies on Turkish people" in English language version.
{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)The steppe was likely largely Iranian-speaking in the 2nd and 1st millennia BCE. This is supported by the split of the Indo-Iranian linguistic branch into Iranian and Indian32, the distribution of the Iranian languages, and the preservation of Old Iranian loanwords in Tocharian33. The wide distribution of the Turkic languages from Northwest China, Mongolia and Siberia in the east to Turkey, Bulgaria, Romania and Lithuania in the west implies large-scale migrations out of the homeland in Mongolia since the beginning of the Common Era34. The diversification within the Turkic languages suggests that several waves of migrations occurred35, and on the basis of the impact of local languages gradual assimilation to local populations were already assumed36. The East Asian migration starting with the Xiongnu complies well with the hypothesis that early Turkic was their major language37. Further migrations of East Asians westwards find a good linguistic correlate in the influence of Mongolian on Turkic and Iranian in the last millennium38. As such, the genomic history of the Eurasian steppe is the story of a gradual transition from Bronze Age pastoralists of western Eurasian ancestry, towards mounted warriors of increased East Asian ancestry – a process that continued well into historical times.
Due to a historically high number of admixed people and large population sizes, the numbers of shared IBD fragments within the same population in the aforementioned groups are the lowest compared to the rest of the world (for Pathans, their shared number of IBDs among themselves is the record low—8.95; this is followed by Azerbaijanians and Uyghurs, each at 10.8; Uzbeks at 11.1; Iranians at 12.2; and Turks at 12.9). Together, the low number of shared IBDs within the same population and the high values for relative relatedness from multiple DHGR components (Supplementary Table S4) indicate the populations with the strongest admixtures where millions of people from remote populations mixed with each other for hundreds of years. In Europe, such admixed populations include the Moldavians, Greeks, Italians, Hungarians, and Tatars, among others. In the Americas, the highest admixture was detected in the Mexicans from Los Angeles (MXL) and Peruvians (PEL) presented by the 1000 Genomes Project.
{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link){{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)Similarly, we detected ∼10% autosomal, 8 to 15% paternal, and ∼8% maternal gene flow from Central Asia. ... This contribution varied for the TR subregions: TR-B, 7.69%; TR-W, 12%; TR-C, 10.1%; TR-N, 10.6%; TR-S, 11.2%; and TR-E, 6.48%.
The steppe was likely largely Iranian-speaking in the 2nd and 1st millennia BCE. This is supported by the split of the Indo-Iranian linguistic branch into Iranian and Indian32, the distribution of the Iranian languages, and the preservation of Old Iranian loanwords in Tocharian33. The wide distribution of the Turkic languages from Northwest China, Mongolia and Siberia in the east to Turkey, Bulgaria, Romania and Lithuania in the west implies large-scale migrations out of the homeland in Mongolia since the beginning of the Common Era34. The diversification within the Turkic languages suggests that several waves of migrations occurred35, and on the basis of the impact of local languages gradual assimilation to local populations were already assumed36. The East Asian migration starting with the Xiongnu complies well with the hypothesis that early Turkic was their major language37. Further migrations of East Asians westwards find a good linguistic correlate in the influence of Mongolian on Turkic and Iranian in the last millennium38. As such, the genomic history of the Eurasian steppe is the story of a gradual transition from Bronze Age pastoralists of western Eurasian ancestry, towards mounted warriors of increased East Asian ancestry – a process that continued well into historical times.
{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)The steppe was likely largely Iranian-speaking in the 2nd and 1st millennia BCE. This is supported by the split of the Indo-Iranian linguistic branch into Iranian and Indian32, the distribution of the Iranian languages, and the preservation of Old Iranian loanwords in Tocharian33. The wide distribution of the Turkic languages from Northwest China, Mongolia and Siberia in the east to Turkey, Bulgaria, Romania and Lithuania in the west implies large-scale migrations out of the homeland in Mongolia since the beginning of the Common Era34. The diversification within the Turkic languages suggests that several waves of migrations occurred35, and on the basis of the impact of local languages gradual assimilation to local populations were already assumed36. The East Asian migration starting with the Xiongnu complies well with the hypothesis that early Turkic was their major language37. Further migrations of East Asians westwards find a good linguistic correlate in the influence of Mongolian on Turkic and Iranian in the last millennium38. As such, the genomic history of the Eurasian steppe is the story of a gradual transition from Bronze Age pastoralists of western Eurasian ancestry, towards mounted warriors of increased East Asian ancestry – a process that continued well into historical times.
Similarly, we detected ∼10% autosomal, 8 to 15% paternal, and ∼8% maternal gene flow from Central Asia. ... This contribution varied for the TR subregions: TR-B, 7.69%; TR-W, 12%; TR-C, 10.1%; TR-N, 10.6%; TR-S, 11.2%; and TR-E, 6.48%.
The steppe was likely largely Iranian-speaking in the 2nd and 1st millennia BCE. This is supported by the split of the Indo-Iranian linguistic branch into Iranian and Indian32, the distribution of the Iranian languages, and the preservation of Old Iranian loanwords in Tocharian33. The wide distribution of the Turkic languages from Northwest China, Mongolia and Siberia in the east to Turkey, Bulgaria, Romania and Lithuania in the west implies large-scale migrations out of the homeland in Mongolia since the beginning of the Common Era34. The diversification within the Turkic languages suggests that several waves of migrations occurred35, and on the basis of the impact of local languages gradual assimilation to local populations were already assumed36. The East Asian migration starting with the Xiongnu complies well with the hypothesis that early Turkic was their major language37. Further migrations of East Asians westwards find a good linguistic correlate in the influence of Mongolian on Turkic and Iranian in the last millennium38. As such, the genomic history of the Eurasian steppe is the story of a gradual transition from Bronze Age pastoralists of western Eurasian ancestry, towards mounted warriors of increased East Asian ancestry – a process that continued well into historical times.
{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)The steppe was likely largely Iranian-speaking in the 2nd and 1st millennia BCE. This is supported by the split of the Indo-Iranian linguistic branch into Iranian and Indian32, the distribution of the Iranian languages, and the preservation of Old Iranian loanwords in Tocharian33. The wide distribution of the Turkic languages from Northwest China, Mongolia and Siberia in the east to Turkey, Bulgaria, Romania and Lithuania in the west implies large-scale migrations out of the homeland in Mongolia since the beginning of the Common Era34. The diversification within the Turkic languages suggests that several waves of migrations occurred35, and on the basis of the impact of local languages gradual assimilation to local populations were already assumed36. The East Asian migration starting with the Xiongnu complies well with the hypothesis that early Turkic was their major language37. Further migrations of East Asians westwards find a good linguistic correlate in the influence of Mongolian on Turkic and Iranian in the last millennium38. As such, the genomic history of the Eurasian steppe is the story of a gradual transition from Bronze Age pastoralists of western Eurasian ancestry, towards mounted warriors of increased East Asian ancestry – a process that continued well into historical times.
Due to a historically high number of admixed people and large population sizes, the numbers of shared IBD fragments within the same population in the aforementioned groups are the lowest compared to the rest of the world (for Pathans, their shared number of IBDs among themselves is the record low—8.95; this is followed by Azerbaijanians and Uyghurs, each at 10.8; Uzbeks at 11.1; Iranians at 12.2; and Turks at 12.9). Together, the low number of shared IBDs within the same population and the high values for relative relatedness from multiple DHGR components (Supplementary Table S4) indicate the populations with the strongest admixtures where millions of people from remote populations mixed with each other for hundreds of years. In Europe, such admixed populations include the Moldavians, Greeks, Italians, Hungarians, and Tatars, among others. In the Americas, the highest admixture was detected in the Mexicans from Los Angeles (MXL) and Peruvians (PEL) presented by the 1000 Genomes Project.
{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link){{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)Similarly, we detected ∼10% autosomal, 8 to 15% paternal, and ∼8% maternal gene flow from Central Asia. ... This contribution varied for the TR subregions: TR-B, 7.69%; TR-W, 12%; TR-C, 10.1%; TR-N, 10.6%; TR-S, 11.2%; and TR-E, 6.48%.
{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)Due to a historically high number of admixed people and large population sizes, the numbers of shared IBD fragments within the same population in the aforementioned groups are the lowest compared to the rest of the world (for Pathans, their shared number of IBDs among themselves is the record low—8.95; this is followed by Azerbaijanians and Uyghurs, each at 10.8; Uzbeks at 11.1; Iranians at 12.2; and Turks at 12.9). Together, the low number of shared IBDs within the same population and the high values for relative relatedness from multiple DHGR components (Supplementary Table S4) indicate the populations with the strongest admixtures where millions of people from remote populations mixed with each other for hundreds of years. In Europe, such admixed populations include the Moldavians, Greeks, Italians, Hungarians, and Tatars, among others. In the Americas, the highest admixture was detected in the Mexicans from Los Angeles (MXL) and Peruvians (PEL) presented by the 1000 Genomes Project.
{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link){{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)Similarly, we detected ∼10% autosomal, 8 to 15% paternal, and ∼8% maternal gene flow from Central Asia. ... This contribution varied for the TR subregions: TR-B, 7.69%; TR-W, 12%; TR-C, 10.1%; TR-N, 10.6%; TR-S, 11.2%; and TR-E, 6.48%.
The steppe was likely largely Iranian-speaking in the 2nd and 1st millennia BCE. This is supported by the split of the Indo-Iranian linguistic branch into Iranian and Indian32, the distribution of the Iranian languages, and the preservation of Old Iranian loanwords in Tocharian33. The wide distribution of the Turkic languages from Northwest China, Mongolia and Siberia in the east to Turkey, Bulgaria, Romania and Lithuania in the west implies large-scale migrations out of the homeland in Mongolia since the beginning of the Common Era34. The diversification within the Turkic languages suggests that several waves of migrations occurred35, and on the basis of the impact of local languages gradual assimilation to local populations were already assumed36. The East Asian migration starting with the Xiongnu complies well with the hypothesis that early Turkic was their major language37. Further migrations of East Asians westwards find a good linguistic correlate in the influence of Mongolian on Turkic and Iranian in the last millennium38. As such, the genomic history of the Eurasian steppe is the story of a gradual transition from Bronze Age pastoralists of western Eurasian ancestry, towards mounted warriors of increased East Asian ancestry – a process that continued well into historical times.
The steppe was likely largely Iranian-speaking in the 2nd and 1st millennia BCE. This is supported by the split of the Indo-Iranian linguistic branch into Iranian and Indian32, the distribution of the Iranian languages, and the preservation of Old Iranian loanwords in Tocharian33. The wide distribution of the Turkic languages from Northwest China, Mongolia and Siberia in the east to Turkey, Bulgaria, Romania and Lithuania in the west implies large-scale migrations out of the homeland in Mongolia since the beginning of the Common Era34. The diversification within the Turkic languages suggests that several waves of migrations occurred35, and on the basis of the impact of local languages gradual assimilation to local populations were already assumed36. The East Asian migration starting with the Xiongnu complies well with the hypothesis that early Turkic was their major language37. Further migrations of East Asians westwards find a good linguistic correlate in the influence of Mongolian on Turkic and Iranian in the last millennium38. As such, the genomic history of the Eurasian steppe is the story of a gradual transition from Bronze Age pastoralists of western Eurasian ancestry, towards mounted warriors of increased East Asian ancestry – a process that continued well into historical times.
Similarly, we detected ∼10% autosomal, 8 to 15% paternal, and ∼8% maternal gene flow from Central Asia. ... This contribution varied for the TR subregions: TR-B, 7.69%; TR-W, 12%; TR-C, 10.1%; TR-N, 10.6%; TR-S, 11.2%; and TR-E, 6.48%.