The macrohaplogroup U structure in Russians
The structure and diversity of mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) macrohaplogroup U lineages in Russians from Eastern Europe are studied on the basis of analysis of variation of nucleotide sequences of complete mitochondrial genomes. In total, 132 mitochondrial genomes belonging to haplogroups U1, U2e, U3, U4, U5, U7, U8a, and K are characterized. Results of phylogeographic analysis show that the mitochondrial gene pool of Russians contains mtDNA haplotypes belonging to subhaplogroups that are characteristic only of Russians and other Eastern Slavs (13.7%), Slavs in general (11.4%), Slavs and Germans (17.4%), and Slavs, Germans, and Baltic Finns (9.8%). Results of molecular dating show that ages of mtDNA subhaplogroups to which Russian mtDNA haplotypes belong vary in a wide range, from 600 to 17000 years. However, molecular dating results for Slavic and Slavic-Germanic mtDNA subhaplogroups demonstrate that their formation mainly occurred in the Bronze and Iron Ages (1000–5000 years ago). Only some instances (for subhaplogroups U5b1a1 and U5b1e1a) are characterized by a good agreement between molecular dating results and the chronology of Slavic ethnic history based on historical and archaeological data.
Keywordsmitochondrial DNA molecular phylogeography Russian gene pool
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 17.Sedov, V.V., Proiskhozhdenie i rannyaya istoriya slavyan (The Origin and Early History of the Slavs), Moscow: Nauka, 1979.Google Scholar
- 19.Gimbutas, M., The Prehistory of Eastern Europe: part 1: Mesolithic, Neolithic and Copper Age Cultures in Russia and the Baltic Area, Cambridge: The Peabody Museum, 1956.Google Scholar
- 20.Anthony, D.W., The Horse, The Wheel, and Language: How Bronze-Age Riders from the Eurasian Steppes Shaped the Modern World, New Jersey: Princeton Univ. Press, 2010.Google Scholar
- 22.Balanovskaya, E.V., Pezhemskii, D.V., Romanov, A.G., et al., Gene pool of the Russian North: Slavs? Finns? Paleoeuropeans?, Vestn. Mosk. Univ., Ser. 23: Anthropol., 2011, no. 3, pp. 27–58.Google Scholar