Source: https://www.scribd.com/document/302790836/AML-2004-Balts-Finns-in-Historical-Perspective
Timestamp: 2019-04-26 01:56:11+00:00

Document:
Analiza Haplo Grupa Bosnjaka i Dr.
ACTA MEDICA LITUANICA. 2004. VOLUME 11 No. 3. P.
to 2,000 YBP and 1,000 YBP. Results. Two separate clusters consisting consequently of four Baltic and two Finnish groups emerged in the dendrogram (Fig. 1).
a real influence on the formation of the Lithuanian gene pool. Conclusions.
anthropological similarities between the Balts and the Finns.
whole Northern Eurasia during the last glacial maximum ∼25,000 YBP.
of people in this area.
The mean measures of divergence (MMD) among separate cranial samples as well as among pooled diachronous ethnic series were calculated and their matrix was clustered. P. and the people of Chernyachov culture. c. the material of 2. to add new ones. Estonia and Karelia were examined by the same author. Two clusters consisting of four Baltic and two Finnish groups emerged in the dendrogram (Fig. and the frequency distribution of gene mutations in the CFTR gene for cystic fibrosis and PAH gene for phenylketonuria.000 YBP) are rather close to the two mentioned clusters.10 0. e). Rh (C. nevertheless. Multivariate analysis of craniometric traits of Neolithic and Bronze Age series from Lithuania and 70 synchronous reference groups from the Baltics and adjacent territories was carried out. In this context. APO. B65. the frequency and distribution of Y-chromosomal haplogroups and the allelic status of different markers.05 0. were measured. HS3.32. what about the diversity between Baltic and Finno-Ugric females.' The Balts and the Finns in historical perspective: a multidisciplinary approach The Finno-Ugric influence on the Balts is particularly uncertain. Secretor (FUT2). α1-antitrypsin). Penroses distances were calculated and their matrix was clustered (2). 1).15 MMD Fig. D. it was made on the basis of determination of only five Y-chromosomal biallelic loci. Duffy. The clusters are close. Discrete cranial traits of 6. Unfortunately. MATERIALS AND METHODS An investigation of Lithuanian population (more than 800 population samples) was made according to different genetic markers. the question arises what about other Y-chromosomal peculiarities. (LW) Colton (Co)). linguistic and archaeological information was used. and is it possible to time genetic events in this special case? In our opinion. There. Kidd (Jk). 1. A25. Are the materials of the authors enough to speculate on the ethnic history of those peoples. MNS. Laitinen et al. Kell. Lewis.69. HS4. D. D. V. craniology. HS4. people from Balto-Slavonic borderline.426 skulls from Lithuania and adjacent territories dated to the two last millennia were investigated (2). and those of Chernyachov people as well as Latvians of the same period stand somewhat sideways. as well as linguistic and archaeological information. Latvian. 3734 (2116 male and 1618 female) excavated in Lithuania and belonging to the 1st and 2nd millennia A. anthropology of modern inhabitants in the area. recent Alu insertions (ACE. The men from Spiginas. Landsteiner-Wiener.43). The medieval Slavonic skulls fit into the Baltic cluster. Anthropological characteristics of modern inhabitants of the Baltic area were quoted after M. Lutheran. E. mtDNA RFLPs and direct sequencing of the 1st hypervariable segment (HVI) of the control region of mtDNA. HS4. HS4. It is obligatory to compile all data on molecular genetics and serology. ethnic history of human populations is a too complicated phenomenon to elucidate it on the basis of several genetic markers. Mesolithic materials from Lithuania are not numerous and fragmental. as well as of 1446 skulls dated to the 1st and 2nd millennia A.65.59. (1) that Baltic males share a common Finno-Ugric ancestry sounds quite categorically. For interpretation of findings. factorial analysis was made. facts of anthropological odontology.23. We dispose the data on the anthropological odontology of 4993 individuals from modern Lithuania. PV92. The Lithuanian skulls (2. Divergence of peoples in East Baltic area and adjacent territories according to discrete cranial traits . Gc. as well as the Lithuanian materials from 1. HS2.14. too. some of them have the somewhat flattened up- Lithuanians 600300 YBP Slavs 1000900 YBP Latvians 600300 YBP Estonians 600300 YBP Karelians 200 YBP Lithuanians 1500 YBP Chernyachov Culture 1500 YBP Latvians 1500 YBP 0. A multidisciplinary approach to elucidating the historical relations between the Balts and the Finns is the goal of the present report.000 YBP. HS4.75. Kretuonas and Duonkalnis are mesocranic. D1. TPA25. Latvia. HS4. it is unclear which part of Lithuania the investigated persons represent. Vitov et al. FXIIIB. East Slavonic. Such markers include blood groups (A1A2B0. Secondly. serum proteins (TF. they are separate.000 YBP from Lithuania. the conclusion by V. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Multivariate phenetical comparisons were performed in diachronous populations on the eastern coast of the Baltic Sea and adjacent territories. Thirdly. Firstly. to request services of paleopopulation comparisons. (6). (35).
On the other hand. and the admixture of Middle-European type is more evident than in Estonians.000 YBP the influx of newcomers from the eastern part of the ancient Baltic area (up to the lower reaches of the Oka River) was detected. It is possible to suppose that the pre-Indo-European background of the south-eastern part of the Baltic region may have had a constant influx from the focus of the Middle European brachycranes (2). a slight MiddleEuropean admixture existing in its central part. On the contrary. only one third of Latvian groups represent this type (35). the picture of masticatory surfaces).000 YBP). Repercussions of archaemorphic people from the primary motherland of all Indo-Europeans in Europe and overbalance of a local analogous component are supposed to be the two main agents of Indo-Europeanization of the South-East Baltic region. two types (mesomorphic mesocranic clinoprosopic and hypermorphic dolichocranic clinoprosopic) were revealed. with an insignificant admixture of West-Baltic and Ilmen-Dnieper types. 5). and six anthropological types were estimated (6). intermingling Lingby-Bromme. Modern Lithuanians represent a homogeneous Middle-European odontological type. 2. In Lithuania. the Middle-European type prevails. It is possible to suppose that the latter phenomenon was a result of unfinished physical consolidation of the Baltic tribe unions during the formation of the Lithuanian nation (10). The same type was detected in the craniological materials (2. Mesolithic population of Lithuania might be related to the Middle-European kernel of mesocranes. In the Ba l tic Se a per part of the face characteristic also of the Stone Age population in Sweden and Denmark. which was detected by V. where the Mongoloid admixture is quite dubious. The first known inhabitants on the eastern coast of the Baltic Sea were Magdalenian hunters and gatherers (12. The skulls from Duonkalnis have a sharp horizontal profile of the middle part of the face. its orientation towards Middle Europe is evident. The first type is closely connected with the Globular Amphora people from Poland.000 YBP). There are differences of their distribution in the three states. Latvia and Estonia was investigated in 19521954 by the Baltic United Expedition. its roots lie even in the Stone Age popula- The Mesocrany.000 YBP). Bunak as early as 1951. A new local culture appeared here. Modern population of Lithuania. Vaidutis Kuèinskas tion (4. and it might be a reflection of the great migration of peoples (2). The main anthropological types of medieval inhabitants of the East Baltic region (2) . Orientation of this craniological type towards the South-East is evident. The second type (massive archaic proto-Europoid) fixed in this area from the Mesolithic started to predominate together with the strengthening of Corded Ware culture and especially with its Boat Axe version. while the Latvian territory is quite heterogeneous (Fig. 2). In the later period (1. narrow face Fig. the inhabitants of Lithuania were quite homogeneous. Consequently. V. a mosaic distribution of local anthropological complexes in the territory of Lithuania came to light. the representatives of the Bell Beaker culture from Moravia. the West-Baltic and East-Baltic types are characteristic of Estonia. wide face Mesocrany. On the East Baltic scale. Ahrensburg and Swiderian cultures (11. In the Neolithic and Bronze Age. The teeth of the native inhabitants of all 44 administrative districts in Lithuania were investigated from the odontological point of view (tooth morphology.000 YBP). Consequently. In the material that represents Balts 2.Gintautas Èesnys. the Megalith culture tribes from Germany as well as with the Middle Neolithic population from Denmark. population in Lithuania and East Prussia. Latvians stand between Lithuanians and Estonians: they belong to the West-Baltic type. wide face Subbrachycrany.000 and 1.
etc. there were three waves of the Indo-European Kurgan people in 6. and they were connected with Indo-European speaking population. The contact zone was very large. This clearly seems too be the case in the Baltic region. It is necessary to note that different forms of Indo-European Corded Ware Culture spread over a wide area of Middle. southern Finland and south-eastern Sweden. invaded the Narva territory. Mesolithic Nemunas culture. 4.0007. Linguistic data are of great importance for elucidation of interrelations between different ethnical groups. based on the careful analysis of both genetic and craniological material. however. Estonia. from the southeast to the northwest of Europe. The latter three cultures made a superstratum on the Neolithic Nemunas and Narva substratum. At the same time South-Western Lithuania was affected by Funnel Beaker. 3. The strong clinal pattern of these two haplogroups resembles the first principal component of genetic variation of classical loci and is consistent with the demic diffusion hypothesis (Fig. Y-HG9 and Y-HG16  Y chromosome haplogroups 1. However.00 0 Y BP Y-HG3 2+ Y-HG1 Fig.00 05 . but geographical vicinity can also play an important role  especially in the absence of barriers. 2nd and 3rd principal components according to classic genetic markers. Published data. 2PC and 3PC  1st. 3). which continued the Paleolithic tradition and was influenced by Maglemosian and Epipaleolithic cultures. recent studies (12. In Early and Middle Neolithic (6. It is commonly accepted that the contacts between the Baltic and Finno-Ugric languages began during the expansion the Baltic tribes northwards and eastwards.500 YBP. only 30 toponyms of Finnish descent were registered in the northern part of Lithuania. such as big mountains or large water systems. gene exchange was inevitable in this process. which form gradual clines or more abrupt changes called genetic boundaries. Pamariai (Baltic Coastal) Culture and its representatives had a hybrid character. was present in the southern part of the region. Comb and Pit Ornamented Pottery culture. Main synthetic gradients of genetic and genomic markers. Linguistic data do not demonstrate the substratum and superstratum relations (11). Its traces were discovered only in Northern Lithuania. Y-HG1. which was connected with Finno-Ugric-speaking people. mostly as far as the lower reaches of the Nemunas River.5004. For instance. The eastern stem of the Balts who did not survive till historical times had linguistic contacts with the tribes of Mari and Mordvi. Globular Amphora and later (4. there are 1. Y-HG3. It is reasonable to assume that the members of the same family of language are also genetically more closely related to each other than to the speakers of unrelated languages.000 YBP). 9 and 16 . the third wave reached the Baltic region.5004. 13) have suggested that language might not always be the major factor in determining relatedness. Geographic patterns of variations are seen on many scales.000 YBP) by Corded Ware cultures.1% of Baltisms in modern Finnish. Thus. while the Kunda culture dominated in the North. reveal similarities and differences between Baltic and other populations. while Kunda culture got impulses from the East. from the Baltic Sea in the West to the upper reaches of the rivers Oka and Volga in the East. mostly in its northern and eastern part. the representatives of both cultures belonged to the circle of Old European languages (7). 3.00 0 YBP ! 2+ ~ 10 .500 YBP. On the contrary. Thus. influences from other neighbouring cultures were also noticeable. Its fragments reached Lithuania.0005. including the territories of Latvia. The influence of the Baltic language on Finnish was more evident: it gave more than got. Gimbutas (9). Mesolithic Nemunas and Kunda cultures developed correspondingly into Neolithic Nemunas and Narva cultures. its west-southern group was spread in the northern part of Lithuania. According to M. The last culture had four variants. Neolithic Nemunas culture was oriented to Central Europe.000 YBP). 1PC. In the western part of the Balts territory (Latvia) the process is going on even nowadays. East and North Europe. There are local differences. To all appearances. However. and they include agricultural terms as well as the vocabulary of essential spheres of human social and cultural activities. The Y chromosome haplogroups 1 and 9 show complementary clines on the continental scale.The Balts and the Finns in historical perspective: a multidisciplinary approach Mesolithic (10. even kindred and mythology. the Baltic people being a result of intermingling among the carriers of the mentioned cultures (8). 2+ Y-HG16 Y-HG9 ~ 4.
2000) other genetic markers (Barbujani. its presence in other populations in any appreciable frequency is likely to be due to a Baltic admixture. The frequency of the Rh haplotype cde was very high in the Lithuanian ethnolinguistic subgroups with a maximum value (0...e. GC and PI was made. linguistic and cultural barriers can be identified (Fig. demonstrating that linguistic differences can have a lesser. In Northern Europe. indicating that the geographical boundary played a major role in determining the genetic frequencies. This distribution resembles the second principal component of variation of classical gene frequencies and shows an eastern (Uralic) admixture in these populations. At the same time the frequency of GC*1F allele in Lithuanians was one of the lowest (0. The Baltic peoples (Lithuanians and Latvians) show a mixture of the western and eastern genetic traits (Fig. of the Kurgan people (Fig. a zone of sharp genetic change is also present between Finno-Ugric (Estonians) and Balts (Latvians and Li- Genetic barriers in Europe acc ording to: mtDNA markers (Simoni et al. Nevertheless. strong geographical. The LW*B allele is a Baltic tribal marker. A comparison of the variation in the frequencies of the allelic genes TF. as in the whole continent. 3). and other genetic markers () (Barbujani G.5% in the North Samogitian and 2. 4). 87: 1816-9) thuanians).Gintautas Èesnys. Vaidutis Kuèinskas The distribution of Y chromosome haplogroup 3 is also strongly clinal (Fig. which has been interpreted (14) as marking the movement. The west-to-east gradient shows the distribution of the Rh haplotype (Rh blood group system). The strongest boundaries divide western populations from eastern ones. In the latter subgroup it was statistically significantly lower than in the rest of Lithuania. 2000) biallelic Y-chromosomal markers (Rosser et al. It reaches its highest frequencies in central-eastern Europe. 4). α1-antitrypsin (PI). relatively high frequencies in the Balts and zero or almost zero levels in Asiatic.. African and West European populations make this blood group a very informative marker for the Baltic genetic influence. 3). were found in Finns and Estonians. Some genetic transferrin variants. The finding of the highest LW*B allele frequency in the North Samogitian and the lowest one in the inhabitants of the South Highlands of Lithuania is in agreement with the assumption that the North Samogitian subgroup is an autochthonous population with the Curonian influence in the North. 4.1) in Europe (16). serum protein Gc-1F. particularly TF*DCHI which is a Finno-Ugric marker. 3). but still important. while the frequencies in the southeast and southwest are low. Its pattern is clinal but regional (Fig. Am J Hum Genet 2000. from north of the Caspian Sea. This distribution resembles the third principal component of variation of classical gene frequencies. Two typical Western European mutations S and Z of the α1-antitrypsin (PI) deficiency have significantly higher frequencies in Balts in comparison to Finns (17). supporting the idea that other factors also contribute to genetic boundaries (Fig. These three main migration directions could have a real influence on the formation of the Lithuanian gene pool. 3). whereas the subgroup of . influence on genetic diversity. Genetic diversity barriers in Europe according to mtDNA markers (··········) (Simoni L et al. The LW*B allele frequency has been shown to vary between 7. It shows a West European influence on the Baltic Sea region. where the Latvians showed a greater similarity to the Lithuanians than to the Estonians. i. 19) suggesting a Baltic genetic influence on the neighbouring Finno-Ugric and Slavic populations. Studies of the Baltic tribal gene LW*B and PAH gene mutation R408W together with VNTR and STR haplotypes indicate the presence of a considerable Baltic admixture in the neighbouring Finno-Ugric and Slavic populations. Finns. gene Z and S alleles.0293). Russians and Poles (18. but interestingly its frequency is also relatively high in Estonians. biallelic Y-chromosomal markers () (13).7% in the inhabitants of the South Highlands of Lithuania. 1990) Fig. The peculiar geographic distribution of the LW*B. 66: 262-78). Sokal R.4867. but not in Latvians and Lithuanians (15). The zones of sharpest genetic changes were located in the whole Europe and especially in the North of Europe. Sokal. The haplogroup 16 of Y chromosome is at high frequency in the north-east of the Baltic Sea. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1990. SD = 0.
Three main migration directions could have a real influence on the formation of the Lithuanian gene pool. Èesnys G. archaeological and linguistic data demonstrate that there was no common ancestry of the Balts and the Finns. paleopopulation genetics and craniology. Mitochondrial DNA diversity has revealed that Lithuanians are characterized by the same mtDNA haplogroups that describe 95% of variation in Europe and are close both to Slavic (Indo-European) and Finno-Ugric speaking populations of Northern and Eastern Europe (20). Hum Hered 2002. 3. 1959. The significant differences between Lithuanian and Estonian Y chromosome STR haplotypes suggest that these populations have different origins or have differentiated before Indo-Europeanization took place in Eastern Baltic. as well as ethnic odontology and anthropology of modern population support this supposition. Moskva. Vilnius: Þiburio leidykla 1996. Studies of the Baltic tribal gene LW*B and PAH gene mutation R408W together with VNTR and STR haplotypes indicate the presence of a considerable Baltic admixture in the neighbouring Finno-Ugric and Slavic populations. 1: 410. which might be associated with the Indo-Europeanization process. 1(29): 4852. carriers of Comb and Pit ornamented Pottery culture. Balèiûnienë I. 2. All these materials allow some generalisations. there is no ground to allege ! that the Balts and the Finns have a common ancestry. Ethnic odontology of the Stone Age man in Lithuania. It is impossible to date the emergence of some genetic and anthropological similarities between the Balts and the Finns. 5. Butrimas A. 2. Antropologinës mûsø ðaknys. Èesnys G. 3). Etnièeskaja antropologija vostoènoj Pribaltiki. The southern part of the area got constant influxes from Middle Europe and from the East. 73: 978. Received 4 May 2004 Accepted 27 May 2004 References 1. 6. It is impossible to date any genetic event in this case without employing a multidisciplinary approach. the northern and the southern parts of the East Baltic area developed somewhat separately. contacting in the territory of present Latvia. 4. Balèiûnienë I. CONCLUSIONS 1. The Finns. 3. Therefore. though the interaction between pre-Baltic and pre-Finnish backgrounds was constant. Most frequent (45% of all Lithuanian Y chromosomes) are haplogroup 3 chromosomes. Balèiûnienë I. Significant differences between Lithuanian and Estonian Y chromosome STR haplotypes suggest that these populations have different origins or have differentiated before Indo-Europeanization took place in the Eastern Baltic region. Medicina 1993. Èesnys G. The lack of correlation between genetic distances based on mtDNA and Y chromosome variation indicate different female and male histories. Lietuviø odontologinis tipas ir jo genezë. Mokslas ir Lietuva 1991. 4. Data on molecular genetics. Akmens amþius Lietuvoje (2-as pataisytas leidimas). 7. which have been taking place from the Mesolithic. Vitov MV. 2: 804. colonized the northern half of the Baltic a little before Baltic Indo-Europeans. through Mesolithic Nemunas and Kunda cultures up to Early Neolithic Nemunas and Narva cultures. is relatively high in the Balts. The frequency of blood group B. Acta medica Lituanica 1994. while oriental influences in the northern part were evident and stable during the entire pre-historical period (Fig. 53: 6878. They are frequent in Uralic and Altaic speakers of northern Eurasia and reflect migrations from Asia. Lahermo P. some physical similarities of populations might occur due to a longstanding gene exchange between neighbors. The second major component (37%) is haplogroup 16 (characterised by TatC allele) chromosomes. Sistonen P. producers of Corded ware culture.The Balts and the Finns in historical perspective: a multidisciplinary approach inhabitants of the South Highlands of Lithuania may involve some influence from the Yotvingian gene pool. which reflect the influence of Indo-Europeans during formation of the Balts (21). 8. reached its southern half having influenced one another. Laitinen V. which is generally a marker of eastern (Asiatic) influence. indicating a recent population bottleneck. Rimantienë R. A lower gene diversity was detected in the Lithuanian haplogroup 16 but not in haplogroup 3 Y chromosomes. J Dent Res 1994. In all appearances. Anthropological. and there was no common substratum of the Balts and the Finns. Èeboksarov NN. There are more differences than communities between them. Beginning with Epipaleolithic culture. Ychromosomal diversity suggests the Baltic males share common Finno-Ugric speaking forefathers. Genetic and phenetical similarities might occur due to gene exchange between adjacent populations of the northern and southern parts of the East Baltic area. The emergence of the Pamariø (Baltic Coastal) group of Indo-Europeans ac- . The dental morphology of Lithuanians. Mark KJ. Savontaus ML.
" 9. Vidutiniø divergencijos matø pagal diskreèius kaukolës poþymius klasterizacijos dendrogramoje (1 pav. Gintautas Èesnys. The LW (Landsteiner Wiener) blood group system phenotypes and LWb allele frequencies in six Lithuanian ethnolinguistic subgroups. archeologiniai ir kalbotyros duomenys rodo. Cavalli-Sforza LL. 13.Kuèinskas V. Population genetics of Lithuanians Annals of Human Biology 2001. Darbe apþvelgiami baltø ir finø santykiai ðiø mokslø poþiûriu. Beckman L. Zerjal T. 67: 152643. Vilnius. Philadelphia. antropologiniai. Hurles ME. finai . antropologija. Lietuviø kalbos kilmë. Amorim A et al. pradedant mezolitu ir baigiant ðiuolaikiniais Lietuvos gyventojais. Kuèinskas V et al. Kuèinskas V. 20. The LWb blood group as a marker of prehistoric Baltic migrations and admixture. Veitia R. Baltø orientacija á Vidurio Europà yra akivaizdi. University of Pennsylvania Press 1970: 15595.). Alpha1-Antitrypsin (PI) alleles as markers of Westeuropean influence in the Baltic Sea region. eds. Transferrin variants as markers of migrations and admixture between populations in the Baltic Sea region. Y chromosomos 1 ir 9 haplogrupës dësningai pasiskirsèiusios Europoje ið pietryèiø á ðiaurës vakarus (3 pav. Acta Medica Lituanica 1998. II tûkstantmetyje (2 pav. Sikström C. . Kuèinskas V. kad baltai ir finai neturëjo bendro protëvio. Kasperavièiûtë D. suggested by analysis of a Y-chromosomal DNA polymorphism. 16. Kada susiklostë baltø ir finø genetinis panaðumas. Vaidutis Kuèinskas cording to archaeological and anthropological data. Perez-Lezaun A et al. In: Cardona G. Èesnys G. Krumina A. Am J Hum Genet 1999. Hum Hered 1999. Mokslas 1998. Princeton University Press 1994. Krumina A. Indo-European and Indo-Europeans. Ambrasienë D. Hoenigswald HM. 48: 18591. Senøjø Lietuvos gyventojø antropologija.) Lietuvos gyventojai buvo homogeniðkesni negu Latvijos. 4: 2813. 11: 16. Y-chromosomal diversity in Europe is clinal and influenced primarily by geography. Kasperavièiûtë D. Ivados. Ambrasienë D. 49: 525. 49: 1548. taip pat kraniologiðkai iðnagrinëta 3 734 kaukolës ið Lietuvos. 65: 143748. rather than by language. Gimbutas M. Þmoniø populiacijos istorijos problema yra tokia sudëtinga. 18. Beckman L. Balèiûnienë I. C. Sistonen P. Iðtirti 800 asmenø ið visos Lietuvos kraujo genetiniai þymenys. pastebima migracija ið rytinës senojo baltø arealo pusës á Lietuvos teritorijà. Zinkevièius Z.) iðryðkëja atskiri baltø ir finø klasteriai. 19. Kà genai sako apie lietuviø kilmæ: Y chromosomos istorija. Acta medica Lituanica 2004. fourth and third millennia B. Adojaan M. Recent male-mediated gene flow over a linguistic barrier in Iberia. 6426 kaukoliø ið Lietuvos ir kaimyniniø kraðtø diskretûs poþymiai. Beckman L. Beckman G. Am J Hum Genet 2000. Vilnius. datuojamos neolitu. Kuèinskas V. Rezultatai. I tûkstantmetyje po Kr. Armenteros M. Sikström C. Genetiniai. Piazza A. Raktaþodþiai: molekulinë genetika. Gintautas Èesnys. baltai. antropologijos. 14. J Indo-European Stud 1990. Sistonen P. Kuèinskas V. Mikelsaar A. Medþiaga ir metodika. Alavantic D. Tam tikras genetinis ir fonetinis panaðumas galëjo rastis dël genø mainø tarp populiacijø senojo baltø arealo ðiauriniame ir rytiniame paribyje. Bertranpetit J. 28(1): 114. 10. Mitochondrial DNA sequence analysis in the Lithuanian population. paleopopuliacinë genetika. Mokslas 1984. þalvario amþiumi ir I bei II tûkstantmeèiais po Kr. Arroyo E. 11. Hurles ME. Virtaranta-Knowles K. Menozzi P. Denisova R. Hum Hered 1999. Princeton. datuoti negalima. Beckman L. Senn A. 21. Hum Hered 1998. kad jà galima spræsti tik sutelktinëmis genetikos. Rosser ZH. 18: 35977. Vaidutis Kuèinskas BALTAI IR FINAI ISTORINËJE PERSPEKTYVOJE: MULTIDISCIPLININIS POÞIÛRIS Santrauka Ávadas. Mikelsaar A-V. Kuèinskas V. archeologijos ir lingvistikos pastangomis. The history and geography of human genes. Laboratorinë medicina 2003. 20(4): 69. Proto-Indo-European culture: the Kurgan culture during the fifth. 12. 17. 15.
Dying and Killing for Forged Identities?

References: V. 
 V. 
 V. 
 V. 
 V. 
 V. 
 V. 
 V. 
 V. 
 V. 
 V.