[Gene pool of Siberian Tatars: Five ways of origin for five subethnic groups].

Siberian Tatars form the largest Turkic-speaking ethnic group in Western Siberia. The group has a complex hierarchical system of ethnographically diverse populations. Five subethnic groups of Tobol-Irtysh Siberian Tatars (N = 388 samples) have been analyzed for 50 informative Y-chromosomal SNPs. The subethnic groups have been found to be extremely genetically diverse (FST = 21%), so the Siberian Tatars form one of the strongly differentiated ethnic gene pools in Siberia and Central Asia. Every method employed in our studies indicates that different subethnic groups formed in different ways. The gene pool of Isker-Tobol Tatars descended from the local Siberian indigenous population and an intense, albeit relatively recent gene influx from Northeastern Europe. The gene pool of Yalutorovsky Tatars is determined by the Western Asian genetic component. The subethnic group of Siberian Bukhar Tatars is the closest to the gene pool of the Western Caucasus population. Ishtyak-Tokuz Tatars have preserved the genetic legacy of Paleo-Siberians, which connects them with populations from Southern, Western, and Central Siberia. The gene pool of the most isolated Zabolotny (Yaskolbinsky) Tatars is closest to Ugric peoples of Western Siberia and Samoyeds of the Northern Urals. Only two out of five Siberian Tatar groups studied show partial genetic similarity to other populations calling themselves Tatars: Isker-Tobol Siberian Tatars are slightly similar to Kazan Tatars, and Yalutorovsky Siberian Tatars, to Crimean Tatars. The approach based on the full sequencing of the Y chromosome reveals only a weak (2%) Central Asian genetic trace in the Siberian Tatar gene pool, dated to 900 years ago. Hence, the Mongolian hypothesis of the origin of Siberian Tatars is not supported in genetic perspective.

[Chromosome as a chronicler: Genetic dating, historical events, and DNA-genealogic temptation].

Nonrecombinant portions of the genome, Y chromosome and mitochondrial DNA, are widely used for research on human population gene pools and reconstruction of their history. These systems allow the genetic dating of clusters of emerging haplotypes. The main method for age estimations is ρ statistics, which is an average number of mutations from founder haplotype to all modern-day haplotypes. A researcher can estimate the age of the cluster by multiplying this number by the mutation rate. The second method of estimation, ASD, is used for STR haplotypes of the Y chromosome and is based on the squared difference in the number of repeats. In addition to the methods of calculation, methods of Bayesian modeling assume a new significance. They have greater computational cost and complexity, but they allow obtaining an a posteriori distribution of the value of interest that is the most consistent with experimental data. The mutation rate must be known for both calculation methods and modeling methods. It can be determined either during the analysis of lineages or by providing calibration points based on populations with known formation time. These two approaches resulted in rate estimations for Y-chromosomal STR haplotypes with threefold difference. This contradiction was only recently refuted through the use of sequence data for the complete Y chromosome; "whole-genomic" rates of single nucleotide mutations obtained by both methods are mutually consistent and mark the area of application for different rates of STR markers. An issue even more crucial than that of the rates is correlation of the reconstructed history of the haplogroup (a cluster of haplotypes) and the history of the population. Although the need for distinguishing "lineage history" and "population history" arose in the earliest days of phylogeographic research, reconstructing the population history using genetic dating requires a number of methods and conditions. It is known that population history events leave distinct traces in the history of haplogroups only under certain demographic conditions. Direct identification of national history with the history of its occurring haplogroups is inappropriate and is avoided in population genetic studies, although because of its simplicity and attractiveness it is a constant temptation for researchers. An example of DNA genealogy, an amateur field that went beyond the borders of even citizen science and is consistently using the principle of equating haplogroup with lineage and population, which leads to absurd results (e.g., Eurasia as an origin of humankind), can serve as a warning against a simplified approach for interpretation of genetic dating results.

[Genetic ecological monitoring in human populations: heterozygosity, mtDNA haplotype variation, and genetic load].

Yu. P. Altukhov suggested that heterozygosity is an indicator of the state of the gene pool. The idea and a linked concept of genetic ecological monitoring were applied to a new dataset on mtDNA variation in East European ethnic groups. Haplotype diversity (an analog of the average heterozygosity) was shown to gradually decrease northwards. Since a similar trend is known for population density, interlinked changes were assumed for a set of parameters, which were ordered to form a causative chain: latitude increases, land productivity decreases, population density decreases, effective population size decreases, isolation of subpopulations increases, genetic drift increases, and mtDNA haplotype diversity decreases. An increase in genetic drift increases the random inbreeding rate and, consequently, the genetic load. This was confirmed by a significant correlation observed between the incidence of autosomal recessive hereditary diseases and mtDNA haplotype diversity. Based on the findings, mtDNA was assumed to provide an informative genetic system for genetic ecological monitoring; e.g., analyzing the ecology-driven changes in the gene pool.