Genetic Analysis of Mingrelians Reveals Long-Term Continuity of Populations in Western Georgia (Caucasus)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To elucidate the population history of the Caucasus, we conducted a survey of genetic diversity in Samegrelo (Mingrelia), western Georgia. We collected DNA samples and genealogical information from 485 individuals residing in 30 different locations, the vast majority of whom being Mingrelian speaking. From these DNA samples, we generated mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) control region sequences for all 485 participants (female and male), Y-short tandem repeat haplotypes for the 372 male participants, and analyzed all samples at nearly 590,000 autosomal single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) plus around 33,000 on the sex chromosomes, with 27,000 SNP removed for missingness, using the GenoChip 2.0+ microarray. The resulting data were compared with those from populations from Anatolia, the Caucasus, the Near East, and Europe. Overall, Mingrelians exhibited considerable mtDNA haplogroup diversity, having high frequencies of common West Eurasian haplogroups (H, HV, I, J, K, N1, R1, R2, T, U, and W. X2) and low frequencies of East Eurasian haplogroups (A, C, D, F, and G). From a Y-chromosome standpoint, Mingrelians possessed a variety of haplogroups, including E1b1b, G2a, I2, J1, J2, L, Q, R1a, and R1b. Analysis of autosomal SNP data further revealed that Mingrelians are genetically homogeneous and cluster with other modern-day South Caucasus populations. When compared with ancient DNA samples from Bronze Age archaeological contexts in the broader region, these data indicate that the Mingrelian gene pool began taking its current form at least by this period, probably in conjunction with the formation of a distinct linguistic community.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".