Ob River Late Neolithic — Kuznetsk‑Altai

Beneath a skyline of windswept river terraces and birch‑scattered foothills, the Late Neolithic people of the Kuznetsk‑Altai region occupied a landscape shaped by the Ob River and its tributaries. Archaeological data indicates occupation in riverine lowlands and valley slopes during the mid to late Neolithic; the four sampled individuals span ca. 5642–3099 BCE and were recovered from Itkul (Bolshoy‑Mys), Kostenkova‑Izbushka and Ust'-Isha in Altai Krai.

Material signatures attributed to the Late Neolithic Ob River cultural horizon include scattered settlement traces, burial contexts and artifact assemblages reported in regional surveys, but direct association between specific artifacts and these four genomes is limited. Limited evidence suggests that population continuity in the valley corridors may have been punctuated by mobility and interaction with neighbouring upland groups.

From a genetic perspective, these individuals carry paternal lineages dominated by haplogroup C and Q—lineages with deep roots in northern and eastern Eurasia—while maternal lineages include A, R and U branches. This combination paints a picture of people rooted in Siberian ancestry yet participating in broader networks of exchange and mobility along river arteries.

Because the dataset comprises only four genomes, interpretations about origins and population dynamics are provisional: archaeological context and additional ancient DNA will be essential to test hypotheses about migration, continuity and cultural transmission in the Kuznetsk‑Altai.

The four individuals attributed to Russia_Ob_LN_KuznetskAltai present a compact but meaningful genetic snapshot. Uniparental markers are dominated by Y‑DNA haplogroup C (three individuals) and Q (one individual), while mitochondrial haplogroups include A+, R, A and U. These markers are characteristic of broad northern and eastern Eurasian ancestries: haplogroup C is frequent in Siberia and parts of East Asia, haplogroup Q is widespread in Siberia and also gives rise to lineages seen in the Americas, and mtDNA A and U lineages have deep regional histories across Eurasia.

Archaeological and genetic data combined suggest a population with strong deep Siberian affinities. However, because only four samples are available, these uniparental signatures must be treated cautiously: they represent individual lineages rather than the full population diversity. Genome‑wide data (if available) would provide greater resolution about admixture events, effective population size and affinities to neighbouring Neolithic groups.

Limited evidence suggests potential continuity with later Altai and broader Siberian populations, but alternative scenarios — such as small‑scale migrations, patrilocal residence patterns or founder effects — could also explain the skew toward C and Q Y‑lineages. Future sampling and genome‑wide analyses will be required to distinguish between continuity, gene flow and social structure influences on the observed genetic pattern.