1. Conclusions regarding all the data we have now:
2.  
3. - Anatolian Turks show a continuum, again. There is an Iranian input among Turks which we are not sure about the source. Potentially either thanks to mixes that happened during the Seljuk Empire or the rearguard migrations that are happened during/after 15-16th centuries. From my perspective, the results, in any chance, suggest more than one migration wave to Asia Minor.
4. - MA2195 might not be an outlier. MA2196 might represent the theory of mixing during the Seljuk era. Therewithal DA222, DA230, and DA89 winking to Oghuz.
5. - Anatolia and Rumelia influenced equally by the migrations that came from the South of the Hazar.
6. - Oghuz population in Anatolia was a definitive dominant among all and absorbed any other Turkic population inside if there were. The other Turkic groups who settled in the Rumelia apparently were able to inherit their DNA today as we see the current drift. The region as a whole, although having various sources for Turkic input, they were not numerous as much as Turkic's who had lived in Anatolia.
7. - It is proved that Balkan Turks have no Anatolian influence on average, again. Actually, the results suggest the Turkic input given to Balkan Turks were more East Eurasian than the Anatolian Turks. At least this is what balanced final admixture shows.
8.  
9. There are some reasons why we see such a situation, and if so, how Balkan Turks have lower East Eurasian scores.
10.  
11. The actual reason is briefly Tatars. Balkan Turks are influenced by those mentioned migrations which happened later and their Turkic form shaped the same as Anatolian Turks as well. Ottoman/Seljuk admixture is definitely dominant here, and the difference I'm talking about is not more than 30%. Parallel to what I have stated, we see models such as x + Turkmen in the majority of Balkan Turks just like what we see in Anatolian Turks. On the other hand, there are also individuals who model with various Tatar populations, even Mongols. They drift the average Turkic DNA slightly.
12.  
13. Yet Ironically Balkan Turks have lower East Eurasian scores. This is a result of most of the Balkan regions, except for Trakya and Deliorman, are not supplied with fresh-comers after a few waves arrived. After all, we see 0% to 3% East Eurasian admixture in regions such as Kastoria, Drama... The regions that have richer Turkic scores usually either got the mentioned Iranian input or the recent Tatar migration took place. Concisely Balkan Turk population expanded through the native population while Turks in Anatolia were numerous against natives.
14.  
15. Role of Celali Rebellions is also a moot point. Balkan Turks usually connected with various regions from Anatolia with IBD. Yes, we don't see the Anatolian influence on averages, but individuals might have it in negligible amounts. Besides, it might be already absorbed in terms of the statistical amounts at all. Lastly, we don't know the DNA profile of Anatolian Turks in the 16-17th century. There is a good potential that they were MA2196-like, and having more East Eurasian than today. This would end up with being no changes in the Balkan Turk DNA profile as it was already Turkmen-like. The isolated Anatolian admixture could not survive more than two generations and would merge with the native Balkan admixture. The truth of the matter is even if they were just like today's Anatolian Turks, there is still an opportunity that Balkan absorbs Anatolian admixture and the Turkic admixture inherits as an isolated admixture and overlapping point.
16.  
17. To sum it up, the expansion of Balkan Turk took place from Turkic to Native. The early Oghuz who registered into Yoruk associations in the 15-16th century were either in pure Oghuz form or mixed in Iran one generation. My personal opinion here, both could be present, yet a great majority can be in Oghuz form still. At the same time with these early-Yoruks also a few Tatar associations were present and functioned the same as Yoruks. A note here that population breakdown according to mentioned associations in the early 1600s is 70% Oghuz - 30% Tatar. Simultaneously, there was probably migration of people who identify as Turkoman and probably were from Iran/Anatolia. These are not registered into Yoruk associations as they are already settled and sent Balkans in order to sustain agricultural production. In the following centuries, Celali Rebellions took place and irregular migrations from Anatolia to the Balkans happened. The process and the input they provided into the DNA pool were explained above. As a final point, Tatar migrations from the Crimean War to the Great War were seen. An era that shaped the genetic formation of Balkan Turks is closed. These all were my observations of between the period Ottoman conquest of Rumelia to the Great War. I would like to talk about it if I miss anything or wrong about something.
18.  
19. For the pre-Ottoman period, there are other measurements that have to be done.